Trent Horn debate with James White: watch here!

[Sr_Brando]

But you have to know what IS Scripture first, right, Brando?

Who told you that Hebrews is inspired and belongs in the NT?

The answer is: the Catholic Church. Catholic bishops, specifically.

Actually, as far as me specifically and individually, no. The RCC and their bishops didn’t tell me. Not to mention the fact that nearly all of the early church fathers taught that the deuterocanonical books were not canon, but good reads. If you want a quote from Jerome to partially back this up, I’ll give you one.

Got to go for the night! Later all!!

 

[PRmerger]

Actually, as far as me specifically and individually, no. The RCC and their bishops didn’t tell me.

Yes, they did, Brando.

Unless you have claimed for yourself the right to decide which ancient texts are inspired?

You have some sort of way to determine whether something belongs in the NT or not?

 

[Lenten_ashes]

Actually, as far as me specifically and individually, no. The RCC and their bishops didn’t tell me. !

Let’s see, there were human beings who said the 27 NT books were inspired. They even put nice chapter divisions in them for you… Those human beings belonged to the Catholic Church.

They told you indirectly and you are trusting that they were guided by the Spirit… There is just no way around this my friend lol

 

[Lenten_ashes]

I agree to disagree. hahaha

Just FYI, you will be taken much more seriously if you leave out the Roman part.

People who come here and insist on calling us “Roman” are usually combative trolls.

The Baptist Church started out of Holland. But you don’t hear anyone being disrespectful, trying to marginalize them by calling them Holland Baptists.

We are Catholic and most of us have never attended Church in Rome.

Thanks.

 

[adamhovey1988]

Just FYI, you will be taken much more seriously if you leave out the Roman part.

People who come here and insist on calling us “Roman” are usually combative trolls.

The Baptist Church started out of Holland. But you don’t hear anyone being disrespectful, trying to marginalize them by calling them Holland Baptists.

We are Catholic and most of us have never attended Church in Rome.

Thanks.

Technically speaking the name of the church in most of the West is the Latin church which uses the Roman rite. Usually when we say Roman Catholic it should refer to the Diocese of Rome. I prefer not to call myself something that originated as an insult when there’s already a word for Catholics, Catholics. if I have to specify I will say that I am Latin some people will say Roman rite or Latin rite. Anyway that’s a thread for another day.

 

[Lenten_ashes]

Technically speaking the name of the church in most of the West is the Latin church which uses the Roman rite. Usually when we say Roman Catholic it should refer to the Diocese of Rome. I prefer not to call myself something that originated as an insult when there’s already a word for Catholics, Catholics. if I have to specify I will say that I am Latin some people will say Roman rite or Latin rite. Anyway that’s a thread for another day.

Yes, I have no problem with the Latin or Roman rite label because it’s totally accurate.

But we know where the “Roman Catholic” label came from (angry early reformers) so many find it offensive and uncharitable to use it here.

Next step is to start calling us “Papists”.

 

[LatinRight]

God bless MT1926 and Lenten_ashes,

You didn’t understand because I didn’t explain it in very well.

So, I try to explain it as a whole and might understand it.

THE QUESTION IS:

Is it a possibility that God saves reprobates, whose names God taken out from the Book of Life and predestined them all to hell before the creation of the world, for their vehement rejection of God and His grace?

There are two crucial points in the above question as follows:

1. For their vehement rejection of God and His grace, God erased their names from the Book of Life, before the creation of the world.
2. For their vehement rejection of God and His grace, God predestined them all to hell, before the creation of the world.

IT IS CRUCIAL TO UNDERSTAND, their names erased from the Book of Life and they are all predestined to hell, BEFORE the creation of the world.

It is also crucial to UNDERSTAND, God has completed the Book of Life before the foundation of the word, and from the completion, the Book of Life admits neither ADDITIONS no ERASURES.

This fact sometimes can cause confusion because God completed the Book of life before the foundation of the world, according to His “chronological order.”

But things concerning the Book of Life in the Bible, for our understanding it is written in our chronological order, like the names of the reprobates taken out from the Book of life in our chronological order, in our time, THIS IS NOT THE CASE.

For our understanding, we must very well know the RCC teachings on predestination!!!

