SPLIT: What did Christ teach that wasn't written,and if it wasn't written how can you be sure He taught it?

[guanophore]

It is possible, alternatively, to suggest that as we are all children of God - every single human being - and we are beloved of Him,

This is not “alternative”. This is a given. God made humanity, an declared it “good”. He loves all, and desires that all come to the knowledge of the Truth. He made us for HImself.

no one individual or group of individuals has a greater claim on God’s grace,

I would say that no one has a “claim” on His grace. It is free and unmerited. However, not all avail themselves of HIs loving grace.
Some reject God’s purpose for themselves.

on His overwhelming love for His children which will keep them within His blessed comfort for all eternity. Except those of course who are innately evil, and have deliberately separated themselves from his omni-beneficence.

This is definitely and “alternative” gospel. God is loving, and desires our fellowship for eternity. However, in His love He is just, and will not be in the presence of sin. Those who prefer sin over Him will not be in “blessed comfort for all eternity”.

 

[adstrinity]

THREE DAYS on CAF reading no thread but this one!!! HAHA! I made it!!!

During the Time of the Apostles there was no King James Bible and how about those who do not speak English? How would preach the Gospel if someone cannot speak English? You can’t hand them a KJV Bible. You have to give them a Spanish Translation of the Bible.

What if they don’t speak Spanish, do we still have to give them a Spanish Translation of the Bible? OOOH! Are they the ones we have to give a Spanish Translation of the Bible to most of all?

…

Anyway, 18 [22-23] Peter’s refusal to accept Jesus’ predicted suffering and death is seen as a satanic attempt to deflect Jesus from his God-appointed course, and the disciple is addressed in terms that recall Jesus’ dismissal of the devil in the temptation account (Matthew 4:10: “Get away, Satan!”). Peter’s satanic purpose is emphasized by Matthew’s addition to the Marcan source of the words You are an obstacle to me.
nccbuscc.org/nab/bible/matthew/matthew16.htm#foot18

13 [18] You are Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church: the Aramaic word kepa - meaning rock and transliterated into Greek as Kephas is the name by which Peter is called in the Pauline letters (1 Cor 1:12; 3:22; 9:5; 15:4; Gal 1:18; 2:9, 11, 14) except in Gal 2:7-8 (“Peter”). It is translated as Petros (“Peter”) in John 1:42. The presumed original Aramaic of Jesus’ statement would have been, in English, “You are the Rock (Kepa) and upon this rock (kepa) I will build my church.” The Greek text probably means the same, for the difference in gender between the masculine noun petros, the disciple’s new name, and the feminine noun petra (rock) may be due simply to the unsuitability of using a feminine noun as the proper name of a male. Although the two words were generally used with slightly different nuances, they were also used interchangeably with the same meaning, “rock.” Church: this word (Greek ekklesia) occurs in the gospels only here and in Matthew 18:17 (twice). There are several possibilities for an Aramaic original. Jesus’ church means the community that he will gather and that, like a building, will have Peter as its solid foundation. That function of Peter consists in his being witness to Jesus as the Messiah, the Son of the living God. The gates of the netherworld shall not prevail against it: the netherworld (Greek Hades, the abode of the dead) is conceived of as a walled city whose gates will not close in upon the church of Jesus, i.e., it will not be overcome by the power of death.
usccb.org/nab/bible/matthew/matthew16.htm#foot12

The scene opens with Jesus and the Twelve in the region of Caesarea Philippi – an area where ancient pagan worship of the Greek god Pan – the god of Spring and shepherds – once flourished (Ray 1999, 32-33). It was a dramatic place located on the side of a mountain with a sheer rock wall overshadowing the town with Pan’s namesake, Paneas. Adding to the already stunning landscape, a temple to the Roman Caesar Augustus stood at the wall’s highest point. The scene is ripe with symbolism for Catholics. Catholic apologist Stephen Ray points out, “By choosing this location for the appointment, Jesus clearly shows that he is setting up his divine kingdom in opposition to the worldly kingdom of the Roman Caesars, who claimed divinity for themselves” (1999, 32).
crosswalk.com/root/spirituallife/11574606/page0/

AND, I would recommend as well, “Upon This Rock,” by Stephen K. Ray for more on the setting and the meaning of the statement, “Upon this Rock.”

