Sola Scriptura questions

[Javl]

That’s funny. The Bible speaks of hell and I believe the Bible. Strange.

Good for you. Note…I didn’t say all Protestants.

PAX DOMINI

Shalom Aleichem

 

[Nicea325]

I am serious as life. Those held in prison were held in a holding place because until Jesus, there was no escape, no redemption.

That place was a place where all departed soul went to.

Isa 14:9 Hell from beneath is moved for thee to meet thee at thy coming: it stirreth up the dead for thee, even all the chief ones of the earth; it hath raised up from their thrones all the kings of the nations.

Was there anyone left?

Blessings, AJ

Sorry,but I do not accept your biblical exegesis at all. Again,if no Hell existed,then where did Satan and his squad of rebel angels reside…if NO HELL EXISTED?

 

[Javl]

Jesus established His church as believers.

Now believers are those who believe in the salvation of God by Jesus and are born again new creatures.

The Apostle Paul went to establish the churches as he addressed them separately.

Act 5:11 And great fear came upon all the church, and upon as many as heard these things.

The believers as a church became fearful.

Act 8:1 And Saul was consenting unto his death. And at that time there was a great persecution against the church which was at Jerusalem; and they were all scattered abroad throughout the regions of Judaea and Samaria, except the apostles.

Persecution against the believers as a church

Act 8:3 As for Saul, he made havock of the church, entering into every house, and haling men and women committed them to prison.

Again of the believers.

The church is addressed as a body of believers residing in a building called a church.

As in " what church do you belong to" verses what beliefs do you have.

When Jesus said to Peter, upon this rock, is meant that upon this faith that Peter had constituted what a believer is that Jesus’ church is established.

The 12 Apostles, 12 in number represent the 12 tribes of Israel, also representing the earthly organizational number.

12 is the number to include the whole world while 10 is a heavenly number, as in the Ten Commandments.

Don’t get me wrong, I appreciate the Catholic churches contribution of the bible, but better yet, I want to give God the glory, the praise for His moving man to write, compile and educate the world about His works.

Blessings, AJ

Jesus built ( established ) one Church only, and not the myriads that exist today, for all His disciples ( believers ). He chose and assembled twelve Apostles which, according to Tradition, was one for each of the twelve tribes of Israel. These Apostles were trained by Him to go out to teach His truths to all nations, Jews and Gentiles alike. They had no written documents. Everything, other than the Hebrew Tanakh, was oral. They taught by Tradition.

Other than some letters and writings by the early Church Fathers, there was no New Testament as we know it today. Everything was taught by memory and by rote. There was no such thing as “sola scriptura” back then since other than the Tanakh there was nothing available. Only when the Bible was assembled ( “canonized” ) in 325 AD was there anything that could be referenced to as reliable for teaching Jesus’ truths.

“Sola Scriptura”. along with “Bible Sufficiency” was an invention of Martin Luther in 1581
when he was questioned at the Synod of Augsberg, Germany. It should be a known fact by Protestants that St. Peter forbids private interpretation ( which includes sola scriptura ) in his second letter ( 2Pet 1:20 and 3:16 ).

There is much more to be said about the use and mis-use of sola scriptura. The Bible is an authority, but it is not the final authority. Whether you accept and believe it or not ( the mis-use of sola scriptura ) the Catholic Church, which has existed from the beginning, is the only authority, given it by Jesus, that can interpret the Bible.

PAX DOMINI

Shalom Aleichem

 

[Dokimas]

Good for you. Note…I didn’t say all Protestants.

PAX DOMINI

Shalom Aleichem

It was this that caught my eye and caused my response, "Yes, that is the result of “sola scriptura” and “bible sufficiency”. "

 

[Richard_Kastner]

Jesus built ( established ) one Church only, and not the myriads that exist today, for all His disciples ( believers ). He chose and assembled twelve Apostles which, according to Tradition, was one for each of the twelve tribes of Israel. These Apostles were trained by Him to go out to teach His truths to all nations, Jews and Gentiles alike. They had no written documents. Everything, other than the Hebrew Tanakh, was oral. They taught by Tradition.

I’m not quite sure what your point is. Are you saying that the apostles taught some truths by there oral “Tradition” that could not be verified by the bible later?

Other than some letters and writings by the early Church Fathers, there was no New Testament as we know it today.

Are you saying that the letters of the ECF are part of the new testament?

