Please help refute this....Sola scripture vs Roman Catholicism

  • Thread starter Thread starter suzyq_psu
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
This is where Faith comes into the discussion—again. Without faith, it is impossible to please God. That faith is not of ourselves, it is the gift of God. See Ephesians 2:8-10, Confraternity version brings this out nicely. If we are truly the workmanship of God through creation in Christ Jesus, we have the courage of conviction, having been born again as Jesus described to Nicodemus in John 3. Nicodemus was a right reverend doctor of divinity who did not know the requirement of being born from above. He had not a clue. Many right reverend doctors of divinity still do not understand what being born again means. The power of regeneration changes one’s spirit of God separated from God to a spirit rejoined to God to walk in newness of life–born again–in the spirit. The mind is not born again nor the flesh. They are in a constant battle with the born again spirit. The real battle is just starting. Satan will go to great lengths in an effort to get a believer back–using confusion and deception and false prophets. The Word of God is the only standard which is dependable. The advice of right reverend doctors has proven to be consistently wrong–especially when they teach for doctrines the commandments of men.

The words of Paul the Apostle: “I know whom I have believed; and am persuaded that He is able to keep that which I have committed unto Him against That Day…”

Jesus has His followers locked in the fold–another they will not follow. See John 10:1-16, The Shepherd and His sheep. True believers know what to do.

Are you born from above my friend? If not, this may be the last opportunity. All of us are only a heartbeat from eternity. I know, having been in various fibrillations for several years.

Have a blessed evening,

James Least
 
**This is where Faith comes into the discussion—**again. Without faith, it is impossible to please God. ** That faith **is not of ourselves, it is the gift of God. See Ephesians 2:8-10, Confraternity version brings this out nicely. If we are truly the workmanship of God through creation in Christ Jesus, we have the courage of conviction, having been born again as Jesus described to Nicodemus in John 3. Nicodemus was a right reverend doctor of divinity who did not know the requirement of being born from above. He had not a clue. Many right reverend doctors of divinity still do not understand what being born again means. The power of regeneration changes one’s spirit of God separated from God to a spirit rejoined to God to walk in newness of life–born again–in the spirit. The mind is not born again nor the flesh. They are in a constant battle with the born again spirit. The real battle is just starting. Satan will go to great lengths in an effort to get a believer back–using confusion and deception and false prophets. The Word of God is the only standard which is dependable. The advice of right reverend doctors has proven to be consistently wrong–especially when they teach for doctrines the commandments of men.

The words of Paul the Apostle: “I know whom I have believed; and am persuaded that He is able to keep that which I have committed unto Him against That Day…”

Jesus has His followers locked in the fold–another they will not follow. See John 10:1-16, The Shepherd and His sheep. True believers know what to do.

Are you born from above my friend? If not, this may be the last opportunity. All of us are only a heartbeat from eternity. I know, having been in various fibrillations for several years.

Have a blessed evening,

James Least
Least,

This is typical of what I recall that you have done in the past. You do not answer questions. You preach. What you believe is not in question. How you came to that belief is in question. You point to Faith and then use a Bible Verse. How do you know that the Bible from which you obtained that verse is true. That is the question you avoid in answering.

Your preaching creates a dilema. Only you know what it means to be born again based on what you believe to be true based on the Bible that you read that you cannot prove to me is true. If you cannot prove it to be true then we have no common ground to discuss the discourse with Nicodemus.

The discourse with Nicodemus, being born again, Faith and true believers are not in question. What is in question is how do you prove that the Bible is true and you avoided that question entirely. You may want to consider that if you continue to preach that the only answer I will post in response to you is…Amen brother…Amen.🙂

I hope you understand.😉
 
Have we not spent enough time contemplating our navels way up here on Mars Hill?

The seed is sown. The fields are ripe. We have no excuses. This world will pass away, with fervent heat, along with all the works. The Word of God abides forever. I make no apology for preaching the Word of God. Jesus told His disciples to preach until killed or raptured–most of them were killed–martyred–that is what the word witness means.

Where will we spend eternity? Certainly not is a villa on the sides of Mars Hill. The Greeks mortgaged it to China anyway.

Peace,

James Least
 
Have we not spent enough time contemplating our navels way up here on Mars Hill?

The seed is sown. The fields are ripe. We have no excuses. This world will pass away, with fervent heat, along with all the works. The Word of God abides forever. I make no apology for preaching the Word of God. Jesus told His disciples to preach until killed or raptured–most of them were killed–martyred–that is what the word witness means.

