I am a Protestant who wants an honest answer

[Ozzie]

Booklover:

I ask you again: WHAT MAKES YOU THINK THAT YOU KNOW MORE THAN THE CHURCH THAT’S BEEN AROUND FOR OVER 2000 YEARS?

Cool down, my friend. This is the “non-Catholic” section of the forum. People come here to discuss and compare doctrines. That’s its intent.

All true believers are part of the Catholic (universal) Church. The true “Church” is what Christ is, and has been, building since Pentecost.

The Scriptures predate the forming of a local church at Rome. Only the Scriptures are inerrant and being God’s written Word, the final authority of faith and practice for the Catholic Church which Christ is still building. A building whose foundation is the Apostles and N.T. prophets, Christ Himself being the corner stone (Eph. 2:20-21).

 

[ncgolf]

Ozzie:

He knew their carnal minds could/would only interpret His words literally. And so they did, and so they stumbled, withdrew, and no longer walked with Him. He exposed their carnality and their unbelief. That was His purpose behind His words. *They stumbled because *they took His words literally.

This makes no sense … why would Christ lead them astray. Christ was in the business of gathering followers not losing them. You seem to say Christ led them away from him intentionally, mixing symbolism and literalism and having them decipher what His real message. Your quote seems to make it hard to figure out what to believe about Christ. There is no way Christ would intentionally allow people to believe something about Him that was not true. There is one who travels the world trying to deceive and confuse people. No, Christ meant what He said, the difficutly in believing in what He said is what separated people.

Ozzie:

And to this day all those who still take His words literally continue to stumble, even refusing to believe that through faith in Him, and Him alone, they have eternal life.

I do not stumble …. I did not put words into Jesus’s mouth. He spoke them and I believe them. It is you who changes Christ’s words. Below are just Christ’s words.
53 “Truly, truly, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you have no life in you. 54 Whoever feeds on my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up on the last day. 55 For my flesh is true food, and my blood is true drink. 56 Whoever feeds on my flesh and drinks my blood abides in me, and I in him. 57 As the living Father sent me, and I live because of the Father, so whoever feeds on me, he also will live because of me. 58 This is the bread that came down from heaven, not as the fathers ate and died. Whoever feeds on this bread will live forever.”

I can quote Christ on the subject … what can you do.

Ozzie:

Don’t dodge the facts, “nc.” John does not connect the two events, nor do the other Gospel accounts.No, the Passover prefigured the crucifixion of Christ. “Behold the Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world” (Jn. 1:29).

Why would John find it necessary to connect anything. The words are plain and simple right before your eyes. I didn’t make them up. I am sure the notion of symbolic meaning of Christ’s words never crossed John’s mind.

In the end I can say Jesus I took your word that You would do what you said You would do … Give me your flesh and blood as food. You said it and I believed it.

What will you say Ozzie, I read it but could not bring myself to believe what that you really meant what you said.

I am not the one diluting Christ’s words. I added nothing to them and subtracted nothing from them. Christ knew who would believe and who wouldn’t.

 

[RBushlow]

xrc:

**RBushlow:
*Mike, I thought you knew all about the Catholic Faith. If that were the case, then you would know the answer to what grace is. . . . .

Let us go in peace to love and serve the Lord.

I do know about the Catholic faith,

Then you must know what grace is.

I have a question for you now:
If you were to die and were standing before God and He asked you, “Why should I let you into My heaven” what would you say?

God Bless and guide you.

 

[Ozzie]

ncgolf:

This makes no sense … why would Christ lead them astray. Christ was in the business of gathering followers not losing them. You seem to say Christ led them away from him intentionally, mixing symbolism and literalism and having them decipher what His real message. Your quote seems to make it hard to figure out what to believe about Christ. There is no way Christ would intentionally allow people to believe something about Him that was not true. There is one who travels the world trying to deceive and confuse people.

