I am a Protestant who wants an honest answer

[Pax]

exrc,

In my previous post on the book of life, I failed to include one final verse from the book of Revelation that should cap this issue off.

In a final warning Jesus tells us in Rev 22:18-19, "I warn every one who hears the words of the prophecy of this book: if any one adds to them, God will add to him the plagues described in this book, and if any one takes away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God will take away his share in the tree of life and in the holy city, which are described in this book.

Please take note that Jesus is talking about heaven, and that if anyone adds or subtracts to the words of this book God will take away his share in the tree of life and in the holy city. In other words that person was saved but has now lost that salvation. There share in the tree of life and in the holy city will be taken from them. They have lost their salvation.

“Once Saved always Saved?” Not a chance!

One thing I should have mentioned but did not. The portion of the quote that says, God will take away his share in the tree of life and in the holy city, which are described in this book. is translated in the King James version as, "God shall take away his part out of the book of life,"

Could it be more clear than this? Obviously, you can lose your salvation.

 

[Greg_McPherran]

You see Ozzie, you seek to follow Jesus and you are a believer in Him. However, you have been trained in habitual patterns of thinking that are in error. These patterns are not from God. You have been trained that any discussion and conclusion of Christian truth must rely on Scripture alone. So this is your pattern. However, this pattern itself is not what God teaches us. You judge the truth of God with a man-made method!

Scripture is true and it is God’s Word, no doubt. The apostolic Church teaches us that the fullness and truth of the Christian faith is taught by the Church ***and ***the Scriptures. Scripture gives evidence of more truth than is contained in Scripture itself (1 Peter 3:19 for example). There are deeper and fuller understandings of the truth that Scripture indicates but does not elaborate on.

You must rid yourself of these man-made patterns of thinking in order to more fully understand God’s truth.

In fact, ultimately these man-made traditions and errors (e.g. Sola Scriptura) are likely from Satan. Jesus said Satan is the father of all lies.

I think perhaps Sola Scriptura was proposed by those who parted from the apostolic Church but still needed some claim to authority to base their religion on. So they invented Sola Scriptura. The apostles never taught Sola Scriptura. I think this departure from the apostolic Church may have been motivated by anger at corruption etc.

Also, we believe that Jesus is truly present in Communion. I think perhaps those who departed from the apostolic Church knew they did not have the presbyterial authority to clebrate the apostolic Communion, so they needed to claim that Communion is merely a symbol.

Also, I think perhaps that in order to discredit the Catholic Church, those who left needed to accuse the Catholic Church of all kinds of things e.g. that we need to claim to be on par with Scripture. This is nonsense. St. Paul was an apostle of our Church and his teaching is not “on par” with Scripture, it is Scripture!

Also, if a person is motivated by pride of self, then this should be an indication to that person that they are more focused on self than humble trust in God. We all need to look at ourselves to check our motives.

You see Ozzie, you think you follow the Bible, however be careful that you are not following men whose authority you presume and whose approval you enjoy. Stand on God’s truth regardless of others in your Church who pressure you otherwise. Make sure you seek truth and are not a “group” follower who has prejudices that you have never questioned.

Come to the apostolic faith Ozzie!

Greg

 

[Ozzie]

Pax:

Why do you find it necessary to insult Cubby in this way. There are many passages in scripture that refer to the authority of the church which is the body of Christ. The Church is also referred to as the pillar and bulwark of the truth. And we are also told in the gospels that if someone doesn’t listen to two or three of the brethren then take the matter to the Church.

This was a personal, critical observation based on the challenges of his posts. But why would this be seen as an insult to you, since you propagate and perpetuate the idealogy that all truth comes out of Rome? He’s doing exactly what you and the Roman Episcopate want of him: believe everything we tell you.

As for the true “Church” being the pillar and bulwark of the truth, I have no problem as long as you don’t restrict that description to Rome’s Episcopal hierarchy. As if its a separate entity in and of itself. A “Church” of its own. The true Catholic (universal) Church, which Christ is building (presently & continuously) is made up of all true believers since Pentecost. But even the true Church is not the truth, it is the supports the truth - the Person and work of Jesus Christ.

