I’m sure you realize I was not referring to ‘all’ people nor just any people but true believers.
One of us is wrong.
No, schaick. The Church of Christ does not “morph into denominations”. Jesus built only ONE CHURCH, and He only has ONE BRIDE. There is only ONE FAITH.
Yes, of course! And indeed, many individual Catholics have done so, especially those corrupt clerics that preciptated the Reformation in Europe. However, the Church is pure and infallible, and being One with Christ, cannot “shife away” from Him.
Yes, I agree on both counts. In order for this to work, Jesus had to give the gift of infallibility to the Church.
Well, they can allow it, but that does not mean that God has allowed it. I think it is clear from the study of history that men hve allowed, and promoted, many things that God does not allow.
You know what the real problem with this thinking is though? This is an example of the path it leads one down.
Are you saying that if I’m not a catholic (in good standing) I will not be in Heaven?
Actually, one of the best definitions of humility is “perceiving according to reality”.
Yes, one can certainly be arrogant in the promulgation of the Truth. Jesus was perceived as arrogant, as were the Apostles. It is no wonder the church founded by them would be perceived that way as well. It is the duty of the Church to preserve the ONE FAITH that was handed down (paradosis).
It is good that you believe the Church is necessary. There are so many bible christians that seem to believe otherwise.
Paul writes to Timothy that the Scriptures are able to lead him to salvation. He is talking about the Septuagint. If the Septuagint were sufficient for Christians, there would be no need of the NT. There would be no need for the Church. Being led to salvation, and living out salvation, are two different things. The scriptures alone do not equip the saints.
Jesus never intended for the Scriptures to teach people how to live according to His commands. This is why He founded a Church. The Scriptures, Holy as they are, do not take the place of the Church.
And the idea that Jesus left His Church adrift, without a visible and authoritative witness to the Truth, does not make sense to me.
If they were, then the HS failed to keep His Word preserved, did He not? Catholics don’t believe that the shortcomings of man are stronger than the HS. We believe that God will preserve His Word where He placed it, and unto the purpose for which it was sent.
Yes, just as the Scriptures testify “whether in writing or by word of mouth”.
Yes, I was assuming that. The Church, though, in addition to believers now on earth, also contains those who have been “perfected forever” and by their heavenly inheritance, can no longer sin. This is another reason that the Church is Holy.
About why the Reformers jettisoned Sacred Tradition? Do you think there is some other reason they did it?
I think there are always consequences for departing from the Apostolic faith. There are more consequences the furhter one departs. One consequence is that departure from the ONE FAITH causes fracturing in the Body, and is contrary to the commandment of unity, and being “of the same mind”.
Not sure I understand what you are saying here. But I have not put forth my personal opinion here. I have represented the Teaching of the Aposltes. Do you think that such teaching can cause the result of false witness and slander?
Could you please provide a chapter and verse that says that St. Paul literally meant “all have sinned” and this literal means all human except Jesus who was fully human?
When we are born again through baptism we become “new creations”, but *we are not “saved” until we die. *
Perhaps. If his adulterous works are “burned up” in purgatory, he will indeed be saved, (after he dies, for, of course, salvation occurs after we die!)
Right. So the verse in Romans in which St. Paul says “all have sinned” is, clearly, not a literal all.
I ask because I want to lead you to an understanding that the verse in Romans does not mean “literally all have sinned.”
You can find it in the Catholic Church, in the Liturgy, in the Magisterium.
And we get no where again. Our presuppositions are keeping us from ‘communicating’. So be it.
That is another man-made tradition, schaick. For nowhere does it say that Scripture interprets itself. You’ve accepted this doctrine from the mouth of a preacher, but you have not seen it written in the Bible.
Where did you want to “get” that you did not?
No, we have communicated fine. There is an abundant clarity about which parts of the apostolic faith you have rejected. There is also clarity that you beleive what you have rejected is a man made invention, and not part of the once for all deposit of faith.
I was taught this principle, along with some other heresies, in the Protestant Seminary I attended. It is covered in the hermeneutics textbook.
Do we agree the Word of God is Spiritual? By this I mean His written Word of the 66 Books.
Well, not 66 books…
Amen!
Agreed. Thank you.
Where did you get this from?
Eph 2:Where did you get this from?