No many people think this is a religous teaching.And for divorce yes God hates it but he doesnt say its a sin name me anyone who has ever gone through a divorce that didnt hate it everyone is hurt but God himself says he divorced Israel God can not sin so divorce is not a sin.It says if the wife leaves her husband not divorce him Women didnt have the same rights in those days they usally had no means of support. If a women left it was usally for a good reason but the husband was not allowed to divorce her just because she left. This is very vague and unspecific to base a whole doctrine onIf the husband divorced his wife that was a differnt matter.
Sola Scriptura, again
- Thread starter goldy
- Start date
-
Welcome to Christian Forums, a Christian Forum that recognizes that all Christians are a work in progress.
You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
- Status
(kriss;26867)
There are hundreds of men's traditions in all religions but I was trying to stick to more general things than to single out certain faiths
Traditions - aren't necessarily a bad thing. God tells us to hold onto them (both oral & written) firmly: 1Cor 11:2 Now I praise you because you remember me in everything and hold firmly to the traditions, just as I delivered them to you. 2 Thessalonians 2:15 15Therefore, brethren, stand fast, and hold the traditions which ye have been taught, whether by word, or our epistle.
There are hundreds of men's traditions in all religions but I was trying to stick to more general things than to single out certain faiths
Traditions - aren't necessarily a bad thing. God tells us to hold onto them (both oral & written) firmly: 1Cor 11:2 Now I praise you because you remember me in everything and hold firmly to the traditions, just as I delivered them to you. 2 Thessalonians 2:15 15Therefore, brethren, stand fast, and hold the traditions which ye have been taught, whether by word, or our epistle.
(kriss;26878)
No many people think this is a religous teaching.And for divorce yes God hates it but he doesnt say its a sin name me anyone who has ever gone through a divorce that didnt hate it everyone is hurt but God himself says he divorced Israel God can not sin so divorce is not a sin.It says if the wife leaves her husband not divorce him Women didnt have the same rights in those days they usally had no means of support. If a women left it was usally for a good reason but the husband was not allowed to divorce her just because she left. This is very vague and unspecific to base a whole doctrine onIf the husband divorced his wife that was a differnt matter.
Where is the verse where God said he "divorced" Israel. I'd like to look that up please.Also - found another verse: Matthew 5:32But I say unto you, That whosoever shall put away his wife, saving for the cause of fornication, causeth her to commit adultery: and whosoever shall marry her that is divorced committeth adultery.Sounds like remarriage is a no-no big time.Also, God takes vows very seriously. If we stand before Him and vow till death do us part, we are held to that vow: Numbers 30:2If a man vow a vow unto the LORD, or swear an oath to bind his soul with a bond; he shall not break his word, he shall do according to all that proceedeth out of his mouth.I think there are more than enough scriptures to make a case that divorce / remarriage is a sin. Will God forgive the repentant? Of course.
No many people think this is a religous teaching.And for divorce yes God hates it but he doesnt say its a sin name me anyone who has ever gone through a divorce that didnt hate it everyone is hurt but God himself says he divorced Israel God can not sin so divorce is not a sin.It says if the wife leaves her husband not divorce him Women didnt have the same rights in those days they usally had no means of support. If a women left it was usally for a good reason but the husband was not allowed to divorce her just because she left. This is very vague and unspecific to base a whole doctrine onIf the husband divorced his wife that was a differnt matter.
Where is the verse where God said he "divorced" Israel. I'd like to look that up please.Also - found another verse: Matthew 5:32But I say unto you, That whosoever shall put away his wife, saving for the cause of fornication, causeth her to commit adultery: and whosoever shall marry her that is divorced committeth adultery.Sounds like remarriage is a no-no big time.Also, God takes vows very seriously. If we stand before Him and vow till death do us part, we are held to that vow: Numbers 30:2If a man vow a vow unto the LORD, or swear an oath to bind his soul with a bond; he shall not break his word, he shall do according to all that proceedeth out of his mouth.I think there are more than enough scriptures to make a case that divorce / remarriage is a sin. Will God forgive the repentant? Of course.
