Skip to main content

Hi to all my Forum Friends,

In the discussion titled "One True Sola" begun by Kraven -- Kraven's post begins with a quote from some unspecified source which states, "Protestants teach Sola Scriptura, Catholics teach Sola Verbum Dei. Who is right? The approach to authority is very different in the ancient Church than in the modernist Protestant church. The Catholic Church follows the “Word of God alone” while the Protestant ecclesiastical groups follow Sola Scriptura which states that only God’s written word is authoritative. . .

To the Protestant the Word is only revealed in written form called Sola Scriptura. To the Catholic Christian the word has a much broader meaning and is revealed to man in more than a written form where men were inspired to reveal God’s Word. "


Basically, what this unknown writer is saying is that the Roman Catholic church believes the Word of God to be the Bible PLUS the writings of the Roman Catholic church.

Yet, the Bible tells us, In 2 Timothy 3:16-17 (nkjv), "All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness, that the man of God may be complete, thoroughly equipped for every good work."

And, in Roman 15:4 (nkjv), we are taught, "For whatever was written in earlier times was written for our instruction, so that through perseverance and the encouragement of the Scriptures we might have hope."

So, if God has given us His Written Word, the Bible, to be our teaching in doctrine, for reproof, correction, and teaching in righteousness -- that through Scripture we might have hope and salvation -- is He only going to give us part of what He wants us to know? Is there anywhere in the Bible where God tells us, "This is My first installment of what you will need to know about salvation. Later, I will have the Roman Catholic church fill you in on the rest of My plan for your salvation?" Somehow, I have never found that in my Bible.

What bothered me most was that Kraven posted a long writing from some anonymous writer; yet, there was not a single word written by Kraven herself. I told Kraven, "Sorry, my Friend, but what you copy/paste is NOT your thinking -- it is from the mind of another. What interests me is what is in YOUR head and in YOUR heart -- not what you copy/paste rote from the Vatican (or some other source)."

And, Kraven responds, "You need to realize, Bill, a billion and a half people believe what I just said because it was put together two thousand years ago, and refined."

According to Wikipedia -- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Major_religious_groups -- lumping Roman Catholics and Protestant Christians together -- it tells us that there are currently between 2 to 2.2 billion people in the "Christian" churches. So, realistically, we can attribute at least half those folks to Protestant Christian churches, that would leave around 1 billion or less in the Roman Catholic church.

That same report shows that Islam represents between 1.57 to 1.65 billion followers. And, lumping the other world religions into a grouping -- they would probably represent about 3 billion people.

So, using your logic that TRUTH is based upon numbers -- then the Qur'an and the holy books of all the other world religions holds more truth than the Bible. Somehow, I cannot believe that. Yet, based upon you logic of numbers -- it is true.

Next, you tell me, "We believe what the Bible says, because of what it says, not to change the wording to make it work for hundreds of different denominations."

Actually, the Roman Catholic church believes what the Bible says -- UNTIL it disagrees with Roman Catholic traditions, doctrines, and catechisms. It is my experience that when this happens -- the Roman Catholic teachings take precedence OVER the Bible.

Kraven, in your mind, and what you understand to be Roman Catholic teachings -- is the Bible the Highest Authority on the teachings of God? Or are the Roman Catholic traditions and teachings the final word?

Which takes precedence -- the Bible or Roman Catholic Traditions?

You tell me, "You try to cut me down, but walk lock step with Chuck Smith and every other heretic slamming all they can with statements they can't back up."

Kraven, I do not fault you for quoting the works of others. I fault you for two things. First, for posting a long post -- which has NONE of your own personal words and thoughts. If we wanted to read what Cardinal So and So writes; we would just google him. What we want to read are YOUR thoughts on the issue. There is no problem with you quoting another to support what YOU have written. But, when your entire post is the writing of another -- does this mean that you have no thoughts of your own? Or does it mean that your church hierarchy will NOT ALLOW you to express your own thoughts?

Second, when you quote the writings of another without giving credit to the original writer -- you are committing plagiarism. That is stealing! And, when you quote another without giving your readers the source information of your quote -- this makes me wonder if you quoted that person accurately -- or did you modify what was written to make it fit your point of view? That doubt can be eliminated by simply stating the source of your quotes.

Do I quote Pastor Chuck Smith and many other conservative Christian teachers, scholars, and theologians? Yes. Do I take what they write to be the absolute truth? Not really. When I hear, or read the writing of a Christian teacher -- I test this against what is taught in Scripture. There are very few pastors, teachers, scholars, theologians with whom I agree 100%. Acts 17:11 tells us to test what our teachers tell us against Scripture. This is what I do. And, when I agree with them -- I often will quote them in my writings.

Then, you tell me, "Not all protestants hate as much as you. One noted Presbyterian Dr. of theology said this about Mary, he declared her to be "Theotokos, Mother of God." He said it was necessary for our salvation for Jesus to be fully human as well as fully divine."

