The Catholic Church is just another denomination

[MrS]

Jesus set the Old Testament Canon. The rest is easy… I believe the Gospels. I believe Paul was commissioned. I believe Paul’s epistles.

Paul said the Jews have the Oracles of God. If you take a look at the Jewish bible, it contains the exact same books as the Old Testament that I believe in.

Do you believe in Hebrews… who wrote it… how do you know
Do you believe in 1,2 Peter… who wrote it… how do you know

Do you believe in the non-Pauline epistles…

Do you believe in Revelations…

How do you believe all this… after all, none of the NT was commissioned by Jesus… none was written by Him… He never instructed any of the apostles to go forth and write.\

None was commissioned by Paul or the 12

In fact, most of the NT was not written by an apostle.

There are however lots of early writings that were not canonized… who made those critical decisions?? Not Paul, and not the apostles.

Now the reformers took that authority on themselves to pronounce their own canon… but then again they are, in the words of the OP…just another denomination.

So let’s believe believers… the authority for all these decisions must be in the bible…

now… where is that inerrant verse…

 

[MrS]

You didn’t get that? Because I believe in Jesus and His words. Jesus set the Canon and Paul said the Jews have the Oracles of God. I believe Jesus therefore I believe the Word of God. Jesus said it was inspired.

me too… even where He said ONLY TO PETER… “… feed My sheep… tend My flock… feed My sheep…”

The Good Shepherd telling one man that he would be the shepherd of the flock… that includes you and me. Guess you better listen to the shepherd.

 

[believers]

Do you believe in Hebrews… who wrote it… how do you know
Do you believe in 1,2 Peter… who wrote it… how do you know

Do you believe in the non-Pauline epistles…

Do you believe in Revelations…

How do you believe all this… after all, none of the NT was commissioned by Jesus… none was written by Him… He never instructed any of the apostles to go forth and write.\

None was commissioned by Paul or the 12

In fact, most of the NT was not written by an apostle.

There are however lots of early writings that were not canonized… who made those critical decisions?? Not Paul, and not the apostles.

Now the reformers took that authority on themselves to pronounce their own canon… but then again they are, in the words of the OP…just another denomination.

So let’s believe believers… the authority for all these decisions must be in the bible…

now… where is that inerrant verse…

Here let me help you. God is sovereign. God gave us His Word preserved. He would never leave us nor would He forsake us. He knows all and is not bound by space or time. You must trust in God. His Word is pure. It is the truth. God, creator of all things can certainly put a book together.

 

[MrS]

Jesus set the Old Testament Canon. The rest is easy… I believe the Gospels. I believe Paul was commissioned. I believe Paul’s epistles.

so since he quoted from the OT that we know contained 45 books, not just 39… our versions are the same, right… just like the original KJV ??

oh, and which verse did you find where Jesus set the CANON of the OT??

oh, still waiting for the verse that proves scripture is the sole authority…

when you find it , you can then discount all the verses where Jesus delegates authority (and never recinds His delegation) to either Peter alone, or to the 12 in union.

Otherwise, beware the wrath of Korah…

 

[fix]

You didn’t get that? Because I believe in Jesus and His words.

Great. Where can I find He wrote a book? I need an authority to prove to me Christ founded a book.

Jesus set the Canon and Paul said the Jews have the Oracles of God.

Can’t you see this is circular?

I believe Jesus therefore I believe the Word of God. Jesus said it was inspired.

Again, circular.

 

[MrS]

Here let me help you. God is sovereign. God gave us His Word preserved. He would never leave us nor would He forsake us. He knows all and is not bound by space or time. You must trust in God. His Word is pure. It is the truth. God, creator of all things can certainly put a book together.

Yes God, the Holy Spirit is the divine author.

And I still warn you that when you claim the Holy Spirit is leading you in one direction, and your protestant brother claims the same for another direction… at the very least, one of you is wrong.

Your faith community is at best a temporary walk toward the fulness of the Truth, found only in the one Church - with Authority - founded by Jesus Christ Himself… not a reformer, heretic etc.

