“Once Saved Always Saved” ...

[SIA]

You yourself see how well protestants study the scripture and pray for the discernment of the Spirit! Talk about 32000 protestant denominations! Discernment of the Spirit!

If you are really praying for the discernment of the Spirit then the Spirit will show you what it means when Peter says, “First of all you must understand this, that no prophecy of scripture is a matter of one’s own interpretation…” (1 Peter 1:20)

Where does scripture tell you to read it and then ask the Holy Spirit for discernment so that you can have your own personal interpretation?

Other Catholics on here claim 33,000 denominations others claim more, you say 32,000. So many different supposed facts. You shouldn’t have any problem listing each one then if they exist right?

 

[estesbob]

hmm, then where does the interpretation of all the other verses in Scripture come from if only a few are manditorily interpreted by the church? You say personal interpretation is no good so where does it come from? Thin air?

You really don’t get it do you? The Church has NEVER been concerned with interpreting specific verses of scripture. All church doctrines must pass a three part test. Are they supported by scripture? Are they Supported by tradition? Are the supported by the infallible teachings of the magestrium.

I could not care less how you parse a verse from Romans or Corinthians or anywhere from anywhere else in scripture . I don’t have to dig through scripture trying to determine the truth-the truth was revealed in its entirety 2,000 years ago and was entrusted by Christ to his Church. You, on the other hand, as with most of our separated brethren ,spend an inordinate amount of time constructing complex theologies out of stringing together random verses of scripture while ignoring all who went before you.

If you and another of our separated brethren , after interminable verse wars, cannot reconcile you differences, you just go off an start another denomination. You deny the infallibility of the magestrium while proudly proclaiming your own infallibly. And through all this confusion reigns supreme except in the Church Christ founded.
.

 

[estesbob]

Other Catholics on here claim 33,000 denominations others claim more, you say 32,000. So many different supposed facts. You shouldn’t have any problem listing each one then if they exist right?

Even two seperate denomnations gives lie to the idea that we can all find the truth via personal interpretation of scripture.

 

[SIA]

You really don’t get it do you? The Church has NEVER been concerned with interpreting specific verses of scripture. All church doctrines must pass a three part test. Are they supported by scripture? Are they Supported by tradition? Are the supported by the infallible teachings of the magestrium.

I could not care less how you parse a verse from Romans or Corinthians or anywhere from anywhere else in scripture . I don’t have to dig through scripture trying to determine the truth-the truth was revealed in its entirety 2,000 years ago and was entrusted by Christ to his Church. You, on the other hand, as with most of our separated brethren ,spend an inordinate amount of time constructing complex theologies out of stringing together random verses of scripture while ignoring all who went before you.

If you and another of our separated brethren , after interminable verse wars, cannot reconcile you differences, you just go off an start another denomination. You deny the infallibility of the magestrium while proudly proclaiming your own infallibly. And through all this confusion reigns supreme except in the Church Christ founded.
.

Oh but I DO get it! Your three part test makes certain that no matter what Scripture verse it is, it must be interpreted in such a way that it squares with what the magisterium states and what the traditions are interpreted to be. The doctrines are not based with Scripture being the authority and heck, they are even being based upon Scripture being less authoritative that at least the magisterium. I DO get it. You just don’t want to get it for yourself.

 

[Chris258]

Oh but I DO get it! Your three part test makes certain that no matter what Scripture verse it is, it must be interpreted in such a way that it squares with what the magisterium states and what the traditions are interpreted to be. The doctrines are not based with Scripture being the authority and heck, they are even being based upon Scripture being less authoritative that at least the magisterium. I DO get it. You just don’t want to get it for yourself.

Hmmmm. I guess you’ve got a point there! We need to scrap these earthly authorities and just go back to Scripture, just Scripture.

Hmm… John 6 is perplexing… is Jesus saying we are to actually eat his flesh and drink his blood to possess eternal life? Or perhaps it’s just symbolic…?

Once the Holy Spirit leads us to the Truth of that passage, we’ve gotta make sure the body of Christ isn’t falling into error. If the Holy Spirit leads us to the Truth that Jesus is speaking in a literal sense, then we’ve got some news for the Baptist Convention and several Evangelical sects. If the Holy Spirit leads us to the Truth that Jesus is speaking symbolically, we’ve got some news for Catholics/Anglicans/Eastern Orthodox/etc…

Christian Truth is binding on all Christians. So we’ve gotta find some way to get them all to agree with the Truth we’ve been led to. This is a toughie…

Any ideas?

