Refuting Protestant Argument on Word of God

  • Thread starter Thread starter Hiedi
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Unfortunately, forum members here have gone a lot further than me in your concern for forum rules, calling some of my church leaders liars and all manner of derogatory names; so yes, I express contempt for the authority being claimed by your leaders, and by your forum members to say what they want about either my character, or the character of various Protestant Church leaders. I do not believe that I have broken any forum rules though, because I am sticking to observable behaviors and statements by same; and no malice or hatred is intended. It would be ludicrous to expect a dedicated Protestant to come to this forum and not express some contempt for some things. Just like you guys do when you talk about us.

Your reminder is duly noted though; and I will be glad to listen to the Moderators at CA if they choose to label me as you and others here have.👍
I’m not responsible for what other members post. I’ll leave you, (and them) to the Moderators here.

In my experience the rules here apply to all equally and if you have a problem then you need to deal with it accordingly, but if you come into a discussion with me and use such rhetoric then I’m going to call you on it. You still have not made your case in response to my points above.
 
Isn’t there even one salvation doctrine in the Protestant Canon which you can show as “insufficient” just as it is written?
Let’s say your “doctrine” is fine for salvation. How do you implement it? Who decides? From your exact scripture, some fundamentalists now claim that no baptism is necessary. You and I think that’s crazy. How can you prove two diametrically opposed viewpoints from the same verses in the Protestant bible? One of you is clearly wrong.

Neither church has Paul’s Tradition to teach the truth, so endless arguments, like right here, go on. How is the Kingdom served by millions of Christians arguing?

John 14:27 “Peace I leave with you; my peace I give you.”
 
opinion. It is nothing but grandiloquence.

You can report me if you like. I stand by every word I said; and while you are reporting me, be sure to report the posts where you or others have said much worse about me or some of my Church’s pioneers.I don’t seem to recall ever asserting that I was anything more than a case made against the allegation that the Catholic Church preaches a different gospel…All I do there is point out that that is not true and that that allegation better fits the modern post reformation step children’s message. 🤷

As for your comments about what others may have said about your religion and its progenitors…that’s pretty much just like little kids and their excuses… “But he did such and such first…”

You still haven’t answered the substance of any of my earlier posts. Where are your facts?:rolleyes:
 
Let’s say your “doctrine” is fine for salvation. How do you implement it? Who decides? From your exact scripture, some fundamentalists now claim that no baptism is necessary. You and I think that’s crazy. How can you prove two diametrically opposed viewpoints from the same verses in the Protestant bible? One of you is clearly wrong.

Neither church has Paul’s Tradition to teach the truth, so endless arguments, like right here, go on. How is the Kingdom served by millions of Christians arguing?

John 14:27 “Peace I leave with you; my peace I give you.”
You actually make a good point re “Peace I leave with you;” but God seems to more advocate unity in diversity, not in submission to the Pope. Paragraph 100 of the CCC tells us the lie that interpretation of the Scriptures is the sole domain of Popes and Bishops, meaning that “unity” to the Catholic leadership in Rome, is nothing short of submission. Diversity is banned and personal Biblical interpretation is falsely relegated by Catholics to the dregs of religiosity.
 
I have been asking for a doctrine re SALVATION that is not made clear enough in the Bible; and needs something more, such as “tradition” before Christians can understand it in a saving sense. Both you & Gary seem unable or unwilling to respond specifically to this. Do you have any comment on this question?
I have a comment:

Matt 28:18-20
8 And Jesus came and said to them, “All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me. 19 Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, 20 teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you; and lo, I am with you always, to the close of the age.”

Jesus did not instruct his Apostles to write a book, or to have people find instructions in a book. He commanded them to “teach all that I have commanded”. This is the most secure road to salvation, to learn “all” that Jesus commanded. To the extent that the Scriptures contain this, they can guide people to believe in Christ. One who comes to believe will eventually be led to follow “all” that He has commanded. 👍
 
You actually make a good point re “Peace I leave with you;” but God seems to more advocate unity in diversity, not in submission to the Pope. Paragraph 100 of the CCC tells us the lie that interpretation of the Scriptures is the sole domain of Popes and Bishops, meaning that “unity” to the Catholic leadership in Rome, is nothing short of submission. Diversity is banned and personal Biblical interpretation is falsely relegated by Catholics to the dregs of religiosity.
The establishment of Christ’s church:

Matthew 16:18-19 (King James Version) “And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. And I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.”

The authorization of Christ’s church:

Luke 10:16 (King James Version) “He that heareth you heareth me; and he that despiseth you despiseth me; and he that despiseth me despiseth him that sent me.”

The proclamation of Christ’s church:

2 Peter 1:20 (King James Version) “Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation.”
 
Maybe scripture is sufficient, at least materially.

However, it is insufficient in regard to the fact that it is insufficiently clear to prevent all the interdemoninational argument about what it means.
 
Maybe scripture is sufficient, at least materially.

