This topic contains 1 reply, has 5 voices, and was last updated by Anonymous 11 years, 11 months ago.
February 3, 2006 at 8:49 pm #1175
Ok Ron, I started a whole new thread so we can go over every detail.
[quote:3bggyl3j]I don’t think so although your examples do suggest differently and they do make one feel that way. However would a true believer ever reach that point is very doubtful as well. This I do know – we can’t ignore the verses that I gave either, nor can one sin their salvation away. As for the
Romans 11:20 -23 this is about the overall people not individuals. The Jews were God’s elect until they, as a whole, rejected the Gospel. The door of Salvation was then opened up to the Gentiles (us) with the Gospel. But this is getting sidelined to far off the main subject.
Luke 8:13 – those on whom the word makes some impressions, but they are not deep and durable ones, will show their hypocrisy in a time of trial; as the seed sown upon the rock, where it gains no root, v. 13. These for awhile believe a little while; their profession promises something, but in time of temptation they fall away from their good beginnings. Whether the temptation arises from the smiles or the frowns, of the world, they are easily overcome by it.
Luke 15:11-32 – a good example of the true believer, although he backslid, He eventually came back to a reality of where his true home was. It shows the patience of God and the need for a believer to be truly a repentant person lest they be lost forever. It involves the heart not just the head.
John 15:1-10 – note the verses mentioned #3 -Now ye are clean through the word which I have spoken unto you. #7- If ye abide in me, and my words abide in you, ye shall ask what ye will, and it shall be done unto you. Yet your church says that we cannot understand Scriptures without your magestirium. Why is that?
I hope this help you understand as well??? If a person truly is a believer, they would have been sealed as a believer –
Eph 1:13,14 – In whom ye also trusted, after that ye heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation: in whom also after that ye believed, ye were sealed with that holy Spirit of promise, Which is the earnest of our inheritance until the redemption of the purchased possession, unto the praise of his glory. [/quote:3bggyl3j]February 4, 2006 at 1:01 pm #5788
Victor that is what I said alright and you responded with:
[quote:2br7opo1]I started a whole new thread so we can go over every detail[/quote:2br7opo1]
So I’m waiting for some comments for us to continue…..
meanwhile here are some views as I see from the Bible that
proves Catholicism is not “The Pillar of Fire / The Pillar of Truth”
as they claim.February 4, 2006 at 5:27 pm #5789
Please don’t push me to answer. I have another life outside of the forum and have plenty things going on at a time. Comments like this really make me think you are out to win this debate. Please show some charity and humility. I’ve told you this more then once and I can only take so much of your smarmy remarks. Just be charitable and patient please.February 4, 2006 at 5:53 pm #5790
Smarmy Remarks? Not sure what you mean by that, but I never know whether or not you’d respond so that is why I push (?) for an answer. I have no problem being charitable and patent. Take your time then and I apologize for being smarmy, I didn’t think I was. Sorry about that.March 1, 2006 at 1:32 am #5803
Victor this may be a “Smarmy Remark”
But are you ever going to reply?March 1, 2006 at 5:07 pm #5804
[quote:uqhehad0]Victor this may be a “Smarmy Remark”
But are you ever going to reply?[/quote:uqhehad0]
[color=blue:uqhehad0]Ok. First and foremost, it is crucial we identify terms. It is my experience that sometimes people are talking about different things while using the same words. Please define the following and we can go from there.
And any other words that are relevant to this discussion.[/color:uqhehad0]March 3, 2006 at 12:28 pm #5805
Hello Victor you wanted these definitions:
[color=darkred:97wixw3e][b:97wixw3e]SALVATION[/b:97wixw3e][/color:97wixw3e] -The salvation that comes through Christ may be described in three tenses: past, present, and future. When a person believes in Christ, he is saved <Acts 16:31>. But we are also in the process of being saved from the power of sin <Rom. 8:13; Phil. 2:12>. Finally, we shall be saved from the very presence of sin <Rom. 13:11; Titus 2:12-13>. God releases into our lives today the power of Christ’s resurrection <Rom. 6:4> and allows us a foretaste of our future life as His children <2 Cor. 1:22; Eph. 1:14>. Our experience of salvation will be complete when Christ returns <Heb. 9:28> and the kingdom of God is fully revealed <Matt. 13:41-43>.