Water in baptism is symbolic only its symbolic of washing away sin and coming into the living water of Jesus Christ and if you give me time to find this It is written in the early writting of the Catholic church that water does not wash away sins. Think of the thief on the cross jesus said I will see you in heaven this day how because he repented and believed upon the lord and was baptised by thr holy spirit When Jesus was with John the holy ghost came upon him in the likeness of a dove the water was symbolic it did nothingThere is nothing wrong with water baptism water is just is not required.We are saved by grace in our repentance and acceptance water or not
I didnt say all traditions were bad I just said they exist in all religions some are very bad others are acceptable I was just pointing out the fact that traditions are hard to tell from the word because as humans we cling to them as facts even if they are not
(kriss;26882)
I didnt say all traditions were bad I just said they exist in all religions some are very bad others are acceptable I was just pointing out the fact that traditions are hard to tell from the word because as humans we cling to them as facts even if they are not
Fair enough. But who decides if it's an acceptable tradition or a bad one?
I didnt say all traditions were bad I just said they exist in all religions some are very bad others are acceptable I was just pointing out the fact that traditions are hard to tell from the word because as humans we cling to them as facts even if they are not
Fair enough. But who decides if it's an acceptable tradition or a bad one?
(kriss;26881)
Water in baptism is symbolic only its symbolic of washing away sin and coming into the living water of Jesus Christ and if you give me time to find this It is written in the early writting of the Catholic church that water does not wash away sins.
Nowhere do we read that the Early Christians viewed baptism as "symbolic" - to the contrary: Hermas"‘I have heard, sir,’ said I [to the Shepherd], ‘from some teacher, that there is no other repentance except that which took place when we went down into the water and obtained the remission of our former sins.’ He said to me, ‘You have heard rightly, for so it is’" (The Shepherd 4:3:1–2 [A.D. 80]). Justin Martyr"As many as are persuaded and believe that what we [Christians] teach and say is true, and undertake to be able to live accordingly . . . are brought by us where there is water, and are regenerated in the same manner in which we were ourselves regenerated. For, in the name of God, the Father and Lord of the universe, and of our Savior Jesus Christ, and of the Holy Spirit, they then receive the washing with water. For Christ also said, ‘Except you be born again, you shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven’ [John 3:3]" (First Apology 61 [A.D. 151]). Origen"It is not possible to receive forgiveness of sins without baptism" (Exhortation to the Martyrs 30 [A.D. 235]). The Catholic Church teaches that baptism is necessary for the forgiveness of sins. We are commanded to be baptized. Acts 2:38Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost. (notice 1st baptized - then rec'd the Holy Spirit) Also, this sure doesn't sound like a suggestion or a symbolically good idea - it sounds like a command from God. The thief on the cross had what's known as a baptism of desire. It was obviously impossible for him to get down from that cross and get baptized - God is merciful above all and would obviously not hold that against Him.Most of us are not in a position where we cannot be baptized. So we should, for the forgiveness of our sins & to receive the Holy Spirit.
Water in baptism is symbolic only its symbolic of washing away sin and coming into the living water of Jesus Christ and if you give me time to find this It is written in the early writting of the Catholic church that water does not wash away sins.
Nowhere do we read that the Early Christians viewed baptism as "symbolic" - to the contrary: Hermas"‘I have heard, sir,’ said I [to the Shepherd], ‘from some teacher, that there is no other repentance except that which took place when we went down into the water and obtained the remission of our former sins.’ He said to me, ‘You have heard rightly, for so it is’" (The Shepherd 4:3:1–2 [A.D. 80]). Justin Martyr"As many as are persuaded and believe that what we [Christians] teach and say is true, and undertake to be able to live accordingly . . . are brought by us where there is water, and are regenerated in the same manner in which we were ourselves regenerated. For, in the name of God, the Father and Lord of the universe, and of our Savior Jesus Christ, and of the Holy Spirit, they then receive the washing with water. For Christ also said, ‘Except you be born again, you shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven’ [John 3:3]" (First Apology 61 [A.D. 151]). Origen"It is not possible to receive forgiveness of sins without baptism" (Exhortation to the Martyrs 30 [A.D. 235]). The Catholic Church teaches that baptism is necessary for the forgiveness of sins. We are commanded to be baptized. Acts 2:38Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost. (notice 1st baptized - then rec'd the Holy Spirit) Also, this sure doesn't sound like a suggestion or a symbolically good idea - it sounds like a command from God. The thief on the cross had what's known as a baptism of desire. It was obviously impossible for him to get down from that cross and get baptized - God is merciful above all and would obviously not hold that against Him.Most of us are not in a position where we cannot be baptized. So we should, for the forgiveness of our sins & to receive the Holy Spirit.
