The Bible is not a Catechetical Book!

[redleghunter]

Frankly looks like debate.

 

[JesusLovesOurLady]

I do not care one little bit if you choose to argue with me. It is however very sad to see you or for that matter so entrenched in their "religion" that they argue with God and His Words as found in the Bible.

YOU as a present day Catholic want people to believe that the YOU and the Catholic Church has faith in the Bible, and that it is the church of the Bible, and encourages its members to read and study the Bible. However, when Catholics try to disprove the Bible as the only authority in religion, their true attitude toward the Bible is revealed just as you have just done.

YOU and The Catholic Church oppose the Bible as the sole guide and standard in religion and whenever it tries to disprove it as such, its true attitude toward it is manifested.

No, YOU attack the Holy Bible, by trying to twist its teaching to say that it it the sole infallible authority, when all it says, is that it's an infallible authority, as I have clearly demonstrated.

The Catholic church itself has said..............
"Is it not strange that if Christianity were to be learned from the Bible only, that Christ himself never wrote a line or commanded his apostles to write; for their divine commission was not to write but to preach the gospel." (Question Box, p. 70).

"Christ gave his disciples no command to write, but only to teach." (Catholic Encyclopedia, Vol. 5, p. 767).

The only reason why the Catholic Church would say that was to establish that the Bible alone is not the standard of authority.

And to affirm reality, which the main reason, I'm Catholic, I want to live in conformity with reality, and that means being Catholic, even if the Church is under the tyrannical grips of the modernists.

Christ didn't actually take a pen in His hand and write the New Testament; nevertheless, it is His production. The Old Testament declares that God built the temple in 1 Kings 8:16,20, but do YOU think that God actually came down and build it Himself???????

He built it through the agency of men and believers in God. Likewise, the written New Testament is the will of Christ. He wrote it through those commissioned by Him. It contains His laws as seen in 1 Cor. 14:37 and produces the faith which brings life in His name as recorded by John 20:30-31.

Yes, it is God's will that we have infallible authority of Sacred Scripture, and YES it was through the agency of men and believers, but why would he dispose of these human agents when the Bible was written? He didn't dispose of the House of David, au contraire, He made the flesh and blood of the House of David His living temple, Our Lady, and He became incarnate in the flesh and blood of the House of David through her! Likewise the Catholic Church that was used by God to write and canonize the Holy Bible are also His Mystical Body!

Thus, the Catholic Church and YOU are incorrect when they say Christ never commissioned His apostles to write. In many books of the prophets of the Old Testament there are no commands to write, but it was God's will that they do so in order to preserve their words for all generations.

The Catholic officials and YOU have assumed that the command to the apostles to teach excluded written instruction. However, writing the inspired Scriptures was part of the work of the apostles and prophets in delivering God's message to man.

My point was, that if Jesus taught Sola Scriptura, He would have placed heavy emphasis on having the Apostles write things down. Instead, He didn't emphasize it, which implies that what was important, was not necessarily the Bible, but that Our Lord's Gospel be preached, by both, spoken and and written word, as well as deed.

In John 12:48 Jesus taught that His word would be the standard of judgment in the last day. He said.........
"He that despiseth me, and receiveth not my words, hath one that judgeth him, the word that I have spoken, the same shall judge him in the last day."
(Catholic Rheims Translation).

Companion verses show that men will be judged by "the gospel" in Rom. 2:16, and "the law of liberty" in James 2:12, and "the books" in Rev. 20:12. All of these are similar and reveal that men will be judged by the New Testament of Christ in the last day.

Then you best repent and believe in the Holy Gospel, for you are resisting it in the name of Sola Scriptura, a tradition of men!

 

[JesusLovesOurLady]

I've got to go, I've just received word that at least one of my friends is struggling and needs my support.

I'll be back later.

 

[redleghunter]

My point was, that if Jesus taught Sola Scriptura, He would have placed heavy emphasis on having the Apostles write things down. Instead, He didn't emphasize it, which implies that what was important, was not necessarily the Bible, but that Our Lord's Gospel be preached, by both, spoken and and written word, as well as deed.

