J
justasking4
Guest
Even if protestants are guessing what belongs in the Bible they have at least “guessed” right on 66 of them. Correct?
If this is true, then protestants are pretty good at guessing…View attachment 4020
- Status
If this is true, then protestants are pretty good at guessing…View attachment 4020
P
PerryJ
Guest
I would like to ask a question concerning Christ and the Bible. Since several passages refer to Christ being able to write and if one believes the Bible is the rule of faith why didn’t Christ write anything down? Wouldn’t he at least once told his apostles to write down his message when he was alive. Several of them were able to write. He didn’t do this. If the Bible is the sole rule of faith why didn’t he do this?
J
justasking4
Guest
Good questions and one we don’t really know. However i think we can agree that what we do have in the NT is what He wanted written down even though He Himself did not write any of it.
P
PerryJ
Guest
I am missing your point. Your two founding fathers stated that if you only use the 66 books you will come to the wrong conclusions. Is this what you want to do? Don’t you want to humbly submit to all of God’s word? Is close enough good enough when it comes to God?
P
PerryJ
Guest
I agree with your point on the NT. It is what he wanted; however, with the thought that it is not all inclusive of his teaching.
po18guy
Well-known member
A charitible calumniation of Christ’s church, if ever I’ve heard one. Do you phone the Orthodox church and call them pagan, as well? Of course not. Yet the two remain essentially identical. So, what is the source of your dislike of the original bible church? “You’ve heard that…” I hope it is more substantive than that.
Have you ever suspected that there is more to Christ than the tiny bit in scripture? Three year’s worth of daily teaching are not in the Gospels. Where can you find the rest? The bible itself states that it is incomplete. You believe the bible, right? See Luke 3:18, John 20:30, John 21:25, and Acts 4:20. So, where is the complete revelation of Christ to be found? Reading and re-reading the same, incomplete bible?
Where are the traditions that the Apostle Paul told you to keep? See 2 Thessalonians 2:15. Where are they to be found? Were they lost? No. How can Christianity be complete without them? It can’t. And, they are not in scripture, so you may be at a standstill, but Catholics and Orthodox are not.
May the peace of Christ be with you.
J
justasking4
Guest
i don’t know what these 2 “founding” fathers wrote but i don’t agree with their conclusions if they are referring to the DC’s books.
i do have all of it. For centuries the church did accept the DC’s books as fully inspired-inerrant. Thats why they were considered DC.
P
PerryJ
Guest
Your posts are proof against yourself. If Sola Scriptura were true would you not have the same belief as Calvin and Luther. so someone here has to have a man made theology as God does not have multiple truths. Now you are kinda stuck. If you state it is Luther and Calvin then the very people that created your theology are in error. If they are in error it refutes everything you and Sola Scriputura stand for. If you state it is you then obviously your faith is in error. No matter which direction you go it shows that your faith is man made.
The DCs have been proven to belong; yet, you refute them? Your faith does not have any facts to support their exclusion other then personal opinion. ???
J
justasking4
Guest
No.
If Luther or Calvin were prophets or apostles then i would be in a bind but we know that is not the case at all. They are but men.
Not so. If the theology is grounded in the Scriptures then i’m on solid ground.
How can a faith that grounds its doctrines in Scripture be man-made?
There were many officals in the Catholic church who thought that the DC’s should not be considered canonical. Even Cardinal Cajetan rejected the DC’s as being inspired-inerrant.
P
PerryJ
Guest
Quote from Luther “There is not on earth a book more lucidly written than the Holy Scripture”
Yet it appears your faith doesn’t even agree with the people that defined your faith.
Your faith can not support Sola Scriptura except by personal opinion. It canot support it scriptually. It can not support the books that you believe are inspired. Your faith can not even agree on the most basic principles of faith and as such their is no perspicuity of scripture which is need for Sola Scriptura to exist.
You also know that one mans opinion, Cardinal, does not matter for our faith. Christ guides our faith not man.