Each needs to look at the traditions in thier church and weigh them against the Word this is how we learn to decern its like a marrige in a way everyone has faults the question is can you live with the faults. But like all relationships you have to look at the faults to make an educated choice. Most people would rather just deny they are there. Example; I know Christ was not born in Dec and I do not celebrate his birth. but I do celebrate him on that Day if others think it is his birth they are celebrating fine. I know better but that doesnt mean I can not join in and thank him for all he has done for me throught the year. So if my church wants a Christmas celebration Im there just not for the exact reason as everyone else. Heres one verse where God divorces IsraelJer 3:8 And I saw, when for all the causes whereby backsliding Israel committed adultery I had put her away, and given her a bill of divorce; yet her treacherous sister Judah feared not, but went and played the harlot also.
(Peacebewithyou;26886)
Nowhere do we read that the Early Christians viewed baptism as "symbolic" - to the contrary: Hermas"‘I have heard, sir,’ said I [to the Shepherd], ‘from some teacher, that there is no other repentance except that which took place when we went down into the water and obtained the remission of our former sins.’ He said to me, ‘You have heard rightly, for so it is’" (The Shepherd 4:3:1–2 [A.D. 80]). Justin Martyr"As many as are persuaded and believe that what we [Christians] teach and say is true, and undertake to be able to live accordingly . . . are brought by us where there is water, and are regenerated in the same manner in which we were ourselves regenerated. For, in the name of God, the Father and Lord of the universe, and of our Savior Jesus Christ, and of the Holy Spirit, they then receive the washing with water. For Christ also said, ‘Except you be born again, you shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven’ [John 3:3]" (First Apology 61 [A.D. 151]). Origen"It is not possible to receive forgiveness of sins without baptism" (Exhortation to the Martyrs 30 [A.D. 235]). The Catholic Church teaches that baptism is necessary for the forgiveness of sins. We are commanded to be baptized. Acts 2:38Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost. (notice 1st baptized - then rec'd the Holy Spirit) Also, this sure doesn't sound like a suggestion or a symbolically good idea - it sounds like a command from God. The thief on the cross had what's known as a baptism of desire. It was obviously impossible for him to get down from that cross and get baptized - God is merciful above all and would obviously not hold that against Him.Most of us are not in a position where we cannot be baptized. So we should, for the forgiveness of our sins & to receive the Holy Spirit.
Baptised yes it is required water is not I will find the historical document for you when I have a few minutes. But there again it is not a bad tradition and hurts no one
Nowhere do we read that the Early Christians viewed baptism as "symbolic" - to the contrary: Hermas"‘I have heard, sir,’ said I [to the Shepherd], ‘from some teacher, that there is no other repentance except that which took place when we went down into the water and obtained the remission of our former sins.’ He said to me, ‘You have heard rightly, for so it is’" (The Shepherd 4:3:1–2 [A.D. 80]). Justin Martyr"As many as are persuaded and believe that what we [Christians] teach and say is true, and undertake to be able to live accordingly . . . are brought by us where there is water, and are regenerated in the same manner in which we were ourselves regenerated. For, in the name of God, the Father and Lord of the universe, and of our Savior Jesus Christ, and of the Holy Spirit, they then receive the washing with water. For Christ also said, ‘Except you be born again, you shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven’ [John 3:3]" (First Apology 61 [A.D. 151]). Origen"It is not possible to receive forgiveness of sins without baptism" (Exhortation to the Martyrs 30 [A.D. 235]). The Catholic Church teaches that baptism is necessary for the forgiveness of sins. We are commanded to be baptized. Acts 2:38Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost. (notice 1st baptized - then rec'd the Holy Spirit) Also, this sure doesn't sound like a suggestion or a symbolically good idea - it sounds like a command from God. The thief on the cross had what's known as a baptism of desire. It was obviously impossible for him to get down from that cross and get baptized - God is merciful above all and would obviously not hold that against Him.Most of us are not in a position where we cannot be baptized. So we should, for the forgiveness of our sins & to receive the Holy Spirit.
Baptised yes it is required water is not I will find the historical document for you when I have a few minutes. But there again it is not a bad tradition and hurts no one
(kriss;26887)
Heres one verse where God divorces IsraelJer 3:8 And I saw, when for all the causes whereby backsliding Israel committed adultery I had put her away, and given her a bill of divorce; yet her treacherous sister Judah feared not, but went and played the harlot also.
