Sola Scriptura Revisited

[Texasgringo70]

Quote:
If this were true, there would not be so much disunity in the Body.

Diversity? Where did Jesus,Apostles or the early church promote or advocate diversity? Sounds like a mere cop out to defend the theological madness of Protestanism

Which begs the question: If there is a ‘great’ deal of unity,then why go off and form entire different churches? Lots of unity,but divided by the scores? I do not see where your logic lies.

Oh really? And how many of those 99% of Protestant denominations profess the Nicene Creed every Sunday? And again,then why be dividied into thousands upon thousands of different churches?

And I really do not know what “unity” you are talking about.

I am sorry if I said something offensive to you. It was not my intention, but it looks like I struck a nerve. I am new to the nuances of the Catholic Church, so I guess I don’t really know what theological madness I need to defend here. Sorry. By diversity I mean the style in which we worship, not so much theology. To put it in Catholic terms you can go to mass at a traditional church, a charismatic church, or even attend a Latin mass and still be attending a Catholic mass. Those are very diverse styles of worship, but still unified under the Catholic Church (I think).

As far as unity is concerned I would say that most of the lines that separated many of the protestant denominations began to be blurred within the last 100 years thanks in part to the works of many of the interdenominational missions organizations. They found it necessary to focus on our similarities for the benefit of pooling resources to aid in spreading the gospel. As another good example of the unity that now exists, I attend a Baptist church right now (I don’t call myself a Baptist, I just go there) and a couple years ago they began a fund raising campaign to pay off the debt they had remaining from their last building project. The first collection of that campaign was not used to pay off their debt, but was given as a tithe to the Methodist church a few blocks away. The Methodist church had just begun its building project and the Baptist church’s gift made a huge impact. In fact at the time I was attending both churches off and on because I hadn’t decided which to attend yet and I was able to see the event from both church’s perspective and it was truly amazing for both churches. If that doesn’t explain what I mean by unity I don’t think I can help you.

No, the churches do not recite the creed every week. Reciting creeds is more typical of the Catholic Church (not a jab, just an observation). Most protestant churches shy away from ritual, so they are not real big on doing anything every week except collecting the offering. What I do is read their doctrinal statements. Many of them will have a pamphlet in the foyer you can just pick up if you want to know what their core beliefs are. Now days you can usually find it on their internet site, and yes all the points covered in the creed are can usually be found there.

So, why have so many denominations you asked? I honestly don’t know. The only thing clear to me is that I apparently would not be welcome in the Catholic Church. Perhaps God is calling us all back into unity. I would hope so, but it looks like the wall that separates protestants from Catholics is much higher than the one that separates many of the protestant denominations. If I had to guess I would say that pride is probably the number one thing that continues to keep us apart. Nobody likes to admit they were wrong on either side even if they only admit they were wrong about how important our differences are.

As a side bar I am curious about how you came up with the 40,000 denominations figure you stated earlier. I would really like to see your source for that. I have never seen such a large number used, but it is a big world I suppose. I might have to read a lot more doctrinal statements.

I hope I did justice to your comments without any further offense. I really do not intend to stir the pot. I just wanted to accurately represent the beliefs of protestants, or at least my understanding of those beliefs.

 

[Beth_Martin]

I am taking a break…part of the problem is language…a human being deemed ‘infallible’.

Secondly, Beth, just in the reference you made to my pastor and not witnessing a single homily that includes the perspective of the Old Testament is the very issue that causes me to pursue any debate. He is already condemned. And this is where I have to bite my tongue.

I know not your pastor and if you are referring to the Pope; I do not know him either nor do you.

So our culture is communal, not individualistic. Have you ever been to a Catholic Mass?

A few times; like about 5-6 in the past 30 years. I agree it is communal just as Israel was and you see no problem with that knowing the result?

