I give you an "E" for Effort in attempting to corrupt the Truth.
The reason why we had depart from your ways 500 years ago!
-
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Confession for Baptist’s and Protestants in general
- Thread starter Cathode
- Start date
I give you an "E" for Effort in attempting to corrupt the Truth.
The reason why we had depart from your ways 500 years ago!
No. Protestantism declared the RCC apostate when it condemned the Gospel to Hell at the Council of Trent
The Church Fathers definitely adhered to the Solas even up to the Reformation
I have obsessively studied Patristics for 40 years, and no, you are in gross error here.
Patristics isn’t Protestant history, I can tell you that.
Early Christian history is NOT RCC history
I give you an "E" for Effort in attempting to corrupt the Truth.
The reason why we had depart from your ways 500 years ago!
I simply quoted the Scripture and furnished you with the Ancient Apostolic understanding that the Fathers and even Apostolic Fathers had.
If Protestantism is right and the Bible was the sole authority, then all Protestantism would be Lutheran and Luther would be a new oracle of God.
Instead Protestantism is a house divided against itself, and Luther preached a different gospel to the Apostles.
It didn’t take an angel of light to deceive Protestantism, it only took an obese, virtueless, German drunkard.
So today I quote the Fathers who knew the Apostles and I share their same interpretations and doctrines from scripture after 2000 years and you call them apostate.
These are apostate? They knew and worked and lived with the Apostles, were appointed by them, and were martyrs for Christ by the pagans.
Think the better of it, and study the Fathers, don’t make Luther your apostle with his new gospel, return to the Early Christian Apostolic beliefs.
I simply quoted the Scripture and furnished you with the Ancient Apostolic understanding that the Fathers and even Apostolic Fathers had.
If Protestantism is right and the Bible was the sole authority, then all Protestantism would be Lutheran and Luther would be a new oracle of God.
Instead Protestantism is a house divided against itself, and Luther preached a different gospel to the Apostles.
It didn’t take an angel of light to deceive Protestantism, it only took an obese, virtueless, German drunkard.
So today I quote the Fathers who knew the Apostles and I share their same interpretations and doctrines from scripture after 2000 years and you call them apostate.
These are apostate? They knew and worked and lived with the Apostles, were appointed by them, and were martyrs for Christ by the pagans.
Think the better of it, and study the Fathers, don’t make Luther your apostle with his new gospel, return to the Early Christian Apostolic beliefs.
I'll take the German drunkard over the Pope every time.
I'll take the German drunkard over the Pope every time.
You took the new gospel the Apostles warned about, Luther is the someone preaching the different gospel.
This isn’t anything new, this Protestant rebellion in the New Covenant had its counterpart in the Old Covenant.
Korah had the same animus and even words against Moses that Luther had against the Pope.
Both used God’s word to rebel against God’s chosen Authority.
It didn’t end well for Korah.
For those who may not be very strong in Christian History, I point you herr
Fanciful and itrelevantA Baptist pastor attending a Catholic exorcism was asked if he needed confession among others. One guy said he wanted to go to confession and did, but the Baptist said he confessed directly to God. The others thought the guys response a little strange. The Baptist had asked the priest if he could attend a Catholic Exorcism to see how it was done.
Once the Exorcism began, the demon manifested and locked onto the Baptist and said that since the His baptism at the age of 12, he had committed over 600 mortal sins that he had not confessed and began to name them off in quick succession.
Where Confession is very necessary is before Exorcisms and this is because demons see the mortal sins of those present and name them. They can also harm those not in a state of Grace.
One of the disturbing things about the Protestant rebellion, is the loss of the ministry of reconciliation, where Protestants do not have this Apostolic sacrament available to them anymore if they commit mortal sins. So they accumulate these sins on their souls.
Their change of theology does not even teach about mortal sin, it’s a doctrine their forefathers rejected, so it is completely alien to them. The new doctrine of OSAS definitely doesn’t inform people about mortal sin or the necessity of Confession, in this theology they count themselves saved already.
In street ministry we have seen the same, possessed people naming the sins of others and making their claim on them.
The demons can not see sin on those who have gone to confession and are in a state of Grace. People in a state of Grace are a pain for them to be near.
“In addition to these there is also a seventh, albeit hard and laborious: the remission of sins through penance…when he does not shrink from declaring his sin to a priest of the Lord.” Origen, Homilies on Leviticus, 2:4 (A.D. 248).
“Moreover, how much are they both greater in faith and better in their fear, who, although bound by no crime of sacrifice to idols or of certificate, yet, since they have even thought of such things, with grief and simplicity confess this very thing to God’s priests, and make the conscientious avowal, put off from them the load of their minds, and seek out the salutary medicine even for slight and moderate wounds, knowing that it is written, ‘God is not mocked.’ God cannot be mocked, nor deceived, nor deluded by any deceptive cunning. Yea, he sins the more, who, thinking that God is like man, believes that he evades the penalty of his crime if he has not openly admitted his crime…I entreat you, beloved brethren, that each one should confess his own sin, while he who has sinned is still in this world, while his confession may be received, while the satisfaction and remission made by the priests are pleasing to the Lord?” Cyprian, To the Lapsed, 28-29 (A.D. 251).