He wasn’t trying to deceive them, He was exposing their unbelief and filtering out those with strictly carnal ambitions. They wanted to make Him king for all the wrong reasons. They followed Him because of WHAT He did, not because of WHO He was.

You’re mistaken if you think Jesus always catered to unbelievers, ever trying to convince them of the truth of His purpose and Person. Read what is written in Matt. 13:

“And the disciples came and said to Him, “Why do You speak to them in parables?” And He answered and said to them, 'To you it has been granted to know the mysteries of the kingdom of heaven, but to them it has not been granted. For whoever has, to him shall more be given, and he shall have an abundance; but whoever does not have, even what he has shall be taken away from him. Therefore I speak to them in parables; because while seeing they do not see, and while hearing they do not hear, nor do they understand”" (vss. 10-13).

It was no different with the unbelieving crowd at Capernaum. He knew which “disciples” were really not His disciples and that His words would draw offense by them and they would leave and follow Him no more. They could not, nor would not, understand the spiritual impact of what He was saying. A carnal mind never can grasp spiritual truths. Nor does it desire to.

Christ Himself tells us why:

MAT 13:15 For the heart of this people has become dull, And with their ears they scarcely hear, and they have closed their eyes lest they should see with their eyes, and hear with their ears, and understand with their heart and return, and I should heal them."

They loved their religion more than Who their religion was about.

 

[Vincent]

Ozzie:

It doesn’t “suggest” anything of what He “can’t do,” but clearly “demonstrates” what He didn’t mean. He was obviously speaking figuratively. It’s very simple, Vincent. Do you want to argue whether or not Jesus can change a door into His body and blood, too? Or maybe the sun or the moon? Afterall, He did say, “I am the door,” “I am the light.”

Of course, nothing is impossible to God. Yet, Jesus never pointed to a door, the sun or the moon and said, “This is my body.” But He did say those words at the Last Supper.

 

[ncgolf]

Ozzie:

He wasn’t trying to deceive them, He was exposing their unbelief and filtering out those with strictly carnal ambitions. They wanted to make Him king for all the wrong reasons. They followed Him because of WHAT He did, not because of WHO He was.

Of course they followed Him for what He did …. He just fed 5,000 people with a few loaves and fishes. Wouldn’t you have been at least curious. Cut them a little slack …. They did want to see and hear more …. But they never expected the Bread of Life Discourse. That did go over their heads …. But can you blame them. It is a difficult concept to believe …. Even for many today.

Ozzie:

It was no different with the unbelieving crowd at Capernaum. He knew which “disciples” were really not His disciples and that His words would draw offense by them and they would leave and follow Him no more. They could not, nor would not, understand the spiritual impact of what He was saying. A carnal mind never can grasp spiritual truths. Nor does it desire to.

The truth you so desire lay in the words of John 6. Christ himself says my flesh is true food and my blood true drink. You are the one who cannot or will not grasp the truth of what Christ speaks. If you want to re-write, paraphrase or change Christ’s words in John 6 … go ahead. You claim to follow the spirit of Christ but do not or cannot follow the words of Christ.

 

[Ozzie]

ncgolf:

Of course they followed Him for what He did …. He just fed 5,000 people with a few loaves and fishes. Wouldn’t you have been at least curious. Cut them a little slack …. They did want to see and hear more …. But they never expected the Bread of Life Discourse. That did go over their heads …. But can you blame them. It is a difficult concept to believe …. Even for many today.

So you’re justifying their unbelief?

The truth you so desire lay in the words of John 6. Christ himself says my flesh is true food and my blood true drink. You are the one who cannot or will not grasp the truth of what Christ speaks. If you want to re-write, paraphrase or change Christ’s words in John 6 … go ahead. You claim to follow the spirit of Christ but do not or cannot follow the words of Christ.

Ok. Let me ask you, do you believe that you, right now, and forever, have eternal life?

 

[Philthy]

xrc:

Are you saying that Christ’s sacrifice on the cross was sufficient? If this is true why is He represented as a sacrifice thousands of times each day?