MAT. 18:17 “And if he refuses to listen to them, tell it to the church; and if he refuses to listen even to the church, let him be to you as a Gentile and a tax-gatherer.” This passage is about a Jew reproving, in private, a fellow Jew if he sins against him. If he does not listen to him, then he should take one or two more with him. If he still refuses to listen, take him before the ecclesia, i.e., the congregation, the elders. If he still doesn’t listen, treat him as a "Gentile," a "tax-gatherer, i.e., a “publican” who collected Roman taxes from the Jews. In other words, he is to be scorned because he refuses to repent of his sin against his fellow Jew. This, of course, is all said with the assumption that he truly did sin against his fellow Jew. That it was not a false accusation. Now, you can take this same principle and apply it to believers today, but this passage has nothing to do with teaching the infallibility of Rome’s “Magesterium” or the complete authority of the church of Rome over all Christendom.

Since all of this is scriptural, Cubby is quite right in listening to the Church. Moreover, Cubby does accept all of scripture.

Actually, like you, he accepts all of the teachings that come out of Rome; beginning with buying into the self-serving notion that only they have the spiritual insight into Scripture and divine truth, and ALL must sit at their feet (oh, and kiss a ring, as well. Well, in mediaeval times they actually did kiss his feet - yuk!!!). Like I said before, this is a cultish mentality and historically has left the door wide open to all sorts of error - completely unchallenged.

You, on the other hand, find it perfectly okay to ignore the Church and to interpret scripture any way that you see fit.

It is my duty as a follower of Jesus Christ to ignore all false teachings that come out of Rome, or historically out of Constantinople, or any modern day church organizations.

 

[Ozzie]

Pax:

You might try reading C.S. Lewis book The Great Divorce. Although he wasn’t Catholic he did believe in the doctrine. His book is a wonderful imaginative portrayal that gives an interesting view of heaven, hell, and purgatory. It is a short and an enjoyable read even if you don’t accept the teaching.

I’ve read it several times. It’s an allegory and written as a rebuttal to Blake’s “Marriage of Heaven and Hell” which taught that reality teaches no absolutes. Lewis’ story shows that even if given a second chance (remember, it’s an allegory,not doctrine) people who go to hell would rather stay there than change their own views. Hell is an absolute and God, being omniscient, is just when He assigns the unbeliever to such a place. It is their own inward desire, they wanted nothing to do with Christ and His sacrificial work on their behalf. They would rather wallow in their own righteousness.

 

[exrc]

Pax:

You have got to be kidding! Jesus is addressing the seven Churches (Ephesus, Smyrna, Pergamum, Thyatira, Sardis, Philadelphia, and Laodicea). These are words to Christians. Didn’t you even read the verses or go back and look at the context?

Pax,
Jewish believers ,ARE, christians. So are gentile believers.What I was saying was that the book of life was a strictly Jewish concept, not gentile. They understood it to mean an earthly book which was kept by the scribes for taking census. There are also eschatalogical implications in these passages that none of us can be absolutely sure of.

You are not seeing the forest because the sapplings keep poking you in the eyes Pax.

The whole plan of Gods redemption from beginning to end is all about what God did for mankind not what mankind can do for him. The cross answers everything, but you do not understand its depth. Nor do you understand how sinful we really are, and how holy and just God is. If you did, you would accept his payment in full for your sins, and leave that abomination that glorifies mans works.

Repent, and come out of her Pax.

I would love to have you sing praises with me together in my congregation.

You are always welcome home to Jesus!

In love exrc

**L’shanah tovah tikatevu **

 

[MariaG]

posted by exrc
The whole plan of Gods redemption from beginning to end is all about what God did for mankind not what mankind can do for him. The cross answers everything, but you do not understand its depth. Nor do you understand how sinful we really are, and how holy and just God is. If you did, you would accept his payment in full for your sins, and leave that abomination that glorifies mans works.

Repent, and come out of her Pax.

I pray that you will someday see the ignorance and hurt your statements have caused. And *you *are always welcome to come home to where Jesus is more fully than you can understand now, the Catholic Church. I pray God will remove the blinders that you have allowed Satan to place over your eyes.

