• 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.

Easiest Defense of Sola Scriptura

Constantine the Sinner

Well-Known Member
Aug 11, 2016
2,059
676
United States
✟38,759.00
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Celibate
See here.

Dr. Luther by no means was acting as a pope and issuing a binding canon, but was doing much the same as other Catholic scholars had done down thru the centuries and right into Trent, but expressed that others could come to their own conclusion.

As for the canon being a product of Tradition, Scripture supports souls discerning both men and writing as being of God, essentially due to their heavenly qualities and attestation, and conflation with what had already been established as being of God. And thus the establishment of the Prot canon is Scriptural in principal, and is not due to presumed infallible conciliar decree.

Though you are not an RC, there is a critical different btwn that and a pope declaring belief in a extraScriptural events over 1700 years after it allegedly occurred, which was so lacking in warrant from early tradition that his own scholars opposed it as belonging to apostolic tradition.

Contrary to typical contentions of RCs, which i understand you are not.

Which was never a source of contention, with the Lord quoting texts from among this canon, and this tripartite canon is seen by many as inferred in Christ establishing His mission to His disciples. (Lk. 24:44)
Actually, the New Testament does sometimes quote books generally seen by Protestants as apocryphal.

For instance, "I make all things new." - Revelation 21:5
"And being but one, she can do all things: and remaining in herself, she maketh all things new: and in all ages entering into holy souls, she maketh them friends of God, and prophets." -Wisdom 7:27. "She" here is the Wisdom of God, the preincarnate Word of God (see Proverbs 8:22-31, and Proverbs 9:3-8).
 
Upvote 0

Constantine the Sinner

Well-Known Member
Aug 11, 2016
2,059
676
United States
✟38,759.00
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Celibate
I've done research on the topic and the Immaculate Conception in Roman Catholicism actually owes its origins to eastern Mariology. Even at the time of Bernard of Clairvaux it was quite controversial with the Romans, Bernard opposed the feast day as a novel tradition.
There was much greater controversy about Christmas, a feast day for Christ's Nativity being seen as a novel tradition.

I find it hard to believe the Catholic idea of the Immaculate Conception comes from us, seeing as how we deny it.
 
Upvote 0

Constantine the Sinner

Well-Known Member
Aug 11, 2016
2,059
676
United States
✟38,759.00
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Celibate
Again your argument is "the Bible is authoritative because the Church says so; and the Church is authoritative because the Bible says so."

It's the same argument the fellas on the bicycles make about the Book of Mormon.
Not really any more circular than, "the Bible is authoritative because the Bible says so."
 
Upvote 0

sculleywr

Orthodox Colitis Survivor
Jul 23, 2011
7,789
683
Starke, FL
✟30,069.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Engaged
Politics
US-Others
Well,,,, you can try. I know it's impossible, but go ahead. Sin no more..... not humanly possible.


That's exactly why we need to confess. If the sin is already forgiven, then you have no need to confess of it. But if we must continue to confess, then it is logical to assume that the confession accomplishes something that is important to our sanctification.


I looked at several translations. The only difference in this passage is that "sins" is translated as faults but "healed" is always "healed".

This is why a Greek concordance is useful. The word Iaomai means heal, but it has the fuller meaning of "to make whole" and "to free from errors and sins, to bring about (one's) salvation"


When we accept Christ as our savior, we are saved. Nothing will change that. Eternal life signed sealed and delivered at the time of death.
Ask yourself, if you die mid week when you have sins that you have not been to the priest to confess, what happens to your soul?


It is only true that we are saved at conversion if the only thing salvation does is forgive. But if that is all salvation does, then James is deceptive in asking if a person can be saved by faith alone.

Salvation is not just forgiveness. Forgiveness is the BEGINNING of salvation, not the whole. There is also justification and glorification. Unless you have been completely sanctified and are currently living in your glorified body, your salvation is not yet complete. And again, you act as if the priest gives the forgiveness, so I will embolden something you are ignoring in the question in this section, just so you don't ask the question again because it isn't even a logical question: the Elder does not give forgiveness. He stands witness to the forgiveness which Christ gives. Is it clear enough now? If he doesn't give the forgiveness, then how is it logical that I can't receive the forgiveness without him. Confession, as I said before is not purely about forgiveness. It is about sanctification.


That is twisting my words. I do not need any other human being alive or dead in order to have my sins forgiven in the eyes of God.
I said nothing about not needing others from time to time to consult for guidance. These, however, can be my wife, my father, my uncle, my boss, my neighbor or a friend on the baseball team.

