Question to prots

Explain

You can do that in the Catholic church too.
Rebuke the Pope, I mean.

The Pope gets rebuked every moment, not sure where this "pope = emperor from wh40k" meme came from.

When you deny Christ's Church, you deny Christ. All authority was given to Christ, and in His Authority, He breathed the Holy Spirit upon His Apostles for the sake of His Church.

You don't get one while denying the other.

If they accepted Christ as Lord, then they were saved

(Okay maybe not you)
But doesn't that mean that for 1500 years, there was no church teaching people to trust in Jesus? I do think the Catholic church trusts in Jesus but I have to make the speech Prot so you can understand me

So the rock of Christ’s Church isn’t infallible?
Doesn’t sound like much of a rock to me

You don’t need a church to teach you to trust Jesus. If you trust Jesus, you ARE the church, invisible, not made by hands.
John 3:8

Only infallible in making judgements with the authority of the Holy Spirit on faith and morals.

Christ never said that Cephas would be super-man. Which ironically, is why the Jews rejected Jesus Christ, because He was not super-man.

Then, how can you drink of the Blood and Body of Jesus Christ and risk damnation if you are in a state of unbelief? Christ never abolished worship.

Jesus Christ still declared Peter as the Rock of his Church, even though he would later be rebuked by Paul.
I don't see how we can't, then, say that the Pope is the rock of the church, even though the rest of the clergy can rebuke him.

When you read Hebrews, do you say

Do you believe you must crawl into your mother’s womb to be born again?

If something is fallible, what is the definition of that word?

If Christ had meant to abolish the worship due to God, He would have.

He didn't. Prove that He did, but we know that you cannot.

The early Christians were still among the Jews during the time of the Apostles as well, still worshiping in the Synagogues.

What kind of argument are you making? I don't understand here.

Peter himself wasn't infallible. Where does this "everything the Pope says is infallible" meme come from? Catholics certainly don't believe it.

I never argued we should not worship God
Carnal Ordinances =/= worship

You base your church off of a fallible man rather than an infallible God, and you don’t see the lack of logic?

I truly hope the idea of afterlife based on what club you're in is not true, because I would love to see all of the "everyone but mine goes to hell" camp from every organization all get put into a giant arena together.

Saying there is no "visible Church" is tantamount to saying there is no "visible worship". Christ said that we should close our doors and pray, but He certainly never abolished worship in the synagogues or the Temple.

What you're preaching is an entirely new and alien doctrine that the Apostles (and even Christ) would have rejected.

No, because this was declared by Jesus Christ. Don't take it up against us, take it up against the authority of Jesus Christ. It won't go well for you.

Jesus Christ never promised that hell wouldn't test His Church, but He promised it would never prevail. Revelations 12 confirms that we will be driven even into the desert in the end-times.

No I don't.
Jesus Christ said he's fine with Peter being the rock, even though he was fallible. Isn't that enough proof?

So, you believe Jesus was fallible when he established his church with Peter? That is literally God saying, "upon this rock I found my church" and you say God was wrong?

wew.

No, because it clearly says in that chapter that

rather than

Ah ok, so you do believe God was wrong and you bring him down to the level of a mere priest.

Good to know. You sure you're not Gnostic?

You keep thinking your complaint is with us, but it is clearly with Jesus Christ. Jesus Christ proclaimed St. Peter, Cephas, and upon Cephas, His Church will be built upon and known.

Yes, all Christians are apart of the universal priest-hood, but you play the part of Korah, reviling the ones vested with authority.

Have you read Hebrews?

Yes. Did you change IP?

Yes, I moved location

I do think that people in the catholic church can be saved, but it would be because it was despite of Papism and her false doctrines. For it's the Holiness graciously given by God, not the human righteousness (while using God as a crutch), that allows people to enter the heavenly kingdom.

Anyone who trusted in Christ to save them. Catholics can be saved too, they just have to trust that it is Christ who saves rather than relying on false idols, mere men or women, or their works.

