They are not opposed to one another, Non, and should not be studied separately from one another, because the NT was created out of the CAtholic Teaching. That is why there are no contradictions between the two. They are two strands of the One Thread of Divine Revelation, delivered once and for all to the Saints.
You have to say that; to say otherwise is to deny your faith. By promoting something outside of Scripture makes is superior, not equal because Scripture does not afford and warns against such practices. You canât even validate the Catholic priesthood from Scripture.
They are not opposed to one another, Non, and should not be studied separately from one another, because the NT was created out of the CAtholic Teaching. That is why there are no contradictions between the two. They are two strands of the One Thread of Divine Revelation, delivered once and for all to the Saints.
By the way, there are several people calling for you on this thread.
Paging Non.
Paging Non.
Please come the thread Non!
Actually, most ofthem do. All who remain in Christ will live forever. Though I grant there are some that have not, and will be in the eternal fire.
Careful Non, your anti-Catholic hostility is leaking again!
You know, this would have been a terrible problem for the Apostles, who did that all the time!
This is very true. To embrace what the Reformers invented 1500 years after Christ would be to embrace âa different gospelâ. The Children of the Reformers donât realize this, and accuse Catholics of having the âdifferent gospelâ because they never have received the original!
No, I promote a lot of great textbooks in my field of expertise. Such an act does not make them superior to scripture. That is faulty reasoning.
Well, I can, but as you pointed out, it is not necessary. you can read about the role of presbyters yourself, if you were willing.
Please use the quoting system properly. Itâs not fair to Randy that you put your comments inside and mingled with Randyâs very decent and appropriate comments.
Iâm not saying that.
The only thing Iâm objecting to is your claim that it is impossible for Melchizedek to be Shem.
I donât quite understand the last question as it relates.
Iâm not saying anything against what you are saying here, but you are mixing apples and oranges. (Heb 7:3) is specifically contrasting the pre-Levitical and Levitical priesthoods in regards to bloodlines and age limits. This verse does not deal with sacrifice (which happens elswhere).
Your literal reading of (Heb 7:3) is unfounded and does not make your case. Jesus did have a father, mother, and ancestry (Mat 1:1-17) and Melchizedek resembled the Son of God this way.
Thank you, and I agree with everything you said!
I didnât understand what he was saying because it had nothing to do with our specific conversation.
Melchizadek canât be Shem because Shemâs Rite of Priesthood would have been the same as Noahâs.
I am reading Hebrews 7:3 with the understanding that the author is referring Melchizadek and not Jesus.
**
That is an old argument; the teacher and father of spiritual things of God such as a Rabbi or Catholic priest is the obvious reference. That is so obvious, but in order to validate your teaching of your faith you have to use the weak argument that has been around for hundreds of years. True believers easily recognize the point Jesus was making. I am not saying you are not a true believer I donât know you personally.
Question, How do you know what books are to be in the bible if the bible doesnât tell you this? How do you know which books were inspired and which werenât? Are you aware that the Corinthians accepted the Letter of Clement as inspired. Should it be included into the bible. One step further; Did you know that many Christians didnât accept the book of Revelation as inspired. Should it be removed from the bible. Pressing on, how do you know that Mark wrote the Gospel of Mark. No book or letter in the bible tells you it was. So how do you know it was? Better yet, how do you know which Mark wrote Mark? The bible doesnât give this information. So you have to rely on something outside of the bible to come to this knowledge. Such as Tradition.
Last time I use that font - sorry will clean it up next time./SIZE]Actually, most ofthem do. All who remain in Christ will live forever. Though I grant there are some that have not, and will be in the eternal fire. Actually a Catholic cannot know his destiny until after to earthly life. That is why many are praying for John Paul II; help him get out of purgatory.
Catholics are not confined to scripture because we have received the Apostolic faith from those to whom it was committed. God has preserved this faith, and prevented it from error, just as He promised. He never promised that to a Catholic Church and you know it.
Scripture was never intended to be the âauthorityâ for the Catholic Church. God gave this role to the Apostles, and their successors, the bishops. Authority requires elements that are not possessed of Scripture.
**Actually you are in error again; delegated authority would be an accurate way with Christ being the âChief Cornerstoneâ. There is a big difference between giving and delegating his authority. This same authority has been given to all the Pastors who are faithful to Godâs word, not the false teachers that add and subtract with their rituals and traditions that usurp the authority of the King.
**
You know, this would have been a terrible problem for the Apostles, who did that all the time!
No again you are incorrect; you are slipping. Since the Apostles were inspired by God, the very Spirit of God speaking through them; not stuff they make up as time marches along like the false teachers do; thus becoming heretics by usurping the role and position of Jesus. In the end the gates of hell will fall and great will be her fall.
Further evidence that Sola Scriptura misses the mark.
Do you even know what Sola Scriptura confirms and what it doesnât?
This is very true. To embrace what the Reformers invented 1500 years after Christ would be to embrace âa different gospelâ. The Children of the Reformers donât realize this, and accuse Catholics of having the âdifferent gospelâ because they never have received the original! the Catholic Church has be inventing another gospel over time; Iâve even seen in another one of you posts speaking of changes within the church, so you yourself know it. As thought there is more and more revelation. Why not believe the JWâs or the MormonsâŚthey have extra revelation just like the Catholic church, so why should anyone pick one or the other? God told us Scripture was sufficient to bring us to salvation; what more does there need to be? Nothing. Salvation is the ultimate prize.
No, I promote a lot of great textbooks in my field of expertise. Such an act does not make them superior to scripture. That is faulty reasoning.
No it doesnât; it the presuppositions that make debate a rational argument. I presume the Bible is the only book inspired by God and God is the ultimate authority, which it and He is. You make another set of presuppositions.
Scripure, in fact, warns in many places that the disciples should hold fast the the traditions, obey their elders, and listen to their Apostles.
That is the funny thing about Catholic apologist; they have to stick to traditions as being equal to Scripture by using the Bible alone; this is why they attack and train you all to attack Sola Scriptura because it the rock that holds all those arguments against the leaking of other doctrines into Christianity.
Well, I can, but as you pointed out, it is not necessary. you can read about the role of presbyters yourself, if you were willing.
The Sacred Traditions are not opposed or contrary to scripture, as you seem to think. The Catholic Church does not hold them superior to it, either.
**
Here is an example of how you are wrong. Mary as co-mediatrix.**