Religious affections and love for God

[graceandglory]

Christians always had the Bible.

1. When was the Bible printed?
   The Bible was printed in 1454 A.D. by Johannes Gutenberg who invented the “type mold” for the printing press. It was the first book ever printed.bibleresources.bible.com/afacts.php

Interesting, that in less than 70 years, the whole Christian Church splits, due to differences of interpretation. Either the Holy Spirit will guide the Church, or it won’t. I recall that Christ said that “Upon this rock, I will build my Church, and the gates of hell will not prevail against it.”

As soon as bible interpretation became up to the individual, instead of the Holy Spirit who was promised by Christ to guide the Church, hundreds of interpretations brought about the protestant "reformation" which was anything but a reform.

The Protestant Reformation was a reform movement in Europe that began in 1517,
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protestant_Reformation

 

[Reformed]

Reformed, before we move on, I must insist we stick to one question at a time I asked very sincerely, and it really seems you are unable to answer.

What does the Catholic church teach today about the gospel message that differs from what the very first Christians in the church were taught and believed about the gospel message? What has changed?

The heart of the gospel of God’s grace is found in the biblical doctrine of justfication. Please study Romans chapter 3 and 4, Romans 5 and 8, and the book of Galatians for starters.

If you study the Protestant Reformation, Council of Trent, and even the Cambridge Declaration written about 12 years ago, all the sources will confirm that the doctrine of justification divides us in our mutually exclusive gospels.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cambridge_Declaration

reformed.org/documents/index.html?mainframe=http://www.reformed.org/documents/cambridge.html

 

[guanophore]

I'm not sure what to say.  Jesus Christ is full of truth and grace.  How do we grow in the grace and knowledge of the Lord Jesus Christr?  Well, I turn to the Holy Scriptures, and you will turn to the Catholic Church.

Your statement makes it sound as if you think these two Sources are opposed, but they are not. When we turn to the Church, she contains the Holy Scriptures. It is the Church that produced, protected, proclaimed, canonized, and propogated the Scriptures.

We do not exactly share the same source of revelation; therefore our discernment and focus will be very different.

This is true. clearly you have rejected the authority that Christ appointed over the Church, so your discernment, by nature will be skewed.

BTW...I believe our primary purpose for our life is to glorify God and enjoy Him forever.

In spite of all your intense bigotry against, and ignorance of Catholicism, I do believe that you are sincere and passionate in your faith.

My positon still remains the same. It has never changed. The official Roman Catholic gospel is a different gospel than what is revealed in Scripture alone.

Yes, of course. The Catholic “gospel” is not “Roman”, as you continually assert, and it is also different that what is revealed by Scripture alone. This is the main reason that the Apostolic faiths reject the heresy of Sola Scriptura. The Holy Writings produced by the Church were never meant to be separated from the Teaching of the Apostles, from whence they were distilled. When they are separated, then the message cannot stay intact.

Therefore, it is a false gospel. However, there is a remnant saved by grace in the Roman Catholic Church that is saved and united to Christ. Therefore, those who are united to Christ are truly part of the body of Christ. God does not save us by our correct theology. Christ saves sinners. The body of Christ is made-up of redeemed sinners, reconciled to God and adopted into the family of God…in-spite of our religious communities.

So you have said. You have also made it clear that your purpose here on CAF is “…my eagerness to proclaim the gospel to you also who are in Rome.” Rom 1:15

I will agree that there are “Catholics” who are thus in name or culture only, and that do not understand their faith, nor do they follow the obedience of faith. I will also agree that those who are united to Christ are truly part of the Body of Christ (however improperly joined). I think you have a deficient view of the Church, however.

The official position of the Roman Catholic Church is very similar. What I proclaim to be the true gospel is condemned by the Council of Trent. Yet, the Catholic Catechism allows for those who proclaim the condemned gospel to be seperated bretherens. Therefore, I am like-minded with the Roman Catholic Church on this issue. We are just coming from opposite directions but both positions acknowledge salvation in Christ seperate and apart from our religious communities.

Yes, this is probably true. Catholics consider your condition similar to that of Appollos, who was passionate about the faith, but uninformed.

We believe that you must be taught from an Apostolic source about the faith so that you can understand it more accurately.

My answer is no. However, when we are in Heaven, our knowledge will expand causing us to praise and worship God in a much deeper way than we are able to in this life.

[SIGN]MEN! [/SIGN]

 

[Reformed]

Reformed,

You are working many threads, all with the same message of your belief and assertion of “Bible alone”. You bring up many points, in your working of many threads, yet you fail to address the repeated assertion of your belief of “Bible alone”.