But just like the verses in the NT, it sounds like God is "divorcing" Israel because she commited adultery. While God hates a divorce, it seems like in the case of adultery it may be an exception. But if the unfaithful is sorry, I think we are obligated to forgive. "Forgive us our tresspasses as we forgive others..." We read though in Jer 3 that even He longs for his adulterous wife Israel to return to Him. Return, faithless Israel,' declares the LORD; 'I will not look upon you in anger For I am gracious,' declares the LORD; 'I will not be angry forever. 13'Only acknowledge your iniquity,
Heres one verse where God divorces IsraelJer 3:8 And I saw, when for all the causes whereby backsliding Israel committed adultery I had put her away, and given her a bill of divorce; yet her treacherous sister Judah feared not, but went and played the harlot also.
But just like the verses in the NT, it sounds like God is "divorcing" Israel because she commited adultery. While God hates a divorce, it seems like in the case of adultery it may be an exception. But if the unfaithful is sorry, I think we are obligated to forgive. "Forgive us our tresspasses as we forgive others..." We read though in Jer 3 that even He longs for his adulterous wife Israel to return to Him. Return, faithless Israel,' declares the LORD; 'I will not look upon you in anger For I am gracious,' declares the LORD; 'I will not be angry forever. 13'Only acknowledge your iniquity,
Well that maybe but it still doesnt say divorce is a sin it just says he hates it. My point is that churchs that use this as doctrine are not told to do so. And in no way is it an unforgivable sin. The church steps out bounds to say this can not be repented for and forgotten by God. Besides what scripture explains we are saved by grace alone and your explanation of the thief on the cross being baptied by desire maybe the church's explanation but no where in Gods Word does it mention baptism by desire as an explanationthis is from Eusebius chapter xl (5) testimonies to John the Baptist 5 For Herod slew him, a good man and one who exhorted the Jews to come and receive baptism, practicing virtue and exercising righteousness toward each other and toward God; for baptism would appear acceptable unto Him when they employed it, not for the remission of certain sins, but for the purification of the body, as the soul had been already purified in righteousness.The early church had a differnt explanation that was more in line with the scripture that is we saved by grace by repentance and acceptance just as the thiefit later was changed. It is a beatiful cermoney and hurts no one but if you are in a desert one should never think they can not repent and accept Christ as their savior
(kriss;26896)
The early church had a differnt explanation that was more in line with the scripture that is we saved by grace by repentance and acceptance just as the thiefit later was changed.
I would be interested in reading that.
The early church had a differnt explanation that was more in line with the scripture that is we saved by grace by repentance and acceptance just as the thiefit later was changed.
I would be interested in reading that.
(kriss;26896)
Well that maybe but it still doesnt say divorce is a sin it just says he hates it. My point is that churchs that use this as doctrine are not told to do so. And in no way is it an unforgivable sin. The church steps out bounds to say this can not be repented for and forgotten by God. Besides what scripture explains we are saved by grace alone and your explanation of the thief on the cross being baptied by desire maybe the church's explanation but no where in Gods Word does it mention baptism by desire as an explanationthis is from Eusebius chapter xl (5) testimonies to John the Baptist 5 For Herod slew him, a good man and one who exhorted the Jews to come and receive baptism, practicing virtue and exercising righteousness toward each other and toward God; for baptism would appear acceptable unto Him when they employed it, not for the remission of certain sins, but for the purification of the body, as the soul had been already purified in righteousness.The early church had a differnt explanation that was more in line with the scripture that is we saved by grace by repentance and acceptance just as the thiefit later was changed. It is a beatiful cermoney and hurts no one but if you are in a desert one should never think they can not repent and accept Christ as their savior
I think I'll jump back in here for a minute since this has been the Kriss vs. Peace debate
Nothing wrong with that, by the way. Peace kicks my rear end in theology knowledge. Anyway Kriss, can you tell me where in scripture where it says the Bible and the Bible alone is the sole rule of faith and truth for all Christians? Kriss, you're not gonna like to hear this, but Sola Scriptura is a man-made doctrine. Just like you think the RCC has a bunch of man-made doctrines, non-Catholic Christians have this one......and it's caused so much division, it's not even funny. Over 33,000 interpretations of scripture by non-Catholic Chriistians. By the way, I saw that you said that the RCC added books to the Bible. Sorry, that's wrong. Martin Luther threw them out after the Reformation because there were things in those books that he didn't agree with.....namely, purgatory.
