Soul Liberty?

My soul and heart tells me that the Catholic Church is the Church is that Christ established on earth and I CHOOSE to follow it.

In doing so, I try to conform myself to its teachings which I accept as the will of God as guided by the Holy Spirit.

I do this willingly instead of reading into Scripture whatever will make God conform to my will and change churches or denoms whenever the one I'm attending teaches something I see as error.

Automaton? No.

Follower? Yes!

 

Did Jesus write any Scriptures? Hmmmm...Nope.

Did he establish a Church? Hmmmmm...Yep!
A Church with the comission to teach.

So...if I follow that Church's teachings, then I must be following Christ.

Simple but it makes sense to me.

 

We don't believe in situation ethics or relativity. We do believe in absolutes. There is absolute truth that God has set forth in the Bible. Protestant churches in general agree far more than you would have others believe. There is also a lot more dissension in the Catholc Church than you like to have others to know. As well there are many kinds of Catholic churches, almost as many kinds of protestants. Catholic theologians can't agree among themselves on various doctrines. I studied out purgatory once and found a wide divergence of views among Catholic theologians on just exactly what purgatory was? You guys couldn't agree among yourselves. Then you turn around and hypocritically accuse us of having differences arising out of the doctrine of soul liberty. That is an absurd accusation when you consider all the differences in the Catholic church.

However, be that as it may, I will give a more Scriptural answer to your complaint/question. Understand what a church is. A church is a voluntary assembly of baptized believers gathered together for the purpose of obeying the Great Commission and carrying out the two ordinances (the Lord's Table and baptism), as Christ has commanded us. Each church is independent and autonomous one from the other. There is no such thing as a denomination. With that in mind, each church is uniquely different, just as they were in the New Testament, and just as they were in Revelation two and three.

Almost every church has a statement of faith. To be a member of that church you agree to that statement of faith, or else go to a church that has a statement of faith that you could agree with. For example I could never agree with Frank's church's statement of Faith, nor Bob Ryan's church's statement of Faith. I would never go there or join those churches, even if they believe they have the truth. I don't believe they have the truth, just like I don't believe you have the truth, or understand it. But I might go to Clint's church, or Briguy's church. Their church's statement of faith are probably much like ours.

No church, not the Catholic Church or any other has ever found all absolute truth in the Bible. If you naively think that you have, just tell me and I will ask you a few questions for you to give me official answers from the catechism or other official sources.

You are quite correct in that. That is why it is so important to do personal Bible study and make sure that you are right. Don't take the church's word for it. Don't take just my word for it. Don't trust just anyone. Do your own research. Let God speak to you and lead you. Hopefully your study will be objective and Spirit-led.

Acts 17:11 These were more noble than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness of mind, and searched the scriptures daily, whether those things were so.

This is the essence of both soul liberty and "the Bible as our final authority." The Bereans were not about to take Paul's words at face value, even though he had a great reputation among all of Christianity by this time. They said that they were going to compare what he said with what the Scriptures said. If the two were in agreement then they would accept his message. Paul called them noble for that reason. "They received the word with all readiness of mind and searched the Scriptures daily, whether those things were so."

So if by much study, I believe certain doctrines of the Catholic church (as well as Oneness Pentecostal, SDA, and Church of Christ) are heretical, I will say so. I have that liberty and responsibility to warn others of wrong teaching.

Only by your personal study of the Scriptures will you know if what I say is true or not. That is your responsibity. Does it match up with the Word of God.

Isa.8:20 To the law and to the testimony: if they speak not according to this word, it is because there is no light in them.
DHK

 

Here you have made some dangerous assumptions which are not necessarily true, and could very well be false. If they are false you are staking your eternal salvation on pure speculation, and assumption. I would never play with my eternal soul so lightly.
For example:

1. "My soul and heart tells me that the Catholic Church is the Church is that Christ established on earth"
--"My soul and my heart," That refers to emotion. You are making a decision based on pure emotion. You are going by your gut feeling that the Catholic Church is the Church that Christ established. What if you are wrong? What then? If you are, you will have all eternity to think about it. There is a Heaven, and there is a Hell. Before making such a statement I would make sure that I am on my way to Heaven, and avoiding Hell. Most historians say that the Catholic church started in the fourth century.