[color=darkred:97wixw3e][b:97wixw3e]Sanctification[/b:97wixw3e][/color:97wixw3e] – the process of God’s grace by which the believer is separated from sin and becomes dedicated to God’s righteousness. Accomplished by the Word of God <John 17:7> and the Holy Spirit <Rom. 8:3-4>, sanctification results in holiness, or purification from the guilt and power of sin. Sanctification in the Atonement. As the process by which God purifies the believer, sanctification is based on the sacrificial death of Christ. In his letters to the churches, the apostle Paul noted that God has “chosen” and “reconciled” us to Himself in Christ for the purpose of sanctification <Eph. 1:4; 5:25-27; Titus 2:14>.
[color=darkred:97wixw3e][b:97wixw3e]Justification[/b:97wixw3e][/color:97wixw3e] – The process by which sinful human beings are made acceptable to a holy God. When God justifies, He charges the sin of man to Christ and credits the righteousness of Christ to the believer <2 Cor. 5:21>. Thus, “through one Man’s righteous act, the free gift came to all men, resulting in justification of life” <Rom. 5:18>. Because this righteousness is “the righteousness of God” which is “apart from the law” <Rom. 3:21>, it is thorough; a believer is “justified from all things” <Acts 13:39>. God is “just” because His holy standard of perfect righteousness has been fulfilled in Christ, and He is the “justifier,” because this righteousness is freely given to the believer <Rom. 3:26; 5:16>.
[color=darkred:97wixw3e][b:97wixw3e]Grace[/b:97wixw3e][/color:97wixw3e] – Favor or kindness shown without regard to the worth or merit of the one who receives it and in spite of what that same person deserves. The theme of grace is especially prominent in the letters of the apostle Paul. He sets grace radically over against the law and the works of the law <Rom. 3:24,28>. Paul makes it abundantly clear that salvation is not something that can be earned or merited; it can be received only as a gift of grace <Rom. 4:4>. Grace, however, must be accompanied by faith; a person must trust in the mercy and favor of God, even while it is undeserved <Rom. 4:16>.
[color=darkred:97wixw3e][b:97wixw3e]Faith[/b:97wixw3e][/color:97wixw3e] – A belief in or confident attitude toward God, involving commitment to His will for one’s life. In the New Testament, “faith” covers various levels of personal commitment. Mere intellectual agreement to a truth is illustrated in <James 2:19>, where even demons are said to believe that there is one God. Obviously, however, they are not saved by this type of belief. Genuine saving faith is a personal attachment to Christ, best thought of as a combination of two ideas– reliance on Christ and commitment to Him. Saving faith involves personally depending on the finished work of Christ’s sacrifice as the only basis for forgiveness of sin and entrance into heaven. But saving faith is also a personal commitment of one’s life to following Christ in obedience to His commands: “I know whom I have believed and am persuaded that He is able to keep what I have committed to Him until that Day” <2 Tim. 1:12>. Faith is part of the Christian life from beginning to end. As the instrument by which the gift of salvation is received <Eph. 2:8-9>, faith is thus distinct from the basis of salvation, which is grace, and from the outworking of salvation, which is good works. The apostle Paul declared that salvation is through faith, not through keeping the works of the law <Eph. 2:8,9>.March 4, 2006 at 2:54 am #5806
Ron, if you are going to copy and paste material from a website, you have to cite it.March 4, 2006 at 4:03 am #5807
Victor, Everything I put down was from
[color=red:34zagahv]Nelson’s Illustrated Bible Dictionary
Copyright (C) 1986, Thomas Nelson Publishers[/color:34zagahv]
Is that better?March 6, 2006 at 10:29 pm #5810
[quote:9ym2j2u7]Victor, Everything I put down was from
[color=red:9ym2j2u7]Nelson’s Illustrated Bible Dictionary
Copyright (C) 1986, Thomas Nelson Publishers[/color:9ym2j2u7]
Is that better?[/quote:9ym2j2u7]
That was Benedict that asked for it, not me. But he is right, you should have noted the source. And thanks for doing so. I will post the catholic defintions soon.March 11, 2006 at 7:46 pm #5815
Well I’ll jump in but I missed the other thread so what exactly are you arguing about right now…?March 12, 2006 at 2:56 am #5816
[quote:2oz9c2ha]Well I’ll jump in but I missed the other thread so what exactly are you arguing about right now…?[/quote:2oz9c2ha]
This: http://www.aboutcatholics.com/community … =4119#4119 and the successive pages. Enjoy. ” title=”Smile” />March 12, 2006 at 3:34 am #5817
Ah I see. Well that is a big thread. Often discussions like this are so difficult because to really get to the root of the problem one needs to get to the beginning. Justification, and more importantly, HOW we are justified, has a lot to do with who we perceive God as, and this starts way before the Bible.