**The Catholic Church affirms predestination as a *DE FIDE *Dogma (the highest level of binding theological certainty).

CATHOLIC ENCYCLOPEDIA

THE CATHOLIC DOGMA. – The predestination of the elect**

Consequently, the whole future membership of heaven, down to its minutest details, has

been IRREVOCABLY FIXED FROM ALL ETERNITY. Nor could it be otherwise. For if it

were possible that a predestined individual should after all be CAST INTO HELL or that

one not predestined should in the end REACH HEAVEN, then God would have been

MISTAKEN in his foreknowledge of future events; He would NO LONGER be omniscient.

God’s unerring foreknowledge and foreordaining is designated in the Bible by the beautiful

figure of the “Book of Life” (liber vitæ, to biblion tes zoes). This book of life is a list which

contains the names of ALL THE ELECT and admits NEITHER ADDITIONS NO ERASURES.

(2) The second quality of predestination, the DEFINITENESS of the number of the elect,

follows NATURALLY from the first. For if the eternal counsel of God regarding the

predestined is UNCHANGEABLE, then the number of the predestined must likewise be

UNCHANGEABLE and DEFINITE, subject NEITHER to ADDITIONS nor to

CANCELLATIONS. Anything indefinite in the number would eo ipso imply a lack of

certitude in God’s knowledge and would DESTROY His omniscience. End quote. Emphasis added.

THE FOLLOWING CRUCIAL FACTS FROM THE ABOVE TEACHINGS OF THE RCC

1. The Book of Life completed before the foundation of the world, from completion, the Book of Life admits NEITHER ADDITIONS NO ERASURES.
2. Only the names of the elect stands written in the Book of Life, they are all predestined to heaven, and they cannot lose their salvation.
3. The names of the reprobates, for their vehement rejection of God and His grace taken out from the Book of Life and they are predestined to hell, before the creation of the world.
4. If an elect would end up in hell or a reprobate would end up in heaven, God would lose His omniscience.

Continue

 

[LatinRight]

Continuation

ACCORDING TO EPH.2:19-22 THE ELECT ARE THE BUILDING BLOCKS OF GOD’S HOLY TEMPLE AND GOD IS THE ARCHITECT AND THE BUILDER

Ephesians 2:19-22
Consequently, you are no longer foreigners and strangers, but fellow citizens with God’s people and also members of his household, built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, with Christ Jesus himself as the chief cornerstone.

In him the whole building is joined together and rises to become a holy temple in the Lord. And in him you too are being built together to become a dwelling in which God lives by his Spirit. End quote.

A PARALLEL EXAMPLE FOR EASIER UNDERSTANDING

An architect building a temple

The architect’s first work is makes a detailed plan and obtains the building material.

Corresponds: God’s “Predestination and salvation of the elect for obtaining the building material."

The architect rejects the useless building material.

Corresponds: God rejects the useless building material, predestined the reprobates to hell.

The architect carefully choosing the building material.

Corresponds: God carefully choosing the building material.

John 6:44 … NO ONE can come to Me unless the Father DRAWS him.

John 6:65 I have said to you that NO ONE can come to Me unless it has been GRANTED to him by My Father.

John 15:16 … You DID NOT choose Me, but I CHOSE YOU …

THE SEQUENCE OF EVENTS OF THE SALVATION OF THE ELECT – (“BUILDING MATERIAL”)

1. Foreknew. – Those whom He foreknew he also predestined.
2. Predestined. – Those whom He predestined he also called.
3. Called. – Those whom He called he also justified.
4. Justified. – Those whom He justified he also glorified.
5. Glorified

The architect builds the good building material into the temple.

Corresponds: God builds His elect (“building material”) into His Holy Temple.

The architect never built useless building material into the temple.

Corresponds: God never built reprobates into His Holy Temple.

Eph.2:21-22;
In him the whole building is joined together and rises to become a holy temple in the Lord.
And in him you too are being built together to become a dwelling in which God lives by his Spirit. End quote.

The elect enter into the Body of Christ by baptism, and in the Body of Christ they built into God’s Holy Temple for a dwelling place of God in the Spirit.

The architect never built building material into the temple what later need to be replaced.

Corresponds: God never baptized reprobates into the Body of Christ and in the Body of Christ never built reprobates into His Holy Temple.

