Books Outside the Bible

[Marymog]

Immaculate conception: "The Immaculate Conception means that Mary, whose conception was brought about the normal way, was conceived without original sin or its stain—that’s what "immaculate" means: without stain." (from Catholic.com)

Edit: Here's another quote, this one from Catholic.org (Catholic Encyclopedia)

In the Constitution Ineffabilis Deus of 8 December, 1854, Pius IX pronounced and defined that the Blessed Virgin Mary"in the first instance of her conception, by a singular privilege and grace granted by God, in view of the merits of JesusChrist , the Saviour of the human race , was preserved exempt from all stain of original sin."​

The idea that Mary was "preserved exempt from the stain of original sin" is a completely unbiblical idea. Consider what the apostle Paul said in the following verses:

Romans 3:21-24--
But now, apart from the law, God’s righteousness has been revealed — attested by the Law and the Prophets — that is, God’s righteousness through faith in Jesus Christ, to all who believe, since there is no distinction. For all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God. They are justified freely by His grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus.

I don't see Paul making any exception here, not even for Mary, who was conceived of man's seed (i.e. she had a human father)! Jesus Christ was NOT conceived of man's seed, but of the Holy Spirit; therefore, He was born without original sin.

This is just one of many doctrines the Catholic Church teaches that is unbiblical! There are many more.

Paul was talking about sin not "original sin".

Do babies sin? How about adults who have a low mental capacity? Do they sin?

Mary

 

[Prayer Warrior]

You agree with the dogma of the men of the Protestant churches (or maybe you created it yourself in your own head) but I can't agree with Catholic dogma?

Mary

My point is that I can disagree with Protestant doctrine without being kicked out of all christendom. To give an example, I was a member of a Presbyterian church, and I completely disagreed with one of the main points of Calvinism. The pastor and I had several discussions about this in which I openly (and intensely, but respectfully) disagreed with him. I also openly disagreed with one of the elders of the church about this. There was never a hint that I would be kicked out of that local church, much less "excommunicated."

On the other hand, a Catholic cannot disagree (at least, openly) with the dogma of the Catholic Church without being excommunicated--excluded from the sacraments that Catholics believe are essential for salvation.

 

[Marymog]

Because I thought that maybe you and BoL are the same person even though posting under 2 different names is against TOS.

You admitted that you use bold. Are you BOL? Just using your own logic

Mary

 

[Prayer Warrior]

Paul was talking about sin not "original sin".

Do babies sin? How about adults who have a low mental capacity? Do they sin?

Mary

Babies are born of man's seed (Adam's seed); therefore, they have a sin nature and must be born again.

 

[CoreIssue]

Paul was talking about sin not "original sin".

Do babies sin? How about adults who have a low mental capacity? Do they sin?

Mary

Yes. But innocents are not held accountable for sin.

 

[Marymog]

My point is that I can disagree with Protestant doctrine without being kicked out of all christendom. To give an example, I was a member of a Presbyterian church, and I completely disagreed with one of the main points of Calvinism. The pastor and I had several discussions about this in which I openly (and intensely) disagreed with him. I also openly disagreed with one of the elders of the church about this. There was never a hint that I would be kicked out of that local church, much less "excommunicated."

On the other hand, a Catholic cannot disagree (at least, openly) with the dogma of the Catholic Church without being excommunicated--excluded from the sacraments that Catholics believe are essential for salvation.

Soooo you don't think the Catholic OR the Presbyterian church has the Truth......only you do?

How can you be a Presbyterian if you disagree with them?

Mary

 

[Marymog]

Babies are born of man's seed (Adam's seed); therefore, they have a sin nature and must be born again.

Where does scripture say that babies must be born again?

You dodged the adults who have a low mental capacity question.

Mary

 

[BreadOfLife]

The church is built a on Petra (Christ, not Petros (Peter)

It is a local church office, not a denominational hierarchy.

There's not a single reference or deferral to Peter in all the bible.

First of all – it’s painfully evident that you don’t understand how debates work.