Rome wasn’t built overnight. The primary church exists in our belief in the Creed, our faith in doctrines that profess: I believe in One God, and Jesus Christ His only Son, True God and True Man Who was conceived by the Holy Spirit, born of the Virgin Mary, suffered, died and was buried and rose from the dead. We believe in the apostolic Catholic church, the communion of saints, and the forgiveness of sin, and the resurrection of the dead. Now what is wrong with that and making it into a creed that we can all profess together?? Infallibility through the Holy Spirit, not man, was what insured our faith was properly formed through the Apostles and their successors.

At the expense of doctrine? The Catholic church use to be intolerant to those outside of her and now she is embracing everyone and teaching that even those, like Muslims, can enter heaven because they worship the “God of Abraham”. You see we can all get together as long as we toss out the doctrine of salvation. I hope you see the point as to why Scripture is the supreme authority concerning all matters of faith and on matters of practicing of traditions and especially concerning Salvation John 3:16. Some traditions and creeeds affirm what the Scripture already teaches and is therefore acceptable, but many are an authority to itself and contradict Scripture and is unacceptable in the sight of God and of Christians.

We have canon law, we have morality and teachings through our universal catechism, the communion of saints. We have a great history of helping the poor, and educating and healing the common people. Ours includes another great history of scholars, artists, musicians. I found out recently that much of our Sunday collection goes into the basket to serve and help non-Catholics in our area including some other denominations. We are ghetto Catholics no more.

All is derived from the Word Made Flesh…and what has come to us through faith in Christ as a church is the great benefit as well as having a culture of people.

We cannot limit the Word of God. I am sure that in person you are a great and spiritual person, alive with faith. Please note you will find many Catholics like yourself who are just as committed to the Word of God as you are.

I changed my last comment to the above; I will just leave you alone in this subscription as it is worm out; no Catholic here can see Sola Scriptura and I do not think anyone really cares about the topic nor to find out what it means and doesn’t mean so it is a pointless subscription and time to move on so nice talking with you; you have been very cordial in my opinion.

May God bless you in your religious and spiritual life.
Beth

 

[Beth_Martin]

i am not denying the providence of God in the canon process. IMO God led his people by the Spirit in the practical road to canonization. I’m not denying this important divine guidance the Church received. Learning about the history of how our primary source documents came to be collected in the NT IMO should be foundational to anyone who considers those writings to be the final authority. If you affirm the Bible you should consider its formation within the life of the Church.

That’s good since God determined the Word before the foundation of the world and used people to give us the Bible that contains His revelation to mankind. the problem is man thinks in his own wisdom that he can add to revelation and claim it is from God. Israel did it if you need an example.

 

[Beth_Martin]

**I need to take a break and you all could use one from me as well so I wish all of you the best and perhaps we’ll debate something different in a different subscription.

May God bles each of you in seeking the truth of the Gospel of God.

Sincerely and respectfully,
Beth**

Long live Sola Scriptura!!

 

[Nicea325]

I am sorry if I said something offensive to you. It was not my intention, but it looks like I struck a nerve. I am new to the nuances of the Catholic Church, so I guess I don’t really know what theological madness I need to defend here. Sorry. By diversity I mean the style in which we worship, not so much theology. To put it in Catholic terms you can go to mass at a traditional church, a charismatic church, or even attend a Latin mass and still be attending a Catholic mass. Those are very diverse styles of worship, but still unified under the Catholic Church (I think).

As far as unity is concerned I would say that most of the lines that separated many of the protestant denominations began to be blurred within the last 100 years thanks in part to the works of many of the interdenominational missions organizations. They found it necessary to focus on our similarities for the benefit of pooling resources to aid in spreading the gospel. As another good example of the unity that now exists, I attend a Baptist church right now (I don’t call myself a Baptist, I just go there) and a couple years ago they began a fund raising campaign to pay off the debt they had remaining from their last building project. The first collection of that campaign was not used to pay off their debt, but was given as a tithe to the Methodist church a few blocks away. The Methodist church had just begun its building project and the Baptist church’s gift made a huge impact. In fact at the time I was attending both churches off and on because I hadn’t decided which to attend yet and I was able to see the event from both church’s perspective and it was truly amazing for both churches. If that doesn’t explain what I mean by unity I don’t think I can help you.

