Should I be rebaptised?

Marymog said:

Hey Stranger,

Using "Scripture alone" please show me what constitutes "Scripture" (table of contents)?

Curious Mary

Click to expand...

Enoch111 said:

True. But the Catholic Church has its own theology, so you have to go by what they believe, and this is what they believe. In fact they say that the bishop of Rome is the Vicar of Christ on earth, so all Christians must bow to him (which is just pure nonsense, and even the Orthodox will tell you that).

On the other hand, since Pope Francis is anything but a shepherd, he should have fired and replaced a long time ago. How do Catholics put up with this Leftist Globalist who does not even know his own theology while he tries to subvert the West?

Click to expand...

Stranger said:

I explained it already in post #(1229). Paul received his gospel from Jesus Christ. (Gal. 1:11) Paul says in (1 Cor. 15:1) "...I declare unto you the gospel which I preached unto you, which also ye have received, and wherein ye stand."

See also (1 Cor. 11:23) "For I have received of the Lord that which also I delivered unto you, That the Lord Jesus the same night which he was betrayed took bread:"

That's alright Mary. I see with the verses you gave that you're used to taking out and changing others words.

Stranger

Click to expand...

he went to those esteemed leaders to make sure that what Jesus told him was accurate/true?

Stranger said:

Oh please Mary. What kind of silly question is that? You go ahead and keep quoting and changing Scripture and I will point it out to you when I see you are amiss.

One thing is for sure. Your tradition isn't Scripture. How's that? That should clear up alot.

Stranger

Click to expand...

Stranger said:

(Matt. 2:23) is not oral tradition. It says 'spoken by the prophets'. It is not a quote. Nazareth was in Galilee. Galilee was known as Galilee of the Gentiles, (Is. 9:1), which the Jews despised. Thus Nathaniel's statement in (John 1:46) "...Can there any good thing come out of Nazareth?"

(Matt. 23:2) is not oral tradition. Jesus just made a true statement. The passing of authority from Moses to Joshua is recorded in Scripture. Then on to the judges etc. etc. etc.

(Acts 20:35) is not oral tradition. Paul wrote by inspiration as did all the New Testament writers.

(1 Cor. 10:4) is not oral tradition. Paul wrote by inspiration as did all the New Testament writers.

(2 Tim. 3:8) is not oral tradition. Paul wrote by inspiration as did all the New Testament writers.

(Eph. 5:14) is not oral tradition. It is based upon (Is. 26:19). Paul wrote by inspiration and so added Christ shall give thee light.

(Heb. 11:37) is not oral tradition. All New Testament writers wrote by inspiration. That it is true and historical, yes. But not because it is based upon oral tradition. It is based upon the inspiration of the New Testament.

(Jude 9) is not oral tradition nor is it based on oral tradition. It is based upon the inspiration of the Holy Spirit.

(Jude 9:14-15) is not oral tradition nor is it based upon oral tradition. It is based upon the inspiration of the Holy Spirit.

You so want 'oral tradition' to be considered as equal with Scripture that you have twisted what was inspired by the Holy Spirit to be nothing but oral tradition. You need 'oral tradition' because the Roman Church can't function on the inspired Scriptures alone. They,you, will lose their power grip over the Catholic Church of Christ.

Paul's teaching was by revelation from Jesus Christ. Not oral tradition. Jesus Christ said, 'It is written'. Thus the importance of Scripture alone.

Stranger

Click to expand...

Stranger said:

Again, nothing in the Bible says the Roman Pontiff is shephard of the Catholic Church. The word 'catholic' isn't even in the Bible.
Try again.
Stranger

Click to expand...

Marymog said:

Thank you Stranger.

So when Paul went to visit Peter and James for a couple of weeks (Gal. 1) you don't think they talked about (oral tradition) anything that Jesus taught the Apostles?

And when Paul went to visit esteemed leaders in Galatians 2 to make sure his teaching was not in vain he went to those esteemed leaders to make sure that what Jesus told him was accurate/true?

That is a fascinating theory you have however your theory is not backed up by Scripture. Just because Paul received instruction from Jesus does not mean he didn't receive it from the Apostles.

You are pretending it can be only one or the other and you are casting aside Scripture that doesn't fit what you believe.

Scripture makes it clear it was both.

Mary

PS...unnecessary sniping from you was removed form your post

Click to expand...

Marymog said:

Got it.....You can't use Scripture alone thus your "Scripture alone" theory fails a very simple test!

Have a great day....Mary

Click to expand...

BreadOfLife said:

WRONG.

What do you think Oral Tradition is?? It is the teaching of the Word of God by MOUTH.
2 Thess 2:15
"Stand firm and hold fast to the Traditions you were taught, EITHER BY an ORAL STATEMENT - OR BY a letter from us."

EVERY ONE of these is an example of Oral Tradition:

Matt. 2:23 - the prophecy "He shall be a Nazarene" is ORAL TRADITION.
Matt. 2:23 refers to this as a PROPHECY. It is ORAL TRADITION - not written Scripture.

