An Observation

[Randy_Carson]

Uhhh…again in the Bible?

Jesus did many other miraculous signs in the presence of his disciples, which are not recorded in this book. But these are written that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that by believing you may have life in his name. (John 20:30-31)

Uhhhhh…no. The verse says that those things were written so that we may believe, etc, but that passage does not prove that the Bible is the sole infallible rule of faith for the believer nor does it address the question of sufficiency.

I see from your posts on this question that you believe the doctrine of sola scriptura.

This particular thread is probably not the place to discuss this properly (though it seems to be drifting in that direction). If you want to get into this matter more fully then, in my opinion, you must answer the following question:

Does the Bible teach sola scriptura? And if so, where?

 

[Cristian_B]

And of those saints in heaven, is there anyone greater than Mary?

(That should stir the pot. )

I believe Jesus was the saint of God. The most Holy of all humans that existed. (Jesus was a human, but with divine character. He did not do anything on His own, but the Father worked through Him). So yes, there is someone holier than Mary, Jesus and The Father.

By the way, I don’t believe Mary is in heaven, but that she is sleeping. When Jesus will come and He will resurrect all that died in Him. If they are already in Heaven, why is there even a need for resurrection?

 

[Cristian_B]

Uhhhhh…no. The verse says that those things were written so that we may believe, etc, but that passage does not prove that the Bible is the sole infallible rule of faith for the believer nor does it address the question of sufficiency.

And I neither answered your question. I answered Kay Cee’s question: where does scripture say, “The scriptures are totally sufficient to give us the information we need to become the Christians we ought to be in the sight of God”? Did I say that the Bible is the sole infallible rule of faith? I said only that it is infallible. The Bible is everything we need for our salvation. Everything else is a plus or minus. You can be sure that the Bible is infallible. The rest, I will live you to judge whether is good or bad.

Does the Bible teach sola scriptura? And if so, where?

It teaches that it alone is enough for our salvation.

 

[Randy_Carson]

I believe Jesus was the saint of God. The most Holy of all humans that existed. (Jesus was a human, but with divine character. He did not do anything on His own, but the Father worked through Him). So yes, there is someone holier than Mary, Jesus and The Father.

By the way, I don’t believe Mary is in heaven, but that she is sleeping. When Jesus will come and He will resurrect all that died in Him. If they are already in Heaven, why is there even a need for resurrection?

Cristian-

What church do you attend?

 

[Cristian_B]

Cristian-

What church do you attend?

Irrelevant, in my opinion. I consider myself a Christian. That is all that matters. If you truly are part of the Church of Christ, there is no more “Catholic”, “Protestant”, “Anglican”, etc. but there is only “brother” and “sister”.

Just say your viewpoint already. I have to go soon and I don’t have time for these little “games”.

And I don’t go to one “church” only. I follow Paul’s advice: test (or investigate) everything and keep what is good. I investigate every church (or sect, rather) I can and keep from it what is good, and good is what is according to God’s will. God expresses His will by Words and His words are the Bible. So, if it is according or in harmony with the Bible then it is good.

 

[Kay_Cee]

Uh… the Bible? Many have undertaken to draw up an account of the things that have been fulfilled among us, just as they were handed down to us by those who from the first were eyewitnesses and servants of the word. Therefore, since I myself have carefully investigated everything from the beginning, it seemed good also to me to write an orderly account for you, most excellent Theophilus, so that you may know the certainty of the things you have been taught. (Luke 1:1-4)

Can it be any clearer than that?

Can it be any clearer that this is regarding “the certainty of the things you have been taught” and not everything in Christianity? Unless the Bible states for certain that “the things you have been taught” encompasses the entirety of Christian teaching, how do you know for certain that is what Luke means?

But it couldn’t be, because if it were, the gospel of Luke would cover the entirety of Christian teaching. After all, it states it was written to verify the certainty of **what had already been taught, **so in order to do that, it would have to cover everything that had already been taught. If everything that had already been taught was the entirety of Christian teaching, and Luke’s gospel covers it, that would mean we wouldn’t need anything in the rest of scripture, for we would already have Christian teaching in its entirety in the gospel of Luke alone. In fact, it would have to mean “the things you have been taught” includes the knowledge of which books belong in the Bible. It would have to include everything in the Book of Revelation, which, at the time Luke wrote his gospel, hadn’t even been written yet. Can you show me that everything in Revelation is covered in Luke’s gospel?

