"Sola Scriptura"

  • Thread starter Thread starter Ad_Deum
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
po18guy said:
Perfect! I use it to show the basis of Catholic doctrine. Just know that there is more to Christ than the bible. We will be delighted to reveal any and all that we can.

Christ’s peace.
Click to expand...
😃 Thank you but your too late Jesus reveals himself to me by His Holy Spirit.

everready

(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)
 
everready said:
😃 Thanks for the warm welcome “Sola Scriptura” I prefer staying with my bible, the day I see this topic start edifying is the day I’ll discuss it until that day I see it as a means of creating strife where there was no strife .😦

everready

http://i171.photobucket.com/albums/u298/hogndog/twocents.gif
Click to expand...
The question was asked because this thread is about sola scriptura. Pasting scripture does not help, because the bible teaches the opposite of sola scriptura.
 
po18guy said:
I invite you to eat His saving Body and drink His cleansing Blood, to spend time with Him in the Flesh. To paraphrase your mother: You don’t know what you’re missing".

It’s not a competition. It’s about the truth of the Word made Flesh - Jesus Christ.
Click to expand...
I have to hand it to you chaps you sure are friendly, but I must decline your too late there as well, I take communion in remembrance of Jesus so as to leave Him to His business.😃

everready

(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)
 
everready said:
I have to hand it to you chaps you sure are friendly, but I must decline your too late there as well, I take communion in remembrance of Jesus so as to leave Him to His business.😃

everready

http://i171.photobucket.com/albums/u298/hogndog/twocents.gif
Click to expand...
To which I can only add that in the Catholic and Orthodox Churches, it is done in remembrance, just as He commanded. BUT, it actually IS Him. Body, Blood, Soul, Divinity. Christ with us until the end of the age, just as He promised. His Flesh is real food and His Blood is real drink. Amen! Alleluia!

Christ’s peace.
 
po18guy said:
To which I can only add that in the Catholic and Orthodox Churches, it is done in remembrance, just as He commanded. BUT, it actually IS Him. Body, Blood, Soul, Divinity. Christ with us until the end of the age, just as He promised. His Flesh is real food and His Blood is real drink. Amen! Alleluia!

Christ’s peace.
Click to expand...
Amen! And just as the Israelites would eat the sacrificial lamb during passover, the Lamb of God offered Himself to be our spiritual nourishment during the re-presentation of the one ultimate sacrifice!
 
po18guy said:
To which I can only add that in the Catholic and Orthodox Churches, it is done in remembrance, just as He commanded. BUT, it actually IS Him. Body, Blood, Soul, Divinity. Christ with us until the end of the age, just as He promised. His Flesh is real food and His Blood is real drink. Amen! Alleluia!

Christ’s peace.
Click to expand...
Quite right mate, the day I received him into my life He came to live within me. Lets go to our bibles and read what the scriptures say.😃

I Corinthians 10:17 For we being many are one bread, and one body: for we are all partakers of that one bread.
18 Behold Israel after the flesh: are not they which eat of the sacrifices partakers of the altar?
19 What say I then? that the idol is any thing, or that which is offered in sacrifice to idols is any thing?
20 But I say, that the things which the Gentiles sacrifice, they sacrifice to devils, and not to God: and I would not that ye should have fellowship with devils.
21 Ye cannot drink the cup of the Lord, and the cup of devils: ye cannot be partakers of the Lord’s table, and of the table of devils.
22 Do we provoke the Lord to jealousy? are we stronger than he?
23 All things are lawful for me, but all things are not expedient: all things are lawful for me, but all things edify not.

Jude

(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)
 
rescath said:
I voted Yes AND No – since that was permitted. In and of itself, Sacred Scripture is a final authority because it’s the Word of God, so there’s no appeal beyond it. Nevertheless, it’s not final in the sense that it doesn’t stand alone from the standpoint of interpretation.

And of courrse, it’s not the ONLY authority.

I think that this poll is problematic because you really have to define what you mean by “final”.
Click to expand...
**
A quick question.:tiphat: Does both sides of your mouth hurt? 🙂 Hard to talk out both sides at the same time isn’t it.:bounce:

Oh by the way Sola Scriptura hahahahahahaha!!:extrahappy: I don’t think so!:hmmm: But that is just my educated position! :doh2: Reason: To follow what is written down in a book, would be making the book somekind of god, an idol if you will. And my God forbad that! But I am a member of the RCC. Other religions may allow worship of idols. :bowdown2: The real Church doesn’t! **
 
I told you this thread would create strife but then there are those the eat the stuff for breakfast.