If you wish to be bored I can posted church father after church father that will support the Church with the DCs. You post one man’s name when I could post dozens of early Church Fathers. Is this what your faith is based upon one Cardinal making a statement? Again listing all of the quotes from the early Church fathers is not needed as Christ protects our faith.
Have you ever taken the time to read the Early Church Fathers? You will find them to be Catholic and fully supportive of the entire Bible not 66 books. Do you respect the people that were taught by the disciples? Their teachings are Catholic not Protestant. Do you respect all of the matyrs that died for the Eucharist? The early Church is Catholic and no matter how much revisionist thoughts one has it can not stand up to the truth of the Bible and history. Even read about the Romans from secular historians it shows that the Faith was Catholic. How much evidence does one need from how many sources does one need to see the truth.
Sola Scriptura is a man made theology.
D
des_scahill
Guest
Both Catholics and Protestants have persecuted each other at various times, The Anabaptists - who influenced modern-day Baptists to adopt the full immersion ritual - have the rare distinction of being persecuted by both I believe.
In fact, if I was so inclined, I could probably whip together a few proof texts along the lines of: True christians get persecuted, the Baptists get persecuted by everybody, Therefore the Baptists are the only true religion.
Mingle thjs with a bit of stuff from the ‘triple tithers’ and start my own church. I’ll make sure it has a seemingly religiious title like “The Church of the Persecuted Remnant” or something Some will swallow it because they don’t read their bible and check up on my claims.
Before you know it you’ll see me on TV on location in the Bahamas bemoaning the sinful state of society. I’ll be asking for more money of course so I can take the ‘truth’ to ALL the fleshpots of the world personally. And because of the urgent need, its understandable that I’ll need my own jet to get there quicker.
Catholics will actually be doing me a favour by labelling my new church as '‘Protestant’ - gives it a bit more generalised ‘street cred’
I hope you see my point. To a Baptist its a mistake to label people as ‘christian’ or not, solely on the basis of a 'denominational label or because they claim they are. You have to very much take each individual as you find them…
The problem with dogma is that while on the one hand it can be helpful, on the other hand if you go too far you find yourself excluding people on the basis of jots and tittles, when all they are really guilty of is a bit of bad theology in a non-critical area of doctrine. We don’t exclude people on the basis of minor bad behaviour, instead we hopefully recognise that its not easy being a disciple, and God has His own priorities in what He deals with first so far as you and I as individuals are concerned. Time often sorts things out.
Yes, Jesus did say to follow your appointed leaders, but he said quite a few things to leaders too. “Whitewashed sepulchres” is one phrase that comes to mind.
I don’t understand that either. It is sad when you encounter such intolerance. We both have extremists and bigots in our congregations I’m afraid… I can truthfully say I’ve met some Catholics whose company I’d prefer to that of some BaptistsWhat i do not understand is some parents would not even allow their Baptist children to play with catholic kids…
Some atheists I’ve talked to, see the mutual persecutions among religions generally as ‘evidence’ that ‘the divisions caused by "religion’ are the source of most of the world’s problems
J
justasking4
Guest
What do you think he meant by this?
Can you give me a couple of examples?
What do you think your doing? Its your opinion also.
Not so. Did Jesus believe that the OT was inspired i.e. the Word of God?
He was not the only who said this kind of thing. Keep in mind he was a high official in the church. Even Jerome believed the DC’s were not inspired.
.
Do you agree that the Scriptures are inspired-inerrant? Are there any other writings that are inspired-inerrant?
No. Have you? Have you their full works?
Are you now claiming that the fathers were taught by the disciples?
Do the church fathers teach that Mary was taken into heaven and is queen of heaven?
That they died for Christ, yes. For the Eucharist I would need to some evidence for this. Do you have some?
There is much that the catholic church teaches that is not found in Scripture. The faith of the apostles is not the same as the catholic church’s.
.
