Protestants; why won't you be CATHOLIC!?

[Hisalone]

Is that the best you can do to refute my statement?

Give us your beliefs regarding Incarnational theology. Or, better yet, do you even know what Incarnational theology is?

It means your answer deserves no reply.

 

[Tanner9188]

Nonsense-if you scoll down in this thread you will see a Proteatnt who claims Catholics are not Christians. He has not been banned. It appears to me you are hiding behind this strawman becuase you can not provide evdidence to back up your assertions about the Church

Perhpaps you can give of some writings of the First Century Church fathers that affirm any of the Protestant doctines of Sola Scriptura, Faith alone, OSAS. While you are at it find us some writings of the early Church fathers that contradict in any way the Doctines of the Catholic Church

**Perhaps you should read Scripture; there you will find that the Apostles and Jesus Himself; that once the Father drew a person to the Son; no one, including yourself, can “snatch” then from the Fathers hand. Perhaps Romans 8:31 till the end would convince you, Paul’s doxology on the security of the saved; or do you not believe God; since His voice and His calling is found in Scripture?

How do you reconcile Hebrews 6:6 “and {then} have fallen away, it is impossible to renew them again to repentance, since they again crucify to themselves the Son of God and put Him to open shame.” - I know you will not answer this because it destroys your theology on being able to lose your salvation or regain it if you had it.

It is IMPOSSIBLE for someone to know the truth, then reject it, and have the ability to come back to repentance. Galatians 4 speaks of the same and I believe Hebrews 10 has another example of the same.

You can only drawl 1 of 2 conclusions; OSAS or OLAL (Once Lost Always Lost); either way to completely destroys the distortion that one can fall away or that one can fall away, then come back as taught by false teachers with false theology.**

 

[Hisalone]

Nonsense-if you scoll down in this thread you will see a Proteatnt who claims Catholics are not Christians. He has not been banned. It appears to me you are hiding behind this strawman becuase you can not provide evdidence to back up your assertions about the Church

Perhpaps you can give of some writings of the First Century Church fathers that affirm any of the Protestant doctines of Sola Scriptura, Faith alone, OSAS. While you are at it find us some writings of the early Church fathers that contradict in any way the Doctines of the Catholic Church

I have been given several warnings so I know how the process works.

Augustine

"Whereas, therefore, in every question, which relates to life and conduct, not only teaching, but exhortation also is necessary; in order that by teaching we may know what is to be done, and by exhortation may be incited not to think it irksome to do what we already know is to be done; what more can I teach you, than what we read in the Apostle? For holy Scripture setteth a rule to our teaching, that we dare not “be wise more than it behoveth to be wise;” but be wise, as himself saith, “unto soberness, according as unto each God hath allotted the measure of faith.” (Rom 12:3) Be it not therefore for me to teach you any other thing, save to expound to you the words of the Teacher, and to treat of them as the Lord shall have given to me.

“For among the things that are plainly laid down in Scripture are to be found all matters that concern faith and the manner of life …”

Back to Augustine. He also said:
“This mediator [Jesus Christ], first through the Prophets, then by his own lips, afterwards through the Apostles, revealed whatever he considered necessary. He also inspired Scripture, which is regarded as canonical and of supreme authority and to which we give credence concerning all those truths we ought to know and yet, of ourselves, are unable to learn.” City of God,

 

[Tanner9188]

Nonsense-if you scoll down in this thread you will see a Proteatnt who claims Catholics are not Christians. He has not been banned. It appears to me you are hiding behind this strawman becuase you can not provide evdidence to back up your assertions about the Church

Perhpaps you can give of some writings of the First Century Church fathers that affirm any of the Protestant doctines of Sola Scriptura, Faith alone, OSAS. While you are at it find us some writings of the early Church fathers that contradict in any way the Doctines of the Catholic Church

**
**Perhaps you should read Scripture; there you will find that the Apostles and Jesus Himself; that once the Father drew a person to the Son; no one, including yourself, can “snatch” then from the Fathers hand. Perhaps Romans 8:31 till the end would convince you, Paul’s doxology on the security of the saved; or do you not believe God; since His voice and His calling is found in Scripture?
**
How do you reconcile Hebrews 6:6? “and {then} have fallen away, it is impossible to renew them again to repentance, since they again crucify to themselves the Son of God and put Him to open shame.” - I know you will not answer this because it destroys your theology on being able to lose your salvation or regain it if you had it.