I do not need to have other people make prayer requests for me. This is not a prerequisite for my prayer being heard. It is certainly something I do because it is reassuring to have others praying for your needs as I pray for the needs of others.


It isn't twisting your words. It's a logical result of your words. If you do not need the intercession of others, there are two logical results:
1. Scripture will never command you to intercede for others, because as it stands, Scripture does.
2. We do not need to confess our sins to each other. But since Scripture commands us to confess our sins one to another, it is obviously NECESSARY for us to do so.

Since scripture commands both of the things which are shown in Confession, the intercession of a person for another, and the Confession of sin to human beings, it is necessary for us to do this. Now, it used to be that you stood on the Ambon and confessed before the entire parish. Would you prefer to do that, instead?

Salvation is not a license to sin. If we are truly humble and repentant we will feel contrite and ask for forgiveness. However, once we are saved we do not have to continually asking for salvation.
You don't have to make more payments on the car but you will certainly be judged on the shape it's in at the end of your life and where you went with it.


Except that you're saying we do have to continue making payments on the car even though it's paid in full. It's not the shape of the car, it is the car itself. If every sin is forgiven, then you NEVER need to confess. It's forgiven, everything is taken care of. It's not going to change. See, salvation is not just forgiveness, and it isn't a one size fits all thing, either. Salvation isn't a moment. It is a life. This is why James very specifically begins his discussion on works and faith by saying he is speaking of salvation. He begins it by asking "can faith save him?" The "him" in the text is referring to the man who has no works. Can faith, with absolutely no works at all, ever save a person? It is implied that such a thing can actually exist according to the people to whom he was responding. But faith, without works, is dead, and will NEVER save. Dead faith will save exactly nobody.

Christ did for sure as He is God.... Stephen may have done so but his prayer in no way was going to admonish the killers from their guilt.

So even though Stephen was a righteous man, praying fervently, his prayer availed exactly NOTHING? There's no Scripture that says you can't pray for the forgiveness of other people. It doesn't say that the answer will always be no.


Well, I couldn't find any translation that stated such a thing.

The thing is, when you go to confession the first thing you say is "forgive me Father, for I have sinned". Personally, I don't follow that view.

Funny, I've never started with that. It's a bit of a popular meme, but it's not universally part of Confession in all rites. It's not even universal among Roman Catholics, as Eastern Rite Catholics don't use that beginning phrase. And you should also remember, however, that in Confession, there is an Icon of Christ, as well as sometimes an Icon of the Trinity. If you assume that the Elder is only there as a witness, and you are confessing to God in the presence of the elder, it would be assumed that by Father, you are addressing the Father in the Trinity, and not the spiritual father. It is only necessary to request his forgiveness for sins which you specifically committed against him as a person. In the rest, you are confessing to God in the presence of the Elder. You must realize that these are things that are actually taught in our catechetical process. Just because you have a cursory knowledge of common Confessional phrases does not mean you understand why those phrases exist.

As to heal and save being connected in Scripture, the word σῴζω is the primary word in question, though iaimao also has shared definitions between save and heal.
 
Upvote 0

sculleywr

Orthodox Colitis Survivor
Jul 23, 2011
7,789
683
Starke, FL
✟30,069.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Engaged
Politics
US-Others
I think you are generalizing here. I travelled quite a bit and lived in 7 different states. I've been to various Evangelical churches and not one of them claims that 'all salvation is about is forgiveness." Which I will take you mean only deliverance and redemption is preached in the Name of Jesus Christ? Perhaps we need to establish a foundation to the discussion. What is the NT Gospel message?

Though they may not say it outright, when you create a sola fide salvation message, especially one which includes the doctrine of Eternal Security, you boil salvation down to just the forgiveness. Because sanctification could never be part of salvation, because if you have been saved (past tense), and it cannot be taken away, then you are claiming to be either completely sanctified, or else that sanctification is not part of salvation, and neither is glorification, for that matter, since glorification follows sanctification.

The New Testament states that forgiveness of sins is the ONLY part of salvation which has been completed. Justification, sanctification, and glorification are part of the daily Christian life. But they are equally part of salvation, which is what synergism means. In order to be justified, we must live in Communion with Christ, showing our love for Christ in the way which Christ told us to: obey His Commands. In this way, justification and sanctification are pretty much one and the same. For the synergist, salvation means more than forgiveness. It means "to become like God". When a person has reached the completion of salvation, he is so much like Christ that when a person sees him, the person cannot help but see Christ. Very few, if any, will ever reach this level on earth, but all people who have lived in Christ will reach this level in heaven, as Christ will cleanse us of all the sin which we were unable to see defeated on earth.

