Jump to content

SovereignGraceSingles

Welcome to SovereignGraceSingles.com. Where Reformed Faith and Romance Come Together! We are the only Christian dating website for Christian Singles in the Reformed Faith worldwide. Our focus is to bring together Christian singles of all ages. Reformed single Christian men and women who wish to meet other Reformed Christian singles for spiritually, like-minded, loving relationships.

SovereignGraceSingles

Then the Lord God said, “It is not good for the man to be alone; I will make him a helper suitable for him.” - Genesis 2:18

SovereignGraceSingles

Meet Like Minded Believers Can two walk together except they be agreed? - Amos 3:3

SovereignGraceSingles

John Calvin puts forward a very simple reason why love is the greatest gift: “Because faith and hope are our own: love is diffused among others.” In other words, faith and hope benefit the possessor, but love always benefits another. In John 13:34–35 Jesus says, “A new command I give you: Love one another. As I have loved you, so you must love one another. By this everyone will know that you are my disciples, if you love one another.” Love always requires an “other” as an object; love cannot remain within itself, and that is part of what makes love the greatest gift.

SovereignGraceSingles

SGS offers a "fenced" community: both for private single members and also a public Protestant forums open to Bible-believing Christians such as Presbyterians, Lutherans, Reformed, Baptists, Church of Christ members, Pentecostals, Anglicans. Methodists, Charismatics, or any other conservative, Nicene-derived Christian Church.
Sign in to follow this  
FollowerOfTheWay

Denominationism

Recommended Posts

FollowerOfTheWay

Studying for yrs the history of each denomination, i have seen where it succeeded and failed.... in my humble opinion, I hate them... they've caused nothing but disorder even though they meant well. Men began doing the right thing at first, teaching and preaching without denial of the Faith and later like King Solomon corrupted what once was.

 

I look forward to the day titles won't be used..... that there shall be no divisions and all of us shall be brothers and sisters in the Lord, the way He intended it to be.

 

*stepping off soap box*

 

Share this post


Link to post
Just Mike
Studying for yrs the history of each denomination, i have seen where it succeeded and failed.... in my humble opinion, I hate them... they've caused nothing but disorder even though they meant well. Men began doing the right thing at first, teaching and preaching without denial of the Faith and later like King Solomon corrupted what once was.

 

I look forward to the day titles won't be used..... that there shall be no divisions and all of us shall be brothers and sisters in the Lord, the way He intended it to be.

 

*stepping off soap box*

 

I beg to differ with you. I am a Southern Baptist and our churches sent money to support missionaries, around the world and here at home. In 1986 I was in Bolivia. The country went into a General Strike, you could not buy food gas or anything the country was completely shut down. Where I was at some Independent Nondenominational missionaries were out of food and gas and propane, they were desperately in serious need. Because the SB has fully supported and sent extra supplies our missionaries shared with these other missionaries, for a good length of time. If it weren't for our SB missionaries what do you think would have happened, they would have had to return home.

 

When churches that believe basically the same join together they can accomplish more that a single church sending out one missionary, and often people back out of their support, leaving that missionary in real serious need.

 

To say you "hate them" is ignorant of the facts. Clearly you have not done due diligence in studding the Southern Baptist Convention. No Christian denomination has more missionaries over the world and here in the US. Perhaps you need to do more study and prayer about your statements.

Edited by Just Mike
Computer failed to complete my thoughts. Darn this HP.
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
FollowerOfTheWay

I think you misunderstand my general point... Men in control over denominations have the tendency to do things there way instead of Gods... I attend a SB church so i don't need to be preached to what they teach and believe.. I said earlier they start off teaching preaching and doing the gospel acts but they to have error... We all do

 

to give you an idea of this many believe in the SB church (members) they are saved because of some prayer they said at the alter... Nit just in the SB but most churches... That is not how one is saved.. The book of Acts and Romans tell us how one is Born Again

 

Yes the SBC is good at missions but even so to my main point, denominations are flawed...

