Not By Scripture Alone

[Steven_Merten]

Hello Randy,

The Protestants do not believe in solo (all) scriptures. The Protestants have taken the authority upon themselves, in their own tradition, to throw out many of Jesus’ scriptural teachings. The Protestants have taken the authority upon themselves to throw out the Old Testament. There are even one or two of St. Paul’s writtings that they have taken it upon themselves to disregard.

It would be more appropriate for the Protestants to say “solo, Protestant selected verses only, scripture” than to say “solo scripture”. “Solo Scripture” makes it sound like they believe every word scripture, especially Jesus, say. The Protestants do not. The many teachings of Jesus instructing us to obey God to go to heaven (through Jesus) have been thrown out by the Protestants.

My fovorite is “solo scripture” Martin Luther scripturally quoting Jesus as his opponant.

Martin Luther****The doctrine of our opponents is similar to that of the false apostles in Paul’s day.Our opponents teach, "If you want to live unto God, you must live after the Law, **for it is written, Do this and thou shalt live."**Quoted from Project Wittenberg, Commentary on the Epistle to the Galatians, (1535) by Martin Luther, Chapter 2 v 19iclnet.org/pub/resources/text/wittenberg/luther/gal/web/gal2-17.html**NAB MAT **19:16"Teacher, what good must I do to possess everlasting life?" He answered, “Why do you question me about what is good? There is One who is good. If you wish to enter into life, keep the commandments.” NAB DEU 30:15 The Choice before Israel.

“Here then, I have today set before you life and prosperity, death and doom. If you obey the commandments of the LORD, your God, which I enjoin on you today, loving him, and walking in his ways, and keeping his commandments, statutes and decrees, you will live and grow numerous, and the LORD, your God, will bless you in the land you are entering to occupy.”

​

NAB LUK 10:25**“Teacher, what must I do to inherit everlasting life?” Jesus answered him:****“What is written in the law?** How do you read it?” He replied:"You shall love the Lord your God
with all your heart,
with all your soul,
with all your strength,
and with all your mind;
and your neighbor as yourself."

Jesus said, “You have answered correctly. Do this and you shall live.”

 

[Randy_Carson]

I will offer an interesting comment that I received from Tim Enloe, a Protestant formerly active in apologetics, in another forum on the topic of sola scriptura. Tim wrote:

"I have no problem with the Catholic belief that “there necessarily be extra-biblical information, experience and understanding that aid us in interpreting the Scriptures correctly.” This is actually not at all incompatible with sola Scriptura, UNLESS one defines sola Scriptura as (or at least practically acts as if it means) “The Bible is the only rule of faith.” Most Protestants do define it this way, unfortunately, but even many who define it accurately (e.g., James White) then vitiate the definition by their bizarre hermeneutical practices. But I can’t go into that now. It’s too big a topic.

"I will just say this: if sola Scriptura means what most Protestants today act like it means, then it is a false principle. On the contrary, everyone has a rule of faith that they bring to Scriptural interpretation. Everyone. We may differ as to the identity of the rule we bring to the Scriptures, but we all have one. For some people it’s the Catholic Creeds. For others its the Assured Results of Modern Scientific Grammatology. For some it’s the “face value” of what lies right on the most shallow level of their own heads. But everyone has a rule. No one literally has no rule except the Bible. That’s just simply impossible, though too many believe it is so.

“As for your request for definition, “sola Scriptura” does not mean the Bible “alone.” Not only is that an impossible position to hold (as outlined above), it is just bad Latin. For the word “sola” in Latin is not an adverb. It is an adjective. The Bible cannot stand (verb) alone (adverb). It could perhaps be the only (adjective) infallible rule of faith (noun phrase), but it can’t be something that stands (verb) alone (adverb). I suppose much of the confusion of Modern Protestantism could be reversed if we all learned Latin again!”

Thoughts anyone?

