I respectfully ask evangelical, protestant and sola scriptura proponents...

[jericho777]

Depends on how you define sola scriptura and/or if you differentiate sola scriptura versus prima scriptura. I don’t use the phrase myself if only because when taken undefined literally it is confusing. But according to some definitions out there I fall under it.

Since I have already done the “debate sola scriptura” thing here i have no interest in repeating myself.

I’m not sure what the neuances of the terms mean either.

I also dislike the label “protestant” because I’m not protesting anyone. I’m very happy in my faith apart from what others believe.

 

[joe370]

Asking a “question” like that is neither asking for information, nor is it calculated to inform anyone. it is antagonistic and dismissive, and to most people from non-Catholic Christian faiths it would appear to also be demeaning. It certainly is not designed to attract anyone to the Catholic faith, or to inform anyone.
…On the whole, they do not take kindly to people attempting to “put down” their religious beliefs as this “question” attempts to do. It is indeed sad that all too many people, on BOTH sides of this issue, would much rather attack each other, than make any attempt to actually dialog…The Protestant faiths arose because of serious, and very wide spread abuses, in the Catholic Church (which our Church acknowledges were there). …Always keep in mind that old adage, “You attract more flies with honey, than you do with vinegar.”

You will not get very far in moving people toward conversion by attacking their faith. And this “question” is most definitely an attack.

I say: I respectfully ask evangelical, protestant and sola scriptura proponents…and you accuse me of all that nonsense? Whatever dude…

 

[joe370]

The methodology of hermeneutics is applied to interpret scripture. BTW how did you interpret scripture before you became catholic?

Just like any other book or books that I read. Of course, when doctrinal differences occur I defer to what I believe is the church established by Jesus. If it worked for the first 400 years of Christianity when the church was settling differences, like the Trinity etc…

I of course totally respect your right to believe whatever you want to believe my brother in Christ…

 

[jmcrae]

Haha well it seems pretty clear to me. Neither Protestants nor Catholics claim that, for example, the United Methodist Church was established two thousand years ago by Jesus, since the historical record is plainly otherwise. So what is there to argue about? The question to ask is not “who founded your denomination”, but rather “does it matter who founded your denomination?”. And the Protestant says that it’s irrelevant who founded your denomination, because denominations are insignificant trifles compared to the One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church.

The only problem with this is that the authority of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church resides in the person of the Bishop of Rome (see Matthew 16:18-19 and John 21:15-19) - so, if one is separated from his authority (schism) or openly rebelling against his teachings (heresy) then one is not (or at least not fully) a member of the One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church.

 

[jmcrae]

Nicea people read the bible and become saved apart from the church organization.

There was no Bible (in the sense that we understand that term today) until after Pope Innocent I declared and defined its contents, in 405 AD.

There were no personal Bibles that people could take home with them and read until the 1800s AD, when printing technology had advanced to the point where it became possible to print large numbers of Bibles, inexpensively.

First there were more than 12 apostles but their primary duty was to preach the gospel.

Yes. They were the Church.

Jesus is the bible. Is he not?

No. What gives you that idea? Jesus is a Person with two natures - human and divine. He is made of flesh and blood. The Bible is a book. It is made of paper. It does not have flesh, or blood, or soul, or divinity, or spirit of any kind.

Could you please give me a bible reference for this?

I Corinthians 12.

 

[jmcrae]

Okay, but where and how did Paul get his information? Scripture clearly doesn’t contain the whole of christian doctrine.

Not to mention, nothing of the New Testament existed yet, until St. Paul began to write to the Thessalonians, in 64 AD.

How did people “get saved” from 33 to 64 AD?

 

[pablope]

All I’m saying is Church leaders must adhere to biblical teaching. And yes I would use the bible to see if they were.

.

Originally Posted by joe370 View Post
When Paul said, “Have confidence in your leaders and submit to their authority, because they keep watch over you as those who must give an account…” - he was actually telling them to rely on the bible?

And how would you know, Jericho…if a Church leader is adhering to biblical teaching or not?

He could very well say also, you are the one with the unBiblical interpretation or teaching?

What would you do in this case?

Or a Christian before the printing press who had no personal Bibles…How where they to know their church leaders were preaching or teaching the truth?

