Roman Catholic..anything wrong with it?

[Albion]

Sorry. I just picked up that quotation from Major1 and your posted reply to it. That was the whole context for me. I admit that I wasn't about to review 420 previous posts, but that might have been a help now that I read your reply to me.

 

[PeaceB]

Why attribute that to Sola Scriptura? And how to you exonerate the various churches that split from each other before Sola Scriptura became an issue during the Reformation? Obviously, I'd say, there's something wrong with your theory, even if you do not care for the concept of 'Scripture Alone.'

I would say that it is Sola Scriptura in combination with the general Protestant belief that each person has the right to interpret Scripture entirely by himself.

 

[Major1]

I believe that the letter to the Hebrews is Scripture, because I hold to the Sacred Tradition of the Catholic Church, and the Sacred Tradition of the Catholic Church teaches that the letter to the Hebrews is Scripture. You reject the Sacred Tradition of the Catholic Church, so you must show us where the Bible teaches that the letter to the Hebrews is Scripture.

These are the two Bible verses that you quoted:

All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness, so that the man of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work.”​

“For prophecy never had its origin in the will of man, but men spoke from God as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit.”
​

Your logic is that a person must provide a Bible verse that teaches every belief that he holds as Christian doctrine.

You believe that the letter to the Hebrews is Scripture. Specifically, you believe that the the letter to the Hebrews is among the Scripture referred to in 2 Tim 3:16-17. You hold this as Christine doctrine.

Following your own logic, you must provide a chapter and verse in the Bible that teaches that the letter to the Hebrews is Scripture. If you cannot, by your own logic, your belief that the letter to the Hebrews is Scripture is "an opinion and nothing more".

Neither of the two verses that you cited above teach that the letter to the Hebrews is Scripture. In fact, neither of the two books listed above mention the letter to the Hebrews at all.

So you will 1) provide us with a chapter and a verse in the Bible that teaches that the letter to the Hebrews is Scripture, 2) admit that your belief is "an opinion and nothing more", or 3) admit that your logic is faulty.

Which is it?

I will be happy to provide you with Bible verses that support those Catholic doctrines, as soon as you show me where the Bible states that the letter to the Hebrews is Scripture, which you hold as a true doctrine of the Christian faith.

Obviously you are never going to post ANY Bible verses that support the doctrines you believe.

You obviously have a reading comprehension problem. "ALL Scripture includes ALL the books of the Canon. This is just not that hard to understand, unless you are willfully being ignorant of this fact.

My dear friend, where did you get the idea that I have to prove anything to you whatsoever about the book of Hebrews????? I accept the explanation given in 2 Timothy 3:16 as it says ALL Scripture is God breathed. There is no way in the world I can make you believe something that you choose not to believe.

I AM responsible for what I believe and I am not responsible to force you. Neither is anyone required to prove anything which you choose to reject.
That is just simply hardheartedness and stubbornness to keep asking the same thing over and over..

Lets try something different. The book of Matthew contains the story of the virgin Mary and the birth of Jesus. BUT where in Matthew is the claim that it is an inspired book??????

What is the chapter and verse where it is found. If you can not prove it, then does that mean the virgin birth is not an inspired event since you can not post the inspired informational information?

That is exactly what you are trying to do with the book of Hebrews.

I am pleased that you believe the Book of Hebrews is inspired. I do not believe it is because the Catholic church says so, I believe it because GOD SAID SO.

If we both believe it to be true, what is the point you are trying to make because you have completely left me behind.

 

[PeaceB]

Obviously you are never going to post ANY Bible verses that support the doctrines you believe.

You obviously have a reading comprehension problem. "ALL Scripture includes ALL the books of the Canon. This is just not that hard to understand, unless you are willfully being ignorant of this fact.

My dear friend, where did you get the idea that I have to prove anything to you whatsoever about the book of Hebrews????? I accept the explanation given in 2 Timothy 3:16 as it says ALL Scripture is God breathed. There is no way in the world I can make you believe something that you choose not to believe.

And you are never going to post any Bible verses that teach what you believe. I have asked you several times to provide a verse that teaches your belief that the letter to the Hebrews is Scripture, and you have yet to provide one single verse that teaches that.

And where did you get the idea that we have to prove anything to you whatsoever about the Catholic doctrines that you reject?

Scripture includes all the books of the canon. But you have not provided one single Bible verse that teaches that the letter to the Hebrews is included among the books of the canon, so that point is irrelevant.

If a person can simply declare, as you have, any book that he desires to be among the canon, without proof from the Bible or Sacred Tradition, then you must accept my assertion that 2 Maccabees and the other Deuterocanonical books are Scripture.

