Reading Scripture together as Christians

[guanophore]

I find your quote of Romans 2:26 to be very interesting in regards to Paul's gospel.  I still don't think that the Catholic Gospel can be documented and supported by the 13 Epistles of Paul.

This is not surprising, since you have demonstrated that you don’t understand what the Church teaches about salvation.

The 13 Epistles of Paul are Catholic. They were written by, for, and about Catholics. They support everything the Catholic Church teaches.

Your interpretation of them, however, may not.

I hope you are aware that I started another thread called “Galatians - Bible Study” since this particular book like Romans are good books to understand Paul’s gospel. The only comment I would like to make in regards to your two post is this:

But if I should be delayed, you should know how to behave in the household of God, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and foundation of truth. (1 Tim 3:15)

Protestants do not understand the church as being the Roman Catholic Church and all of her teachings.

That may be because there was no Roman Rite in the Catholic Church at the time these epistle was written.

The church of the living God consists of all those who have been united to Christ throughout redemptive history and is much bigger.

While this is true, it is still a deficient view of the Church, which is the Body of Christ. The reason the Church is infallible is because of her Divine Head. I would think someone who understands the biblical doctrine of Federal Headship would understand this!

It is bulit upon the revealed teachings of the Apostles recorded in the New Testmanet and not through apparent apostles or prophets comming outside the New Testament Apostles.

Such a formulation seems to imply that the apostles and prophets not recorded int the NT some how come from outside the Catholic faith that is recorded in the NT.

The Faith to contend for that was once for all delievered to the saints (Jude 3), is contained withing the pages of Holy Scripture.

This is true, but it is not the only place where it is contained.

 

[AshleyBelle]

Please see the title of this thread. If you want to debate sola scriptura and Catholic Magesterium authorities, please start another thread. This is a Bible Study currently being led by Ryan who is Roman Catholic. It is appropriate to comment with extra-biblical sources and additional Scripture to support your comments, which Ryan appropriately has posted. However, a distinction needs to be made in regards to a posting of the Catholic Catechism. The Catholic must submit to the Catholic Catechism, but a Protestant will only submit to Scripture as illuminated by God the Holy Spirit as final authority for understanding spiritual truth. In a Bible Study, we need order and discipline to learn from God through the Scriptures. This can’t be a free for all on all issues that unite and divide Protestants and Catholics.

Reformed, we are trying to study the scriptures with you.

See my posts above, I am asking valid questions. You presented your point of view, I presented mine.

You’re allowed to post Protestant documents, but you forbid us from referring to the catechism?

You won’t answer my questions, because they infringe too much on the idea of sola scriptura?

 

[guanophore]

Protestant’s Final Authority is the Word of God. Catholics have a different source of final authority and hear a different voice than the authorative Word of God which is Holy Scripture.

No, Reformed, this is a misunderstanding. The authority that Jesus gave to the Church is the same authority that produced the Scripture. There are no contradictions between the two, because they come from the same Source (God). I am sure it seems like “a different voice” to you, because you are so far separated from the Sacred Tradition and have been given so much misinformation about the Catholic Church that it is difficult for you to see. However, if you are willing to be intellectually honest, and really look at what the Church teaches, instead of the misinformation you have been given, you may realize that the voice is not different.

X. The supreme judge by which all controversies of religion are to be determined, and all decrees of councils, opinions of ancient writers, doctrines of men, and private spirits, are to be examined, and in whose sentence we are to rest, can be no other but the Holy Spirit speaking in the Scripture.[24]

reformed.org/documents/wc…ofs/index.html

Click on the link for scriptrual proofs for each statement of faith.

---

You yourself have admitted that we all read scripture through our biased lenses. This is why scripture itself is subject to the perception of the reader. Since individuals are fallible, this doctrine has created a plethora of ecclesial communities all in conflict over some " biblical doctrine".

