How many pages from the Bible do you use or need to use to support your beliefs?

[Dokimas]

John.1
[1] In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
[2] He was in the beginning with God;
[3] all things were made through him, and without him was not anything made that was made.
[4] In him was life, and the life was the light of men.
[5] The light shines in the darkness, and the darkness has not overcome it.

The Word of God is most certainly a Person, not a writing, however Holy. His living and powerful presence works through the Scriptures to those who are open to receive Him.
Plenty of people read the scriptures and are not pierced, nor are any of their thoughts laid bare, because they are not open to Him.

Let me see if I understand your position…

Jesus is His Body. The Body is the CC. This makes the CC one and the same as Jesus. Therefore the CC is the Word of God???

 

[guanophore]

I have not seen any versus from you defending your position that we are not elected, predestined or chosen by God. I do realize that you can’t anyway so our conversation is now over.

Catholics wrote the verses for Catholics, so of course we accept that we are elected and predestined. Our understanding of it is informed by the Apostles, though, and not Reformers.

I have a question, Jer. If God saves who He will save, and He chooses us before we choose Him, is it possible for us to reject His purpose for ourselves?

I ask this because you have stated that His will is irresistable. I understand this to mean that, sooner or later, at some point during the person’s life, even if it is a split second before death, that elected person will yield to God. It sounds like an inevitability.

 

[onenow1]

My redemption is sealed, by the cross, I am born from above in baptism; and like the apostle Paul I am working out my salvation in fear and trembling,paying attention to all the words of God, through the bible and the Church. (Phil. 2:12),

Peace and God bless
onenow1opcorn:

 

[estesbob]

Do we have to accept ST? If so, and we don’t agree that ST is equal to the Bible, how can we debate? See the fix we all are in?

We are not in a fix. You are. The Church has remained constant for 2,000 years . Those who embraced Sola Scriptura have went off in 30,000 different drections.

 

[guanophore]

Let me see if I understand your position…

Jesus is His Body. [/qutoe]

Jesus is the Head of His Body, the Church. We are members of His Body. He does not separate Himself from His body.
Dokimas;6812989:

The Body is the CC.

The Body of Christ consists of all those who have gone before us in the faith (saints who are perfected forever), those who are preparing for heaven (purgatory) and the Church militant, the body of believers here on earth who are still working out their salvation with fear and trembling.

This makes the CC one and the same as Jesus.

No.

We are member of His Body. We are connected to Him, and to one another, because we have been baptized into him. He is espoused to the Church, and is connected to her as a man to his wife.

[22] Wives, be subject to your husbands, as to the Lord.
[23] For the husband is the head of the wife as Christ is the head of the church, his body, and is himself its Savior.
[24] As the church is subject to Christ, so let wives also be subject in everything to their husbands.
[25] Husbands, love your wives, as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her,
[26] that he might sanctify her, having cleansed her by the washing of water with the word,
[27] that he might present the church to himself in splendor, without spot or wrinkle or any such thing, that she might be holy and without blemish.
[28] Even so husbands should love their wives as their own bodies. He who loves his wife loves himself.
[29] For no man ever hates his own flesh, but nourishes and cherishes it, as Christ does the church,
[30] because we are members of his body.
[31] “For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh.”
[32] This mystery is a profound one, and I am saying that it refers to Christ and the church;

He noursihes and cherishes His Body just as if it were His own flesh. As He taught, the two shall become One. This will occur in the wedding feast of the Lamb.

 Therefore the CC is the Word of God????????

God committed His Word to the Church. The Divine elements of the Church preserve that Word infallible. She is the custodian of His Word.

I would like to say that I really appreciate your attempt to understand CAtholic thought on this matter, Doki. I know that it is a very different concept of Church for many of our separated brethren, who seem to “behead” the Church by defining it as “the body of believers on earth” only.

What do you make of Jesus telling Saul of Tarsus “why are you persecuting Me” when Scripture makes it clear he was persecuting the Church?

 

[Dokimas]

Dokimas;6812989:

Let me see if I understand your position…

Jesus is His Body. [/qutoe]

Jesus is the Head of His Body, the Church. We are members of His Body. He does not separate Himself from His body.

The Body of Christ consists of all those who have gone before us in the faith (saints who are perfected forever), those who are preparing for heaven (purgatory) and the Church militant, the body of believers here on earth who are still working out their salvation with fear and trembling.