2. "In doing so, I try to conform myself to its teachings which I accept as the will of God as guided by the Holy Spirit."
--I am not trying to be offensive. I am only trying to get you to think about things. You say you were guided by the Holy Spirit. How do you know it was the Holy Spirit? Is Satan able to imitate the Holy Spirit. I beieve he is. How would you be able to differentiate between the leading of God's Holy Spirit, and being deceived by an evil spirit?

3. "I do this willingly instead of reading into Scripture whatever will make God conform to my will and change churches or denoms whenever the one I'm attending teaches something I see as error."
Every church is made up of men. What makes you think that the men in your church are any more "perfect" than any other church. You have the personal responsibility to study the Bible yourself. You cannot depend on the church to spoon-feed you. God commanded you personally to "Search the Scriptures."
Concerning the perfection of your church, or its doctrine, or the men who made it, think of these two verses when you think of your magesterium, and those who put together your catechism.

1John 1:8 If we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us.

1John 1:10 If we say that we have not sinned, we make him a liar, and his word is not in us.
DHK

 

If it is that simple follow one of the church's that is built on the foundation of Christ. The Catholic Church was started in the fourth century and was not founded on either the Apostles or on Christ. If you claim anyone for its founder you might as well claim Constantine.

Choose an independent Bible Believing church instead.
DHK

 

Choose Jesus, you live forever!
He can be found in every bible believing and practicing church. You can even find him in most Catholic churches. He is among those without the disguises.

 

I am not really going to answer this question but I did want to chime in with something. It is clear that there is much in Scripture that is not up for interpretation. Much of Scripture interprets other parts of Scripture. Please note, I said much, not all. However, I do agree there are parts that do require interpretation. I just wanted to point that out because it was beginning to seem like you are painting it out that a person can't even pick up a Bible and read it without the church (i.e. RCC) interpreting it for them.

Also, why is the RCC the only true church? Was not Christ talking of the body of believers when he talks of the church? He most assuredly was not talking of the RCC. Wouldn't you agree that there are believers outside the RCC? So then isn't Christ's church more than the RCC?

Neal

 

I have read many, including the 20th century book entitled " The vatican's holocaust " by Avro Manhattan.

Thank God that there is enough religious freedom today. But if i lived during the dark ages, i might be one that will be tortured by the catholic inquisitor. Maybe the catholic church don't practice it today but i believe they will do it again once they have the opportunity.

The catholic church by their deceitful ecumenical movement is pretending to be harmlesss as dove but in reality, they still believe in the inquistion since they claim that their church dogmas is infallible.

May God give us the strength when that time comes. They did and justified it before and they will surely do it again.

 

DHK:
Just to set the record straight.
1. I have no church. Jesus Christ does. Mat. 16;18,Acts 20:28.
2. One cannot join the Lord's church. He is added to it by God. Acts 2:47.
3. Christians have no articles of faith, and no creed. We teach and practice those things authorized by the new testament of Jesus Christ. Mat. 28:18-20. Our faith is in Christ Jesus where all spiritual blessings are found. Eph. 1:3.
4. If you want to join any church, it will have to be one you cannot read of in the new testament of Jesus Christ as God adds the saved to his church. Acts 2:38-47.
5. Denominations or division does exist. I Cor. 1:10-13. Things that are different are not the same. The various protestant groups do not teach or practice the same things. Phil. 3:16,17. In fact, a number of them even disagree on what must I do to be saved? Acts 2;37;16:30;9:6,7.

The practice of worship is also quite dissimilar amongst these groups. In fact, most practice the use of mechanical instruments of worship under the vehement protest of the very founders of their groups. Some remember the Lord's death on the first day, Other groups chose to do it once a quarter, or bimonthly etc. I Cor. 11:23-27, Acts 2:42. A large number of mainline denominations employ women as preachers in their assemblies where men and women are present. This practice is forbidden by the new testament. I Tim. 2:11-13.

