M
Montalban
Guest
From an Orthodox Christian’s perspective that appeal is false. For 2,000 years the Catholic Church has been ‘developing’ dogma, not just defining it.
- Status
M
Malachi4U
Guest
“non-denom”? Is that short for non-committal?
So, everyone who believes in Jesus can believe anything they want and everyone goes to heaven? We just find a new church whenever the minister says something we don’t like? Jesus said, “Do not be of one mind and one Faith. Don’t obey me, just write some book and follow what ever you want it to say. Rewrite my words when you don’t agree with them.”?
P
Protestant101
Guest
Well, it is possible that God is calling you into the Protestant Reformation.
It is my humble opinion that many Catholics misunderstand the Reformation; and what Protestants mean/should mean, by a) how we are saved, and b) by “sola scriptura.”
To me, it is the strawman approach when Catholics say, such as you have here, that Protestants teach “by faith alone.” Granted, some protestants are misled, and they seem to be saying that; but your assertion here tries to lead people to believe that all Protestants teach it that way; and that is not true.
Many Protestants recognize the truth in Eph.2:8-9 that says:
We are saved only by Jesus (Jo.1:29), and even the Protestants who are saying “by faith alone” are just trying to emphasize this grand truth. Of course, “faith without works is dead;” but can you explain to the reformation please, just how we can claim there is any merit in the death of Christ for our sins, if it is so that we are saved by “our works?”
Also, those who are so opposed to what they call “sola scriptura” use the strawman approach there. They say that we mean divine revelation/inspiration comes only from the Bible; yet, the Bible clearly tells us that there are several other ways God speaks to us. Many protestants do not deny this, as you say they do; but yes, we do have a different take on it than Catholics.
To me, both Catholics and Protestants need to be urged to go to their Bibles for themselves. Catholics are dependent on the Pope for the final say so in doctrine; and many, (not all) Protestants follow on their heels, not by looking to the Pope, but by looking to "Apologetics Ministries/Experts.
Very few people just sit down and quietly read/study their own Bibles to see what God is speaking to the world today. We all are so lost in seeking the Sacred meaning from the medium of another person’s mind.
Sola Scriptura simply means that if you had nothing else (which is the case sometimes) then the Bible would give you all the knowledge you would ever need for salvation.
The Bible is God’s Voice, speaking to us, just as surely as though we could hear it with our own ears. As Jesus put it in Jo.6:63: “The Words that I have spoken to you are spirit and life.” We miss out on so much when we do not choose to make the Bible our primary Source for our personal devotions and study.
P
Protestant101
Guest
I do not agree with this statement. Can you show us how they have done this?
M
Montalban
Guest
Most Protestants and Catholics seem to think that we need to get into some kind of ‘bargain’ with God - to attain ‘justification’ - to ‘satisfy’ God.
It seems odd since God never changes and doesn’t need to be ‘satisfied’ at all.
It is why some say that Catholics and Protestants are like two sides of the same coin.
In the Catholic Catechism…
1494 The confessor proposes the performance of certain acts of
“satisfaction” or “penance” to be performed by the penitent in order to repair the harm caused by sin and to re-establish habits befitting a disciple of Christ.
scborromeo.org/ccc/para/1494.htm
Protestants just believe that this can be attained through a once-in-a-lifetime declaration. There’s no difference though in the mistaken belief that God needs to be satisfied. It’s just how you attain it that Protestants differ from Catholics.
It seems odd since God never changes and doesn’t need to be ‘satisfied’ at all.
It is why some say that Catholics and Protestants are like two sides of the same coin.
In the Catholic Catechism…
1494 The confessor proposes the performance of certain acts of
“satisfaction” or “penance” to be performed by the penitent in order to repair the harm caused by sin and to re-establish habits befitting a disciple of Christ.
scborromeo.org/ccc/para/1494.htm
Protestants just believe that this can be attained through a once-in-a-lifetime declaration. There’s no difference though in the mistaken belief that God needs to be satisfied. It’s just how you attain it that Protestants differ from Catholics.
M
Montalban
Guest
Probably the ‘filioque’ is the most known addition
P
Protestant101
Guest
"The kingdom of God was taken from the religious leaders of Jesus’ day, which, according to you would be, essentially, Catholics; and the people that “the kingdom of God” was thereby given to, is the unbroken succession of Protestants that Catholics ignore. We don’t have a Pope, because we have Jesus; and His Spirit, which will guide us into ALL truth.
Now, I have a question for you:
M
Montalban
Guest
Except Jesus Himself picked out 12 Apostles, gave them a commission to act in His name, and that they then picked priests, deacons and bishops.
They also ran a church for 300 years without a Bible… which itself says that it doesn’t cover everything Jesus said and did, anyway.
John 21:25 Jesus did many other things as well. If every one of them were written down, I suppose that even the whole world would not have room for the books that would be written.
P
Protestant101
Guest
This is not true. Not all Protestants see it this way. Many of us see it as the Bible explains it in:
Jesus is the One who “died unto sin once;” how can we possibly do that? Jesus didn’t even crucify Himself. Someone else had to do it. Why don’t you try to hang yourself on a cross and see how you make out. Then you will see what I mean.
The law of God is the detector of sin. We have inspired testimony upon this point. “For I was alive without the law once,” Paul writes, “but when the commandment came [home to the conscience], sin revived, and I died. And the commandment, which was ordained unto life, I found to be unto death. For sin, taking occasion by the commandment, deceived, and by it slew me.” This is the work that the law will do for every soul that is living in sin. The law points out sin, and condemns it, and sends the sinner to Christ for pardon and cleansing.
M
Montalban
Guest
Which is to say that Jesus’ sacrifice was paid to satisfy God.
