Someone can lose their salvation?

[NonCatholic]

So anyone who you would consider to be “unsaved” ONLY does good for selfish reasons?

I don’t know; maybe you should ask one.

 

[NonCatholic]

I klnow that is what you believe, NC.

Then why is it you continue to cast your pearls of understanding before the swine of this site?

Sure you feel that you need to convert them for a while. But if we choose to remain in our error and obstinance, I would think that Scripture says to move on.

However, I am sure that you will be able to produce a sniglet of scripture to the contrary.

Why do you sound so bitter? Who converts? Who are the swine?

 

[NonCatholic]

I guess I never viewed this parable as meaning that there is a winner’s circle/champion’s stand ala The Olympics, where some of the saved get to live in a better section of Heaven. The prodigal son received even greater accolades even though he had been a “rejector”, at which his brother expressed jealousy/contempt. Hopefully the brother was able to see things from his father’s point of view and rejoice in the prodigal’s return. If not, it seems as if your views could set up a heirarchy among the saved in Heaven. I may be unaware, but I have never heard such an idea.

I have not heard of such an idea as a better section in heaven either. Don’t confuse or commingle two separate parables; that may add to ones confusion.

If you want to really get into the depth of the Prodigal son; I would recommend this book to you or anyone else who wants to unlock the richness of this parable.

gty.org/Products/Books/451161

 

[guanophore]

And totally wrong.

I hope you will soon set yourself to dispatching the scriptures that have been posted here, so that we can see how they can be explained away.

 

[guanophore]

I don’t know; maybe you should ask one.

I believe me, I have. There are truly altruistic people in the world. This is why Paul says that those who have not heard of Christ are judged in the light of their consciences.

Why do you sound so bitter?

It is often painful for us to have the ignorant come here and insult the precious faith that was handed down to us from the Aposltes.

Who converts?

It seems like you are hoping and praying that we will convert.

Who are the swine?

I expect those of us to whom you have revealed “the truth” and don’t accept it.

 

[The_Smiter]

I have not heard of such an idea as a better section in heaven either. Don’t confuse or commingle two separate parables; that may add to ones confusion.

If you want to really get into the depth of the Prodigal son; I would recommend this book to you or anyone else who wants to unlock the richness of this parable.

gty.org/Products/Books/451161

I am NOT presenting the idea of a tiered Heaven - you di with the post to which this was a response.

 

[The_Smiter]

I don’t know; maybe you should ask one.

What are you - a 3rd Grader?

I asked a legitimate question about the clarification of your post - and this is your response?

Curiouser and curiouser…

 

[The_Smiter]

Why do you sound so bitter? Who converts? Who are the swine?

I am being serious and not trying to belittle you NC. And iuf I WAS bitter, I would simply launch off one-liners as you do in response to posts with which I might disagree. I think that is the distinction between your posts and the posts of others on this forum. I don’t need a comment from you on that - it is just my observation.

You are obviously on fire with your zeal for The Word and with what God is doing in your life. As a Catholic, I feel that I go where I am called and The Holy Spirit helps me to be productive.

I do not OBJECTIVELY see the productivity of your participation here. It is all going around in circles.

I have no right to say to leave, nor would I want to. I guess I am not as strong or advanced in my Christian journey as others on this site who continue to respond to you charitably and really exemplify the patience of Job when it comes to continually posting clarification after clarification that you automatically ignore or dismiss.

If I want to paint my car green and you think that all cars should be red, would you simply spend the rest of your life trying to convince me how important driving a red car is - even if I tell you that I am sticking with green? Couldn’t you just as easily shrug you shoulders and accept the fact that there might be some cars other than red ones on the road and that some of them just might be going to the same destination you are? Check the gas and fluids - pay attention to the guts of the car. The difference in color is not sinful, just a question of prudence to be wrestled with (‘prudence’ being an actual theological term here).

 

[ncgolf]

I posted this earlier and am curious to your response …

The judgment for the saved is for rewards, which are probably more like accolades

Judgement is to decide who is worthy of rewards and why. The particular judgement is then a review of life and then either rewards (either heaven or purgatory) or damnation.

The reward/penalty is the outcome of the judgement … not the judgement.

the best reward is that one is in heaven with Jesus.

I agree.

