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

  • Thread starter Thread starter joe370
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
CalChristian said:
… and yet, someone can ONLY know this if The Catholic Church tells them?

.
Click to expand...
If that someone happens to be a Christian. 🙂

Again, Cal, how do you know what Jesus said? Who told you that his words in the Gospel of Mark are* theopneustos?*
 
joe370 said:
If the CC cannot be trusted to have infallibly safeguarded truth regarding things like Mary’s IC, Purgatory, the sacrifice of the Mass, etc, then logically, the CC cannot be trusted to have infallibly safeguarded the 27 books of the NT, e.g. the gospel of Mark, which should make the infallibility of those 27 books of the NT suspect for many protestants. Oddly enough, they blindly accept the latter, but…:confused: 🤷
Click to expand...
  1. IF any accepts what is and is not Scripture BECAUSE the RCC tells them, then why is there not a single church body on the PLANET that agrees with the RCC on what is and is not Scripture?
  2. I disagree with your rubric that if one is right on ONE point, ergo such must be right about EVERYTHING. I accept the Doctrine of the Trinity, do you ergo insist that I must be categorically and automatically right about EVERYTHING? If you don’t accept your argument, why ask others to?
.
 
PRmerger said:
If that someone happens to be a Christian. 🙂

Again, Cal, how do you know what Jesus said? Who told you that his words in the Gospel of Mark are* theopneustos?*
Click to expand...
Incidentally, does putting “Jesus said” before an ancient Christian text make it inspired?

For example, do you believe that this is part of the inspired word of God, Cal:

Jesus said, "The person old in days won’t hesitate to ask a little child seven days old about the place of life, and that person will live.

For many of the first will be last, and will become a single one."

Yes or no?

If no, (and I’m guessing you’ll say no because you’re a smart fellow/lady), then how do you know it’s not inspired?

Because Father Google told you? 😉
 
PRmerger said:
If that someone happens to be a Christian.
Click to expand...
And yet… Moses and all those Hebrews at Sinai knew what Scripture was without The Catholic Church telling them…

All those Prophets (and their audiences) knew without The Catholic Church telling them…

King Josiah knew (and all his audience) knew without The Catholic Church telling them…

Jesus knew (and all His audiences) knew without The Catholic Church telling them…

St. Paul, St. Peter, St. James, St. John (and all their audiences) knew without The Catholic Chruch telling them…

All CENTURIES before The Council of Trent (or meeting at Hippo, etc.)…

How is that possible?

And the Eastern Orthodox Christians seems to know (and they don’t agree with The Catholic Church on what is and is not Scripture). Did The Catholic Church tell them? Why then do they have a different collection of books?

I think your argument that what is and is not Scripture is known because of The Catholic Church is simply incredible.

.
 
joe370 said:
I respectfully ask evangelical, protestant and sola scriptura proponents:

By whose authority does any one person, (such as myself) - have the right to start a church and call his/her established church the church founded by Jesus Christ on Pentecost? Please leave the catholic church out of the discussion unless of course you can prove that the catholic church is not the church founded by Jesus Christ circa AD 33, in Jerusalem, on Pentecost! 👍

Thanks…🙂
Click to expand...
This will be fun to see Protestants and Evangelical’s explain this.
🍿
 
CalChristian said:
And yet… Moses and all those Hebrews at Sinai knew what Scripture was without The Catholic Church telling them…
Click to expand...
Yep, and you’ve helped me to understand that it was through Tradition.

Or do you disagree with this, Cal?

And I won’t ask again about how you know that Jesus spoke the words in Mark and that they are inspired.

Your inability to answer that speaks volumes.

I hope, though, that you have come to realize through this dialogue that each and every time you quote the Scriptures you are giving tacit approval to the authority of the Catholic Church.

For you would not know that the Gospel of Mark is inspired except through Tradition.

Just as the Hebrews knew. 🙂
 
CalChristian;8556435]1. IF any accepts what is and is not Scripture BECAUSE the RCC tells them, then why is there not a single church body on the PLANET that agrees with the RCC on what is and is not Scripture?
Click to expand...
Easy to explain. Because they rejected the teachings of the CC, starting with the reformers, and went off and started their own man-made church, establishing their own rubrics and doctrinal charter, which led to a similar trend within protestantism:

Disgruntled protestants leaving their protestant church to form their own protestant church, and thousands of protestant churches later…😦
  1. I disagree with your rubric that if one is right on ONE point, ergo such must be right about EVERYTHING. I accept the Doctrine of the Trinity, do you ergo insist that I must be categorically and automatically right about EVERYTHING? If you don’t accept your argument, why ask others to?
Click to expand...
So we can accept the fact that the CC got it completely right about some things but completely wrong about other things? :hmmm: If that works for you…👍

Cal, by whose authority does any one person,*** (such as myself)*** - have the right to start a church and call his/her established church the church founded by Jesus Christ on Pentecost? Please leave the catholic church out of the discussion unless of course you can prove that the catholic church is not the church founded by Jesus Christ circa AD 33, in Jerusalem, on Pentecost!

🙂
 
PRmerger said:
Yep, and you’ve helped me to understand that it was through Tradition.