Scripture alone or Bible alone, amounts to the sole authority over Christ’s people. The most familiar term for this belief is “sola scriptura”. This is the belief that God reveals His truth to each individual through scriptures and scriptures alone, even if each individual receives a different “truth”, according to their private interpretation. Sola scriptura is a false Gospel.

How can God’s truth be different for each individual according to their private interpretation? How can the many denominations be perfectly one with so many different doctrines?

**Joh 10:16 And I have other sheep, that are not of this fold; I must bring them also, and they will heed my voice. So there shall be one flock, one shepherd.

Eph 4:3 eager to maintain the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace.
Eph 4:4 There is one body** and one Spirit, just as you were called to the one hope that belongs to your call,
Eph 4:5 one Lord, one faith, one baptism,
Eph 4:6 one God and Father of us all, who is above all and through all and in all.

Rom 16:17 I appeal to you, brethren, to take note of those who create dissensions and difficulties, in opposition to the doctrine which you have been taught; avoid them.

1Co 1:10 I appeal to you, brethren, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that all of you agree and that there be no dissensions among you, but that you be united in the same mind and the same judgment.

Php 2:2 complete my joy by being of the same mind, having the same love, being in full accord and of one mind.

Rom 15:5 May the God of steadfastness and encouragement grant you to live in such harmony with one another, in accord with Christ Jesus,
Rom 15:6 that together you may with one voice glorify the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ.

Joh 17:17 Sanctify them in the truth; thy word is truth.
Joh 17:18 As thou didst send me into the world, so I have sent them into the world.
Joh 17:19 And for their sake I consecrate myself, that they also may be consecrated in truth.
Joh 17:20 "I do not pray for these only, but also for those who believe in me through their word,
Joh 17:21 that they may all be one; even as thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee, that they also may be in us, so that the world may believe that thou hast sent me.
Joh 17:22 The glory which thou hast given me I have given to them, that they may be one even as we are one,
Joh 17:23 I in them and thou in me, that they may become perfectly one, so that the world may know that thou hast sent me and hast loved them even as thou hast loved me.

1Co 12:13 For by one Spirit we were all baptized into one body–Jews or Greeks, slaves or free–and all were made to drink of one Spirit.

Rom 12:4 For as in one body we have many members, and all the members do not have the same function,
Rom 12:5 so we, though many, are one body in Christ, and individually members one of another.

Eph 4:4 There is one body and one Spirit, just as you were called to the one hope that belongs to your call,

Col 3:15 And let the peace of Christ rule in your hearts, to which indeed you were called in the one body. And be thankful.

You state you believe scriptures to be God inspired. Why didn’t God inspire it be written that scriptures was the pillar and ground of truth, instead of the Church?

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.

Why didn’t Christ teach us to take our disputes to scriptures, if it’s the sole authority, instead of the Church?

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.

The Catholic Church, that you claim to be false, through the canonical process, brought the letters and epistles together to be one complete Bible. The Catholic Church preserved the Bible for centuries before the Protestant reformation, where the teaching of sola scriptura evolved.

The Church and faith existed before the Bible. Many were converted prior to the Bible’s existence. The living Church Christ created is older than the Bible.

Why did God inspire the dangers of misinterpretations be written?

**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. **

Christ taught to listen to the Church, even if the “men” themselves did not live what they taught. Don’t you think this is God’s way of telling us the teachings would be protected?

**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. **

You continue to “preach” your Gospel as right over all others. That directs us to the beginning of “authority”. Please tell us where it is taught that the Bible is the sole authority.

Why don’t you start a sola scriptura thread? It is not my job to make you acknowledge the Word of God to be authorative in your life. It is only by God the Holy Spirit that someone can receive the Holy Scriptures as authorative revelation over and above all other sources.

 

[AshleyBelle]

The heart of the gospel of God’s grace is found in the biblical doctrine of justfication. Please study Romans chapter 3 and 4, Romans 5 and 8, and the book of Galatians for starters.

If you study the Protestant Reformation, Council of Trent, and even the Cambridge Declaration written about 12 years ago, all the sources will confirm that the doctrine of justification divides us in our mutually exclusive gospels.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cambridge_Declaration

reformed.org/documents/index.html?mainframe=http://www.reformed.org/documents/cambridge.html

Reformed I really believe you are dodging this question, and I won’t deny it is a difficult one! I’m not asking about the issues of the reformation, what councils had to say, or what a declaration stated 12 years ago about our differences.