It doesn’t matter how many denials you post – they are NOT evidence. Without some actual Scriptural, historical and linguistic proof for your claims – your argument is DEAD on arrival. This is the case with EVERYTHING you just posted – which I will no obliterate, point by point . . .

In Matt. 16:18, Jesus told Simon “And so I say to you, you are Peter (Petros), and upon this rock (Petra) I will build my church, and the gates of the netherworld shall not prevail against it.”

BOTH instances of “ROCK” apply to Simon Peter because Jesus wasn’t speaking Greek – He spoke ARAMAIC. In Aramaic, there is only ONE word for Rock and that is “Kepha”. In the Greek – John HAD to call Simon “Petros” because he is a MAN – and “Petra” is a FEMININE noun.

What Jesus actually said was:
“And so I say to you, you are Kepha, and upon this Kepha I will build my church, and the gates of the netherworld shall not prevail against it.”

This is why St. Peter is referred to as “Cephas” in many of St. Paul’s letters, because Cephas is the closest Greek transliteration of the Aramaic, Kepha.
Jesus clearly appointed St. Peter as earthly head of the Church and Chief Apostle here in Matthew’s Gospel as well as Luke 22:31-32, where he told Peter that he prayed for him ALONE to strengthen the other Apostles in his absence.

In John 21:15-19, Jesus confronts Peter 3 times, which mirrors the 3 times Peter denied Him. However, Jesus not only asks Peter of he loves Him – He tells Peter 3 times to feed His lambs, tend his sheep and to feed His sheep. Jesus doesn’t give this instruction to any other Apostle.

You anti-Catholics believe Peter is NOT the Rock but that the Rock refers to his confession of faith. This violates the hermeneutical principle known as the “Granville Sharp’s Rule”, which states:

`When the copulative KAI connects two nouns of the same case, if the article HO or any of its cases precedes the first of the said nouns or participles, and is not repeated before the second noun or participle, the latter always relates to the same person that is expressed or described by the first noun or participle; i.e., it denotes a further description of the first-named person.'" (A Manual Of The Greek New Testament, Dana & Mantey, p. 147)

MOST anti-Catholics adhere to this Protestant hermeneutical rule – EXCEPT in the case of Matt. 16:18.
Gee – I wonder WHY that is . . .

Regarding your asinine claim that Jesus was talking to ALL the Apostles and not just Peter – even a 2nd grader can see that he was speaking ONLY to Peter:

Matt. 16:15-18
15 He said to THEM (plural), “But who do YOU (plural) say that I am?”

16 Simon Peter said in reply, “You are the Messiah, the Son of the living God.”
17 Jesus said to HIM (singular) in reply, “Blessed are YOU (singular), Simon son of Jonah. For flesh and blood has not revealed this to YOU (singular), but my heavenly Father.
18 And so I say to YOU (singular), YOU (singular) are Peter (singular), and upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of the netherworld shall not prevail against it.

19 I will give YOU (singular) the keys to the kingdom of heaven. Whatever YOU (singular) bind on earth shall be bound in heaven; and whatever YOU (singular) loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.”

Couldn’t be ANY CLEARER that from verses 16-18, Jesus is talking to Peter – and Peter ALONE.

As for Acts 1:20 – this is in reference to Judas’s OFFICE of Bishop (Episkopoi).
It shows that it was a SUCCESSIVE office.

As to your final moronic claim that there is “not a single reference or deferral to Peter in all the bible” – this is complete hogwash, as I have already listed SEVERAL.

Here’s ONE more:
In Matt. 10:2 – Peter is listed as the FIRST Apostle (Protos) – even though he was NOT the first Apostle chosen.
Gee – I WONDER why that is . . .

You LOSE because you refuse to do your homework.
It’s no WONDER your forum is dying . . .

 

[Prayer Warrior]

Soooo you don't think the Catholic OR the Presbyterian church has the Truth......only you do?

How can you be a Presbyterian if you disagree with them?