No, the churches do not recite the creed every week. Reciting creeds is more typical of the Catholic Church (not a jab, just an observation). Most protestant churches shy away from ritual, so they are not real big on doing anything every week except collecting the offering. What I do is read their doctrinal statements. Many of them will have a pamphlet in the foyer you can just pick up if you want to know what their core beliefs are. Now days you can usually find it on their internet site, and yes all the points covered in the creed are can usually be found there.

So, why have so many denominations you asked? I honestly don’t know. The only thing clear to me is that I apparently would not be welcome in the Catholic Church. Perhaps God is calling us all back into unity. I would hope so, but it looks like the wall that separates protestants from Catholics is much higher than the one that separates many of the protestant denominations. If I had to guess I would say that pride is probably the number one thing that continues to keep us apart. Nobody likes to admit they were wrong on either side even if they only admit they were wrong about how important our differences are.

As a side bar I am curious about how you came up with the 40,000 denominations figure you stated earlier. I would really like to see your source for that. I have never seen such a large number used, but it is a big world I suppose. I might have to read a lot more doctrinal statements.

I hope I did justice to your comments without any further offense. I really do not intend to stir the pot. I just wanted to accurately represent the beliefs of protestants, or at least my understanding of those beliefs.

Excuse me? Offend me? Is that how you read it? None at all. As for the 40,000 different denominations? It is from a Protestant Publication which I will provide for you.

Yes pride is one of the major causes of the many divisions.

 

[Nicea325]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nicea325

Apparently you do not read my reply to your other posts where I asked you to provide historical proof were St.Ignatius taught and defended Sola Scripture. All you did was throw a sucker punch.

If you cared to read St. Ignatius; you would see doctrinal error mixed with truth. For example he made the claim that after the asention of Christ the first thing the Apostles did was choose a replacement for Judas Iscariot. Is that accurate? What does the Scripture or better yet, Peter say? God choose. He also mentions Paul commanding Timothy to appoint other overseers and deacons, which is true because it is written in Scripture in a letter passed around before he made the statement. He also said that Paul told Timothy to ordain overseers. Is this what is taught in Scripture? Nope; God ordains and men appoint following rules that God ordained - see the difference?. Appoint and ordain have two different uses and meanings. If you just read what these early fathers said and compare it to what is written you will see no deviations, but you must first read your Scripture and then compare it. Then count how many times Jesus said “it is written” or “so that Scripture would be fulfilled”. How many times did Paul and Peter use similar phrases?

Excuse me? If I CARED to read St.Ignatius? No offense,if had not read his works,then I would not have questioned your fallacy that the first 3 generations of church fathers believed and taught Sola Scriptura. So with that being said yet you still failed miserably to support your argument. Hence, you cannot provide any such conclusive evidence because not ONE church father from the first 3 generations taught or believe the novelty called Sola Scriptura.

I get back to my original statement. How could you be convinced to accept a true, correct and adequate answer that he or she is unwilling to accept much less even consider?

Nice divergence here,but to bad it did not back up your own words of the first 3 generation of church fathers who taught and believed Sola Scriptura.

Quote:
Scoffing? Show me the command from Jesus for any mere mortal to start their own church based on his/her private interpretation of scripture? Show me where Jesus gave anyone the authority to start their own church,so I too can start my own church. I did not know Jesus was into competition,since He alone already founded ONE church 2,000 years ago.

Scoffing even more? You must find joy in it is all I can conclude. At least you tell the truth that Jesus is building His church and not the Catholic church as Scripture teaches although I believe that was a Freudian slip on your part.

You must be a great dancer with all those great moves you display? No scriptural evidence for Jesus giving any mere mortal to start their own church? But I am scoffing-eh? Pride can be a thick pill to swallow at times.uch:

 

[Texasgringo70]

Excuse me? Offend me? Is that how you read it? None at all. As for the 40,000 different denominations? It is from a Protestant Publication which I will provide for you.