 

[Cristian_B]

Can it be any clearer that this is regarding “the certainty of the things you have been taught” and not everything in Christianity? Unless the Bible states for certain that “the things you have been taught” encompasses the entirety of Christian teaching, how do you know for certain that is what Luke means?

But it couldn’t be, because if it were, the gospel of Luke would cover the entirety of Christian teaching. After all, it states it was written to verify the certainty of **what had already been taught, **so in order to do that, it would have to cover everything that had already been taught. If everything that had already been taught was the entirety of Christian teaching, and Luke’s gospel covers it, that would mean we wouldn’t need anything in the rest of scripture, for we would already have Christian teaching in its entirety in the gospel of Luke alone. In fact, it would have to mean “the things you have been taught” includes the knowledge of which books belong in the Bible. It would have to include everything in the Book of Revelation, which, at the time Luke wrote his gospel, hadn’t even been written yet. Can you show me that everything in Revelation is covered in Luke’s gospel?

The book of revelation does not teach anything, but rather informs us of what will happen, so when it will happen, our faith will go stronger.

All the epistles are based on Jesus, and the gospels are about Jesus, His life. So we can deduce that the epistles are based on the gospels.

I’ll go to sleep now. Bye and happy new year!

 

[fbl9]

I believe Jesus was the saint of God. The most Holy of all humans that existed. (Jesus was a human, but with divine character. He did not do anything on His own, but the Father worked through Him). So yes, there is someone holier than Mary, Jesus and The Father.

If this what you believe then you can not claim the title christian…All Christians beleive Jesus is GODnot merely a holy human.

By the way, I don’t believe Mary is in heaven, but that she is sleeping. When Jesus will come and He will resurrect all that died in Him. If they are already in Heaven, why is there even a need for resurrection?

This shows you haven’t read the book of Revalations…how do you account for those in the white robes? St.John’s Apocalypse7:9…Doesn’t look like these persons are sleeping.

addressing your question as to why there needs to be a reserection…The spirit gives life that is the purpose of the spirit,how can a spirit fulfil it’s purpose with no body to give life to?

 

[Kay_Cee]

The book of revelation does not teach anything, but rather informs us of what will happen, so when it will happen, our faith will go stronger.

Really? Where does the Bible say that? Please cite book, chapter, and verse that tells us “The book of Revelation does not teach anything.”

Isn’t informing us of “what will happen” teaching us something? Is that one of the things covered by Luke’s gospel?

All the epistles are based on Jesus, and the gospels are about Jesus, His life. So we can deduce that the epistles are based on the gospels.

This is a fallacy in logic. Just because both are about Jesus, you cannot conclude that one writing is based upon the other or that Luke covers everything in all the other writings. Remember, the gospel of Luke was written to verify what was already taught, so in order to do that, it would have to discuss what was already taught. Here is a partial list of things not discussed in Luke:

The miracle at Cana (John 2:1-11)
Jesus walking on water (covered in Matthew, Mark, and John)
The healing of the man born blind (John 9)
The withered fig tree ((both Matthew and Mark)
The parable of the seed (Mark 4)
The parable of the mustard seed (both Matthew and Mark)
The parable of the talents (Matthew 25)

Please explain how the gospel of Luke explains the certainty of these things when it doesn’t even mention them.

I’ll go to sleep now. Bye and happy new year!

I’ll be staying up till midnight. Happy New Year to you too!

 

[LittleSoldier]

Irrelevant, in my opinion. I consider myself a Christian. That is all that matters. If you truly are part of the Church of Christ, there is no more “Catholic”, “Protestant”, “Anglican”, etc. but there is only “brother” and “sister”.

Just say your viewpoint already. I have to go soon and I don’t have time for these little “games”.

And I don’t go to one “church” only. I follow Paul’s advice: test (or investigate) everything and keep what is good. I investigate every church (or sect, rather) I can and keep from it what is good, and good is what is according to God’s will. God expresses His will by Words and His words are the Bible. So, if it is according or in harmony with the Bible then it is good.