Everything was taught by memory and by rote. There was no such thing as “sola scriptura” back then since other than the Tanakh there was nothing available. Only when the Bible was assembled ( “canonized” ) in 325 AD was there anything that could be referenced to as reliable for teaching Jesus’ truths.

You yourself say here that the bible is “reliable for teaching Jesus’ truths”. Again, do you think that the apostles were teaching “truths” that could not be referenced in the bible later?
Gal1
8But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed.

What “Gospel” do you think Paul is talking about here Javl? The Gospel he is talking about is the Gospel of Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John. These Gospels talk about Jesus and His plan of Salvation. They are found in THE BIBLE.

“Sola Scriptura”. along with “Bible Sufficiency” was an invention of Martin Luther in 1581
when he was questioned at the Synod of Augsberg, Germany. It should be a known fact by Protestants that St. Peter forbids private interpretation ( which includes sola scriptura ) in his second letter ( 2Pet 1:20 and 3:16 ).

2Tim3
12Yea, and all that will live godly in Christ Jesus shall suffer persecution.

13But evil men and seducers shall wax worse and worse, deceiving, and being deceived.

14But continue thou in the things which thou hast learned and hast been assured of, knowing of whom thou hast learned them;

15And that from a child thou hast known the holy scriptures, which are able to make thee wise unto salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus.

16All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:

17That the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works.

Let me ask you Javl if scripture is as it says here “able to make thee wise unto salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus.” What else is there that you think the apostles were teaching that is not contained in these scriptures that could possibly be of any significance?

There is much more to be said about the use and mis-use of sola scriptura. The Bible is an authority, but it is not the final authority. Whether you accept and believe it or not ( the mis-use of sola scriptura ) the Catholic Church, which has existed from the beginning, is the only authority, given it by Jesus, that can interpret the Bible.

PAX DOMINI

Shalom Aleichem

So, are you saying that the “Tradition” of the CC is the final authority and takes presidence over the word of God? And where does Jesus give the CC the sole authority to interpret the bible?

 

[Nicea325]

I’m not quite sure what your point is. Are you saying that the apostles taught some truths by there oral “Tradition” that could not be verified by the bible later?

Are you saying that the letters of the ECF are part of the new testament?

You yourself say here that the bible is “reliable for teaching Jesus’ truths”. Again, do you think that the apostles were teaching “truths” that could not be referenced in the bible later?
Gal1
8But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed.

What “Gospel” do you think Paul is talking about here Javl? The Gospel he is talking about is the Gospel of Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John. These Gospels talk about Jesus and His plan of Salvation. They are found in THE BIBLE.

2Tim3
12Yea, and all that will live godly in Christ Jesus shall suffer persecution.

13But evil men and seducers shall wax worse and worse, deceiving, and being deceived.

14But continue thou in the things which thou hast learned and hast been assured of, knowing of whom thou hast learned them;

15And that from a child thou hast known the holy scriptures, which are able to make thee wise unto salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus.

16All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:

17That the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works.

Let me ask you Javl if scripture is as it says here “able to make thee wise unto salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus.” What else is there that you think the apostles were teaching that is not contained in these scriptures that could possibly be of any significance?

So, are you saying that the “Tradition” of the CC is the final authority and takes presidence over the word of God? And where does Jesus give the CC the sole authority to interpret the bible?

So, are you saying that the “Tradition” of the CC is the final authority and takes presidence over the word of God? And where does Jesus give the CC the sole authority to interpret the bible

No. That is a Protestant belief that scripture and tradition are against each other. Or that one is above the other or inferior to the other. Protestanism is an either/or dichotomy. Sacred Scripture and Sacred Tradition go hand-in-hand.

And where did Jesus give every individual the authority to interpret scripture and found their own churches?

Jesus founded a church with authority, he did not hand out Bibles and tell everyone:

Okay you are all given authority to interpret scripture as you please. That is called Islam.

Christianity is NOT a book-only religion. So many Protestants have the belief Christianity and the church came from the Bible and it is false.

 

[Roman_Catholic_1]

What “Gospel” do you think Paul is talking about here Javl? The Gospel he is talking about is the Gospel of Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John. These Gospels talk about Jesus and His plan of Salvation. They are found in THE BIBLE.

