Protestant interpretations...

[Des]

And what did the Early Church Fathers say:

’Not all that the Lord did was written down, but only what was deemed sufficient, either from the point of view of morals, or from the point of view of dogmas.’ Cyril of Alexandria (died A.D. 444) (Comm. John 12).

lol, He believed Mary remained a Virgin. He was one of the biggest advocates of Mary having the Mother of God title.
As you like to do with Scripture, you took that way out of context.

*“The Word himself, coming into the Blessed Virgin herself, assumed for himself his own temple from the substance of the Virgin and came forth from her a man in all that could be externally discerned, while interiorly he was true God. Therefore he kept his Mother a virgin even after her childbearing” (*Cyril of Alexandria - Against Those Who Do Not Wish to Confess That the Holy Virgin is the Mother of God 4 [A.D. 430]).

’eing most properly assured that the Scriptures are indeed perfect, since they were spoken by the Word of God and His Spirit.’ Irenaeus (ca. A.D. 140-ca. A.D. 202) (Against Heresies 2,28:2).

Yes, the Catholic Church acknowledges that Scripture is indeed perfect. No errors in it whatsoever.

’[T]he tokens of truth are more exact as drawn from Scripture, than from other sources.’ Athanasius, the great Patriarch of Alexandria (Nicene Definition 32).

He was at First Council of Nicaea in 325, the council that produced the Nicene Creed and anathematized Arius. He obviously believed in the Catholic Church councils to define truths definitively for the rest of the faithful.

Ginger how could I miss it. And PLEASE compare it to the CCC. And then show me the DIFFERENCE!

I wouldn’t bother to continue to ask her rinnie. Ginger seems to think if she says something enough without evidence it becomes truth.

 

[Ginger2]

Then, Ginger the world has stopped! We agree! We agree that there is an authority (The Church) to say if a doctrine is right or wrong. That’s exactly what Tert did! Excellent!

• Michael

Tertullian is speaking out against making claims that are not clearly written in the Scriptures and reading into those Scriptures what is not there.

Where is it you see Tertullian say the RC can interpret even what is not written?

Please provide the chapter so I can see it.

Tertullian is making a point much like I did against free bible students when they said there were two earths, one destroyed by satan and another created from its debris.

That is obviously not written in the Scriptures, but fanciful theories added to them without justification.

Ginger

 

[Luke65]

I was being sarcastic. Did you not see the icon??

It is irrelevant to me whether a Catholic or a Protestant mistranslates the Scriptures - either way it is wrong.

That is the point of my post.

I did not say you misquoted that particular version. I said the verse you quoted does not say “obey”. Your quote was not accurate to the original text, that is your error, not mine.

Since that is the only version I know of that says “obey” I did assume you chose it intentionally. Was I wrong?

Ginger

Yes, you were wrong that I used a Catholic Bible, and you’re somehow ignorant of many other translations. But here’s the bottom line: St. John used the Greek word “pisteuo” (4100) for “believe”; if he wanted to simply say “not believe”, he would have used the word “apisteo” (569), but he did not. He used a different and much stronger word, “apeitheo” (544). Here is how AMP has it: “But whoever disobeys (is unbelieving toward, refuses to trust in, disregards, is not subject to) the Son”. It’s not my fault if dishonest Protestant translators, like ol’ King James, want you to think that all you have to do is believe in Christ and you’re already saved.

 

[teak421]

Tertullian is speaking out against making claims that are not clearly written in the Scriptures and reading into those Scriptures what is not there.

Where is it you see Tertullian say the RC can interpret even what is not written?

Please provide the chapter so I can see it.

Tertullian is making a point much like I did against free bible students when they said there were two earths, one destroyed by satan and another created from its debris.

That is obviously not written in the Scriptures, but fanciful theories added to them without justification.

Ginger

Look above for the quotes from Athanasius… Gives you insight into a major player in the Arian crisis.

Also, Ginger… You are incorrect. Arias used SCRIPTURE to put forward his heretical views, not fanciful theories as you put it… Common, you know that… Even Tert said that…

Cya! Heading home! BBQing!!!

• Michael

 

[ronin67]

[SIGN][/SIGN]

Ed I just am speechless with that one! I gotta take a few minutes to let that one sink in. For the love of Peter even The scripture tells you not to go by scripture alone. But to go by SS and Oral Tradition. And by the Early Fathers of the Church! Holy Smokes!