If “scripture alone” is what you tell me…then you would be saying the first Christians had to trust this doctrine, which means they had to trust ONLY the old testament writings!

And if you say that “well the Bible was always there” then do you believe the Bible is only the old testament? Because the New testament writings came later!

I am simply asking what did the church teach and BELIEVE about the gospel message, from the very first Christians, so close to Christ’s life, that is DIFFERENT from what the Catholic church teaches now?

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

We know the Apostles were eye-witnesses to the ministry of Jesus Christ. What a great privilege they were given to be chosen to walk with Him in all of redemptive history. For the rest of us Christians, we walk by faith according to their testimonies. How do Catholics understand the testimonies of the Apostles, but through the New Testament Scriptures? Do you want to know what the Apostles saw, felt, experienced and heard from the incarnate God? We have to turn to the Scriptures. Jesus Christ told them that they would not be orphans when He left the 11 disciples. When Christ ascended, the promised Holy Spirit dwelled in the chosen disciples to remind them all that Christ taught. What did the Spirit of God remind the Apostles about…but what Jesus taught, and where can we find what the Apostles heard from God the Holy Spirit, but through Holy Scriptures. Do you at least agree that the writings of the Apostles revealed in the New Testament are more trustworthy than all of apparent successor’s of Peter combined? Which source of revelation is superior, Sacred Tradition or Sacred Scriputre?

The testimony and eye-witmenss account of the Apostle John:

Reformed,

How many Apostles, that were eyewitnesses to Christ’s life, wrote the New Testament?

1. 
   *]Matthew
   *]John
   *]Peter
   
   This means the majority of the New Testament was written by those who learned the Gospel through oral tradition, from the men of the Church Christ built.
   
   To answer your question about the superiority of tradition vs. scriptures, they are equal and both necessary for the fullness of Christ’s teachings.
   
   2Th 2:15 Therefore, brethren, stand fast: and hold the traditions, which you have learned, whether by word or by our epistle.
   
   Isn’t it contradictory to say that God has the ability to protect scriptures, yet lacks the ability to protect the Church He started Himself?

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

Why don’t you start a sola scriptura thread? It is not my job to make you acknowledge the Word of God to be authorative in your life. It is only by God the Holy Spirit that someone can receive the Holy Scriptures as authorative revelation over and above all other sources.

You are the one who states the Bible is the sole authority. That is sola scriptura. Therefore, I am addressing your comments.

Please take a moment to tell us where the teaching of the Bible being the sole authority comes from? It would be nice if you used scriptures, as I have done to support the teaching of oral tradition, Church and scriptures as authoritative.

 

[Reformed]

Reformed,

How many Apostles, that were eyewitnesses to Christ’s life, wrote the New Testament?

1. 
   *]Matthew
   *]John
   *]Peter
   
   This means the majority of the New Testament was written by those who learned the Gospel through oral tradition…
   
   To answer your question about the superiority of tradition vs. scriptures, they are equal and both necessary for the fullness of Christ’s teachings.
   
   2Th 2:15 Therefore, brethren, stand fast: and hold the traditions, which you have learned, whether by word or by our epistle.
   
   Isn’t it contradictory to say that God has the ability to protect scriptures, yet lacks the ability to protect the Church He started Himself?

1. 
   LOL… I love you guys like a younger brother. Are you implying the gospel accounts of John and Matthew are more trustworthy and inspired than Luke and Mark? Since tradition states that Moses wrote Genesis, can we trust the book of Genesis?
   
   Yes, revleaton is pased down orally until it is written. Why do you think it was important for God to have a written account of His revealaton to mankind? What’s that game that we play in a circle? We have a person whisper an oral statment to the next person, and that person whispers that oral statment to the next person, all the way down the line. And the last person repeats what he hears…which is completely different than what the first person started out with. I’d rather trust was is written over on-going revelation.

 

[AshleyBelle]

LOL… I love you guys like a younger brother. Are you implying the gospel accounts of John and Matthew are more trustworthy and inspired than Luke and Mark? Since tradition states that Moses wrote Genesis, can we trust the book of Genesis?

Yes, revleaton is pased down orally until it is written. Why do you think it was important for God to have a written account of His revealaton to mankind? What’s that game that we play in a circle? We have person whisper an oral statment to the next person, and that person whispers that oral statment to the next person, all the way down the line. And the last person repeats what he hears…which is completely different than what the first person started out with. I’d rather trust was is written over on-going revelation.

