NOT EVERYTHING IS WRITTEN IN SCRIPTURES.

Buzzard

Well-known member
]
As I do yours. But other things come into play here like the eunuch seeking the counsel of Phillip; that we are told to take our disagreements to "the church"; and that we could possibly interpret the scriptures to our own destruction. The evidence is clear, a visible church was established by Christ on this earth that had the proper authority to guide the faithful on their spiritual journey. That we are not to do all of this by ourselves, and that we are subject to those whom God has placed over us.
The eunuch did not possess the spiritual knowledge of the Messiah

Acts 8: 34 "And the eunuch said to Philip, “About whom, I ask you, does the prophet say this, about himself or about someone else?” 35 Then Philip opened his mouth, and beginning with this Scripture he told him the good news about Jesus."

What happened to Philip, an Apostle; after he introduced he eunuch to Christ???????????
did he say,
I can't leave, he won't be able to understand
unless I stay and Guide him;
so you get someone else to go to Azotus:


Acts 8:39
39 And when they were come up out of the water,
the Spirit of the Lord caught away Philip,
that the eunuch saw him no more:
and he went on his way rejoicing.

------Paul says Farewell to the Church of Ephesians --------
For Paul had determined to sail by Ephesus,
because he would not spend the time in Asia:
for he hasted, if it were possible for him,
to be at Jerusalem the day of Pentecost.

17 And from Miletus he sent to Ephesus,
and called the elders of the church.

------- the eunuch saw Philip no more:------------

and Paul tells the Ephesian Church
And now, behold,
I know that ye all, among whom I have gone preaching the kingdom of God,
shall see my face no more.
so:
And now, brethren, I commend you to God,
and to the word of his grace,
which is able to build you up,
and to give you an inheritance
among all them which are sanctified.

Not one word there, not a hint of
I commend you Peter, nor any Bishop
especially of the Sodomite Sons of Belial of the RCC
already given over
Bound by Paul to a Reprobate Mind
(Romans Ch.1)

That my friends; is the power to Bind and Loose


Fake Fig Trees / Wolves in Sheep Clothing
Cast aways; they are
Given over too a Reprobate mind;

to whom is reserved the blackness of darkness for ever.
 
Last edited:

Misfit

Well-known member
The eunuch did not possess the spiritual knowledge of the Messiah
Yes we know that.

Acts 8: 34 "And the eunuch said to Philip, “About whom, I ask you, does the prophet say this, about himself or about someone else?” 35 Then Philip opened his mouth, and beginning with this Scripture he told him the good news about Jesus."
And who was this Phillip person? He was one of the original 7 deacons as reported in Acts 6:5, thus he was a teacher in the Church, a member of the Church leadership of the day, a clergyman. You can't twist the scriptures about this, the eunuch was seeking counsel from someone who had knowledge of the Lord. It is clear as day that the eunuch was not depending on himself to find out what was going on all by himself, nope, not what happened at all. He needed to seek the counsel of someone associated with the Christian Church and he certainly did so.

Define "the church" and who will protect us from "interpret(ing) the Scriptures to our own destruction"? It's rather a simple answer:
It's a simple answer which of course you miss. It is the established Church with a hierarchy, who with the Holy Spirit as their guide leads the faithful into the truth. The letters to the outlying churches (parishes) prove this. Left to their own devices, the Corinthians for example were messing up, and messing up badly. They were determining things falsely and the Church leaders had to write to them to set them straight. No, God never left us to figure out things on our own, He never envisioned or actually did such a thing.
 

Buzzard

Well-known member
It's a simple answer which of course you miss. It is the established Church with a hierarchy, who with the Holy Spirit as their guide leads the faithful into the truth. The letters to the outlying churches (parishes) prove this.
Misfit said:
The letters to the outlying churches (parishes) prove this.

do they; now really


For I am jealous over you with godly jealousy:
for I have espoused you to one husband,
that I may present you as a chaste virgin to Christ.