Yet they (the apostles) did write things down....The New Testament. Quote below the pic in signature confirms this.

 

[W2L]

Presbyteros is simply Greek for priest, as any dictionary will affirm. "hiereus" is for the OT priests that fell into disuse, which is why you don't see "hiereus" in the NT. The reason you are so angry over this matter is that your spiritual forefathers abolished the NT priesthood. Now you want to blame the CC.

1 Peter 2:9New King James Version (NKJV)
9 But you are a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, His own special people, that you may proclaim the praises of Him who called you out of darkness into His marvelous light;

 

[redleghunter]

Presbyteros is simply Greek for priest, as any dictionary will affirm. "hiereus" is for the OT priests that fell into disuse, which is why you don't see "hiereus" in the NT

Not accurate.

Luke chapter 1:5

There was in the days of Herod, the king of Judaea, a certain priest named Zacharias, of the course of Abia: and his wife was of the daughters of Aaron, and her name was Elisabeth.

Lexicon :: Strong's G2409 - hiereus

Strong’s Definitions
ἱερεύς hiereús, hee-er-yooce'; from G2413; a priest (literally or figuratively):—(high) priest.

Therefore hiereus still used in the NT.

Tit 1:5 - For this cause left I thee in Crete, that thou shouldest set in order the things that are wanting, and ordain elders in every city, as I had appointed thee:

Lexicon :: Strong's G4245 - presbyteros

Strong’s Definitions
πρεσβύτερος presbýteros, pres-boo'-ter-os; comparative of πρέσβυς présbys (elderly); older; as noun, a senior; specially, an Israelite Sanhedrist (also figuratively, member of the celestial council) or Christian "presbyter":—elder(-est), old.


Not a priest.

 

[JesusLovesOurLady]

Yet they (the apostles) did write things down....The New Testament. Quote below the pic in signature confirms this.

Like I said, that's not my point.

 

[JesusLovesOurLady]

My dear friend. You beating "Traditions" to death.

NO ONE is saying that traditions are evil or wrong or sin.

The problem is that when MAN MADE traditions replace the directions given in the Bible.

That is the issue and that is what "Sola Scripture" tries to eliminate.

These Traditions are not "man made" but are of God, and develop organically overtime, some of them, like the Holy Rosary as attacked below, (which saved Europe from a Muslim invasion 446 years ago, last Saturday, see here: Feast Of Our Lady Of The Rosary | Christian Forums) spring in whole, or in part, from Sacred Scriptures themselves. But this isn't what we're debating here.

Deuteronomy 4:2.......
"Ye shall not ADD UNTO THE WORD which I command you neither shall ye take away from it.............".

Here's an interesting passage:

For I testify to every one that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book: If any man shall add to these things, God shall add unto him the plagues written in this book.
And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from these things that are written in this book.
Revelations 22:18-19 DR
​

So it's worse to take away words from Divine Revelation, than to add them, so if a group of Christians were to say... tear seven books out of the Bible, we should be more fearful of those folk, than Christians who allegedly add stuff. But that's another topic for another time.

May I also point out to you the words of Paul in 1 Timothy 4:1-3...........
"Now the Spirit speaks expressly that in the last days some shall depart fro the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits and the doctrines of devils, speaking lies in hypocrisy having their conscience seared with a hot iron............FORBIDDING TO MARRY, and commanding to abstain from meats.........".

Now having read that, I hope that you know that the Catholic Church forbids its Bishops and priests to marry.

Saint Paul never married either, is he condemning himself here?

Again..........this is ADDING to the Scriptures!!!!

No, if what you said here was true, which it's not -Again, St. Paul never married, so if this were true, St. Paul would be guilty of the very thing he is condemning!- this wouldn't be adding to Scripture, this would be disobeying.

And yes, I'm not afraid to say this, because I know that I and the Catholic Church live in conformity with Divine Revelation which reveals itself through the Sacred Scriptures which do not contradict, Sacred Tradition, or the Magisterium! You however do, as you however do, you follow Sola Scriptura, and fail to defend it as Biblically sound.

