The unforgiveable sin ?

[aspen]

All sin we identify ourselves with is unforgiven sin. If we fail to recognize it and believe it to be who we are is no longer simply a shortcoming

 

[BreadOfLife]

Who determines what is 'sacred tradition'?
If Sacred Tradition never changes, then why does it change, or modify, or abandon lesser traditions?
If Sacred Tradition never opposes Scripture, then why is it necessary, since you have the Scripture.

Stranger

1. That which is doctrinal and handed down verbally.

2. Sacred Tradition doesn't change, modify or abandon anything.

3. Sacred Tradition is necessary because NOT everything was written down in Scripture. The Bible is very clear about that (John 21:25, 2 Thess. 2:15). For example - how to baptize people is not explicitly described in Scripture. Another example would be the canon of Scripture. The list of Books that make up the Bible is not listed in Scripture.

 

[Stranger]

1. That which is doctrinal and handed down verbally.

2. Sacred Tradition doesn't change, modify or abandon anything.

3. Sacred Tradition is necessary because NOT everything was written down in Scripture. The Bible is very clear about that (John 21:25, 2 Thess. 2:15). For example - how to baptize people is not explicitly described in Scripture. Another example would be the canon of Scripture. The list of Books that make up the Bible is not listed in Scripture.

I asked 'who'?

Catechism 83 "In the light of Tradition, these traditions can be retained, modified or even abandoned under the guidance of the Church's magisterium." So, I ask again, if sacred tradition doesn't change, then how can it modify, abandon, or retain. There should be no need.

But, extra books, goes against Scripture. And, if water baptism is not 'explicitly' described in Scripture, why do you need other explicit instruction?

Stranger

 

[Heb 13:8]

Only to those who have faith and obey.

Did the thief on the cross obey, or did He believe? Luke 23:42-43

As I have shown you many times now - even the DEMONS believe (James 2:19). Demons don't have faith, which requires obedience.

And as I have told you many times, demons do not believe in a Savior.

Matt. 7:21-23

This passage is referring to those in Jesus time, unless you think God is in contradiction.

John 6:35-40 Then Jesus declared, “I am the bread of life. Whoever comes to me will never go hungry, and whoever believes in me will never be thirsty. 36But as I told you, you have seen me and still you do not believe. 37All those the Father gives me will come to me, and whoever comes to me I will never drive away. 38For I have come down from heaven not to do my will but to do the will of him who sent me. 39And this is the will of him who sent me, that I shall lose none of all those he has given me, but raise them up at the last day. 40For my Father’s will is that everyone who looks to the Son and believes in him shall have eternal life, and I will raise them up at the last day.”

John 10:25-30 Jesus answered, “I did tell you, but you do not believe. The works I do in my Father’s name testify about me, 26but you do not believe because you are not my sheep. 27My sheep listen to my voice; I know them, and they follow me. 28I give them eternal life, and they shall never perish; no one will snatch them out of my hand. 29My Father, who has given them to me, is greater than all ; no one can snatch them out of my Father’s hand. 30I and the Father are one.”

According to Jesus Himself - You MUST be baptized with Water , which required obedience . . .John 3:5 Jesus answered, “Amen, amen, I say to you, no one can enter the kingdom of God without being born of WATER and Spirit.

John 3:5 is referring to spiritual water that comes from the Holy Spirit. In the world of believers, we call this anointing and love from God.

John 4:14 But whoever drinks the water I give him will never thirst. Indeed, the water I give him will become in him a fount of water springing up to eternal life."

John 7:38 Whoever believes in me, as Scripture has said, rivers of living water will flow from within them."

And anybody who believes they can be disobedient to God and still enter Heaven is not only ignorant of Scripture - but is also living in denial . .

Only the religious condemn believers and accuses them of all sorts of things. That is the will of Satan.

Gen 3:1 Now the serpent was more crafty than any of the wild animals the Lord God had made. He said to the woman, “Did God really say, ‘You must not eat from any tree in the garden’?”

Rev 12:10 Then I heard a loud voice in heaven say: "Now have come the salvation and the power and the kingdom of our God, and the authority of his Messiah. For the accuser of our brothers and sisters, who accuses them before our God day and night, has been hurled down.

 

[BreadOfLife]

I asked 'who'?

Whoever handed it down.
Sacred Tradition didn't just pop up out of thin air. It was handed down from the Apostles.