I agree…if the gospel message was really handed down by a game of telephone then it stands to reason that it would sound different 2000 years later.

But the problem, is that I have yet to see you or anyone else provide an example of HOW it has changed. So I am left to conclude that the holy spirit truly has guarded the teachings of the Catholic church for 2000 years, without error, as Christ promised

But if you disagree, please can you show me what is different about the gospel message taught in today’s Catholic church, that was NOT taught by the first Christians in the early church?

 

[MerickOWA]

Why don’t you start a sola scriptura thread? It is not my job to make you acknowledge the Word of God to be authorative in your life. It is only by God the Holy Spirit that someone can receive the Holy Scriptures as authorative revelation over and above all other sources.

Maybe you don’t understand as much about sola scriptura as you claim. Sola scriptura is exactly “Holy Scriptures as authorative revelation over and above all other sources”. How can you say that you aren’t discussing Sola scriptura and then go on to claim that you’re trying to teach sola scriptura on these forums.

And if you say that “well the Bible was always there” then do you believe the Bible is only the old testament? Because the New testament writings came later!

You still haven’t answered the question of how can we trust the New testament. If someone is going to accept the idea of sola scriptura, how do they know they can put equal trust in the new testament as the old. Certainly the fact that Jesus quoted the old testament would be good evidence to their sacredness. But we have only the new testament writings to verify what Jesus said, and if I’m not sure on their authenticity, how am I to know if thats what Jesus REALLY said?

 

[Reformed]

Reformed I really believe you are dodging this question, and I won’t deny it is a difficult one! I’m not asking about the issues of the reformation, what councils had to say, or what a declaration stated 12 years ago about our differences.

If “scripture alone” is what you tell me…then you would be saying the first Christians had to trust this doctrine, which means they had to trust ONLY the old testament writings!

And if you say that “well the Bible was always there” then do you believe the Bible is only the old testament? Because the New testament writings came later!

I am simply asking what did the church teach and BELIEVE about the gospel message, from the very first Christians, so close to Christ’s life, that is DIFFERENT from what the Catholic church teaches now?

What the first church embraced and taught is recorded in the Scriptures. Maybe you can start with the book of Acts to see what the 1st Century church believed in regards to the gospel. Start with the account with the jailer and the question of "what must I do to be saved? The official Roman Catholic answer will give you insight in what is different than the answer the Apostle Paul gave to the jailer. BTW…that is why we have three Bible Studies, to answer your question that you stated.

 

[MerickOWA]

LOL… I love you guys like a younger brother. Are you implying the gospel accounts of John and Matthew are more trustworthy and inspired than Luke and Mark? Since tradition states that Moses wrote Genesis, can we trust the book of Genesis?

Yes, revleaton is pased down orally until it is written. Why do you think it was important for God to have a written account of His revealaton to mankind? What’s that game that we play in a circle? We have a person whisper an oral statment to the next person, and that person whispers that oral statment to the next person, all the way down the line. And the last person repeats what he hears…which is completely different than what the first person started out with. I’d rather trust was is written over on-going revelation.

According to your argument about the children’s game, perhaps then we CAN’T trust the new testament. After all, most of what is written in the new testament is NOT written by the apostles but only written down as hearsay. Someone HEARD what the apostles said and wrote it down, so perhaps they got it wrong? How do we KNOW?

 

[MerickOWA]

What the first church embraced and taught is recorded in the Scriptures. Maybe you can start with the book of Acts to see what the 1st Century church believed in regards to the gospel. Start with the account with the jailer and the question of "what must I do to be saved? The official Roman Catholic answer will give you insight in what is different than the answer the Apostle Paul gave to the jailer. BTW…that is why we have three Bible Studies, to answer your question that you stated.

Why should we start with the book of Acts? Did all of the Church have the book of Acts? Is THAT the book that the early church had? From my research into the book of Acts, it appears to have been written somewhere between 70-100 AD and possibly by Luke? How can we be sure!?

 

[guanophore]

Church history is very important.

I am pleasantly surprised to hear you say this! Previously when it was suggested that history should be taken into account when understanding the Holy Writings of the Church, you discounted this idea.

I think you need to know the official position of what consists of Sacred Tradition as compared to just tradition. Not all of the work of the early Church Fathers can support Catholic doctrine. They contradicted each other at times. In addition, the writings of the early Church Fathers are not considered inspired or God-breathed by the Catholic Church.

Yes, this is true.

