What must I do to be saved?

[paul_c]

I give up, you are blinded.

If you can’t refute what I am saying, are you sure you are not the one who is blinded?

 

[QuickCat]

Mr. Dandy: Did you notice that our LORD Jesus Christ was ministering to a people who were still under the Law during His earthly ministry? Would you tell a lost person to “Believe on the LORD Jesus Christ and thou shalt be saved.” Would you tell him that “Christ died for your sin and was buried and resurrected” for your salvation? Would you tell him that the moment he believes on the LORD Jesus Christ he is sealed by the Holy Spiirt? Would you tell him that he is now “complete in Christ?” Would you tell him that nothing can be added to this completeness?

 

[Jim_Dandy]

How about letting Holy Spirit be our one and only guide. Totally infallable and full of love. Who loves us with an everlasting love. Who desires above all that everyone should be saved!

Don’t put you faith in man, but in GOD!

The much maligned Holy Spirit is allegedly responsible tor guiding Protestants into thousands of conflicting and competing denominations. He is allegedly the source of every whim of doctrine that the mind of man has invented, for every misinterpretation of the Scriptures. It was a sad day when Martin Luther made every person – regardless of his/her knowledge level of the original languages, the cultural mileau, and the intent of the authors – his/her own interpreter of the Scriptures.

The Holy Spirit was sent to the Church, to guide her to all truth, always, and the Church in turn teaches us. John 14:16-18, 14:26; 15:26, 16:7-15.

The Holy Spirit is imparted to each person in Baptism, but not for the purpose of interpreting Scripture.

Jim Dandy

 

[Jim_Dandy]

Mr. Dandy: Did you notice that our LORD Jesus Christ was ministering to a people who were still under the Law during His earthly ministry? Would you tell a lost person to “Believe on the LORD Jesus Christ and thou shalt be saved.” Would you tell him that “Christ died for your sin and was buried and resurrected” for your salvation? Would you tell him that the moment he believes on the LORD Jesus Christ he is sealed by the Holy Spiirt? Would you tell him that he is now “complete in Christ?” Would you tell him that nothing can be added to this completeness?

Mr. QuickCat,

No, I would not. I would tell him to become a Catholic and to do exactly what the Church founded by Christ for the salvation of the world tells him to do. Divine Revelation is known through Sacred Apostolic Tradition, Sacred Scripture, and the Magisterium (teaching authority) of the Church.

“Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and thou shalt be saved” is only the beginning for an adult. Didya notice “shalt” is future tense? The Bible doesn’t say "believe and you are saved. Salvation is not instantaneous; it is a process. Faith Alone (Sola Fide), aka belief alone, is Martin Luther’s 16th century invention. The Word of God, both written down in Scripture and taught orally, has a whole lot more to say about what we should do to be saved. We must follow Christ’s commandments – persevere to the end [of our lives] (Luke 10:22, Mk 13:13).

The Church teaches that “Christ died for our sin and was buried and resurrected” for the salvation of mankind. That means all of us. So yes, I would say that.

“Would you tell him that the moment he believes on the LORD Jesus Christ he is sealed by the Holy Spiirt?” Chapter and verse, please.

“Complete in Christ?” Chapter and verse, please.

“Nothing can be added to this completeness?” Chapter and verse, please.

Where I have asked for chapter and verse, I need to see your reference and read the context.

Thanks for your post.

Jim Dandy

 

[RevG]

RevG, I look forward to receiving your comments when you have more time.

I didn’t say the OT was written by the Church. However, the name “Old Testament” was given to the sacred Scriptures of Judaism by the Catholic Church in A.D. 382 at the Council of Rome. At the same time, she named 27 of her own writings the “New Testament” Her entire collection of sacred Scripture, she named Tá Biblia, the Bible.

Please let me assure you, I have studied the Bible, both formally and informally. After two years of formal study through the University of San Francisco, I am certified to teach Scripture to adults, though I have never done so. I’m always eager to learn more. That’s why I read the Bible often.