On your second point; there are many who believe their saved, but are self deceived for many reasons, one of them is because they think they associate with the right religion. Matthew 7:13-14 speaks of the this along with other Scriptures.

Hence the need for judgement … I find it much too presumptous for you to decide whether you are either one, God’s judgment, given the totality of His knowledge, is much more just than any decision you could make here on earth. I believe one can be confident but let the game end before declaring victory.

Let God judge your heart and those of others … I find it odd that Jesus would say the tax collectors and prostitutes get into heaven before you, speaking of the Pharisees.

This, to me, tells us … any of us can be decieved as you describe. Be careful.

God waits till the end to either damn or glorify … why cant you wait?

 

[NonCatholic]

Hi, NonCatholic,

I would have said it a bit differently… but, in my opinin, love4mary was right on target: Scripture and/or Faith alone is not the path identified by God in either the Old or New Testaments.

What was the message Jesus gave to the religious leaders and their followers concerning there rituals and traditions?

If the Bible is to be the ONLY source then it must not only act as its own reference, but must have evidence of completeness. The Bible was never designed for such a feat - while important, it is not everything. To say that, “The Bible Is Not Enough” is a hypothesis that requires proof to stand up in a debate. Let me offer some proofs, but first one quick definitions:

Why did the Jews get so off track? What were they not following in relation to the Scriptures? God’s word could never pull off such a feat; it probably needs a lot more ritual and tradition, which from the Bible I read, is part of the problem and not the solution…just my observation.

Bible: A collection of writings which the Church of God has solemnly recognized as inspired. (admittedly brief - but, for those interested in a more thorough definition go to: newadvent.org/cathen/02543a.htm

Recognized as inspired by what institution of men? Can be verified by what body of men?

Anyone making a claim that something is something must substantiate the claim. The Burden of Proof always rests with those making the claim. For example, Christ claimed He is God. He just did not make a statement and sit down, rather, He fulfilled all of the prophet’s statements, He performed super-natural signs, He foretold His own Death and Rising, and He founded His Church. In short, Christ proved His Statement.

The Bible is one book; and there are anathemas given to those who add, subtract and do not do. Deuteronomy 27:26, Psalm 119:21, Jeremiah 11:3, Galatians 3:10, & Revelation 22:19

2- There is no place in the Bible that says the Bible is the only source of truth. Merely saying, as St. Paul does, that all scripture is inspired and is profitable and beneficial for many things ( 2 Tim 3:16) is not the same as saying it is everything.

The Bible is the gospel…right? 2 Thessalonians 2:13-15 But we should always give thanks to God for you, brethren beloved by the Lord, because God has chosen you from the beginning for salvation through sanctification by the Spirit and faith in the truth. 14 It was for this He called you through our gospel, that you may gain the glory of our Lord Jesus Christ. 15 So then, brethren, stand firm and hold to the traditions which you were taught, whether by word {of mouth} or by letter from us. Were these traditions not the gospel, with Baptism and The Lords Supper as ordinances?

Whenever one quotes 2 Timoth 3:15, it should be listed in its entire context.
2 Timothy 3:10-17 Now you followed my teaching, conduct, purpose, faith, patience, love, perseverance, 11 persecutions, {and} sufferings, such as happened to me at Antioch, at Iconium {and} at Lystra; what persecutions I endured, and out of them all the Lord rescued me! 12 Indeed, all who desire to live godly in Christ Jesus will be persecuted. 13 But evil men and impostors will proceed {from bad} to worse, deceiving and being deceived. 14 You, however, continue in the things you have learned and become convinced of, knowing from whom you have learned {them,} 15 and that from childhood you have known the sacred writings which are able to give you the wisdom that leads to salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus. 16 All Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness; 17 so that the man of God may be adequate, equipped for every good work.

What do you think needs to be added? Rituals and traditions?

3- Jesus Christ, the Apostles and St. Paul verbally instructed and gave example those who wanted to become Christians. This is known as oral revelation and is of equal importance as the Bible. We see the following examples of oral revelation (non-written) in the Gospels as:

This “oral revelation” you are speaking of is known as the New Testament.

d.) John 24:25 - Possibly the most damning statement concerning SS: John tells his readers that not everything has been written down.

John 21:15 And there are also many other things which Jesus did, which if they were written in detail, I suppose that even the world itself would not contain the books that would be written.