Yes pride is one of the major causes of the many divisions.

I guess I misunderstood the tone of your response. It is hard to gauge someones feelings based on the written words alone. I am glad I got that one wrong.

Yes, please, get me that reference. I know there are a large number of independent churches with no denominational affiliation, but I never would have imagined that the number of denominations would be that high. My thought is that they might have used a watered down definition of denomination that captures some of the independent churches and calls them a denomination in and of themselves or some of the smaller fringe groups. I’ll know that better once I read the article. Then again it is a large world and it could be that high. There have been a lot of splinters throughout history unfortunately. It would be nice if some of these could patch up their relationships and merge to reduce the overall number.

 

[guanophore]

Actually, you have have it backwards because you are refusing to see where the authority resonates from.

How do you figure that? I am not the one siding with the enemies of Jesus!

How does the authority of Jesus erase what the HS has written: That God gave this authority to men. You are still left with a need to explain away this passage. Did the HS make a mistake on that word?

The Apostles or you or I left to ourselves are powerless against being reconciled to God.

This is irrelevant to the fact that God gave the power to forgive sins to men.

It is the Power of the gospel of God given from heaven that enables one to be reconciled to God through the work of the Holy Trinity.

No arguement here.

As far as authority; the Word was made flesh and dwelt among men and the Word was given to men through divine revelation, which is the Gospel of God. Therefore, amyone the Father has chosen to give the “great news” through divine revelation via a preacher, a teacher, the Bible or through creation and what is written on the heart is saved if one choses to accept that message?

I do agree with this. The part where we probably disagree is that you seem to think whoever perceives himself as a chosen person is such a one, whereas, the way Jesus set things up, authority is passed from person to person.

So if you gave your neighbor the true unadulterated gospel of God, and he/she accepts you have the power to forgive because you are doing the will of the Father , which is why heaven already has forgiven and vice versa.

No, preaching the gospel does not give me the power to forgive sins.

So where does the power and the authority lie? With God, not with man.

This is why the authority on earth to forgive sins needed to be given to men by Jesus. That is why He authorized the Apostles, saying “whose sins you forgive are forgiven, whose sins you retain are retained.”

As for the Apostles they were men with extraordinary authority to heal and to raise the dead as signs and wonders given by God on a temporary basis to establish the church.

You can produce no evidence that the power and authority given them is “temporary”. This is another man made invention that supports rebellion against the authority set up by Christ.

This is why the Pope and the magersterium and the priesthood are are fallacious because they do not have an Apostolic authority and are proven trhough history to be very fallible.

On what basis do you claim that they do not have Apostolic Authority? On your invention that the authority given by Christ is “temporary”?

Authority and fallibility are not mutually exclusive. Humans are fallible. God gave humans authority.

Give me a Pope who can raise the dead and perform other signs and wonders and I might believe in your religion.

I doubt that. More likely you would say he was the Beast, or one of the other figures in the last times that amounts to an antichrist.

In addition to siding with the enemies of Christ, you are demanding signs and wonders, like the doubters. Instead, Jesus said “blessed is the one who has not seen, and yet believes”

But to preach that anything outside of what God has revealed to man through the Bible is adding to the written word of God;

The Catholic chuch added the entire NT to the Scriptures. It was added out of Sacred Tradition. This idea you have that all revelation of God is confinced to the Bible cannot even be found in the Bible!

Don’t you think such an important notion ought to be found somewhere in it’s pages?

for all of your “traditions” are written down just as all the oral traditions the Apostles spoke of are written down to the extent God wanted them revealed.

This is also a modern American Evangelical fantasy. This cannot be found in Scripture either.

We know the Apostles had been given the ability to raise the dead, heal the sick and other signs and wonders, but no Pope has.

This demonstrates how little you know about the Popes!

I’m not picking on the Pope, it can be anyone who makes or has made the same claims as coming from some made up Apostolic succession which can’t even be found in Scripture.

