Is Scripture MISSING Dogmas?

[Souldier]

It's not someone who says he is. It's someOne. The laying on of hands is the sign of an apostle, or his successor. Jesus laid hands on the apostles, the apostles layed hands on Paul and Mattias and those who came after them, etc.

An acorn doesn't have roots, and yet it is the same substance as an oak tree. Why does an oak tree need roots, leaves, bark, etc? FWIW, Peter carried a sword, did he not? He tried to protect Jesus, did he not? Did Jesus need protecting?

You have things confused quite a bit. None of the apostles used swords even after Jesus ascended into heaven. The point wasn't that Jesus didnt need protected but that the apostles themselves didnt need protected, that was the power of God that was shown in them, for a reason. The Acorn theory is flawed, its seems to be an attempt to explain away the clear truth. Paul mentions signs of an apostle and he wasn't talking about laying on of hands


Besides that, an Acorn grows up into a tree. So the lack of growing into a tree means that its not an acorn

 

[BobRyan]

You would accept someone outside the Church to explain infallibility to you?

Outside what church??

 

[Root of Jesse]

It is interesting how you forego explicit instruction to follow example on apostolic succession, but Paul's example of using only scripture to verify NT revelations with Bereans... I guess I'm confused how you choose between the two.

Especially when you add that Paul also told Timothy to listen to the Traditions Paul taught Timothy.

 

[Souldier]

But they do know.

No we dont. The evidence proves otherwise as well.

 

[BobRyan]

Christ never observed Sabbath the way it was traditionally observed either. Not after he started His ministry anyway. I see what Christ said about the Sabbath, i see pauls teaching about the law and i see his teaching from Romans 14 and Collossians and im under the impression that we are shown a better way.

Christ was accused by unbelieving Jews of breaking the Sabbath in Mark 2 - Christ stated that He did not break it and that the "Sabbath was made for mankind".

In Matt 5 Christ said this about the idea that HE came to destroy/abolish/set-aside the Law of God. (Something the non-Christian Jews loved to accuse Him of doing).

[FONT=&quot]Matt 5
17 “Do not think that I came to destroy the Law or the Prophets. I did not come to destroy but to fulfill. 18 For assuredly, I say to you, till heaven and earth pass away, one jot or one tittle will by no means pass from the law till all is fulfilled. 19 Whoever therefore breaks one of the least of these commandments, and teaches men so, shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven; but whoever does and teaches them, he shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.

John heard and was in agreement.

1 John 5
"Whoever believes that Jesus is the Christ is born of God, and whoever loves the Father loves the child born of Him.
2By this we know that we love the children of God, when we love God and observe His commandments.
3 For this is the love of God, that we keep His commandments; and His commandments are not burdensome. 1 John 5:1-3
[/FONT]

 

[Root of Jesse]

There have been many examples of multiple-popes at the same time - often having rival papal armies at war with each other. Finally Emperor Sigismund in the 15th century defrocked all Papal lines and started his own papal line with his own group of Cardinals - since that time - I think there has only been one pope at a time.

Certainly some popes have been good Christians - no doubt at all.

But the top ten wicked popes are sometimes said to be ...

Top 10 Most Wicked Popes - Listverse



in Christ,

Bob

10 out of 260? Pretty good percentage. And when you see how they're all concentrated in one particular era, you see how succumbing to the ways of the world affects the Catholic Church, and that living in the world without being of the world is the best way for the Church to be.

 

[BobRyan]

Regarding my prior post where John and Christ appear to be in agreement - so also does James appear to agree ...

[FONT=&quot]
James 2
8 If, however, you are fulfilling the royal law according to the Scripture, “You shall love your neighbor as yourself,” (Lev 19:18) you are doing well.
9 But if you show partiality, you are committing sin and are convicted by the law as transgressors. 10 For whoever keeps the whole law and yet stumbles in one point, he has become guilty of all.
11 For He who said, [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]“Do not commit adultery[/FONT][FONT=&quot],”
also said, [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]“Do not commit murder.”[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Now if you do not commit adultery, but do commit murder, you have become a transgressor of the law. [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]12 So speak and so act as those who are to be judged by the law of liberty[/FONT]

 

[BobRyan]

10 out of 260? Pretty good percentage. And when you see how they're all concentrated in one particular era, you see how succumbing to the ways of the world affects the Catholic Church, and that living in the world without being of the world is the best way for the Church to be.