The new testament of Jesus Christ commands us to fellowship based on the truth. Eph. 4:1-6, II John 9-11. This is absent in the religious world of today. In fact, the number of religious groups and divers doctrines continues to proliferate. There are at present thousands of different groups who operate under the guise of Christianity.

It is an extreme distortion of fact to say there are no denominations in the religious world. The meaning of the very term implies by another authority. This is exactly the reason we have a religious world divided. Men chose to reject the simplicity in Jesus Christ. Mat. 28:18-20.

The religious world should take heed to the words of Solomon in Proverbs 14: 12," There is a way that seemeth right unto a man but the end thereof is always death."

 

Always amuses me how one persons "heart and soul" tells them one thing, and another persons "heart and soul" tells them another.... and so on and on....


Scripturally speaking, of course.

Also, think of Paul ..... rushing down there to Damascas, full of indignant righteousness, frothing at the bit, rarin' to have a piece of the christians there.... his "heart and soul" beating with heartfelt Godly emotion (yes, he honestly felt in his heart and soul he was working for His Lord and Master) when

kaboom!


God changed his heart and soul ....... and opened his eyes in a miraculous way!!!!!

About turn!


Oh well, just an amusing observation I often make......

 

I have read many, including the 20th century book entitled " The vatican's holocaust " by Avro Manhattan.

Thank God that there is enough religious freedom today. But if i lived during the dark ages, i might be one that will be tortured by the catholic inquisitor. Maybe the catholic church don't practice it today but i believe they will do it again once they have the opportunity.

The catholic church by their deceitful ecumenical movement is pretending to be harmlesss as dove but in reality, they still believe in the inquistion since they claim that their church dogmas is infallible.

May God give us the strength when that time comes. They did and justified it before and they will surely do it again. </font>[/QUOTE]Yes and thank God I was not alive and well in the days when the KKK was started by a baptist. I am quite certain the majority of the KKK has been baptists and it is quite likely that many baptist preachers have put on those white robes. The KKK is still around today. It's charter is hatred of Jews Catholics and Blacks. Perhaps you could show me a public statement by the Baptist Church opposing membership in such an organization.

I also see on many baptists websites baptists speaking about Calvinism. Ever heard of the Geneva Inquisition SEB. Let's just say it wasn't Catholic. And let's just say a man named John Calvin wasn't too disaproving of a man by the name of Servetus being barbequed over an open fire.

More interesting stuff. Seems King James had a phobia about witches and so had many women burned at the stake. Now later he determined that most of these charges against these women had been trumpted up. The point is why is this man's name on any Bible?

[ May 23, 2003, 12:03 PM: Message edited by: thessalonian ]

 

Hey SoutheastBaptist,

I just put in Calvin and Baptist and got over 100,000 hits. Calvinist and Baptist another 5000 or so. And it looks like both words coming up goes rather deep in to the pages. Needless to say, I don't have time to go in to them all. So quite obviously John Calvin and the Geneva Inquisition can be tied to the Baptist religion.

Got a few hits on KKK and Baptist also. About 4000 or so. Here is one interesting site about the KKK in Texas.


Wonder if Soul Liberty and the KKK are compatable? Wonder if anyone was thrown out of a Baptist Church for being a member of the KKK? I never recall hearing such a thing. Not intending to be offensive here. Just letting SEB know that Baptist history isn't all it's cracked up to be either.

Blessings

[ May 23, 2003, 10:28 AM: Message edited by: thessalonian ]

 

Southeast Baptist

This is funny.

