A New Testament Christian's Crisis of Faith

[ntchristian]

I want to begin this thread by addressing the following post by 'Walter', my brother, former Baptist-turned Catholic", whose post appeared in another thread of mine on the Reformation and early church, closed before I could reply. Walter said, "And I was a Baptist who discovered that the Catholic and Orthodox Churches are the closest to what NT Church looked like. Read Early Church history and say what you posted here. Just not reality. The Early Church grew and EVOLVED into a Church where the 3 fold ministry was found outside of each local church.The reason Baptist churches are so divided and split are because of this."

I have read early church history, extensively, and also compared what the Fathers wrote to the New Testament. That is what led me in the opposite direction to you. There are things that I still hold dear about Orthodoxy -- it's theology of God and man, and especially the atonement, and the reason I do is that these doctrines are founded on what the NT and early church/Christians believed and taught. What led me away from Orthodoxy are those doctrines and practices which are based on extra-biblical sources contrary to NT teachings, and there are many. Let me ask you this: If a doctrine and/or practice is taught in the NT, why do you think anybody or any church has the right and authority to change that? As I mentioned, clearly the NT doctrine and practice was that pastor and bishop was one office, not two, and there was no hierarchy. Yet the Catholic and Orthodox churches changed that. On whose authority? The NT is God's word. What is established there should be followed, not changed by a man or a group of men. Therefore, when I sought to find and return to NT Christianity, I had no choice but to leave Orthodoxy. And I never even considered turning to Rome, since Rome departed much further from the NT than did Orthodoxy.

That leads me to the point of this thread. In general, I have found Protestantism closer to NT Christianity than the other two branches, and closer still are the believers' baptism churches. However, I am much distressed to learn how much Protestantism still kept some of the most basic errors and innovations of Rome. Nothing gives more evidence of that than the Protestant doctrines of the atonement. Yes, and unfortunately Baptists are included in this. The Protestant atonement doctrines have caused me great trouble. They are not based on scripture or the early church teachings. They distort who God is. Every time I hear preaching on this, it just cuts my spirit up. It has turned the Gospel from Good News to bad news.

I can never go back to Orthodoxy, but I fear I will not be able to abide in any church that teaches these things. I am having a crisis of faith. I long to be with other believers, but like-minded believers. I fear this is impossible for me. I don't know if I can be a solitary Christian. I don't know anymore if I can even remain a Christian when surrounded by such awful doctrines. I love NT Christianity, and to me the Baptists and other believers' baptism churches are, I believe, in many ways the closest to the NT in doctrine and practice. But I cannot abide the Augustinian views or the RC-inspired atonement doctrines.

I felt a few days ago that i might not be able to even remain a Christian, but I'll always believe in the physical, bodily resurrection Of Jesus Christ, which to me separates Christianity from every other religion. So, I don't at this point know what to do. I am greatly distressed and grieved in my spirit, and I ask for prayers.

Thank you all very much.

 

[Rob_BW]

My friend, it grieves me to see you so torn. It's certainly tough when you're unable to find an assembly to fellowship with.

 

[ntchristian]

My friend, it grieves me to see you so torn. It's certainly tough when you're unable to find an assembly to fellowship with.

I appreciate your kindness.

 

[ntchristian]

I certainly do not mean to attack anyone's personal faith. I'm just trying to say what mine is and where I am in attempting to practice it, and seeking prayers for assistance.

 

[Yeshua1]

I want to begin this thread by addressing the following post by 'Walter', my brother, former Baptist-turned Catholic", whose post appeared in another thread of mine on the Reformation and early church, closed before I could reply. Walter said, "And I was a Baptist who discovered that the Catholic and Orthodox Churches are the closest to what NT Church looked like. Read Early Church history and say what you posted here. Just not reality. The Early Church grew and EVOLVED into a Church where the 3 fold ministry was found outside of each local church.The reason Baptist churches are so divided and split are because of this."