It is IMPOSSIBLE for someone to know the truth, then reject it, and have the ability to come back to repentance. Galatians 4 speaks of the same and I believe Hebrews 10 has another example of the same.

You can only drawl 1 of 2 conclusions; OSAS or OLAL (Once Lost Always Lost); either way to completely destroys the distortion that one can fall away or that one can fall away, then come back as taught by false teachers with false theology.
**
christiananswers.net/q-eden/sola-scriptura-earlychurch.html**

Irenaeus and Tertullian held to sola Scriptura.
Cyril of Jerusalem held to sola Scriptura
Gregory of Nyssa held to sola Scriptura**

 

[waynie11]

(shucks, nobody responded to my post!)

Hi.
I like Catholics, I love the music, the buildings, the history/tradition, etc.

However, the reason I’m not Catholic is that a ‘a tree is judged by its fruit’.
In my research of every form of Christianity, I find that Quakerism is the closest there is to being non-hypocritical or contradictory. They were the first abolitionists, always against war/pacifist, always kind to the native Americans and did not betray them like others, never had an inquisition, etc.

To me, that means a lot. Catholic history is marred by some real atrocities, including WWII, treatment of Jews, the inquisition, etc. Protestantism in general has some real discriminatory practices as well, especially Martin Luther was a real anti-semite. But so far I’ve found nothing disagreeable even in the earliest history of Quakerism.

Wayne

 

[jlhargus]

**Perhaps you should read Scripture; there you will find that the Apostles and Jesus Himself; that once the Father drew a person to the Son; no one, including yourself, can “snatch” then from the Fathers hand. Perhaps Romans 8:31 till the end would convince you, Paul’s doxology on the security of the saved; or do you not believe God; since His voice and His calling is found in Scripture?

How do you reconcile Hebrews 6:6 “and {then} have fallen away, it is impossible to renew them again to repentance, since they again crucify to themselves the Son of God and put Him to open shame.” - I know you will not answer this because it destroys your theology on being able to lose your salvation or regain it if you had it.**

It is IMPOSSIBLE for someone to know the truth, then reject it, and have the ability to come back to repentance. Galatians 4 speaks of the same and I believe Hebrews 10 has another example of the same.

You can only drawl 1 of 2 conclusions; OSAS or OLAL (Once Lost Always Lost); either way to completely destroys the distortion that one can fall away or that one can fall away, then come back as taught by false teachers with false theology.

JL: [Hb6:4 For it is impossible for those who were ONCE ENLIGHTENED, and have TASTED of THE HEAVENLY GIFT, and were made PARTAKERS OF THE HOLY GHOST, 5 And have TASTED the good WORD OF GOD, AND THE POWERS OF THE WORLD TO COME, 6 IF THEY SHALL FALL AWAY, TO RENEW THEM AGAIN unto repentance; SEEING THEY CRUCIFY to themselves THE SON of God afresh, and put him to an open shame.]

Paul is addressing a Christian community of those who have been ENLIGHTENED. They are not on the brink of being enlightened they are ENLIGHTENED and HAVE TASTED OF THE HEAVENLY GIFT, MADE PARTAKERS OF THE HOLY GHOST, They have the indwelling Holy Ghost.

Paul warns believers, with the indwelling Holy Spirit , of the danger of apostasy, alluding to those once Christian Hebrews, who left the Christian community and returned to Judaism. Having rejected Christ’s sacrifice, returning and placing their faith in animal sacrifice, which can never renew them again to repentance taking away sin. It is impossible for them to repent and be renewed, apart from Christ and the Christian Community. As long as they remain hostile to the Gospel, it is impossible to renew them unto repentance. They are separated from Christ and his people, by choice and crucify to themselves the Son of God afresh.

Why warn believing Christians against falling away if it can’t happen? How can non-believers, fall away from something they don’t have? Could non-believers be RESTORED to something they haven’t first possessed? The point is when a believer falls away from Christ, they will not find salvation in anyone other than Christ, it is impossible, as there is no other name under heaven by which men can be saved.