How could Paul be talking about these Gospels before they were written? Besides Paul is referring to the Gospel, not Gospels. Paul tells us what the Gospel is:

Now I would remind you, brethren,** in what terms I preached to you the gospel**, which you received, in which you stand, by which you are saved, if you hold it fast–unless you believed in vain. For I delivered to you as of first importance what I also received, that Christ died for our sins in accordance with the scriptures, that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day in accordance with the scriptures… 1 Cor 15:1-4

God bless

 

[Richard_Kastner]

How could Paul be talking about these Gospels before they were written? Besides Paul is referring to the Gospel, not Gospels. Paul tells us what the Gospel is:
God bless

You’re kidding right? Am I being punked or don’t you really get it? Do you think that Paul is talking about a different “Gospel” than Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John. If so what do you think that “Gospel” is about?

You gave the beautiful quote from 1Cor.15
Now I would remind you, brethren, in what terms I preached to you the gospel, which you received, in which you stand, by which you are saved, if you hold it fast–unless you believed in vain. For I delivered to you as of first importance what I also received, that Christ died for our sins in accordance with the scriptures, that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day in accordance with the scriptures… 1 Cor 15:1-4

And btw this is also in the bible. Do you think that this is telling us something different than the gospels? I mean come on man. The word Gospel means “good news”. The good news is that of Jesus Christ and Him crucified for our Salvation. From Gen. to Rev. this is what the bible is about. There is nothing outside of this teaching that is necessary.

 

[Javl]

I’m not quite sure what your point is. Are you saying that the apostles taught some truths by there oral “Tradition” that could not be verified by the bible later?

Are you saying that the letters of the ECF are part of the new testament?

You yourself say here that the bible is “reliable for teaching Jesus’ truths”. Again, do you think that the apostles were teaching “truths” that could not be referenced in the bible later?
Gal1
8But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed.

What “Gospel” do you think Paul is talking about here Javl? The Gospel he is talking about is the Gospel of Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John. These Gospels talk about Jesus and His plan of Salvation. They are found in THE BIBLE.

2Tim3
12Yea, and all that will live godly in Christ Jesus shall suffer persecution.

13But evil men and seducers shall wax worse and worse, deceiving, and being deceived.

14But continue thou in the things which thou hast learned and hast been assured of, knowing of whom thou hast learned them;

15And that from a child thou hast known the holy scriptures, which are able to make thee wise unto salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus.

16All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:

17That the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works.

Let me ask you Javl if scripture is as it says here “able to make thee wise unto salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus.” What else is there that you think the apostles were teaching that is not contained in these scriptures that could possibly be of any significance?

So, are you saying that the “Tradition” of the CC is the final authority and takes presidence over the word of God? And where does Jesus give the CC the sole authority to interpret the bible?

Since you love to quote your version ( sola scriptura ) of the Bible and refuse to accept Jesus’ words since it does not fit into your version(s), I’ll let you answer your own questions. I will repeat and say over and over again and again, you are totally in error and reject Jesus’ words which are plainer than the nose on your face.

Say what you will, your words carry no weight with me. I listen to and follow solemly and obediently my God and Saviour, Jesus Christ, who’s words you have proven that you don’t understand and therefore reject.

PAX DOMINI

Shalom Aleichem

 

[Roman_Catholic_1]

You’re kidding right? Am I being punked or don’t you really get it? Do you think that Paul is talking about a different “Gospel” than Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John. If so what do you think that “Gospel” is about?

That is a wonderful Christian post…

You are confusing the Gospel with the Gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John. Paul could not have written about the Gospels before they were written and before he knew about them. Paul could though, and did (see 1 Cor. 15:1) write about the Gospel.

You gave the beautiful quote from 1Cor.15

To show you what Paul is talking about when he refers to the Gospel. He is not referring to the Gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John but, rather, the Gospel.

And btw this is also in the bible.

I don’t recall saying otherwise. Can you please tell me what you are talking about?

Do you think that this is telling us something different than the gospels?

Yes because the Gospel, while it can be found therein, is not Matthew, Mark, Luke and John to Paul. The Gospel to Paul is that, “Christ died for our sins in accordance with the scriptures, that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day in accordance with the scriptures…”. Paul is not referring to the Gospels (Matthew, Mark, Luke and John) in Galatians but the Gospel.

I mean come on man. The word Gospel means “good news”. The good news is that of Jesus Christ and Him crucified for our Salvation. From Gen. to Rev. this is what the bible is about. There is nothing outside of this teaching that is necessary.