My dea Beth, I am glad you are here at CAF. Perhaps you will learn a little about your own family history. The Bible was created by the Apostolic Succession four centuries after Christ.

Scripture was never intended to be a complete compendium of the faith.

Any argument as to who is to interpret Scripture infallibly is ad nauseum argument because you will get to who is the interpreter of the infallible interpreter and who is the verifier of that interpreter etc etc.

I am sorry this is what happens to you Beth. This does not happen to Catholics because we trust Jesus at His word. He promised that the Church would be led into all Truth, and we believe Him. He gave the Keys to the Kingdom to Peter, and He gave the Apostles the authority to bind and loose, and to forgive sins. And we believe Him.

 

[guanophore]

That is where the power of the HS resides and leads and guides us to the truth of the Gospel of God.

Paul taught that the HS does not lead people in an opposite direction from the Apostolic Teaching. If a person is so led, they are the victim of “a different gospel” than what was delivered once for all to the Church.

You should read Colossians chapter 3 today and see how he fought this very issues.

I gotta tell ya, it takes a healthy hubris for you to come to CAF and tell me what you think I should do for my spiritual development. :ehh:

The most important isuue is “what is the Gospel of God”? Do you know it ? Do you accept it? Is the gospel the greatest thing you have ever heard? If you do not know or you are indifferent; you have a serious spiritual issue which nedds mending.

Is that why you are here at CAF, Beth? Did you come here to try to mend our broken spirituality?

 

[guanophore]

[SIGN][/SIGN]

Temporary Basis. I will not leave you orphans. I am with you until the end of age!! Temporary Basis

Would love to see that scripure also. Temporary basis. I sure never saw it

Hear! Hear! I want what rinnie wants!

 

[guanophore]

I know of no priest in Scripture that resambles the NT,

Idon’t either. I think it is much more accurate to say that the NT resembles the priesthood. The NT was formed by those priests who are standing in the Apostolic Succession. It reflects what the Church believes. It is no the Source of the faith. Jesus is the Source, and the faith was whole and entire before one word of the NT was ever written.

much less can forgive a sin, only the OT and that is a poor shadow of that at best in my opinion.

I am not sure why you would have such a low opinion of the Revelation so of God. Catholics realize that what is in the OT is given for our instruction. In it we see the pattern of what is fulfilled in the New.

Even that Levitical priesthood understood that God alone can forfive sins.

Yet it was their duty to listen to confessions, and offer sacrifices. This is the duty of every priest.

Which is why Scripture must be the test by which any man-made teaching is approved or disapproved.

I am sorry, but I have little interest in any man made teaching at all. Why would someone want to approve a man made teaching like Sola Scriptura, when it contradicts the Bible?

Apparently you are able to see such a priesthood, but I see but one as explained in the book of Hebrews that i touched upon above…

Yes, I am able to see it because I have received the faith from the Apostles.

Hebrews is a very good explanation of the NT priesthood.

I have a vague understanding of your priest “being the person of Christ”, but that just adds further distance between man-made teachings and revelation from God written in the Holy bible in my opinion

Perhaps you are saying that a human acting in the person of Christ puts distance between man and God? Maybe you think the Apostles, acting in the person of Christ put distance between people and God?

If you are saying that the priesthood puts distance between the teachings of man and the revelation of God, I think we agree. It is the priesthood that has been able to preserve the Sacred Tradition upon which the Bible is based, and therefore, clarify what is of God, and what is of man (like sola scriptura).

and as you tried to twist the book of Acts above. Christ needs no one to act on behalf of Himself;

I think you lost me here. What about the book of Acts? Do you honestly not see people acting on His behalf in the book of Acts?

What do you think the Apostle meant when He said “we are ambassadors of Christ”? Don’t you realize that an ambassador acts on behalf of a ruler?

He said "it is finished"; now He just decides to use messengers to offer the free gift of Salvation through a heart of repentance.

If he is using messengers, are they not acting on His behalf? It seems like you are contradicting yourself.

Are you dead serious that no Catholic teachngs contradict Scripture? Are you just pulling our legs?