Just a few things that are common assumptions:

1. This does not mean that you can "sin away" your salvation. Even though our path of sanctification requires that we combat our sin, grace still abounds even more than our sins.
2. This does not mean that you must meet some kind of "quota" of good deeds to be saved.
3. This does not mean that you have to constantly worry "am I saved or am I not?" You don't ask that about the other relationships in your life. You know the status of your marriage the same way that you know the status of your relationship with Christ. It isn't something you will lose arbitrarily.
 
Upvote 0

fhansen

Oldbie
Sep 3, 2011
15,936
3,986
✟385,584.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Indeed there are pages. I quoted the portion where the CCC states the Sacred Scriptures are the written Word of God. That was to another poster who denied the claim.
Well, in what I read of your exchange I saw nothing where the poster denied that Scripture is the written word of God. Maybe I missed it.
 
Upvote 0

JacksBratt

Searching for Truth
Site Supporter
Jul 5, 2014
16,294
6,495
63
✟596,843.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Married
Another thing about cursing scripture and scripture alone is, the Gideon Bible.
I was traveling through West Virginia not long ago. I stayed at Alpine Lake Resort. Stunning! I love mountains so I never wanted to leave.
I get into my room and as I always do when I travel I opened the beside table drawer looking to see if a Gideon's Bible was there. Sure enough there was.

I pull it out to see how much wear it had. None. The spine was perfect as if it had never been opened once.

Here's a what if. Because I met someone who fit the profile.
What if a truck driver on the road for the long haul stops in a hotel or motel for that matter. They're tired of sleeping in the truck and they just want one night in a room. They feel down, depressed, life sucks, they're ready to hit that bottle of Wild Turkey they bought when they walked to the liquor store just down the road.
They open that bedside table drawer and there's Gideons.

They take it as a sign. You now have two choices. Open that Bourbon or open the Bible. Or a third choice, veg out in front of the boob-tube.
They choose the Bible. And there in that room hours later they find they believe whats written. They drop to their knees and ask Jesus to save them. They hold faith in the word. And all that it tells them about themselves and their place in God's plan and world.

They walk into the bathroom, draw a warm bath and Baptize themselves as they read John did to the son of God.
They are so emotionally invested in that Bible that they have a total life conversion in that room.

Are they saved? Does Jesus know them?

They would be saved even without the baptism. From what I understand the baptism is more of a public profession of faith and you should really do it in front of your peers. Also, it is done in obedience to Christ and not a prequisit of being saved.

Therefore, even without the bathtub version of a self baptism, this trucker would be conscidered a born again christian and were he to die in his sleep that night would enter into heaven and dwell with his Lord forever.
 
  • Like
Reactions: civilwarbuff
Upvote 0

PeaceByJesus

Unworthy servant for the Worthy Lord + Savior
Feb 20, 2013
2,779
2,095
USA
Visit site
✟83,561.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Others
Not at all, The Bible was writen by the Church and thus we know it is true, The Church is Inspired and vivified by the Holy Spirit and so the Bible..

The Bible was not written by the Church, as only the NT was, while your reasoning logically means that the 1st century souls should have submitted to the instruments and stewards of Scripture under their magisterium, as you require us to do.

Instead of knowing the Bible is true because it was written by the Church, which assurance would be upon the premise of ensured ecclesiastical veracity, souls ascertained both men and writings as being of God, before a church of Rome ever presumed it was essential for this. And thus 1st century souls could know (as we can - and that Rome is in error) that the church was true because the scriptural substantiation of its preaching, to which it appealed.

For the church actually began in dissent from those who sat in the seat of Moses over Israel, (Mt. 23:2) who were the historical instruments and stewards of Scripture, "because that unto them were committed the oracles of God," (Rm. 3:2) to whom pertaineth" the adoption, and the glory, and the covenants, and the giving of the law, and the service of God, and the promises" (Rm. 9:4) of Divine guidance, presence and perpetuation as they believed, (Gn. 12:2,3; 17:4,7,8; Ex. 19:5; Lv. 10:11; Dt. 4:31; 17:8-13; Ps, 11:4,9; Is. 41:10, Ps. 89:33,34; Jer. 7:23)

And instead they followed an itinerant Preacher whom the magisterium rejected, and whom the Messiah reproved them Scripture as being supreme, (Mk. 7:2-16) and established His Truth claims upon scriptural substantiation in word and in power, as did the early church as it began upon this basis. (Mt. 22:23-45; Lk. 24:27,44; Jn. 5:36,39; Acts 2:14-35; 4:33; 5:12; 15:6-21;17:2,11; 18:28; 28:23; Rm. 15:19; 2Cor. 12:12, etc.)