Now as for Jannes and Jambres, may I say to you that they are the names of the two magicians who stood against Moses. Exodus 7:11 says to us................
"Then Pharaoh also called the wise men and the socerers, now the magicians of Egypt...........".

Their names were actually preserved in a Targum which is an Aramaic paraphrase of a portion of the Hebrew old Test. and that is why Paul knew their names as recorded in 2 Timothy 3:8.

Yes, Jannes and Mambres, are in the Bible, just as are Devotion to Mary, and Purgatory, it's just that, they're not explicit. The fact that you refer to the Targum, just reinforces my argument that Saint Paul is quoting Tradition, Sacred Tradition, Sacred Scripture, and the Magisterium, all work together to teach us the Holy Gospel of Jesus Christ, and Divine Revelation.

 

[JesusLovesOurLady]

Does anyone want to still keep trying to defend Sola Scriptura? Or shall I bring at that proof-text for one of the most important Dogmas in the Catholic Faith, and have you try and attack it?

 

[PeaceByJesus]

This is a rant. Cut it down to one or two topics, not rattle off 5+ topics in one post that would take 5 pages to answer.

When you post provocative assertive propaganda then sometimes it finally needs to be refuted as a descriptive list, rather than a link, while you posted about 30 links, taking up about as much space, in lieu of an argument.

 

[PeaceByJesus]

Presbyteros is simply Greek for priest, as any dictionary will affirm. "hiereus" is for the OT priests that fell into disuse, which is why you don't see "hiereus" in the NT.

Wrong. Orthodox historian scholar John Anthony McGuckin admits that "the word "priesthood" is itself a corruption of the Greek "presbyter." (John Anthony McGuckin, "The Orthodox Church: An Introduction to its History, Doctrine, and Spiritual Culture)

Russell Jonas Grigaitis (O.F.S.) (while yet trying to defend the use of "priest"), informs,

"The Greek word for this office is...[hiereus], which can be literally translated into Latin as sacerdos [as for kohen]. First century Christians [actually the Holy Spirit who inspired writers] felt that their special type of hiereus (sacerdos) was so removed from the original that they gave it a new name, presbuteros (presbyter). Unfortunately, sacerdos didn't evolve into an English word, but the word priest [from old English "preost"] took on its definition." (Russell Jonas Grigaitis)

The problem is Catholicism usually translates both "hiereus" and "presbuteros" as "priest" (which the RC Douay Rheims Bible inconsistently calls them: Acts 20:17; Titus 1:5), which means that the distinction the Holy Spirit provided by never using the distinctive term “hiereus” for NT presbuteros (and never manifesting them as having the Catholic unique sacerdotal function) is lost.

which is why you don't see "hiereus" in the NT.

Maybe you are referring to see the Greek word, but the words “hiereus” and “archiereus" ("priest" and "high priest" as in Heb. 4:15; 10:11) are used by the Holy Spirit distinctively for a separate sacerdotal (sacrificing) class in the New Testament (over 280 times total*, mainly as archiereus”).

The reason you are so angry over this matter is that your spiritual forefathers abolished the NT priesthood. Now you want to blame the CC.

There you go again, resorting to your vicious fallacious mind reading. You should know is just makes you look like a desperate cultist, who assumes anyone who dares disagree with the object of your devotion must be driven by a malevolent angry motive, and never love for Truth, and who thus defends teachings we agree on since that are of Scripture.

 

[JesusLovesOurLady]

My internet connection has been acting up a bit lately, I think I'll be okay, but just to let you know, if it takes awhile for me to respond (although today was actually quite, I thank the Lord my God, the God of Mary for this success) this is probably the reason why. Although, tomorrow, I'll be at my apartment so things will be quite different tomorrow, regardless.

 

[redleghunter]

Does anyone want to still keep trying to defend Sola Scriptura? Or shall I bring at that proof-text for one of the most important Dogmas in the Catholic Faith, and have you try and attack it?

