since the Bible is the Word of God it is all we need...

[D_Martin]

The world of Protestantism has many flavors, and many Protestants have no idea that they are a branch of a branch of a branch of the groups who broke away from the original Church established by Christ. If some of these people would have said these things to the Church Fathers then the Fathers would have wondered what planet they came from. This “me and Jesus only” mantality wrapped up in a mass of relativism and confusion is so unbiblical and has no relation whatsoever to what the Early Christian Church believed. If people would take the time to study the writings of the New Testament authors and then the writings of their contemporaries and those who were either appointed by the Apostles to be bishops or other men who were Christians within their generation or right after, then they would see that their beliefs do not resemble these reinvented wheels and newly invented doctrines among non-Catholics.

my 20 min’s were up, so again:

Like what?

The original church was in Jerusalem and branched out to many of the cities in the Roman empire what make you think that the Catholic church isn’t reinvented from that?

Wasn’t the First Council of Nicaea an attempt to start bringing all the churches (not catholic mind you there was no such thing in 325) in the Roman empire under one umbrella of authority and belief starting with the Nicene Creed? Or do you just like to omit that from the history of the church and churches of western culture. There’s a whole world out there that truly seeks and knows God in a very personal way through and in the Lord Jesus Christ that has nothing to do with the Vatican or Catholicism.

Sorry the Vatican no matter how mush you want to believe it does, doesn’t corner the market on the Truth of God. Catholics are still H bent on ruling Christendom, ah its gone folks, no more Holly Roman Empire, the Lord toke it away from the Roman Catholic bishopry hundreds of years ago, get over it, move on. Preaching authority of the “Catholic Church” isn’t the Gospel anyway.

 

[Abu]

D Martin #21
Wasn’t the First Council of Nicaea an attempt to start bringing all the churches (not catholic mind you there was no such thing in 325) in the Roman empire under one umbrella of authority and belief starting with the Nicene Creed?

False.

**Catholic was first used by St Ignatius of Antioch in his letter to the Smyrneans, A.D. 107, “Where Jesus Christ is, there is the Catholic Church.” **It is from the Greek katholike meaning “general” or “universal”. Within 90 years it meant also “orthodox” or faithful to the teachings of Christ. (The Catholic Catechism, Fr John A Hardon, S.J., Doubleday, 1975, p 217).

The third successor of St Peter, Clement, wrote to the Catholics of Corinth in A.D. 95: “If any man should be disobedient unto the words spoken by God through us, let them understand that they will entangle themselves in no slight transgression and danger… Render obedience to the things written by us through the Holy Spirit.” (I Clem. ad Cor. 59,1). This Is The Faith, Francis J Ripley, Fowler Wright Books, 1971, p 151; 139-141].

The apostles were a collegial community, under Peter. “By the end of the apostolic age, the bishops of the Catholic Church began meeting together on a regional basis, and with the first ecumenical council at Nicaea in 325, this co-operative activity reached worldwide proportions.” (Fr John A Hardon, S.J.,* The Catholic Catechism*, Doubleday, 1975, p 320-321). The teaching of Ecumenical Councils has to be approved by Christ’s Supreme Vicar.

 

[irenaeuslyons]

" Wherever the bishop shall appear, there let the multitude [of the people] also be; even as, wherever Jesus Christ is, there is the Catholic Church."
St. Ignatius of Antioch, Epistle to the Smyraens (A.D. 110)

“[God hath set ] all the other means through which the Spirit works; … For where the Church is, there is the Spirit of God; and where the Spirit of God is, there is the Church, and every kind of grace; but the Spirit is truth."
St. Irenaeus of Lyons, Against Heresies (A.D. 180)

“The church of God which sojourns at Rome to the church of God which sojourns at Corinth … But if any disobey the words spoken by him through us, let them know that they will involve themselves in transgression and in no small danger.”
Pope St. Clement of Rome, 1st Epistle to the Corinthians (A.D. 96)

“… the Church which presides in the place of the region of the Romans, and which is worthy of God, worthy of honour, worthy of the highest happiness, worthy of praise, worthy of credit, worthy of being deemed holy, and which presides over love…”
St. Ignatius of Antioch, Epistle to the Romans (A.D. 110)

" [we do this, I say,] by indicating that tradition derived from the apostles, of the very great, the very ancient, and universally known Church founded and organized at Rome by the two most glorious apostles, Peter and Paul; as also [by pointing out] the faith preached to men, which comes down to our time by means of the successions of the bishops. For it is a matter of necessity that every Church should agree with this Church, on account of its pre- eminent authority…"
St. Irenaeus of Lyons, Against Heresies (A.D. 180)

 

[D_Martin]

False.

