If 2 Timothy 3:16-17 is teaching Sola Scriptura today...

[Richard_Kastner]

Hi, Richard,

I am really not sure what it is you are missing…or, maybe you do not like the answers I have already provided…?

Richard, this passage tells you nothing of WHAT you are to DO. For example, Christ identifies that Baptism is necessary for salvation - yet various Protestant groups say that Baptism is optional, or it MUST be by immersion or is to be only done in the name of God (avoiding the Trinity as identified in Matthew 28). So, we have this quote from 2Tim that says nothing about this - yet, there is this major disagreement over Baptism. Christ says it is necessary (John 3:3-7) yet some men say it is not quoting (or, should I say mis-quoting) the Bible!

My ANSWER TO YOU is that 2Tim is fine for as far as it goes - but the problem is IT DOES NOT GO FAR ENOUGH!

I have given you items that I think you believe - and their origin in the four earliest Catholic Church Councils - and, you don’t respond except for this repeated quote from 2Tim.

I have identified that there are 20,000+ Protestant groups all claiming to be the true path to Christ - yet all arguing over the INTERPRETATION of Scripture - with no one having the authority to declare in a definitive manner (like Peter did in Acts 15 to the Judiazers) what we are to DO. This is where the “…wise unto salvation…” comes in. Christ commanded us to DO things and for those who failed they were, “… shut outside where there was the weeping and gnashing of teeth”. We are not saved by our works (don’t want you to get off on a tangent) but through our cooperation (that means we DO what Christ has commanded) with the Grace of God.

Ultimately, one has to take what is written in Scripture and apply it to their life - and, it is at the point of application that one questions: “Is this the right way?” Just looking around at 20,000+ different ways of believing - yet all claiming to be Christian, you should get some very confused sense that they all can not be right. And, 2Tim is not addressing this issue. Now, it you don’t get that sense, then you answer me, why not? If SS is so incredibly clear because Scriputre is so understandable, then how come we all of these divergent claims to truth?

Now, Richard, I have done my best to answer your question. If you find it unanswered then you will need to specifically tell me where it is that it fails - and just don’t quote 2Tim again.

God bless

The questions are really not that hard to understand. You say that the CC is the only one that can infallibly interpret scripture. I would like to know what there is about 2Tim. 3:15-17 that you need interpreted? And if scripture is able to make us wise unto salvation what more than this is there that you think that we need?

 

[Cat_Herder]

Here’s Heb11:25
25Choosing rather to suffer affliction with the people of God, than to enjoy the pleasures of sin for a season;

What are you talking about?

[BIBLEDRB]Heb 11:33-36[/BIBLEDRB]

[BIBLEDRB]2 Macc 7:25-39[/BIBLEDRB]

What? Is this the gospel according to the Cat Herder? Faith in Jesus Christ does not save and we work out our own salvation? Are you sure you want to make this statement?

[BIBLEDRB]Mt 7:21[/BIBLEDRB]
[BIBLEDRB]James 2:24[/BIBLEDRB]
[BIBLEDRB]Gal 5:6[/BIBLEDRB]
[BIBLEDRB]1 Cor 13:2[/BIBLEDRB]
[BIBLEDRB]Phil 2:12[/BIBLEDRB]

Why are baptism and the Holy Spirit essential?

[BIBLEDRB]Mark 16:16[/BIBLEDRB]
[BIBLEDRB]Ezekiel 37:14[/BIBLEDRB]
[BIBLEDRB]John 3:5[/BIBLEDRB]
[BIBLEDRB]Acts 2:38[/BIBLEDRB]
[BIBLEDRB]Tit 3:5[/BIBLEDRB]

I have never said that we are saved by the bible. But the bible tells us about Jesus who is the way, the truth, and the life and that is essential to eternal life.

[BIBLEDRB]Matthew 7:15-23[/BIBLEDRB]

 

[pablope]

The questions are really not that hard to understand. You say that the CC is the only one that can infallibly interpret scripture. I would like to know what there is about 2Tim. 3:15-17 that you need interpreted? And if scripture is able to make us wise unto salvation what more than this is there that you think that we need?

