Is scripture the highest authority?

[Thursday]

Now, Thursday, you cannot have it both ways!

In the first quote you say THERE ARE contradictory doctrines and false teachings among those who follow Jesus.
then, in the second quote of you say THERE ARE NO false teachings or contradictory doctrines in the Church. (I reasonably understand you mean the Catholic Church, here).

This is what I conclude, where any or all of what follow applies:
1. You don't know what you are talking about.
2. You are confused, and can't make up your mind.
3. You are so indoctrinated with RC ecclesiology you are blind to understanding the plain truth of what the Scriptures teach.
4. If you are right about no false teaching, etc, in your RC church, then your RC church does not follow Jesus, according to your first quote.

The Catholic Church, founded by Jesus, teaches no false doctrines.

Outside the Church you find a multitude o contradictory doctrines on central matters of the faith.

The Church is protected against teaching error.

 

[lesliedellow]

Justification is by faith, but not by faith alone.

Salvation is by grace through faith and works.

Here's the catechism portion on Justification and Grace:

http://www.vatican.va/archive/ccc_css/archive/catechism/p3s1c3a2.htm

http://www.catholic.com/quickquestions/why-does-the-church-teach-that-works-can-obtain-salvation

You might want to read the first two paragraphs of the answer, but especially the second.

 

[Thursday]

http://www.catholic.com/quickquestions/why-does-the-church-teach-that-works-can-obtain-salvation

You might want to read the first two paragraphs of the answer, but especially the second.

Exactly What I said. Did you even read this?

The Church teaches that it's God's grace from beginning to end which justifies, sanctifies, and saves us. As Paul explains in Philippians 2:13, "God is the one, who, for his good purpose, works in you both to desire and to work."

Notice that Paul's words presuppose that the faithful Christian is not just desiring to be righteous, but is actively working toward it. This is the second half of the justification equation, and Protestants either miss or ignore it.

James 2:17 reminds us that "faith of itself, if it does not have work, is dead." In verse 24 James says, "See how a person is justified by works and not by faith alone." And later: "For just as a body without a spirit is dead, so also faith without works is dead" (2:26).

 

[lesliedellow]

Exactly What I said. Did you even read this?

The Church teaches that it's God's grace from beginning to end which justifies, sanctifies, and saves us.

Your very own words. God may subsequently move people he has saved to do his will, but it is not the doing of his will which saves.

 

[Thursday]

Thursday, Let's take one of the traditions of the Church which is to burn incense and just to tell everyone that I hate picking fights I went through https://www.ewtn.com/library/ANSWERS/INCENSE.HTM to understand. So the smoke is a symbol of the LORD's ambiance. Fair enough. The only thing that makes me feel little bit on edge with the practice is that incense was strictly to be used by priests because it was meant to burn in the temple of Jerusalem. In fact, it was an anathema to use for pleasure purposes. I would like to assume you take it with the strictest order when doing it. However, the temple was destroyed and God hasn't sent instructions on the construction of the temples since the destruction. So the question is, is it of any service to use something the LORD stopped using a long time ago? As you say, it's a sacred tradition but I'm not sure if it should influence the presence of God in the parish or not because, He's interest changed from physical demands to spiritual demands and the heart of man. If I believe the smoke should make me feel closer to God it should be crucial to understand that God would always be there whether there's incense or not and not that, he's more present when there's smoke than when there isn't!

Incense represents our prayers rising to God.

Revelation 5:8
When He had taken the scroll, the four living creatures and the twenty-four elders fell down before the Lamb. Each one had a harp, and they held the golden bowls full of incense, which are the prayers of the saints.

Rev 8:3,4
Another angel, who had a golden censer, came and stood at the altar. He was given much incense to offer, with the prayers of all God's people, on the golden altar in front of the throne.
The smoke of the incense, together with the prayers of God's people, went up before God from the angel's hand.

 

[Thursday]

Your very own words. God may subsequently move people he has saved to do his will, but it is not the doing of his will which saves.

A rejection of God's will can condemn a person. We can't be saved without God's grace, but that doesn't mean we don't have to cooperate.

Read the post you provided.