Hi Mike -

Christs sacrifice was perfectly sufficient, however I doubt you understand that sufficiency alone actually accomplishes nothing - which in no way implies that Christ’s sacrifice accomplished nothing - but sufficiency alone is lacking an effect. In short, it’s a sophomoric question. Whatever you do, don’t get Ozzie and me going on this again…

xrc:

If this is true why is He represented as a sacrifice thousands of times each day?

Christs sacrifice is eternal and is continually applied to our current need. Like when you pray for something or when someone comes to faith in Christ - his eternal sacrifice is APPLIED to their temporal need. You have not read all the posts - which, of course is inconsiderate - we forgive you.

xrc:

I suppose you don’t believe that Rome has elevated Mary to the status of diety either! The Catechism of the Catholic Church (1994) states:

#966 “Finally the Immaculate Virgin, preserved free from all stain of original sin, when the course of her earthly life was finished, was taken up body and soul into heavenly glory, and exalted by the Lord as Queen over all things, so that she might be the more fully conformed to her Son, the Lord of lords and conqueror of sin and death. The Assumption of the Blessed Virgin is a singular participation in her Son’s Resurrection and an anticipation of the resurrection of other Christians.

---

Nope, nothing about deity (please note the correct spelling). In fact it says “so that she might be more fully conformed to her Son…an anticipation of the resurrection of other Christians.” How do you get deity from that?

xrc:

The popular prayer following the Rosary for Catholics is the “Hail Holy Queen.” It starts, “Hail Holy Queen, mother of mercy, our life, our sweetness and our hope.” This is the offering of ones life and hope to the Queen of Heaven.

Nice try, but you’ve confused the grammar. I’ll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume it was an honest mistake. This is the kind of thing that happens when you have your “Protestant Glasses” on . Let me rewrite it for you so it makes sense.
Hail Holy Queen, mother of JESUS. Jesus is MERCIFUL AND OUR LIFE, OUR SWEETNESS AND OUR HOPE. Those attributes are being attributed to Christ not Mary. Yes, the Catholic Church holds Mary in high regard - like Luther - but only in relation to Christ. And don’t forget the rest: Pray for us, oh holy mother of God, that we may be made worthy of the promises of Christ." Now you may disagree with the theology, but there is no “worship of Mary” here, just a request for her prayers on our behalf.

xrc:
see next post…

 

[Philthy]

Are you aware that prayer is a form of worship? Just how many prayers in the rosary are directed to Mary versus God!

None - they are all directed at God.

xrc:
If you were to die and were standing before God and He asked you, “Why should I let you into My heaven” what would you say? I’m still waiting for someone to answer this one!

Boy this is really deep - I can’t imagine why no one has responded. Perhaps because if they do it will give you license to attack their response? Or perhaps they are just imitating your example of not responding to Pax, who generously provided a 14 point explanation to your questions regarding the Catholic Bible only to be ignored by you. Or, perhaps they recognize that the question is impossible to answer - no one KNOWS what they will say. Then again, maybe, because the bible tells us there won’t be any Q&A session as you pose, just a separation of “sheep and goats” no one wants to bother answering it. In any event, I will give it a try though I have the distinct feeling that we’ll all be entirely speechless - think about it… But if I were to try and articulate an answer NOW, I would probably say, “Lord, I am not worthy. Look not on my sins but on the faith of your Church in your beloved Son. For the sake of His sorrowful passion have mercy on me, a sinner. Still, not my will Father, but your will be done.” Now my wife - who’s much better at these things than I am - without a moment’s hesitation says that she would say,“Because I am your child.” I kinda like that answer, but I still think we’ll be SPEECHLESS.

BTW - I beg you - please stop the bold red print - it’s obnoxious to the human visual system.

Phil

 

[xrc]

dennisknapp:

What I am asking is for you to show me from HISTORY that what you believe is not an innovation of the 16th century.