No.

We are member of His Body. We are connected to Him, and to one another, because we have been baptized into him. He is espoused to the Church, and is connected to her as a man to his wife.

[22] Wives, be subject to your husbands, as to the Lord.
[23] For the husband is the head of the wife as Christ is the head of the church, his body, and is himself its Savior.
[24] As the church is subject to Christ, so let wives also be subject in everything to their husbands.
[25] Husbands, love your wives, as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her,
[26] that he might sanctify her, having cleansed her by the washing of water with the word,
[27] that he might present the church to himself in splendor, without spot or wrinkle or any such thing, that she might be holy and without blemish.
[28] Even so husbands should love their wives as their own bodies. He who loves his wife loves himself.
[29] For no man ever hates his own flesh, but nourishes and cherishes it, as Christ does the church,
[30] because we are members of his body.
[31] “For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh.”
[32] This mystery is a profound one, and I am saying that it refers to Christ and the church;

He noursihes and cherishes His Body just as if it were His own flesh. As He taught, the two shall become One. This will occur in the wedding feast of the Lamb.

God committed His Word to the Church. The Divine elements of the Church preserve that Word infallible. She is the custodian of His Word.

I would like to say that I really appreciate your attempt to understand CAtholic thought on this matter, Doki. I know that it is a very different concept of Church for many of our separated brethren, who seem to “behead” the Church by defining it as “the body of believers on earth” only.

What do you make of Jesus telling Saul of Tarsus “why are you persecuting Me” when Scripture makes it clear he was persecuting the Church?

Who says the Body of Christ is only on earth? All who die in Christ are part of His Body. I’m not sure how you’re extrapolating your wrong understanding of what I believe about the Body of Christ???

So, you disagree with all those here that have equated the CC with Jesus because the CC is His Body?

Jesus said, when “you’ve done it to the least of My brothren, you’ve don it to Me.” (Sorry I don’t have time to find the verse and paste it.)

 

[JonNC]

Originally Posted by jericho777
The overwhelming weight of scripture shows that God chooses us and gives the elect the ability to be saved. Not everyone will even hear there is a God. Remember He first loved us.

Unless you mean all of us are “elect”, it sounds more like you here are saying that God first loved only some of us.

JL: In other words God has created billions upon billions of souls, knowing HE would not give then even a slite chance to be saved. Those who have lived in proverty and oppression all thier earthly life. Only to be thrown into hell at death, that they may continue to be tormented for all eternity. I thought God loved his creation, I didn’t know he hated it.

I agree.

Jon

 

[guanophore]

Who says the Body of Christ is only on earth? All who die in Christ are part of His Body. I’m not sure how you’re extrapolating your wrong understanding of what I believe about the Body of Christ???

I am sorry if I misunderstood. When you defined the Church as the body of believers on earth, I thought that you were excising the saints who are perfected. This part of the Church cannot err, as they are preserved forever in His Truth. Perhaps you do not equate the Body of Christ with the Church, and that is how I misunderstood?

So, you disagree with all those here that have equated the CC with Jesus because the CC is His Body?

No. I embrace (as most of those on CAF do) the Teaching of the Church on the nature of the Body. This is in the catechism.

The Body of Christ is larger than the visible Catholic Church, as it contains all those who have been baptized into Christ.

Jesus said, when "you've done it to the least of My brothren, you've don it to Me."  (Sorry I don't have time to find the verse and paste it.)

Good. So this is the extent to which Jesus identifies Himself with His Body, the Church.

 

[jlhargus]

jericho: You wanted me to post more biblical proofs so I did as you asked. Now all you can do is talk trash and run your mouth and make accusations. I’m waiting to see all your scriptural evidences that defend your position.

JL: I am waiting for you to post scripture, to defend your tradition of men, that God creates a few souls to be saved and billions to be tormented atonally. The Church ALONG with Apostolic Tradition whether by Word or Epistle is in total agreement with ever scripture you posted concerning predestination. I don’t have time now, but long story short. God knew before he created anything who would and who would not accept HIS grace and CHOOSE to do HIS will. Here is the Church’s view vivacatholic.wordpress.com/2007/08/12/predestination-in-catholicism/

[Dt30:19 I call heaven and earth to record this day against you, that I HAVE SET BEFORE YOU BEFORE YOU LIFE AND DEATH, blessing and cursing: therefore CHOOSE life, that both thou and thy seed may live:] God does not FORCE us to accept Him with some so called irrestable grace. He give us the grace to CHOOSE life or death

Your tradition of men presents and sounds more like a moslem, master and slave relationship, understanding and teaching of God, not Christianity. I have come to the conclusion you belong to Calvary Chapel or their Vineyard Outreach, will you confirm or deny?