 

[n2thelight]

Ignatius

By the way, you still are ducking the issue and have not addressed the issues and questions I raised above.
Please answer these questions!

1. Does the Bible say that the Bible is the Pillar and Foundation of Truth or does it say that Scripture is profitable for reproof, for correction and for instruction.?

1. Does the Bible say that The Church is the Pillar and Foundation of Truth and that it is through The Church that the manifold wisdom of God is made known?

Do you know the menaning of the verses that you got your questions from?

II Timothy 3:16 “All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:”

All Scripture that is written in the Word of God was given by the Holy Spirit of God. Every word that Moses wrote, that David wrote, and that Paul wrote were given by the inspiration of the Holy Spirit and placed by God into their minds. It is also through the Holy Spirit that will reveal to you the doctrine or teaching that you are to know from this Word. It doesn’t come from any man, but from the Spirit of God and His Word. “For reproof” is so that you can prove it for yourself and see that it is true and real. To show you when something is right or wrong.

“For correction” is to help you change those things that are not in accordance with God’s Word. Correction is a daily thing in your life, for as long as you are in your flesh body, you will be doing things and saying things that need correction. “Instruction in righteousness” means to discipline yourself in those things you know to be righteous. We are living in that time when deception and false doctrine will be at its greatest, and that is why we must stay in the Word for our instructions in righteousness, and discipline ourselves to pay attention to what is said and the events that are going on around us each day.

Ephesians 3:10 “To the intent that now unto the principalities and powers in heavenly places might be known by the church the manifold wisdom of God,”

The “principalities” are the rulers, not just of this earth, but “angelic beings” also. This means that Satan himself, and his fallen angels, as well as Satan’s children [Kenites] are , or “might be known by the Church”. The church is the body of Christ, and if you know and understand who is in Satan’s realm, then you have the “wisdom of God”.

This is Paul’s intent in writing this letter to the Ephesians. So that they and you can identify all of Satan’s forces, both on earth, [the Kenites], and his angels when they arrive on earth at the sounding of the fifth trumpet [Revelation 9:1-10].

The true “wisdom of God” is to know our Heavenly Father, and His love and fairness towards each of us.

theseason.org/nt.htm

Again you all keep saying the Church,as meaning Roman Catholic
having all authority,I don’t buy that,Im part of the church lead by the Holy Spirit,not the Pope

Galatians 1:8 “But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed.”

Paul is saying that though he or those that were with him, or even an angel from heaven come to you with any other gospel then the gospel that Paul preached when he was with them, let them be cursed. Call it to his face the lie that he is spreading, and curse him for spreading those lies.

Now,how can I know what he preached except it be from the word of God,which is the Bible,being that I was not there.

"No man, no church, no religious authority has any warrant from God to augment the inspired Word of Scripture with additional traditions, or to alter the plain sense of it by subjecting it to the rigors of a “traditional” meaning not found in the Word itself. To do so is clearly to invalidate the Word of God—and we know what our Lord thinks of that (Matt. 15:6-9). "

Again if tradition goes against the Word,I am not to believe it,regardless of who told me.

And for those here who have said Ive not answered a particular question,I will,don’t worry.

 

[Lisdogan]

I hestate to say this…but if you believe the Bible is not the infallible Word of God, you are not Catholic. Very nice of you to provide titles of encyclicals, but not one of them contradicts the Catechism of the Catholic Church:

[ARTICLE 3
SACRED SCRIPTURE

I. CHRIST - THE UNIQUE WORD OF SACRED SCRIPTURE ](Catechism of the Catholic Church - PART 1 SECTION 1 CHAPTER 2 ARTICLE 3)

I understand of course what you are saying. But what do you say about the dinosaurs who roamed earth for millions of years, long before the creation story of Genesis? What about conflicting evidence in OT and NT in may-times-identified cases? This is a big bottle of confusion for the thinking Catholic, ne?