Please see the title of this thread. If you want to debate sola scriptura and Catholic Magesterium authorities, please start another thread. This is a Bible Study currently being led by Ryan who is Roman Catholic. It is appropriate to comment with extra-biblical sources and additional Scripture to support your comments, which Ryan appropriately has posted. However, a distinction needs to be made in regards to a posting of the Catholic Catechism. The Catholic must submit to the Catholic Catechism, but a Protestant will only submit to Scripture as illuminated by God the Holy Spirit as final authority for understanding spiritual truth. In a Bible Study, we need order and discipline to learn from God through the Scriptures. This can’t be a free for all on all issues that unite and divide Protestants and Catholics.

Let me see if I understand you here. It is ok to post the Westminster profession of faith to support the bible study, but it is not ok to post anything from the Catechism, because it does not apply?

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

Please see the title of this thread. If you want to debate sola scriptura and Catholic Magesterium authorities, please start another thread. This is a Bible Study currently being led by Ryan who is Roman Catholic. It is appropriate to comment with extra-biblical sources and additional Scripture to support your comments, which Ryan appropriately has posted. However, a distinction needs to be made in regards to a posting of the Catholic Catechism. The Catholic must submit to the Catholic Catechism, but a Protestant will only submit to Scripture as illuminated by God the Holy Spirit as final authority for understanding spiritual truth. In a Bible Study, we need order and discipline to learn from God through the Scriptures. This can’t be a free for all on all issues that unite and divide Protestants and Catholics.

Hello Reformed,

It appears you contradict your own statement referencing the discussion of “sola scriptura”, by stating, “but a Protestant will only submit to Scripture as illuminated by God the Holy Spirit as final authority for understanding spiritual truth”. Is “your” rule against Catholics discussing authority while you promote your personal interpretation of authortiy?

Protestant’s Final Authority is the Word of God. Catholics have a different source of final authority and hear a different voice than the authorative Word of God which is Holy Scripture.

X. The supreme judge by which all controversies of religion are to be determined, and all decrees of councils, opinions of ancient writers, doctrines of men, and private spirits, are to be examined, and in whose sentence we are to rest, can be no other but the Holy Spirit speaking in the Scripture.[24]

I am directing this question to your post above, so as not to be accused of going off topic. Since you say Protestant’s final authority is the word of God, will you please provide where that teaching comes from?

It seems to me that the inspired word of God states the Church is the pillar and ground of truth. Why didn’t God inspire it be written that scriptures were the pillar and ground of truth?

**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. **

 

[guanophore]

Hello Reformed,

It appears you contradict your own statement referencing the discussion of “sola scriptura”, by stating, “but a Protestant will only submit to Scripture as illuminated by God the Holy Spirit as final authority for understanding spiritual truth”. Is “your” rule against Catholics discussing authority while you promote your personal interpretation of authortiy?

I am directing this question to your post above, so as not to be accused of going off topic. Since you say Protestant’s final authority is the word of God, will you please provide where that teaching comes from?

It seems to me that the inspired word of God states the Church is the pillar and ground of truth. Why didn’t God inspire it be written that scriptures were the pillar and ground of truth?

**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. **

I think you hit this nail right on the head Prodigal!

It is impossible to have a scripture study without presuppositions.

To study the Scriptures together, we must understand one another’s framework.

 

[Reformed]

Reformed, we are trying to study the scriptures with you.

See my posts above, I am asking valid questions. You presented your point of view, I presented mine.

You’re allowed to post Protestant documents, but you forbid us from referring to the catechism?

You won’t answer my questions, because they infringe too much on the idea of sola scriptura?

Hi Ashley,

Please follow the lead of Ryan on posts 687 and 688. He is commenting on the particular Bible chapters that we are on and posting sources to support his comment on those particular Bible chapters. Ryan is Roman Catholic and is actually guiding this particluar Bible Study through the book of 1 Corinthians.

 

[ryanoneil]

Protestant’s Final Authority is the Word of God. Catholics have a different source of final authority and hear a different voice than the authorative Word of God which is Holy Scripture.

I don’t want to argue about it Reformed, but the Word of God is a person (Jesus Christ) and He is not limited to a book.

