Sola Scriptura Silence

[Ferde_Rombola]

You say “we are NOT infallible”, you surely did not include your pope in that did you.?

I mean you ane me, Ralph. The Pope is infallible only in matters of faith and morals and only when speaking ex cathedra. Do you mean you didn’t know that?

 

[Ferde_Rombola]

Who was at the cross. Ralph

I assume that’s a question even though you ended the sentence with a period.

I’m not going to answer your question, Ralph. It’s absurd.

 

[ralphy]

I mean you ane me, Ralph. The Pope is infallible only in matters of faith and morals and only when speaking ex cathedra. Do you mean you didn’t know that?

How did he aquire that infallible status, was it on his own accord, or did all the other people below his status agree with him. By the way, why do you call him Holy, only god is Holy. Ralph

 

[ralphy]

I assume that’s a question even though you ended the sentence with a period.

I’m not going to answer your question, Ralph. It’s absurd.

Yes it was a question. Was Peter at the cross? Ralph

 

[ralphy]

:

Did you understand even one word of what Steve wrote to you? The Catholics on this board are trying to teach you about the Christian faith and the Gospel message and all you can do is respond with bumper sticker slogans and revival tent cheers. Please stop pretending you know something, Ralph. Make an effort to understand what’s being said instead of firing off an unthinking, nonsensical comebacker.

Is this statement correct?.“No one in the flesh is perfect”. Ralph

 

[Ferde_Rombola]

How did he aquire that infallible status, was it on his own accord, or did all the other people below his status agree with him.

WHATEVER YOU BIND ON EARTH SHALL BE BOUND IN HAVEN; WHATEVER YOU LOOSE ON EARTH SHALL BE LOOSED IN HEAVEN."

What will it take for you to get that, Ralph? You’ve only been told half a dozen times in the last week alone. Wake up!

By the way, why do you call him Holy, only god is Holy. Ralph

“Be holy as your Father in heaven is holy!” That one was covered for you today. Do you read things here or just respond to them on the fly?

 

[Ferde_Rombola]

Yes it was a question. Was Peter at the cross? Ralph

Now you’re asking a different question. How does it relate to what I said? On the night Jesus was betrayed, only Peter had the guts and the love to follow Him into a place where he, too, was in fear of losing his life. Which was why he denied Him.

You’ve done what all protestants to when they’re confronted by something they can’t answer; you changed the subject. And you’ll do it again.

 

[Ferde_Rombola]

:Is this statement correct?.“No one in the flesh is perfect”. Ralph

The statement is irrelevant to the subject. It’s meaningless. Like the rest of your bumper-sticker slogans.

 

[ralphy]

WHATEVER YOU BIND ON EARTH SHALL BE BOUND IN HAVEN; WHATEVER YOU LOOSE ON EARTH SHALL BE LOOSED IN HEAVEN."

What will it take for you to get that, Ralph? You’ve only been told half a dozen times in the last week alone. Wake up!

“Be holy as your Father in heaven is holy!” That one was covered for you today. Do you read things here or just respond to them on the fly?

Those people who Jesus spoke to are all gone now, no one took their place. I am beginning to see that the Roman catholic church is totally taken up by tradition and it pretty well shows me that I am waisting my time to direct you to the scripture. You are following the “gospel” of the Roman catholic church and mostly ignoring the word of God. I will pray for you. Ralph

 

[ralphy]

Now you’re asking a different question. How does it relate to what I said? On the night Jesus was betrayed, only Peter had the guts and the love to follow Him into a place where he, too, was in fear of losing his life. Which was why he denied Him.

You’ve done what all protestants to when they’re confronted by something they can’t answer; you changed the subject. And you’ll do it again.

I see a “lack” of guts and love when Peter was afraid and denied Him. Peter was not at the cross. Ralph

 

[Randy_Carson]

I don’t believe that infants sin, however they were born in sin. Can mentally deficient people sin, I don’t think so, however ,they were born in sin. Did Jesus sin, no He did not sin. Yes, all have sinned and come short of the glory of God. Christ is God incarnate and could not sin. I somehow think you know that. Ralph

Of course.

However, you have answered my question. Yes, they were born in sin (except Jesus and Mary, of course), but not ALL have sinned through personal acts of disobedience to God.

Sin and sins are two different things. Somehow I think you know that.

 

[SteveGC]

Did you understand even one word of what Steve wrote to you? The Catholics on this board are trying to teach you about the Christian faith and the Gospel message and all you can do is respond with bumper sticker slogans and revival tent cheers. Please stop pretending you know something, Ralph. Make an effort to understand what’s being said instead of firing off an unthinking, nonsensical comebacker.

Thanks, Ferde. I’m quite used to it by now, with ralph and others like him.

Ralph’s not here to learn.

Ralph’s here to inject.

Apparently to inject Jesus into Jesus’ Church, as if He hasn’t been here all along.