Moreover, your assertion that you know that the Bible is true rests upon the the novel and unScriptural premise of ensured perpetual magisterial infallibility, Scripture was not written by your magisterium, in which case the scholarly doubts and disagreements would not have continued for centuries and right into Trent.

Instead, NT souls came to ascertain what was of God just as OT souls did and we can, which in essence is due to the heavenly qualities and attestation of it.

This requires overcoming the competition by Scriptural means, not by the autocratic decrees of Rome,"but have renounced the hidden things of dishonesty, not walking in craftiness, nor handling the word of God deceitfully; but by manifestation of the truth commending ourselves to every man's conscience in the sight of God. (2 Corinthians 4:2)
 
Upvote 0
Dec 14, 2010
2,285
218
47
San Juan del Río
✟34,297.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Single
You use Bible verses as if you have an infallible interpretation of them. It is mere eisegesis you promote for your church as those verses in no way confirms your church is the one true church. As the OC posters here point out they are the one true church, and you point out your church is the one true church. Who are we to believe?


Sorry, I regard the Orthodox as Catholics in schism with the see of Rome, And they all know that We have some issues on matters of Doctrine and that I Am able to show that We catholics and They orthodox are mostly in agreement in many things. As many as the fact that we share saints, we share most of our doctrine, and we disagree in matters of doctrine in some Marian dogmas of the Catholic Church and in the endorsement of Divorse and Contraseption that The Orthodox have made.

While the Celibacy is mandatory for the Bishops of Orthodoxy it is mandatory fo Bishops and Priests of Catholicism.
While we proclame that Mary is Immaculate since her conception, they reject that Mary ever sinned or ever was stained by the sin of Adam.
While we Proclaim that Purgatory is for the cleaning of the saved ones, they proclaim that saved ones are going to be christified.
Both Catholics and Orthodox believe in the Seven sacraments
Both Catholics and Orthodox believe in the Communion of the Saints
Both Catholics and Orthodox believe in Seven first Councils of the Church.

We Disagree in some Terminology and understanding of the Original Sin definition, and in the Filioque. And i can prove that We Catholics are right in proclaiming Filoque, and that the Orthodox are not necesarilly Wrong if they omit Filioque, but that they are wrong if they Reject Filioque.

But in this case we Catholics and Orthodox mostly agree in the fact that the Sacred scripture is Right since it is a Book of The Church and the Church is Vivified by the Holy Spirit, the Source of truth is not the Bible but the Church inspired by the Holy Spirit as the Very Bible says.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: fhansen
Upvote 0

JacksBratt

Searching for Truth
Site Supporter
Jul 5, 2014
16,294
6,495
63
✟596,843.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Married

That's exactly why we need to confess. If the sin is already forgiven, then you have no need to confess of it. But if we must continue to confess, then it is logical to assume that the confession accomplishes something that is important to our sanctification.




This is why a Greek concordance is useful. The word Iaomai means heal, but it has the fuller meaning of "to make whole" and "to free from errors and sins, to bring about (one's) salvation"




It is only true that we are saved at conversion if the only thing salvation does is forgive. But if that is all salvation does, then James is deceptive in asking if a person can be saved by faith alone.

Salvation is not just forgiveness. Forgiveness is the BEGINNING of salvation, not the whole. There is also justification and glorification. Unless you have been completely sanctified and are currently living in your glorified body, your salvation is not yet complete. And again, you act as if the priest gives the forgiveness, so I will embolden something you are ignoring in the question in this section, just so you don't ask the question again because it isn't even a logical question: the Elder does not give forgiveness. He stands witness to the forgiveness which Christ gives. Is it clear enough now? If he doesn't give the forgiveness, then how is it logical that I can't receive the forgiveness without him. Confession, as I said before is not purely about forgiveness. It is about sanctification.




It isn't twisting your words. It's a logical result of your words. If you do not need the intercession of others, there are two logical results:
1. Scripture will never command you to intercede for others, because as it stands, Scripture does.
2. We do not need to confess our sins to each other. But since Scripture commands us to confess our sins one to another, it is obviously NECESSARY for us to do so.