Years ago, my wife had a habit of saying, "They said. . . " And, I would always ask her, "Who are 'they'?" As I told her -- and I tell you; if you want to be taken seriously when you speak or write -- DO NOT speak or write in generalities. "They said. . ." or "He said. . ." -- has no meaning whatsoever unless you have already identified this person or source in your writing. Who are they? Who is he? If you want to be taken seriously when you write or speak -- tell us specifically WHO said it. You have quoted an anonymous Presbyterian theologian. This could be Dr. Seuss for all we know.

Is Jesus Christ fully Man and fully God? Yes. Absolutely. We are told in Hebrews 2:17 (nasb), "Therefore, He (Jesus Christ) had to be made like His brethren in all things, so that He might become a merciful and faithful high priest in things pertaining to God, to make propitiation for the sins of the people."

Yes, Jesus Christ was born fully human and fully divine deity. But, that divine nature in no way translated to Mary. Mary was a blessed, totally normal, mortal woman. And, Mary is a saint in heaven today. For now, the bodies of Mary and all those billions of other saints who have died in Christ, rest in their graves while their spirits are in the presence of God in heaven. At the Rapture, they, and we who are still alive, will be given our glorified, immortal bodies.

Do I hate? Yes, I hate it when anyone comes on a Religion Forum, or in any Christian community -- and teaches false doctrines and false teachings, claiming them to be Biblical -- when it is very obvious that these doctrines and teachings are NOT Biblical. Yes, I hate that -- and I will refute such teachings as long as God gives me the time, means, and ability.

Next, you declare, "Two natures in the person of God the son. Therefore, since Mary was the source of his human nature, she was mother of Jesus; and since Jesus is God, she is the mother of God. There is no need to be offended by this truth, the doctor pointed out, because it safeguarded our salvation."

Mary was NOT "the source of His human nature." God was the source of His human nature. Mary was the human vessel, the human womb, through which God, the true source, brought the Incarnate Son of God into human flesh.

You write using your computer. Is your computer YOUR MIND? No. The computer is a tool which you use to bring forth what is in your mind. By the same token, God used Mary as His tool by which He brought forth the Incarnate Son of God.

Therefore, Mary is not the Mother of God. God is preexisting, God was not created -- so, how can a mortal woman be His mother? Mary was a woman, a normal mortal woman, who was blessed to be used by God to accomplish His purpose. Nothing more, nothing less.

Finally, you tell me, "So you see, Not everybody is as screwed up as you. I'll tell you once more, Whatever you read from me I believe. I've been all over this stuff all my life. Its what I think, it's what I believe, do you understand?"

Sounds like a perfect case of brainwashing to me, i.e., this is what I have been told all my life -- so, therefore, this is what I WILL BELIEVE!

Personally, I like what Pastor Greg Laurie, of Harvest Crusades, tells us. Speaking of people who come forward through emotion or some other pressure, and the same could be applied to those who have a lifetime of being brainwashed -- Pastor Greg told us, "I would rather see a person who is a non-believer come into our church, sit in the back, and listen critically for six months -- rather than rushing up that first day to the altar. Let him/her listen, absorb, analyze, chew on, criticize, and sincerely think about what is being taught. Then, maybe in a few weeks, in a few months, when he/she has seriously considered the truth of atonement and salvation and sees it to be true -- then, let that person come forward and commit his/her life to Jesus Christ."

In 1987, when I became serious about God, Jesus Christ, and salvation -- I began to attend a church where I felt His love and His presence strongly, the Filipino-American Church of Irvine (California). I attended worship services, Sunday School classes, and weekly Bible studies -- for six months. Then, I felt I was ready to commit my life to Jesus Christ. And, I have never regretted that decision.

This is the same relationship I want to tell others about; that, they, too, can have this relationship with Him. You will notice that I refer to a relationship with Jesus Christ -- not with a church or any organization -- but, only with Jesus Christ. This is salvation; this is eternal security; this is eternal life in Christ -- this is a personal, saving relationship with our Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ.

You see, Kraven, no one is born into a church; no one is born a Christian; no one is born a believer. This is a decision, a choice, we all must make when we are old enough to truly understand about God, Jesus Christ, and what it means to be saved and have eternal life in Christ. This is why we in the Protestant church do not baptize until a person is at or beyond the age of accountability -- the age when a person can truly understand what it means to be a Christ Follower.

Am I "screwed up" as you accuse? Very possibly. I have been called worse.

Am I a "hater" as you accuse? Only when I hear or read false doctrines and false teachings being sown among vulnerable folks.

God bless, have a wonderful, blessed day,

Bill

Attachments

Images (1)
  • 0_-_CROSS-BIBLE_SAID-IT-1c
Original Post

Replies sorted oldest to newest

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Bill Gray:
Hi to all my Forum Friends,

In the discussion titled "One True Sola" begun by Kraven -- Kraven's post begins with a quote from some unspecified source which states, "Protestants teach Sola Scriptura, Catholics teach [i]Sola Verbum Dei
Do I hate? Yes, I hate it when anyone comes on a Religion Forum, or in any Christian community -- and teaches false doctrines and false teachings, claiming them to be Biblical -- when it is very obvious that these doctrines and teachings are NOT Biblical. Yes, I hate that -- and I will refute such teachings as long as God gives me the time, means, and ability.