Paul describes this and how it is ON PAR with Scripture (2 Thess. 2:15).

Catechism 83 "In the light of Tradition, these traditions can be retained, modified or even abandoned under the guidance of the Church's magisterium." So, I ask again, if sacred tradition doesn't change, then how can it modify, abandon, or retain. There should be no need.

Apparently, you didn't R*E*A*D my last post - so I'll make it simple enough for a child to understand.
Sacred Tradition doesn't change. Sacred or Apostolic Tradition is doctrine has been handed down from the beginning. We read about it in the testimonies of the Early Church.

Minor traditions, on the pother hand CAN be done away with.
For example, the idea that Mary never died is a minor Tradition - as is the idea that she DID die. They are minor traditions because they are NOT binding on the believer - like Baptism.

But, extra books, goes against Scripture. And, if water baptism is not 'explicitly' described in Scripture, why do you need other explicit instruction?

"Extra" Books?? What are you talking about??
Who has "extra" Books??

the Catholic Church doesn't have "extra" books in our bible. Protestants DELETED books from the canon.

As for Baptism, Scripture is not explicit on HOW it is done. It does say, however, that it is mandatory. It is Sacred Tradition, and NOT Scripture that gives us the details.
In the 1st century document The Didache, written while the Apostles were STILL alive - instructions on HOW to baptize are explicit.

The writings of the Early Church Fathers are also explicit about how the Apostles handed down the Tradition of baptizing infants and small children that is only alluded to in Scripture (Acts 10:1-49, 11:13-14, Acts 16:23-33, 1 Cor. 1:16):

Irenaeus
"He [Jesus] came to save all through himself; all, I say, who through him are reborn in God: INFANTS, and CHILDREN, and youths, and old men. Therefore he passed through every age, becoming an infant for infants, sanctifying infants; a child for children, sanctifying those who are of that age . . . [so that] he might be the perfect teacher in all things, perfect not only in respect to the setting forth of truth, perfect also in respect to relative age" (Against Heresies 2:22:4 [A.D. 189]).

Hippolytus
"Baptize first the CHILDREN, and if they can speak for themselves let them do so. Otherwise, let their parents or other relatives speak for them" (The Apostolic Tradition 21:16 [A.D. 215]).

Origen
"Every soul that is born into flesh is soiled by the filth of wickedness and sin. . . . In the Church, baptism is given for the remission of sins, and, according to the usage of the Church, baptism is given even to INFANTS. If there were nothing in infants which required the remission of sins and nothing in them pertinent to forgiveness, the grace of baptism would seem superfluous" (Homilies on Leviticus 8:3 [A.D. 248]).

"The Church received FROM THE APOSTLES the tradition of giving baptism even to INFANTS. The apostles, to whom were committed the secrets of the divine sacraments, knew there are in everyone innate strains of [original] sin, which must be washed away through water and the Spirit" (Commentaries on Romans 5:9 [A.D. 248]).

Cyprian of Carthage
"As to what pertains to the case of INFANTS: You [Fidus] said that they ought not to be baptized within the second or third day after their birth, that the old law of circumcision must be taken into consideration, and that you did not think that one should be baptized and sanctified within the eighth day after his birth. In our council it seemed to us far otherwise. No one agreed to the course which you thought should be taken. Rather, we all judge that the mercy and grace of God ought to be denied to no man born" (Letters 64:2 [A.D. 253]).

 

[BreadOfLife]

Did the thief on the cross obey, or did He believe? Luke 23:42-43

Spoken like a true Biblical anarchist.
NEVER form your doctrines on the exception.

The obedience of Baptism is the NORM (Mark 16:16).
The thief on the cross was kind of "busy" at the time and didn't have the opportunity to get baptized. Jesus recognized this and saved him anyway. Had he lived - he would have definitely been baptized.

And as I have told you many times, demons do not believe in a Savior.

Doesn't matter.
YOU aid that all we had to do was "believe" - like the demons in James 2:19.

You stuck your foot in your mouth - and now, you're back-peddling . . .

This passage is referring to those in Jesus time, unless you think God is in contradiction.
John 6:35-40 Then Jesus declared, “I am the bread of life. Whoever comes to me will never go hungry, and whoever believes in me will never be thirsty. 36But as I told you, you have seen me and still you do not believe. 37All those the Father gives me will come to me, and whoever comes to me I will never drive away. 38For I have come down from heaven not to do my will but to do the will of him who sent me. 39And this is the will of him who sent me, that I shall lose none of all those he has given me, but raise them up at the last day. 40For my Father’s will is that everyone who looks to the Son and believes in him shall have eternal life, and I will raise them up at the last day.”