Still waiting on the question … well, you know.

 

[believers]

Great. Where can I find He wrote a book? I need an authority to prove to me Christ founded a book.

Can’t you see this is circular?

Again, circular.

This is not circular. You just don’t understand it.

Luk 24:44
And he said unto them, These [are] the words which I spake unto you, while I was yet with you, that all things must be fulfilled, which were written in the law of Moses, and [in] the prophets, and [in] the psalms, concerning me (Jesus).

That means the Jews have the Oracles of God. Therefore, it is the Word of God.

 

[believers]

so since he quoted from the OT that we know contained 45 books, not just 39… our versions are the same, right… just like the original KJV ??

oh, and which verse did you find where Jesus set the CANON of the OT??

oh, still waiting for the verse that proves scripture is the sole authority…

when you find it , you can then discount all the verses where Jesus delegates authority (and never recinds His delegation) to either Peter alone, or to the 12 in union.

Otherwise, beware the wrath of Korah…

Rom 3:1-2
What advantage then hath the Jew? or what profit [is there] of circumcision?
Much every way: chiefly, because that unto them were committed the oracles of God.

Luk 24:44
And he said unto them, These [are] the words which I spake unto you, while I was yet with you, that all things must be fulfilled, which were written in the law of Moses, and [in] the prophets, and [in] the psalms, concerning me.

Luk 11:51
From the blood of Abel unto the blood of Zacharias, which perished between the altar and the temple: verily I say unto you, It shall be required of this generation.

The traditional Jewish canon was divided into three sections (Law, Prophets, Writings), and an unusual feature of the last section was the listing of Chronicles out of historical order, placing it after Ezra-Nehemiah and making it the last book of the canon. In light of this, the words of Jesus in Luke 11:50-51 reflect the settled character of the Jewish canon (with its peculiar order) already in his day. Christ uses the expression “from the blood of Abel to the blood of Zechariah,” which appears troublesome since Zechariah was not chronologically the last martyr mentioned in the Bible (Jer. 26:20-23). However, Zechariah is the last martyr we read of in the Old Testament according to Jewish canonical order (II Chron. 24:20-22), which was apparently recognized by Jesus and his hearers.

 

[MrS]

Rom 3:1-2
What advantage then hath the Jew? or what profit [is there] of circumcision?
Much every way: chiefly, because that unto them were committed the oracles of God.

Luk 24:44
And he said unto them, These [are] the words which I spake unto you, while I was yet with you, that all things must be fulfilled, which were written in the law of Moses, and [in] the prophets, and [in] the psalms, concerning me.

Luk 11:51
From the blood of Abel unto the blood of Zacharias, which perished between the altar and the temple: verily I say unto you, It shall be required of this generation.

The traditional Jewish canon was divided into three sections (Law, Prophets, Writings), and an unusual feature of the last section was the listing of Chronicles out of historical order, placing it after Ezra-Nehemiah and making it the last book of the canon. In light of this, the words of Jesus in Luke 11:50-51 reflect the settled character of the Jewish canon (with its peculiar order) already in his day. Christ uses the expression “from the blood of Abel to the blood of Zechariah,” which appears troublesome since Zechariah was not chronologically the last martyr mentioned in the Bible (Jer. 26:20-23). However, Zechariah is the last martyr we read of in the Old Testament according to Jewish canonical order (II Chron. 24:20-22), which was apparently recognized by Jesus and his hearers.

regardless of how many books of the OT you choose to accept, you might consider them as fulfilled in the NT… like Isaah 20 20 fulfilled in Matt 16:18

oops sorry, that has to do with authority… and you don’t get it.

 

[believers]

so since he quoted from the OT that we know contained 45 books, not just 39… our versions are the same, right… just like the original KJV ??

oh, and which verse did you find where Jesus set the CANON of the OT??

oh, still waiting for the verse that proves scripture is the sole authority…

when you find it , you can then discount all the verses where Jesus delegates authority (and never recinds His delegation) to either Peter alone, or to the 12 in union.