A protestant declared "The two natures"

Next, you declare, [color:blue]"Two natures in the person of God the son. Therefore, since Mary was the source of his human nature, she was mother of Jesus; and since Jesus is God, she is the mother of God. There is no need to be offended by this truth, the doctor pointed out, because it safeguarded our salvation."


-----------------------------------------------------------------

There is no way scriptura and Verbum Dei are the same.

Prove I posted one false word.

K
Last edited by Kraven
quote:
Originally posted by Kraven:
There is no way scriptura and Verbum Dei is the same. Prove I posted one false word. K

Hi Kraven,

While I appreciate you reposting my long initial post -- I am not sure our Forum Friends appreciate seeing it posted twice. You might want to delete the longer post when posting a response. We do not want our Forum Friends throwing rocks at both of us for long posts!

Now, nowhere did I say you posted a "false word" in the sense of being a lie. I am sure that you believe all the misleading doctrines you post. My suggestion to you is that when you post, let it be your writings. Use "identified and credited" quotes from another -- but, let the heart of the post be your thoughts and your writings.

Are "Sola Scriptura" and "Sola Verbum Dei" the same? Basically, yes.

Sola Scriptura means "By Scripture Alone" -- and Sola Verbum Dei means “Word of God alone”

The Word of God means one of two things: Either the Living Word of God (Jesus Christ) or the Written Word of God (the Bible).

And, since the Written Word of God is called Scripture -- I can say "By Scripture alone" or I can say "Word of God alone" -- and it means the same thing. How can you refute that?

God bless, have a wonderful, blessed day,

Bill

Attachments

Images (1)
  • 0_-_CROSS-BIBLE_SOLA-FEDE_Outline
quote:
Originally posted by Kraven:
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Bill Gray:
Hi to all my Forum Friends,

In the discussion titled "One True Sola" begun by Kraven -- Kraven's post begins with a quote from some unspecified source which states, "Protestants teach Sola Scriptura, Catholics teach [i]Sola Verbum Dei
Do I hate? Yes, I hate it when anyone comes on a Religion Forum, or in any Christian community -- and teaches false doctrines and false teachings, claiming them to be Biblical -- when it is very obvious that these doctrines and teachings are NOT Biblical. Yes, I hate that -- and I will refute such teachings as long as God gives me the time, means, and ability.

A protestant declared "The two natures"

Next, you declare, [color:blue]"Two natures in the person of God the son. Therefore, since Mary was the source of his human nature, she was mother of Jesus; and since Jesus is God, she is the mother of God. There is no need to be offended by this truth, the doctor pointed out, because it safeguarded our salvation."


-----------------------------------------------------------------

There is no way scriptura and Verbum Dei are the same.

Prove I posted one false word.

K


...............ONE LAST TIME.....Read above reply.......what long inital post?

................YOU LOST THIS, I'M MOVING ON TO THE NEXT ONE..................

...............Are you mad because we got the Cross? Wonder how we got that Cross?


K.
Last edited by Kraven
Hi Kraven,

Be childish all you want. You and I both know that your initial post had my full post in it. Then, you obviously had second thoughts and, having pity on our Forum Friends -- you modiied it.

I always copy and save posts before I write my response. Do I need to show your initial post?

God bless, have a wonderful, blessed day,

Bill

Attachments

Images (1)
  • Tennis-Player-1a
If I could jump in.......Sola Scriptura literally couldn't have been true, practically speaking, for most Christians throughout history, since the movable-type printing press only appeared in the mid-15th century. Preaching and oral Tradition, along with things like devotional practices, Christian holidays, church architecture and other sacred art, were the primary carriers of the gospel for 1400 years. For all these centuries, sola Scriptura would have been regarded as an absurd abstraction and impossibility.



quote:
Originally posted by House of David:
If I could jump in.......Sola Scriptura literally couldn't have been true, practically speaking, for most Christians throughout history, since the movable-type printing press only appeared in the mid-15th century. Preaching and oral Tradition, along with things like devotional practices, Christian holidays, church architecture and other sacred art, were the primary carriers of the gospel for 1400 years. For all these centuries, sola Scriptura would have been regarded as an absurd abstraction and impossibility.

Hi David,

Writing existed, we know for certain, from the time of Moses. And, I believe we can be sure it existed before his time.

So, written Scripture has been around long before the printing press. Sorry, my Friend, but that argument is like a sieve -- will never hold water.

God bless, have a wonderful, blessed day,

Bill

Attachments

Images (1)
  • Friends_Piggy
quote:
Originally posted by Bill Gray:
quote:
Originally posted by House of David:
If I could jump in.......Sola Scriptura literally couldn't have been true, practically speaking, for most Christians throughout history, since the movable-type printing press only appeared in the mid-15th century. Preaching and oral Tradition, along with things like devotional practices, Christian holidays, church architecture and other sacred art, were the primary carriers of the gospel for 1400 years. For all these centuries, sola Scriptura would have been regarded as an absurd abstraction and impossibility.

Hi David,

Writing existed, we know for certain, from the time of Moses. And, I believe we can be sure it existed before his time.

So, written Scripture has been around long before the printing press. Sorry, my Friend, but that argument is like a sieve -- will never hold water.

