1. Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

Former Protestant Pastor Helps Shepherd Catholic Converts

Discussion in 'Free-For-All Archives' started by Carson Weber, Oct 9, 2003.

  1. BobRyan

    BobRyan Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2002
    Messages:
    32,913
    Likes Received:
    71
    Faith:
    Non Baptist Christian
    Ray -

    According to Bokenkotters "Concise History of the Catholic Church" the same cardinals that elect Urban claim that the "mob" altered the elections and so they elected another Pope - free of the mob. And thus began the great schism pg 166-168.

    Before the schism - when Gregory XI died the Romans feared a French Pope "might" be elected. As Bokenkotter states (pg 166)
    finally they came across the solution "the resignation of both Popes". A solution they would try when opportunity was present.

    all three successors to the three Pope system were deposed.

    At this time they also burned John Huss at the stake!! (err - I mean "exterminated" him) What a fitting crime.

    On November 11, 1417 the used a new system - the cardinals were joined by six delegates of each RC nation - thirty in all - . That group then selected the next Pope - a complete break from all three papal lines !!!!


    In Christ,

    Bob
     
  2. thessalonian

    thessalonian New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 11, 2003
    Messages:
    1,767
    Likes Received:
    0
    Who cares about the three pope years. They were short. There was some confussion perhaps but that does not mean that the Church was any thing less than the Church. We don't claim a continuous line of Popes. You see, Apostolic succession is fully contained in the college of the bishops also. Our authority is not dependent upon their being a Pope every single year, though certainly it is an office that has been filled as quickly as possible throughout time. I believe there is one gap of about 3 years if I remember right. Not sure what the cirucmstances were. Likely world traveling conditions didn't allow the Bishops to come together to elect a new one.

    Bob Ryan can point out all the difficulties of history he wants but he was not there so he cannot adequately judge them. Only God can do that. He can point out sins of Popes and Bishops. We say YES they were sinners. Every single Pope has been. It proves nothing more that that they were sinners. For Paul sinned and we don't rip the pages of his writings out. He said "the good that I would do, I do not, while the EVIL that I would not do I do.". I have not seen one person rip the writings of Peter out of his bible yet because Peter denied the Lord three times either. Heck, the Lord called him satan. It just goes on and on. Most of what Bob posts is lies and distortions (bearing false witness, a commandment he seems to care little about in spite of his great "love" for the third (his "fourth" commandment). It's just bitter nonsense from his disfunctional childhood I suspect. There's disfunction in all of our childhoods Bob. It's okay. Let go.

    Blessings
     
  3. BobRyan

    BobRyan Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2002
    Messages:
    32,913
    Likes Received:
    71
    Faith:
    Non Baptist Christian
    Why is it that when I quote Catholic sources - catholics say it is "all lies and distortions"??

    Is it because our RC bretheren have come to expect "lies and distortions" from Catholic sources?

    I find that amazing!

    This thread is on some kind of non-Catholic pastors converting to Catholicism. The question is asked (and never answered) "how many of them were Bible-believing informed fundamentalist pastors" --

    To which the catholic response is "dead silence".

    Then we point out FROM CATHOLIC sources - what the RC history has actually BEEN. (Which then leads us to ask what history those non-catholic pastors were impressed by).

    But in all this - the catholic response is "oouch! you are saying something yada-yada-yada negative about catholics".

    Instead of following the point and responding intelligently and with a compelling argument - we get "rant after rant".

    Surely "that" was not the "compelling" case for those non-Catholic pastors!

    Where was the "attraction"!

    Where was the "intelligent" decision?

    In Christ,

    Bob
     
  4. JFS

    JFS New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2002
    Messages:
    83
    Likes Received:
    0
    I know of one person but I don't know if he was a pastor. He was definitly a Fundamentalist and his father was a pastor his name is David Currie
    The question I have for you Bob is you are so willing to condem the Catholic church based on the sins of individuals. Do we as Catholics get any marks from you based on all the good works that were done by Catholics in the name of Jesus?


    God Bless You
    John
     
  5. Carson Weber

    Carson Weber <img src="http://www.boerne.com/temp/bb_pic2.jpg">

    Joined:
    Dec 5, 2001
    Messages:
    3,079
    Likes Received:
    0
    David Currie, as far as I know, has preached from the pulpit at many Fundamentalist churches. I'm not sure if he's ever been a "pastor" though.
     
