Spoken Word and Written Word are the Same

[neophyte]

Axehead, you wrote: 'They all agree much more with one another than with you and the RCC which itself has many schisms and divisions within their ONE Church. In fact, some Orders are actually very antagonistic and competitive towards other Orders. The animosity is very bad, all within one organization. Would you like me to list the schism and antagonisms? I won't do that. You already know them'

Sorry but you're very mistaken, the Catholic Church has never changed a doctrine since Pentecost 1st century. I never said .ever, that the # of Prot churches and there off-shoot cults at 400 to my understanding that it has been well over 30,00o denom and non-denominational churches/cults with none agreeing on which HS and which interpretation is correct .Insanity prevails literally in many of your Prot churches and cults. i am not writing about any schism and antagonisms with the exception of the EOC but their doctrine is the same as the Latin Catholic Rite [ Catholic Church ] the other problem has occurred also within Protestantism.


Gypsy, go check the yellow pages of your phone book.

Axeman, one more thing. As an example of your Prot changing doctrinal teaching , i will use the contraception issue , up untill 1930 all churches ,both Protestants and Catholics were teaching that using contraception was wrong, how is it that all your prot churches along with your Prot. cults abandon this church teaching of the past 2000 years of Christianity, when did your KJV Bibles change? Only the Catholic Church and the EOC never changed their doctrinal teaching.

 

[Rex]

i will use the contraception issue

Please neo you sound like some little apprentice wizard looking to pull some magic out of this bag of spells .ROTF LOL

 

[neophyte]

Please neo you sound like some little apprentice wizard looking to pull some magic out of this bag of spells .ROTF LOL

I see where you're always using evasive tactics to avoid my questions and true facts,You must recognize by facts as truth because you never can refute them with Bible truths.

 

[Axehead]

Please neo you sound like some little apprentice wizard looking to pull some magic out of this bag of spells .ROTF LOL

Yes, we know whatever you say Neo, must be correct.

hmmmm...............................................nope............

 

[THE Gypsy]

Gypsy, go check the yellow pages of your phone book.

Why? Is the Scripture to much for you to handle?

I just wanted to be certain that you weren't actually quoting Scripture to support your view. You were simply pontificating, not sticking to any Scripture or doctrine.

BTW...Isn't that frowned on in the Catholic Church?

 

[neophyte]

Why? Is the Scripture to much for you to handle?

I just wanted to be certain that you weren't actually quoting Scripture to support your view. You were simply pontificating, not sticking to any Scripture or doctrine.

BTW...Isn't that frowned on in the Catholic Church?

Gyp, ironic how you believe that the NT is compiled with the correct Books when you say anything connected to Christ's Catholic Church is wrong, being that history proves that it was the Bishops of Christ's Catholic Church that selected the Books.
Your Prot religion from its inception was anti-Catholic, and remains so to this day.If the Catholic faith isn't Christian as you bark about then logically neither is your Protestant religion, which has inherited the bulk of its theology from the Catholic faith.

 

[THE Gypsy]

Gyp, ironic how you believe that the NT is compiled with the correct Books when you say anything connected to Christ's Catholic Church is wrong, being that history proves that it was the Bishops of Christ's Catholic Church that selected the Books.
Your Prot religion from its inception was anti-Catholic, and remains so to this day.If the Catholic faith isn't Christian as you bark about then logically neither is your Protestant religion, which has inherited the bulk of its theology from the Catholic faith.

Your argument might hold some credence if it was not based on ignorance and holding to a false premise.

 

[Rex]

I see where you're always using evasive tactics to avoid my questions and true facts,You must recognize by facts as truth because you never can refute them with Bible truths.

We both know that's not true, You simply didn't address me directly did you, so there was noting for me to say.

 

[neophyte]

Your argument might hold some credence if it was not based on ignorance and holding to a false premise.

Prove what I wrote isn't true, show me documentation please, no documentation, no proof ,then that simply means that what I posted about the Bishops through the guidance of the Holy Spirit gave us the List of Canonical Books that you and I accept as the NT is true and you both are wrong.Documentation please,

 

[Axehead]

Gyp, ironic how you believe that the NT is compiled with the correct Books when you say anything connected to Christ's Catholic Church is wrong, being that history proves that it was the Bishops of Christ's Catholic Church that selected the Books.
Your Prot religion from its inception was anti-Catholic, and remains so to this day.If the Catholic faith isn't Christian as you bark about then logically neither is your Protestant religion, which has inherited the bulk of its theology from the Catholic faith.

What you wrote isn't true. Most of what you write isn't true.

