Protestants: Tackle This

[Prodigal_Son1]

Bible alone or Bible plus tradition?

**1Co 11:2 Now I praise you, brethren, that in all things you are mindful of me and keep my ordinances as I have delivered them to you.

2Th 2:15 (2:14) Therefore, brethren, stand fast: and hold the traditions, which you have learned, whether by word or by our epistle.

2Th 3:6 And we charge you, brethren, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that you withdraw yourselves from every brother walking disorderly and not according to the tradition which they have received of us.

Joh 21:25 But there are also many other things which Jesus did which, if they were written every one, the world itself. I think, would not be able to contain the books that should be written.

Mar 13:31 Heaven and earth shall pass away: but my word shall not pass away.

2Ti 1:13 Hold the form of sound words which thou hast heard of me: in faith and in the love which is in Christ Jesus.

2Ti 2:2 And the things which thou hast heard of me by many witnesses, the same commend to faithful men who shall be fit to teach others also.

2Pe 1:20 Understanding this first: That no prophecy of scripture is made by private interpretation.

2Pe 3:15 And account the longsuffering of our Lord, salvation: as also our most dear brother Paul, according to the wisdom given him, hath written to you:
2Pe 3:16 As also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things; in which are certain things hard to be understood, which the unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, to their own destruction.

1Pe 1:25 But the word of the Lord endureth for ever. And this is the word which by the gospel hath been preached unto you.

Rom 10:17 Faith then cometh by hearing; and hearing by the word of Christ.

1Co 15:1 Now I make known unto you, brethren, the gospel which I preached to you, which also you have received and wherein you stand.
1Co 15:2 By which also you are saved, if you hold fast after what manner I preached unto you, unless you have believed in vain.

Mar 16:15 And he said to them: Go ye into the whole world and preach the gospel to every creature.

Mat 23:2 Saying: The scribes and the Pharisees have sitten on the chair of Moses.
Mat 23:3 All things therefore whatsoever they shall say to you, observe and do: but according to their works do ye not. For they say, and do not. **

Where are the scriptures instructing to only use scriptures and to take those scriptures and give them out to everyone for them to interpret for themselves?

 

[Dokimas]

Peter, the Apostle Christ appointed over His Church, tells us the dangers of interpretations of Pauls writings by the unlearned or unstable and he added, as they do other scriptures. 2 Peter 3:15 - 16.

Christ made many promises to the Apostles.

Mat 28:18 And Jesus coming, spoke to them, saying: All power is given to me in heaven and in earth.
Mat 28:19 Going therefore, teach ye all nations: baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost.
Mat 28:20 Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you. And behold I am with you all days, even to the consummation of the world.

Joh 14:16 And I will ask the Father: and he shall give you another Paraclete, that he may abide with you for ever:
Joh 14:17 The spirit of truth, whom the world cannot receive, because it seeth him not, nor knoweth him. But you shall know him; because he shall abide with you and shall be in you.
Joh 14:18 I will not leave you orphans: I will come to you.

Joh 14:26 But the Paraclete, the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, he will teach you all things and bring all things to your mind, whatsoever I shall have said to you.

I’ve used it before to demonstrate Christ’s confidence that the truth of God can be protected through sinful men, and I’m going to use it again.

Mat 23:1 Then Jesus spoke to the multitudes and to his disciples,
Mat 23:2 Saying: The scribes and the Pharisees have sitten on the chair of Moses.
Mat 23:3 All things therefore whatsoever they shall say to you, observe and do: but according to their works do ye not. For they say, and do not.

The was the Temple of the Old covenant. Christ knew what was going to happen to Him and He knew He would build a Church, of the new and everlasting covenant. He taught the people to listen to the authority, but do not as they do. This shows Christ’s confidence that God’s truth can be protected through His Church.

Private interpretation didn’t exist in the Old Testament and Christ didn’t say anything contrary to that with the new covenant.

**Nehemiah 8

1And all the people gathered themselves together as one man into the street that was before the water gate; and they spake unto Ezra the scribe to bring the book of the law of Moses, which the LORD had commanded to Israel.

2And Ezra the priest brought the law before the congregation both of men and women, and all that could hear with understanding, upon the first day of the seventh month.

3And he read therein before the street that was before the water gate from the morning until midday, before the men and the women, and those that could understand; and the ears of all the people were attentive unto the book of the law.

4And Ezra the scribe stood upon a pulpit of wood, which they had made for the purpose; and beside him stood Mattithiah, and Shema, and Anaiah, and Urijah, and Hilkiah, and Maaseiah, on his right hand; and on his left hand, Pedaiah, and Mishael, and Malchiah, and Hashum, and Hashbadana, Zechariah, and Meshullam.