The Encyclicals and the Vatican publication on reading the Bible (John Paul II and Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger) do not contradict the Church’s position on the immutable infallibility of the Bible perhaps, but they certainly do suggest different ways in which exegetes interpret the truth it contains.

 

[Lisdogan]

Just to clarify:
A document can only be error free. Scripture is error free.

Please can you clarify what you mean here?

 

[Lisdogan]

To be taught what we should believe, especially considering that it is the truth, is absolutely not objectionable. There is no brainwashing in the Catholic Church, because there is no need for it. We as a Church teach all of God’s people (or at least those who will listen) the fullness of truth, using the authority passed down from Jesus himself.

 

[Lisdogan]

You have a few things correct here, but you also have a few things very wrong which might be at the root of your struggle. As I clarified earlier, Scripture is inerrant. From what you write here it sounds like you might not even believe that. I am also not sure if you understand what it means to be infallible. Many new Catholics and non-Catholics do not understand it, so it might be best to leave it out of the conversation for now. Scripture is inerrant.

Your “it does not say it all” leads me to see where you are possibly going off track. Sacred Scripture was never intended to “say it all.” Scripture itself records that “all the books in the world could not contain” everything Christ did. The Church has always studied from outside the direct scope of the Bible. That is what Sacred Tradition IS. Tradition produced Scripture, but they are not at odds with each other.

Where we look is to the Church. The Church has the authority to teach. The Church has preserved Sacred Tradition and the Church has preserved and produced Sacred Scripture from those many other non-inspired documents out there. Those are the three legs that are the Church.

Thank you for this really helpful post. Let me ask for more help.

• What do we mean when we say ‘The Bible is inerrant’?
• What do we mean when we say the ‘truth of the Bible is immutable’?
• How does the Church/Pope/Magisterium inter alia discern which are the ‘many other non-inspired documents’?
• If a document is ‘non-inspired’ might it not contain errors, and therefore not be inerrant until incorporated in Sacred Scripture?
• How was the body of Sacred Tradition evolved and defined?
• What do we take from the Saints and Doctors of the Church over the ages in terms of content of the Sacred Tradition - and if a Saint is a Saint, do we automatically assume that his or her perceptions and pronouncements are of the faith/consistent with Sacred Tradition/inerrant/infallible/immutable?

There seems to be a lot that I am not allowed to think about for myself. I am not being facetious; just frustrated as I am a convert -not a cradle Catholic - and have not been taught all the correct truths. I am also a liberal. Is that a Bad Thing?

It is common cause, I think, that a religion that does not grow, expand, revitalise and renew its commitments, will ultimately die. I think about that a lot.

In Christ

 

[NotWorthy]

Do you know the menaning of the verses that you got your questions from?

II Timothy 3:16 “All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:”

All Scripture that is written in the Word of God was given by the Holy Spirit of God. Every word that Moses wrote, that David wrote, and that Paul wrote were given by the inspiration of the Holy Spirit and placed by God into their minds. It is also through the Holy Spirit that will reveal to you the doctrine or teaching that you are to know from this Word. It doesn’t come from any man, but from the Spirit of God and His Word. “For reproof” is so that you can prove it for yourself and see that it is true and real. To show you when something is right or wrong.

Except of course if one is ignorant and twists it to fit their own purposes. You can make this statement above all you want, but you will have to explain how two and or more faiths can use this technique (Holy Spirit inspired interpretation) to come up with two completely different teachings.