Yes, it does say this, but in many cases the oral traditions/ceremonial practices of the Catholic church takes prescedent over the bible. Example, the one you avoided answering in my orginal text, calling a priest father. I know how the FATHER addressed this issue and so do you if you have read the bible, yet it still happens, why??

Take Care and May God Bless!

Ed

 

[ronin67]

[SIGN][/SIGN]

Its not. Tell me what does this mean and why did Jesus say it? Jn 20:23 Jesus told his apostles If YOU forgive the sins of ANY they are forgiven if You retain the sins of any they are retained. Now if that ain’t scripture what is?

Yes, it does say that but not in the context and script the Catholic church uses (Forgive me father for I have sinned). The only Father I know is God our Heavenly Father (and “NO”, my earthly father is addressed as “Dad”). Now if that ain’t scripture then I don’t know what is. Yes, a game of scripture tag! I love this forum (no joke).

Take Care and May God Bless!

Ed

 

[Des]

What is interesting on this little search is that Luke uses the things that were heard and put them in writing and still uses the word “katecheo” in chapter 1

"it seemed fitting for me as well, having investigated everything carefully from the beginning, to write {it} out for you in consecutive order, most excellent Theophilus; so that you may know the exact truth about the things you have been taught (katecheo).

So Luke is writing the things down that were taught orally, which is true of the Bible we have today. Good example of the oral being put to the written to be better preserved; this was true of the OT as well.

The Church gives us the Cathechism so that we may know ‘exactly’ what the Church teaches. Does this mean that we need the Catechism only? No. So you fall very short of the meaning you’re trying to invoke from that passage.

Mt 9:2 And they brought to Him a paralytic lying on a bed. *Seeing their faith, Jesus said *to the paralytic, “Take courage, son; your sins are forgiven.”

Mt 9:22But Jesus turning and seeing her said, “Daughter, take courage; your faith has made you well.” At once the woman was made well.

Mt 9:29Then He touched their eyes, saying, “It shall be done to you according to your faith.”

Lu 7:50And He said to the woman, “Your faith has saved you; go in peace.”

You can take your argument up with Jesus rather than me (above)?

1Pe 1:5 who are protected by the power of God through faith for a salvation ready to be revealed in the last time.

2Pe 1:1 Simon Peter, a bond-servant and apostle of Jesus Christ, To those who have received a faith of the same kind as ours, by the righteousness of our God and Savior, Jesus Christ:

You might debate with Peter (above)?

Ro 3:28For we maintain that *a man is justified by faith *apart from works of the Law.

Ro 3:30since indeed *God who will justify the circumcised by faith *and the *uncircumcised through faith *is one.

Ro 5:1Therefore, having been justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ,

How do we get this faith?
Ro 10:17 So faith {comes} from hearing, and hearing by the word of Christ.

Ga 2:16nevertheless knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the Law but through faith in Christ Jesus, even we have believed in Christ Jesus, so that we may be *justified by faith in Christ *and not by the works of the Law; since by the works of the Law no flesh will be justified.

Ga 3:22But the Scripture has shut up everyone under sin, so that the promise by faith in Jesus Christ might be given to those who believe.
Ga 3:24 Therefore the Law has become our tutor {to lead us} to Christ, so that we may be justified by faith.

Ga 5:5 For we through the Spirit, by faith, are waiting for the hope of righteousness.

Eph 2:8 For by grace you have been saved through faith; and that not of yourselves, {it is} the gift of God;

You can take it up with the apostle Paul (above)?

I take my orders from God and if He say we are to live by faith, justified by faith, saved by faith, then I am onboard.

You seem to think that if you throw the word ‘Faith’ around alot, it backs up your doctrines. Faith is an act. Unless you believe God makes us believie in Him? It’s you or myself, using our own free will to submit to God and all of His power as each and everyone of those people did in those verses you just threw down on here. You basically didn’t even come close to trying to prove your side.
You honestly think that within each and everyone of those individuals, they didn’t have the love for God attached to their faith as well? The faith alone doctrine doesn’t work and very nonsensical.

You are missing the point; who can love God with all their heart mind and soul and love their neighbor as themselves? Only those who what? Believe. Is this not what Jesus said through the apostle John; that the will of the Father is that everyone beholds or looks upon the Son and believes for eternal life? Without the very first will; you can’t do the commands.