2Pt2:20 For if, after they have escaped the pollutions of the world through [the full, personal] knowledge of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, they again become entangled in them and are overcome, their last condition is worse [for them] than the first. 21 For never to have obtained a [full, personal] knowledge of the way of righteousness would have been better for them than, having obtained [such knowledge], to turn back from the holy commandment which was [verbally] delivered to them. 22 There has befallen them the thing spoken of in the true proverb, The dog turns back to his own vomit, and, The sow is washed only to wallow again in the mire. [Amplified Bible]

Sources: RSV, Ignatius Catholic Study Bible, Commentary and Notes by Scott Hahn and Curtis Mitch. Douay-Rheims Bible, footnotes, Loreto Publications. NAB, The Catholic Answer Bible footnotes, Our Sunday Visitor Publishing Division. And a Protestant source, David Guzik’s Commentaries on the Bible, on line @ studylight.org/com/guz/view.cgi?book=heb&chapter=006

Paul is emphasizing how serious it is to abandon Christ. Mk 3:29 But he that shall blaspheme against the Holy Ghost hath never forgiveness, but is in danger of eternal damnation. The sin against the Holy Spirit is resisting his prompting to repent, it is the only sin than cannot be forgiven in this or the next age.

I have often wondered how people connect the “Bread of Life” sermon with the Lord’s Supper; there is no correlation to the two unless you were one of those who walked away in unbelief; became an apostate and started your own cannibal christian church…have you ever wondered that?

JL: I thought you believed in OSAS, yet here you admit believers can fall away, I will remember to remind you of your admission when you say OSAS.

 

[FidesSpesCarita]

**
**Perhaps you should read Scripture; there you will find that the Apostles and Jesus Himself; that once the Father drew a person to the Son; no one, including yourself, can “snatch” then from the Fathers hand. Perhaps Romans 8:31 till the end would convince you, Paul’s doxology on the security of the saved; or do you not believe God; since His voice and His calling is found in Scripture?

---

How do you reconcile Hebrews 6:6? “and {then} have fallen away, it is impossible to renew them again to repentance, since they again crucify to themselves the Son of God and put Him to open shame.” - I know you will not answer this because it destroys your theology on being able to lose your salvation or regain it if you had it.

It is IMPOSSIBLE for someone to know the truth, then reject it, and have the ability to come back to repentance. Galatians 4 speaks of the same and I believe Hebrews 10 has another example of the same.

You can only drawl 1 of 2 conclusions; OSAS or OLAL (Once Lost Always Lost); either way to completely destroys the distortion that one can fall away or that one can fall away, then come back as taught by false teachers with false theology.
**
christiananswers.net/q-eden/sola-scriptura-earlychurch.html**

Irenaeus and Tertullian held to sola Scriptura.
Cyril of Jerusalem held to sola Scriptura
Gregory of Nyssa held to sola Scriptura

I apologize for the lack of solidity that will follow in my post, but I need to chime in on this.

Oh please… cut the B.S. here. The only one of the four fathers you list I have read is Irenaeus and based upon Irenaeus alone (pun intended) I know the list to be false. Why would Irenaeus simultaneously submit to Scripture alone and in his “Against Heresies” tell people to look to Rome to find the truth taught by Christ? (Cant remember the reference and dont want to find it right now).

That is my relatively short, uneducated and coffee-fueled diatribe… now back to those who know more and better than I.

 

[Hisalone]

(shucks, nobody responded to my post!)

Hi.
I like Catholics, I love the music, the buildings, the history/tradition, etc.

However, the reason I’m not Catholic is that a ‘a tree is judged by its fruit’.
In my research of every form of Christianity, I find that Quakerism is the closest there is to being non-hypocritical or contradictory. They were the first abolitionists, always against war/pacifist, always kind to the native Americans and did not betray them like others, never had an inquisition, etc.

To me, that means a lot. Catholic history is marred by some real atrocities, including WWII, treatment of Jews, the inquisition, etc. Protestantism in general has some real discriminatory practices as well, especially Martin Luther was a real anti-semite. But so far I’ve found nothing disagreeable even in the earliest history of Quakerism.