For their vehement rejection of God and His grace, reprobates predestined to hell before the foundation of the world and they all end up in hell.
They are wrong building materials.

Just as justification and sanctification is one event and cannot be separated,** in the same way baptism into the Body of Christ and in the Body of Christ being built into God’s Holy Temple is one event and cannot be separated.**

As Catholics, we cannot know we are among the elect or the reprobates until we die.

From RCC teachings and from the Scripture we can know, if we are elect we are members of the Body of Christ and in the Body of Christ we have been built into God’s Holy Temple.

We also can know, if we are reprobates for our vehement rejection of God and His grace, God erased our names from the Book of Life and God predestined us to hell, before the creation of the world and we never been baptized into the Body of Christ and in the Body of Christ we never built into God’s Holy Temple. – God knows we are wrong building materials.

We are free to say, in fact this is a *DE FIDE *Dogma of the RCC:
If we are reprobates once, we will die as reprobates, if we are elect once we will die as elect.

If a Catholic doesn’t believe the above statement, doesn’t believe the DE FIDE Dogma of the RCC on the above issue.

If something is not yet clear, please ask. – It is not easy to fully understand.

God bless.

LatinRight

 

[PRmerger]

But we know where the “Roman Catholic” label came from (angry early reformers) so many find it offensive and uncharitable to use it here…

Most of the time it’s just ignorance. They don’t know that the Church isn’t Roman.

That’s just what they’ve heard all their life–the Roman Catholic Church.

 

[PRmerger]

Continuation

ACCORDING TO EPH.2:19-22 THE ELECT ARE THE BUILDING BLOCKS OF GOD’S HOLY TEMPLE AND GOD IS THE ARCHITECT AND THE BUILDER

Ephesians 2:19-22
Consequently, you are no longer foreigners and strangers, but fellow citizens with God’s people and also members of his household, built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, with Christ Jesus himself as the chief cornerstone.

In him the whole building is joined together and rises to become a holy temple in the Lord. And in him you too are being built together to become a dwelling in which God lives by his Spirit. End quote.

A PARALLEL EXAMPLE FOR EASIER UNDERSTANDING

An architect building a temple

The architect’s first work is makes a detailed plan and obtains the building material.

Corresponds: God’s “Predestination and salvation of the elect for obtaining the building material."

The architect rejects the useless building material.

Corresponds: God rejects the useless building material, predestined the reprobates to hell.

The architect carefully choosing the building material.

Corresponds: God carefully choosing the building material.

John 6:44 … NO ONE can come to Me unless the Father DRAWS him.

John 6:65 I have said to you that NO ONE can come to Me unless it has been GRANTED to him by My Father.

John 15:16 … You DID NOT choose Me, but I CHOSE YOU …

THE SEQUENCE OF EVENTS OF THE SALVATION OF THE ELECT – (“BUILDING MATERIAL”)

1. Foreknew. – Those whom He foreknew he also predestined.
2. Predestined. – Those whom He predestined he also called.
3. Called. – Those whom He called he also justified.
4. Justified. – Those whom He justified he also glorified.
5. Glorified

The architect builds the good building material into the temple.

Corresponds: God builds His elect (“building material”) into His Holy Temple.

The architect never built useless building material into the temple.

Corresponds: God never built reprobates into His Holy Temple.

Eph.2:21-22;
In him the whole building is joined together and rises to become a holy temple in the Lord.
And in him you too are being built together to become a dwelling in which God lives by his Spirit. End quote.

The elect enter into the Body of Christ by baptism, and in the Body of Christ they built into God’s Holy Temple for a dwelling place of God in the Spirit.

The architect never built building material into the temple what later need to be replaced.

Corresponds: God never baptized reprobates into the Body of Christ and in the Body of Christ never built reprobates into His Holy Temple.

For their vehement rejection of God and His grace, reprobates predestined to hell before the foundation of the world and they all end up in hell.
They are wrong building materials.

Just as justification and sanctification is one event and cannot be separated,** in the same way baptism into the Body of Christ and in the Body of Christ being built into God’s Holy Temple is one event and cannot be separated.**

As Catholics, we cannot know we are among the elect or the reprobates until we die.