How do you account for this passage if the Bible is a Catholic book? " A bishop then must be blameless, the husband of one wife, vigilant, sober, of good behaviour, given to hospitality, apt to teach; Not given to wine, no striker, not greedy of filthy lucre; but patient, not a brawler, not covetous; One that ruleth well his own house, having his children in subjection with all gravity; For if a man know not how to rule his own house, how shall he take care of the church of God?" (1 Tim. 3:2, 4-5).

The Catholic Church Did Not Give the World the Bible

[background=rgb(246, 246, 246)]So, When Did the RCC Declare the Canonicity of the Bible? [/background]

 

[THE Gypsy]

Gyp, ironic how you believe that the NT is compiled with the correct Books when you say anything connected to Christ's Catholic Church is wrong, being that history proves that it was the Bishops of Christ's Catholic Church that selected the Books.
Your Prot religion from its inception was anti-Catholic, and remains so to this day.If the Catholic faith isn't Christian as you bark about then logically neither is your Protestant religion, which has inherited the bulk of its theology from the Catholic faith.

Your argument might hold some credence if it was not based on ignorance and holding to a false premise.

Prove what I wrote isn't true, show me documentation please, no documentation, no proof ,then that simply means that what I posted about the Bishops through the guidance of the Holy Spirit gave us the List of Canonical Books that you and I accept as the NT is true and you both are wrong.Documentation please,

1. I have never said "anything connected to Christ's Catholic Church is wrong". (False premise)

2. "history proves that it was the Bishops of Christ's Catholic Church that selected the Books" - History proves no such thing. (False premise)

3. "Your Prot religion from its inception was anti-Catholic" - Since we are all anonymous posters on an anonymous forum and you do not know me personally, you have no way of Knowing WHAT my "religion" is or if I have any "religion at all". (Ignorance)

4. "If the Catholic faith isn't Christian as you bark about" - I have NEVER said or implied that. (False premise and ignorance)

Like I said, your entire post was...based on ignorance and holding to a false premise. As was your last post..."simply means that what I posted about the Bishops through the guidance of the Holy Spirit gave us the List of Canonical Books that you and I accept as the NT is true and you both are wrong". I said nothing about "bishops" "guidance" or the "Holy Spirit". Instead of reading what I DID say, you simply fabricated and pontificated.

 

[dragonfly]

Hi neophyte,

This is for you.... another question, Who said this, please?


'For we have not followed cunningly devised fables, when we made known unto you the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ...'

 

[Axehead]

If the Bible is a Catholic book, then:

• 1. Why does it condemn clerical dress? (Matt. 23:5-6).
• 2. Why does it teach against the adoration of Mary? (Luke 11:27-28).
• 3. Why does it show that all Christians are priests unto God? (1 Pet. 2:5,9).
• 4. Why doesn't it uphold the observance of special days? (Gal. 4:9-11).
• 5. Why does it teach that all Christians are saints instead of special select ones? (1 Cor. 1:2).
• 6. Why does it condemn the making and adoration of images? (Ex. 20:4-5).
• 7. Why does it teach that baptism is immersion instead of pouring? (Col. 2:12).
• 8. Why does it forbid us to address spiritual leaders as "father"? (Matt. 23:9).
• 9. Why does it teach that Christ is the only foundation and not the apostle Peter? (1 Cor. 3:11).
• 10. Why does it teach that there is one mediator instead of many? (1 Tim. 2:5).
• 11. Why does it teach that a bishop must be a married man? (1 Tim. 3:2, 4-5).
• 12. Why is it opposed to the primacy of Peter? (Luke 22:24-27).
• 13. Why does it oppose the idea of purgatory? (Luke 16:26).
• 14. Why is it completely silent about infant baptism, indulgences, confession to priests, the rosary, the mass, and many other things in the Catholic Church?

 

[neophyte]

If the Bible is a Catholic book, then:

• 1. Why does it condemn clerical dress? (Matt. 23:5-6).
• 2. Why does it teach against the adoration of Mary? (Luke 11:27-28).
• 3. Why does it show that all Christians are priests unto God? (1 Pet. 2:5,9).
• 4. Why doesn't it uphold the observance of special days? (Gal. 4:9-11).
• 5. Why does it teach that all Christians are saints instead of special select ones? (1 Cor. 1:2).
• 6. Why does it condemn the making and adoration of images? (Ex. 20:4-5).
• 7. Why does it teach that baptism is immersion instead of pouring? (Col. 2:12).
• 8. Why does it forbid us to address spiritual leaders as "father"? (Matt. 23:9).
• 9. Why does it teach that Christ is the only foundation and not the apostle Peter? (1 Cor. 3:11).
• 10. Why does it teach that there is one mediator instead of many? (1 Tim. 2:5).
• 11. Why does it teach that a bishop must be a married man? (1 Tim. 3:2, 4-5).
• 12. Why is it opposed to the primacy of Peter? (Luke 22:24-27).
• 13. Why does it oppose the idea of purgatory? (Luke 16:26).
• 14. Why is it completely silent about infant baptism, indulgences, confession to priests, the rosary, the mass, and many other things in the Catholic Church?