 

[Catholic_Dude]

My comments in red

I will offer an interesting comment that I received from Tim Enloe, a Protestant formerly active in apologetics, in another forum on the topic of sola scriptura. Tim wrote:

"I have no problem with the Catholic belief [yes you do, I dont even need to read on] that “there necessarily be extra-biblical information, experience and understanding that aid us in interpreting the Scriptures correctly.” [Go ahead and list an authoritative bit of “extra biblical” information] This is actually not at all incompatible with sola Scriptura [Im expecting a “but” to follow this], UNLESS “unless” works too] one defines sola Scriptura as (or at least practically acts as if it means) “The Bible is the only rule of faith.” Most Protestants do define it this way [let me ask you this, WHO in protestantism has the authority to define SS?], unfortunately, but even many who define it accurately (e.g., James White) then vitiate the definition by their bizarre hermeneutical practices. [Amen] But I can’t go into that now. It’s too big a topic.

"I will just say this: if sola Scriptura means what most Protestants today act like it means, then it is a false principle. [Distancing himself from what he now recognizes to be a indefensible and unBiblical teaching] On the contrary, everyone has a rule of faith that they bring to Scriptural interpretation. Everyone. [Who’s your final authority? Please dont say “The Bible”] We may differ as to the identity of the rule we bring to the Scriptures, but we all have one. For some people it’s the Catholic Creeds. [How about for Catholics alone its the Catholic Creeds] For others its the Assured Results of Modern Scientific Grammatology. For some it’s the “face value” of what lies right on the most shallow level of their own heads. [LOL, For the record a Catholic didnt say this a Protestant did] But everyone has a rule. No one literally has no rule except the Bible. That’s just simply impossible, though too many believe it is so.

“As for your request for definition, “sola Scriptura” does not mean the Bible “alone.” [A new age protesant apologist trying to salvage his faith with a new spin] Not only is that an impossible position to hold (as outlined above), it is just bad Latin. For the word “sola” in Latin is not an adverb. It is an adjective. The Bible cannot stand (verb) alone (adverb). It could perhaps be the only (adjective) infallible rule of faith (noun phrase), but it can’t be something that stands (verb) alone (adverb). I suppose much of the confusion of Modern Protestantism could be reversed if we all learned Latin again!” [Appealing to what is nothing more than a irrelevant nuance (a la “its just bad latin”) in order to quietly distance himself from what he now fully recognizes as a unfounded and indefensible teaching]

Thoughts anyone?

Its called the new age of protestant apologetics, more and more of them are awaking to see just how bad their position really is, and little by little they distance themselves from it. On top of that more and more they begin to sound Catholic but have not got to the point to admit the Church had it right all along. I have said this before, Sola Scriptura is a smokescreen, it deflects from the real issue of authoritative interpretation which ultimately rests at the Magesterial level.

 

[mikeledes]

All that Scripture Alone has done is spawn doctrinal confusion. Why? Because it wasn’t meant to be that way. Scripture was written to Christians that already received Christian teachings in the form of Apostolic Tradition. Scripture was interpreted in light of this Tradition.

God Bless,
Michael

 

[mikeledes]

Here are some verses to support my previous post:

Luke 1:1-4

“Many have undertaken to draw up an account of the things that have been fulfilled among us, just as they were handed down to us by those who from the first were eyewitnesses and servants of the word. Therefore, since I myself have carefully investigated everything from the beginning, it seemed good also to me to write an orderly account for you, most excellent Theophilus, so that you may know the certainty of the things you have been taught.”

1 John 2:21, 24

“I do not write to you because you do not know the truth, but because you do know it and because no lie comes from the truth… See that what you have heard from the beginning remains in you. If it does, you also will remain in the Son and in the Father.”

The Bible was not written to be the final and only source of teaching. It was written to reaffirm many of the teachings the early Christians received orally through the Apostolic Tradition and it is in light of this Tradition, preserved by the Catholic Church, that Scripture must be interpreted.

It is from this Apostolic Tradition that we have clearer teachings on the Trinity, sexually immoral acts like masturbation, and what constitutes a valid marriage before God. All of the above three are taken for granted by Protestants, but none of them are clearly explained or found in Scripture. You don’t find the words “person”, “nature”, or “being” in reference to the Trinity, for example. Nor do you find clear explanations on the Hypostatic Union or the relation between the human and divine wills of Jesus Christ.

God Bless,
Michael

 

[Redbandito]

There is a prodominant Protestant definition?