If I understand the deposit of Sacred Tradition, it is a pick and choose thing, which continues to grow.

No, this is false.

God did preserve His gospel for all generations which is recorded and written down. The earliest church history which is also recorded as God-breathed is found in the Scriptures. It is superior revelation than all of Sacred Tradition found outside of Sacred Scripture.

This is what you have been taught by your anti-catholic tutors. The Sacred Tradtition, however, that produced the Scriptures, is just as a live and well in the Church as it was when those inspired writings were penned.

Did you follow the Sacred Oral and Written Tradition thread? Just because sinners can mishandle Scripture and incorrectly interpret the Word of God, does not nullify the truth of God’s written revelation.

Absolutely! And just because sinners can mishandle and incorrectly interpret the Sacred Traditions does not nullify the truth of God’s revelation through them.

Ephesians 4 is the unity passage which testifies that those with the Spirit are enabled by the Spirit to grow in unity of the essentials of the Christian Faith. Catholics like to throw out a red-herring distraction to claim that there are a million denominations. But when you study the testimonies of God’s elect and redeemed, the Spirit unites those who are in Christ with basicallame testimonies, same faith, and same gospel. Here is the gospel in a nutshell.

I agree about the unity,and I think we both agree that the Spirit of God always leads to unity. The splintering and disunity, therefore, is not a “red herring”, but evidence that the unity does not exist.

Christians always had the Bible. Did you know that the Apostles and Jesus Christ quoted the Bible all the time? How did Jesus respond to Satan in the desert? What is concealed in the OT was revealed in the NT. When the Apostles wrote to the churches (NT Epistles), they were quoting Scripture recorded in the OT.

Indeed. We know that they used the Septuagint for those quotes, which is the main reason we accept that version of the Scripture as the one approved by Christ and the Apostles.

All of Scripture points to Jesus Christ and the cross, especially the OT. The Bible is really just one book of redemptive history.

It is very Catholic of you to say that!

How do Catholics understand the testimonies of the Apostles, but through the New Testament Scriptures? Do you want to know what the Apostles saw, felt, experienced and heard from the incarnate God?  We have to turn to the Scriptures.

I want to commend and appreciate your for recognizing a non-Roman Catholic. :clapping: :dancing:

We also understand the Apostolic teaching through the living letter that is written into the Church. Yes, we believe ignorance of Scripture is ignorance of Christ, but our Christ is not confined to the Holy Writings that point to Him. We come to Him, that we might find life. He is 100% identified with His Church, and there is no separation.

Jesus Christ told them that they would not be orphans when He left the 11 disciples. When Christ ascended, the promised Holy Spirit dwelled in the chosen disciples to remind them all that Christ taught. What did the Spirit of God remind the Apostles about…but what Jesus taught, and where can we find what the Apostles heard from God the Holy Spirit, but through Holy Scriptures.

Catholics take Jesus at His word here, and we believe He would never abandon the Church, for which He gave His life. On the contrary, He loves the Church, and nourishes her with His own Body and Blood. We agree that we find the Teachings in Scripture. We know that all lf the Teaching was never confined to Scripture. Don’t you wish you had the mp3’s from the lectures in Tyrannus?

Do you at least agree that the writings of the Apostles revealed in the New Testament are more trustworthy than all of apparent successor’s of Peter combined? Which source of revelation is superior, Sacred Tradition or Sacred Scriputre?

They are equal. However, the successors of Peter, including the “apparent” ones clearly are not all trustworthy. God is able to preserve HIs word even in the face of the untrustworthy.

 

[Reformed]

According to your argument about the children’s game, perhaps then we CAN’T trust the new testament. After all, most of what is written in the new testament is NOT written by the apostles but only written down as hearsay. Someone HEARD what the apostles said and wrote it down, so perhaps they got it wrong? How do we KNOW?

Well, the Bible claims to be God-breathed. That’s good enough for me to trust what God declares. We are not Mormon Christians. Therefore, we all agree that the Bible is God-breathed. Good try my friend.

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

LOL… I love you guys like a younger brother. Are you implying the gospel accounts of John and Matthew are more trustworthy and inspired than Luke and Mark? Since tradition states that Moses wrote Genesis, can we trust the book of Genesis?

Yes, revleaton is pased down orally until it is written. Why do you think it was important for God to have a written account of His revealaton to mankind? What’s that game that we play in a circle? We have a person whisper an oral statment to the next person, and that person whispers that oral statment to the next person, all the way down the line. And the last person repeats what he hears…which is completely different than what the first person started out with. I’d rather trust was is written over on-going revelation.