How can something that is derived from the inspired-inerrant Word of God be man made?
L
larry_m
Guest
To Po18. I have come to that conclusion by 4 decades of intense study of religions. Even your own Cardinal, when approached with the fact that the Catholic church has alot of tradition based on Paganism, agreed. I will get the quote for you. No, I do not believe even the universe can hold all the truth as it is in our Savior. But all we need for our salvation is in the Scriptures only. If the Orthodox Church was invloved in this discussion I would say the same thing. Same as to my Protestant bretheren who hold to pagan tradition. Even my own church if they held to pagan tradition. Thankyou for your reply. Your brother in our Savior.
P
Pixie_Dust
Guest
Tradition is not “based” on paganism, rather certain practices have been *redeemed *by the Church and are ways we celebrate Christ and His love for us.
po18guy
Well-known member
Where does the bible teach sola scriptura? It most certainly does not. It teaches that both scripture and tradition must be held to.
**2 Thessalonians 2:15 (KJV) Therefore, brethren, stand fast, and hold the traditions which ye have been taught, whether by word, or our epistle.
**
Men teach sola scriptura, a man-made doctrine, by their own authority. I cannot and will not follow that error.
By the reasoning you have given, Saint Paul encouraged the worship of a pagan god when he spoke to the Greeks in Athens of their “unknown god”, and claimed to be his representative.
Acts 17:23 "For as I walked around and looked carefully at your objects of worship, I even found an altar with this inscription: TO AN UNKNOWN GOD. Now what you worship as something unknown I am going to proclaim to you."
You are not declaring Paul a pagan are you? Certainly, this stands as a scriptural example of even Paul supplanting pagan worship with Christian worship. Your studies should have told you that, as the early church grew, Christian practices supplanted pagan practices in certain cases - but for Christian reasons.
One can never understand the early, Christ-founded, pre-biblical church without setting the bible down. God does not reveal Himself to only the literate. You cannot have the fulness of God’s revelation with sola scriptura. If you are satisfied with that tiny, although inspired, revelation, may the Lord bless you!
I am praying for you, my brother.
Christ’s peace.
L
larry_m
Guest
Thankyou PO18 for your reply & prayers. To Pixie Dust. Is there a thread where we can discuss & I can show you the paganism that has crept into the churches so we don’t muck up this thread with another topic? I look forward to sharing & discussing this with you. Your brother in our Savior.
C
Claudius
Guest
But we must stand against them when they preach sin. This is not heaping the sins of the father on the son, it is holding the son accountable for hisown sins.
What the Catholic Church teaches is right and what protestants teach is wrong. They are teaching their congregations to sin and telling them that it is a sin to do right. We must not tollerate this. We need to understand what they teach and hold them accoutable for when they teach sin.
Yes, The Catholic Church must be holy. At the same time Jesus also commanded us to admonish the sinner. He told us that if a man sins he will die, but if we do not inform him of his sin, we will be responisble for that man’s death. If we love the protestants as the church commands us to do, we must confront them and admonish them so that they will repent.
Big difference, Catholic teaches the truth. Protestant preachers are teaching their congregations to sin. By the way, Catholics are the community that belongs to Christ. Protestants don’t want to be. We need to change that.
Judgemental or kind. It is a difference of oppinion. I don’t want them to go to hell. I want as many of the to go to heaven as possible and that is just not going to happen as long as they listen to ministers tell them that they should have a fat 401k and a lincoln towncar. that is not going to happen as long as they preach racism, and contraception and abortion.
Oh really. So would you go to a Church named as “st. Hitler.” Didn’t think so. There absolutely is a sense that some people are close to God and others are not. Catholic Mystics, look it up. I sure hope you are not going to tell me that Mother Teresa and Jenna Jamison are on the same level of nearnes to God. We are the Catholics Church, you know, Saints, Bishops, Eucharist, the holy scriptures.
