You can't have it both ways.

[StTommyMore]

Read the statement more closely. I do not use the doctrine so I have an excuse for not being a catholic.

No you don’t. No one has the freedom to choose a lie.

 

[Dokimas]

Deal with it. Sola Scriptura is a false teaching invented be evil men

If the mods don’t deal with this uncalled for statement, I’ll be disappointed in them. One of the put me in the corner for a ‘time out’ for being unkind. This is far more unkind than anything I’ve said.

 

[StTommyMore]

If the mods don’t deal with this uncalled for statement, I’ll be disappointed in them. One of the put me in the corner for a ‘time out’ for being unkind. This is far more unkind than anything I’ve said.

It is true. Sola Scriptura is not of God, and therefore, evil.

 

[Dokimas]

No you don’t. No one has the freedom to choose a lie.

Either you or I or both of us are having trouble following this discussion. I think I have a handle on it.

 

[joe370]

Hey UniversalGuy…

I’m saying that it’s more than just okay to pick and choose doctrines. It is absolutely necessary if there is actually such a thing as a false doctrine, right? And if there are actually false prophets then you can expect them to push false doctrines, right?

I think I understand what you are saying. In light of that logic, what’s to stop me from deciding, for example, that the trinitarian dogma is a false doctrine, contrived and perpetrated by the CC? Moreover, under whose authority would I be speaking, other than my own?

Jesus never commissioned me (as a teaching church) - to do anything, but he did commission his apostolic church to teach in his stead, and he provided his church with the holy spirit to shepherd his church into all truth, until the end of time, and, if not for that promise of the holy spirit in perpetuity, then yes, I would agree that questioning the doctrinal merit of the church founded by Jesus, would be okay, and yes, I agree with you that all of this is a big leap of faith, but locating the historical church founded by Jesus, is NOT; it just takes a little time and effort to determine whether or not that church is the CC or the EOC in an unbiased manner of course. At least that was the case for me.

Were you suggesting that the EOC does not reject the notion that Jesus’ church was built on Simon renamed Kepha?

As far as I’ve discovered they pray for the dead without really having a dogmatically defined understanding of why they’re doing it. Similarly with the state immediately after death I don’t think there’s a defined dogma in Orthodoxy. So that means there are all sorts of speculations by theologians. And that’s allowed in Orthodoxy I think. And I’ve read about something called tollhouses. But I think the idea of tollhouses is just speculation. Also I have a feeling the Catholic idea that purgation or torturous cleansing from defilement for a couple of centuries is necessary BEFORE entering God’s presence is rejected by the Orthodox because they say that merely entering God’s presence will burn away impurity. Could God do that do you think? Could God burn away impurity by His mere presence and not subject a soul to centuries of torture? I think He would want to anyway.

UG, Eastern Orthodox members do pray and make offerings for the dead. For example:

*“Again we pray for the repose of the soul of the servant(s) of God (insert name), departed this life; and that he she, they, may be pardoned all his her, their sins, both voluntary and involuntary.” *

They do believe in a purgative state even if they don’t outright say it. The CC simply defined what the EOC believes, without actually defining it, if in fact they pray for the dead, and we both agree that they do. Those in heaven don’t need their prayers; those in hell cannot benefit from their prayers, ergo, the third interim state, that ultimately, is a staging area, so to speak, on the way heaven.

I am not familiar with the term tollhouse; I’ll look into it.

Actually it’s 6 centuries. LOL…The CC doesn’t put a timetable to this state of purification, for those in that temporary state exist outside of time as we know it. I would argue that it’s in fact God’s very presence burning away impurity, that is the cause of any pain. God’s very nature is pure, unadulterated love and God absolutely abhors sin, and the residue left over of said sin, and the closer a soul gets to that beatific vision in an impure/unclean state, the more painful the process, logically speaking. If there is a purifying fire (God’s presence burning away impurity as you put it) - as the CC teaches, then I wouldn’t imagine that the transition from this world to the eternal world, for lack of a better word, would be without some discomforts/pain for the soul, on its way to that otherworldly existence? Could God burn away impurity by His mere presence and not subject a soul to discomfort or pain - absolutely, logically speaking, for nothing is impossible for god.

UG, you are OK (I know it doesn’t sit well with you; you know what I mean…) - with the idea of eternal punishment handed out by God, due to mortal, temporal sin, but have a problem with temporary punishment of a purificatory nature, handed out by God, due to venial (call it what ever you want) - temporal sin?

