Catholics CAN'T Answer This Question!!!

[redleghunter]

Show me were the word rapture is or the word Trinity

Well I have to say Jesus commanded a Trinitarian baptism:

Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost: Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you always, even unto the end of the world. Amen. (Matthew 28:19-20)

 

[Darrel Slugoski]

Well we should both agree the Triune God is well attested to in Sacred Scriptures.

Rapture does appear though.

Then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever be with the Lord. (1 Thessalonians 4:17)

In the Greek "caught up" is harpazō.

The word "rapture" comes from the Latin Vulgate. Rapiemur

deinde nos qui vivimus qui relinquimur simul rapiemur cum illis in nubibus obviam Domino in aera et sic semper cum Domino erimus

Sorry if the word Purgatory doesn't, the same rule applies for rapture . You are telling me that the word purgatory is not used in scripture there for it does not exist . You must apply the same rule for the word rapture . Otherwise you are interpreting scripture just as Catholics do and contradicting your . You are just changing the rules . Not one protestant reformer believed it, not one early Christian did eather . It was invented by a pastor John dDary in the 1830s

Well we should both agree the Triune God is well attested to in Sacred Scriptures.

Rapture does appear though.

Then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever be with the Lord. (1 Thessalonians 4:17)

In the Greek "caught up" is harpazō.

The word "rapture" comes from the Latin Vulgate. Rapiemur

deinde nos qui vivimus qui relinquimur simul rapiemur cum illis in nubibus obviam Domino in aera et sic semper cum Domino erimus

 

[redleghunter]

Sorry if the word Purgatory doesn't, the same rule applies for rapture . You are telling me that the word purgatory is not used in scripture there for it does not exist . You must apply the same rule for the word rapture . Otherwise you are interpreting scripture just as Catholics do and contradicting your . You are just changing the rules . Not one protestant reformer believed it, not one early Christian did eather . It was invented by a pastor John dDary in the 1830s

I just showed you where to find rapture. From your own Latin Vulgate. There's no interpretation but translation.

The issue with your inquiry is that (1) rapture is explicitly in Sacred Scriptures and (2) Trinity is clearly demonstrated. Both can be readily demonstrated by exegesis.

The issue with purgatory is the use of eisegesis to arrive at a Biblical reference. Not so with the Trinity. I already showed you a Trinitarian baptism we both should agree to.

I don't think Catholics need to nuke the Bible to argue their doctrine of purgatory. It is based on Latin tradition and not shared by the Eastern Orthodox.

The only NT references we have to the intermediary state of our souls upon death is by (1) Christ in His parable of Lazarus and the rich man (Luke 16:19-31) and (2) St Paul in 2 Corinthians 5 and Philippians 1

 

[Darrel Slugoski]

Well I have to say Jesus commanded a Trinitarian baptism:

Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost: Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you always, even unto the end of the world. Amen. (Matthew 28:19-20)

I agree but the word Trinity is not used . Nor is the word rapture . The word Rapienur means in latin " we shall be snatched or we shall be carried away." ( I guess they could change the word in the bible to Rapienur/rapture to reflect that, just to be fare ) Now as I have said no early reformer believed it or nor any early Christian believed such a doctrine . John Darby invented the doctrine of the Rapture in the 1830s . The early Church defined the Trinity in 325 ad in the Council of Nicea and was coined by the Bishop Theophilus in 180 ad . were the precise theological vocabulary we know today was developed . I have a friend who used to believe God was the same person playing three different three different roles , he used to be a oneness pentecostal . So scripture must be interpreted and defined . Scripture is NOT self interpreting . Someone must define the interpretation .

 

[Darrel Slugoski]

I just showed you where to find rapture. From your own Latin Vulgate. There's no interpretation but translation.

The issue with your inquiry is that (1) rapture is explicitly in Sacred Scriptures and (2) Trinity is clearly demonstrated. Both can be readily demonstrated by exegesis.

