Two Questions To Protestants?

[ttomm46]

1-Who copied the and preserved the Holy bible before the Reformation?..Baptist? Penticostals? Who?

2-If each person is supposed to understand the Bible without the Churches interpretation why are there over 10,000 protestant sects and numerous cults all claiming to be correct and bible believing?

just curious..

[RezaMikhaeil]

[quote name='ttomm46' post='1238761' date='Apr 11 2007, 10:26 AM'][color="#FF0000"]I'm Orthodox but I know exactly how every Protestant is going to interpret these:[/color]

1-Who copied the and preserved the Holy bible before the Reformation?..Baptist? Penticostals? Who?

[color="#FF0000"]Protestants aren't going to give credit to a single individual but God himself. They will say that God himself preserved the text, but that its them that know how to properly interpret it.[/color]

2-If each person is supposed to understand the Bible without the Churches interpretation why are there over 10,000 protestant sects and numerous cults all claiming to be correct and bible believing?

[color="#FF0000"]Every Protestant Sect would say "because they're wrong" but they'd also point out that Roman Catholics and Orthodox disagree on some things too, and some protestants would make the case that different interpretations is a good thing because no human is perfect so no human can interpret them correct 100% of the time.[/color]

just curious.. [/quote]

[dairygirl4u2c]

the best response i know of..

The early church preserved the bible. Just because God acted to put the bible together doesn't mean he continues to act in an infallible sense in the CC. Just like the old testament was put together by God without the CC, so it goes with the new testament. Sure, Rome had prominent authority when finalizing canon, but that doesn't necessarily mean they were the pope as they understand today. (see all my stuff about the papacy growing from an influential church to a man made church) Note that the canon that was used was first shown in a list by some saint guy. (i think it may have been missing one book though) It wasn't because of the CC per se that the list was generated.

That there are so many groups only shows the differences of opinion of people growing in the spirit. They all believe the holy spirit will guide them. They are wrong sometimes, but they learn from their mistakes. Eventually all will understand. They could say you don't trust the holy spirit to act in individuals, granted you do within the church. There were many sects of Jews with the old testament back in the day too, but that didn't mean it was false.

Edited April 11, 2007 by dairygirl4u2c

[ttomm46]

well..actually the Saduccees,,If I spelled that right, didn't believe in a resurrection so they were wrong...actually Rome and the East because there were no other churches..

so your saying that all these numerous groups have the truth?

the holy spirit is the spirit of truth so they are all guided by the spirit?
wouldn't that include anti Trinitarian groups like oneness churches...?
i really can't see the holy spirit working that way.

Edited April 11, 2007 by ttomm46

[dairygirl4u2c]

THat the sadduces were wrong makes my point. they were wrong, yet the holy spirit were surely guiding the jews before Jesus. not what everyone believes is true who are trying to follow. but, they are all progressing. somehting that people will never agree on are not fundamental. the essentials everyone believes, or will believe eventually. this premise ofmine is the best place to attack me.

Edited April 11, 2007 by dairygirl4u2c

[FullTruth]

Why are there 10,000 protestant sects?
Because some people take hold of one truth in the bible, and blow it out of proportion.

Who preserved the word?
God did, through people living in the spirit.

On oneness churches?
What's your problem with Jesus named people? They believe Jesus Christ is God incarnate. They believe Jesus Christ died for our sins. Just because you don't agree with them, doesn't mean they aren't guided by the spirit, and the fact you say that shows you are not guided by the spirit, IMHO.

Remember, I am posting about a lot of experiences I had with God, and those were experiences I had with God when I was a oneness believer. If God could be involved in my life as a oneness believer, how was the spirit not involved in my life?

[jeffpugh]

Good response, GodChaser.

I think the spirit works with protestants, but one can't claim that the 30 000+ 'churches' are the fruits of the Spirit. It would imply God has schizophrenia (or whatever). It is based on human fallacy.

[ttomm46]

[quote name='Sacred Music Man' post='1239339' date='Apr 11 2007, 10:43 PM']Good response, GodChaser.

