Challange for protestant

[Mateo el Feo]

[quote name='Eutychus' post='1039736' date='Aug 8 2006, 12:30 PM']FWIW, EKKLESIA translates best as MILITIA/AD HOC GROUP, or people called out in a time of trouble. It was NEVER THEN understood to be a worldwide denomination, with ranks and orders culminating in a city state ruled by an emperorer, with dukes, barons, and knights. { Pope, Cardinals, Archbishops, Bishops, Priests } that was the Nicolaitan modality that Jesus said he HATED and for emphasis repeated that twice in Revelation in His revelation to John to TWO seperate local churches. The church was not supposed to mirror the Moses/High Priest model, but be a flat localized congration of believers, that only came together in a brief period to settle matters of interest to the entire body.[/quote]Using this logic, one must conclude that St. Paul had no right to dictate to these "flat localized congregations of believers" in his epistles. Right? Could the primitive local church's reject the teachings of St. Paul or the other apostles? I would ask if a modern protestant church could reject St. Paul's Epistles; but, many already do...

The Council of Jerusalem seems to indicate a single group that could make decisions for the entire Church.

Let's use this to return to the actual thread topic. Can two "flat localized congregations of believers" come to opposite conclusions regarding the necessity of Baptism for salvation? If so, are their own opposing "truths" valid for the members of each congregation? In other words, could Baptism be efficacious (i.e. conferring God's grace, removing original sin, etc) for one congregation and purely symbolic (i.e. no grace) for another?

[Eutychus]

[quote] Rather, it was the localization of the church in its very early history that was co-emergent with the bishop [b][u][color="#990000"]as head of an order of clerics[/color][/u][/b].[/quote]

Good grief.

Let's try this one again.

Starting with Revelation { you know that book they never teach Catholics other than Rev 12, and that improperly? } IMMEDIATELY we notice a particular HATE, yes indeed, HATE that Jesus exhibits towards a unique group of men, He identifies them as NICOLAITAN's { from the compound Greek NIKE = VICTORIOUS OVER, and LAOS = LAITY/COMMON MAN } ... or to make this perfectly clear, professional hierarcial clergy that rule over men and elevate themselves.

Now, is this a misapplication or a mistaken use of the word? Hardly, using that silly protestant idea of letting scripture interpret scripture, we zip over to Matthew 23 where, with the exception of the first sentence or two, and a substitution of Archbishop, Bishop, Cardinal and Pope for Pharisee, Rabbi, etc, you can find the modern and medieval Roman Catholic clergy clearly identified. Using the harshest language possible, over and over, Jesus condems that sort of position and pride in the churchmen of HIS DAY, and in Revelation, continues on and projects with a near fulfillment in the two churches mentioned with a far prophetic show of what and where it would go as the pagans came into the church and gradually morped what was to be a small, local, powerless group, into a pride filled, pomp, attraction and magnet for the men in silk and gilded hockeysticks who adored being called "your eminence, your excellency, holy father, father, and other such grandious pompous arrogant titles and living a live of the Roman aristocracy surrounded by fawning synchophants and art and the finest wine cellars and flunkies waiting on them hand and foot.

[b][u]And from this, YOU GET, that Jesus WANTED a PROFESSIONAL ORDER OF CLERICS?[/b][/u]

We must have been educated on different planets then. My 12 years of Catholic education had to be unlearned, and the Holy Spirit employed, to let me SEE what God wanted me to see, and forget what PROFESSIONAL CLERICS had brainwashed me to believe.

May you too, someday, be so blessed and get the blessings that accrue to those that learn and DO what is indicated in Revelation 18:4, the VERSE OF THE DAY for those called and tapped.

Edited August 8, 2006 by Eutychus

[Justified Saint]

Eutychus,

I stated a simple historical fact to illustrate the huge disconnect between your cut and paste whacked out conspiracy theories/interpretations and historical reality. Given the obvious confusion and agitation in your post, I'd say it achieved its purpose.

It is hard not to be dismissive when you have traded in your poor (unfortunately) Catholic education for an equally (indeed less) Protestant/fundamentalist one. Despite your occasional use of Greek words, you aren't fooling anyone (it is akin to using big words that you don't even understand).

I really don't care anything about your interpretation -- it's all over the place in terms of books and passages. I would suggest you go elsewhere if you want to pass of your readings for logical thought.

Now, if you want to return to the topic that would be another matter:

Is baptism necessary for salvation? Is repentance?

Edited August 8, 2006 by Justified Saint

[Mateo el Feo]

[quote name='Eutychus' post='1039736' date='Aug 8 2006, 12:30 PM']
Yeah, how horrid, rethinking all those extrabiblical practices that seeped into the EKKLESIA community as the pagan cultures around them seeped into the new religion.

A "Radical Departure" from Judaism....at first??

Have you even READ the book of Acts?

Try rereading chapter 2 again.[/quote]
As a matter of fact, I have read the Acts of the Apostles; and, I think that the differences between established Judaism and Christianity (i.e. "the Way") is most obvious in the book of Acts. Let's look at some more of the text.

[b]The Apostles' Teachings at odds with the Sadducees[/b]
Acts 4:1-2 ([url="http://www.usccb.org/nab/bible/acts/acts4.htm#v1"]link[/url])[quote name='Acts 4:1-2']While they were still speaking to the people, the priests, the captain of the temple guard, and the Sadducees confronted them, disturbed that they were teaching the people and proclaiming in Jesus the resurrection of the dead.[/quote]
Acts 5:17-18 ([url="http://www.usccb.org/nab/bible/acts/acts5.htm#v17"]link[/url])
[quote name='Acts 5:17-18']Then the high priest rose up and all his companions, that is, the party of the Sadducees, and, filled with jealousy, laid hands upon the apostles and put them in the public jail.[/quote]
[b]The Apostles' Teachings at odds with the Pharisees[/b]
Acts 15:5 ([url="http://www.usccb.org/nab/bible/acts/acts15.htm#v5"]link[/url])[quote name='Acts 15:5']But some from the party of the Pharisees who had become believers stood up and said, "It is necessary to circumcise them and direct them to observe the Mosaic law."[/quote]So, yeah, I would say that Christianity had some new theological ideas/interpretations that were a departure from Judaism of the time. Not the least of these was the belief that Our Lord Jesus Christ is God. I think it's fair to say that most of the Christian interpretation of OT prophesies as they relate to Our Lord were not held by Judaism before the advent of Christianity.

[jswranch]

[quote name='Eutychus' post='1039809' date='Aug 8 2006, 01:04 PM']
Good grief.

Starting with Revelation { you know that book they never teach Catholics other than Rev 12, and that improperly? } [/quote]
Yes I know that book. It is the one Scott Hahn (former Prot pastor) taught about where he showed me just how heavenly the Mass is. Thanks for reminding me.

(The Lamb's Supper)

[desertwoman]

I"m Baptist, so yeah, our church teaches that we must be baptized.

[Justified Saint]

[quote name='desertwoman' post='1042309' date='Aug 12 2006, 07:51 PM']
I"m Baptist, so yeah, our church teaches that we must be baptized.
[/quote]

Your Baptist church teaches that baptism is [b]necessary[/b] for salvation or only that it is an appropriate sign of the Christian community?

[desertwoman]

Necessary. I remember growing up there, and its always baptism, baptism. When you reach the age of accountablity, you must be baptized.

So, when I was twelve, and after attending numerous of classes about being Baptist, and learning about my faith, I was baptized in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. I had to recite the Apostles Creed, and then the church greeted me welcome and I became a memember.