Since scripture commands both of the things which are shown in Confession, the intercession of a person for another, and the Confession of sin to human beings, it is necessary for us to do this. Now, it used to be that you stood on the Ambon and confessed before the entire parish. Would you prefer to do that, instead?


Except that you're saying we do have to continue making payments on the car even though it's paid in full. It's not the shape of the car, it is the car itself. If every sin is forgiven, then you NEVER need to confess. It's forgiven, everything is taken care of. It's not going to change. See, salvation is not just forgiveness, and it isn't a one size fits all thing, either. Salvation isn't a moment. It is a life. This is why James very specifically begins his discussion on works and faith by saying he is speaking of salvation. He begins it by asking "can faith save him?" The "him" in the text is referring to the man who has no works. Can faith, with absolutely no works at all, ever save a person? It is implied that such a thing can actually exist according to the people to whom he was responding. But faith, without works, is dead, and will NEVER save. Dead faith will save exactly nobody.



So even though Stephen was a righteous man, praying fervently, his prayer availed exactly NOTHING? There's no Scripture that says you can't pray for the forgiveness of other people. It doesn't say that the answer will always be no.




Funny, I've never started with that. It's a bit of a popular meme, but it's not universally part of Confession in all rites. It's not even universal among Roman Catholics, as Eastern Rite Catholics don't use that beginning phrase. And you should also remember, however, that in Confession, there is an Icon of Christ, as well as sometimes an Icon of the Trinity. If you assume that the Elder is only there as a witness, and you are confessing to God in the presence of the elder, it would be assumed that by Father, you are addressing the Father in the Trinity, and not the spiritual father. It is only necessary to request his forgiveness for sins which you specifically committed against him as a person. In the rest, you are confessing to God in the presence of the Elder. You must realize that these are things that are actually taught in our catechetical process. Just because you have a cursory knowledge of common Confessional phrases does not mean you understand why those phrases exist.

As to heal and save being connected in Scripture, the word σῴζω is the primary word in question, though iaimao also has shared definitions between save and heal.

You know what.....I have asked this question several times and it is never answered. It is always skipped over....

So I will ask it point blank. This whole idea of a Priest and confession etc is all good from the pulpit. The whole car analogy, the "you cannot be forgiven for sins you haven't committed"... works good at Sunday mass.. However....check this scenario out and let me know how it plays.

You are a Christian, believe in Christ, believe He is your savior, gave your life to Him and live every day in a closer relationship with Him. You have asked Him to forgive your sins and come into your life and fully accept His gift of salvation....

Now, you go to your priest and take confession. He admonishes you of all your sins, tells you to do some penance or whatever they do....

So, you leave the church after your confession. You are pure as the driven snow...

During the next week, as every human does, you sin. Pick some common sins.... tell a white lie, flip someone the bird and call them an A hole..... drink too much with the boys, covet your neighbors new sport car... what ever... on and on...

Now, on your way home from work on Friday... you as a sinner now... no more Mr. Clean... get in a head on collision with a cement truck and find yourself standing in front of your savior in heaven....You have not confessed your sins from the following week. Never made it to the Priest,

What is your dilemma? Are you damned? Did you lose your spot in heaven? Are you still saved? What now? Does Christ see you as a sinner and send you to hell?

Please. Feel free to answer what happens next. With no run around answers. It's pretty clear your in a pinch if what you say is true....

You give me your answer and I'll tell you mine.
 
  • Like
Reactions: civilwarbuff
Upvote 0

PeaceByJesus

Unworthy servant for the Worthy Lord + Savior
Feb 20, 2013
2,779
2,095
USA
Visit site
✟83,561.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Others
Actually, the New Testament does sometimes quote books generally seen by Protestants as apocryphal.

For instance, "I make all things new." - Revelation 21:5
"And being but one, she can do all things: and remaining in herself, she maketh all things new: and in all ages entering into holy souls, she maketh them friends of God, and prophets." -Wisdom 7:27. "She" here is the Wisdom of God, the preincarnate Word of God (see Proverbs 8:22-31, and Proverbs 9:3-8).

I do not think that is certain, but then again Paul quoted pagans a couple times, thus... But what I meant was that the Lord (and His preachers) quoted Scripture as the authorative word of God (as in Mt. 4) and validated His mission by it as a body, versus simply invoking a truth from other sources.