To come to an understanding of God in the first place, we need to usually lean on the natural moral law that resides within our hearts, given to us by God. This is generally one of the best arguments to start a dialogue with a non-believer about the Christian God.
So then I say to those who claim breaking this law is okay; do you believe in a just God? If so, how do you hold to OSAS? If we can break the natural law with impunity, it is not really a law, and then one of the biggets examples of God in the world goes out an airlock. It just doesn’t follow.
For those who were simply born into Protestantism and accept the Bible without question, never even thinking to ask why*, or even how they know God exists, somehow I suppose this doctrine can exist. But for someone who looks at things clearly, OSAS makes no sense. At all.
*I am not saying the Bible isn’t inspired or that God does not exist, obviously. But most protestants do not have a clue why they believe in the Bible.March 12, 2006 at 4:19 am #5818
[quote:3ndyxaav]*I am not saying the Bible isn’t inspired or that God does not exist, obviously. But most protestants do not have a clue why they believe in the Bible.[/quote:3ndyxaav]
My difficulty with that is we all (Prot and Cath alike) accept it as the Word of God, but why? Who said it was? How do we know? Protestantism really can’t answer that truthfully without referring back to the Catholic Church.March 17, 2006 at 4:09 am #5829
[b:2r5dyslp]To Uncertaindrummer – where did you find this in the Bible?[/b:2r5dyslp]
To come to an understanding of God in the first place, [i:2r5dyslp][u:2r5dyslp]we need to usually lean on the natural moral law that resides within our hearts,[/u:2r5dyslp][/i:2r5dyslp] given to us by God. This is generally one of the best arguments to start a dialogue with a non-believer about the Christian God. [/quote:2r5dyslp]
[b:2r5dyslp] I don’t see that anywhere?
To you and Jon about :[/b:2r5dyslp]
*I am not saying the Bible isn’t inspired or that God does not exist, obviously. But most protestants do not have a clue why they believe in the Bible.
My difficulty with that is we all (Prot and Cath alike) accept it as the Word of God, but why? Who said it was? How do we know? Protestantism really can’t answer that truthfully without referring back to the Catholic Church [/quote:2r5dyslp]
[b:2r5dyslp]anything like this is pure crap as I hope to prove…. you guys don’t even believe in sola scriptura …… but that is our purpose in being here right? So lets dig into the Scriptures fellas ” title=”Very Happy” />[/b:2r5dyslp]March 17, 2006 at 1:18 pm #5831
Why? Why on Earth should we dig into “scripture”? And what is “scripture” by the way?
