Here's you chance Protestants

What I don't understand is this --

The 40 days of Great Lent includes Sundays, and begins on Clean Monday (two days earlier than Ash Wednesday) and are immediately followed by what are considered distinct periods of fasting, Lazarus Saturday and Palm Sunday, which in turn are followed straightway by Holy Week. --

How in the world is this time of year associated with Christ's fast in the wilderness - given that his ministry starts in the fall of the year when He was baptized by John?

In any case - as a voluntary symbolic fast - to remember Christ's fast of both food and water for 40 days - does not seem like a bad thing to me.

 

If Jesus served only as our example, we are all doomed.

 

Could only be said by who thinks the example set by Jesus is worthless.

Our purpose in life is his example.

The sad thing Brian is not going to read this, he just puts folks on ignore.

1 Peter 2
21For you have been called for this purpose, since Christ also suffered for you, leaving you an example for you to follow in His steps,

1 John 2
6the one who says he abides in Him ought himself to walk in the same manner as He walked.

Matthew 11

28“Come to Me, all who are weary and heavy-laden, and I will give you rest. 29“Take My yoke upon you and learn from Me, for I am gentle and humble in heart, and YOU WILL FIND REST FOR YOUR SOULS. 30“For My yoke is easy and My burden is light.”

Matthew 10
38“And he who does not take his cross and follow after Me is not worthy of Me.

Matthew 7

24“Therefore everyone who hears these words of Mine and acts on them, may be compared to a wise man who built his house on the rock. 25“And the rain fell, and the floods came, and the winds blew and slammed against that house; and yet it did not fall, for it had been founded on the rock. 26“Everyone who hears these words of Mine and does not act on them, will be like a foolish man who built his house on the sand. 27“The rain fell, and the floods came, and the winds blew and slammed against that house; and it fell—and great was its fall.”


Acts 14
22strengthening the souls of the disciples, encouraging them to continue in the faith, and saying, “Through many tribulations we must enter the kingdom of God.”

 

Baptists are not Protestants anyway

 

Of course they are newbie. You are fighting against reason.

Please inform us of any Baptists of the 17th century you denied they were indeed Protestant.

 

Your pagan occult practices will not save you, only the resurrected Son of God can save you. Christ is not on the cross anymore, He is Risen and seated at God the Father's Right Hand! Turn from your false religion and Worship King Jesus in the Beauty of His Holiness!

 

Lent is for me a time when I try with God's gracious help to let go of those things which interfere with my relationship with Him and focus on those practices which improve it. Of course we should do this every day all year round but it's interesting and noteworthy that He has chosen to place us in a creation which is seasonal, with different activities appropriate for different times and seasons, which in turn is carried over to the liturgical year, first for the Jews and then for their successors, the Church. Also of interest is that Satan is called (amongst many other things) the Lord of the Flies, and the lifespan of your common fly species is 40 days...

 

Fasting is often done for the glory of self, not God.

It is infinitely better that we abstain from teachings that pervert the gospel than we abstain from food.

 

We must remember that JESUS WAS MORE THAN JUST A MAN. While HE could go 40 days without food or water, WE can't!

Besides that, if we do something we KNOW is harmful to our bodies, are we not sinning?

And NOWHERE does Scripture tell us to try to emulate Jesus in such a manner! besides that, WE can only emulate Jesus up to a point. We can't walk on water, make something from nothing, heal all manners of illness, nor save anyone from his/her sins.

And besides that, I won't follow any man-made RCC practices.

 

Bit of a dialogue of the deaf you have going here, Adonia...

 

Cult? We Catholics come and go. 1 out 5 probably go to Mass.

Personally I haven't been in mass couple years, its been a strange adventure I went to Baptist church for 5 years and then last with Jehovah's Witness bout 3 years.

Catholic teaching is you are required to stay true to your good conscience even if it pitts you against catholic teaching.
That to go against your good conscience is a sin.