5And Ezra opened the book in the sight of all the people; (for he was above all the people) and when he opened it, all the people stood up:

6And Ezra blessed the LORD, the great God. And all the people answered, Amen, Amen, with lifting up their hands: and they bowed their heads, and worshipped the LORD with their faces to the ground.

7Also Jeshua, and Bani, and Sherebiah, Jamin, Akkub, Shabbethai, Hodijah, Maaseiah, Kelita, Azariah, Jozabad, Hanan, Pelaiah, and the Levites, caused the people to understand the law: and the people stood in their place.

8So they read in the book in the law of God distinctly, and gave the sense, and caused them to understand the reading.**

The Church was Christ’s authority. He is the head of His Church.

Col 1:18 He is the head of the body, the church; he is the beginning, the first-born from the dead, that in everything he might be pre-eminent.

Is there anything He cannot do?

Secular history even records the fact that there was only one Church for 1500 years, until the time of the reformation. The sinful men have run amok, but the teachings prevailed…even the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.

Once again you have chosen wonderful verses to share with us. All great verses. My problem is that it is the CC that says these verses are about itself. As I understand the verses, the CC is part of those verses. BTW, I couldn’t find the the word Catholic in any of the verses you used.​

And may I add, those verses speak of my church as well. My church is the Body of Christ, the Bride of Christ.

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

Oral tradition, it’s Biblical. Up for a little challenge? Show me where the things demonstrated below are written anywhere else in scriptures? If they’re not written about, these men could have only learned them through the oral tradition.

When Christ spoke of the chair of Moses, He did not explain what the chair was. It’s apparent the crowd knew what He was speaking about as the Chair of Moses is not mentioned anywhere else in scriptures.

Mat 23:1 Then Jesus spoke to the multitudes and to his disciples,
Mat 23:2 Saying: The scribes and the Pharisees have sitten on the chair of Moses.
Mat 23:3 All things therefore whatsoever they shall say to you, observe and do: but according to their works do ye not. For they say, and do not.

Another example of oral tradition is found in the writings of St. Luke. Remember, St. Paul nor St. Luke were eye witnesses of Christ, yet he wrote words Christ spoke, that were not written anywhere else in scriptures, including the Gospels. (Also think about this, St. Luke nor St. Mark were eye witnesses to Christ, yet they wrote two Gospels, they wrote what they heard through oral tradtion.)

Act 20:35 I have shewed you all things, how that so labouring you ought to support the weak and to remember the word of the Lord Jesus, how he said: It is a more blessed thing to give, rather than to receive.

St. Paul also wrote about Jannes and Mambres, the two magicians for Pharoah. Remember, Moses’ staff, turned into a snake, ate their staffs turned into snakes. Jannes and Mambres are not written about anywhere in scriptures. The only way St. Paul could have known their names, was through oral tradition.

2Ti 3:8 Now as Jannes and Mambres resisted Moses, so these also resist the truth, men corrupted in mind, reprobate concerning the faith.

St. Paul also wrote about the rock that followed the Israelites, during the Exodus led by Moses. The rock that followed them, is not written about anywhere else in scriptures.

1Co 10:4 And all drank the same spiritual drink: (And they drank of the spiritual rock that followed them: and the rock was Christ.)

 

[Dokimas]

Bible alone or Bible plus tradition?

**1Co 11:2 Now I praise you, brethren, that in all things you are mindful of me and keep my ordinances as I have delivered them to you.

2Th 2:15 (2:14) Therefore, brethren, stand fast: and hold the traditions, which you have learned, whether by word or by our epistle**.

2Th 3:6 And we charge you, brethren, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that you withdraw yourselves from every brother walking disorderly and not according to the tradition which they have received of us.

Joh 21:25 But there are also many other things which Jesus did which, if they were written every one, the world itself. I think, would not be able to contain the books that should be written.

Mar 13:31 Heaven and earth shall pass away: but my word shall not pass away.

2Ti 1:13 Hold the form of sound words which thou hast heard of me: in faith and in the love which is in Christ Jesus.

2Ti 2:2 And the things which thou hast heard of me by many witnesses, the same commend to faithful men who shall be fit to teach others also.

2Pe 1:20 Understanding this first: That no prophecy of scripture is made by private interpretation.

2Pe 3:15 And account the longsuffering of our Lord, salvation: as also our most dear brother Paul, according to the wisdom given him, hath written to you:
2Pe 3:16 As also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things; in which are certain things hard to be understood, which the unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, to their own destruction.

1Pe 1:25 But the word of the Lord endureth for ever. And this is the word which by the gospel hath been preached unto you.