Your basic argument is that everything a Christian holds as doctrine must be proved from the Bible, and that Catholic doctrines are not found in the Bible. Since this the case, you must prove that everything you hold as Christian doctrine is taught by the Bible too. You cannot do this, as evidenced by your complete inability to provide one single verse that teaches your belief that Hebrews is Scripture or Canon. Your failure to abide by your own principle proves that your argument is false.

Lets try something different. The book of Matthew contains the story of the virgin Mary and the birth of Jesus. BUT where in Matthew is the claim that it is an inspired book??????

I do not know if or where the book of Matthew teaches that the book is inspired. Perhaps the Bible does claim that the book of Matthew is inspired, but I know that the book of Matthew is inspired Scripture because Catholic Tradition holds it to be inspired, and because Catholic Tradition is authoritative.

Why don't you tell me how you know that Matthew is inspired Scripture? Chapter and verse, please.

 

[Major1]

That post was in response to a different query, i.e. Essentially the question was ..The woman who gives birth to Jesus in rev 12 can't be Mary as the woman is also refered to as having seed/children which the dragon makes war with rev 12:17.
Mary like Sarah in OT is a mother of many. And that does not prompt a rejection of PV Doctrine as also suggested in the question responded to

You said.............
"Mary like Sarah in OT is a mother of many. And that does not prompt a rejection of PV Doctrine as also suggested in the question responded to."

Prove it Biblically!

All we see is opinion after opinion and never a single Bible verse to verify a comment.

If Perpetual Virginity means that Mary was a virgin her whole life even after birthing Jesus, how can Rev. 12:17 then tell us that MARY WAS A MOTHER OF MANY.

The outstanding Christiane teacher and author, Dr. John Waalvord writes......
"That a woman represents Israel is not unusual in the context of the Book of Revelation. Indeed, another woman named Jezebel is portrayed as representing a false religion in Revelation 2:20. A harlot in Revelation 17 represents the apostate church of the end times. In similar fashion, the woman of Revelation 12 represents the nation of Israel.

Note also that the woman mentioned in Revelation 12 “fled into the wilderness where she had a place prepared by God, so that there she might be nourished for one thousand two hundred and sixty days” (verse 6). There is certainly nothing in Mary’s life that remotely resembles what is described in this verse. In context, the verse refers to Israel in the prophetic future."

 

[PeaceB]

What is the chapter and verse where it is found. If you can not prove it, then does that mean the virgin birth is not an inspired event since you can not post the inspired informational information?

No, because I accept Catholic Tradition, which teaches that Mathew is Scripture. Our Tradition also holds that Jesus was born of a virgin.

You reject Catholic Tradition, so you must provide another source for your belief that Matthew is Scripture.

I am pleased that you believe the Book of Hebrews is inspired. I do not believe it is because the Catholic church says so, I believe it because GOD SAID SO.

If we both believe it to be true, what is the point you are trying to make because you have completely left me behind.

I also believe that God said so. But the question is, WHERE did God say so? If God said so in Scripture, then you should be able to show us exactly in Scripture where he said that. But you have not done that. Not even close.

I accept the Tradition of the Catholic Church, as handed down orally from Jesus Christ and the Apostles. That Tradition teaches that Hebrews is Scripture, that Matthew is Scripture, and that perpetual virginity, the assumption, and other Catholic doctrines that you reject are true Christian doctrine.

Since you reject the Tradition of the Catholic Church, you must show us exactly in the Bible where each and every one of your doctrinal beliefs come from. You cannot reject Catholic Tradition on one hand, and then refuse to back up your beliefs with Bible verses on the other hand. You cannot rely on the books that the Catholic Church told you are Scripture as part of her Tradition, and then reject that same Tradition with respect to other doctrines that you disagree with. You must prove everything that you believe from the Bible, or you must accept the validity of Catholic Tradition. You cannot have it both ways.

 

[Panevino]

You said.............
"Mary like Sarah in OT is a mother of many. And that does not prompt a rejection of PV Doctrine as also suggested in the question responded to."

Prove it Biblically!

All we see is opinion after opinion and never a single Bible verse to verify a comment.

If Perpetual Virginity means that Mary was a virgin her whole life even after birthing Jesus, how can Rev. 12:17 then tell us that MARY WAS A MOTHER OF MANY.

The outstanding Christiane teacher and author, Dr. John Waalvord writes......
"That a woman represents Israel is not unusual in the context of the Book of Revelation. Indeed, another woman named Jezebel is portrayed as representing a false religion in Revelation 2:20. A harlot in Revelation 17 represents the apostate church of the end times. In similar fashion, the woman of Revelation 12 represents the nation of Israel.

Note also that the woman mentioned in Revelation 12 “fled into the wilderness where she had a place prepared by God, so that there she might be nourished for one thousand two hundred and sixty days” (verse 6). There is certainly nothing in Mary’s life that remotely resembles what is described in this verse. In context, the verse refers to Israel in the prophetic future."

holy family flee to Egypt as Herod (dragon) seeks to kill /devour the child

 

[Goatee]

Why have you not read what I have already posted? I have answered this question now 3 times for you.