 

[DerekJM]

Scripture is a guide and prayer book, bible fundamentalism/ literalism is a new age phenomenon that states it is the supreme authority or law book, but it was not written that way.

 

[amariselle]

The Catholic Church, founded by Jesus, teaches no false doctrines.

Outside the Church you find a multitude o contradictory doctrines on central matters of the faith.

The Church is protected against teaching error.

No false doctrines and no errors? Really?

So, you don't think Martin Luther had good reason to object to much of Catholic doctrine? (The sale of indulgences for example) You don't believe it was a false doctrine to teach people that they can buy their loved ones a place in heaven?

And what about praying to Mary to intercede and guide Christians? Where did Jesus (or any of the disciples or Paul) teach that His followers are to go to Mary in such a way?

What about praying to saints? Where in Scripture is this taught? Where does it say that there should be patron saints for certain causes that Christians can go to with their concerns and requests? Does the Bible not say that we have ONE Mediator, Jesus Christ?

What about penance or purgatory? Where are these Catholic doctrines found in Scripture? Is the work of Christ on the cross enough, or does Scripture teach that we must make ourselves right with God by doing so many Our Fathers and Hail Marys, or by going to a place where our mortal sins are burned away so we can enter heaven?

What about the veneration of relics? Where is this taught in Scripture? Or the use of icons?

Much of the Catholic doctrine and tradition that you claim is absolutely without error is in fact entirely and inexcusably contrary to Scripture and the teachings of Jesus Himself.

It's mind boggling to me that you believe the Catholic Church has never taught anything of error, and that it hasn't lied and mislead people. (And in fact punished those who disagree, even unto torture or death).

I think you need to do some honest and careful research into the history and present day practices and teachings of the Catholic Church, in comparison to the word of God. (Which is of higher authority than ANY church teaching or tradition, including those of Protestant churches).

And, just so we're clear, I'm not saying Protestant churches are without fault in this regard. In fact, I have started several threads on these forums about my concerns with much of what is going on in many Protestant churches today.

There is no one perfect denomination, because denominations are made up of people, and people are not perfect, we make mistakes.

 

[Linet Kihonge]

The issue isn't what it represents, the issue is it's place in the Spiritual realms to create a divine interaction between the God-Head and the saints. If I were to be asked, CC is more inclined towards, creating relationships between man and the Divine and not how God wanted man to connect with the Divine. So it would make sense why it's okay to do veneration because we are helping mankind become one with the heavens and as well as in faith the LORD will be in the midst. However, the LORD's way of helping mankind to become one with him was His Son and the intercession of the Holy Spirit and from my view, in CC there are many doors for the LORD to reach mankind and one of them is the intercession of the Saints yet there's nowhere in the Bible that shows the saints should seek intercession from the departed. If anything the only thing man can do, is make pleas of pardon for the departed but that's as far as it would go. Therefore, I don't think the traditions are 100% scriptural inspired, the belief in apparitions leave too much leeway for mischievous manifestations. There's almost no explanation if St. John appeared to a saint today will not to do something to convince a believer such a presence

 

[civilwarbuff]

Catholics and Orthodox agree that we were united as one Church for hundreds of years. Our debate has nothing to do with protestant claims which are easily debunked.

Which claims are those?

 

[civilwarbuff]

This is the second half of the justification equation, and Protestants either miss or ignore it.

http://greatnonprofits.org/categories/view/protestant/page:2
Sometimes people find it much easier to ignore the obvious or continue to pass along incorrect information rather than take the 30 seconds necessary to find the information for themselves.
http://greatnonprofits.org/categories/view/protestant/page:2

 

[civilwarbuff]

Scripture is a guide and prayer book, bible fundamentalism/ literalism is a new age phenomenon that states it is the supreme authority or law book, but it was not written that way.

And where in tradition (I assume that is where you got that) does it say that?

 

[pescador]

You are adding to scripture.

Did you miss this:

John 15:10
If you keep my commands, you will remain in my love, just as I have kept my Father's commands and remain in his love.

Romans 11
22Consider therefore the kindness and sternness of God: sternness to those who fell, but kindness to you, provided that you continue in his kindness. Otherwise, you also will be cut off.