Share this post


Link to post
Just Mike
I think you misunderstand my general point... Men in control over denominations have the tendency to do things there way instead of Gods... I attend a SB church so i don't need to be preached to what they teach and believe.. I said earlier they start off teaching preaching and doing the gospel acts but they to have error... We all do

 

to give you an idea of this many believe in the SB church (members) they are saved because of some prayer they said at the alter... Nit just in the SB but most churches... That is not how one is saved.. The book of Acts and Romans tell us how one is Born Again

 

Yes the SBC is good at missions but even so to my main point, denominations are flawed...

 

Jesus Christ died on that Bloody Cross for my wickedness and sins. I am flawed, so no matter what church I may belong to, everyone is just like me. But as Followers of Christ Jesus our best is just that, the best we humans can do. God knows our frame is made of dust. Thus some of what we do is basically dirt, and in the end everything we Christ Followers do will be burned and made brand new. As a Follower of Jesus Christ, be it denominations or churches or just people we are called to do the best we can.

 

In the churches I was pastor and the church we belong to we do not intriduce anyone to Christ at the alter call. We do not have a alter call, people are asked to see the pastor a deacon or someone in the church.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Innerfire89

Sorry, but I must point out your hypocrisy.

You point a finger at denominations because of their division while you divide yourself from them.

 

None who believe the Gospel are completely divided, we are all still part of the same adopted family.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
reformed baptist
Studying for yrs the history of each denomination, i have seen where it succeeded and failed.... in my humble opinion, I hate them... they've caused nothing but disorder even though they meant well. Men began doing the right thing at first, teaching and preaching without denial of the Faith and later like King Solomon corrupted what once was.

 

Your studies will, I'm sure, have revealed the greater evil of there being no denominations - but just one church? It took the reformation and the death of many believers to free us from that tyranny.

 

Now, technically Baptists are not a denomination, rather they are associations (historically speaking they are independent churches that share fellowship) and I believe that to be the biblical model - but here is the thing, I love the truth and my Presbyterians friends love the truth - but we do not agree on all things and we can't both be right, yet we both passionately believe we are right! What is better, for them to have their church and us to have ours where we can each teach what we understand the truth to be, and love the other church - or be together and constantly be fighting among ourselves and either only preaching half the word of God or have the preacher one week disagree with what comes next.

 

Denomination are healthy - and they are as Christ Jesus has designed and is building his church (unless you think he is failing in that endevour?)

 

I look forward to the day titles won't be used..... that there shall be no divisions and all of us shall be brothers and sisters in the Lord, the way He intended it to be.

 

*stepping off soap box*

 

That is his intention certainly, but what is the means through which he accomplishes that end?

 

It is through us having to learn to love each other despite our differences, and in the end it is through those differences that we learn and grow - every time I am confronted with something i don't agree with, or have never heard before I am driven back to the word of God to study and I trust (by God's grace) to amend my view if I find error there - what encouragement would I have to do that without our differences?

 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
FollowerOfTheWay

I guess I have to once again clear up misunderstanding... Yes, were flawed... everyone, but many hold to the faith of their denomination instead of the Foundation Stone (who is Christ our Lord)... Many say I'm (this or that) instead of I follow Christ and His teachings... The Bible also reminds us to rightly divide, and though I am not perfect (far from it) I can point to errors in all denominations (some more extreme then others)... The idea is many believe in their denomination ignoring the foundation who is Christ... that's my issue,

 

I agree that the Word is what we should always use... it will help us to divide truth from fables...