Wayne

the 1st century church’s meetings were similar to friends meetings in that all participated in discussion, and teaching.

 

[estesbob]

Perhaps you should read Scripture; there you will find that the Apostles and Jesus Himself; that once the Father drew a person to the Son; no one, including yourself, can “snatch” then from the Fathers hand. Perhaps Romans 8:31 till the end would convince you, Paul’s doxology on the security of the saved; or do you not believe God; since His voice and His calling is found in Scripture?

You and I disagree on how these verses should be interpreted-how do we resolve that?

How do you reconcile Hebrews 6:6 “and {then} have fallen away, it is impossible to renew them again to repentance, since they again crucify to themselves the Son of God and put Him to open shame.” - I know you will not answer this because it destroys your theology on being able to lose your salvation or regain it if you had it.

I dont see anything in these verses that has to be reconciled nor anything that destroys Catholic Theology. Evidently you and disagree on what these verses are saying-how do we resolve that?

**

**It is IMPOSSIBLE for someone to know the truth, then reject it, and have the ability to come back to repentance. Galatians 4 speaks of the same and I believe Hebrews 10 has another example of the same. **

**

Why should I accept your version of the Truth-more importantly why do Protestants have so many different versions of the Truth?

**

You can only drawl 1 of 2 conclusions; OSAS or OLAL (Once Lost Always Lost); either way to completely destroys the distortion that one can fall away or that one can fall away, then come back as taught by false teachers with false theology.

**

Only if we accpet your personal interpreation of Scripture. By what authority do you presume to interpret scripture for the rest of us?

I am still waiting for an answer to this:

Perhpaps you can give of some writings of the First Century Church fathers that affirm any of the Protestant doctines of Sola Scriptura, Faith alone, OSAS. While you are at it find us some writings of the early Church fathers that contradict in any way the Doctines of the Catholic Church

 

[jlhargus]

**
**Perhaps you should read Scripture; there you will find that the Apostles and Jesus Himself; that once the Father drew a person to the Son; no one, including yourself, can “snatch” then from the Fathers hand. Perhaps Romans 8:31 till the end would convince you, Paul’s doxology on the security of the saved; or do you not believe God; since His voice and His calling is found in Scripture?

---

How do you reconcile Hebrews 6:6? “and {then} have fallen away, it is impossible to renew them again to repentance, since they again crucify to themselves the Son of God and put Him to open shame.” - I know you will not answer this because it destroys your theology on being able to lose your salvation or regain it if you had it.

It is IMPOSSIBLE for someone to know the truth, then reject it, and have the ability to come back to repentance. Galatians 4 speaks of the same and I believe Hebrews 10 has another example of the same.

You can only drawl 1 of 2 conclusions; OSAS or OLAL (Once Lost Always Lost); either way to completely destroys the distortion that one can fall away or that one can fall away, then come back as taught by false teachers with false theology.
**
christiananswers.net/q-eden/sola-scriptura-earlychurch.html**

Irenaeus and Tertullian held to sola Scriptura.
Cyril of Jerusalem held to sola Scriptura
Gregory of Nyssa held to sola Scriptura

JL: [Hb6:4 For it is impossible for those who were ONCE ENLIGHTENED, and have TASTED of THE HEAVENLY GIFT, and were made PARTAKERS OF THE HOLY GHOST, 5 And have TASTED the good WORD OF GOD, AND THE POWERS OF THE WORLD TO COME, 6 IF THEY SHALL FALL AWAY, TO RENEW THEM AGAIN unto repentance; SEEING THEY CRUCIFY to themselves THE SON of God afresh, and put him to an open shame.]

Paul is addressing a Christian community of those who have been ENLIGHTENED. They are not on the brink of being enlightened they are ENLIGHTENED and HAVE TASTED OF THE HEAVENLY GIFT, MADE PARTAKERS OF THE HOLY GHOST, They have the indwelling Holy Ghost.