I have read early church history, extensively, and also compared what the Fathers wrote to the New Testament. That is what led me in the opposite direction to you. There are things that I still hold dear about Orthodoxy -- it's theology of God and man, and especially the atonement, and the reason I do is that these doctrines are founded on what the NT and early church/Christians believed and taught. What led me away from Orthodoxy are those doctrines and practices which are based on extra-biblical sources contrary to NT teachings, and there are many. Let me ask you this: If a doctrine and/or practice is taught in the NT, why do you think anybody or any church has the right and authority to change that? As I mentioned, clearly the NT doctrine and practice was that pastor and bishop was one office, not two, and there was no hierarchy. Yet the Catholic and Orthodox churches changed that. On whose authority? The NT is God's word. What is established there should be followed, not changed by a man or a group of men. Therefore, when I sought to find and return to NT Christianity, I had no choice but to leave Orthodoxy. And I never even considered turning to Rome, since Rome departed much further from the NT than did Orthodoxy.

That leads me to the point of this thread. In general, I have found Protestantism closer to NT Christianity than the other two branches, and closer still are the believers' baptism churches. However, I am much distressed to learn how much Protestantism still kept some of the most basic errors and innovations of Rome. Nothing gives more evidence of that than the Protestant doctrines of the atonement. Yes, and unfortunately Baptists are included in this. The Protestant atonement doctrines have caused me great trouble. They are not based on scripture or the early church teachings. They distort who God is. Every time I hear preaching on this, it just cuts my spirit up. It has turned the Gospel from Good News to bad news.

I can never go back to Orthodoxy, but I fear I will not be able to abide in any church that teaches these things. I am having a crisis of faith. I long to be with other believers, but like-minded believers. I fear this is impossible for me. I don't know if I can be a solitary Christian. I don't know anymore if I can even remain a Christian when surrounded by such awful doctrines. I love NT Christianity, and to me the Baptists and other believers' baptism churches are, I believe, in many ways the closest to the NT in doctrine and practice. But I cannot abide the Augustinian views or the RC-inspired atonement doctrines.

I felt a few days ago that i might not be able to even remain a Christian, but I'll always believe in the physical, bodily resurrection Of Jesus Christ, which to me separates Christianity from every other religion. So, I don't at this point know what to do. I am greatly distressed and grieved in my spirit, and I ask for prayers.

Thank you all very much.

Are you torn up over the penal substitution doctrine then?

 

[ntchristian]

Are you torn up over the penal substitution doctrine then?

Yes, mainly. I also have trouble with the broad salvation/soteriology of non-Orthodox churches. Too Augustinian/RCC-influenced.

 

[Reformed1689]

They are not based on scripture or the early church teachings. They distort who God is. Every time I hear preaching on this, it just cuts my spirit up. It has turned the Gospel from Good News to bad news.

This is your opinion, but I believe you are wrong.

 

[utilyan]

I want to begin this thread by addressing the following post by 'Walter', my brother, former Baptist-turned Catholic", whose post appeared in another thread of mine on the Reformation and early church, closed before I could reply. Walter said, "And I was a Baptist who discovered that the Catholic and Orthodox Churches are the closest to what NT Church looked like. Read Early Church history and say what you posted here. Just not reality. The Early Church grew and EVOLVED into a Church where the 3 fold ministry was found outside of each local church.The reason Baptist churches are so divided and split are because of this."

I have read early church history, extensively, and also compared what the Fathers wrote to the New Testament. That is what led me in the opposite direction to you. There are things that I still hold dear about Orthodoxy -- it's theology of God and man, and especially the atonement, and the reason I do is that these doctrines are founded on what the NT and early church/Christians believed and taught. What led me away from Orthodoxy are those doctrines and practices which are based on extra-biblical sources contrary to NT teachings, and there are many. Let me ask you this: If a doctrine and/or practice is taught in the NT, why do you think anybody or any church has the right and authority to change that? As I mentioned, clearly the NT doctrine and practice was that pastor and bishop was one office, not two, and there was no hierarchy. Yet the Catholic and Orthodox churches changed that. On whose authority? The NT is God's word. What is established there should be followed, not changed by a man or a group of men. Therefore, when I sought to find and return to NT Christianity, I had no choice but to leave Orthodoxy. And I never even considered turning to Rome, since Rome departed much further from the NT than did Orthodoxy.