From RCC teachings and from the Scripture we can know, if we are elect we are members of the Body of Christ and in the Body of Christ we have been built into God’s Holy Temple.

We also can know, if we are reprobates for our vehement rejection of God and His grace, God erased our names from the Book of Life and God predestined us to hell, before the creation of the world and we never been baptized into the Body of Christ and in the Body of Christ we never built into God’s Holy Temple. – God knows we are wrong building materials.

We are free to say, in fact this is a *DE FIDE *Dogma of the RCC:
If we are reprobates once, we will die as reprobates, if we are elect once we will die as elect.

If a Catholic doesn’t believe the above statement, doesn’t believe the DE FIDE Dogma of the RCC on the above issue.

If something is not yet clear, please ask. – It is not easy to fully understand.

God bless.

LatinRight

What about Cornelius? He was pleasing to God prior to being regenerated.

 

[Lenten_ashes]

Latin rite,

You are correct. God knows who was saved or not from the beginning and he even knew Lucifer would betray him as well. He wouldn’t be God if he didn’t know all that.

And I understand what you are saying now.

My next question is about the language of the material you quoted from.

Wondering if that is official Church teaching you quoted from? We have a lot of Theologians who’s words get tossed around as if it were, so that’s why i ask.

Thank you and God bless you.

 

[MT1926]

You stated,
I showed that the Word of God by nature is the breath of God, alive and active. If God is infallible, so is his word. I am not changing the definition of infallible.

Actually, you didn’t. You just spouted off a bunch of Bible verses that say what you want them to say. You are using circular reasoning. You basically told me the Bible is infallible, because it it the Word of God. By nature it is the breath of God. I can prove this because the Bible says so. The Bible can not inspire itself. If that is your only defense than the Koran and the Book of Mormon must also be the Word of God because they say so.

Unless an infallible person is reading the Bible, the Bible itself can not be infallible. If you can’t even grasp a concept as simple as this why would anyone trust what you are teaching?

The only possible way for your above statement to be true would be if you could prove you are sitting in a chair and Jesus himself, in person, is reading the scriptures to you. The only other possible way is if Jesus left us a line of succession to speak for him in his visible absence.

Luke 10:16 “He who hears you hears me, and he who rejects you rejects me, and he who rejects me rejects him who sent me.”

 

[MT1926]

God bless MT1926 and Lenten_ashes,

IT IS CRUCIAL TO UNDERSTAND, their names erased from the Book of Life and they are all predestined to hell, BEFORE the creation of the world.

It is also crucial to UNDERSTAND, God has completed the Book of Life before the foundation of the word, and from the completion, the Book of Life admits neither ADDITIONS no ERASURES.

This fact sometimes can cause confusion because God completed the Book of life before the foundation of the world, according to His “chronological order.”

But things concerning the Book of Life in the Bible, for our understanding it is written in our chronological order, like the names of the reprobates taken out from the Book of life in our chronological order, in our time, THIS IS NOT THE CASE.

Continue

Thanks for the response. It was a little to detailed and spread out for me. I had a hard time understanding it. So can’t say you are right or wrong. I did some searching on my own and from what I found I would say you are probably mostly correct, you are just leaving out another part to the story.

This is what I found, I bolded what you sited and other important parts

God’s unerring foreknowledge and foreordaining is designated in the Bible by the beautiful figure of the “Book of Life” (liber vitae, Greek: to biblion tes zoes). This book of life is a list which contains the names of all the elect and admits neither additions nor erasures. From the Old Testament (cf. Ex., xxxii, 32; Ps. lxviii, 29) this symbol was taken over into the New by Christ and His Apostle Paul (cf. Luke, x, 20; Heb., xii, 23), and enlarged upon by the Evangelist John in his Apocalypse [cf. Apoc., xxi, 27: “There shall not enter into it anything defiled. but they that are written in the book of life of the Lamb” (cf. Apoc., xiii, 8; xx, 15)]. The correct explanation of this symbolic book is given by St. Augustine (De civ. Dei, XX, xiii): “Praescientia Dei, quae non potest falli, liber vitae est” (the foreknowledge of God, which cannot err, is the book of life). **However, as intimated by the Bible, there exists a second, more voluminous book, in which are entered not only the names of the elect, but also the names of all the faithful on earth. ****Such a metaphorical book is supposed wherever the possibility is hinted at that a name, though entered, might again be stricken out **[cf. Apoc., iii, 5: “and I will not blot out his name out of the book of life” (cf. Ex., xxxii, 33)]. The name will be mercilessly cancelled when a Christian sinks into infidelity or godlessness and dies in his sin. Finally there is a third class of books, wherein the wicked deeds and the crimes of individual sinners are written, and by which the reprobate will be judged on the last day to be cast into hell (cf. Apoc., xx, 12): “and the books were opened;. and the dead were judged by those things which were written in the books, according to their works”. It was this grand symbolism of Divine omniscience and justice that inspired the soul-stirring verse of the Dies irce, according to which we shall all be judged out of a book: “Liber scriptus proferetur: in quo totum continetur”. Regarding the book of life, cf. St. Thomas, I, Q. xxiv, a. 1-3, and Heinrich-Gutberlet, “Dogmat. Theologie”, VIII (Mainz, 1897), § 453.