I'll be honest. Sola Scriptura has been defended. See how that works.

I am frankly disappointed you have not responded to the many unanswered posts which give a firm foundation that both Christ and His apostles were firmly rooted in presenting Holy Scriptures to refute the traditions of man and were cited hundreds of times in the NT to proclaim Christ as Lord and Savior to lost souls. They did so using TaNaKh which shows we can find Christ's Gospel and His commands for holy living in the OT. See Luke 24:44-50.

The apostles taught from Holy Scriptures endued from power on High and that right there is how we test truth claims...The wholly Inspired word of God.

And I quote:

“The phrase “the word of God” occurs over forty times in the New Testament. It is equated with the Old Testament (Mark 7:13). It was what Jesus preached (Luke 5:1). It was the message the apostles taught (Acts 4:31; 6:2). It was the word the Samaritans received (Acts 8:14) as given by the apostles (Acts 8:25). It was the message the Gentiles received as preached by Peter (Acts 11:1). It was the word Paul preached on his first missionary journey (Acts 13:5, 7, 44, 48-49; 15:35-36), his second missionary journey (Acts 16:32; 17:13; 18:11), and his third missionary journey (Acts 19:10). It was the focus of Luke in the books of Acts, who recounted its wide and rapid spread (Acts 6:7; 12:24; 19:20). Paul was also careful to tell the Corinthians that he spoke the word as it was given from God, that it had not been adulterated , and that it was a manifestation of the truth (2 Corinthians 2:17; 4:2). And Paul acknowledged it as the source of his preaching (Colossians 1:25; 1 Thessalonians 2:13).” (Biblical Doctrine a Systematic Summary of Bible Truth; John MacArthur and Richard Mayhue; chapter 2)​

I was Catholic raised, faithful weekly mass goer and even in the summer went to mass during the week with my mother. I was educated in Catholic schools to include a in a very rigorous Jesuit university. What is happening with your posts here on a discussion thread is not debate.

1. You started out with a defective definition of Sola Scriptura. Then when given the proper definition continued with the defective definition. Right there if we were debating at a dais you would already have lost.

2. You fended off counter arguments about the RC magisterium as not relevant to the discussion. Which means you created a situation where no one could debate the alternative you implied as above Sola Scriptura---An infallible magisterium Sola Eccelsia. Which I will note was another debate ender as you limited the scope of the discussion to your preconceived conclusion.

3. This venue is not for debating as you wanted it to be. Maybe you knew that as you chose what you wanted to reply to and ignored a multitude of counter arguments which directly addressed your OP assertions and arguments. These discussion threads will have multiple posters and it is quite easy to pick and choose and even honestly miss several posts. I recommended that you may want to use the Formal Debate Forum to propose what you did here. It is a one on one debate format where the challenger and challenged work out the scope and timeline of the debate and a staff member opens a thread only for the two debaters. I believe you said you were in college. If so you will be familiar with such a debate format.

Finally, this is not an ad hominem attacking you. I really think you wanted to get an academic experience from posting here. I hope what I wrote will be well received and not seen as unkind. I love Catholics. Most of my family is Catholic and we don't flame each other during the holidays. We usually focus on the Love of Christ and His Grace and Mercy. It's great to debate or discuss theology but not at the level where we provoke each other to anger. Our time is more wisely spent reaching lost souls with the Gospel of Grace and living the lives of a new creation in Jesus Christ (2 Corinthians 5:17) (Romans 8:2-6).

 

[PeaceByJesus]

Does anyone want to still keep trying to defend Sola Scriptura? Or shall I bring at that proof-text for one of the most important Dogmas in the Catholic Faith, and have you try and attack it?