Dead serious. The only think that is contradictory are your perceptions. The NT was written by, for, and about Catholics. That is why there is nothing in it that contradicts the teaching of the Church. All the books that contained anything inconsistent with Sacred Tradition were not included in the canon.

 

[guanophore]

Except there were no priests as you would define a priest;

Really? How do you think I would define “priest”? I enjoy the dialogue, but you sure do make a lot of sweeping assumptions about me!

the only priesthood that remained after the death of Christ is His high Priesthood with ALL Christians belonging to the royal priesthood of believers.

This is what you have been given to believe by those who have separated themselves from the Authority appointed by Christ. They believed they had to jettison what Jesus set up, because the men in positions of authority were corrupted by sin.

The OT is a shadow of what was to come. In it, we see that there is a High Priest, a minsterial priesthood, and the priesthood of the nation. This is fulfilled in the NT, where we see the priesthood of Jesus manifested in the ministers, and in the Body.

What kind of sacrifice(s), which is always a primary function of a priestly body by definition, in the NT?

It is Jesus, the once for all sacrifice for our sins.

**

Romans 12 tells us what our function as “priest” are.

Therefore I urge you, brethren, by the mercies of God, to present your bodies a living and holy sacrifice, acceptable to God, {which is} your spiritual service of worship. ------- Romans 12:1

I am glad that you are taking your calling to sacrifice as a member of God’s priestly people seriously.

Beth_Martin:
------ But this is what happens when one deviates from the Scripture and its authority born of God and not the traditions of men.
**

No, Beth, this is what happens when people follow a tradition started by men, and embrace heresies like Sola Scriptura.

Scripture is not able to wield authority, because the exercise of authority requires a person. That is why Jesus gave His authority to men, and did not write books.

If there were true, then the Popes and all those before the current one would have been able to raise the dead, heal all the sick and would have forgiven all Catholics and maybe in his kindness pardon a few Protestants.

Indeed, they were certainly able.

 I never knew a man/woman that could forgive sins except the God-man, who was perfect;

Clearly you have had very limited experiences.

Perhaps someday you will be able to have a personal encounter with one who stands under the Apostolic Succession.

so yes you must be perfect as He is perfect to allow salvation.

I am sorry, but I cannot make any sense out of this at all. It is not up to me to “allow salvation”. God’s salvation, which He has made available to all, is not dependent upon human perfection. On the contrary, He has chosen what is foolish to shame the wise, what is weak to show His strength.

What is salvation? Saved from what? Sins and its condemnation or penalty. The forgiveness of sins is salvation, they are synonymous.

I am glad we are in agreement about SOMETHING!

If you do not understand that Salvation is the forgiveness of all your sins by the blood of Jesus Christ, then you have some other Gospel than the one God gave to man and that is a deadly gospel to ones soul.

It is by His blood that the priest is able to forgive the sins of people in His name.

Again you are incorrect and have it backwards, it is by the power and authority of Christ that anyone’s sins are forgiven.

I don’t believe I claimed otherwise.

 No man can forgive a sin against God; only God can do that.

You are siding with the enemies of Christ (again).

What keeps you from siding with the disciples, who rejoiced that this power was given to men?

God gave men/women the message from the heavenlies that salvation has come to all men whosoever will accept the gift of God, which is His Son, the Lord Jesus Christ. Forgiveness of sins based on the perfect sacrafice of the Son from which the Father sent and the Son being filled with the Holy Spirit fulfilled all righteousness so that as sinners who cannot by their own merit reconcile themselves to God; it is a gift.

It is very Catholic of you to say this.

If you are a Christian...

How might you be able to tell if this were the case?

 

[KathleenGee]

Gads…am back…but I am not sure I want to engage with Beth…way too much projection and misunderstandings…don’t know if she realizes how little she truly knows…and if she is even open to learning from us.

 

[guanophore]

Tell me the “Good News” Mr. or Ms. Guanaphore; I need to know if you have the Gospel of God as Paul states in Romans 1.