God Bless,
Your sister in Christ,
Maria

St. Michael the archangel, defend us in the day of battle, be our safeguard against the wickedness and snares of the devil. May God rebuke him, we humbly pray, and do thou Prince of Heavenly Host, by the power of God thrust into hell, satan and all the evil spirits who prowl about the world seeking the ruin of souls. Amen.

 

[Greg_McPherran]

exrc:

If you did, you would accept his payment in full for your sins…

How do you believe that Jesus payed for our sins? Was it His suffering, His death, His resurrection, or all of these?

Greg

 

[KLStevens]

What I continue to see here on this thread is a debate about authority.

As far as our non-Catholic friends are concerned, they alone have the authority to understand and interpret Scripture without respect to Sacred Tradition.

Catholics on the other hand acknowledge the facts of history:

1. Before there was a Bible, there was Tradition.
   —this is supported in Scripture by the many passages that refer to the teachings the communities “had already received” or were taught “orally.” 1 Cor 11:2, 2 Thess 2:15, 3:6, 2 Tim 2:2, 1 Pet 1:25, 1 Cor 15:1-3, etc.
2. That tradition was passed down, through chosen successors.
   —See 1 Tim 4:14, 5:17, 5:22, Titus 1:5
3. There was a clear hierarchy in the earliest Christian communities.
   –See 1 Tim 3:1-9, Acts 14:23. This is also clear from non-Biblical writings of the time. Also let us not forget that Jesus and His Apostles were all Jewish and quite accustom to a Church structure. Remember He did not come to abolish the law but fulfill it.
4. It was not until 350+ years after Christ that a Bible was put together. Prior to that certain Christian communities had only limited access to ALL of the writings contained in our present day Bibles.

What points 1-4 tell us is:
360 years prior to us having a Bible, Jesus Christ established a Church, with a structure (means it could not have been an invisible Church of disconnected believers) that held strong to ALL that they were taught: both written and ORAL.

If you do not accept the Tradition of the Catholic Church, you only have access to half of the deposit of faith.

NO OTHER CHURCH HAS ACCESS TO THE ORAL TRADITION GIVEN TO THE CATHOLIC CHURCH BY CHRIST.
—John 21:25 tells us that not everything Jesus did is to be found in Scripture.
—1 Cor 11:2 and 2 Thess 2:15 tell us that we must hold fast to Tradition.
—2 Thess 3:6 tells us to shun those who do not ACT according to Tradition.
—In Acts 20:35 Paul quotes a saying of Jesus that is not found in Scripture. And since Paul was not a disciple of Jesus before His crucifixion–we must remember that PAUL WAS TAUGHT BY THE APOSTLES.

There are many other passages that talk about the authority of tradition. And NO WHERE IN SCRIPTURE DDOES IT SAY THAT ALL TRADITION HAS NOW BEEN RECORDED IN THE BIBLE. In fact it says just the opposite.

Now with all that said, every Christian accepts some authority on Scripture.

1. ALL accept the authority of the Catholic Church to have chosen and compiled the books of the Bible. (If they do not, why not add in some books, The Gospel of Thomas is a favorite of today’s progressive Christians who can’t stand the fact that the Catholic Church picked the books of the Bible.)
2. Some, after the Reformation, have chosen to accept the authority of those Reformers who edited down Scripture (and added a few words) and disregarded OT books that were used by Jesus.

Here you have two choices:

1. Pick the books that were originally taken as Sacred Scripture some 1700 years ago.
2. Pick the edited books of the Reformation based on the original books held by the Catholic Church.

If you can accept the authority of the Catholic Church to give you your Scripture, how can you disregard her Authority to tell you what it meant when it was written?

NO WHERE IN SCRIPTURE DOES IT TELL US THAT SCRIPTURE ALONE IS ALL A CHRISTIAN NEEDS.
Quite the opposite. As evidenced above, non-Scriptural tradition was to be followed.

As proven in Scripture, Jesus followed non-Scriptural traditions as a Jew, so did His Apostles.

 

[KLStevens]

continued from above…

With that said ALL CHRISTIANS FOLLOW SOME SORT OF NON-SCRIPTURAL TRADITION.
—If you are a Catholic, you follow 2000 years of SACRED TRADITION.

—If you are Protestant, you follow such non-Scriptural traditions as the Trinity, Sola Scriptura, Sola Fide. The latter two concepts DID NOT EXIST PRIOR TO THE REFORMATION.