Or do you disagree with this, Cal?
Click to expand...
So, which is it? Because The Catholic Church declares such? OR because of Tradition? Are you now changing your position?
I hope, though, that you have come to realize through this dialogue that each and every time you quote the Scriptures you are giving tacit approval to the authority of the Catholic Church.
Click to expand...
Ah, I didn’t read far enough. Nope, you’re still at The Catholic Church said so.

When you can explain how The Catholic Church informed Moses and the Hebrews that those two tablets were Scripture, I’ll consider your point.

.
 
pablope said:
In what form do you think…oral or written?
Click to expand...
Read Exodus 31:18 Sounds to me like it was (literally, lol) written in stone.

Moses and the Hebrews accepted it as Scripture. I can find no reference to them accepting it as such because The Catholic Church told them so.

.
 
CalChristian said:
Read Exodus 31:18 Sounds to me like it was (literally, lol) written in stone.

Moses and the Hebrews accepted it as Scripture. I can find no reference to them accepting it as such because The Catholic Church told them so.
Click to expand...
Right. They did it because of Sacred Tradition–the oral proclamation of the Word of God.

And that’s the ONLY way you know what’s Scripture, too. :yup:

Unless you can tell us another way you know? :hmmm:
 
joe370 said:
Cal, by whose authority does any one person,*** (such as myself)*** - have the right to start a church and call his/her established church the church founded by Jesus Christ on Pentecost? Please leave the catholic church out of the discussion unless of course you can prove that the catholic church is not the church founded by Jesus Christ circa AD 33, in Jerusalem, on Pentecost!
  1. I know of NO Protestant church that claims for itself that it itself alone was “founded by Jesus in 33 AD.” Since none claims such, why it is necessary for them to prove that what they don’t claim is nonetheless the case?
  2. I know of 3 church bodies that DO claim that Jesus specifically and particularly founded their church body: The Eastern Orthodox Church, The Catholic Church, and The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints. Since they are the only 3 that claim such, they are the only 3 that have the burden of proof.
  3. I reject your entire premise that a claim is a dogmatic fact unless it can be proven to be false. Prove for me that there are not 6.1 billion furry brown creatures living on the Moon of Endor. Can’t? Does that prove that ergo it is a dogmatic fact that there are? See problem with your rubric and the premise of your question? IMO, it’s just a diversion technique to try to get the attention OFF the one making the claim and the necessity to prove it, ODDLY by trying to put it on those that don’t make the claim and thus have nothing via it to prove.
.
Click to expand...
 
CalChristian said:
When you can explain how The Catholic Church informed Moses and the Hebrews that those two tablets were Scripture, I’ll consider your point.
Click to expand...
I am saying that the Catholic Church has informed YOU that the Bible is inspired.

Nothing more and nothing less.

Unless you want to offer* another *way as to how you know the Gospel of Mark to be inspired?
:coffeeread:
 
PRmerger said:
They are one and the same, Cal.
Click to expand...
Ah, okay. So, Moses knew that those two Tablets were Scripture because of the Tradition specifically and solely of The Catholic Church as indicated at the Council of Trent.

Friend, I know that The Catholic Church has a “tradition” of what is and is not Scripture, one NONE but itself alone accepts. But how this proves that THAT’S how Moses and the Hebrews knew that the two Tablets were Scripture is a point I don’t understand. And I think I’ll need to leave it at that.

Friend, since Moses, the Hebrews, the Prophets (and all their audiences), Jesus, St. Paul, St. Peter, St. John, St. James (and all their audiences) didn’t need The Catholic Church to tell them what is and is not Scripture, I don’t think you have a case at ERGO the only way one can know what is and is not Scripture is if The Catholic Chruch tells them.

.
 
CalChristian said:
Friend, since Moses, the Hebrews, the Prophets (and all their audiences), Jesus, St. Paul, St. Peter, St. John, St. James (and all their audiences) didn’t need The Catholic Church to tell them what is and is not Scripture, I don’t think you have a case at ERGO the only way one can know what is and is not Scripture is if The Catholic Chruch tells them.
Click to expand...
If you define “scripture” as Old Testament only
 
CalChristian said:
Ah, okay. So, Moses knew that those two Tablets were Scripture because of the Tradition specifically and solely of The Catholic Church as indicated at the Council of Trent.
Click to expand...
No, Cal. Tradition is as indicated by Jesus Christ.
Friend, I know that The Catholic Church has a “tradition” of what is and is not Scripture, one NONE but itself alone accepts.
Click to expand...
Really. You believe that the Shepherd of Hermas is inspired? Or that the Gospel of Thomas is?

Do you think the Church erred in including Revelation and 3 John?
But how this proves that THAT’S how Moses and the Hebrews knew that the two Tablets were Scripture is a point I don’t understand. And I think I’ll need to leave it at that
Click to expand...
They knew because someone told them. Just like you!
 
CalChristian said:
Friend, since Moses, the Hebrews, the Prophets (and all their audiences), Jesus, St. Paul, St. Peter, St. John, St. James (and all their audiences) didn’t need The Catholic Church to tell them what is and is not Scripture, I don’t think you have a case at ERGO the only way one can know what is and is not Scripture is if The Catholic Chruch tells them.
Click to expand...
I will concede if you can offer another way that you know that the Gospel of Mark is inspired.

It seems that you can’t. :nope:

I’ll leave it at that.

(Or maybe not. :))
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top