Sola Scriptura 2

[Mungo]

I have.

Your history is revisionist in its entirety.

The claimed history of the RCC, is that Jesus gave Peter the preeminence over all the apostles, that Jesus made Peter the head of His church and built the Roman Catholic church on him, that Peter was therefore the first pope, and that every subsequent pope holds the seat of Peter, via apostolic succession - making their sect the preeminent church that heads all Christendom, and the pope the supreme head over all Christianity.


The first thing wrong with claiming Peter founded and was the head of the RCC, is the fact that God made him the apostle to the Jews, and the Roman church consisted of gentiles.


In the New Testament, Peter is shown multiple times in the Jerusalem church - the Jewish Christian church - and is never found once in the gentile Roman church.


Scripture says Paul is the apostle to the gentiles, and that Peter is the apostle to the Jews (to the circumcision), so Peter would not be the head of a gentile Roman church!


To whit:


Gal 2:7 On the contrary, they saw that God had given me the task of preaching the gospel to the Gentiles, just as he had given Peter the task of preaching the gospel to the Jews.


Gal 2:8 For by God's power I was made an apostle to the Gentiles, just as Peter was made an apostle to the Jews.


That explains why the apostle to the gentiles, Paul, wrote the book of Romans instead of Peter, the supposed head of the RCC.


And Paul calls those in the Roman church, gentiles - in case someone wants to claim that the Roman church isn’t a gentile church.


Romans 1:13 Now I would not have you ignorant, brethren, that oftentimes I purposed to come unto you, (but was let hitherto,) that I might have some fruit among you also, even as among OTHER Gentiles.


And when Paul wanted to visit Peter 3 years after his conversion on Damascus road, he had to go to Jerusalem, where Peter and the Jewish Christian church was, instead of to Rome:


Gal 1:18 Then after three years I went up to Jerusalem to see Peter, and abode with him fifteen days.


Peter was not in Rome being the pope - he was at Jerusalem where the Jewish Christian church was.


The second thing wrong with the claim that the first and original church was founded in Rome by Peter, is found in Acts 2, where it’s clear that the church started in Jerusalem, with Peter preaching there to the first 3,000 converts to Christianity.


It’s historical fact that the Jerusalem church was the first church, and was the preeminent church from its beginning in Acts 2, until the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 AD.


Wikipedia:


Jerusalem was the first center of the church, according to the Book of Acts, and according to the Catholic Encyclopedia, the location of "the first Christian church".[8] The apostles lived and taught there for some time after Pentecost.[9] James, the brother of Jesuswas a leader in the church, and his other kinsmenlikely held leadership positions in the surrounding area after the destruction of the city until its rebuilding as Aelia Capitolina, c. 130, when all Jews were banished from the city.[9]

In about 50, Barnabasand Paulwent to Jerusalem to meet with the "pillars of the church",[10] James, Peter, and John. Later called the Council of Jerusalem, according to Pauline Christians, this meeting (among other things) confirmed the legitimacy of the mission of Barnabas and Paul to the gentiles, and the gentile converts' freedom from most Mosaic law, especially circumcision.

When Peter left Jerusalem after Herod Agrippa Itried to kill him, James appears as the principal authority.[14] Clement of Alexandria(c. 150–215) called him Bishop of Jerusalem.[14] A second-centurychurch historian, Hegesippus, wrote that the Sanhedrinmartyred him in 62.[14]

In 66, the Jews revolted against Rome.[9] Rome besieged Jerusalem for four years, and the city fell in 70.[9] The city, including the Temple, was destroyed and the population was mostly killed or removed.[9] According to a tradition recorded by Eusebiusand Epiphanius of Salamis, the Jerusalem church fled to Pellaat the outbreak of the First Jewish Revolt.


Notice that the first church council was held in the Jerusalem church - because it was the preeminent church - not Rome.



Also, Jesus told the apostles that none of them would be above the others - Peter was not given preeminence:


Mat 20:25 But Jesus called them unto him,and said, Ye know that the princes of the Gentiles exercise dominion over them, and they that are great exercise authority upon them.

