A compelling non-Catholic argument

[CentralFLJames]

The Bible is complete. So the only History that concerns my faith is the 66 books of History that I already have. Outside of faith, history is a way to learn from other peoples mistakes.

Your bible is an incomplete truth just like your faith is. Luther pulled out a tithe for Satan (7 entire books and other parts from the origingal 72 that the early church gave us).

You put your faith in sola scriptura that scripture tells us is unbiblical itself since it utterly rejects the word of God about following the traditions and teachings of the apostles. Further your sola scriptura is about 10% short of the full word. This GUARANTEES you operate to a fractional truth. And you want to teach others scripture? You want to teach the teachers!? Pride and arrogance in error are the mark of spiritual depravity. Take a history lesson from Lucifer’s arrogance to see where it leads’; it leads to a change of venue and a name change.

James

 

[protestantman]

But no Christian would agree with you more than about 500 years ago, because then we had 73 books.
I even have a King James Bible that is 150 years old that has 73 books. So for the majority of Christians it really isn’t 66 books for the faith, but 73 books. Why would the Holy Spirit lead us to division, wouldn’t you see an increasing unity if we were supposed to based of Sola Scriptura?
Which is the infallible interpretation? If there is none, then we can believe whatever we want.

And if it is just core beliefs then it really doesn’t matter if there are 66 or 73 books.

This line of thinking makes no sense to me.

God Bless
Scylla

Who is responsible for the change, and was it always 73 up to that point? Gods punishment will be severe for those responsible for either adding or taking away from scripture. So either way, someone added 7 books or took them away.

 

[mikeledes]

Yet in all of this, we never said that we were infallible.

Infallibility does not mean moral impeccability. Or will you reject the writings of David and Solomon in the Bible because they committed grievous sins? Caiphas was committing a great sin, and yet God still used him, since he was high priest:

John 11:49-51

**49But one of them, Caiaphas, who was high priest that year, said to them, “You know nothing at all,
50nor do you take into account that it is expedient for you that one man die for the people, and that the whole nation not perish.”
51Now he did not say this on his own initiative, but being high priest that year, he prophesied that Jesus was going to die for the nation, **

God Bless,
Michael

 

[protestantman]

I am having a hard time understanding what you are apologizing for. Can you be specific?

In anger to previous posts, I copy pasted text from an A-C source, in an intent to be sarcastic. This response offended you because of its A-C source. I was wrong on two accounts.

1 - acting in anger
2 - offensive material

 

[protestantman]

Whether they like it or not, Protestants turn to the author’s biggest fan for understanding - Martin Luther (Lutherans), Wesley (Methodists, Nazarenes, Holiness, Pentecostals, etc. ), John Calvin (Reformed, Presbyterians, Reformed Baptists, etc. ), Dispensationalists (John Nelson Darby) etc.

God Bless,
Michael

Not this protestant. I have never even read the 95 thesis. I try not to preconcieve anything when I read the Bible. I do not study Luther or Calvin to find biblical interpretation.

 

[scylla]

Who is responsible for the change, and was it always 73 up to that point? Gods punishment will be severe for those responsible for either adding or taking away from scripture. So either way, someone added 7 books or took them away.

You are busy answering so I will give you a concise answer. It was man guided by the Holy Spirit who put it together, up until Martin Luther there were 73 then, he moved 7 books apart from the other books. Once he demoted some books, since they were so Catholic, people requested they omit them from the Bible, eventually about 150 years ago they completely removed them from most non-catholic Bibles.

We can start a new thread on that, as you are busy responding to many other posts.

God Bless
Scylla

 

[mikeledes]

Not this protestant. I have never even read the 95 thesis. I try not to preconcieve anything when I read the Bible. I do not study Luther or Calvin to find biblical interpretation.

So you came to your conlcusions without any assiatance from a teacher or a preacher? You do not attend a church and listen to sermons? Do you attend Bible studies or listen to or watch Protestant programs on TV or on the radio? You don’t have to read the works of Luther, Calvin, etc. to be influenced by their thought. Reading the works of someone who has been influenced by their thought is sufficient. BTW, are you an Arminian/ Wesleyan or a Calvinist? How do you know you’re a “Protestant”?

God Bless,
Michael

 

[protestantman]

And my point is that you cannot have been separated from something you were never a part of in the first place, It is clear from your posts that you have never understood Catholic Teaching. You have never been educated in the Apostolic Teachings. You are separated to the extent that you have never been properly joined in the beginning.

The fact remains that I am seperated.

That’s silly. Scripture is all about history. It is the story of history from God’s point of view.