To do the Father’s will and command…which is:

Matt 7: 21"Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only he who does the will of my Father who is in heaven.

Math 12: 36But I tell you that men will have to give account on the day of judgment for every careless word they have spoken. 37For by your words you will be acquitted, and by your words you will be condemned."

Matth 16: 27: For the Son of Man is going to come in his Father’s glory with his angels, and then he will reward each person according to what he has done.

I think James says it very clearly too: 1: ver 26-27

26If anyone considers himself religious and yet does not keep a tight rein on his tongue, he deceives himself and his religion is worthless. 27Religion that God our Father accepts as pure and faultless is this: to look after orphans and widows in their distress and to keep oneself from being polluted by the world.

Do these verses agree with what you believe? You seem to be ignoring these…you may not trust what a catholic says…but at least ask your pastor or somebody you trust about these verses…

 

[tqualey]

Hi, Richard,

Judging from your response, quite a lot needs interpretation!

The questions are really not that hard to understand. You say that the CC is the only one that can infallibly interpret scripture. I would like to know what there is about 2Tim. 3:15-17 that you need interpreted? And if scripture is able to make us wise unto salvation what more than this is there that you think that we need?

What you are saying is that EVERYTHING is contained in this quote - Scripture has all of answers. And, this simply isn’t the case! So, obviously this is a matter of interpretation… and let me re-present one of the many items I have given you - that you have simply chosen to ignore.

In Acts 15, we have the first major internal challenge to the Catholic Faith - the insistance by the Judiazers that Gentile converts must first be circumcised and be required to follow the Law of Moses BEFORE being able to follow Christ. Peter, the First Pope, acting under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, declared this requirement from the Judizers is not from God and is not necessary. Now, let me explain that a little better…

Beginning from Genesis (Gen 17:10) with God giving the covenant to Abraham - all the way through to Acts 15, no one is recorded to have spoken against circumcision. (Some of the prophets identified that these stiff-necked people needed their heart circumcised - but, that is another matter!) So, here we have the clearly inspired word of God, commanding circumcision throughout the OT - and now we have Christ establishing the New Covenant, giving authority to His Church (and, that would be the Catholic Church) to bind and lose (Matt 16:18) and Peter exercising this God given Power. This means we have the inspired Word of God - taking a new direction! The sign of God’s covenant with His People (circumcision) is no longer required!

Does this need interpretation? Yes - and, you know what, Peter goes and gives it! So, we have the first challenge and the first resolution. The issue was interpretation of the Bible and the Chruch gave the answer - and the answer did not come from what had been previously written in the Bible, but from the inspiration of the Holy Spirit through Peter. This even just happens to be recorded in the Bible.

It is the Church - just like what Peter, the First Pope, did when he articulated God’s Will in moving in this new direction - that makes the interpretation. Christians do not circumcise anymore - as a direct result of God’s inspiration to Peter who announced to all that this was no longer a requirement.

The same took place with the other Catholic Church Councils - grave issues arose that needed to be resolved and Scripture did not provide the clear answer (or, else everyone would have come up with the right answer and there would not have been a problem in the first place!) 2Tim is like telling you the alphabet is needed for everything that is written - but, it does not write down anything itself. The Bible is truly Inspired - and God is the Principal Author - and this same God established the Catholic Church from which, just like Peter in Acts 15, it resolves issues through its teaching authority.

I don’t think I can be any clearer on this matter: SS is a man made belief that does not come from God.

God bless

 

[Richard_Kastner]

pablope:
To do the Father’s will and command…which is:

Matt 7: 21"Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only he who does the will of my Father who is in heaven.

Math 12: 36But I tell you that men will have to give account on the day of judgment for every careless word they have spoken. 37For by your words you will be acquitted, and by your words you will be condemned."

Matth 16: 27: For the Son of Man is going to come in his Father’s glory with his angels, and then he will reward each person according to what he has done.

I think James says it very clearly too: 1: ver 26-27

26If anyone considers himself religious and yet does not keep a tight rein on his tongue, he deceives himself and his religion is worthless. 27Religion that God our Father accepts as pure and faultless is this: to look after orphans and widows in their distress and to keep oneself from being polluted by the world.