Again, to love God is an act in itself. Belief without love is dead. Good works automatically comes out of love. One cannot be without the other.
You guys are too hung up on the word Faith. Not surprising when you all have the final say what the Written Word is trying to teach.

grace is help from God. what is that? grace is unmerited (undeserved) favor from God, not some partial help.

Grace is help from God. We have to do our part as well.

Yes, it does say that but not in the context and script the Catholic church uses (Forgive me father for I have sinned). The only Father I know is God our Heavenly Father (and “NO”, my earthly father is addressed as “Dad”). Now if that ain’t scripture then I don’t know what is. Yes, a game of scripture tag! I love this forum (no joke).

Take Care and May God Bless!

Ed

lol, you just called the man who helped to make you, your earthly Father. I bet you didn’t see that coming.

 

[JohnnyBeth]

JB please don’t do that. ITs a cop out. You got called on what you said, now defend it. No one denied the scripture its your take on it that we disagree with. And now you let them show you where they disagree with your take, and you can let them explain their take. And then you can see what they are trying to show you.

Cop out; better review the post again; what SimonAZ said was not there in Scripture; was there verbatium. There is nothing to defen unless you disagree with Scripture, which you can take up with God; He wrote it, not me.

 

[ronin67]

The Church gives us the Cathechism so that we may know ‘exactly’ what the Church teaches. Does this mean that we need the Catechism only? No. So you fall very short of the meaning you’re trying to invoke from that passage.

You seem to think that if you throw the word ‘Faith’ around alot, it backs up your doctrines. Faith is an act. Unless you believe God makes us believie in Him? It’s you or myself, using our own free will to submit to God and all of His power as each and everyone of those people did in those verses you just threw down on here. You basically didn’t even come close to trying to prove your side.
You honestly think that within each and everyone of those individuals, they didn’t have the love for God attached to their faith as well? The faith alone doctrine doesn’t work and very nonsensical.

Again, to love God is an act in itself. Belief without love is dead. Good works automatically comes out of love. One cannot be without the other.
You guys are too hung up on the word Faith. Not surprising when you all have the final say what the Written Word is trying to teach.

Grace is help from God. We have to do our part as well.

lol, you just called the man who helped to make you, your earthly Father. I bet you didn’t see that coming.

I did, I had to break it down that my earthly father (had to throw father in their because Catholics misuse father all the time, when it should be only used to address our heavenly Father) was always addressed as dad and never father. Now stop avoiding my other issues I stated. What say ye on the above practices of the Catholic Church? Typical response, divert attention, change subject, and pretend victory. I also love when you call a Catholic a Christian. “I’m not a Christian, I’m Catholic”. Please people, you are killing me. Every serious question I asked was not entirely answered. “Yes, it is in the scripture”. Ok we already established this, however you (The Catholics) haven’t established the little human twists you put on scripture to meet man made doctrine. What you may ask, read my prior posts. Stop drawing it out with worthless threads falling away from the original questions. Answer ye now or submit to defeat to the truth of God’s inspired words.

Take Care and May God Bless you my fellow Christians (sorry, I meant Catholics).

Ed

 

[JohnnyBeth]

You heard the man loud and clear the first time. You just again as usual cannot understand a single word he is saying Kinda like you do with scripture

You take something that is said, you turn in around (try to anyway) to fit what you want it to say, and it never works. The Pope NEVER may I repeat NEVER said anything even remote to what you are saying he said.

But Now I feel so so much better. You not only do it to me, you do it to the Church and now the Pope. I am in GOOD COMPANY. My MAN the Pope has the KEYS TO THE KINGDOM. LET me repeat THE KEYS TO THE KINGDOM! Now let me help you with that and define it for you. The Kingdom is not his HOME IN ROME

Now you have showed me nothing as usual. You have still never showed me where the Church changed the teaching on purgatory yet. Lets stick with that instead of running from one place to another.

I will try to check back sometime this weekend. LEts see if you can show me where the CCC and the teaching you showed contradict eachother. Lets start there. One subject at a time.

There is actually one key to the kingdom and they were given to all the apostles and the key represents authority to open the door to heaven or keep it locked to forbid one from entering. You will not find a definitive explanation or definition as to what the key or keys actaully are from a Catholic definition.