It is my hope that God does in fact burn away impurity by His mere presence, but does not subject a soul to pain in the process, but it just doesn’t seem logical due to God’s extreme aversion/antipathy towards sin and the effects of sin on the soul.

 

[joe370]

Originally Posted by StTommyMore View Post
Deal with it. Sola Scriptura is a false teaching invented be evil men.

Simmer down Tom.

 

[joe370]

Trent was a circus. It was an attempted distraction for the Catholic faithful to the fact that Luther had left with a sustantial following and a “Last Word” if you will on the wishes for Luther from Rome. Compared with Nicea and others of meaningful measures, it was a joke.

Maybe you should simmer down too. A judgmental/rude debate is a debate not worth having. Why can’t we all just have a pleasant exchange?

 

[joe370]

Rightly, you said to Cranmer2010:

;7035144]For Catholics. Not for the Orthodox or any of the other groups and not for us. Local regional synods are not binding. For Catholics, Trent officially set your canon.

Rightly, if the CC (Trent) - set the canon for the Anglican church, who set the canon for you or the rest of the PC’s? Please don’t say God, for this is a given and an argument that Cranmer could posit.

 

[joe370]

Rightlydivide, did the Holy spirit guide Jesus’ church to infallibly define the canon of sacred scripture ? If so then which church, considering the fact that you said:

“The Oriental Orthodox have a different canon. The Eastern Orthodox have a different canon ( I have one right next to me)** and we have a different one.” **

Simple question deserving a simple answer.

 

[guanophore]

I mean that it’s just not possible to prove a belief in something. Any belief. You can’t prove that God exists. And you can’t prove that He doesn’t exist.

This is so true. It is what makes me so confused that my separated brethren frequently ask for “proof”.

I’m saying that it’s more than just okay to pick and choose doctrines.  It is absolutely necessary if there is actually such a thing as a false doctrine, right?  And if there are actually false prophets then you can expect them to push false doctrines, right?

Yes, there are false doctrines, but we do not distinguish which ones they are by “picking and choosing” what suits us. There is one divine deposit of faith that was given for all time to the Church, from which we are to RECEIVE the correct doctrines.

As far as I’ve discovered they pray for the dead without really having a dogmatically defined understanding of why they’re doing it.

There are a great many spiritual devotions that are not dogmatically defined. However, the intercession for those who have left the veil of flesh is based upon the doctrine of the Body of Christ (that we can all help, or hurt one another through our membership in one another) and the doctrine of the communion of saints. These are the doctrines that must be recieved.

Similarly with the state immediately after death I don’t think there’s a defined dogma in Orthodoxy. So that means there are all sorts of speculations by theologians. And that’s allowed in Orthodoxy I think. And I’ve read about something called tollhouses. But I think the idea of tollhouses is just speculation.

Yes.

 Also I have a feeling the Catholic idea that purgation or torturous cleansing from defilement for a couple of centuries is necessary BEFORE entering God’s presence is rejected by the Orthodox because they say that merely entering God’s presence will burn away impurity.

Yes. It is really quite silly to project our concept of time into the eternal states. As scripture clearly indicates, this can happen “in a moment, in the twinkling of an eye”.

It would be equally improper to think that we leave this world with no attachments to it, or perfect sanctification from our sin nature. Clearly there is much to be done in order for us to be made clean, so that we can enter.

 Could God do that do you think?  Could God burn away impurity by His mere presence and not subject a soul to centuries of torture?  I think He would want to anyway.

Absolutely.

However, I am in favor of getting the dross separated from me right here, right now!

 

[guanophore]

Queen Mary was largely a victim of bad press. As the presses were owned by the Schismatics, this is not to be unexpected.

Perhaps you need a bit of a refresher on Anglican History Jimmy. After King Henry VIII died, England was ruled by Bloody Mary who WAS Catholic and ordered the burning at the stake of Cranmer, Latimer and Ridley.

So then she didn’t have Cranmer, Latimer and Ridley burned at the stake? This after all these years is completely botched history?

 

[guanophore]

This statement is wrong. It’s statements like this from catholics that make me wonder if I’d be accepted into the CC.

It is a true statement, Doki. The Reformers utterly rejected the corrupted Catholic leadership of the day, and wanted a “pure” source of authority over the church.

You will not be accepted into the Catholic Church until you are willing to relinquish such heresies as Sola Scriptura.