Well that maybe but it still doesnt say divorce is a sin it just says he hates it. My point is that churchs that use this as doctrine are not told to do so. And in no way is it an unforgivable sin. The church steps out bounds to say this can not be repented for and forgotten by God. Besides what scripture explains we are saved by grace alone and your explanation of the thief on the cross being baptied by desire maybe the church's explanation but no where in Gods Word does it mention baptism by desire as an explanationthis is from Eusebius chapter xl (5) testimonies to John the Baptist 5 For Herod slew him, a good man and one who exhorted the Jews to come and receive baptism, practicing virtue and exercising righteousness toward each other and toward God; for baptism would appear acceptable unto Him when they employed it, not for the remission of certain sins, but for the purification of the body, as the soul had been already purified in righteousness.The early church had a differnt explanation that was more in line with the scripture that is we saved by grace by repentance and acceptance just as the thiefit later was changed. It is a beatiful cermoney and hurts no one but if you are in a desert one should never think they can not repent and accept Christ as their savior
I think I'll jump back in here for a minute since this has been the Kriss vs. Peace debate
Nothing wrong with that, by the way. Peace kicks my rear end in theology knowledge. Anyway Kriss, can you tell me where in scripture where it says the Bible and the Bible alone is the sole rule of faith and truth for all Christians? Kriss, you're not gonna like to hear this, but Sola Scriptura is a man-made doctrine. Just like you think the RCC has a bunch of man-made doctrines, non-Catholic Christians have this one......and it's caused so much division, it's not even funny. Over 33,000 interpretations of scripture by non-Catholic Chriistians. By the way, I saw that you said that the RCC added books to the Bible. Sorry, that's wrong. Martin Luther threw them out after the Reformation because there were things in those books that he didn't agree with.....namely, purgatory.(kriss;26896)
Well that maybe but it still doesnt say divorce is a sin it just says he hates it. My point is that churchs that use this as doctrine are not told to do so. And in no way is it an unforgivable sin. The church steps out bounds to say this can not be repented for and forgotten by God. Besides what scripture explains we are saved by grace alone and your explanation of the thief on the cross being baptied by desire maybe the church's explanation but no where in Gods Word does it mention baptism by desire as an explanationthis is from Eusebius chapter xl (5) testimonies to John the Baptist 5 For Herod slew him, a good man and one who exhorted the Jews to come and receive baptism, practicing virtue and exercising righteousness toward each other and toward God; for baptism would appear acceptable unto Him when they employed it, not for the remission of certain sins, but for the purification of the body, as the soul had been already purified in righteousness.The early church had a differnt explanation that was more in line with the scripture that is we saved by grace by repentance and acceptance just as the thiefit later was changed. It is a beatiful cermoney and hurts no one but if you are in a desert one should never think they can not repent and accept Christ as their savior
With regard to divorce, didn't Christ say that whoever divorces his spouse commits adultery? You said that Christ never said divorce is a sin. Isn't adultery a sin, and a very big sin?
Well that maybe but it still doesnt say divorce is a sin it just says he hates it. My point is that churchs that use this as doctrine are not told to do so. And in no way is it an unforgivable sin. The church steps out bounds to say this can not be repented for and forgotten by God. Besides what scripture explains we are saved by grace alone and your explanation of the thief on the cross being baptied by desire maybe the church's explanation but no where in Gods Word does it mention baptism by desire as an explanationthis is from Eusebius chapter xl (5) testimonies to John the Baptist 5 For Herod slew him, a good man and one who exhorted the Jews to come and receive baptism, practicing virtue and exercising righteousness toward each other and toward God; for baptism would appear acceptable unto Him when they employed it, not for the remission of certain sins, but for the purification of the body, as the soul had been already purified in righteousness.The early church had a differnt explanation that was more in line with the scripture that is we saved by grace by repentance and acceptance just as the thiefit later was changed. It is a beatiful cermoney and hurts no one but if you are in a desert one should never think they can not repent and accept Christ as their savior
With regard to divorce, didn't Christ say that whoever divorces his spouse commits adultery? You said that Christ never said divorce is a sin. Isn't adultery a sin, and a very big sin?