The expression “power of the keys” is derived from Christ’s words to St. Peter (in Matthew 16:19). The promise there made finds its explanation in Isaiah 22, in which “the key of the house of David” is conferred upon Eliacim, the son of Helcias, as the symbol of plenary authority in the Kingdom of Juda. Christ by employing this expression clearly designed to signify his intention to confer on St. Peter the supreme authority over His Church.
newadvent.org/cathen/08631b.htm

If you read past this you will see how the leap to Petrine primacy , then immediately assign meaning to the “Church” takes place and these are two giat leaps as I see it.

What is clearly neglected and must be to make such leaps is the Matthew 18 verse(s) where Jesus is preaching to a crowd and uses the exact same terminology about loosing (permitting) & binding (forbid) . You know it is a crowd for 2 reasons 1) a little child is right there and two parts os the sermon here is the same verbiage as the Sermon on the Mount. Question: why or how could this loose & bind or authority to forgive sins be given to ordinary people/Christians? The authority is from heave and resides in the message of the gospel. Accept the gospel/loose/permit or reject the gospel/bind/forbid. We do not know, but it would be assumed that Jesus oft repeated the same sermon and parables etc as part of His teaching to different groups He spoke to; He would not need to change the message or come up with new material.

Isaiah 22 refers clearly to Christ, not Peter; just analyize the passages right before and right after and it is clear as the day is bright. I’ve heard the prime minister argument from my Uncle, but that doesn’t flush or maybe it does…LOL, but anyway a Priminister is the ruling head and authority, which is Christ alone, not the church; they are the members not the authority. At least in a Biblical sense. Also, the church is the pillar and support of the truth, which is the word of God or Scripture.; it is the very reason the church exists on earth, which is to promote the gospel and help protect its purity. How is this accomplished?
“All Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness; so that the man of God may be adequate, equipped for every good work.”

“And He gave some {as} apostles, and some {as} prophets, and some {as} evangelists, and some {as} pastors and teachers, for the equipping of the saints for the work of service, to the building up of the body of Christ; until we all attain to the unity of the faith”

I already kow you disagree and that is okay, but it is the truth as I see and understand the gospel. I can and have shared the gospel and heaven does agree that those who willingly reject it will remain in there sin and forbidden to enter Heaven and vice versa. The purpose of the church on earth is to build up the body in Christ by the versus listed above.

 

[JohnnyBeth]

JB, if I did the two greatest commandants the verses you listed above wouldn’t be an issue! Think about it, why would I do immoral things if I loved the Lord with all my heart mind and soul? Or treat anyone like a sexual object if I loved them correctly?

• Michael

You do not understand the point; you cannot do the latter without the first. The second passage I tried to edit because it is a “will”, but not the first and most important as I see it.

 

[Des]

I did, I had to break it down that my earthly father (had to throw father in their because Catholics misuse father all the time, when it should be only used to address our heavenly Father).

Actually, I think it’s because you know you’d look rather ridiculous saying "the person who I biologically attained my genes from.

As for call no man your father in the strict literal tense you state, the Bible disagrees with your man made teaching.

And think not to say within yourselves, We have Abraham to our father: for I say unto you, that God is able of these stones to raise up children unto Abraham. [Matthew 3:9]

Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh. [Genesis 2:24]

Who said unto his father and to his mother, I have not seen him; neither did he acknowledge his brethren, nor knew his own children: for they have observed thy word, and kept thy covenant. [Deut. 33:9]

And going on from thence, he saw other two brethren, James the son of Zebedee, and John his brother, in a ship with Zebedee their father, mending their nets; and he called them. [Matthew 4:21]

I write unto you, fathers, because ye have known him that is from the beginning. I write unto you, young men, because ye have overcome the wicked one. I write unto you, little children, because ye have known the Father.

And the father of circumcision to them who are not of the circumcision only, but who also walk in the steps of that faith of our father Abraham, which he had being yet uncircumcised. [Romans 4:12]

Therefore it is of faith, that it might be by grace; to the end the promise might be sure to all the seed; not to that only which is of the law, but to that also which is of the faith of Abraham; who is the father of us all, (As it is written, I have made thee a father of many nations, before him whom he believed, even God, who quickeneth the dead, and calleth those things which be not as though they were. [Romans 4:16-17]

Matthew 19:19 honor your father and your mother’; and ‘you shall love your neighbor as yourself.’ "

John 8:56 Abraham your father rejoiced to see my day; he saw it and was glad. (How many are willing to say that Jesus broke His own commandment?)

Now stop avoiding my other issues I stated. What say ye on the above practices of the Catholic Church? Typical response, divert attention, change subject, and pretend victory.

