• Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.

Mountainmike

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Nov 2, 2016
4,818
1,642
67
Northern uk
✟665,511.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
The Lord didn't choose to pass down faith through scripture? Okie dokie then.

He gave us apostles.
Few could read, and even less could afford to own scripture.
Owning a bible is a recent phenomenon, brought about by the printing press, and only in recent centuries - the last two- has average Joe been affluent enough to afford it.

The truth was passed on by "paradosis" , handing down (translated by the word tradition, but modern connotations of that word do not help) - by the actions of the church.
Study the history of the canon - including the heretical ones - and the ratification at catholic councils.
ALl that came later.

"The pillar of truth is the church." or so scripture says!

Protestants confuse the two statements
"all that is true is in scripture" ( and anyone can interpret it)
(the protestant version leading to endless schism, because of conflicting interpretation)
with
"all that is in scripture is true" (but only if you interpret it correctly, and with authority)
(our version)

They are not the same.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Albion

Facilitator
Dec 8, 2004
111,127
33,262
✟583,992.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Married
He gave us apostles.
Few could read, and even less could afford to own scripture.
You're guessing now. Remember that the Jews and early Christians attended synagogue where scripture was read and taught. Also, that Jesus, as recorded in the NT, referred his Apostles TO the Scriptures and they knew what he and it meant.
 
Upvote 0

Phil 1:21

Well-Known Member
Apr 3, 2017
5,869
4,395
United States
✟152,342.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
"all that is in scripture is true" (but only if you interpret it correctly, and with authority)
I'll trust the guidance of the Holy Spirit over a magisterium with centuries of corruption. Jesus calls us to a personal relationship with Him, not one that is filtered through a hierarchy of fallible men and dead people.
 
Upvote 0

Mountainmike

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Nov 2, 2016
4,818
1,642
67
Northern uk
✟665,511.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
I dont guess anythign.

I study.

Or does the protestant surreal world now contain Amazon of the first century?

It seems I have to remind you the first canon was deemed heretical (Marcions) - and it was Rome that was instrumental in refuting it! So just because a bible existed did not mean it was inspired, nor were many books that failed to make the grade, also in circulation.

It was a catholic council that gave you what you now have.



You're guessing now. Remember that the Jews and early Christians attended synagogue where scripture was read and taught. Also, that Jesus, as recorded in the NT, referred his Apostles TO the Scriptures and they knew what he and it meant.
 
Upvote 0

Mountainmike

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Nov 2, 2016
4,818
1,642
67
Northern uk
✟665,511.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Now explain why the "Guidance of the holy spirit" has given protestants at least 5 mutually exclusive versions of eucharist (and not the one of the early church!) - similar version of baptism, similar exclusive variations of salvation and clergy - I could go on - other sacraments , marriage, abortion, you name it you all disagree on it.

And every one of you claim the holy spirit guided you! yet 99.99 percent of you provably believe in falsehoods because you believe in 10000 mutually exclusive things.
And there is only one truth!

That is part of the reason as a protestant and evangelical, I studied the early church which was a journey that led back to Rome.


I can only point out that just as the authors of scripture were inspired , as people they were fallible. God Used them, it did not make them perfect. Ditto the magisterium. The catholic church is made of people and peopel are corrupt. But they have in council the power to "bind and loose" on doctrine - our Lord gave them that, and as a result they decided your canon and creed.

But our Lord promised "his church was one 0- the gates of hell would not prevail against his church" So find a church that has believed in the same things for 2000 years. There is only one.

I'll trust the guidance of the Holy Spirit over a magisterium with centuries of corruption. Jesus calls us to a personal relationship with Him, not one that is filtered through a hierarchy of fallible men and dead people.
 
Upvote 0

Albion

Facilitator
Dec 8, 2004
111,127
33,262
✟583,992.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Married
It was a catholic council that gave you what you now have.

^_^ The councils that did this only "stated for the record" what the true faith was. The framers of the Nicene Creed, for example, did not invent the doctrines involved.

In fact, if you read the Creed carefully, you will see that they state in the words of the Creed itself that SCRIPTURE is where it came from. No other "authority" such as tradition or the pope or custom is mentioned. Sola Scriptura was the rule.
 
Upvote 0

Phil 1:21

Well-Known Member
Apr 3, 2017
5,869
4,395
United States
✟152,342.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Now explain why the "Guidance of the holy spirit" has given protestants at least 5 mutually exclusive versions of eucharist (and not the one of the early church!) - similar version of baptism, similar exclusive variations of salvation and clergy - I could go on - other sacraments , marriage, abortion, you name it you all disagree on it.

