a question for "Bible Only" churches

[Prodigal_Son1]

You evading my question. Please answer it directly.

You’re evading the discussion. You can’t make someone say yes or no on something they’ve never seen. If I could prove your proof as self written or wrong would you join the Catholic Church?

All we’ve seen is what you ‘believe’, but no supporting documentation to show us why you believe whatever. That is just another opinion and if you look around these forums, you’ll see plenty of those…

 

[Nicea325]

Just as my comment would be about the CC, none are. The church Jesus started is made up of ALL true believers no matter what church or denomination or no church they go to.​

So I guess you out smarted yourself with your 39,000 question.

More circular arguments with no beginning or end,nothing new to me,heard it a biliion times. Cannot answer so go in circles.Oh I see! So Jesus founded a VISIBLE church 2,000 years ago and it just disappeared? How convenient.

So if you truly believe NO church is the ‘real’ church of Christ,then I guess it has all been a waste of time? So much for Jesus leaving a church and leaving it to us to decide what it really is or might be. What nonsense and foolishness you believe.

There you go again:

The church Jesus started is made up of ALL true believers no matter what church or denomination or no church they go to.

Once again,did the Holy Spirit say it would teach different truths? Lutherans believe in the Real Presence of the Eucharist,while Baptist deny it. Baptists believe Once Saved Always Saved,but Methodists deny it. Should I go on?

Explain how ALL believers are the TRUE church,if the majority conflict with each other?

Sorry,but your argument holds no water and its simply bogus. More important it is not even what Christ taught or even the Apostles taught.

I will repeat what I have said many times to others like you:

If you make a charge, be prepared to back it up with ‘proof’ of what you say, or do not make the charge in the first place.

Propagating a lie is as big a sin for the person who does it as the person
who ‘dreamed’ up the lie in the first place.
See what happens to liars in Rev 21:27.

 

[wmscott]

Dokimas, post 21, you asked a question about when the term Catholic Church came about. I provided the information and a link to the referenced material. Care to respond?

 

[CWBetts]

I make no issue about if or when the CC lost the true faith. I believe the CC started in the 300s with Constantine and the true church is made up of ALL true believers (followers) of Jesus the Chrsit, the Son of the Living God, God in Human flesh.​

I do not accept those writings you mentioned as part of the inspired Word of God, the Bible.

Considering that you are not infallible, you must yourself accept that there is a very good possibility that you are incorrect in your assessment of the validity (or in your case, the lack thereof) of the Deuterocanonical texts.

 

[Dokimas]

You’re evading the discussion. You can’t make someone say yes or no on something they’ve never seen. If I could prove your proof as self written or wrong would you join the Catholic Church?

All we’ve seen is what you ‘believe’, but no supporting documentation to show us why you believe whatever. That is just another opinion and if you look around these forums, you’ll see plenty of those…

I have not called upon history for my points from the Bible. You seem to believe things because ‘the church has always taught this and the churches history goes all the way back to Peter’.

I HAVE commented that I disagree with the history some of you write about.​

There’s enough reason from the Bible to question some of the teachings of the CC so that I would not become a catholic BECAUSE the church and its people say the church CAN’T be wrong about their teachings. If the church didn’t claim infallibility and the history lined up, then I could overlook the difference of Biblical understanding.

 

[Dokimas]

Now that I’ve answered the question I posed to you that you through back to me, would you please answer it too?

 

[wmscott]

Now that I’ve answered the question I posed to you that you through back to me, would you please answer it too?

 

[Nicea325]

I have not called upon history for my points from the Bible. You seem to believe things because ‘the church has always taught this and the churches history goes all the way back to Peter’.

I HAVE commented that I disagree with the history some of you write about.​

There’s enough reason from the Bible to question some of the teachings of the CC so that I would not become a catholic BECAUSE the church and its people say the church CAN’T be wrong about their teachings. If the church didn’t claim infallibility and the history lined up, then I could overlook the difference of Biblical understanding.

How ironic. Protestants cannot even agree among themselves when it comes to
interpretation of Holy Scripture. Who do we believe, thousands of Bishops in the Catholic
Church all teaching the same DOCTRINES/DOGMAS or 39,000 protestants all teaching something different???

The RCC claimed infallibility? Ah no! Jesus SAID he would always be with it… You read your Bible but have a problem comprehending most of it,apparently

 

[Dokimas]

Considering that you are not infallible, you must yourself accept that there is a very good possibility that you are incorrect in your assessment of the validity (or in your case, the lack thereof) of the Deuterocanonical texts.

Correct. Also understanding that most likely the same could be said for where you get your info, seem I’m in the middle of a dilema. Seeing I’m responsible for me, I’ll do the best I can and trust Jesus will direct my path.​

When I said ‘correct’ to your post, I FULLY meant it. Could you admit it for you and the CC?

 

[Dokimas]

Head and Shoulders may help.

 

[jmcrae]

Yawn!!! Putting words in my mouth again. What I’ve ALWAYS said is that the CC in not THE church but many of its member are part of the one true church. I’m quite sure those catholics who were used by the Holy Spirit to cannonize the NT were part of the real universal Christian church which is far bigger than the CC.

How do you discern that the members of the Councils of Hippo, Carthage and Rome, together with Pope Innocent I, were members of The True Church, but the members of the Council of Ephesus were not? (Other than the fact that you happen to agree with the findings of the one, and you happen to disagree with the findings of the other?)

