Suzannah
There are many posts here to answer to, so if I may, I would like to try to answer them all here.
What I meant by Mary being married and having children is, that she would do nothing sinful in the process. That is all. People that are celebate are not more holy than people who are faithfully married and who bear faithful children. In fact, the leaders of the early church were required to be married and have believing children in order to be Bishops. (reference the Epistles of Timothy and Titus)
With regard to who is in the church, I am saying that Christians, immersed, born again believers in Jesus, have always followed him alone, regardless of any denominational affiliation they had, or what church they went to. IOW, the church of Christ is larger, and older than the Roman church or the Orthodox chuch, the Coptic church, or the Syrian church. Even in the later and divisive Protestant churches, wherein there are those whose garments are white and not stained with sin, who belong to the Lord alone.
I can safely say that the Lord's church is older than the one in Rome because it was founded on Penticost in Jerusalem many decades before the one in Rome. Until the Basilica was built over Peter's discovered remains, the Roman church was only one of many churches in the other prominent cities of the known world. But they all considered themselves to be His church, and they all spoke the same things and believed the same things, which is our orthodoxy.
Besides this, until the Lateran coucils in the twelfth century and onward, the dogma concerning Mary, the veneration of the Saints, and Transubstantiation was not evident in the Roman church. Therefore it is a more modern doctine, and now has become required. I do not think anyone can 'prove' these things to be of first century origin. More than that, placing a doctrine or dogma as equal to in importance with the Gospel is plainly taught against in Scripture.
To another question concerning the witness and the physical presence of the Church, remember that for the first three centuries the church met from house to house and in secret places. Yet it came to dominate the Roman Empire by the end of the first century, emptying out the pagan temples, and gaining right treatment for slaves, for women, and for infants. This was all done centuries before the church came to have a ruling clergy and priesthood, and before it built any of its cathedrals.
The church is the Lord's Kingdom, and is not of this world, as Jesus said. And he is the ultimate Shepherd of his people, calling them each by their names, and watching over them, lifting them up, and giving them the power to overcome the world, as he did. The Lord has never needed a large, visible, worldly organization to do his will on earth. His people are his church, and they, as individual members, are the ones who live by faith in Him. (Hebrews 11).
Suzanna, I ask the Lord's blessing on your efforts to follow him. It might be a good thing for you to join with the Catholic church. For myself, I could never swim the Tiber, however. I am placing my trust in the Lord alone, and I know he will provide all I need.
And a last question of you. Why are you quoting that part from St. Gregory of Nyssa, when that quote plainly denies the Godhood and the Lordship of Jesus?
thereselittleflower:
My statement about Martin Luther is based on his works, regardless of my personal thoughts about the man. It is evident that he was devout, both before and after his nailed his document to the church door, so long ago. His greatest statement of all was totally ignored by his own people, however. He told them plainly, never to call themselves by his name, or to name any church after him. Rather, he pointed people to the Christ, saying that Jesus should have the primacy in all things. Yes, he was a fallible person. Aren't we all.
"As the Bible says, I am already saved (Rom. 8:24, Eph. 2:58), Im also being saved (1 Cor. 1:8, 2 Cor. 2:15, Phil. 2:12), and I have the hope that I will be saved (Rom. 5:910, 1 Cor. 3:1215). Like the apostle Paul I am working out my salvation in fear and trembling (Phil. 2:12), with hopeful confidence in the promises of Christ (Rom. 5:2, 2 Tim. 2:1113)."
BTW, I love your string of Scripture you quoted on your post concerning salvation. Excellent!
Shelb5 (Michelle)
Concerning Scripture and Tradition. The total word of the Gospel, and all the things necessary to life and godliness was given to the church from the beginning. It is faithfully recorded in the New Testament, and it has not changed at all since it was given. Our faith rests on the Word of God, and it is not something that evolves over time into something else, as man made Traditions have done. A comparison of today's traditions and dogmas to the New Testament can readily show this.
Beloved, while I was very diligent to write to you concerning our common salvation, I found it necessary to write to you exhorting you to contend earnestly for the faith which was once for all delivered to the saints. -Jude 1:3
Be diligent to present yourself approved to God, a worker who does not need to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth. - 2 timothy 2:15
All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness, that the man of God may be complete, thoroughly equipped for every good work. -2 timothy 3:16-17
I did not say faith alone Nor do I hold to that Protestant doctrine. Faith without works is dead. The book of Acts in the New Testament clearly shows that every convert recorded there had to do things that were necessary for their salvation to be effected. Acts is the faithful record of the works of the Apostles, as they built the Lord's church, and as such that record of their works is an excellent way for us to restore his church today.