 

I like my pastor but can't always agree with his teachings because from time to time his views are taught..... Same is true when I was in Bible College, they taught their views on many topics and I challenged them with the Word of God... God's word trumps mans views (even if people have good intentions) this is why many denominations are turning away from sound doctrine (even at the cost of real believers in those denominations)

 

Now differences when it comes to things which are not eternal (timing of the rapture is a big one) we can debate and disagree but both will inherit the Kingdom of Heaven. Accepting that God's view of marriage has changed, that is a teaching from the Devil and violates His Holy Word ("I am the Lord and I change not", or "He is the same yesterday, today and forever")

 

I hope you understand my point now

Share this post


Link to post
William
Staff
The idea is many believe in their denomination ignoring the foundation who is Christ... that's my issue

 

I generally notice this in non denominational affiliations. The early Creeds address who Christ is. But non denominational bodies and "others" generally tend to ignore or oppose the truths as conveyed in the early creeds from Scripture.

 

What I'm trying to emphasize is that denominations are Christian because there is unity in the ESSENTIALS that they believe.

 

There are going to be factions, divisions, schisms, etc among us.

  • 1 Corinthians 11:18-19 For, in the first place, when you come together as a church, I hear that there are divisions among you. And I believe it in part, for there must be factions among you in order that those who are genuine among you may be recognized.

Just the fact that we are warned that there will be false teachers and prophets among us lets us know that there will be divisions.

  • 2 Peter 2:1 But false prophets also arose among the people, just as there will be false teachers among you, who will secretly bring in destructive heresies, even denying the Master who bought them, bringing upon themselves swift destruction.

How much orthodoxy shall we sacrifice at the expense of unity? What is most important to you, truth or unity, or is there some balance? For example, are there non negotiable essentials to the Christian faith?

 

Mind you that though we are from different denominations, we profess only one catholic church. In this way, though we each disagree we do recognize and even commune together as one body of believers.

 

Nicene Creed:

 

"We believe in one God the Father Almighty, Maker of heaven and earth, and of all things visible and invisible.

 

“And in one Lord Jesus Christ, the only-begotten Son of God, begotten of the Father before all worlds, God of God, Light of Light, Very God of Very God, begotten, not made, being of one substance with the Father by whom all things were made; who for us men, and for our salvation, came down from heaven, and was incarnate by the Holy Spirit of the Virgin Mary, and was made man, and was crucified also for us under Pontius Pilate. He suffered and was buried, and the third day he rose again according to the Scriptures, and ascended into heaven, and sitteth on the right hand of the Father. And he shall come again with glory to judge both the quick and the dead, whose kingdom shall have no end.

 

“And we believe in the Holy Spirit, the Lord and Giver of Life, who proceedeth from the Father, who with the Father and the Son together is worshipped and glorified, who spoke by the prophets. And we believe in one holy catholic and apostolic Church. We acknowledge one baptism for the remission of sins. And we look for the resurrection of the dead, and the life of the world to come. Amen."

 

God bless,

William

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
William
Staff
Studying for yrs the history of each denomination, i have seen where it succeeded and failed.... in my humble opinion, I hate them... they've caused nothing but disorder even though they meant well. Men began doing the right thing at first, teaching and preaching without denial of the Faith and later like King Solomon corrupted what once was.

 

Your studies will, I'm sure, have revealed the greater evil of there being no denominations - but just one church? It took the reformation and the death of many believers to free us from that tyranny.

 

Now, technically Baptists are not a denomination, rather they are associations (historically speaking they are independent churches that share fellowship) and I believe that to be the biblical model - but here is the thing, I love the truth and my Presbyterians friends love the truth - but we do not agree on all things and we can't both be right, yet we both passionately believe we are right! What is better, for them to have their church and us to have ours where we can each teach what we understand the truth to be, and love the other church - or be together and constantly be fighting among ourselves and either only preaching half the word of God or have the preacher one week disagree with what comes next.

 

Denomination are healthy - and they are as Christ Jesus has designed and is building his church (unless you think he is failing in that endevour?)

 

I look forward to the day titles won't be used..... that there shall be no divisions and all of us shall be brothers and sisters in the Lord, the way He intended it to be.

 

*stepping off soap box*

 

That is his intention certainly, but what is the means through which he accomplishes that end?