What about Reading comprehension?????

First of all I have NO logic to present what so ever. I read the Bible and teach the Bible. I do not teach religion in any way.

Secondly, YES. For a person to be a Christian, he must depend on the truth of God's Word as the basis for his belief. Christianity is found in the Bible in the life, death, burial and resurrection of Jesus Christ and NOTHING ELSE.

Third....YES, the book of Hebrews is the inspired Word of God.
The Bible clearly claims to be inspired of God. According to 2 Timothy 3:16–17........
“All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness, so that the man of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work.”

Peter expressed the same concept in 2 Peter 1:21..........
“For prophecy never had its origin in the will of man, but men spoke from God as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit.”

Reading comprehension is very important.

These direct statements of the inspiration of the Bible are confirmed by dozens of references throughout the Old and New Testaments. It is actually up to you to either accept them or reject them. All God asks us to do is believe.

I repeat to you what I have stated twice before. Those who attack the written Word of God also attack the incarnate Word of God, Jesus Christ. If the Bible is in error, then Christ is in error too. The two stand or fall together. For this reason evangelical Christians insist that the Bible is indeed the inspired Word of God and that the authors were guided by the Spirit so that they wrote the truth without any error.

Now there is only one reason I can think of that you would attack the inspiration of the book of Hebrews.

You see, what you do not realize is that Theologically speaking, scholars generally regard the book of Hebrews to be second in importance only to Paul's letter to the Romans in the New Testament. No other book so eloquently defines Christ as high priest of Christianity, superior to the Aaronic priesthood, and the fulfillment of the Law and the Prophets. This book presents Christ as the Author and Perfecter of our faith and as a Catholic that just tears up to pieces.

You see, the Bible and especially Hebrews does not prove Catholic teachings and doctrine. In fact there are a lot of things that you as a Catholic accept which can not be found in the Bible at all.

So what has to be done?????? What are you doing????? Cast doubt, deny the truth of the Scriptures and fall on Catholic dogma instead of Bible truth.

Now......would you please post the Bible verse that supports the sinlessness of Mary?

Also, would you post the verses which teach Mary was a virgin after Jesus was born.

Then could you also post the Scriptures which say that Bishops can not be married.

Then maybe you could post those Scriptures about crossing ones self.

Also, I have always wondered where the Rosary came from. Can you post the Bible verse for that action.

I really think you should spend more time trying to validate your beliefs to Scripture truth instead of worrying about the book of Hebrews. But that is just me.

So will you........
1) provide us with a chapter and a verse in Scripture that teaches you those things that you claim are Bible doctrine which I just asked you....(Again).
2) admit that your belief is "an opinion and nothing more", or
3) admit that your logic is faulty.

Which is it?????

As always, your view is of a closed Bible. One where teachings and revelations stop when the Bible is closed!

As a Catholic I truly believe that the Holy Spirit continues to work in the church. Revealing truths and teaching continually.

Scripture as you believe it did not exist for hundreds of years. There was NO BIBLE. People were taught by 'mouth' via the Holy Spirit.

How would you, a Sola Scriture pastor have managed in those days?

 

[Panevino]

You said.............
"Mary like Sarah in OT is a mother of many. And that does not prompt a rejection of PV Doctrine as also suggested in the question responded to."

Prove it Biblically!

All we see is opinion after opinion and never a single Bible verse to verify a comment.

If Perpetual Virginity means that Mary was a virgin her whole life even after birthing Jesus, how can Rev. 12:17 then tell us that MARY WAS A MOTHER OF MANY.

the same way Sarah had 1 child Isaac with Abraham and at the same time they are spiritual mother (isa 51:2) and father of millions.
Per Rev12 Mary mother of Jesus physically and of many others spiritually.

The outstanding Christiane teacher and author, Dr. John Waalvord writes......
"That a woman represents Israel is not unusual in the context of the Book of Revelation. Indeed, another woman named Jezebel is portrayed as representing a false religion in Revelation 2:20. A harlot in Revelation 17 represents the apostate church of the end times. In similar fashion, the woman of Revelation 12 represents the nation of Israel.

yes and personified in Mary

Note also that the woman mentioned in Revelation 12 “fled into the wilderness where she had a place prepared by God, so that there she might be nourished for one thousand two hundred and sixty days” (verse 6). There is certainly nothing in Mary’s life that remotely resembles what is described in this verse. In context, the verse refers to Israel in the prophetic future."

Per my previous post, holy family flee to Egypt as Herod (dragon) sought to kill/devour the child

 

[Phil 1:21]

At the end of the day it comes down to which one you feel is superior, the word of God, or the word of man. As for me, I choose God.

 

[PeaceB]

And I accept the Word of God is the highest form of truth

So do I. We are in agreement.

and the Bible confirms all of its doctrines.