Um, I didn’t divert from anything. You may find this shocking but I didn’t read more than what I quoted from you. Whatever you asked, there are numerous threads here. Do a search to find your answers. Nothing you bring to the table is new to us.

Take Care and May God Bless you my fellow Christians (sorry, I meant Catholics).

Ed

Ah, a sarcastic post hidden under the charity of a God Bless.

 

[Randy_Carson]

There is actually one key to the kingdom and they were given to all the apostles and the key represents authority to open the door to heaven or keep it locked to forbid one from entering. You will not find a definitive explanation or definition as to what the key or keys actaully are from a Catholic definition.

Ah, the keys. Let’s take a look at what one Protestant had to say, shall we?

“So we stand here and with open mouth stare heavenward and invent still other keys. Yet Christ says very clearly in Matthew 16:19 that He will give the keys to Peter. He does not say He has two kinds of keys, but He gives to Peter the keys He Himself has, and no others. It is as if He were saying: why are you staring heavenward in search of the keys? Do you not understand I gave them to Peter? They are indeed the keys of Heaven, but they are not found in Heaven. I left them on earth. Don’t look for them in Heaven or anywhere else except in Peter’s mouth where I have placed them. Peter’s mouth is My mouth, and his tongue is My key case. His office is My office, his binding and loosing are My binding and loosing.”

What Protestant said that? Martin Luther.

(*Martin Luther, The Keys, in Conrad Bergendoff, ed. trans. Earl Beyer and Conrad Bergendoff, Luthers Works, vol. 40, Philadelphia: Fortress, 1958, p. 365-366.) *

 

[JohnnyBeth]

I would like to make a statement. And as clear as I can so it is not turned around on me.

The Baltimore Catechism was used for American Parishes a generations ago.

It has never changed from the CCC.

The only difference is the CCC reaches into the scriptures to give you a better understanding. Thats it.

Example What is a sacrament. A sacrament is an outward sign instituted by Christ to give Grace. Old Def.

New def. Same thing. But then John Paul 11 takes these sacraments piece by piece and shows you how Jesus showed these signs in the bible. Thats it.

Just like Purgatory read what GINGER quoted and then the CCC. Same teaching, just one is explained in greater detail. Thats it!

Don’t believe me go back and read them. You will see its the truth!

Good rationalization; still doesn’t change the reality does it? The word sacrament is not used in Scripture to my knowledge; if that is true and I believe it is; how is that Christ instituted that which does not exist in His word?

The Douay-Rheims uses the word sacrament one time in Eph 5:32 “This is a great sacrament: but I speak in Christ and in the church.” The term is actually mystērion, which is always used as “mystery or mysteries”;

I will say that just because a word is not specifically or exactly used does not neccessarily mean it is not implicit. So if you choose to believe that Christ instituted 7 sacraments; then who am I to say it ain’t so?

 

[Randy_Carson]

I did, I had to break it down that my earthly father (had to throw father in their because Catholics misuse father all the time, when it should be only used to address our heavenly Father) was always addressed as dad and never father.

Is that really what the Bible taught you? Or do you misunderstand what the Bible really means?

Call No Man Your Father

Matthew 23:8-10
8"But you are not to be called ‘Rabbi,’ (Gr. rabbi) for you have only one Master (Gr. didaskalos, kathegetes) and you are all brothers. 9And do not call anyone on earth ‘father,’ (Gr. patera) for you have one Father (Gr. pater), and he is in heaven. 10Nor are you to be called ‘teacher,’ (Gr. kathegetai) for you have one Teacher (Gr. kathegetes), the Christ.” (NIV)

Matthew 23:8-10
8”But be not ye called Rabbi (Gr. rabbi): for one is your Master (Gr. didaskalos, kathegetes), even Christ; and all ye are brethren. 9And call no man your father (Gr. patera) upon the earth: for one is your Father (Gr. pater), which is in heaven. 10Neither be ye called masters (Gr. kathegetai) : for one is your Master (Gr. kathegetes), even Christ.” (KJV)

Based on the preceding passage, many non-Catholics claim that the Catholic Church violates the scriptural prohibition against calling anyone “father” since its priests are commonly called “father” and the pope is referred to as the “Holy Father.” Is this really what the Bible teaches? Let’s take a closer look at Biblical examples.

Jesus Violates This Command

Luke 16:24
24So he called to him, “Father (Gr. pater) 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.”