**Catholic was first used by St Ignatius of Antioch in his letter to the Smyrneans, A.D. 107, “Where Jesus Christ is, there is the Catholic Church.” **It is from the Greek katholike meaning “general” or “universal”. Within 90 years it meant also “orthodox” or faithful to the teachings of Christ. (The Catholic Catechism, Fr John A Hardon, S.J., Doubleday, 1975, p 217).

The third successor of St Peter, Clement, wrote to the Catholics of Corinth in A.D. 95: “If any man should be disobedient unto the words spoken by God through us, let them understand that they will entangle themselves in no slight transgression and danger… Render obedience to the things written by us through the Holy Spirit.” (I Clem. ad Cor. 59,1). This Is The Faith, Francis J Ripley, Fowler Wright Books, 1971, p 151; 139-141].

The apostles were a collegial community, under Peter. “By the end of the apostolic age, the bishops of the Catholic Church began meeting together on a regional basis, and with the first ecumenical council at Nicaea in 325, this co-operative activity reached worldwide proportions.” (Fr John A Hardon, S.J.,* The Catholic Catechism*, Doubleday, 1975, p 320-321). The teaching of Ecumenical Councils has to be approved by Christ’s Supreme Vicar.

The word in Greek katholike as understood, and used in your example in 107 isn’t the same as what transpired after 325 under the Imperial power of emperor of the Roman empire starting with Constantine and became the religion of the Roman Empire. Not the same view and understanding, not in the same ballpark, not in the same universe. Nice try though. Really didn’t know the origin of the word catholic. (Edited)

But if you notice no talk about the Lord here, always the church, the wonderful church, look at what I belong to, look at me I me I me I me. And always trying to justify to others how it should be in charge of all Christians. Never look at the Lord Jesus Christ who saves all souls.

Though the word katholike now catholic may have meant what it meant in 107 AD but in 2015 it don’t mean nor is used in that sense by anyone unless it’s a catholic trying to prove the only way to heaven is through the catholic church, as they define it. The last I checked Jesus said He was the Way and the only Way. Just because you might be a believer in the Lord God of Israel in the name of Jesus Christ doesn’t make you the way to know God. The sheep are not the Shepard.

 

[zz912]

The word in Greek katholike as understood, and used in your example in 107 isn’t the same as what transpired after 325 under the Imperial power of emperor of the Roman empire starting with Constantine and became the religion of the Roman Empire. Not the same view and understanding, not in the same ballpark, not in the same universe. Nice try though. Really didn’t know the origin of the word catholic. (Edited)

Please do correct your ignorance of history. The Council of Nicaea was called by the Emporer Constantine to decide the matter of the Arian heresy. He was actually leaning more towards the Arian view, but accepted the Church declaration that it was heresy.

And Constantine did NOT make Christianity the religion of the Roman Empire. He issued the Edict of Toleration, which made Christianity legal in the Empire. It didn’t make it the state religion. That didn’t happen for almost another century, and Constantine was long dead.

But if you notice no talk about the Lord here, always the church, the wonderful church, look at what I belong to, look at me I me I me I me. And always trying to justify to others how it should be in charge of all Christians. Never look at the Lord Jesus Christ who saves all souls.

Funny, but the Lord views the Church as pretty intertwined with Himself. In fact, when St. Paul was persecuting the Church, Jesus asked why Paul was persecuting Him. There is NO separation from the Church, the Bride of Christ, the Body of Christ, from Christ Himself. You simply can’t separate them.

And if you read the New Testament, you’ll see St. Paul and St. Peter exercising a LOT of authority over Christians. St. Paul explicitly passes this authority on to others, and intructs them to pass it on to others after them, with the same instructions to pass it on. So when did this authority end (chapter and verse please)?