And besides, at Mass heaven and earth meet and Lord God Jesus himself makes himself present to us Body, Blood, Soul and Diviinity and we get to recieve him and he comes into our bodies and becomes part of our bodies. That is the closest we will get to God in this life.
Are you going to tell me that a faithful Catholic who recieves Jesus in the Eucharist is on the same level of nearness to God as a protestant preacher who teaches his congregation to HATE the euchrist and calls Christianity a pagan religion and want to destroy every Catholic Church in the world.
I don’t know if you go to protestant “services” often but you can believe they teach that and want that. They put it on tv and send books to people in the mail. If we let them have their way, America would be a bloodbath with the blood of myrtered Catholics running through the streets.
I have to disagree with you. They know what the Catholic Church teaches and I can give you two examples of how I know that.
The first is that when they get together in their Anti-Catholic services they talk about Catholic teachings and denounce them. “Those evil Catholics believe that Jesus is the word of God but we know better, the Bible is the word of God.” They teach their congregations to HATE all Catholic teachings. How can they do that? They do that by finding out what the Church teaches and teaching their congregations to fear and hate all the truth that the Catholic Church stands for.
Second reason I know is from their attack tactics. They find out that the Catholic Church teaches something, le’s call it X. The Church teaches that X is very bad and if you do X you will go to hell unless you repent and ask for forgiveness. Protestants find out what X is and then make up a lie and tell faithful Catholics who believe that X is wrong because the Church has taught them that X is wrong, that the Church is in fact doing X. This will make the faithful Catholic angry and outraged that the Church would do X, because X is so wrong.
The goal of all of this is to get the person to leave the Catholic Church. Anything but Catholic, the ABCs of protestantism. The poor person who falls for this knows, because the Church taught them, that X is wrong and once they believe that the Church does X, which it really does not, the person then leaves the Church. The really ironic part is that once the person leaves the Catholic Church and joins the protestants in protesting against Christ they are then told by the protestant minister that X is in fact really ok. Please, go ahead and sin and debase yourself doing X all day long. They are decievers.
You might be right but I do not want someone to convert simply because they get along with Catholic but because they believe the things which the Catholic Church teaches to be true and lives according to the commands of Christ.
I am not the guy to go and watch the movie where Lord Jesus sits and pats children on the head. I am the guy who went to watch the movie where Jesus showed us just how far the depts of his love for us reach by being crucified for us on the cross so that we can have a shot at going to heaven.
All this conversation started over talking about protestants believing or not believing in sola scriptura. They really don’t believe in that. They just say that so that they can cover their ears and go “blah, blah, blah that’s not in the bible” whenever Catholic try to tell them the truth. If they really believed in sola scriptura then they would be forced to not believein sola scriptura by the testimony of the Bible itself against them and to become Catholic.
They avoid becoming Catholic, and many even just a mere Christian for that matter, by diliberatly not reading the Bible.
They do not believe in the Gospel. They make up in their heads way ahead of time what they believe and skim through the bible, not willing to be taught by the Bible, until they find a part the can be twisted to support what they predecided they believe.
Anyone who reads the bible honestly will come away rejecting slavery but other have twisted the bible to say that we must keep slaves. They twist the bible to support racism, debauchery, prostetution, fornication and all other manner of sin. There are still protestants out there who are telling people that they have to be circumsized to get into heaven. They are teaching once saved always saved which is anit-biblical, the bible specifically states the opposite. They teach the rapture, another anti-Biblical protestant teaching. They teach Faith alone, another anti-biblical teaching. They divorce, they contracept and practice abortion. And on top of all of that, they teach that you don’t have to be Baptized. The Bible stand in direct opposition to all these protestant teachings.
“Well I don’t agree with Reverand Bobby about abortion but he is such a nice guy…”
“So nice that you are letting him go to hell. Wow you are such a great Christian, you will let a nice guy like abortionist ‘reverand’ Bobby go to hell.”