 

[Mea_Culpa]

Oh but I DO get it! Your three part test makes certain that no matter what Scripture verse it is, it must be interpreted in such a way that it squares with what the magisterium states and what the traditions are interpreted to be. The doctrines are not based with Scripture being the authority and heck, they are even being based upon Scripture being less authoritative that at least the magisterium. I DO get it. You just don’t want to get it for yourself.

You don’t get it. Jesus didn’t write a book, he founded a Church, the Catholic Church. After about 400 years, different Church Councils defined the canon of the Bible. There was no Bible for the first 400 years of the Church.

 

[iaskquestions]

Other Catholics on here claim 33,000 denominations others claim more, you say 32,000. So many different supposed facts. You shouldn’t have any problem listing each one then if they exist right?

The last time I had read, it was 32000, but you know, they keep splitting up further! So it’s probably 33000 now I guess!

Alright, here’s the link.

bringyou.to/apologetics/a106.htm

 

[iaskquestions]

Hmm… John 6 is perplexing… is Jesus saying we are to actually eat his flesh and drink his blood to possess eternal life? Or perhaps it’s just symbolic…?

Christian Truth is binding on all Christians. So we’ve gotta find some way to get them all to agree with the Truth we’ve been led to. This is a toughie…

Any ideas?

I too would like to ask the same question to SIA.

 

[estesbob]

Oh but I DO get it! Your three part test makes certain that no matter what Scripture verse it is, it must be interpreted in such a way that it squares with what the magisterium states and what the traditions are interpreted to be. The doctrines are not based with Scripture being the authority and heck, they are even being based upon Scripture being less authoritative that at least the magisterium. I DO get it. You just don’t want to get it for yourself.

And you will be condemend to be like a modern day Diogenes-sitting in bright light shining your lamp on verse after verse, enageing in argument after argument over verse after verse while the truth has always been there if you just put the lamp down and embraced the teachings of the Church Christ left you.

 

[backfrmthebrink]

Don’t be under wrong assumptions. The Catholic Church has never said that you cannot read the Bible. Don’t put words into the Church’s mouth! The church only warns us of the fact that at times our personal interpretation can be wrong.

What did Christians do for 1500 years before the printing press was invented and bibles were widely distributed? Did they study scripture by themselves and pray for discernment? No. In fact they learnt from the authorized teachers. No wonder there were not many divisions, for people understood scripture correctly, for it was** taught **to them. There was no concept of “self-study”.

But when people began to study by themselves (I’m not saying that is wrong) and form their **own interpretations **(which can be wrong), they just couldn’t agree among themselves! 32000 denominations! All claiming to be guided by the Spirit!

That is not true. The cc has had on its list of banned books the Bible. It forbid the masses to read it . That is why translating it to other languages other than Latin, reserved for educated people, had caused such an uproar

 

[backfrmthebrink]

And you will be condemend to be like a modern day Diogenes-sitting in bright light shining your lamp on verse after verse, enageing in argument after argument over verse after verse while the truth has always been there if you just put the lamp down and embraced the teachings of the Church Christ left you.

Christ didn’t leave us with teachings from the cc. He left us with His teachings

 

[estesbob]

That is not true. The cc has had on its list of banned books the Bible. It forbid the masses to read it . That is why translating it to other languages other than Latin, reserved for educated people, had caused such an uproar

The only Bible’s the Church objected to were those that were shoddy or deliberately altered translations. (as you have a habit of doing when you posts verses). You really dont know very about about Catholicism do you?

 

[distracted]

Again understanding is not my problem here. I suggest you study again. It is wise indeed for all of us don’t you think but don’t try to teach something as preposturous as what you are trying to do.

there you go assuming again. You have absolutely NO idea what i have studied or not studied…

and i am not going to say…

you can just presume away…

 

[distracted]

You rightfully can’t expect Catholics to fully understand the Scriptures

How presumptous… as if you know ALL Catholics in the world…

When I was Catholic we never read the Bible as a family when I was growing up because my parents feared that they would always misunderstand what they read or that they would interpret it in a different way that what the RCC had sanctioned.

Your parents were wise to realize that the Church has been around longer than you…

Since becoming Anglican, I read Scripture almost daily. It has filled many voids in my life and I understand so much more about what God wants for us and how my faith has grown so much. My Anglican church encourages us to read Scripture and pray. No fear for me anymore, just pure unmolested joy in GOD"S Word.

since reverting to the Catholic faith, i hear Scripture read daily at Mass. It has filled many voids in my life and i understand so much more about waht God wants for us and… my faith has grown so much. My Catholic Church encourages us to read Scripture and pray. No fear for me anyore (like when i was in those non-Catholic, so-called churches:hypno: ), just pure unmolested joy in God’s Word (and sacraments and the Real Presence, which no other “church” has).