And every one of you claim the holy spirit guided you! yet 99.99 percent of you provably believe in falsehoods because you believe in 10000 mutually exclusive things.

That is part of the reason as a protestant and evangelical, I studied the early church which was a journey that led back to Rome.
The problem is you look at 100 leaves, see that no two are perfectly identical, and proclaim they couldn't belong to the same tree.
 
Upvote 0

Mountainmike

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Nov 2, 2016
4,818
1,642
67
Northern uk
✟665,511.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
The problem is you look at 100 leaves, see that no two are perfectly identical, and proclaim they couldn't belong to the same tree.

That analogy is false

Take a simple thing. An all protestant affair. Salvation..
The difference between "once saved always saved ""saved and can lose it" "notsaved till the end"
They are mutually exclusive

They are not different views of the same thing.
If three hold those views, two are wrong,but all claim the holy spirit guided them.
So either the holy spirit changes his mind on a daily basis, or two of your are wrong - and the holy spirit does not guide you! I vote the latter.

Jesus gave a means to resolve this. He gave the power to "bind and loose" - see who he gave it to!

Seriously -...it is questions like that, and the inability of protestantism to answer them, that led me back to Rome.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Mountainmike

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Nov 2, 2016
4,818
1,642
67
Northern uk
✟665,511.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
If you want a dialogue, spare the insult of emoticons.


And accept the fact that the power of councils, was the power to "bind and loose"
It did not make those fathers infallible, it made their decisions on doctrine infallible.

Without that you would not have a new testament.

It allowed them to state what was always true, and of multiple options - eg the nature of Christ true man or true god? - which was correct

That is all the magisterium does! It does not make those people other than corrupt, as all are!

But it is the guiding anchor that has stopped church doctrine dividing protestant fashion.



^_^ The councils that did this only "stated for the record" what the true faith was. The framers of the Nicene Creed, for example, did not invent the doctrines involved.

In fact, if you read the Creed carefully, you will see that they state in the words of the Creed itself that SCRIPTURE is where it came from. No other "authority" such as tradition or the pope or custom is mentioned. Sola Scriptura was the rule.
 
Upvote 0

Albion

Facilitator
Dec 8, 2004
111,127
33,262
✟583,992.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Married
Seriously -...it is questions like that, and the inability of protestantism to answer them, that led me back to Rome.

What a mistake you made, then. "Protestantism" is not a denomination; it's a general term describing thousands of churches that have a few things in common, mainly issues that separate them all from Catholicism. But it is ridiculous to talk as though you are referring to a single denomination. OF COURSE it's possible to find differences of belief among a large number of churches, most of which have nothing but the barest of essentials in common with the others.

If I were to do the same thing you did here and compare the Lutheran Church--Missouri Synod (to use an example that includes a number of CF members) simultaneously against the Roman Catholic, Eastern Orthodox, Coptic, Old Catholic and a few other churches generally classified as 'Catholic'... I could easily say the Lutheran Church is united, but look at all the disagreements among the Catholics! They must be wrong since they disagree!

And you made your choice of denomination on the basis of that verbal trick, you say??
 
Upvote 0

Albion

Facilitator
Dec 8, 2004
111,127
33,262
✟583,992.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Married
And accept the fact that the power of councils, was the power to "bind and loose"
It did not make those fathers infallible, it made their decisions on doctrine infallible.
So you say. That's nothing more than a denominational POV. There's nothing objective that would make it so, nor have you even attempted anything along the lines of evidence.

Without that you would not have a new testament.
We wouldn't have a consensus on which books belong in it. All of those that are in your copy of the Bible were in use in the churches BEFORE the council met and were considered inspired. Besides, the work of the councils was the work of the whole church, not the Roman or Latin part of it alone. We all are heirs of that undivided church.
 
Upvote 0

BobRyan

Junior Member
Angels Team
Site Supporter
Nov 21, 2008
53,346
11,901
Georgia
✟1,092,424.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Married
So your saying I can be saved apart from the sacraments of the Roman Catholic Church?

The "New Covenant" according to RCC doctrine is confined to the Catholic mass... so if you are going to be saved it will have to be "without the New Covenant" in that system of belief.
 
Upvote 0

BobRyan

Junior Member
Angels Team
Site Supporter
Nov 21, 2008
53,346
11,901
Georgia
✟1,092,424.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Married
What a mistake you made, then. "Protestantism" is not a denomination; it's a general term describing thousands of churches that have a few things in common, mainly issues that separate them all from Catholicism. But it is ridiculous to talk as though you are referring to a single denomination. OF COURSE it's possible to find differences of belief among a large number of churches, most of which have nothing but the barest of essentials in common with the others.