If you we not blind or blinded you could see that,

1. From the time when He chose to reveal His will to an entire nation then He preserved it in writing, which is His manifest means of authoritative preservation. (Exodus 17:14; 34:1,27; Deuteronomy 10:4; 17:18; 27:3; 31:24; Joshua 1:8; 2 Chronicles 34:15,18-19; Ps. 19:7-11; 119; John 20:31; Acts 17:11; Revelation 1:1; 20:12, 15;Matthew 4:5-7; 22:29; Lk. 24:44,45; Acts 17:2,11; 18:28; 28:23)

It was not because oral tradition preserved the Word of God that brought about a national revival, but because of reading the wholly inspired-of-God written word:

And Hilkiah answered and said to Shaphan the scribe, I have found the book of the law in the house of the Lord. And Hilkiah delivered the book to Shaphan. (2 Chronicles 34:15)

Then Shaphan the scribe told the king, saying, Hilkiah the priest hath given me a book. And Shaphan read it before the king. And it came to pass, when the king had heard the words of the law, that he rent his clothes. (2 Chronicles 34:18-19)

2. As is abundantly evidenced, the word of God/the Lord was normally written, even if sometimes first being spoken, and that as written, Scripture became the transcendent supreme standard for obedience and testing and establishing truth claims as the wholly Divinely inspired and assured, Word of God.

3. It was not oral tradition that the psalmist exalts in 175 verses in one psalm alone. The Lord did not quote oral tradition in refuting the devil, (Mt. 4) or Jewish leadership, (Mt. 22) or in substantiating His mission to His disciples and opened their understanding to, but Scripture. (Lk. 24:44,45) It was not oral tradition that Peter quoted as authoritative in preaching the gospel, (Acts 2) or that Paul reasoned out of, or that noble truth lovers ascertained the veracity of his oral preaching by, or that Apollos was mighty in, and showed that Jesus was the Christ by. (Acts 17:2,11; 18:25,28)

It was not oral transmission that Paul told Timothy that was able to make him wise unto salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus, (2 Timothy 3:15) and was wholly inspired of God and that was "profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works." (2 Timothy 3:16-17)

4. Oral transmission had its place in passing on what would be written, and we know what is valid ans essential that God wanted to be known by its writing. Men such as the apostles could preach as wholly inspired of God and provided new public revelation, neither of which Rome claims to do.

5. While not claiming to preach as wholly inspired of God, SS preachers themselves can enjoin obedience to oral preaching of Scriptural Truths, yet even the veracity of the words of apostles was subject to testing by Scripture. (Acts 17:11)

6. As for sufficiency in providing what is needed for the life of faith, Scripture formally provides what is needed for regeneration so that a soul may be become born again by reading such a message as Acts 10:36-43, and also see clear moral teachings. Yet Scripture also materially provides for reason, and the "due use of ordinary means" by which unclear meanings may be deduced via the illumination of the Holy Spirit. But while providing all the Truth needed for obedience and growth in grace and salvation (which God always did from the beginning, while able to provide more) this does not mean that all have this deductive ability, and Scripture provides for teachers, the magisterial office, etc., as well as the light of nature. And which (as evidenced by Reformed continuists) SS need not be opposed to Go "speaking" to souls today (at least during the offering) but not as adding to Scripture or giving new doctrine.

7. Scripture also provides for additional wholly inspired revelation being written and established as being of God, by which we have the NT canon.

8. Thus it is manifest that the wholly inspired word of God is alone the supreme sufficient standard, and that as written this was the transcendent standard for faith and obedience, and as the words of popes and councils of Catholicism do not speak as wholly inspired of God nor provide new revelation then they cannot be equal to Scripture.

9. Moreover, the veracity of what popes and councils of Catholicism says is itself based on what they say of themselves, that they possess ensured perpetual magisterial infallibility which is a novel and unScriptural premise. Thus the Assumption is made a matter of required belief, Jude 1:3Jude 1:3 , where it would be found if it was true.

10. And this presumption of ensured perpetual magisterial infallibility is also based upon the presupposition that an infallible magisterium is essential for assuredly correctly knowing what is of God (both men and writings), but which effectively invalidates the NT church, since it began with souls having correctly ascertained what was of God (both men and writings), and in dissent from the historical magisterial stewards of express Divine revelation.

Thus your foundation premise and argument has gone down in flames, or else the NT church must.