To give you Scriptural support for what I believe is useless, for we do not interpret Scripture the same, and as a Catholic, (and one who follows the historical church) Scripure has never in the history of the Church been the only authority. So, by my own criteria and that of history, quoting Scripture alone would be a contradiction, and I don’t deal in contraditions.

But back to my challenge: Historical evidence for the following please,

1. Sola fide (that’s faith alone).
2. Sola scriptura (scripture alone)
3. Baptism is only a symbol and not salvific.
4. Eucharist is only a symbol and not salvific.

Show me a “bible Christian” in the history of the Church prior to the 16th century? Please? Pretty please?

I am the one who asked you to:

---

Please show me, in the New Testament, where you find baptismal regeneration, seven sacraments, sanctifying grace, transubstantiation, a continuing sacrifice, confession to a priest, temporal punishment, indulgences, purgatory, merited eternal reward, the papacy, Mary’s Immaculate Conception, Assumption into heaven, co-redemptive work, mediation of all grace etc. Just give me the Book, the chapter and the verse that supports these practices and I’ll concede!

---

To this point you have given me no response because the truth is, these are nowhere to be found within the pages of Scripture! . They are Catholic fabrications whithout a hint of biblical support! They are untruths!

---

**Now let’s see what Scripture has to say concerning this! **
**
John 17:17 – Jesus said to God “Sanctify them in the truth; Thy word is truth.*”

Colossians 1:5 – “…because of the hope laid up for you in heaven, of which you previously heard in the word of truth, the gospel…”

2 Timothy 2:15 – “Be diligent to present yourself approved to God as a workman who does not need to be ashamed, handling accurately the word of truth.”

James 1:18 – “In the exercise of His will He brought us forth by the word of truth, so that we might be, as it were, the first fruits among His creatures.”
Acts 17:11 – Now these were more noble-minded than those in Thessalonica, for they received the word with great eagerness, examining the Scriptures daily, {to see} whether these things were so. "

I John 5:7 – "And it is the Spirit who bears witness, because the Spirit is the truth."

Ephesians 6:17 – "…the sword of the Spirit, which is the word of God."

---

*Con’t

---

 

[xrc]

dennisknapp:

I am asking you to provide evidence that what you believe is not an innovation of the 16th century. Therefore, the burden of proof is yours.

Where is the historical evidence that what you believe is not an INNOVATION?

Show us that what you believe (that does not agree with the historical Church) existed prior to the 16th century.

I know you are probably going to cop out and say,“what I believe is in Scripture, therefore I need no evidence.”

But if what you believe is so "biblically"clear and understandable then there should be someone who agrees with you somewhere prior to the 16th century, shouldn’t there?

To quote a popular movie line, “Show me the money!”

Con’t

---

Deuteronomy 4:2* – “You shall not add to the word** which I am commanding you, nor take away from it, that you may keep the commandments of the LORD your God which I command you.”
Hebrews 2:1-3** – “For this reason we must pay much closer attention to what we have heard, lest we drift away {from it.} For if the word spoken through angels proved unalterable, and every transgression and disobedience received a just recompense, how shall we escape if we neglect so great a salvation? After it was at the first spoken through the Lord, it was confirmed to us by those who heard**…”

***Revelation 22:18-19 ***– "I testify to everyone who hears the words of the prophecy of this book: if anyone adds to them, God shall add to him the plagues which are written in this book; and if anyone takes away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part from the tree of life and from the holy city, which are written in this book."

2 Timothy 4:3-4 – “For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine**; but {wanting} to have their ears tickled, they will accumulate for themselves teachers in accordance to their own desires; and will turn away their ears from the truth, and will turn aside to myths.” *
1 Timothy 1:3-4* – “As I urged you upon my departure for Macedonia, remain on at Ephesus, in order that you may instruct certain men not to teach strange doctrines**, nor to pay attention to myths and endless genealogies, which give rise to mere speculation rather than {furthering} the administration of God which is by faith.” *

1 Timothy 4:1-3* – “But the Spirit explicitly says that in later times some will fall away from the faith, paying attention to deceitful spirits and doctrines of demons**, by means of the hypocrisy of liars seared in their own conscience as with a branding iron, {men} who forbid marriage {and advocate} abstaining from foods, which God has created to be gratefully shared in by those who believe and know the truth.” *

2 Peter 2:1* – “But false prophets also arose among the people, just as there will also be false teachers among you, who will secretly introduce destructive heresies**, even denying the Master who bought them, bringing swift destruction upon themselves.”

