Why do protestant groups insist on saving people that don’t need saving…?

Show me the documents from the period to show that then

[ April 18, 2006, 01:21 PM: Message edited by: Matt Black ]

 

Eliyahu,

Good link there. Lots of interesting reading in it. Much truth. Praise God for His loyal witnesses all through the ages.

Thanks

Mike

 

Are you implying that there were no other Christians in the world between 313 and 1160? If so, you are the perfect product of Roman Catholic revisionist history. You are living in absolute, and willful ignorance.

By for now. Y. b. in C. Keith

 

Matt Black said...

And Kamoroso said...

I agree. It sure is looking like they have Matt "hook line and sinker", as they say.

Totally closed to truth...totally receptive to error.

Very very sad.

Mike

 

So the answer's 'no', then? OK.

 

Need more sources of information?

Check out: Infidels.org -- Read after: Joseph Mccabe, "The Popes and Their Church."

There is a wealth of information to be gleaned among the skeptic/atheistic bias--Joe was a monk at 20, spent most of his 87 years as an outspoken atheist.

Good midnight research.

"You shall know the Truth; the Truth shall make you free."

Selah,

Bro. James

 

Checked it out. Written 1918 ie: not in the years 313-1160, so doesn't qualify.

 

Are you checking out the bibliographies?

Is your Bible an original? How do you know it is authentic?

This is about a preponderance of circumstantial evidence, which corroborates the scripture; gleaned from the writings of the victorious--in this world. There may not be any notarized documents. That does not change the fact of it--
kind of like the flood of Noah--scientists are calling it a hydro-cataclysm the extent of which has yet to be determined. My copy of the Bible says it was a worldwide flood which covered the highest mountain. Where is the source document? Many ancient civilizations have record of a big flood. We find seashells on mountaintops. Can we conclude there has been a big hydro something or other somewhere in the past? Where is the document? Do not need to find the Ark either.

Now what?

Selah,

Bro. James

 

As already indicated, the authenticity of the Bible is a red herring in this discussion.

 

I learn from you more. BTW, Pilgrim Church in English is quite worthwhile to buy. It is really a good book.

 

Just trying to establish a precedent Matthew.

That God has provided a divine and necessarily infallible standard is a "given" to some--it is part of being personally acquainted with one's Lord and Master. Some doubt. Sola Scriptura is a "given" to some. Some doubt. Some are still "kicking against the pricks".

Selah,

Bro. James

 

You must be relying on a certain history now, to refuse the other history. Does it have all the proofs which you can verify?


These days Turkish Government deny the Armenian Genocide in 1915, and there are not so much proof for that, because Turkey destroyed the most evidences, then do you agree with Turkish Government?

Most of Albigenes documents and books were destroyed by RCC, and therefore now you trust RCC comments on Albigenes, and you condemn Albigenes as Heretics, right? RCC never presented any documents written by Albigenes themselves, as they never presented the documents by Nestorius himself either. Can we judge the defendants by the criteria and by the evidences presented by the plaintiff only? Moreover, the plaintiff in this case murdered them, eradicated the people there, the Plaintiff maintains Idolatry, Purgatory, Papal Infallibility, Compulsory Celibacy, Infant Baptism, etc which cannot be accepted by the True Believers even today, while those defendants refused such paganism, as the victims of the horrible masacres. Which one do you think you should trust?

Matt, I want to hear from you, as a lawyer, a fair judgment on this case of history.

 

At least the Scriptures are documents! All I'm asking for is some documents dating from 313-1160 which support the thesis being advanced. Is that so difficult?

[ETA - Eliyahu, you ask for my input as a lawyer ref the Albigenses in particular. OK, then, two points of pleading:

1. Albigense sources - I have already referred either on this thread or on the Catholicism thread to the existence of the Ritual Cathare de Lyon as such a source document. Interesting reading....they were not Christian...

2. Catholic sources - yes, I accept history is written by the victors and that, part from #1 above, we have little to go on except Catholic sources as to what the Cathars/ Albigenses believed and practised. However, I want to make a point here: when you read the Catholic sources (eg: New Advent) as to what the Waldenses, the Lollards and the Hussites believed, they are remarkably honest: they may not agree with what those groups believed but they are quite candid in laying out the proto-evangelical beliefs of these groups and they would agree with you and Bro James that these groups could rightly be regarded by evangelicals as their spiritual forbears. Not so the Cathar-Albigenses - the Catholic sources are very clear that this group believed something very different to modern evangelicals. My question to you is this: if the Catholics are guilty of misrepresenting the truth re the Cathar-Albigenses as you allege, how come they've told the truth about the other three medieval groups?

[ April 19, 2006, 01:57 PM: Message edited by: Matt Black ]

 

Matt,
For example, I post here the link for 300-850 AD period and it mentions about the sources. If you have any objection to it, you can present the opposite argument.

http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/thailand/PC-B-034.HTM

Otherwise, if you just refuse the history without any reasoning, then you are confessing that you are biased with pre-conception already.

 

That period was dominated by RCC, and if any scholar published any book, then RCC eradicated them as they did with Heugnots in later time too.

Why didn't Roman Catholic preserve any documents written by Albigenes ? Ask RCC.

 

I followed the link - no mention of sources apart from someone called Kattenbusch whom I presume post-dates the period with which we are concerned.

 

That period was dominated by RCC, and if any scholar published any book, then RCC eradicated them as they did with Heugnots in later time too.

Why didn't Roman Catholic preserve any documents written by Albigenes ? Ask RCC. </font>[/QUOTE]See my extended/ edited post two up.

 

Hussites, Waldenses, Lollards are difficult for Catholic to deny, because they showed their faith quite well and they left the records quite a lot.
On the other hand Albigenes and Cathari were less organized and they lived in the era of no-printing Tech available. They themselves didn't distribute much literatures as Eastern Asian Christians failed to do so. Then RC take such opportunity to cendemn them as Heretics.
I am very sure that they must have contained some wrong doctrines as even Reformers made many mistakes, but the key issue was whether they had the confession of Being Born Again or not, and I had such a glimpse that they were born again believers when I read Pilgrim Church written by EH Broadbent.

 

The Waldenses existed nearly 300 years before the printing press was invented and lived in remote Alpine valleys. The Cathars on the other hand were part of the fabric of the rich troubadour culture of south-west France which was cultivated by the Counts of Toulouse. So I'm far from convinced of your above theory

 

Why doesn't RC have any record of the defendants? Is it because RC accused them without cause? If Rc accused them there must be any evidence from the defendants.