Paul asks the Corinthians to listen to the shepards of the Church AND live according to their example AND have the humility called for in the Old Testament.

I have applied these things to myself and Apollos for your benefit, brothers, so that you may learn from us not to go beyond what is written, so that none of you will be inflated with pride in favor of one person over against another. (1 Cor 4:6)

 

[guanophore]

I don’t want to argue about it Reformed, but the Word of God is a person (Jesus Christ) and He is not limited to a book.

Paul asks the Corinthians to listen to the shepards of the Church AND live according to their example AND have the humility called for in the Old Testament.

I have applied these things to myself and Apollos for your benefit, brothers, so that you may learn from us not to go beyond what is written, so that none of you will be inflated with pride in favor of one person over against another. (1 Cor 4:6)

Do you think the words “do not go beyond what is written” here refer to the OT?

I agree that it is counsel to listen to he Teaching of the Church, and not get caught up in factiousness, but I think Paul is referring to the example that he just wrote as the guide.

Although I agree with you about the humility called for in the OT also.

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

The Apostles learned and taught through oral tradition, which is a form of authority, that Protestants reject.

Using scriptures, to stay within the limitations of the OP’s rules, below are examples of teachings, in the New Testament, that came from the oral tradition.

Christ spoke about the chair of Moses. How would the people he was addressing have known about the chair of Moses, it wasn’t written about anywhere in the Old Testament?

**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. **

How did St. Paul know about the rock that followed the Israelites in the desert, it wasn’t written about anywhere in the Old Testament?

**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.) **

How did St. Paul know the names of the two magicians that worked for pharoah (remember, they turned their staffs into snakes and Moses’ staff/snake ate them), they were not named anywhere in the Old Testament?

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

The above are examples of things known to the people from the time of Christ, that were not written in scriptures. There are many examples of things spoke about in the New Testament that definately referenced Old Testament scriptures. Two of these examples are listed below, one as a “type” and the other as a prophesy.

**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. **

**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 27:46 And about the ninth hour, Jesus cried with a loud voice, saying: Eli, Eli, lamma sabacthani? That is, My God, My God, why hast thou forsaken me?

Mar 15:34 And at the ninth hour, Jesus cried out with a loud voice, saying: Eloi, Eloi, lamma sabacthani? Which is, being interpreted: My God, My God, Why hast thou forsaken me? **

Psa 22:1 Unto the end, for the morning protection, a psalm for David. (22:2) O God my God, look upon me: why hast thou forsaken me? Far from my salvation are the words of my sins.

Why would St. Paul tell us to hold to the traditions learned either by epistle or by word? Isn’t this clearly a teaching of authority by St. Paul that includes both scriptures and oral tradition?

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

Catholics and Protestants agree that scriptures are God inspired. Interpretations of those scriptures are where the differences lie. This brings several questions to mind.

1. Why didn’t God inspire it to be written which letters and epistles would be a part of the complete Bible, instead of leaving the canonical process up to the Church?
2. Why didn’t God inspire it to be written, in 2Th 2:15, to state by epistle alone?
3. Why did God inspire it be written that the Church was the pillar and ground of truth instead of scriptures?
4. Why didn’t God inspire it be written to take disputes to scriptures instead of His Church, as instructed by our Lord?

**Mat 18:17 And if he will not hear them: tell the church. And if he will not hear the church, let him be to thee as the heathen and publican. **

 

[Reformed]

I don’t want to argue about it Reformed, but the Word of God is a person (Jesus Christ) and He is not limited to a book.

Paul asks the Corinthians to listen to the shepards of the Church AND live according to their example AND have the humility called for in the Old Testament.

I have applied these things to myself and Apollos for your benefit, brothers, so that you may learn from us not to go beyond what is written, so that none of you will be inflated with pride in favor of one person over against another. (1 Cor 4:6)

There is the written Word of God and the living Word of God. The written Word of God points us to the Living Word of God. To know the living Word of God, we must grow in the written Word of God. Why does Jesus warn us about that many we come claimming to be the Christ. If the written Word of God does not determine who is the living Word of God, why not embrace the Mormon Jesus, Hindu Jesus, Muslim Jesus, JW Jesus, New Age Jesus, Jesus Seminar Jesus, etc?