Though the word katholike now catholic may have meant what it meant in 107 AD but in 2015 it don’t mean nor is used in that sense by anyone unless it’s a catholic trying to prove the only way to heaven is through the catholic church, as they define it. The last I checked Jesus said He was the Way and the only Way. Just because you might be a believer in the Lord God of Israel in the name of Jesus Christ doesn’t make you the way to know God. The sheep are not the Shepard.

Are you denying that Jesus set up Peter and the other Apostles as shepherds?

 

[Abu]

Good to know that the realization that the Catholic Church was declared universal and orthodox very early is now acknowledged .

D Martin #24
(Edited)

So, that IS the Church which Jesus declared solemnly to be “My Church” (Mt 16:18).

All four promises to Peter alone:
“You are Peter and on this rock I will build My Church.” (Mt 16:18)
“The gates of hell will not prevail against it.”(Mt 16:18)
“I will give you the keys of the Kingdom of heaven." ( Mt 16:19)
“Whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven.” (Mt 16:19) [Later also to the Twelve].

Sole authority:
“Strengthen your brethren.” (Lk 22:32)
“Feed My sheep.”(Jn 21:17).

The last I checked Jesus said He was the Way and the only Way.

Which is precisely why the only Way is through His Church as, He called Her, for anyone to be saved, whether they know it or not.

 

[stewstew03]

…
(Edited)
…

(Edited) what, exactly, is a “true believer”?

 

[joe371]

=D_Martin

The true interpretation of scripture is Jesus Christ…/]

What does that even mean?

 

[joe371]

Martin;12643170]

Though the word katholike now catholic may have meant what it meant in 107 AD but in 2015 it don’t mean nor is used in that sense by anyone unless it’s a catholic trying to prove the only way to heaven is through the catholic church, as they define it.

You can now admit that you were wrong; that you intentionally lied or that you were misinformed and sadly shared that bogus information with others, about the underlined part:

Furthermore, many elements of sanctification and of truth"273 are found outside the visible confines of the Catholic Church: "the written Word of God; the life of grace; faith, hope, and charity, with the other interior gifts of the Holy Spirit, as well as visible elements."274 Christ’s Spirit uses these Churches and ecclesial communities as means of salvation, whose power derives from the fullness of grace and truth that Christ has entrusted to the Catholic Church. All these blessings come from Christ and lead to him,275 and are in themselves calls to "Catholic unity."276

 

[Church_Militant]

You know as well as I do that the one (scripture) is a witness to us of the other (Jesus Christ) Jesus says as much, but I don’t remember where at this time. It seems sinister that you would seek an answer otherwise.

Sorry, but that’s what it looked like. Maybe you need to be more concise in your statements?

It’s not complicated, once A&E lost the life that God gave them, all that is to be done is the restoration of that same life, according to God’s satisfaction. So Jesus fulfilled and is the fulfillment of scripture,

All good thus far…

and that which is contrary to scripture has no real business in the church of any denomination,

Okay…so again…you’re saying that only things found in scripture have any place in the church?

Then what about these things?
Sunday school?
Vacation Bible School?
Wedding rings?
Women clergy?
Vernacular Bible translations? (IOW shouldn’t we all be studying scripture in Greek Hebrew and Aramaic?)

unless it’s to lead away from Christ, or distract from the Christian’s fulfillment in Christ.

Seems to me that you have your own interpretations of scripture more than what scripture actually says.

For instance, can you show me any scripture where the Bible lays specific claim to being the final and ultimate authority for all that Christians believe and practice?
Please feel free to use our own Catholic Bible since it will avail you more scriptures to work with.

 

[Church_Militant]

The word in Greek katholike as understood, and used in your example in 107 isn’t the same as what transpired after 325 under the Imperial power of emperor of the Roman empire starting with Constantine and became the religion of the Roman Empire. Not the same view and understanding, not in the same ballpark, not in the same universe. Nice try though. Really didn’t know the origin of the word catholic.

(Edited)

You really believe that? I suggest that you check your historical sources and get some objective ones, since the teachings of the Catholic Church remained the same after 312 AD and long after Constantine’s death. See my blog article THE PAGANIZATION OF THE CATHOLIC CHURCH UNDER CONSTANTINE

But if you notice no talk about the Lord here, always the church, the wonderful church, look at what I belong to, look at me I me I me I me. And always trying to justify to others how it should be in charge of all Christians. Never look at the Lord Jesus Christ who saves all souls.