Jesus tells a parable in which He has one of the characters speak to “Father Abraham” which would obviously be a bad example for His audience. Does Jesus contradict Himself?

Paul Violates This Command

Romans 4:1-18
1What then shall we say that Abraham, our forefather, discovered in this matter?

In this passage, Paul refers to Abraham as a spiritual father eight times. This is a terrible precedent to establish if Jesus has prohibited us from using the term “father.”

1 Corinthians 4:14-15
14I am not writing this to shame you, but to warn you, as my dear children. 15Even though you have ten thousand guardians in Christ, you do not have many fathers (Gr. pateras), for in Christ Jesus I became your father through the gospel.

In this passage, Paul refers to himself as the spiritual father of the Corinthians. This is a terrible precedent to establish if Jesus has prohibited us from using the term “father.”

Ephesians 4:11-13
11It was he who gave some to be apostles, some to be prophets, some to be evangelists, and some to be pastors and teachers (Gr. didaskalovs), 12to prepare God’s people for works of service, so that the body of Christ may be built up 13until we all reach unity in the faith and in the knowledge of the Son of God and become mature, attaining to the whole measure of the fullness of Christ.

Paul, under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, says that God has established some people as “teachers” in the Church; this appears to be a direct violation of Jesus’ prohibition against calling anyone “teacher”. Does God contradict Himself?

James Violates This Command

James 3:1
1Not many of you should presume to be teachers (Gr. didaskaloi), my brothers, because you know that we who teach will be judged more strictly.

James, under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, says that not many believers should presume to be “teachers.” This implies that a few (though not many) should and would rightfully have that position. Does God contradict Himself?

James 2:21
21Was not Abraham our father justified by works, when he had offered Isaac his son upon the altar?

James, under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, refers to the spiritual fatherhood of Abraham. This is a terrible precedent to establish if Jesus has prohibited us from using the term “father.”

Stephen Violates This Command

Acts 7:2
2To this he replied: "Brothers and fathers, listen to me!

 

[Randy_Carson]

Good rationalization; still doesn’t change the reality does it? The word sacrament is not used in Scripture to my knowledge; if that is true and I believe it is; how is that Christ instituted that which does not exist in His word?

JohnnyBeth-

The word “sacrament” like “trinity”, “incarnation”, “Bible” and “transubstantiation” are words used to describe concepts in a short-hand form.

Jesus established baptism, confirmation, the Eucharist, confession, holy orders, marriage and healing of the sick as means of receiving grace in His Church. Today, we refer to these using the concept word “sacraments”, but that’s just for convenience.

I will say that just because a word is not specifically or exactly used does not neccessarily mean it is not implicit. So if you choose to believe that Christ instituted 7 sacraments; then who am I to say it ain’t so?

Oh. Okay. I’m glad that’s settled.

 

[JohnnyBeth]

No, it doesn’t. You’re assuming that, but that is not what St. Paul said. Read more carefully: (oops, I just noticed Simon already answered this point, but here’s more)

“knowing that while we are at home in the body we are absent from the Lord”

Did Paul say: “knowing that when we are not at home in the body we will be with the Lord”? No.

“prefer rather to be absent from the body and to be at home with the Lord.”

Yes, we would “prefer” for this life to be over “and” be with God. We would prefer not to have to go through Purgatory when we die. We would prefer to be able to eat, drink and be merry today, and go straight to Heaven tomorrow. Yes, that sure does tickle the ears.

It is written: “When we die those of us who are saved will immediately be with the Lord in Heaven forever!” No it isn’t - God never said that. I wonder why?

“Settle matters quickly with your adversary who is taking you to court. Do it while you are still with him on the way, or he may hand you over to the judge, and the judge may hand you over to the officer, and you may be thrown into prison. I tell you the truth, you will not get out until you have paid the last penny.” (Matthew 5:25-26 NIV)

Hmm, sounds like we might need some kind of indulgence to get out of “prison”.

“That servant who knows his master’s will and does not get ready or does not do what his master wants will be beaten with many blows. But the one who does not know and does things deserving punishment will be beaten with few blows.” (Luke 12:47-48)

Give me an indulgence!

“Above all, love each other deeply, because love covers over a multitude of sins.” (1 Peter 4:8)

I thought Christ “covered over” our sins. Oh you’re right, Peter, the Bible never says that Christ “covers over” our sins - I wonder why Protestants say that? Only we can “cover over” sins. Only Christ can “wash away” sin. Christ paid the eternal debt for our sins. We pay the temporal price for our sins. And if we don’t pay that debt while we’re still on Earth, then we will not get out of Purgatory until we have paid the last penny.

