- This topic is empty.
- Posts
Hi CA,
How can those who had no choice to repent and be baptized now claim to have authority in the church they have yet to join?CatholicApologist wrote:
Quote Let me state this…that the man who declares that he accepts only the Bible as his authority in religious matters does not really mean it. For he really believes in what he himself thinks any given passage of the Bible to mean, which might not be what the Bible means at all. For such a person, the only ultimate authority in religious matters is not that of the Bible, BUT THAT OF HIS OWN JUDGEMENT CONCERNING IT, and he has no assurance that his own judgment is any more reliable than that of others whose interpretation differs from his and who honestly believe his interpretation to be quite mistaken.
That is a statement that shows lack of belief in God. For If you are led by God then God will interpret scripture for you as it is intended. The statement I just made is based on the belief God exist and will be there for those that seek him. So I ask “why do you think that God will not guide those who truly seek him?”
CatholicApologist wrote:
Quote His method was to establish a Church authorized by him to teach mankind in his name.
That is a strange teaching since he instructed his students to obey the Jewish hierarchy and in the Act of the Apostles the Christian church is recorded as being part of the Jewish faith though a different sect within it ranks.
Matthew 23:1-4(NIV) reads:
Quote Then Jesus said to the crowds and to his disciples: “The teachers of the law and the Pharisees sit in Moses' seat. So you must obey them and do everything they tell you. But do not do what they do, for they do not practice what they preach. They tie up heavy loads and put them on men's shoulders, but they themselves are not willing to lift a finger to move them.
and
Acts 24:5(NIV) reads:
Quote We have found this man to be a troublemaker, stirring up riots among the Jews all over the world. He is a ringleader of the Nazarene sect
Should I go through other translation including Roman Catholic ones and point out they state pretty much the same thing. I believe Christians were finally thrown out of the Jewish faith in about 1 A.D.
CatholicApologist wrote:
Quote Christ, therefore, meant the official teaching of the apostles and of their successors in the Church to be our guide, not the written Bible which is so liable to misinterpretation by its various individual readers, however sincere they may be
New Testament Scripture is written by the apostles and those, like Luke and Mark, they considered reliable. How do I know someone is their successors unless they teach the same message that the apostles teach?
Acts 17:11(NIV) reads:
Quote Now the Bereans were of more noble character than the Thessalonians, for they received the message with great eagerness and examined the Scriptures every day to see if what Paul said was true.
Luke, who your sect considers a Saint, commended the Bereans for testing what the apostle Paul taught against what the Old Testament Scriptures taught. Luke did not voice your objections when they chose to do that.
Once again I am fairly sure this scripture states the same thing is any translation there is.
Quote (942767 @ Sep. 15 2009,12:08) I wasn't around when those who decided what books were to be included in the Canon and which were not, but I can certainly tell by the principle that I have already stated, that precept must be upon precept and line upon line, whether or not something in the scriptures that we have lines up with God's Word or not, and also, I have the priviledge of going to God in prayer and asking Him if He said something that someone says that He said was said by Him or not. In this way, I can never be deceived by those who claim to be sent by Him.
With all due respect, bro….You say, “…I have the priviledge of going to God in prayer and asking Him if He said something….”.
Do you believe that Keith has the same priviledge? I do. Has God told you both the same concerning the Trinity? No. How Come? Is one of you a better listener? Or a better Christian? I'm confused….
Love,
MandyQuote (Gene @ Aug. 24 2009,16:36) CA………A long Post of nothing, the reason the Catholic Church does not Hold that the Scripture are the only true source of Truth is because they Have their on form of truth that has nothing to do with the Scriptures But Just there So-Called (HOLY FATHER) which is another Blasphemous Statement . The HOLY SPIRIT has enlighten MY heart to see through all the LIES of the Catholic Church and Her daughters the Protestant. YOU want to talk about Reformers lets talk about Micheal Servetus who John Calvin had Burned at the stake for not agreeing with the TRINITY DOCTRINE , Seeing you pride yourself on your Scholarship , GO and read (OUT OF THE FLAMES) it has a word for word copy of the trial . The CATHOLIC CHURCH has it also, and they consented with His murder and even burnt Him in apogee . It appears you have bought into the deluded teachings of the Catholic and Protestant teachings Which have (NO) scriptural Back up, just books printed by them that justify (THEIR) belief systems. You need to throw all the book away and get back to what is written in scripture or as you say the Hand Book. IMO peace and love………………………gene
Gene with that I agree. Since we were Castholics I know first hand what their believes are. What I can't understand is that when someone tells you how wrong it is, and shows you Scriptures, that you still believe the same. So so wrong. I am forever thankful to God for calling us out of that Church. One thing that I have learned now, if God does not open your eyes, you will not understand.