Where will we spend eternity? Certainly not is a villa on the sides of Mars Hill. The Greeks mortgaged it to China anyway.

Peace,

James Least
Can’t answer the question?
 
Blessings to you this beautiful Sunday,

A grassroots proof which may not hold up in the hallowed halls of religious academia: The Bible is still here–a glaring witness to the depravity of man and the grace of God. Many of us seem hung up in jots and tittles. Scoffers, skeptics and professors of higher textual criticism have come and gone. There she is translated into dozens of languages–also in braille. We are without excuse. The gates of hell have not prevailed, as Jesus promised. Yet the god of this world still assails the Word and the Bride. Lucifer knows his reign is coming to a close. He redoubles effort to deny, confuse and deceive–kind of like insurance companies.

Eternity is a heartbeat away–then what? Are we ready?

Peace,
James Least
 
Blessings to you this beautiful Sunday,

A grassroots proof which may not hold up in the hallowed halls of religious academia: The Bible is still here–a glaring witness to the depravity of man and the grace of God. Many of us seem hung up in jots and tittles. Scoffers, skeptics and professors of higher textual criticism have come and gone. There she is translated into dozens of languages–also in braille. We are without excuse. The gates of hell have not prevailed, as Jesus promised. Yet the god of this world still assails the Word and the Bride. Lucifer knows his reign is coming to a close. He redoubles effort to deny, confuse and deceive–kind of like insurance companies.

Eternity is a heartbeat away–then what? Are we ready?

Peace,
James Least
So…no answer to the question then? Can’t answer it? Or afraid to?
 
Have we not spent enough time contemplating our navels way up here on Mars Hill?

The seed is sown. The fields are ripe. We have no excuses. This world will pass away, with fervent heat, along with all the works. The Word of God abides forever. I make no apology for preaching the Word of God. Jesus told His disciples to preach until killed or raptured–most of them were killed–martyred–that is what the word witness means.

Where will we spend eternity? Certainly not is a villa on the sides of Mars Hill. The Greeks mortgaged it to China anyway.

Peace,

James Least
Amen.🙂
 
Blessings to you this beautiful Sunday,

A grassroots proof which may not hold up in the hallowed halls of religious academia: The Bible is still here–a glaring witness to the depravity of man and the grace of God. Many of us seem hung up in jots and tittles. Scoffers, skeptics and professors of higher textual criticism have come and gone. There she is translated into dozens of languages–also in braille. We are without excuse. The gates of hell have not prevailed, as Jesus promised. Yet the god of this world still assails the Word and the Bride. Lucifer knows his reign is coming to a close. He redoubles effort to deny, confuse and deceive–kind of like insurance companies.

Eternity is a heartbeat away–then what? Are we ready?

Peace,
James Least
Amen:)
 
So…no answer to the question then? Can’t answer it? Or afraid to?
Far,

Ofthesons and Least cannot answer the question without baring their souls to the reality of how they came to believe Scripture was Scripture.

They have an answer to the question however probably within the audience that they discuss with are never challenged with “Ok, I hear everything you say, the Bible is true…How can you prove that the Bible is true”…In the audience they align with, church with, socialize with probably they all accept this as a conclusion.

Fear is relevant. It is fearful to examine a long held belief and the preaching is to be heard the sound of a drowning man…no answer…just prayers for help.

There will be no answer from ofthesons as this person is stuck in their presuppositions and never took the time to examine anything beyond that. If you were in their shoes you would probably wonder why this approach that worked so well has met a wall of “prove the Bible to be True”…imagine a salesman selling with a script that worked until one day someone challenged the script…what now? Usually a salesman goes somewhere where there is not challenged where there will be a sale rather than examine the script.

The Least is preaching and this is evidence of fear for sure. It is evidence of sadness. It is evidence of hope that somehow someone will engage in the dialogue and be sidetracked and that is why I suggested for the Least that the only response absent a response is Amen…

You and I both know that Sola Scriptura cannot be proven, that the Bible cannot be proven to be true unless certain admissions are made and those that hold these beliefs cannot bring themselves to that point.

I believe that the Bible is true and that the Scripture is Scripture and that Scripture properly interpreted is a guide to the rule of Faith however I admit what Least and ofthsons deny and that is where they are stuck. Expect no responses from ofthesons other than gibberish or from Least other than preaching.
 