Galatians 1:6-9** – “I am amazed that you are so quickly deserting Him who called you by the grace of Christ, for a different gospel**; which is {really} not another; only there are some who are disturbing you, and want to distort the gospel of Christ. But even though we, or an angel from heaven, should preach to you a gospel contrary to that which we have preached to you, let him be accursed. As we have said before, so I say again now, if any man is preaching to you a gospel contrary to that which you received, let him be accursed.”

Jude 1:3-4** – “Beloved, while I was making every effort to write you** about our common salvation, I felt the necessity to write to you appealing that you contend earnestly for the faith which was once for all delivered to the saints. For certain persons have crept in unnoticed, those who were long beforehand marked out for this condemnation, ungodly persons who turn the grace of our God into licentiousness and deny our only Master and Lord, Jesus Christ.”

It appears that the early Church had a very high regard for the Scriptures but no positive mention of tradition. How curious?

In Christ Alone,
Mikehttp://bible-studies.net/l5/spirit_poured/spirit_poured.htm#spiritpoured
*

 

[xrc]

RBushlow:

Then you must know what grace is.

I have a question for you now:
If you were to die and were standing before God and He asked you, “Why should I let you into My heaven” what would you say?

God Bless and guide you.

**I do know about the Catholic faith, thats why I am no longer Catholic!!!

---

Regarding the questions, I wanted your definition of grace!**

When I say “In Christ Alone” I am excluding Mary, the saints, the RCC etc.

You still haven’t answered the following: If you were to die and were standing before God and He asked you, “Why should I let you into My heaven” what would you say?

In Christ Alone,
Mike

 

[ncgolf]

Ozzie:

So you’re justifying their unbelief?

.
Of course not but I understand it. As long as they had breath they could at some point in the future believed. I won’t condemn them. Christ’s teachings, especially this one is a difficult one, it is no crime to have not believed the first time it was heard.

Ozzie:

Ok. Let me ask you, do you believe that you, right now, and forever, have eternal life?

By examining my life at this moment, I do believe I am in a state of grace, but I am not my own judge. The Lord will judge my fitness for heaven at the time of my death. The power of the sacraments provides each of us with grace needed to keep us in His light. We become grace filled … not by anything I have done but by the grace granted me by Almighty God. I do not believe in once saved always saved. The judgement for heaven and hell is made at death … no sooner.

I answered your question so please answer mine … why do you not believe what Christ explains clearly in John 6. I can quote Christ on His words … why is that not enough?

 

[xrc]

ncgolf:

.
Of course not but I understand it. As long as they had breath they could at some point in the future believed. I won’t condemn them. Christ’s teachings, especially this one is a difficult one, it is no crime to have not believed the first time it was heard. By examining my life at this moment, I do believe I am in a state of grace, but I am not my own judge. The Lord will judge my fitness for heaven at the time of my death. The power of the sacraments provides each of us with grace needed to keep us in His light. We become grace filled … not by anything I have done but by the grace granted me by Almighty God. I do not believe in once saved always saved. The judgement for heaven and hell is made at death … no sooner.

I answered your question so please answer mine … why do you not believe what Christ explains clearly in John 6. I can quote Christ on His words … why is that not enough?