I would never belittle the Divine Inspiration of the Bible. But may I ask, how do you know that these writings – and no others – are divinely inspired? And may I ask, where is the God-inspired list of the contents of the Bible? Without it, how do you know your Bible contains all the writings it should have, and none that it shouldn’t?

There are several different collections of writings that different Christian groups call their Bible. Which is the real Bible? And how do you know?

Which Bible? Whose Canon? Please check out this Methodist website, and you’ll see the problem:

gbgm-umc.org/umw/bible/canon2.stm

Remember, the Bible is not a continuous book, but a collection of writings. Who collected them? When? With what authority?

Bible study and Bible history are very challenging subjects. I await your future posts.

Are you an ordained reverend? Of what denomination?

Thanks,

Jim Dandy

Mr Jim,

I am an ordained minister of the Southern Baptist Church. I have a Bachelor’s degree in Theology and am almost finished with a Master’s degree, so I also have had some formal training. I unfortunately have obligations which require much time right now and only get to read these posts briefly, But I assure you my intent is to post a sufficient reply to these posts when time allows.
It is my hope that we are all trying to teach the same Jesus Christ; however, that does not always seem to be the case. I do however look forward to our future discussions on how we disagree on this and other topics.

RevG

 

[Jim_Dandy]

Mr Jim,

I am an ordained minister of the Southern Baptist Church. I have a Bachelor’s degree in Theology and am almost finished with a Master’s degree, so I also have had some formal training. I unfortunately have obligations which require much time right now and only get to read these posts briefly, But I assure you my intent is to post a sufficient reply to these posts when time allows.

It is my hope that we are all trying to teach the same Jesus Christ; however, that does not always seem to be the case. I do however look forward to our future discussions on how we disagree on this and other topics.

RevG

Hello, RevG,

Thanks for your post. I understand your time pressures. Please write when you can. I would enjoy hearing from you. I forgot to say that I also studied OT history under a rabbi and NT history under a Disciples of Christ minister as an undergraduate. But your formal education is far exceeds mine.

:tiphat:

Jim Dandy

 

[QuickCat]

1Co 15:1 ¶ Moreover, brethren, I declare unto you the gospel which I preached unto you, which also ye have received, and wherein ye stand;
1Co 15:2 By which also ye are saved, if ye keep in memory what I preached unto you, unless ye have believed in vain.
1Co 15:3 For I delivered unto you first of all that which I also received, how that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures;
1Co 15:4 And that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures:
Eph 1:13 In whom ye also trusted, after that ye heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation: in whom also after that ye believed, ye were sealed with that holy Spirit of promise,
Col 2:8 Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ.
Col 2:9 For in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily.
Col 2:10 And ye are complete in him, which is the head of all principality and power:
Strong’s Greek Dictionary
4137. πληροω pleroo
Search for G4137 in KJVSL
πληροω pleroo play-ro’-o
from 4134; to make replete, i.e. (literally) to cram (a net), level up (a hollow), or (figuratively) to furnish (or imbue, diffuse, influence), satisfy, execute (an office), finish (a period or task), verify (or coincide with a prediction), etc.:—accomplish, X after, (be) complete, end, expire, fill (up), fulfil, (be, make) full (come), fully preach, perfect, supply.
See Greek 4134
Col 2:13 ¶ And you, being dead in your sins and the uncircumcision of your flesh, hath he quickened together with him, having forgiven you all trespasses;
Mr. Dandy: You seem like a very nice man. I pray that you will give the Scriptures cited a prayerful consideration. Dispite all the rhetoric, there is one simple truth: “The Lord Jesus loves me this I know, because the Bible tells me so.”
Grace and peace,
QC

 

[paul_c]