God bless, have a wonderful, blessed day,

Bill



I respectfully disagree. Writing may have existed, but mass producing written literature and getting it into the hands of the faithful was a long time coming. Early church believers had to rely on other resources for God's Holy teaching.



quote:
Originally posted by House of David:
quote:
Originally posted by Bill Gray:
quote:
Originally posted by House of David:
If I could jump in.......Sola Scriptura literally couldn't have been true, practically speaking, for most Christians throughout history, since the movable-type printing press only appeared in the mid-15th century. Preaching and oral Tradition, along with things like devotional practices, Christian holidays, church architecture and other sacred art, were the primary carriers of the gospel for 1400 years. For all these centuries, sola Scriptura would have been regarded as an absurd abstraction and impossibility.

Hi David,

Writing existed, we know for certain, from the time of Moses. And, I believe we can be sure it existed before his time. So, written Scripture has been around long before the printing press. Sorry, my Friend, but that argument is like a sieve -- will never hold water.

God bless, have a wonderful, blessed day, Bill

I respectfully disagree. Writing may have existed, but mass producing written literature and getting it into the hands of the faithful was a long time coming. Early church believers had to rely on other resources for God's Holy teaching.

Hi David,

True, the printing press was not around in the days of Jesus. However, we know that Moses wrote Scripture; we know that hundreds of years before Christ, the Essenes were copying and writing Scripture and other documents. Many of these were found in the caves of Qumran. We know that the early church leaders wrote and copied Scripture to send to the other churches. John, on the Isle of Patmos, was told to write what had been revealed to him and to send it to the seven churches -- the book of Revelation.

And, all of this happened long before the Roman Catholic church, the Church of Rome, came into existence -- and long before the Roman Catholic church began composing and writing its own laws, traditions, etc., to preempt the Written Word of God.

Yes, David, there was oral teaching as well as written teaching in the early church -- but, this has nothing to do with the Vatican's laws and traditions which closely resemble the Pharisees laws.

God bless, have a wonderful, blessed day,

Bill

Attachments

Images (1)
  • 0_-_CROSS-BIBLE_SOLA-FEDE_Outline
quote:
Originally posted by House of David:
quote:
Originally posted by Bill Gray:
Yes, David, there was oral teaching as well as written teaching in the early church -- but, this has nothing to do with the Vatican's laws and traditions which closely resemble the Pharisees laws.

Which one - specifically - resembles a law of the pharisees?

Hi David,

Actually, all of the Roman Catholic traditions and doctrines.

Through Moses, God gave the Israelites the Ten Commandments and, then, the Law to expand upon and explain His commandments. When God does something, it is complete. When He gave the Israelites the Ten Commandments and His Law -- nothing more was needed for the Israelites to be the people He wanted them to be.

However, the corrupt priests and scribes, i.e., the Pharisees and Sadducees, decided they needed to add to God's work. Obviously they thought that God's work was not finished -- and that they had to finish His work for Him. So, they wrote many hundreds of new laws, the Pharisaical laws with which they controlled even the most minute aspect of the lives of the Israelites.

This, in my view, is what the Vatican has done over the past 1700 years -- wrapped their followers in velvet chains of Vatican laws, traditions, rituals, etc. -- to the point that many people believe they are born Roman Catholic.

When we are born, we are clean slates. God willing, the new born child will be raised in a Christian home and taught about God and Jesus Christ -- so that when the child reaches the age of true understanding -- he/she can, of his/her own free will, choose to follow Jesus Christ.

To do this, the child needs the love of Christian parents and the love of a Christian family -- not the velvet chains of Vatican laws.

God bless, have a wonderful, blessed day,

Bill

Attachments

Images (1)
  • 0_-_CROSS-BIBLE_SAID-IT-1c
quote:
To do this, the child needs the love of Christian parents and the love of a Christian family -- not the velvet chains of Vatican laws.


Nope. I did not have Christian parents, Bill.
I found Jesus and the Fullness of the Church in the Catholic Church.
Your theory doesn't hold water.
quote:
Originally posted by vplee123:
quote:
To do this, the child needs the love of Christian parents and the love of a Christian family -- not the velvet chains of Vatican laws.


Nope. I did not have Christian parents, Bill.
I found Jesus and the Fullness of the Church in the Catholic Church.
Your theory doesn't hold water.


bill....Your're becoming more brain dead every day.

Every protestant denomination has laws and rules which differ from church
to church. If you want to keep up your childish velvet chains type of
talk, I'm more than ready and up for it.

So the question among Christians should not be what is the Word but instead
how is the Word revealed to man. To the Protestant the Word is only revealed
in written form called Sola Scriptura.

Gen. to Rev. - Scripture never says that Scripture is the sole infallible
authority for God's Word. Scripture also mandates the use of tradition.
This fact alone disproves sola Scriptura.

So the question among Christians should not be what is the Word but instead
how is the Word revealed to man. To the Protestant the Word is only revealed
in written form called Sola Scriptura.

Sola Scriptura is not a doctrine for a better understanding of the Logos
but instead is designed to circumvent the legitimate authority
of the Church given by Christ.

The Church throughout history has faithfully exercised her authority to guard
the word of God against the attacks of heresies, such as Sola Scriptura.