Matt 23:2 - Jesus relies on the ORAL TRADITION of acknowledging Moses' seat of authority (which passed from Moses to Joshua to the Sanhedrin). This is not recorded in the Old Testament. It is ORAL TRADITION - not written Scripture.

1 Cor. 10:4 - Paul relies on the ORAL TRADITION of the rock following Moses.
It is ORAL TRADITION - not written Scripture.

2 Timothy 3:8 - Paul relies on the ORAL TRADITION when speaking of Pharoah’s magicians, Jannes and Jambres. Their names are not recorded in the Old Testament. It is ORAL TRADITION - not written Scripture.

Eph 5:14 - Paul relies on ORAL TRADITION to quote an early Christian hymn - "awake O sleeper rise from the dead and Christ shall give you light." It is ORAL TRADITION - not written Scripture.

Heb. 11:37 - the author of Hebrews relies on the ORAL TRADITION of the martyrs being sawed in two.
It is ORAL TRADITION - not written Scripture.

Jude 9 - Jude relies on the ORAL TRADITION of the Archangel Michael's dispute with Satan over Moses' body.
It is ORAL TRADITION - not written Scripture.

Jude 14-15 - Jude relies on the ORAL TRADITION of Enoch's prophecy which is not recorded in the Old Testament.
It is ORAL TRADITION - not written Scripture.

In your desperation, you are trying to redefine what "Oral Tradition" is . . .

Click to expand...

BreadOfLife said:

WRONG again . . .

Acts 9:31 talks about how the Early Church grew throughout the region. The language used here describes the Catholic Church:
“Then the church throughout Judea, Galilee, and Samaria experienced peace and thus was strengthened. Living in the fear of the Lord and in the encouragement of the Holy Spirit, the church increased in numbers.”

According to Strong’s Greek Concordance – which is used by Protestants AND Catholics alike – the verse is translated as:
“The true Church throughout all Judea . . .”

Here is the phrase in Greek:
η μεν ουν εκκλησια καθ ολης της ιουδαιας

The Catholic Church gets its name from the GREEK for “according to the whole” and “universal” - εκκλησια καθ ολης, which is pronounced “katah-holos”.

Εκκλησια (ekklesia) - A gathering of citizens called out from their homes into some public place, an assembly; CHURCH
καθ (katah) - Through out, according to
ολης (holos) - All, whole, completely
"Ekklesia Kata-holos" = CATHOLIC CHURCH.

Click to expand...

Stranger said:

Again, the word 'catholic' isn't in the Bible. Shout a little louder. Throw a little more bs on it. It still isn't there.
Stranger

Click to expand...

Stranger said:

I've already answered these. Go back and reread.

I'm not desperate. You're the one shouting from the roof tops. You don't fool anyone. We learned a long time ago, the one who beats the pulpit the hardest is the one who doesn't know what he is talking about.

You have nothing.

Stranger

Click to expand...

BreadOfLife said:

And I just proved to you that is IS.

Remember - denial ain't just a river in Egypt, pal . . .

Click to expand...

epostle said:

Your tolerance for idiocy never ceases to amaze me.

Click to expand...

BreadOfLife said:

And I just proved to you that is IS.

Remember - denial ain't just a river in Egypt, pal . . .

Click to expand...

BreadOfLife said:

No, you answered nothing. You simply denied the truth.
BIG difference.

ALL of them illustrate Oral Tradition . . .

Click to expand...

epostle said:

Your tolerance for idiocy never ceases to amaze me.

Click to expand...

epostle said:

First, I am a Catholic. I happen to practice in the LATIN Rite. Rites are determined largely, but not exclusively, geography. There are Byzantine Catholics in my city. A Roman Byzantine Catholic is a joke, but Stranger doesn't get it.
I stand with BofL on this matter.

When the apostles brought the Gospel to the major cultural centers of their day the essential elements of religious practice were inculturated into those cultures. This means that the essential elements were clothed in the symbols and trappings of the particular people, so that the rituals conveyed the desired spiritual meaning to that culture. In this way the Church becomes all things to all men that some might be saved (1 Cor. 9:22).

There are three major groupings of Rites based on this initial transmission of the faith, the Roman, the Antiochian (Syria) and the Alexandrian (Egypt). Later on the Byzantine derived as a major Rite from the Antiochian, under the influence of St. Basil and St. John Chrysostom. From these four derive the over 20 liturgical Rites present in the Church today.

I'm guessing the real issue with Stranger is his comic book view of church history and papal jurisdiction. In his world, that can only mean dominating dictatorship, not spiritual leadership.

Click to expand...

Stranger said:

No. You didn't. You twisted words and Scripture to sooth your conscience that the word 'catholic' is there. But it isn't.

Where's the blue large words? Shout louder and throw more bs on it. Perhaps many will be convinced. But both you and I know you are lying.

Stranger

Click to expand...

Stranger said:

Sorry, I showed already that 'none' of them illustrate oral tradition.

You need more blue words and shout louder, and more bs on it.

Stranger

Click to expand...