Protestants & Sola Scriptura/Problems with Coherence

[ChrissyB364]

As soon as I saw that gotquestions.org was your reference point you completely lost credibility. That website is so full of lies, ignorance and misconception it is unreal. If you want to have a real, intelligent and well informed discussion you should really get a new source for your information. That’s just my:twocents:

 

[YendisAgev]

As soon as I saw that gotquestions.org was your reference point you completely lost credibility. That website is so full of lies, ignorance and misconception it is unreal. If you want to have a real, intelligent and well informed discussion you should really get a new source for your information. That’s just my:twocents:

Calling something a lie without proof that it is a lie is not fair play. That’s just my:twocents:

Now, if you have an example of where they lied about something, please give me some scriptural proof (As we both believe the Bible to be the word of God, we should be able to agree that it is a good source).

 

[ChrissyB364]

From gotquestions.org:
Question: “I am a Catholic, why should I consider becoming a Christian?”

Do I need to go into any further detail here? Geesshhh.

 

[Isaiah45_9]

You know fishing is not a bad thing however I have learned from Jesus silence has its value and now I am ready to continue.

I have selected one of your questions - The canonization of scripture .

I am convinced that the old testament existed during the
time of Jesus and the apostles and for centuries prior. The new testament although not bonded together as we know it today after being written by their authors had existed throughout the church. here is a link that will go into full details. ccel.org/ccel/alexander_a/canon.ii.i.html?highlight=canonizing,of,scripture#highlight

And where exactly, in the Bible, did Jesus and His Apostles say anything about the Canon they had, in other words the Septuagint? Not Josephus, Origen, etc, etc. On the Bible Alone, where do Jesus and the Apostles complain about the Scriptures they had?

And, Does your Bible have ALL the books Paul was referring to in 2 Tim 3:16? What is Paul referring to when He says all Scripture is breathed by God? Since Jesus and the Apostles quote from the Septuagint about 85% of the time approx. (300/350 quotes).

If Sola Scriptura was… well… Scriptural. How come it didn’t include a list of books?

However, Scriptures does say that there is a Church. The revealed mystery hidden for ages and generations (1 Col 24-26), the pillar and buttress of Truth (1 Tim 3:15), and the highest authority to resolve matters among the faithful (Matt 18:15-17).

Thanks.

 

[pablope]

“From my understanding, if scripture and Tradition never conflict, then there is no issue.”


Your understanding is wrong. Nearly everything the Roman Catholic Church teaches conflicts with the Bible…

I don’t think I can fit everything I’d like to say here so here is a link:

gotquestions.org/Catholic-questions.html

And here is a link from that website talking about Sola Scriptura: gotquestions.org/sola-scriptura.html

It conflicts? Or it is because of your interpretation?

I got a question for you: How can the RCC contradict the Bible when it was written, compiled and canonized by Catholic bishops?

Why do you even believe every book in the Bible should be in the Bible?

Here is my suggestion…why don’t you pick one topic…start a thread…and state and provide proof of why you think this particular teaching of the RCC conflicts with the Bible.

You can start reading here…and pick one which you disagree with: www.scripturecatholic.com

 

[kwortham]

“From my understanding, if scripture and Tradition never conflict, then there is no issue.”


Your understanding is wrong. Nearly everything the Roman Catholic Church teaches conflicts with the Bible…

The Bible is in perfect harmony with the Catholic Church because the Catholic Church created the Bible. Only the Church, as pillar and ground of the truth, can interpret the Bible:

2Pe_1:20 Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation.

What is your authority for misinterpreting the Bible? Where does the Bible assume the mantle of sole ruler of faith? Where does the Bible say that you must follow scripture “alone” or that “only scriture” is profitable? Where does the Bible say that the Bible is “sufficient” for all things pertaining to the Christian? What does the Bible call the pillar and ground of the truth? Where does the Bible call itself the pillar and ground of the truth? How do you know which books are canonical to the Bible? What authority attested to which books should be included in the canon? Give a historical record before the 15th century of any church teaching sola scriptura. If sola scriptura is true, then why was it not taught before the 16th century. Why did protestants rip books out of the Bible? Give a historical listing / record of the protestant bible (66 books) before the 16th century. Why is there no historical record of 66 books for the bible before the 16th century?

Mat 18:17 And if he shall neglect to hear them, tell it unto the church: but if he neglect to hear the church, let him be unto thee as an heathen man and a publican.