Mary

Of course I don't think that I'm the only person who has the truth! I just don't subscribe to any one Protestant denomination's doctrine.

I see Protestant denominational doctrines as being biblical overall (i.e. within the teaching of the Bible), but as representing different aspects of Bible doctrine. For instance, the Presbyterians emphasize predestination, while the Methodists emphasize man's free will. I believe that both of these ideas are taught in the Bible; they're two sides of the same coin, so to speak.

Some Catholic Church doctrine is completely unbiblical--like the dogma of Immaculate Conception. It's based on man's faulty reasoning instead of the Bible. As I said before, this dogma is but one of many unbiblical Catholic doctrines.

Edit: Am I wrong about Catholics and excommunication?

 

[BreadOfLife]

Woe, BoL, you think that because the original Greek term means catholic, Luke (the writer of Acts) was talking about the Catholic denomination? And you're still insisting that Jesus Christ gave mere mortals supreme authority.... You're aware that there are other interpretations of the scriptures you listed, right?

Here's another version of these scriptures that sheds some light on their true meaning. This is the from Amplified Bible and shows shades of meaning according the original Greek.

15 He said to them, But who do you [yourselves] say that I am?
16 Simon Peter replied, You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.
17 Then Jesus answered him, Blessed (happy, fortunate, andto be envied) are you, Simon Bar-Jonah. For flesh and blood [men] have not revealed this to you, but My Father Who is in heaven.
18 And I tell you, you are Peter [Greek, Petros—a large piece of rock], and on this rock [Greek, petra—a huge rock like Gibraltar] I will build My church, and the gates of Hades (the powers of the infernal region) shall not overpower it [or be strong to its detriment or hold out against it].
19 I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven; and whatever you bind (declare to be improper and unlawful) on earth must be what is already bound in heaven; and whatever you loose (declare lawful) on earth must be what is already loosed in heaven.

Edit: This goes along with the "Lord's Prayer" in Matthew 6:7-13.

7 And when you pray, do not heap up phrases (multiply words, repeating the same ones over and over) as the Gentiles do, for they think they will be heard for their much speaking.
8 Do not be like them, for your Father knows what you need before you ask Him.
9 Pray, therefore, like this: Our Father Who is in heaven, hallowed (kept holy) be Your name.
10 Your kingdom come, Your will be done on earth as it is in heaven.
12 Give us this day our daily bread.
11 And forgive us our debts, as we also have forgiven (left, remitted, and let go of the debts, and havegiven up resentment against) our debtors.
13 And lead (bring) us not into temptation, but deliver us from the evil one. For Yours is the kingdom and the power and the glory forever. Amen.

Clearly, we are to pray that HIS will be done on earth as it is in Heaven. We pray in accordance with HIS supreme authority--HIS will!

WHAT is your point, exactly??
WHO said that we don’t pray the GOD’S will be done?? Unlike MOST Protestant denominations – we Catholics recite the Lord’s Prayer during EVERY Mass and several times during other devotions. I would venture to say that we are MOREfamiliar with it than Protestants.

As a matter of fact – the 1st century document called The Didache (Teachings of the Twelve Apostles) recommends reciting it THREE TIMES daily. Oh – you reject the Didache because it’s not Scripture??
WHERE do you think that you Protestants got the doxology at the end of the Lord’s Prayer (For thine is the Kingdom, etc.)??
That came NOT from Scripture – but from the DIDACHE.

The office of the Papacy is a GOD-given office. It is not the Pope we follow – but Christ.
The Pope is a VICAR – NOT the actual Christ.

So much for your charge that we follow a man instead of God . . .

 

[Prayer Warrior]

BoL, are you or were you a priest or on staff with a Catholic Church? I've never known a Catholic who knows what the Bible says, much less Greek and Aramaic texts.

 

[BreadOfLife]

No repercussions, harsh replies or accusations. But tell me. Who are you defending? Your denomination or Jesus?

You are more interested in defending Catholicism than in standing for the pure word of God, unleavened by the introduction of strange and unbiblical, ungodly doctrines.