“It is necessary to confess our sins to those whom the dispensation of God’s mysteries is entrusted.” Basil, Rule Briefly Treated, 288 (A.D. 374).
“These are capital sins, brethren, these are mortal.” Pacian of Barcelona, Penance, 4 (A.D. 385).
You took the new gospel the Apostles warned about, Luther is the someone preaching the different gospel.
This isn’t anything new, this Protestant rebellion in the New Covenant had its counterpart in the Old Covenant.
Korah had the same animus and even words against Moses that Luther had against the Pope.
Both used God’s word to rebel against God’s chosen Authority.
It didn’t end well for Korah.
Moses was a man of God and Korah received just reward.
ON the other hand, the Pope was a blasphemer and the German drunkard found grace in the eyes of the Lord.
For those who may not be very strong in Christian History, I point you herr
I have seen this one before and I find it humerus to observe how he prefaces his lecture saying that for most Protestants the first 75 % of Christianity is a complete blank.
That’s because Protestantism doesn’t have any history before Luther, Protestantism is founded upon its one Apostle Luther who preached a different gospel to all preceding Christianity.
Luther’s teachings are new and human founded with no Apostolic lineage.
Read the Fathers for any length of time and will see that Protestantism is alien to the Early Christians.
I have seen this one before and I find it humerus to observe how he prefaces his lecture saying that for most Protestants the first 75 % of Christianity is a complete blank.
That’s because Protestantism doesn’t have any history before Luther, Protestantism is founded upon its one Apostle Luther who preached a different gospel to all preceding Christianity.
Luther’s teachings are new and human founded with no Apostolic lineage.
Read the Fathers for any length of time and will see that Protestantism is alien to the Early Christians.
Our Church history comes from Scripture, not from a bunch of blasphemers who changed that history to be theirs in the traditions of men.
Yes, just look at how the RCC has persecuted real believers in the name of an apostate Gospel.
Again, Christ is our High Priest.For mortal sins, either perfect contrition is needed or Absolution from an Apostolic Successor.
If you have perfect contrition directly to God you will be forgiven and restored to a state of Grace. But you will not know it for sure, and thats only if you have perfect contrition.
However with Apostolic absolution, your contrition does not need to be perfect and you may only have a fear of Hell for instance. But you will know for sure because it has been declared by the priest who forgives sin in the Person of Christ.
The power of forgiving or retaining sin is God breathed on the Apostles as God breathed life into Adam, the Apostolic ministry restores life to those who have fallen into grievous sin.
That is why confession is the sure way to restore people back to a state of Grace.
“All mortal sins are to be submitted to the keys of the Church and all can be forgiven; but recourse to these keys is the only, the necessary, and the certain way to forgiveness. Unless those who are guilty of grievous sin have recourse to the power of the keys, they cannot hope for eternal salvation. Open your lips, them, and confess your sins to the priest. Confession alone is the true gate to Heaven.” Augustine, Christian Combat (A.D. 397).
“Just as in the Old Testament the priest makes the leper clean or unclean, so in the New Testament the bishop and presbyter binds or looses not those who are innocent or guilty, but by reason of their office, when they have heard various kinds of sins, they know who is to be bound and who loosed.” Jerome, Commentary on Matthew, 3:16,19 (A.D. 398).
Only God can forgive sin per JesusI would like to encourage Baptist’s or Protestants in general who have had grievous sin in their life after Baptism, to seriously consider confession to a priest , especially if death is a near possibility.
It is biblical and all the Early Christians practiced it. It’s not something to be scared of, rather it is something to be glad of and thankful for.
It is a great gift established by Jesus Himself.
Ask him, Why are the names of the “Apostolic successors” not included as foundational stones in Revelation?When I get to New Jerusalem, I'm going to look at the names on those stones, and I'll also look for the names of the Popes.
If I see the names of the Popes in the foundation of New Jerusalem, I'll find you and apologize, but until then.......
Judas is cut out. There are only 12 Gates to the Kingdom.
Only from the Apostles comes the Apostolic lineage.
It would be very tedious to reckon all the successions of Bishops, even by Irenaeus’ time, so he points out the successions of Bishops of the Church of Rome, which was the most important Church, as it is today.
“Since, however, it would be very tedious, in such a volume as this, to reckon up the successions of all the Churches, we do put to confusion all those who, in whatever manner, whether by an evil self-pleasing, by vainglory, or by blindness and perverse opinion, assemble in unauthorized meetings; [we do this, I say,] by indicating that tradition derived from the apostles, of the very great, the very ancient, and universally known Church founded and organized at Rome by the two most glorious apostles, Peter and Paul; as also [by pointing out] the faith preached to men, which comes down to our time by means of the successions of the bishops. For it is a matter of necessity that every Church should agree with this Church, on account of its pre- eminent authority, that is, the faithful everywhere, inasmuch as the apostolical tradition has been preserved continuously by those [faithful men] who exist everywhere.” Irenaeus, Against Heresies, 3:3:2 (A.D. 180).