Do these verses agree with what you believe? You seem to be ignoring these…you may not trust what a catholic says…but at least ask your pastor or somebody you trust about these verses…

What do you think that I should ask them concerning these vs. pablope? You post these verses along with my two questions. Do you somehow think that they answer these questions?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Richard Kastner
The questions are really not that hard to understand. You say that the CC is the only one that can infallibly interpret scripture. I would like to know what there is about 2Tim. 3:15-17 that you need interpreted? And if scripture is able to make us wise unto salvation what more than this is there that you think that we need?

By the way I believe everything that is in the bible.

 

[Cat_Herder]

The questions are really not that hard to understand. You say that the CC is the only one that can infallibly interpret scripture. I would like to know what there is about 2Tim. 3:15-17 that you need interpreted? And if scripture is able to make us wise unto salvation what more than this is there that you think that we need?

[BIBLEDRB]2 Peter 3:15-17[/BIBLEDRB]
[BIBLEDRB]2 Peter 1:20[/BIBLEDRB]
[BIBLEDRB]2 Thess. 3:6[/BIBLEDRB]
[BIBLEDRB]2 Tim 1:13[/BIBLEDRB]

 

[onenow1]

However, I have lost track of the number of times that you have posted and reposted and reposted 2 Tim. 3:15-17 as if those three verses were the entire Bible.

This is important ! Because in context Chapter 2 comes before 3,and you nailed it Cat.

2Timothy 2:7 Think over what I say, for the Lord will grant you understanding in everything.
8 Remember Jesus Christ, risen from the dead, descended from David, as preached in {MY }gospel.

God Bless All
onenow1

 

[Richard_Kastner]

Hi, Richard,

Judging from your response, quite a lot needs interpretation!

What you are saying is that EVERYTHING is contained in this quote - Scripture has all of answers. And, this simply isn’t the case! So, obviously this is a matter of interpretation… and let me re-present one of the many items I have given you - that you have simply chosen to ignore.

In Acts 15, we have the first major internal challenge to the Catholic Faith - the insistance by the Judiazers that Gentile converts must first be circumcised and be required to follow the Law of Moses BEFORE being able to follow Christ. Peter, the First Pope, acting under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, declared this requirement from the Judizers is not from God and is not necessary. Now, let me explain that a little better…

Beginning from Genesis (Gen 17:10) with God giving the covenant to Abraham - all the way through to Acts 15, no one is recorded to have spoken against circumcision. (Some of the prophets identified that these stiff-necked people needed their heart circumcised - but, that is another matter!) So, here we have the clearly inspired word of God, commanding circumcision throughout the OT - and now we have Christ establishing the New Covenant, giving authority to His Church (and, that would be the Catholic Church) to bind and lose (Matt 16:18) and Peter exercising this God given Power. This means we have the inspired Word of God - taking a new direction! The sign of God’s covenant with His People (circumcision) is no longer required!

Does this need interpretation? Yes - and, you know what, Peter goes and gives it! So, we have the first challenge and the first resolution. The issue was interpretation of the Bible and the Chruch gave the answer - and the answer did not come from what had been previously written in the Bible, but from the inspiration of the Holy Spirit through Peter. This even just happens to be recorded in the Bible.

It is the Church - just like what Peter, the First Pope, did when he articulated God’s Will in moving in this new direction - that makes the interpretation. Christians do not circumcise anymore - as a direct result of God’s inspiration to Peter who announced to all that this was no longer a requirement.

The same took place with the other Catholic Church Councils - grave issues arose that needed to be resolved and Scripture did not provide the clear answer (or, else everyone would have come up with the right answer and there would not have been a problem in the first place!) 2Tim is like telling you the alphabet is needed for everything that is written - but, it does not write down anything itself. The Bible is truly Inspired - and God is the Principal Author - and this same God established the Catholic Church from which, just like Peter in Acts 15, it resolves issues through its teaching authority.