I understand the teaching of the Virgin Mary, and I accept that she is to be venerated, because she was faithful when the time came for her to accept her place as the mother of our Lord Jesus. Thus she is the new Eve, and she should be blessed and placed above every other woman by us all. (Ihope that you can see I am no Protestant!)
Does this mean I must accept the later dogma that she was born without sin? I do accept that. I believe she lived a sinless life in her Lord, for she accepted that he was the Christ, the Annointed of God, and the Saviour of the world. (So are we all justified in the same way!) She was witness to all of the things that transpired in Jesus' life, and she lived a life of beauty and holiness, showing forth to the world that we should all worship Jesus, who is God, and the Son of God.
Please do not count me sinful if I read the Scripture that Jesus had five brothers and two sisters, and that his brother James was very prominent in the early church, charing the first Jerusalem Council (Acts 15). James led an excellent life believing in his Lord, and dying a martyr's death for doing so. My understanding is that being married, and bearing children is not a sin, nor could it in any way detracted from Mary's vivid and faithful life in any way.
Many of my brothers and sisters in Christ accept that she was always a virgin. I accept them, and they accept me, not because we disagree, but because our allegience is to the Lord alone, and not any doctrine.
thereselittleflower
As I said before, faith in Jesus is what we are saved by. But it must be an active, living faith, not just verbal assent to his deity and lordship.
As for the later creeds, I follow them, for they are where we get our orthodoxy, and our understanding concerning the fact that Jesus is both God and man.And you are right, they do protect us against heresy. All heresy, according to the early church fathers had to do with what someone thought about the Christ. Christology has to be defended against Arians, Gnostics, Pelagians, and all other false beliefs concerning the Saviour.
But everything the creeds say, they say because Scripture said it first. Scripture records the faithful witness of the Apostles, and their sound doctrine we are to live in. The Apostles in the New Testament times were already fighting heresies. But even the Apostles point us to Jesus, and his most excellent life and example to us. This is why we wear the name of Christ, and not the name of an Apostle, regardless of how holy and vernerated they were. They point us to Jesus, as do the Creeds. Every dogma that fails to do this is not a blessing to us, I think, but it takes away from the Lordship of Jesus.
Today, you are correct that there are many 'Christian' faiths, but they are not all orthodox. If one of them says that Jesus is not God, they are heretics. If they are preaching a different Gospel than the one that was once and for all delivered to the Saints (in the New Tesatment and in the times of the Apostles), then we are to not accept it.
Yes, Immersion, or Baptism, is required for salvation. There is no question about that in the New Testament. Centuries later in the church, Affusion replaced immersion. From the beginning, this was not so. My reason for thinking this way is that baptism is pictued in the NT to be a burial (Romans 6) and we are to be buried under the water, and raised to newness of life in our Lord. All the examples of immersion in the New Testament show this.
Later preachers, Charles Finney (1824) in particular, began to teach that being baptized is sinful, since faith must be alone, apart from everything else. Finney is the author of the 'sinner's prayer' and is the one who denied the sacraments to his members. His preaching was very popular in early America, and many denominations followed him.
Belief, faith in Christ means to believe ALL and submit to ALL He has commanded us, and that the Holy Spirit, when He came, would lead them, His apostles, into all truth.
You spoke well here,.This is the pillar and foundation of the Truth. I am not so sure about their successors, however. Many of them in many places and times did not follow the Apostles' sound doctrine. We have all fo their teaching recorded in the New Testament, however, and their sound doctrin is unchanging.
The Church IS the pillar and the ground of the Truth as long as she is faithful to the sound doctrine given by the Apostles, concerning the Lord and his witness to us. But it is the Lord who is to be submitted to, and nothing else, nor any man. Jesus has primacy in our lives.
As to submittng to Peter or his successors, I agree that Peter was given the keys of the Kingdom. This is why he was the one who preached the first Gospel sermon to the Jews on Penticost, and why he was the first to preach the Good News to the Gentiles, in Cornelius. But as we said, our faith rests upon the sound teaching of the Apostles, including Peter. Are the teachings of Paul to be discarded? Or the teachings of James, or Matthew?
Again, our faith must rest on the One they all preached about, who is the living Lord.
Jesus is our great High Priest, and he is our Advocate with the Father, who is always in his presence, interceding for us all. He alone remains our sovereign Lord and our 'Papa,' our Shepherd in the church.
I hope my response here has been given in a spirit of love, and that I have not offended any of you here on this forum.
I was directed here by Katmondo, who told me this is a forum for the Restoration Movement. Have I erred in coming here? If so, please accept my most humble apologies! I consider myself a member of the Lords, church, and as such, I am your brother. And I am still seeking to restore his church in this present age.
Love,
Roger