What about those members who attended both the Council of Hippo and the Council of Ephesus? Were they members of the True Church at one moment, and then not members of the True Church at another moment?

 

[Dokimas]

How ironic. Protestants cannot even agree among themselves when it comes to
interpretation of Holy Scripture. Who do we believe, thousands of Bishops in the Catholic
Church all teaching the same DOCTRINES/DOGMAS or 39,000 protestants all teaching something different???

The RCC claimed infallibility? Ah no! Jesus SAID he would always be with it… You read your Bible but have a problem comprehending most of it,apparently

Gee you got me. I’ll have to think on this for a while.​

I guess I’m a Bible illiterate. Thanks for your concern. I’ll have to think of this for a while.

 

[CWBetts]

Correct. Also understanding that most likely the same could be said for where you get your info, seem I’m in the middle of a dilema. Seeing I’m responsible for me, I’ll do the best I can and trust Jesus will direct my path.​

When I said ‘correct’ to your post, I FULLY meant it. Could you admit it for you and the CC?

How can the Church be fallible? To deny infallibility of the Catholic Church is to call Jesus a liar.

 

[Dokimas]

How do you discern that the members of the Councils of Hippo, Carthage and Rome, together with Pope Innocent I, were members of The True Church, but the members of the Council of Ephesus were not? (Other than the fact that you happen to agree with the findings of the one, and you happen to disagree with the findings of the other?)

What about those members who attended both the Council of Hippo and the Council of Ephesus? Were they members of the True Church at one moment, and then not members of the True Church at another moment?

I don’t decern them. I respect their right to their opinion and their personal relationship to Jesus.​

Thanks for asking.

 

[Dokimas]

How can the Church be fallible? To deny infallibility of the Catholic Church is to call Jesus a liar.

Wrong!! But, as I always try to remember, you are welcome to your opinion, even though there’s a good chance it’s wrong.

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

I have not called upon history for my points from the Bible. You seem to believe things because ‘the church has always taught this and the churches history goes all the way back to Peter’.

I HAVE commented that I disagree with the history some of you write about.​

There’s enough reason from the Bible to question some of the teachings of the CC so that I would not become a catholic BECAUSE the church and its people say the church CAN’T be wrong about their teachings. If the church didn’t claim infallibility and the history lined up, then I could overlook the difference of Biblical understanding.

Bah! You said:

If I could produce enough supporting documentation to prove my point, would you stop believing the history written by the CC?

This made me think you’d share something besides an opinion to consider. You placed an unreasonable request to your offer of documentation. It’s like a child going to their mother and saying, ‘mom if I ask you something, will you say yes?’

Let me give you your biggest challenge to Catholic history being self written and self serving. The Catholic Church had possession of scriptures since the beginning, even if you want to limit that to the 300s. Now you’re going to say those are totally God inspired, but we wrote the history to be self serving? Do you really understand the implication of your ‘speculation’?

Had the Church wanted to write a self serving history, it had every opportunity to do it within scriptures. Protestants did not get scriptures until the 1500s. That alone should show any honest person that the Catholic Church is honest, because we delivered scriptures that could be twisted and used against the very Church that preserved them through the ages.

You are now playing a cat and mouse game with documentation, for what I believe is, it simply does not exist. It’s no more than an opinion, and now it appears to be biased, since you’re avoiding the discussion.

 

[Dokimas]

Dokimas, post 21, you asked a question about when the term Catholic Church came about. I provided the information and a link to the referenced material. Care to respond?

Sorry I missed your link. Post it again and I’ll try to see it and look and respond.

 

[CWBetts]

Wrong!! But, as I always try to remember, you are welcome to your opinion, even though there’s a good chance it’s wrong.

Umm actually, if the Church is fallible, then that means the the Church is not “led to all truth” by the Holy Spirit, negating a statement of Jesus Christ. Either the Church is infallible, or Jesus was wrong. Which is it?

 

[Dokimas]

Bah! You said:

This made me think you’d share something besides an opinion to consider. You placed an unreasonable request to your offer of documentation. It’s like a child going to their mother and saying, ‘mom if I ask you something, will you say yes?’

Let me give you your biggest challenge to Catholic history being self written and self serving. The Catholic Church had possession of scriptures since the beginning, even if you want to limit that to the 300s. Now you’re going to say those are totally God inspired, but we wrote the history to be self serving? Do you really understand the implication of your ‘speculation’?

Had the Church wanted to write a self serving history, it had every opportunity to do it within scriptures. Protestants did not get scriptures until the 1500s. That alone should show any honest person that the Catholic Church is honest, because we delivered scriptures that could be twisted and used against the very Church that preserved them through the ages.

You are now playing a cat and mouse game with documentation, for what I believe is, it simply does not exist. It’s no more than an opinion, and now it appears to be biased, since you’re avoiding the discussion.

If I were you I’d refuse to answer my question too. Good stragegy on your part; dodge and avoid and do it justifing your position against mine. Okay, but we’re at a standstill again.

 

[Dokimas]

Umm actually, if the Church is fallible, then that means the the Church is not “led to all truth” by the Holy Spirit, negating a statement of Jesus Christ. Either the Church is infallible, or Jesus was wrong. Which is it?

Sorry to say but there’s at least one other posibility and that DO NOT include Jesus being wrong. Of course having your presupposition about the CC being that church, sure you can only come up with the two options you came up with. If your presupposition is wrong, there’s at least one more option as I’ve pointed out.