Otherwise, beware the wrath of Korah…

You mean the authority when they judge the 12 tribes of Israel? Remember, the Christian church was called out of the gentiles… not the 12 tribes of Israel.

 

[MrS]

You mean the authority when they judge the 12 tribes of Israel? Remember, the Christian church was called out of the gentiles.

The Christian Church (singular ) is the fullfillment of the Jewish Covenants, and the the old Jerusalem.

It is for all, Jew and non-Jew (gentile)

My reference to authority stemmed from your post. Jesus delegates His authority in the NT to Peter alone, or to Peter and the 11 in unity …

They alone had the power to lay on hands to consecrate new bishops, like Paul, who could then in turn ordain others into the ministerial priesthood…

We have so much that you lack… hence the Catholic Church is not just another denomination.

 

[believers]

The Christian Church is the fullfillment of the Jewish Covenants, and the the old Jerusalem.

It is for all, Jew and non-Jew (gentile)

My reference to authority stemmed from your post. Jesus delegates His authority in the NT to Peter alone, or to Peter and the 11 in unity …

They alone had the power to lay on hands to consecrate new bishops, like Paul, who could then in turn ordain others into the ministerial priesthood…

We have so much that you lack… hence the Catholic Church is not just another denomination.

Yes, I lack roman catholic doctrines. But I don’t lack faith in Jesus Christ. I believe on Him alone to get me into heaven. I don’t have faith in anything or anyone but Jesus. I joined His church by believing in His gospel and repenting. According to His promise, I’m saved.

 

[nerfherder]

makes you wonder what he/she really believes in …

Why does that make you wonder, I wonder?

All it means is that, like many others, I do not believe scripture ie the Bible, is the sole authority. Neither do some Catholics on this Forum.

It does not speak to what I do believe in.

And I am a she fyi.

 

[fix]

This is not circular. You just don’t understand it.

Luk 24:44
And he said unto them, These [are] the words which I spake unto you, while I was yet with you, that all things must be fulfilled, which were written in the law of Moses, and [in] the prophets, and [in] the psalms, concerning me (Jesus).

That means the Jews have the Oracles of God. Therefore, it is the Word of God.

“If you should find someone who does not yet believe in the gospel, what would you [Mani] answer him when he says, ‘I do not believe’? Indeed, I would not believe in the gospel myself if the authority of the Catholic Church did not move me to do so” (ibid., 5:6). catholic.com/library/What_Catholic_Means.asp

 

[MrS]

Yes, I lack roman catholic doctrines. But I don’t lack faith in Jesus Christ. I believe on Him alone to get me into heaven. I don’t have faith in anything or anyone but Jesus. I joined His church by believing in His gospel and repenting. According to His promise, I’m saved.

you have a different definition of saved and those differences often are the crux of the problem.

I laud your statement that you have faith in Jesus Christ. I could only hope that you continue to increase your faith to all that He said and all that He directed, and all that He commanded, and all that He taught.

But if you don’t have or believe in the Real Presence so clear in John 6, and again clear in Paul, , … then you really don’t have his Gospel…yet.

The good news is that He did not leave us orphans, that He will always be with us, that He has re-opened the Gates of Heaven for those who listen, and obey.

If “saved” is a final declaration… Catholics would contend that you are not “saved” until those Gates of Heaven close behind you.

Your “favorite” apostle, St Paul even asked the early Church members to pray that he not become lost.

Q: If he knew that salvation is a process, and that one can lose his justification (and Paul did know that)… how can you presume to know more?

A: You can’t… so work out your salvation in fear and trembling.

oopps… there is that nasty word…work…
Oh well, guess the Catholic Church is NOT just another denomination.

A #2 your interpretation is faulty

or… both A and A2

 

[Kurt_G]

Where in scripture does Paul recognize Peter’s leadership?

OK, this first one is subjective, I just read it easily this way:
Gal. 2:11 “… to his face” and Gal. 2:14 “… to Kephas, in front of all…” is an indication that Paul is not fearful of calling out even the leader, when it’s necessary.