That leads me to the point of this thread. In general, I have found Protestantism closer to NT Christianity than the other two branches, and closer still are the believers' baptism churches. However, I am much distressed to learn how much Protestantism still kept some of the most basic errors and innovations of Rome. Nothing gives more evidence of that than the Protestant doctrines of the atonement. Yes, and unfortunately Baptists are included in this. The Protestant atonement doctrines have caused me great trouble. They are not based on scripture or the early church teachings. They distort who God is. Every time I hear preaching on this, it just cuts my spirit up. It has turned the Gospel from Good News to bad news.

I can never go back to Orthodoxy, but I fear I will not be able to abide in any church that teaches these things. I am having a crisis of faith. I long to be with other believers, but like-minded believers. I fear this is impossible for me. I don't know if I can be a solitary Christian. I don't know anymore if I can even remain a Christian when surrounded by such awful doctrines. I love NT Christianity, and to me the Baptists and other believers' baptism churches are, I believe, in many ways the closest to the NT in doctrine and practice. But I cannot abide the Augustinian views or the RC-inspired atonement doctrines.

I felt a few days ago that i might not be able to even remain a Christian, but I'll always believe in the physical, bodily resurrection Of Jesus Christ, which to me separates Christianity from every other religion. So, I don't at this point know what to do. I am greatly distressed and grieved in my spirit, and I ask for prayers.

Thank you all very much.

It hasn't changed. Your error is real simple. Your understanding is a Square is also Rectangle therefore all Rectangles are Squares.

Before the bible is finished written, Before the last apostle has died. You have folks appointed by the apostles as Bishops.

Ignatius of Antioch
“Now, therefore, it has been my privilege to see you in the person of your God-inspired bishop, Damas; and in the persons of your worthy presbyters, Bassus and Apollonius; and my fellow-servant, the deacon, Zotion. What a delight is his company! For he is subject to the bishop as to the grace of God, and to the presbytery as to the law of Jesus Christ” (Letter to the Magnesians 2 [A.D. 110]).

“Take care to do all things in harmony with God, with the bishop presiding in the place of God, and with the presbyters in the place of the council of the apostles, and with the deacons, who are most dear to me, entrusted with the business of Jesus Christ, who was with the Father from the beginning and is at last made manifest” (ibid., 6:1).

“Take care, therefore, to be confirmed in the decrees of the Lord and of the apostles, in order that in everything you do, you may prosper in body and in soul, in faith and in love, in Son and in Father and in Spirit, in beginning and in end, together with your most reverend bishop; and with that fittingly woven spiritual crown, the presbytery; and with the deacons, men of God” (ibid., 13:1–2).

“It is necessary, therefore—and such is your practice that you do nothing without the bishop, and that you be subject also to the presbytery, as to the apostles of Jesus Christ our hope, in whom we shall be found, if we live in him. It is necessary also that the deacons, the dispensers of the mysteries [sacraments] of Jesus Christ, be in every way pleasing to all men” (Letter to the Trallians 2:1–3 [A.D. 110]).

“In like manner let everyone respect the deacons as they would respect Jesus Christ, and just as they respect the bishop as a type of the Father, and the presbyters as the council of God and college of the apostles. Without these, it cannot be called a church” (ibid., 3:1–2).

“He that is within the sanctuary is pure; but he that is outside the sanctuary is not pure. In other words, anyone who acts without the bishop and the presbytery and the deacons does not have a clear conscience” (ibid., 7:2).