I think the spirit works with protestants, but one can't claim that the 30 000+ 'churches' are the fruits of the Spirit. It would imply God has schizophrenia (or whatever). It is based on human fallacy.[/quote]
you accuse me of not being guided by the spirit......What a laugh from a person without the sacraments..lol.

the holy spirit doesn't give one sect some truth and others some partial truth..You should really try learning the Bible and what it is instead..I have a feeling your experiences are entirely of your your own making...I don't appreciate you telling me I'm not guided by the spirit when you don't have Sacraments to give you spiritual life.

I don't see any cogent facts to back up your rambling..But you accuse me of not being guided by the spirit..Oh well..what can you expect from someone who slings it but can't present facts..

I was reading your profile....Does this Babylon thing mean you want to destroy the church?
By the way i'm fairly dumb so please tell me what a Religious Spirit is?

"I live a life of modesty and amazement. God has freed me from every single religious spirit that has ever attached itself to me.<br /><br />I love God, and he loves me, and we're going to take up the bow and fire arrows at the Spirits of Babylon.""""

Edited April 12, 2007 by ttomm46

[FullTruth]

[quote name='ttomm46' post='1239420' date='Apr 12 2007, 01:17 AM']you accuse me of not being guided by the spirit......What a laugh from a person without the sacraments..lol.

the holy spirit doesn't give one sect some truth and others some partial truth..You should really try learning the Bible and what it is instead..I have a feeling your experiences are entirely of your your own making...I don't appreciate you telling me I'm not guided by the spirit when you don't have Sacraments to give you spiritual life.

I don't see any cogent facts to back up your rambling..But you accuse me of not being guided by the spirit..Oh well..what can you expect from someone who slings it but can't present facts..

I was reading your profile....Does this Babylon thing mean you want to destroy the church?
By the way i'm fairly dumb so please tell me what a Religious Spirit is?

"I live a life of modesty and amazement. God has freed me from every single religious spirit that has ever attached itself to me.<br /><br />I love God, and he loves me, and we're going to take up the bow and fire arrows at the Spirits of Babylon.""""[/quote]
Hey ttomm46,

What's your issue with me?

Babylon is what many are starting to realize, it is this whole system of death that has invaded itself in our world. Abortion this, destruction of the environment that. Who cares about life, because we're all going to be reincarnated anyways. Sin, Sin, Sin. Lets profane God.

The spirit of Babylon is the Spirit of the Anti-Christ, and I am taking full aim at it.

The fact you're now attacking me.... hmmm, interesting. I will chalk this up to one scripture,

[quote name='Romans 3:1-7' date=' KJV']What advantage then hath the Jew? or what profit is there of circumcision?

Much every way: chiefly, because that unto them were committed the oracles of God.

For what if some did not believe? shall their unbelief make the faith of God without effect?

[b]God forbid: yea, let God be true, but every man a liar; as it is written, That thou mightest be justified in thy sayings, and mightest overcome when thou art judged.[/b]

But if our unrighteousness commend the righteousness of God, what shall we say? Is God unrighteous who taketh vengeance? (I speak as a man)

God forbid: for then how shall God judge the world?

For if the truth of God hath more abounded through my lie unto his glory; why yet am I also judged as a sinner?[/quote]

Next thing you will be saying that I'm nuts, and nobody should listen to me, right ttomm46?

Too bad God justifieth me, and many on this board can tell I have a walk with God, because God has testified of me in their minds and hearts.

And you can't destroy the church ttomm46, because Jesus Christ said that the gates of hell will not prevail against the church! Praise God!

BTW, I read 7 chapters of the bible on days I have to work, and 21 chapters of the bible when I don't. Hmmm... I should read more, according to you. . .

Edited April 12, 2007 by FullTruth

[kateri05]

isn't it about quality and not quantity?


regardless of the Truth in this debate, which of course, rests with Mother Church , people in here sure are a little fiesty... and not in the fun debate kinda way, but in the uncharitable kinda way. make sure you pray before you post

[Budge]

[quote] 1-Who copied the and preserved the Holy bible before the Reformation?..Baptist? Penticostals? Who?[/quote]Valdouise, Waldensians, Lorillards, and Hussites etc...



