SPLIT: From Fatima...Images & the Salvation of Catholics

  • Thread starter Thread starter newbie1234
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
JonathanKinsman said:
Well, look in Acts and in the Gospels. Check out the Pauline and Petrine letters. Those who were given the power to loose and to bind were those who passed it down through the ages to current bishops.

You may not like that, but it is historically and scripturally true.

"Let’s rely solely on the Word of God today."

Great, Newbie, but I can’t find any biblical proof that gives your pastor the power to change the bread and wine into the body and blood of Christ.

I looked everywhere and I can’t find where sola scriptura is mentioned either! Help me.
Click to expand...
So far no Protestants have been able to give a Biblical support for Sola Scriptura. Not one. They may quote,

2 Timothy 3:16, “16: All scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness.” But that doesn’t say Scripture is the Sole Authority.

It’s odd Protestants used that and the Catholic used to show Biblical Support for Church position as the Pillar and Bulwark of the Truth.

1 Timothy 3:15. if I am delayed, you may know how one ought to behave in the household of God, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and bulwark of the truth.
 
newbie1234 said:
That is incorrect. Prophetic books have what is called dual fulfillment. Which means the prophecy will be fulfilled twice both in the future. Not once in the past and once in the future.
Click to expand...
Newbie, give the scriptural reference for your assertion that "Prophetic books have what is called dual fulfillment."

If you can’t back it up with scripture, it ain’t True.

Sounds like personal interpretation, yessiree.
 
JonathanKinsman said:
Well, look in Acts and in the Gospels. Check out the Pauline and Petrine letters. Those who were given the power to loose and to bind were those who passed it down through the ages to current bishops.

You may not like that, but it is historically and scripturally true.

"Let’s rely solely on the Word of God today."

Great, Newbie, but I can’t find any biblical proof that gives your pastor the power to change the bread and wine into the body and blood of Christ.

I looked everywhere and I can’t find where sola scriptura is mentioned either! Help me.
Click to expand...
If you believe that the bible is the unerring Word of God. You would see that we could base all doctrine solely on the bible and nothing else. Man’s words and laws, be they from the early church fathers or the founding fathers of our country, are constanly changing and needing adjustments
 
newbie1234 said:
That is incorrect. Prophetic books have what is called dual fulfillment. Which means the prophecy will be fulfilled twice both in the future. Not once in the past and once in the future.
Click to expand...
By this doctrine, you mean there will be two Second Coming? :bigyikes: :bigyikes: :whistle:
 
JonathanKinsman said:
Newbie, give the scriptural reference for your assertion that "Prophetic books have what is called dual fulfillment."

If you can’t back it up with scripture, it ain’t True.

Sounds like personal interpretation, yessiree.
Click to expand...
How about Christ coming, then Christ coming again?
That’s just off the top of my head. I can open my bible but it will take some time. Do you need me to do that?
 
newbie1234 said:
If you believe that the bible is the unerring Word of God. You would see that we could base all doctrine solely on the bible and nothing else.

Man’s words and laws, be they from the early church fathers or the founding fathers of our country, are constanly changing and needing adjustments
Click to expand...
The Word of God is inerrant. Catholics have NEVER believed otherwise.

What “doctrine” are you talking about? The doctrine of sola scriptura?

One really important question, Newbie: where do you find scriptural reference that** “we could base all doctrine solely on the Bible and nothing else.”?**

They’re your words, back 'em up in Scripture!

(Newbie, tonight when you pray, remember to thank God for two things: the gift of the Bible (chosen from so many competing books) by those Catholic bishops and Popes, and, the fact that you are not a member of the Ethiopic Church, whose bible is 81 books long!!!
 
JonathanKinsman said:
The Word of God is inerrant. Catholics have NEVER believed otherwise.

What “doctrine” are you talking about? The doctrine of sola scriptura?

One really important question, Newbie: where do you find scriptural reference that** “we could base all doctrine solely on the Bible and nothing else.”?**

They’re your words, back 'em up in Scripture!

(Newbie, tonight when you pray, remember to thank God for two things: the gift of the Bible (chosen from so many competing books) by those Catholic bishops and Popes, and, the fact that you are not a member of the Ethiopic Church, whose bible is 81 books long!!!
Click to expand...
2tim3:16
 
newbie1234 said:
How about Christ coming, then Christ coming again?
That’s just off the top of my head. I can open my bible but it will take some time. Do you need me to do that?
Click to expand...
Yes, we do.

You asserted it: back it up in Scripture.

You know, as in "So sayeth the Lord…“all prophecies have two fulfillments,” or “There be dual meanings and fulfillments to every Prophetic book picked by Catholics after leaving the Jewish faith and following that guy we don’t believe is the Messiah, Jesus of Nazareth.”

After all, Newbie, the Jews who put together YOUR Old Testament (the textus receptus) changed some things in Isaiah and dropped Maccabees in order to get rid of those pesky christians who were claiming that God was made Man and walked the earth and came for all mankind.
Click to expand...
 
JonathanKinsman said:
Yes, we do.

You asserted it: back it up in Scripture.

You know, as in "So sayeth the Lord…“all prophecies have two fulfillments,” or “There be dual meanings and fulfillments to every Prophetic book picked by Catholics after leaving the Jewish faith and following that guy we don’t believe is the Messiah, Jesus of Nazareth.”