If, as you contend, the verity of the Word of God cannot be proven, is it possible to contend that it cannot be disproven? A basic rule of apparently ancient stuff being authentic or not is that it is considered authentic unless proven false. It is the old innocent until proven guilty concept. As already pointed out, many skeptics and scoffers have come and gone still unsuccessful in trying to disprove Jesus’s existence and purpose. Man wanting to be God is making a full circle–we get that from Lucifer, the angel of light. New Age Humanism is really popular–it is very compatible with our Narcissistic society. What need is there for a word from God The Creator?

There is still a word from the one crying in the wilderness which applies even today: Repent, the Kingdom of God is at hand. Just a note on time, probably more than a few picoseconds: if a thousand years is one day to God, we are coming up on the end of the second day since Jesus walked the earth. Further, the sixth day since the Creation.

So what? The Sabbath of God is nearer than one may think. It will not be a rest for those who deny His Word.

You guys are tough. The Spirit the Holy can break the toughest–see the adventures of Saul of Tarsus on the road to Damascus, Book of Acts. Jesus blinded Saul and knocked him down to get his attention. Paul was opthamologically impaired for the rest of his life. The Lord used him to plant many churches and to receive what amounts to a large part of the New Testament.

Will you pray for me? I am already praying for you.

Selah,

James Least
 
Far,

Ofthesons and Least cannot answer the question without baring their souls to the reality of how they came to believe Scripture was Scripture.

They have an answer to the question however probably within the audience that they discuss with are never challenged with “Ok, I hear everything you say, the Bible is true…How can you prove that the Bible is true”…In the audience they align with, church with, socialize with probably they all accept this as a conclusion.

Fear is relevant. It is fearful to examine a long held belief and the preaching is to be heard the sound of a drowning man…no answer…just prayers for help.

There will be no answer from ofthesons as this person is stuck in their presuppositions and never took the time to examine anything beyond that. If you were in their shoes you would probably wonder why this approach that worked so well has met a wall of “prove the Bible to be True”…imagine a salesman selling with a script that worked until one day someone challenged the script…what now? Usually a salesman goes somewhere where there is not challenged where there will be a sale rather than examine the script.

The Least is preaching and this is evidence of fear for sure. It is evidence of sadness. It is evidence of hope that somehow someone will engage in the dialogue and be sidetracked and that is why I suggested for the Least that the only response absent a response is Amen…

You and I both know that Sola Scriptura cannot be proven, that the Bible cannot be proven to be true unless certain admissions are made and those that hold these beliefs cannot bring themselves to that point.

I believe that the Bible is true and that the Scripture is Scripture and that Scripture properly interpreted is a guide to the rule of Faith however I admit what Least and ofthsons deny and that is where they are stuck. Expect no responses from ofthesons other than gibberish or from Least other than preaching.
There is a confidence about you, but the reality is that you have no idea what you’re talking about. And you don’t seem to pay attention very well or you’re just blind. I’m still tied up with other things.

I’ll address you again soon enough.
 
If, as you contend, the verity of the Word of God cannot be proven, is it possible to contend that it cannot be disproven? A basic rule of apparently ancient stuff being authentic or not is that it is considered authentic unless proven false. It is the old innocent until proven guilty concept. As already pointed out, many skeptics and scoffers have come and gone still unsuccessful in trying to disprove Jesus’s existence and purpose. Man wanting to be God is making a full circle–we get that from Lucifer, the angel of light. New Age Humanism is really popular–it is very compatible with our Narcissistic society. What need is there for a word from God The Creator?

There is still a word from the one crying in the wilderness which applies even today: Repent, the Kingdom of God is at hand. Just a note on time, probably more than a few picoseconds: if a thousand years is one day to God, we are coming up on the end of the second day since Jesus walked the earth. Further, the sixth day since the Creation.

So what? The Sabbath of God is nearer than one may think. It will not be a rest for those who deny His Word.

You guys are tough. The Spirit the Holy can break the toughest–see the adventures of Saul of Tarsus on the road to Damascus, Book of Acts. Jesus blinded Saul and knocked him down to get his attention. Paul was opthamologically impaired for the rest of his life. The Lord used him to plant many churches and to receive what amounts to a large part of the New Testament.

Will you pray for me? I am already praying for you.

Selah,

James Least
Amen.
 