1Co 15:1 ¶ Moreover, brethren, I declare unto you the gospel which I preached unto you, which also ye have received, and wherein ye stand;
1Co 15:2 By which also ye are saved, if ye keep in memory what I preached unto you, unless ye have believed in vain.
1Co 15:3 For I delivered unto you first of all that which I also received, how that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures;
1Co 15:4 And that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures:
Eph 1:13 In whom ye also trusted, after that ye heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation: in whom also after that ye believed, ye were sealed with that holy Spirit of promise,
Col 2:8 Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ.
Col 2:9 For in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily.
Col 2:10 And ye are complete in him, which is the head of all principality and power:
Strong’s Greek Dictionary
4137. πληροω pleroo
Search for G4137 in KJVSL
πληροω pleroo play-ro’-o
from 4134; to make replete, i.e. (literally) to cram (a net), level up (a hollow), or (figuratively) to furnish (or imbue, diffuse, influence), satisfy, execute (an office), finish (a period or task), verify (or coincide with a prediction), etc.:—accomplish, X after, (be) complete, end, expire, fill (up), fulfil, (be, make) full (come), fully preach, perfect, supply.
See Greek 4134
Col 2:13 ¶ And you, being dead in your sins and the uncircumcision of your flesh, hath he quickened together with him, having forgiven you all trespasses;
Mr. Dandy: You seem like a very nice man. I pray that you will give the Scriptures cited a prayerful consideration. Dispite all the rhetoric, there is one simple truth: “The Lord Jesus loves me this I know, because the Bible tells me so.”
Grace and peace,
QC

Of course you have to believe in the saving power of Jesus -all Christians do. We all believe that Jesus died for OUR sins and we all believe that it was through his redemptive power that the gates of heaven were opened to us. The question at hand is “Do we have to do anything ourselves to enter into those gates of heaven that were opened for us?”

Scripture and Tradition both tell us that in addition to believing in Jesus, we must follow him through those gates to get to heaven. Jesus himself in Matthew 7 tells us to enter through the narrow gate by doing the will of His Father, In answer to a question about how to attain eternal life in Matthew 19, he tells them to follow the commandments and if you want to be perfect, sell all you have and follow him. St. James tells us in James 2: 14-26 that Faith without works is dead. St. Paul in 1corinthians 13 tells us that if you have faith enough to move mountains, but do not have love, you are nothing. St. Peter tells us in 1Peter 3 that we must follow Jesus into baptism, which will save us now. When Peter was asked by the first converts what to do in actss 2, he told them to be baptized, echoing Jesus commission to the church in Matthew 2: 18-20. Jesus in John 6 told his disciples that to have life within them, they must eat his body and drink his blood, Unfortunately for them, most of his disciples abandonned him at this point. The bible, both Old and New testaments, are full of explanations about how to live our lives to get to heaven. Its certainly more than just believing that you will be saved.

 

[QuickCat]

Mr. Dandy: Our Lord Jesus Christ, in Matthew 7, is addressing Jewish people still under the Law. He is not addressing the Body of Christ. James is probably the earliest book of the Acts period and is addressed to “Twelve tribes scattered abroad.” Still addressed to Jews under the Law. In Acts 2 Peter is addressing Israel [vs 22]. Israel was promised that at some point in history [when our Lord Jesus Christ establishes His earthly kingdom with Israel being the head and not the tail] they [Israel] would be a kingdom of priests. You may want to note Exodus 19:5,6 and compare what Peter says in 1 Peter 2:9. The initiatory rite into this priesthood was washing with water [Exodus 29:4; 40:12], a baptism. This is why he tells Israel to repent and be baptized for [eis] the remission of sins. He had just accused these people of murdering their Messiah. He preached the cross as bad news for these Jews. Never does he mention the death, burial and resurrection of the Lord Jesus Christ as the saving gospel. You will note that Paul mentions the various “washings” of the O.T. in Hebrews 9:10 where the word “washings” is the same word used for baptism. Peter, James and John met with Paul and told him that they would confine their ministries to the Jews Gal. 2:9). Paul never tells us that we must do any work for our salvation. He does say in Phil 2:12 that we are to “work out our salvation.” But he is writing to people who are already saved, they are to “work out” that which is already inwrought. He doesn’t say to work “for” our salvation.

 

[Jim_Dandy]

QuickCat wrote (current post is in black, previous post is in red)

My reply is in bold.