Rom 10:17 Faith then cometh by hearing; and hearing by the word of Christ.

1Co 15:1 Now I make known unto you, brethren, the gospel which I preached to you, which also you have received and wherein you stand.
1Co 15:2 By which also you are saved, if you hold fast after what manner I preached unto you, unless you have believed in vain.

Mar 16:15 And he said to them: Go ye into the whole world and preach the gospel to every creature.

Mat 23:2 Saying: The scribes and the Pharisees have sitten on the chair of Moses.
Mat 23:3 All things therefore whatsoever they shall say to you, observe and do: but according to their works do ye not. For they say, and do not.

Where are the scriptures instructing to only use scriptures and to take those scriptures and give them out to everyone for them to interpret for themselves?

There are no audio or video tapes (CDorDVD) of Paul’s preaching or any of the preaching of the apostles. I’d love to hear their sermons.​

What about the other verses that tell us to not follow traditions?

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

Once again you have chosen wonderful verses to share with us. All great verses. My problem is that it is the CC that says these verses are about itself. As I understand the verses, the CC is part of those verses. BTW, I couldn’t find the the word Catholic in any of the verses you used.​

And may I add, those verses speak of my church as well. My church is the Body of Christ, the Bride of Christ.

**Acts 9:31

(IGNT+) αιG3588 THE μενG3303 INDEED ουνG3767 THEN εκκλησιαιG1577 ASSEMBLIES καθG2596 THROUGHOUT οληςG3650 WHOLE τηςG3588 THE ιουδαιαςG2449 OF JUDEA καιG2532 AND γαλιλαιαςG1056 GALILEE καιG2532 AND σαμαρειαςG4540 SAMARIA ειχονG2192 [G5707] HAD ειρηνηνG1515 PEACE, οικοδομουμεναιG3618 [G5746] BEING BUILT UP καιG2532 AND πορευομεναιG4198 [G5740] GOING ON τωG3588 IN THE φοβωG5401 FEAR τουG3588 OF THE κυριουG2962 LORD, καιG2532 AND τηG3588 IN THE παρακλησειG3874 COMFORT τουG3588 OF THE αγιουG40 HOLY πνευματοςG4151 SPIRIT επληθυνοντοG4129 [G5712] WERE INCREASED.

G2596
κατά
kata
kat-ah’
A primary particle; (preposition) down (in place or time), in varied relations (according to the case [genitive, dative or accusative] with which it is joined): - about, according as (to), after, against, (when they were) X alone, among, and, X apart, (even, like) as (concerning, pertaining to, touching), X aside, at, before, beyond, by, to the charge of, [charita-] bly, concerning, + covered, [dai-] ly, down, every, (+ far more) exceeding, X more excellent, for, from . . . to, godly, in (-asmuch, divers, every, -to, respect of), . . . by, after the manner of, + by any means, beyond (out of) measure, X mightily, more, X natural, of (up-) on (X part), out (of every), over against, (+ your) X own, + particularly, so, through (-oughout, -oughout every), thus, (un-) to (-gether, -ward), X uttermost, where (-by), with. In composition it retains many of these applications, and frequently denotes opposition, distribution or intensity.

G3650
ὅλος
holos
hol’-os
A primary word; “whole” or “all”, that is, complete (in extent, amount, time or degree), especially (neuter) as noun or adverb: - all, altogether, every whit, + throughout, whole.

kata holos
kat-ah’ hol’-os
Catholic is an adjective derived from the Greek adjective καθολικός (katholikos), meaning “universal”**.

As much as I like sticking with scriptures, I’m going to use the words of St. Ignatius. He wrote the following in 110AD, about the same time that St. John wrote Revelations.

**Chapter VIII.-Let Nothing Be Done Without the Bishop.

See that ye all follow the bishop, even as Jesus Christ does the Father, and the presbytery as ye would the apostles; and reverence the deacons, as being the institution(55) of God. Let no man do anything connected with the Church without the bishop. Let that be deemed a proper(56) Eucharist, which is [administered] either by the bishop, or by one to whom he has entrusted it. Wherever the bishop shall appear, there let the multitude [of the people] also be; even as, wherever Jesus Christ is, there is the Catholic Church**. It is not lawful without the bishop either to baptize or to celebrate a love-feast; but whatsoever he shall approve of, that is also pleasing to God, so that everything that is done may be secure and valid.(57)

Please notice he was introducing the term. He was using the term as it was already known.

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

There are no audio or video tapes (CDorDVD) of Paul’s preaching or any of the preaching of the apostles.​

What about the other verses that tell us to not follow traditions?

We’ve already discussed the fact that there are no contradictions in scriptures. Below in outline form is the objections and defenses of the tradition.