Mat 20:26 But it shall not be so among you: but whosoever will be great among you, let him be your minister;

Mat 20:27 And whosoever will be chief among you, let him be your servant:


Peter didn’t think he was anything but a fellow elder:


1Pe 5:1 The elders which are among you I exhort, who am ALSO an elder, and a witness of the sufferings of Christ, and also a partaker of the glory that shall be revealed:


And Jesus did not tell Peter that the church would be built on him:


Mat 16:18 And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.


Jesus spoke of two different rocks: Peter is Petros in the Greek - small rock - and the rock the church is built on is Petra - bedrock.


In the Greek Jesus said: thou art PETROS, and upon this PETRA I will build my church.


The language God chose for the New Testament to be written in, explicitly states there are two different rocks there.


Also, the Greek word for church , kuriakos ,is not found in Matthew 16:18 - the word used is ekklesia, meaning a congregation of people assembled together - it does not mean a church organization of Pope, cardinals, bishops, and priests, as the Roman sect wants us to believe.


And in fact the church of Christ isn’t built on any single individual apostle or prophet:


Eph 2:20 And are built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ himself being the chief corner stone;


Built on the foundation of apostles, PLURAL, and prophets, PLURAL - not on Peter alone.


In Matthew 16:19 Jesus gives Peter keys (authority) and the power to bind and loose - yet 2 chapters later when He met the other apostles, Jesus gives the same power of binding and loosing to them, too, in Matthew 18:18 - so Peter has no special authority beyond what the 12 shared.


Peter was not a Bishop, or Pope in the Roman church - ever.


Linus was the first bishop/pope of the Roman church, according to the Orthodox Church.


Peter, the apostle to the Jews, is found in the NT only in the Jerusalem church - the Jewish Christian church - not in the gentile Roman church.


And when Paul visited Peter 3 years after his conversion on Damascus road, he had to go to Jerusalem, where Peter and the Jewish Christian church was:


Gal 1:18 Then after three years I went up to Jerusalem to see Peter, and abode with him fifteen days.


Peter was not in Rome being a pope.

I would be agreeable to discuss your false histories in an appropriate thread. But this is about the false teaching of Sola Scriptura.
Like robert derrick you just want to avoid the topic because you have no Scriptural support for this man made doctrine.

 

[Mungo]

You said: And all outside His written Word are without His authority.

CORRECT

INCORRECT

 

[Mungo]

No it's not(scripture) the totality ,as scripture itself states .What the heck is a sacred tradition ?

Sacred Tradition is those words and teaching that Jesus and the Apostles passed on orally and are not written down in Scripture.

Did not Christ give us the Holy Spirit to lead and guide .

Christ promised the apostles the Holy Spirit would guide them, not all Christians, into all truth (Jn 16:13). They were promises made to his Church.

I see where it's written that Christ did many things that were not written but where is it written that He intended those things to be known.

Where does it say they were to be kept secret?
Paul taught for years, both Jews and Gentiles. He wrote a few letters to address particular issues (and we know at least one has been lost). Where does Paul say only the teaching is his letters were to be passed on? [/quote]

May I ask are you talking about the catechism of the catholic church ?

If you mean post in #213, CCC stands for Catechism of the Catholic Church.

 

[David in NJ]

This is beyond ridiculous.
The Bible is not Jesus. The Bible is a book not a person.

Zondervan Press (or whoever published your Bible) do not print millions of copies of Jesus.

The Word of God is ridiculous to sinful man, whose mind is darkened and whose heart is hardened.

 

[David in NJ]

Sacred Tradition is those words and teaching that Jesus and the Apostles passed on orally and are not written down in Scripture.


Christ promised the apostles the Holy Spirit would guide them, not all Christians, into all truth (Jn 16:13). They were promises made to his Church.


Where does it say they were to be kept secret?
Paul taught for years, both Jews and Gentiles. He wrote a few letters to address particular issues (and we know at least one has been lost). Where does Paul say only the teaching is his letters were to be passed on?

If you mean post in #213, CCC stands for Catechism of the Catholic Church.[/QUOTE]

mungo said: Christ promised the apostles the Holy Spirit would guide them, not all Christians, into all truth (Jn 16:13). They were promises made to his Church.