Sola Scriptura and Sola Verdum Dei, they're not the same. As you know
Sola Scriptura is not biblical and goes against Christian theology.

The name Catholic was used in the first century by the first father's
when talking about the Catholic church Jesus found while he was on earth.
This is not a theory, it's proven history. There again, true facts about
this history are known.Does this change anything? not really,
but it sure upset's you. Why?

Sola Scriptura is a sixteenth century man made doctrine designed to destroy
the unity of the Church and fragments the entire body of Christ
by exponentially increasing schisms caused by accepting only
part of God’s word by the Protestants


K.
Hi Kraven,

First, you tell me, "Bill....Your're becoming more brain dead every day."

Is this type of Forum Manners taught in one of the Roman Catholic Catechism classes, i.e., "How to relate to those who disagree with you?"

You tell me, "Every protestant denomination has laws and rules which differ from church to church. If you want to keep up your childish velvet chains type of talk, I'm more than ready and up for it."

In the Protestant denominations still clinging to vestiges of their tossed off Roman Catholic heritage -- there are still many rules, rituals, and laws. However, in most Protestant churches, especially the Baptist, no such rules, rituals, and laws exist. Yes, the Baptist denominations do have their guidelines which are suggested to the local churches. But, the local churches are autonomous and self ruling. Makes for better relationships.

Next, you say, "So the question among Christians should not be what is the Word but instead how is the Word revealed to man. To the Protestant the Word is only revealed in written form called Sola Scriptura."

Yes, we in the Protestant faith do believe and teach that, in the Bible, when it speaks of the Word, i.e., Logos -- it is speaking of Jesus Christ. We do view Jesus Christ as the Living Word of God and we view the Bible as the Written Word of God.

So, what about "traditions"?

In Isaiah 29:13 we read, "Then the Lord said, 'Because this people draw near with their words And honor Me with their lip service, But they remove their hearts far from Me, And their reverence for Me consists of tradition learned by rote.'" This does not sound to me like God loves your canned traditions and rituals.

We read Jesus' response to traditions, found in Matthew 15:1-3, "Then the scribes and Pharisees who were from Jerusalem came to Jesus, saying, 'Why do Your disciples transgress the tradition of the elders? For they do not wash their hands when they eat bread.' He answered and said to them, 'Why do you also transgress the commandment of God because of your tradition?'"

And, He continues, in Matthew 15:7-9, "Hypocrites! Well did Isaiah prophesy about you, saying: 'These people draw near to Me with their mouth, And honor Me with their lips, But their heart is far from Me. And in vain they worship Me, Teaching as doctrines the commandments of men.'"

This tells me that God in the Old Testament, and Jesus Christ in the New Testament, did not care too much for Pharisaical type laws, traditions, and rituals. Yet, the Roman Catholic church persist in claiming this to be only way to worship God.

Then, you tell me, "Gen. to Rev. - Scripture never says that Scripture is the sole infallible authority for God's Word. Scripture also mandates the use of tradition. This fact alone disproves Sola Scriptura."

Yet, the Bible tells us, In 2 Timothy 3:16-17 (nkjv), "All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness, that the man of God may be complete, thoroughly equipped for every good work."

And, in Roman 15:4 (nkjv), we are taught, "For whatever was written in earlier times was written for our instruction, so that through perseverance and the encouragement of the Scriptures we might have hope."

So, if God has given us His Written Word, the Bible, to be our teaching in doctrine, for reproof, correction, and teaching in righteousness -- that through Scripture we might have hope and salvation -- is He only going to give us part of what He wants us to know? Is there anywhere in the Bible where God tells us, "This is My first installment of what you will need to know about salvation. Later, I will have the Roman Catholic church fill you in on the rest of My plan for your salvation?" Somehow, I have never found that in my Bible.

You declare, "So the question among Christians should not be what is the Word but instead how is the Word revealed to man. To the Protestant the Word is only revealed in written form called Sola Scriptura."

How is the "Word" revealed to man? Well, let me see. In 2 Timothy 3:16 we read, "All Scripture is given by inspiration of God" where Scripture refers to the Written Word of God. I see that as saying that God has given, by inspiration through the forty writers of the Bible -- ALL that is required for man's salvation, ALL that is required for man to live a Christian life; ALL that is needed to fulfill the plan of God for mankind.

Yet, the Pharisees and the Roman Catholic Vatican hierarchy, tells us, "No, God's revealed plan is not sufficient. We must finish His work for Him." Seems to me that these folks do not have an omniscient, omnipotent, omnipresent God -- but, instead a weaker God who needs man to finish His work. Yet, on the cross, Jesus told us, "It is finished!" (John 19:30).

Rev. Sun Myung Moon tells his followers in his Unification church that Jesus did not have a chance to finish His work on earth -- and that is why God has sent Moon and his wife to finish what Jesus could not finish ("Essentials of the Unification Principle, Teaching of Sun Myung Moon" pages 166-167, 223).

In effect, that is what the Roman Catholic church is teaching, i.e, that God, Jesus Christ, did not finish His work on earth -- so, the Vatican has the Pope to finish His work and to finish writing His Written Word. And, where Sun Myung Moon claims his wife is the new Eve -- the Roman Catholic church claims Mary to be the Queen of Heaven and the Mother of God. The similarity is very striking.