3 But I fear, lest by any means,
as the serpent beguiled Eve through his subtilty,
so your minds should be corrupted from the simplicity that is in Christ.

4 For if he that cometh preacheth another Jesus, whom we have not preached,
or if ye receive another spirit, which ye have not received,
or another gospel, which ye have not accepted,
ye might well bear with him.
-----------BUT-----------
13 For such are false apostles, deceitful workers,
transforming themselves into the apostles of Christ.

14 And no marvel;
for Satan himself is transformed into an angel of light.

15 Therefore it is no great thing if his ministers also
be transformed as the ministers of righteousness;
whose end shall be according to their works.

seems Paul knew it wouldn't be long before
Satan and his minister would try to deceive the Bride of Christ
as he did to Eve in the Garden the Bride of Adam

Left to their own devices, the Corinthians for example were messing up, and messing up badly. They were determining things falsely and the Church leaders had to write to them to set them straight. No, God never left us to figure out things on our own, He never envisioned or actually did such a thing.
and just who said they were messing up ???
The Sodomite Sons of Belial of the RCC
ministers of Satan
were they the ones that wrote
as Misfit said:
The letters to the outlying churches (parishes) prove this.
 
Last edited:

mica

Well-known member
Yes we know that.

And who was this Phillip person? He was one of the original 7 deacons as reported in Acts 6:5, thus he was a teacher in the Church, a member of the Church leadership of the day, a clergyman.
he wasn't part of the rcc. it didn't exist then. He was a believer in and follower of Christ alone.

You can't twist the scriptures about this, the eunuch was seeking counsel from someone who had knowledge of the Lord.
there's no need to twist scripture. those who have been long time Christians and studied His word for yrs/decades are very helpful to new Christians - as they are called to be. you don't get that knowledge from the rcc.

It is clear as day that the eunuch was not depending on himself to find out what was going on all by himself, nope, not what happened at all. He needed to seek the counsel of someone associated with the Christian Church and he certainly did so.
...
yes, someone who was part of His church, not the rcc.

I did the same - a friend who was a believer (raised catholic) helped me by taking me to services / bible studies with him and spent a lot of time after services discussing it with me - and on the phone.
 

Buzzard

Well-known member
[
Misfit said:
Left to their own devices, the Corinthians for example were messing up, and messing up badly. They were determining things falsely and the Church leaders had to write to them to set them straight. No, God never left us to figure out things on our own, He never envisioned or actually did such a thing.
the Corinthians for example were messing up, and messing up badly.

2Cor.11:2​
For I am jealous over you with godly jealousy:
for I have espoused you to one husband,
that I may present you as a chaste virgin to Christ.

a Chaste Virgin;
without Spot, without Blemish,
not having spot, or wrinkle,
or any such thing;
but that it should be holy and without blemish.

Misfit;
I want to be there at judgement when you tell Christ that his bride
"a Chaste Virgin"
not having spot, or wrinkle,
or any such thing;
was
as you said "were messing up, and messing up badly."
and some Son of Belial of the RCC had to straighten her out

EDITED BY MOD--RULE 12


and they; speaking great swelling words ,
blaspheme the Son, the father, the Bride,
and those that dwell in heaven

amazing
"
by their own words they condemn themselves
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Misfit

Well-known member
Misfit;
I want to be there at judgement when you tell Christ that his bride
"a Chaste Virgin"
not having spot, or wrinkle,
or any such thing;
was
as you said "were messing up, and messing up badly."
and some Son of Belial of the RCC had to straighten her out

I didn't say it, the Scriptures in Corinthians said it, so, what, you don't believe them now? 1Cor 4:14 " I am writing you this not to shame you, but to admonish you as my beloved children". Then it's on to chapter 5 where he deals with a case of incest. Verse 1 says: "It is widely reported that there is immorality among you, and immorality of a kind not found even among pagans - a man living with his fathers wife. He then goes on to advise that the body is not for immorality (Chapter 6 v 13). One of the worst problems however is the abuse of the Lord's Supper by them (Chapter 11 verses 17-22).