And many denominations (like EO) call themselves Catholic
 
Upvote 0

BobRyan

Junior Member
Angels Team
Site Supporter
Nov 21, 2008
53,346
11,901
Georgia
✟1,092,424.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Married
Sola scriptura is easily provable as LOGICALLY false .
A man made tradition of the reformation.

until you read the Bible.



2 Tim 3:16 "ALL Scripture is inspired by God AND IS to be used for DOCTRINE"
Is 8:20 "To the LAW and to the Testimony - if they speak not according to THIS WORD - there is no light in them"
Acts 17:11 "they studied the scriptures daily to SEE IF those things spoken by Paul - WERE SO"
Gal 1:6-9 "IF WE (Apostles) OR an ANGEL from heaven should preach a gospel contrary to what we have preached to you - let him be accursed!"

6 I am amazed that you are so quickly deserting Him who called you by the grace of Christ, for a different gospel; 7 which is really not another; only there are some who are disturbing you and want to distort the gospel of Christ. 8 But even if we, or an angel from heaven, should preach to you a gospel contrary to what we have preached to you, he is to be accursed! 9 As we have said before, so I say again now, if any man is preaching to you a gospel contrary to what you received, he is to be accursed!


The argument against "sola scriptura" is essentially that - none of those texts should exist!

1. The Holy Spirit authored the Bible - 2 Peter 1:19-21 - so that following the Bible is to follow the work and teaching of the Holy Spirit Himself.
2. The Holy Spirit condemns all doctrine that contradicts scripture Gal 1:6-9 Isaiah 8:19-20
3. The Holy Spirit IS God .. so then our authority is God.
4. There are those "seared in their conscience" such that following it would be sin in that case. 1 Tim 4:2

It is the Holy Spirit that gives us Acts 17:11 telling us that they are approved who "study the scriptures daily to SEE IF those things are so"


Acts 17
10 The brethren immediately sent Paul and Silas away by night to Berea, and when they arrived, they went into the synagogue of the Jews. 11 Now these were more noble-minded than those in Thessalonica, for they received the word with great eagerness, examining the Scriptures daily to see whether these things were so. 12 Therefore many of them believed, along with a number of prominent Greek women and men. 13 But when the Jews of Thessalonica found out that the word of God had been proclaimed by Paul in Berea also, they came there as well, agitating and stirring up the crowds.



Acts 17 highlights a detail that defeats the entire argument against sola scriptura.

The Jews in Berea had as their overlords their own Rabbi's their long standing traditions of men.
The "god fearing gentiles" in those synagogues had the same domineering overlords commanding them what to think.

Now as we all know - Paul and Silas come with a Bible-based message that is more Bible than overlord-of-the-Jews man-made-tradition.

A. Many hear would argue that "thinking outside the box" ...freeing themselves from the chains imposed by their overlords and "searching the scriptures daily to SEE IF those things were SO" was Holy Spirit lead - and proof that even in the most UNFAVORABLE context - sola scriptura still wins!

B. Others would argue "this never should have happened since the overlords-of-tradition should always be obeyed and scripture is not all that clear in what it says anyway".

So here was a perfect demonstration in favor of position-A.


Indeed your first post is offensive to truth, let alone catholics!

Do you really think those meetings in Germany are going to toss the Bible under the boot of man-made-tradition??

Indeed...the bible actually contradicts it where it says "the pillar and foundation of truth is the church! PROVING there is truth outside scripture, indeed the very pillar of truth is outside scripture!

The Bible says Christ is the foundation
1Cor 3
11 For no man can lay a foundation other than the one which is laid, which is Jesus Christ.


1 Peter 2
6 For this is contained in Scripture:
“Behold, I lay in Zion a choice stone, a precious corner stone,
And he who believes in Him will not be disappointed
.”
7 This precious value, then, is for you who believe; but for those who disbelieve,
“The stone which the builders rejected,
This became the very corner stone,”
8 and, “A stone of stumbling and a rock of offense”;

No catholic council told saints what to read as scripture in the first century... and we all know it.
 
Upvote 0

Phil 1:21

Well-Known Member
Apr 3, 2017
5,869
4,395
United States
✟152,342.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
That analogy is false

Take a simple thing. An all protestant affair. Salvation..
The difference between "once saved always saved ""saved and can lose it" "notsaved till the end"
They are mutually exclusive

They are not different views of the same thing.
You once again ignored the tree (what salvation is, by whom and how it is given) to look for differences in the leaves. Friend, I understand where you're coming from. I was raised there too. And every day I thank God that he tore that curtain in half and pulled me through it.
 