2 Corinthians 11:4

For if someone comes and proclaims another Jesus than the one we proclaimed, or if you receive a different spirit from the one you received, or if you accept a different gospel from the one you accepted, you put up with it readily enough.

Matthew 24:5
For many will come in my name, saying, ‘I am the Christ,’ and they will lead many astray.

Mark 13:6
Many will come in my name, saying, ‘I am he!’ and they will lead many astray

Matthew 24:24
For false christs and false prophets will arise and perform great signs and wonders, so as to lead astray, if possible, even the elect.

Mark 13:22
For false christs and false prophets will arise and perform signs and wonders, to lead astray, if possible, the elect.

2 Corinthians 11:13
For such men are false apostles, deceitful workmen, disguising themselves as apostles of Christ.

 

[ryanoneil]

Do you think the words “do not go beyond what is written” here refer to the OT?

I agree that it is counsel to listen to he Teaching of the Church, and not get caught up in factiousness, but I think Paul is referring to the example that he just wrote as the guide.

Although I agree with you about the humility called for in the OT also.

Do you mean (1 Cor 4:1-5)?
I believe the OT warnings he quoted earlier are part of the example he just wrote.

**For it is written: “I will destroy the wisdom of the wise, and the learning of the learned I will set aside.” (1 Cor 1:19)
Therefore I will again deal with this people in surprising and wondrous fashion: The wisdom of its wise men shall perish and the understanding of its prudent men be hid. (Isa 29:14) **

**so that, as it is written, “Whoever boasts, should boast in the Lord.” (1 Cor 1:31)
Thus says the LORD: Let not the wise man glory in his wisdom, nor the strong man glory in his strength, nor the rich man glory in his riches; But rather, let him who glories, glory in this, that in his prudence he knows me, Knows that I, the LORD, bring about kindness, justice and uprightness on the earth; For with such am I pleased, says the LORD. See, days are coming, says the LORD, when I will demand an account of all those circumcised in their flesh: (Jer 9:22-24) **

**For the wisdom of this world is foolishness in the eyes of God, for it is written: “He catches the wise in their own ruses,” and again: “The Lord knows the thoughts of the wise, that they are vain.” (1 Cor 3:19-20)
He catches the wise in their own ruses, and the designs of the crafty are routed. (Job 5:13)

The LORD does know human plans; they are only puffs of air. (Ps 94:11) **

 

[guanophore]

Do you mean (1 Cor 4:1-5)?
I believe the OT warnings he quoted earlier are part of the example he just wrote.

For it is written: “I will destroy the wisdom of the wise, and the learning of the learned I will set aside.” (1 Cor 1:19)
Therefore I will again deal with this people in surprising and wondrous fashion: The wisdom of its wise men shall perish and the understanding of its prudent men be hid. (Isa 29:14)

so that, as it is written, “Whoever boasts, should boast in the Lord.” (1 Cor 1:31)
Thus says the LORD: Let not the wise man glory in his wisdom, nor the strong man glory in his strength, nor the rich man glory in his riches; But rather, let him who glories, glory in this, that in his prudence he knows me, Knows that I, the LORD, bring about kindness, justice and uprightness on the earth; For with such am I pleased, says the LORD. See, days are coming, says the LORD, when I will demand an account of all those circumcised in their flesh: (Jer 9:22-24)

**For the wisdom of this world is foolishness in the eyes of God, for it is written: “He catches the wise in their own ruses,” and again: “The Lord knows the thoughts of the wise, that they are vain.” (1 Cor 3:19-20)
He catches the wise in their own ruses, and the designs of the crafty are routed. (Job 5:13)

The LORD does know human plans; they are only puffs of air. (Ps 94:11)**

Thanks. I think this passage is often used to refute the validity of oral tradition, but I think the context makes it clear that this in not how it should be applied.