Please read posts #1337 & #1338

---

In Christ Alone,
Mike

 

[dennisknapp]

I am the one who asked you to:

Please show me, in the New Testament, where you find baptismal regeneration, seven sacraments, sanctifying grace, transubstantiation, a continuing sacrifice, confession to a priest, temporal punishment, indulgences, purgatory, merited eternal reward, the papacy, Mary’s Immaculate Conception, Assumption into heaven, co-redemptive work, mediation of all grace etc. Just give me the Book, the chapter and the verse that supports these practices and I’ll concede!

To this point you have given me no response because the truth is, these are nowhere to be found within the pages of Scripture! . They are Catholic fabrications whithout a hint of biblical support! They are untruths!

**Now let’s see what Scripture has to say concerning this! **

***J*****ohn 17:17 – Jesus said to God "Sanctify them in the truth; Thy word is truth."

Colossians 1:5 – "…because of the hope laid up for you in heaven, of which you previously heard in the word of truth, the gospel…"

2 Timothy 2:15 – "Be diligent to present yourself approved to God as a workman who does not need to be ashamed, handling accurately the word of truth."

James 1:18 – "In the exercise of His will He brought us forth by the word of truth, so that we might be, as it were, the first fruits among His creatures."
Acts 17:11 – Now these were more noble-minded than those in Thessalonica, for they received the word with great eagerness, examining the Scriptures daily, {to see} whether these things were so. "

---

I John 5:7 – "And it is the Spirit who bears witness, because the Spirit is the truth."

Ephesians 6:17 – "…the sword of the Spirit, which is the word of God."

Con’t

**

So, are we going to get an answer here or what?

Like stated very clearly before, I don’t need to provide Scriptural support for my views because, and pay attention… NOWHERE IN THE HISTORY OF THE CHURCH HAS SCRIPTURE BEEN THE ONLY AUTHORITY.

I have Tradition and the Magisterium as well. This includes Councils, creeds, and a living interpretive body know as the College of Bishops and the Pope. With these, as well as a proper understanding of Scripture do I justify my beliefs.

As for you, please show me that prior to the 16th century anyone held you beliefs, and please no more Scriptural quotes taken out of context. Thanks.

 

[Catherine_S]

1. Do not flatter yourself Mike……!!

2. With Him…In Him and Through Him !

---

****Shalom,
Catherine

Catherine I wasn’t trying to flatter myself, I was only making an observation! Please don’t be so thin skinned!

Your response to my question was pretty vague so let me pose another: If you were to die tonight and God asked you why He should let you into His heaven, what would you say?

**In Christ Alone, **

**Mike **

With Him…In Him…and through Him !
Shalom,
Catherine

 

[dennisknapp]

xrc:

1 Timothy 4:1-3** – “But the Spirit explicitly says that in later times some will fall away from the faith, paying attention to deceitful spirits and doctrines of demons**, by means of the hypocrisy of liars seared in their own conscience as with a branding iron, {men} who forbid marriage {and advocate} abstaining from foods, which God has created to be gratefully shared in by those who believe and know the truth.”

2 Peter 2:1** – “But false prophets also arose among the people, just as there will also be false teachers among you, who will secretly introduce destructive heresies**, even denying the Master who bought them, bringing swift destruction upon themselves.”

Galatians 1:6-9** – “I am amazed that you are so quickly deserting Him who called you by the grace of Christ, for a different gospel**; which is {really} not another; only there are some who are disturbing you, and want to distort the gospel of Christ. But even though we, or an angel from heaven, should preach to you a gospel contrary to that which we have preached to you, let him be accursed. As we have said before, so I say again now, if any man is preaching to you a gospel contrary to that which you received, let him be accursed.”

Jude 1:3-4** – “Beloved, while I was making every effort to write you** about our common salvation, I felt the necessity to write to you appealing that you contend earnestly for the faith which was once for all delivered to the saints. For certain persons have crept in unnoticed, those who were long beforehand marked out for this condemnation, ungodly persons who turn the grace of our God into licentiousness and deny our only Master and Lord, Jesus Christ.”

It appears that the early Church had a very high regard for the Scriptures but no positive mention of tradition. How curious?