Would you tell him that “Christ died for your sin and was buried and resurrected” for your salvation?

1Co 15:1 ¶ Moreover, brethren, I declare unto you the gospel which I preached unto you, which also ye have received, and wherein ye stand;
1Co 15:2 By which also ye are saved, if ye keep in memory what I preached unto you, unless ye have believed in vain.
1Co 15:3 For I delivered unto you first of all that which I also received, how that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures;
1Co 15:4 And that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures:

**I answered this in my previous post. My answer was “yes.” **​

Would you tell him that the moment he believes on the LORD Jesus Christ he is sealed by the Holy Spiirt?

Eph 1:13 In whom ye also trusted, after that ye heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation: in whom also after that ye believed, ye were sealed with that holy Spirit of promise,

No, I wouldn’t tell him that. I would tell him that he will be given the gift of the Holy Spirit when he is baptized: Repent and be baptized, every one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ, for the forgiveness of your sins; and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.
(Acts 2:38)

---

Would you tell him that he is now “complete in Christ?”

Col 2:8 Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ.
Col 2:9 For in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily.
Col 2:10 And ye are complete in him, which is the head of all principality and power:

I can’t tell from these verses what you mean by “complete.” The KJV is a translation in archaic English with many errors. Col 2:10 RSV: . . . and you have come to fullness of life in him, who is the head of all rule and authority.​

Would you tell him that nothing can be added to this completeness?

Strong’s Greek Dictionary
4137. πληροω pleroo
Search for G4137 in KJVSL
πληροω pleroo play-ro’-o
from 4134; to make replete, i.e. (literally) to cram (a net), level up (a hollow), or (figuratively) to furnish (or imbue, diffuse, influence), satisfy, execute (an office), finish (a period or task), verify (or coincide with a prediction), etc.:—accomplish, X after, (be) complete, end, expire, fill (up), fulfil, (be, make) full (come), fully preach, perfect, supply.
See Greek 4134

What does complete mean in the verses you cited?

If you mean that we “accept Jesus Christ as our personal Lord and Savior” and we’re complete, finished, nothing else is required, I say that’s wrong.

---

Col 2:13 ¶ And you, being dead in your sins and the uncircumcision of your flesh, hath he quickened together with him, having forgiven you all trespasses;

**Where did you intend this verse to fit? **

---

Mr. Dandy: You seem like a very nice man. I pray that you will give the Scriptures cited a prayerful consideration. Dispite all the rhetoric, there is one simple truth: "The Lord Jesus loves me this I know, because the Bible tells me so. QC

"Little ones to Him belong, they are weak but he is strong. Yes, Jesus loves me. Yes, Jesus loves me. Yes, Jesus loves me, the Bible tells me so." Learned that at my mama’s knee when we both were Southern Baptist.

**Thank you for your kind words.

A verse or verses do not a doctrine make. The teachings of the Catholic Church came from the lips of the Apostles before and while the NT was being written. The NT is based on the teaching of the Church**;** the teaching of the Church is not based on the NT.

The Church didn’t come out of the Bible; rather, the Bible came out of the Church. The Church is nearly 400 years older than the Bible.

So Catholics have a different perspective on the Scriptures than do Protestants. The NT confirms the Church’s teachings, but it is not their source. The Church’s teachings are the teaching of the Apostles, which are confirmed in the Scriptures.

Here’s a book, Where We Got the Bible:

catholicapologetics.info/apologetics/protestantism/wbible.htm

Peace be with you,

Jim Dandy**

 

[Jim_Dandy]

