Are the Reformation churches drifting into ecumenical extinction.

[Walpole]

Major difference 101. Christ reigns over His Church not some Apostate From South America who denies the Gospel

Christ reigns over His Church by the means He established ---> The episcopacy

 

[Walpole]

Please provide a passage from the Bible that legitimizes your assertion.

Sure thing...

The Greek word from which we get "bishop" is episkopos. It comes from two Greek words:

Epi = over
Skopos = one that watches, looks after; guardian, protector

A bishop is thus an overseer / guardian / protector of a Church.

Acts 1:20
Acts 20:28
1 Tim 3:2
Phil 1:1
Titus 1:7

 

[Garrett20]

John 6:51 ---> "I am the living bread which came down from heaven. If anyone eats of this bread, he will live forever; and the bread that I shall give is My flesh, which I shall give for the life of the world.”


Christianity 101.

Walpole, your arguments are typically well thought out and intelligible, but you’re missing on this one bad...

Our Lord also said “I am the door”. Was he a literal door?

In John 21, Jesus told Peter to ‘Feed My lambs’ and ‘tend my sheep’. Was Jesus only concerned with a physical farm he had back in Nazareth and wanted his animals looked after?

 

[Marooncat79]

St. Paul was indeed the greatest evangelist ever, but he didn't forget the altar as he worshipped. Of course that passage deals with Holy Communion because the re-enactment of the Last Supper was a specific command of Christ where he leaves himself in the Holy Eucharist for future generations of Christians. Time is transcended and we are there on Calvary, at the foot of the cross - just as Jesus intended and you folks reject that truth.

I am rejecting the authority of the pope which was the topic at the time

I also reject other heresy of the RCC

 

[Walpole]

Walpole, your arguments are typically well thought out and intelligible, but you’re missing on this one bad...

Our Lord also said “I am the door”. Was he a literal door?

In John 21, Jesus told Peter to ‘Feed My lambs’ and ‘tend my sheep’. Was Jesus only concerned with a physical farm he had back in Nazareth and wanted his animals looked after?

Thanks for the kind words.

Was the instruction to actually eat the bread that Jesus said was His body literal or did the Apostles not actually consume it? In other words, did they recognize it was just a metaphor and not actually eat it?

Is there anywhere in salvation history (via the Scriptures) where eating a body was a metaphor for something other than that?

Is it just a coincidence that Jesus was born in the city of Bethlehem, which means "House of Bread" and laid in a manger, which is a feeding troth?

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

Yes

He is asking you if you believe in the real presence of Christ in the Eucharist. That in short is why Roman Catholics believe they are the one true church and you are merely another sect, (piss ant).

 

[Adonia]

I am rejecting the authority of the pope which was the topic at the time

I also reject other heresy of the RCC

You can reject whomever you want, as I likewise do with rejecting your interpretation of the scriptures and your founders interpretation of them.

 

[Adonia]

Walpole, your arguments are typically well thought out and intelligible, but you’re missing on this one bad...

Our Lord also said “I am the door”. Was he a literal door?

In John 21, Jesus told Peter to ‘Feed My lambs’ and ‘tend my sheep’. Was Jesus only concerned with a physical farm he had back in Nazareth and wanted his animals looked after?

Of course he wasn't the door, but what you miss is the enormity of the moment and Jesus was not going to use metaphors at that point. He said what he said and he meant what he meant, it was only some 1600 years of all Christendom believing that truth was it changed by one man (Zwingli), who at that point was even rebelling from the first rebels (Luther & Co.) You are on shaky ground indeed with following that belief.

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

You can reject whomever you want, as I likewise do with rejecting your interpretation of the scriptures and your founders interpretation of them.

Come on.....who is the founder you are referring to!

 

[Particular]

Sure thing...

The Greek word from which we get "bishop" is episkopos. It comes from two Greek words:

Epi = over
Skopos = one that watches, looks after; guardian, protector

A bishop is thus an overseer / guardian / protector of a Church.

Acts 1:20
Acts 20:28
1 Tim 3:2
Phil 1:1
Titus 1:7

I know what the word means. You still fail to prove your assertion from scripture. You stated:

The presence of the bishop is essential to define the Church itself. There is no Church if there is no valid bishop presiding over her.

Nowhere do you find anyone say "There is no church, if there is no valid bishop presiding over her."
Your assertion is false.
Jesus says that "where two or three are gathered in my midst, there I am." Nowhere does he say his church does not exist without a valid bishop presiding over her.
You bureaucratic nonsense from your denomination is showing.