I have been looking for it for years, and the closest I can come is what James R. White says it is. (At least many will refer to him as their definition of it.)

But I run into differences from that definitiion as well, including hte proposition that scripture is “self-interpreting.” Dave Armstrong, in his blog/site, puts the big hurt on that idea as I recall. So does Robert Sungenis in his *Not by Scripture Alone *in one of the best refutations of Sola Scriptura I have seen in a long while.

God bless,

PAX

Bill+†+

Pillar and Foundation of Truth, the Church. (1 Tim 3:15)

Yes indeed. The argument there becomes one of material or formal sufficiency. I have not heard one solid argument for the idea of formal sufficiency. I certainly have not seen one verse that remotely touches this.

 

[Redbandito]

I will offer an interesting comment that I received from Tim Enloe, a Protestant formerly active in apologetics, in another forum on the topic of sola scriptura. Tim wrote:

"I have no problem with the Catholic belief that “there necessarily be extra-biblical information, experience and understanding that aid us in interpreting the Scriptures correctly.” This is actually not at all incompatible with sola Scriptura, UNLESS one defines sola Scriptura as (or at least practically acts as if it means) “The Bible is the only rule of faith.” Most Protestants do define it this way, unfortunately, but even many who define it accurately (e.g., James White) then vitiate the definition by their bizarre hermeneutical practices. But I can’t go into that now. It’s too big a topic.

"I will just say this: if sola Scriptura means what most Protestants today act like it means, then it is a false principle. On the contrary, everyone has a rule of faith that they bring to Scriptural interpretation. Everyone. We may differ as to the identity of the rule we bring to the Scriptures, but we all have one. For some people it’s the Catholic Creeds. For others its the Assured Results of Modern Scientific Grammatology. For some it’s the “face value” of what lies right on the most shallow level of their own heads. But everyone has a rule. No one literally has no rule except the Bible. That’s just simply impossible, though too many believe it is so.

“As for your request for definition, “sola Scriptura” does not mean the Bible “alone.” Not only is that an impossible position to hold (as outlined above), it is just bad Latin. For the word “sola” in Latin is not an adverb. It is an adjective. The Bible cannot stand (verb) alone (adverb). It could perhaps be the only (adjective) infallible rule of faith (noun phrase), but it can’t be something that stands (verb) alone (adverb). I suppose much of the confusion of Modern Protestantism could be reversed if we all learned Latin again!”

Thoughts anyone?

Actually, I think it’s great that he admits that it is impossible to approach the Scripture, without a tradition, as a blank slate. That’s great that he can be so honest.

However, his last paragraph is simply misinformed. I understand that he is seeking to rectify the “latin” with the meaning of the phrase. However, he simply ignores the historical context with which this phrase was created. For in practice, the Reformers practiced sola scriptura in a very similar way.

 

[Redbandito]

My comments in red

Its called the new age of protestant apologetics, more and more of them are awaking to see just how bad their position really is, and little by little they distance themselves from it. On top of that more and more they begin to sound Catholic but have not got to the point to admit the Church had it right all along. I have said this before, Sola Scriptura is a smokescreen, it deflects from the real issue of authoritative interpretation which ultimately rests at the Magesterial level.

Exactly! Part of the problem is that your average, every day Baptist does not understand the implications of this. They may come closer to the Catholic position on justification, or even tradition, but they don’t get what that means. Many are just ignorant of history. Many don’t know that Luther taught, “The church stands or falls” on his false doctrine of justification (sola fide). Thus, when you are able to show them sola fide is wrong, they do not necessarily get the next step.

 

[Joseph_Smith]