How can one love a god who would just create to torment? If that god is that cruel, unjust and unloving you could only live in fear. How could you TRUST such a god? How would you TRUST that god isn’t pulling your leg. If that god is that cruel and unjust he may really be going to reward those, you think are going to hell, and throw in hell those who are trying to do his will, just for fun. How could you TRUST the word of such a god?

 

[jlhargus]

Jericho: However when you talk about tradition you assume they are not already identified in scripture.

JL: 2 THES 2:14 Whereunto he called you by OUR GOSPEL, to the obtaining of the glory of our Lord Jesus Christ. 15 Therefore, brethren, stand fast, and hold the traditions which ye have been taught, whether BY word, OR our epistle.

The Church does NOT assume, the scriptures clearly, unambiguously, VERIFY with a clear statement we are to HOLD FAST TRADITION, TAUGHT whether by WORD or EPISTLE. It is your faith group who ASSUME a tradition of men to nullify the Word of God. You cannot find a scripture that VERIFIES your tradition of men, that all TRADITION is in the written Word. [2 Thes 3:6 6Now we command you, brethren, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that ye withdraw yourselves from every brother that walketh disorderly, and not after the tradition which he received of us.]

It seems TRADITION was so important that those who did not follow it were to be ignored.

Jericho: Leading to the misconception that you have some new revelation that is not written in scripture. But these two posts explain what they are referring to.

JL: There are no new revelations since the last apostle died.

Jericho: Your use of Sacred Tradition as the lens of scriptural interpretation leads people to question the validity of your cause in light of the fidelity to the faith that was once for all delivered to the saints.

JL: Yes the Church does interpret scripture in the light of Apostolic Tradition. Just as your group interpret according to their tradition. When you studied the bible with Calvary or Vineyard, you did so thru the lens of traditions.

 

[Bran_Stark]

How many pages thick, would the Bible be, if we limited it to Protestant, or “Born-again” verses? I know that the Catholic Bible would remain the same, because we don’t reject anything in the Bible and we don’t believe that there exists, any true conflict in the Bible when viewed, and understood in context. The Catholic Church also has a Liturgical Calendar, in which, nearly the entire Bible is read aloud during Mass. I also know that some of the early Protestant Churches accept and use, most of the King James Version (KJV) Bible, although the KJV, at least the older ones, have many books that have been removed…
How many pages from the Bible do you use or need to use to support your beliefs?

Well there are no “Protestant verses”, any more than there are “Catholic verses”. And none of us reject a single sentence in the Bible (though we do disagree which books are included within it).

But both Protestants and Catholics do not need to use the entire Bible to support their beliefs. I hear tell there’s this little book called the Catechism of the Catholic Church that quotes and reference certain Biblical verses, but by no means all of them, to show the essentials of the Catholic Faith - just like the various Reformed confessions attempt to show the same.

So while every verse and chapter and book may be inspired, the fact is that some are more important and relevant than others. What doctrine of Christianity, pray tell, is proven by this verse:

“And thou shalt have a paddle upon thy weapon; and it shall be, when thou wilt ease thyself abroad, thou shalt dig therewith, and shalt turn back and cover that which cometh from thee.”

 

[minkymurph]

I don 't use any pages from the Bible to support my beliefs.

The reason being, it was not why the Bible was written. God did not inspire the authors of the Bible so we in the twenty first century could prove our point. Using the Bible as a means to prove your own opinions or beliefs ‘right,’ or to prove ‘I am in the right religion cos I know how to interpret the Bible properly,’ demonstrates a lack of appreciation for God’s revelation to us.

After having said that, the Bible does contain divinely revealed truths; a knowledge of which should lift us to a higher spiritual dimension than human intellect. The Bible is not simply meant to be read, like a novel or an autobiography.

 

[estesbob]

Well there are no “Protestant verses”, any more than there are “Catholic verses”. And none of us reject a single sentence in the Bible (though we do disagree which books are included within it).