In Christ Alone,
Mikehttp://bible-studies.net/l5/spirit_poured/spirit_poured.htm#spiritpoured

These are pointless quotes taken out of context. (Not Sacred Scripture but your use of it.)

Have you ever even read the writings of the Early Church Fathers?

Papias

“Papias A.D. 120], who is now mentioned by us, affirms that he received the sayings of the apostles from those who accompanied them, and he, moreover, asserts that he heard in person Aristion and the presbyter John. Accordingly, he mentions them frequently by name, and in his writings gives their traditions [concerning Jesus]. . . . [There are] other passages of his in which he relates some miraculous deeds, stating that he acquired the knowledge of them from tradition” (fragment in Eusebius, *Church History *3:39 [A.D. 312]).

Eusebius of Caesarea

“At that time A.D. 150] there flourished in the Church Hegesippus, whom we know from what has gone before, and Dionysius, bishop of Corinth, and another bishop, Pinytus of Crete, and besides these, Philip, and Apollinarius, and Melito, and Musanus, and Modestus, and, finally, Irenaeus. From them has come down to us in writing, the sound and orthodox faith received from tradition” (*Church History *4:21).

 

[dennisknapp]

Cont.

Irenaeus

“As I said before, the Church, having received this preaching and this faith, although she is disseminated throughout the whole world, yet guarded it, as if she occupied but one house. She likewise believes these things just as if she had but one soul and one and the same heart; and harmoniously she proclaims them and teaches them and hands them down, as if she possessed but one mouth. For, while the languages of the world are diverse, nevertheless, the authority of the tradition is one and the same” (*Against Heresies *1:10:2 A.D. 189]).

“That is why it is surely necessary to avoid them [heretics], while cherishing with the utmost diligence the things pertaining to the Church, and to lay hold of the tradition of truth. . . . **What if the apostles had not in fact left writings to us? Would it not be necessary to follow the order of tradition, which was handed down to those to whom they entrusted the churches?” **(ibid., 3:4:1).

…

"It is possible, then, for everyone in every church, who may wish to know the truth, to contemplate the tradition of the apostles which has been made known throughout the whole world. And we are in a position to enumerate those who were instituted bishops by the apostles and their successors to our own times—men who neither knew nor taught anything like these heretics rave about.

"But since it would be too long to enumerate in such a volume as this the successions of all the churches, we shall confound all those who, in whatever manner, whether through self-satisfaction or vainglory, or through blindness and wicked opinion, assemble other than where it is proper, by pointing out here the successions of the bishops of the greatest and most ancient church known to all, founded and organized at Rome by the two most glorious apostles, Peter and Paul, that church which has the tradition and the faith which comes down to us after having been announced to men by the apostles.

“With this church, because of its superior origin, all churches must agree—that is, all the faithful in the whole world—and it is in her that the faithful everywhere have maintained the apostolic tradition” (ibid., 3:3:1–2).

Clement of Alexandria

“Well, they preserving the tradition of the blessed doctrine derived directly from the holy apostles, Peter, James, John, and Paul, the sons receiving it from the father (but few were like the fathers), came by God’s will to us also to deposit those ancestral and apostolic seeds. And well I know that they will exult; I do not mean delighted with this tribute, but solely on account of the preservation of the truth, according as they delivered it. For such a sketch as this, will, I think, be agreeable to a soul desirous of preserving from loss the blessed tradition” (*Miscellanies *1:1 A.D. 208]).

 

[Pax]

You probably played a lot of Dodge-Ball when you were a kid because you’re really good at dodging my questions!

---

In Christ Alone,
Mike

xrc,

I answered your initial broadside of 14 points. I have dodged nothing. If you are willing to handle things in an organized and intelligent format I will take on each question you pose. If you take a shot gun approach as you have on this thread then you are wasting people’s time and you are not engaging in a reasonable give and take. You are instead engaging in biblically illiterate heckling. Now take your pick. Be reasonable or be obnoxious.