Mr. Dandy: Our Lord Jesus Christ, in Matthew 7, is addressing Jewish people still under the Law. He is not addressing the Body of Christ. James is probably the earliest book of the Acts period and is addressed to “Twelve tribes scattered abroad.” Still addressed to Jews under the Law. In Acts 2 Peter is addressing Israel [vs 22]. Israel was promised that at some point in history [when our Lord Jesus Christ establishes His earthly kingdom with Israel being the head and not the tail] they [Israel] would be a kingdom of priests. You may want to note Exodus 19:5,6 and compare what Peter says in 1 Peter 2:9. The initiatory rite into this priesthood was washing with water [Exodus 29:4; 40:12], a baptism. This is why he tells Israel to repent and be baptized for [eis] the remission of sins. He had just accused these people of murdering their Messiah. He preached the cross as bad news for these Jews. Never does he mention the death, burial and resurrection of the Lord Jesus Christ as the saving gospel. You will note that Paul mentions the various “washings” of the O.T. in Hebrews 9:10 where the word “washings” is the same word used for baptism. Peter, James and John met with Paul and told him that they would confine their ministries to the Jews [Gal. 2:9). Paul never tells us that we must do any work for our salvation. He does say in Phil 2:12 that we are to “work out our salvation.” But he is writing to people who are already saved, they are to “work out” that which is already inwrought. He doesn’t say to work “for” our salvation.

Hi, Mr. QC,

That’s an interesting interpretation of parts of the NT. You have a lot of competition. There are many folks in Protestantland who believe their translation is the right one who disagree with yours.

It’s important in understanding the NT to know that Paul, for example, was writing to local Churches that he had already established and taught orally. So they already knew what to believe. His letters are not a systematic instruction. He was responding to problems he had heard about. With regard to the Corinthians, Paul was answering letters he had received from them which were lost in antiquity. We have the answers but not the questions. There’s a lot to know about the NT and the Bible.

The NT is not a systematic instruction book in Christianity. You have to know what the Church was teaching during the time the NT was written to understand it correctly.

The Body of Christ is the Church. The Bride of Christ is the Church.

The Cross is good news for everyone.

St.Paul’s ministry was primarily to the Gentiles.

Christ and the Apostles didn’t teach instant salvation. No one is “saved.” Salvation is a process. It begins at Baptism and ends at death. That’s why St. Paul tells us to work out our salvation in fear and trembling.

James 2:24 - You see that a man is justified by works and not by faith alone.

Peace be with you,

Jim Dandy
[/quote]

 

[pablope]

Mr. Dandy: Our Lord Jesus Christ, in Matthew 7, is addressing Jewish people still under the Law. He is not addressing the Body of Christ.

Hi, there Mr QC…

Let me clarify what you are trying to say here…do you mean that since Matt 7 is being addressed to the Jews, the words of Jesus in Matt 7, in particular, verse 21…do not apply to us today?

I will wait for your clarification before I write any further. I just would like to find out what you mean here.

James is probably the earliest book of the Acts period and is addressed to “Twelve tribes scattered abroad.” Still addressed to Jews under the Law.

It looks like you are not missing some of the verse on Phil 2: 12, but here it is:

12 Therefore, my dear friends, as you have always obeyed—not only in my presence, but now much more in my absence—**continue to work out your salvation with fear and trembling, **

Let me ask you a question then…what does this mean “continue to work out your salvation with fear and trembling” to you?

[/QUOTE]

 

[RevG]

A verse or verses do not a doctrine make. The teachings of the Catholic Church came from the lips of the Apostles before and while the NT was being written. The NT is based on the teaching of the Church**;** the teaching of the Church is not based on the NT.

The Church didn’t come out of the Bible; rather, the Bible came out of the Church. The Church is nearly 400 years older than the Bible.

So Catholics have a different perspective on the Scriptures than do Protestants. The NT confirms the Church’s teachings, but it is not their source. The Church’s teachings are the teaching of the Apostles, which are confirmed in the Scriptures.