“For correction” is to help you change those things that are not in accordance with God’s Word. Correction is a daily thing in your life, for as long as you are in your flesh body, you will be doing things and saying things that need correction. “Instruction in righteousness” means to discipline yourself in those things you know to be righteous. We are living in that time when deception and false doctrine will be at its greatest, and that is why we must stay in the Word for our instructions in righteousness, and discipline ourselves to pay attention to what is said and the events that are going on around us each day.

Ephesians 3:10 “To the intent that now unto the principalities and powers in heavenly places might be known by the church the manifold wisdom of God,”

The “principalities” are the rulers, not just of this earth, but “angelic beings” also. This means that Satan himself, and his fallen angels, as well as Satan’s children [Kenites] are , or “might be known by the Church”. The church is the body of Christ, and if you know and understand who is in Satan’s realm, then you have the “wisdom of God”.

This is Paul’s intent in writing this letter to the Ephesians. So that they and you can identify all of Satan’s forces, both on earth, [the Kenites], and his angels when they arrive on earth at the sounding of the fifth trumpet [Revelation 9:1-10].

The true “wisdom of God” is to know our Heavenly Father, and His love and fairness towards each of us.

So, you are claiming to have this wisdom of God? I’m impressed.

Again you all keep saying the Church,as meaning Roman Catholic
having all authority,I don’t buy that,Im part of the church lead by the Holy Spirit,not the Pope

Do you deny the Law of Gravity? What does that prove?

Galatians 1:8 “But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed.”

And you’ve tried to spread proof of this, and you haven’t proven a thing. All you’ve left is a pile of accusations, that when someone proves it, you just throw out some more chum.

Paul is saying that though he or those that were with him, or even an angel from heaven come to you with any other gospel then the gospel that Paul preached when he was with them, let them be cursed. Call it to his face the lie that he is spreading, and curse him for spreading those lies.

Now,how can I know what he preached except it be from the word of God,which is the Bible,being that I was not there.

"No man, no church, no religious authority has any warrant from God to augment the inspired Word of Scripture with additional traditions, or to alter the plain sense of it by subjecting it to the rigors of a “traditional” meaning not found in the Word itself. To do so is clearly to invalidate the Word of God—and we know what our Lord thinks of that (Matt. 15:6-9).

It’s funny you should say that, for Scripture makes that statement pretty clear. You still haven’t proved that any thing other than the Church is the Pillar and Bulwark of Truth.

Again if tradition goes against the Word,I am not to believe it,regardless of who told me.

And for those here who have said Ive not answered a particular question,I will,don’t worry.

By the way, you haven’t answered the question. Scripture tells you to take it to the Church, not to twist the words of Scripture to your own use.

 

[SD_Catholic]

Do you know the menaning of the verses that you got your questions from?

II Timothy 3:16 “All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:”

All Scripture that is written in the Word of God was given by the Holy Spirit of God. Every word that Moses wrote, that David wrote, and that Paul wrote were given by the inspiration of the Holy Spirit and placed by God into their minds. It is also through the Holy Spirit that will reveal to you the doctrine or teaching that you are to know from this Word. It doesn’t come from any man, but from the Spirit of God and His Word. “For reproof” is so that you can prove it for yourself and see that it is true and real. To show you when something is right or wrong.

“For correction” is to help you change those things that are not in accordance with God’s Word. Correction is a daily thing in your life, for as long as you are in your flesh body, you will be doing things and saying things that need correction. “Instruction in righteousness” means to discipline yourself in those things you know to be righteous. We are living in that time when deception and false doctrine will be at its greatest, and that is why we must stay in the Word for our instructions in righteousness, and discipline ourselves to pay attention to what is said and the events that are going on around us each day.

Ephesians 3:10 “To the intent that now unto the principalities and powers in heavenly places might be known by the church the manifold wisdom of God,”

The “principalities” are the rulers, not just of this earth, but “angelic beings” also. This means that Satan himself, and his fallen angels, as well as Satan’s children [Kenites] are , or “might be known by the Church”. The church is the body of Christ, and if you know and understand who is in Satan’s realm, then you have the “wisdom of God”.