 

[Major1]

These Traditions are not "man made" but are of God, and develop organically overtime, some of them, like the Holy Rosary as attacked below, (which saved Europe from a Muslim invasion 446 years ago, last Saturday, see here: Feast Of Our Lady Of The Rosary | Christian Forums) spring in whole, or in part, from Sacred Scriptures themselves. But this isn't what we're debating here.


Here's an interesting passage:

For I testify to every one that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book: If any man shall add to these things, God shall add unto him the plagues written in this book.
And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from these things that are written in this book.
Revelations 22:18-19 DR
​

So it's worse to take away words from Divine Revelation, than to add them, so if a group of Christians were to say... tear seven books out of the Bible, we should be more fearful of those folk, than Christians who allegedly add stuff. But that's another topic for another time.


Saint Paul never married either, is he condemning himself here?


No, if what you said here was true, which it's not -Again, St. Paul never married, so if this were true, St. Paul would be guilty of the very thing he is condemning!- this wouldn't be adding to Scripture, this would be disobeying.

And yes, I'm not afraid to say this, because I know that I and the Catholic Church live in conformity with Divine Revelation which reveals itself through the Sacred Scriptures which do not contradict, Sacred Tradition, or the Magisterium! You however do, as you however do, you follow Sola Scriptura, and fail to defend it as Biblically sound.


Yes, Jannes and Mambres, are in the Bible, just as are Devotion to Mary, and Purgatory, it's just that, they're not explicit. The fact that you refer to the Targum, just reinforces my argument that Saint Paul is quoting Tradition, Sacred Tradition, Sacred Scripture, and the Magisterium, all work together to teach us the Holy Gospel of Jesus Christ, and Divine Revelation.

YOU are completely in error my friend. The dogmas and triditions of the Catholic church are all man made. You can claim that they are not all you want to but you are speaking only to yourself as those of us who you are speaking with know better.

Purgatory.
Sinlessness of Mary.
Perpetual virginity.
Rosary.
Unmarried Bishops.
Bowing to Statues.
Praying to the dead.

ALL of those and more are ALL man made teachings by the RCC!!!!!!

I would also say to you that if you spent less time reading RCC websites, and copy and pasting them and instead actually did some Bible study you would learn some things.

You insist that Paul was not married but it is NOT YOU who said that. It came from a RCC web site blog!!!!!

With a little Bible study allow me to show you what I learned many years ago my friend.

1 Corinthians 7:8...............
"But I say to the unmarried and to the widows: It is good for them if they remain even as I am".

1. Paul puts himself in the category of being "unmarried".
2. The word "unmarried" translates the Greek word agamos.
3. Paul uses the term agamos to refer to those who have been married but now are no longer married.
4. The context of agamos in 1 Corinthians 7:8 is dominated by Paul's instructions to those who are married or who have been married.
5. The Greek word for "widower" was not in use during the Koine period.
6. The word for "unmarried" appears to be the masculine word for someone who has lost a spouse.
7. As a good Pharisee, it is highly unlikely that Paul would have been single his entire life.

A member of the Sanhedrin HAD TO BE A MARRIED MAN!

What have we now learned? Paul was without a doubt a WIDOWER!

 

[Major1]

No, YOU attack the Holy Bible, by trying to twist its teaching to say that it it the sole infallible authority, when all it says, is that it's an infallible authority, as I have clearly demonstrated.


And to affirm reality, which the main reason, I'm Catholic, I want to live in conformity with reality, and that means being Catholic, even if the Church is under the tyrannical grips of the modernists.


Yes, it is God's will that we have infallible authority of Sacred Scripture, and YES it was through the agency of men and believers, but why would he dispose of these human agents when the Bible was written? He didn't dispose of the House of David, au contraire, He made the flesh and blood of the House of David His living temple, Our Lady, and He became incarnate in the flesh and blood of the House of David through her! Likewise the Catholic Church that was used by God to write and canonize the Holy Bible are also His Mystical Body!