John 10:25-30 Jesus answered, “I did tell you, but you do not believe. The works I do in my Father’s name testify about me, 26but you do not believe because you are not my sheep. 27My sheep listen to my voice; I know them, and they follow me. 28I give them eternal life, and they shall never perish; no one will snatch them out of my hand. 29My Father, who has given them to me, is greater than all ; no one can snatch them out of my Father’s hand. 30I and the Father are one.”

WRONG.
Matt. 7:21-22 is talking about a FUTURE event – the Day of Judgement.

As for nobody been able to snatch us out of God’s hand – this is true.

However – WE can leave God’s hand by our own doing (Matt. 7:19-23, Matt. 10:22, Matt. 24:13, Matt. 25:31–46, John 15:1-6, Rom. 11:22, 1 Cor. 9:27, 1 Cor. 4:4, 1 Tim. 4:1, Heb. 3:6, Heb. 3:12-14, Heb 6:4-6, Heb. 10:26-27, 2 Pet.r 3:17, 1 John 2:24, 1 John 5:13, Rev. 3:5, Rev. 22:19).

John 3:5 is referring to spiritual water that comes from the Holy Spirit. In the world of believers, we call this anointing and love from God.

John 4:14 But whoever drinks the water I give him will never thirst. Indeed, the water I give him will become in him a fount of water springing up to eternal life."

John 7:38 Whoever believes in me, as Scripture has said, rivers of living water will flow from within them."

What a bankrupt understanding of Scripture.

In John 3:5. Jesus is describing to Nicodemus the reality of Baptism. His description of Baptism in this verse mirrors what took place 2 chapters earlier at his OWN Baptism.

Only the religious condemn believers and accuses them of all sorts of things. That is the will of Satan.

Gen 3:1 Now the serpent was more crafty than any of the wild animals the Lord God had made. He said to the woman, “Did God really say, ‘You must not eat from any tree in the garden’?”

Rev 12:10 Then I heard a loud voice in heaven say: "Now have come the salvation and the power and the kingdom of our God, and the authority of his Messiah. For the accuser of our brothers and sisters, who accuses them before our God day and night, has been hurled down.

WRONG.

ALL through Scripture, we are told that God condemns the disobedient (Exodus 21:17, Leviticus 26:14-16, Proverbs 1:25, Proverbs 30:17, Matthew 15:4, Acts 5:1-11, Romans 5:19 , Ephesians 2:21, John 3:4-5).

How can YOU possibly believe that you can be disobedient and STILL be saved??

Jesus said, “If you love me, KEEP MY COMMANDMENTS” (John 14:15).
He didn’t say, “If you love me, you can disobey me.”

 

[Stranger]

Whoever handed it down.
Sacred Tradition didn't just pop up out of thin air. It was handed down from the Apostles.

Paul describes this and how it is ON PAR with Scripture (2 Thess. 2:15).


Apparently, you didn't R*E*A*D my last post - so I'll make it simple enough for a child to understand.
Sacred Tradition doesn't change. Sacred or Apostolic Tradition is doctrine has been handed down from the beginning. We read about it in the testimonies of the Early Church.

Minor traditions, on the pother hand CAN be done away with.
For example, the idea that Mary never died is a minor Tradition - as is the idea that she DID die. They are minor traditions because they are NOT binding on the believer - like Baptism.



"Extra" Books?? What are you talking about??
Who has "extra" Books??

the Catholic Church doesn't have "extra" books in our bible. Protestants DELETED books from the canon.

As for Baptism, Scripture is not explicit on HOW it is done. It does say, however, that it is mandatory. It is Sacred Tradition, and NOT Scripture that gives us the details.
In the 1st century document The Didache, written while the Apostles were STILL alive - instructions on HOW to baptize are explicit.

The writings of the Early Church Fathers are also explicit about how the Apostles handed down the Tradition of baptizing infants and small children that is only alluded to in Scripture (Acts 10:1-49, 11:13-14, Acts 16:23-33, 1 Cor. 1:16):

What I asked is 'who' determines what is Sacred Tradition. Do you have it written down somewhere? Does the Pope whisper in someones ear what is Sacred Tradition? Who determines?