After all, Newbie, the Jews who put together YOUR Old Testament (the textus receptus) changed some things in Isaiah and dropped Maccabees in order to get rid of those pesky christians who were claiming that God was made Man and walked the earth and came for all mankind.
Click to expand...
I don’t know what you’re talking about when you say the Jews changed Isaiah. We have the septuagint> how could they have changed the ot after Jesus was born if we have a copy from two hundred years before He was born?
Not every prophecy has dual fulfillment. I will need some time to compile a list though.
 
newbie1234 said:
The second coming is the second fulfilment. Does that make sense?
Click to expand...
But the Second Coming only happens once not twice. There are no 2 Second Comings.

Jesus will return on Earth as Just King and Judge in his 2nd Return.
 
newbie1234 said:
2tim3:16
Click to expand...
You really are serious with this old chestnut of the sola scriptura crowd?? Really, Newbie, I thought you knew your Bible!

2 Timothy 3:16

“All scripture is inspired by God and is useful for teaching, for refutation, for correction, and for training in righteousness.”

Okay, Newbie, you brought it up:
  1. There was NO CHRISTIAN CANON or “scripture” other than the Septuagint at the time the Timothy letters were written. Look that one up in Protestant websites, Newbie!
  2. The Gospels and Acts were written AFTER this letter.
  3. Whenever “scripture” is mentioned in ANY NT book, it refers to Jewish scripture from the Septuagint. JESUS QUOTED THE SEPTUAGINT !
  4. There was no Catholic Bible at this time.
So, how does this passage give credence to your assertion that “we could base all doctrine solely on the Bible and nothing else”?

There is NOTHING in 2 Timothy 3:16 to back up your assertions concerning “doctrine.” NOTHING!

OT scripture, according to your quote, is USEFUL in FOUR distinct areas: teaching, refutation, correction and righteouness.

Where is “doctrine setting”

Consider yourself taught, refuted and corrected.
 
newbie1234 said:
2tim3:16
Click to expand...
You know I knew you were going to quote that but 2 Tim 3: 16: “All scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness.”

But it doesn’t say that Scripture is final authority in all matters. It does say it is inspired by God, and its profitable for teaching, reproof, for correction, and training… but it doesn’t say its the sole authority in all matters… It doesn’t even say alone…
 
newbie1234 said:
If you believe that the bible is the unerring Word of God. You would see that we could base all doctrine solely on the bible and nothing else. Man’s words and laws, be they from the early church fathers or the founding fathers of our country, are constanly changing and needing adjustments
Click to expand...
What makes you so sure that the Bible is the ONLY source of the unerring Word of God?
 
newbie1234 said:
The fact that the apparations don’t contracdict each other is an indication that they are all from the same source. That being the case if we look at all the things that all the aparitions said, we would see that some of the things are getting away from honoring Jesus as the only source of salvation, ** such as the apparition being co-redemptrix.** That is the area of concern.
Click to expand...
Can you point me to this Apparition, the co-redemptrix ? a link perhaps.

And if you had checked some private revelations over the past number of years you will see many that contradict each-other, and why the Church is always careful to make a judgement.

Also there were many off-shoots from Lourdes, and a lot more, so yes some alleged apparitions have contradicted genuine ones.

If you do a search you’ll find them, I can’t post up unapproved apparitions.
 
Mannyfit75 said:
But the Second Coming only happens once not twice. There are no 2 Second Comings.

Jesus will return on Earth as Just King and Judge in his 2nd Return.
Click to expand...
Jesus is coming for the SECOND time
The first fulfillment on the prophecy was in 32ad
The second fulfilment of the prophecy will be sometime in the near future. Does this clear it up for you?
 
newbie1234 said:
I don’t know what you’re talking about when you say the Jews changed Isaiah. We have the septuagint> how could they have changed the ot after Jesus was born if we have a copy from two hundred years before He was born?
Not every prophecy has dual fulfillment. I will need some time to compile a list though.
Click to expand...
In Jewish OT manuscripts (the ones Protestants used until the 1960s when scholars from other denominations were given access to the Vatican manuscripts -yes, plural, there are many different versions of the same book sometimes!- of the Septuagint and the Vulgate) the greek word for “virgin” in Isaiah was changed to “maiden” implying youth and not virginity.

If you read the RSV, you are reading a bible which used Catholic manuscripts (the ones we always use) for your study and enlightenment.

You said EVERY prophetic book has a dual fulfillment.

It is incumbent upon you to back it up or admit you were wrong.

In the early Church (which so many Protestants just yearn for) it was customary to apologize publicly for statements not in line with orthodox teaching. Follow the custom, Newbie.
Click to expand...
 
JonathanKinsman said:
You really are serious with this old chestnut of the sola scriptura crowd?? Really, Newbie, I thought you knew your Bible!
2 Timothy 3:16

“All scripture is inspired by God and is useful for teaching, for refutation, for correction, and for training in righteousness.”

Okay, Newbie, you brought it up:
  1. There was NO CHRISTIAN CANON or “scripture” other than the Septuagint at the time the Timothy letters were written. Look that one up in Protestant websites, Newbie!
  2. The Gospels and Acts were written AFTER this letter.
  3. Whenever “scripture” is mentioned in ANY NT book, it refers to Jewish scripture from the Septuagint. JESUS QUOTED THE SEPTUAGINT !
  4. There was no Catholic Bible at this time.
So, how does this passage give credence to your assertion that “we could base all doctrine solely on the Bible and nothing else”?
Click to expand...
Come on, Newbie, Manny and I and others are awaiting your reply anxiously!

Where is the scriptural proof for “doctrine” in the Bible???
Click to expand...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top