I don’t think I can be any clearer on this matter: SS is a man made belief that does not come from God.

God bless

Tom I thank you for the fine lesson on biblical history. But I don’t see an aswer to my questions. I’m not asking about Acts 15 Gen.17 Or Matt.16 What I am asking is if scripture, which I take to mean the bible, is able to make us wise UNTO SALVATION through FAITH IN JESUS CHRIST. What more than this is necessary and what about that do you need interpreted. Now all this talk about Acts 15 Gen17 and Matt.16 is fine but it is absolutely a diversion from these two very specific questions. Now if you can’t or won’t answer them that’s fine, but don’t make out like you answered them when you have totally ignored them. If you want to discuss circumcision or some other topic that’s for another thread. Here’s the OP once again.

If 2 Timothy 3:16-17 is teaching Sola Scriptura today, then it had to be teaching Sola Scriptura in the first century, since there cannot be two diametrically opposed interpretations of the same verse. However, if 2 Timothy 3:16-17 was teaching Sola Scriptura in the first century, then that would mean that Paul was contradicting himself, since, in the first century, he was also promoting inspired oral tradition as another source of divine revelation, as well as promoting deference to the church authority, as opposed to the bible alone, as per Hebrews 13:17.

Quote:
Obey your leaders and defer to them, for they keep watch over you and will have to give an account, that they may fulfill their task with joy and not with sorrow, for that would be of no advantage to you.

 

[Cat_Herder]

Tom I thank you for the fine lesson on biblical history. But I don’t see an aswer to my questions. I’m not asking about Acts 15 Gen.17 Or Matt.16 What I am asking is if scripture, which I take to mean the bible, is able to make us wise UNTO SALVATION through FAITH IN JESUS CHRIST. What more than this is necessary and what about that do you need interpreted. Now all this talk about Acts 15 Gen17 and Matt.16 is fine but it is absolutely a diversion from these two very specific questions.

[BIBLEDRB]2 Tim 3:16[/BIBLEDRB]

Your inability to respond to the list I have supplied you is duly noted.

 

[pablope]

What do you think that I should ask them concerning these vs. pablope? You post these verses along with my two questions. Do you somehow think that they answer these questions?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Richard Kastner
The questions are really not that hard to understand. You say that the CC is the only one that can infallibly interpret scripture. I would like to know what there is about 2Tim. 3:15-17 that you need interpreted? And if scripture is able to make us wise unto salvation what more than this is there that you think that we need?

By the way I believe everything that is in the bible.

Then, what are you asking for? Could you clarify your question? I took your question to mean the following: What is needed to do after you have accepted Christ? If this is not what you are seeking, then what is it you are seeking? May be provide responders with what you are thinking or a hint of it.

 

[Richard_Kastner]

Originally Posted by Richard Kastner
What do you think that I should ask them concerning these vs. pablope? You post these verses along with my two questions. Do you somehow think that they answer these questions?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Richard Kastner
The questions are really not that hard to understand. You say that the CC is the only one that can infallibly interpret scripture. I would like to know what there is about 2Tim. 3:15-17 that you need interpreted? And if scripture is able to make us wise unto salvation what more than this is there that you think that we need?

Then, what are you asking for? Could you clarify your question? I took your question to mean the following: What is needed to do after you have accepted Christ? If this is not what you are seeking, then what is it you are seeking? May be provide responders with what you are thinking or a hint of it.

The Catholic position seems to be that more is needed outside of what is contained in the bible. 2Tim3:15 says “holy scriptures, which are able to make thee wise unto salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus.” If this is true, what is it that the Catholic Church thinks that we need other than “salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus.” and the Catholics on this thread keep saying that the CC is the only one that can authoritively interpret scripture. So I would like to know what there is about 2Timothy 3:15-17 that needs interpretation? It seems quite clear and straightforward to me. This is about as clear as I can make it pablope.

 

[Cat_Herder]

You think that because I want you to say what you mean that I don’t “care for charity”
I’m not sure I see how that follows.