And there were also other things which he wrote about regarding the abuses by the Corinthian people. You just don't like the fact that a central authority is in charge here, that central authority being the Church and the men who led it. Corinthians alone blows up your claim that each Christian is a "Church" unto themselves, that everyone somehow has the authority to interpret the Holy Word as they see fit. Such a thing is not true in the least. So yes, I stand by my claim that they "were messing up, and messing up badly" and I will repeat those words to God myself at Judgement.
 

Misfit

Well-known member
he wasn't part of the rcc. it didn't exist then. He was a believer in and follower of Christ alone.
He was a deacon of the Church which Jesus set up on this earth, the visible church designed to lead the faithful forward. At the very minimum, we are closer to being the descendants of that church than you are.

there's no need to twist scripture.
Something you folks do all the time to come to the conclusions you want.

I did the same - a friend who was a believer (raised catholic) helped me by taking me to services / bible studies with him and spent a lot of time after services discussing it with me -
With the result of you being led astray and away from the Church which Jesus started.
 

Lastdaysbeliever

Well-known member
I didn't say it, the Scriptures in Corinthians said it, so, what, you don't believe them now? 1Cor 4:14 " I am writing you this not to shame you, but to admonish you as my beloved children". Then it's on to chapter 5 where he deals with a case of incest. Verse 1 says: "It is widely reported that there is immorality among you, and immorality of a kind not found even among pagans - a man living with his fathers wife. He then goes on to advise that the body is not for immorality (Chapter 6 v 13). One of the worst problems however is the abuse of the Lord's Supper by them (Chapter 11 verses 17-22).

And there were also other things which he wrote about regarding the abuses by the Corinthian people. You just don't like the fact that a central authority is in charge here, that central authority being the Church and the men who led it. Corinthians alone blows up your claim that each Christian is a "Church" unto themselves, that everyone somehow has the authority to interpret the Holy Word as they see fit. Such a thing is not true in the least. So yes, I stand by my claim that they "were messing up, and messing up badly" and I will repeat those words to God myself at Judgement.
Although I am not part of the discussion between you and Buzzard I would like to address a claim you have made in this reply that is not truthful, nor factual, nor Biblical. You wrote:

"...Corinthians alone blows up your claim that each Christian is a "Church" unto themselves, that everyone somehow has the authority to interpret the Holy Word as they see fit. Such a thing is not true in the least....".

I don't personally know a single follower of the way that believes we are a "Church" unto ourselves and I haven't read where Buzzard made that claim. Feel free to point me to that quote as you see fit as I am new to CARM. As far as authority to interpret the Holy Word we don't interpret it "as (we) see fit". As you submit your understanding to the interpretations of your pope, his bishops and cardinals and others of ecclesiastical authority concerning RCC dogma and faith, we also have essentials of our faith that is defined and inalterable. To deviate from these are to be outside the faith. No way around that. We also follow the Bible's directions for discipline and our leadership wields this authority based on Scripture. In the body I attend we had two members of the leadership who were expelled because they refused to repent and turn from their sin. This is Biblical and imperative to sustain a church that follows the Bible.

Now, considering that the understanding of "the Church' between the RCC members and followers of the way is diametrically opposed and attested to by these debates, this difference is one of the greatest divides between your belief system and our faith. I make that distinction because you are told what to believe by a system. That ecclesiastical authority you wrote of that you must submit to and recommended I do too.

As for myself, I can't speak for any other but those I personally know, the church is not a building, not an institution, not a heirarchy established by men as the ecclesiastical authority that they awarded to themselves. No, the church of Christ is believers. The body of Christ. We are part of His body (Romans 12:4-5, 1 Corinthians 12:12, Ephesians 1:22, 2:19-22, 4:4, 5:23, Colossians1:24, 1:18) and not "a "Church" unto (ourselves)...".

P.S. I appreciate this interaction with you. It causes me to grow and really love as Christ loves.
 