Those wicked popes certainly had "successors".

The question is what happens when all papal lines were abolished in the 15th century by Sigismund?

 

[Souldier]

You would accept someone outside the Church to explain infallibility to you?

I just thanked him for his time, he took time to explain and i was thankful. Its called being considerate. I dont know that he is outside the Church. I dont think you or the Pope are qualified to say who is in and who is out. That's the Lords job. You may be able to excommunicate people from your own denomination but that doesn't give your denomination power over the universal Church of God.

 

[Souldier]

Christ was accused by unbelieving Jews of breaking the Sabbath in Mark 2 - Christ stated that He did not break it and that the "Sabbath was made for mankind".

In Matt 5 Christ said this about the idea that HE came to destroy/abolish/set-aside the Law of God. (Something the non-Christian Jews loved to accuse Him of doing).

[FONT=&quot]Matt 5
17 “Do not think that I came to destroy the Law or the Prophets. I did not come to destroy but to fulfill. 18 For assuredly, I say to you, till heaven and earth pass away, one jot or one tittle will by no means pass from the law till all is fulfilled. 19 Whoever therefore breaks one of the least of these commandments, and teaches men so, shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven; but whoever does and teaches them, he shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.

John heard and was in agreement.

1 John 5
"Whoever believes that Jesus is the Christ is born of God, and whoever loves the Father loves the child born of Him.
2By this we know that we love the children of God, when we love God and observe His commandments.
3 For this is the love of God, that we keep His commandments; and His commandments are not burdensome. 1 John 5:1-3
[/FONT]

Christ was not resting on that day. He and his apostles did work by picking food which the law forbids. So Christ's healing works is not the only issue. (its lawful to do good on the sabbath) They actually did not rest on that day. So it seems that its lawful to not rest on that day as well. So we must consider that the day of rest may mean something else.

 

[Souldier]

Regarding my prior post where John and Christ appear to be in agreement - so also does James appear to agree ...

[FONT=&quot]
James 2
8 If, however, you are fulfilling the royal law according to the Scripture, “You shall love your neighbor as yourself,” (Lev 19:18) you are doing well.
9 But if you show partiality, you are committing sin and are convicted by the law as transgressors. 10 For whoever keeps the whole law and yet stumbles in one point, he has become guilty of all.
11 For He who said, [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]“Do not commit adultery[/FONT][FONT=&quot],”
also said, [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]“Do not commit murder.”[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Now if you do not commit adultery, but do commit murder, you have become a transgressor of the law. [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]12 So speak and so act as those who are to be judged by the law of liberty[/FONT]

Did the apostles fail to observe the whole law when they failed to rest on the sabbath?

 

[Souldier]

Especially when you add that Paul also told Timothy to listen to the Traditions Paul taught Timothy.

Those traditions do not include RCC tradition.

 

[Root of Jesse]

You have things confused quite a bit. None of the apostles used swords even after Jesus ascended into heaven.

But before his Crucifixion, Peter did. Nothing confusing about that.

The point wasn't that Jesus didnt need protected but that the apostles themselves didnt need protected, that was the power of God that was shown in them, for a reason.

Who do you think requires the bullet-proof glass and Swiss Guards? You think the pope requests it? John Paul II was shot in St. Peter's Square and at the time being guarded. At any rate, it's not a requirement, especially of the one chosen Pontiff. It's given him.

The Acorn theory is flawed, its seems to be an attempt to explain away the clear truth. Paul mentions signs of an apostle and he wasn't talking about laying on of hands

Paul wrote to particular Churches about particular things. He answered questions sent to him. I don't see Paul listing the requirements of an apostle, especially considering he didn't know Christ in the flesh. He became an apostle after he met with the Twelve, according to Galatians. Christ converted him and told him what he would be and what he would do. But the Twelve ordained him.

