Have we lost the faith of our fathers?

[MoreCoffee]

Pedrito, the post apostolic fathers are called early church fathers by the Church because their teaching is consistent with the teaching of Christ and reflects the presence of the Holy Spirit as their teacher and guide as the scriptures say

If you love me, keep my commandments. And I will ask the Father, and he will give another Advocate to you, so that he may abide with you for eternity: the Spirit of Truth, whom the world is not able to accept, because it neither perceives him nor knows him. But you shall know him. For he will remain with you, and he will be in you. I will not leave you orphans. I will return to you. Yet a little while and the world will not see me any longer. But you will see me. For I live, and you shall live. In that day, you shall know that I am in my Father, and you are in me, and I am in you. Whoever holds to my commandments and keeps them: it is he who loves me. And whoever loves me shall be loved by my Father. And I will love him, and I will manifest myself to him."

Judas, not the Iscariot, said to him: "Lord, how does it happen that you will manifest yourself to us and not to the world?"

Jesus responded and said to him: "If anyone loves me, he shall keep my word. And my Father will love him, and we will come to him, and we will make our dwelling place with him. Whoever does not love me, does not keep not my words. And the word that you have heard is not of me, but it is of the Father who sent me. These things I have spoken to you, while abiding with you. But the Advocate, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, will teach you all things and will suggest to you everything whatsoever that I have said to you. Peace I leave for you; my Peace I give to you. Not in the way that the world gives, do I give to you. Do not let your heart be troubled, and let it not fear. You have heard that I said to you: I am going away, and I am returning to you. If you loved me, certainly you would be gladdened, because I am going to the Father. For the Father is greater than I. And now I have told you this, before it happens, so that, when it will happen, you may believe. I will not now speak at length with you. For the prince of this world is coming, but he does not have anything in me. Yet this is so that the world may know that I love the Father, and that I am acting according to the commandment that the Father has given to me. Rise up, let us go from here." [SUP]John 14:15-31[/SUP]​

 

[Josiah]

1. God never promised that the Holy Spirit would only teach SOME (the ones the individual, singular RC Denomination CURRENTLY says the Holy Spirit did - but only where those few agreed - in the sole opinion of the individual RC Denomination - with the current RC Denomination).

2. There is no universally accepted list of who is or is not a "father." NONE of them are regarded by anyone as always right and therefore dependably lead by the Holy Spirit. Reality: WE tend to view SOME men (the "some" never definitively defined) as wise and helpful - men we tend to respect: mere, fallible, accountable, sometimes-wrong MEN but unusually wise and helpful. THIS is what is meant by "church fathers".

3. No one ever had faith in them (Christians have their faith in Christ - it's what makes them Christians) so no one could have "lost" faith in "Them."



- Josiah

 

[MoreCoffee]

The truth is that God did not teach heretics their heresy nor sinners how to sin but he did promise to send the Holy Spirit to lead and guide the faithful [SUP]John 14:26[/SUP] and the early Church fathers were led by the Holy Spirit and taught by Him so that what they wrote is of enduring value to the faithful living today.

 

[Josiah]

he did promise to send the Holy Spirit to lead and guide the faithful [SUP]John 14:26[/SUP]

I agree. And of course, as you proved, God NEVER promised to lead the RC Denomination (exclusively or at all). And God NEVER promised to just teach and lead SOME believers (the ones the individual, singular RC or LDS denominations currently and exclusive CLAIM were alone "lead" - but only when such agree with the current, individual RCC or LDS).




.

 

[MoreCoffee]

I agree. And of course, as you proved, God NEVER promised to lead the RC Denomination (exclusively or at all). And God NEVER promised to just teach and lead SOME believers (the ones the individual, singular RC or LDS denominations currently and exclusive CLAIM were alone "lead" - but only when such agree with the current, individual RCC or LDS).

God did promise to lead the Catholic Church because the Catholic Church is the Church of which Christ spoke in the gospels and of which the apostles wrote in their letters, histories, and apocalyptic visions.