You can always tell a religious person from a Saint - religious people do not understand Scripture and fight against it, whereas a Saint lives and breaths by the Word of God.

 

[Mungo]

The Word of God is ridiculous to sinful man, whose mind is darkened and whose heart is hardened.

The Bible is not ridiculous
Jesus is not ridiculous
Suggesting that the Bible is Jesus is ridiculous.

 

[Mungo]

If you mean post in #213, CCC stands for Catechism of the Catholic Church.

mungo said: Christ promised the apostles the Holy Spirit would guide them, not all Christians, into all truth (Jn 16:13). They were promises made to his Church.

You can always tell a religious person from a Saint - religious people do not understand Scripture and fight against it, whereas a Saint lives and breaths by the Word of God.[/QUOTE]
You don't like being disproved from Scripture do you.

 

[David in NJ]

mungo said: Christ promised the apostles the Holy Spirit would guide them, not all Christians, into all truth (Jn 16:13). They were promises made to his Church.

You can always tell a religious person from a Saint - religious people do not understand Scripture and fight against it, whereas a Saint lives and breaths by the Word of God.

You don't like being disproved from Scripture do you.[/QUOTE]

On the contrary, when Scripture corrects me i am blessed and i rejoice for His Truth is my sustenance.

 

[Mungo]

You don't like being disproved from Scripture do you.

On the contrary, when Scripture corrects me i am blessed and i rejoice for His Truth is my sustenance.

Then accept the truth of what the Bible says.

 

[robert derrick]

I have.

Your history is revisionist in its entirety.

Peter was not in Rome being a pope.

Peter was not in Rome being a pope

But a pope was in Rome being a pope, when they religion separated itself from the body of Christ and usurped the headship of Jesus.

You historical study is good, and I appreciate it. But of course, people who have no problem revising Scripture with their own traditions, also have no problem revising history with their religion. As you noted.

What is interesting is how it all started by misreading the rock upon which Jesus would build His church: The Rock is that of confession of faith from God that Jesus is the Christ, not the person confessing faith.

And Scripture in the same Chapter of Matthew 16, has Peter being rebuked as a devil shortly thereafter, when he betrays the very faith in Jesus as Christ, by rebuking Jesus for prophesying His death!

It is truly amazing how blind people can be, when reading plain Scripture, once a special little foolish interpretation Scripture gets stuck in their heads and hearts.

It is upon this completely bogus view of Peter somehow being the supreme apostle above all apostles, as the person upon whom Christ would build His church, that they then made up an even grosser doctrine of a 'successor' of Peter on earth, who is therefore now the 'rock' that Christ builds His church, so that the incarnate Peter rules over all as Head of the church.

The same religion that deifies Mary, has also deified Peter. It is all idolatrous ignorance, which requires a rejection of Scriptural authority in order to promote it as true of God.

And they truly resent anyone daring to reject their outside traditions in favor of Scripture, and the reason is simple: they love their own traditions outside of Scripture, because they love their own leaders outside of Jesus Christ.

They believe all things by sight only: except they can touch and feel and read original manuscripts, they will not believe the truth, and except they can touch and kiss and see physical leaders in the flesh, they will not follow Christ.

Sola Scriptura is the only way to walk after the spirit and not by sight, because only Scripture is the Word of God written by inspiration of the Spirit.

 

[Curtis]

I would be agreeable to discuss your false histories in an appropriate thread. But this is about the false teaching of Sola Scriptura.
Like robert derrick you just want to avoid the topic because you have no Scriptural support for this man made doctrine.

As I also said, I have Given the evidence before - here it is once again:

Gods written word itself is clear that the scriptures are the sole and final authority over Christianity:

2Ti 3:14 But continue thou in the things which thou hast learned and hast been assured of, knowing of whom thou hast learned them;

2Ti 3:15 And that from a child thou hast known the holy scriptures, which are able to make thee wise unto salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus.

2Ti 3:16 All scripture isgiven by inspiration of God, and isprofitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:

2Ti 3:17 That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works.

We are told to study the scriptural word, and rightly interpret it - it’s our responsibility to determine accurately what they teach - not have someone tell us what scripture teaches or means:

2Ti 2:15 Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.

