Jesus isn't Catholic

[Bible Highlighter]

You also don't see the Bible saying that everything about the early Church has to be recorded in it to be true.

All Scripture is profitable for doctrine.... so that the man of God may be perfect unto all good works (2 Timothy 3:16-17). So if you believe this passage in Scripture, you don't need any other doctrine or teachings besides Scripture so as to be perfect unto every good work. But because this passage conflicts with what you believe in regards to what your church teaches, you have to change it in some way. My suggestion: Read this verse over and over for a year and ask the Lord to reveal the truth to you on it. Do not seek what you want to hear, but seek out the truth in what it really says. Make this passage the focus for this year. Know everything you can on it.

 

[chilehed]

All Scripture is profitable for doctrine.... so that the man of God may be perfect unto all good works (2 Timothy 3:16-17).

2 Timothy is Sacred Scripture, but your theology doesn't give you any way to prove it. The only reason you think that it is, is that you were told it is, and the only reason you were told it is, is because the Catholic Church originally said it is. That's one of the myriad problems with non-Catholic theology: in rejecting the authority of the Catholic Church, it deprives itself of right to assume the Canon that the Catholic Church determined.

So if you believe this passage in Scripture, you don't need any other doctrine or teachings besides Scripture so as to be perfect unto every good work.

That's not, it's just your personal opinion which isn't supported by what scripture actually says.

I'm sure that you'd agree that dress shoes are profitable for dressing well, so that you can have everything you need to attend a wedding. Would you also say that you therefore would be fully dressed if you showed up wearing nothing but dress shoes?

My suggestion: Read this verse over and over for a year

My suggestion: don't be so blindingly arrogant that you think that folks who disagree with your fallible non-authoritative musings haven't studied the Bible enough.

 

[Just_a_Christian]

Your disagreement is noted. But in rejecting the Catholic Church you aren't very specific about which brand you belong to. I would like to know so that everyone else here could then pile on about all the things wrong with that brand. You are hiding your brand while attacking the brand of others. Not very sportsmanlike of you. You hide under a generic 'Christian' label, but I can and do often use that label myself. What do YOU mean when YOU call YOURSELF Christian? Inquiring minds want to know.

Christ established His church. God said He has given ALL authority to Him and that in ALL things He should have the preeminence. Being subject to the teachings of any "man" would certainly be contradictory to Christ having all authority. I'm not big on what name is upon the door but rather whether or not sound doctrine is advocated. Having said that, if Christ is to have the preeminence in all things, the name on the door should at least be a Biblical one.
Unto the church of God which is at Corinth, to them that are sanctified in Christ Jesus, called to be saints, with all that in every place call upon the name of Jesus Christ our Lord, both their's and our's:
1 Corinthians 1:2
Salute one another with an holy kiss. The churches of Christ salute you.
Romans 16:16
As I already stated, it is that which a group of people teach, preach and practice that determines whether or not they are acceptable to God. When one follows His teaching on how one becomes a Christian, God Himself adds that soul to the body of Christ. The Bible ONLY creates a Christian ONLY. The "brand" that I "belong" to is Christ.
God's word is my guide alone.
In Him

 

[fhansen]

Christ established His church. God said He has given ALL authority to Him and that in ALL things He should have the preeminence. Being subject to the teachings of any "man" would certainly be contradictory to Christ having all authority. I'm not big on what name is upon the door but rather whether or not sound doctrine is advocated.

The problem is that you become the "man", the authority, in determining what constitutes sound doctrine. And you may well disagree significantly with the next "man" doing the same thing. The church is an entity that's intended to be more than the sum of its human parts, where the Spirit guides, a place where the buck stops, where a continuous historical lineage of the faith exists, a place where it's held, preserved, and proclaimed/spread. The early disciples already faced false gospels, competing authorities, who claimed to speak in the name of Christ.

 

[Just_a_Christian]

The problem is that you become the "man", the authority, in determining what constitutes sound doctrine. And you may well disagree significantly with the next "man" doing the same thing. The church is an entity that's intended to be more than the sum of its human parts, where the Spirit guides, a place where the buck stops, where a continuous historical lineage of the faith exists, a place where it's held, preserved, and proclaimed/spread. The early disciples already faced false gospels, competing authorities, who claimed to speak in the name of Christ.

Yes the apostles and the New Testament Christian's did encounter false doctrine. The buck stops with God, not historical lineages, claims or traditions. The church is NOT above God's written word. See Revelation. God dictates what is and is not sound doctrine and He does that via the Holy Spirit's completed work, the Bible. The New Testament Christians were told by Paul that a falling away was coming and that it had already began. Now the falling away has either already occurred or has yet to happen. Why am I sure it has already occurred? The New Testament church morphed, taking on a human leader, the Pope. Many false doctrines over the years being taught, traditions of man being taught in place of the word, etc., etc...
It does not have to be this way though.
In Him

 

[Bible Highlighter]

2 Timothy is Sacred Scripture, but your theology doesn't give you any way to prove it. The only reason you think that it is, is that you were told it is, and the only reason you were told it is, is because the Catholic Church originally said it is. That's one of the myriad problems with non-Catholic theology: in rejecting the authority of the Catholic Church, it deprives itself of right to assume the Canon that the Catholic Church determined.