[Start with this…

**The Bible is true because…👍

**
Not the Bible is true because I believe**🤷

Thank you:bowdown:

I will pay attention and pray that scales will fall from my eyes as you provide your evidence.🙂
 
You are no Greg Bahnsen, sorry!
I am going to give you a more thorough response when I can, but let me set forth some things.

You may not think this is important, but while I do profess to be a Presuppositionalist, I do not subscribe to Greg Bahnsen’s version of it. I don’t even believe you can rightly call his method/apologetic ‘presuppositional’.

I’d like to refer you to a link that just might help you see the difference and get a better handle as to what I’ve been saying or have been trying to say in essence. The attached link leads to a page in which there is a written debate between an unbeliever and Vincent Cheung. I believe the debate is relevant, because if I can recall correctly, Cheung challenges the unbeliever on beliefs that everyone (even the so-called “Presuppositionalist”) takes for granted, but no one ever objectively questions. Even if the debate doesn’t seem to present much detail as to where he is coming from, he has made publications openly available on webpages and free pdf files.

www.vincentcheung.com/biblical-rationalism-vs-psycho-assertionism/

I’m not really convinced that reading his material will make very much of a difference because (1) you probably don’t have the time or interest to do this and (2) because the attempted refutations I have seen have evidenced a misunderstanding of him too.

I’ll get back to you!

Have a nice Sunday!
 
Prove to me the Bible is true… Is this an individual challenge? Or may anyone participate? If the latter, may I offer my viewpoint with a minimal amount of consternation and contempt and a maximum of love and kindness–both of which are kind of foreign notions considering the subject at hand: Is there an infallible standard which man has not corrupted? This has been the bone of contention for 16-17 centuries–it is still going. It is also a pivotal point of Truth–what did God say? What does man say about what God said?

Allowing the doctrines of man alongside the Truth of God’s Word implies that man has a problem with what God has revealed in His Word. It is somehow inadequate or untrustworthy. So we have volumes of what learned men say God might have said and what God might have meant, adinfinitum.

For those of us unable to make it through Oxford, Cambridge and/or Vatican U, how does one sort through all of this? See John 3:5, in context. All of this is a futile exercise in religious semantics if one has not the spiritual discernment which accompanies being “born from above”. Nicodemus, a right reverend doctor of divinity did not understand. Jesus chided him for being so high and so dumb.

This should be enough to get the “light” saber slashing.

Peacefully,

James Least
The problem isn’t with God’s Word. The problem is how men can misinterpert God’s Word… Remember when Satan tempted Jesus in the desert- He used Scripture. Remember Peter’s talk about how false teachers will twist Scripture? The issue here is how is God’s Word rightly divided. Any can claim the Holy Spirit’s guidance, but you also have good Christians with right hearts, getting into some serious disagreements about how Scripture should be taught.

You say that we Catholics are following men’s doctrines. But I want to point something out to you. Scripture is Tradition. Jesus didn’t come down from Heaven and hand the apostles a book and say this is Scripture. Now he came down from heaven, died, rose again, and left the Holy Spirit to his apostles. With the statement that He would be with them forever, and guide them through all time. Some of these apostles and their followers wrote down their accounts, and wrote letters. The Church throughout the centuries, and once again we as Catholics, believe guided by the Holy Spirit, codified these as Scripture along with the Old Testament.

I want to point out that there was a debate in Jesus’s time between Scripture only, and Scripture and Tradition. Between the Pharisees and the Saducees. The Saddacuees used Scripture only to deny things like the Resurrection. The Pharisees accepted oral tradition and rejected the Saducees arguments on that basis. Jesus very much sided with the Pharisees on this and told the Saducees that they don’t understand Scripture.

Big Tradition for Catholics is pretty much if the Church has taught something one way throughout time. I.e the Church has strongly taught Real Presence in Communion, and has interpeted Jesus words literally, than that’s the way we will continue to interpert those verses. Its not up for discussion. Its how we have indentified false teachers like Arius, who have attempted to argue things like Jesus isn’t God. We’ll know Arius, your wrong we’ve always taught Jesus was God-get away from us. If there’s something that leads to a major disagreement than a Church council as accordance with Scripture is called. We trust the Holy Spirit to guide that Council as He’s promised to do.

Once again what I’m going to point out to you is that HOW we Catholics choose to divide the Word of God is very Scriptural. Scripture after all is clear about someone coming to you with a Gospel other than the one you have claimed.

Its far more Scriptural than everyone going to Scriptures coming with their own conclusion and then seperating, which is what we see with Protestantism. Scripture after all is clear that we are suppose to be in agreement.