Boy have been waiting for a forum like this. It is my lucky day. Jesus said that you error not knowing the scriptures nor the power of the age to come. God in his wisdom Gave us his word in written from. A road map if you do not have enoof wisdom to read and follow the map you are truly blinb. It is that simple. If you practice that which is against his instruction you are anti-christ. To be anti-christ means to be against him, in rebellion to him, apostate to his teaching. His enemy.
Example in the Holy Scripture a bishop is to be the husband of one wife, not given to drunkness, gentel and ect. Is that a bishop in the catholic church.
Example in the Holy Scripture it states call no man Father execpt your Father in heaven. What do you call your priest in the catholic church.
Example in the catholic church you teach that people are in purgotory. The scripture declare that the dead are not in purgotory by that to be absent from the body is to be present with the Lord.
Example in the bible we are instructed not to make for ourselfs any craven image of anything in heaven or on the earth. So you make images of dead saints in the catholic chuch.
Example in the bible we have 5 offices of the church. Apostle Prophet preacher evangel and teacher. In the catholic church you have a pope, arch bishop, bishop, ect does not quite match the church of Christ does it.
Example in the bible we are instructed as christians to harm on no. Your church has had how many holy wars.
Example in the bible does it say you can sell the forgiveness of sin for money.
Example in the bible does it say that a child can be baptized into the body of church before the age of reason.
Your church promotes that, it is not in the word of God
Example in the bible all christians are called priest and kings unto God. The catholic faith declare that only the priest are really priest.
Example in the bible we are instructed that the spirits of the dead in christ are in a state of rest. There spirits are with the Lord. Your church is teaching that peters spirit is with the pope. lol
Example in the bible Christ is the head of the church. In the Catholic church Christ has been replaced by the pope who can give and take membership. Membership from the church.
Example in the bible christ states i will never depart from you. Your church teaches to be excommunicated it to have christ removed from you.
Example in the bible in the new testiment it states that you are neither male nor female neither jew nor greek, meaning that woman can serve in any role that men serve in. In your church they denounce that and only allow men to serve as leaders.
In the bible we are instructed to test everthing by the word of God and the spirit. Your church does not want you to test anything because they do not line up with the word of God.
Lacking the power of God is a great witness of there current and prior state of relationship with God.

 

[Redbandito]

Boy have been waiting for a forum like this. It is my lucky day. Jesus said that you error not knowing the scriptures nor the power of the age to come. God in his wisdom Gave us his word in written from. A road map if you do not have enoof wisdom to read and follow the map you are truly blinb. It is that simple. If you practice that which is against his instruction you are anti-christ. To be anti-christ means to be against him, in rebellion to him, apostate to his teaching. His enemy.
Example in the Holy Scripture a bishop is to be the husband of one wife, not given to drunkness, gentel and ect. Is that a bishop in the catholic church.
Example in the Holy Scripture it states call no man Father execpt your Father in heaven. What do you call your priest in the catholic church.
Example in the catholic church you teach that people are in purgotory. The scripture declare that the dead are not in purgotory by that to be absent from the body is to be present with the Lord.
Example in the bible we are instructed not to make for ourselfs any craven image of anything in heaven or on the earth. So you make images of dead saints in the catholic chuch.
Example in the bible we have 5 offices of the church. Apostle Prophet preacher evangel and teacher. In the catholic church you have a pope, arch bishop, bishop, ect does not quite match the church of Christ does it.
Example in the bible we are instructed as christians to harm on no. Your church has had how many holy wars.
Example in the bible does it say you can sell the forgiveness of sin for money.
Example in the bible does it say that a child can be baptized into the body of church before the age of reason.
Your church promotes that, it is not in the word of God
Example in the bible all christians are called priest and kings unto God. The catholic faith declare that only the priest are really priest.
Example in the bible we are instructed that the spirits of the dead in christ are in a state of rest. There spirits are with the Lord. Your church is teaching that peters spirit is with the pope. lol
Example in the bible Christ is the head of the church. In the Catholic church Christ has been replaced by the pope who can give and take membership. Membership from the church.
Example in the bible christ states i will never depart from you. Your church teaches to be excommunicated it to have christ removed from you.
Example in the bible in the new testiment it states that you are neither male nor female neither jew nor greek, meaning that woman can serve in any role that men serve in. In your church they denounce that and only allow men to serve as leaders.
In the bible we are instructed to test everthing by the word of God and the spirit. Your church does not want you to test anything because they do not line up with the word of God.
Lacking the power of God is a great witness of there current and prior state of relationship with God.

Joseph, you have a lot to learn my friend. Could you start off with confining your posts to the subject in the thread title? These are all important issues to be addressed, and believe me they will be, but they each deserve their own thread title. If you’re really interested in discussing things, and not just lobbing accusations at the Church, then take the time to post each accusation in it’s own thread. Just looking through your accusations, there are a lot of things I would consider to be misuses of the Scripture, and certainly misunderstandings on Catholic teaching. I look forward to your new threads. God Bless!