IreneQuote (Not3in1 @ Sep. 23 2009,04:27) Quote (942767 @ Sep. 15 2009,12:08) I wasn't around when those who decided what books were to be included in the Canon and which were not, but I can certainly tell by the principle that I have already stated, that precept must be upon precept and line upon line, whether or not something in the scriptures that we have lines up with God's Word or not, and also, I have the priviledge of going to God in prayer and asking Him if He said something that someone says that He said was said by Him or not. In this way, I can never be deceived by those who claim to be sent by Him.
With all due respect, bro….You say, “…I have the priviledge of going to God in prayer and asking Him if He said something….”.
Do you believe that Keith has the same priviledge? I do. Has God told you both the same concerning the Trinity? No. How Come? Is one of you a better listener? Or a better Christian? I'm confused….
Love,
Mandy
Good point Mandy. Marty unwittingly substantiates CA's point that no one relies on scripture alone. We all to some extent rely on scripture + our judgment or whatever. For Kathi it is scripture + a whisper or maybe the reverse order.I am not saying I agree with CA.
thinker
Hi TT,
You teach CA's dogmas so these differences are minor.
Men must add their pennyworth to truth.Quote (Nick Hassan @ Sep. 22 2009,14:39) Hi TT,
You teach CA's dogmas so these differences are minor.
Men must add their pennyworth to truth.
….saith the Lord according to NHs gospel!
WJ
Hi WJ,
Why do you preach catholic dogma but rebel against their pope?
Surely you should seek obedience to the Lord Jesus.Quote (Nick Hassan @ Sep. 22 2009,14:55) Hi WJ,
Why do you preach catholic dogma but rebel against their pope?
Surely you should seek obedience to the Lord Jesus.
NHYou mean the same Catholic dogma you preach, like the death, burial and ressurection of Jesus?
Or how about the great white throne judgment or his second coming?
And the biggest one of all is you hold to the Bible Cannon that the CC declared to be the inpired scriptures!
Your statement is hillarious!
Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Sep. 23 2009,06:52) Quote (Nick Hassan @ Sep. 22 2009,14:39) Hi TT,
You teach CA's dogmas so these differences are minor.
Men must add their pennyworth to truth.
….saith the Lord according to NHs gospel! WJ
WJ,
Don't forget that NH is a son of Bildad. Remember Bildad that Gnostic who said that the heavenly bodies are “unpure” and that man is a “worm?” God condemned Bildad's speech but NH still propagates it. Man is a “worm” and so God could not become flesh.It is amazing that NH would find fault with those he thinks embraces catholic dogmas when he himself sides with a man who was not an oracle of God and whose speech God Himself condemned.
thinker
Hi TT,
Your attacks come from the knowledge that your dogmas are not yours but those of the catholic church?
You will need to choose your master well.Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Sep. 23 2009,06:59) Quote (Nick Hassan @ Sep. 22 2009,14:55) Hi WJ,
Why do you preach catholic dogma but rebel against their pope?
Surely you should seek obedience to the Lord Jesus.
NHYou mean the same Catholic dogma you preach, like the death, burial and ressurection of Jesus?
Or how about the great white throne judgment or his second coming?
And the biggest one of all is you hold to the Bible Cannon that the CC declared to be the inpired scriptures!
Your statement is hillarious!
Nick,
WJ got ya.
thinker
Quote (Nick Hassan @ Sep. 23 2009,07:10) Hi TT,
Your attacks come from the knowledge that your dogmas are not yours but those of the catholic church?
You will need to choose your master well.
Your father Bildad was an oracle of God or not?thinker
Hi WJ,
So the trinity dogma spawned by the deceived 180 years after their Master had left them.
It has yet to be found in scripture and Jesus warned us about such deceivers.Quote (Nick Hassan @ Sep. 23 2009,07:25) Hi WJ,
So the trinity dogma spawned by the deceived 180 years after their Master had left them.
It has yet to be found in scripture and Jesus warned us about such deceivers.
Nick,As moderator, you should know and respect that this thread is not about the Trinity. It is about whether the Scriptures are the sole source for truth. So far….no one here can show me where the Scriptures substantiate that claim. So therefore you believe a self-refuting proposition…it is logically untenable.