Again you were referring to a specific quote of Paul’s from Galatians. I am telling you that he was referring to the Gospel not the Gospels. For one the Gospels had not even been written yet when Paul wrote Galatians (most scholars put it late 40’s to early 50’s). Two, Paul tells us what the Gospel is in 1 Cor. 15:1.

I hope this helps. Try to show a little more Christian charity in your posts.

God bless

 

[look3467]

Sorry,but I do not accept your biblical exegesis at all. Again,if no Hell existed,then where did Satan and his squad of rebel angels reside…if NO HELL EXISTED?

That’s OK if you don’t accept my views at all. I am not the least bit offended.

I present my views for several reasons 1. To encourage people to look into their beliefs 2. To get people to search thing said out in the bible. 3. So that many who have an admiration for God to become more intimate with Him.

Now, as for hell, God speaks of it as having Jesus go there. As Jesus prayed in the Garden ref: Luk 22:42 Saying, Father, if thou be willing, remove this cup from me: nevertheless not my will, but thine, be done.

It was the will of the Father that Jesus go to hell to visit those there of which Jesus was willing for the love of the Father and for humanity.

Evidenced by this verse: Mat 16:26 For what is a man profited, if he shall gain the whole world, and lose his own soul? **or what shall a man give in exchange for his soul? **

You see, humanity as a whole became lost, not the Jews, the Gentiles but the whole of humanity.

The Jews where chosen to reveal the God of creation to the world of which later were rejected for the grafting in or adoption of the Gentile world.

So we see a problem here that God needed to correct.

Since Jesus came at a predetermined time in human history, all previous souls who lived and died had no place to go because they were in a lost condition.

So, God held them in a holding place separate from God termed hell, yet as like a prison.

In order for God to address the salvation of their souls, God in Jesus had to include them all into the body of Jesus by having Jesus take the condemnation of the world, condemned, sacrificed and the loss of His soul.

The verse of above states that Jesus wanted the whole world, nothing short of the whole that is why He was willing to lose His own soul so that the world through Him might be saved.

Jesus knew one thing, that the Father loved Him and would not let his soul rot in hell.

Refsa 16:10 For thou wilt not leave my soul in hell; neither wilt thou suffer thine Holy One to see corruption.

If God cleared Jesus of all the sins of the world being in Hell, then Jesus gained the whole world for the Father as the Fathers will.

Now, if you still want to believe in hell, that is up to you,

As for me, I live as a new born creature enjoying the benefits of the kingdom of God.

Blessings, AJ

 

[Richard_Kastner]

That is a wonderful Christian post…

You are confusing the Gospel with the Gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John. Paul could not have written about the Gospels before they were written and before he knew about them. Paul could though, and did (see 1 Cor. 15:1) write about the Gospel.

To show you what Paul is talking about when he refers to the Gospel. He is not referring to the Gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John but, rather, the Gospel.

There is no difference in the gospel because the one doing the talking changes.

I don’t recall saying otherwise. Can you please tell me what you are talking about?

This thread is about sola scriptura. The whole point of my post was that the Gospel of Jesus Christ and Him crucified can be found in the bible. What else is necessary?

Yes because the Gospel, while it can be found therein, is not Matthew, Mark, Luke and John to Paul. The Gospel to Paul is that, “Christ died for our sins in accordance with the scriptures, that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day in accordance with the scriptures…”. Paul is not referring to the Gospels (Matthew, Mark, Luke and John) in Galatians but the Gospel.

Again you were referring to a specific quote of Paul’s from Galatians. I am telling you that he was referring to the Gospel not the Gospels. For one the Gospels had not even been written yet when Paul wrote Galatians (most scholars put it late 40’s to early 50’s). Two, Paul tells us what the Gospel is in 1 Cor. 15:1.

I hope this helps. Try to show a little more Christian charity in your posts.

God bless

I,m sorry if you think that my post was without charity. Maybe I do get a little intense. However whether Paul, Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, or anyone in the bible talks about the Gospel IT’S THE SAME GOSPEL. There is no other Gospel in the bible save Jesus and Him crucified.

 

[Roman_Catholic_1]

There is no difference in the gospel because the one doing the talking changes.

Richard there still seems to be something that is preventing understanding of what I am saying. Let me try one more time. You quoted Galataions 1:8 and then said:

What “Gospel” do you think Paul is talking about here Javl? The Gospel he is talking about is the Gospel of Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John. These Gospels talk about Jesus and His plan of Salvation. They are found in THE BIBLE.