  6. Frogman

    Frogman <img src="http://www.churches.net/churches/fubc/Fr

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2001
    Messages:
    5,492
    Likes Received:
    0
    I remember reading about a certain number of vagabond Jews casting out demons in the name of Jesus. They were doing a good work, right? The demons said, Jesus we know and Paul we know, you we don't know.

    We also know that when we do all that is required of us as servants, still we must say we are unprofitable servants.

    Bro. Dallas
     
  7. CatholicConvert

    CatholicConvert New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 15, 2001
    Messages:
    1,958
    Likes Received:
    0
    Bob Ryan --

    Intelligent decision comes from intelligent people. Intelligent people are smart enough to realize certain things regarding the Church. They realize that Jesus described the Church as a net which would catch both good and bad fish, and as a field which would bring forth both wheat and tares.

    Neither the net nor the field is changed by the fact that in them there are worthless things which are only fit for destruction. Intelligent people realize this and concern themselves only with the teachings of the Church, not the failures of Her people, which are legion (for we are ALL sinners --except you, I guess).

    However, it is certainly less than intelligent to let one's personal animus blind him to the teachings of Jesus Himself and how they apply to the Church. It is certainly less than intelligent to continue to dredge up scum off the pond and act as if the scum is the whole pond. It is certainly less than intelligent to ignore the testimony of those who lived and died holy lives before mankind. It is certainly less than intelligent to bring up moral failure and act as if the personal failures of a few constitute sin on the part of the whole body.

    When are YOU going to start acting a little intelligent....?

    I think that even some of the gracious Protestants on this board are getting more than a little tired of flinging dung around and acting as if that makes your point. Why don't you stick to doctrinal issues and put the dung up?
     
  8. BobRyan

    BobRyan Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2002
    Messages:
    32,913
    Likes Received:
    71
    Faith:
    Non Baptist Christian
    I know of one person but I don't know if he was a pastor. He was definitly a Fundamentalist and his father was a pastor his name is David Currie


    The question I have for you Bob is you are so willing to condem the Catholic church based on the sins of individuals. Do we as Catholics get any marks from you based on all the good works that were done by Catholics in the name of Jesus?


    God Bless You
    John
    </font>[/QUOTE]No question!

    The point is not "yada-yada-something bad about catholics".

    The point is that the organization - the Catholic denomination through its doctrines and practices in the dark ages - went into some errors that the Bible even predicts.

    However that does not mean that individuals were not serving God as faithful Christians - selfless service for the good of mankind done by many saved and God-fearing Catholics in all ages.

    No question.

    We applaud their self-sacrifice and faithful service!

    Oh - and by the way - thank you for being focused enough to actually answer the question with some information. You are the first!

    In Christ,

    Bob
     
  9. BobRyan

    BobRyan Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2002
    Messages:
    32,913
    Likes Received:
    71
    Faith:
    Non Baptist Christian
    The question is whether he himself was a Bible-believing fundamentalist. Someone that actually took the gospel, the creation account, the fall of man, the totally depravity of all mankind, the priesthood of all believers, the inspiration of ALL the 66 books -- Literally Just as the Bible teaches it?

    If so, then it would make a fascinating read to see how he was convinced against that view. If you have a link with his statements showing his positions formerly and then the change - I would be happy to read it.

    My point is that I don't find it particularly surprising that a non-fundamentalist who already doubts some parts of scripture - could be persuaded over time to join in the RCC form of that same set of beliefs. In fact, I am surprised more don't do that.

    If you are saying that he never actually was fundamentalist (Bible believing) then I understand.

    In Christ,

    Bob
     
  10. BobRyan

    BobRyan Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2002
    Messages:
    32,913
    Likes Received:
    71
    Faith:
    Non Baptist Christian
    Let me guess.


    All you can hear is "yada-yada-yada-something-bad-about-Catholics"!!

    Why does that not surpise me!

    In Christ,

    Bob
     
  11. Carson Weber

    Carson Weber <img src="http://www.boerne.com/temp/bb_pic2.jpg">

    Joined:
    Dec 5, 2001
    Messages:
    3,079
    Likes Received:
    0
    Why does that not surpise me!

    Because that is, in essence, the unwavering and consistent content of your posts.. a fruit of your SDA Anti-Catholic tradition.
     
  12. thessalonian

    thessalonian New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 11, 2003
    Messages:
    1,767
    Likes Received:
    0
    Froggie,

    First of all I agree. The Apostolic age has ended. Amen.