 

[distracted]

The only Bible’s the Church objected to were those that were shoddy or deliberately altered translations. (as you have a habit of doing when you posts verses). You really dont know very about about Catholicism do you?

No kidding!!!

 

[distracted]

The Angilcan Church is a perfect example of whatb happens when everybody gets to have their own theology. in the past 70 years they have changed doctines on contraception, homosexuality, female ordination, and abortion-just to name a few. Only via personal interptetation can one discern that the Bible does not condemn homosexuality and allows priestesees.

***thanks for that excellent point… ***

 

[distracted]

Other Catholics on here claim 33,000 denominations others claim more, you say 32,000. So many different supposed facts. You shouldn’t have any problem listing each one then if they exist right?

you just want to waste our time getting us to do this kind of thing… because that would be better than hearing any more about the Catholic faith… because you know there is truth there. that you can’t refute…

 

[distracted]

I could not care less how you parse a verse from Romans or Corinthians or anywhere from anywhere else in scripture . I don’t have to dig through scripture trying to determine the truth-the truth was revealed in its entirety 2,000 years ago and was entrusted by Christ to his Church.

:clapping:

You, on the other hand, as with most of our separated brethren ,spend an inordinate amount of time constructing omplex theologies out of stringing together random verses of scripture while ignoring all who went before you.

 

[Mea_Culpa]

Christ didn’t leave us with teachings from the cc. He left us with His teachings

Protest-ants claim to be so in love with the Bible, but there are parts they seem to skip over, like Matthew 16:18-19

And I tell you, you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my Church, and the gates of Hades shall not prevail against it. I will give you the keys to the kingdom of heaven, and whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.

In other words, Christ left us with his Church, the Catholic Church. Christ never wrote anything, he never told any of his disciples to write anything. His teachings were passed on orally through the tradition of the Church, until they were (some of them) written down and codified in the Bible (by the Catholic Church). For the first 400 years of the one, holy, catholic, and apostolic Church, there was no Bible. Protest-ants think the Bible fell out of the sky, or was written by Jesus himself - their ignorance of how it came to be is partially what fuels their confusion over how Holy Scripture fits in with the Sacred Tradition of the Church and the Magisterium.

The Church is not so much interested in interpreting individual verses of the Bible as it is in instructing the faithful in how to prayerfully approach the study of the Bible. For Protest-ants who are interested in this authentic study of the Bible, I would suggest signing up for RCIA classes at your local parish and accepting the One True Faith. The Bible is an integral part of our Catholic Faith, but can only really be understood in the context of that Catholic Faith guided by the Sacred Tradition and Magisterium of the Church. To try to read and understand the Bible outside of that context can only lead to misunderstanding, misinterpretation, confusion, schism, and heresy (i.e., Protest-ant-ism).

 

[backfrmthebrink]

Hmmmm. I guess you’ve got a point there! We need to scrap these earthly authorities and just go back to Scripture, just Scripture.

Hmm… John 6 is perplexing… is Jesus saying we are to actually eat his flesh and drink his blood to possess eternal life? Or perhaps it’s just symbolic…?

Once the Holy Spirit leads us to the Truth of that passage, we’ve gotta make sure the body of Christ isn’t falling into error. If the Holy Spirit leads us to the Truth that Jesus is speaking in a literal sense, then we’ve got some news for the Baptist Convention and several Evangelical sects. If the Holy Spirit leads us to the Truth that Jesus is speaking symbolically, we’ve got some news for Catholics/Anglicans/Eastern Orthodox/etc…

Christian Truth is binding on all Christians. So we’ve gotta find some way to get them all to agree with the Truth we’ve been led to. This is a toughie…

Any ideas?

First there is no interpretation of scripture for unregenerate people. This is a Biblical truth. But to address the question of John6 being challenging it is not. It clearly is metaphorically just as the Lords prayer, a kingdom prayer is an example of prayerr for we are to pry like that not that prayer. It was an example. The eating of the actual flesh and blood it lunacy when taken to mean a literal. It would be the calling down from heaven of Christ to an actual and rtitualistic partaking of the eating of him daily fo cc. Transubstantiation does not hold up to Hebrews clear message that Christ is appointed to die once. He shed His blood once and for all. There will be no second shedding of His blood yet the cc sheds His blood daily and equally absurd is the power that this ritual gives its Priests at that particular time of the mass. If ever there will be an accounting of ourselves for what we teach it will be here no matter how well meaning the participants would be. CLEAR: Christ is appointed to die once.