I think Catholics, Orthodox, or other denominations can still be saved even today.

Just so long as they believe in salvation through the perfect life, death and resurrection of Christ alone. That is the key. If they seek with pure intent, any questionable practices of the "official" church won't be held against them.

t. Pentecostal

If Protestants consider Catholics and Orthodox as valid Christians who hold some errors, fine that will just mean the mistaken early Christians are still Christians who are saved.

But many Protestants dont hold this and for those kind of Protestants, the answer is really there is no actual Christian from 1Clement onwards at the very least. This is also why the early Christians to those like Baptists are simply utterly irrelevant

t.Catholic

We don't hear a lot about the early church as prots but that doesn't mean we are discouraged from studying them, they're just as valid teachers as modern ones, if not better.

Faith without works is dead, who can enter Heaven without a single good work?

Say that when you actually treat them as teachers rather than paying lip service

It's not faith in faith alone that saved but having a trust in Christ. Although Catholicism does not preach the gospel, there are still individuals within the faith who actually believe in it but don't quite know it and are just born in to a wrong system. These people are a part of the invisible church and it's impossible to answer the question in the OP since you're practically asking me who is saved and not. That's only for God to know.

faith alone is enough for salvation, works can be a demonstrate of faith

For most mainstream protestants: everyone including Catholics, as long as they really do have faith in Christ.

For a handful of meme churches in southern United States: a secret underground church that survived since the time of the apostles. Everyone else was a crypto pagan

Anyone who puts their full trust in God, loves their neighbor, strives to do good and repents from their mistakes. It's not complicated. What kind of God do you think we have??

Attached: Dg3Xa7YUEAY3qbX.jpg (800x1028, 187.69K)

“Lord Lord, many good works have I done in your name…”
“Begone from me, I never knew you”

You may be in for a surprise

Stop misrepresenting Matthew

in Matthew 25:31-46. The sheeps are rewarded because they have provided for the king himself by feeding the hungry, provisioning the thirsty with water, welcoming the stranger, clothing the naked, caring for the sick, and visiting those in prison (vv. 34-40). When the righteous express their ignorance regarding their performance of these merciful deeds, inquiring about when they have done the things for which they are rewarded (vv. 37-39), the king responds, “Truly I tell you, just as you did it to one of the least of these brothers and sisters of mine, you did it to me” (v. 40).43 So closely linked are Jesus and his followers that showing material kindness to Jesus’ disciples is to do the same for Jesus himself. In a very real way, then, by caring for fellow disciples, the sheep embody the secret performance of merciful deeds advocated in Matt 6:2-4, for the righteous are not even aware of the extent to which their ἐλεημοσύνη has ministered to Christ.

Conversely, the goats are sent away “into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels” (v. 41), cursed and banished to eternal punishment (v. 46) because of their failure to perform merciful deeds for followers of Jesus who are hungry, thirsty, strangers, naked, sick, and imprisoned. Nothing is stated or implied about the motivations of those sheep who have acted mercifully on behalf of the destitute, although the motif of divine judgment on the basis of how individuals have cared for the marginalized strongly suggests that, here as elsewhere in Matthew’s Gospel, ethics are motivated by eschatology.

The scene of the Son of Man’s judgment of the righteous and unrighteous in Matt 25:31-46 offers a fitting and evocative climax of the motif of divine reward for merciful deeds or punishment for their absence in the Gospel of Matthew. Matthew’s Gospel envisions a universal judgment of all people—including followers of Jesus—on the basis of deeds performed in this life, and an important measure of one’s righteousness is care for needy disciples of Jesus.46 In this sense, merciful action toward needy disciples in Matthew’s Gospel is primarily meritorious in the sense that practices of merciful care for the poor result in heavenly reward at the final assize, when the works of all people will be judged

Good thing then that he didn't deny Christ's church

t. Cain

Know them by their fruits.