**Verses to challenge Catholic doctrines of Tradition

Mat 15:3 But he answering, said to them: Why do you also transgress the commandment of God for your tradition? For God said:

Mat 15:2 Why do thy disciples transgress the tradition of the ancients? For they wash not their hands when they eat bread.
Mat 15:3 But he answering, said to them: Why do you also transgress the commandment of God for your tradition? For God said:
Mat 15:4 Honour thy father and mother: And: He that shall curse father or mother, let him die the death.
Mat 15:5 But you say: Whosoever shall say to father or mother, The gift whatsoever proceedeth from me, shall profit thee.
Mat 15:6 And he shall not honour his father or his mother: and you have made void the commandment of God for your tradition.

Mar 7:9 And he said to them: Well do you make void the commandment of God, that you may keep your own tradition.

Mar 7:7 And in vain do they worship me, teaching doctrines and precepts of men.
Mar 7:8 For leaving the commandment of God, you hold the tradition of men, the washing of pots and of cups: and many other things you do like to these.
Mar 7:9 And he said to them: Well do you make void the commandment of God, that you may keep your own tradition.
Mar 7:10 For Moses said: Honour thy father and thy mother. And He that shall curse father or mother, dying let him die.
Mar 7:11 But you say: If a man shall say to his father or mother, Corban (which is a gift) whatsoever is from me shall profit thee.
Mar 7:12 And further you suffer him not to do any thing for his father or mother,
Mar 7:13 Making void the word of God by your own tradition, which you have given forth. And many other such like things you do.

Col 2:8 Beware lest any man cheat you by philosophy and vain deceit: according to the tradition of men according to the elements of the world and not according to Christ.

Col 2:8 Beware lest any man cheat you by philosophy and vain deceit: according to the tradition of men according to the elements of the world and not according to Christ.
Col 2:9 For in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead corporeally.
Col 2:10 And you are filled in him, who is the head of all principality and power.
Col 2:11 In whom also you are circumcised with circumcision not made by hand in despoiling of the body of the flesh: but in the circumcision of Christ.

Defense of Traditions

1Co 11:2 Now I praise you, brethren, that in all things you are mindful of me and keep my ordinances as I have delivered them to you.

2Th 2:15 (2:14) Therefore, brethren, stand fast: and hold the traditions, which you have learned, whether by word or by our epistle.

2Th 3:6 And we charge you, brethren, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that you withdraw yourselves from every brother walking disorderly and not according to the tradition which they have received of us. **

There are traditions of men and traditions of Christ…

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

Martin Luther, leader of the Protestant reformation, conceded that the Bible came from the Catholic Church.

**“We are obliged to yield many things to the Papists (Catholics)–that they possess the Word of God which we received from them, otherwise we should have known nothing at all about it." **

If the Bible came from the Catholics, surely they know the correct interpretation.

I’ve given you alot to read and reflect on, just add prayer. Now, I have to go to Church, my wife has to work tomorrow, so we attend the Saturday vigil. Be back soon.

 

[Jean_1958]

But what is truth? How do you know that the beliefs that you hold as a Christian are really true? As a Catholic, I know that the dogma of the CC is true because it comes directly from God under the guidance of the Holy Spirit.

I have seen Protestants comdemn other Protestants as non-Christian because they do not hold to the same beliefs. One time at my work, two non-denominational Christians got into a verbal shouting match with one another because they disagreed on how to interpret certain passages. Were both of them correct, one correct/one wrong, or were they both wrong? I have been to Baptist churches and Lutheran churches that have closed communion because they do not want people who don’t believe the same as they do to receive communion. Who is in the right or wrong?

You say “we worship God in Spirit and truth”. Whose truth do you use? How do you discern that YOUR interpretation of the Bible is correct over someone else’s?

You are putting your faith in man and his decrees. They are telling you it comes from God but you have to test what they say against the word of God. The word of God is not unknowable or requiring of special knowledge. Scripture used to interpret scripture goes a long way.

Catholics condemn other believers all the time here and give back handed comments suggesting they are some how inferior or some kind of stupid. There are Catholics who don’t believe the pope is even legitimate. Or that the CC is in grave error over Vatican II. Catholics don’t share communion with non Catholics either.

That did not answer any of my questions.

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

New Testament example against private interpretation, that shows the scriptures were not enough authority.