Here is a list of references to the OT in the NT, by the grace of God.
 
Upvote 0

PeaceByJesus

Unworthy servant for the Worthy Lord + Savior
Feb 20, 2013
2,779
2,095
USA
Visit site
✟83,561.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Others
You know what.....I have asked this question several times and it is never answered. It is always skipped over....

So I will ask it point blank. This whole idea of a Priest and confession etc is all good from the pulpit. The whole car analogy, the "you cannot be forgiven for sins you haven't committed"... works good at Sunday mass.. However....check this scenario out and let me know how it plays.

You are a Christian, believe in Christ, believe He is your savior, gave your life to Him and live every day in a closer relationship with Him. You have asked Him to forgive your sins and come into your life and fully accept His gift of salvation....

Now, you go to your priest and take confession. He admonishes you of all your sins, tells you to do some penance or whatever they do....

So, you leave the church after your confession. You are pure as the driven snow...

During the next week, as every human does, you sin. Pick some common sins.... tell a white lie, flip someone the bird and call them an A hole..... drink too much with the boys, covet your neighbors new sport car... what ever... on and on...

Now, on your way home from work on Friday... you as a sinner now... no more Mr. Clean... get in a head on collision with a cement truck and find yourself standing in front of your savior in heaven....You have not confessed your sins from the following week. Never made it to the Priest,

What is your dilemma? Are you damned? Did you lose your spot in heaven? Are you still saved? What now? Does Christ see you as a sinner and send you to hell?

Please. Feel free to answer what happens next. With no run around answers. It's pretty clear your in a pinch if what you say is true....

You give me your answer and I'll tell you mine.

For non-mortal sins they will send him to purgatory (Roman version at least) to make expiation for his sins which he did not suffer enough on earth for. And also to become perfect in character so he can enter Heaven. Seriously, they will.

Wait to see their proffered proof texts exposed by the grace of God, if any care to offer such.
 
Upvote 0

VanillaSunflowers

Black Lives Don't Matter More Than Any Other Life
Jul 26, 2016
3,741
1,733
DE
✟26,070.00
Gender
Female
Faith
Nazarene
Marital Status
Married
They would be saved even without the baptism. From what I understand the baptism is more of a public profession of faith and you should really do it in front of your peers. Also, it is done in obedience to Christ and not a prequisit of being saved.

Therefore, even without the bathtub version of a self baptism, this trucker would be conscidered a born again christian and were he to die in his sleep that night would enter into heaven and dwell with his Lord forever.
Absolutely.
The Baptism is symbolic and not requisite otherwise it would be a works based salvation issue and we know we do not have to work to earn salvation.
His thought was to follow the example of Christ and be Baptized for his own sake.
I think it was a beautiful story of one come to Christ. May God always bless his journey.
 
  • Like
Reactions: JacksBratt
Upvote 0
Dec 14, 2010
2,285
218
47
San Juan del Río
✟34,297.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Single
The Bible was not written by the Church, as only the NT was, while your reasoning logically means that the 1st century souls should have submitted to the instruments and stewards of Scripture under their magisterium, as you require us to do.

In the first century there was not New Testament compiled as we have it now, and You are a bit mistaken if you think that the Old testament is Not also a Legacy of the Church, Because The Church is The New Covenant that is heir of the Ancient Covenant. The Old testament Proclaims the coming of the New covenant, The Church itself.

Instead of knowing the Bible is true because it was written by the Church, which assurance would be upon the premise of ensured ecclesiastical veracity, souls ascertained both men and writings as being of God, before a church of Rome ever presumed it was essential for this. And thus 1st century souls could know (as we can - and that Rome is in error) that the church was true because the scriptural substantiation of its preaching, to which it appealed.

The Catholic Church in the first millenium was Strongly supported in the Successor of Peter, as we can read in all the fathers of the First 3 centuries, Saint Ignatius of Antioch, Saint Ireneus of Lyon, Saint Cyprian of Cartague, Saint Clement Pope, etc. all of them point to the Church of Rome as the visible Authority of the Church. PArticularly, for your information, We know the four gospels of the Sacred Scripture to be defended and endorsed by saint Ireneus of Lyon who was disciple of Saint Policarpus who was disciple of Saint John Apostle. Saint Clement Pope Knew Saint Peter in person, the same as Saint Ignatius of Antioch.