In the end for me its about following Jesus, and recognizing that no I Rebecca am not the be end and end all. That I don’t have to lean on my own understanding. That God has sent His Spirit to us Christians throughout all time and the Holy Spirit just doesn’t say one thing one century and another throughout. Its about trusting Jesus that his promise to never leave us or forsake us is true.

I guess at the end we Catholics can be wrong about things (we Catholics certainly have done some bad things in the past, in the name of our faith.)… But the heart of Catholicism, I think is correct and humble. This is a faith that has been passed down to us for 2,000 years. This is the faith we received and we will stand and fight for that faith, till the end of days.
 
There is a confidence about you, but the reality is that you have no idea what you’re talking about. And you don’t seem to pay attention very well or you’re just blind. I’m still tied up with other things.

I’ll address you again soon enough.
If you have time enough to post and read other posts, you have time enough to answer a simple question, as does James the Least.
 
I am going to give you a more thorough response when I can, but let me set forth some things.

You may not think this is important, but while I do profess to be a Presuppositionalist, I do not subscribe to Greg Bahnsen’s version of it. I don’t even believe you can rightly call his method/apologetic ‘presuppositional’.

I’d like to refer you to a link that just might help you see the difference and get a better handle as to what I’ve been saying or have been trying to say in essence. The attached link leads to a page in which there is a written debate between an unbeliever and Vincent Cheung. I believe the debate is relevant, because if I can recall correctly, Cheung challenges the unbeliever on beliefs that everyone (even the so-called “Presuppositionalist”) takes for granted, but no one ever objectively questions. Even if the debate doesn’t seem to present much detail as to where he is coming from, he has made publications openly available on webpages and free pdf files.

www.vincentcheung.com/biblical-rationalism-vs-psycho-assertionism/

I’m not really convinced that reading his material will make very much of a difference because (1) you probably don’t have the time or interest to do this and (2) because the attempted refutations I have seen have evidenced a misunderstanding of him too.

I’ll get back to you!

Have a nice Sunday!
Of,

I read the argument and found it a waste of time. I see Chung throwing in statements I do not necessarily agree with.
Now, of course I would not agree with this very broad statement, although this does apply to many people’s theologies. I would say that in those cases they speak neither for Scripture nor for me, just as not every atheist represents all atheists
As for faith, as I have stated in my books, Christians ought to believe in all the propositions in Scripture, and all the propositions that is necessarily deduced from it.
The question who is deducing and what are these propositions. Cheung mentions his deduced propositions and compares them to…
Since you mentioned Sproul, Packer, and Carson, I will also point out that my theology also differ from them on several important points. For example, they say that election is active and reprobation is passive — I do not believe that, but I believe that both are active. On this matter I am more like Herman Hoeksema and Gordon Clark.
I don’t find that I would lean towards any of them and their deduced propositions are in the long run fallible interpretations as no Protestant is infallible. So why would I go there?

In the course of his argument he then draws on a supposition and throws out a verse
I never said that God is beyond logic.
John 1:1 says, “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.” The word translated “Word” is logos, which is just as (or even more so) properly translated “Reason” or “Logic.”
I went to Cheungs website…

http://www.vincentcheung.com/other/suffprofit2011.pdf

and under sufficiency of Scripture I found this…the beginning of his talk…
But as for you, continue in what you have learned and have become
convinced of, because you know those from whom you learned it,
and how from infancy you have known the holy Scriptures, which
are able to make you wise for salvation through faith in Christ Jesus.
All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking,
correcting and training in righteousness, so that the man of God
may be thoroughly equipped for every good work.1
Paul writes that “All Scripture is God-breathed.” There is some debate about the correct
translation for “All Scripture.” Of course, we should strive for an accurate rendering, but
the dangers of other translations have been exaggerated. Whether we translate it “all
Scripture” or “every Scripture” makes no essential difference – the former declares the
whole of Scripture inspired, and the latter declares every part of Scripture inspired. Either
way, all of Scripture and every part of it is God-breathed.
He then makes a giant leap in the discussion and realizes that there is discomfort and says this…:rotfl:
It is therefore unreasonable to assume that Paul must refer to only the Old Testament
when he says “All Scripture.” As Robert Reymond writes, Paul would have been willing to include, and "almost certainly did include, within the technical category of ‘all
Scripture’ the New Testament documents, including his own, as well."5 Since the New
Testament documents are regarded as inspired and even called “Scripture,” we may with
certainty regard them as “God-breathed.” Both the Old Testament and the New Testament
are “Scripture,” and they make up one book that is our Bible. Therefore, there is no
problem in regarding the verse as asserting, “The whole Bible is God-breathed.” In fact,
there is no excuse in thinking otherwise.
Realize that this is a fallible Protestant providing you a deduced proposition that if you believe will allow for an interesting discussion. This deduction is Extrabiblical. Therefore which extrabiblical proposition do we trust? A fallible Protestant deduction for all Protestants are fallible or something else? That fallible Protestant deduction does not coincide with what Scripture that I believe teaches.