Paul warns believers, with the indwelling Holy Spirit , of the danger of apostasy, alluding to those once Christian Hebrews, who left the Christian community and returned to Judaism. Having rejected Christ’s sacrifice, returning and placing their faith in animal sacrifice, which can never renew them again to repentance taking away sin. It is impossible for them to repent and be renewed, apart from Christ and the Christian Community. As long as they remain hostile to the Gospel, it is impossible to renew them unto repentance. They are separated from Christ and his people, by choice and crucify to themselves the Son of God afresh.

Why warn believing Christians against falling away if it can’t happen? How can non-believers, fall away from something they don’t have? Could non-believers be RESTORED to something they haven’t first possessed? The point is when a believer falls away from Christ, they will not find salvation in anyone other than Christ, it is impossible, as there is no other name under heaven by which men can be saved.

2Pt2:20 For if, after they have escaped the pollutions of the world through [the full, personal] knowledge of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, they again become entangled in them and are overcome, their last condition is worse [for them] than the first. 21 For never to have obtained a [full, personal] knowledge of the way of righteousness would have been better for them than, having obtained [such knowledge], to turn back from the holy commandment which was [verbally] delivered to them. 22 There has befallen them the thing spoken of in the true proverb, The dog turns back to his own vomit, and, The sow is washed only to wallow again in the mire. [Amplified Bible]

Sources: RSV, Ignatius Catholic Study Bible, Commentary and Notes by Scott Hahn and Curtis Mitch. Douay-Rheims Bible, footnotes, Loreto Publications. NAB, The Catholic Answer Bible footnotes, Our Sunday Visitor Publishing Division. And a Protestant source, David Guzik’s Commentaries on the Bible, on line @ studylight.org/com/guz/view.cgi?book=heb&chapter=006

Mk 3:29 But he that shall blaspheme against the Holy Ghost hath never forgiveness, but is in danger of eternal damnation. The sin against the Holy Spirit is resisting his prompting to repent, it is the only sin than cannot be forgiven in this or the next age.

You posted in another line this link, forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=5525045&postcount=836
your fourth paragraph down, “I have often wondered … there is no correlation to the two unless you were one of those who walked away in unbelief, became an apostate and started your own cannibal christian church”. I my reply to that in post 925 I said I thought you believed in OSAS, yet here you admit believers can fall away, I will remember to remind you of your admission when you say OSAS.

No one can snatch one from God, but we can remove ourself by sin, as you even show by your above statement. One can’t be an apostate without first being a Christian.

 

[estesbob]

I have been given several warnings so I know how the process works.

Augustine

"Whereas, therefore, in every question, which relates to life and conduct, not only teaching, but exhortation also is necessary; in order that by teaching we may know what is to be done, and by exhortation may be incited not to think it irksome to do what we already know is to be done; what more can I teach you, than what we read in the Apostle? For holy Scripture setteth a rule to our teaching, that we dare not “be wise more than it behoveth to be wise;” but be wise, as himself saith, “unto soberness, according as unto each God hath allotted the measure of faith.” (Rom 12:3) Be it not therefore for me to teach you any other thing, save to expound to you the words of the Teacher, and to treat of them as the Lord shall have given to me.

“For among the things that are plainly laid down in Scripture are to be found all matters that concern faith and the manner of life …”

Back to Augustine. He also said:
“This mediator [Jesus Christ], first through the Prophets, then by his own lips, afterwards through the Apostles, revealed whatever he considered necessary. He also inspired Scripture, which is regarded as canonical and of supreme authority and to which we give credence concerning all those truths we ought to know and yet, of ourselves, are unable to learn.” City of God,

Unfotunately you have approached Augustine the same way you approach Scripture -cut n pasting out of context quotes and demanding we interpret them the way you do. No one disputes the importance of Scripture-what we did dipute is that it is the sole , final authority and that each person can find the truth themselves by reading Scripture.

Far from affirming Scripture as the ultimate authority Augusine makes it very clear that Authority lies with the Church:

“There are many other things which rightly keep me in the bosom of the Catholic Church. The consent of the people and nations keeps me, her authority keeps me, inaugurated by miracles, nourished in hope, enlarged by love, and established by age. The succession of priests keep me, from the very seat of the apostle Peter (to whom the Lord after his resurrection gave charge to feed his sheep) down to the present episcopate [of Pope Siricius]” (*Against the Letter of Mani Called “The Foundation” *5 [A.D. 397]).