 

[Particular]

Thanks for the kind words.

Was the instruction to actually eat the bread that Jesus said was His body literal or did the Apostles not actually consume it? In other words, did they recognize it was just a metaphor and not actually eat it?

Is there anywhere in salvation history (via the Scriptures) where eating a body was a metaphor for something other than that?

Is it just a coincidence that Jesus was born in the city of Bethlehem, which means "House of Bread" and laid in a manger, which is a feeding troth?

Walpole, every Jew celebrates the Passover and has many symbolic rituals that are performed in the Seder meal. It is crystal clear that Jesus was speaking metaphorically.
Jesus disciples would have revolted and left him if they thought he was speaking literally. No Jew would ever break God's law by eating human flesh and drinking blood. It was forbidden.
Peter didn't have any clue that the dietary laws were changed until God sends him to talk with Cornelius in the book of Acts, so any claim that Jesus was offering his real flesh and real blood at the last supper is pure hocum.

 

[Adonia]

I know what the word means. You still fail to prove your assertion from scripture. You stated:

Nowhere do you find anyone say "There is no church, if there is no valid bishop presiding over her."
Your assertion is false.
Jesus says that "where two or three are gathered in my midst, there I am." Nowhere does he say his church does not exist without a valid bishop presiding over her.
You bureaucratic nonsense from your denomination is showing.

Long before you walked this earth, long before John Smythe walked this earth, there were the leaders of the early Christian Curch who took over after all the Apostles died out.

They were called the Early Church Fathers, the Bishops who called the synods and councils that determined the basics of the Christian faith. Their legitimacy came directly from the apostles, men who had been ordained by their predecessors all the way back to the very last Apostle, from one Bisop to another. You act like none of that ever happened.

People who stood up and started their own little churches, who came up with their own interpretation of things were dismissed out of hand as the heretics they were. So yes, they were correct when they said where there is no valid bishop, there is no valid church. They took that stuff very seriously back then.

We had but one Christian Chuch, but one denomination, but one doctrine, not the thousands that exist today. You yourself are a member of a sect within a sect, are you not? Case closed!

 

[Adonia]

Walpole, every Jew celebrates the Passover and has many symbolic rituals that are performed in the Seder meal. It is crystal clear that Jesus was speaking metaphorically.
Jesus disciples would have revolted and left him if they thought he was speaking literally. No Jew would ever break God's law by eating human flesh and drinking blood. It was forbidden.
Peter didn't have any clue that the dietary laws were changed until God sends him to talk with Cornelius in the book of Acts, so any claim that Jesus was offering his real flesh and real blood at the last supper is pure hocum.

Many people did leave Jesus after he proclaimed his body and blood in the Holy Eucharist. (John 6:66). In John 6:52, even the Jews understood exactly what Jesus was saying, it was no joke.

 

[rockytopva]

Ecumenical- adjective - representing a number of different Christian Churches.

Ephesus - Messianic - Beginning with the Apostle to the Circumcision, Peter
Smyrna - Martyr - Beginning with the Apostle to the Un-Circumcision, Paul
Pergamos - Orthodoxy formed in this time... Pergos is a tower... Needed in the dark ages
Thyatira - Catholicism formed in this time - The spirit of Jezebel is to control and to dominate.
Sardis - Protestantism formed in this time- A sardius is a gem - elegant yet hard and rigid
Philadelphia - Wesleyism formed in this time - To be sanctioned is to acquire it with love.
Laodicea - Charismatic movement formed in this time - Beginning with DL Moody, the first to make money off of ministry

Candlesticks - Seven church congregations
Stars - Individuals within the congregations, all held in the right hand of Christ
Seals - The seven seals sealed each congregation within the lambs book of life

And I wept much, because no man was found worthy to open and to read the book, neither to look thereon. - Revelation 5:4

If this interpretation is not correct why all the ado?

I find more churches going the way of the Laodicean church age. I do not believe Rome is an issue here as they are struggling with the same issues as everyone else.

 

[Yeshua1]

The link doesnt work anymore, not quite sure why, but the text says it all..

"Pope Benedict XVI has reasserted the universal primacy of the Roman Catholic Church, approving a document released Tuesday that says Orthodox churches were defective and that other Christian denominations were not true churches.....

In the latest document, formulated as five questions and answers, the Vatican seeks to set the record straight on Vatican II's ecumenical intent, saying some contemporary theological interpretation had been 'erroneous or ambiguous' and had prompted confusion and doubt.