 

[Catholic_Dude]

My comments in red.

 Example in the Holy Scripture a bishop is to be the husband of one wife, not given to drunkness, gentel and ect. Is that a bishop in the catholic church. Yes it is, unless your trying to say Catholics teach a bishop must be a mean self centered drunken polygamist?
 Example in the Holy Scripture it states call no man Father execpt your Father in heaven. What do you call your priest in the catholic church. "in Christ Jesus **I became your father through the gospel.**" -1 Cor 4:15...Here we see Paul as a spiritual father to lead and preach the gospel.
 Example in the catholic church you teach that people are in purgotory. The scripture declare that the dead are not in purgotory by that to be absent from the body is to be present with the Lord. "Anyone who speaks a word against the Son of Man will be forgiven, but anyone who speaks against the Holy Spirit **will not be forgiven**, either in this age **or in the age to come**."-Matt 12:32
 Example in the bible we are instructed not to make for ourselfs any craven image of anything in heaven or on the earth. So you make images of dead saints in the catholic chuch. We are not to make idols. Idols are false gods, representing the Saints in the form of a statue as a visible reminder of them and their Christian lives is not idolatry.
 Example in the bible we have 5 offices of the church. Apostle Prophet preacher evangel and teacher. In the catholic church you have a pope, arch bishop, bishop, ect does not quite match the church of Christ does it. Thats a misrepresentation, there is no 5 official offices like the ones you state above, and some of the offices you mention overlap.
 Example in the bible we are instructed as christians to harm on no. Your church has had how many holy wars. All nations have blood on their hands, both Protestant and Catholic nations. Sometimes the war was justified and done in defense other times it wasnt. 
 Example in the bible does it say you can sell the forgiveness of sin for money. The Catholic Church teaches against the concept of buying and selling God's favor, however that concept does not include charitable acts which the Bible says are part of being a Christian. For example: "Above all, love each other deeply, because **love [charity] covers over a multitude of sins**."-1Pt4:8, Luke 3:8-14
 Example in the bible does it say that a child can be baptized into the body of church before the age of reason.

Your church promotes that, it is not in the word of God Luther and the Lutherans today officially teach infant Baptism as do other Protestant denominations. It stems from the concept those born into Christian families can be members of the Christian Communities through Baptism just as Circumcision was for infants born into the Jewish culture. (see also Acts 2:38-39, Col 2:11-12)
Example in the bible all christians are called priest and kings unto God. The catholic faith declare that only the priest are really priest. Just as only the Apostles are truly Apostles and preachers are truly preachers. Though we all have a limited duty in those offices (eg preach to our neighbor while not having to be a official pastor) they are actual officies which not everyone holds.
Example in the bible we are instructed that the spirits of the dead in christ are in a state of rest. There spirits are with the Lord. Your church is teaching that peters spirit is with the pope. lol I dont know where you heard such a thing but it is totally false.
Example in the bible Christ is the head of the church. In the Catholic church Christ has been replaced by the pope who can give and take membership. Membership from the church. Yes the Church has the power to include and exclude members if they disobey Church leaders, eg Matt 18:17
Example in the bible christ states i will never depart from you. Your church teaches to be excommunicated it to have christ removed from you. Christ will never depart from guiding the Church, which Catholics fully believe. Christians can be separated from Christ however through sin, eg 1Tim1:20
Example in the bible in the new testiment it states that you are neither male nor female neither jew nor greek, meaning that woman can serve in any role that men serve in. In your church they denounce that and only allow men to serve as leaders. Your claim is totally unbiblical, it nowhere says women can be bishops for example and against other Scriptures, eg Eph 5:22-24
In the bible we are instructed to test everthing by the word of God and the spirit. Your church does not want you to test anything because they do not line up with the word of God.
Lacking the power of God is a great witness of there current and prior state of relationship with God. Thats simply not true. You have been misinformed about what Catholicism really teaches.

 

[Mannyfit75]

Joseph Smith will never understanding Catholicism. He is like the other Protestants who have an totally misunderstanding of the Catholic Church.