Quote (CatholicApologist @ Sep. 23 2009,07:31) Quote (Nick Hassan @ Sep. 23 2009,07:25) Hi WJ,
So the trinity dogma spawned by the deceived 180 years after their Master had left them.
It has yet to be found in scripture and Jesus warned us about such deceivers.
Nick,As moderator, you should know and respect that this thread is not about the Trinity. It is about whether the Scriptures are the sole source for truth. So far….no one here can show me where the Scriptures substantiate that claim. So therefore you believe a self-refuting proposition…it is logically untenable.
Yes CA,
Nick makes everything about the trinity. I personally believe he is not qualified to be a moderator because of what you say and also because he is very judgmental and provocative.thinker
Hi CA,
Your bizarre trinity spawned from abandonment on reliance on sacred scripture as truth.
Now you try to justify the thoughts of foolish men being a better foundation.
Such is rebellion and the idolatry of the vain minds of men.Quote (kerwin @ Sep. 22 2009,22:06) CatholicApologist wrote: Quote Let me state this…that the man who declares that he accepts only the Bible as his authority in religious matters does not really mean it. For he really believes in what he himself thinks any given passage of the Bible to mean, which might not be what the Bible means at all. For such a person, the only ultimate authority in religious matters is not that of the Bible, BUT THAT OF HIS OWN JUDGEMENT CONCERNING IT, and he has no assurance that his own judgment is any more reliable than that of others whose interpretation differs from his and who honestly believe his interpretation to be quite mistaken.
That is a statement that shows lack of belief in God. For If you are led by God then God will interpret scripture for you as it is intended. The statement I just made is based on the belief God exist and will be there for those that seek him. So I ask “why do you think that God will not guide those who truly seek him?”
Matthew 23:1-4(NIV) reads:
Quote Then Jesus said to the crowds and to his disciples: “The teachers of the law and the Pharisees sit in Moses' seat. So you must obey them and do everything they tell you. But do not do what they do, for they do not practice what they preach. They tie up heavy loads and put them on men's shoulders, but they themselves are not willing to lift a finger to move them.
Lack of belief in God? Not hardly. It is illogical to say that “if you are led by God”, He will do so by a personal revelation apart from anyone else. You are putting God in a box. Your premise is faulty. Of course God guides those who truly seek Him. The way he chose to do it was to establish a Church built upon apostles who were commanded to preach (orally) a message to other people. Here's the kicker. When others heard the message preached, they were expected TO BELIEVE IT AND ACT UPON IT. This is why you read the apostles' saying things like this:“For this cause also thank we God without ceasing, because, when ye received the word of God which ye heard of us, ye received it not as the word of men, but as it is in truth, the word of God, which effectually worketh also in you that believe.” – 1 Thess. 2:13
So the words of men were the words of God. Nobody was handed a book.
Quote CatholicApologist wrote: Quote His method was to establish a Church authorized by him to teach mankind in his name.
That is a strange teaching since he instructed his students to obey the Jewish hierarchy and in the Act of the Apostles the Christian church is recorded as being part of the Jewish faith though a different sect within it ranks.
A. When Jesus told the Jews to obey those that sat in Moses' seat, it was because they were the jurisdiction even He, God in the flesh, submitted Himself to before His passion and cross. But at the cross, He brought the Mosaic law to death, having Himself fulfilled it.
B. I read the verse you quoted. Did you notice that it was those who where trying to destroy St. Paul who called the Church a “sect.” That's as bad as a Mormon quoting Genesis 3 to try and prove that we will be “as gods”.
Quote New Testament Scripture is written by the apostles and those, like Luke and Mark, they considered reliable. How do I know someone is their successors unless they teach the same message that the apostles teach? No, that is not the first question to ask. The first question to ask is “How do I know the NT was really written by the apostles and who assures me this is so.” That would be a good start. You are starting from a premise of Sola Scriptura….a premise you haven't even begun to defend.
Quote Acts 17:11(NIV) reads: Quote Now the Bereans were of more noble character than the Thessalonians, for they received the message with great eagerness and examined the Scriptures every day to see if what Paul said was true.
Luke, who your sect considers a Saint, commended the Bereans for testing what the apostle Paul taught against what the Old Testament Scriptures taught. Luke did not voice your objections when they chose to do that.
Once again I am fairly sure this scripture states the same thing is any translation there is.