It seems there was a man in 1611 who was burned for his beliefs in England. Now there is one website in trying to show that there were baptists throughout the ages that claim him as a Baptist. There is a problem with this and it ties in to your soul liberty doctrine. King James, who's name is on the Bible that most Baptists use was not in favor of Soul Liberty it seems for he had this dear man burned.

http://www.reformedreader.org/history/unknown/ch02.htm

Now another site in trying to defend having the dear King's name on their Bibles says that this righteous man was right in burning Mr. Edwards. That he was not a Baptist. Once again of course, denying the Baptist theory of Soul Liberty. So apparently it is a doctrine that baptist don't hold in too high esteem themselves.

http://www.jesus-is-lord.com/guilty.htm

Seems whatever story works.

 

Oh My!

Pastor Thomas Robb, a born again Christian and a baptist pastor - gave his life to Christ it says:

http://www.christianidentity.tv/bio.htm

What else might he be in to?

http://www.kkk.com/

More on Baptists and Soul liberty and the KKK.


http://www.pastornet.net.au/jmm/aasi/aasi0944.htm

"The KKK was supported most notably by Methodists, Baptists and the Disciples of Christ; all of which had been the most susceptible to Fundamentalism"

Seems like there is a bit of housecleaning for you baptists to do SEB before you go worrying about the Catholics restarting the inquisition.

[ May 23, 2003, 12:52 PM: Message edited by: thessalonian ]

 

A bit of misinformation propagated here. It seems that Thessalonian is trying to whitewash the Catholic Church of its terrible misdeeds. The KKK was a political movement. It was primarily conservative in nature (yet still horribly wrong). It undoubtedly harbored more Catholics than it did Baptists, as Baptsist by their nature in that era were more non-resistant to violence.

The most unfortunate victims of the Reconstruction Era were the poor whites and freed Negroes who fared the worse under the violent conditions. The most infamous villains were the Carpetbaggers and Scalawags, most of whom just happened to be Jewish. But there is documentation that ex-Confederate Jews, as well as many Catholics also joined the Klan. Religious distinctions were not part of the original Ku Klux Klan's doctrine. Names like Cohen and Rosenbaum appear on both sides. Some Jews rose as high as the rank of Grand Cyclops in the original KKK. (In time I will add a section dealing with the Jews in the KKK.)

http://www.kkklan.com/briefhist.htm

[ May 23, 2003, 04:07 PM: Message edited by: DHK ]

 

The difference is, Thessalonian, that if (Heaven forbid) the Catholic church started the Inquisition again, you would be bound to that organization or you would have to relenquish all ties. If I found out that my pastor (Heaven forbid) were involved with the KKK, I could leave that congregation and go to another church that held the same core beliefs but had a more moral man in the pulpit.

In other words, I could "test and hold on to the good." You, as a Catholic, could only test and have to put up with it.

It's interesting to me that you still hold up the KKK as a strawman in these debates. There were plenty of Baptists who did not, and do not, support hate organizations such as the KKK. Do you think this Baptist affiliation supports them?

click here

When you mention the KKK, I am free to just say, "Yes, that is a horrible organization. They are a disgrace to decent southerners everywhere." Yet when someone says "Inquisition," you have to resort to trying to stereotype another group to pull attention away from the Catholics. You are not allowed to denounce the atrocities commited by the church while I am free to denounce the actions of others that claim the name "Baptist."

My own church does not need "housecleaning" but if it did, the congregation could do so. Despite the fact that all Christians are priest (1Peter 2:9), you are powewrless to shape your doctrine or your assembly as led by the Holy Spirit. If you see blatant wrong and it is sanctioned by those who have claimed that power for themselves, you're either silently stuck with it or you run the risk of being excommunicated or anathema.

 

Always amuses me how one persons "heart and soul" tells them one thing, and another persons "heart and soul" tells them another.... and so on and on....


Scripturally speaking, of course.

Also, think of Paul ..... rushing down there to Damascas, full of indignant righteousness, frothing at the bit, rarin' to have a piece of the christians there.... his "heart and soul" beating with heartfelt Godly emotion (yes, he honestly felt in his heart and soul he was working for His Lord and Master) when </font>[/QUOTE]First, Paul was on his way with ORDERS from the high priest. He was not acting out of his feelings.

kaboom!