He isn’t the first in these forum who is so Anti-Catholic.

 

[Randy_Carson]

Boy have been waiting for a forum like this. It is my lucky day.

I agree that today is your lucky day, for today you begin to hear the truth and come out of the darkness that has you in bondage.

As has already been suggested, you should create a separate thread for each allegation you wish to make against the Catholic Church. That way we can clear up your misunderstandings in an orderly fashion.

Let’s begin at the beginning, however.

Jesus did not leave us a book. He left us a Church which consisted initially of the Apostles and a handful of others…slightly more than a hundred or so. He made specific promises to those Apostles and gave them authority to do the work that He commissioned them to do. For example:

Matthew 16:17-19
“Jesus replied, ‘Blessed are you, Simon son of Jonah, for this was not revealed to you by man, but by my Father in heaven. And I tell you that you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of Hades will not overcome it. I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven; whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven.’”

Here we see that Simon Peter was blessed by God the Father with extraordinary revelation about Jesus the Son. Jesus in turn indicated that Peter would be given the keys to the kingdom of heaven and have the authority to bind and loose in heaven. Are you familiar with reference to the keys from the Old Testament? The steward of the king wore a key that indicated the office that he held. Peter has been given a symbol of the authority that he is to exercise in place of the King.

Additionally, Jesus states that whatever Peter binds on earth is also bound in heaven, etc. Since it does not make sense that God would be put into the position of ratifying anything and everything that Peter would “bind or loose”, the passage must mean that Peter is led to declare only those things which are already true in heaven. This, coupled with the promises of Jesus to 1) remain with the Church to the end of the age and 2) to send the Holy Spirit who would lead the Church into all truth, forms the basis for the infallibility on matters of faith and morals of the Catholic Church.

All other issues flow from the Apostolic Authority and Apostolic Succession found only in the Catholic Church as outlined in these (and many other) scriptures.

I expect you’ll have questions, so fire when ready.

 

[Randy_Carson]

Boy have been waiting for a forum like this. It is my lucky day. Example in the Holy Scripture it states call no man Father execpt your Father in heaven. What do you call your priest in the catholic church.

Father, of course. And the scriptures give us the example:

From a parable of Jesus
"There was a rich man who was dressed in purple and fine linen and lived in luxury every day. At his gate was laid a beggar named Lazarus, covered with sores and longing to eat what fell from the rich man’s table. Even the dogs came and licked his sores. The time came when the beggar died and the angels carried him to Abraham’s side. The rich man also died and was buried. In hell, where he was in torment, he looked up and saw Abraham far away, with Lazarus by his side. So he called to him, ’ Father Abraham, have pity on me and send Lazarus to dip the tip of his finger in water and cool my tongue, because I am in agony in this fire.’ "But Abraham replied, ‘Son, remember that in your lifetime you received your good things, while Lazarus received bad things, but now he is comforted here and you are in agony. And besides all this, between us and you a great chasm has been fixed, so that those who want to go from here to you cannot, nor can anyone cross over from there to us.’ "He answered, ‘Then I beg you, father, send Lazarus to my father’s house, for I have five brothers. Let him warn them, so that they will not also come to this place of torment.’ “Abraham replied, ‘They have Moses and the Prophets; let them listen to them.’ ‘No, father Abraham,’ he said, ‘but if someone from the dead goes to them, they will repent.’ He said to him, ‘If they do not listen to Moses and the Prophets, they will not be convinced even if someone rises from the dead.’” (Luke 16:19-31)

Did Jesus contradict His own teaching against calling someone “father” by using that very phrase in His own parable? Or have you misunderstood what our Lord meant when he said, “Call no man your father.”

From the teaching of Paul
“I do not write this to make you ashamed, but to admonish you as my beloved children. For though you have countless guides in Christ, you do not have many fathers. For I became your father in Christ Jesus through the gospel” (1 Cor. 4:14–15).