Doesn’t what you say here go against what St. Paul said to Timothy here:

14 But as for you, continue in what you have learned and have become convinced of, because you know those from whom you learned it,

Does this verse not speak of knowing who your leaders are…and trust what they had imparted to you?

 

[jmcrae]

Actually Jesus came to save souls not start a church. He uses the body of believers to be His ambassadors preaching the gospel.

How could He save souls, without starting a Church for those saved souls to belong to? When Noah saved the animals from the flood, he didn’t just leave them where they were - he took them into the Ark.

In the same way, when Jesus saves souls, He puts them into the Church.

Jesus is the word made flesh.

Yes. God’s creative word - the Big Bang. Not the Bible.

Jesus is the bible in the flesh that has all the authority. See how easy that is.

It’s also completely incorrect. Jesus is not the Bible. The Bible is the word of God in a completely different sense than how Jesus is the word of God. Jesus is the Word that created us.

The Bible didn’t create us, though. The Bible is God’s love letter to us, given through human beings who were given the ability to convey information about the relationship between God and human beings.

 

[pablope]

Actually Jesus came to save souls not start a church. He uses the body of believers to be His ambassadors preaching the gospel.

Just adding on from JMcrae…

Then why did Jesus say this to Peter:

Matt 16:
18 And I tell you that you are Peter,** and on this rock I will build my church**, and the gates of Hades[c] will not overcome it.

Jesus is the word made flesh. Jesus is the bible in the flesh that has all the authority. See how easy that is.

 

[CopticChristian]

Actually Jesus came to save souls not start a church. He uses the body of believers to be His ambassadors preaching the gospel.

Jesus is the word made flesh. Jesus is the bible in the flesh that has all the authority. See how easy that is.

Jesus came to reconcile the world to himself, for by Him all things were created for Him and there is not anything not made that was not made by Him. He used the Old Covenant as a model of the New Covenant that would reconcile the world and He chose to use a Church.

This is the Protestant delima of narrow minded thinking in your own salvation paradigm. Jesus saves! Yes, Jesus saves. Throught the Bible? Through the Sinners prayer? Through meditation? No through the Church, the mystery hidden for ages…

How that by revelation he made known unto me the mystery; (as I wrote afore in few words, 4Whereby, when ye read, ye may understand my knowledge in the mystery of Christ) 5Which in other ages was not made known unto the sons of men, as it is now revealed unto his holy apostles and prophets by the Spirit; 6That the Gentiles should be fellowheirs, and of the same body, and partakers of his promise in Christ by the gospel: 7Whereof I was made a minister, according to the gift of the grace of God given unto me by the effectual working of his power. 8Unto me, who am less than the least of all saints, is this grace given, that I should preach among the Gentiles the unsearchable riches of Christ; 9And to make all men see what is the fellowship of the mystery, which from the beginning of the world hath been hid in God, who created all things by Jesus Christ: 10To the intent that now unto the principalities and powers in heavenly places might be known by the church the manifold wisdom of God, 11According to the eternal purpose which he purposed in Christ Jesus our Lord: 12In whom we have boldness and access with confidence by the faith of him. 13Wherefore I desire that ye faint not at my tribulations for you, which is your glory.

Go argue with Paul, who obtained this teaching from Jesus, by revalation, not by reading the Bible, because Paul read the Bible, OT and knew it by heart and he like you did not understand it until it was revealed.

Go take a break and study your bible. This Church. The Church. The Church. You must hate to know that God chose to build a Church and use it to reconcile the world, including you to Himself. Call Paul, pray to Jesus, ask Him why He did this to you and the rest of the world.

 

[jericho777]

Just like any other book or books that I read. Of course, when doctrinal differences occur I defer to what I believe is the church established by Jesus. If it worked for the first 400 years of Christianity when the church was settling differences, like the Trinity etc…

I of course totally respect your right to believe whatever you want to believe my brother in Christ…

Glad to hear it works for you as good as mine works for me.

BTW you never told how you were able discern truth before you were cathoilc.

 

[jericho777]

There was no Bible (in the sense that we understand that term today) until after Pope Innocent I declared and defined its contents, in 405 AD.