The apostles wrote that if anyone preaches anything contradictory to what they have given us, they are accursed - thus the Roman Catholic Church has no power or authority to change any doctrine they gave us in their writings:

Gal 1:8 But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed.

Gal 1:9 As we said before, so say I now again, If any manpreach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed.

Jesus never once appealed to oral tradition, but did say, ‘it is written’, said to ‘study the scriptures’, said, ‘you do err, not knowing the scriptures’, and said to ‘search the scriptures’.

Mat 22:29 Jesus answered and said unto them, Ye do err, not knowing the scriptures, nor the power of God.

Joh 5:39 Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me.

It’s obvious from Jesus’ own words, and from the scriptures themselves, that God has given His written word the final say and sole authority over the church concerning doctrines.

That the scriptures have the sole and final doctrinal authority, and that we as individual believers are told it’s our responsibility to study and determine scripture truth ourselves, is illustrated very well by the fact that the Bereans were called honorable for not accepting what the apostle Paul taught them, until they ‘examined the scriptures, to see if he taught them correctly:

Act 17:10 And the brethren immediately sent away Paul and Silas by night unto Berea: who coming thitherwent into the synagogue of the Jews.

Act 17:11 These were more noble than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness of mind, and searched the scriptures daily, whether those things were so.

The claim that the Roman Catholic Church can change or invent new doctrine, is not so.

The Bible has the final word about church doctrines over the pope, and anyone else.

Period!

 

[robert derrick]

First let me say that I believe that Scripture is true, and God inspired, infallible, written Word and revelation. This is what the Catholic Church believes and teaches. But Scripture, the written word of God, is not the totality of God's words to men.

There is no 'but' with God about Scripture.

They say it, but they do otherwise.

Sola Scriptura:

If those 'words' of men are not found written in Scripture, nor are Scripturally confirmed, then they are words that men may believe and practise for themselves. But when they go on to preach those words of men for doctrine of God, then they become false teachers, apostles, prophets, etc...

If those words of men contradict Scripture, then they are words that lie against God openly.

Therefore, it is impossible to believe Scripture to be true and infallibly right pertaining to things of the true God, and yet reject Sola Scriptura.

Therefore, them that reject Sola Scriptura as defined above, who also claim to 'believe' in Scripture as truth of God, are honoring Scripture with their lips, while practising traditions contrary to Scripture with their lives.

Likewise, they speak the name of Jesus with their lips only, while idolizing their true leaders of men on earth, who's words of tradition reject Scripture of God.

 

[robert derrick]

No it's not(scripture) the totality ,as scripture itself states .What the heck is a sacred tradition ? Did not Christ give us the Holy Spirit to lead and guide .

I see where it's written that Christ did many things that were not written but where is it written that He intended those things to be known .

May I ask are you talking about the catechism of the catholic church ?

What the heck is a sacred tradition?

A 'Sacred' traditions is any tradition of men outside of Scripture, that men really like, and so they dress it up with really religious-sounding words, like 'Sacred' and 'Sacrament'.

There are the holy Scriptures that make us wise unto salvation, and then there are the 'Sacred' traditions of men, that make them wise unto themselves.

For when they knew Scripture, they honored Scripture not as authority of God, neither were thankful for Scripture, but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened. Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools, And changed the glory of the uncorruptible Word of God into an image made like to corruptible traditions of man.

 

[robert derrick]

As I also said, I have Given the evidence before - here it is once again:

Gods written word itself is clear that the scriptures are the sole and final authority over Christianity:

2Ti 3:14 But continue thou in the things which thou hast learned and hast been assured of, knowing of whom thou hast learned them;

2Ti 3:15 And that from a child thou hast known the holy scriptures, which are able to make thee wise unto salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus.

2Ti 3:16 All scripture isgiven by inspiration of God, and isprofitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:

2Ti 3:17 That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works.

We are told to study the scriptural word, and rightly interpret it - it’s our responsibility to determine accurately what they teach - not have someone tell us what scripture teaches or means:

2Ti 2:15 Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.