Just as justification and sanctification is one event and cannot be separated, in the same way baptism into the Body of Christ and in the Body of Christ being built into God’s Holy Temple is one event and cannot be separated.

From RCC teachings and from the Scripture we can know, if we are elect we are members of the Body of Christ and in the Body of Christ we have been built into God’s Holy Temple.

We also can know, if we are reprobates for our vehement rejection of God and His grace, God erased our names from the Book of Life and God predestined us to hell, before the creation of the world and we never been baptized into the Body of Christ and in the Body of Christ we never built into God’s Holy Temple. – God knows we are wrong building materials.

We are free to say, in fact this is a DE FIDE Dogma of the RCC:
If we are reprobates once, we will die as reprobates, if we are elect once we will die as elect.

If a Catholic doesn’t believe the above statement, doesn’t believe the DE FIDE Dogma of the RCC on the above issue.

If something is not yet clear, please ask. – It is not easy to fully understand.

I’m sorry if I am miss understanding this, I’m still learning, but I thought it was a process not one event. Could you please add some links or something. I am having a hard time seeing if you are giving your opinion or true Catholic teaching. I am also having a hard time understanding the point you are trying to make.

Sure there are elect, sure there are reprobates. However, we have no way of judging who is elect and who is reprobate.

I think the extension, of your quote, that I quote pretty much contradicts the statement:

If we are reprobates once, we will die as reprobates, if we are elect once we will die as elect.

Not only are we able to know if we are reprobate or elect. I believe God wrote or didn’t write our name in the book of life because he was able to see if we were elect or reprobate in an instant, because he could see the summation of our entire life in an instant.

The thread is about the debate “Can a Christian lose their Salvation”. Are you saying no? Because your post seems to allude to that response but never comes right out and says it.

Thanks

 

[MT1926]

Actually, as far as me specifically and individually, no. The RCC and their bishops didn’t tell me. Not to mention the fact that nearly all of the early church fathers taught that the deuterocanonical books were not canon, but good reads. If you want a quote from Jerome to partially back this up, I’ll give you one.

Got to go for the night! Later all!!

Brando. I am enjoying the dialogue with you but you are on the wrong website if you thing you can spout bits and pieces of the Church fathers to try and prove a point. If you want to be honest to yourself, honest to others, and most importantly honest to God. You need to research all that the Fathers have taught and the history of the Church founded by Christ. If you plan to keep picking and choose from history to use what fits best into your theology, you’re not walking an honest journey with Christ.

Yes numerous Church Fathers disagree about the deuterocanonical books. However, what does that prove? You see here is the problem if you want to point to the Jerome to prove your point you need to admit his authority. If you don’t admit his authority and accept the other things he says then you are being a hypocrite. The Catholic Church does look to the Church Fathers to show how the people of the day followed the faith, but the Fathers are not infallible they have to be looked at under the authority of the Church.

Let’s look at your go to guy Jerome…
Sure you can give us a quote from Jerome in which it appears he rejected most of the deuterocanonical parts of Scripture. But history tells us a different story. He did accept portions of the DC and he did included all seven books in his Latin translation of Scripture, known as the Vulgate. Why would he do this if they weren’t inspired. It is because, ultimately in the end Jerome recognized that the Church alone had the authority to determine the canon. Not him, not you , not me, not any of the other fathers.