 

[Josiah]

God did promise to lead the Catholic Church

Sorry, but you yourself referenced the words of Jesus.... and they don't so much as even MENTION the individual, singular RC Denomination - exclusively or at all. For this or anything at all.

You can CLAIM anything - as wild and absurd and unhistorical and egotistical as your imagination can create - but you yourself proved it: Jesus said NOTHING about your denomination.... promised it nothing.... not once, not ever. BTW, He didn't promise anything to any other singular, individual denomination either. All this "Jesus just teaches ME.... Jesus just leads ME.... there's one who infallibly follows - ME.... there's one who infallibly learns - ME" that whole obsession of the RCC for itself is ... well..... you gave the verse that shows what it is. Now, you can swallow ANYTHING.... you can believe ANYTHING (no one is likely going to impact that) but it seems silly to me to CLAIM that GOD said it when you just proved he did nothing of the sort.

 

[MoreCoffee]

I don't mind a bit of banter. You're wrong. You will never admit it.

 

[Josiah]

I don't mind a bit of banter. You're wrong. You will never admit it.

All you need to do is admit you erred when you quoted the verse and noted it said NOTHING about the individual RC Denomination. Either the verse errs (by not mentioning the RC Denomination) or you do when claiming GOD promised this to the individual, singular RC Denomination. Which is it?

 

[JSales]

The truth is that God did not teach heretics their heresy nor sinners how to sin but he did promise to send the Holy Spirit to lead and guide the faithful [SUP]John 14:26[/SUP] and the early Church fathers were led by the Holy Spirit and taught by Him so that what they wrote is of enduring value to the faithful living today.

On this we both agree and yet in history the Roman Catholics went down a bad path if you remember which is why God chose to bring back the faith of our fathers through men like Calvin and Luther.

 

[MoreCoffee]

On this we both agree and yet in history the Roman Catholics went down a bad path if you remember which is why God chose to bring back the faith of our fathers through men like Calvin and Luther.

God chose to chastise the erring members of his Catholic Church by the rebellion and tumults of the protestant revolt but God did not teach Martin Luther or John Calvin their wicked theological errors.

 

[psalms 91]

wicked only to you and lets face it your church has enough errors of its own

 

[MoreCoffee]

wicked only to you and lets face it your church has enough errors of its own

Martin Luther's doctrine is not accepted by Baptists. John Calvin's doctrine is not accepted by most Pentecostals. The teachings of these men are wicked and erroneous to many more people than me alone.

 

[Lamb]

Martin Luther's doctrine is not accepted by Baptists. John Calvin's doctrine is not accepted by most Pentecostals. The teachings of these men are wicked and erroneous to many more people than me alone.

Not all of Luther's doctrine is believed by other Protestants but they all believe in salvation by grace through faith and not works.

 

[MoreCoffee]

Not all of Luther's doctrine is believed by other Protestants but they all believe in salvation by grace through faith and not works.

I do not know any Church that teaches salvation by works, not now and not in the past but I do know ignorant people who teach something like it and of denominations and independent groups and semi-Christian sects that teach things that sound like it. The Catholic Church teaches - and always has taught - that salvation comes from God as an act of God's grace in Jesus Christ. Nobody will ever be saved by their own efforts but everybody who is called by God turns from their sins and walks with God according to the graces given to them by God and according to their desire to please God [SUP](Php 2:12-13)[/SUP].

So then, my loved ones, as you have at all times done what I say, not only when I am present, but now much more when I am not with you, give yourselves to working out your salvation with fear in your hearts; For it is God who is the cause of your desires and of your acts, for his good pleasure. Do all things without protests and arguments; So that you may be holy and gentle, children of God without sin in a twisted and foolish generation, among whom you are seen as lights in the world, Offering the word of life; so that I may have glory in you in the day of Christ, because my running was not for nothing and my work was not without effect. And even if I am offered like a drink offering, giving myself for the cause and work of your faith, I am glad and have joy with you all: And in the same way do you be glad and have a part in my joy. [SUP]Philippians 2:12-18[/SUP]​