Exactly, and I only care about history from Gods point of view. Not from tradition, nor from the secular world, nor from historians. Gods point of view is without error.

I am perfectly happy to forgive you. However, be mindful that true repentance involves a change of behavior. Everyone who has spoken to you about your behavior will be watching closely to see if there is a metanoia.

As they should.
I should also say that many of the posts in response to mine have not been without anger.

The NT is authored by Catholics. The HS worked through Catholics to write. The writing was not meant to be separated from the Catholic faith that it represents.

No, God is still the author. The catholic church was merely a transcriber. There is a difference.

If you are using a 66 book bible, then yours is incomplete. The Bible was never meant to be the Sole rule of faith. Otherwise, Jesus would have written books instead of starting a Church.

The Church is anyone who believes in the Bible. The church is not a teaching institution, it is a fellowship of believers. The Bible is the source for teaching.

 

[CentralFLJames]

Not this protestant. I have never even read the 95 thesis. I try not to preconcieve anything when I read the Bible. I do not study Luther or Calvin to find biblical interpretation.

So you just flipped a coin on which bible to read to secure your eternal salvation and trusted in that bible to teach you it’s truths without even looking into the history of the person who assembled the book?

I know some people in Brooklyn who want to sell you a bridge that is rumored to deliver you to the promised land (depending on which direction one walks). Interested?

James

 

[protestantman]

You are busy answering so I will give you a concise answer. It was man guided by the Holy Spirit who put it together, up until Martin Luther when he moved 7 books apart from the other books. Once he demoted some books, since they were so Catholic people requested they omit them from the Bible, eventually about 150 years ago they completely removed them from most non-catholic Bibles.

We can start a new thread on that, as you are busy responding to many other posts.

God Bless
Scylla

OK. please post a link.

 

[guanophore]

And what is the symbology of washing the feet of others?

Among other things, it certainly is the opposite of seating oneself at the head of the table!

I am not here to convert or to be converted. I do believe that I should understand your faith more. My intentions are that I would be streangthend in some way here. It is important for me to understand your faith if I need to speak of it in the future.

Why? Why now? What is your intention for the future? If you really wish to understand Catholicism, it might be more useful to ask for answers instead of providing your own. In front of the question!

It is also my intention that you would also grow. This is however dependant on you and I cannot force it. My biggest intention is more fellowship between the active members of the Body of Christ. In spite of the fact that sometimes I offend, my intention is still the same.

I learn a lot on the forum, which is my reason for being here also. What I am wondering is, why would you come to a Catholic forum for fellowship,when you obviously consider our faith to be erroneous? Why not go to a “bible only” board?

I doubt that you will be able to have much fellowship with Catholics, since Catholicism is not a Bible Based religion.

Yet in all of this, we never said that we were infallible.

Catholics don’t claim to be infallible, it is the Teaching of Jesus that is infallible.

 

[protestantman]

So you came to your conlcusions without any assiatance from a teacher or a preacher? You do not attend a church and listen to sermons? Do you attend Bible studies or listen to or watch Protestant programs on TV or on the radio? You don’t have to read the works of Luther, Calvin, etc. to be influenced by their thought. Reading the works of someone who has been influenced by their thought is sufficient. BTW, are you an Arminian/ Wesleyan or a Calvinist? How do you know you’re a “Protestant”?

God Bless,
Michael

Despite the fact that I listen to sermons that are a result of Luters teachings, does not mean I blindly accept them as truth. I try to understand the word as it is revealed to me by the HS.

I am neither. Some of what I believe is similar to them, but that is all. If I am not protestant, than what would you call me? I am a protestant, because I do not accept all the teachings of the Catholic Church.

 

[mikeledes]

Exactly, and I only care about history from Gods point of view. Not from tradition, nor from the secular world, nor from historians. Gods point of view is without error.

The Church is anyone who believes in the Bible. The church is not a teaching institution, it is a fellowship of believers. The Bible is the source for teaching.

And what is God’s point of view regarding free will? Predestination? Infant baptism? Speaking in tongues and the gift of prophecy in our day and age? etc. I keep get contradictory explanations and conclusions from Protestants.

