Evidence from Sola Scriptura - right from the Bible itself

[Hieronymus]

Yeah, your faith tradition does have issues.

Again, i have no faith tradition.
I'm a convert, for some 8 years now.
I used to be a 'Euro-buddhist' (you know, new agy..)
Haven't found a church yet.
Did find the Truth though.

 

[Erose]

On the contrary - the mere quote of the text is sufficient to give rise to strong opposition to it.

The text is evident and obvious -- no matter those who wish to ignore every detail in it. When your argument is "against the text" then -- posting "the text" ... is sufficient for the unbiased objective readers.

Your right the text is evident and obvious. The problem is what you are getting out of those texts isn't what is in them.

 

[Erose]

Again, i have no faith tradition.
I'm a convert, for some 8 years now.
I used to be a 'Euro-buddhist' (you know, new agy..)
Haven't found a church yet.
Did find the Truth though.

Whatever "truth" you found on-line comes from someone's faith tradition. It sounds much like the Adventist's faith tradition, but there are others who are similar.

I would like to give you some advice, I highly recommend that you don't use sites that speak negatively about a specific denomination, because they hardly are ever accurate. Maybe there are Catholic sites that do the same thing to certain Protestant denominations, I don't know; but if there are such sites, I would stay away from them also. Do research from actual sources. For example if you want to know what Catholic's teach then read our catechism. It's online. If you want to know what Lutherans teach read the small and large catechism, etc.

You want to understand the history of the Church, read legitimate books of history. I find that Anglicans are very balanced in what they write. I also think most Catholic historians are as well, but there are some who are not.

Church history isn't perfect and pristine as we all would like it to be, because no matter who started the Church, it is still made up of sinful men. But you know what reading the OT lets you know that neither were the Jews, and yet God hanged in there with them.

My point being is that history is not a thing you are going to find on an anti-(whatever) site. The only thing you going to find is propaganda.

 

[topcare]

Did find the Truth though.

Apparently not

 

[Hieronymus]

Apparently not

Christ is my life and hope, yours is a cerial disc.

 

[topcare]

Christ is my life and hope, yours is a cookie.

First I do not appreciate the ad hominem nor breaking the rules of the forum by insinuating that I am not a Christian. Secondly you have no idea what Church I go to so don't assume. We can all see that you have no idea about historical Christianity because your ideas are full of lies

 

[Hieronymus]

Whatever "truth" you found on-line comes from someone's faith tradition.

You really want it to be a tradition, don't you?
And i'm appalled by your calling Jesus Christ a "whatever truth you found online"
At least i don't think He is a cereal disc.

It sounds much like the Adventist's faith tradition, but there are others who are similar.

But there's only One Jesus Christ, only One written Word of God.
And you know what?
Because i can say Jesus Christ payed for my transgressions on the cross, so that i am justified in Him, i am saved.
For Jesus Christ is the Door, He is the Way, nobody comes to the Father but through Him.
For God loved the world so much, He gave his only begotten Son.
And whosoever believes in Him will not perish, but have life eternal.

God gave me, a sinner, this belief.
All glory is to God.

 

[Hieronymus]

First I do not appreciate the ad hominem nor breaking the rules of the forum by insinuating that I am not a Christian.

Maybe you should look at your little picture under your messages.

it's also rather hypocritical to cry when you insinuated the same.

 

[Hieronymus]

Would cereal disc be okay with you?
I changed it.

 

[EastCoastRemnant]

First I do not appreciate the ad hominem nor breaking the rules of the forum by insinuating that I am not a Christian. Secondly you have no idea what Church I go to so don't assume. We can all see that you have no idea about historical Christianity because your ideas are full of lies

You insinuated in your post that the brother didn't find the truth as he believes so don't go around waving your 'mods are gonna hear about this' stick.

 

[EastCoastRemnant]

You really want it to be a tradition, don't you?
And i'm appalled by your calling Jesus Christ a "whatever truth you found online"
At least i don't think He is a cereal disc.But there's only One Jesus Christ, only One written Word of God.
And you know what?
Because i can say Jesus Christ payed for my transgressions on the cross, so that i am justified in Him, i am saved.
For Jesus Christ is the Door, He is the Way, nobody comes to the Father but through Him.
For God loved the world so much, He gave his only begotten Son.
And whosoever believes in Him will not perish, but have life eternal.

God gave me, a sinner, this belief.
All glory is to God.

AMEN!

 

[BobRyan]

There are some exchanges here that contrast the RCC view of the wafer - the bread - in the communion service vs the non-RCC view.

There is a Catholic Commentary on the Baltimore Catechism after Vatican II that also addresses the two widely different points of view.

The Catholic statement we find in "The Faith Explained" by Leo Trese is 'instructive' even if this is a Catholic statement and I am not a Catholic.

Will post it. (However I don't know that this subject is specific to the OP about the Bible - unless the claim is that if you view the Mass as do many Catholics here - then you would have to reject Sola Scriptura testing of doctrine and tradition)

In any case - division on the POV exists - between Catholic and Protestants - so let's see what the Catholic view of that GAP is -


The Faith Explained – A bestselling RC commentary on the Baltimore Catechism post Vatican II by Leo J. Trese is promoted as “A standard reference for every Catholic home and library”. Complete with Papal Imprimatur -- Quote from page 350-351

Parenthetical inserts “mine”

===================quote

The Faith Explained – Page 350

“On this, the last night before His death, Jesus is making His last will and testament.