Some people (not me) appear to be allergic to good works in their theology and write as if good works are some horrible curse that contaminates the gospel when the truth is that Christians are called to a life of good works in obedience to the Lord Jesus Christ [SUP](John 14:15; 15:10)[/SUP]. I guess some kinds of theology makes them write that way and makes them oppose every expression of faith that includes the necessity of good works in the life of the faithful who will obtain salvation through faith and good works as James says in his letter

"What use is it, my brothers, for a man to say that he has faith, if he does nothing? will such a faith give him salvation? If a brother or a sister is without clothing and in need of the day's food, And one of you says to them, Go in peace, be warm and full of food; but you do not give them the things of which their bodies have need, what profit is there in this? Even so faith without works is dead. But a man may say, You have faith and I have works; let me see your faith without your works, and I will make my faith clear to you by my works. You have the belief that God is one, and you do well: the evil spirits have the same belief, shaking with fear. Do you not see, O foolish man, that faith without works is of no use? Was not the righteousness of Abraham our father judged by his works, when he made an offering of Isaac his son on the altar? You see that his faith was helping his works and was made complete by them; And the holy Writings were put into effect which said, And Abraham had faith in God and it was put to his account as righteousness; and he was named the friend of God. You see that a man's righteousness is judged by his works and not by his faith only. And in the same way, was not the righteousness of Rahab, the loose woman, judged by her works, when she took into her house those who were sent and let them go out by another way? For as the body without the spirit is dead even so faith without works is dead. [SUP]James 2:14-26[/SUP]"​

In the Catechism of the Council of Trent it's written that

"Justifying Grace

But the grace of justification, which signs us with the Holy Spirit of promise, who is the pledge of our inheritance,' transcends all His other most ample gifts. It unites us to God in the closest bonds of love, lights up within us the sacred flame of piety, forms us to newness of life, renders us partakers of the divine nature, and enables us to be called and really to be the sons of God."

...

"All The Sacraments Signify Something Present, Something Past, Something Future:

This applies to all the Sacraments; for all of them declare not only our sanctity and justification, but also two other things most intimately connected with sanctification, namely, the Passion of Christ our Redeemer, which is the source of our sanctification, and also eternal life and heavenly bliss, which are the end of sanctification. Such, then, being the nature of all the Sacraments, holy Doctors justly hold that each of them has a threefold significance: they remind us of something past; they indicate and point out something present; they foretell something future.

Nor should it be supposed that this teaching of the Doctors is unsupported by the testimony of Holy Scripture. When the Apostle says: All we who are baptised in Christ Jesus, are baptised in his death, he gives us clearly to understand that Baptism is called a sign, because it reminds us of the death and Passion of our Lord. When he says, We are buried together with him by baptism into death; that as Christ is risen from the dead by the glory of the Father, so, we also may walk in newness of life, he also clearly shows that Baptism is a sign which indicates the infusion of divine grace into our souls, which enables us to lead a new life and to perform all the duties of true piety with ease and cheerfulness. Finally, when he adds: If we have been planted together in the likeness of his death, we shall be also in the likeness of his resurrection, he teaches that Baptism clearly foreshadows eternal life also, which we are to reach through its efficacy."​

These things were written soon after the beginning of the Protestant revolt and are drawn from Catholic Church teaching that had already existed for many centuries yet the Protesters did not want any part of the Catholic Church and created their own denominations which soon found themselves splitting into yet more denominations. Today there are many Lutheran denominations and many Calvinist denominations each with their own special emphases on this and that part of Martin Luther's teaching and John Calvin's teaching and some created new ideas never expressed by Martin Luther or John Calvin. And there are Baptists who didn't like a great number of the things taught by Martin Luther nor did they like a good number of the teachings of John Calvin. Baptists, Pentecostals, Methodists, Anglicans, Independents, and a host of others exist now; some rejecting this teaching while others reject that teaching in the overall teaching of Martin Luther and the teachings of John Calvin. It may have been inevitable that the Catholic Church would be rent apart by schisms and heresies in the sixteenth century, and who can say what may have happened had it not been so? The Catholic Church of that time was itself troubled by some corrupt bishops and some corrupt priests both groups having some members appointed by wealthy and powerful people whose used political and military power to impose their will on the Church in their jurisdiction and some very senior clerics - yes even as senior as some of the popes of those days - were corrupt too. So we have a divided Christianity today in which old battles - long since repudiated by the Catholic Church and also by some (or many) Protestant denominations - are still fought in the pages of internet forums and in other places (such as books, comics and pamphlets).