I’m saying that Paul in no way was, nor could have since they weren’t written yet, be talking about the Gospels. Paul was referring to the Gospel which he lays out in 1 Cor. 15

This thread is about sola scriptura. The whole point of my post was that the Gospel of Jesus Christ and Him crucified can be found in the bible. What else is necessary?

I was referring to a specific comment you made where you thought Paul was referencing the Gospels. He wasn’t. That’s all I am saying. To be frank, I am tired of the SS discussion.

However whether Paul, Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, or anyone in the bible talks about the Gospel IT’S THE SAME GOSPEL. There is no other Gospel in the bible save Jesus and Him crucified.

Correct but Paul, when he speaks of the Gospel is referring to the Gospel in general and not the Gospels specifically.

God bless you

 

[look3467]

The bible in it’s self has all that is needed to bring one to Christ.

When one does come to Christ via what the bible says,at that time it is the Spirit of Christ who deals with individual to convert that individuals heart.

Other than that, its anybody’s guess.

For or against what is termed “church” is a matter of perspective.

The bible is by itself sufficient to find God’s salvation.

Blessings, AJ

 

[Nicea325]

That’s OK if you don’t accept my views at all. I am not the least bit offended.

I present my views for several reasons 1. To encourage people to look into their beliefs 2. To get people to search thing said out in the bible. 3. So that many who have an admiration for God to become more intimate with Him.

Now, as for hell, God speaks of it as having Jesus go there. As Jesus prayed in the Garden ref: Luk 22:42 Saying, Father, if thou be willing, remove this cup from me: nevertheless not my will, but thine, be done.

It was the will of the Father that Jesus go to hell to visit those there of which Jesus was willing for the love of the Father and for humanity.

Evidenced by this verse: Mat 16:26 For what is a man profited, if he shall gain the whole world, and lose his own soul? **or what shall a man give in exchange for his soul? **

You see, humanity as a whole became lost, not the Jews, the Gentiles but the whole of humanity.

The Jews where chosen to reveal the God of creation to the world of which later were rejected for the grafting in or adoption of the Gentile world.

So we see a problem here that God needed to correct.

Since Jesus came at a predetermined time in human history, all previous souls who lived and died had no place to go because they were in a lost condition.

So, God held them in a holding place separate from God termed hell, yet as like a prison.

In order for God to address the salvation of their souls, God in Jesus had to include them all into the body of Jesus by having Jesus take the condemnation of the world, condemned, sacrificed and the loss of His soul.

The verse of above states that Jesus wanted the whole world, nothing short of the whole that is why He was willing to lose His own soul so that the world through Him might be saved.

Jesus knew one thing, that the Father loved Him and would not let his soul rot in hell.

Refsa 16:10 For thou wilt not leave my soul in hell; neither wilt thou suffer thine Holy One to see corruption.

If God cleared Jesus of all the sins of the world being in Hell, then Jesus gained the whole world for the Father as the Fathers will.

Now, if you still want to believe in hell, that is up to you,

As for me, I live as a new born creature enjoying the benefits of the kingdom of God.

Blessings, AJ

That’s OK if you don’t accept my views at all. I am not the least bit offended.

I am sorry,but your theology is far to modern for me.

I present my views for several reasons

1. To encourage people to look into their beliefs

To have them reinforce their own beliefs or to have them question it? Big difference.

1. To get people to search thing said out in the bible.

Unfortunately your approach as led to thousands of different churches and beliefs,which I do not consider handed down from Christ. They all stem from man-made churches and poor biblical exegesis. I read my Bible everyday and I can interpret whatever I want, but at the end of the day,the church has taken care of that long before you or I existed.

1. So that many who have an admiration for God to become more intimate with Him.

True. But also means to obey what He said and taught,not put words into his mouth,such as Hell not existing.

 

[Richard_Kastner]

Richard there still seems to be something that is preventing understanding of what I am saying. Let me try one more time. You quoted Galataions 1:8 and then said:

I’m saying that Paul in no way was, nor could have since they weren’t written yet, be talking about the Gospels. Paul was referring to the Gospel which he lays out in 1 Cor. 15

I was referring to a specific comment you made where you thought Paul was referencing the Gospels. He wasn’t. That’s all I am saying. To be frank, I am tired of the SS discussion.