That's not, it's just your personal opinion which isn't supported by what scripture actually says.

I'm sure that you'd agree that dress shoes are profitable for dressing well, so that you can have everything you need to attend a wedding. Would you also say that you therefore would be fully dressed if you showed up wearing nothing but dress shoes?

My suggestion: don't be so blindingly arrogant that you think that folks who disagree with your fallible non-authoritative musings haven't studied the Bible enough.

I thought I could help you to see what 2 Timothy 3:16-17 says. Seeing you are not interested by praying about it to the Lord (Which is something that I would even do), I think it is best to agree to disagree in love and respect and move on.

May the Lord's goodness be upon you.

 

[fhansen]

Yes the apostles and the New Testament Christian's did encounter false doctrine. The buck stops with God, not historical lineages, claims or traditions. The church is NOT above God's written word. See Revelation. God dictates what is and is not sound doctrine and He does that via the Holy Spirit's completed work, the Bible. The New Testament Christians were told by Paul that a falling away was coming and that it had already began. Now the falling away has either already occurred or has yet to happen. Why am I sure it has already occurred? The New Testament church morphed, taking on a human leader, the Pope. Many false doctrines over the years being taught, traditions of man being taught in place of the word, etc., etc...
It does not have to be this way though.
In Him

Many false doctrines come from wrong interpretations of the Bible. In fact, using Scripture as the sole rule of faith is a virtual guarantee of division simply because an endless supply of individuals are privately interpreting it. The Ethiopian eunuch needed to have Scripture interpreted for him by Philip, a member of an exclusive group of disciples who had the inside info and understanding based on the revelation they had received before a word of the NT was written.

 

[timothyu]

Actually that generic "Christian" label needs to be removed from the options in the name of truth-in-advertising.

What would that accomplish?

 

[fhansen]

The New Testament church morphed, taking on a human leader, the Pope. Many false doctrines over the years being taught, traditions of man being taught in place of the word, etc., etc...
It does not have to be this way though.
In Him

That's all theory, speculation, self-serving pop-mythology. And even if it were true I can assure you that your theology will differ widely from, say, the Eastern Orthodox, another ancient church stemming directly from the original Church, and one whose theology on justification and many other areas rejected or questioned by the Reformers, etc, happens to be virtually identical to that of the RCC.

 

[timothyu]

It is unfortunate that the entire religion has chosen to continue in the traditions of man with it's division and political like bickering over who is the best option. The religion rejected the Kingdom for the world of man and realigned itself with the structure of man until this day in most denominations.

Fortunately scripture still teaches what churches rarely do... that the division is not between man but between the Kingdom of God vs the world that man has made in our image, in all institutions including religion. The Adversary is not about to let a human made religion be free of the adversarial spirit.

 

[timothyu]

one whose theology on justification and many other areas rejected or questioned by the Reformers, etc, happens to be virtually identical to that of the RCC.

I've wondered, why then did they split?

 

[fhansen]

I've wondered, why then did they split?

It was mainly over a question of authority. Doctrinal issues were pretty trivial, especially in hindsight, and very limited in number.

 

[chilehed]

I thought I could help you to see what 2 Timothy 3:16-17 says.

I know what it says, and I agree with it.

Seeing you are not interested by praying about it to the Lord...

Rather, "seeing as how I believe what the Bible actually says rather than your fallible, non-authoritative, erroneous mischaracterisation of it,..."

 

[timothyu]

It was mainly over a question of authority. Doctrinal issues were pretty trivial, especially in hindsight, and very limited in number.

Isn't God the only authority, Jesus His only human King, the Kingdom His only domain. I've always wondered. Why does man have to make it about self and build kingdoms of our own? Is that not contrary to the Gospel of the Kingdom?

 

[fhansen]

It is unfortunate that the entire religion has chosen to continue in the traditions of man with it's division and political like bickering over who is the best option. The religion rejected the Kingdom for the world of man and realigned itself with the structure of man until this day in most denominations.

Fortunately scripture still teaches what churches rarely do... that the division is not between man but between the Kingdom of God vs the world that man has made in our image, in all institutions including religion. The Adversary is not about to let a human made religion be free of the adversarial spirit.

The faith is one. People divide, regardless of the source of revelation we have and appeal to.

 

[timothyu]

The faith is one. People divide, regardless of the source of revelation we have and appeal to.

It is unfortunate.
Matthew 13:22 He also that received seed among the thorns is he that heareth the word; and the care of this world, and the deceitfulness of riches, choke the word, and he becometh unfruitful.

 

[fhansen]

It is unfortunate.
Matthew 13:22 He also that received seed among the thorns is he that heareth the word; and the care of this world, and the deceitfulness of riches, choke the word, and he becometh unfruitful.

Yes, but people often divide over the meaning of the word before they even get a chance to choke it.

 

[Concord1968]

What would that accomplish?

People actually being honest for a change.

 

[timothyu]

Yes, but people often divide over the meaning of the word before they even get a chance to choke it.

True. Odd bunch that doesn't understand putting the will of the Father first which is love all as self instead of just self.

 

[timothyu]

People actually being honest for a change.

Not quite sure what you are referring to, sorry. Clarification?