Act 8:27 And rising up, he went. And behold, a man of Ethiopia, an eunuch, of great authority under Candace the queen of the Ethiopians, who had charge over all her treasures, had come to Jerusalem to adore.
Act 8:28 And he was returning, sitting in his chariot and reading Isaias the prophet.
Act 8:29 And the Spirit said to Philip: Go near and join thyself to this chariot.
Act 8:30 And Philip running thither, heard him reading the prophet Isaias. And he said: Thinkest thou that thou understandest what thou readest?
Act 8:31 Who said: And how can I, unless some man shew me? And he desired Philip that he would come up and sit with him.
Act 8:32 And the place of the scripture which he was reading was this: He was led as a sheep to the slaughter: and like a lamb without voice before his shearer, so openeth he not his mouth.
Act 8:33 In humility his judgment was taken away. His generation who shall declare, for his life shall be taken from the earth?
Act 8:34 And the eunuch answering Philip, said: I beseech thee, of whom doth the prophet speak this? Of himself, or of some other man?
Act 8:35 Then Philip, opening his mouth and beginning at this scripture, preached unto him Jesus.
Act 8:36 And as they went on their way, they came to a certain water. And the eunuch said: See, here is water: What doth hinder me from being baptized?
Act 8:37 And Philip said: If thou believest with all thy heart, thou mayest. And he answering, said: I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God.
Act 8:38 And he commanded the chariot to stand still. And they went down into the water, both Philip and the eunuch. And he baptized him.

The eunuch had the scriptures only. Yet, he could not understand them until the authority, Philip, opened his mouth and preached Jesus to him.

 

[larkin31]

What writings do we have that are not written by fallible men?

As we believe God inspired His word to be written, we also believe Christ built a Church, with those He appointed and gave authority too. Just as God’s word was written by fallible men, the canon was defined by fallible men, the word was translated by fallible men, the word was preserved by fallible men, fallible men included the numbering system on chapters and verses, fallible men added the punctuation marks and fallible men interpret the scriptures. Does this take away from God’s written word to be truth? …

I was not addressing the idea of “truth”. I was addressing the specific claim of infallibility. It appears now that you agree with me that the Bible is fully capable of having error in it; that it indeed could well be an imperfect document, and that indeed the Catholic church may have imperfect teachings emanating from its leaders. I don’t question much about Catholic doctrine, but I do appreciate the admission that it is not an infallible process of doctrine-making.

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

As we speak of authorities, I want to share something with you about the place Christ announced He was building a Church.

The place was Caesarea Philippi, named by Herod Philip in honor of the ruling Caesar of the time. Caesarea Philippi was originally known as the Panion, the city of Pan dedicated to the Greek god Pan. Pan was the god of many things to the Greeks, among them shepherds and flocks. Pan was considered by pagans to be the “great god” who ruled the world. To Christians, Pan represented the power of evil.

The place that Christ was transfigured is above the spot where an altar to Pan is hidden in the cliffs, even to this day.

Caesarea Philippi is a mountain with a ‘cave’ down below it, believed then to be the gates of the “abyss”.

Why of all places, would Christ choose such a place? A place so antithetical to the Kingdom of God? Because Christ, through the Church He was establishing, is the antithesis to everything which kept men from the Kingdom. Even the gates of hell shall not prevail against that Kingdom.

The Kingdom Christ established, through His Church, needs a King…a King of Kings. However, when the King, established by God through David, is absent from the physical kingdom, it cannot be left unattended. Hence, the keeper of the keys, the “prime minister” or “vicar”, is charged with the full authority of the king over all his lands, peoples, and possessions. He can make law or repeal it. He can make any decisions the King would make. And he is responsible to the King for every action he takes.

Isa 22:19 And I will drive thee out from thy station, and depose thee from thy ministry.
Isa 22:20 And it shall come to pass in that day, that I will call my servant Eliacim the son of Helcias,
Isa 22:21 And I will clothe him with thy robe, and will strengthen him with thy girdle, and will give thy power into his hand: and he shall be as a father to the inhabitants of Jerusalem, and to the house of Juda.
Isa 22:22 And I will lay the key of the house of David upon his shoulder: and he shall open, and none shall shut: and he shall shut, and none shall open.

Mat 16:19 And I will give to thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven. And whatsoever thou shalt bind upon earth, it shall be bound also in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth, it shall be loosed also in heaven.

1 Chronicles 9, gives the specifics of the keys. The holder of the keys was the king’s “right hand man.” He literally sat at the king’s right hand.

The Davidic throne was considered the throne of God by the Jews.

1Ch 29:20 And David commanded all the assembly: Bless ye the Lord our God. And all the assembly blessed the Lord the God of their fathers: and they bowed themselves and worshipped God, and then the king.
1Ch 29:21 And they sacrificed victims to the Lord: and they offered holocausts the next day, a thousand bullocks, a thousand rams, a thousand lambs, with their libations, and with every thing prescribed most abundantly for all Israel.
1Ch 29:22 And they ate, and drank before the Lord that day with great joy. And they anointed the second time Solomon the son of David. And they anointed him to the Lord to be prince, and Sadoc to be high priest.
1Ch 29:23 And Solomon sat on the throne of the Lord as king instead of David his father, and he pleased all: and all Israel obeyed him.