  • Winner
Reactions: BobRyan
Upvote 0

faroukfarouk

Fading curmudgeon
Apr 29, 2009
35,915
17,131
Canada
✟287,108.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Nevertheless, each person should live as a believer in whatever situation the Lord has assigned to them, just as God has called them. This is the rule I lay down in all the churches. Was a man already circumcised when he was called? He should not become uncircumcised. Was a man uncircumcised when he was called? He should not be circumcised. Circumcision is nothing and uncircumcision is nothing....
Well, exactly; good quote.
 
Upvote 0

BobRyan

Junior Member
Angels Team
Site Supporter
Nov 21, 2008
53,346
11,901
Georgia
✟1,092,424.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Married
Not really in context my friend:
Nevertheless, each person should live as a believer in whatever situation the Lord has assigned to them, just as God has called them. This is the rule I lay down in all the churches. Was a man already circumcised when he was called? He should not become uncircumcised. Was a man uncircumcised when he was called? He should not be circumcised. Circumcision is nothing and uncircumcision is nothing....

Each person should remain in the situation they were in when God called them.

Nevertheless: And this is his command: to believe in the name of his Son, Jesus Christ, and to love one another as he commanded us.

That 1 Cor 7 quote could use some more context as well... start by not cutting the quote in the middle of a sentence. Let me help you.

"Circumcision is nothing and uncircumcision is nothing....but what matters is keeping the Commandments of God"

There was a lot of "blood on the floor" during the years of the reformation when Protestants were slaughtered by the millions.

We can all chalk it up to "so much dark-ages thinking" but doing so would be to forget that ecumenical councils like Lateran IV that called for "extermination of heretics" are not so easy to "Walk away from" since they were deemed to be "infallible" and still are.

That is a sticking point.

But more than this - why were so many protesting Catholics willing to get killed over doctrinal differences?? That is where the OP comes in.

And if you look at the book of Acts - you find the early Apostles getting killed by their fellow Jews - "over doctrinal differences".

What was the doctrinal difference "worth dying for"??

Turns out it is "truth" because as Christ said in John 14 "I AM the way the TRUTH and the life"

What Catholicism was slow to learn is that " your truth is not real truth if you have to kill others who differ with you".
 
  • Like
Reactions: Anguspure
Upvote 0

Meowzltov

Freylekher Yid
Aug 3, 2014
18,602
4,463
64
Southern California
✟66,774.00
Country
United States
Gender
Female
Faith
Judaism
Marital Status
Celibate
Politics
US-Others
I've been doing this Catholic v Protestant thing my whole life and I'm 56 now. I was raised Fundamentalist, and am now Catholic, and the journey from one to the other was one of incredible study of Bible, theology, and Church History, especially the Early Church. I know all about the issues of the Reformation like the back of my hand, from birth (my father was an ex-pastor). After my conversion, I worked to build bridges by participating in dialogue between Catholics and Protestants. My goal is the ultimate unity of the Church -- not the superficial unity when we pretend we don't have significant differences -- but true unity of the sort that the Church had in the time of the Apostles.

What was the Reformation? The Reformation began as a revolt against corruption in the Catholic Church. It was long overdue -- even we Catholics say so. Then, pride took a good idea and wrecked it -- both Luther and the Pope were terrible, nasty egotists, the "my way or the highway" types. No humility from either one. And Luther had a fowl, dirty mouth. And so what began as a legitimate reform degraded into a game of "quien es mas macho." And basically, the Pope was the bigger dog in the fight. It got to the point where he lost his patience with this priest calling him all sorts of names rather than give him an ounce of respect considering his office. History records that Luther was excommunicated for heresy, but I don't believe it for a second. I think he would have been tolerated if he had simply been humble. But he simply had to be a jerk to the wrong person.

Once excommunicated, Luther's response was "You can't fire me, I quit!" So he sets up his own shop, which immediately divides into scores of other shops. Why? Because sola scriptura can't provide unity.

The Body of Christ then goes through the bloodiest age in its history. Whether it's the 3000-5000 deaths of the Spanish Inquisition, or the 73,000 deaths under Henry VIII, Christian culture of that era simply believed it was best to kill the heretic, whether you were protestant or Catholic. Even Luther urged the slaughter of the Anabaptists.

Even when things "calmed down" everyone was still in a state of "trench mentality." We could not listen to each other. We considered each other dangerous heretics, not even real Christians. Protestants were even at odds with each other, deeply suspicious and even hostile. Yes, times were better, but certainly not good.