However, it is insufficient in regard to the fact that it is insufficiently clear to prevent all the interdemoninational argument about what it means.
The Bible is perfectly clear, you are still pronouncing it as “insufficient.”
 
The Bible is perfectly clear, you are still pronouncing it as “insufficient.”
I didn’t say the Bible wasn’t sufficient. Also, I agree that it is clear, because to me it is quite clear as to what it means.

What I did say was that it is not clear enough to prevent all the bickering that I see going on.
 
The Bible is perfectly clear, you are still pronouncing it as “insufficient.”
101, for some reason, the Presbyterians, Anglicans, Baptists, Wesleyans, Episcopalians, Lutherans, Pentecostals, Congregationalists, and thousands of other denominations have reached vastly different conclusions from those you have, while reading your exact bible! It is obvious that you are comfortable with your unique-in-Christendom set of beliefs. Are you claiming that your fellow Protestants are wrong? Wouldn’t you be far better off trying to convince them of the truth, since they are also “sola scripturists”?

Or, are you sent only to save the victims of the “whore of Babylon”?

Christ’s peace.
 
I didn’t say the Bible wasn’t sufficient. Also, I agree that it is clear, because to me it is quite clear as to what it means.

What I did say was that it is not clear enough to prevent all the bickering that I see going on.
A child’s spinning top that is perfectly balanced spins in one, fixed location. An unbalanced top dances to every corner of the room.

Scripture is the left hand of faith. Tradition is the right hand. When used together, they balance perfectly. When you lack that balance, your doctrines spin all over. Proof exists.

Christ’s peace.
 
What I did say was that it is not clear enough to prevent all the bickering that I see going on.
That is absolutely NOT true. The problem is not/never the scriptures being unclear, insufficient; etc, the problem is not scripture; it is not a matter of fact that the Protestant Canon is “insufficient” - the only problem is people. The written word is the solution to all of our problems, including ourselves.

It is quite clear enough to prevent all “bickering.”
Pro 13:10 Only by pride cometh contention:
LOL; now I suppose that there will develop some marvellous polemics about what constitutes “contention” or “bickering,” as opposed to “standing for the Truth.” :tiphat:
 
The problem there of course is that that majority disagrees with both the New Testament and the verifiably historic Christian writings of the early church. So…who would you believe? The New Testament and the early Christians who in many cases were martyred for their faith, or some modern teachers who departed from that?Really? Please prove your point with historical facts and citations of the writings of the first and second century Christians… IOW, show me these early church “Protestant teachings” that you speak of, because I don’t believe that you can do so. :knight2: :dts:
wow… a lot has happened since I last looked… But I’m talking about Purgatory (decreed in the 14-15 hundreds?), Infallibility of the Pope, Assumption of Mary, salvation in all faiths, and I’m sure there are plenty of others which were “decreed”, “thought up”, or “inspired” long after the Bible was written/put-together. Were the early Christians martyred for a faith different to ours? No! Our faith is that the Lord Jesus Christ has died for our sins and risen again, and He alone will save us.

What Protestant teachings are there? We don’t have anything other than the Bible. We have interpretations of the Bible in various books we may choose to read, but if you’ve ever been to a Protestant church sermon, you’ll find you’re only learning straight out of the Bible.

I see a lot of Catholic mis-understanding of Protestant beliefs on this forum already. I’m in no way very knowledgeable about Catholicism; don’t take this the wrong way that I’m being hypocritical. I’m here to learn about Catholicism.

Jibb
 
That is absolutely NOT true. The problem is not/never the scriptures being unclear, insufficient; etc, the problem is not scripture; it is not a matter of fact that the Protestant Canon is “insufficient” - the only problem is people. The written word is the solution to all of our problems, including ourselves.

It is quite clear enough to prevent all “bickering.”
I am late into this discussion, but from what I have picked up, P101 you seem to be saying that all would be well in the Christian world if people were not the problem, since the Bible is the solution to all our problems. My questions to you are exactly what is the problem with people and which Bible is the solution?

Blessings
 
I am late into this discussion, but from what I have picked up, P101 you seem to be saying that all would be well in the Christian world if people were not the problem, since the Bible is the solution to all our problems. My questions to you are exactly what is the problem with people and which Bible is the solution?

Blessings
What do you mean “blessings?”

You asked, “What is the problem with people?”
Rom 3:23 For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God; (KJV, Protestant Canon)

The “come short” part includes the Pope, and all the Bishops who “interpret” God’s holy Word which speaks for itself, and doesn’t need “interpreting” except as it is it’s own expositor.
 
wow… a lot has happened since I last looked… But I’m talking about Purgatory (decreed in the 14-15 hundreds?), Infallibility of the Pope, Assumption of Mary, salvation in all faiths, and I’m sure there are plenty of others which were “decreed”, “thought up”, or “inspired” long after the Bible was written/put-together. Were the early Christians martyred for a faith different to ours? No! Our faith is that the Lord Jesus Christ has died for our sins and risen again, and He alone will save us.

