J
JRKH
Guest
Thanks ro those additional notes from I assume your first reading of the Bible. Very interesting indeed.
Peace
James
- Status
Peace
James
J
JRKH
Guest
Now Now - Let’s be charitable. -
I noticed that in Geometer’s post as well and wondered what he meant by that.
Perhaps Geometer will come back and clarify.
Peace
James
J
JRKH
Guest
Great Replies so far folks - keep em coming.
Peace
James
Peace
James
R
Rightlydivide
Guest
Yes that was 7 years ago now. It was my first reading. I was converted and baptized and ready to read. I even took two days off work to read I am pretty sure.Thanks ro those additional notes from I assume your first reading of the Bible. Very interesting indeed.
Peace
James
2
2nd_Adam
Guest
When I study and read Romans and Galatians, I always come out with faith alone. Check this verse out for a forensic justification:
And you, who were dead in your trespasses and the uncircumcision of your flesh, God made alive together with him, having forgiven us all our trespasses, by canceling the record of debt that stood against us with its legal demands. This he set aside, nailing it to the cross. He disarmed the rulers and authorities and put them to open shame, by triumphing over them in him. - Colossians 3
If you were given just a Bible, you could only come out with a historic protestant position on issues that divide us. I’m not really sure how you can come out with Apostolic Succession through Scripture alone. You would need more than a Catholic understanding of Matthew 16. Maybe someone can give me a string of Scriptures to support Apostolic Succesion through the Bible alone. I find this thread so interesting.
And you, who were dead in your trespasses and the uncircumcision of your flesh, God made alive together with him, having forgiven us all our trespasses, by canceling the record of debt that stood against us with its legal demands. This he set aside, nailing it to the cross. He disarmed the rulers and authorities and put them to open shame, by triumphing over them in him. - Colossians 3
If you were given just a Bible, you could only come out with a historic protestant position on issues that divide us. I’m not really sure how you can come out with Apostolic Succession through Scripture alone. You would need more than a Catholic understanding of Matthew 16. Maybe someone can give me a string of Scriptures to support Apostolic Succesion through the Bible alone. I find this thread so interesting.
2
2nd_Adam
Guest
Sure, that is a valid position. However, I believe this thread is about being contained in the box. This is a stacked thread for the sola scriptura Christians. What would happen if the Mormon missionaries could only debate through biblical revelation only? It wouldn’t be much of a debate with a sola scriptura Christian. Our final source of authority determines the contents of our faith.
X
xixxvmcm85
Guest
Without any proper exegesis or catechesis whatsoever, I’d probably walk away with the impression that the Bible is BS. Without anyone teaching me the various meanings of metaphors 2000 years ago, the various Hebrew and Aramaic literary devices used during the time, and the basic understanding of the Christian Tradition which prompted the codification of the Bible in the first place, I don’t think I’d be able to work through the at-first-glance contradictions of it.
ETA: I do think the Dogma of the Trinity would be hard to swallow. I’d probably read the New Testament and in my feeble knowledge adopt a Marcionite interpretation or maybe even a Gnostic one.
R
Reuben_J
Guest
I does not matter whether it one year or more. The Bible to me would be just a good story book. That was how it was to me when I was a kid.
In answering your hypothetical, I would go to the Catholic Church. I am saying this not because I am a Catholic but because among all the churches that are in existence today, the Roman Catholic Church is still the one that has strong claim to being the church that Jesus founded. It is not interrupted since its inception 2000 years ago. There are no other churches quite like it.
I would go to the Catholic Church with my Bible because if there is any church that can tell you correctly what is in it and what it means, the CC is the best bet.
God bless.
J
JCLeathers
Guest
ParkerD,
I’m with you on this. By the Power of the Holy Spirit, we could interpret the Bible correctly.
Besides, why even consider the impossible scenario; aren’t there more important, real life issues to consider?
Peace,
John
I’m with you on this. By the Power of the Holy Spirit, we could interpret the Bible correctly.
Besides, why even consider the impossible scenario; aren’t there more important, real life issues to consider?
Peace,
John
J
JCLeathers
Guest
Although, the Catholic church teaches that interpretation of the Bible requires the Sacred Scripture and Apostolic Tradition/Succession. Also Blessed John XXIII suggested the additional use of “methods of research and modern literary thought”. After fervent prayer to ask God for the power of the Holy Spirit, one should be able to successfully read and interpret the Bible.?? Whatever.
J
JRKH
Guest
John,
Yes there are other things more important, but sometimes considering such impossible scenerios can give us insights that might help us in other areas of understanding our Brothers and sisters in Christ.
Peace
James
J
JRKH
Guest
While I am not sure how the above effects a determination on Church structure, I do have to say that I don’t know how, by reading just the Bbile, anyone could come up with “Faith Alone”. Especially in light of this passage by the Same Author, in 1 Cor ch12:31 thru ch13:13. In this St Paul clearly states that the Way of Love is the greatest of All.
I too am not sure I would come up with an “Apostolic succession”, in th sense of the Pope etc. I think I would see a strong authoritative Church under teh autority of the Bishops and based on a Councilior model etc. I base this on things like Act 15 showing the faithful coming together in council to answer doctrinal and practical questions. The fact that St Paul wrote to many different Churches continuing to give instruction. The Fact of Christ and St Paul both praying for unity to the extent of “Being of one mind”. Mat 18 also tells us to take difficult issues “To The Church”.
Peace
James
J
JCLeathers
Guest
I hear ya James.