“I appeal to you for my child, Onesimus, whose father I have become in my imprisonment” (Philemon 10)

“To Timothy, my true child in the faith: grace, mercy, and peace from God the Father and Christ Jesus our Lord” (1 Timothy 1:2)

“To Titus, my true child in a common faith: grace and peace from God the Father and Christ Jesus our Savior” (Titus 1:4)

From a Letter of John
“No greater joy can I have than this, to hear that my children follow the truth” (3 John 4)

Sounds like Paul and John considered themselves spiritual fathers to all these disciples, doesn’t it? And this is from the Word of God inspired by the Holy Spirit, is it not? :yup:

 

[Randy_Carson]

Boy have been waiting for a forum like this. It is my lucky day. Example in the catholic church you teach that people are in purgotory. The scripture declare that the dead are not in purgotory by that to be absent from the body is to be present with the Lord.

Tell us, Brother Smith, what is the Apostle Paul speaking of when he writes:
“If any man builds on this foundation using gold, silver, costly stones, wood, hay or straw, his work will be shown for what it is, because the Day will bring it to light. It will be revealed with fire, and the fire will test the quality of each man’s work. If what he has built survives, he will receive his reward. If it is burned up, he will suffer loss; he himself will be saved, but only as one escaping through the flames.” (1 Corinthians 3:12-15)
Does this not say that we will be purified by fire and what we have “built” or done in this life will bring us reward (or not) depending upon how well we have built?

Some will be saved only “escaping through the flames”.

 

[Randy_Carson]

Boy have been waiting for a forum like this. It is my lucky day. Example in the bible we are instructed not to make for ourselfs any craven image of anything in heaven or on the earth. So you make images of dead saints in the catholic chuch.

Dead saints? “Have you not read in the book of Moses, in the account of the bush, how God said to him, ‘I am the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob’? He is not the God of the dead, but of the living. You are badly mistaken!” (Mark 12:26-27)

As for making images of “anything in heaven or on the earth”, consider the command of God:They traveled from Mount Hor along the route to the Red Sea, to go around Edom. But the people grew impatient on the way; they spoke against God and against Moses, and said, “Why have you brought us up out of Egypt to die in the desert? There is no bread! There is no water! And we detest this miserable food!” Then the LORD sent venomous snakes among them; they bit the people and many Israelites died. The people came to Moses and said, “We sinned when we spoke against the LORD and against you. Pray that the LORD will take the snakes away from us.” So Moses prayed for the people. The LORD said to Moses, “Make a snake and put it up on a pole; anyone who is bitten can look at it and live.” So Moses made a bronze snake and put it up on a pole. Then when anyone was bitten by a snake and looked at the bronze snake, he lived. (Numbers 21:4-9) [Hezekiah] did what was right in the eyes of the LORD, just as his father David had done. He removed the high places, smashed the sacred stones and cut down the Asherah poles. He broke into pieces the bronze snake Moses had made, for up to that time the Israelites had been burning incense to it. (It was called Nehushtan.) (2 Kings 18:3-5)The Lord commanded Moses to make an image of a snake to save the people who were bitten by serpents. However, when they began to worship it and burn incense to it, Hezekiah destroyed it as a false god.

Catholics have statues of great heroes of the past to remind us of their worthy example. Yes, we ask them to pray for us…just as you yourself might ask someone in your own congregation to pray for a need that you might have. The saints are alive and able to pray for us just as much as you and I can pray for each other.

And since they are already in heaven before the throne of God, we might consider that their prayers are even more effective than our own for “the prayer of a righteous man availeth much.” They are obviously righteous since they are already home!

 

[Randy_Carson]

On Praying to Saints

Jesus teaches from the Old Testament
“But in the account of the bush, even Moses showed that the dead rise, for he calls the Lord ‘the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob.’ He is not the God of the dead, but of the living, for to him all are alive.” (Luke 20:37-38)