“Anyone who does wrong will be repaid for his wrong, and there is no favoritism.” (Colossians 3:25)

“No favoritism”? But we’re Christians!

“From everyone who has been given much, much will be demanded” (Luke 12:48)

It does not have to be stated; it is implicit in being justified. It is the “good news”

Know your Bible?
Ro 4:7 "BLESSED ARE THOSE WHOSE LAWLESS DEEDS HAVE BEEN FORGIVEN, AND WHOSE SINS HAVE BEEN COVERED.

Ro 4:8"BLESSED IS THE MAN WHOSE SIN THE LORD WILL NOT TAKE INTO ACCOUNT."

Romans 4:23-25Now not for his sake only was it written that it was credited to him, but for our sake also, to whom it will be credited, as those who believe in Him who raised Jesus our Lord from the dead, {He} who was delivered over because of our transgressions, and was raised because of our justification.

Here is the negative:
Ps 32:2How blessed is the man to whom the LORD does not impute iniquity, And in whose spirit there is no deceit!

Good luck on repaying what is owed.
Ro 4:4 Now to the one who works, his wage is not credited as a favor, but as what is due.

 

[JohnnyBeth]

Ginger, I wouldn’t have used Irenaeus… For example, in that same tract, Book I, Chapter 3. Take some time to read it… The people he is fighting against are using Scripture to prove an heretical viewpoint. Yet, he as a Bishop of the Catholic Church tells them… Sorry, Charley, you are wrong! He (the Church) was the authority to determine that a teaching was wrong… NOT Scripture. Also, I’m sure glad the Church got it right in 325 (we have a great Creed) or we would all be JW’s!

• Michael

Did you just put “Church” above Scripture?

 

[Randy_Carson]

Did you just put “Church” above Scripture?

The Church, not the Bible, is “the pillar and foundation of the truth” (cf. 1 Timothy 3:15).

And, no, the Church is not above scripture. Pillars and foundations provide support from below.

 

[JohnnyBeth]

How do you believe we are saved?

• Michael

When we reach that point in our lives where we realized what filthy rotten human trash we are before God and how we have offended (sinned against) him is so many ways as there are stars in the sky and realize that we cannot make up for one offense much less all the offenses no matter how remorseful or how many “good things” we can say or do, because His standard is perfection and we already blew it. We now realize we need serious help and mercy and beg God to forgive us and acknowledge our failures and sins against Him and cry out for the Savior, believe on the Lord Jesus, then you will receive gift of salvation if you are sincere, which only God knows the true heart.

I believe the real difference between the person that say they believe and the ones that truly do are the ones that have reached that loathsome point where in all humility stand naked (not literally) before God; fully exposed and cry out to him like a child who is helpless-dealing with their sin issue. This is why you here things like just “believe” or do this and that and you will be okay. Perform this duty or that duty. Believing in Jesus means all that He is, his character and attributes that make him God; it is not intellectual, but heart-felt. It is not religion, but a relationship. Notice below that in both the NT & OT it is given to “whoever will”. Why do you think Jonah was so upset and tried to flee from God; the Jews hated the gentiles in Niniveh and God shamed the nation of Israel with one prophet and one sermon and all were saved and partook of that which the Jews thought only belonged to them. Was Jonah happy they repented, no he was mad…see the story. the Jes today are still obstinate and don’t want to share God, so to speak. God has always saved people the same way; this is why it is all of grace, all of faith, in all that is Christ. no amount of religion will save anyone from the wrath of sin.

Rom. 10For the Scripture says, “WHOEVER BELIEVES IN HIM WILL NOT BE DISAPPOINTED .” For there is no distinction between Jew and Greek; for the same Lord is Lord of all, abounding in riches for all who call on Him; for “WHOEVER WILL CALL ON THE NAME OF THE LORD WILL BE SAVED.”

1Pe 2:6 For {this} is contained in Scripture: “BEHOLD, I LAY IN ZION A CHOICE STONE, A PRECIOUS CORNER {stone,} AND HE WHO BELIEVES IN HIM WILL NOT BE DISAPPOINTED.”

Ps 22:5 To You they cried out and were delivered; In You they trusted and were not disappointed.