For the church actually began in dissent from those who sat in the seat of Moses over Israel, (Mt. 23:2) who were the historical instruments and stewards of Scripture, "because that unto them were committed the oracles of God," (Rm. 3:2) to whom pertaineth" the adoption, and the glory, and the covenants, and the giving of the law, and the service of God, and the promises" (Rm. 9:4) of Divine guidance, presence and perpetuation as they believed, (Gn. 12:2,3; 17:4,7,8; Ex. 19:5; Lv. 10:11; Dt. 4:31; 17:8-13; Ps, 11:4,9; Is. 41:10, Ps. 89:33,34; Jer. 7:23)

Wrong, wrong and wrong again and again and again. The Old Testament Was Anouncing the New testamen, and the New Covenant, The prophets anounced the old covenant comming into an end.

And instead they followed an itinerant Preacher whom the magisterium rejected, and whom the Messiah reproved them Scripture as being supreme, (Mk. 7:2-16) and established His Truth claims upon scriptural substantiation in word and in power, as did the early church as it began upon this basis. (Mt. 22:23-45; Lk. 24:27,44; Jn. 5:36,39; Acts 2:14-35; 4:33; 5:12; 15:6-21;17:2,11; 18:28; 28:23; Rm. 15:19; 2Cor. 12:12, etc.)

The Church is The community of the Apostles which Christ, God Himself settled to began the New Covenant anounced since the times of the Prophets. The Old covenant was betrayed by the Jews to the point of satanism as we read in Ezequiel, God anounced to Ezequiel de coming of the Castizement and the mark of the saved ones. The New Covenant was being awaited.

Moreover, your assertion that you know that the Bible is true rests upon the the novel and unScriptural premise of ensured perpetual magisterial infallibility, Scripture was not written by your magisterium, in which case the scholarly doubts and disagreements would not have continued for centuries and right into Trent.

On the contrary, Paul was pharisee himself, All the Apostles were Jews, many other Jews converted themselves to The New Covenant, some of them very very high empowered jews, Like Saint Nicodemus, and Saint Joseph of Arimathea.

Instead, NT souls came to ascertain what was of God just as OT souls did and we can, which in essence is due to the heavenly qualities and attestation of it. )

The New Covenant is made to Fullfill the promises of the Old Covenant. There is only one Flock, Not two.

This requires overcoming the competition by Scriptural means, not by the autocratic decrees of Rome,"but have renounced the hidden things of dishonesty, not walking in craftiness, nor handling the word of God deceitfully; but by manifestation of the truth commending ourselves to every man's conscience in the sight of God. (2 Corinthians 4:2)

Rome is the Principal see of the Church, from the very begining since Saint PETER moved there, as well as Saint Paul.

Your florid words do not give you reason.
 
  • Like
Reactions: fhansen
Upvote 0
Dec 14, 2010
2,285
218
47
San Juan del Río
✟34,297.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Single
The same way that David Conquered Jebus (Jerusalem) and converted the City in the center of Judaism (Old Covenant) (2 Samuel 5:6-7) Is the Same way that Jesús Conquered The Roman Empire, and as David downed Goliat with a Rock, Jesús downed Rome itself with PETER.

The Ark of the Covenant was not in Jerusalem until David Conquered the City and moved the ark to it, If you want to understand it, Jesús did the same with Rome. Jesus claimed to Jerusalem to convert itself, and Jesus told us that the gentiles were going to preside over the jews and that Jerusalem was going to be destroyed.

Matthew 8:5-12

5 And when Jesus was entered into Capernaum, there came unto him a centurion, beseeching him, 6 And saying, Lord, my servant lieth at home sick of the palsy, grievously tormented.

7 And Jesus saith unto him, I will come and heal him.

8 The centurion answered and said, Lord, I am not worthy that thou shouldest come under my roof: but speak the word only, and my servant shall be healed.

9 For I am a man under authority, having soldiers under me: and I say to this man, Go, and he goeth; and to another, Come, and he cometh; and to my servant, Do this, and he doeth it.

10 When Jesus heard it, he marvelled, and said to them that followed, Verily I say unto you, I have not found so great faith, no, not in Israel.

11 And I say unto you, That many shall come from the east and west, and shall sit down with Abraham, and Isaac, and Jacob, in the kingdom of heaven.

12 But the children of the kingdom shall be cast out into outer darkness: there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

sculleywr

Orthodox Colitis Survivor
Jul 23, 2011
7,789
683
Starke, FL
✟30,069.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Engaged
Politics
US-Others
You know what.....I have asked this question several times and it is never answered. It is always skipped over....