Besides that, an Acorn grows up into a tree. So the lack of growing into a tree means that its not an acorn

The acorn is as much an oak tree as a 100 year old oak tree, just as the early Church looks different than today's Catholic Church. But they are the same Church.

 

[BobRyan]

Did the apostles fail to observe the whole law when they failed to rest on the sabbath?

In Acts 13 you have Sabbath after Sabbath gospel meetings with both Gentiles and Jews.

In Acts 17 same thing.

In Acts 18 -- same thing

In Acts 15 the dispute in the christian church is resolved by James in part by pointing to the fact that they are hearing scripture every Sabbath in the Synagogues.

It is unclear that there is even one example of Sabbath breaking by the NT saints.

And of course Christ said the Sabbath was "made for mankind" Mark 2:27.

And in Isaiah 56:2-6 Sabbath for gentiles.
Is 66:23 Sabbath for all mankind for all eternity in the New Heavens.

But to your point if the Ten Commandments were being deliberately broken by the saints -- then James argues this would be a problem.

Suppose for a moment that James were arguing for more breaking of God's Commandments -- is this the best way to argue in favor of that?

[FONT=&quot]James 2
8 If, however, you are fulfilling the royal law according to the Scripture, “You shall love your neighbor as yourself,” (Lev 19:18) you are doing well.
9 But if you show partiality, you are committing sin and are convicted by the law as transgressors. 10 For whoever keeps the whole law and yet stumbles in one point, he has become guilty of all.
11 For He who said, [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]“Do not commit adultery[/FONT][FONT=&quot],”
also said, [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]“Do not commit murder.”[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Now if you do not commit adultery, but do commit murder, you have become a transgressor of the law. [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]12 So speak and so act as those who are to be judged by the law of liberty[/FONT]

 

[Root of Jesse]

Those traditions do not include RCC tradition.

Where's that? In the Bible...

 

[BobRyan]

Christ was not resting on that day. He and his apostles did work by picking food which the law forbids. So Christ's healing works is not the only issue. (its lawful to do good on the sabbath) They actually did not rest on that day. So it seems that its lawful to not rest on that day as well. So we must consider that the day of rest may mean something else.

The actual Law does not forbid walking through a grain field and munching on whatever you happen to find. That is the part that the Jews made up. It is not in the OT.

Also healing was not forbidden on the Sabbath in either OT or NT - in fact Christ argues that His work is completely consistent with the Law of God.

It is the unchristian Jews that accuse Christ of breaking God's Law - Christ never says "yes I am breaking the Law of God because I am trying to teach my followers how to break God's Law and have no worries about it".

In fact in Gal 4 it is stated that Christ "born under the Law" perfectly complied with that Law.

in 1John 3:4 "sin IS transgression of the Law" -- and Christ had no sin.

"Do we then make void the Law of God by our faith?? God forbid! In fact we ESTABLISH the Law of God" Rom 3:31

Christ gave His commandments at Sinai according to Heb 8:6-10 and so in the 3rd commandment 'Love Me and Keep My commandments" so also in John 14:15 before the cross "If you Love Me Keep My Commandments"

in Christ,

Bob

 

[BobRyan]

Originally Posted by Souldier

Originally Posted by Root of Jesse

Especially when you add that Paul also told Timothy to listen to the Traditions Paul taught Timothy.
​

Those traditions do not include RCC tradition.
​

Christ points out here - that not all of the traditions -- made up by man -- pass the test of sola scriptura validation - upholding the Commandments of God as opposed to man-made tradition.



Mark 7

7 Howbeit in vain do they worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men.
8 For laying aside the commandment of God, ye hold the tradition of men, as the washing of pots and cups: and many other such like things ye do.
9 And he said unto them, Full well ye reject the commandment of God, that ye may keep your own tradition.
10 For Moses said, Honour thy father and thy mother; and, Whoso curseth father or mother, let him die the death:
11 But ye say, If a man shall say to his father or mother, It is Corban, that is to say, a gift, by whatsoever thou mightest be profited by me; he shall be free.
12 And ye suffer him no more to do ought for his father or his mother;
13 Making the word of God of none effect through your tradition, which ye have delivered: and many such like things do ye.