“I cried out while I was in your midst, I spoke with a loud voice, the voice of God: ‘Give heed to the bishop and the presbytery and the deacons.’ Some suspect me of saying this because I had previous knowledge of the division certain persons had caused; but he for whom I am in chains is my witness that I had no knowledge of this from any man. It was the Spirit who kept preaching these words, ‘Do nothing without the bishop, keep your body as the temple of God, love unity, flee from divisions, be imitators of Jesus Christ, as he was imitator of the Father’” (Letter to the Philadelphians 7:1–2 [A.D. 110]).

Clement of Alexandria
“A multitude of other pieces of advice to particular persons is written in the holy books: some for presbyters, some for bishops and deacons; and others for widows, of whom we shall have opportunity to speak elsewhere” (The Instructor of Children 3:12:97:2 [A.D. 191]).

“Even here in the Church the gradations of bishops, presbyters, and deacons happen to be imitations, in my opinion, of the angelic glory and of that arrangement which, the scriptures say, awaits those who have followed in the footsteps of the apostles and who have lived in complete righteousness according to the gospel” (Miscellanies 6:13:107:2 [A.D. 208]).

Hippolytus
“When a deacon is to be ordained, he is chosen after the fashion of those things said above, the bishop alone in like manner imposing his hands upon him as we have prescribed. In the ordaining of a deacon, this is the reason why the bishop alone is to impose his hands upon him: he is not ordained to the priesthood, but to serve the bishop and to fulfill the bishop’s command. He has no part in the council of the clergy, but is to attend to his own duties and is to acquaint the bishop with such matters as are needful. . . .

“On a presbyter, however, let the presbyters impose their hands because of the common and like Spirit of the clergy. Even so, the presbyter has only the power to receive [the Spirit], and not the power to give [the Spirit]. That is why a presbyter does not ordain the clergy; for at the ordaining of a presbyter, he but seals while the bishop ordains” (The Apostolic Tradition 9 [A.D. 215]).
=====

Romans 16:1

I commend to you our sister Phoebe, a deacon of the church in Cenchreae.


This new church your looking for has Female Bishops?


The Church can dismantle the whole system......and now ordain REFEREES. with black and white stripes. If it wanted to.
How?

Matthew 18
18“Truly I say to you, whatever you bind on earth shall have been bound in heaven; and whatever you loose on earth shall have been loosed in heaven.

If you don't believe the church and BIND AND LOOSE, then you are not a bible believer, PERIOD.

The Church can call the shots.

 

[ntchristian]

It hasn't changed. Your error is real simple. Your understanding is a Square is also Rectangle therefore all Rectangles are Squares.

Before the bible is finished written, Before the last apostle has died. You have folks appointed by the apostles as Bishops.

Ignatius of Antioch
“Now, therefore, it has been my privilege to see you in the person of your God-inspired bishop, Damas; and in the persons of your worthy presbyters, Bassus and Apollonius; and my fellow-servant, the deacon, Zotion. What a delight is his company! For he is subject to the bishop as to the grace of God, and to the presbytery as to the law of Jesus Christ” (Letter to the Magnesians 2 [A.D. 110]).

“Take care to do all things in harmony with God, with the bishop presiding in the place of God, and with the presbyters in the place of the council of the apostles, and with the deacons, who are most dear to me, entrusted with the business of Jesus Christ, who was with the Father from the beginning and is at last made manifest” (ibid., 6:1).

“Take care, therefore, to be confirmed in the decrees of the Lord and of the apostles, in order that in everything you do, you may prosper in body and in soul, in faith and in love, in Son and in Father and in Spirit, in beginning and in end, together with your most reverend bishop; and with that fittingly woven spiritual crown, the presbytery; and with the deacons, men of God” (ibid., 13:1–2).