1Ti 3:15 But if I tarry long, that thou mayest know how thou oughtest to behave thyself in the house of God, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and ground of the truth.

 

[YendisAgev]

From gotquestions.org:
Question: “I am a Catholic, why should I consider becoming a Christian?”

Do I need to go into any further detail here? Geesshhh.

It is a misleading leading title, but the first line is, “First, please understand that we intend no offense in the wording of this question.”

gotquestions.org/Catholic-Christian.html

 

[Pheonix]

Your understanding is wrong. Nearly everything the Roman Catholic Church teaches conflicts with the Bible…

 

[ChrissyB364]

and should follow with, but please continue to read if you wish to be offended.

I will give it that it is cleverly disguised and crafted to seem well intentioned. That’s how it draws in the misinformed and continues to misinform them.

 

[Isaiah45_9]

It is a misleading leading title, but the first line is, “First, please understand that we intend no offense in the wording of this question.”

gotquestions.org/Catholic-Christian.html

No offense only adds to ignorance.

 

[YendisAgev]

YendisAgev;9401804:

The burden of proof is upon you then to supply us with Catholic teachings, and which scriptures they conflict with.

Further, it is not the “Roman Catholic Church.” It is the “Catholic Church.” The “Roman” merely denotes the Western Rite of Catholicism.

I’d recommend started separate threads then, because your link doesn’t posit accurate information.

First: the first question on this link is “I am Catholic. Why should I consider becoming Christian?” This alone shows how unreliable and anti-Catholic your source is. To put it bluntly: only an ignoramus would say a Catholic isn’t a Christian.

Second: this link claims Catholics worship Mary and the Saints. Any person who has seriously studied Catholicism knows that the Catholic Church worships neither Mary nor the Saints; we worship God and God alone. We merely give Mary and the Saints honor.

Third: this link brings up the illogical "petros

vs. petra" argument with regards to Matthew 16:18. There is only a distinction between petros and petra is Attic Greek. The New Testament was originally written in Koine Greek, where there was no distinction between the two words.

Fourth: this link, under the sola scriptura question, brings up circular reasoning by saying that Scripture is inspired because Scripture says it’s inspired.

1] " only an ignoramus would say a Catholic isn’t a Christian" The title is misleading to grab attention. I do not respect those who call me such name.

2] I was a former Roman Catholic, I know the church does not teach that one is to “worship Mary,” But living in southern Louisiana shows a different take on who Mark was.

google.com/search?sugexp=chrome,mod=0&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8&q=worship+define#hl=en&gs_nf=1&tok=Ku01bJO3yQKl8ovoTR2W5g&pq=worship%20define&cp=11&gs_id=2d&xhr=t&q=define+worship&pf=p&sclient=psy-ab&oq=define+wors&aq=0&aqi=g4&aql=&gs_l=&pbx=1&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.r_cp.r_qf.,cf.osb&fp=6a72428b52cffcb2&biw=1920&bih=955

^ Sorry for the long link

3] I’m not too sure about that, so I will not go into details I don’t know (I will research it though). [This does not impact the rest of the discussion though.

4] If you choose to not believe in the Bible as the only rule of faith and pratice, your entire faith is wrong since the Catholic Church is based on the bible.

 

[ChrissyB364]

I am politely bowing out of this with a big “Oy”.:nope:

 

[Pheonix]

The title is misleading to grab attention.

So an offensive title is permissble? That’s great logic.

I do not respect those who call me such name.

I never said you were an ignoramus, now did I? That name was directed at the link, not you. I do, however, apologize if I made it seem like the word was directed at you.

4] If you choose to not believe in the Bible as the only rule of faith and pratice, your entire faith is wrong since the Catholic Church is based on the bible.

I never claimed that the Bible did not contain God’s Word, so stop attacking a straw-man.

I merely pointed out that “Scripture is true because Scripture says it’s true” is circular reasoning. As such, committing a logical fallacy is likewise positing an egregious argument.

 

[YendisAgev]

So an offensive title is permissble? That’s great logic.

I never said you were an ignoramus, now did I? That name was directed at the link, not you. I do, however, apologize if I made it seem like the word was directed at you.

I never claimed that the Bible did not contain God’s Word, so stop attacking a straw-man.

I merely pointed out that “Scripture is true because Scripture says it’s true” is circular reasoning. As such, committing a logical fallacy is likewise positing an egregious argument.

Not no be unkind, but I recall you said, “To put it bluntly: only an ignoramus would say a Catholic isn’t a Christian.”