 

[guanophore]

You are the rudest and most naive person I have the misfortune of meeting since coming here. You are wrong on almost everything you say but yet your arrogance will not allow you to realize it. I do not reserve IGNORE for many folks but you most certainly qualify for the honors.

While I don’t agree that the sole purpose of SS is to draw people away from the faith, it is not rude to recognize that it was invented to replace the apostolic authority in the Catholic Church. the Reformers wanted and needed a source that was inerrant and inspired, and they certainly could not see that in the local clerical authorities.

The result of their efforts to find a pure replacement for these corrupt clerics, however, did result in pulling people away from the Apsotolic faith. SS has spawned countless divisions in the Body, and more occur on a dailly basis.

 

[guanophore]

No you don’t. No one has the freedom to choose a lie.

Brother, you need to have a holy hour, or pray a rosary. You are really getting out of hand.

Of course every person has the freedom to choose a lie! What must you be thinking to make such a post?

Adam and Eve started off by choosing a lie, and humans have been doing it ever since.

Most people have no idea that SS is even a heresy, and choose it because they think it came from God Himself!

 

[StTommyMore]

Brother, you need to have a holy hour, or pray a rosary. You are really getting out of hand.

Of course every person has the freedom to choose a lie! What must you be thinking to make such a post?

Adam and Eve started off by choosing a lie, and humans have been doing it ever since.

Most people have no idea that SS is even a heresy, and choose it because they think it came from God Himself!

No,we do not. We have the ability to choose a lie, but not the right to do so.

 

[Eric_Hilbert]

Remain of the topic of the OP, stop the childish bickering or some of you will be waving

(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)

 

[UniversalistGuy]

Guanophore and especially joe370,

Thank you for responding to my posts. I appreciate you giving me your insights. I’ve been thinking all this stuff over and I’ve decided that I don’t want to be a Catholic. I feel more and more uncomfortable on this forum posting anything cos you never know when a Catholic is going to lose his temper and attack. But thank you for being civil among so many that aren’t.

 

[schaick]

Hey Shaick…

Am I seeing in three’s LOL…A great passage showing that Jesus sent the spirit of truth to His one church to testify about Jesus, but it does not say that the father and the HS or Jesus and the HS are one. This merely says that the comforter comes from the father, with no suggestion that they are one. I am trying hard to see things from your perspective by the way.

Are you saying that you believe that the Trinity is simply a tradition?

I’m sorry I didn’t realize that you truly had no idea that the concept of the Trinity is in Scripture: Please forgive me.

Here we read how someone who lied to the Holy Spirit has in fact lied to GOD:
Acts 5
3Then Peter said, “Ananias, how is it that Satan has so filled your heart that you have lied to the Holy Spirit and have kept for yourself some of the money you received for the land? 4Didn’t it belong to you before it was sold? And after it was sold, wasn’t the money at your disposal? What made you think of doing such a thing? You have not lied to men but to God.”

1 Corinthians 2

If you google “Bible verses that support the Trinity” you will find tons of infornation and all the Bible verses that support each idea that forms the concept of the Trinity, subordination within, 3 persons, etc,

Check this out:
biblehelp.org/reference_1.htm

Prove it? Jesus church is called the CC as early as the latter part of the 1st century; I can provide citations if necessary? No other church existed until the 11th century, at which point the one CC divided into 2; this is a historical fact. If I am wrong then prove it and I will concede your point.

Are you saying catholic as in universal?

What about the Eastern/Greek Orthodox Church? What about the Jerusalem Church- the very first and very Jewish Christian Church?

All along the way there have been disenters when the Catholic Church has added new ideas to it’s teachings from the Sacred Tradition, not supprted by Scripture.

OK, I’ll bite. Help me find Jesus’ fledgling church that existed from the time of Pentecost to the advent of the man-made CC, that traversed the centuries alongside the supposed man-made church, the CC, until the 16th century, that MUST still exist today? Please be as direct as I was when answering your questions?

The Catholic Church is just one more denomination of that all encompassing universal Church that Jesus built.

It sounds as if you are of the mind set that people not members of the Catholic Church are not members of the universal Church.

Again, how do you know they didn’t add something to the NT, that shouldn’t have been there (like the 7 OT books that the CC supposedly added) - or exclude something from the bible, that should have been there?

Read the Apochrypha and spurious Books you can see for yourself why certain Books were not added- too fanciful, no early Church Fathers referenced them, we have no proof as to how early they were written, etc.

I guess you do not have the faith in GOD that HE would not allow HIS Word to be corrupted. We have the Bible GOD wanted us to have.