 

It is through us having to learn to love each other despite our differences, and in the end it is through those differences that we learn and grow - every time I am confronted with something i don't agree with, or have never heard before I am driven back to the word of God to study and I trust (by God's grace) to amend my view if I find error there - what encouragement would I have to do that without our differences?

Now, technically Baptists are not a denomination

 

But isn't it amazing that when these small "independent" congregations surface on the radar that they are counted denominations? Some claim there are 40 thousand plus denominations, many of which should be under the label of sect or cult. As you probably have noticed I emphasize the early Creeds and use them as a litmus test. When an individual or congregation rejects them it sends up a red flag as a cult alert warning. The early Creeds were derived from councils which held to the principle of Sola Scriptura, before councils began contradicting one another. I'm going to search for some relevant articles on this subject in the near future and share it. Any sources that anyone has to point me to would be much appreciated.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Just Mike

Independent nondenominational church pastors have no one on a higher level to be accountable to. Sometimes having someone at a higher level to seek help with a church issue, can be very helpful. Southern Baptist say we are connected by a rope of sand, in other words we are connected by choice not be someone who can fire a pastor, only the church can dismiss a pastor.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
nolidad
Studying for yrs the history of each denomination, i have seen where it succeeded and failed.... in my humble opinion, I hate them... they've caused nothing but disorder even though they meant well. Men began doing the right thing at first, teaching and preaching without denial of the Faith and later like King Solomon corrupted what once was.

 

I look forward to the day titles won't be used..... that there shall be no divisions and all of us shall be brothers and sisters in the Lord, the way He intended it to be.

 

*stepping off soap box*

 

Denominationalism is the result of the flesh of the believers creating schisms in the church! Paul addressed this in Corinthians. But also denominationalism was foretold by the Lord in the church age (mystery form of the kingdom) through the parables. It is an evil that God is using to show the tried and true! Every denomination is very imperfect (some more than others). The worse is that we will air our dirty family laundry for the world to see! This does great harm to the cause of Christ!

 

I remember when I worked in the big postal sorting facility (before becoming a letter carrier). I was privileged to start a prayer group of believers. We met twice a week on our lunch break and simply prayed for co-workers, our churches and leadership. I made it clear that any uniques prayer methodologies were to be excluded! Just focusing on HIm and not eh smllaer differences (I know there are huge doctrinal differnces that must be fought for) we succeeded in glorifying God to the co workers!

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
William
Staff
Denominationalism is the result of the flesh of the believers creating schisms in the church!

 

Please elaborate,

 

Lemme ask you something. Say your congregation under its leadership began to fall apostate. What is the process one should follow in order to "Reform" them? And at what point would you separate from the apostate body? Would you say that it is time to leave when believers are being disciplined for bringing the apostate body back to Scripture?

 

Just curious as to how you view early catholic Protestant reformers.

 

God bless,

William

Share this post


Link to post
reformed baptist
Studying for yrs the history of each denomination, i have seen where it succeeded and failed.... in my humble opinion, I hate them... they've caused nothing but disorder even though they meant well. Men began doing the right thing at first, teaching and preaching without denial of the Faith and later like King Solomon corrupted what once was.

 

Your studies will, I'm sure, have revealed the greater evil of there being no denominations - but just one church? It took the reformation and the death of many believers to free us from that tyranny.

 

Now, technically Baptists are not a denomination, rather they are associations (historically speaking they are independent churches that share fellowship) and I believe that to be the biblical model - but here is the thing, I love the truth and my Presbyterians friends love the truth - but we do not agree on all things and we can't both be right, yet we both passionately believe we are right! What is better, for them to have their church and us to have ours where we can each teach what we understand the truth to be, and love the other church - or be together and constantly be fighting among ourselves and either only preaching half the word of God or have the preacher one week disagree with what comes next.

 

Denomination are healthy - and they are as Christ Jesus has designed and is building his church (unless you think he is failing in that endevour?)

 

I look forward to the day titles won't be used..... that there shall be no divisions and all of us shall be brothers and sisters in the Lord, the way He intended it to be.