“It is necessary, therefore—and such is your practice that you do nothing without the bishop, and that you be subject also to the presbytery, as to the apostles of Jesus Christ our hope, in whom we shall be found, if we live in him. It is necessary also that the deacons, the dispensers of the mysteries [sacraments] of Jesus Christ, be in every way pleasing to all men” (Letter to the Trallians 2:1–3 [A.D. 110]).

“In like manner let everyone respect the deacons as they would respect Jesus Christ, and just as they respect the bishop as a type of the Father, and the presbyters as the council of God and college of the apostles. Without these, it cannot be called a church” (ibid., 3:1–2).

“He that is within the sanctuary is pure; but he that is outside the sanctuary is not pure. In other words, anyone who acts without the bishop and the presbytery and the deacons does not have a clear conscience” (ibid., 7:2).

“I cried out while I was in your midst, I spoke with a loud voice, the voice of God: ‘Give heed to the bishop and the presbytery and the deacons.’ Some suspect me of saying this because I had previous knowledge of the division certain persons had caused; but he for whom I am in chains is my witness that I had no knowledge of this from any man. It was the Spirit who kept preaching these words, ‘Do nothing without the bishop, keep your body as the temple of God, love unity, flee from divisions, be imitators of Jesus Christ, as he was imitator of the Father’” (Letter to the Philadelphians 7:1–2 [A.D. 110]).

Clement of Alexandria
“A multitude of other pieces of advice to particular persons is written in the holy books: some for presbyters, some for bishops and deacons; and others for widows, of whom we shall have opportunity to speak elsewhere” (The Instructor of Children 3:12:97:2 [A.D. 191]).

“Even here in the Church the gradations of bishops, presbyters, and deacons happen to be imitations, in my opinion, of the angelic glory and of that arrangement which, the scriptures say, awaits those who have followed in the footsteps of the apostles and who have lived in complete righteousness according to the gospel” (Miscellanies 6:13:107:2 [A.D. 208]).

Hippolytus
“When a deacon is to be ordained, he is chosen after the fashion of those things said above, the bishop alone in like manner imposing his hands upon him as we have prescribed. In the ordaining of a deacon, this is the reason why the bishop alone is to impose his hands upon him: he is not ordained to the priesthood, but to serve the bishop and to fulfill the bishop’s command. He has no part in the council of the clergy, but is to attend to his own duties and is to acquaint the bishop with such matters as are needful. . . .

“On a presbyter, however, let the presbyters impose their hands because of the common and like Spirit of the clergy. Even so, the presbyter has only the power to receive [the Spirit], and not the power to give [the Spirit]. That is why a presbyter does not ordain the clergy; for at the ordaining of a presbyter, he but seals while the bishop ordains” (The Apostolic Tradition 9 [A.D. 215]).
=====

Romans 16:1

I commend to you our sister Phoebe, a deacon of the church in Cenchreae.


This new church your looking for has Female Bishops?


The Church can dismantle the whole system......and now ordain REFEREES. with black and white stripes. If it wanted to.
How?

Matthew 18
18“Truly I say to you, whatever you bind on earth shall have been bound in heaven; and whatever you loose on earth shall have been loosed in heaven.

If you don't believe the church and BIND AND LOOSE, then you are not a bible believer, PERIOD.

The Church can call the shots.

See, this is where Catholics, and Orthodox, err. You want to take the Fathers and try to read what they say back into the NT, even if it means changing what the NT says. However, you cannot get around the undeniable fact that in the NT bishop and pastor was one and the same office. The terms were synonymous. Actually, the following terms all designated only one office: pastor, bishop, overseer, presbyter, elder. That is the NT church order which no man and no group of men can change. Now it is true that as time went on, authoritarian men did change the NT church order and changed the NT office of bishop/pastor into two offices, so that by the end of the second century this was the order that was in place. Now it may be debated as to why this took place -- to try and safeguard apostolic doctrine being one such positive hypothesized reason, but I contend that no one had the right or authority to change the apostolic order as contained in the NT. This principle of a group of men and later one man having authority to make such change is what led to the many errors in ecclesiology and doctrine that later served as catalyst for the Protestant Reformation. The Orthodox Church at least stayed pretty close to apostolic theology, whereas the RCC did not, introducing such false innovations as the papacy and Anselm's sick atonement theory nearly a thousand years removed from NT/apostolic doctrine.