Please do not tell me they are one and the same.

ALL denominations are MEN'S creations - and NOT God's.

This includes them ALL.
Ask yourself, forgetting me or others, who do you represent? Jesus or your man created sect? This is a question for EVERY Christian by the way.

To answer your first question – I don’t belong to a “denomination”.
The Catholic Church is the Original Tree from which Protestantism splintered into denominations – and continues to splinter.

As to your second point – as I have already explained in GREAT detail – Christ and His Church are inseparable. Jesus EQUATES His very self with His Church (Acts 9:4-5).
Paul tells us that His Church is the FULLNESS of Christ (Eph. 1:22-23). For YOU to try and separate the two is heresy.

Your LAST comments are 100% correct.
ALL denominations were started by mere MEN in the 16th century and beyond.

 

[BreadOfLife]

BoL, are you or were you a priest or on staff with a Catholic Church? I've never known a Catholic who knows what the Bible says, much less Greek and Aramaic texts.

No, I am simply an educated Catholic.

 

[Prayer Warrior]

No, I am simply an educated Catholic.

You are a rare breed, deceived, but unique.

 

[BreadOfLife]

Certainly not you.
The boogey man maybe, but not you.....

Then let's see some evidence . . .

 

[BreadOfLife]

You are a rare breed, deceived, but unique.

If I'm so "deceived" - WHY is it that NONE of you has be able to present a valid refutation??

That's a tough question for all of you . . .

 

[Frank Lee]

The brainwashing of Muslims or others is always the same. This is the evil of man created religion. There is NEVER any love or gentleness in their Roman gestapo doctrine. Wolves cloaked in colorful robes.

There is nothing in this religion's doctrine of love. Only lifeless works. The spirit behind the replies of this cult is viscious as we see here. Spewing self righteousness and venom.

The very first catholic and Jesus' reply.

While Jesus was saying these things, one of the women in the crowd raised her voice and said to Him, "Blessed is the womb that bore You and the breasts at which You nursed." But He said, "On the contrary, blessed are those who hear the word of God and observe it."
Luke 11:27‭-‬28 NASB

Did not God place this for a reason? Yes as a warning against this dangerous cult.

 

[CoreIssue]

First of all – it’s painfully evident that you don’t understand how debates work.

It doesn’t matter how many denials you post – they are NOT evidence. Without some actual Scriptural, historical and linguistic proof for your claims – your argument is DEAD on arrival. This is the case with EVERYTHING you just posted – which I will no obliterate, point by point . . .

In Matt. 16:18, Jesus told Simon “And so I say to you, you are Peter (Petros), and upon this rock (Petra) I will build my church, and the gates of the netherworld shall not prevail against it.”

BOTH instances of “ROCK” apply to Simon Peter because Jesus wasn’t speaking Greek – He spoke ARAMAIC. In Aramaic, there is only ONE word for Rock and that is “Kepha”. In the Greek – John HAD to call Simon “Petros” because he is a MAN – and “Petra” is a FEMININE noun.

What Jesus actually said was:
“And so I say to you, you are Kepha, and upon this Kepha I will build my church, and the gates of the netherworld shall not prevail against it.”

This is why St. Peter is referred to as “Cephas” in many of St. Paul’s letters, because Cephas is the closest Greek transliteration of the Aramaic, Kepha.
Jesus clearly appointed St. Peter as earthly head of the Church and Chief Apostle here in Matthew’s Gospel as well as Luke 22:31-32, where he told Peter that he prayed for him ALONE to strengthen the other Apostles in his absence.

In John 21:15-19, Jesus confronts Peter 3 times, which mirrors the 3 times Peter denied Him. However, Jesus not only asks Peter of he loves Him – He tells Peter 3 times to feed His lambs, tend his sheep and to feed His sheep. Jesus doesn’t give this instruction to any other Apostle.