(2 Thess. 2:15) says nothing about your so called 'sacred traditions'. It speaks of the traditions taught by the prophets and apostles, which is taught by word or epistle. That is no proof for the validity of Romes 'sacred traditions'. You have to prove your 'traditions' are valid through the comparison
of Scripture. Which finds you wanting.

Again, you are not paying attention. How can minor traditions change if Sacred tradition never changes. Yet it changes minor traditions. Once Sacred Tradition changes your so called minor traditions, you change Sacred Tradition. What a joke.

The apocrypha were never part of the Cannon of Scripture. Rome had to add them due to the Reformation they were fighting.

Again, if the method of water baptism is not explicitly stated in Scripture, then why do you need other writings to explain? The writings of the church fathers are not Scripture. Unless you have some proof that they are?

Stranger

 

[Joshua☩]

(2 Thess. 2:15) says nothing about your so called 'sacred traditions'. It speaks of the traditions taught by the prophets and apostles, which is taught by word or epistle. That is no proof for the validity of Romes 'sacred traditions'. You have to prove your 'traditions' are valid through the comparison
of Scripture. Which finds you wanting.

Every Catholic tradition can be found within a complete Bible, not a stripped down version.

The apocrypha were never part of the Cannon of Scripture. Rome had to add them due to the Reformation they were fighting.
Stranger

The so-called "Apocrypha" was present in the Septuagint, which was translated by ancient Jews before the time of Christ, and many of them, such as the Book of Tobit, have also been found in Hebrew.
The Septuagint was the most widely accepted version of the Old-Testament prior to the Reformation, and there is ample evidence that they were in use all throughout early Christianity.
The first complete translation of the Bible into English, known as Wycliffe's Bible, translated in 1186 A.D., contains the books of the "Apocrypha", along with a letter from St. Paul to the Laodocians.

 

[Heb 13:8]

Spoken like a true Biblical anarchist. NEVER form your doctrines on the exception.

So how many people you think accepted Christ on their death beds in the entire church age? The thief believed. That's why he was saved.

Doesn't matter.

It doesn't matter that demons don't believe Jesus is their savior? It makes all the difference in the world BOL. It's what separates believers from nonbelievers, and demons are not believers.

As for nobody been able to snatch us out of God’s hand – this is true. However –

To the religious there is "however"..the sin penalty is paid for. You either believe it is or isn't. It is very simple.

What a bankrupt understanding of Scripture. In John 3:5. Jesus is describing to Nicodemus the reality of Baptism. His description of Baptism in this verse mirrors what took place 2 chapters earlier at his OWN Baptism.

The religious have a hard time with this, the only way to experience God's love and anointing is to come to faith in Christ so you can receive the indwelling Holy Spirit.

How can YOU possibly believe that you can be disobedient and STILL be saved??

Easy, we fall short every day because the only person that was perfect was Jesus. We depend on His perfection, not our perfection.

- Heb 13:8

 

[Stranger]

Every Catholic tradition can be found within a complete Bible, not a stripped down version.



The so-called "Apocrypha" was present in the Septuagint, which was translated by ancient Jews before the time of Christ, and many of them, such as the Book of Tobit, have also been found in Hebrew.
The Septuagint was the most widely accepted version of the Old-Testament prior to the Reformation, and there is ample evidence that they were in use all throughout early Christianity.
The first complete translation of the Bible into English, known as Wycliffe's Bible, translated in 1186 A.D., contains the books of the "Apocrypha", along with a letter from St. Paul to the Laodocians.

Give a list of the Roman traditions.

The Palestinian Jews never accepted the Apocrypha as Scripture. Never. And there are no quotes in the Bible from the Apocrypha.

I never said the Apocrypha didn't exist. It just wasn't part of Scripture.

Stranger

 

[Joshua☩]

Give a list of the Roman traditions.

The Palestinian Jews never accepted the Apocrypha as Scripture. Never. And there are no quotes in the Bible from the Apocrypha.

I never said the Apocrypha didn't exist. It just wasn't part of Scripture.

Stranger

Well, i'm not sure how you can argue that they were never a part of scripture, since they were included in the Bible that was used in the vast majority of Jewish temples outside of, and yes, even within Palestine. It is the version of the Old Testament that would have been carried by the Apostles as they set about on their proselytizing journeys.
Also, they were regarded as canonical by St. Jerome when he translated the Latin Vulgate, and were in widespread use throughout the Christian world until the creation of the Luther Bible.