2
2nd_Adam
Guest
When I made it all the way to Revelation, I would have read that there is one body and many churches… all with their own strengths and shortcomings. I would also have come across the accounts of apparent pillars of the church committed heretical errors in regards to the gospel and other essentials of the faith (denying Christ)… and another leader rebuked him publicly because the issue warranted it. I would also come to the conclusion that the Apostle Paul was the leader of the 1st Century Church since he wrote about 1/2 of the New Testament books. I’m not sure if church government or structure could be determined by the Scriptures which models any of the denominations and churches today.
C
cthulhubryan
Guest
A single church with a single set of doctrines and centralized leadership. Jesus said He would build His Church on Peter.
2
2nd_Adam
Guest
If that’s your conclusion, why haven’t you become an official member of the Catholic Church?
C
Cat
Guest
I think there’s a lot of truth in what you say, however, I still disagree, and here’s why.
My husband and I did NOT want to see Catholicism in the Bible!!!
Oh, my no! Ai yi yi! CATHOLIC? US?!! No way!
After we were thrown out of our Protestant church, we prayed that God would lead us to a church where people were really serious about God and were teaching the Bible.
Two years later, after being part of a Catholic apologetics class in the parish nearest us (the class was taught by a professor and former pastor of one of the evangelical Protestant churches that we had attended! He and his wife had converted to Catholicism.), my husband and I realized as we were driving home that God had answered our prayer and led us to the Catholic Church.
And you know what we told God?
“NO! God, we didn’t mean the Catholic Church! We meant a 'real Christian church! C’mon, joke’s over! Now lead us to a real church, a Protestant church!”
2nd Adam, we fought like cats to remain Protestant!! Turning Catholic meant giving up everything. If you know anything about evangelicalism, you know that it’s an entire lifestyle. ALL of our friends, except for our skating rink friends, were in our church. We didn’t drink, go to clubs, dance, etc. --we were total misfits in the Catholic Church because of our evangelical upbringing.
We were afraid that if we became Catholic, we would lose all our Protestant friends (which kind of happened), and we wouldn’t have any Catholic friends (which is kinda sorta the case–the drinking thing really does get in the way of forming close friendships).
I’ve often said on these forums that when we were Protestant, my husband and I were either at church or involved in a church ministry at least 5-6 days/evenings a week. Our whole life was church–our reason for living was to fulfil the Great Commission and tell the world about Jesus Christ.
To become Catholic meant starting a whole new life, and that’was extremely scary, terrifying. We didn’t know how to “be” Catholic!
In fact, one reason I wrote my children’s novels was to create devout Catholic characters (the Officer and the skating coach) who live their faith in their everyday life. It gave me a chance to “practice” being Catholic, and helped me to see what it would feel like to “put on Catholic clothes,” figuratively speaking.
Add to everything else the scorn and shock of our relatives, including our two daughters. (Since then, our oldest daughter has also converted to Catholicism, and our younger daughter and her husband have expressed interest, but both of them are very distrusting of any church. My husband and I are their “church.” And amazingly, my parents-in-law have softened towards the Catholic Church and have attended Mass with us.)
Anyway, we worked very hard to find errors and flaws in the Catholic Church theology and practices. We did NOT want any part of Catholicism at all, and fought hard to stay Protestant. I’ve never read so much Bible in my life, and I’ve read a lot of Bible! I had my Heidelberg Catechism out and was reading like crazy all the “proofs” that “Romanism” was wrong! I also got out all my favorite Protestant apologetics books and re-read them, looking for proofs that my husband and I had fallen into a pagan, non-Christian church. I even read through the old Jack T. Chick comics (I have a complete collection!).
I think a lot of Protestants who are considering Catholicism have more to lose than we did. After all, we were not pastors or missionaries, but had secular jobs. Those who make their living in the evangelical churches give up everything we gave up, but also give up their livelihoods. That’s tough.
At any rate, I think that Protestants, especially evangelicals, who are comparing the Catholic Church to the Bible will look extremely hard to prove that Catholicism is wrong, not the other way around.
R
Rightlydivide
Guest
I did not see Peter in charge of the church. I saw Peter in charge of the apostles and as an apostle to the Jews. I saw Paul writing to all the Gentiles and he was the apostle to the Gentiles. I did not think Paul and Peter liked each other. I thought the super apostles he was referring to were the three pillars.
J
JCLeathers
Guest
Well put CAT!!!
Peace,
John
Peace,
John
J
JRKH
Guest
Interesting.
I often think that the whole issue about “The Pope” dividing Catholic and Protestant is something of a “red herring”. I mean, The Catholic Church is not run by a single person with absolute authority, but rather is run much more on a “council” model. Now granted that general councils are not called often, but regional ones are, and the level of communication between the Bishops around the world is phenominal. Decisions are never taken lightly or without due prayer and deliberation.
So I think that if we look at the Early Church up through the East West Split, we will see much more diversity but struggling to get at the truth. I see something much nearer to a “Council” setting, than we perceive today. That is what I think we see in Acts 15 and the Council of Jerusalem. We might argue back and forth about what Peter said and what James said and so forth but the main issue there in Acts was that two Churches in two locations had doctrinal concerns of such significance that Paul (The Local Bishop) was unable to resolve it. The Church then, meeting in **General council **took up the matter and after making a determination, no one in ANY of the Churches needed to be circumsized This to me is the essence of both “Tell it to The Church” and “Be One as The Father and I are One…”
Sorry for the above getting a bit off topic by bringing in the Early Church post Apostolic era.
Peace
James
- Status