The concept of the Trinity was never explicitly addressed in Scripture although it, like many Catholic Traditions are implicit it Scripture. In fact, some of the earliest heresies (and some later ones) used Scripture to prove that Jesus WAS NOT divine or that He WAS ONLY HUMAN!

---

I will next address something that seemed to be overlooked in an earlier post I wrote to Ozzie. He claimed

Ozzie:

But your tradition does not square up with the foundation Paul laid.

I responded:
Actually Ozzie, the foundation of the Catholic Church and Tradition is the teaching of Jesus Christ, not Paul’s.

This “foundation Paul laid” that you speak of is a development of the Reformation.

Prior to the Reformation, Christians did not take Paul’s letters as their foundation of faith.

And it also tells us clearly in Scripture of Paul’s writings: 2 Peter 3:16
“There are some things in them HARD TO UNDERSTAND, which the IGNORANT AND UNSTABLE TWIST TO THEIR OWN DESTRUCTION, as they do the other Scripture.”

So even Scripture tells us Paul’s writings are difficult to interpret. Yet Ozzie admits he uses these as the foundation of faith.

Catholics, however, use the teachings of Jesus as the foundation of faith, and in light os such, read Paul’s letters in light of Jesus’ teachings.

THIS IS AN EXAMPLE OF A NON-CATHOLIC USING EXTRA-BIBLICAL TRADITION.

Our Catholic Tradition squares up quite nicely with ALL OF SCRIPTURE as long as you read it with the original Catholic teachings in mind. If you choose to read Scripture in light of its 16th century understanding–you have to give priority to Paul over Our Lord. and you have to disregard all the directives about Tradition, Church, Heirarchy, Works, etc.

---

Another point that was overlooked from an earlier post that is relevant now:

Ozzie:

Scripture can have many secondary applications, but those applications are first subordinate to a true interpretation, of which there can be only one.

I responded:
Amazing thing here…is that for your interpretation to be the true one, that means for 1500+ years no Christian knew it!

What happened to all those Christians? They must have never been saved, huh?

Even the Apostles and the students of the Apostles must have never been saved for your statement to be “true” since your interpretation of Scripture came after the Reformation–from people with no connection to the Apostolic teachings safeguarded by Jesus’ Church…

You, I and everyone here knows that many great Christians will disagree with your interpretations.

I will add:
NO WHERE IN SCRIPTURE DOES IT SAY ONCE YOU BELIEVE IN JESUS CHRIST YOU WILL HAVE THE POWER TO UNDERSTAND SCRIPTURE ALL BY YOURSELF.

Actually it says quite clearly just the opposite: 2 Peter 1:20
“…No prophesy of scripture is a matter of ONE"S OWN INTERPRETATION.”

Why do you disregard this warning? And all the additional warnings about false teachers.

Tell me this: If the Catholic Church warned about false teachers in its Bible, would it make sense that the TEACHINGS THEY HELD PRIOR TO THAT would be considered false? No.

Sincerely Yours In Christ,
KLStevens

PS: I am still offering to send FREE to anyone some books that will help our non-Catholic friends better understand Jesus’ Catholic Church and its teachings. Please contact me and I will gladly send them on. I WILL NOT PUT YOUR NAME ON SOME STRANGE MAILING LIST or anything like that.

 

[Philthy]

exrc:
Phil,
I could quite simply answer your questions with yes or no, A or B.
However, these questions are far to leading, for a simple answer. You have demonstrated this in your reply to, my question. I believe that " quite consequential" is clearly and emphatically with consequence ( A ), as opposed to, without consequence ( B )… Ambiguous?

My answer was clearly ( A )

With a brief clarification, as you have prescribed.

Phil,

This is indicative that you have not spent much time studying Leviticus (OT) in light of Hebrews (NT), which is its commentary, and completion.

Your answer, IS, truly ambiguous. You have answered (A), then in your explanation fused A+B together as your choice. However, In my explanation, I merely explained what those eternal consequences were.

The correct answer is (A) only.

If you agree (A) alone payed the PENALTY for ALL your sins, past, present, and future .Then we can go on to the next question.

When the penalty for a crime has been paid for completely, must

the criminal continue to pay the penalty after that point in time?