Furthermore, this odd quoting requirement makes no sense at all. Judges, Ruth, Ezra, Esther, Ecclesiastes, Lamentations, Obadiah, Jonah, Zephaniah, and the Song of Solomon are never quoted in the New Testament, and nobody has a problem with them.
The Book of Enoch is quoted by St. Jude and yet is not considered canonical by anyone except the Ethiopian Orthodox Church.
So this idea that a book must be quoted in the New Testament in order to be canonical is absurd.

 

[Joshua☩]

For Catholic traditions found in a complete Bible;

Purgatory, prayers for the dead, and the perseverance of the saints are found in Maccabees.

Most of the Christian understanding of the interactions between humans and Angles (Angelology) comes from the Book of Tobit.

Confession comes from the Book of Baruch. Side note, I forgot to mention that Baruch is quoted throughout the New Testament.

I'm sure that there are more but I'll defer to BreadOfLife who seems to be more knowledgeable on the subject than I am. The simple fact is that Catholic practices can be supported if one uses a complete Bible.

 

[mjrhealth]

How can YOU possibly believe that you can be disobedient and STILL be saved??

Good question,

Call no man father.

Mat 23:9 And call no man your father upon the earth: for one is your Father, which is

How about teh pope

Mat 23:10 Neither be ye called masters: for one is your Master, even Christ.

Or mediators

1Ti_2:5 For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus;
how many do you have???

And baptism

Mat_3:11 I indeed baptize you with water unto repentance: but he that cometh after me is mightier than I, whose shoes I am not worthy to bear: he shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost, and with fire:

and

Act 1:5 For John truly baptized with water; but ye shall be baptized with the Holy Ghost not many days hence.

remember pentecost, it was only the beginning

Act 11:15 And as I began to speak, the Holy Ghost fell on them, as on us at the beginning.
Act 11:16 Then remembered I the word of the Lord, how that he said, John indeed baptized with water; but ye shall be baptized with the Holy Ghost.
Act 11:17 Forasmuch then as God gave them the like gift as he did unto us, who believed on the Lord Jesus Christ; what was I, that I could withstand God?

Teh Holy Spirit, forgotten by men and His relgions, treated like a second rate teacher and an act to put on in front of teh people

Act_2:33 Therefore being by the right hand of God exalted, and having received of the Father the promise of the Holy Ghost, he hath shed forth this, which ye now see and hear.

Disobedience BOL your religion is full of it, you do know that any thing that replaces Christ, opposes Christ ids dissobedient to Christ it Anti Christ. So before you go crying "anti catholic" look at who it is you are being disobedient to.

 

[Stranger]

Well, i'm not sure how you can argue that they were never a part of scripture, since they were included in the Bible that was used in the vast majority of Jewish temples outside of, and yes, even within Palestine. It is the version of the Old Testament that would have been carried by the Apostles as they set about on their proselytizing journeys.
Also, they were regarded as canonical by St. Jerome when he translated the Latin Vulgate, and were in widespread use throughout the Christian world until the creation of the Luther Bible.

Furthermore, this odd quoting requirement makes no sense at all. Judges, Ruth, Ezra, Esther, Ecclesiastes, Lamentations, Obadiah, Jonah, Zephaniah, and the Song of Solomon are never quoted in the New Testament, and nobody has a problem with them.
The Book of Enoch is quoted by St. Jude and yet is not considered canonical by anyone except the Ethiopian Orthodox Church.
So this idea that a book must be quoted in the New Testament in order to be canonical is absurd.

No the Palestinian Jews rejected and still do reject the Apocrypha. Their Old Testament is the same Old Testament of the Protestant Bible.

Jerome rejected the Apocrypha as part of the canon. Quoting from the Old Testament is not the only criteria that played a role in a book being part of the Canon.

Stranger

 

[BreadOfLife]

Give a list of the Roman traditions.
The Palestinian Jews never accepted the Apocrypha as Scripture. Never. And there are no quotes in the Bible from the Apocrypha.
I never said the Apocrypha didn't exist. It just wasn't part of Scripture.

Stranger

To say that the Jews NEVER accepted the Deuterocanonical Books as Scripture is a complete and total LIE.

The 7 Deuterocanonical Books were part of the OPEN Jewish Canon that existed prior to and after the life of Christ. They were only ejected after Jesus walked the earth because of the influence they were having on the Dispersed Jews who were converting to Christianity.