Jude

(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)
 
everready said:
Quite right mate, the day I received him into my life He came to live within me. Lets go to our bibles and read what the scriptures say.
Click to expand...
Let’s keep reading into chapter 11 of 1 Corinthians: 1 Corinthians 11:20-30 (King James Version) “When ye come together therefore into one place, this is not to eat the Lord’s supper. For in eating every one taketh before other his own supper: and one is hungry, and another is drunken. What? have ye not houses to eat and to drink in? or despise ye the church of God, and shame them that have not? what shall I say to you? shall I praise you in this? I praise you not. For I have received of the Lord that which also I delivered unto you, that the Lord Jesus the same night in which he was betrayed took bread: And when he had given thanks, he brake it, and said, Take, eat: this is my body, which is broken for you: this do in remembrance of me. After the same manner also he took the cup, when he had supped, saying, this cup is the new testament in my blood: this do ye, as oft as ye drink it, in remembrance of me. For as often as ye eat this bread, and drink this cup, ye do shew the Lord’s death till he come. Wherefore whosoever shall eat this bread, and drink this cup of the Lord, unworthily, shall be guilty of the body and blood of the Lord. But let a man examine himself, and so let him eat of that bread, and drink of that cup. For he that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh damnation to himself, not discerning the Lord’s body. For this cause many are weak and sickly among you, and many sleep.”

The Sacred Tradition of the Eucharist, instituted by Christ, as well as the scriptures in Luke 22:18-20, Matthew 26:26-28 as well as John 6:50-59 form the very basis of our belief in the real presence of Christ in the Eucharist. Clearly, Saint Paul believed this, having received revelation directly from the Lord. How else can you eat and drink damnation unto yourself lest it be the Lord? How can you be guilty of the Body and Blood of Christ, unless it really is Him? If it is solely a memorial, how can your soul be condemned for unworthily eating and drinking? What would stir up the Lord’s wrath about eating and drinking?

That is what Catholics and Orthodox believe, and have since day one.

Christ’s peace, brother.
 
everready said:
😃 Thank you but your too late Jesus reveals himself to me by His Holy Spirit.

everready
Click to expand...
**Ever, Praise the Lord!
You seem intelligent. A little closed minded, if you don’t mind me saying that, but intelligent.😃
May I explain a few things? I promise it won’t hurt! 👍
In the beginning of Christianity there was One Holy, Catholic and Apostolic church. Are you with me so far?
It was established by Jesus. Jesus is the Head and the Church is the body! Can we agree on that?
OK, flash forward 2,000 years. I don’t know it if you realize it or not but there are currently over 60,000 denominations which call themselves Christian and all claim to be following exactly what Jesus commanded. :hmmm:
However, the really strange thing is they mostly believe different things, pratice different forms of worship, and disagree with each other. They all have “different personalities” if you will. Still with me?
Could I also get you to agree that Jesus is “perfect” and as such has no mental disorders?
By that I mean such as Multiple Personality Disorder (MPD) ? {That is a psychiatric disorder characterized by having at least one “alter” personality that controls a person’s behavior. The “alters” are said to occur spontaneously and involuntarily, and function more or less independently of each other. }

Since I hope you agree that Jesus isn’t insane, He must have only one “personality” He must have only one “body”, one Church here on Earth. Correct?:sad_yes:

That being so, could you also agree that the other 59,999 must be from the Devil? A plot to steal souls?
Since the RCC was the original church and Jersus said the Holy Spirit would guide its decisions and Jesus would be the head by which the RCC could reach the Father.
Since I hope that we both agree that Jesus does not suffer from any mental disorders and He promised to guide His church, the only possible answer is that the RCC is the real personality and body of Christ.
The other denominations all will admit that they came later. They have different stories ranging from 500 years ago up until less than 3 years ago. Whatever their beliefs they all must be called “imitation” churches.
Understand, I am not trying to be judgemental, nor mean, or rude. I am only stating logical facts. An allegory would be if I developed an dessert that tastes like real Ice Cream. I can’t truthfully call it Ice Cream can I? It would be and is called “Imitation Ice Cream”! Correct? Well how could we call reproductions near copies of the real church anything else but imitation? 🤷
Sure, many of these imitation churches look a little like the real church, why some may even “act” like the real church . But since they aren’t the real church and Jesus surely didn’t want 60,000 different personalities ~ They “must” be false and have been developed by the Devil to steal souls! :bigyikes: Agreed?
The RCC doesn’t worship a book written by man. No idols, no false gods. No one or thing except the “real” Savior Jesus Christ. To obtain eternal life we are commanded to physically comply with Mark 14: 22-26!
Remember the analogy of the ice cream? My final question is do you really want an imitation Jesus? The real one is so much better!

Ever, May God Bless You and all others who read this with an open heart rather than a closed head! :hammering: Jesus loves you, He really does! **
 
everready said:
I told you this thread would create strife but then there are those the eat the stuff for breakfast.