There were no personal Bibles that people could take home with them and read until the 1800s AD, when printing technology had advanced to the point where it became possible to print large numbers of Bibles, inexpensively.

Yes. They were the Church.

No. What gives you that idea? Jesus is a Person with two natures - human and divine. He is made of flesh and blood. The Bible is a book. It is made of paper. It does not have flesh, or blood, or soul, or divinity, or spirit of any kind.

I Corinthians 12.

You mean there was no OT people could read to find truth like Paul told Timothy to do?

We don’t agree on the biblical definition of church.

Jesus it the literal physical incarnation of the word of God.

I don’t think I Corinthians 12 is the right one.

 

[Nicea325]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nicea325
Yes Jesus came to save souls and one means is through His Church,not the Bible-Only. If he did not come to found His Church,then why he even bother to select 12 men to continue with His Church? Why even bother to tell Peter: BUILD MY CHURCH? Church…not the Bible-Only.

Nicea people read the bible and become saved apart from the church organization. First there were more than 12 apostles but their primary duty was to preach the gospel. Jesus said to go into all the world and preach the good news to all creation. He didn’t tell them to preach the church. The body is secondary to peoples salvation.

It is heretical to separate the Church apart from God and believe all one needs is the Bible.What about the millions who never READ the Bible or will never read it? How did they get saved? In fact I even heard a fundamentalist on TV say the samething. No where was such a notion taught by God or the 12. Second,tell me how many of the common folks owned a copy of the NT letters and was saved? Yes Jesus said to PREACH the Word,not FOLLOW the Bible-Only. It is you alone as many others who have a false belief that the church and Word are two separate entities pitted against each other.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nicea325
Yes I see how easy it is for you because you indirectly are admitting the Bible is the FINAL authority. Thus,show me where Jesus taught it as the final authority?

Jesus is the bible. Is he not?

Seriously? So you practice idolatry? You worship a book? Jesus (God) is a sacred book? Many others who are not Catholic would also disagree with you. No…Jesus is more than just the Holy Bible. I do not know what God you worship,but the Christian God is more than a collection of books.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nicea325
You side stepped jericho: Is the Church the mystical Body of Christ-yes or no?

Could you please give me a bible reference for this?

The Church is Christ’s Body.Paul’s use of the body as an image to describe the unity Christians have with Christ and each other is particularly vivid: “For as in one body we have many parts, and all the parts do not have the same function, so we, though many, are one body in Christ and individually parts of one another” (Rom 12:4-5). The Lord alluded to this unity when he prayed, “May [they] be one, as we are one, I in them and you in me, that they may be brought to perfection as one” (Jn 17:22-23). He used the analogy of himself as a vine and Christians as its branches to illustrate the organic bond Christians share (Jn 15:1-5).

The teaching that the Church is Christ’s Body is emphasized throughout the New Testament. See 1 Cor 10:16, 12:12-27; Gal 3:28; Eph 1:22-23, 3:4-6, 4:4, 15, 25, 5:21-32; Col 1:18, 3:15; Heb 13:1-3.

 

[rovimax]

I am not a breakaway proponent, but I can see that if you feel that the established church had become corrupt or had developed in a way that was contrary to its original creeds or values then you might feel that the established church had lost its authority in some way. This issue affects all christian churches, not just the catholic church.

If this will be the case then a person who left his church looked at the outward characteristics of his church not in in its doctrines which is supposed to be guided by the Holy Spirit. Men falls but the doctrines uphold the teachings of Jesus Christ because they were guided by the Holy Spirit. We should walk by faith not by sight… .

 

[jericho777]

And how would you know, Jericho…if a Church leader is adhering to biblical teaching or not?

He could very well say also, you are the one with the unBiblical interpretation or teaching?

What would you do in this case?

Or a Christian before the printing press who had no personal Bibles…How where they to know their church leaders were preaching or teaching the truth?

Doesn’t what you say here go against what St. Paul said to Timothy here:

14 But as for you, continue in what you have learned and have become convinced of, because you know those from whom you learned it,

Does this verse not speak of knowing who your leaders are…and trust what they had imparted to you?