P.S. YOU try showing God’s existance without using the natural law.March 17, 2006 at 3:44 pm #5832
[quote:199s21ew][b:199s21ew]anything like this is pure crap as I hope to prove…. you guys don’t even believe in sola scriptura …… but that is our purpose in being here right? So lets dig into the Scriptures fellas ” title=”Very Happy” />[/b:199s21ew][/quote:199s21ew]
Sola Scriptura wasn’t even invented until the 1500’s by a rogue priest. How did the Christian Church operate before that time?March 17, 2006 at 8:09 pm #5833
[quote:3tkhy13l][quote:3tkhy13l][b:3tkhy13l]anything like this is pure crap as I hope to prove…. you guys don’t even believe in sola scriptura …… but that is our purpose in being here right? So lets dig into the Scriptures fellas ” title=”Very Happy” />[/b:3tkhy13l][/quote:3tkhy13l]
Sola Scriptura wasn’t even invented until the 1500’s by a rogue priest. How did the Christian Church operate before that time?[/quote:3tkhy13l]
Uuu….uuu..aaa….me me…..pick me. I know.
For the first 1,500 years or so we (real Christians) were in caves and high mountains in the Rockies. We came here by boat through Alaska and managed to invent a printing press which mass produced bibles in the early 100’s. Once we had Bibles, it was all good and we were ready to argue about a particular verse until we were blue in the face. The down fall is of course that no one knew we were in the Rockies, so it never got documented.
PS – We were running from the fierce and Barbaric Romans and the cult of the Catholic Church. If it wasn’t for us coming here to the US, who would of hung the witches at Salem?
Full version available at Chick Tracts.comMarch 18, 2006 at 1:18 am #5835
[u:1zfi9thk][b:1zfi9thk]Who gave us the scriptures?[/b:1zfi9thk][/u:1zfi9thk] D (For your infomation guys)
The Roman church says they proclaimed which books were actually inspired and placed them in one volume, so we should all be indebted to the Catholic Church for the New Testament. Actually the Catholic Church in 397 the Council of Carthage had the 27 books considered the canon. However these books were read and distributed as Ccripture for over 300 years by individual Christians and church’s long before their church councils claimed to give us the Bible. The Synod of Antioch in 266 AD. had rejected Paul of Samosata’s teaching (a modalist) as foreign to the ecclesiastical canon. Athanasius, who fought to preserve the Trinity in the council of Nicea in 325 Ad. when the Church was being challenged had all 27 books of the New Testament. When Athanasius argued in his debate against Arius he used much of the New Testament and quoted from almost every book. He said they were the springs of salvation do not add nor take away.
Almost 40 years later the council of Laodicea in 363 A.D. decreed that only canonized books of the old and new Testament were to be read in the Church’s. None of the councils made any list of what is in or out, the reason being that the majority of the church had accepted and used these books for many years before them. Are we to accept the premise that 300 years passed with confusion and we waited for the church to decide in 397 A.D. what was to be our Scripture? Generations would have come and gone not having the whole Bible. The truth is that we can produce almost the entire Bible we have today from the early church writings in the mid 100’s to 200’s.
In 397 Ad. the council of Carthage put their approval on the canon that was already read by and throughout the church. It then became a fixed canon for the western church as it was for the eastern.
The word canon means rule of faith, the standard in which we measure and evaluate something is true or right and from god. The word for canonicity comes from the Greek word Kanon which is found in Gal.6:16 Peace and mercy to all who follow this rule. How did the church determine what was to be scripture and what was to be rejected. The Roman Catholic church states they gave us the Bible, is this true?
First they determined was it authoritative- did it come as thus saith the Lord, did they recognize God’s voice in it. Did it have the life transforming power of God when it was applied.
Was the author an apostle or was he connected to an apostle (known as a apostolic legate). An example of this is Mark wrote under Peters authority and Luke wrote his Gospel and book of Acts under Paul’s authority. Was it accepted and received by the other apostles who were eye witnesses. such as when Peter stated that Pauls writings were considered Scripture as they were being written ( 2 Pt.3:15-16).