Now before we get into a deeper discussion of what Augustine taught do you accpet EVERYTHING Augustine taught or just those tiny fragments that you believe affirm you embracing of false doctrines?

 

[waynie11]

the 1st century church’s meetings were similar to friends meetings in that all participated in discussion, and teaching.

thanks for replying Hisalone!

btw, I just wanna say that I think all are saved eventually, even after death we can accept salvation. I say this because ‘with God, all things are possible’.

cheers everybody!

Wayne

 

[JonNC]

Infant Baptism is essential? You would have to disagree with yourself if you then turn around and agree to have an adult get baptized…

No, adult Baptism, when infant Baptism has not been performed, then becomes essential - one baptism for the remission of sins.

Jon

 

[JonNC]

=Tanner9188;5559829]**More accurately; Protestants recognize the difference between baptism of the Spirit as opposed to water baptism as Scripture teaches. **
Take a moment and make sure that you specify which Protestant you are speaking of.
While many Lutherans will claim a separation from “protestantism”, we are usually grouped in there. Some of your statements here do not apply to Lutherans. You might read here what Lutherans teach about Baptism.bookofconcord.org/defense_7_baptism.php#article9

whereas the protestant will state in accord with Scripture that it is impossible to loose one’s salvation once he is declared righteous/justified by God.

Augsburg Confession:

Article XII: Of Repentance.

1] Of Repentance they teach that for those who have fallen after Baptism there is remission of sins whenever they are converted 2] and that the Church ought to impart absolution to those thus returning to repentance. Now, repentance consists properly of these 3] two parts: One is contrition, that is, 4] terrors smiting the conscience through the knowledge of sin; the other is faith, which is born of 5] the Gospel, or of absolution, and believes that for Christ’s sake, sins are forgiven, comforts 6] the conscience, and delivers it from terrors. Then good works are bound to follow, which are the fruits of repentance.

7] They condemn the Anabaptists, who deny that those once justified can lose the Holy Ghost

. Also those who contend that some may attain to such 8] perfection in this life that they cannot sin.

Being once justified does not deny free will, nor the ability to lose salvation.

Jon

 

[guanophore]

How did the ECF expose heresy?
By the authority of scripture.

Yes and with Sacred Tradition, because the canon of the NT was not yet formed, and just as in the heresies today, there was no small dispute about which books were considered scripture. Also, the manner in which the scriptures were interpreted was according to the Apostolic Tradition, which your traditions has been separated from for centuries.

if we questioned the auhenticity of Catholicism we would be banned. How couragous of you.

No, you can question. You are not allowed to do it disrespectfully, is all.

Do you have any idea how far Catholicism has deviated from first century Christianity?

No, could you please enlighten me?

It means your answer deserves no reply.

It was not an answer, but a question, and one quite worthy of reply. I am also interested to learn. What is your understanding of the incarnational principle?

 

[guanophore]

Perhaps you should read Scripture; there you will find that the Apostles and Jesus Himself; that once the Father drew a person to the Son; no one, including yourself, can “snatch” then from the Fathers hand. Perhaps Romans 8:31 till the end would convince you, Paul’s doxology on the security of the saved; or do you not believe God; since His voice and His calling is found in Scripture?

People are not snatched. They jump out, and run away.

How do you reconcile Hebrews 6:6 “and {then} have fallen away, it is impossible to renew them again to repentance, since they again crucify to themselves the Son of God and put Him to open shame.” - I know you will not answer this because it destroys your theology on being able to lose your salvation or regain it if you had it.

This is an excellent question. One of the greatest controversies in the early church had to do with how to handle persons who denied Christ to save their skins.

The blood of Jesus is all that can save, so one who spurns it (decides he does not need it) has no recourse. Until death, we can always pray that such a person will come to repentance, and recognize their need for His Blood.

It is IMPOSSIBLE for someone to know the truth, then reject it, and have the ability to come back to repentance. Galatians 4 speaks of the same and I believe Hebrews 10 has another example of the same.