In an effort to extend an olive branch in this discussion I will address one of your questions. Since you listed baptismal regeneration first (although it may have been covered earlier in this thread), I will answer you on baptism.

Please carefully consider the following:

OT-- Baptism prefigured
Ezk 36:25-28
I will sprinkle clean water upon you, and you shall be clean from all your uncleannesses, and from all your idols I will cleanse you.
A new heart I will give you, and a new spirit I will put within you; and I will remove from your body the heart of stone and give you a heart of flesh. I will put my spirit within you, and make you follow my statutes and be careful to observe my ordinances. Then you shall live in the land that I gave to your ancestors; and you shall be my people, and I will be your God.

Compare this to ACTS 2:37-38

Now when they heard this, **they were cut to the heart ** and said to Peter and to the other apostles, “Brothers, what should we do?” Peter said to them, "Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ so that your sins may be forgiven; and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.

ACTS 10:48
And he commanded them to be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ. Then they asked him to remain for some days.

ACTS 19:1-7
While Apollos was at Corinth, Paul passed through the upper country and came to Ephesus. There he found some disciples. And he said to them, “Did you receive the Holy Spirit when you believed?” And they said, “No, we have never even heard that there is a Holy Spirit.” And he said, “Into what then were you baptized?” They said, “Into John’s baptism.” And Paul said, “John baptized with the baptism of repentance, telling the people to believe in the one who was to come after him, that is, Jesus.” On hearing this, they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus. And when Paul had laid his hands upon them, the Holy Spirit came on them; and they spoke with tongues and prophesied. There were about twelve of them in all.

ACTS 22:16
And now why do you wait? Rise and be baptized, and wash away your sins, calling on his name.’

MATTHEW 28:19
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,

JOHN 3:5
Jesus answered, "Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God.

MARK 16:16
He who believes and is baptized will be saved; but he who does not believe will be condemned.

ROMANS 6: 3-4
Do you not know that all of us who have been baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into his death? We were buried therefore with him by baptism into death, so that as Christ was raised from the dead by the glory of the Father, we too might walk in newness of life.

GALATIANS 3:27
For as many of you as were baptized into Christ have put on Christ.

COLOSSIANS 2:11-12
In him also you were circumcised with a circumcision made without hands, by putting off the body of flesh in the circumcision of Christ; and you were buried with him in baptism, in which you were also raised with him through faith in the working of God, who raised him from the dead

EPHESIANS 4:5
one Lord, one faith, one baptism,

TITUS 3:4-8
but when the goodness and loving kindness of God our Savior appeared, he saved us, not because of deeds done by us in righteousness, but in virtue of his own mercy, **by the washing of regeneration and renewal in the Holy Spirit, **

1 PETER 3:21
Baptism, which corresponds to this, now saves you, not as a removal of dirt from the body but as an appeal to God for a clear conscience, through the resurrection of Jesus Christ,

see next post

 

[Pax]

cont. from prior post

Baptism—Nicodemus

Some people, including Ozzie, try to claim that when Jesus speaks with Nicodemus that he his talking about natural child birth and the bag of waters in terms of being born of water rather than speaking of baptism.

This view does violence to the passage in which Jesus tells Nicodemus that a man must be born anew in baptism. Clearly, the bag of waters interpretation cannot be true. First of all, those who make the case for the interpretation do not offer any evidence that the Jews described childbirth in terms of the bag of waters. We know that Jesus was talking about the water of baptism because the scriptures that immediately follow the meeting with Nicodemus say that, “After this Jesus and his disciples went into the land of Judea: there he remained with them and baptized” (John 3:22). The subsequent verses also mention that John the Baptist was nearby baptizing because there was an abundance of water. Baptism has always been associated with water, whereas childbirth in Jewish usage was more likely associated with blood. A biblical foundation for this latter point is found in John 1:12-13 where we read, “But to all who received him, who believed in his name, he gave power to become children of God: who were born, not of blood nor of the will of the flesh nor of the will of man, but of God.”