The issue with purgatory is the use of eisegesis to arrive at a Biblical reference. Not so with the Trinity. I already showed you a Trinitarian baptism we both should agree to.

I don't think Catholics need to nuke the Bible to argue their doctrine of purgatory. It is based on Latin tradition and not shared by the Eastern Orthodox.

The only NT references we have to the intermediary state of our souls upon death is by (1) Christ in His parable of Lazarus and the rich man (Luke 16:19-31) and (2) St Paul in 2 Corinthians 5 and Philippians 1

The Orthodox have the tradition of "toll houses" which is similar to Purgatory . Are you Orthodox ?

Goto to go to sleep . thanks for your challenging defense .

 

[redleghunter]

I agree but the word Trinity is not used .

However derived by exegesis. The Sacred Scriptures declare there is only One True God. The Sacred Scriptures clearly point to The Father, The Son, The Holy Spirit as Persons and confer Divine attributes. The Scriptural substantiation is solid. The heretics who denied the Deity of Jesus Christ led to the councils which affirmed One God Three Divine Persons. St Athanasius of Alexandria made direct arguments from Sacred Scriptures. You cannot compare his exegesis of Scriptures to prove the Trinity to the current Roman Catholic apologists use of eisegesis to argue Biblical passages for purgatory.

Exegesis vs. Eisegesis we need to know the difference:

Exegesis and eisegesis are two conflicting approaches in Bible study. Exegesis is the exposition or explanation of a text based on a careful, objective analysis. The word exegesis literally means “to lead out of.” That means that the interpreter is led to his conclusions by following the text.

The opposite approach to Scripture is eisegesis, which is the interpretation of a passage based on a subjective, non-analytical reading. The word eisegesis literally means “to lead into,” which means the interpreter injects his own ideas into the text, making it mean whatever he wants.

What is the difference between exegesis and eisegesis?

Nor is the word rapture . The word Rapienur means in latin " we shall be snatched or we shall be carried away." ( I guess they could change the word in the bible to Rapienur/rapture to reflect that, just to be fare ) Now as I have said no early reformer believed it or nor any early Christian believed such a doctrine . John Darby invented the doctrine of the Rapture in the 1830s .

Yes therefore, snatched away is the English translation (not interpretation) of Rapienur. Therefore the word appears in the Bible. Let's be reasonable about this.

The doctrine surrounding this word is another matter. I don't think much of Darby and his personal theology. Some see this as the Resurrection of the righteous and some see it as the Resurrection. I was not arguing those points but to show you the word is there, alas it is.

The only point I will make is St Irenaeus did mention this caught away in Against Heresies and which those who are historic futurists agree:

And therefore the creation is suited to [the wants of] man; for man was not made for its sake, but creation for the sake of man. Those nations however, who did not of themselves raise up their eyes unto heaven, nor returned thanks to their Maker, nor wished to behold the light of truth, but who were like blind mice concealed in the depths of ignorance, the word justly reckons as waste water from a sink, and as the turning-weight of a balance — in fact, as nothing; Isaiah 40:15 so far useful and serviceable to the just, as stubble conduces towards the growth of the wheat, and its straw, by means of combustion, serves for working gold. And therefore, when in the end the Church shall be suddenly caught up from this, it is said, There shall be tribulation such as has not been since the beginning, neither shall be. Matthew 24:21 For this is the last contest of the righteous, in which, when they overcome they are crowned with incorruption.
CHURCH FATHERS: Against Heresies, V.29 (St. Irenaeus)

The early Church defined the Trinity in 325 ad in the Council of Nicea and was coined by the Bishop Theophilus in 180 ad . were the precise theological vocabulary we know today was developed . I have a friend who used to believe God was the same person playing three different three different roles , he used to be a oneness pentecostal . So scripture must be interpreted and defined . Scripture is NOT self interpreting . Someone must define the interpretation .

The Holy Scriptures clearly show Modalism is error. How do you think the early church theologians refuted such?

Scripture is NOT self interpreting . Someone must define the interpretation .