(goldy;27011)
(Kriss;26896)
Well that maybe but it still doesnt say divorce is a sin it just says he hates it. My point is that churchs that use this as doctrine are not told to do so. And in no way is it an unforgivable sin. The church steps out bounds to say this can not be repented for and forgotten by God. Besides what scripture explains we are saved by grace alone and your explanation of the thief on the cross being baptied by desire maybe the church's explanation but no where in Gods Word does it mention baptism by desire as an explanation this is from Eusebius chapter xl (5) testimonies to John the Baptist 5 For Herod slew him, a good man and one who exhorted the Jews to come and receive baptism, practicing virtue and exercising righteousness toward each other and toward God; for baptism would appear acceptable unto Him when they employed it, not for the remission of certain sins, but for the purification of the body, as the soul had been already purified in righteousness. The early church had a differnt explanation that was more in line with the scripture that is we saved by grace by repentance and acceptance just as the thief it later was changed. It is a beatiful cermoney and hurts no one but if you are in a desert one should never think they can not repent and accept Christ as their savior
With regard to divorce, didn't Christ say that whoever divorces his spouse commits adultery? You said that Christ never said divorce is a sin. Isn't adultery a sin, and a very big sin?Romans 6:23 - For the wages of sin is death; but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord.All sin is equal except one...Jag
(Kriss;26896)
Well that maybe but it still doesnt say divorce is a sin it just says he hates it. My point is that churchs that use this as doctrine are not told to do so. And in no way is it an unforgivable sin. The church steps out bounds to say this can not be repented for and forgotten by God. Besides what scripture explains we are saved by grace alone and your explanation of the thief on the cross being baptied by desire maybe the church's explanation but no where in Gods Word does it mention baptism by desire as an explanation this is from Eusebius chapter xl (5) testimonies to John the Baptist 5 For Herod slew him, a good man and one who exhorted the Jews to come and receive baptism, practicing virtue and exercising righteousness toward each other and toward God; for baptism would appear acceptable unto Him when they employed it, not for the remission of certain sins, but for the purification of the body, as the soul had been already purified in righteousness. The early church had a differnt explanation that was more in line with the scripture that is we saved by grace by repentance and acceptance just as the thief it later was changed. It is a beatiful cermoney and hurts no one but if you are in a desert one should never think they can not repent and accept Christ as their savior
With regard to divorce, didn't Christ say that whoever divorces his spouse commits adultery? You said that Christ never said divorce is a sin. Isn't adultery a sin, and a very big sin?Romans 6:23 - For the wages of sin is death; but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord.All sin is equal except one...Jag
(thesuperjag;27012)
Romans 6:23 - For the wages of sin is death; but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord.All sin is equal except one...Jag
So divorce is sin, right?
Romans 6:23 - For the wages of sin is death; but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord.All sin is equal except one...Jag
So divorce is sin, right?
(goldy;27009)
I think I'll jump back in here for a minute since this has been the Kriss vs. Peace debate Nothing wrong with that, by the way. Peace kicks my rear end in theology knowledge. Anyway Kriss, can you tell me where in scripture where it says the Bible and the Bible alone is the sole rule of faith and truth for all Christians? Kriss, you're not gonna like to hear this, but Sola Scriptura is a man-made doctrine. Just like you think the RCC has a bunch of man-made doctrines, non-Catholic Christians have this one......and it's caused so much division, it's not even funny. Over 33,000 interpretations of scripture by non-Catholic Chriistians. By the way, I saw that you said that the RCC added books to the Bible. Sorry, that's wrong. Martin Luther threw them out after the Reformation because there were things in those books that he didn't agree with.....namely, purgatory.