Any Catholic who knows the truth and does not confront the protestants with it to save some of them, I must say, you are some of the cruelest people I could ever imagine. There is nothing more heartless then letting someone sin and telling them nothing. Those people need us. They need us to be the light. We shouldn’t hide under a basket, we should shine so that some of them may see. We are the salt of the earth. We can not sit here and do nothing. We must confront them, otherwise we are good for nothing but to be cast out and tred underfoot.
It isn’t like we are asking them learn Latin or Syriac. We are asking them to repent and become full Christians in the Church that Lord Jesus, the second person of the Blessed Trinity, founded. Is that so hard? I know it will be for some but really, asking them to live up to the name Christian should be a battle cry we should never get tired of trumpeting.
K
Kay_Cee
Guest
If I may jump into the discussion at this point . . .
I’m confused. Where does the idea that Scriptures are the ***sole ***infallible rule of faith come from? What is it based upon? How do you know that’s God’s intent? If it is God’s intent, he must have communicated that to us in some manner, right? Could you please show me a source for how God communicated that to us? And could you please be sure it’s an infallible source, so I can be absolutely certain that’s God’s intent?
Please note: I’m not questioning that scripture is an infallible rule of faith. I’m questioning that it’s the ***sole ***infallible rule of faith.
D
des_scahill
Guest
The elders in my church don’t have any organizational authority over the pastor at all. The pastor is accountable directly to the entire congregation membership. It takes a full members meeting to hire or fire a pastor.
Naturally we expect the pastor to be knowledgeable of scripture, he couldn’t be a pastor otherwise. But we don’t expect him to be an expert theologian either. But yes, it is possible that many could be swayed into error by persuasive and plausible sounding arguments. Thats why there is a big emphasis amongst Baptists on a degree of personal responsibility for their acceptance or non-acceptance of a teaching. They have a responsibility to check things for themselves against the sacred texts. Blaming the teacher of a falsehood didn’t work for Adam and Eve. . .
There is some truth in what you say, but I’d disagree with the 'many errors’ and 'happens** often**", at least so far as my own congregation is concerned. I’d certainly agree its not ‘perfect’ , though.
What I said was: “Catholics don’t seem to have any practical belief in the personally indwelling Holy Spirit in each believer being capable of giving them a personal ‘nudge’ if what is being preached is bad theology” .
I wasn’t meaning to be critical in any way of the Eucharist, and my apologies if you got that meaning out of it, it certainly wasn’t what I intended… What I was trying to express was that Baptists see the indwelling Holy Spirit as an ongoing state of affairs for every true believer. And He is capable of giving each of us personal guidance and help on an ongoing basis, including enlightening our understanding of the sacred texts. So the Holy Spirit is a potential source of personal authority to the individual believer.
Somewhere along the line I’ve got the impression that Catholics seem to attach very little importance to this personal guidance so far as ‘interpretation’ of scripture is concerned. The emphasis seems to be more on ‘conscience’ and what the ‘leaders’ of the church teach. That was why I used the words ‘practical belief’ - they perhaps acknowledge that personal guidance from the Holy Spirit exists, but they don’t ‘rely’ on it, or see it as a valid form of authority thats available to the lay member. Am I right in having that view?
Talking generally about authority…
In some respects there is a ‘similarity’ with the process Catholics follow, but the important differences are:
in the Baptist case we do our best to make the source of authority ‘independent’ of ourselves and also our leaders.;
and
the lay members have a very large say in what goes on so far as running their local congregation is concerned. But that is (hopefully) always constrained by what the sacred texts say… The implied assumption is that all members are lead and guided personally - to a greater or lesser degree depending on the depth of their personal relationship with our Lord - by the indwelling Holy Spirit. Thats not seen as excluding the other sources of authority, simply an additional source.