It does not say they cannot be restored to repentance. The only unforgivable sin is rejection of the HS. If one continues to refuse the calling of the Father and to be drawn to the Son by the HS, then one will be permitted to go to perdition. God does not want puppets, but sons and daughters. Those who choose to reject Him are allowed to join the devil andhis anges.

You can only drawl 1 of 2 conclusions; OSAS or OLAL (Once Lost Always Lost); either way to completely destroys the distortion that one can fall away or that one can fall away, then come back as taught by false teachers with false theology.

Apparently you can only “drawl” two, since you cannot accept the Apostolic Teachings on these matters.

 

[Tomster]

Yes and with Sacred Tradition, because the canon of the NT was not yet formed, and just as in the heresies today, there was no small dispute about which books were considered scripture. Also, the manner in which the scriptures were interpreted was according to the Apostolic Tradition, which your traditions has been separated from for centuries.

No, you can question. You are not allowed to do it disrespectfully, is all.

No, could you please enlighten me?

It was not an answer, but a question, and one quite worthy of reply. I am also interested to learn. What is your understanding of the incarnational principle?

Thank you very much!

 

[Tomster]

It means your answer deserves no reply.

Or does it really mean that you do not have an answer?

 

[Tanner9188]

I apologize for the lack of solidity that will follow in my post, but I need to chime in on this.

Oh please… cut the B.S. here. The only one of the four fathers you list I have read is Irenaeus and based upon Irenaeus alone (pun intended) I know the list to be false. Why would Irenaeus simultaneously submit to Scripture alone and in his “Against Heresies” tell people to look to Rome to find the truth taught by Christ? (Cant remember the reference and dont want to find it right now).

That is my relatively short, uneducated and coffee-fueled diatribe… now back to those who know more and better than I.

I assume two things; 1) you clicked the link and read the material and 2) You understand what you read. If so, provide substance to your claim; otherwise no one wants to hear someone chime in and rant.

 

[Tanner9188]

You and I disagree on how these verses should be interpreted-how do we resolve that?

Read the Scripture and beg God for understanding; that would be a great start. You can always tell when a person cannot refute something when they provide zero substance to their post on serious issues that strike at the heart of your theology. This is a pretty typical response from a Catholic.

I dont see anything in these verses that has to be reconciled nor anything that destroys Catholic Theology. Evidently you and disagree on what these verses are saying-how do we resolve that?

**Read the Scripture and beg God for understanding; that would be a great start. You can always tell when a person cannot refute something when they provide zero substance to their post on serious issues that strike at the heart of your theology. **

Why should I accept your version of the Truth-more importantly why do Protestants have so many different versions of the Truth?

**There is but one truth when God speaks through Scripture; some truths can have more than one application and often does. I wouldn’t take any ones interpretation of Scripture; I would and am like the Bereans to see if these things are true; another good suggestion for you.

---

Only if we accpet your personal interpreation of Scripture. By what authority do you presume to interpret scripture for the rest of us?

I am still waiting for an answer to this:

** If you need to ask such a question; further evidence you do not understand what provisions God has given to each “true disciple”. Moreover it also shows that you do not believe God because you are not even willing to see for yourself what He has to say; how can you, you lean on someone else’s understanding. Isn’t that why you and others put more emphasis on the “Church” than on Scripture?**

Perhpaps you can give of some writings of the First Century Church fathers that affirm any of the Protestant doctines of Sola Scriptura, Faith alone, OSAS. While you are at it find us some writings of the early Church fathers that contradict in any way the Doctines of the Catholic Church

**What did the Early Church believe about the authority of Scripture? (sola Scriptura)

The Apostolic Fathers and the Apologists held to sola Scriptura

Irenaeus and Tertullian held to sola Scriptura
Cyril of Jerusalem held to sola Scriptura
Gregory of Nyssa held to sola Scriptura
The Early Church operated on basis of sola Scriptura

Customs and Practices as Apostolic Oral Tradition

christiananswers.net/q-eden/sola-scriptura-earlychurch.html

---

What does the Bible teach about sola Scriptura (final authority of Scripture)? Answer
christiananswers.net/q-eden/sola-scriptura-bible.html
**