“It is my purpose to write an account of the successions of the holy apostles, as well as of the times which have elapsed from the days of our Saviour to our own; and to relate the many important events which are said to have occurred in the history of the Church; and to mention those who have governed and presided over the Church in the most prominent parishes, and those who in each generation have proclaimed the divine word either orally or in writing… When Nero was in the eighth year of his reign, Annianus succeeded Mark the evangelist in the administration of the parish of Alexandria…Linus …was Peter’s successor in the episcopate of the church there…Clement also, who was appointed third bishop of the church at Rome.” Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History,1:1,2:24, (A.D. 325).
“[W]e shall not recede from the faith … as once laid it continues even to this say, through the tradition of the fathers, according to the succession from the apostles, even to the discussion had at Nicea against the heresy which had, at that period, sprung up.” Hilary of Poitiers, History Fragment 7 (ante A.D. 367).
“[D]uring the days of that Anicetus, bishop of Rome, who succeeded Pius and his predecessors, For, in Rome, Peter and Paul were the first both apostles and bishops; then came Linus, then Cletus … However the succession of the bishops in Rome was in the following order. Peter and Paul, and Cletus, Clement…” Epiphanius, Panarion, 27:6 (A.D. 377).
Bishop Athanasius was a Successor from Mark.
“He [St. Athanasius] is led up to the throne of Saint Mark, to succeed him in piety, no less than in office; in the latter indeed at a great distance from him, in the former, which is the genuine right of succession, following him closely. For unity in doctrine deserves unity in office; and a rival teacher sets up a rival throne; the one is a successor in reality, the other but in name. For it is not the intruder, but he whose rights are intruded upon, who is the successor, not the lawbreaker, but the lawfully appointed, not the man of contrary opinions, but the man of the same faith; if this is not what we mean by successor, he succeeds in the same sense as disease to health, darkness to light, storm to calm, and frenzy to sound sense.” Gregory of Nazianzen, Oration 21:8 (A.D. 380).
“For they [Novatians] have not the succession of Peter, who hold not the Chair of Peter, which they rend by wicked schism; and this, too, they do, wickedly denying that sins can be forgiven even in the Church, whereas it was said to Peter: ‘I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven. and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound also in heaven, and whatsoever thou shall loose on earth shall be loosed also in heaven.'” Ambrose, Concerning Repentance, 7:33 (A.D. 384).
“It has been ordained by the apostles and their successors, that nothing be read in the Catholic Church, except the law, and the prophets, and the Gospels.” Philastrius of Brescia, On Heresies (ante A.D. 387).
“‘To the fellow-Bishops and Deacons.” What is this? Were there several Bishops of one city? Certainly not; but he called the Presbyters so. For then they still interchanged the titles, and the Bishop was called a Deacon. For this cause in writing to Timothy, he said, “Fulfill thy ministry,’ when he was a Bishop. For that he was a Bishop appears by his saying to him, ‘Lay hands hastily on no man.’ (1 Tim. v. 22.) And again, ‘Which was given thee with the laying on of the hands of the Presbytery.’ (1 Tim. iv. 14.) Yet Presbyters would not have laid hands on a Bishop. And again, in writing to Titus, he says, ‘For this cause I left thee in Crete, that thou shouldest appoint elders in every city, as I gave thee charge. If any man is blameless, the husband of one wife’ (Tit. i. 5, 6); which he says of the Bishop. And after saying this, he adds immediately, ‘For the Bishop must be blameless, as God’s steward, not self willed:’ (Tit. i. 7.)” John Chrysostom, Homilies on Phillipians, 1:1 (A.D. 404).
Although I totally reject papal authority, why is it so important that Peter be the 1st pope in Rome? What was so special about Rome at that time other than population?
Couldn’t he have been pope in Jerusalem where Christianity came to fruition? Is not God Lord over all?
Your theology is founded on denials. The denial of scriptural examples, and the denial of the Early Christian Fathers and Bishops, even the Apostolic Fathers who knew the Apostles personally.
Read the Fathers and they will give you the authentic understanding of Scripture and authentic Christian Doctrines.
Unfortunately you have been indoctrinated in the new novel heresies of the Protestant rebellion, which is a dogs breakfast of conflicting doctrines and erroneous interpretations itself.
The Fathers teach authentic Christianity.
If they do why do you reject so much of their teachings? Ie sola Fide, sola scriptura, sola gratia and sola Christus?
Yet Scripture says “confess your sins to one another “
But and to the priest does not appear
So now they aren’t a bunch of Apostates?
All of the Fathers are Catholic history, not Protestant or Baptist history which was human founded traditions that are alien to the Fathers and Early Christians, and to each other.
The original Apostles did not believe everything that the RCC says they did in the manner portrayed by the RCC
Yes there are, and ignorance doesn’t help.
Please help me see where the Bible differentiates between types venial and mortal
I always understand they He cleanses us from all sin
Do you have a scriptural reference for that please?