 

[Reformed]

Does everyone understand that there are two central issues with our division of Protestantism and Roman Catholicism?

1. Authority - how does God reveal Himself to us
2. The Gospel or the great good news of God. We have two mutually exclusive proclamations and understanding of the gospel because we have mutually exclusive beliefs on the bibilical doctrine of justification. How do we understand the true biblical doctrine of justification, through Scripture alone or through official Roman Catholic teaching. Can we all agree, that they are not the same gospel?

Do we now see what caused the Protestant Reformation? Things have not changed in 500 years in regards to these two central issues.

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

There is the written Word of God and the living Word of God. The written Word of God points us to the Living Word of God.

Below, please find a scriptural explanation of the living word…

Joh 1:1 In the beginning was the Word: and the Word was with God: and the Word was God.

Since I’ve been staying within “your” rules of only using scriptures, will you please show me the scriptures stating that scriptures are the sole authority for us?

Why does Jesus warn us about that many we come claimming to be the Christ. If the written Word of God does not determine who is the living Word of God, why not embrace the Mormon Jesus, Hindu Jesus, Muslim Jesus, JW Jesus, New Age Jesus, Jesus Seminar Jesus, etc?

2 Corinthians 11:4

For if someone comes and proclaims another Jesus than the one we proclaimed, or if you receive a different spirit from the one you received, or if you accept a different gospel from the one you accepted, you put up with it readily enough.

Matthew 24:5
For many will come in my name, saying, ‘I am the Christ,’ and they will lead many astray.

Mark 13:6
Many will come in my name, saying, ‘I am he!’ and they will lead many astray

2 Corinthians 11:4, read in context, was speaking to a specific audience in this epistle. You have to realize many of his writings were corrections to the Church of Corinth, to prevent them from being led astray by many false teachers of those times.

This is clearly indicated by the many letters and epistles that did not become a part of the complete Bible through the canonical process. For example, please see the list of New Testament Apocrypha.

The works that presented themselves as “authentic” but did not obtain general acceptance from within the churches are called New Testament Apocrypha.

Here’s another link for an “expanded” list of New Testament Apocrypha.

1. Pseudo-Jesus apocrypha
   1.1 The Epistles of Jesus to Abgarus

1. Pseudo-apostolic (general) apocrypha
   2.1 Teachings of the Twelve Apostles (Didache)
   2.2 Epistle of the Apostles

1. Psuedo-apostolic (specific - by Apostle) apocrypha
   3.1 - Andrew -
   3.1.1 Acts of Andrew
   3.1.2 Acts of Andrew and Matthias*

3.2 - Barnabas -
3.2.1 Acts of Barnabas*
3.2.2 Epistle of Barnabas
3.2.3 Gospel of Barnabas

3.3 - Bartholomew -
3.3.1 Gospel of Bartholomew
3.3.2 Martyrdom of Bartholomew*

3.4 - James -
3.4.1 Apocryphon of James
3.4.2 Book of James (protevangelium)
3.4.3 First Apocalypse of James
3.4.4 Second Apocalypse of James

3.5 - John -
3.5.1 Acts of John
3.5.2 Acts of John the Theologian*
3.5.3 Apocryphon of John (long version)
3.5.4 Book of John the Evangelist
3.5.5 Revelation of John the Theologian*

3.6 - Mark -
3.6.1 Secret Gospel of Mark

3.7 - Matthew -
3.7.1 Acts and Martyrdom of St. Matthew the Apostle*
3.7.2 The Martyrdom of Matthew

3.8 - Nicodemus -
3.8.1 Gospel (Acts) of Nicodemus (aka The Acts of Pontius Pilate)

3.9 - Peter -
3.9.1 Acts of Peter
3.9.2 Acts of Peter and Andrew
3.9.3 Apocalypse of Peter - version 1
3.9.4 Apocalypse of Peter - version 2
3.9.5 Gospel of Peter
3.9.6 Letter of Peter to Philip

