Bible alone?

[mjrhealth]

All I can say is this, the bible is Not Jesus, it has no life in it. It was put together by fallible men with self interest at heart, teh fact that it has any truth is quiet remarkable considering. It has its place but it cannot replace Christ not the Holy Spirit. It is because men put the bible above and before God, it because men use it to manipulate and control, and to boast that it has cause so much problem.

It is because men refuse God and Christ instead rather lean on there own understanding, there is so much confusion, and God is not the author of confusion. as Jesus put it, He is the true bread, and any man who eats of Him will never go hungry, but who is willing to put al aside for His sake.

But men would rather their study, their religions, being taught by men than learning from Christ. He has being calling His bride to Himself, The wedding feast is being prepared, but those whom He has invited, have refused teh invitations

I have to study,
I have to go to church.
I must do this and I must do that

As Jesus put it let the dead bury the dead.

He didnt come to find men studying, or going to church or perfecting themselves or keeping the law,No He Said

When I come, will I find faith Upon the earth??
Will He??
seems to be very lacking the evidence is in al the self effort.

 

[Marymog]

All I can say is this, the bible is Not Jesus, it has no life in it. It was put together by fallible men with self interest at heart, teh fact that it has any truth is quiet remarkable considering. It has its place but it cannot replace Christ not the Holy Spirit. It is because men put the bible above and before God, it because men use it to manipulate and control, and to boast that it has cause so much problem.

It is because men refuse God and Christ instead rather lean on there own understanding, there is so much confusion, and God is not the author of confusion. as Jesus put it, He is the true bread, and any man who eats of Him will never go hungry, but who is willing to put al aside for His sake.

But men would rather their study, their religions, being taught by men than learning from Christ. He has being calling His bride to Himself, The wedding feast is being prepared, but those whom He has invited, have refused teh invitations

I have to study,
I have to go to church.
I must do this and I must do that

As Jesus put it let the dead bury the dead.

He didnt come to find men studying, or going to church or perfecting themselves or keeping the law,No He Said

When I come, will I find faith Upon the earth??
Will He??
seems to be very lacking the evidence is in al the self effort.

You lean on your understanding. Is there no confusion in that?

 

[JunChosen]

We can give names of "true believers" who upheld authentic beliefs and practices in early church history before there was a Bible. You can't. Their writings are not inspired, but valuable (which your reject or are just plain ignorant of). We can prove the Catholicity of martyrs of the first 3 centuries of Christianity before there was a Bible, whereas you make vague unnamed reference to the "true believers" in a feeble attempt to associate your beliefs with the historic Church, and refuse to admit they were all Catholic, as 1st century St. Ignatius of Antioch clearly was.

Not only have you divorced yourselves from their authentic beliefs and practices (not all explicit in Scripture), you have disowned your elder brother, Judaism, and don't fulfil it in any meaningful sense. So you get tickled with anti-Catholic zingers on "Bible Christian" sites, and run to a forum like this thinking you have something over Catholicism.
"To be deep in history is to cease to be a Protestant."

LET GOD BE TRUE AND ALL MAN LIARS!

To God Be The Glory

 

[JunChosen]

The wedding feast is NOW! No need to wait...

The source book of our faith is the Bible. Please show chapter and verse.

To God Be The Glory

 

[Ronald Nolette]

Yup - they were BOTH part of the ONE Catholic Church.
Antioch and Troas are just different places - not different Churches.

Sooooooo, if a Calvinist and a Baptist have an argument about salvation because one believes in Double Predestination and the other doesn't - WHO do they go to to settle the matter, per Matt. 18:15-18.

Let me know when you figure THAT one out . . .


PS - there are no perfect PEOPLE.
The Church IS perfect because it is the FULLNESS of Christ (Eph. 1:22-23) - and HE is perfect.

Well they don't go to the RC church which believes that one can lose their salvation!

Double predestination is a fringe psoition held by a minority. Everyone is born condemned! It is only the ones foreknown by God that are predestined to salvation.

 

[BreadOfLife]

Well they don't go to the RC church which believes that one can lose their salvation!
Double predestination is a fringe psoition held by a minority. Everyone is born condemned! It is only the ones foreknown by God that are predestined to salvation.

And that's the ENTIRE point.
There are a LOT of "fringe" positions out there that fall within the parameters of Christianity.

MY question was about Authority - and WHO has it, per Matt. 18:15-18 when they disagree?

 

[Philip James]

The source book of our faith is the Bible. Please show chapter and verse.