You directed that to anyone who believes that, and I do. No offense. There are many true Chirstains in the RCC, but many do not follow Christ alone.

 

[Pheonix]

Not no be unkind, but I recall you said, “To put it bluntly: only an ignoramus would say a Catholic isn’t a Christian.”

Ummm… exactly. I said “AN ignoramus.” As it’s in the singular form, I was directing it at the link, specifically at the author who put forth such an offensive title.

You directed that to anyone who believes that, and I do. No offense. There are many true Chirstains in the RCC, but many do not follow Christ alone.

If I had truly intended to direct my statement at “anyone who believes that,” then I would have used the word “anyone.”

I can see the problems with how I worded it, though, and how it came across as an ad hominem. Again, I apologize for the faulty wordy, but rest assured that it was not directed at you.

Further, who are you to judge who is a “true” Christian and who isn’t? After all, only God can see into the hearts of man. On what evidence do you claim someone isn’t “[following] Christ alone?”

 

[YendisAgev]

Ummm… exactly. I said “AN ignoramus.” As it’s in the singular form, I was directing it at the link, specifically at the author who put forth such an offensive title.

If I had truly intended to direct my statement at “anyone who believes that,” then I would have used the word “anyone.”

I can see the problems with how I worded it, though, and how it came across as an ad hominem. Again, I apologize for the faulty wordy, but rest assured that it was not directed at you.

Further, who are you to judge who is a “true” Christian and who isn’t? After all, only God can see into the hearts of man. On what evidence do you claim someone isn’t “[following] Christ alone?”

No need for apology. Sometimes it seems people are jut trying to be mean by calling names. No harm no foul.

We are all messengers of Christ. I’m not judging anyone. But who am I? I’m a follower of Jesus Christ. I believe in him alone and reject the contradictions of the Catholic church concerning the scriptures.

 

[YendisAgev]

It conflicts? Or it is because of your interpretation?

I got a question for you: How can the RCC contradict the Bible when it was written, compiled and canonized by Catholic bishops?

Why do you even believe every book in the Bible should be in the Bible?

Here is my suggestion…why don’t you pick one topic…start a thread…and state and provide proof of why you think this particular teaching of the RCC conflicts with the Bible.

You can start reading here…and pick one which you disagree with: www.scripturecatholic.com

Get your history correct. The books were choosen in the earlier than modern Roman Catholic Church.

I believe the early church was not corrupted by man.

Fun link for RCs and Protestants: bible.ca/b-bible-timeline-religious-history.htm

Please use this link for information: bible.ca/canon.htm

Please don’t send me away to my own discussion. I’m fine right here.

 

[Pheonix]

Sometimes it seems people are jut trying to be mean by calling names.

Question: is “jut” an accidental misspelling of “just”? If so, then my justified anger wasn’t directed at you, as I said. It was directed at the offensive title. You claim that the author put forth that title to draw attention, but that in no way makes it right.

We are all messengers of Christ.

Amen.

I’m not judging anyone.

“but many do not follow Christ alone.”

And that is not a judgment on someone… how?

But who am I? I’m a follower of Jesus Christ.

As am I.

I believe in him alone and reject the contradictions of the Catholic church concerning the scriptures.

There are no contradictions between Catholic teaching and Sacred Scripture, especially since the Catholic Church put compiled the Sacred Scriptures. If you feel otherwise, then please start a separate thread on each respective teaching you feel contradicts Scripture so we can discuss it.

 

[MartinJordan]

Get your history correct. The books were choosen in the earlier than modern Roman Catholic Church.

I believe the early church was not corrupted by man.

Fun link for RCs and Protestants: bible.ca/b-bible-timeline-religious-history.htm

Please use this link for information: bible.ca/canon.htm

Please don’t send me away to my own discussion. I’m fine right here.

Sorry to butt in but (no pun intended), who’s in charge of this website? Please inform the founder thanks.

Quite dubious imo.

MJ

 

[pablope]

Get your history correct. The books were choosen in the earlier than modern Roman Catholic Church.

I believe the early church was not corrupted by man.

Fun link for RCs and Protestants: bible.ca/b-bible-timeline-religious-history.htm

Please use this link for information: bible.ca/canon.htm

Please don’t send me away to my own discussion. I’m fine right here.

It is good manners not to hijack the thread of others.

And I got my history correct…maybe you should first take out the bloke in your own eyes before you make condescending statements.