Sometimes I can’t believe I take time out of my day to address him, with rather long posts too. Some of them I spend a tremendous amount of time on, as I’ve seen you do with others here as well. It’s like a punch in the gut when he does not bother to respond, or worse, when he does, the response is (as you say) a bumper sticker slogan regurgitating either Sunday School level theologies every Christian agrees with, or a paper thin false doctrine from the chaotic bowels of sola scriptura. Either way, he demonstrates he possesses no real desire to absorb anything, and he lacks the capacity to have sincere dialogue. I know guys like CFJames, who got this thread started for ralph, spends an extraordinary amount of time putting together posts to help ralph learn the facts about The Church…much longer posts than mine…just an amazing effort to foster understanding - and when the reply is a curt phrase that address 1% or less of those posts, it must be overwhelmingly frustrating.

He’s looking for buzz words or buzz phrases from us…he then ignores everything except those, and pastes in his anti-Catholic reply. This is “injection” at it’s finest.

God Bless

 

[josie_L]

Exactly. Why should it?

Yes, the reformers were right. Sola Scriptura, and all of the solas, came about because of the reformers belief that the visible Church, at that time, was corrupt, and those who followed them believed that it remained corrupt. I agree with them.

The reformers disagreed on many key doctrinal issues, so who was right - Luther, Calvin, Zwingli, Knox - take your pick? If the Reformation was truly the work of the Holy Spirit then without any further complications the reformers should have come to the exact interpretation of Scriptures, why is it that they didn’t?

Historically and theologically, sola scriptura failed from its very inception, witness the disagreements between the reformers and the growth of protestant denominations since and after that “glorious” event.

The reformers were aware that the words sola scriptura weren’t in the Scripture, but also, they were keenly aware that the scriptures were the only true repository of God’s revelation to man, and that they were the means God had ordained to lead sinners into the truth and to guide Christians in their daily lives. Many scripture passages attest to that. Christ Himself, held all of the Jews to the teachings of Moses and the prophets—another name for the OT.

Pronouncing the CC has corrupted was the only way that the reformers could justify their break from the one true Church of Christ, sola scriptura by default was their sole (literally as they had rejected Tradition and the authority of the Church) source of authority.

Another argument you’ll hear is, the NT wasn’t canonized until long after the death of Christ, and the apostles. That is true, and the reformers knew that, they were CATHOLICS! They also knew that the writings of the NT were in circulation well before they were assembled as the NT.

Were most people in the 1st century literate, that is, could they read and interpret the scriptures for themselves, or did someone read and intepret it for them? How does sola scriptura work for the individual who is illiterate and as such must depend on someone else’s ability to read and interpret? I would imagine that there was a good many people who were illiterate in the 1st century.

Next you’ll hear, the Church is the pillar and foundation of the truth. But what is a pillar and foundation if not that which holds up the truth found in God’s written revelation.

And if the Church is that which upholds the Truth found in God’s written (and oral) revelation, what would happen to the Truth if the Church were not there to hold it up? It would invariably collapse.

Furthermore, you’ll hear that the apostles taught oral tradition, and 2 Thess 2:15is cited as proof of that.

Yes, it was cited that we must also follow oral tradition.

Anyone caring more about truth, than about some overused and faulty apologetic, would take the time to read the entire chapter and beyond.

In so doing, one finds that Paul states, in writing, the oral teachings he already delivered to the Thessalonians.

Which means at one point in time he had delivered to them the teachings of Christ by word of mouth before he even wrote the letter you mention.

In v1, the oral teaching concerns the Coming of our Lord, and our gathering to Him, and Paul reminds them that he had told that to them before in person v5. Regarding the holding to traditions in v15, one finds the other oral teaching already delivered in v 6, keep away from every brother who leads an unruly life. That’s a clearly written teaching throughout scripture.

Don’t get what you’re trying to prove with this?

. . . unwritten oral tradition, taught by any apostle. It can’t be done.

Ahh, now I understand, you think that Tradition has nothing to offer as everything we need to know is pretty much in the Bible.

Well, if you would like to find out what the Apostles taught (orally) read the Didache for starters: it mentions abortion, the evil of contraceptives, the eucharist, the necessity of baptism and how it is to be performed, fasting, the role of bishops and deacons, how to recognize false prophets, penance, how Christians assembled on the lord’s day. . . . etc.

(continued)

Sola scriptura is a false doctrine.

 

[Benadam]

I couldn’t read this without addressing it

Christ Himself, held all of the Jews to the teachings of Moses and the prophets—another name for the OT.

Jesus instructed ‘His’ listeners to obey the teachers who had the authority to enterpret what was written. 'Do as they say but don’t do as they do’.

Jesus was attesting to the fact that the teaching authority established in the beginning must be obeyed even if Jesus say’s they are corrupt!

Not a lesson taken to heart by the ‘so called’ reformers.

 

[Jerry_Marino]

That’s like someone demanding that unless every event in your life is documented in written form they must not have happened. And even if they were so documented, how does that, by itself, prove anything anyway?

well since we are not dealing with the things of man but that of God i’d rather stick to His Word.

so if mary was born without sin, what of her parents?

do you know that rahab is in the line of Christ geneology?

do you know that rahab was a prostitute?

and the list goes on…

God bless you

 

[ralphy]

Of course.

