Are RCC and OC (should through in the Copts just to be fair) Saved?

[Jim1999]

Mary was the mother of Jesus and not the Christ, if you want to be fussy about it. Jesus was the man, and properly, Jesus the Christ.

Cheers,

Jim

 

[Thinkingstuff]

There are many things that are not clear. Over and over again I here from the J.W.'s: "The reason we don't accept the trinity is because we can't understand it." Is that a reason not to accept a doctrine? I may not be able to understand how electricity works but I believe it does.
There are many things in the Bible I don't understand. But if the Bible teaches them, then I accept them by faith.

That is totally not the point that Agnus Dei is making. He's following the thought that what you understand by the trinity was passed down by the Church rather than being specifically stated in scriptures. Scriptures alludes to the Trinity. It doesn't define Trinity. How does the trinity work together?. Jesus is God but How much God is he. Is he like substance with God like Arius would say or is he of the Same Substance. These things were defined over councils not self evident in the Scriptures. Has nothing to do with whether you understand something or not.

 

[Agnus_Dei]

Mary was the mother of Jesus and not the Christ, if you want to be fussy about it.

And where do you get this from, Mary was the mother of "Jesus", but not the "Christ"? Are you really serious?

Jesus was the man, and properly, Jesus the Christ.

...so while "Jesus" was in the womb He or is it "he" was only human...not divine?

In XC
-

 

[DHK]

That is totally not the point that Agnus Dei is making. He's following the thought that what you understand by the trinity was passed down by the Church rather than being specifically stated in scriptures. Scriptures alludes to the Trinity. It doesn't define Trinity. How does the trinity work together?. Jesus is God but How much God is he. Is he like substance with God like Arius would say or is he of the Same Substance. These things were defined over councils not self evident in the Scriptures. Has nothing to do with whether you understand something or not.

I already laid it out for you very simply and very clearly.
Each person of the Godhead claims to be deity.
The OT especially claims that there is only one God. We all believe that there is only one God. Yet the Father claims deity, the Son claims deity, the Holy Spirit claims deity. There are three persons that claim deity. There is one God. There are three persons in one God.
God the Father, God the Son, God the Holy Spirit, as it says in Mat.28:19,20.
The picture is clear at Jesus baptism where all three are physically present.
But there is still only one God.
Just because you can't understand it doesn't mean it is not taught. It is taught, and clearly so.
Often God refers to himself as "we" as He does in Genesis 1--Let us make man in our own image--more evidence.

If one rejects all of this evidence it is simply rebellion or rejection of the Word of God.

 

[DHK]

So sure the Trinity concept is found in Holy Scripture, but exactly how the 3 coexisted wasn't exactly clear, as noted above. Thus through the Councils, the Church reaffirmed what had always been taught regarding this issue from the beginning.

In XC
-

Your argument is from silence.
Can you prove that either the Catholics or Orthodox "discovered" the doctrine of the trinity as you are now doing. This is really the height of arrogance.
Can you prove that the Apostle Paul or Peter or any of the other apostles never understood the concept of the trinity?
Can you demonstrate that for us? Can you jump into this "primary source game" that we are playing here, and lay out your primary sources that prove beyond any shadow of a doubt that the Apostle Paul did not understand the trinity.
I will await your verifiable attested primary documentation, signed and sealed by the proper popes, vicars, primates, etc.

 

[Agnus_Dei]

Your argument is from silence.
Can you prove that either the Catholics or Orthodox "discovered" the doctrine of the trinity as you are now doing. This is really the height of arrogance.
Can you prove that the Apostle Paul or Peter or any of the other apostles never understood the concept of the trinity?

Arguing from silence? DHK, It's already been pointed out to you that you get a big 'ol "F" in History...so I doubt you really want to tackle the "primary source" game again and lose...

Can you prove that either the Catholics or Orthodox "discovered" the doctrine of the trinity as you are now doing. This is really the height of arrogance.

Arrogance DHK? Apparently you haven't read any of your posts...But if you wanna call me arrogant for proclaiming the truth...I reckon that'll be ok with me.

Anyway, not only do you get a "F" in History, you also get an "F" in Reading Comprehension. You're so blinded by your hatred...yes hatred...for anything Orthodox that you lose the mental capacity to even think.

Can you prove that either the Catholics or Orthodox "discovered" the doctrine of the trinity as you are now doing. This is really the height of arrogance.

Where did I say the Orthodox "discovered" the Trinity DHK...where, post the post number where I said that...pretty please?!

Here's what I said and please DHK pay attention:

So sure the Trinity concept is found in Holy Scripture, but exactly how the 3 coexisted wasn't exactly clear, as noted above. Thus through the Councils, the Church reaffirmed what had always been taught regarding this issue from the beginning​

So DHK I said that through the Councils the Church reaffirmed what had always been taught regarding the Trinity from the beginning. Meaning that the Church had always had a correct understanding of the Trinity that dates back to the Apostles.