Misfit

Well-known member

As for myself, I can't speak for any other but those I personally know, the church is not a building, not an institution, not a heirarchy established by men as the ecclesiastical authority that they awarded to themselves.

Do you deny the historical reality that at one time there was only one Christian Church (yes, an actual visible church here on earth to which all Christians were a part of) Do you deny the great schism that occurred in 1054 between the Eastern and Western branches of that same Christian Church?


No, the church of Christ is believers.
Yes, that too. But scripture tells us that others also speak of Christ and that we are not to level any disdain on them.

The body of Christ. We are part of His body

Yes of course, but there was also indeed an institutional Christian Church, a visible Church on this earth whose leaders had the power and authority to decide things.

and not "a "Church" unto (ourselves)...".
Well, many from your point of view certainly think so with the idea that the individual can and should be interpreting God's word all by themselves.


P.S. I appreciate this interaction with you. It causes me to grow and really love as Christ loves.
As I do. Things can be learned from such dialogue.
 

mica

Well-known member
mica said:
he wasn't part of the rcc. it didn't exist then. He was a believer in and follower of Christ alone.
He was a deacon
what's your catholic definition of - deacon?

of the Church which Jesus set up on this earth,
He didn't 'set up' the rcc, man did that.

the visible church designed to lead the faithful forward.
catholics aren't faithful to Christ and His word. they are faithful to the men of the rcc - most twist even that.

At the very minimum, we are closer to being the descendants of that church than you are.
...
no, catholics are not. they don't bother to read the words written in scripture, they don't understand the few they do read or hear. catholics believe and follow words of men, not of God.
 

Lastdaysbeliever

Well-known member
Do you deny the historical reality that at one time there was only one Christian Church (yes, an actual visible church here on earth to which all Christians were a part of) Do you deny the great schism that occurred in 1054 between the Eastern and Western branches of that same Christian Church?

There is, was and always will be only one visible church and that is the body of believers who follow Jesus Christ. It matters not what your churches name is, what the greeting board says about your denomination, your sect, who your pastor of priest is. None of that matters except in the eyes of man. How many wars have been fought over theological differences? How many Christians were persecuted, tortured and killed by the HRCC for not submitting to their belief system? Many, who were deemed heretics by your ecclesiastical authorities tribunals, if I recall my history. So many that several of your past Pope's and I think the current Pope asked forgiveness for persecutions and inquisitions not only against Christians, but Jews. So, yes, with exceptions to your question.

Yes, that too. But scripture tells us that others also speak of Christ and that we are not to level any disdain on them.

I'm not certain what you mean here. If I understand you right, that other faiths speak of Christ? I'd appreciate a clarification.

Yes of course, but there was also indeed an institutional Christian Church, a visible Church on this earth whose leaders had the power and authority to decide things.

Decide what? And this institutional Christian Church, was it the church of Jerusalem that the brother of Jesus, James, was in charge of? Was it the church in Rome that Paul brought into the full knowledge of the Gospel of Jesus Christ? Was it Aquilla and Priscilla who taught Apollos of the baptism of Jesus Christ and had a home church? So many examples of groups of believers that were not institutional Christian churches and yet were the visible church. The body of Jesus Christ, His church, and this body has been here, active since the Apostles and the day of Pentecost and has not been a monolithic church except in the minds of institutional Christian churches not unlike the HRCC.

Well, many from your point of view certainly think so with the idea that the individual can and should be interpreting God's word all by themselves.

Ah, but are we to level any disdain on them? :)

As I do. Things can be learned from such dialogue.
Thank you my friend.
 

Misfit

Well-known member
How many wars have been fought over theological differences? How many Christians were persecuted, tortured and killed by the HRCC for not submitting to their belief system?
Too many wars have been fought over these theological differences, and with the utmost zeal from both sides. Catholic priests (as well as well as parishioners) were routinely darn and quartered in England. No one side holds the high ground here.