To God Be The Glory

Exodus 12:6

Luke 22:14

 

[Philip James]

Exodus 12:6

Luke 22:14

1Cor 10:18
Malachi 1:11

 

[Philip James]

1Cor 10:18
Malachi 1:11

John 3:29

Mark 2:19

 

[mjrhealth]

You lean on your understanding. Is there no confusion in that?

Your sarcasm is astounding, the blind following teh blind

God bless yo.

 

[Illuminator]

Well they don't go to the RC church which believes that one can lose their salvation!

Double predestination is a fringe psoition held by a minority. Everyone is born condemned! It is only the ones foreknown by God that are predestined to salvation.

And that's the ENTIRE point.
There are a LOT of "fringe" positions out there that fall within the parameters of Christianity.

MY question was about Authority - and WHO has it, per Matt. 18:15-18 when they disagree?

Guaranteed salvation is held by a fringe minority, invented by the same man who taught double predestination, held by a fringe minority. Calvin did flip flops confusing predestination to grace, with predestination to glory.

Ephesians 1:5 – Paul teaches that God “predestined” us in love to be His sons through Jesus Christ. “Predestination” means that God knows what we will do before we do it (it does not mean that God determines what we do; otherwise, we would have no freewill).

Predestination is taken from the Greek word “prooridzo” which means to know or declare in advance by God’s foreknowledge. See, for example, 1 Peter 1:2 where Peter writes about the “elect according to the foreknowledge of God.”

The terms “predestination” and “the elect” always refer to God’s knowledge (not human knowledge) because God is outside of time (and humans cannot predict the future). There are two types of “predestination,” to grace and to glory. In this verse, Paul is teaching about predestination to grace, which means becoming a Christian.

1 Peter 1:1-2 – Paul teaches about being destined by God for obedience to Christ. This is another example of predestination to grace. But there is also predestination to glory.

Rom. 8:29-30 – Paul also writes that we are predestined to be conformed to the image of His Son. Now Paul is writing about predestination to glory, which means not only becoming a faithful Christian during our lives, but persevering to the end by conforming our will to Christ’s will.

1 Cor. 15:49 – Paul writes that we are conformed in His image at the resurrection, when we shall bear the image of the man of heaven. These are the people who were predestined to glory.
...+
Matthew 7:18 – Jesus says that sound trees bear good fruit. But there is no guarantee that a sound tree will stay sound. It could go rotten.

Matthew 7:21 – all those who say “Lord, Lord” on the last day will not be saved. They are judged by their evil deeds.

Luke 8:13 – Jesus teaches that some people receive the word with joy, but they have no root, believe for a while, and then fall away in temptation. They had the faith but they lost it.

John 6:37 – those who continue to come to Jesus He won’t cast out. But it’s a continuous, ongoing action. We can leave Jesus and He will allow this because He respects our freewill.

read more here

 

[Illuminator]

Well they don't go to the RC church which believes that one can lose their salvation!

Catholics can know if they are saved, but they cannot claim to be 100% infallibly certain they are saved until AFTER they are dead, not before. Otherwise, they would be contradicting Scripture. See above post.

 

[Eternally Grateful]

Bible-believing, Protestant Christians would say that a hierarchy is not needed to tell them what is canonical.

They can say that all day, such a dogmatic statement as such is not found anywhere in the Bible. It's not inferred or suggested or hinted at. Nothing. Nadda. Zero.
I would challenge any Bible-believing, Protestant Christian to prove, using the premise of SS, that the Magisterium is not needed to tell them what is canonical. That's just as stupid as saying the Seat of Moses (the Old Testament Magisterium) was not needed to tell the Israelites what 5 books belonged in the Pentateuch.

That's just as dumb as saying Peter, James, John, other apostles and elders were not the Magisterium of the Council of Jerusalem. So lets stick with straight up biblical exegesis. But we can't do that without some guidelines as agreed by all as to what makes a reasonable exegete: one who brings out the meaning of passages based on context, not pre-conceived biases. Show from Scripture, and Scripture Alone, where this dogma is taught, suggested, inferred or hinted at. Use sound exegetical guidelines.

Next, show from history that no hierarchy was needed to prove inspired books from forged books. Give historical evidence that "a pluralty of elders" in union with true believers was all that was needed to discern the canon, because we all know how human beings agree on everything, just like they agreed on everything and didn't really debate for 4 centuries.