If you are a Christian you should believe that Jesus is God. I don’t think you do. From what I’ve read you believe He is a saint. So why do you follow Him rather than follow any other saint? What is it about Jesus that is so special?

I know you didn’t say this to me, but I don’t play little “games” and I don’t think the poster you are replying to was playing little “games” either. You have spent very little time in this thread yet you say you don’t have time for little “games.” I think you’re using that as an excuse to not get into a detailed explanation of what the Bible actually states and doesn’t state. Just like Fair Lady, you side-step, but you are rude about it. OK? That is my viewpoint.

Do you believe that Jesus Christ is God?

 

[LittleSoldier]

Instead of addressing each concern that deals with my use of scripture, I’ll address this to all of you. Maybe it will help. I’ve been scratching my head, wondering why the fuss over the use of scripture as the ultimate authority. I think the missing link may be that your view of scripture is totally different than mine. Tell me if I’m right or wrong. Here are a few basic points that are foundational to why I use scripture:

1. God revealed Himself to us through His written Word which was recorded by men who were inspired by Him.
2. The Bible is absolute truth and we can depend on it because God is Truth and because He gave us His word.
3. The scriptures are totally sufficient to give us the information we need to become the Christians we ought to be in the sight of God.

Here’s an excellent article that will explain my dependence on scripture:
christiananswers.net/q-eden/sola-scriptura-bible.html

I’d also be interested in hearing from each of you as to how much you study the Bible. Does the Bible hold your interest?

Fair Lady, I’m waiting for your answer to my questions from post #107. Are you going to answer me or is this another side-step maneuver?

Tick tock…Tick tock…waiting for an answer…Tick tock…

 

[LittleSoldier]

Instead of addressing each concern that deals with my use of scripture, I’ll address this to all of you. Maybe it will help. I’ve been scratching my head, wondering why the fuss over the use of scripture as the ultimate authority. I think the missing link may be that your view of scripture is totally different than mine. Tell me if I’m right or wrong. Here are a few basic points that are foundational to why I use scripture:

1. God revealed Himself to us through His written Word which was recorded by men who were inspired by Him.
2. The Bible is absolute truth and we can depend on it because God is Truth and because He gave us His word.
3. The scriptures are totally sufficient to give us the information we need to become the Christians we ought to be in the sight of God.

Here’s an excellent article that will explain my dependence on scripture:
christiananswers.net/q-eden/sola-scriptura-bible.html

I’d also be interested in hearing from each of you as to how much you study the Bible. Does the Bible hold your interest?

Hmmmm, funny thing about that link. It states the following:

"In the very last commandment in the Bible God resolutely tells us not to add to nor take away from His Word.

“For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book: If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book: And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the Book of Life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book”
—Revelation 22:18-19

His Word is absolutely sufficient in itself (Psalm 119:160)."

Yet you yourself have added to the Bible several times in this thread. Don’t you believe this website? You provided it. Why are you adding to the Bible? I’m very sorry but this is bordering on hypocrisy IMHO.

 

[Des]

Uhhh…again in the Bible?

Jesus did many other miraculous signs in the presence of his disciples, which are not recorded in this book. But these are written that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that by believing you may have life in his name. (John 20:30-31)

So, if John (according to John 21:24, John’s testimony is true) said that his epistle is enough for us to believe and get life, isn’t the rest of the Bible more than enough? Yes it is. In fact God gave us epistles and the Old Testament are just in case someone would have doubts regarding an aspect of their lives. The epistles are a “bonus” from God.

I believe Jesus was the saint of God. The most Holy of all humans that existed. (Jesus was a human, but with divine character. He did not do anything on His own, but the Father worked through Him). So yes, there is someone holier than Mary, Jesus and The Father.

Oh the wonderful irony. You’re using a verse that every protestant uses, as proof that the Bible is everything we need for our salvation yet you both have two totally contradicting doctrines regarding who Jesus really is. You say He’s a Saint of God. They say He’s God. How about you ask your ‘Scripture is Sufficient’ brethren if they think you’re even a Christian. I’m thinking you already know that answer though.