My point was, that if Jesus taught Sola Scriptura, He would have placed heavy emphasis on having the Apostles write things down. Instead, He didn't emphasize it, which implies that what was important, was not necessarily the Bible, but that Our Lord's Gospel be preached, by both, spoken and and written word, as well as deed.


Then you best repent and believe in the Holy Gospel, for you are resisting it in the name of Sola Scriptura, a tradition of men!

As I said before, I do hope that you do not run away as you do more harm to the RCC than good.

You just said.............
"My point was, that if Jesus taught Sola Scriptura, He would have placed heavy emphasis on having the Apostles write things down."

In an attempt to support Roman Catholic Tradition, and discredit Sola Scriptura, you may hear the claim made by Catholics that Jesus never told any of his disciples to write anything down, and clearly never wrote any of the scriptures Himself. For example:

"Is it not strange that if Christianity were to be learned from the Bible only, that Christ Himself never wrote a line, nor ever commanded His apostles to write. Only five of the twelve did write; for their divine commission was not to write, but to preach and teach the gospel (Matt. xxviii. 19; Mark xvi. 15; Luke x. 16; Acts i. 8). They wrote merely to confirm their teaching, never giving the slightest intimation that Christianity was to rest solely on a Bible foundation."

Source: The Question-Box Answers, by Rev. Bertrand L. Conway, of the Paulist Fathers, copyright 1903 by "The Missionary Society of St. Paul the Apostle in the State of New York", published by the Catholic Book Exchange, 120 West 60th Street, New York, Nihil Obstat: Remigius Lafort, S.T.L., Censor Deputatus, Imprimatur: Joannes M. Farley, Archiep. Neo Ebor., February, 1903, pgs. 69-70.

Rev 1:11 Saying, I am Alpha and Omega, the first and the last: and, What thou seest, write in a book, and send it unto the seven churches which are in Asia; unto Ephesus, and unto Smyrna, and unto Pergamos, and unto Thyatira, and unto Sardis, and unto Philadelphia, and unto Laodicea.

Rev 1:19 Write the things which thou hast seen, and the things which are, and the things which shall be hereafter;

Rev 2:1 Unto the angel of the church of Ephesus write; These things saith he that holdeth the seven stars in his right hand, who walketh in the midst of the seven golden candlesticks;

Rev 2:8 And unto the angel of the church in Smyrna write; These things saith the first and the last, which was dead, and is alive;

Rev 2:12 And to the angel of the church in Pergamos write; These things saith he which hath the sharp sword with two edges;

Rev 2:18 And unto the angel of the church in Thyatira write; These things saith the Son of God, who hath his eyes like unto a flame of fire, and his feet are like fine brass;

Rev 3:1 And unto the angel of the church in Sardis write; These things saith he that hath the seven Spirits of God, and the seven stars; I know thy works, that thou hast a name that thou livest, and art dead.

Rev 3:7 And to the angel of the church in Philadelphia write; These things saith he that is holy, he that is true, he that hath the key of David, he that openeth, and no man shutteth; and shutteth, and no man openeth;

Rev 3:14 And unto the angel of the church of the Laodiceans write; These things saith the Amen, the faithful and true witness, the beginning of the creation of God;

Rev 14:13 And I heard a voice from heaven saying unto me, Write, Blessed are the dead which die in the Lord from henceforth: Yea, saith the Spirit, that they may rest from their labours; and their works do follow them.

Rev 19:9 And he saith unto me, Write, Blessed are they which are called unto the marriage supper of the Lamb. And he saith unto me, These are the true sayings of God.

Rev 21:5 And he that sat upon the throne said, Behold, I make all things new. And he said unto me, Write: for these words are true and faithful.

So, twelve times, and to seven different church communities, John the Revelator is directed by Jesus to write what became scripture.

Well, did Jesus ever write anything down Himself, in His own hand?
Yes, He most certainly did!