    Secondly it is not scripture that we get from the Popes. But a lesser charism (as oppossed to divine revelatoin). We get infallible interprutation. Remember Joseph in the Old Testament. He was an infallible interpruter of dreams. Well we think that God's truth is so important that he would like us to know the fullness his commands of it. Mt. 28 commands the Apostles to go and teach ALLLLLLLL the truth to the whole world. Mark 16 tells us that salvation is bound to all that salvation depends on those things that are to be taught. Therefore they must be without error.

    I haven't heard President Bush say "I am the president of the united states" in a long time. In fact I don't believe I have ever heard him utter those words so I guess it must not be true. The evidence is clear with Peter. He is the rock on which the Church is to be built. He is spoken of as a shepherd in John 21. This goes well with Jer 3:15 - I will give you shepherds after my own heart who will give you knowledge and understanding. Peter alone in Luke 22 around v. 30 is solely responsible for strengthening the Apostles after the resurrection. Peter is mentioned far more than any other of the 12. Around 190 times to about 30 for John as the next hightest. Peter is always mentioned first in lists of the apostles. Interestingly I go on Protestant websites and the head pastor is always mentioned first and the most on those sites. Peter walks on water. The only one other than Jesus to ever accomplish this feat. Jesus speaks from Peter's boat. (the bark of Peter, funny that is an age old name for the Papacy). But most important of all, every single time the Apostles are addressed as a whole it is Peter who responds. It is all scripture Dallas. I see nothing but denials from you with little scriptural support in all of this.

    And historically your position is even less creditable. Every single time there was an issue in the Church from the earliest of times, the issue was raised to the Roman See and the Pope. I can present countless quotes that prove this. And Protestants claim that Constantine established the Catholic Church but the antipopes, Hippolatus and Novation actually prove this to be a lie. They, by their claiming the Roman Papacy show that the Bishop of Rome was a highly sought position of authority in the Church. We have lists of the Bishops of Rome back to Peter. Funny thing is there are no lists that I know of of other Sees. Only a few anti-bishops or anti-patriarchs. Baptistmal Regenerantion, salvation, infant baptist, the Eucharist and much much more. The evidence is overwhelming if you look at it objectively rather than in fear that Rome may be right and you may have to follow the truth.

    Blessings
     
  13. Frogman

    Frogman <img src="http://www.churches.net/churches/fubc/Fr

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2001
    Messages:
    5,492
    Likes Received:
    0
    Did men nominate, elect and consecrate your first pope? Why have you broken the tradition Christ first set in the church if this is his intention? Why is this a 'highly sought after position'? Is it because of the 'highly'?

    You are wrong also concerning history and the seeking counsel from Rome. The precedent was set in Jerusalem found in Acts 15. In that ch. Peter declares there is they (Jewish Christians) beleive they shall be saved through the grace that is in Christ Jesus even as they (Gentiles), showing there is a move away from any kind of observance of the OT religion. Why can't you guys see this? It is basic to scripture. Is it because you are looking to man instead of depending on the Spirit? I don't know. I just don't understand how anyone can possess the indwelling of the Holy Spirit the Spirit of truth and then will let men put burdens upon them as such.

    Bro. Dallas
     
  14. Carson Weber

    Carson Weber <img src="http://www.boerne.com/temp/bb_pic2.jpg">

    Joined:
    Dec 5, 2001
    Messages:
    3,079
    Likes Received:
    0
    Hi Dallas

    Did men nominate, elect and consecrate your first pope?

    No, he was appointed by the King. And, when I say "the King", I mean "THE King".

    The precedent was set in Jerusalem found in Acts 15.

    The decision in Acts 15 was that the Pagan Gentiles do not need to become Jews before they become Christians, and the decision regarding Church discipline as well as Church dogma was made by the men at the council: Apostles as well as other leaders. I'm witnessing a precedent for human authority over the Church - one of humble service.
     
  15. thessalonian

    thessalonian New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 11, 2003
    Messages:
    1,767
    Likes Received:
    0
    Dallas

    Once again I give you scripture and you give me denials.

    Was it the Holy Spirit that set the canon of the NT in stone in the late 4th century, no it was men, no it was a council, no it was men. Don't you believe that God guides men's actions through the Holy Spirit. Have you know faith in what he laid down. The Gospel is grace! AMEN!

    The Council of Jerusalem reflects exactly what happens in the Catholic Church. Popes make infallible statements. Peter settled the issue of circumcision of Gentiles. Then the council itself decided to send out a letter regarding meat sacrificed to idols. That is what our councils and Popes do. Notice nowhere in scripture before the council does it say that "circumcision is done". Find me the verse. Paul didn't settle the issue though as an apostle he sided on the correct side and that is to be expected from guidance of the holy spirit. I have no doudt that every other Apostle was on the correct side. But Peter was the one that Spoke for the Church in declaring it not neccessary and of no value in salvation.