It restates key sections of a 2000 document the pope wrote when he was prefect of the congregation, 'Dominus Iesus,' which set off a firestorm of criticism among Protestant and other Christian denominations because it said they were not true churches but merely ecclesial communities and therefore did not have the 'means of salvation......MSN | Outlook, Office, Skype, Bing, Breaking News, and Latest Videos

So, you can see how ecumenism was just a bait to lure the unwary churches, using the old lies of entanglement.

The true church of christ is not Rome, Sda, or Baptist, but all of the redeemed!
They refuse to acknowledge either Pope or Ellen White!

 

[Noah Hirsch]

A question the churches of the Reformation have to ask themselves, is Rome seen as the "voice" of the Christian world. Unfortunately, that's becoming what the churches of the Reformation are allowing through ecumenism, as because most Christians have no idea about what Rome states or declares.

YouTube - Vatican demands for - POPE TO BE KING OF YOUR CONSCIENCE! #1

YouTube - Vatican demands for - POPE TO BE KING OF YOUR CONSCIENCE! #2

Holy See Insists That It Has Right to Speak
Says It Participates in International Community as Guardian of Man

ROME, NOV. 28, 2007 (Zenit.org).- The human being has dignity and a transcendent dimension, and this is why an independent moral authority, such as the Holy See, has a role to play in international organizations, says an official at the Vatican Secretariat of State.

Monsignor Pietro Parolin, undersecretary for relations with states, affirmed..."The Catholic Church is the only religious institution that can enter into diplomatic relations and that interests itself in international rights, acting through the Holy See, an international sovereign subject of singular characteristics," Monsignor Parolin said.

He explained that an adequate understanding of the Holy See, as such, requires two distinctions. First, one must bear in mind that the Holy See cannot simply be identified with the Church, as a community of believers. And second, it cannot be identified with Vatican City State, a geographical place that assures the freedom of the Roman Pontiff. 'The Holy See is the Holy Father himself inasmuch as he is an independent, universal, spiritual authority, together with the organizations of the Roman Curia that collaborate with his mission,' ............

The principles of the ecumenical movement were spelled out at Vatican II and it was asserted that the main aim of the entire ecumenical effort was to bring about the recognition of the supremacy of the bishop of Rome. In order for churches to unite, all churches must recognize the primacy of the papal See. Pope John Paul II, in September 1995, issued a similar statement in which he claimed that recognition of the primacy of the pope is essential for church unity. The headline of the article in the Catholic newspaper, Southern Cross, September 17, 1995, read:
"For unity all churches must accept papal authority.
The Catechism of the Catholic Church also states:
Christ bestowed unity on his Church from the beginning. This unity, we believe, subsists in the Catholic Church as something she can never lose, and we hope that it will continue to increase until the end of time. Article 820
The final object of ecumenism, as Catholics conceive it, is unity in Faith, worship, and the acknowledgement of supreme spiritual authority of the Bishop of Rome." Priest J.Cornell
For the Catholic Church, this unity that must be achieved, does not only apply to the separated Reformation Churches, but includes all the people of the world:

In 1975, the growing partnership between Protestantism and Catholicism was demonstrated by the release of a joint common catechism. This 720 page book offers comprehensive statements of the Christian faith and, according to the editors, was written:
"to help ensure that Christians cooperate within their own communities in the common growth of the churches towards that unity in variety, which is the goal of all ecumenical effort."

This document encourages many compromises, and brushes aside basic Biblical precepts with impunity.The churches of the Reformation saw the errors and wrong doctrines and came out of it, yet they seem to be drifting right back to it without anyone at the wheel. Here is from my buddy Amo....
All those who will not continue the Reformation, have nowhere else to go but back to Rome. There will be many more in the near future no doubt. All roads of this world lead to Rome. Only the straight and narrow leads away from it. She is destined, according to biblical prophecy, to once again ride not only the the kings of Europe again, but the kings of all the earth. Anyone paying attention can see her ever expanding influence over the same. Will Durant said it well.