Here is my assessment of where things stand 500 years after the Reformation. Something happened after the Holocaust that made us take a second look at ourselves. The fact that we had the atomic power to destroy the world was alarming. The fact that a Christian country had exterminated a third of the Jews in the world was deeply shaking and humbling. We entered a new era with the idea that any day could be our last so make it count, and maybe seeing that we aren't the wonderful people we thought, that perhaps we should spend as much time and effort making peace as making war.

There are four great movements that have effected where we stand now.
  1. The mainline Churches were brought closer together by a common social gospel
  2. The rise of Evangelicalism spread across denominational lines.
  3. Vatican II prepared the Catholic Church for its great ecumenical thrust
  4. The Charismatic movement also spread across denominational lines

It is absolutely a certainty that we are much closer than 500 years ago. Catholics and Protestants live together, work together, raise children together, pray together, study the Bible together -- we come up short when it comes to communion. All in all, this is heaven compared to the 1600s.

Doctrinally? Progress has been made. The biggest doctrinal issue was about justification, and the World Lutheran Federation and the Catholic Church together produced the Joint Declaration on the Doctrine of Justification in 2000, which has now also been signed by the Methodists, and is expected to be signed by the Anglicans shortly.

But really, the doctrinal issues were always second on the list. Many of them aren't even real. For example, the Catholic church teaches us to only worship God, therefore it is not Catholic teaching to worship Mary. Many Protestant objections are misunderstandings. But even the ones that ARE legitimate objections (legitimate meaning they are objections to actual Catholic teachings) are still secondary. It's not what Luther was really all about.

What Luther rebelled against was CHURCH AUTHORITY. The primary thing dividing then, and still dividing us now, is sola scriptura verses the authority of the Church. (My pet peeve -- I can't get my protestant friends to agree on what sola scriptura means. Sometimes they come up with definitions that even the Catholic Church would agree with, and if sola scriptura doesn't rule out church authority, then really your Catholic again.) Remember, Luther was in a fight with the Pope. He didn't want the Church telling him what to think. He was his own Pope. So for all the progress we've made on other fronts, on this one we have made no progress at all: shall we have one pope, or shall we have billions?
 
Upvote 0

Mountainmike

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Nov 2, 2016
4,818
1,642
67
Northern uk
✟665,511.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
And sola scriptura is still provably false.
Nowhere do your quotes say "only scripture"
Which is logically, historically and scripturally false.
Nor was it the way the faith was passed on in the early church.

Not one SINGLE thing you have said has challenged that.
You can write it in green in 10 foot high letters, and it still won't change the truth.
Nor will repeating the same falasy endlessly.

Protestantism is based on a falasy - the reason it has split into 10000 bits ALL wholly opposed to each other on doctrine, with mutually exclusive interpretations of every aspect. Even Luther regretted the monster he created in later life with his man made tradition of sola scriptura - he called it "the greatest scandal"

Why is it protestants consistently say 2+2=5?
And when challenged they keep repeating the same falasy.

The entire thread is offensive to truth, let alone Catholics.
It is sad you consider it beneficial to lead more generations away from the true church.

Now study the early church, and come back to the true meaning of faith.



until you read the Bible.



2 Tim 3:16 "ALL Scripture is inspired by God AND IS to be used for DOCTRINE"
Is 8:20 "To the LAW and to the Testimony - if they speak not according to THIS WORD - there is no light in them"
Acts 17:11 "they studied the scriptures daily to SEE IF those things spoken by Paul - WERE SO"
Gal 1:6-9 "IF WE (Apostles) OR an ANGEL from heaven should preach a gospel contrary to what we have preached to you - let him be accursed!"

6 I am amazed that you are so quickly deserting Him who called you by the grace of Christ, for a different gospel; 7 which is really not another; only there are some who are disturbing you and want to distort the gospel of Christ. 8 But even if we, or an angel from heaven, should preach to you a gospel contrary to what we have preached to you, he is to be accursed! 9 As we have said before, so I say again now, if any man is preaching to you a gospel contrary to what you received, he is to be accursed!


The argument against "sola scriptura" is essentially that - none of those texts should exist!






Do you really think those meetings in Germany are going to toss the Bible under the boot of man-made-tradition??



The Bible says Christ is the foundation
1Cor 3
11 For no man can lay a foundation other than the one which is laid, which is Jesus Christ.


1 Peter 2
6 For this is contained in Scripture:
“Behold, I lay in Zion a choice stone, a precious corner stone,
And he who believes in Him will not be disappointed
.”
7 This precious value, then, is for you who believe; but for those who disbelieve,
“The stone which the builders rejected,
This became the very corner stone,”
8 and, “A stone of stumbling and a rock of offense”;

No catholic council told saints what to read as scripture in the first century... and we all know it.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0