That’s cute…I don’t suppose you have ever had the courage to a attend a Catholic Mass have you? A more Christocentric service you will never find anywhere this side of Heaven.

As for our forum conversations…we keep them on topic (try it…you might like it) which in this case is a discussion (or debate) as to the validity of the doctrine of Sola Scriptura (or the Bible alone). If you can prove from the Bible that the Bible specifically lays claim to being the final and ultimate authority for all that Christians believe and practice the you’re good to go…if not, then I am saying that since Sola Scriptura has no specific mandate in scripture that it violates its own premise and therefore (by its own standard) cannot be a correct Christian doctrine.

Though the word katholike now catholic may have meant what it meant in 107 AD but in 2015 it don’t mean nor is used in that sense by anyone unless it’s a catholic trying to prove the only way to heaven is through the catholic church, as they define it. The last I checked Jesus said He was the Way and the only Way. Just because you might be a believer in the Lord God of Israel in the name of Jesus Christ doesn’t make you the way to know God. The sheep are not the Shepard.

Irrelevant to this topic.

 

[zz912]

The original church was in Jerusalem and branched out to many of the cities in the Roman empire what make you think that the Catholic church isn’t reinvented from that?

Wasn’t the First Council of Nicaea an attempt to start bringing all the churches (not catholic mind you there was no such thing in 325) in the Roman empire under one umbrella of authority and belief starting with the Nicene Creed?

The attempt to bring all churches under one umbrella of authority started from the beginning. That is WHY St. Paul wrote many of his letters. Have you ever asked WHY he wrote his letters???

Most of them were attempts to bring the various wayward communities back into line and back under the authority of the bishops. That’s why he was instructing Timothy and Titus about how to rule their various communities, and how the ordain men and transmit on the faith.

Have you ever considered why the letters were written in the first place? If there was no umbrella of authority, then why would St. Paul be writing to them exercising his authority? Why would he write to Timothy and Titus on how to exercise THEIR authority? Why would he instruct Timothy and Titus on how those they ordain should exercise their authority? When did this authority end?

 

[Church_Militant]

So…where are these scripture references that make your case for Sola Scriptura?

 

[joe371]

So…where are these scripture references that make your case for Sola Scriptura?

There are none. :nope:

 

[Church_Militant]

There are none. :nope:

You and I know that but I figure these guys deserve a chance to make their case. After all…the truth is out there…

 

[joe371]

You and I know that but I figure these guys deserve a chance to make their case. After all…the truth is out there…

I tried, as a former protestant, and failed almost immediately.

 

[Church_Militant]

I tried, as a former protestant, and failed almost immediately.

Yeah but look where it led you…into the fullness of truth.

I think this realization was one of the big turning points in my own reversion to the Catholic faith. It was very freeing to no longer be bound to an error that was so deceptive.

I love the Bible and read and study it a great deal but it’s great not to have to have someone trying to tell me what every single verse and passage means…often with some pretty wild twists and mental gymnastics. That’s pretty much what I faced all the time in the n-C communities I was part of.

 

[joe371]

Yeah but look where it led you…into the fullness of truth.

I think this realization was one of the big turning points in my own reversion to the Catholic faith. It was very freeing to no longer be bound to an error that was so deceptive.

I love the Bible and read and study it a great deal but it’s great not to have to have someone trying to tell me what every single verse and passage means…often with some pretty wild twists and mental gymnastics. That’s pretty much what I faced all the time in the n-C communities I was part of.

to that.

 

[triumphguy]

This is pretty much a prize winning example of what this thread is about. You seem to think that this interpretation sums up the whole issue, but again…this is very subjective and of course not shared with all other “Bible only” Christians.

No one is talking here about theology, though it is inescapable eventually, but the real problem is that many n-Cs believe that anyone can pick up a Bible and read it and rightly handle the word of truth but the wide diversity of interpretations and divisions among n-Cs flies in the face of that idea based upon 1st Corinthians 14:33. Moreover, there is no scripture at all where it lays claim to any such final and ultimate authority and that being the case, the very doctrine violates its own premise and so, by its own standards, cannot be correct Biblical belief.

That’s right - 20,000 protestant denominations prove you are correct.

 

[Church_Militant]

That’s right - 20,000 protestant denominations prove you are correct.

Anything over 2 is too many I think.