Jesus teaches by parable
"There was a rich man who was dressed in purple and fine linen and lived in luxury every day. At his gate was laid a beggar named Lazarus, covered with sores and longing to eat what fell from the rich man’s table. Even the dogs came and licked his sores. "The time came when the beggar died and the angels carried him to Abraham’s side. The rich man also died and was buried. In hell, where he was in torment, he looked up and saw Abraham far away, with Lazarus by his side. So he called to him, ‘Father Abraham, have pity on me and send Lazarus to dip the tip of his finger in water and cool my tongue, because I am in agony in this fire.’ But Abraham replied, ‘Son, remember that in your lifetime you received your good things, while Lazarus received bad things, but now he is comforted here and you are in agony. And besides all this, between us and you a great chasm has been fixed, so that those who want to go from here to you cannot, nor can anyone cross over from there to us.’ He answered, ‘Then I beg you, father, send Lazarus to my father’s house, for I have five brothers. Let him warn them, so that they will not also come to this place of torment.’ Abraham replied, ‘They have Moses and the Prophets; let them listen to them.’ ‘No, father Abraham,’ he said, ‘but if someone from the dead goes to them, they will repent.’ He said to him, ‘If they do not listen to Moses and the Prophets, they will not be convinced even if someone rises from the dead.’ (Luke 16:19-31)

One “dead” guy talks to Abraham (also “dead”) and Abraham talks back? And he’s interceding for his living relatives?? I guess they’re really alive, after all. Hey, wait a cotton-pickin’ second…didn’t Jesus have one of the characters in his story call someone “Father”??? But that’s another debate…

Jesus teaches by personal example
“After six days Jesus took with him Peter, James and John the brother of James, and led them up a high mountain by themselves. There he was transfigured before them. His face shone like the sun, and his clothes became as white as the light. Just then there appeared before them Moses and Elijah, talking with Jesus.”

Wow! Jesus, was talking to two “dead” people, Moses and Elijah? Except that they’re actually alive, aren’t they? :yup:

John teaches through prophetic revelation
“He came and took the scroll from the right hand of him who sat on the throne. And when he had taken it, the four living creatures and the twenty-four elders fell down before the Lamb. Each one had a harp and they were holding golden bowls full of incense, which are the prayers of the saints.” (Revelation 5:7-8)

What’s this??? The 24 elders in heaven each have a golden bowl full of the prayers of the saints? And we’re all saints now, aren’t we, brother? So, how did they get hold of our prayers to offer to God?

“Another angel, who had a golden censer, came and stood at the altar. He was given much incense to offer, with the prayers of all the saints, on the golden altar before the throne.” (Revelation 8:3)

Oh, my! Now some angel is offering our prayers along with incense. Wait a second…incense? Isn’t that a Catholic thing? :dancing:

 

[JoeyWarren]

Example in the bible we are instructed that the spirits of the dead in christ are in a state of rest. There spirits are with the Lord. Your church is teaching that peters spirit is with the pope. **lol I dont know where you heard such a thing but it is totally false. **

Joseph Smith is starting to smell like a Seventh Day Adventist. It sounds like he believes in Soul Sleep.

 

[Cam-masta]

The reason why our Protestant brothers and sisters aren’t responding to the challenge is because they are afraid to find out one thing… that they’re wrong! :yup:

 

[marko_pasa]

I still want to HEAR

from John Smith, or from Hank Haenegraff, or from James White, or from Dave Hunt, or from Ron Rhodes, or from R.C. Sproul, or from James McCarthy, or from Keith A. Mathison, or from Charles C. Ryrie, or from Lee Strobel, or from Josh McDowell, or from whoeverelse

THAT WHERE in the Bible THEY SEE these two words “sola” and “scriptura” come together EVER??

NOT THAT IT IS MEANT OR IMPLIED OR IT TEACHES SO,

But I really need to see it IN BLACK INK ON WHITE PAPER!!

I need to see THE NAME OF THE BOOK;

I need to see THE NUMBER OF THE CHAPTER;

I need to see THE NUMBER OF THE VERSE OR VERSES…

PLEASE…!!!

I’M STILL WAITING A PROMPT ANSWER… :yawn: :bible1:

Let me help you guys a little with an example;

If you would ask me

THAT where in the Bible we see these two words “faith” and “alone” LITERALLY come together IN BLACK INK ON WHITE PAPER, not that it is MEANT or IMPLIED ???

My PROMPT ANSWER would be

JAMES 2:24 :bible1: You see that a person is justified by what he does and not by FAITH ALONE…(The Holy Bible, The New International Version, Zondervan Publishing House, Grand Rapids, Michigan, 1984) CLEARLY LITERAL AND SIMPLE…:yup:

GOOD LUCK