Will that help you to determine if I am “christian” according to your standards?

It is off topic in this thread.

What is relevant is that the gospel was preached prior to the NT being written. That gospel (Sacred Tradition) did not cease to be valid because some parts of it were written down.

“Deposit of faith”? What is this the Vatican bank?

It is the Teaching of the Apostles that was committed once for all the Church. The Sacred Tradtiion and the Sacred Scripture together make up this Divine Deposit of His Revelation. It is preserved by the HS infallible.

May I see a written list of infallible Roman Catholic papal or consiliar statements?

I am sure you can. They are all on the Vatican website. I am not sure a lifetime is enough to study them all.

Then, we can add them to the Bible;

No, Beth. The Catholic Church closed the canon in 382. Nothing can be added.

after all why seperate the two since they are supposedly on equal footing.

Catholics have never separated the two fo them. We were given them on equal footing by the Apostles, and they have been preserved exactly that way, as we were commmanded by them.

The Reformers separated themselves from the Apostolic Traditions about 500 years ago.

I want an authoritative list of what these messages are and where they are compiled and listed for the ignorant to view and understand;

Now, now, Beth, don’t take names to yourself!

The best place to start if the Catechism. In it are summarized the Teachings of the Apostles, and they are cross referenced with Scripture and the writings of the Fathers.

something that God in His wisdom did through the work of the Holy Spirit using men as the tool to produce such a single souce of true revelation.

Indeed, this is true of Sacred Scripture, and Sacred Tradition. Both are two strands of one Revelation.

 

[KathleenGee]

Yes, I would recommend her to the catechism…if she would.

 

[guanophore]

After reading this post Mr./Ms. Guanaphore; please define what is the church of Jesus according to Scripture and then according to your church. Thanks.

If you can show me how this is related to the topic, I will consider it.

I suggest first getting the One true Teacher or Father, then ask Him for guidance and wisdom to learn about Him and Christian practice (obedience) as is written in His word.

You are new here, Beth, so you may not have taken the time to read the forum rules. CAF is not provided for you as a venue to condescendlingly provide us with spiritual guidance.

***But if any of you lacks wisdom, let him ask of God, who gives to all generously and without reproach, and it will be given to him. -----  James 1:5***

I’m sorry if you find this to be offensive,

We do not find the Word of God offensive. Just your attitude.

but there are plenty of great teachers of Scripture that God can lead you to through prayer or supplications. Augustine, Anselm, Aquinas, Jerome, Calvin, Luther, and Edwards are recognized heavyweights of church history.

Recognized by whom?

Regardless you must first have the Holy Spirit which means knowing and accepting the Gospel of God in only one sense; its purest.  Without the Holy Spirit no one will be lead or guided to the truth as stated in Scripture.

Have you determined that none of us have the HS? Is that why you are here? Are we in need of evangelism?

That was the same claim of the Scribes and Pharisees,

How is that?

Do you think that they believed they were indwelt by the HS?

Viva Sola Scriptura for this is where one will find the Way!!

One will certainly find the way with SS. One will find oneself progressively moving further and further from the Apostolic message.

It is not a way that the Apostles would encourage.

 

[KathleenGee]

Actually I changed my mind…this lady would not go near a catechism…instead, she would be one I would make friends with. Invite her to my home, get to know her…too many issues…and attitude.

 

[guanophore]

As opposed to the infallible and contradictive teachings of various councils and Popes?? !

You sure seem to have a lot of hostility and condescension toward that about which you know very little.

By definition, an infallible teaching cannot contradict what the HS has already revealed through Sacred Tradition and Sacred Scripture.

Do you have any idea how many “works or letters or writings” that had to be sifted? It was a multitude in the hundreds if not thousands; therefore the only conclusion one can arrive at is the true conclusion which is the hand of God!!

At least we are in agreement on this point.

If you believe the authority of the Bible is inadequate; why not just say the what God said is inadequate and cut to the chase?