John says the “things Jesus did”, like all the miracles, especially that of healing, and written in detail. Wouldn’t you imagine if all the stories of all the people He healed were written in detail it would make the Vatican library look small?

Context is everything in understanding.

Many more proofs can be given about oral tradition being what moved the Apostles to preach form Pentecost Sunday forward. It was word of mouth and actions that caused the early CC to grow.

It was something that caused the CC to grow; I agree rituals and traditions.

In brief, there simply is no evidence to support scripture alone is the answer. And, this is truly an issue that addresses salvation and how we approach Christ.

The answer to what? The scripture is more than sufficient to save a person from condemnation; isn’t that what it is all about? So why all the extra’s?

We have not addressed the ECF and their approach to both Scripture and Tradition as safeguarded by the CC.

The ECF, is that the Catholic and evangelicals together? If so, I believe that to be the work of the devil.

 

[Roman_Catholic_1]

The answer to what? The scripture is more than sufficient to save a person from condemnation; isn’t that what it is all about? So why all the extra’s?

NonCatholic

It is the Grace of God that saves through faith in His only begotten Son. (A faith that is not alone by the way) The Bible does not save anyone! It is the work of Christ.

If the Bible were to be completely destroyed, Christ would still be worthy of worship. The Bible is dependent on Christ, not Christ on the Bible. You are putting something created on or above the level of the creator in stating that it can save souls.

Wasn’t there a thread about the Protestant pillar of Sola Deo gloria ; Glory to God alone? What happened?

God bless

 

[Randy_Carson]

Whenever one quotes 2 Timoth 3:15, it should be listed in its entire context.
2 Timothy 3:10-17 Now you followed my teaching, conduct, purpose, faith, patience, love, perseverance, 11 persecutions, {and} sufferings, such as happened to me at Antioch, at Iconium {and} at Lystra; what persecutions I endured, and out of them all the Lord rescued me! 12 Indeed, all who desire to live godly in Christ Jesus will be persecuted. 13 But evil men and impostors will proceed {from bad} to worse, deceiving and being deceived. 14 You, however, continue in the things you have learned and become convinced of, knowing from whom you have learned {them,} 15 and that from childhood you have known the sacred writings which are able to give you the wisdom that leads to salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus. 16 All Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness; 17 so that the man of God may be adequate, equipped for every good work.

What do you think needs to be added? Rituals and traditions?

How about context and understanding? For example, I think the passage should be read as follows:

2 Timothy 3:14-17 – Tradition + Scripture + Magisterium

2 Timothy 3:14-17
14But as for you, continue in what you have learned and have become convinced of (Timothy had learned the Gospel and become convinced that it was true by Paul’s ORAL preaching and teaching. This oral preaching and teaching is known to Catholics as Sacred Tradition.), because you know those from whom you learned it (Timothy had learned the gospel from Paul, an Apostle (and Bishop) of the Church, and possibly from other Church leaders whom Timothy had heard preaching and teaching. The teaching authority of the Church is known to Catholics as the Magisterium.) , 15and how from infancy you have known the holy Scriptures (Timothy would have known only the Old Testament scriptures from his infancy since the New Testament had not been written or completed at the time Paul’s letter to Timothy was composed. However, the New Testament is recognized as part of the Bible, the written Word of God. This is known to Catholics as Sacred Scripture.), which are able to make you wise for salvation through faith in Christ Jesus. (Only after commending the Tradition “handed on” from the Magisterium does Paul go on to discuss the nature of Sacred Scripture in the following verses.)16All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness, 17so that the man of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work.

Here’s another interesting point to consider: Timothy was a Greek, and the Old Testament that he would have been familiar with from the time of his youth was the Septuagint. Therefore, Paul is specifically telling Timothy to continue in what he had learned from the Septuagint, and of course, the Septuagint contains seven books that Martin Luther did not like because they contain passages that support distinctly Catholic doctrines like praying for the dead and purgatory.

Consequently, while the Greek Septuagint was known to Jesus, Paul and Timothy, modern Protestants insist upon using an Old Testament that was altered by the removal of books (such as Maccabees and others) at the Council of Jamnia in 70 A.D. Unfortunately, Jamnia was not a real council; it was a meeting of rabbis, and their decision concerning the canon wasn’t binding on all of Judaism.