Bible-believing Protestants can't agree on whether or not baptism is an essential doctrine because there they have no Magisterium, and don't think one is necessary to clarify what is a moral act and what is not. They don't want a Magisterium, and should stop making a fuss about something they don't want.
This may shed some light on why Bible Believing Protestants are losing their best scholars to Catholicism. The answers they were getting fell short of common sense.

IMO, failure to prove the Magisterium in harmony with Sacred Tradition and Sacred Scripture were/are not needed for sound teaching tells me the Bible-believing Protestant is an oxymoron of terms.

What council in Jesus day determined which scrolls (books) belonged in the torah?

how could they know which books were inspired and which were not, using your own reasoning?

 

[Eternally Grateful]

And that's the ENTIRE point.
There are a LOT of "fringe" positions out there that fall within the parameters of Christianity.

MY question was about Authority - and WHO has it, per Matt. 18:15-18 when they disagree?

The authority given to the church would be bound by scripture

it’s funny you use scripture to try to prove your point then deny scripture is the source

if a calvinist and baptisT (who both believe in the same gospel by the way) argue about who is right. Then they go to the word. The Catholic Church is just another church, all churches would need to use the word as the final authority, one who does not should be condemned as followers of men not God

 

[Eternally Grateful]

Catholics can know if they are saved, but they cannot claim to be 100% infallibly certain they are saved until AFTER they are dead, not before. Otherwise, they would be contradicting Scripture. See above post.

Then John was wrong

because he told us we can know we have eternal life

you claim we can’t

that alone should set you to pause in what you believe

 

[Marymog]

Your sarcasm is astounding, the blind following teh blind

God bless yo.

Soooo you don’t lean on your own understanding?

 

[Eternally Grateful]

Soooo you don’t lean on your own understanding?

It’s obvious you do not listen to a thing people say

your argument is a trained one, one taught you by your leaders and teachers, one used to get you to mock us, because that’s all you ever do.

I actually feel sorrow for you

 

[Marymog]

It’s obvious you do not listen to a thing people say

your argument is a trained one, one taught you by your leaders and teachers, one used to get you to mock us, because that’s all you ever do.

I actually feel sorrow for you

No, it’s not obvious. I think I made it pretty clear that I listen to and test EVERYTHING that people say. Is it your conclusion if I don’t agree with you I’m not listening?

Being confident in what I believe and rejecting what you believe is mocking you? How do you come to that conclusion?

Scripture says we are supposed to follow our teachers and leaders (elders) and that they are worthy of double honor and in charge of our soul. You are your own leader. Are YOU worthy of double honor?

Please, don’t feel sorry for me. I used to be a misguided Protestant When I was deciding for myself what the truth is or isn’t. Now I am confident I have found the truth. It is in The Church which is the pillar and foundation of truth....just like Scripture says.

 

[Eternally Grateful]

No, it’s not obvious. I think I made it pretty clear that I listen to and test EVERYTHING that people say. Is it your conclusion if I don’t agree with you I’m not listening?

if you did you would not believe the way you do, it’s why most anti Catholics are no longer catholic

Being confident in what I believe and rejecting what you believe is mocking you? How do you come to that conclusion?

Scripture says we are supposed to follow our teachers and leaders (elders) and that they are worthy of double honor and in charge of our soul. You are your own leader. Are YOU worthy of double honor?

Please, don’t feel sorry for me. I used to be a misguided Protestant When I was deciding for myself what the truth is or isn’t. Now I am confident I have found the truth. It is in The Church which is the pillar and foundation of truth....just like Scripture says.

yep, they are

but if they are wrong they take you and everyone else with them

again, if your leaders were so infallible, their beliefs would line up with the word, and they would not need all these extra biblical things to support them

your trained to mock us, and use the excuses you always use,

most of us see right through it, because we were not trained like you, that’s hey Luther got much wrong, because of fear and training. It’s hard to give everything up when you been so trained

 

[Marymog]

The authority given to the church would be bound by scripture

it’s funny you use scripture to try to prove your point then deny scripture is the source

if a calvinist and baptisT (who both believe in the same gospel by the way) argue about who is right. Then they go to the word. The Catholic Church is just another church, all churches would need to use the word as the final authority, one who does not should be condemned as followers of men not God

Hi EG,

I have met YOUR criteria. I go to my Church who ‘uses the word as the final authority’. But yet you accuse me (all Catholics) of being a follower of men. Please help me understand how I am a follower of men when I have met your criteria of going to the Church?

Mary