Solomon sat on the throne in place of his father and all obeyed him.

Christ renamed Simon to Peter and gave him the keys to the kingdom of heaven, the authority to bind and loose on earth.

Now let’s look at the name change. Name changes in scriptues were always significant. When a name change took place in the Old Testament, there was always an explanation. Abram becomes Abraham because God will make of him a great nation. Jacob becomes Israel because he contended and had power with God and with men and prevailed. Simon becomes Peter because upon his strength in faith the Church would be founded.

Mat 16:17 And Jesus answering said to him: Blessed art thou, Simon Bar-Jona: because flesh and blood hath not revealed it to thee, but my Father who is in heaven.
Mat 16:18 And I say to thee: That thou art Peter; and upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.

Peter is the English translation of the Greek and Aramaic words for rock.

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

I was not addressing the idea of “truth”. I was addressing the specific claim of infallibility. It appears now that you agree with me that the Bible is fully capable of having error in it; that it indeed could well be an imperfect document, and that indeed the Catholic church may have imperfect teachings emanating from its leaders. I don’t question much about Catholic doctrine, but I do appreciate the admission that it is not an infallible process of doctrine-making.

You are mistaken, to put words into my mouth. I believe the Bible to be the inerrant inspired word of God. I believe Christ built a Church. I believe God has the power to protect His truth in His written word and the spoken word in His Church, even through fallible men. We have proof today.

 

[jericho777]

New Testament example against private interpretation, that shows the scriptures were not enough authority.

Act 8:27 And rising up, he went. And behold, a man of Ethiopia, an eunuch, of great authority under Candace the queen of the Ethiopians, who had charge over all her treasures, had come to Jerusalem to adore.
Act 8:28 And he was returning, sitting in his chariot and reading Isaias the prophet.
Act 8:29 And the Spirit said to Philip: Go near and join thyself to this chariot.
Act 8:30 And Philip running thither, heard him reading the prophet Isaias. And he said: Thinkest thou that thou understandest what thou readest?
Act 8:31 Who said: And how can I, unless some man shew me? And he desired Philip that he would come up and sit with him.
Act 8:32 And the place of the scripture which he was reading was this: He was led as a sheep to the slaughter: and like a lamb without voice before his shearer, so openeth he not his mouth.
Act 8:33 In humility his judgment was taken away. His generation who shall declare, for his life shall be taken from the earth?
Act 8:34 And the eunuch answering Philip, said: I beseech thee, of whom doth the prophet speak this? Of himself, or of some other man?
Act 8:35 Then Philip, opening his mouth and beginning at this scripture, preached unto him Jesus.
Act 8:36 And as they went on their way, they came to a certain water. And the eunuch said: See, here is water: What doth hinder me from being baptized?
Act 8:37 And Philip said: If thou believest with all thy heart, thou mayest. And he answering, said: I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God.
Act 8:38 And he commanded the chariot to stand still. And they went down into the water, both Philip and the eunuch. And he baptized him.

The eunuch had the scriptures only. Yet, he could not understand them until the authority, Philip, opened his mouth and preached Jesus to him.

There was no private interpretation here. The eunuch knew scripture but had no idea who Jesus was ( he had come from Ethiopia, hello! ) until Phillip explained it to him. In fact Phillip was validating the truth of scripture itself. Obviously the eunuch knew who God was and that he needed a personal relationship with Him from just from reading scripture! No church to inform him of it.

Would your church baptize him immediately after his confession of faith?

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

There was no private interpretation here. The eunuch knew scripture but had no idea who Jesus was ( he had come from Ethiopia, hello! ) until Phillip explained it to him. In fact Phillip was validating the truth of scripture itself. Obviously the eunuch knew who God was and that he needed a personal relationship with Him from just from reading scripture! No church to inform him of it.

Would your church baptize him immediately after his confession of faith?

Still no answers to my questions?

**Acts 17:10 - 12
10 Then the brethren immediately sent Paul and Silas away by night to Berea. When they arrived, they went into the synagogue of the Jews. 11 These were more fair-minded than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness, and searched the Scriptures daily to find out whether these things were so. 12 Therefore many of them believed, and also not a few of the Greeks, prominent women as well as men. (KJV)

After searching the Scripture, MANY of them believed. That implies that MANY of them did not. They searched the same Scriptures, and yet disagreed. And, we can assume that the Greeks probably did not search the Scriptures at all, yet a “number of them” believed.