However, you have answered my question. Yes, they were born in sin (except Jesus and Mary, of course), but not ALL have sinned through personal acts of disobedience to God.

Sin and sins are two different things. Somehow I think you know that.

I only refered to Jesus as sinless. Ralph

 

[ralphy]

Sola scriptura is a false doctrine.

Faith comes by hearing, and hearing by the "word"of God. Ralph

 

[ralphy]

Thanks, Ferde. I’m quite used to it by now, with ralph and others like him.

Ralph’s not here to learn.

Ralph’s here to inject.

Apparently to inject Jesus into Jesus’ Church, as if He hasn’t been here all along.

Sometimes I can’t believe I take time out of my day to address him, with rather long posts too. Some of them I spend a tremendous amount of time on, as I’ve seen you do with others here as well. It’s like a punch in the gut when he does not bother to respond, or worse, when he does, the response is (as you say) a bumper sticker slogan regurgitating either Sunday School level theologies every Christian agrees with, or a paper thin false doctrine from the chaotic bowels of sola scriptura. Either way, he demonstrates he possesses no real desire to absorb anything, and he lacks the capacity to have sincere dialogue. I know guys like CFJames, who got this thread started for ralph, spends an extraordinary amount of time putting together posts to help ralph learn the facts about The Church…much longer posts than mine…just an amazing effort to foster understanding - and when the reply is a curt phrase that address 1% or less of those posts, it must be overwhelmingly frustrating.

He’s looking for buzz words or buzz phrases from us…he then ignores everything except those, and pastes in his anti-Catholic reply. This is “injection” at it’s finest.

God Bless

Scripture is always very hard on the ears for those who have no ears to “hear” the word of God. I have heard the Roman catholic teaching for a good many years and I find that scripture is more appealing and especially it is true. Ralph

 

[centurion210]

Thanks, Ferde. I’m quite used to it by now, with ralph and others like him.

Ralph’s not here to learn.

Ralph’s here to inject.

Apparently to inject Jesus into Jesus’ Church, as if He hasn’t been here all along.

Sometimes I can’t believe I take time out of my day to address him, with rather long posts too. Some of them I spend a tremendous amount of time on, as I’ve seen you do with others here as well. It’s like a punch in the gut when he does not bother to respond, or worse, when he does, the response is (as you say) a bumper sticker slogan regurgitating either Sunday School level theologies every Christian agrees with, or a paper thin false doctrine from the chaotic bowels of sola scriptura. Either way, he demonstrates he possesses no real desire to absorb anything, and he lacks the capacity to have sincere dialogue. I know guys like CFJames, who got this thread started for ralph, spends an extraordinary amount of time putting together posts to help ralph learn the facts about The Church…much longer posts than mine…just an amazing effort to foster understanding - and when the reply is a curt phrase that address 1% or less of those posts, it must be overwhelmingly frustrating.

He’s looking for buzz words or buzz phrases from us…he then ignores everything except those, and pastes in his anti-Catholic reply. This is “injection” at it’s finest.

God Bless

Steve,

At first I was a little angry with guys like Ralph in that they were wasting our time. But in reality I find I have learned a lot from you guys, and believe it or not – – from Ralph! Not that Ralph really knows much, he really doesn’t seem like a very intelligent guy, but you don’t have to be when you’re only dealing with partial truths and some of these gospel tracts they pass around.

I think many people who are prayerfully on a journey for the truth will see the thoughtful (lengthy) well organized responses by you and many others and will contrast them with the "extremely"juvenile and shallow responses, especially by Ralph. I know many people read these posts and never participate, but the message does get across. You and others like you need to know how much good you do by putting up with such nonsense and still sticking to the truth. I hope Ralph keeps posting so others can continue to see the difference between Ralph and the truth. Who knows, maybe even he might learn something. He keeps talking about “hearing”. I think the only thing he hears is the sound of his own voice. At least his NON ANSWERS are brief.

God bless, and keep it up, Steve.

 

[ralphy]

Steve,

At first I was a little angry with guys like Ralph in that they were wasting our time. But in reality I find I have learned a lot from you guys, and believe it or not – – from Ralph! Not that Ralph really knows much, he really doesn’t seem like a very intelligent guy, but you don’t have to be when you’re only dealing with partial truths and some of these gospel tracts they pass around.

I think many people who are prayerfully on a journey for the truth will see the thoughtful (lengthy) well organized responses by you and many others and will contrast them with the "extremely"juvenile and shallow responses, especially by Ralph. I know many people read these posts and never participate, but the message does get across. You and others like you need to know how much good you do by putting up with such nonsense and still sticking to the truth. I hope Ralph keeps posting so others can continue to see the difference between Ralph and the truth. Who knows, maybe even he might learn something. He keeps talking about “hearing”. I think the only thing he hears is the sound of his own voice. At least his NON ANSWERS are brief.

God bless, and keep it up, Steve.

I may not be as intellegent as some as you, however I did not expect this to be an IQ test, as I would fail badly. I pray every day for “wisdom” that God will give me the words to say (especially His word). Ralph