This leads to a couple of obvious questions: “Why would the Holy Spirit be guiding a group of rabbis around 70 A.D. when there was already a Christian Church in existence that was under His infallible guidance as Jesus promised? And why should the hastily drawn-up and not universally binding Hebrew canon trump the Church’s common use of the Septuagint that had continued for over fifteen centuries? Luther picked that truncated canon for the same reason the rabbis did: To reject specific teachings that were in the new Christian faith that was spreading so rapidly, the Catholic faith.

The answer to what? The scripture is more than sufficient to save a person from condemnation; isn’t that what it is all about? So why all the extra’s?

Because scripture is not formally sufficient and nowhere declares itself to be so.

 

[NonCatholic]

I posted this earlier and am curious to your response …

Judgement is to decide who is worthy of rewards and why. The particular judgement is then a review of life and then either rewards (either heaven or purgatory) or damnation.

The reward/penalty is the outcome of the judgement … not the judgement.

There are two judgments; one for rewards-the righteous and one for hot, hotter and hottest spot in hell. One is the Bema seat and the other the great white throne. I don’t see the concept of purgatory in the NT or OT unless “present with the Lord” is not heaven.

I find it much too presumptous for you to decide whether you are either one, God’s judgment, given the totality of His knowledge, is much more just than any decision you could make here on earth. I believe one can be confident but let the game end before declaring victory.

I understand the last sentence here, but not the first one; so I will address the latter. I was victorious in the time of my justification, not the justification of the Catholic teaching. All I can tell you is that when god works in you and you live by His truth, one of the blessings you receive is the confidence and assurance of his joy, which is Christ Jesus. What can separate me from the love of God; Paul tells me in Romans 8:31-3931 What then shall we say to these things? If God is for us, who can be against us? 32 He who did not spare His own Son, but delivered Him up for us all, how shall He not with Him also freely give us all things? 33 Who shall bring a charge against God’s elect? It is God who justifies. 34 Who is he who condemns? It is Christ who died, and furthermore is also risen, who is even at the right hand of God, who also makes intercession for us. 35 Who shall separate us from the love of Christ? Shall tribulation, or distress, or persecution, or famine, or nakedness, or peril, or sword? 36 As it is written: "For Your sake we are killed all day long; We are accounted as sheep for the slaughter."37 Yet in all these things we are more than conquerors through Him who loved us. 38 For I am persuaded that neither death nor life, nor angels nor principalities nor powers, nor things present nor things to come, 39 nor height nor depth, nor any other created thing, shall be able to separate us from the love of God which is in Christ Jesus our Lord.

Paul said it better than I ever could, because it is the Holy Spirit speaking.

Let God judge your heart and those of others … I find it odd that Jesus would say the tax collectors and prostitutes get into heaven before you, speaking of the Pharisees.

What are you paraphrasing from? I am a tax collector…LOL

This, to me, tells us … any of us can be decieved as you describe. Be careful.

Only the deceived are deceived. All I can tell you is that the Holy Spirit will witness to your spirit; just as the Bible tells us. If you are walking according to the will of God; your will will be His will…now that is unity in spirit and in truth; just as the Bible tells us. Also, when you are walking according to your own will as a believer, the Holy Spirit will warn you through your conscience and one does not yield, He will chasten you…that is not very desirable from a human standpoint.

God waits till the end to either damn or glorify … why cant you wait?

Wait for what? I’m already justified before God and I am very grateful for the assurance and joy of my salvation? God has been very generous to me and my family and why would I want to dishonor Him by being full of guilt and doubt?

May God bless you with His peace and joy!

 

[mackbrislawn]

The only way I can describe it to you on a personal note. I can’t help but do good things, I do things I would have not even thought about if not for a regenerate heart. Many are the little things, but it is always thinking of the Lord and putting others before self. I’ll give an example that happened today. We recently had about 8 inches of snow with freezing rain in between. I was outside shoveling my half of the driveway so I could get to the grocery store to get milk and bread…told my spouse I’d be back in a few minutes, then and I saw my neighbor 3 doors down shoveling her driveway and her car was stuck at the bottom. So I stopped my shoveling and went over to help her. There was a lot of ice and it took about 45 minutes. We got her car up the driveway, but we needed to do the bottom where the snow plow went through. We worked another 10 minutes and told her that I try to finish it before she came home from work. I am still recovering from knee surgery in December and just had my 9th Epidermal Steroid Injection for my low back pain, so this is something I should not be doing, Before receiving Christ; I would not have helped her - seeing she would most likely get it done anyway and besides my back and knee are in pain and this would only make it worse, but now I can’t help myself; i would have to be in a state of total incapacitation not to see my neighbors need and not help…even then i might call another neighbor to help; whereas before i wouldn’t have done that.