In most cases it is. However, the epistles of Paul confirm pastors, elders and the teaching office. All to be rooted in the Word (2 Timothy 4:1-5)

 

[redleghunter]

The Orthodox have the tradition of "toll houses" which is similar to Purgatory . Are you Orthodox ?

Goto to go to sleep . thanks for your challenging defense .

Not Orthodox but know church history due to a rigorous Jesuit education.

My point bringing up the EO church view is to show there was not catholic agreement early in the church. This was made manifest centuries later at the Council of Ferrara-Florence [1438–1445].

Here is the Orthodox view of as they deem it Psuedo Snynod of Ferrara-Florence:

The Orthodox Response to the Latin Doctrine of Purgatory

The very same Biblical passages the Orthodox bishops argued against you will find Protestants debate here.

Now take the time of Tetzel move back in history and you can see a clear Latin doctrinal development (Cardinal Manning) of purgatory.

Yet again we have two clear Biblical teachings on our intermediary state (1) from Christ in Luke 16 and (2) from St Paul in 2 Corinthians 5 and Philippians 1.

I will note, the NT "afterlife" theme is focused on the Resurrection as Paul painfully is aware in 2 Corinthians 5 he wants to happen before he dies as he does not want to be unclothed but better to be absent from these bodies and present with the Lord.

 

[Major1]

I gave you the scriptures but you choose to ignore them .

NOT SO!

You gave "some Scriptures" that is true but they in no way were in support of Purgatory and it has nothing to do with me ignoring them. You followed A Catholic blogger who suggested those verse but when then are examined and correctly considered by CONTEXT, not one single accepted Bible scholar will agree with you.

Listen, my friend, we can do this all day if you want to but the fact is that there are NO Scriptures which support Purgatory. NONE!

 

[Major1]

neither is the word trinity or rapture

Can we please, please get away from this ridiculous thesis of the word Trinity and Rapture.
It has been explain, to you and the Scriptures give which implicate the teaching of both even though neither word is in the Scriptue.

It has been discussed and talked about over and over and over.

Instead of taking the time to type out what you just said, why did you not just google "Trinity, 3 in One".

 

[Major1]

Show show me in scripture were it says when you disagree with others interpretation that you can start a new Church . Where is that written ?

Really! You want to go there? There are NO Scriptures that say that. Denominationalism is a man thing and not a God thing.

Having said that, I guess you are unaware that that is exactly what the Roman Catholic church did my friend. If there was only “One” denomination of Christian thought; then we would have a better idea of “What is Truth”; but human logic has aborted the Truth of God and replaced it with the “Traditions of men” according to the RCC.

 

[Major1]

Jesus made Peter the head of the church and gave Him the Keys. You will not agree with that bit of Scripture much the same as you dismiss any other scripture that is linked to the Catholic teachings!

You will also know that it was the protestants that removed books from the Bible when it says in the Bible that nothing can or should be removed or added.

You do seem to pick what you want from scripture and, for want of a better word, interpret it any way you feel is right! The Catholics view is wrong in your eyes. Only YOUR view is correct. Only YOUR teachings on scripture are correct. Only YOUR explanations on scripture are correct. Can you see a pattern there?

Only YOU are correct when it comes to anything Biblical!

I really don't want to continue down this road. It is not healthy for my soul. I indeed love the Catholic church. I see no errors in its doctrines. I only see truth, backed up by scripture.

You continually dismiss Catholic views.

I am always amused that when anyone is unable to respond to critical examination of their thoughts and religion, they ALWAYS resort to the personal comments.

WHY is that do you think? WHY do YOU think that YOU needed to say.................
"You do seem to pick what you want from scripture and, for want of a better word, interpret it any way you feel is right."

"Only YOUR view is correct. Only YOUR teachings on scripture are correct. Only YOUR explanations on scripture are correct."

I do not blame you for withdrawing from the discussion. IF I were you and I could not stand up for my religion and validate what I think with proof from the Word of God, I would do exactly the same thing.