The very fact that there was disagreement between some Church Fathers tells us a great deal. It became obvious that no one individual could provide an infallible list of inspired books. The bottom line: “We have no other assurance that the books of Moses, the four Gospels, and the other books are the true word of God,” wrote Augustine, “but by the canon of the Catholic Church.”

God Bless

 

[Sr_Brando]

Brando. I am enjoying the dialogue with you but you are on the wrong website if you thing you can spout bits and pieces of the Church fathers to try and prove a point. If you want to be honest to yourself, honest to others, and most importantly honest to God. You need to research all that the Fathers have taught and the history of the Church founded by Christ. If you plan to keep picking and choose from history to use what fits best into your theology, you’re not walking an honest journey with Christ.

Yes numerous Church Fathers disagree about the deuterocanonical books. However, what does that prove? You see here is the problem if you want to point to the Jerome to prove your point you need to admit his authority. If you don’t admit his authority and accept the other things he says then you are being a hypocrite. The Catholic Church does look to the Church Fathers to show how the people of the day followed the faith, but the Fathers are not infallible they have to be looked at under the authority of the Church.

Let’s look at your go to guy Jerome…
Sure you can give us a quote from Jerome in which it appears he rejected most of the deuterocanonical parts of Scripture. But history tells us a different story. He did accept portions of the DC and he did included all seven books in his Latin translation of Scripture, known as the Vulgate. Why would he do this if they weren’t inspired. It is because, ultimately in the end Jerome recognized that the Church alone had the authority to determine the canon. Not him, not you , not me, not any of the other fathers.

The very fact that there was disagreement between some Church Fathers tells us a great deal. It became obvious that no one individual could provide an infallible list of inspired books. The bottom line: “We have no other assurance that the books of Moses, the four Gospels, and the other books are the true word of God,” wrote Augustine, “but by the canon of the Catholic Church.”

God Bless

Ummm… How can a Pope get this wrong? Pope Gregory the Great while quoting from 1 Maccabees tells us that 1 Maccabees is, “…not Canonical, yet brought out for the edification of the Church, we bring forward testimony.”
Here’s a slightly larger section for context:
“With reference to which particular we are not acting irregularly, if from the books, though not Canonical, yet brought out for the edification of the Church, we bring forward testimony. Thus Eleazar in the battle smote and brought down an elephant, but fell under the very beast that he killed (1 Macc. 6.46)” (Gregory the Great, Morals on the Book of Job, vol. II parts III and IV, Book XIX.34, in A Library of the Fathers of the Holy Catholic Church, p. 424. The New Catholic Encyclopedia confirms that Pope Gregory did not accept a canonical status for the Apocrypha (II:390).)

 

[adamhovey1988]

Ummm… How can a Pope get this wrong? Pope Gregory the Great while quoting from 1 Maccabees tells us that 1 Maccabees is, “…not Canonical, yet brought out for the edification of the Church, we bring forward testimony.”
Here’s a slightly larger section for context:
“With reference to which particular we are not acting irregularly, if from the books, though not Canonical, yet brought out for the edification of the Church, we bring forward testimony. Thus Eleazar in the battle smote and brought down an elephant, but fell under the very beast that he killed (1 Macc. 6.46)” (Gregory the Great, Morals on the Book of Job, vol. II parts III and IV, Book XIX.34, in A Library of the Fathers of the Holy Catholic Church, p. 424. The New Catholic Encyclopedia confirms that Pope Gregory did not accept a canonical status for the Apocrypha (II:390).)

Apcohrypha or Deuterocanonical? They are two different things.

 

[Sr_Brando]

Actually, you didn’t. You just spouted off a bunch of Bible verses that say what you want them to say. You are using circular reasoning. You basically told me the Bible is infallible, because it it the Word of God. By nature it is the breath of God. I can prove this because the Bible says so. The Bible can not inspire itself. If that is your only defense than the Koran and the Book of Mormon must also be the Word of God because they say so.

When you are arguing about your ultimate authority, the argument is inherently circular but usually useful. An ultimate authority needs to be self-evident. If you don’t understand, I can give at least 1 reference, off the top of my head, where this is even taught by phd philosophers. However, my ultimate authority, the bible, teaches the same thing, “For when God made a promise to Abraham, since he had no one greater by whom to swear, he swore by himself, …”. So if you were to ask Abraham about the promise, he would have to say, “God promised. I know this is true because God swore by himself.” That’s circular but not viciously circular.