So we are left with the question…

How do you, ofthesons, prove that the Bible is true.:confused:
 
The problem isn’t with God’s Word. The problem is how men can misinterpert God’s Word… Remember when Satan tempted Jesus in the desert- He used Scripture. Remember Peter’s talk about how false teachers will twist Scripture? The issue here is how is God’s Word rightly divided. Any can claim the Holy Spirit’s guidance, but you also have good Christians with right hearts, getting into some serious disagreements about how Scripture should be taught.

You say that we Catholics are following men’s doctrines. But I want to point something out to you. Scripture is Tradition. Jesus didn’t come down from Heaven and hand the apostles a book and say this is Scripture. Now he came down from heaven, died, rose again, and left the Holy Spirit to his apostles. With the statement that He would be with them forever, and guide them through all time. Some of these apostles and their followers wrote down their accounts, and wrote letters. The Church throughout the centuries, and once again we as Catholics, believe guided by the Holy Spirit, codified these as Scripture along with the Old Testament.

I want to point out that there was a debate in Jesus’s time between Scripture only, and Scripture and Tradition. Between the Pharisees and the Saducees. The Saddacuees used Scripture only to deny things like the Resurrection. The Pharisees accepted oral tradition and rejected the Saducees arguments on that basis. Jesus very much sided with the Pharisees on this and told the Saducees that they don’t understand Scripture.

Big Tradition for Catholics is pretty much if the Church has taught something one way throughout time. I.e the Church has strongly taught Real Presence in Communion, and has interpeted Jesus words literally, than that’s the way we will continue to interpert those verses. Its not up for discussion. Its how we have indentified false teachers like Arius, who have attempted to argue things like Jesus isn’t God. We’ll know Arius, your wrong we’ve always taught Jesus was God-get away from us. If there’s something that leads to a major disagreement than a Church council as accordance with Scripture is called. We trust the Holy Spirit to guide that Council as He’s promised to do.

Once again what I’m going to point out to you is that HOW we Catholics choose to divide the Word of God is very Scriptural. Scripture after all is clear about someone coming to you with a Gospel other than the one you have claimed.

Its far more Scriptural than everyone going to Scriptures coming with their own conclusion and then seperating, which is what we see with Protestantism. Scripture after all is clear that we are suppose to be in agreement.

In the end for me its about following Jesus, and recognizing that no I Rebecca am not the be end and end all. That I don’t have to lean on my own understanding. That God has sent His Spirit to us Christians throughout all time and the Holy Spirit just doesn’t say one thing one century and another throughout. Its about trusting Jesus that his promise to never leave us or forsake us is true.

I guess at the end we Catholics can be wrong about things (we Catholics certainly have done some bad things in the past, in the name of our faith.)… But the heart of Catholicism, I think is correct and humble. This is a faith that has been passed down to us for 2,000 years. This is the faith we received and we will stand and fight for that faith, till the end of days.
Amen.:extrahappy:
 
I will say this I feel that with the way Protestants use Scripture, Scripture loses its authority because you have people who can argue passages until the Lord comes. There has to be a means for the rest of us to know what is the RIGHT interpertation, did the Lord mean for us to just argue back and forth about it. Or is there a means of knowing at least on the major issues what is right and wrong… Of course there are some things we will never know. Scripture does talk about us avoiding getting into arguments about controversies. But on the major issues and you have some major issues here like Can you Lose your Salvation. We must have means to come to agreement.

I think we Catholics need to emphasize what the real issue here and its not on Scripture’s authority. Rather the issue is how Scripture is suppose to be interpreted. How we are suppose to divide it. I’d point out that we Catholics are being honest when we say we are using our Tradition to interpert Scripture everyone does.
 
I said that the Bible is not provable, but that there is justification for belief in it.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top