3.10 - Philip -
3.10.1 Acts of Philip
3.10.2 Gospel of Philip

3.11 - Thaddeus -
3.11.1 Acts of Thaddeus (Epistles of Pontius Pilate)*
3.11.2 Teaching of Thaddeus

3.12 - Thomas -
3.12.1 Acts of Thomas
3.12.2 Apocalypse of Thomas
3.12.3 Book of Thomas the Contender
3.12.4 Consumation of Thomas
3.12.5 Gospel of Thomas

1. Pseudo-Pauline apocrypha
   4.1 3 Corinthians
   4.2 Acts 29
   4.3 Acts of Paul
   4.4 Acts of Paul and Thecla
   4.5 Acts of Peter and Paul*
   4.6 Acts of Xanthippe and Polyxena
   4.7 Apocalypse of Paul
   4.8 Apocalypse of Paul - other version
   4.9 Epistle to the Laodiceans
   4.10 Revelation of Paul*
   4.11 Paul and Seneca

1. Infancy Gospels apocrypha
   5.1 Arabic Infancy Gospel
   5.2 First Infancy Gospel of Jesus Christ
   5.3 Infancy Gospel of Pseudo-Matthew
   5.4 Infancy Gospel of Thomas - Greek A
   5.5 Infancy Gospel of Thomas - Greek B
   5.6 Infancy Gospel of Thomas - Latin

1. Relatives of Jesus apocrypha
   6.1 Gospel of Mary
   6.2 Gospel of the Nativity of Mary
   6.3 Book of John concerning the dormition of Mary (transitus mariæ)*
   6.4 History of Joseph the Carpenter*
   6.5 Narrative of Joseph of Arimathaea

1. Sub-canonical (disputed canon) apocrypha
   7.1 Shepherd of Hermas
   7.2 II Clement
   7.3 Diatession
   7.4 Gospel of the Lord (Marcion)

1. Other significant Epistles and pseudomynous writings and apocrypha
   8.1 I Clement
   8.2 Avenging of the Saviour
   8,3 Epistles of Pontius Pilate
   8.4 Letter of Aristeas
   8.5 Sentences of the Sextus
   8.6 Alexandrians
   8.7 Revelations of Stephen
   8.8 Muratonian Canon (fragment)

1. Fragments of lost apocryphal books
   9.1 Gospel of the Ebionites
   9.2 Gospel of the Egyptians
   9.3 Egerton Gospel (Egerton Papyrus 2)*
   9.4 Gospel of the Hebrews
   9.5 Traditions of Mattias
   9.6 Gospel of the Nazaraeans
   9.7 Preaching of Peter

1. Apostolic Constitutions (Didascalia Apostolorum)
   10.1 Book 1
   10.2 Book 2
   10.3 Book 3
   10.4 Book 4
   10.5 Book 5
   10.6 Book 6
   10.7 Book 7
   10.8 Book 8

1. Psuedo-Sibylline Oracles **
   11.0 Preface
   11.1 Chapter I
   11.2 Chapter II
   11.3 Chapter III
   11.4 Chapter IV
   11.5 Chapter V
   11.6 Chapter VI
   11.7 Chapter VII
   11.8 Chapter VIII
   11.9 Chapter XI
   11.10 Chapter XII
   11.11 Chapter XIII
   11.12 Chapter XIV
   11.13 Appendices - Fragments

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

Does everyone understand that there are two central issues with our division of Protestantism and Roman Catholicism?

1. Authority - how does God reveal Himself to us
2. The Gospel or the great good news of God. We have two mutually exclusive proclamations and understanding of the gospel because we have mutually exclusive beliefs on the bibilical doctrine of justification. How do we understand the true biblical doctrine of justification, through Scripture alone or through official Roman Catholic teaching. Can we all agree, that they are not the same gospel?

Do we now see what caused the Protestant Reformation? Things have not changed in 500 years in regards to these two central issues.

I have bolded and underlined part of you quote above for emphasis.

Since you continue to maintain the scripture alone argument, again I ask that you please provide where that teaching comes from. It would be nice to stay within the rules “you” have imposed on this thread and use scriptures.