2 Peter 2:20
If they have escaped the corruption of the world by knowing our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ and are again entangled in it and are overcome, they are worse off at the end than they were at the beginning.

I'm not adding to anything and I'm quoting scripture in context. I don't select single, unrelated verses from different biblical "books", out-of-context, as you do, to try to prove a predetermined doctrinal point. That is deception! There are plenty of warnings in the Bible of false teachers who try to distort God's word.

 

[Propianotuner]

Merely presenting a series of declarative statements without demonstrating the logic behind them is no more fruitful of an exercise than saying "my doxy is orthodoxy, and your doxy is heterodoxy, because I am me and you are you". As fellow lovers of Christ we should be eminently more capable of a discussion with substance to it than bandying about with discussion in which we only pontificate at one another.

Jesus started a Church. He gave the Church his authority to forgive sins, make rules, teach, and settle disputes.

Right. Can you demonstrate how these scriptural truths add up to Sola Ekklesia? Or we expected to take you, "Your Magnificence, Your Excellency", at your word?

He told us that when we have a dispute we should listen to the Church. He said that refusing to listen to the Church is grounds for expulsion from the community.

Show us which scriptures are involved and how the NT says this is supposed to work out. The Reformation began as an effort by people within the Church who wanted to remonstrate with it, and edify other Christians. They were just as much "the Church" at that point as others in the Church.

Those in the opposing quarters of the Church had effectively refused to listen themselves, and were somehow content with, for example, a flawed, 1000+ years old translation in a dead language. People weren't even allowed to hear the gospel, in Church, in a tongue they could understand. The very height of heresy is effectively teaching that the Gospel shouldn't be spread.

The Catholic Church, which contains the majority of the world's Christians, is now and always has been united under a single hierarchy and a unified dogma. If you want to know what the Church teaches, you can look it up.

Demonstrate this "single hierarchy" and "unified dogma".

We aren't children who need to be led across the street by you holding our hands. We are every bit as capable as you, and it's a simple fact that with how many people there are here we can also be quite a bit more experienced and educated than you. I have every reason, springing out from my love for you as a reflection of God and also as one who loves Him, to respect you as my family and accordingly treat you with respect, as if you are every bit of my intellectual equal, and I should reasonably be able to expect the same basic courtesy, and more importantly love.

 

[DerekJM]

No false doctrines and no errors? Really?

So, you don't think Martin Luther had good reason to object to much of Catholic doctrine? (The sale of indulgences for example) You don't believe it was a false doctrine to teach people that they can buy their loved ones a place in heaven?

And what about praying to Mary to intercede and guide Christians? Where did Jesus (or any of the disciples or Paul) teach that His followers are to go to Mary in such a way?

What about praying to saints? Where in Scripture is this taught? Where does it say that there should be patron saints for certain causes that Christians can go to with their concerns and requests? Does the Bible not say that we have ONE Mediator, Jesus Christ?

What about penance or purgatory? Where are these Catholic doctrines found in Scripture? Is the work of Christ on the cross enough, or does Scripture teach that we must make ourselves right with God by doing so many Our Fathers and Hail Marys, or by going to a place where our mortal sins are burned away so we can enter heaven?

What about the veneration of relics? Where is this taught in Scripture? Or the use of icons?

Much of the Catholic doctrine and tradition that you claim is absolutely without error is in fact entirely and inexcusably contrary to Scripture and the teachings of Jesus Himself.

It's mind boggling to me that you believe the Catholic Church has never taught anything of error, and that it hasn't lied and mislead people. (And in fact punished those who disagree, even unto torture or death).

I think you need to do some honest and careful research into the history and present day practices and teachings of the Catholic Church, in comparison to the word of God. (Which is of higher authority than ANY church teaching or tradition, including those of Protestant churches).

And, just so we're clear, I'm not saying Protestant churches are without fault in this regard. In fact, I have started several threads on these forums about my concerns with much of what is going on in many Protestant churches today.

There is no one perfect denomination, because denominations are made up of people, and people are not perfect, we make mistakes.