Yes, it would seem this episode reinforces one’s belief they are saved.

 

[sodak]

I don’t see the concept of purgatory in the NT or OT unless “present with the Lord” is not heaven.

As has been explained to you, those in purgatory are not separated from the Lord. I’m starting to understand your confusion.

 

[NonCatholic]

How about context and understanding? For example, I think the passage should be read as follows:

2 Timothy 3:14-17 – Tradition + Scripture + MagisteriumWhy not add?

2 Timothy 3:14-17
14But as for you, continue in what you have learned and have become convinced of (Timothy had learned the Gospel and become convinced that it was true by Paul’s ORAL preaching and teaching. This oral preaching and teaching is known to Catholics as Sacred Tradition.), because you know those from whom you learned it (Timothy had learned the gospel from Paul, an Apostle (and Bishop) of the Church, and possibly from other Church leaders whom Timothy had heard preaching and teaching. The teaching authority of the Church is known to Catholics as the Magisterium.) , 15and how from infancy you have known the holy Scriptures (Timothy would have known only the Old Testament scriptures from his infancy since the New Testament had not been written or completed at the time Paul’s letter to Timothy was composed. Who and what did the OT point to? Wasn’t that what Paul is reminding Timothy? verse 15 "and that from childhood you have known the Holy Scriptures, which are able to make you wise for salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus.
The Septuagint includes some books not found in the Hebrew Bible. Many Protestant Bibles follow the Jewish canon and exclude the additional books. Roman Catholics, however, include some of these books in their canon while Eastern Orthodox Churches use all the books of the Septuagint.

This leads to a couple of obvious questions: “Why would the Holy Spirit be guiding a group of rabbis around 70 A.D. when there was already a Christian Church in existence that was under His infallible guidance as Jesus promised? And why should the hastily drawn-up and not universally binding Hebrew canon trump the Church’s common use of the Septuagint that had continued for over fifteen centuries? Luther picked that truncated canon for the same reason the rabbis did: To reject specific teachings that were in the new Christian faith that was spreading so rapidly, the Catholic faith.

Don’t know, may want to ask a Hebrew scholar; I’m not sure whether what you said there is true, partially true or false…no idea.

Because scripture is not formally sufficient and nowhere declares itself to be so.

I don’t recall the Apostles or Jesus being very formal; but the Catholic tradiiton with all its pageantry, rituals and traditions could certainly classify as formal. I don’t know how much the clothing that the Pope wears when he is decked out, but I would bet its more than most of us make in a year or two, but it appears very formal. I wonder what Peter would think and if he would be jealous because he did not get all that. This would be a new thread, in fact now that I’m at the end…I think all of this might be somewhat off topic.

culturalcatholic.com/PopeBenedictXVI.htm

 

[guanophore]

What was the message Jesus gave to the religious leaders and their followers concerning there rituals and traditions?

Jesus distinguished between sacred tradition, and the traditions of man. So did the Apostles. As long a no traditions of man interfered with the Sacred Traditions, they were not a problem.

It is inappropriate to throw out all tradition, since most of it does not interfere with Sacred (Divine) Tradition. Further, it is insufficient to fail to make a distinction between the two.

However, the arguement about tradition probably belongs on another thread.

(tradition) is part of the problem and not the solution…just my observation.

Looking at things through anti-Catholic lenses colors ones observations. In fact, Jesus and the Apostles upheld and practiced the bulk of tradition, both sacred, and non.

Recognized as inspired by what institution of men?  Can be verified by what body of men?

Any recognition by a “body of men” would be worthless, really. No body of “men” is qualified to make judgement on the Word of God. The canon was formed by the Church, whose Head is Christ, and who is ensouled by the HS. It is these divine elements, not the human elements, that make the Church infalible.