This is Paul’s intent in writing this letter to the Ephesians. So that they and you can identify all of Satan’s forces, both on earth, [the Kenites], and his angels when they arrive on earth at the sounding of the fifth trumpet [Revelation 9:1-10].

The true “wisdom of God” is to know our Heavenly Father, and His love and fairness towards each of us.

theseason.org/nt.htm

Again you all keep saying the Church,as meaning Roman Catholic
having all authority,I don’t buy that,Im part of the church lead by the Holy Spirit,not the Pope

Galatians 1:8 “But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed.”

Paul is saying that though he or those that were with him, or even an angel from heaven come to you with any other gospel then the gospel that Paul preached when he was with them, let them be cursed. Call it to his face the lie that he is spreading, and curse him for spreading those lies.

Now,how can I know what he preached except it be from the word of God,which is the Bible,being that I was not there.

"No man, no church, no religious authority has any warrant from God to augment the inspired Word of Scripture with additional traditions, or to alter the plain sense of it by subjecting it to the rigors of a “traditional” meaning not found in the Word itself. To do so is clearly to invalidate the Word of God—and we know what our Lord thinks of that (Matt. 15:6-9). "

Again if tradition goes against the Word,I am not to believe it,regardless of who told me.

And for those here who have said Ive not answered a particular question,I will,don’t worry.

Do you really think Jesus would set up a “church” that would have so many different beliefs… as in thousands of protestant denoms… do you believe this was his intentions? If no… than all that claim to belong to his Church can’t all be right can they?

Again since you say everything a man should know is in Scripture… obviously you haven’t thought about how the average Christian would become a Christian in the years… uhmmm let’s say 100AD, 225AD, or 300AD… This should be easy to answer…

SD

 

[cfrancis]

Do you know the menaning of the verses that you got your questions from?

II Timothy 3:16 "All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:"

All Scripture that is written in the Word of God was given by the Holy Spirit of God. Every word that Moses wrote, that David wrote, and that Paul wrote were given by the inspiration of the Holy Spirit and placed by God into their minds.

Ooooohhhh, I like 2 Tim 3:16!

In its immediate context, Paul was speaking of the OT, as evidenced by vv14-15:
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.

Yet in its broader context, yes, Paul was speaking about the writings that would eventually become the NT - yet he makes no mention of those, and the Holy Spirit didn’t inspire any of the NT authors to delineate what those writings were.

SOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO…

You and all Christians are still dependent upon an extra-Biblical source - a Sacred Tradition - to tell you what books belong in the Bible.

 

[JLongoria]

SOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO…

N2, you need to understand how weak your arguments are. You are drinking in everything from those sites without really pausing to think, “are they really proving anything?”

The answer to that would be no. They’re throwing around accusations without proving anything - there’s no meat to their arguments!

Notice how you, and they, ignore the “profitable” part; in that context, it never says “sufficient”. Something that is “profitable” is really only useful; it does not grant it absolute teaching authority (as would the word “sufficient”), nor does it make it all-encompassing.

One can lie to themselves all they want in order to never admit that they are wrong, yet the truth of this Scripture still stands. Consider the ramifications then if we actually pay attention to that
“profitable” part:

Suddenly, extra-Biblical - meaning stuff that is not in the Bible - is not actually anti-Biblical. Sure, if it does against what is said in the Bible, then you bet it is wrong!

Yet nothing the Catholic Church teaches goes against the Bible; it is completely Christ-centered. If you actually read about the real Catholic Church, you would know that. In the spirit of seeking truth, I would stop reading those horrendously biased websites.

Every single piece of evidence you have brought up has been thoroughly refuted, and you have yet to acknowledge some of the absolutely brilliant posts by other posters here. You have yet to acknowledge scripture as saying the Church is the pillar of truth, among many other things.