 

[Rens]

Martin Luther's doctrine is not accepted by Baptists. John Calvin's doctrine is not accepted by most Pentecostals. The teachings of these men are wicked and erroneous to many more people than me alone.

I just look at the fruit. If some teacher teaches something, yet kills people, I am not gonna listen. They will think they do God a favor, but they know neither Me, nor the Father.

 

[MoreCoffee]

I just look at the fruit. If some teacher teaches something, yet kills people, I am not gonna listen. They will think they do God a favor, but they know neither Me, nor the Father.

Well, even the devil can quote scripture. And remember Caiaphas who said "it is better for one man to die than for the whole people to perish". He was a jerk but he still spoke the truth as a prophet [SUP](John 11:49-52)[/SUP].

 

[Rens]

Well, even the devil can quote scripture. And remember Caiaphas who said "it is better for one man to die than for the whole people to perish". He was a jerk but he still spoke the truth as a prophet [SUP](John 11:49-52)[/SUP].

Yes that's true. Jesus said also listen to the pharisees, just don't do as them, but He also warned them to watch out for the leaven of the pharisees.
Since I read that Calvin killed that Jewish guy I don't want anything to do with his doctrins.

 

[atpollard]

Since I read that Calvin killed that Jewish guy I don't want anything to do with his doctrins.

There are lots of reasons to accept or reject Calvinist Doctrines, but half-truths and over simplifications about what John Calvin did or did not do is not among them. For the record, John Calvin killed no one. At worst he wrote in a letter to a friend that he agreed that the Spanish Heretic should be killed if he will not recant his heresy. However, saying someone deserves to die in a private letter and killing them are not the same thing.

 

[MoreCoffee]

There are lots of reasons to accept or reject Calvinist Doctrines, but half-truths and over simplifications about what John Calvin did or did not do is not among them. For the record, John Calvin killed no one. At worst he wrote in a letter to a friend that he agreed that the Spanish Heretic should be killed if he will not recant his heresy. However, saying someone deserves to die in a private letter and killing them are not the same thing.

John Calvin acted as state prosecutor in the case against Michael Servetus. Michael Servetus was executed. It is said that John Calvin asked that Michael Servetus receive a less painful execution than that which he did receive. That was a kind of mercy but it was a very thin mercy - the same kind of thin mercy that Henry VIII granted to saint Thomas More.

Michael Servetus taught heresy and I know of no one who esteems him a saint - some may, people can be very perverse about such things - so his memory is preserved mainly as a warning against John Calvin's practises and beliefs. I do not subscribe to any theory of theology that makes its source sufficient reason for rejecting it nor do I discount the real wickedness present in John Calvin's action toward Michael Servetus - John Calvin was a creature of his times and his acts were like the acts of other leaders who killed for the "faith" thinking that executing heretics was a boon to society and a service for God.

Saint Thomas More is remembered as a saint by Catholics and - surprisingly - by many Anglicans.

 

[Rens]

There are lots of reasons to accept or reject Calvinist Doctrines, but half-truths and over simplifications about what John Calvin did or did not do is not among them. For the record, John Calvin killed no one. At worst he wrote in a letter to a friend that he agreed that the Spanish Heretic should be killed if he will not recant his heresy. However, saying someone deserves to die in a private letter and killing them are not the same thing.

Evil enough. He had him killed. Paul also wrote letters to get christians killed and was with the execution of Stephen, but he wrote his letters that are in the Bible after he converted. How can God speak to you how to interpret the Bible if you live in darkness.

They will put you out of the synagogues; yes, the time is coming that whoever kills you will think that he offers God service. 3 And these things they will do to you because they have not known the Father nor Me.