The apostles wrote that if anyone preaches anything contradictory to what they have given us, they are accursed - thus the Roman Catholic Church has no power or authority to change any doctrine they gave us in their writings:

Gal 1:8 But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed.

Gal 1:9 As we said before, so say I now again, If any manpreach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed.

Jesus never once appealed to oral tradition, but did say, ‘it is written’, said to ‘study the scriptures’, said, ‘you do err, not knowing the scriptures’, and said to ‘search the scriptures’.

Mat 22:29 Jesus answered and said unto them, Ye do err, not knowing the scriptures, nor the power of God.

Joh 5:39 Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me.

It’s obvious from Jesus’ own words, and from the scriptures themselves, that God has given His written word the final say and sole authority over the church concerning doctrines.

That the scriptures have the sole and final doctrinal authority, and that we as individual believers are told it’s our responsibility to study and determine scripture truth ourselves, is illustrated very well by the fact that the Bereans were called honorable for not accepting what the apostle Paul taught them, until they ‘examined the scriptures, to see if he taught them correctly:

Act 17:10 And the brethren immediately sent away Paul and Silas by night unto Berea: who coming thitherwent into the synagogue of the Jews.

Act 17:11 These were more noble than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness of mind, and searched the scriptures daily, whether those things were so.

The claim that the Roman Catholic Church can change or invent new doctrine, is not so.

The Bible has the final word about church doctrines over the pope, and anyone else.

Period!

The claim that the Roman Catholic Church can change or invent new doctrine, is not so.

Actually it is so, and they do, because they can. For a season.

And the great dragon was cast out, that old serpent, called the Devil, and Satan, which deceiveth the whole world: he was cast out into the earth, and his angels were cast out with him.

Woe to the inhabiters of the earth and of the sea! for the devil is come down unto you, having great wrath, because he knoweth that he hath but a short time.

And when the dragon saw that he was cast unto the earth, he persecuted the woman which brought forth the man child...And the serpent cast out of his mouth water as a flood after the woman, that he might cause her to be carried away of the flood...And the earth helped the woman, and the earth opened her mouth, and swallowed up the flood which the dragon cast out of his mouth.

The devil absolutely hates it, when a believer of Jesus refuses to even hear His made up inventions of traditions outside of Scripture, and so he finds no place in heaven to speak from, and his 'Sacred' speakers are rejected for the idol-makers they are.

He casts a flood of accusation by those traditions after the believers of Jesus and His Word only, to hopefully get them likewise carried away with them that reject Scripture only.

The Scriptures of the God of all the earth help us against such a flood of false teaching and teachers and followers, by swallowing them all up as so much debris filled and darkened waters.

Even as the earth itself swallowed up Korah and his followers, that declared themselves and their own 'Sacred' words were holy too. (Num 16:3)

Those who reject Sola Scriptura are Korahites to the core.

 

[robert derrick]

Christ promised the apostles the Holy Spirit would guide them, not all Christians, into all truth (Jn 16:13).

Speaking for himself, we understand it to be perfectly true by his own words.

No wonder some reject Sola Scriptura, afterall, since they don't believe they can be led of the spirit into all truth, then why bother with Scripture of truth? (Dan 10:21)

religious people do not understand Scripture and fight against it, whereas a Saint lives and breaths by the Word of God.

So says the one who rejects Scripture as the written authority of God, breathed into the hearts of His prophets and apostles.

What about the 'Sacred' words of the 'Sacred' leaders, that are also breathed out to accompany Scripture? Aren't they supposed to be believed and inhaled too?

Sola Scriptura ensures what we breath is from God and not from the prince and power of the air.

 

[Mungo]

As I also said, I have Given the evidence before - here it is once again:

Gods written word itself is clear that the scriptures are the sole and final authority over Christianity:

2Ti 3:14 But continue thou in the things which thou hast learned and hast been assured of, knowing of whom thou hast learned them;

2Ti 3:15 And that from a child thou hast known the holy scriptures, which are able to make thee wise unto salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus.

2Ti 3:16 All scripture isgiven by inspiration of God, and isprofitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:

You are just recycling scripture that has already been refuted.
As I said before these say that scripture is profitable/useful . They do not say they are the only thing that is profitable/useful.
They do not support Sola Scriptura.