[img]http://www.chick.com/catalog/books/excerpts/1252/1252_37.jpg[/img]

All the Catholic Bibles and modern apostate translations--Hort and Wolcott come via the Alexandrian stream.


'

[quote]VII. ANTIOCH OR ALEXANDRIA

There is one point upon which both sides of the current debate agree: the early transmissional history of the New Testament is a "tale of two cities", Antioch and Alexandria. And just as surely as the KJV Text was woven into the spiritual life of Antioch in Syria, so was also the Modern Version Text in Alexandria. Today a believer must decide whether he is more comfortable with a Bible whose roots go back to one or the other of these two cities. The choice is a clear one, as there is very little common ground between them.
[b]
Certainly Antioch has by far the more glorious Biblical heritage. It became to the Gentile Christians what Jerusalem had been to the Jews, and superseded Jerusalem as the base for the spread of the Gospel. The "disciples were called Christians first in Antioch" (Acts 11:26). It was the starting point for the Apostle Paul's missionary journeys. Mark, Barnabas, and Silas were there; as was Peter and probably Luke. The Book of Acts leaves us with no doubt that Antioch was the centre of early church activity.

Egypt shares no such glory. It has always been looked upon as a symbol of the world-system which is opposed to the things of God. [/b]God would not allow His Son (Mt. 2), His nation (Ex. 12), His patriarchs (Gen. 50), or even the bones of the patriarchs (Ex. 13:19) to remain there. The Jews were warned repeatedly not to return to Egypt, not to rely upon it for help, not to even purchase horses there, etc. Thus, in contrast to what is being claimed today, it is hard to believe that Egypt and Alexandria would have been the central place where God would preserve His Holy Word. Frankly, it was the last place on earth that one could trust in doctrinal and biblical matters. It certainly wasn't safe to get a Bible there!
[b]
Even Bruce Metzger, a supporter of the Alexandrian Text, is compelled to catalogue the vast amount of religious corruption which came from Alexandria:[/b]

Among Christians which during the second century either originated in Egypt or circulated there among both the orthodox and the Gnostics are numerous apocryphal gospels, acts, epistles, and apocalypses. Some of the more noteworthy are the Gospel according to the Egyptians, the Gospel of Truth, the Gospel of Thomas, the Gospel of Philip, the Kerygma of Peter, the Acts of John, the Epistle of Barnabas, the Epistle of the Apostles, and the Apocalypse of Peter. There are also fragments of exegetical and dogmatic works composed by Alexandrian Christians, chiefly Gnostics during the second century. We know, for example, of such teachers as Basilides and his son Isidore, and of Valentinus, Ptolemaeus, Heracleon, and Pantaenus. All but the last-mentioned were unorthodox in one respect or another. In fact, to judge by the comments made by Clement of Alexandria, almost every deviant Christian sect was represented in Egypt during the second century; Clement mentions the Valentinians, the Basilidians, the Marcionites, the Peratae, the Encratites, the Docetists, the Haimetites, the Cainites, the Ophites, the Simonians, and the Eutychites. What proportion of Christians in Egypt during the second century were orthodox is not known (The Early Versions of the New Testament, Clarendon Press, 1977, p. 101).

Let it be said again: Alexandria was the worst possible place to go for a Bible! Yet it is precisely the place that our present-day translators have gone in gathering the major sources of the modern Bible.[/quote]


[url="http://www.feasite.org/Tracts/fbcdark2.htm#Antioch"]http://www.feasite.org/Tracts/fbcdark2.htm#Antioch[/url]

[N/A Gone]

Heremenutically that was retarded..

ok, I have finals. But Im excited to see how someone is gonna respond to that. Do you actually believe that budge?

[Apotheoun]

I always thought that Budge got her history from comic books, and now that thought has been confirmed.

[Phoenix Reborn]

[quote name='Apotheoun' post='1239901' date='Apr 12 2007, 08:45 AM']I always thought that Budge got her history from [b]Jack Chick[/b] comic books, and now that thought has been confirmed.[/quote]

Edited April 12, 2007 by Phoenix Reborn

[Starets]

She's also admitted to using Alexander Hislop [shudder] as a source