So I will ask it point blank. This whole idea of a Priest and confession etc is all good from the pulpit. The whole car analogy, the "you cannot be forgiven for sins you haven't committed"... works good at Sunday mass.. However....check this scenario out and let me know how it plays.

You are a Christian, believe in Christ, believe He is your savior, gave your life to Him and live every day in a closer relationship with Him. You have asked Him to forgive your sins and come into your life and fully accept His gift of salvation....

Now, you go to your priest and take confession. He admonishes you of all your sins, tells you to do some penance or whatever they do....

So, you leave the church after your confession. You are pure as the driven snow...

During the next week, as every human does, you sin. Pick some common sins.... tell a white lie, flip someone the bird and call them an A hole..... drink too much with the boys, covet your neighbors new sport car... what ever... on and on...

Now, on your way home from work on Friday... you as a sinner now... no more Mr. Clean... get in a head on collision with a cement truck and find yourself standing in front of your savior in heaven....You have not confessed your sins from the following week. Never made it to the Priest,

What is your dilemma? Are you damned? Did you lose your spot in heaven? Are you still saved? What now? Does Christ see you as a sinner and send you to hell?

Please. Feel free to answer what happens next. With no run around answers. It's pretty clear your in a pinch if what you say is true....

You give me your answer and I'll tell you mine.
As I said and already answered, the forgiveness isn't given by the priest at Confession. Please read the link, or at least do a simple word search for the word "forgive" in it:
http://www.orthodox.net/services/evening-prayers.html

So like I said, your question is based on a false premise that we must be forgiven in the presence of the priest to really receive it. Certainly, it is necessary that we confess our sins one to another in obedience to the command of God, but it isn't because of forgiveness, but because God told us to. The priest only is there to bear witness to the forgiveness, which already happened if you are following any semblance of a standard prayer rule. Since the premise is a false premise, there is no need to answer your question.
 
Upvote 0

redleghunter

Thank You Jesus!
Site Supporter
Mar 18, 2014
38,117
34,056
Texas
✟199,236.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
The "claim" for what? For atheism or agnosticism-or for divergent views of Scriptural meaning? Scripture speaks for itself-or does it? Is your exegesis somehow superior to someone who holds opposing views on the particular doctrines mentioned in my post? Does "best exegetical methodology", whatever that is, necessarily win the day in discovering God's nature and will for man?

The difference between eisegesis and exegesis.

Here's the difference :

Error occurs when we try to make the Scriptures mean what we want them to mean.

As opposed to reading and studying them within their historical context and original audience.

Trying to use verses to directly support a church structure in the 5th century that did not exist in the 1st century is eisegesis.
 
Upvote 0

redleghunter

Thank You Jesus!
Site Supporter
Mar 18, 2014
38,117
34,056
Texas
✟199,236.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
"To the church of God in Corinth, to those sanctified in Christ Jesus and called to be his holy people, together with all those everywhere who call on the name of our Lord Jesus Christ--their Lord and ours:" 1 Cor 1:2

There is only one "church of God", with many particular churches based on geography.
Then I guess the Eastern Orthodox should not be condemned for holding to such.
 
  • Like
Reactions: civilwarbuff
Upvote 0

redleghunter

Thank You Jesus!
Site Supporter
Mar 18, 2014
38,117
34,056
Texas
✟199,236.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Seven Churches... I mean are You serious?

The Gospel refers to Local Churches, Local Particular Churches in Communion, as much as Peter was in communion with the Church in Antioch, The Church in Jerusalem, and the Church in Rome. And as much as Paul sent his letters to the Church in Rome, the Church in Corinth, the Church in Philladelphia, the Church in Tesalony, etc.

You want to take advantage of the Plural conception of many Local Churches to extend it to incommunicant communities claiming to follow Jesus, each one the way the want. That is called CHEATING.

I am serious. Why did John have to address 7 churches when he could have sent one letter to Rome and let the pope figure it out.
 
Upvote 0
Dec 14, 2010
2,285
218
47
San Juan del Río
✟34,297.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Single
I am serious. Why did John have to address 7 churches when he could have sent one letter to Rome and let the pope figure it out.

Easy, Because the seven Churches mean all The Churches, seven means wholeness, the seven churches mentioned were representing the Church in plenitude, Jesus wants his Church to be pure and obedient to him, and prices the sacrifices that the church suffers, The seven churches mentined in the Apocalypse are in fact a mesage for the whole church.
 
Upvote 0