You anti-Catholics believe Peter is NOT the Rock but that the Rock refers to his confession of faith. This violates the hermeneutical principle known as the “Granville Sharp’s Rule”, which states:

`When the copulative KAI connects two nouns of the same case, if the article HO or any of its cases precedes the first of the said nouns or participles, and is not repeated before the second noun or participle, the latter always relates to the same person that is expressed or described by the first noun or participle; i.e., it denotes a further description of the first-named person.'" (A Manual Of The Greek New Testament, Dana & Mantey, p. 147)

MOST anti-Catholics adhere to this Protestant hermeneutical rule – EXCEPT in the case of Matt. 16:18.
Gee – I wonder WHY that is . . .

Regarding your asinine claim that Jesus was talking to ALL the Apostles and not just Peter – even a 2nd grader can see that he was speaking ONLY to Peter:

Matt. 16:15-18
15 He said to THEM (plural), “But who do YOU (plural) say that I am?”

16 Simon Peter said in reply, “You are the Messiah, the Son of the living God.”
17 Jesus said to HIM (singular) in reply, “Blessed are YOU (singular), Simon son of Jonah. For flesh and blood has not revealed this to YOU (singular), but my heavenly Father.
18 And so I say to YOU (singular), YOU (singular) are Peter (singular), and upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of the netherworld shall not prevail against it.

19 I will give YOU (singular) the keys to the kingdom of heaven. Whatever YOU (singular) bind on earth shall be bound in heaven; and whatever YOU (singular) loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.”

Couldn’t be ANY CLEARER that from verses 16-18, Jesus is talking to Peter – and Peter ALONE.

As for Acts 1:20 – this is in reference to Judas’s OFFICE of Bishop (Episkopoi).
It shows that it was a SUCCESSIVE office.

As to your final moronic claim that there is “not a single reference or deferral to Peter in all the bible” – this is complete hogwash, as I have already listed SEVERAL.

Here’s ONE more:
In Matt. 10:2 – Peter is listed as the FIRST Apostle (Protos) – even though he was NOT the first Apostle chosen.
Gee – I WONDER why that is . . .

You LOSE because you refuse to do your homework.
It’s no WONDER your forum is dying . . .

I have studied forces 57 years.

Had tons of debates on theology and while a Councilman, Mayor and State Arbitrator.

Far more experience in study than you.

As far as being listed first, someone has to be. That does not give them an elevated position.

What list? Haven't seen one.

I stand by what I said.

As I have said in general most forms are dying. Rapture Ready and Christianforums have merged with others and are half or more the size of what they used to be.

Biblically, the only Bishops are in the local churches. No denominations with hierarchies.

Kai distinguishes individuals.

You can also refer to a group such as the committee, council, etc. A singular group of plural composition.

All you're doing is quoting catholic theologians.

Did Jesus Speak Greek?

 

[Marymog]

Of course I don't think that I'm the only person who has the truth! I just don't subscribe to any one Protestant denomination's doctrine.

I see Protestant denominational doctrines as being biblical overall (i.e. within the teaching of the Bible), but as representing different aspects of Bible doctrine. For instance, the Presbyterians emphasize predestination, while the Methodists emphasize man's free will. I believe that both of these ideas are taught in the Bible; they're two sides of the same coin, so to speak.

Some Catholic Church doctrine is completely unbiblical--like the dogma of Immaculate Conception. It's based on man's faulty reasoning instead of the Bible. As I said before, this dogma is but one of many unbiblical Catholic doctrines.

Edit: Am I wrong about Catholics and excommunication?

It seems to me that you are saying that you do have the Truth since you know how to sift thru everyone else's doctrines and decide that it is wrong with that doctrine. If you know which doctrines everyone else got wrong, you must know what doctrines are right. Right?

Excommunication occurs when one has committed a particularly grave sin as does not seek forgiveness or repent.

Mary

 

[LC627]

So the question still remains: Can you show me where @BreadOfLife said salvation is by faith alone??

He probably means by works alone.

Mary

I believe you missed my sarcasm in reference to Martin Luther.