There are HUNDREDS of quotes, references and direct allusions to the Deuterocanonical Books in the New Testament.
Here are just a few of them:
Eph. 6:13-17 - The whole discussion of armor, helmet, breastplate, sword, shield follows Wis. 5:17-20.
Matt. 2:16 - Herod's decree of slaying innocent children was prophesied in Wis. 11:7 - slaying the holy innocents.
Matt. 6:19-20 - Jesus' statement about laying up for yourselves treasure in heaven follows Sirach 29:11 - lay up your treasure.
Matt.. 7:12 - Jesus' golden rule "do unto others" is the converse of Tobit 4:15 - what you hate, do not do to others.
Matt. 7:16,20 - Jesus' statement "you will know them by their fruits" follows Sirach 27:6 - the fruit discloses the cultivation.
Matt. 11:25 - Jesus' description "Lord of heaven and earth" is the same as Tobit 7:18 - Lord of heaven and earth.
Matt. 12:42 - Jesus refers to the wisdom of Solomon which was recorded and made part of the deuterocanonical books.
Matt. 16:18 - Jesus' reference to the "power of death" and "gates of Hades" references Wisdom 16:13.
Matt. 22:25; Mark 12:20; Luke 20:29 - Gospel writers refer to the canonicity of Tobit 3:8 and 7:11 regarding the seven brothers.
Mark 4:5,16-17 - Jesus' description of seeds falling on rocky ground and having no root follows Sirach 40:15.
Luke 1:42 - Elizabeth's declaration of Mary's blessedness above all women follows Uzziah's declaration in Judith 13:18.
Luke 1:52 - Mary's magnificat addressing the mighty falling from their thrones and replaced by lowly follows Sirach 10:14.
Luke 2:29 - Simeon's declaration that he is ready to die after seeing the Child Jesus follows Tobit 11:9.

 

[BreadOfLife]

No the Palestinian Jews rejected and still do reject the Apocrypha. Their Old Testament is the same Old Testament of the Protestant Bible.

Jerome rejected the Apocrypha as part of the canon. Quoting from the Old Testament is not the only criteria that played a role in a book being part of the Canon.

Stranger

More lies, Stranger??

Jerome regarded the Deuterocanonical Books as "SACRED SCRIPTURE".

When Jerome wrote about the Books NOT being canonical - he was speaking on behalf of the Jewish scholars who aided him in his translation of the Bible in to Latin.
Here, in his own words, Jerome explains this and condemns people like you who say that he didn't accept or "grudgingly" accepted the Deuterocanonicals:

"What sin have I committed if I followed the judgment of the churches? But he who brings charges against me for relating the objections that the Hebrews are wont to raise against the story of Susanna, the Son of the Three Children, and the story of Bel and the Dragon, which are not found in the Hebrew volume (ie. canon), proves that he is just a foolish sycophant. For I wasn't relating my own personal views, but rather the remarks that they [the Jews] are wont to make against us" (Against Rufinus 11:33 [A.D. 402]).

Why don't you do your homework instead of spewing this ignorant nonsense??

 

[BreadOfLife]

Good question,
Call no man father.
Mat 23:9 And call no man your father upon the earth: for one is your Father, which is
How about teh pope
Mat 23:10 Neither be ye called masters: for one is your Master, even Christ.

I've already educated you on all these subjects - but since you seem to enjoy being humiliated in public - I'll educate you again . . .
In Matt. 23:9, Jesus is using hyperbole (exaggeration) to make a point and does so many times in Scripture. In the verse that precedes this (Matt: 23:8), Jesus tells us not to call people “Teachers”.

Is Jesus telling us that we can’t call certain people "fathers" or “teachers” when they may actually be fathers or teachers? Absolutely NOT. He is telling us that no man is to be considered father above our Father in heaven and no person is to be considered teacher above our Teacher in heaven.