Wrong again. Paul had no subjective experience. God spoke to him in an audible voice. Like any believer he was changed. It was not a subjective emotional experience. He submitted to the Lord, whose voice he actually heard.

Not very amusing when the observation is not very Biblical.
DHK

 

In all the time I have been involved in this forum (better than a year and a half now) I have yet to see a Catholic admit that any atrocity that the Catholic Church commited was wrong. From the Crusades to the refusal of Law's resignation, EVERYTHING gets whitewashed. To admit error admits the humanness of the organization. The Catholics seem to view the church as equal to the Godhead, incapable of error, not needing to strive.

As I said before, soul liberty neccesitates resposibility. Non-catholic congregations recognize the fallibility of humans and are willing to accept human limitation. We (hopefully) constantly strive to be better. We will admit not only our shortcomings at Judgment, but also our growth and improvements.
Matthew 25:20

 

Oh my, Thessalonian, (RE: your post, May 23, 2003 09:50 AM) what you discovered simply shows that ignorance and intolarance have no religious barriers!

Even so, that should have no bearing on our modern, enlightened, religious environment however, because we no longer allow prayer in our public life, schools, workplace, etc. We are rapidly heading for a religion free society instead of a society of free religion. We have essentially taped the mouths of our preachers, banning them from speaking out against "government" from their pulpits. Basically, we are on a return path to the DARK AGES! There is only one way to prevent that, and Daniel is a good example, so is Joseph. Both of them refused to bow down to "other gods". Neither of them prayed to the dead. They honored the living God by their firm beliefs.

But alas, the teachings of the Catholic church when followed strictly, would have you praying to the dead (departed saints), instead of the Living God. It would have you kneeling before images whether graven or painted. Of course the Church calls them ICONs whose purpose is "merely to remind you", which is precisely the purpose of an IDOL.

The Catholic Church would have you substituting bread the product of wheat, for "the real flesh"; and wine the product of the grape, for "the real blood" of Jesus the Living Christ.

The Catholic Church would have you believe that getting dunked in water is essential to your salvation, when clearly it is spirit baptism performed by the Holy Spirit that is essential. Just another "substitution", Counterfeiting the real.

But go ahead, follow the teachings of "The Mother Church" after all, it is your life, you are free to live it as you wish, but you will be judged on the purity of your faith, and all these polutants will have a disastrous effect.

Then again you can renounce the falseness, repent and follow the Lord Jesus Christ the true head of the church instead of the counterfeit or "christ substitute" that heads up the Catholic religion.

 

In all the time I have been involved in this forum (better than a year and a half now) I have yet to see a Catholic admit that any atrocity that the Catholic Church commited was wrong. From the Crusades to the refusal of Law's resignation, EVERYTHING gets whitewashed. To admit error admits the humanness of the organization. The Catholics seem to view the church as equal to the Godhead, incapable of error, not needing to strive.

As I said before, soul liberty neccesitates resposibility. Non-catholic congregations recognize the fallibility of humans and are willing to accept human limitation. We (hopefully) constantly strive to be better. We will admit not only our shortcomings at Judgment, but also our growth and improvements.
Matthew 25:20 </font>[/QUOTE]This is simply a lie Clint. I have stated several times that Catholics have made errors in temporal matters. Seems to me you are guilty of the same thing you accuse me of.


And in order to fend off attacks on his beloved religion Clint switches back ones again to the Inquisition and calling the Catholic a blind, ignornat zombie who worships the pope.
You did not answer my major points. If King James killed people for their religion are you not honoring him by putting his name on your Bibles. That flies in the face of what you say about having the choice of saying those KKK'ers were naughty boys. We have a website that says they are so that should do it. KJ was naughty but you just have to have his name on your Bible because it's the cats meow of Bibles. John Calvin Burned Servetus which is of course against soul liberty but let's put his name on our Churches and use it as a label for our doctrines. Who is whitwashing what is my question. No whitwashing here. I am just making a hypocrit out of you. That's all.