So if Berean “A” searched the Scriptures and thus believed Paul, yet Berean “B” searched the very same Scriptures and disagreee, and, further, a “number of Greeks” my very well have not searched the Scriptures at all, then where are we left? Is Berean “A” right and Berean “B” wrong? Is neither one right or wrong and only the Scripture is right? Are the Greeks (who might very well be Gentiles and unfamiliar with the Scriptures, right? Are some right? No. Paul is right!

Paul was sent (the definition of Apostle) to teach. He was sent with authority. He says so himself. He did not go to Berea to hold a Bible Study. He did not “ask” them to “search the Scriptures”. He did not say “I am telling you the truth because the Bible says so”. He taught with authority. He was right, and teaching Truth, whether or not the Bereans found it in Scripture. Some found it, some did not. Is Paul any less right because many did not believe? No. Paul is right whether or not Berean “A” finds it in Scripture or Berean"B" does not. Nowhere does this text state, or even imply, that the decision is up to the Bereans. Nowhere does it state or imply that Paul’s teachings are only to be considered valid if it can be proven in Scripture.

What Paul taught was Truth because he had the authority to teach it. “Many”, after searching the Scriptures, believed him. “Many”, after searching the very same Scriptures, did not. Who was right? The answer is: None of them. Paul was right.**

 

[tweetymom]

New Testament example against private interpretation, that shows the scriptures were not enough authority.

Act 8:27 And rising up, he went. And behold, a man of Ethiopia, an eunuch, of great authority under Candace the queen of the Ethiopians, who had charge over all her treasures, had come to Jerusalem to adore.
Act 8:28 And he was returning, sitting in his chariot and reading Isaias the prophet.
Act 8:29 And the Spirit said to Philip: Go near and join thyself to this chariot.
Act 8:30 And Philip running thither, heard him reading the prophet Isaias. And he said: Thinkest thou that thou understandest what thou readest?
Act 8:31 Who said: And how can I, unless some man shew me? And he desired Philip that he would come up and sit with him.
Act 8:32 And the place of the scripture which he was reading was this: He was led as a sheep to the slaughter: and like a lamb without voice before his shearer, so openeth he not his mouth.
Act 8:33 In humility his judgment was taken away. His generation who shall declare, for his life shall be taken from the earth?
Act 8:34 And the eunuch answering Philip, said: I beseech thee, of whom doth the prophet speak this? Of himself, or of some other man?
Act 8:35 Then Philip, opening his mouth and beginning at this scripture, preached unto him Jesus.
Act 8:36 And as they went on their way, they came to a certain water. And the eunuch said: See, here is water: What doth hinder me from being baptized?
Act 8:37 And Philip said: If thou believest with all thy heart, thou mayest. And he answering, said: I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God.
Act 8:38 And he commanded the chariot to stand still. And they went down into the water, both Philip and the eunuch. And he baptized him.

The eunuch had the scriptures only. Yet, he could not understand them until the authority, Philip, opened his mouth and preached Jesus to him.

Probably because he couldn’ read!

 

[adrift]

Probably because he couldn’ read!

And Philip running thither, heard him **reading **the prophet Isaias.

It says he could read

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

Probably because he couldn’ read!

Read Acts 8:28 - 30

**Act 8:28 And he was returning, sitting in his chariot and reading Isaias the prophet.
Act 8:29 And the Spirit said to Philip: Go near and join thyself to this chariot.
Act 8:30 And Philip running thither, heard him reading the prophet Isaias. And he said: Thinkest thou that thou understandest what thou readest? **

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

There was no private interpretation here. The eunuch knew scripture but had no idea who Jesus was ( he had come from Ethiopia, hello! ) until Phillip explained it to him. In fact Phillip was validating the truth of scripture itself. Obviously the eunuch knew who God was and that he needed a personal relationship with Him from just from reading scripture! No church to inform him of it.

Would your church baptize him immediately after his confession of faith?

Act 8:30 And Philip running thither, heard him reading the prophet Isaias. And he said: Thinkest thou that thou understandest what thou readest?
Act 8:31 Who said: And how can I, unless some man shew me? And he desired Philip that he would come up and sit with him.

The authority of the Church, Philip, preached Jesus to him and he believed!

The scripture doesn’t say the eunuch knew who God was. The scripture shows Philip asking if he UNDERSTANDEST what he was reading? If he couldn’t understand, he couldn’t interpret…

You have failed to answer any questions that I have politely asked of you, some repeatedly.

Please discontinue the condescending tone in your posts.