I told you that Paul preached Tradition alongside his letters and that this Tradition helped to ensure a correct interpretation. L

Just to make sure I know what you are saying. Do you think that the things you have on your list here are necessary for our salvation? In other words, Do we need

1. A list of what books are Scripture for our salvation? This is in the bible.

If you really think the Bible fell down from heaven with all of its books in order then I have some oceanfront property in Arizona to sell you.

1. Which translation is authoritative for our salvation? You don’t think that all christian translations are authoritative?

The KJV contains many errors. The NIV contains mistranslations, which are common in any dynamic equivalence translation. Even the NAB, a Catholic translation, has erroneous footnotes.

1. An authoritative interpreter, since there is supposed to be one faith, one Lord and one Baptism for our salvation?

[BIBLEDRB]Mark 16:16[/BIBLEDRB]

1. Instructions on how to worship God for our salvation? This is in the bible.

No it isn’t and you know it. If it was all “Bible” Christians would worship in the same way. They don’t.

1. Instructions on how to conduct a marriage ceremony for our salvation?

[BIBLEDRB]1 Tim 2:15[/BIBLEDRB]

An explanation of why you have a church building when the Bible says to sell it. for our salvation?

[BIBLEDRB]Luke 18:20-30[/BIBLEDRB]

 

[Richard_Kastner]

I told you that Paul preached Tradition alongside his letters and that this Tradition helped to ensure a correct interpretation.

This is what you said

:
It is what Paul taught alongside his epistles. He didn’t just write to the churches. He visited them and preached to them and in so doing explained what he meant in the letters.

Now if you are saying that Paul in his oral preaching was preaching more or less the same things that he preached in his epistles then fine we have no problem. If however you are saying that Paul preached something other than the gospel message and that the CC is somehow the only one that is privy to that information then we do have a problem, because Paul himself says Gal.1: 8But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed.
And the gospel he preached was Jesus Christ and him crucified. 1Cor.2:2

If you really think the Bible fell down from heaven with all of its books in order then I have some oceanfront property in Arizona to sell you.

Who said anything about falling down from heaven? We have a list of books that are considered scripture. It’s called the bible.

The KJV contains many errors. The NIV contains mistranslations, which are common in any dynamic equivalence translation. Even the NAB, a Catholic translation, has erroneous footnotes.

Let me ask again. You don’t think that all christian translations are authoritative? Do you think the bible, without the errors, is the inspired word of God?

:
4. Instructions on how to worship God for our salvation? This is in the bible.

No it isn’t and you know it. If it was all “Bible” Christians would worship in the same way. They don’t.

I’m afraid your logic escapes me. If what was all bible?

Micah 6:8
He hath shewed thee, O man, what is good; and what doth the LORD require of thee, but to do justly, and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with thy God?

Ecclesiastes 12:13
Now all has been heard; here is the conclusion of the matter: Fear God and keep his commandments, for this is the whole duty of man.

 

[onenow1]

If 2 Timothy 3:16-17 is teaching Sola Scriptura today, then it had to be teaching Sola Scriptura in the first century, since there cannot be two diametrically opposed interpretations of the same verse. However, if 2 Timothy 3:16-17 was teaching Sola Scriptura in the first century, then that would mean that Paul was contradicting himself, since, in the first century, he was also promoting inspired oral tradition as another source of divine revelation, as well as promoting deference to the church authority, as opposed to the bible alone, as per Hebrews 13:17.

Certainly !! if 2 Tim. was teaching SS in the 1st century it would do so now. But it didn’t then and it doesn;t now!! There are dozens of responses here, that answer your premise.:twocents:

Peace

 

[Richard_Kastner]

Certainly !! if 2 Tim. was teaching SS in the 1st century it would do so now. But it didn’t then and it doesn;t now!! There are dozens of responses here, that answer your premise.:twocents:
Peace

If it is not teaching SS then you must be saying that something other than faith in Jesus Christ v.15And that from a child thou hast known the holy scriptures, which are able to make thee wise unto salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus. is needed.

What would that be one?

 

[Nicea325]

Are you saying there is something else that is inspired 2Tim.3:16 only mentions scripture. What else would it be?