Jude

http://i171.photobucket.com/albums/u298/hogndog/twocents.gif
Click to expand...
**
Jude,

I love :love: your sense of humor! :flowers: A warning ~ don’t let PeterJ catch you using humor.:tsktsk: It angers Him! :extrahappy: Most others are OK with it and in fact the Pope encourages it!

:highprayer: “Humor is in fact an essential element in the mirth of creation. We can see how, in many matters in our lives, God wants to prod us into taking things a bit more lightly.” —Pope Benedict XVI :highprayer:

We can make our differences and disagreements a little easier to take if we joke about them rather than attempt to anger each other.:takethat: **
 
everready said:
I told you this thread would create strife but then there are those the eat the stuff for breakfast.

Jude
Click to expand...
**
Jude, I think po18guy want to be a teacher! It looks like he also “likes” you. From reading a couple of his interesting :yawn: insightful posting to you and others I know you will cherish each and every word :sleep: I would run and hide if I were you :rotfl: At least until he wanders off to bother some one else! Eeerrrr, I meant to share his faith with others!:extrahappy:

God Bless!
By the way “Welcome” if no one else has noticed that you are “new” here, let me be the first to say that! We actually are a pretty nice group of people. Opinionated 🙂 but nice!
:hug3: :yyeess: :thankyou: **
 
mattkubes said:
Again, that’s great, but neither interpretation denies that basic truth. The truth of the passage is that God created everything, that it was good, and that we fell from His friendship. Neither the literal or allegorical interpretation denies the truth of the passage. You’re creating a strawman here.
Click to expand...
“In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.” The truth of this passage is that God created everything.

“… And the evening and the morning were the first day.” The truth of this passage is that evening and morning makes up one day – a literal day, teaching the truth about a literal 6-day creation.

“And God made the beast of the earth AFTER HIS KIND…” The truth of this passage is that God’s creation of animal life was “after its kind” – He created the lion as a lion, the horse as a horse right away without letting them go through the process of evolution.

“And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness…” The truth of this passage is that God created man according to His image and likeness, not according to the likeness of an ape or some primordial soup that evolved into His image and likeness after millions of years of evolution.

Understanding these clear and plain passages in Scripture in any other way is engaging in private interpretation and deliberate twisting of the Word of God.
Unfortunately, this is where your line of reasoning fails. This man, although I’m sure he was well-intentioned, was wrong to say that the Church teaches that some of the major prophets don’t exist. In fact, even if it IS in an edition of the catechism, ask anyone - the catechism, although it contains some infallible teachings, is NOT an infallible document.
Click to expand...
Could you please tell me what church documents are considered infallible by the RCC? Also, if the Bible is considered church document is this an infallible document?
I know it can be frustrating, but there is a lot of garbage out there. You can’t just find a reference by a Catholic author and assume that it is 100% Catholic teaching (I’ll be the first to admit that catechesis has been lacking in this generation). Unless it’s an official Church document, you just have no assurance that what the author says, even if just in his nuances, is correct. Luckily, Catholic Answers backs everything up with Church documents, or at least derives its tracts from them. All of your questions can be answered by them - just do a search or ask someone here to direct you to some resources if you’d like!
Click to expand...
Thanks for the suggestion. Am I to understand that ALL the teachings found in Catholic Answers are official church teaching? What about those found in the Catholic Encyclopedia, are those official church teaching?
Again, you’ve created a strawman - the Church doesn’t teach that there is no one in hell…so there goes that point. The Church simply doesn’t make statement on anyone who is in hell because we can’t know - if you know anything about the canonization process, that shouldn’t be surprising. The Church doesn’t just proclaim someone to be a Saint for fun - it’s a long, involved process, that requires at least two miracles to be verified. How on earth could the opposite process work? How do we know someone didn’t repent before death? What benefit could there be to proclaiming a soul to be “damned”?
Click to expand...
I was not asking for the RCC to name someone who is in hell, or whether Adolf Hitler is in hell. My comment was directed to this quote: “The Roman Catholic Church has never defined that anyone, even Adolf Hitler, has gone to hell.” The gist of this statement is about the RCC not committing itself to whether or not anyone is in hell now (Adolf Hitler is mentioned here only as an example). My remark was about the ridiculousness of teaching hell and damnation for the wicked after death, yet not being able to say categorically if there is at least one soul (doesn’t have to be Adolf Hitler) now in hell.