I do not think one writing of the Bible is more trustworthy than the others. It is one complete book and cannot be taken in context without the other parts.

The game you mention, where in scriptures does Christ promise to be with that game and protect it with His Holy Spirit. That game is a creation of “man”. The Church was a creation of Christ.

Please explain why God inspired His writings could be taken hard to understand to the destruction of those who misunderstand them? Tell me where scriptures teach or warn against the oral tradition, as it does with scriptures.

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.

**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. **

Again, isn’t it contradictory to say that God has the ability to protect scriptures, yet lacks the ability to protect the Church Christ, Himself, built?

 

[guanophore]

The heart of the gospel of God’s grace is found in the biblical doctrine of justfication. Please study Romans chapter 3 and 4, Romans 5 and 8, and the book of Galatians for starters.

If you study the Protestant Reformation, Council of Trent, and even the Cambridge Declaration written about 12 years ago, all the sources will confirm that the doctrine of justification divides us in our mutually exclusive gospels.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cambridge_Declaration

reformed.org/documents/index.html?mainframe=http://www.reformed.org/documents/cambridge.html

And if you are willing to have some intellectual honesty, and read what the Church teaches, you may find that what you have been taught is not accurate.

Why don’t you start a sola scriptura thread? It is not my job to make you acknowledge the Word of God to be authorative in your life. It is only by God the Holy Spirit that someone can receive the Holy Scriptures as authorative revelation over and above all other sources.

I think maybe you should reconsider, Reformed. God the HS is not going to teach anything contrary to what was revealed by Jesus and the Apostles, so maybe you better do it yourself?

LOL… I love you guys like a younger brother.

Careful, your condscension is leaking again.

Yes, revleaton is pased down orally until it is written. Why do you think it was important for God to have a written account of His revealaton to mankind? What’s that game that we play in a circle? We have a person whisper an oral statment to the next person, and that person whispers that oral statment to the next person, all the way down the line. And the last person repeats what he hears…which is completely different than what the first person started out with. I’d rather trust was is written over on-going revelation.

What evidence do you have that the Word of God suddenly vanished into ether after it was written?

The Holy Words of God are not some silly child’s game of “telephone”. God spent millenia preparing a people who could preserve Sacred Oral Tradition accurately, and then He gave many great and precious promises by HIs Spirit that He would preserve His word written in the heart of His Church.

You also misunderstand Sacred Tradition. It is a part of th e"once for all" deposit of faith. It is not “on-going revelation”. I pray you will develop some intellectual honesty, so that you can have a discussion of integrity with us about the things of God, rather than continually fighting strawmen that emanate from errors that you have been taught about what we believe.

 

[Reformed]

I do not think one writing of the Bible is more trustworthy than the others. It is one complete book and cannot be taken in context without the other parts.

The game you mention, where in scriptures does Christ promise to be with that game and protect it with His Holy Spirit. That game is a creation of “man”. The Church was a creation of Christ.

Please explain why God inspired His writings could be taken hard to understand to the destruction of those who misunderstand them? Tell me where scriptures teach or warn against the oral tradition, as it does with scriptures.

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.

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.

Again, isn’t it contradictory to say that God has the ability to protect scriptures, yet lacks the ability to protect the Church Christ, Himself, built?

We have to define the word church. I’m catholic too! I need to get some work done. Have a great morning everyone! May our discussions and debate drive us deeper to know Him better…to the praise of His glorious grace!

 

[MerickOWA]

Well, the Bible claims to be God-breathed. That’s good enough for me to trust what God declares. We are not Mormon Christians. Therefore, we all agree that the Bible is God-breathed. Good try my friend.

If i show you a book that CLAIMS to be written by God, should we accept that too? Why is the Mormon claim about their book not valid!? You don’t answer the question. We can believe the Bible because the Bible claims it to be so?

If you believe that… I have a car that claims to be worth 1 million dollars, but I’ll sell it for only 10 thousand (what a deal)!

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

Well, the Bible claims to be God-breathed. That’s good enough for me to trust what God declares. We are not Mormon Christians. Therefore, we all agree that the Bible is God-breathed. Good try my friend.

We believe the Bible to be God breathed or inspired. Why didn’t God inspire it be written that the Bible was the pillar and ground of truth instead of the Church?

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.

You need to address the question of where the teaching that the Bible is the sole authority comes from? Repeatedly avoiding it does not add any validity to your assertion that it is.