Was it accepted by the overall church. Did the people bear witness of it by the Holy Spirit and did it not conflict with the already revealed body of Scripture. The Church was able to reject false books and this would insure the right ones were accepted because it would delay their recognition. At that time and even hundreds of years afterwards, there were numerous false letters and forgeries circulating, they identified them as false by putting them alongside the apostles teachings already delivered. They have the content that was consistent with the already accepted writings.
Did the books have the quality and inspiration that was consistent with the word of God. It was for this reason the Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha were rejected by not meeting the criteria.
So the test was by the eye witnesses or by Scripture itself. In the same way today we would reject the book of Mormon, we don’t need to have to have a church council and have bishops test it, each of us can apply the scriptural test as we are encouraged to do in 1 Thess.5, “test all things.” So if these letters taught doctrine contrary to what was already delivered or contradict practices of Christian living already given it was rejected. Also if they lacked the prophetic and had inaccuracies historically it was refused.
There originally was no church council to decide what books were to be included in the canon. They were recognized by the consensus of the entire body of the church not by a council of bishops. The books were written under the inspiration of God, they were canonical the moment they were written. A council was not necessary to affirm what was already true. No book became canonical by the action of a church council in the same way the Old Testamnet books were not decided upon by the Sanhedrin. What the council did was to determine which books did not meet the tests for canonicity. There were no books written from 30-45 A.D. because believers had access to the apostles who were living eyewitnesses. Christ’s return was imminent. So there was no immediate concern to write it down. The New Testament started to penned down approximately 15-20 years after the ascension. Since many of the apostles were alive there was no reason to write, they also thought Christ’s return was imminent so it was not necessary. When the church had its first martyr Stephen, then they were persecuted and scattered, it then became necessary to pen down the teachings. It was from this event that letters were copied and circulated so that the teachings would not be lost or changed. As the apostles went out they shared the writings and commanded them to be passed on to others. The apostles put their writings into circulation through the church. “I charge you by the Lord that this epistle be read to all the holy brethren.” (1 Cor. 1:2 and Eph.1:1) We have examples of letters to be read to all in scripture 1 Thess.5:27, “to be read to all the church’s” Col.4:16, “read to the church of Colosse and the Laodiceans” Gal.1:21, “to the church’s of Galatia.” Jesus tells John the apostle in Rev 1:11saying, “I am the Alpha and the Omega, the First and the Last,” and, “What you see, write in a book and send it to the seven churches which are in Asia: to Ephesus, to Smyrna, to Pergamos, to Thyatira, to Sardis, to Philadelphia, and to Laodicea.”
All the New Testament books were written between 45-75 A.D excluding the apostle Johns writings, which occurred later in 80-95 A.D. There were schools of Scribes (scholia) that copied the Ccripture by hearing, also lecture rooms were people would copy down what they heard. From the beginning the church copied and shared the original documents to circulate the apostles writings. By 170 A.D. most of the Bible had already been approved and read by the church and the term New Tetstamet was in use. This was long before any council. To protect the writings from being lost they were copied for distribution. First were the Pauline epistles next were the 4 gospels in one work, then Acts 1 Pt., 1 Jn., Revelation all these were accepted in both the East and the West (these were called Homologumena= all books accepted by the entire church). Their was James and Jude, 2nd and 3rd John, 2nd Peter, Hebrews which were disputed books because they were not familiar with them, these 6 books were accepted later (these are called Antilogumena= books accepted by some of the church). Their were also false books circulating by authors who claimed to be an apostle or penned an apostles name. They were considered false because it contradicted the writings previously delivered, Ex. The 1st miracle of Jesus was that he did miracles as a boy not change the water to wine (these were called Notha = writings claiming inspiration but were false). Some of these ended up being in the Koran. By the 2nd century we find the expression the New Testament. If all the Gospels were the same it would be a clear case of collusion we would then have a question of their validity.