What Protestant teachings are there? We don’t have anything other than the Bible. We have interpretations of the Bible in various books we may choose to read, but if you’ve ever been to a Protestant church sermon, you’ll find you’re only learning straight out of the Bible.

I see a lot of Catholic mis-understanding of Protestant beliefs on this forum already. I’m in no way very knowledgeable about Catholicism; don’t take this the wrong way that I’m being hypocritical. I’m here to learn about Catholicism.

Jibb
I’m glad to hear you’re open to learn about Catholicism. It’s always good to keep an open mind. However, make no mistake, there are as many or more preconceived notions about Catholicism that are based in ignorance of it by our Protestant brethren than there are Catholics who have similiar predujices against Protestantism. You mentioned one: All those decrees and doctrines made up centuries after the start of the early Church. That is not at all true. These made up decrees and doctrines were in fact in response to the need to put a tradition into doctrine.

From the very start, doctrine was needed to keep the faithful true to the new religion established by Jesus. For proof of this, look to the Acts of the Apostles and the various letters of Paul, Peter, James and John. From the start there were those who tried to make the teachings of Jesus their own by their own interpretations and agenda.

Mostly, the defining doctrines had to do either with the Church or with Jesus Himself since there were heresies to be dealt with such as Arianism, Nesetorianism, Monanticism etc. Later doctrine such as the Marian, papal infallibility, etc. were dealt with because of challenges to the accepted traditions. These traditions were held under the scrutiny of the Scriptures, early tradition from the Church fathers, and past Magesterium teachings. In short, if the tradition can not be backed up as sound and complete then it remains tradition and does not become doctrine. Tradition that would be proved to go against accepted doctrine would be banned as heresy. Tradition that can not be backed up yet does not go specifically against doctrine is acceptable for Catholics to believe in but it is not required. There are many legends and traditions that Catholics believe in that are not doctrine but they are acceptable because they do not go against doctrine.

As far as our Mass goes, obviously you have never attended a Catholic Mass. The entire Mass is Scripture in some form. The entrance antiphon is generally from Isaiah although it can be from any source in the Bible depending on the season of the year or the feast celebrated. The prayers and hymns are scripturally based. The Our Father is said at every Mass. There are three readings from the Bible every Sunday and two in the daily Mass. One of those readings must be from the Gospels. Each year has one of the synoptic Gospels that is assigned to it with the Gospel of John used each year interspersed as needed. Specifically, John is used every year for the Bread of Life Discourse. Sermons are also based on the readings. One thing our priests will do though is to many times apply those teachings to our present day daily lives in situations of 21st century living. IOW, how does a teaching that is 2000 years old apply to us today.

The consecration of the Eucharist is straight out of both the Last Supper and Revelations. We’re not waiting for the day when we can sing praises to God with the Heavenly hosts above. We already have that at each and every Mass when the Eucharist is consecrated. That is the most beautiful part of our Faith yet it is the one that comes under the most fire from many Protestants except for maybe the Marian doctrines or praying to the saints.

Take care
Dennis
 
Now I see what you mean. Did you guys go to law school or something? I see I have a lot to learn when it comes to logic. Can you recommend me any books on logical reasoning/arguments?
I didn’t go to law school… I’m just a “cradle Catholic”…and while I will readily admit I am a “revert”…who is finding his way back, and really trying to get it right… But this is not about me, but about you… 🙂

I haven’t read the whole thread…but here are two books that I have recently bought and “devoured”!! Couldn’t put them down: “The One Minute Apologist”, by Dave Armstrong, and “Pope Fiction” by Patrick Madrid.

I don’t tend to see the answers to questions as being a “matter of logic”…so much as a matter of reality and understanding written words. I find that ascertaining the true context of many passages of scripture can be hard, but then…as a Catholic I have the benefit, as you do, of having literally thousands of years of learned experience to help vis a vis the Church.

Possibly getting your hands on the “One Minute Apologist” will resolve some questions for you, I know it did for me 😃
 
What do you mean “blessings?”

You asked, “What is the problem with people?”
Blessings in the name of our Lord P101. You have not answered my question as to which Bible is the solution. I await your answer.

Next you said
Quote:
Rom 3:23 For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God; (KJV, Protestant Canon)
The “come short” part includes the Pope, and all the Bishops who “interpret” God’s holy Word which speaks for itself, and doesn’t need “interpreting” except as it is it’s own expositor.
Hmmm…Earlier on you said and I quote you “the only problem is people.” Now you have switched gears and are telling me, that even though Paul said For all have sinned that its only the “Pope, and all the Bishops”. So in others words the culprits and the source of the Christian world problems are the Pope, and all the Bishops.

What about Bishop T.D. Jakes? He is a Bishop albeit self appointed. Or how about Bishop Tom from the Zambaravian church of Cumcumbers? After all both are Bishops and they are people so it logically follows that they are part of the problem as well.

Why do some evangelicals critise each other when it comes to the Gospel message if the Bible is self interpreting as you claim?

Blessings,

BhTech
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top