See
John Calvin’s Teaching on the Vicarious Sin-bearing of Christ by Dr. Brian Allison
briceandbensa.com/calvin.htm
Wherein he quotes Calvin…
“His fundamental assumption was that man by sinning offended the honour of God. Now God could either punish man or demand satisfaction of him. Since the former alternative would have involved the destruction of man, His handiwork, He chose the latter, in order that man might be saved. The satisfaction required was an infinite satisfaction, such as no mere man could render; and therefore it became necessary for the Son of God to become man, in order to satisfy the divine honour”
Vicarious Atonement, 22f
(emphasis mine)
P
Protestant101
Guest
The Bible doesn’t make the claim that it covers all that Jesus said or did. But neither does it tell priests or bishops or apostles to to speak or write anything that would defy the Biblical authority of His Word. This is why "the kingdom of God was taken from the official Church of Jesus’ day, (the Catholic Church) and the Apostles who were the true Protestants, carried on the lineage that the Bible declares of: “The gates of hell shall not prevail against it.” Why do you think Protestants are still around?
Most catholic apologetics lean heavily on Jo.21:25. But, in Jo.21:25, John breaks forth with a very impassioned declaration concerning the many remarkable things that His master, (Jesus) had done and said. It is evident that John composed his gospel with certain spiritual objectives in mind; and he related only those events that would contribute to those specific objectives.
All of the other Bible writers did the same and that is the only reason why so many of Jesus’ actions or words were left unrecorded. And, this is the very reason that the Bible is enough for our salvation. The very fact that all of this stuff about Jesus was left out shows us that God Himself was saying, what’s in the Bible is all we need. Jo.21:25 does not in any way tell us that anything left out by any Bible writer was going to someday be needed, and be essential to our salvation.
“Thy Word is a Lamp unto my feet…” (Ps.119:105)
P
Protestant101
Guest
Again, not true. You ignore the rest of the text which says that Jesus also “lives unto God.”
M
Montalban
Guest
Actually, it is true. I cited Calvin himself saying so. And there’s no problem ‘within Calvinism’ that Jesus the sacrifice is also God - in fact Catholics and Protestants believe that Jesus is the only one that could be the sacrifice, because He’s perfect.
M
Montalban
Guest
I know it doesn’t. That’s why I just stated that it doesn’t.
Indeed. So what is your point? I (as an Orthodox) believe my priests don’t contradict it. You’re assuming that this is happening. Got any examples?
So you’re saying that Christ established a priesthood, and then took it away? This seems to be more evidence of a God that does change
That’s as silly as saying Christianity is false because Jews are still around.
Indeed. John recognised that not all Jesus said is recorded. How does this help your case?
Where does it say the Bible is all we need? How was it that the church didn’t have the bible for 300 years, if we needed the Bible? Why didn’t Jesus then present the Bible to us before He departed?
By the way, do you worship on a Saturday or a Sunday?
Does your church have communion?
The whole basis for being a sola scriptura church is flawed. Even the Bible shows this!
Christ predicted His church would not fail (Matt. 16:18). Paul says it is the rock of teaching (1 Tim. 3:15)
Not everything taught, was written down
John 21:25 Jesus did many other things as well. If every one of them were written down, I suppose that even the whole world would not have room for the books that would be written.
Specific lessons were not by scripture
Luke 10:16"He who listens to you listens to me; he who rejects you rejects me; but he who rejects me rejects him who sent me."
Paul himself gives a quotation from Jesus that was handed down orally to him: “It is more blessed to give than to receive” (Acts 20:35). This saying is not recorded in the Gospels and must have been passed on to Paul. And therefore Paul himself uses tradition as a guide for teaching.
He also quotes from other non-Biblical sources, such as this early hymn…
Ephesians 5:14 for it is light that makes everything visible. This is why it is said: “Wake up, O sleeper, rise from the dead, and Christ will shine on you.”
Paul himself handed on faith by word-of-mouth. He praised those who followed Tradition: “I commend you because you remember me in everything and maintain the traditions even as I have delivered them to you” (1 Cor. 11:2).
A
allischalmers
Guest
Proudly forever Baptist
allischalmers
allischalmers
J
JaneFrances
Guest
Luke 1:51
He has performed mighty deeds with his arm; he has scattered those who are proud in their inmost thoughts.
P
Protestant101
Guest
Why don’t you show us then just what was taken from who. Explain the verse in question to us so that we can see what is truth here.
P
Protestant101
Guest
This is a mute point because God commanded in many places for His spoken word to be the written word and there is no difference between the two:
Isaiah 8:1 Moreover the LORD said unto me, Take thee a great roll, and write in it with a man’s pen concerning Mahershalalhashbaz.
P
Protestant101
Guest
What have these two questions got to do with sola scriptura or with tradition, in the context that we are discussing?
I
Image_of_God
Guest
Once again I will say I am sorry for my generalized statement and my misinterpretation of Calvinist doctrine. The PROBLEM I will state again, is that Jesus said he would be with the Church until the end of time. Luther created a completely new church, teaching new doctrines. This is true. The Pope has never replaced God. If you say this then you are saying that Peter replaced God. And this is the problem today. Each Protestant denomination can link itself someway or another to the Catholic Church(all of them!). There was only one Church. If you Believe the Holy Spirit does not teach error and you agree with the Reformation purposely, you are being contradictory. For the reason why the Reformation was started was because many people thought the Church was in error. My last doctrine that I put was directly quoted to Calvinists and it was a mistake. There has been a pope for almost 2,000 years and all of a sudden you do not need him anymore.
I am sorry if you are misunderstanding me, but there was only one Church with Peter as her physical leader established by Christ, not 60,000. Please forgive me for any mistake.
But where is the rock Peter in your church?- Status