The second example is the well discussed Acts 15, in which people insist on shouting down even Paul and Barnabas. But once Peter begins talking, everyone stops and listens. Once Peter has spoken and has everyone’s ear, then, and only then, is Paul able to tell of his wonderful conversions.

Yes, I recognize that not everyone would see it this way. It just looks pretty plain to me, that’s all…

Who baptized Paul and when did this happen?

Acts 9:18 “Immediately things like scales fell from his eyes and he regained his sight. He got up and was baptized.”

And, where in scripture exactly does Jesus tell Paul about the eucharist?
This verse says nothing about the eucharist.
1Cr 11:23
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:

• Is this a trick question?* 1 Cor 11:23 (and following) are exactly that-- Jesus in action, instituting His Eucharist for us. But the real point I was trying to make was this: Paul indicates that he learned of this directly from Jesus (not the other apostles), and Paul has passed it on to his congregations.

So, even if your Scriptural interpretations don’t allow for a “Catholic Eucharist” here, at least take the lead from Paul, that the event (call it what you want/Lord’s Supper, Communion meal, etc.) should take a center part of your communal service. (Convert David Currie, for one, had noticed that those who practice a more frequent communion meal become closer Christian communities.)

God Bless Us All!

 

[nerfherder]

Actually, you need to prove that you can use something other than the Word of God. I don’t need to prove that the Bible alone is the authority.

Anyway, here again are the versesPro 15:10
Correction [is] grievous unto him that forsaketh the way: [and] he that hateth reproof shall die.

Believe the Bible or die. Can your church say that?

What does it mean: Believe the Bible or die? I do not understand the intent of this statement. It seems terribly ferocious.

 

[MrS]

Why does that make you wonder, I wonder?

All it means is that, like many others, I do not believe scripture ie the Bible, is the sole authority. Neither do some Catholics on this Forum.

It does not speak to what I do believe in.

And I am a she fyi.

if you noticed, the post refered to your comment on believers, as did my comment.

and we agree again that no Catholic should believe that Scripture is the sole authority… we leave that heretical teaching to those who choose it.

 

[MrS]

OK, this first one is subjective, I just read it easily this way:
Gal. 2:11 “… to his face” and Gal. 2:14 “… to Kephas, in front of all…” is an indication that Paul is not fearful of calling out even the leader, when it’s necessary.

The second example is the well discussed Acts 15, in which people insist on shouting down even Paul and Barnabas. But once Peter begins talking, everyone stops and listens. Once Peter has spoken and has everyone’s ear, then, and only then, is Paul able to tell of his wonderful conversions.

Yes, I recognize that not everyone would see it this way. It just looks pretty plain to me, that’s all…

Acts 9:18 “Immediately things like scales fell from his eyes and he regained his sight. He got up and was baptized.”

Is this a trick question? 1 Cor 11:23 (and following) are exactly that-- Jesus in action, instituting His Eucharist for us. But the real point I was trying to make was this: Paul indicates that he learned of this directly from Jesus (not the other apostles), and Paul has passed it on to his congregations.

So, even if your Scriptural interpretations don’t allow for a “Catholic Eucharist” here, at least take the lead from Paul, that the event (call it what you want/Lord’s Supper, Communion meal, etc.) should take a center part of your communal service. (Convert David Currie, for one, had noticed that those who practice a more frequent communion meal become closer Christian communities.)

God Bless Us All!

nicely done, Kurt… welcome and add believes to your prayer list

 

[nerfherder]

It is not “my” bible. There are many versions, and even more erroneous translation, and ever more erroneous/heretical interpretations.

The Bible is the Book of the Catholic Church, which the Church gives to the world. It was written by human authors under the guidance of the Holy Spirit, the Divine Author of all Scripture.

The Holy Spirit will not divide us. Thus if you say the Holy Spirit is leading you to a different truth or interpretation, you blasphem the Holy Spirit… your world of division is not of God. And St. Paul, the Catholic would agree.

The bible is not a book which belongs to the Church of Rome. And Christ, the founder of the universal catholic church, would agree. I have no doubt.