I
ibkc
Guest
The thing is, though, it doesn’t line up. What you say reflects pretzel logic.Absolutely. That’s why I take such great steps to make sure that what I say lines up with scripture.
The thing is, though, it doesn’t line up. What you say reflects pretzel logic.Absolutely. That’s why I take such great steps to make sure that what I say lines up with scripture.
The church. Now, please read the rest of the passage, which tells us the role of the church in relation to God’s word.Who or what, according to the Bible, is the “pillar and foundation of the truth”?
It is the Church (1 Tim 3:15)
So you say. If you really had a case against me, you’d have shown some evidence.The thing is, though, it doesn’t line up. What you say reflects pretzel logic.
I already did. You even know that I did because you then mocked me for posting those verses of scripture.Fair enough. But, you cited these verses to support your claims that contradict what the apostles taught. Then you accused the Catholic Church of inventing “traditions” and things like purgatory and the papacy.
Show us where the apostles taught or anyone in the early Church believed the things you are pushing. You can’t. They all support the Church’s claims. Always have and always will.
And this is Unbiblical. The Bible says that Christ’s sacrifice is the only thing that can save us.We suffer anyway. In Purgatory, we join our sufferings with Christ’s suffering on the Cross, and make His sacrifice to be our own, and in this way, we pass from our own life into His life.
Again, never says anything about Peter being the pope.“Chief shepherd” is the Pope.
And which verse is this?It is because St. Peter’s own word was God’s Law that St. Paul had to rebuke him for breaking it.
The Old Testament ScripturesThe church. Now, please read the rest of the passage, which tells us the role of the church in relation to God’s word.
Who or what, according to the Bible is “profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness that the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works”?
The concept behind one church is having one final authority along interpretations of the doctrins. This final authority can be amended should there be a need for it to be so. The problem exists when individuals interpret scripture falsly, and some have been known to twist it around to mean something entirely different then what was intended to be so in the first place. Having that final authority prevents this from happening. With the protestants I used to hang out with online, many of them were at each others throats over some of these differing interpretations, and you had better believe, they had their own traditions just as the Catholic church does, the difference here is the Catholic church stems from the beginning with theirs, the protestant ones do not.I’m saying that, while those men are welcome to their opinions, and their opinions are instructive, inasmuch as they align with scripture, it is scripture that is the authority, not their opinions.
First, it’s good to see that you admit that it’s the word of God and not the Roman Catholic church.The Old Testament Scriptures
But why would you be so arrogant as to try to amend God’s word?This final authority can be amended should there be a need for it to be so.
Actually, wresting authority away from God insures that the your “final authority” will be corrupt and use the scriptures for their own purposes.Having that final authority prevents this from happening.
So you say. If you really had a case against me, you’d have shown some evidence.
The Bible says many things about what saves us…such as “This prefigured baptism, which saves you now.” (1 Peter 3:21)And this is Unbiblical. The Bible says that Christ’s sacrifice is the only thing that can save us.
Again, never says anything about Peter being the pope.
And which verse is this?
Of course not. Because the authority which Christ appointed, The Catholic Church, told us in the late fourth century which New Testament era writings were to ba added to the Septuagint to form the Sacred Scriptures and to be read as the inspired word of God.First, it’s good to see that you admit that it’s the word of God and not the Roman Catholic church.
Second, you don’t believe that the New Testament has the same authority?
You’'re speaking here of the Oral Tradition. This is what the Catholic Church believes in.Actually, the Gospel did exist. It had been preached throughout the Old Testament and in the church before the epistles were written.
The New Testament didn’t even exist yet; it was not proclaimed to be Scripture until 405 AD, by Pope Innocent I.First, it’s good to see that you admit that it’s the word of God and not the Roman Catholic church.
Second, you don’t believe that the New Testament has the same authority?