    Your history ends at the end of the NT and starts up again when you were in your diapers. You need to check the writings of Irenaus, Jerome, Augustine, Cyprian, Cyril, Ambrose, and the great Athanasius. Even of the heretics Pelgius, Celestius, Arius, etc. etc. And of the councils.

    Salvation is by grace. Guidance as to what the Gospel fully entails is through the Church which is the "pillar and foundation of the truth".


    Blessings
     
  16. thessalonian

    thessalonian New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 11, 2003
    Messages:
    1,767
    Likes Received:
    0
    Dallas,

    I just had a look at your website. Looks like you have big plans. I look forward to seeing your historical layout of the Church between say 90 AD and today. I am sure you should easily be able to show us where there were Landmark Baptists in the years 100, 200, 400, 8000, 1600 and of course today we know there are. My guess is you can trace them back to a name and a date (though I don't know the history of your Church) as can easily be done with the Lutherans (Martin Luther) and Presbyterians (calvinism), Assembly of God (1900's), Baptists (Zwingli), Mormons (Joseph Smith), Jehoviah's Witnesses, Islam (Muhomed of course) and Hindu's. I have not had anyone show me one legitimate name name (Constantine? Ya right, Ignatius called the Church Catholic a few hundred years before him and taught the Eucharist and Apostolic Succession and Baptismal regeneration) that was responsible for the beliefs of the Catholic Church. Oh wait, there is one name. Jesus.

    When you do do this historical expose' of Landmark Baptists throughout time you might want to leave groups like the Paulicians who believe in a dual God concept and rejected most of scripture, and the Albegisians who twisted the scriptures so that sex within marriage was evil and sex outside marriage was good out of you historical analysis. Besides the Southern Baptists and Church of Christ alread claim them for their groups.

    I look forward to your site.

    Blessings
     
  17. Frogman

    Frogman <img src="http://www.churches.net/churches/fubc/Fr

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2001
    Messages:
    5,492
    Likes Received:
    0
    I could and would heartily Amen this but you don't mean the last sentence. The church is not the Pope. The church is not only made up of the ruling presbytery. The church is local and visible and is made up of local and visible immersed believers.

    I give you scripture:
    If you will not take scripture what will you take?

    Bro. Dallas
     
  18. Frogman

    Frogman <img src="http://www.churches.net/churches/fubc/Fr

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2001
    Messages:
    5,492
    Likes Received:
    0
    It is there my friend. The Bible teaches that God is the builder of it in eternity:

    Heb. 3:
    4  For every house is builded by some man; but he that built all things is God.


    It is there because Christ said that it would be. It is there because it is local and visible and can be found. Will everyone be in full agreement with me? Perhaps not, but they will certainly be found to hold to the ordinances which Christ set in the church. The will certainly not make the ordinance of baptism their salvation because their salvation is what leads them to baptism. This are they whom the Catholic church under the headship of man hunted and plagued throughout the valley of the piedmont. They were there of that as truth I am confident.

    Thanks for the encouragement. I appreciate it. I have wanted to get back to that work, but have not had opportunity to do so lately. I will return to it in time as the Lord wills and not the Pope. You must appreciate the fact that I am careful to read all histories I can find and access as this is an important subject and I agree should not be painted by a doctrinal brush of which I am even capable of wielding.

    I simply ask your prayers on my behalf. Are these to be such that I would awaken and see the error of my belief, then so be it, shall I pass beyond the bounds the Lord has set for me? What is that bound? Infallibility is a part and portion of it, but not the whole of it. Am I sometimes moved by the Spirit of God, yes, does this mean that the baptists ought to hold me as their head? No, for they have one head only and this is Christ Jesus the Lamb of God. How shall they remove him and install me?

    Bro. Dallas
     
  19. Frogman

    Frogman <img src="http://www.churches.net/churches/fubc/Fr

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2001
    Messages:
    5,492
    Likes Received:
    0
  20. Frogman

    Frogman <img src="http://www.churches.net/churches/fubc/Fr

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2001
    Messages:
    5,492
    Likes Received:
    0
    The following is taken from: http://users.aol.com/libcfl2/walden.htm#chap8

    This link is chapter 8 of the article cited in the link in my last post.

     
Loading...