In John 1:1 we are told, "In the beginning was the Word (Logos), and the Word (Logos) was with God, and the Word (Logos) was God." So, it is pretty clear that the Word IS Jesus Christ -- the Living Word.

And, ALL SCRIPTURE is the Written Word of God. "It is finished!" What more is needed that God did not remember to do?

You weakly claim, "Sola Scriptura is not a doctrine for a better understanding of the Logos but instead is designed to circumvent the legitimate authority of the Church given by Christ."

If by church, you mean the body of Christ, the church, which was begun on the Day of Pentecost when the Holy Spirit came upon the 120 waiting in the Upper Room and indwelled them -- then, I will agree that Jesus Christ did indeed give us the church, the "universal" body of Christ -- all Christian believers worldwide.

However, if you mean the Church of Rome begun by Emperor Constantine, i.e., the Roman Catholic church -- then, no, this was not the work of Jesus Christ. It was, instead, the work of Constantine, when after his battle field conversion -- and for the sake of his mother who was a Christian believer -- he recognized the Christian faith and began his church in Rome.

Constantine effectively made Christianity the state church -- and to lure those Romans who still worshiped pagans into his church -- he allowed them to bring in their pagan statues and icons. One such statue, the statue of the pagan mother/child worship which is traced back to Semiramis and her child, Tammuz, after the death of Nimrod -- Constantine allowed to be brought into the church. They renamed the statue to be Mary and the infant Jesus. Thus was what was to later be the beginning of Mariology -- the veneration or worship of Mary.

Then, you declare, "The Church throughout history has faithfully exercised her authority to guard the word of God against the attacks of heresies, such as Sola Scriptura."

By Church, I must assume you mean the Roman Catholic church. And, yes, this church has exercised it "authority" over the people. However, this was not to protect the Word of God -- but, to protect the rule and the legacy of the Roman Catholic hierarchy. To do this, just as the Pharisees did in the days of Jesus -- the Roman Catholic church wrote many new laws, traditions, and rituals designed to put a velvet chain around the necks of all its followers -- making them captives of false teachings and false doctrines.

You tell us, "Sola Scriptura and Sola Verdum Dei, they're not the same. As you know Sola Scriptura is not biblical and goes against Christian theology."

Are "Sola Scriptura" and "Sola Verbum Dei" the same? Basically, yes.

Sola Scriptura means "By Scripture Alone" -- and Sola Verbum Dei means “Word of God alone”

The Word of God means one of two things: Either the Living Word of God (Jesus Christ) or the Written Word of God (the Bible).

And, since the Written Word of God is called Scripture -- I can say "By Scripture alone" or I can say "Word of God alone" -- and it means the same thing. How can you refute that?

Next, you tell us, "The name Catholic was used in the first century by the first father's when talking about the Catholic church Jesus found while he was on earth. This is not a theory, it's proven history. There again, true facts about this history are known. Does this change anything? not really, but it sure upset's you. Why?"

Once again, I must ask -- are you saying the "catholic" church -- or are you referring to the Roman Catholic church? If, by saying "catholic" you refer to the meaning of this word which is "universal" -- then, yes, the church was spoken of as the catholic church, i.e, the universal church, the universal body of Christ, from the beginning in 33 AD.

However, if you mean the Roman Catholic church -- that began about 312 AD when Constantine formed his own state church.

Finally, you declare, "Sola Scriptura is a sixteenth century man made doctrine designed to destroy the unity of the Church and fragments the entire body of Christ by exponentially increasing schisms caused by accepting only part of God’s word by the Protestants."

You keep referring to the "Church" -- without defining what you mean. Do you mean the church which was begun on the Day of Pentecost when the Holy Spirit came upon the 120 people in the Upper Room in 33 AD? Or, are you referring to Constantine's Chuch of Rome which was begun about 312 AD?

So, whether one says Sola Scriptura (By Scripture Alone) or one says Sola Verbum Dei (Word of God Alone) -- we still are talking about the Living Word of God, Jesus Christ -- or the Written Word of God, the Bible. And, no one is trying to fragment the body of Christ. We only want to share the marvelous news, i.e., the Good News (Gospel) of Jesus Christ with all the world.

Our Good News, our Gospel -- is that Jesus Christ came to earth in human form to be our "Once For All" High Priest and Atonement. He died on the cross to offer eternal salvation to all who will, by the grace of God, through faith in Jesus Christ, PLUS nothing else (Ephesians 2:8-9) -- believe and receive His "free gift" of eternal life.

He rose from the grave, i.e., His resurrection, which assured the resurrection to eternal life for all people -- believers to eternal life with God; non-believers to eternal life in hell, with Satan.

He ascended into heaven where He sits at the right hand of God the Father, as the "One and Only" Mediator between man and God -- for all Christian believers.

And, He will come again to take His church home with Him to heaven, i.e., the Rapture.

This, my Friend, is what true Christians are working toward, this is the unity we want to see in the body of Christ, the church -- and we do not need Pharisaical laws, traditions, and rituals to accomplish this. We need only to believe what we are taught in the Written Word of God and to be the best Christ Followers we can within the limitations of this weak human tent in which we live during this mortal life.