But both Protestants and Catholics do not need to use the entire Bible to support their beliefs. I hear tell there’s this little book called the Catechism of the Catholic Church that quotes and reference certain Biblical verses, but by no means all of them, to show the essentials of the Catholic Faith - just like the various Reformed confessions attempt to show the same.

So while every verse and chapter and book may be inspired, the fact is that some are more important and relevant than others. What doctrine of Christianity, pray tell, is proven by this verse:

“And thou shalt have a paddle upon thy weapon; and it shall be, when thou wilt ease thyself abroad, thou shalt dig therewith, and shalt turn back and cover that which cometh from thee.”

poop runs downhilll?

 

[guanophore]

poop runs downhilll?

 

[Doxiemom]

all of them.

 

[minkymurph]

Catholics and Protestants both believe Christ was the Incarnate God.

Interestingly, the word ‘Trinity’ is not used anywhere in the Bible and nowhere in the new Testament does Jesus claim to be the Incarnate God.

As Christians we are aware of John 1:1 the 7 ‘I am’s’ recorded in John and many other verses that elude to the belief Jesus was the Incarnate God. However, this belief cannot be proven irrevocably from scripture. Little is said in relation to the divinity of the Holy Spirit and if my memory of ecumenical councils serves me right, there was some dispute about this.

So, why do Christians believe in a Trinitiarian God? As Catholics, we believe Jesus was the Incarnate God because that’s who the Apostle’s believed he was. They in turn revealed this to others who believed it and it has been handed down to this day. I believe it is a divinely revealed truth, but it cannot be irrevocably proven from Scripture. I would guarantee, if you quoted the Bible from back to front and upside down from now to doomsday to demonstrate the belief Christ was God, someone who does not believe Christ was God will remain unconvinced.

So what’s my point? Scriputure can only be understood in light of the Spirit This leaves us with a problem when using the Bible to support our beliefs. Which interpretation it the ‘right’ one and why?

 

[Jon_Hus]

Actaully Bible Christians hold to their pown ersonal interpretation of the whole Bible-which has, in the last 500 years, led to mass confusion. as to what Scripture says

Could you kindly explain to this simple creature what the purpose of having the 20 some church councils over the last 2000 years if not to remedy mass confusion? Could you shed some light on why we shouldn’t consider The Great Schism, The Iconoclast controvarsy, the Avignon Papacy, The Inquisition, V2, just to name some, as a remedy of mass confusion?

So, there was no mass confusion before the reformation, is that your teaching?

 

[estesbob]

Could you kindly explain to this simple creature what the purpose of having the 20 some church councils over the last 2000 years if not to remedy mass confusion? Could you shed some light on why we shouldn’t consider The Great Schism, The Iconoclast controvarsy, the Avignon Papacy, The Inquisition, V2, just to name some, as a remedy of mass confusion?

So, there was no mass confusion before the reformation, is that your teaching?

Can you tell me which of the councils was called to adress mass confusion about Church Doctines? The Churchs teaching have remained consistent for 2,000 years. Our seperated Bretheren, OTH, have split into tens of thousands of different denominations since the so called Reformation.

 

[Jon_Hus]

Can you tell me which of the councils was called to adress mass confusion about Church Doctines? The Churchs teaching have remained consistent for 2,000 years. Our seperated Bretheren, OTH, have split into tens of thousands of different denominations since the so called Reformation.

So, basically you want us to believe that the councils, papal bulls, encyclicals, and so forth were called to vote on the color and theme of St. Peters? I have the book set Vatican Council II: Constitutions, Decrees, Declarations-- 100s of pages of confusion clarification which has since spawned 100s of other books trying to explain the explanations.

You haven’t explained the purpose of the pronouncements, publications, movements, papal relocations, military actions, mass migrations, forced conversions, inquisitions and misc. get-togethers/historical inconveniences.

 

[estesbob]

So, basically you want us to believe that the councils, papal bulls, encyclicals, and so forth were called to vote on the color and theme of St. Peters? I have the book set Vatican Council II: Constitutions, Decrees, Declarations-- 100s of pages of confusion clarification which has since spawned 100s of other books trying to explain the explanations.

You haven’t explained the purpose of the pronouncements, publications, movements, papal relocations, military actions, mass migrations, forced conversions, inquisitions and misc. get-togethers/historical inconveniences.

I take it this means you can not tell us what councils were called to deal with mass confusion about Church Doctrines?