When Christianity conquered Rome the ecclesiastical structure of the pagan church, the title and vestments of the pontifex maximus, the worship of the Great Mother and a multitude of comforting divinities, the sense of supersensible presences everywhere, the joy or solemnity of old festivals, and the pageantry of immemorial ceremony, passed like maternal blood into the new religion, and captive Rome captured her conqueror. The reins and skill of government were handed down by a dying empire to a virile papacy; the lost power of the broken sword was rewon by the magic of the consoling word; the armies of the state were replaced by the missionaries of the Church moving in all directions along the Roman roads; and the revolted provinces, accepting Christianity, again acknowledged the sovereignty of Rome. Through the long struggles of the Age of Faith the authority of the ancient capital persisted and grew, until in the Renaissance the classic culture seemed to rise from the grave, and the immortal city became once more the center of summit of the world's life and wealth and art. When, in 1936, Rome celebrated the 2689th anniversary of her foundation, she could look back upon the most impressive continuity of government and civilization in the history of mankind. May she rise again.(CAESAR AND CHRIST, A history of Roman Civilization and of Christianity from their beginnings to A.D.325. By Will Durant-1944)

Rev 17:18 And the woman which thou sawest is that great city, which reigneth over the kings of the earth...

...Rome is Babylon and ecumenism is the snare.

Yes, this ecumenicalism is the road to apostasy. Indeed, the embracing of those we know to venerate Mary and hold that Christ is offered again and again in the Mass is itself apostasy. All the corruption and error in so-called “Evangelicalism” is why I consider myself a non-conformist puritan rather than an Evangelical anymore. Much of so-called “Evangelicalism” is abominable.

 

[Particular]

Long before you walked this earth, long before John Smythe walked this earth, there were the leaders of the early Christian Curch who took over after all the Apostles died out.

They were called the Early Church Fathers, the Bishops who called the synods and councils that determined the basics of the Christian faith. Their legitimacy came directly from the apostles, men who had been ordained by their predecessors all the way back to the very last Apostle, from one Bisop to another. You act like none of that ever happened.

People who stood up and started their own little churches, who came up with their own interpretation of things were dismissed out of hand as the heretics they were. So yes, they were correct when they said where there is no valid bishop, there is no valid church. They took that stuff very seriously back then.

We had but one Christian Chuch, but one denomination, but one doctrine, not the thousands that exist today. You yourself are a member of a sect within a sect, are you not? Case closed!

I understand Church history. That doesn't mean that a church without a bishop is not God's church. Once again you are falling upon your tradition, outside of scripture and then attempt to make a definitive statement.
Walpole's assertion has no legs.

 

[Marooncat79]

You can reject whomever you want, as I likewise do with rejecting your interpretation of the scriptures and your founders interpretation of them.

Interesting that you deny the words of Jesus

 

[Adonia]

Interesting that you deny the words of Jesus

Me? You need to look into a mirror.

 

[Dave G]

I'd like to answer these, Adonia, just so you know where some of us stand:

Do you believe in the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ

Yes.

and that he offers us forgiveness because of that fact?

No.
Christ does not offer anyone anything.

He promises eternal life to those who believe on Him ( John 3:16, John 3:36, John 5:24 ), from the heart ( Romans 10:9-10 ).
It was never an offer that requires something that men can provide, similar to a market deal.

Eternal life is a gift ( Romans 6:23 ), given by God to those He decides to have mercy on ( Romans 9:14-18 ).

Does you sect hold that reality as the focal point of worship?

My "sect" is the same one that Paul was accused of being part of ( Acts of the Apostles 28:16-22 ).

Respectfully, we don't worship God in a building that's built like a temple and has an altar.
We don't need a temple, we are His temple ( 1 Corinthians 3:16 ).
He builds the temple, and it is a spiritual one, not a physical one ( 1 Peter 2:5 ).

The Old Testament Law of Moses and its elements are gone, replaced by a living relationship with the living God through His Spirit within us, and based on the work of His Son on our behalf ( Colossians 2:13-14 ).

We worship Him in Spirit and in truth ( John 4:24 ).

I see, so it was YOUR Grand Poobah, Mr. John Smythe who finally brought forth the correct gospel after some 1600 years. How nice.

The Gospel is the Gospel of Jesus Christ, not John Smythe, and it does not belong to the Catholic Church.
It belongs to the Lord, and He uses it to call His people out of every tongue, tribe and nation from under Heaven, and from all the ends of the earth.

It is the Gospel, and it existed centuries before what we now know as the Catholic Church ever came into being.

Time is transcended and we are there on Calvary, at the foot of the cross - just as Jesus intended and you folks reject that truth.

We believe and accept that Christ is risen, and that the cross had a purpose...
To cleanse us from our sins and to reconcile a people that God has chosen for Himself, to Him.

We don't dwell there, nor do we permanently immortalize and try to capture one moment of His suffering for us in an image.
We've moved beyond that to where He is now....

Sitting at the right hand of our Father, making intercession for us.
Triumphant over sin, death and Hell, and waiting to rule as He rightfully should.

We also wait as patiently as possible to see Him again.

May He bless you greatly, sir.