Many of the church fathers (bishops, pastors) quote the New Testament. Such as Polycarp (69-155 A.D.), quoting much of the New Testament (Matt., Acts, Hebrews, 1 Pt. And 10 of Paul’s letters) his letter to the Philippians. Justin Martyr (100-160 A.D.) quotes all 4 Gospels, Acts and the epistles of Paul and Revelation. Portions of the gospels were read every Sunday in church. Clement, of Alexandria (165-220 AD) names all the books of the New Testament except Philemon, James, 2 Peter and 3 John. Irenaeus (135-210 A.D.) quotes from all the New Testament books except Philemon, Jude, James and 3 John. Origen 185-254 names all the books of both the Old and New Testaments. 160-240. In 300 A.D. Athanasius referred to all 27 books of the New Testament represented in the eastern church. He said “they were the springs of salvation do not add nor take away,” so he had already decided what was truly the Scripture. Tertullian who was a contemporary of both Origen and Clement mentions all the New Testament books minus James, 2 Peter and 2 John. Eusebius gave explanations and quotations from all the canonical books. They had their authority from the primary authority found in the writings of the apostles which made up the Bible.
We can produce almost all the New Testament from the church fathers writings and quotations before the year 150 A.D. proving that there was no church government to approve of what was in or out. The Scripture is God breathed, its origin is with God, it is not man given (2 Pt.1:21). The churches commission is to protect and promote the word as she is the pillar and ground of truth. Jesus said he was the truth and his word was truth to abandon this source puts one outside being called the church.
Jesus said my sheep hear my voice, they will flee from the voice of stranger. Jn.17:8, “I have given them your words you have given me.” John 8:47, “He who is of God hears God’s words; therefore you do not hear, because you are not of God.” When Jesus was questioned by Pilate he was asked what is truth. He said ‘everyone who hears my voice is of the truth.” His voice is found in the Scriptures delivered to us today.
John 8:30-32 ” As He spoke these words, many believed in Him. Then Jesus said to those Jews who believed Him, “If you abide in My word, you are My disciples indeed. “And you shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free.” In Jn.17:7, Jesus said His word is truth” because it was spoken from Him, truth incarnate.
John 14:24-26, “He who does not love Me does not keep My words; and the word which you hear is not Mine but the Father’s who sent Me. “These things I have spoken to you while being present with you. “But the Helper, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in My name, He will teach you all things, and bring to your remembrance all things that I said to you.” The purpose of the Spirit is to bear witness to Jesus and His words
John 16:12-14 “I still have many things to say to you, but you cannot bear them now. “However, when He, the Spirit of truth, has come, He will guide you into all truth; for He will not speak on His own authority, but whatever He hears He will speak; and He will tell you things to come. “He will glorify Me, for He will take of what is Mine and declare it to you.” The Spirit guides us and only speaks what Christ says. He does not teach new doctrine!
Jn2:20-21 “But you have an anointing from the Holy One, and you know all things. I have not written to you because you do not know the truth, but because you know it, and that no lie is of the truth. The spirit is given to teach us and lead us to truth this is not found in any man today but the God/man who already came.
I Jn. 3:2 ” Now he who keeps His commandments abides in Him, and He in him. And by this we know that He abides in us, by the Spirit whom He has given us.” There is no Christian without the inner witness which bears witness to the word as our guide. It is the Spirit that is the teaching authority of the church not the Pope or any anointed man. the spirit was sent into the world to convince of sin righteousness and judgment. He is another just like Jesus.
The church did not give us the Bible the apostles did, and they began the church that Jesus founded. The Bible can exist where there is no church building or assembly but the church cannot exist where there is no Bible.
The Holy Spirit wrote it all down so there would be no mistakes. The Holy Spirit is the source of Scripture and all believers are given him to interpret what he wrote. What better guide and teacher can we have than the same one who inspired the apostles to write Scriptures.March 18, 2006 at 7:54 pm #5838
Did you denounce logic sometime in your life, Ron? You are quoting scripture to show us your idea of Scripture.
Let me ask you; How do you know 1 Thssalonians is the inspired word of God? How do you know? The answer: You don’t know. You relied on the Catholic Church’s council to declare it was inspired. Without that, you’ve got nothing.
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.