Most Catholics have read all this stuff before, you don't have to scratch too far below the surface to find it. ( I have read all this stuff on Christian Apologetic sites like CARM, which defines Christianity and Christians as strictly Calvinist in nature - virtually everyone else is a goner)
The OP is about whether the Word of God is the ultimate authority, and whether we should regard it as our rule an law book.
Of course many Catholics look to the Church for guidance and interpretation, and the bible as a supplement to their spiritual path and life - not something that needs us to become lifelong students of.

 

[AnticipateHisComing]

Jesus started one Church.

Since you repeat this, I will repeat my response to it, which you have not refuted.

Jesus did not start a church in the sense of how we use the word today. You are being deceptive in continuing to say such. What Jesus started was the new covenant with its teachings. He called multiple apostles to spread his teachings. These apostles converted multiple followers in multiple locations, to which John wrote seven letters to seven "churches". What we now call a church with rigid doctrine positions and central authority did not come until much later.

He gave it his authority to forgive sins, make rules, and teach.

OK, Jesus/Paul gave people different positions in his community of believers. Did Jesus say they were inerrant? Did Jesus give authority to any apostles that was above his words?

Which Church is led by the apostles and their successors?

Good question. It is more than one, which means there is not the unity that you claim.

Here's a quote from Ignatius in 107 AD. Ignatius was a disciple of John. He was eaten by lions in Rome for refusing to renounce Christ.

“You must all follow the bishop as Jesus Christ follows the Father, and the presbytery as you would the apostles. Reverence the deacons as you would the command of God. Let no one do anything of concern to the Church without the bishop. Let that be considered a valid Eucharist which is celebrated by the bishop, or by one whom he appoints. Wherever the bishop appears, let the people be there; just as wherever Jesus Christ is, there is the Catholic Church. Nor is it permitted without the bishop either to baptize or to celebrate the agape; but whatever he approve, this too is pleasing to God, so that whatever is done will be secure and valid.” (St. Ignatius of Antioch, Bishop and Martyr; Letter to the Smyrneans § 8)

If you are looking for a history lesson, you don't have wait some 70 years after Jesus' death to find a false teaching. This is talked about in scripture.

"Reverence the deacons as you would the command of God."
So the RCC is rooted in the concept of inerrancy; big surprise there, but it must be true because some bishop said it.

Where does Jesus give the authority to even Peter to inerrancy? I have asked this before, but you ignore it. Scripture even recounts Peter in error. And if Peter had this authority, where did Jesus give Peter the authority to pass it on?

As I posted before, the first apostles had a special place with special authority that is not passed on. If it was, then we would have the miracles that they did. We would have additions to scripture that they did. And, Jesus would have said there would be more than 12 thrones in heaven for all the other apostles that you claim there have been since them.

 

[AnticipateHisComing]

The Catholic Church, founded by Jesus, teaches no false doctrines.

Outside the Church you find a multitude o contradictory doctrines on central matters of the faith.

The Church is protected against teaching error.

Where is this stated in scripture? Where is the Catholic Church given authority above scripture?

 

[yeshuaslavejeff]

Where is this stated in scripture? Where is the Catholic Church given authority above scripture?

Isn't it in Revelation ?
(not by Yhwh though, ever)

 

[AnticipateHisComing]

Catholics and Orthodox agree that we were united as one Church for hundreds of years.

So now you say there are differences in the Church, while before you say there weren't. So now it appears there is a time limit on inerrancy in the Church.

Our debate has nothing to do with protestant claims which are easily debunked.

Half-truths are just as bad as outright lies; probably worse because a liar caught will concede, but one who spreads half-truths will not be corrected. Likewise, there is no such thing as partially inerrant and there is no distinction between major falsehoods like "protestants" and minor falsehoods like the differences that divide the different churches that claim apostolic authority.

Either the Church is inerrant or it isn't. If the inerrancy was passed down by apostolic succession, there would not be splits.

 

[Thursday]

No false doctrines and no errors? Really?

So, you don't think Martin Luther had good reason to object to much of Catholic doctrine? (The sale of indulgences for example)

No, he didn't. The sale of indulgences was NEVER Catholic doctrine. You need to do more research.