I’ve never yet seen or heard of a Baptists members meeting that attempted to introduce some new interpretation of an already established doctrinal position. Mostly meetings deal with issues such as the appointment of pastors, church finances, whether or not the congregation should accept government funding for some projects, give financial support to (say) the World Council of Churchs etc etc
The Baptist approach is not without its problems because we are just as human as everyone else. But if a congregation goes ‘off the rails’ - and that does happen sometimes - the ‘damage’ is largely confined to just that specific congregation.
P
PerryJ
Guest
It is interesting how you provide no support for your positions. Everything I state is supported by secular sources and can easily be looked up on the web. Yet it appears you make no effort to find out about Christ. For example the following of your Church versus Luther and Calvin is apparent. Luther and Calvin didn’t even agree on many subjects. Before you post your question how did they not agree, I would suggest you look it up. I have to admit it is frutstrating dealing with an individual that it appears makes no effort to find out about the Lord they follow.
Another example is apparently you have done no research into Jerome or you wouldn’t use him as an example. Jerome at a later date listed four of the books as sacred Scripture. It appears because you have done no research on your own and only take the word of revisionist Protestant you do not know or I guess ignore these historical fact. If you researched Jerome you would also know that he submitted to the Church. In fact he stated that anyone that went against the Catholic Church was the anti-christ. This would include the people you follow. If you believe in Jerome why do you not follow his other thoughts. If you did any research you would also know why he excluded the DCs and you would know that his assumption was proved wrong. It is a historical fact that his assumption was proven wrong by the Dead Sea and Ben Sira scrolls. Yet do you make any effort to verify this historical fact that has been know for decades? If you did any research of the DCs you would know that all the Church Father’s prior to Jerome included the DCs.
A high Church offical means nothing and you know this. The Pope and the magesterium guided by the Holy Ghost matter. Your statement supports the Catholic Faith. Men fail and make poor judgement. That is why the Church is guided by the Holy Spirit. You follow the teachings of men. We follow the Holy Spirit. Your response will be this is my opinion; however,it is not opinion. It is proven by the Bible, early Church Fathers and historical records of secular writers. The Church has been proven correct time and again by secular writers. Your Church Fathers have been proven wrong by secular historians. Before you ask how I would suggest you read books about Luther or Calvin and find out what kind of men they were. How their faith differs from yours. How their theology was based upon theories of men. It is there for you to understand if you chose to read about them.
I would suggest reading the early Church Fathers. Your questions appears to show that you have made no effort to read.
The massacre at Lyon was for the Eucharist. I believe I have given this information to you before. I believe 19,000 people died. If you would read about history of Rome you would know that there is boundless testimony against Christians that they were cannibals. This is based upon the misunderstanding of the Eucharist. Roman historians prove the Eucharist was followed by the earliest of Christians. Have you read any books on this subject?
You try to derail this thread away from Sola Scriptura because you have been proven wrong. You have no Biblical support for Sola Scriptura.
Your statement “How can something that is derived from the inspired-inerrant Word of God be man made?” ??? Do you believe their are multiple truths from God? If not then their has to be a man made theology somewhere because there are so many variations. I believe you will state it is the Catholic’s. This is not supported from Scripture. Not supported by history. Not supported by the Church Fathers. Not supported by the history of the Reformation because by the beginning of the 1600s there were hundreds of Protestant denominations already. Even if you believe this wasn’t true read about the differences between Luther, Calvin Zwingli etc. From the very beginning there were many Protestant variations that did not agree. Have you read about the Peasant Wars? They were partially caused by people not following the teachings of Luther. Within just a few short years Protestantism had already fallen apart into many individuals groups that all thought they knew what the Lord was telling them. All but one had to be man made. I guess your thinking your part of the one that got it right out of all of the Protestant denominations.
If you truly want to know about the Lord I will provide books for you to read. I am confused by your thoughts as it appears you make no effort to learn about the Lord. You post questions; but, no support for your ideas. I understand that support for your ideas is not historical or Biblical; however, I do not see effort into learning the truth by reading. Why? Again I can provide you a list of books to read.
- Status