Please, understand my friend. I have said this over and over and over again. I am not saying I am right or that my comments on Scriptures are correct. YOU are an adult. You have access to a computer. YOU have a Bible. DO NOT TAKE my word for anything.

Have you noticed that not one single Protestant believer has posted and said.....
wait Major, what you just said about John 3:16 is incorrect and I do not believe what you said is right. NOT ONE!!!!!

YOU do the work. YOU look up the Scriptures and do the exegesis of the Scriptures with an open heart and an open mind.

Your problem is not with me my child as I am not the enemy that you seem intent on making me. I simply do not agree with Catholic teachings and have the ability to say so and THAT upsets YOU and other Catholic believers.

 

[Major1]

It's not much of a "discussion," is it, to keep saying "I agree with Catholicism?" We thought you might also know why you do.

Agreed!

 

[yeshuaslavejeff]

I am always amused that when anyone is unable to respond to critical examination of their thoughts and religion, they ALWAYS resort to the personal comments.

When errors of any kind in any group are "TRUSTED",
BEFORE they resort to defensive posturing, they START (always) with false premises(common to men everywhere, learned later in life by God's Graciousness when someone is willing) ) they think and believe will certainly convince others (by magic? or some other means)
as if "WHAT? - YOU DON'T BELIEVE ME?!?!" (feigned shock and sometimes real disbelief that someone else doesn't believe them NOR their boss or group or leader or whatever)

 

[Major1]

I am leaving this thread. There is nothing but hate towards Catholicism.

Blessings to you all

Blessings to you and have a Happy New Year!

 

[Phil 1:21]

It's not much of a "discussion," is it, to keep saying "I agree with Catholicism?" We thought you might also know why you do.

I can only answer from my upbringing in the RCC, but the simple reason is because the RCC says so. Difference of opinion wasn't allowed, because to question the church was to question God, and that was a sin. So we became little people parroting what we were told, devoid of critical thought.

 

[Major1]

Lol.......I think one can label you as an incorrect preacher / teacher going on the amount of incorrect assumptions you have about Catholicism.

Not So. You can however label he as an "old country boy" from the great promised land of Alabama.

 

[Major1]

Can you show me where the word 'Trinity' is in the Bible? Or the words 'Sola Scripture' please?

I have researched what Catholicism says about purgatory. I have looked at the scripture it has pointed to. I agree with Catholicism. I see it in scripture very clearly indeed.

You choose to dismiss the scripture given to you by others.

That is your choice.

Blessings to you

Actually, they are in the verse right after Purgatory, the sinlessness of Mary, and her assumption to heaven in Jude 2:1-5.

 

[FireDragon76]

Well we should both agree the Triune God is well attested to in Sacred Scriptures.

Rapture does appear though.

Then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever be with the Lord. (1 Thessalonians 4:17)

In the Greek "caught up" is harpazō.

The word "rapture" comes from the Latin Vulgate. Rapiemur

deinde nos qui vivimus qui relinquimur simul rapiemur cum illis in nubibus obviam Domino in aera et sic semper cum Domino erimus

Right, but the Rapture, as commonly understood, has to do with pre-millenial Dispensationalism (a notion that was once unique to one of the most highly sectarian of religious movements, the Plymouth Brethren, but has now spread like wildfire). It is not simply the eschaton and general resurrection, which all Christians traditionally believe in.

 

[redleghunter]

Right, but the Rapture, as commonly understood, has to do with pre-millenial Dispensationalism (a notion that was once unique to one of the most highly sectarian of religious movements, the Plymouth Brethren, but has now spread like wildfire). It is not simply the eschaton and general resurrection, which all Christians traditionally believe in.

Yes but Darby and the PB was not the subject of the inquiry.

 

[FireDragon76]

I think Catholics are onto something when they point out how alot of stuff can be drawn out of the Bible haphazardly and completely miss the more potentially wholesome aspects of being a Christian. The Rapture is a good example. This can become a dangerous belief that fuels doomsday cults, at the very least, it causes people to make unwise choices planning for the future.