I implore you, my friend: seek the truth in these Scriptures. Let not you deceive yourself in to thinking you are Spirit-lead, for the Spirit led the Church for 1500 years before the heresy of personal interpretation reared its ugly head.

And what’s interesting is that Catholics believe the same things taught **before **the Council of Trent. Nothing has changed; instead, some things were clarified so as to say, “you silly Reformers have had it wrong about us since the beginning! You don’t even understand against that which you rebel: Christ’s Church”.

I pray for you, N2, that you see how erroneous this path you have taken truly is.

 

[po18guy]

II Timothy 3:16 “All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:”

Note: it does not say “scripture is all”, it says “all scripture” Big difference, and one that leads astray.

theseason.org/nt.htm

What authority can be found at this site? None. Whoever assembled it has no more authority than you or I to interpret scripture, or prophecies thereof. I refer to 2 Peter 1:19-22

Again you all keep saying the Church,as meaning Roman Catholic

Christ founded one church. Period. Luke 11:23 “He who is not with me is against me, and he who does not gather with me, scatters.”

…having all authority,I don’t buy that,Im part of the church lead by the Holy Spirit, not the Pope

So, the Holy Spirit can lead a personal friend of yours, the pastor, but cannot lead another man, who has the office of Peter? I find that very interesting.

"No man, no church, no religious authority has any warrant from God to augment the inspired Word of Scripture with additional traditions, or to alter the plain sense of it by subjecting it to the rigors of a “traditional” meaning not found in the Word itself. To do so is clearly to invalidate the Word of God

How can you expect us to believe this personal opinion? It’s not from the bible.

No foundation of solid, authoritative interpretation, no true faith. Personal interpretation brings destruction, as it is fostered by the spirit of antichrist, who leads the elect away from the truth.

Christ’s peace.

 

[ChrisWRIT]

"No man, no church, no religious authority has any warrant from God to augment the inspired Word of Scripture with additional traditions, or to alter the plain sense of it by subjecting it to the rigors of a “traditional” meaning not found in the Word itself. To do so is clearly to invalidate the Word of God—and we know what our Lord thinks of that (Matt. 15:6-9). "

Again if tradition goes against the Word,I am not to believe it,regardless of who told me.

I agree.

So why exactly do you hold to the man made tradition of Sola Scriptura, which invalidates the Word of God?

Doing so is based on the claim that ANY individual man has the authority to “augment” the Scriptures by putting them in a position that they do not attempt to take, and in fact, refute.

Just curious.

 

[Randy_Carson]

Do you know the menaning of the verses that you got your questions from?

II Timothy 3:16 “All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:”

It’s interesting that you non-Catholics always seem to forget that Paul also wrote 2 Timothy 3:14-15! Maybe that is because it supports Catholic teaching concerning Scripture, Tradition and the Magisterium. Take a look:

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.

gain you all keep saying the Church, as meaning Roman Catholic, having all authority,I don’t buy that,Im part of the church lead by the Holy Spirit,not the Pope.

If you are led by the Holy Spirit individually, does this mean that you are individually infallible in your understanding of the Bible? Or is it possible that DESPITE being personally led by the Spirit, you might not understand the scriptures correctly?

Now,how can I know what he preached except it be from the word of God,which is the Bible,being that I was not there.

You can know what He preached from the Bible. You cannot know what He meant apart from the infallible teaching of the Church. For example, do you believe that infants should be baptized or not? What scripture verse specifically tells you that you should/should not baptize them?

Again if tradition goes against the Word,I am not to believe it,regardless of who told me.

I invite you to name a single Catholic “tradition” that goes against the Word of God. Of course, I hope that you will explain WHY you believe it does so.

 

[Gamera]

If you are led by the Holy Spirit individually, does this mean that you are individually infallible in your understanding of the Bible? Or is it possible that DESPITE being personally led by the Spirit, you might not understand the scriptures correctly?