What grieves me, as I laid out in my thread on the Reformation is that the Protestant Reformers didn't reform soteriology and atonement theory back to the NT/early church but keep Rome's egregious errors and even made them worse -- i.e, Calvinism.

This reliance on extra-biblical sources to establish doctrine has led to grievous errors in the church. Extra-biblical sources may be valuable, but they should not be used to establish doctrine and practices that contradict the only apostolic source of authority for the Christian faith -- the NT. Even if you contend that "The Church" wrote and canonized the NT, and intentionally or unintentionally make tradition equal with the NT, the fact remains that the NT scriptures are the only apostolic witness to Jesus Christ and because of that must be the final authority in doctrinal matters. Even if one holds that there is liberty to have more than one form of church government, with bishops being separate from pastors, that still does not change the fact that in the NT this was one office -- that of bishop/pastor, terms used as synonyms in the NT. That is the final word to me, as one who is seeking NT Christianity and to live as much as possible as a NT Christian. That is also why I cannot accept the Protestant soteriology/salvation/atonement theories, insomuch as they slavishly follow the errors of Rome. which I think they may not even be aware that they are doing. But, as I said, Roman and Protestant theology share Augustinianism, which I totally reject as unscriptural and not held by NT Christians and the early church.

 

[ntchristian]

And utilyan, with all due respect, you are not truly a Bible believer if you think anyone has the authority to change what the Bible teaches. That's what an apostate church does, and I will not be a part of any apostate church. Jesus warned about that in the Book of revelation.

I suppose by your criteria you think it was acceptable for the RCC to authorize religious persecution and murder of dissenters. BTW, that's another way that the Protestant Reformers, except for the Radical Reformers, followed their mother church in Rome. How anyone could do such a thing and claim to be following the Prince of Peace is beyond me. No "one true church" there, just a demon-possessed bunch of prelates. At least Orthodoxy never engaged in such persecution, not to my knowledge anyway.

 

[ntchristian]

I must add this: In spite of deep and significant differences, I do fear that someday Orthodoxy and Rome will again unite. I think it's the spirit of the age and will happen if Jesus tarries. That would be a sad day for me, although I am no longer Orthodox. I still have friends and family there.

 

[utilyan]

See, this is where Catholics, and Orthodox, err. You want to take the Fathers and try to read what they say back into the NT, even if it means changing what the NT says. However, you cannot get around the undeniable fact that in the NT bishop and pastor was one and the same office. The terms were synonymous. Actually, the following terms all designated only one office: pastor, bishop, overseer, presbyter, elder. That is the NT church order which no man and no group of men can change. Now it is true that as time went on, authoritarian men did change the NT church order and changed the NT office of bishop/pastor into two offices, so that by the end of the second century this was the order that was in place. Now it may be debated as to why this took place -- to try and safeguard apostolic doctrine being one such positive hypothesized reason, but I contend that no one had the right or authority to change the apostolic order as contained in the NT. This principle of a group of men and later one man having authority to make such change is what led to the many errors in ecclesiology and doctrine that later served as catalyst for the Protestant Reformation. The Orthodox Church at least stayed pretty close to apostolic theology, whereas the RCC did not, introducing such false innovations as the papacy and Anselm's sick atonement theory nearly a thousand years removed from NT/apostolic doctrine.

What grieves me, as I laid out in my thread on the Reformation is that the Protestant Reformers didn't reform soteriology and atonement theory back to the NT/early church but keep Rome's egregious errors and even made them worse -- i.e, Calvinism.