The Bible is one book; and there are anathemas given to those who add, subtract and do not do. Deuteronomy 27:26, Psalm 119:21, Jeremiah 11:3, Galatians 3:10, & Revelation 22:19

No, it is not. It is a library of material. The Church compiled all these separate books and placed them in a collection. None of those references apply to any book other than the one about which they were written. The Church has the authority to add and subtract from the Bible. The books themselves do not make this determination. They cannot, any more than they can teach themselves.

The Bible is the gospel…right?

No, it is a collection of Holy Writings created to support the Gospel.

by the Spirit and faith in the truth. 14 It was for this He called you through our gospel, that you may gain the glory of our Lord Jesus Christ. 15 So then, brethren, stand firm and hold to the traditions which you were taught, whether by word {of mouth} or by letter from us. Were these traditions not the gospel, with Baptism and The Lords Supper as ordinances?

They were 'the Way", a lifestyle lived by the Apostles before the faithful which they could emulate.

There is nothing in scripture that refers to Baptism or the Lord’s supper as an “ordinance”. Neither is this consistent with Apostolic Teaching. This term is a man made invention of the Reformation.

Whenever one quotes 2 Timoth 3:15, it should be listed in its entire context.
2 Timothy 3:10-17 Now you followed my teaching, conduct, purpose, faith, patience, love, perseverance, 11 persecutions, {and} sufferings, such as happened to me at Antioch, at Iconium {and} at Lystra; what persecutions I endured, and out of them all the Lord rescued me! 12 Indeed, all who desire to live godly in Christ Jesus will be persecuted. 13 But evil men and impostors will proceed {from bad} to worse, deceiving and being deceived. 14 You, however, continue in the things you have learned and become convinced of, knowing from whom you have learned {them,} 15 and that from childhood you have known the sacred writings which are able to give you the wisdom that leads to salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus. 16 All Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness; 17 so that the man of God may be adequate, equipped for every good work.

What do you think needs to be added? Rituals and traditions?

You read this, and paste it here, but it does not seem to go in. Paul is referring here to the ritual and tradition that he lived, and passed on. His conduct, and the fruit of the Spirit in his life. This is the living letter of God in the Church.

This "oral revelation" you are speaking of is known as the New Testament.

No.

However, the NT does reflect the Oral Traditions. It was created out of them.

The Church is also God Breathed, and it did not stop being so after the NT was written.

John says the “things Jesus did”, like all the miracles, especially that of healing, and written in detail. Wouldn’t you imagine if all the stories of all the people He healed were written in detail it would make the Vatican library look small?

I do.

Context is everything in understanding.

I agree. the context of the NT is the Catholic Church. It was written by, for , and about Catholics. It is impossible to understand it correctly apart from this context.

The scripture is more than sufficient to save a person from condemnation; isn’t that what it is all about? So why all the extra’s?

Because we don’t believe that. We believe that the Holy Writings, though they are profitable, cannot save. Only Jesus is sufficient to save a person from condemnation.

Statements like this sound to us like bibiloatry.

The ECF, is that the Catholic and evangelicals together? If so, I believe that to be the work of the devil.

It is a work of the devil for the Body of Christ to be united?

No, I am sure he was referring to the Early Church Fathers. They were all Catholic.

If you think it is “of the devil” to be united with Catholics, why are you here on this forum?

 

[Matariel]

Jesus distinguished between sacred tradition, and the traditions of man. So did the Apostles. As long a no traditions of man interfered with the Sacred Traditions, they were not a problem.

It is inappropriate to throw out all tradition, since most of it does not interfere with Sacred (Divine) Tradition. Further, it is insufficient to fail to make a distinction between the two.

However, the arguement about tradition probably belongs on another thread.

Looking at things through anti-Catholic lenses colors ones observations. In fact, Jesus and the Apostles upheld and practiced the bulk of tradition, both sacred, and non.

Any recognition by a “body of men” would be worthless, really. No body of “men” is qualified to make judgement on the Word of God. The canon was formed by the Church, whose Head is Christ, and who is ensouled by the HS. It is these divine elements, not the human elements, that make the Church infalible.

No, it is not. It is a library of material. The Church compiled all these separate books and placed them in a collection. None of those references apply to any book other than the one about which they were written. The Church has the authority to add and subtract from the Bible. The books themselves do not make this determination. They cannot, any more than they can teach themselves.

No, it is a collection of Holy Writings created to support the Gospel.

They were 'the Way", a lifestyle lived by the Apostles before the faithful which they could emulate.