I pray that I have cleared up any misconceptions which still lingered.

God bless, have a wonderful, blessed day,

Bill

Attachments

Images (1)
  • 0_-_CROSS-BIBLE_SOLA-FEDE_Outline
quote:
I pray that I have cleared up any misconceptions which still lingered.


And I pray that one day you will realize that you are *not* someone that I would look to in order to clear up misconceptions- for all you do is perpetuate them.
The Catholic Church was NOT "started" by Constantine. Please get this fact straight.
quote:
Originally posted by vplee123:
quote:
I pray that I have cleared up any misconceptions which still lingered.

And I pray that one day you will realize that you are *not* someone that I would look to in order to clear up misconceptions- for all you do is perpetuate them. The Catholic Church was NOT "started" by Constantine. Please get this fact straight.

VP, DON'T GIVE US AN "EMOTIONAL" RESPONSE - GIVE US A "FACTUAL" RESPONSE!

Attachments

Images (1)
  • Friends_Piggy_Bear-1
Bill, there was no emotion in that response, I promise you.
The Catholic Church was instituted by Christ, when He gave the "keys" to the Kingdom to Simon Peter, and said YOU are Peter. On this rock I build my church.
The Eucharist was instituted by Christ when He ate with His Apostles, and said "Take this, all of you and eat it- this is my body. Which will be given up for you. Do this in remembrance of me".
The Catholic Church is the original Christian Church, from which all other denominations "spun off".
Those are the facts.
No emotion whatsoever, just facts.
quote:
Originally posted by Bill Gray:
quote:
Originally posted by vplee123:
quote:
I pray that I have cleared up any misconceptions which still lingered.

And I pray that one day you will realize that you are *not* someone that I would look to in order to clear up misconceptions- for all you do is perpetuate them. The Catholic Church was NOT "started" by Constantine. Please get this fact straight.

VP, DON'T GIVE US AN "EMOTIONAL" RESPONSE - GIVE US A "FACTUAL" RESPONSE!


bill boy..You're the one that's emotional,very emotional. You keep the
same false facts going because the truth has already put you down.
The church can prove everything I've said with record's two thousand
year's old. I've disproven your sola scriptura, lies about Mary, the word
brother, constantine, Eucharist and other lies I can't remember any more.

I do remember your twisted hate for the church Jesus started and told Peter
to do with it as (Jesus) I have taught you. I make a statement to you
and you can't disprove it, so you kick and yell at every one.

What I say to you has been proven and reproven time and again. your not
the first person to call Jesus a lier and you won't be the last.

Kraven for the truth.
Hi Kraven,

You tell me, "I make a statement to you and you can't disprove it, so you kick and yell at every one."

Yes, you make statements and declarations -- but, you supply nothing to support what you say. If you have true Biblical proof of your Roman Catholic teachings -- share them with us.

Then, you say, "What I say to you has been proven and reproven (sic) time and again. your not the first person to call Jesus a lier (sic) and you won't be the last."

You have copy/pasted writings from some anonymous source, which we can only assume may have come from the Vatican -- but, you tell us NONE of your own thoughts on Biblical issues. And, these sources you copy/paste take Scripture out of context in a vain attempt to prove what is not truly Biblical.

The only thing we get from you, and several of your Roman Catholic colleagues -- are emotional outbursts and name calling. But, if that is the best you can do; I suppose we will have to live with it.

God bless, have a wonderful, blessed day,

Bill

Attachments

Images (1)
  • 0_-_CROSS-BIBLE_SOLA-FEDE_Outline
quote:
The only thing we get from you, and several of your Roman Catholic colleagues -- are emotional outbursts and name calling. But, if that is the best you can do; I suppose we will have to live with it.


Au contraire, mon frere...

ANyone can look through prior posts and see that these topics have been addressed and defended ad nauseum.
Bill, if you perceive an emotional rant, perhaps you should think about what you have been saying about our Church- "it's not biblical" "You are wrong" "You are a puppet of the Vatican" "you are a cannibal"....and on and on.

You denegrate our religion as a sport, and you betcha you are making some people angry. You "think" our doctrines are false. We have shown biblical proof time and time again, and written volumes of apologetics over the months.

You feel a "NEED" to refute the false teachings of the Catholic Church- you've said so in the past- why do you need to do so? We are Christians, believing in the Father, Son, Holy Spirit and Life Everlasting. And why do you think you have the authority to REFUTE anyone?
Have you been given special insight by our Lord? Do you know something the rest of humanity does not?
I would ask you to examine your heart a bit, try to figure out what you have against your Catholic CHristian Brethern, and get over it.
It's really getting old.
Please search the archives and re-read all the apologetics, with Scripture, and let it go...
You can have your beliefs, (Sola Scriptura,etc) and we have ours.
Nobody has to be "right". Jesus certainly didn't want us to divide and fight over Him. Poor example of Christ's walk, Bill.

So before you claim that you just HAVE to refute Catholic doctrine, ask yourself this: how do you know???? What if you're wrong?
Why is the Catholic CHurch the oldest and largest Church in the world if it is so wrong??