Here’s a book, Where We Got the Bible:

catholicapologetics.info/apologetics/protestantism/wbible.htm

Peace be with you,

Jim Dandy

Mr Jim,

I am enjoying the conversations that I get to read on this topic. Although I do differ ever so slightly on my understanding on the topic I appreciate the kind exchange between the sides, it is not always the case even when both sides are trying real hard (slight sarcasm).
I feel obligated to point out two things on this post, the first about the 400 years of the church prior to the writing of the Bible…The church was instituted by Jesus somewhere between 6 BC and 33 AD (which is the generally accepted years of His life) and the last book of the NT was written before 100 AD. I think what you meant was before it was put into a codex. The letters of the NT were well known by 100 AD and we have copies of the NT found in Qumran that date back to around 110-125 AD.
Second, the website that you linked is blatantly errant in some of what it states. here is a quote from it: “namely that the Bible, as we have it now, was not printed in any language at all till about 1500 years after the birth of Christ” unless you take the as we have it now to mean with the inclusion of deutero-cannonical books, which is not the intent i dont think, then this is just a blatant lie. Although the Bible was not mass produced as it is now it was copied by scribes which is obvious and evident by the Dead Sea scrolls.
Blessings,
RevG

 

[QuickCat]

Mr. Dandy: In your threads you seem to indicate that one must become a member of your church in order to get saved. Well, Paul writes in 1 Cor. 12:13 that the Holy Spirit baptizes one into the Body of Christ. One must be saved before he can be baptized BY the Holy Spirit into the Body of Christ. This is quite different from being baptized WITH the Holy Spirit as those were on the day of Pentecost.

 

[ESMDHokie77]

The church was instituted by Jesus somewhere between 6 BC and 33 AD (which is the generally accepted years of His life) and the last book of the NT was written before 100 AD. I think what you meant was before it was put into a codex.

Well indeed, the Church came before the Written Word of God! It is very important to note that some books that are canonical weren’t held as popular, and some books that are apocryphal weren’t held as heretical, until the Church declared the canon.

Second, the website that you linked is blatantly errant in some of what it states. here is a quote from it: “namely that the Bible, as we have it now, was not printed in any language at all till about 1500 years after the birth of Christ” unless you take the as we have it now to mean with the inclusion of deutero-cannonical books, which is not the intent i dont think, then this is just a blatant lie. Although the Bible was not mass produced as it is now it was copied by scribes which is obvious and evident by the Dead Sea scrolls.
Blessings,
RevG

It’s not blatantly errant, printing refers to the use of a printing press. Indeed as you pointed out it was hand copied for most of its history!

 

[Jim_Dandy]

Mr Jim,

I am enjoying the conversations that I get to read on this topic. Although I do differ ever so slightly on my understanding on the topic I appreciate the kind exchange between the sides, it is not always the case even when both sides are trying real hard (slight sarcasm).
I feel obligated to point out two things on this post, the first about the 400 years of the church prior to the writing of the Bible…

Not writing. Selecting, collecting, and canonizing the NT, which was written in the first century, and canonizing the 46 writings of the Greek Septuagint that the Church inherited from Jesus and the Apostles. There was no book named “the Bible” until the end of the fourth century.

The church was instituted by Jesus somewhere between 6 BC and 33 AD (which is the generally accepted years of His life) and the last book of the NT was written before 100 AD.

The Church was born at Pentecost, A.D. 33, in Jerusalem. St. John’s Gospel was written A.D. 90 - 100. The date recognized by Protestant scholars for the canonization of the Bible is A.D. 397 at the Council of Carthage. My statement was “the Church is nearly 400years older than the Bible.” Is this what you’re referring to? My statement – “nearly” means “approximately” – stands.

I think what you meant was before it was put into a codex. The letters of the NT were well known by 100 AD and we have copies of the NT found in Qumran that date back to around 110-125 AD

.

No, that’s not what I meant. See above. The Qumran scrolls are OT, not NT.

Second, the website that you linked is blatantly errant in some of what it states. here is a quote from it: “namely that the Bible, as we have it now, was not printed in any language at all till about 1500 years after the birth of Christ”

Rev, the Bible could not have been printed until the printing press was invented in the fifteenth century, which is what that statement refers to. First off the press was the Gutenberg Bible, an edition of the Vulgate, containing the canon of the Council of Rome in A.D. 382, including the so-called deuterocanonical books which are in the original Bible. Maccabees is just as canonical as Matthew.

unless you take the as we have it now to mean with the inclusion of deutero-cannonical books, which is not the intent i dont think, then this is just a blatant lie.