And yet God gives us a teaching auhtority to prevent us from being carried away by all kinds of heresies:

**11And He gave some as apostles, and some as prophets, and some as evangelists, and some as pastors and teachers,
12for the equipping of the saints for the work of service, to the building up of (the body of Christ;
13until we all attain to (the unity of the faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God, to a mature man, to the measure of the stature which belongs to the fullness of Christ.
14As a result, we are no longer to be children,tossed here and there by waves and carried about by every wind of doctrine, by the trickery of men, by craftiness in deceitful scheming; **

This teaching authority settled the first major doctrinal controversy in Christianity - Acts 15 - and rendered decisions that was binding on all Christians:

Acts 16:4

**4Now while they were passing through the cities, they were delivering the decrees which had been decided upon by the apostles and elders who were in Jerusalem, for them to observe. **

God bless,
Michael

 

[protestantman]

So you just flipped a coin on which bible to read to secure your eternal salvation and trusted in that bible to teach you it’s truths without even looking into the history of the person who assembled the book?

No. The person who assembled the book is nothing compared to the Author.

I know some people in Brooklyn who want to sell you a bridge that is rumored to deliver you to the promised land (depending on which direction one walks). Interested?

Would you call this a personal attack? You are making a direct reference to me personally. You are being demeaning. You accuse me of doing wrong. I apologize, and in return I get crude joking?

 

[scylla]

OK. please post a link.

Ok, I will do this when I get to work, I am headed out right now and I will let you get your breath. I don’t want to give the impression we are dogpiling you.

Just look up my name in a couple hours there will be a link.

Scylla

 

[mikeledes]

Despite the fact that I listen to sermons that are a result of Luters teachings, does not mean I blindly accept them as truth. I try to understand the word as it is revealed to me by the HS.

I am neither. Some of what I believe is similar to them, but that is all. If I am not protestant, than what would you call me? I am a protestant, because I do not accept all the teachings of the Catholic Church.

You can be a Jehovah’s Witness or a Mormon, groups that are not considered Protestant. You are either Calvinist or Arminian. You cannot be both or neither. Each theology has its variations - Calvinists (5 pointers, 4 Pointers, etc. ) and Arminians (Wesleyan and OSAS) - but there are only two camps when it comes to predestination/ free will. But by identifying yourself as Protestant, you are identifying yourself with a theology - a fractured one - but a theology nonetheless. How were you first exposed to Protestantism?

God Bless,
Michael

 

[mikeledes]

No. The person who assembled the book is nothing compared to the Author.

And who assembled it? Who did God use?

God bless,
Michael

 

[guanophore]

The fact remains that I am seperated.

Ok, I accept that. I don’t really think it has occured as a result of your own fault, however, In fact, I think you are to be commended for coming here to try to understand the separation better, This is always the first step to unity.

Exactly, and I only care about history from Gods point of view. Not from tradition, nor from the secular world, nor from historians. Gods point of view is without error.

God works through all these, and we can much better understand God’s point by studying the others. Sacred Tradition is God’s point of view. It is the Source for the written text.

As they should.
I should also say that many of the posts in response to mine have not been without anger.

We all fall short in many ways. Let us pray for one another, and bear one another’s burdens, and thus fulfill the Law of Christ.

No, God is still the author. The catholic church was merely a transcriber. There is a difference.

It is much more than “transcription”. The men that wrote those books (NT) believed what they wrote with all their heart, soul, mind and strength, and all of them gave their lives for their beliefs.

The Church is anyone who believes in the Bible. The church is not a teaching institution, it is a fellowship of believers. The Bible is the source for teaching.

This is Reformation theology. It is not Apostolic Teaching. What made a person a member of the Body before the NT was written? If Jesus did not give the Church the Authority to teach, what is the Great Commission saying?

 

[xmormon]

OK. please post a link.

Post a link for me also.

Bottom line here protestantman, You have much more to be thankful to the Catholics for then just the preservation, compiling, editing, publishing, etc. of the Bible. The Catholic church also warded off the attempts of 100’s of heretics who led movements to change doctrines like the trinity, resurrection, etc. Catholics proved thousands of times that they alone held the deposit of the faith. Sure there have always been men like yourself determined to destroy the rock and exchange it for autonomy. But, while all you protestants are walking around disagreeing on virtually everything except for thinking your all saved. The Catholic church goes on warding off your attempts to change the clear solid doctrines of Christ’s church. The Catholic Church is the only Bible based church. All others have twisted the interpretation to avoid this obvious truth…

 

[protestantman]

And what is God’s point of view regarding free will? Predestination? Infant baptism? Speaking in tongues and the gift of prophecy in our day and age? etc. I keep get contradictory explanations and conclusions from Protestants.

It is whatever the Holy Spirit says it is. We will know for sure when Christ returns who has the correct interpritation. My own personal interpritation is clouded unless the HS decides to make it clear.

And yet God gives us a teaching auhtority to prevent us from being carried away by all kinds of heresies:

But by your own confessions of free will, can you not turn away. You say you are prevented from being caried away, not turning away.