There is nothing in scripture that refers to Baptism or the Lord’s supper as an “ordinance”. Neither is this consistent with Apostolic Teaching. This term is a man made invention of the Reformation.

You read this, and paste it here, but it does not seem to go in. Paul is referring here to the ritual and tradition that he lived, and passed on. His conduct, and the fruit of the Spirit in his life. This is the living letter of God in the Church.

No.

However, the NT does reflect the Oral Traditions. It was created out of them.

The Church is also God Breathed, and it did not stop being so after the NT was written.

I do.

I agree. the context of the NT is the Catholic Church. It was written by, for , and about Catholics. It is impossible to understand it correctly apart from this context.

Because we don’t believe that. We believe that the Holy Writings, though they are profitable, cannot save. Only Jesus is sufficient to save a person from condemnation.

Statements like this sound to us like bibiloatry.

It is a work of the devil for the Body of Christ to be united?

No, I am sure he was referring to the Early Church Fathers. They were all Catholic.

If you think it is “of the devil” to be united with Catholics, why are you here on this forum?

Awesome post, Guanophore. Good rebuttal.

 

[guanophore]

I don't see the concept of purgatory in the NT or OT unless "present with the Lord" is not heaven.  :confused:

Which in fact is the case! Jesus promised the thief he would be with HIm that very day in paradise, yet the gates of heaven were not yet opened, as He had not yet ascended. On the contrary, He descended.

Also, God allowed Samuel to appear and converse with Saul. Samuel told Saul “tomorrow, you and your sons will be with me”, yet, God had abandoned Saul, and not Samuel. Obviously, there is a place that is neither heaven or hell, also referred to in scripture as 'prison". Jesus says you cannot get out until you pay the very last penny!

I was victorious in the time of my justification, not the justification of the Catholic teaching.

Catholic teaching is that we are victorious at our justification.

What can separate me from the love of God; Paul tells me in Romans 8:31-39. 35 Who shall separate us from the love of Christ? Shall tribulation, or distress, or persecution, or famine, or nakedness, or peril, or sword? 38 For I am persuaded that neither death nor life, nor angels nor principalities nor powers, nor things present nor things to come, 39 nor height nor depth, nor any other created thing, shall be able to separate us from the love of God which is in Christ Jesus our Lord.

Nothing separates us from His love. To equate His love for us with eternal life is a mistake.

Paul said it better than I ever could, because it is the Holy Spirit speaking.

Yes. Paul also said that it is presumptuous to acquit oneself, or to assume one is saved before the Last day.

Wait for what? I’m already justified before God and I am very grateful for the assurance and joy of my salvation? God has been very generous to me and my family and why would I want to dishonor Him by being full of guilt and doubt?

I think you misunderstand. Discarding the sin of presumption and immaturity does not mean that one should pick up the sins of guilt and doubt.

 

[guanophore]

Who and what did the OT point to? Wasn’t that what Paul is reminding Timothy? verse 15 "and that from childhood you have known the Holy Scriptures, which are able to make you wise for salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus.

The faith is in a Person, Christ, who is alive in the Church, His Body. The Holy Writings point to HIm, in the Church, so that we can come to HIm,and be saved. Scriptures make us wise, they do not save us. We are saved by grace, through faith.
NonCatholic;4743686:

The New Testament are the things the Apostles were teaching and preaching…how hard is that?

Impossible. The NT does not preach and teach itself, nor is it able to contain the lifestyle of an Apostle.

I don’t recall the Apostles or Jesus being very formal; but the Catholic tradiiton with all its pageantry, rituals and traditions could certainly classify as formal.

It can be. It is not necessarily so.

 I don't know how much the clothing that the Pope wears when he is decked out, but I would bet its more than most of us make in a year or two, but it appears very formal.

I don’t make any of my clothes. so definitely whatever he has on is more than I make. I bet he does not make his own clothes either.

I wonder what Peter would think and if he would be jealous because he did not get all that.   This would be a new thread, in fact now that I'm at the end..I think all of this might be somewhat off topic.

Peter was a humble man, and was not even given to jealousy even when he was young and impetuous. Whatever jealousy he had, the Lord cleaned it out.

I don’t doubt that the Pope would be happier in a fishermans tunic.

It really comes across shallow when you judge the heart of a man by the clothing he wears.