Jesus was speaking about the Scribes and Pharisees who exalted themselves before all:
“They love places of honor at banquets, seats of honor in synagogues, greetings in marketplaces, and the salutation 'Rabbi.”(Matt 23:6-7)

The BIBLE proves you wrong:
- Jesus said, “Your FATHER Abraham rejoiced at the thought of seeing my day; he saw it and was glad.” (John 8:56).
- St. Stephen refers to "our FATHER Abraham," (Acts 7:2).
- St. Paul speaks of "our FATHER Isaac” (Romans 9:10).
- For I became your FATHER in Christ Jesus through the gospel" (1 Cor. 4:14–15).
- Honor your FATHER and your mother" (Exod. 20:12).
- "For this I was appointed a preacher and apostle . . . a teacher of the Gentiles in faith and truth" (1 Tim. 2:7).
- "For this gospel I was appointed a preacher and apostle and teacher" (2 Tim. 1:11).
- "God has appointed in the church first Apostles, second prophets, third teachers" (1 Cor. 12:28).

Or mediators

1Ti_2:5 For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus;
how many do you have???/QUOTE]

REALLY??
James 5:13-20 is ALL about interceding and mediating for one another.

Study your Bible . . .

And baptism

Mat_3:11 I indeed baptize you with water unto repentance: but he that cometh after me is mightier than I, whose shoes I am not worthy to bear: he shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost, and with fire:

and
Act 1:5 For John truly baptized with water; but ye shall be baptized with the Holy Ghost not many days hence.
remember pentecost, it was only the beginning

Act 11:15 And as I began to speak, the Holy Ghost fell on them, as on us at the beginning.
Act 11:16 Then remembered I the word of the Lord, how that he said, John indeed baptized with water; but ye shall be baptized with the Holy Ghost.
Act 11:17 Forasmuch then as God gave them the like gift as he did unto us, who believed on the Lord Jesus Christ; what was I, that I could withstand God?
Teh Holy Spirit, forgotten by men and His relgions, treated like a second rate teacher and an act to put on in front of teh people
Act_2:33 Therefore being by the right hand of God exalted, and having received of the Father the promise of the Holy Ghost, he hath shed forth this, which ye now see and hear.
Disobedience BOL your religion is full of it, you do know that any thing that replaces Christ, opposes Christ ids dissobedient to Christ it Anti Christ. So before you go crying "anti catholic" look at who it is you are being disobedient to.

So . . . . you're against Baptism with water??
That kind of disobedience explains a LOT . . .

 

[BreadOfLife]

What I asked is 'who' determines what is Sacred Tradition. Do you have it written down somewhere? Does the Pope whisper in someones ear what is Sacred Tradition? Who determines?

(2 Thess. 2:15) says nothing about your so called 'sacred traditions'. It speaks of the traditions taught by the prophets and apostles, which is taught by word or epistle. That is no proof for the validity of Romes 'sacred traditions'. You have to prove your 'traditions' are valid through the comparison
of Scripture. Which finds you wanting.

Again, you are not paying attention. How can minor traditions change if Sacred tradition never changes. Yet it changes minor traditions. Once Sacred Tradition changes your so called minor traditions, you change Sacred Tradition. What a joke.

The apocrypha were never part of the Cannon of Scripture. Rome had to add them due to the Reformation they were fighting.

Again, if the method of water baptism is not explicitly stated in Scripture, then why do you need other writings to explain? The writings of the church fathers are not Scripture. Unless you have some proof that they are?

Stranger

Pay attention, Stranger.
I've already told you that Sacred Tradition has been passed down by the Apostles. I even gave you two perfect examples of this.

NOT everything they taught was written down in Scripture, as I amply demonstrated by showing you 2 Thess. 2:15, where Paul says to hold fast to what they taught WHETHER BY an oral statement - OR BY a letter. I also educated you about the 1st century document, The Didache (Teachings of the Twelve Apostles), wherein Baptism is meticulously described.

As for your total confusion about Sacred Tradition and minor traditions - they have nothing to do with each other.

Finally, as to the 7 Deuterocanonical Books - YOUR claim that the Church added them during the Protestant Revolt is the most ignorant and asinine thing you have claimed so far. The Council of Trent simply CLOSED the canon. It didn't create it.

- The Synod of Rome (382) is where the canon was first formally identified.
- It was confirmed at the Synod of Hippo eleven years later (393). At the Council (or Synod) of Carthage (397), it was yet again confirmed. The bishops wrote at the end of their document, "But let Church beyond sea (Rome) be consulted about confirming this canon". There were 44 bishops, including St. Augustine who signed the document.
- 7 years later, in 405, in a letter from Pope Innocent I to Exsuperius, Bishop of Toulouse, he reiterated the canon.
- 14 years after that, at the 2nd Council (Synod) of Carthage (419) the canon was again formally confirmed.