2Ti 3:17 That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works.

You are just recycling scripture that has already been refuted.
As I said before this says that Scripture is necessary. It does not say that Scripture is the only thing that is necessary.
It does not support Sola Scriptura

We are told to study the scriptural word, and rightly interpret it - it’s our responsibility to determine accurately what they teach - not have someone tell us what scripture teaches or means:

2Ti 2:15 Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.

Yes we are to study Scripture. But that does not say that we can "rightly divide" Scripture without outside help.
Scripture warns against that. First of all you must understand this, that no prophecy of scripture is a matter of one’s own interpretation, (2Pet 1:20)

The apostles wrote that if anyone preaches anything contradictory to what they have given us, they are accursed - thus the Roman Catholic Church has no power or authority to change any doctrine they gave us in their writings:

Gal 1:8 But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed.

Gal 1:9 As we said before, so say I now again, If any manpreach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed.

No Catholic doctrine (properly understood) contradicts Scripture (properly interpreted).

Jesus never once appealed to oral tradition, but did say, ‘it is written’, said to ‘study the scriptures’, said, ‘you do err, not knowing the scriptures’, and said to ‘search the scriptures’.

Mat 22:29 Jesus answered and said unto them, Ye do err, not knowing the scriptures, nor the power of God.

Joh 5:39 Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me.

Again this claim has already been refuted
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.” (Mt 23:1-3). The scribes and Pharisees had a valid and binding teaching authority passed down from Moses. This is not in scripture but in the Mishnah (originally an oral tradition).

The chair of Moses outside a synagogue was the traditional place where teachers (Pharisees) sat to teach people.

It’s obvious from Jesus’ own words, and from the scriptures themselves, that God has given His written word the final say and sole authority over the church concerning doctrines.

On the contrary Jesus founded a Church and gave that Church authority concerning doctrine.

That the scriptures have the sole and final doctrinal authority, and that we as individual believers are told it’s our responsibility to study and determine scripture truth ourselves, is illustrated very well by the fact that the Bereans were called honorable for not accepting what the apostle Paul taught them, until they ‘examined the scriptures, to see if he taught them correctly:

Act 17:10 And the brethren immediately sent away Paul and Silas by night unto Berea: who coming thitherwent into the synagogue of the Jews.

Act 17:11 These were more noble than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness of mind, and searched the scriptures daily, whether those things were so.

Again this has already been refuted.
Yes, the Bearans searched the OT Scriptures (which was all they had) to check that what Paul claimed the Ot said was correct.
But you cannot teach the Birth, Life, Death and Resurrection of Jesus from the OT.
Paul preached new teaching they had no heard before.
They were more noble than the Thessalonians because they accepted Paul's oral teaching about Jesus.

It was the Thessalonians who were less noble because they did not accept Paul's teaching. They were Sola Scriptura.

The claim that the Roman Catholic Church can change or invent new doctrine, is not so.

The Catholic Church does not change or invent new doctrine.

The Bible has the final word about church doctrines over the pope, and anyone else.

Period!

No, Jesus founded a Church to have the final say over doctrine.

It is the false doctrine of Sola Scriptura and everyone interpreting Scripture for themselves that has led to 40,000 different Protestants sects teaching contrary doctrines.

By their fruit you shall know them. And their fruit is divisive.

 

[Mungo]

First let me say that I believe that Scripture is true, and God inspired, infallible, written Word and revelation. This is what the Catholic Church believes and teaches. But Scripture, the written word of God, is not the totality of God's words to men.

There is no 'but' with God about Scripture.

They say it, but they do otherwise.

Sola Scriptura:
If those 'words' of men are not found written in Scripture, nor are Scripturally confirmed, then they are words that men may believe and practise for themselves. But when they go on to preach those words of men for doctrine of God, then they become false teachers, apostles, prophets, etc...

If those words of men contradict Scripture, then they are words that lie against God openly.

I agree that if doctrines contradict Scripture then they are wrong. But it does not follow that they have to be Scripturally confirmed.

Sola Scriptura contradicts Scripture. I've given many examples (see post #211) which you have failed to address.