Yes
or
No

In love,exrcHey exrc-

So am I correct that you are answering A to both of my questions? Is that correct or did you, again, ignore the first one?I’m gonna proceed with the assumption that you answered A for both. I don’t think that’s unreasonable.

Your answer, IS, truly ambiguous.

My answer is not ambiguous at all, the problem lies in your question. As I stated, you didn’t give an option that resulted in mutually exclusive answers. But notice the difference - I still answered your question, by selecting one of your choices, A, and then I explained my response. That doesn’t seem confusing to me. You haven’t done that yet for the first question, and only now have you clarified your answer to the second question - Im not trying to be deceptive - honest. I thought I had done a good job of wording my questions and the answers so that you could comfortably answer them. Sorry if you felt otherwise.

May I summarize our agreement so far:

1. You (and I) believe there is a relationship between the forgiveness of your current and future sins and Christ’s sacrifice on the cross. It is the basis for their forgiveness.
2. You (and I) believe that in order to be forgiven we must continue to confess our sins throughout our lives.
3. You (and I) believe that there is an eternal consequence for you (personally) intentionally not confessing your sins.

My third question is this: What is the eternal consequence?

A) I change my mind - there is no eternal consequence.

B) I go to hell

C) I go to heaven, but my heavenly reward is lessened

D) None of the above. The eternal consequence is____________(fill in blank).

Now I will answer your question:.

"When the penalty for a crime has been paid for completely, must

the criminal continue to pay the penalty after that point in time?"

My answer is No.
No additional payment is due - unless another crime is committed. The issue of forgiveness, however, is unaddressed.

Sorry this took so long - connection pblms…

Phil

 

[Greg_McPherran]

Matthew 10:14-15 Whoever will not receive you or listen to your words–go outside that house or town and shake the dust from your feet. Amen, I say to you, it will be more tolerable for the land of Sodom and Gomorrah on the day of judgment than for that town.
You see, Jesus sent the disciples with no Bibles! No Bibles at all! And he tells of the judgement of those who would not listen to those that Jesus placed in authority.

“Whoever receives you receives me, and whoever receives me receives the one who sent me.”

Matthew 10:19-21 “If you wish to be perfect, go, sell what you have and give to (the) poor, and you will have treasure in heaven. Then come, follow me.”

**Matthew 25:44-46 **Then they will answer and say, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry or thirsty or a stranger or naked or ill or in prison, and not minister to your needs?’ He will answer them, ‘Amen, I say to you, what you did not do for one of these least ones, you did not do for me.’ And these will go off to eternal punishment, but the righteous to eternal life."

**Matthew 28:19-20 **Go, therefore, and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you.

**You see, Jesus Himself tells the disciples to teach other disciples to observe what Jesus commanded them. **The hearers were to believe on the authority of those sent.

1 Timothy 6:20-21 O Timothy, guard what has been entrusted to you. Avoid profane babbling and the absurdities of so-called knowledge. By professing it, some people have deviated from the faith.

The faith has been entrusted to disciples.

2 Timothy 3:13-14 But wicked people and charlatans will go from bad to worse, deceivers and deceived. But you, ***remain faithful to what you have learned ***and believed, because you know from whom you learned it,

Why does St. Paul say to remain faithful? He says because of who you learned it from.

Greg

 

[Greg_McPherran]

exrc:

Repent, and come out of her Pax.

I would love to have you sing praises with me together in my congregation.

You are always welcome home to Jesus!

In love exrc

Ahh, is this the old reverse psychology?

 

[Greg_McPherran]

Pride is a prison. Humility is the key to get out.

 

[Katholikos]

Ozzie wrote:

I’ve committed to the study of His inerrant Word

The early Christians were not “committed to the study of His inerrant Word” yet many, many of them died martyrs for the Faith. How did they know what to believe? The Catholic Church was their teacher!