Did you read the words of Jesus that I posted at the end of my post?
Jn.5:39Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me.

Are you sure about this statement ? What do you base this on Nicea? Jesus said Well, let’s start with the one just gave you. Jn.5:39Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me. Jn.17:17Sanctify them through thy truth: thy word is truth. Jn.6:63It is the spirit that quickeneth; the flesh profiteth nothing: the words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life. Where do we find the words of God (Jesus)? How about this Nicea? 1Jn.5: 9If we receive the witness of men, the witness of God is greater: for this is the witness of God which he hath testified of his Son.
10He that believeth on the Son of God hath the witness in himself: he that believeth not God hath made him a liar; because he believeth not the record that God gave of his Son.
11And this is the record, that God hath given to us eternal life, and this life is in his Son.

Where do we find the record of Jesus, Nicea? It’s the bible. Not just the new or old testament. The bible is about God’s plan of Salvation and that is manifest in Jesus. I don’t know about you Nicea but I believe Paul when he writes to Timothy “thou hast known the holy scriptures, which are able to make thee wise unto salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus.”

How would we know about Jesus if we did not have the bible, Nicea?

No Richard! The RCC does not teach something else other than God inspired the Bible authors. That is not the point Richard. The point is that God also inspired more than just the Biblical authors.

Did you read the words of Jesus that I posted at the end of my post?
Jn.5:39Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me.

Bad exegesis…Richard.Sorry Richard,but what you want to convey are the teachings of Richard,not Jesus. Read the entire passages in its entirety with the entire chapter,book and Bible. So Jesus is teaching that by scripture alone it is sufficient for salvation?

How would we know about Jesus if we did not have the bible, Nicea?

Wow! Then tell me what Bible were Christians in the year 40 A.D. using,since you are claiming they only way to know about Jesus is through the Bible? What about the people today living under extremely bad conditions? Do they just go to Barnes and Nobles and by a KJV Bible in order to know about Jesus? I did not know God binded Himself only to written words?

 

[onenow1]

If it is not teaching SS then you must be saying that something other than faith in Jesus Christ v.15And that from a child thou hast known the holy scriptures, which are able to make thee wise unto salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus. is needed.

What would that be one?

My faith journey started at baptism and is on going, just as the 3000 at Pentecost,HEARING the words of of Jesus from St.Peter and later from his successors, teaching all who will listen .

This was their commission !! Matt.28 :18-20 And Jesus came and said to them, “All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me. 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; and lo, I am with you always, to the close of the age.”

Peace
onenow1

 

[pablope]

Originally Posted by Richard Kastner
What do you think that I should ask them concerning these vs. pablope? You post these verses along with my two questions. Do you somehow think that they answer these questions?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Richard Kastner
The questions are really not that hard to understand. You say that the CC is the only one that can infallibly interpret scripture. I would like to know what there is about 2Tim. 3:15-17 that you need interpreted? And if scripture is able to make us wise unto salvation what more than this is there that you think that we need?

The Catholic position seems to be that more is needed outside of what is contained in the bible. 2Tim3:15 says “holy scriptures, which are able to make thee wise unto salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus.” If this is true, what is it that the Catholic Church thinks that we need other than “salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus.” and the Catholics on this thread keep saying that the CC is the only one that can authoritively interpret scripture. So I would like to know what there is about 2Timothy 3:15-17 that needs interpretation? It seems quite clear and straightforward to me. This is about as clear as I can make it pablope.

Hi, Richard…now i understand what you are grappling with, between what the CC teaches and from what you have been taught. First, I apologize with my previous post if it offended. It was not my intention. I will make an attempt and try my best. And I do not think there is a need for a further interpretation of the verse.

I would like to put the whole section where this came from to put it into it’s proper context:
2Tim 3: 14-17 (from NAB):

14You, however, continue in the things you have learned and become convinced of, knowing from whom you have learned them,
**15and that from childhood you have known the sacred writings which are able to give you the wisdom that leads to salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus.
**
16All Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness; 17so that the man of God may be adequate, equipped for every good work.