Because you all may have a problem reading and understanding scripture doesn’t mean other do. I take my queue from the Bereans. Besides how do you know if something in your church is unbiblical?

You neglected to read 2 Tim 1:5 where we see it is his mother and grandmother and not the church from which he received his faith. “I have been reminded of your sincere faith, which first lived in your grandmother Lois and in your mother Eunice and, I am persuaded, now lives in you also.”

 

[joe370]

Jericho, you said:

“You may not use it (CCC) - in lieu of scripture but you use it like I use scripture.”

The CCC is nothing more than an elementary guide containing a summary of the principles of the catholic faith. Wouldn’t it make good sense for every church (leadership) - regardless of denomination, to have some sort of church manual at their disposal that would delineate the church’s teachings thereby shoring up the church’s constitution if or when, sadly, doctrinal integrity, regarding the church’s practices and beliefs are ever challenged or compromised, and giving each respective church that much needed cohesion, order and structure?

 

[jmcrae]

You mean there was no OT people could read to find truth like Paul told Timothy to do?

Not in the sense of picking up a book from a bookshelf and opening up to read it, no.

The scrolls of the Old Testament were kept in big rooms called Scriptoria. (singular: Scriptorium) They were huge. One scroll of the Scriptures (there were at least 46 in total) would have been about the same square footage as of your living room rug. Not exactly portable.

The majority of ordinary people heard them read out in the synagogue or at the Temple. Learned men like St. Paul and St. Timothy could go to the Scriptorium, take a scroll, and read it there, but it wasn’t something they could take home and read. Of course, those who regularly went to the synagogue would have been familiar with most of the Old Testament, and would have been able to quote it from memory, because of hearing them repeated so often.

Once they had heard the oral tradition of the Apostles - the sayings of Jesus, the things He did, and the story of His life, death and resurrection - they would have been able to make the connection to the various prophecies of the Old Testament - but nobody could have come up with the story and sayings of Jesus from the Old Testament alone - they would have had to hear the story from the Apostles, first, before they could understand the connections.

Jesus it the literal physical incarnation of the word of God.

Right. Jesus is the physical incarnation of the Word that came forth from the Father’s mouth to create all that exists.

He is not the physical incarnation of a book. Nor is the Bible a physical incarnation of Jesus.

There is no correlation between the Bible and Jesus, even though both of them are called “the Word of God.” They are two entirely different expressions of God’s Word. The Bible is neither your Creator nor your Saviour.

I don’t think I Corinthians 12 is the right one.

There are many quotes in the New Testament that describe the Church as the mystical body of Christ. You could get out your Strongs, turn to “Church” in the index, and just start looking them up, I think.

 

[JonNC]

Jericho, you said:

The CCC is nothing more than an elementary guide containing a summary of the principles of the catholic faith. Wouldn’t it make good sense for every church (leadership) - regardless of denomination, to have some sort of church manual at their disposal that would delineate the church’s teachings thereby shoring up the church’s constitution if or when, sadly, doctrinal integrity, regarding the church’s practices and beliefs are ever challenged or compromised, and giving each respective church that much needed cohesion, order and structure?

The Lutheran Book of Concord.

Jon

 

[jericho777]

How could He save souls, without starting a Church for those saved souls to belong to? When Noah saved the animals from the flood, he didn’t just leave them where they were - he took them into the Ark.

In the same way, when Jesus saves souls, He puts them into the Church.

Yes. God’s creative word - the Big Bang. Not the Bible.

It’s also completely incorrect. Jesus is not the Bible. The Bible is the word of God in a completely different sense than how Jesus is the word of God. Jesus is the Word that created us.

The Bible didn’t create us, though. The Bible is God’s love letter to us, given through human beings who were given the ability to convey information about the relationship between God and human beings.

Saved souls are part of the body of Christ which make up the church the called out ones.

The big bang?

Jesus is the word incarnate. Could you please define what your position is?

 

[pablope]

Because you all may have a problem reading and understanding scripture doesn’t mean other do.

Seems you are dodging the question, Jericho…and where do you get your understanding from? You had to have taken it from someone.

And how do you know your understanding is correct? And what of the other person who has a different understanding from you?

What do you do?

I take my queue from the Bereans.