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.
Albion said:No, but you chose to answer the question asking about it.
You usually answer such questions by citing the official position of the Catholic Church. What is ITS position, then?
As I recall, Dollarsbill asked the same question.
I didn't say that and I can't judge such a person. I thought that the question I was answering was about those people who left the Catholic Church, whether or not they can be saved. My answer is, I hope so. But if they know that the Roman Catholic Church is the true Church, they are obligated to return.
dollarsbill said:Are you saying they're not saved?
We've heard that before. So then, we who reject the Catholic church doctrines are still saved?I thought I did give the Church's position, which is, people are not held responsible if out of their ignorance they don't realize the Catholic Church is the true Church.
dollarsbill said:We've heard that before. So then, we who reject the Catholic church doctrines are still saved?
I thought I did give the Church's position, which is, people are not held responsible if out of their ignorance they don't realize the Catholic Church is the true Church.
We've heard that before. So then, we who reject the Catholic church doctrines are still saved?
Albion said:Ah. We are protected by our ignorance, just like the pagans who've never heard of Christ. That would also mean that we are not judged on anything else we do, either, so long as we mean well.
SolomonVII said:Saved by your ignorance, one might add.
So long as you follow the example and teachings of Jesus Christ to the best of your ability.
How so?And, no, Christians are not in the same category is pagans..
The Scriptures are God-breathed, the Council didn't "decide" which was God-breathed, they search for it. They canonized the Scriptures but they did not decide what was Scripture. You might claim differently because they "compiled it" but you can't decided something that was God-breathed. Scripture was God-breathed before 314 AD, and those earlier Christians had not only the Scriptures but the gift of the Holy Spirit AND some where blessed with being eyewitnesses to the events. Rest assure, the Holy Scripture was here BEFORE 314 AD.The 1st Century Christians had many "letters" that were circulated around to the different churches. Yes, these were in existence and they were divinely inspired. There were many other writings passed around which were very edifying.
Finally, in the 3rd Century, a Church Council gathered to decide which of the writings ought to be considered Holy Scipture. This was called canonization and the resulting collection was known as the canon--ie., the Holy Scriptures.
So we think that the Scriptures were "authorized" by the Church? Did not the Holy Spirit write those Scriptures through men? Are not the Scriptures God-breathed? Who has the authority? Was it not GOD who authorized those writings? How does the Scriptures, authorized by God, transferred authorization because it was "compiled" by men? Think about this, the Old Testament was compiled by the Jews before 314AD, does that mean those who compiled it had "authority"?The point is that the Church is what made those decisions and therefore "compiled" the Scriptures and put its stamp of authority on those Scriptures. So the answer to the question about who was the authority before Scripture was canonized is: the Church. The Bible was canonized by the authority of the Church.
I"m not quite sure what you typed--don't know if you edit before you wrote to me--, but you didn't actually show anything about Holy Traditions or the authority of the church, you simply transferred authorization to the men who compiled Scripture and followed that tradition.So this supports the notion that it is not Scripture alone that determines doctrine. It is the combination of Holy Scripture, Holy Tradition, and the authority of the Church.
That doesn't answer the question, was the "bible" here even though not compiled before it was "compiled" in 314AD?Does that make sense?
What does it mean when it was asked: "What was used to judge before the Bible was compiled"?
LOL, thank God for God's word.Its a reinactment of Acts 15 all over again
Certain men arose saying
"Except ye believe the assumption", ye cannot be saved.
Their letters might ressemble this
Forasmuch as we have heard, that certain which went out from us have troubled you with words, subverting your souls, saying, Ye must believe in the assumption or spend eternity in hell: to whom we gave no such commandment:
Albion said:So, if I consider Transubstantiation, Mariolatry, and Purgatory, for example, unscriptural and wrong, I'm still OK with God because I sincerely believe that. This seems an odd two-track path to salvation, if you ask me, in that you are obligated to believe such things under pain of sin and I am not, quite apart from whether or not they are true. However, that's just my reaction, not a complaint about your answer.
How so?
How so? Christians have entered into the life of Christ through Baptism.
That doesn't answer the question, was the "bible" here even though not compiled before it was "compiled" in 314AD?[/QUOTE]daydreamergurl15 said:The Scriptures are God-breathed, the Council didn't "decide" which was God-breathed, they search for it. They canonized the Scriptures but they did not decide what was Scripture. You might claim differently because they "compiled it" but you can't decided something that was God-breathed. Scripture was God-breathed before 314 AD, and those earlier Christians had not only the Scriptures but the gift of the Holy Spirit AND some where blessed with being eyewitnesses to the events. Rest assure, the Holy Scripture was here BEFORE 314 AD.
Yeah, there were some false writings out there but the Apostles warned the people of just that and told them to stay focus on the gospel that was being preached to them.
So we think that the Scriptures were "authorized" by the Church? Did not the Holy Spirit write those Scriptures through men? Are not the Scriptures God-breathed? Who has the authority? Was it not GOD who authorized those writings? How does the Scriptures, authorized by God, transferred authorization because it was "compiled" by men? Think about this, the Old Testament was compiled by the Jews before 314AD, does that mean those who compiled it had "authority"?
I"m not quite sure what you typed--don't know if you edit before you wrote to me--, but you didn't actually show anything about Holy Traditions or the authority of the church, you simply transferred authorization to the men who compiled Scripture and followed that tradition.
Does that make sense?
It's part of the topic. We're speaking about the word of God.1. What is and is not "Scripture" is not the topic of Sola Scriptura or of this thread. If you are disturbed and troubled by the reality that not a single other denomination agrees with the RC one on this matter (and never has), I can understand that - but that's a different subject for another day and thread. The praxis of the Rule of Scripture doesn't define what is Scripture any more than the praxis of the Rule of Law defines what is Law.
Read what I was replying to, maybe then it will make sense why I said what I said.2. It's not the first century. It's the 21st. Surely, you know that.
If you don't want to be part of the conversation I am having, do me a favor and don't quote me.So what? If you have other letters that Paul penned and believe them to be Scripture and thus are protesting your denomination's decision at Trent in the 16th Century, then start a thread and propose that such letter be added to the list of books your denomination regards as Scripture. Or even if you think such a letter is not Scripture but has some relevance to you in spite of it not being from God, then start a thread and post the entire verbatim content of such book.
That doesn't answer the question, was the "bible" here even though not compiled before it was "compiled" in 314AD
The following verse shows that the Church has authority, being the pillar of truth:
1 Timothy 3:15 CPDV
"But, if I am delayed, you should know the manner in which it is necessary to conduct yourself in the house of God, which is the Church of the living God, the pillar and the foundation of truth."
That doesn't answer the question, was the "bible" here even though not compiled before it was "compiled" in 314AD?
The following verse shows that the Church has authority, being the pillar of truth:
1 Timothy 3:15 CPDV
"But, if I am delayed, you should know the manner in which it is necessary to conduct yourself in the house of God, which is the Church of the living God, the pillar and the foundation of truth."
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?