I’ve heard it said that the problem with Protestantism isn’t that they don’t have a pope; the problem with Protetsantism is that everyone is his own pope.

 

[Lisdogan]

It is possible, alternatively, to suggest that as we are all children of God - every single human being - and we are beloved of Him, no one individual or group of individuals has a greater claim on God’s grace, on His overwhelming love for His children which will keep them within His blessed comfort for all eternity. Except those of course who are innately evil, and have deliberately separated themselves from his omni-beneficence.

The LORD our God, the LORD is one!

You have written

Everyone who is born under the consequence of original sin is in danger of going to hell. Jesus provided for a way out, through HIs sacrifice on the cross. He entrusted the preaching and teaching of His gospel to HIs apostles, and they to their successors. Those who are not in union with the Apostolic successors are lacking in elements of the teaching of Jesus. All who are lacking have a more difficult time escaping the fires of hell, since only the Truth will provide escape, and they are missing parts of it.

Yes, my take is alternative, or else we have two propositions that are contradictory. You propose we are all bound for hell because we are born under the curse of original sin. We can be saved by Christ, but only if we are in union with the apostolic succession (ie CC), in which case we take our chances.

I have suggested that the CC does not actually enter here any more than the Buddhist Sangha Mehta. We - all 6 billion human beings - are all beloved of the Creator. We all have access to his eternal comfort - except those who are by choice innately evil (define). It is God who decides, not an institution surely.

 

[po18guy]

I’ve heard it said that the problem with Protestantism isn’t that they don’t have a pope; the problem with Protetsantism is that everyone is his own pope.

By simple math, with thousands of denoms, that would make millions of Protestant Popes. And, to think of the trouble the College of Bishops has in reaching agreement on anything…

 

[foundation]

This is not “alternative”. This is a given. God made humanity, an declared it “good”. He loves all, and desires that all come to the knowledge of the Truth. He made us for HImself.

Yes, my take is alternative, or else we have two propositions that are contradictory. You propose we are all bound for hell because we are born under the curse of original sin. We can be saved by Christ, but only if we are in union with the apostolic succession (ie CC), in which case we take our chances by being something else, presumaby Christian to start with.

I have suggested that the CC does not actually enter here any more than the Buddhist Sangha Mehta. We - all 6 billion human beings here now - are all beloved of the Creator. We all have access to his eternal comfort - except those who are by choice innately evil (define). It is God who decides, not an institution surely.

---

 

[foundation]

Except that God distributes His Graces through the Church, the Church that so many have walked away from.

Yes, God can give His Graces where He pleases, but that is up to Him. But He did promise to distribute them through His Church normally.

God distributes His grace as He wills it: it is not for us to determine how He does that, or why, although we do try to discern his will. He does not distribute his grace through CC or any other Christian Church, or any Hindu, Moslem or Daoist organisation, which are of man. He distributes His grace to mankind, his Beloved.

Can you give me a reference for ‘He did promise to distribute them…’?

 

[NotWorthy]

God distributes His grace as He wills it: it is not for us to determine how He does that, or why, although we do try to discern his will. He does not distribute his grace through CC or any other Christian Church, or any Hindu, Moslem or Daoist organisation, which are of man. He distributes His grace to mankind, his Beloved.

Can you give me a reference for ‘He did promise to distribute them…’?

• He instituted the priesthood through the Last Supper, teaching them to repeat His actions in the Eucharist. According to John 6, in the Eucharist, we receive His Graces…
• He gave the Apostles the Authority to Forgive and Retain Sins (surely, you would agree that this is a Grace).
• Peter taught at Pentecost about the Graces received in Baptism - although this Grace can be received through the actions of someone other than the priest/bishop, the Church does teach the form and matter of this means of Grace.
• James teaches of the Annointing of the Sick.

So, although you are correct that God is not limited to these (and other) Promises of His Grace, the Church does have Faith that God distributes His Graces through these channels just as He promised.