A cult has to have terrorist and demonizing of all else system in play. Fear tactics, Like if you don't agree with my way then you go to hell or everyone else out there serve(s)r(s) the devil.

 

It's also ritualistic, superstitious, and pagan.

 

nope

Baptist belief existed long before and separate from the reformation

Cardinal Hosius (1504-1579)
Cardinal Hosius says, "Were it not that the Baptists have been grievously tormented and cut off with the knife during the past 1,200 years, they would swarm in greater number than all the Reformers"

It is also evident that the Baptists were not Protestants because they were fiercely persecuted by the Protestant Reformers and their followers. Uncounted thousands of them lost their goods, their lands, and their lives in these persecutions. Konred Grebel died in prison in 1526. Felix Manz was drowned by the authorities at Zurich in 1527. Noted Baptist leader Baithauser Hubmaier was burned alive at the stake in Vienna March 10, 1528. Three days later his wife was drowned by being thrown over the Danube bridge with a stone tied to her neck. The facts abundantly attest that historically Baptists are not Protestants.

 

What a joke. He is talking about ANABAPTISTS. Apart from re-baptizing they wouldn't share your "faith alone" theology. Which is why protestants put them to death just as much as everyone else.

Anabaptist are NOTHING like Baptist. Your best connection to Anabaptist are Amish, Mennonites, Hutterites.


The Anglican priest who Invented Baptists John Smyth understood the problem of not having a pedigree to Jesus Christ so he left to join the Mennonites.

The only reason your trying to make the connection is YOU also are starting to see the problem of pedigree.

The words of scripture next to never change, but the meaning the reader puts changes all the time. The right genuine meaning can only be handed down, it can't be made up.

So when people make up fake rules that are not found in scripture and history shows no one ever taught that, it has no legs to stand on.

Fake Rules Like "Sola Scriptura".

 

no , Anabaptist and Brethren, Mennonites are reformers.

Baptist existed long before reformation as that Cathlic Cardinal who ran the Second Diet of Speier states

not always called Baptist but the beliefs were Montanists (150 A.D.), the Novatians (240 A.D.), Donatists (305 A.D.), Albigenses (1022 A.D.), Waldensians (1170 A.D.)

Even a fool, when he holdeth his peace, is counted wise: and he that shutteth his lips is esteemed a man of understanding.

 

John Calvin is the first reformer and jokingly gave Anabaptist a 2nd baptism by drowning them.

Please by all means if you share the exact faith of any of those heretical groups say that then.

Montanists had a Montanus as a prophet who claimed : " "I am the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit.""

They were bit close to Pentecostals with prophecy trumping and overriding doctrine. Women priests and bishops. ect.

Novatians and Donatists very "works alone" based in as much as they kicked folks out when they failed. Hardly a once saved always saved stance.

You need a pedigree of someone who taught the things you believe yourself now being taught then.

 

C.H. Spurgeon well summarized our position:

We believe that the Baptists are the original Christians. We did not commence our existence at the reformation, we were reformers before Luther or Calvin were born; we never came from the Church of Rome, for we were never in it, but we have an unbroken line up to the apostles themselves. We have always existed from the very days of Christ, and our principles, sometimes veiled and forgotten, like a river which may travel under ground for a little season, have always had honest and holy adherents . . . (Metropolitan Tabernacle Pulpit, 1861, p. 225.)
. . . we, known among men, in all ages, by various names, such as Donatists, Novatians, Paulicians, Petrobrussians, Cathari, Arnoldists, Hussites, Waldenses, Lollards, and Anabaptists, have always contended for the purity of the Church, and her distinctness and separation from human government. Our fathers were men inured to hardships, and unused to ease. They present to us, their children, an unbroken line which comes legitimately from the apostles, not through the filth of Rome . . . (Ibid., p. 613.)


maybe I misstated a group, but not all . These groups were not totally in agreement with modern Baptist teaching but did have an element of personal action and responsibilty. The position is still the same Baptist have are not Protesyants

 

Cathars?! Really?!

 

The Bogmils.