But, as I said previously, the so-called deuterocanonical books were canonized and are part of the first Bible, the original Bible, the only Bible until Martin Luther excluded these writings from the canon of his German translation. He left them in his Bible, but placed them in an appendix between the OT and the NT and left the pages unnumbered so readers would know he did not regard these writings as Scripture. He also said so in the prefaces. This resulted in the eventual removal of these Scriptures from Protestant Bibles in 1827.

He also rejected Hebrews, James, Jude, and Revelation and gave them similar treatment --he removed them from their place in the canonical Scriptures and put them in an appendix at the end of the NT. Since you accept his authority regarding the canon of the OT, why do you reject his canon of the NT?

Although the Bible was not mass produced as it is now it was copied by scribes which is obvious and evident by the Dead Sea scrolls.

Those scribes who dedicated their entire lives to copying the Christian Scriptures were Catholic monks. The Dead Sea Scrolls – written by Jewish hands – are not the whole Bible, but the OT – and not all of it.

Hope you can drop by again, Rev. Thanks for you post.

Please remember that the Bible has only one canon, not two. Deuterocanonical refers to those writings that were generally accepted later than other writings. It was a term that originated in the 16th century. The NT also has a deuterocanon.

Peace be with you, Jim Dandy

 

[QuickCat]

Mr. Dandy: Please consider the following:
Both Peter and Paul taught that the Lord Jesus Christ was the Son of God, that He was crucified, and that He rose from the dead after the third day. So one might ask, “What is the difference between their two gospels?”

[1] Paul speaks to Gentiles and Jews, while Peter
speaks to Israel only, with the one exception, the house of Cornelius.

[2] Another key difference is that in making the offer of the kingdom to Israel [Acts 3:19-21] Peter raises our Lord in resurrection to sit on David’s throne as the king of Israel. The Lord’s death and resurrection were not presented by Peter as part of the gospel of the kingdom. By way of contrast, Paul taught that the death and resurrection of our Lord Jesus Christ are essential parts of our gospel of grace. [1 Cor. 15:1-4].

[3] Paul taught that the Lord Jesus Christ died as a sacrifice for our sins, and that we are cleansed by His blood. But in all of his sermons in the early chapters of Acts, Peter makes no mention of this. Decades later, near the end of their lives, Peter and John each wrote of the cleansing blood of the Lord Jesus Christ [1 Peter 1:2-3, 18-21, 2:24, 5:12 and 1 John 1:7 and 2:2]. However, in early Acts, they never mention the blood sacrifice, propitiation, or that the Lord Jesus Christ died for our sins. It had not yet been revealed.

Paul also told the Gentiles that the Lord Jesus Christ willingly gave up His life for our sins [Galatians 1:4]. Whereas Peter repeatedly accuses the Jews of murder. One example is Acts 2:36, where Peter says, “But ye denied the Holy One … and killed the Prince of Life…” Then in Acts 5:30 he says, “,Jesus, whom ye slew and hanged on a tree.” Finally Stephen, who also preached Peter’s gospel, told the Jews in Acts 7:52, “Which of the prophets have not your fathers persecuted? And they have slain them which shewed before of the coming of the Just One; of whom ye have been the betrayers and murderers…”

Paul, on the other hand, constantly stressed the sacrificial nature of the death of the Lord Jesus Christ. “Whom God hath set forth to be a propitiation [appeasing sacrifice] through faith in His blood…” [Romans 3:25].

The blood of the Lord Jesus Christ IS NOT MENTIONED by Peter and the other 11 apostles in Acts, yet it is a vital part of the gospel of the grace of God given to Paul.

It is of the utmost importance to realize that Paul’s letters are filled with the fact that the crucifixion of the Lord Jesus Christ was the sacrifice that paid for our sins. Please note the following Scriptures:
Romans 5:6-11 “……Christ died for the ungodly……while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us….being now justified by His blood, we shall be saved from wrath through him…we were reconciled to God by the death of His Son….we shall be saved by His life…we have now received the atonement.”