Someone asked and I answered not sure which thread but will do so here:

How do I know The Bible is GOD’s Word?

Not because early Church Fathers said so or because of some Sacred Tradition. There is only one way to know if a writing is from GOD-prophecies fufilled.

One very cool side note-Truth in histiorical facts. We are seeing more and more archeology supporting Scripture.

 

[joe370]

Schaick, you said:

Are you saying that you believe that the Trinity is simply a tradition?

I’m sorry I didn’t realize that you truly had no idea that the concept of the Trinity is in Scripture: Please forgive me.

Acts 5
3Then Peter said, “Ananias, how is it that Satan has so filled your heart that you have lied to the Holy Spirit and have kept for yourself some of the money you received for the land? 4Didn’t it belong to you before it was sold? And after it was sold, wasn’t the money at your disposal? What made you think of doing such a thing? You have not lied to men but to God.”

I have read Acts 5 a hundred times and I don’t know how I did not connect the dots. The preceding passage that you have cited is awesome and one that I have overlooked; thank you so much, and I will use it to defend the Trinity, from a biblical perspective, regarding my friend who is a Jehovah’s Witness. It’s not explicit but it will definitely suffice! I have been looking for that one passage, that one missing piece of the trinity puzzle, found in the bible, regarding the Father or the Son being one with the Holy spirit, for so long, and I don’t know how I overlooked it or how so many people failed to bring it up when I insisted that the bible does not suggest that the Father and the HS are one or that the Son and the HS are one.

Thanks again for the heads up.

With that said: Schaick, why, in your opinion, do sola scriptura advocates write so many books on doctrine and the Christian life in general, if indeed all that is necessary is the Bible alone? I am sure they are helpful; no doubt about that, but why go beyond the word of God by reading pedagogical material, when the word of God is reputedly, **all sufficient? **

If the Bible by itself is the self-contained and all sufficient word of God and all that is needed for one to understand it, then why don’t SS advocates simply hand out Bibles in lieu of extraneous non-biblical sources? And if the bible alone is all sufficient, then why does it not produce consistent results, i.e. - why do SS advocates not all believe the same thing? Certainly that would be the true test of its authenticity? This was a question that I could not reconcile with sound reasoning as a former SS advocate. I use to justify it by saying: well, it’s not God’s word that is lacking but the interpretation of Gods word, which helped me realize why the bible admonishes the reader to not rely on private interpretation of the bible alone for the simple fact that there is the potential for people to misinterpret to their own destruction:

*“that no prophecy of the Scripture is made by private interpretation,”*and we all know that the spirit of prophecy is tetemony of Jesus, *“For the testimony of Jesus is the spirit of prophecy.” *

*"…there are certain things hard to be understood, which the unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other Scriptures, to their destruction." *

It occurred to me, as a SS advocate, that the scriptures, by themselves, can be used to our destruction, and who was I that I should think myself learned or stable enough to interpret what was entrusted to the shepherds of Jesus’ church?

• "Philip ran up and heard him reading Isaiah the prophet and said, “Do you understand what you are reading?” He replied, “How can I, unless someone instructs me?”

As a former SS advocate, I was inundated with extra-biblical studies, and I began to ask myself: what is the purpose of these many Protestant study bibles if all that is needed is the Bible by itself?

As a SS pastor, wouldn’t it be more prudent as a SS advocate, to simply read the bible to his flock, if the bible alone is the Christians sole rule of faith and the final authority? I mean, why, as a SS advocate, would I need the pastors personal spin on anything regarding the word of God, when I have the very word of God at my disposal?

Schaick,** thanks again for the heads up my friend**.

 

[joe370]

Guanophore and especially joe370,

Thank you for responding to my posts. I appreciate you giving me your insights. I’ve been thinking all this stuff over and I’ve decided that I don’t want to be a Catholic. I feel more and more uncomfortable on this forum posting anything cos you never know when a Catholic is going to lose his temper and attack. But thank you for being civil among so many that aren’t.

Universal guy, I am pretty sure you are going to find that sort of blustering, (which is almost always due to both parties and their overzealousness) - where ever you go. We are all, only humans, disposed to such imperfections, but we shouldn’t let those human imperfections prevent us from finding the church founded by Jesus Christ, which is comprised of nothing but sinners, prone to such imperfections - maybe?

Hope you will be back. If not, then Godspeed my friend…

Your brother in Christ, Joe…