This reliance on extra-biblical sources to establish doctrine has led to grievous errors in the church. Extra-biblical sources may be valuable, but they should not be used to establish doctrine and practices that contradict the only apostolic source of authority for the Christian faith -- the NT. Even if you contend that "The Church" wrote and canonized the NT, and intentionally or unintentionally make tradition equal with the NT, the fact remains that the NT scriptures are the only apostolic witness to Jesus Christ and because of that must be the final authority in doctrinal matters. Even if one holds that there is liberty to have more than one form of church government, with bishops being separate from pastors, that still does not change the fact that in the NT this was one office -- that of bishop/pastor, terms used as synonyms in the NT. That is the final word to me, as one who is seeking NT Christianity and to live as much as possible as a NT Christian. That is also why I cannot accept the Protestant soteriology/salvation/atonement theories, insomuch as they slavishly follow the errors of Rome. which I think they may not even be aware that they are doing. But, as I said, Roman and Protestant theology share Augustinianism, which I totally reject as unscriptural and not held by NT Christians and the early church.

"This reliance on extra-biblical sources to establish doctrine has led to grievous errors in the church."
Yes the #1 being that tradition that teaches the only source for christian stuff is found in scripture alone.


"You want to take the Fathers and try to read what they say back into the NT"

What do you mean BACK into the NT? These guys existed BEFORE the NT is done. You are talking to people who have the apostles ALIVE and in front their face.


You've studied history "extensively"

Find one legit Christian in those first 500 years.

I named a FEMALE DEACON in Scripture.

Romans 16:1

I commend to you our sister Phoebe, a deacon of the church in Cenchreae.


I want you to tell us she is a Female BISHOP, and that is now what you will be looking for in your next church.


Even if we don't agree........
Here's the good news, God is Good. God is Love. the highest priority is Love. Love God and Love neighbor.

1 Thessalonians 5

21But examine everything carefully; hold fast to that which is good; 22abstain from every form of evil.

If God the Father torturing Jesus, a la penal sub turns you off. Go to that church anyways and pick up what it good.

Or try to find how to reconcile penal sub. how could it be accomplished at the same time keeping God's good character.

Everyone on this board, this thread, we love each other......I hope. Give God a chance to be the hero, as in .....expect him so to be. Don't put this guard up in your heart that says God doesn't care about you. Pray on all this.

 

[Yeshua1]

Yes, mainly. I also have trouble with the broad salvation/soteriology of non-Orthodox churches. Too Augustinian/RCC-influenced.

Do you have issues then with the wrath of God aspect of Pst, or that Jesus had to suffer for our sins, or?

 

[Yeshua1]

"This reliance on extra-biblical sources to establish doctrine has led to grievous errors in the church."
Yes the #1 being that tradition that teaches the only source for christian stuff is found in scripture alone.


"You want to take the Fathers and try to read what they say back into the NT"

What do you mean BACK into the NT? These guys existed BEFORE the NT is done. You are talking to people who have the apostles ALIVE and in front their face.


You've studied history "extensively"

Find one legit Christian in those first 500 years.

I named a FEMALE DEACON in Scripture.

Romans 16:1

I commend to you our sister Phoebe, a deacon of the church in Cenchreae.


I want you to tell us she is a Female BISHOP, and that is now what you will be looking for in your next church.


Even if we don't agree........
Here's the good news, God is Good. God is Love. the highest priority is Love. Love God and Love neighbor.

1 Thessalonians 5

21But examine everything carefully; hold fast to that which is good; 22abstain from every form of evil.

If God the Father torturing Jesus, a la penal sub turns you off. Go to that church anyways and pick up what it good.

Or try to find how to reconcile penal sub. how could it be accomplished at the same time keeping God's good character.

Everyone on this board, this thread, we love each other......I hope. Give God a chance to be the hero, as in .....expect him so to be. Don't put this guard up in your heart that says God doesn't care about you. Pray on all this.

