Using Bible to understand

  • Thread starter Thread starter Brucejlb
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
B

Brucejlb

Guest
I recently read this from the web site. Catholicbible101.
Romans 2:6: For God will render to every man according to his deeds.

– Using “the Bible Alone” theory, we can conclude that God will judge us according to our deeds.

Revelation 20:13: And the sea gave up the dead in it; and death and hell delivered up the dead which were in them: and they were judged every man according to their works.

This implies that deeds and works are not the same ???
 
Last edited:
We Catholics don’t have the Bible alone theory.
Therefore, your conclusion would be in error.
 
Last edited:
The books of the Bible [all 73 of them] were not written in chapters and verses…these embellishments were added much later…extracting a single verse and using it to ‘prove’ something cannot be correct…all in the Bible must be taken in context, including the intent of the original human author…
 
Brucejlb said:
I recently read this from the web site. Catholicbible101.
Romans 2:6: For God will render to every man according to his deeds.

– Using “the Bible Alone” theory, we can conclude that God will judge us according to our deeds.

Revelation 20:13: And the sea gave up the dead in it; and death and hell delivered up the dead which were in them: and they were judged every man according to their works.

This implies that deeds and works are not the same ???
Click to expand...
From the Greek study bible. Both passages use the same Greek word. for work / deed. No distinction.

Rom 2:6 “deeds” ἔργα
Rev 20:13 “deeds” ἔργα

BTW, you identify as “traditional”. What does that mean?
 
Last edited:
Deeds and works are synonymous and interchangeable. As noted above, those English words are translated from the same Greek word.

And “sola scriptura” is a false tradition of men. Catholics don’t believe in traditions of men. The only traditions we believe in are Sacred Tradition given by God, or Church traditions hallowed by God’s Church. Protestants are the ones who believe in medieval traditions of men.
 
Last edited:
Very well said. You can not take a single verse and use it to prove something.
This seems to be the case though when one uses John 1:1 to prove the trinity.
The rest of the book of John indicates that Jesus and his father are two different persons.
 
Brucejlb said:
Very well said. You can not take a single verse and use it to prove something.
This seems to be the case though when one uses John 1:1 to prove the trinity.
The rest of the book of John indicates that Jesus and his father are two different persons.
Click to expand...
That would be correct. The Holy Trinity is three Divine Persons in one God. So Jesus and His Father ARE two different persons.
 
The Trinity is what our faith is about. The Trinity is God. One plant, three natures as explained by St Patrick
 
Or a Shamrock also. Three parts all make one whole, the trinity.
 
Last edited:
Brucejlb said:
Sort of like an egg with three yolks ?
Click to expand...
😄 That’s one I haven’t heard before!

I do not have the language to explain to a non-believer the nature of the Holy Trinity. I turn to the Catechism for such things.
202 Jesus himself affirms that God is “the one Lord” whom you must love “with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your mind, and with all your strength”. At the same time Jesus gives us to understand that he himself is “the Lord”. To confess that Jesus is Lord is distinctive of Christian faith. This is not contrary to belief in the One God. Nor does believing in the Holy Spirit as “Lord and giver of life” introduce any division into the One God:

We firmly believe and confess without reservation that there is only one true God, eternal infinite (immensus) and unchangeable, incomprehensible, almighty and ineffable, the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit; three persons indeed, but one essence, substance or nature entirely simple.
Click to expand...
There is much, much more the Catechism at paragraphs 232 through 267. It is profound and beautiful, and sometimes a bit over my head. 😊
 
Brucejlb said:
This implies that deeds and works are not the same ???
Click to expand...
You lost me. Are you seriously saying that because one word was translated as “works” and another word was translated as “deeds” that they are different?
Is a “submarine” different from a “Hoagie”? Is a “car” different from an “automobile”? Come on.
 
No I am not saying they are different. I was just making the point that there is no difference.
 
This may seem hard to believer but some years ago I purchased a used book called "Dictionary of The Bible.
It was produced by a Jesuit priest called "John McKenzie S.J… It was published in the early 60’s and sanctioned by the church. In the section “God” he explains that if you look at the Greek language from which the NT [new testament] was mainly written in you will see that Jesus is the “son of God” not God.
He explains that in the NT the Greek word applied to God is ho-theos or “the God”, whereas Jesus in Greek is only referred to as “theos” That is why in the Bible the reference to “almighty God” is mentioned the word God is usually in capital letters. He goes on to state " John 1:1 should be rigorously be translated “the word was a divine being” One of the scriptures he refers to is: John 20:28 where Jesus refers to God as his God.
 
But when you cut of one of the leaves of a shamrock it is not complete anymore. There is only two thirds left. so when Jesus died there were only two thirds of the trinity left.
 
If you believe God is almighty then that shamrock, which is only to help represent the trinity, could never be broken. Did Jesus not rise and sit at the right hand of the Father?
 
Any material used to make an analogy is going to be inadequate.
God does not have parts. He is supremely simple. There are not three parts of the Trinity; there are Three Persons.

Arianism was defeated long ago as the heresy it was. Almost unanimous was the council, surely led by God Almighty.
 
Check your history. Arianism was defeated with the help at the Council of Nicaea, (325), the first ecumenical council of the Christian church, meeting in ancient Nicaea (now İznik, Tur.). It was called by the emperor Constantine I, an unbaptized catechumen, or neophyte, who presided over the opening session and took part in the discussions. This was contrary to Jesus command that his followers should not be a part of this world and its politics. You remember that the Jews wanted to make him a king over them and he refused. He told them that his kingdom was not part of this world.
 
Yes he rose form the DEAD. That would mean that one third of the trinity was dead. ??
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top