 

[Dokimas]

**Acts 9:31

(IGNT+) αιG3588 THE μενG3303 INDEED ουνG3767 THEN εκκλησιαιG1577 ASSEMBLIES καθG2596 THROUGHOUT οληςG3650 WHOLE τηςG3588 THE ιουδαιαςG2449 OF JUDEA καιG2532 AND γαλιλαιαςG1056 GALILEE καιG2532 AND σαμαρειαςG4540 SAMARIA ειχονG2192 [G5707] HAD ειρηνηνG1515 PEACE, οικοδομουμεναιG3618 [G5746] BEING BUILT UP καιG2532 AND πορευομεναιG4198 [G5740] GOING ON τωG3588 IN THE φοβωG5401 FEAR τουG3588 OF THE κυριουG2962 LORD, καιG2532 AND τηG3588 IN THE παρακλησειG3874 COMFORT τουG3588 OF THE αγιουG40 HOLY πνευματοςG4151 SPIRIT επληθυνοντοG4129 [G5712] WERE INCREASED.

G2596
κατά
kata
kat-ah’
A primary particle; (preposition) down (in place or time), in varied relations (according to the case [genitive, dative or accusative] with which it is joined): - about, according as (to), after, against, (when they were) X alone, among, and, X apart, (even, like) as (concerning, pertaining to, touching), X aside, at, before, beyond, by, to the charge of, [charita-] bly, concerning, + covered, [dai-] ly, down, every, (+ far more) exceeding, X more excellent, for, from . . . to, godly, in (-asmuch, divers, every, -to, respect of), . . . by, after the manner of, + by any means, beyond (out of) measure, X mightily, more, X natural, of (up-) on (X part), out (of every), over against, (+ your) X own, + particularly, so, through (-oughout, -oughout every), thus, (un-) to (-gether, -ward), X uttermost, where (-by), with. In composition it retains many of these applications, and frequently denotes opposition, distribution or intensity.

G3650
ὅλος
holos
hol’-os
A primary word; “whole” or “all”, that is, complete (in extent, amount, time or degree), especially (neuter) as noun or adverb: - all, altogether, every whit, + throughout, whole.

kata holos
kat-ah’ hol’-os
Catholic is an adjective derived from the Greek adjective καθολικός (katholikos), meaning “universal”**.

As much as I like sticking with scriptures, I’m going to use the words of St. Ignatius. He wrote the following in 110AD, about the same time that St. John wrote Revelations.

Please notice he was introducing the term. He was using the term as it was already known.

Ac 9:31 Then the churches throughout all <3650> Judea, Galilee, and Samaria had peace and were edified. And walking in the fear of the Lord and in the comfort of the Holy Spirit, they were multiplied.
Ac 15:22 Then it pleased the apostles and elders, with the whole <3650> church, to send chosen men of their own company to Antioch with Paul and Barnabas, namely, Judas who was also named Barsabas, and Silas, leading men among the brethren.
Ro 16:23 Gaius, my host and the host of the whole <3650> church, greets you. Erastus, the treasurer of the city, greets you, and Quartus, a brother. The whole church world wide or local?
1Co 14:23 Therefore if the whole <3650> church comes together in one place, and all speak with tongues, and there come in those who are uninformed or unbelievers, will they not say that you are out of your mind? The church world wide or the church of Corinth?

 

[adrift]

Teachings from God are always correct. Man is the one that gets it wrong. In order for the Catholic church (or ANY church) to have been correct over all these centuries it would have to have had in place sinless individuals as leaders…and you and I know that is not possible. Really.

You have arrived at an incorrect conclusion. In order for a Church to be correct, it would have to have the protection of the Holy Spirit which it does. “The gates of hell will not prevail against it” was the promise of Jesus. The “it” that Jesus was referring to was the Church He just said He was building on Peter. You have expressed why there is infallibility.

I am interested in where you got your definition of cult from? Cult has gathered a rather wrong connotation. Cult

Main Entry: cult
Pronunciation: \ˈkəlt
Function: noun
Usage: often attributive
Etymology: French & Latin; French culte, from Latin cultus care, adoration, from colere to cultivate — more at wheel
Date: 1617

1 : formal religious veneration : worship
2 : a system of religious beliefs and ritual; also : its body of adherents
3 : a religion regarded as unorthodox or spurious; also : its body of adherents
4 : a system for the cure of disease based on dogma set forth by its promulgator
5 a : great devotion to a person, idea, object, movement, or work (as a film or book); especially : such devotion regarded as a literary or intellectual fad b : the object of such devotion c : a usually small group of people characterized by such devotion

The most common definition is stated first in a dictionary. Note that every religion would fall under this definition.
For a further description try this link
It is too bad that you didn’t check into what cult really is rather than taking a negative meaning only.