No, the 'bible is not inadequate. However, it’s purpose was not to wield authority. This is an activity that can only be accomplished by a person. The exercise of authority requires characteristics that Scripture does not have. Forcing the Holy Writings into a role they were never meant to take is one of the most foundational errors of the Reformation.

May the Gospel of God penetrate your heart; my prayer to God the Father.

Will you be able to tell that this has happened if we come to believe as you do?

There is always a sucession of both the true and the false, but the question is who speaks for God? Well to answer that we must go to the Scripture and see who tells the Gospel of God and who teaches another gospel; just as Paul instructed Timothy and Titus.

What does scripture tell us to do if there is a disagreement among believers? I think if you are honest with yourself, you will realize that scripture indicates another method of solving this problem.

But a succession in the way you ascribe; that is fallacy and arragant to begin with.

It is important for you to beleive this, so that you can justify your rebellion against it. If you admitted that what Jesus set up in the way of authority for His Church was still valid today, then you would be obligated to submit.

For if your type of “successors” followed the Scripture and the discipline of those as overseers and deacons as the pastoral letters indicate, then you would not have the same blemished history that continues because the commands of those letters is ignored.

You are suffering a logical fallacy here, Beth. You are purporting that what God has created can be thwarted by the sinful actions of men. This is not the case. What God has created, man cannot destroy. We can only destroy our plan for ourselves through our disobedience.

People’s personal sin does not nullify the authority of God. We can see this clearly in the case of Peter, who, though He denied Christ, was appointed by Him to feed and care for the flock.

We can go back to Paul and his dealings with those who were in authority and the problems he had and examples of how he dealt with them.

I think this is truek, and we can also look at the authority Paul exercised as an Apostle, and how he passed this authority on to the bishops.

 

[KathleenGee]

How many times we have seen as Catholics the power of Jesus Christ working through broken humanity!

The Lord does indeed work through broken vessels…we must die to ourselves for the Lord to begin to live through us just as the wheat must fall to the ground to die before giving new life.

Not all truth is solely in Scriptures…there is the truth of Christianity lived out. And that is our history as believers, for 2000 years!

 

[guanophore]

Most Catholics do know how they relate to Scripture in relation to their own tradition.

This is a sad fact. We have a plethora of poorly catechized Catholics. That is one reason CAF exists.

The Priest as you know it doesn’t exist in Scripture.

On the contrary, we can clearly see the minsterial priesthood in the Scripture. I think it is YOUR idea of the priesthood that you can’t find. Since it is a figment of your imagination, it is not surprising you cannot find it in the NT.

 I have a feeling you believe you can do certain acts and God owes you saving faith based on your own meritorious acts of religion.

Really? Do you know where the “feeling” came from? It sounds like anti-Catholic propoganda to me.

 God owes you nothing and you cannot earn His favor.

Although it is true that God does not “owe” us anything, we can earn His favor in many ways.

i hear of this charity in the "Sacraments" and it is just the opposite.  By performing and preparig for a Sacrament, like confirmation for example; you expect to receive something "saving" (i.e. some saving grace") in return.

Do you think it is wrong to be properly disposed to receive a gift? Do you think it would be better to show up and ask for a gift and expect not to get it?

Jesus taught that “even more will God give the HS to those that ask”. And, according to the wisdom of St. James you quoted above, we are to ask with expectant faith. One that does not expect anything does not need to think he will receive anything.

Charity is no longer charity it is now become wages of what you have earned.

You lost me here. How is the gift any less a gift because I am excited to receive it?

This is what the Pharasees and the Jewish leaders completely missed; that it is by His grace; that is it, nothing more.

Does that mean you believe that you can do nothing to be receptive to God’s grace?

 Your justification is by His grace, your sanctification is by His grace,  and your final redemption into your final glorification is all of HIs grace -  that is the "Good News"  God has come to seek the lost sinner and by faith and repentance we come and we receive by His doing and His doing alone.

It is very Catholic of you to say this!

It seems like you have been given to believe a lot of misconceptions about Catholicism.