 

[Cristian_B]

If you are a Christian you should believe that Jesus is God. I don’t think you do. From what I’ve read you believe He is a saint. So why do you follow Him rather than follow any other saint? What is it about Jesus that is so special?

Do you believe that Jesus Christ is God?

Perhaps I have been misunderstood…

I’m saying that before the resurrection Jesus was a normal human with a lot of faith, love and hope. Now He has all power on and Earth and in Heaven, but before that, he was simply a perfect saint…physically. He has divine character, thus He is God. But He was in a human body, thus He didn’t have Superman powers. I’m not telling you He is not God, but that before the resurrection He had no “powers”.

I know you didn’t say this to me, but I don’t play little “games” and I don’t think the poster you are replying to was playing little “games” either. You have spent very little time in this thread yet you say you don’t have time for little “games.” I think you’re using that as an excuse to not get into a detailed explanation of what the Bible actually states and doesn’t state. Just like Fair Lady, you side-step, but you are rude about it. OK? That is my viewpoint.

It was 1 am in the morning and I needed sleep. Now I can talk as long as you want.

 

[wisdomseeker]

I’ve been researching Catholicism because my granddaughter goes to a Catholic school and I am interested in finding out what she is learning.

One observation I’m making is that it is common for Catholics to pray to Mary to ask her to pray for them. Then the praise report comes in. Who gets the credit for answered prayers? Mary. There isn’t even an acknowledgment of God’s involvement in what He has done.

Comments from grateful recipients of answered prayer often include the notion that Mary’s prayers are more effective than the recipient going directly to God with their prayers. I believe it is wrong to give the credit to Mary. God is the One who provides every one of His mercies and graces. ALL glory should be directed to Him.

Aside from the fact that I don’t believe Mary should be prayed to in the first place, I find it extremely offensive to give her the praise for what transpires.

I think you are confused because what you have learned from your pastors. have ever occured to you that they may not the ones to be enterpreters of Sacred Scriptures?

God is not jealous or envious of His own. i dont know where you got that idea but i know is not from God. how can you even think that God would be jealous of His Mother if She does good to His People. and how can it be wrong if we love and honor His Mother. and give credits for her prayers that are answered? dont be afraid to honor those who are of God and from God. as Catholics we are the family of God. those who are here today and those who are gone to be with Our Lord. have you seen the prayers to St Michael the Archangel?

 

[cecilia97]

Perhaps I have been misunderstood…

I’m saying that before the resurrection Jesus was a normal human with a lot of faith, love and hope. Now He has all power on and Earth and in Heaven, but before that, he was simply a perfect saint…physically. He has divine character, thus He is God. But He was in a human body, thus He didn’t have Superman powers. I’m not telling you He is not God, but that before the resurrection He had no “powers”.

It was 1 am in the morning and I needed sleep. Now I can talk as long as you want.

Jesus Christ is one person with two natures: divine and human. They cannot be separated, thus He is and was always divine AND human. Would you like me to post some scriptures where Jesus Himself states, before His death and resurrection, that He was God?

 

[Randy_Carson]

Irrelevant, in my opinion. I consider myself a Christian. That is all that matters. If you truly are part of the Church of Christ, there is no more “Catholic”, “Protestant”, “Anglican”, etc. but there is only “brother” and “sister”.

Just say your viewpoint already. I have to go soon and I don’t have time for these little “games”.

And I don’t go to one “church” only. I follow Paul’s advice: test (or investigate) everything and keep what is good. I investigate every church (or sect, rather) I can and keep from it what is good, and good is what is according to God’s will. God expresses His will by Words and His words are the Bible. So, if it is according or in harmony with the Bible then it is good.

I asked because your posts suggest that you have embraced “soul sleep” - a false doctrine taught by Jehovah’s Witnesses and other sects.

If you are embarassed by your membership in some other organization, and you don’t want to tell us the name of it, I certainly understand.

 

[Des]

Really? Where does the Bible say that? Please cite book, chapter, and verse that tells us “The book of Revelation does not teach anything.”

Isn’t informing us of “what will happen” teaching us something? Is that one of the things covered by Luke’s gospel?