You said that the RCC can’t name a person who is in hell because it can’t know. I agree with you on that a hundred percent. No one can know. Why? Simply because we do not know if that person repented before death. Now, how on earth could that work the other way around? How could we know a person is saved and is in heaven? Using your line of reasoning, how do we know the person does not have some hidden sin that only he and God know about? Can we claim to be psychic or divine that we can know what is in the hearts of men?
I’d like to see the actual quotes from Origen, but even if he said it, that wouldn’t phase me - only St. Peter and his successors are given the charism of infallibility when teaching to the universal Church. As for what the Church teaches: hell is real, Satan and the fallen angels made an irrevocable decision, and those who die outside of God’s friendship will have their wills fixed against God - in other words, the Church teaches that no one is getting out of hell This is in part because God respects their decision to spend eternity separate from Him, and also as a matter of Divine Justice.
Click to expand...
Does the RCC teach that God is merciful? Is God more merciful than the most merciful human being?
… now, the Catechism tells us that we entrust those unbaptised souls to the God’s Mercy. Could this change in the future? Sure. There hasn’t been a dogmatic proclamation either way.
Click to expand...
Is this that part of the teaching in the catechism that is infallible? By the way, how do I choose which teaching to pick from the Catechism that are infallible?
 
mattkubes said:
Originally posted by Mailman
If “the book” is the Bible and the Bible is the Word of God, then statement 2 becomes:
“Christianity is the religion of the book.” And it contradicts the first statement.

Since the Bible didn’t fall out of the sky (i.e. it was compiled by the Church), the Bible can’t, logically, supersede the Church. If you read the quote again, the Church teaches that the Word of God is not limited to a static book - although the Bible does contain God’s written word, and although it is immeasurably important, the Church is also open to the action of the Holy Spirit through the Magisterium. Unless you presuppose the validity of sola scriptura (or at least the invalidity of the Catholic position), the quote makes perfect sense!
Click to expand...
Is there anything wrong with my logic? Again:
  1. “The Christian faith is not a religion of the book.”
  2. “Christianity is the religion of the Word of God.”
    If “the book” is the Bible and the Bible is the Word of God, then statement 2 becomes:
    “Christianity is the religion of the book.”
    If there’s nothing wrong with my logic, then I don’t see how it makes perfect sense. It’s contradictory.
Anyway, I’ve got this question: Are ALL the teachings of the RCC consistent with the teachings in the Bible? Just a simple yes or no. You don’t have to go through all that Tradition-interpretation-magisterium thing again. I know all about that.
 
po18guy said:
The bible does not teach, anywhere, that it alone is the sole rule of faith. Period. Believe otherwise? Show me the money!
Click to expand...
Here, in full, is what I believe about the Bible. Tell me which part you don’t agree and we’ll go from there.

The Bible (OT and NT) are God’s revelation and the complete expressed will of God to man, inspired in thought and word, and infallible in the original writings; that they are of supreme and final authority in faith and in life, and the source of Truth. I believe all teachings contrary to the Holy Bible are false. I do not accept the Bible AND some other sacred writings; I accept the Bible alone.
 
foundthelight said:
I almost agree with you. The reason I say almost is in the question of interpretation. Scripture, tradition and teaching authority (Magisterium) are inexorably linked. The writings of the Early Church Fathers make up much of what we call tradition. These men were much closer to the Apostles then we and our language of theology is developed from them.

As questions came up concerning theological understandings, some of them quite divisive, the Church met and hashed them out thus defining proper interpretation. These interpretations are part of what we call the Magisterium.

The Reformation led to a rejection of teaching authority of the Church, and replaced it, in many cases, with individual interpretation or with the interpretation championed by strong personalities such as Calvin, Luther and Zwingli resulting in many diverse theological positions on salvation such as Methodism, Presbyterianism, Word of Faith, Pentecostals, the Anabaptists and a whole litany of others. Many Divinity Schools push their particular interpretation as the only truth. You can as will fail courses by disagreeing with the teachers theological biases.

In many congregations teaching authority is reserved by the Pastor. And may heaven help you if you disagree with that Pastor’s interpretation.

Did Christ really intend that there would be so many conflicting teachings?

Without Scripture, Tradition, and the Magisterium ( teaching authority) there can exist only anarchy.
Click to expand...
Why is there anarchy now within the Catholic community? And I don’t mean just among the laity, but among its priests as well?
 
Mailman said:
Why is there anarchy now within the Catholic community? And I don’t mean just among the laity, but among its priests as well?
Click to expand...
It is far from anarchy! You have heard of each and every dissenter, due to the media we have today. There definitely are some disobedient “Protestants” among the priests, but they are sooner or later tuned up by the Bishop. And, the angry dissident laity soon form meaningless splinter groups. They are as those who walked away in John 6:66, and get all the media attention.

Remember what Saint Paul said about many members, many gifts, but one Body. It is indeed tragic that Protestantism defines disunity. It is a tragedy to the Body of Christ that Protestantism even exists. However, the Catholic Church was founded by Christ with a unifying structure, and a unifier over all. Can you say, after sober reflection, that at the current rate of fragmentation, any Protestant sect will exist 1,500 years from now?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top