Ex 31:18 (KJV) WRITTEN BY THE FINGER OF GOD...................
"And he gave unto Moses, when he had made an end of communing with him upon mount Sinai, two tables of testimony, tables of stone, written with the finger of God. "

John 8:1-9 JESUS WRITES THE SINS OF THE SCRIBES AND PHARISEES ON THE GROUND FOR ALL TO SEE......................
"they said, tempting him, that they might have to accuse him. But Jesus stooped down, and with his finger wrote on the ground, as though he heard them not.
So when they continued asking him, he lifted up himself, and said unto them, He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her.
And again he stooped down, and wrote on the ground."

Several instances of Jesus telling a prophet to write a book are also found in the Old Testament:

Exo 17:14...........
" And the LORD said unto Moses, Write this for a memorial in a book, and rehearse it in the ears of Joshua: for I will utterly put out the remembrance of Amalek from under heaven."

Exo 34:27 ..............
"And the LORD said unto Moses, Write thou these words: for after the tenor of these words I have made a covenant with thee and with Israel."

Jer 30:1-2..............
"The word that came to Jeremiah from the LORD, saying, Thus speaketh the LORD God of Israel, saying, Write thee all the words that I have spoken unto thee in a book.

Jer 36:1...............
" And it came to pass in the fourth year of Jehoiakim the son of Josiah king of Judah, that this word came unto Jeremiah from the LORD, saying, Take thee a roll of a book, and write therein all the words that I have spoken unto thee against Israel, and against Judah, and against all the nations, from the day I spake unto thee, from the days of Josiah, even unto this day.

Isa 8:1........
" Moreover the LORD said unto me, Take thee a great roll, and write in it with a man's pen concerning Mahershalalhashbaz.

Hab 2:1-3.........
"I will stand upon my watch, and set me upon the tower, and will watch to see what he will say unto me, and what I shall answer when I am reproved. And the LORD answered me, and said, Write the vision, and make it plain upon tables, that he may run that readeth it.

Rev 22:19....................
" And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book".

To those who would amend the word of God through the addition of the traditions and doctrines of men, even claiming their traditions are equal with scripture as the word of God and necessary for salvation, let them heed the warning given by Jesus Christ Himself.

 

[Major1]

There are plenty of pro life warriors in all Christian denominations Roman Catholic including. What our Roman Catholic friends will tell us is those who are pro choice are not in keeping with church teachings. They are correct to say so.

The issue I believe @PeaceByJesus makes is why are the shepherds of the Catholic flock not exercising their authority to correct, reprove or remove such members who are publicly thumbing their noses at clear church teachings?

For every bishop who refused to give Nancy Pelosi communion there are three who will.

AMEN my brother.........amen!

 

[PeaceByJesus]

Yes, Jannes and Mambres, are in the Bible, just as are Devotion to Mary, and Purgatory, it's just that, they're not explicit. The fact that you refer to the Targum, just reinforces my argument that Saint Paul is quoting Tradition, Sacred Tradition, Sacred Scripture, and the Magisterium, all work together to teach us the Holy Gospel of Jesus Christ, and Divine Revelation.

Paul also quotes truths which pagans professed, (Acts 17:28) and we know this is Truth because it is stated as being so in wholly inspired words as the word of God. Likewise we know that it was Jannes and Jambres that withstood Moses because of its inclusion in wholly inspired Scripture. (2 Timothy 3:8) That is our basis for it being Divinely Revealed Truth, for it cannot be that all that has been said or orally passed down is Divine Truth.

However, the basis for what Rome says is Divinely Revealed Truth is the the novel and unScriptural premise of ensured perpetual magisterial infallibility, with its presumption that this is essential for assuredly correctly ascertain what is of God. Which has been debunked. You yourself have essentially nuked the NT church by making impossible that common souls could have assuredly correctly ascertained what is of God without an ensured infallible magisterium, but which did not exist.

You may have eyes, but this thread has shown that ye see not.

 

[FreeinChrist]

MOD HAT

This thread is closed for review. There is too much flaming.

 

[FreeinChrist]

MOD HAT

Folks, the flaming needs to stop. Please stay on topic and do not insult the other member personally. This can be a heated topic but keep the discussion civil.

reopening​