He absolutely was refering to the same Gospel that the Gospel writers were talking about and If you are tired of the discussion on SS why are you posting on this thread?

Correct but Paul, when he speaks of the Gospel is referring to the Gospel in general and not the Gospels specifically.

God bless you

Are you saying that Paul was completely unaware of the “Gospels” as preached by Mattew, Mark, Luke, and John? Notice I said preached and not written and what is the difference between the Gospel in general and the Gospels specifically.

 

[Nicea325]

The bible in it’s self has all that is needed to bring one to Christ.

When one does come to Christ via what the bible says,at that time it is the Spirit of Christ who deals with individual to convert that individuals heart.

Other than that, its anybody’s guess.

For or against what is termed “church” is a matter of perspective.

The bible is by itself sufficient to find God’s salvation.

Blessings, AJ

The bible in it’s self has all that is needed to bring one to Christ.

False premise and historically false.

Tell me how many people owned a Bible in the year 70 A.D.? What about the scores of people who never owned a Bible or capable of not reading? How did they come to know and follow Christ with no Bible?

 

[Nicea325]

He absolutely was refering to the same Gospel that the Gospel writers were talking about and If you are tired of the discussion on SS why are you posting on this thread?

Are you saying that Paul was completely unaware of the “Gospels” as preached by Mattew, Mark, Luke, and John? Notice I said preached and not written and what is the difference between the Gospel in general and the Gospels specifically.

I am sure he heard them Richard,but exactly are you trying to prove or point out? Only a question.

 

[look3467]

I am sorry,but your theology is far to modern for me.

Ok, so it’s not fore you.

To have them reinforce their own beliefs or to have them question it? Big difference.

If you want to rely on the church for your understanding, I have no problem with that.

I for one choose to rely on what the word says and what the holy Spirit given in understanding.

Like I said before, I am grateful to the Catholic Church for being instrumental in bringing the bible together, but it is the Holy Spirit of God which teaches us.

If you are satisfied with your beliefs why even respond to anything in the non-Catholic forum?

Unfortunately your approach as led to thousands of different churches and beliefs,which I do not consider handed down from Christ. They all stem from man-made churches and poor biblical exegesis. I read my Bible everyday and I can interpret whatever I want, but at the end of the day,the church has taken care of that long before you or I existed.

Then let’s limit God to only one church and the rest of the world…well…?

True. But also means to obey what He said and taught,not put words into his mouth,such as Hell not existing.

Do some research on what hell is, how it is used in the bible, why Jesus had to go there and who can open the doors to heaven that no man could.

Prison of departed souls (termed hell) was before Christ, but since Christ, there is no reason any longer to hold any souls captive.

Blessings, AJ

 

[Roman_Catholic_1]

He absolutely was refering to the same Gospel that the Gospel writers** were talking about **

This is not what I am saying nor is it what you said:

What “Gospel” do you think Paul is talking about here Javl? The Gospel he is talking about is the Gospel of Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John. These Gospels talk about Jesus and His plan of Salvation. They are found in THE BIBLE.

Again, Paul was not referring to the Gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John in Galatians, the verse of Scripture you quoted. The Gospels were not written when Paul wrote Galatians so he could not have made any reference to them. What Paul was referring to was the Gospel, which he indicates in 1 Cor. 15:1. I really cannot be anymore clear here.

Are you saying that Paul was completely unaware of the “Gospels” as preached by Mattew, Mark, Luke, and John?

No. He was unaware of the Gospels written by them which you stated he was referencing in Galatians. Again:
Richard Kastner:

What “Gospel” do you think Paul is talking about here Javl? The Gospel he is talking about is the Gospel of Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John.** These Gospels talk about Jesus and His plan of Salvation. They are found in THE BIBLE.**

Notice I said preached and not written .

You said they were in the Bible. To be in the Bible they must have been written.

and what is the difference between the Gospel in general and the Gospels specifically

The Gospel = 1 Cor. 15. The Gospels = Matthew, Mark, Luke and John. There is a difference when speaking of Paul, which is who you were quoting. Paul could not have been aware of the Gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John which is what you said he was. Remember, you said they were in the Bible, clearly you did not think they were just “preached” or why would you say they were in the Bible?:

What “Gospel” do you think Paul is talking about here Javl? The Gospel he is talking about is the Gospel of Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John. **These Gospels talk about **Jesus and His plan of Salvation. **They are found in THE BIBLE. **

You and Paul are not talking on the same wave length.

God bless you