So many that several of your past Pope's and I think the current Pope asked forgiveness for persecutions and inquisitions not only against Christians, but Jews.
Which is a good thing.
I'm not certain what you mean here. If I understand you right, that other faiths speak of Christ? I'd appreciate a clarification.
Luke 9:49-50. “Master,” said John, “we saw someone driving out demons in Your name, and we tried to stop him, because he does not accompany us.” 50“Do not stop him,” Jesus replied, “for whoever is not against you is for you.”

Decide what?
Things like the concept of the Trinity, fighting heresies, the Canon of Scripture - all done by the various synods and councils that were held in the early Christian Church.
And this institutional Christian Church, was it the church of Jerusalem that the brother of Jesus, James, was in charge of? Was it the church in Rome that Paul brought into the full knowledge of the Gospel of Jesus Christ? Was it Aquilla and Priscilla who taught Apollos of the baptism of Jesus Christ and had a home church? So many examples of groups of believers that were not institutional Christian churches and yet were the visible church. The body of Jesus Christ, His church, and this body has been here, active since the Apostles and the day of Pentecost and has not been a monolithic church except in the minds of institutional Christian churches not unlike the HRCC.
Well, there was indeed this institutional church. It had its leaders in those early days and then after them the Church evolved as it did, the same Church that was then led by those Bishops whom we now call the Early Church Fathers. This new Christian Church was not stagnant, it grew as one. There is a definite historical record of this Christian Church.
Ah, but are we to level any disdain on them?
Good retort! ☺️ (We probably should not if they speak of Christ). It is the confusion that can result from this sort of thing with the myriad of Christian sects coming into existence, with all claiming that they have hit upon the absolute "truth". I guess the question to answer is can we find Christ in different ways?

Thank you my friend.
Even though we might have a different interpretation concerning some of His written word, in the end I know that you love Jesus as I also do. He is my Savior and advocate before the Father, my only chance to get into the Promised Land.
 
Last edited:

Bob Carabbio

Well-known member
So says the person who is part of a particular denomination.
Chuckle!! Over the last 59 years, I've been: Southern Baptist, American Baptist, Assembly of God, Church of Christ (Campbellite), United Church of Christ, United Methodist, Charismatic, and several types of Independent. If you're gonna run with Christians, you'd best go where they gather, at the time that they gather.

I've spent MOST of the last 59 years in the Assemblies of God, since their "package" is pretty much O.K. with me (although lately the "Soft Rock" music they play is irritating). But that's the advantage of being a "Free-Range Charismatic Calvinist leaning Non-Systematic Eclectic". You can feast on the MEAT - and spit out the BONES almost anywhere.
 

Misfit

Well-known member
Chuckle!! Over the last 59 years, I've been: Southern Baptist, American Baptist, Assembly of God, Church of Christ (Campbellite), United Church of Christ, United Methodist, Charismatic, and several types of Independent. If you're gonna run with Christians, you'd best go where they gather, at the time that they gather.

I've spent MOST of the last 59 years in the Assemblies of God, since their "package" is pretty much O.K. with me (although lately the "Soft Rock" music they play is irritating). But that's the advantage of being a "Free-Range Charismatic Calvinist leaning Non-Systematic Eclectic". You can feast on the MEAT - and spit out the BONES almost anywhere.
I appreciate you admitting as much. I have a friend who is AOG, she is a nice person and she prays for me as I also pray for her.
 

mica

Well-known member
Do you deny the historical reality that at one time there was only one Christian Church (yes, an actual visible church here on earth to which all Christians were a part of) Do you deny the great schism that occurred in 1054 between the Eastern and Western branches of that same Christian Church?
...
not exactly... Christians weren't just part of His church, they ARE His church.

if you're referring to the rcc - that isn't part of His c
hurch.
 

mica

Well-known member
Bob Carabbio said:
Sorry but what the Bible SAYS is an "Absolute", and the Holy SPirit guides into all truth - Not denominational Christianity.
So says the person who is part of a particular denomination.
so? Christians gather together in many different denominations and in nondenom groups. as a nondenom I've been part of groups of several different denominations of believers.
 
Top