Taken together, it states that what Timothy has learned, be it from his teacher/s (most likely St Paul) and from Scripture makes him wise (makes thee wise) or gives him wisdom or makes him a learned man. I think we agree on this.

This learning/training (reading the Bible, listening to your pastor) then leads to something…“leads to salvation”…or it leads us to the Word of God…or the teachings of Jesus…if you will…when the word of God reaches you and is planted, what happens?If you believe it, so leads to Faith in the Word or Faith in Jesus or however you define it. But it stops there, isn’t it? It does not say anything further. Does it say you are saved already when you have just Faith?

What did Jesus say of our Faith? He compares it to a mustard seed. Matthew 17: 20:

20And He said to them, "Because of the littleness of your faith; for truly I say to you, if you have faith the size of a mustard seed, you will say to this mountain, ‘Move from here to there,’ and it will move; and nothing will be impossible to you.

Now, what did he say of the mustard seed? Remember the parable of the mustard seed?
Matt13: 31-32
31He presented another parable to them, saying, “The kingdom of heaven is like a mustard seed, which a man took and sowed in his field; 32and this is smaller than all other seeds, but when it is full grown, it is larger than the garden plants and becomes a tree, so that THE BIRDS OF THE AIR come and NEST IN ITS BRANCHES.”

Did Jesus say that’s it, that your faith will remain dormant, and not growin you? In his very words: Matt 7: 21 “Not everyone who says to Me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but he who does the will of My Father who is in heaven will enter.”

In light of the verse above, when you professed (Lord, Lord) your belief in Christ, did he said that is enough? No, He says do the will of the Father. What is the will of the Father?

Matt 16: 24-25: 24Then Jesus said to His disciples, "If anyone wishes to come after Me, he must deny himself, and take up his cross and follow Me. 25"For whoever wishes to save his life will lose it; but whoever loses his life for My sake will find it.

He says “lose your life”…that is renew your life, do not sin anymore, come to a new life.

On the the day of judgement, Matt 16: 27: For the Son of Man is going to come in the glory of His Father with His angels, and WILL THEN REPAY EVERY MAN ACCORDING TO HIS DEEDS.

The Lord is saying that you will have to account for what you have done. Did he say he will disregard your deeds? Or your works? Where is that stated anywhere in the Bible.

This then is in essence what the CC says outside of the Bible…have faith, but the faith must grow in you, remain in Christ, do not sin, love your neighbors…for on judgement day, you will be made to account for your deeds.

Summary from James 1: 26If anyone thinks himself to be religious, and yet does not bridle his tongue but deceives his own heart, this man’s religion is worthless. 27Pure and undefiled religion in the sight of our God and Father is this:** to visit orphans and widows in their distress, and to keep oneself unstained by the world. **

Same thing as above, isn’t it? So, do you think the CC teaching or position is unbiblical?

 

[wisdomseeker]

what does that add to your salvation? i didn’t recall reading anywhere where Jesus came solely to institute catholic church. the only thing in the bible that looked similar to catholic church are the pharisees and Sadducee of the old, like how their priest are adorned with fine rob and are revered. last time i checked, Christ was without a place to lay his head.

It adds much. obedience to Christ and believe all He says, I am sure it pleases God. so, it does add faith and obedience equals to salvation. disobedience and rebellious against God leads to danmination.

 

[wisdomseeker]

What do you think that I should ask them concerning these vs. pablope? You post these verses along with my two questions. Do you somehow think that they answer these questions?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Richard Kastner
The questions are really not that hard to understand. You say that the CC is the only one that can infallibly interpret scripture. I would like to know what there is about 2Tim. 3:15-17 that you need interpreted? And if scripture is able to make us wise unto salvation what more than this is there that you think that we need?

By the way I believe everything that is in the bible.

we need the Church of the Living God, the pillar and bullwark of the Truth to teach us what all that means. you know that One Church spoke off in the Bible. they all go together, the Church and the Word of God, all go together. you cannot take them apart, no matter how hard you try. that is why you have so much confusion among yourselves, all trying to enterpret what was not giving to you. you cannot steal from God and succeed.