I have provided scriptures showing, in addition to scriptures, the Church has authority through oral tradition. Catholics believe God reveals Himself to us through scriptures and His living Church.

 

[ryanoneil]

There is the written Word of God and the living Word of God. The written Word of God points us to the Living Word of God. To know the living Word of God, we must grow in the written Word of God. Why does Jesus warn us about that many we come claimming to be the Christ. If the written Word of God does not determine who is the living Word of God, why not embrace the Mormon Jesus, Hindu Jesus, Muslim Jesus, JW Jesus, New Age Jesus, Jesus Seminar Jesus, etc?

I pretty much agree with you except the “must” underlined part.

Does everyone understand that there are two central issues with our division of Protestantism and Roman Catholicism?

But I thought we were going to try and stay focussed.

guanophore:

Thanks. I think this passage is often used to refute the validity of oral tradition, but I think the context makes it clear that this in not how it should be applied.

 

[Reformed]

I pretty much agree with you except the “must” underlined part.

But I thought we were going to try and stay focussed.

Please keep us on track Ryan! It is your job as Bible Study leader to keep us focused on the Scriptures that we are discussing together.

 

[Reformed]

I have bolded and underlined part of you quote above for emphasis.

Since you continue to maintain the scripture alone argument, again I ask that you please provide where that teaching comes from. It would be nice to stay within the rules “you” have imposed on this thread and use scriptures.

I have provided scriptures showing, in addition to scriptures, the Church has authority through oral tradition. Catholics believe God reveals Himself to us through scriptures and His living Church.

In our Bible Study, we agreed that a person can support their comments through other scriptures and extra-biblical sources. The sola scriptura debate needs to be done on another thread.

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

In our Bible Study, we agreed that a person can support their comments through other scriptures and extra-biblical sources. The sola scriptura debate needs to be done on another thread.

Well, while I have certainly provided scriptures to support my comments, you have failed to provide any scriptures supporting your assertion of the Bible being the sole authority. If you define the Bible being the sole authority as sola scriptura, maybe you shouldn’t keep making that assertion. To avoid discussing your assertion of the Bible being the sole authority and stopping Catholics from explaining the Catholic perspective of authority is simply not being honest in this discussion. One of my posts addresses scriptures and oral tradition as “authoritative”, it’s not a sola scriptura argument, it’s an authority discussion in response to your assertion of the Bible being the sole authority.

It appears the rules are “fixed” to allow you to continue discussing the Protestant perspective of authority but does not allow a Catholic perspective from being discussed. It appears you’re the only one to complain about this. Why is that?

Why is it you refuse to tell us where the Bible being the sole authority teaching comes from?

 

[Reformed]

Well, while I have certainly provided scriptures to support my comments, you have failed to provide any scriptures supporting your assertion of the Bible being the sole authority. If you define the Bible being the sole authority as sola scriptura, maybe you shouldn’t keep making that assertion. To avoid discussing your assertion of the Bible being the sole authority and stopping Catholics from explaining the Catholic perspective of authority is simply not being honest in this discussion. One of my posts addresses scriptures and oral tradition as “authoritative”, it’s not a sola scriptura argument, it’s an authority discussion in response to your assertion of the Bible being the sole authority.

It appears the rules are “fixed” to allow you to continue discussing the Protestant perspective of authority but does not allow a Catholic perspective from being discussed. Why is that?

Why is it you refuse to tell us where the Bible being the sole authority teaching comes from?

What in the world are you talking about? This is a Catholic Forum debate site. Catholics reject sola scriptura and we all know that. My comments are posted in line with my faith. Why would I post Catholic Sacred Traditon to support what I comment? Just comment on the Scriptures that we are going through together with whatever source that you want to. Please give me the same liberty that I have given you. After-all, this is your home field, and not mine. Why don’t you debate on an all Protetstant Forum site and maybe that will enable you to be more charitable and graceful towards me. You don’t have to participate on these Bible Study threads.