That is a case of Christ demonstrating the way that the magisterium is hammered "sola scriptura" in the cases where it's traditions and "doctrines of men" are at odds with scripture.

[FONT=&quot]The elders are in fact the "magisterium" even Paul admits to this.

Then Jesus spoke to the crowds and to his disciples, saying, “The scribes and the Pharisees have taken their seat on the chair of Moses. Therefore, do and observe all things whatsoever they tell you, but do not follow their example. For they preach but they do not practice. (Matthew 23:1-3)[/FONT]

 

[BobRyan]

Originally Posted by BobRyan Christ was accused by unbelieving Jews of breaking the Sabbath in Mark 2 - Christ stated that He did not break it and that the "Sabbath was made for mankind".

In Matt 5 Christ said this about the idea that HE came to destroy/abolish/set-aside the Law of God. (Something the non-Christian Jews loved to accuse Him of doing).

[FONT=&quot]Matt 5
17 “Do not think that I came to destroy the Law or the Prophets. I did not come to destroy but to fulfill. 18 For assuredly, I say to you, till heaven and earth pass away, one jot or one tittle will by no means pass from the law till all is fulfilled. 19 Whoever therefore breaks one of the least of these commandments, and teaches men so, shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven; but whoever does and teaches them, he shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.

John heard and was in agreement.

1 John 5
"Whoever believes that Jesus is the Christ is born of God, and whoever loves the Father loves the child born of Him.
2By this we know that we love the children of God, when we love God and observe His commandments.
3 For this is the love of God, that we keep His commandments; and His commandments are not burdensome. 1 John 5:1-3[/FONT]

Christ was not resting on that day. He and his apostles did work by picking food which the law forbids. So Christ's healing works is not the only issue. (its lawful to do good on the sabbath) They actually did not rest on that day. So it seems that its lawful to not rest on that day as well. So we must consider that the day of rest may mean something else.

Christ said that the Priests do work for the temple on Sabbath and are innocent - and He claimed that in the service of God - He Himself is even greater than the temple and so service to Him is that much more appropriate on Sabbath.


[FONT=Arial, Geneva, Helvetica]The Pharisees did not object to the act of taking the grain. Such plucking of the grain was allowed by the law ( Deuteronomy 23:25 ) and is still practiced by hungry travelers in Palestine, which is, and has always been,[/FONT]

Matt 12:5
"Or have you not read in the Law, that on the Sabbath the priests in the temple break the Sabbath and are innocent?

Jesus shows innocence when it comes to violating God's Law - he does not proclaim the goodness of breaking the law - the goodness of sin.

The "other way" to do this would have been for Christ to say "it does not matter if this is breaking the Law of God or not when it comes to the Sabbath because the Sabbath is ended -- even before the cross... ended".

It is instructive that He is not choosing that option.

 

[ThatTrueLight]

Not that it matters much to many here, although scripture clearly shows that the requirement for the Apostle to replace Judas had to have accompanied the Apostles and was also a witness to His being raised from the dead.

These are from Acts;

Wherefore of these men which have companied with us all the time that the Lord Jesus went in and out among us, beginning from the baptism of John, unto that same day that he was taken up from us, must one be ordained to be a witness with us of his resurrection.

And with great power gave the apostles witness of the resurrection of the Lord Jesus: and great grace was upon them all.

Paul saw the LORD also as he says here in Corinthians;

Am I not an apostle? am I not free? have I not seen Jesus Christ our Lord?

Once again, not that it matters. Men are going to continue to pretend that the men in their assembly are Apostles and that the foundation continues to be built..

Because they can't ever be wrong.

 

[Souldier]

Where's that? In the Bible...

There is no Pope in the bible. Thats an RCC tradition but not one that the Apostles had.