As far as the Koran and the BoM are concerned, I allow them to make their claims for the sake of the argument. And, then I proceed to show them the inherent inconsistencies of their claims.

Unless an infallible person is reading the Bible, the Bible itself can not be infallible. If you can’t even grasp a concept as simple as this why would anyone trust what you are teaching?

Umm… this poses a serious problem for you. You state the CC is infallible and you read their infallible articles. Does that make the CC fallible?

The only possible way for your above statement to be true would be if you could prove you are sitting in a chair and Jesus himself, in person, is reading the scriptures to you. The only other possible way is if Jesus left us a line of succession to speak for him in his visible absence.

What if the 3rd person of the Holy Trinity were still here speaking to all the elect of God? Isn’t this another possible way?

 

[Sr_Brando]

Apcohrypha or Deuterocanonical? They are two different things.

“Not Canonical” means what?

 

[Sr_Brando]

Sr_Brando;14494140:

Question, did Irenaeus shot himself in the foot, so to so, by make the statement that the scriptures are the ground and pillar? (See following quote below.)

If he did so, then he did so in defiance of the Scriptures which state that “something else” is the ground and pillar of truth.

How very Protestant of you PR! Hahaha
About your statement of 1 Tim 3:15 -

You got it.

The Bible does not point to itself as the authority…but rather to…

the CHURCH!!!

Are you quoting an infallible source who has interpreted this passage for you? I am curious because if it is your interpretation then it’s fallible right? And, if fallible?

Got to go, lunch break is over!

Later everyone. And, I do pray you all have a safe and great day!

 

[Lenten_ashes]

Ummm… How can a Pope get this wrong? Pope Gregory the Great while quoting from 1 Maccabees tells us that 1 Maccabees is, “…not Canonical, yet brought out for the edification of the Church, we bring forward testimony.”
Here’s a slightly larger section for context:
“With reference to which particular we are not acting irregularly, if from the books, though not Canonical, yet brought out for the edification of the Church, we bring forward testimony. Thus Eleazar in the battle smote and brought down an elephant, but fell under the very beast that he killed (1 Macc. 6.46)” (Gregory the Great, Morals on the Book of Job, vol. II parts III and IV, Book XIX.34, in A Library of the Fathers of the Holy Catholic Church, p. 424. The New Catholic Encyclopedia confirms that Pope Gregory did not accept a canonical status for the Apocrypha (II:390).)

**
Answer by Fr. John Echert on 11-11-2001:**

*In the Moral Treatises 19.21, citing a passage from Maccabees, St. Gregory the Great prefaced the citation by writing: “We shall not act rashly, if we accept a testimony of books, which, although not canonical, have been published for the edification of the Church.” Created pope in 590 AD, this writing is subsequent to statements by the Council of Hippo (393 AD) and the second Council of Carthage (419 AD) which affirmed the canonicity of the so-called deutero-canonical works of the Old Testament. Pope Gregory was strongly influenced by the position of St. Jerome, who was of the personal opinion that these seven works of the Old Testament were not equal to other recognized works of the Jewish canon. However, St. Gregory did not formally teach that the deutero-canonical works were not inspired and he quotes from all of these biblical works in his own writings with the exception of two–Judith and Baruch. The solution to the statement of Pope Gregory may be resolved as proposed by the great biblical scholar A.E. Breen, who wrote:

In the phraseology of St. Gregory “canonical” signified something over and above divine. It signified those books concerning which the whole world, with one accord, united in proclaiming the Word of God. The other books were divine, were used as sources of divine teaching by the Church, but there was lacking the authoritative decree of the Church making them equal to the former in rank."

In other words, Pope Gregory accepted the deutero works as inspired and divine but not necessarily of the same stature as the other canonical works. Such was a personal opinion and not formally taught by the Pope. Infallibility guarantees that the pope will be preserved from teaching error but not that he may be wrong in a personal opinion which is not promulgated as a teaching*

ewtn.com/v/experts/showmessage_print.asp?number=335152&language=en