Jesus did and said many other things that are not recorded in Sacred Scripture. Is that not the Word of God?

2 Timothy 3:16..............
"ALL Scripture is the inspired Word of God".

Amen! Now please provide a chapter and a verse that teaches that the letter to the Hebrews is Scripture.

You are definitely suffering from reading comprehension.

Resorting to insults are you? That is so unlike you, Major1. Frankly, I am surprised given your long history of charity on this website.

You can not question the inspiration of Hebrews and then accept the book of Matthew for the same reason. If Hebrews is not inspired then Matthew can not be inspired which brings into the validly of the virgin Mary.

I wrote "I believe that the letter to the Hebrews is Scripture". After this, you wrote "I am pleased that you believe the Book of Hebrews is inspired." I also wrote "I know that the book of Matthew is inspired Scripture". So your claim that I question the inspiration of Hebrews is baseless.

You can not have it both ways. If Matthew is inspired then Hebrews must be as well as they both come under the umbrella of 2 Timoty 3:16.

Please provide me with a Bible verse that states that Matthew and Hebrews "come under the umbrella of 2 Timothy 3:16". You reject Catholic Tradition, so you must prove everything that you believe from Scripture. Chapter and verse, please.

The fact of the matter is that you have no basis for your belief that Matthew and Hebrews are Scripture, except for the Catholic Tradition that tells you so. You have not provided one single verse that states that Hebrews is Scripture. 2 Timothy does not even mention the letter to the Hebrews at all.

You have accepted the words of sinners, men and call them Traditions and YOU have rejected the Word of God. If you are comfortable with that then may the Lord bless you. I will not be your judge.

I wrote "I believe that the letter to the Hebrews is Scripture". After this, you wrote "I am pleased that you believe the Book of Hebrews is inspired." I also wrote "I know that the book of Matthew is inspired Scripture". So your claim that I have rejected the word of God is baseless.

You on the other hand, reject Catholic Tradition, by which the teachings of Jesus and the apostles that are not recorded in Scripture are passed down from generation to generation. So it is you who rejects the word of God.

"But I will not be your judge".

 

[PeaceB]

At the end of the day it comes down to which one you feel is superior, the word of God, or the word of man. As for me, I choose God.

So then, brothers, stand firm and hold to the traditions that you were taught by us, either by our spoken word or by our letter.

 

[PeaceB]

Once again you are in error. Rev. 12:6 says..............
“fled into the wilderness where she had a place prepared by God, so that there she might be nourished for one thousand two hundred and sixty days”.

No where in the gospels can you or anyone else find that the family of Jesus was in Egypt for 1260 days.

13 Now when they had departed, behold, an angel of the Lord appeared to Joseph in a dream and said, “Rise, take the child and his mother, and flee to Egypt, and remain there until I tell you, for Herod is about to search for the child, to destroy him.” 14 And he rose and took the child and his mother by night and departed to Egypt 15 and remained there until the death of Herod. This was to fulfill what the Lord had spoken by the prophet, “Out of Egypt I called my son.”

 

[Goatee]

Major1

How would you have managed in the days when there was no Bible? Approx 300 years!

Tell us?

 

[PeaceB]

It is customary to tell us all what the Book, chapter and verse is my friend.

That would be the tradition, now wouldn't it?

 

[Major1]

That would be the tradition, now wouldn't it?

NO. It would be proper and civil and the correct thing to do. Why should I have to post the Scriptures YOU posted?

But you knew that already didn't you my friend?

 

[PeaceB]

Try again!!!!!! Where are the words........"Stay there for One Thousand Two Hundred and Sixty Days".

And "Herod" is not mentioned in Rev. 12 at all.

And nowhere does Scripture state that the Church got pregnant and gave birth to a child.

1260 days is not to be taken literally. It is meant to indicate a period of persecution.

Personally, I interpret the woman in Revelation 12 as a symbol of Mary, Israel, and the Church. There are different layers of symbolism, and you can see that elsewhere in the book of Revelation.

Remember YOU brought this up, not me. YOU said that Hebrews was not "Inspired" because the word "Inspired" is not found in Hebrews.

No. I never wrote that. That is a baseless claim. And I have clarified the point on numerous occasions now. The fact that you continue to make the assertion is amazing.

 

[PeaceB]

NO. It would be proper and civil and the correct thing to do. Why should I have to post the Scriptures YOU posted?

But you knew that already didn't you my friend?

You do not have to do anything. Nobody has a gun to your head.

 

[Major1]

You do not have to do anything. Nobody has a gun to your head.

And that is what I meant by "civil" or rather the lack there of.

 

[Major1]

She is a spiritual mother like Sarah in the OT

What book, what chapter and verse??????

If you can not supply a Bible Scripture your post then is nothing but an opinion and we all have those.