These Councils came together to snuff out the heretical teachings before they got out of hand.

You really wanna impress me DHK, tell the class how many of these Council members of bishops were Baptist...please list them.

In XC
-

 

[DHK]

Here's what I said and please DHK pay attention:

So sure the Trinity concept is found in Holy Scripture, but exactly how the 3 coexisted wasn't exactly clear, as noted above. Thus through the Councils, the Church reaffirmed what had always been taught regarding this issue from the beginning​

So DHK I said that through the Councils the Church reaffirmed what had always been taught regarding the Trinity from the beginning. Meaning that the Church had always had a correct understanding of the Trinity that dates back to the Apostles.

These Councils came together to snuff out the heretical teachings before they got out of hand.

You really wanna impress me DHK, tell the class how many of these Council members of bishops were Baptist...please list them.

In XC
-

If the Apostles always taught from the beginning the trinity then these councils didn't have to reaffirm any such thing as the trinity did they. It was taught; it was well known. Believers taught it from the beginning. Why does the RCC especially try and claim "discovery" for this doctrine?
It is absurd.

 

[DHK]

That is totally not the point that Agnus Dei is making. He's following the thought that what you understand by the trinity was passed down by the Church rather than being specifically stated in scriptures. Scriptures alludes to the Trinity. It doesn't define Trinity. How does the trinity work together?. Jesus is God but How much God is he. Is he like substance with God like Arius would say or is he of the Same Substance. These things were defined over councils not self evident in the Scriptures. Has nothing to do with whether you understand something or not.

It was passed down by the Apostles not the "so-called church." What do you mean by "church." Orthodox? That is what Agnus means? Matt? Perhaps he means Church of England or Anglican. Briony? I think she would say the RCC. What "church"? There was no "church" in existence; only churches. Those churches were started by Paul and the other apostles. The teaching of the apostles were handed down.

2 Peter 3:2 That ye may be mindful of the words which were spoken before by the holy prophets, and of the commandment of us the apostles of the Lord and Saviour:

 

[Agnus_Dei]

It was passed down by the Apostles not the "so-called church." What do you mean by "church." Orthodox? That is what Agnus means? Matt? Perhaps he means Church of England or Anglican. Briony? I think she would say the RCC. What "church"? There was no "church" in existence; only churches. Those churches were started by Paul and the other apostles. The teaching of the apostles were handed down.

The Apostles were doing what the Lord commanded them to do. The Churches that made up the Apostolic era of the Church weren't like we witness today in Protestantism. There was one Church a Christian Church, Orthodoxy believes that the Church has her origin in the Apostolic Community called into being by Jesus Christ, and enlivened by the Holy Spirit. It was called neither RC, Orthodox, CoE, Anglican or Baptist for that matter. This is all recorded in the History of the Church.

In XC
-

 

[Agnus_Dei]

If the Apostles always taught from the beginning the trinity then these councils didn't have to reaffirm any such thing as the trinity did they. It was taught; it was well known. Believers taught it from the beginning.

DHK, try and look at it this way...when I was a Baptist there was a cry from the fundamentalist that the senimaries were turning "liberal"...we'll welcome to the Church! The Early Church had the same issue as well. There were bishops that started either questioning or adding to what has already been taught.

It was the Churches job, guided by the Holy Spirit as promised by Christ to be led into all truth and to be reminded of all things to guard the authentic Christian teaching passed on by the Apostles. Thus this is what the Councils were doing.

In XC
-

 

[DHK]

DHK, try and look at it this way...when I was a Baptist there was a cry from the fundamentalist that the senimaries were turning "liberal"...we'll welcome to the Church! The Early Church had the same issue as well. There were bishops that started either questioning or adding to what has already been taught.

There is still a cry going out from fundamental churches about liberalism in other churches, about heresies abounding, about aberrant and deviant doctrines that believers need to stay away from. Independent Baptist Churches don't call councils. They warn their churches. The pastor has an obligation to his own flock, his own people, that is his own local church. The problems he faces are endemic to his area not the area of India or Jordan, etc. Those areas may be encountering other problems.

For example the Corinthian Church encountered different problems than the church at Thessalonica. Neither one of them needed a council to help them face adversity or to solve error or problems.

It was the Churches job, guided by the Holy Spirit as promised by Christ to be led into all truth and to be reminded of all things to guard the authentic Christian teaching passed on by the Apostles. Thus this is what the Councils were doing.
-

It was the churches (small c), that is the local churches duty, guided by the Holy Spirit to guide them into the truths of the Word of God. There is no denomination in the Word of God. There is no Orthodox Organization in the Word of God.