This is a fallacy in logic. Just because both are about Jesus, you cannot conclude that one writing is based upon the other or that Luke covers everything in all the other writings. Remember, the gospel of Luke was written to verify what was already taught, so in order to do that, it would have to discuss what was already taught. Here is a partial list of things not discussed in Luke:

The miracle at Cana (John 2:1-11)
Jesus walking on water (covered in Matthew, Mark, and John)
The healing of the man born blind (John 9)
The withered fig tree ((both Matthew and Mark)
The parable of the seed (Mark 4)
The parable of the mustard seed (both Matthew and Mark)
The parable of the talents (Matthew 25)

Please explain how the gospel of Luke explains the certainty of these things when it doesn’t even mention them.

I’ll be staying up till midnight. Happy New Year to you too!

Great post Kay Cee.

Perhaps I have been misunderstood…

I’m saying that before the resurrection Jesus was a normal human with a lot of faith, love and hope. Now He has all power on and Earth and in Heaven, but before that, he was simply a perfect saint…physically. He has divine character, thus He is God. But He was in a human body, thus He didn’t have Superman powers. I’m not telling you He is not God, but that before the resurrection He had no “powers”.

You’ve been misunderstood by a few of us here, myself included. Amazing how little it takes, to throw someone off the trail completely when attempting to intepret another’s words isn’t it. And we’re pretty much all from the same culture where your words haven’t been translated from another language or two as well.

 

[Fair_Lady]

I’m afraid you have not obliged at all.

The verses you post do not prohibit infant baptism whatsoever; they suggest that those who heard the gospel message believed what they heard and were baptized as the message required. However, the examples you gave concerned adult converts and do not address the matter of infant baptism at all.

As you know, the Jews were accustomed to circumcising infants according to the law, and Paul even calls baptism the “circumcision of Christ” - a choice of words that would have more meaning for his audience than for us today. Further, writings from the early Church reveal that the Church was not concerned about whether infants should be baptized but about how quickly they should be baptized.

In order to meet the standard that you have established, I need to see a verse that says, “Thou shalt not baptize infants” or something that is unambiguous.

Again, Christians on both sides of this issue would benefit from any guidance that you have to offer from within the pages of scripture alone.

Or are you beginning to see the problem of going by the Bible Alone?

Whew, we’re heading into another huge topic. The short answer to all of what you are asking is that the circumcision of the babies was part of the Abrahamic Covenant and we are now in the Covenant of Grace. Here’s an excellent article that tells us what we need to know about all this:
carm.org/christianity/baptism/baptism-necessary-salvation

I would encourage anyone who really wants to understand this, to pull out your Bibles and dig deep!

 

[Fair_Lady]

how can you even think that God would be jealous of His Mother if She does good to His People. and how can it be wrong if we love and honor His Mother. and give credits for her prayers that are answered?

First, I think the point needs to be made that Mary is NOT the mother of God. When we name Him as God, we are always cognizant of the fact that God is the Father, Son and Holy Spirit.

Having said that, we know from scripture that Mary was the mother of Jesus. She is the one who bore Him in His humanity. Jesus had submit to the lowering of Himself in order to come into Mary’s womb for “a little while” as it says in Hebrews 2:7.

Mary doesn’t share any of the divinity of God. She was special in that she became the vessel to bear the human form of Jesus and she was His earthly mother. But Mary needed Him as a Saviour just like you and me.

Simply put, God doesn’t share His glory with anyone - not the angels and not humanity. He is Supreme over all.

dont be afraid to honor those who are of God and from God. as Catholics we are the family of God. those who are here today and those who are gone to be with Our Lord. have you seen the prayers to St Michael the Archangel?

Isaiah 42:8 “I am Jehovah, that is My name; And My glory I will not give to another, Nor My praise to carved images.”

Isaiah 48:11 “For My own sake, for My own sake, I will do it; For how should My name be profaned? And I will not give My glory to another.”

Revelation 5:13 "And every creature which is in heaven and on the earth and under the earth and such as are in the sea, and all that are in them, I heard saying: “Blessing and honor and glory and power Be to Him who sits on the throne, and to the Lamb, forever and ever!”