This is most absurd blashemous thing I have ever heard So you are so brain washed that you can even dare to think the Word of God which by the Way came first is a man made doctrine and your religion is not of men You are delusionalThere is only the God and the Word of God that matters your religion is only to serve him not the other way around. And as for your On this rock quote on Peter you again are mistaken it was speaking of all Christ believers(christians) not your catholic chuch if you remember Peter might have been the fisrt leader of Christain church but the church split into protestant and catholic we both have the same roots which by the way are in Judisim God never said the Catholics were right were choosen you have no more credituals than any one else except in your own minds and if those minds dare to put themselfs above the Word of God you are truly lost and maybe this explains all the false doctrine beliefs you accept as church doctrine you go ahead put your religion above God and all else and I assure you on judgement day he will tell you get behind me I never knew youPsby the way Peter was never Catholic(as you define it) he was a Christian only
I think I'll jump back in here for a minute since this has been the Kriss vs. Peace debate
Nothing wrong with that, by the way. Peace kicks my rear end in theology knowledge. Anyway Kriss, can you tell me where in scripture where it says the Bible and the Bible alone is the sole rule of faith and truth for all Christians? Kriss, you're not gonna like to hear this, but Sola Scriptura is a man-made doctrine. Just like you think the RCC has a bunch of man-made doctrines, non-Catholic Christians have this one......and it's caused so much division, it's not even funny. Over 33,000 interpretations of scripture by non-Catholic Chriistians. By the way, I saw that you said that the RCC added books to the Bible. Sorry, that's wrong. Martin Luther threw them out after the Reformation because there were things in those books that he didn't agree with.....namely, purgatory.This is most absurd blashemous thing I have ever heard So you are so brain washed that you can even dare to think the Word of God which by the Way came first is a man made doctrine and your religion is not of men You are delusionalThere is only the God and the Word of God that matters your religion is only to serve him not the other way around. And as for your On this rock quote on Peter you again are mistaken it was speaking of all Christ believers(christians) not your catholic chuch if you remember Peter might have been the fisrt leader of Christain church but the church split into protestant and catholic we both have the same roots which by the way are in Judisim God never said the Catholics were right were choosen you have no more credituals than any one else except in your own minds and if those minds dare to put themselfs above the Word of God you are truly lost and maybe this explains all the false doctrine beliefs you accept as church doctrine you go ahead put your religion above God and all else and I assure you on judgement day he will tell you get behind me I never knew youPsby the way Peter was never Catholic(as you define it) he was a Christian only
Jhn 6:44 No man can come to me, except the Father which hath sent me draw him: and I will raise him up at the last day.You wanna show me where it says the catholic church or any man will let you know who the father calls????God will call whom he likes NO church or religion need to get between me and my God he is the one in control ALL WISDOM comes from God and him alone not men or their religion To believe it wrong to go to straight to the father without going through some religion or person/ organization first. Is truly sad that your religion has made you so blind and co-depentant that you can not imagine going to his Word without filtering it through your church doctrine. But I guess thats why they need their own catholic bible instead of using Gods true Word wouldnt want the sheepeoples to read Gods real Word.the only reason a person would even think like this is to be brainwashed into believeing their church/religion will save them and as far as I know Only through the grace of God by our Lord Jesus Christ can we be saved.You wanna worship catholisim go ahead I worship God above all, his word, and his Word aloneI dont remember God saying oh and you must be catholic but then maybe thats what your church wants you to believe
(goldy;26811)
This will probably ruffle some feathers on here. But hey, that's why everyone on here loves me, rightI hear a whole lot of people on here giving me this sort of advice: "Goldy, you don't need the Catholic Church telling you what to do. Just read God's Word." Well personally, I read from the Word of God everyday along with saying other prayers. The RCC has daily readings and Sunday readings for everyday of the year. These are the exact same passages that are read at every single Catholic mass on the planet. I always find it interesting how Catholics are accused of having teachings that are un-biblical when the bible is a Catholic book!! A little history lesson, and I'm quoting an esteemed Catholic author: The Bible didn't just drop down from Heaven one fine day. The Bible was written by people just like us with some form of primitive inks and pens. 1500 years elapsed between the writing of the Book of Genesis and the writing of the Book of Revelation. The Bible was not originally written in English, needless to say. It is also critically important that we remember that the Bible, as we have it now, wasn't printed in any language at all until almost 1500 years after the Birth of Christ. For almost one and a half millennia after the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus, the only books that existed were hand-written. What type of perspective does that place on the modern Protestant-Evangelical idea that every person must carry around a Bible? (Rediscovering Catholicism, Kelly)The crux of every biblical argument between Catholic and non-Catholic Christians goes directly to interpretation. Folks, we need an Authority to interpret Sacred Scripture. If you feel you should be able to interpret Scripture any way you want, you are in essence making yourself God, your own authority. The Word of God has the power to transform lives, but it is NOT MEANT TO BE ABUSED AND INTERPRETED ANY WAY WE WOULD LIKE. Please keep this in mind when you read from the Word of God.