We are told that the Bereans were more noble-minded (open-minded, better disposed, fair)—but more noble-minded than whom? The Thessalonians! It is convenient for Fundamentalists to pull this passage out of context and force it to stand alone. That way their case seems convincing, but the context tells the real story. Before we look at the Bereans, let’s take a look at those they are compared to, the Thessalonians. What did the Thessalonians do that made them less noble-minded?
We find out in Acts 17:1–9: “Now when they had passed through Amphipolis and Apollonia, they came to Thessalonica, where there was a synagogue of the Jews. And Paul went in, as was his custom, and for three weeks he argued with them from the Scriptures, explaining and proving that it was necessary for the Christ to suffer and to rise from the dead, and saying, ‘This Jesus, whom I proclaim to you, is the Christ.’ And some of them were persuaded and joined Paul and Silas, as did a great many of the devout Greeks and not a few of the leading women. But the Jews were jealous, and, taking some wicked fellows of the rabble, they gathered a crowd, set the city in an uproar, and attacked the house of Jason, seeking to bring them out to the people. And when they could not find them, they dragged Jason and some of the brethren before the city authorities, crying, ‘These men who have turned the world upside down have come here also, and Jason has received them, and they are all acting against the decrees of Caesar, saying that there is another king, Jesus.’ And the people and the city authorities were disturbed when they heard this. And when they had taken security from Jason and the rest, they let them go.”
The Thessalonians rejected Paul and his message, and, after denouncing him, they became jealous that others believed. They treated Paul with contempt and violence, throwing him ignominiously out of town. Why? “For three weeks he [Paul] reasoned with them from the Scriptures” in the synagogue, as was his custom. They did not revile Paul the first week or the secon
d; rather, they listened and discussed. But ultimately they rejected what he had to say. They compared Paul’s message to the Old Testament and decided that Paul was wrong. We must remember that many were proclaiming a wide variety of new teachings, all supposedly based on the Scriptures and revelations from God. Heresies, cults, and sects were as numerous in the Roman Empire as they are today. The Jews in Thessalonica had a right to be skeptical.Now let’s look at Luke’s comment about the noble-minded Bereans: “The brethren immediately sent Paul and Silas away by night to Berea, and when they arrived they went into the Jewish synagogue. Now these Jews were more noble than those in Thessalonica, for they received the word with all eagerness, examining the Scriptures daily to see if these things were so. Many of them therefore believed, with not a few Greek women of high standing as well as men” (Acts 17:10–12).
When Protestants use this passage as a proof text for the doctrine of sola scriptura, they should realize that those in question were not Christians; they were Hellenistic Jews. There was no doctrine of sola scriptura within Jewish communities, but the Scriptures were held as sacred. Although the Jews are frequently referred to as “the people of the book,” in reality they had a strong oral tradition that accompanied their Scriptures, along with an authoritative teaching authority, as represented by the “seat of Moses” in the synagogues (Matt. 23:2). The Jews had no reason to accept Paul’s teaching as “divinely inspired,” since they had just met him. When new teachings sprang up that claimed to be a development of Judaism, the rabbis researched to see if they could be verified from the Torah.
If one of the two groups could be tagged as believers in sola scriptura, who would it be, the Thessalonians or the Bereans? The Thessalonians, obviously. They, like the Bereans, examined the Scriptures with Paul in the synagogue, yet they rejected his teaching. They rejected the new teaching, deciding after three weeks of deliberation that Paul’s word contradicted the Torah. Their decision was not completely unjustified from their scriptural perspective. How could the Messiah of God be cursed by hanging on a tree like a common criminal, publicly displayed as one who bore the judgment of God? What kind of king and Messiah would that be? This seemed irreconcilable to them (see Simon J. Kistemaker, Acts [Grand Rapids, Michigan: Baker Books, 1990], 614).
When some of the Greeks and prominent citizens did accept Jesus as Messiah, the Jews became jealous—and rightfully so, from their perspective, since the new believers separated themselves from the synagogue and began meeting elsewhere, at Jason’s house. The Jews naturally considered themselves the authoritative interpreters of the Torah. Who were the Gentiles to interpret Scripture and decide important theological issues or accept additional revelation? They were the “dogs,” not the chosen custodians of the oracles of God (see William Barclay, The Acts of the Apostles [Philadelphia, Pennsylvania: Westminster Press, 1976], 128).
We can see, then, that if anyone could be classified as adherents to sola scriptura it was the Thessalonian Jews. They reasoned from the Scriptures alone and concluded that Paul’s new teaching was “unbiblical.”
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