Ibid. Page 351

A last will is no place for figurative speech ; under the best of circumstances (human) courts sometimes have difficulty in interpreting a testator’s intentions aright, even without the confusion of symbolic language. Moreover, since Jesus is God, He knew that as a result of His words that night, untold millions of people would be worshiping him through the centuries under the appearance of the bread. if he would not really be present under those appearances, the worshippers would be adoring a mere piece of bread, and would be guilty of idolatry,. Certainly that is something that God Himself would set the stage for, by talking in obscure figurative speech.

…

IF Jesus was using a metaphor; if what He really meant was, “This bread is a sort of SYMBOL of My Body, and this is a SYMBOL of My Blood (not yet spilled – so they were not then participating in sacrifice); hereafter, any time that My followers get together and partake of the bread and wine like this, they will be honoring Me and representing My death”; if that IS what Jesus meant (as many protestants claim), then the apostles got Him all wrong . And through their misunderstanding ,mankind has for centuries worshiped A PIECE OF BREAD as God”

 

[topcare]

You insinuated in your post that the brother didn't find the truth as he believes so don't go around waving your 'mods are gonna hear about this' stick.

If he believes jack chick and SDA revisionist history than he has not received truth, he may have received Christ, that I do not know nor can I judge, and then bought into lies about Historic Christianity

 

[topcare]

Would cereal disc be okay with you?
I changed it.

No it's not.

 

[Erose]

You really want it to be a tradition, don't you?

I don't have to want, it is what it is. It would be like me wanting the moon in the sky...

And i'm appalled by your calling Jesus Christ a "whatever truth you found online"

What a silly comment. First, you didn't come up with your false understanding of the Catholic Church in a vacuum, by just reading Scripture. It would be impossible for you to do so. So yes you have to be careful what you read online. There is a lot of garbage out there, and those websites that justify their Christianity, by making false accusations about another Christian group, need to be avoided at all costs. They are garbage. it is as simple as that.

At least i don't think He is a cereal disc.But there's only One Jesus Christ, only One written Word of God.

What is a cereal disc?

And you know what?
Because i can say Jesus Christ payed for my transgressions on the cross, so that i am justified in Him, i am saved.

There is quite a bit required of you than just making a confession. Reading Scripture will tell you that.

For Jesus Christ is the Door, He is the Way, nobody comes to the Father but through Him.
For God loved the world so much, He gave his only begotten Son.
And whosoever believes in Him will not perish, but have life eternal.

Amen.

God gave me, a sinner, this belief.

Perhaps the passage above; but the other "stuff" for a lack of a better word, didn't come from God, but some idiot online.

All glory is to God.

Amen.

 

[Erose]

Would cereal disc be okay with you?
I changed it.

What is a cereal disc?

 

[Hieronymus]

Topcare, Erose, i apologise for ridiculing your tradition.

 

[Erose]

There are some exchanges here that contrast the RCC view of the wafer - the bread - in the communion service vs the non-RCC view.

There is a Catholic Commentary on the Baltimore Catechism after Vatican II that also addresses the two widely different points of view.

The Catholic statement we find in "The Faith Explained" by Leo Trese is 'instructive' even if this is a Catholic statement and I am not a Catholic.

Will post it. (However I don't know that this subject is specific to the OP about the Bible - unless the claim is that if you view the Mass as do many Catholics here - then you would have to reject Sola Scriptura testing of doctrine and tradition)

In any case - division on the POV exists - between Catholic and Protestants - so let's see what the Catholic view of that GAP is -


The Faith Explained – A bestselling RC commentary on the Baltimore Catechism post Vatican II by Leo J. Trese is promoted as “A standard reference for every Catholic home and library”. Complete with Papal Imprimatur -- Quote from page 350-351

Parenthetical inserts “mine”

===================quote

The Faith Explained – Page 350

“On this, the last night before His death, Jesus is making His last will and testament.

Ibid. Page 351

A last will is no place for figurative speech ; under the best of circumstances (human) courts sometimes have difficulty in interpreting a testator’s intentions aright, even without the confusion of symbolic language. Moreover, since Jesus is God, He knew that as a result of His words that night, untold millions of people would be worshiping him through the centuries under the appearance of the bread. if he would not really be present under those appearances, the worshippers would be adoring a mere piece of bread, and would be guilty of idolatry,. Certainly that is something that God Himself would set the stage for, by talking in obscure figurative speech.

…

IF Jesus was using a metaphor; if what He really meant was, “This bread is a sort of SYMBOL of My Body, and this is a SYMBOL of My Blood (not yet spilled – so they were not then participating in sacrifice); hereafter, any time that My followers get together and partake of the bread and wine like this, they will be honoring Me and representing My death”; if that IS what Jesus meant (as many protestants claim), then the apostles got Him all wrong . And through their misunderstanding ,mankind has for centuries worshiped A PIECE OF BREAD as God”

If you are going to post something, post the whole thing, and not just an exert. This tells no one nothing.

 

[topcare]

Topcare, Erose, i apologise for ridiculing your tradition.

Thank you and I apologize if I have caused offense to you

 

[Hieronymus]

Thank you and I apologize if I have caused offense to you

These things happen in the heat of discussions.
It's cool now. Thanks.