The Canon of Scripture was officially closed at the council of Trent in the 16th century because of the Scriptural perversions happening within Protestantism and the random editing and deleting of books from the Canon.

Do your HOMEWORK . . .

 

[JesusIsFaithful]

what is it - is it one off or widespread - why is it unforgiveable etc ? - any comments - twinc

The Pharisees were resisting believing in Jesus Christ by saying that Jesus has a demon and thus sinning against the Holy Ghost. That means the only sin that is unforgiveable that the Holy Spirit will convict of is not believing in Jesus Christ.

John 16:7 Nevertheless I tell you the truth; It is expedient for you that I go away: for if I go not away, the Comforter will not come unto you; but if I depart, I will send him unto you.8 And when he is come, he will reprove the world of sin, and of righteousness, and of judgment:9 Of sin, because they believe not on me;10 Of righteousness, because I go to my Father, and ye see me no more;11 Of judgment, because the prince of this world is judged.

Any other sin, the Father will chasten the believer for not repenting of, and it would be better to trust the Lord as our Good Shepherd and ask Him for help to discern iniquity as well as lean on Him all the tie to depart from iniquity and not just rely on Him to lead them away from temptation and deliver them from the evil one since we do not wrestle against flesh & blood but against principalities and against dark forces.

Ephesians 6:10 Finally, my brethren, be strong in the Lord, and in the power of his might.11 Put on the whole armour of God, that ye may be able to stand against the wiles of the devil.12 For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places.13 Wherefore take unto you the whole armour of God, that ye may be able to withstand in the evil day, and having done all, to stand.

Since John 3:18 testify that sinners are already condemned, then the only sin that is unforgiveable is the sin of unbelief which the Holy Ghost will convict of as it is that sin of not believing is why that sinner's name is not written in the Book of Life and thus cast into the lake of fire to burn for all eternity.

John 3:18 He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.19 And this is the condemnation, that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil.20 For every one that doeth evil hateth the light, neither cometh to the light, lest his deeds should be reproved.21 But he that doeth truth cometh to the light, that his deeds may be made manifest, that they are wrought in God.

 

[Stranger]

To say that the Jews NEVER accepted the Deuterocanonical Books as Scripture is a complete and total LIE.

The 7 Deuterocanonical Books were part of the OPEN Jewish Canon that existed prior to and after the life of Christ. They were only ejected after Jesus walked the earth because of the influence they were having on the Dispersed Jews who were converting to Christianity.

There are HUNDREDS of quotes, references and direct allusions to the Deuterocanonical Books in the New Testament.
Here are just a few of them:
Eph. 6:13-17 - The whole discussion of armor, helmet, breastplate, sword, shield follows Wis. 5:17-20.
Matt. 2:16 - Herod's decree of slaying innocent children was prophesied in Wis. 11:7 - slaying the holy innocents.
Matt. 6:19-20 - Jesus' statement about laying up for yourselves treasure in heaven follows Sirach 29:11 - lay up your treasure.
Matt.. 7:12 - Jesus' golden rule "do unto others" is the converse of Tobit 4:15 - what you hate, do not do to others.
Matt. 7:16,20 - Jesus' statement "you will know them by their fruits" follows Sirach 27:6 - the fruit discloses the cultivation.
Matt. 11:25 - Jesus' description "Lord of heaven and earth" is the same as Tobit 7:18 - Lord of heaven and earth.
Matt. 12:42 - Jesus refers to the wisdom of Solomon which was recorded and made part of the deuterocanonical books.
Matt. 16:18 - Jesus' reference to the "power of death" and "gates of Hades" references Wisdom 16:13.
Matt. 22:25; Mark 12:20; Luke 20:29 - Gospel writers refer to the canonicity of Tobit 3:8 and 7:11 regarding the seven brothers.
Mark 4:5,16-17 - Jesus' description of seeds falling on rocky ground and having no root follows Sirach 40:15.
Luke 1:42 - Elizabeth's declaration of Mary's blessedness above all women follows Uzziah's declaration in Judith 13:18.
Luke 1:52 - Mary's magnificat addressing the mighty falling from their thrones and replaced by lowly follows Sirach 10:14.
Luke 2:29 - Simeon's declaration that he is ready to die after seeing the Child Jesus follows Tobit 11:9.

Protestants played no role in the Hebrew Bible. Look at the Hebrew Bible today and tell me how many books are in it.

You can't blame everything on Luther.

Stranger