Every one of your questions has been refuted with either a Biblical explanation or from Christian members from the early Christian community by Catholics on this Forum over and over.
Here are a few questions that you and other anti-Catholics fail to answer

[ 1 ] Where did Jesus give instructions that the Christian faith should be based exclusively on a Book?

[ 2 ] Where did Jesus tell his apostles to write anything down ?

[ 3 ] Where in the NT do the apostles tell future generations that our Christian faith will be based on a book ?

[ 4 ] Protestants claim that Jesus categorically condemned all oral tradition [ Matt. 15: 3, 6; Mark 7:8 ?] If so why does He bind His listeners to oral tradition by telling them to obey oral tradition by telling them that to obey the scribes and Pharisees when they sit on Moses seat" [ Matt.23:2 ] ?

[ 5 ] Protestants claim that St. Paul categorically condemn all oral tradition [ Col.2: 8 ] If so, why does He tell the Thessalonians to "stand firm and hold to the traditions which you were taught, whether by word or letter" [ 2 Thess. 2:15 ] and praises the Corinthians because they " hold firmly to the traditions " [ 1 Cor. 11:2 ? ]

[ 6 ] If the authors of the NT believed in sola Scriptura , why did they sometimes draw on oral tradition as authorative and as God's Word [ Matt. 2: 23; 23:2; 1 Cor. 10:4; 1 Pet. 3:19; Jude 9: 14-15 ] ?

[ 7 ] Where in the Bible is God's Word restricted to what is written down ?

[ 8 ] On what authority , or on what principle , would we accept as Scripture books that we know were not written by one of the 12 apostles ?

[ 9 ] Where in the Bible do we find an inspired and infallible list of books that belong in the Bible ?

[ 10 ] How do we know, from the Bible by itself , that the individual Books of the New Testament are inspired even when they make no claim to be inspired ?
Please not [ 2 Tim.3:16-17 ] how do we know that even that verse is inspired, anybody can say that their writings are inspired, Joseph Smith claimed the Book of Morman was inspired, same with the Koran and Torah. Who decided that those Books in our NT are inspired ?

These are only 10 questions , there are more.

 

[mjrhealth]

[ 1 ] Where did Jesus give instructions that the Christian faith should be based exclusively on a Book?

Witout faith you cannot please God, my faith and the faith of many is based soley on the works that Jesus did, we have no faith in man but God, who is our father, it is not based on a book or mens doctrines,

Act 26:18 To open their eyes, and to turn them from darkness to light, and from the power of Satan unto God, that they may receive forgiveness of sins, and inheritance among them which are sanctified by faith that is in me.

1Co_2:5 That your faith should not stand in the wisdom of men, but in the power of God.

In all His Love

 

[whitestone]

Only Jesus can open our eyes to knowing Him, by opening our eyes to scriptures. Only Scriptures shows us how to die to self so that the Holy Spirit of Jesus can Come into us to reveal us all truth out of Scriptures.

(Psa 40:7)

Then said I, Lo, I come: in the volume of the book it is written of me,

(Heb 10:7)

Then said I, Lo, I come (in the volume of the book it is written of me,) to do thy will, O God.



(This is how it works);

(Luk 24:31)

And their eyes were opened, and they knew him; and he vanished out of their sight.


(Luk 24:32)
And they said one to another, Did not our heart burn within us, while he talked with us by the way, and while he opened to us the scriptures?

 

[neophyte]

Still waiting for your answers to my questions, so far your answers are not applicable to my 10 questions.

 

[Axehead]

Neo,

You know it's not a prerequisite to know Greek to understand the scriptures, right? It is the Spirit of God that gives understanding. Do you believe that?

 

[mjrhealth]

Would it be of any use answering your questions, it will not do any good, you have decided who you believe and nothing that is writen will change that. IS that a cop out ,no, but this is just turning into a debate, one cannot debate the truth, one either accepts it or rejects it.When one rejects the truth than one has rejected Jesus for He is the truth. There are many here seeking the truth I hope they have their ears open.

In all His Love

 

[neophyte]

In post # 74 I gave you 10 Bible questions. Why wouldn't you want to answer the questions in defense of the Bible being that the Bible Alone position is your sole rule of faith, it looks to me like your afraid to expose your limited knowledge of Bible History and if you were to answer the questions with the truth, then that truth would cause your whole position to collapes in ruins. Why aren't you proving me wrong ?