 

*stepping off soap box*

 

That is his intention certainly, but what is the means through which he accomplishes that end?

 

It is through us having to learn to love each other despite our differences, and in the end it is through those differences that we learn and grow - every time I am confronted with something i don't agree with, or have never heard before I am driven back to the word of God to study and I trust (by God's grace) to amend my view if I find error there - what encouragement would I have to do that without our differences?

Early creeds are good way to test orthodoxy on key issues i agree

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
nolidad
Denominationalism is the result of the flesh of the believers creating schisms in the church!

 

Please elaborate,

 

Lemme ask you something. Say your congregation under its leadership began to fall apostate. What is the process one should follow in order to "Reform" them? And at what point would you separate from the apostate body? Would you say that it is time to leave when believers are being disciplined for bringing the apostate body back to Scripture?

 

Just curious as to how you view early catholic Protestant reformers.

 

God bless,

William

Hi William! Perhaps I should have been more explicit! I used the words tried and true as a reference to Paul

 

From 1 Cor. 11 17 Now in this that I declare unto you I praise you not, that ye come together not for the better, but for the worse.

 

18 For first of all, when ye come together in the church, I hear that there be divisions among you; and I partly believe it.

 

19 For there must be also heresies among you, that they which are approved may be made manifest among you.

 

Because of the rise of the tares in the church- yes there are times we must pull away from a church that has gone apostate or heretical and the leadership will not return to the truth.

 

Paul said it best- it is necessary but an evil nonetheless!

 

As to the early reformers? Heroes of the faith all!

 

Romanism was but an empty husk of Christendom (having a form of godliness but....)

Share this post


Link to post
Matto

Who declares who is apostate though? I always thought only an infallible authority could declare and denounce something as apostate? Is the individual believer the final arbiter of what's apostate?

Share this post


Link to post
FollowerOfTheWay

I believe the Living Word does just that and the HS testifies to it.. Men can get things wrong but with Christ as the led the Spirit will answer

Share this post


Link to post
Matto
I believe the Living Word does just that and the HS testifies to it.. Men can get things wrong but with Christ as the led the Spirit will answer

 

Well the main thing that's kept me Catholic all these years is the Church maintaining that it is infallible in its interpretation of scripture. All the Protestants I have met can't guarantee that their interpretations of scripture are infallible, so it's far too risky, I mean what part could they be teaching in error, it could be something really important. Protestantism rejected the idea of infallibility along time ago from what I have learned, but I've never understood how some could declare other denominations interpretations thus doctrines apostate without maintaining a position of infallible interpretation of scripture.

 

Without an infallible interpreter of scripture we can't know the Truth, and we certainly couldn't declare other denominations apostate.

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
reformed baptist

 

Well the main thing that's kept me Catholic all these years is the Church maintaining that it is infallible in its interpretation of scripture. All the Protestants I have met can't guarantee that their interpretations of scripture are infallible, so it's far too risky, I mean what part could they be teaching in error, it could be something really important. Protestantism rejected the idea of infallibility along time ago from what I have learned, but I've never understood how some could declare other denominations interpretations thus doctrines apostate without maintaining a position of infallible interpretation of scripture.

 

Without an infallible interpreter of scripture we can't know the Truth, and we certainly couldn't declare other denominations apostate.

 

 

 

And yet the current pope contradicts the previous one on almost everything - and I know for a fact that I can go to a RCC church locally and I will get a very different 'interpretation' to the one I would get in a Irish catholic community - why is that if the RCC is infallible?

 

As for the denying infallibility - well I'm sorry that is simply wrong - we believe the scriptures to be inerrant and infallible - we believe man to be neither and so, we would never be so arrogant as to assume we have everything right, rather we continually search the scriptures to learn the truth and the grow in knowledge and understanding. It seems to me, being honest enough to admit we can get it wrong is simple humility, truthfulness, and a proper recognition of human sinfulness! However that being said we also believe in the perspicuity of scripture - ie that on the most important matter the bible is perfectly clear - so for example, I would never say 'my teaching is infallible' - but I would say, for example - 'on the doctrine of the deity and humanity of Jesus I am right and those who disagree with me are heretics'.