Therefore, it is impossible to believe Scripture to be true and infallibly right pertaining to things of the true God, and yet reject Sola Scriptura.

Untrue. It is correct to believe Scripture to be authoritative (true and reliable) - if properly interpreted. but also reject Sola Scriptura

Therefore, them that reject Sola Scriptura as defined above, who also claim to 'believe' in Scripture as truth of God, are honoring Scripture with their lips, while practising traditions contrary to Scripture with their lives.

Likewise, they speak the name of Jesus with their lips only, while idolizing their true leaders of men on earth, who's words of tradition reject Scripture of God.

People who believe in the false teaching of Sola Scriptura which contradicts Scripture itself are honoring Scripture with their lips, while practising traditions contrary to Scripture with their lives.

Likewise, they speak the name of Jesus with their lips only, while idolizing their own selves with a tradition of men that rejects Scripture of God.

 

[Mungo]

Christ promised the apostles the Holy Spirit would guide them, not all Christians, into all truth (Jn 16:13).

Speaking for himself, we understand it to be perfectly true by his own words.

No wonder some reject Sola Scriptura, afterall, since they don't believe they can be led of the spirit into all truth, then why bother with Scripture of truth? (Dan 10:21)

Scripture itself warned of the dangers of such a belief First of all you must understand this, that no prophecy of scripture is a matter of one’s own interpretation, (2Pet 1:20).
Jesus promised the apostles , and therefore his Church, that the Holy Spirit would lead them into all truth. He did not make that promise to individual Christians.

You claimed that doctrines have to be Scripturally confirmed. But the doctrine that every Christian is led into all truth by the Holy Spirit is not Scripturally confirmed.

religious people do not understand Scripture and fight against it, whereas a Saint lives and breaths by the Word of God.

So says the one who rejects Scripture as the written authority of God, breathed into the hearts of His prophets and apostles.

The Catholic Church does not reject Scripture. It rejects the false doctrine of Scripture alone.

What about the 'Sacred' words of the 'Sacred' leaders, that are also breathed out to accompany Scripture? Aren't they supposed to be believed and inhaled too?

Sola Scriptura ensures what we breath is from God and not from the prince and power of the air.

What is that rant about?

 

[amigo de christo]

Amen.

Thats right my friend . The lambs shall stand upon the truth of that bible . For only that GOD can save
ONLY that JESUS does save . Most folks have kicked that ol book to the curb , BUT NOT THE LAMBS .
OH NO , NOT THE LAMBS . WE CLING TO CHRIST and we read our bibles .

 

[Mungo]

The claim that the Roman Catholic Church can change or invent new doctrine, is not so.

Actually it is so, and they do, because they can. For a season.

And the great dragon was cast out, that old serpent, called the Devil, and Satan, which deceiveth the whole world: he was cast out into the earth, and his angels were cast out with him.

Woe to the inhabiters of the earth and of the sea! for the devil is come down unto you, having great wrath, because he knoweth that he hath but a short time.

And when the dragon saw that he was cast unto the earth, he persecuted the woman which brought forth the man child...And the serpent cast out of his mouth water as a flood after the woman, that he might cause her to be carried away of the flood...And the earth helped the woman, and the earth opened her mouth, and swallowed up the flood which the dragon cast out of his mouth.

The devil absolutely hates it, when a believer of Jesus refuses to even hear His made up inventions of traditions outside of Scripture, and so he finds no place in heaven to speak from, and his 'Sacred' speakers are rejected for the idol-makers they are.

He casts a flood of accusation by those traditions after the believers of Jesus and His Word only, to hopefully get them likewise carried away with them that reject Scripture only.

The Scriptures of the God of all the earth help us against such a flood of false teaching and teachers and followers, by swallowing them all up as so much debris filled and darkened waters.

Even as the earth itself swallowed up Korah and his followers, that declared themselves and their own 'Sacred' words were holy too. (Num 16:3)

Those who reject Sola Scriptura are Korahites to the core.

The flood of false teaching is coming from the 40,000 splintered Protestant denominations, sects and cults that are the fruit of the false doctrine of Sola Scriptura.

The devil loves that doctrine for it divides and divides.