1 John 2:27 (King James Version)27.But the anointing which ye have received of him abideth in you, and ye need not that any man teach you: but as the same anointing teacheth you of all things, and is truth, and is no lie, and even as it hath taught you, ye shall abide in him.John 16:13 (King James Version) 13.Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth: for he shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak: and he will shew you things to come.The truth is in the word. A Man need only the Spirit of God to speak the truth.. In Peter we see all scriptures were written by Holy men of God who were inspired by the Holy Spirit/ The truth is upheld because the scripturess written were truth.Men need Jesus Christ and the Holy Spirit.. No man can know the truth of God without being taught by the Spirit personally.The 10 virgins shows they all waited for the bridegroom but they needed their own oil.
This will probably ruffle some feathers on here. But hey, that's why everyone on here loves me, right
I hear a whole lot of people on here giving me this sort of advice: "Goldy, you don't need the Catholic Church telling you what to do. Just read God's Word." Well personally, I read from the Word of God everyday along with saying other prayers. The RCC has daily readings and Sunday readings for everyday of the year. These are the exact same passages that are read at every single Catholic mass on the planet. I always find it interesting how Catholics are accused of having teachings that are un-biblical when the bible is a Catholic book!! A little history lesson, and I'm quoting an esteemed Catholic author: The Bible didn't just drop down from Heaven one fine day. The Bible was written by people just like us with some form of primitive inks and pens. 1500 years elapsed between the writing of the Book of Genesis and the writing of the Book of Revelation. The Bible was not originally written in English, needless to say. It is also critically important that we remember that the Bible, as we have it now, wasn't printed in any language at all until almost 1500 years after the Birth of Christ. For almost one and a half millennia after the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus, the only books that existed were hand-written. What type of perspective does that place on the modern Protestant-Evangelical idea that every person must carry around a Bible? (Rediscovering Catholicism, Kelly)The crux of every biblical argument between Catholic and non-Catholic Christians goes directly to interpretation. Folks, we need an Authority to interpret Sacred Scripture. If you feel you should be able to interpret Scripture any way you want, you are in essence making yourself God, your own authority. The Word of God has the power to transform lives, but it is NOT MEANT TO BE ABUSED AND INTERPRETED ANY WAY WE WOULD LIKE. Please keep this in mind when you read from the Word of God.1 John 2:27 (King James Version)27.But the anointing which ye have received of him abideth in you, and ye need not that any man teach you: but as the same anointing teacheth you of all things, and is truth, and is no lie, and even as it hath taught you, ye shall abide in him.John 16:13 (King James Version) 13.Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth: for he shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak: and he will shew you things to come.The truth is in the word. A Man need only the Spirit of God to speak the truth.. In Peter we see all scriptures were written by Holy men of God who were inspired by the Holy Spirit/ The truth is upheld because the scripturess written were truth.Men need Jesus Christ and the Holy Spirit.. No man can know the truth of God without being taught by the Spirit personally.The 10 virgins shows they all waited for the bridegroom but they needed their own oil.
What people who think that the Bible alone is the way to go ignore:1. The Bible didn't exist until hundreds of years after Christ. 2. The average person could not read the bible for over a centruy after that. Hmmm.. sort of difficult for God to guide His people, dont'cha think? They can't read - they don't own Bibles. I guess he's up there in heaven scratching his head saying, "Houston, we have a problem." Nope. Only kidding. When Jesus left his disciples He didn't hand out Bibles and say, "Now pass these out and tell the followers to read it and figure it out for themselves. THAT would be ridiculous because of #1 & #2. Instead, he said, "Upon this rock (PETER) I build my Church. Hello? Not a Bible to guide the people.. but a Church.So toss out your Bibles. No, kidding again. You DO however need HIS CHURCH that HE (Jesus) established to understand HIS word. Because what happens when we all, claiming the Holy Spirit as our guide" go it alone? It becomes your opinion VS. mine vs. Kriss vs. Pariah vs. Denver vs. Jag vs. Jehovah's Witness vs. Mormon vs. Methodist vs. Lutheran vs. non-denom etc. etc. etc. What a mosh pit of confusion. And God is a God of order, not confusion. Spend 5 minutes poking around on this site and you'll find a bunch of people who disagree about what the Bible says. Do you really think that THIS is what Jesus intened when he prayed for unity? You're not looking very unified about much, I gotta tell ya. Besides, sola scriptura isn't even IN the Bible. Show me the verse where God says the Bible alone is to be our guide. ps. To my brother goldy: Happy third Sunday of Advent! I hope you had a joy-filled day!
- Status
Similar threads