 

As for teaching error....well people in glass houses.........

 

You know it is amazing how many people are so desperate for certainty and so keen to be told what to think that weather it is right or wrong just isn't important to them!

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Innerfire89

Well the main thing that's kept me Catholic all these years is the Church maintaining that it is infallible in its interpretation of scripture. All the Protestants I have met can't guarantee that their interpretations of scripture are infallible, so it's far too risky, I mean what part could they be teaching in error, it could be something really important. Protestantism rejected the idea of infallibility along time ago from what I have learned, but I've never understood how some could declare other denominations interpretations thus doctrines apostate without maintaining a position of infallible interpretation of scripture.

Without an infallible interpreter of scripture we can't know the Truth, and we certainly couldn't declare other denominations apostate.

 

It's much more of a risk to allow another human unquestionable authority over your beliefs when they might not be infallible as they claim to be.

 

The truth of the Gospel is plane and simple, which is why Martin Luther translated Scripture so the common German could read in his own language.

 

​​​​​​

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Matto

"It's much more of a risk to allow another human unquestionable authority over your beliefs when they might not be infallible as they claim to be."

 

How is does it differ across Protestantism though with all the human authorities claiming many conflicting interpretations of scripture? How can they say other blokes are apostate who are interpreting their own doctrines from the same bible? I can't see the charity in declaring others apostate without having an infallible interpretation themselves, just doesn't seem right, don't get it.

 

I thought there were at least 10 German vernacular editions of the Bible long before Luther, some of them fairly famous?

Share this post


Link to post
Matto

Sorry, correction there were 18 complete Catholic German editions of the bible before Luther according to the Wikipedia, not sure if that's right but I thought there was at least 10.

Share this post


Link to post
Innerfire89
"It's much more of a risk to allow another human unquestionable authority over your beliefs when they might not be infallible as they claim to be."

 

How is does it differ across Protestantism though with all the human authorities claiming many conflicting interpretations of scripture? How can they say other blokes are apostate who are interpreting their own doctrines from the same bible? I can't see the charity in declaring others apostate without having an infallible interpretation themselves, just doesn't seem right, don't get it.

 

I thought there were at least 10 German vernacular editions of the Bible long before Luther, some of them fairly famous?

 

One doesn't have to be infallible to understand Scripture, you don't have to be 100% correct on everything to be correct on anything.

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Innerfire89
Sorry, correction there were 18 complete Catholic German editions of the bible before Luther according to the Wikipedia, not sure if that's right but I thought there was at least 10.

 

There were German translations, but they weren't available to everyone, they had to be approved by the church to have one. Luther made it possible for everyone to see the truth of Scripture for themselves.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Matto

 

And yet the current pope contradicts the previous one on almost everything - and I know for a fact that I can go to a RCC church locally and I will get a very different 'interpretation' to the one I would get in a Irish catholic community - why is that if the RCC is infallible?

 

As for the denying infallibility - well I'm sorry that is simply wrong - we believe the scriptures to be inerrant and infallible - we believe man to be neither and so, we would never be so arrogant as to assume we have everything right, rather we continually search the scriptures to learn the truth and the grow in knowledge and understanding. It seems to me, being honest enough to admit we can get it wrong is simple humility, truthfulness, and a proper recognition of human sinfulness! However that being said we also believe in the perspicuity of scripture - ie that on the most important matter the bible is perfectly clear - so for example, I would never say 'my teaching is infallible' - but I would say, for example - 'on the doctrine of the deity and humanity of Jesus I am right and those who disagree with me are heretics'.

 

As for teaching error....well people in glass houses.........

 

You know it is amazing how many people are so desperate for certainty and so keen to be told what to think that weather it is right or wrong just isn't important to them!