• Christianity wasn’t based on any written word, but was taught and handed down *orally *from the Apostles through the Bishops to the Church (the People of God).
• The Christian Scriptures didn’t yet exist and would not until the end of the fourth and beginning of the fifth centuries.
• The selection of the contents of the NT was a winnowing process; until the decree of the Church no one knew for certain which writings were scripture and which were not. Even when Eusebius wrote the History of Church early in the fourth century, the canon was still in flux.
• The NT Scriptures were the confirmation – not the source – of Christian belief.
• The NT Scriptures are a confirmation and were supplemental to the Faith taught orally by the Apostles through the Bishops.
• Only an estimated 10% of people could read and write. The writings were read aloud to them at Mass, including – before the fifth century – those that were not ultimately canonized such as the letters of Clement, Ignatius, and others.
• No one had a complete Bible – not even the local Churches. Copies had to be made by hand and circulated by hand by travelers and were very, very expensive.

"At first a local church would have only a few apostolic letters and perhaps one or two gospels" Introduction to the New Testament, RSV.

It was not until after the invention of the printing press that Sola Scriptura and the idea that man should “study God’s Word” (the Bible) could even have entered the mind of man – the idea is only 487 years old…

How do you know the correct table of contents for the Bible?

How do you know the writings are inerrant?

How do you know the Bible is the “Word of God”? It’s a disparate collection of writings, written by different men at different times and locations, for different audiences and purposes. Who vouches for it? It’s an inanimate object – it can’t, and doesn’t, declare itself to be “Scripture.”

JMJ Jay

 

[exrc]

Greg_McPherran:

How do you believe that Jesus payed for our sins? Was it His suffering, His death, His resurrection, or all of these?

Greg

Greg,
It was his substitutionary death which paid the debt owed.

His resurrection is the evidence that his promise was fulfilled,and could be delivered.

His life is proof that believers shall live again also!

Greg, you are also welcome to partake in eternal life if you choose to believe his promises.

Forsake the whore that you follow.

Come out of her my beloved, he says!

Your humble servant exrc

Love and blessings to you my friend!!!

 

[exrc]

Des:

God makes His point with Divine Revelation understood with the Guidence of the Holy Spirit by Sacred Scripture and Sacred Tradition through His Holy Catholic Church.

Also, everyone in Purgatory are “Just” or they wouldn’t be there. They have already been judged. If they were not “Just” they would be in hell.

And of course Purgatory is where they are made perfect.

Des,
Does a just man have to go to prison to pay a penalty?

Please use your God given common sense!!

May God deliver you from this perverted thinking.

Truly in love, exrc

 

[Des]

The problem with some of the protestants on this board is that they are not here to understand. They just want to keep repeating their same twisted verses without giving any logical thought about their position as sola scripture believers. They have no authority whatsoever. They cannot with “ONE VOICE” preach on matters of faith and morals. For example: there is this protestant fellow who may divorce his wife. I said that scripture is quite clear on the sin of divorce. He only says “but why would God want me to suffer like this?” and says he will divorce and put trust in the Lord. There is nobody to tell him absolutely that what he is doing is wrong. Plain and simple. Only a book with words that speak to him when and how he wants them to speak to him.

 

[exrc]

MariaG:

I pray that you will someday see the ignorance and hurt your statements have caused. And *you *

are always welcome to come home to where Jesus is more fully than you can understand now, the Catholic Church. I pray God will remove the blinders that you have allowed Satan to place over your eyes. Maria,
Once you believe that Jesus has paid for your salvation in full.
You will be able to appreciate the things which I am trying to convey. I do not seek to insult you, but set you free of sacramentalism. When Jesus said to the man who wanted to bury his dead relative, let the dead bury the dead, he wasn’t seeking to insult him , but reveal the truth. The truth hurts, but in the end it heals. A lie comforts, but in the end it kills. I am obligated to tell you the truth!

Hope you understand!

Des, I have just prayed that you will be delivered from the system that holds you in bondage.

In love exrc Dan!!!

 

[Greg_McPherran]

exrc:

Greg,
It was his substitutionary death which paid the debt owed.

Explain to me what the debt was and who it needed to be paid to and how His death paid it.

 

[MrS]

exrc:

His life is proof that believers shall live again also!

Greg, you are also welcome to partake in eternal life if you choose to believe his promises.

Forsake the whore that you follow.

Come out of her my beloved, he says!

QUOTE]

Your bio says you are not part of any religion… it shows. Religion means “relationship with God”.

He will open your eyes in His time. We all pray for that wonderful day of grace for you.