Ephesians 1:7 “In whom we have redemption through His Blood, the forgiveness of sins…”

Ephesians 2:12-13 “….made nigh by the Blood of Christ.”

Colossians 1:20 “And, having made peace through the Blood of His cross.”

1 Thessalonians 5:9-10 “For God has NOT APPOINTED US TO WRATH, but to obtain salvation by our LORD JESUS CHRIST, WHO DIED FOR US…”

Galatians 2:20 “I am crucified with Christ: nevertheless I live; yet not I, but Christ liveth in me: and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by the faith of the Son of God, who loved me, and GAVE HIMSELF FOR ME.”

Romans 8:31-32 “If God be for us, who can be against us? He that spared not His Own Son, but DELIVERED HIM UP FOR US ALL…”

Romans 4:24-25 “…if we believe on Him that raised up Jesus our Lord from the dead; Who was delivered for our offenses, and was raised again for our justification.”

1 Timothy 2:5-6 “For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus; Who GAVE HIMSELF A RANSOME FOR ALL.” Note that this was to be “TESTIFIED IN DUE TIME.”

Ephesians 5:1-2 “…., as Christ hath given Himself for us an offer and a sacrifice to God…”

2 Corinthians 5:21 “For He hath made Him to be sin for us, who knew no sin; that we might be made the righteousness of God IN HIM.”

Paul mentions, by my count, the death of the Lord Jesus Christ 64 times in his epistles.

 

[Jim_Dandy]

Mr. Dandy: Please consider the following:
Both Peter and Paul taught that the Lord Jesus Christ was the Son of God, that He was crucified, and that He rose from the dead after the third day. So one might ask, “What is the difference between their two gospels?”

[post truncated by Jim D]

Mr. QC, the Apostes all taught the same gospel. Christ did not tell them, Peter, you teach this, and Paul, you teach that. He ordered all the Apostles to teach the nations “to observe all that I have commanded you.”

The Catholic Church selected 27 of her own writings to form the New Testament at the end of the fourth century. Since she was the Agent of the Holy Spirit to write, copy, select, collect, canonize, name, and protect the NT, she has to know what it means, don’tchathink?

You’re reading an English translation which is an approximation of the meaning in the original languages. That’s the problem with all translations. Languages can’t be translated word for word. Translators try to convey the meaning of the oldest existing copies (there are no originals), but it’s very difficult. Every translation is different.

Please keep in mind that the Bible is not one continuous book, but is a collection of separate but related writings. In view of that, your conclusions don’t work.

Christianity wasn’t based on the Bible**;** it was taught by the Church. St. John tells us “There are many other things that Jesus did, but if these were to be described individually, I do not think the whole world would contain all the books that would be written” John 21:25.

Christianity is known through Sacred Scripture, Sacred Apostolic Tradition, and the Church’s Magisterium (teaching authority).

It’s a pleasure writing to you. Peace be with you,

Jim Dandy

 

[RevG]

Mr Dandy,

The fact that the Bible was not Mass Produced does not mean it was not printed. In fact the fact that it was printed by hand does mean that it was in print and printed years before the invention of the printing press. In fact even prior to the invention of the printing press there were inventions to allow a single scribe to create several copies at one time.

Next, the what you call “so called deuterocanonnical books” are not so so-called and there is not a second canon for the NT. See the problem with the typical Catholic response to Deutero-cannonical books was what you said which does not account for Athanasius putting into print the accepted books of the NT in his 39th Pascal letter somewhere real close to 369 AD. which is a few years prior to Martin Luther.

Since we are on the subject can you show anytime that Jesus quoted an Apocryphal book? It is obvious from reading the ECF (early church fathers) that they were not held as having the same authority…but I digress.

And one last point for church history, the church was started somewhere between 27AD and 33 AD. No one who is honest can say with any certainty that it was 27, 30 or 33.

Looking forward to your response, and the obvious banter that will come from others,
RevG

 

[pablope]

Mr Dandy,

In fact the fact that it was printed by hand