 

I haven't seen any changes to the catechism of the Catholic Church regarding interpretation of scripture, nothing has been infallibly declared in contradiction to previous teaching. I'll look at it though.

 

"As for the denying infallibility - well I'm sorry that is simply wrong - we believe the scriptures to be inerrant and infallible"

 

The problem is Catholics only believe the Bible because their infallible authority the Apostolic See declared it to be infallible and inerrant. I don't know on what basis different Protestant denominations hold that the bible is infallible or inerrant, but that's the way Catholics see it.

 

People might say that the Catholic Church only officially infallibly declared the Bible at Trent, but all they did at Trent is reaffirm the same Latin Vulgate from around 400ad.

 

So in a Catholics head is the idea that if the Catholic Church is fallible, then the Bible fallible, so no point believing it.

 

So if we would reject Pope Damasus Decree of the Council of Rome , then the first Bible could be rejected. The Catholic Church Councils determined the Canon itself. Not only did the Catholic Church determine what should be put into the Canon of Scripture, it determined what shouldn't be in scripture, which was many diffent writings proporting to be letters and gospels.

 

The thing is, if you undermine the authority of the Apostolic See to a Catholic, he has no trust that Bible is infallible or errant.

Even the books in Protestant Bibles are determined by the Catholic Church.

 

Like professor Peter Flint said " Without the Catholic Church, we would have no Bible " he is the Protestant translator of the dead sea scrolls.

 

The whole idea for the Canon in the first place was Catholic, to assemble only the books used in Catholic liturgy from the time of the Apostles.

 

"Likewise it has been said: Now indeed we must treat of the divine Scriptures, what the universal Catholic Church accepts and what she ought to shun. The order of the Old Testament begins here: Genesis one book, Exodus one book, Leviticus one book, Numbers one book, Deuteronomy one book, Josue Nave one book, Judges one book, Ruth one book, Kings four books, Paralipomenon two books, Psalms one book, Solomon three books, Proverbs one book, Ecclesiastes one book, Canticle of Canticles one book, likewise Wisdom one book, Ecclesiasticus one book. Likewise the order of the Prophets. Isaias one book, Jeremias one book,with Ginoth, that is, with his lamentations, Ezechiel one book,Daniel one book, Osee one book, Micheas one book, Joel one book, Abdias one book, Jonas one book, Nahum one book, Habacuc one book, Sophonias one book, Aggeus one book, Zacharias one book, Malachias one book. Likewise the order of the histories. Job one book, Tobias one book, Esdras two books, Esther one book, Judith one book, Machabees two books. Likewise the order of the writings of the New and eternal Testament, which only the holy and Catholic Church supports. Of the Gospels, according to Matthew one book, according to Mark one book, according to Luke one book, according to John one book. The Epistles of Paul [the apostle] in number fourteen. To the Romans one, to the Corinthians two, to the Ephesians one, to the Thessalonians two, to the Galatians one, to the Philippians one, to the Colossians one, to Timothy two, to Titus one, to Philemon one, to the Hebrews one. Likewise the Apocalypse of John, one book. And the Acts of the Apostles one book. Likewise the canonical epistles in number seven. Of Peter the Apostle two epistles, of James the Apostle one epistle, of John the Apostle one epistle, of another John, the presbyter, two epistles, of Jude the Zealut, the Apostle one epistle.” Pope Damasus, Decree of the Council of Rome, The Canon of Scripture A.D. 382

 

Even many Protestants have said it's unsafe to undermine those early Catholic Councils that determined the Bible because it takes away from the Bibles authority.

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Matto

 

One doesn't have to be infallible to understand Scripture, you don't have to be 100% correct on everything to be correct on anything.

 

What part could you be wrong on then? Hopefully nothing important.

 

See this is what would worry a Catholic, if someone says what they think scripture means, then add, but I could be wrong about that. It's a serious thing for us that can't be left to just opinion.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...