The were biships, overseers, pastors ,elder all were the same thing, just different terms being used. Scriptures do NOT support the set up of the RCC, do not support papacy, cardinals, Sacramental graces, Mass, Mother mary etc...
Your church officially went Apostate when it declared Council of Trent!

 

[utilyan]

The were biships, overseers, pastors ,elder all were the same thing, just different terms being used. Scriptures do NOT support the set up of the RCC, do not support papacy, cardinals, Sacramental graces, Mass, Mother mary etc...
Your church officially went Apostate when it declared Council of Trent!

So before Trent you are saying there was no "papacy, cardinals, Sacramental graces, Mass, Mother mary etc..."

Well let me tell you, Calvinism has always been evil, teaching that God worships Satan, That God has a fallen mortal's mind sense of justice. That he ORDAINS THE RAPE OF BABIES FOR HIS GLORY, plenty of who he hated since the foundation before they were born. Its more important for him to show off his glory then to help anyone. Vanity and Pride, Satan's bread and butter.

The Character of God in Calvnism is worst than any living person folks can think up.

I challenge anyone to think up a more evil version of God then the Calvinist version, I guarantee you will lose.


I never heard any Calvinist say " NO GOD IS NOT A NAZI" and then explain how he is different.

You know why? Cause they know God is a Spiritual Nazi.

Those who worship evil got no problem with a god who is "privileged" to evil as they see evil as a sign of strength and a perk.

 

[Yeshua1]

So before Trent you are saying there was no "papacy, cardinals, Sacramental graces, Mass, Mother mary etc..."

Well let me tell you, Calvinism has always been evil, teaching that God worships Satan, That God has a fallen mortal's mind sense of justice. That he ORDAINS THE RAPE OF BABIES FOR HIS GLORY, plenty of who he hated since the foundation before they were born. Its more important for him to show off his glory then to help anyone. Vanity and Pride, Satan's bread and butter.

The Character of God in Calvnism is worst than any living person folks can think up.

I challenge anyone to think up a more evil version of God then the Calvinist version, I guarantee you will lose.


I never heard any Calvinist say " NO GOD IS NOT A NAZI" and then explain how he is different.

You know why? Cause they know God is a Spiritual Nazi.

Those who worship evil got no problem with a god who is "privileged" to evil as they see evil as a sign of strength and a perk.

The God of Calvinism would be the Trinity themselves, and sorry to see that you consider God evil and a rapist!

 

[utilyan]

The God of Calvinism would be the Trinity themselves, and sorry to see that you consider God evil and a rapist!

My God is Jesus Christ who wills that all men be saved.

My God did not ordain rape. Yours planned it, For his glory.

Thank you for proving my point again and again. You could not tell us how your false idea of God is different from Hitler.

Its like your subconsciously telling everyone to stay away from your evil belief.

 

[Yeshua1]

My God is Jesus Christ who wills that all men be saved.

My God did not ordain rape. Yours planned it, For his glory.

Thank you for proving my point again and again. You could not tell us how your false idea of God is different from Hitler.

Its like your subconsciously telling everyone to stay away from your evil belief.

Your Jesus is weak then, as he cannot have his will get done!

 

[utilyan]

Your Jesus is weak then, as he cannot have his will get done!

Its God's will that you never sin again. He does not want you to sin today nor tomorrow. Can his will get done? Or is he weak?


If I told any other christian their idea of God was like Hitler, They would laugh at me. You can't laugh at all because it rings so true for you.

 

[Yeshua1]

Its God's will that you never sin again. He does not want you to sin today nor tomorrow. Can his will get done? Or is he weak?


If I told any other christian their idea of God was like Hitler, They would laugh at me. You can't laugh at all because it rings so true for you.

if God will was that all sinners were to get saved, and If he intended the death of Jesus to provide for that, would that not be Universalism?