...points to ponder...
quote:
Originally posted by Bill Gray:
Hi Kraven,

You tell me, "I make a statement to you and you can't disprove it, so you kick and yell at every one."

Yes, you make statements and declarations -- but, you supply nothing to support what you say. If you have true Biblical proof of your Roman Catholic teachings -- share them with us.

Then, you say, "What I say to you has been proven and reproven (sic) time and again. your not the first person to call Jesus a lier (sic) and you won't be the last."

You have copy/pasted writings from some anonymous source, which we can only assume may have come from the Vatican -- but, you tell us NONE of your own thoughts on Biblical issues. And, these sources you copy/paste take Scripture out of context in a vain attempt to prove what is not truly Biblical.

The only thing we get from you, and several of your Roman Catholic colleagues -- are emotional outbursts and name calling. But, if that is the best you can do; I suppose we will have to live with it.


bill...........You can assume whatever you want to, what little you said here is a lie.

You have yet to disprove the core Catholic values and beliefs. You can't disprove the
time line of origin of the Catholic church or when the name catholic started.

K
quote:
Posted 10 November 2010 06:34 AM Hide Post

quote:
The only thing we get from you, and several of your Roman Catholic colleagues -- are emotional outbursts and name calling. But, if that is the best you can do; I suppose we will have to live with it.



Au contraire, mon frere...

ANyone can look through prior posts and see that these topics have been addressed and defended ad nauseum.
Bill, if you perceive an emotional rant, perhaps you should think about what you have been saying about our Church- "it's not biblical" "You are wrong" "You are a puppet of the Vatican" "you are a cannibal"....and on and on.

You denegrate our religion as a sport, and you betcha you are making some people angry. You "think" our doctrines are false. We have shown biblical proof time and time again, and written volumes of apologetics over the months.

You feel a "NEED" to refute the false teachings of the Catholic Church- you've said so in the past- why do you need to do so? We are Christians, believing in the Father, Son, Holy Spirit and Life Everlasting. And why do you think you have the authority to REFUTE anyone?
Have you been given special insight by our Lord? Do you know something the rest of humanity does not?
I would ask you to examine your heart a bit, try to figure out what you have against your Catholic CHristian Brethern, and get over it.
It's really getting old.
Please search the archives and re-read all the apologetics, with Scripture, and let it go...
You can have your beliefs, (Sola Scriptura,etc) and we have ours.
Nobody has to be "right". Jesus certainly didn't want us to divide and fight over Him. Poor example of Christ's walk, Bill.

So before you claim that you just HAVE to refute Catholic doctrine, ask yourself this: how do you know???? What if you're wrong?
Why is the Catholic CHurch the oldest and largest Church in the world if it is so wrong??

...points to ponder...


Maybe because wide is the gate and broad is the way that leads to destruction, and there are many go in by it.
quote:
Originally posted by vplee123:
quote:
The only thing we get from you, and several of your Roman Catholic colleagues -- are emotional outbursts and name calling. But, if that is the best you can do; I suppose we will have to live with it.


Au contraire, mon frere...

ANyone can look through prior posts and see that these topics have been addressed and defended ad nauseum.
Bill, if you perceive an emotional rant, perhaps you should think about what you have been saying about our Church- "it's not biblical" "You are wrong" "You are a puppet of the Vatican" "you are a cannibal"....and on and on.

You denegrate our religion as a sport, and you betcha you are making some people angry. You "think" our doctrines are false. We have shown biblical proof time and time again, and written volumes of apologetics over the months.

You feel a "NEED" to refute the false teachings of the Catholic Church- you've said so in the past- why do you need to do so? We are Christians, believing in the Father, Son, Holy Spirit and Life Everlasting. And why do you think you have the authority to REFUTE anyone?
Have you been given special insight by our Lord? Do you know something the rest of humanity does not?
I would ask you to examine your heart a bit, try to figure out what you have against your Catholic CHristian Brethern, and get over it.
It's really getting old.
Please search the archives and re-read all the apologetics, with Scripture, and let it go...
You can have your beliefs, (Sola Scriptura,etc) and we have ours.
Nobody has to be "right". Jesus certainly didn't want us to divide and fight over Him. Poor example of Christ's walk, Bill.

So before you claim that you just HAVE to refute Catholic doctrine, ask yourself this: how do you know???? What if you're wrong?
Why is the Catholic CHurch the oldest and largest Church in the world if it is so wrong??

...points to ponder...


bill,

ARE YOU GOING TO JUST INGNORE THIS? I THINK YOU OWE VEEP A ANSWER, OR AT LEAST REFUTE IT.

THAT'S MORE YOUR STYLE, WHAT YOU WANT IS PEOPLE TO THINK IS REFUTE, WHEN ACTUALLY IT'S A LIE.

INV.
quote:
Why is the Catholic CHurch the oldest and largest Church in the world if it is so wrong??

...points to ponder...



Maybe because wide is the gate and broad is the way that leads to destruction, and there are many go in by it.


And that was my point to ponder.
Remember guys, there will be a more people lost ( in hell ) than there will be saved (heaven).

That is something we don't mention much on here. But if you are a believer then you know that is what the Bible teaches.

Just a point to ponder on.
quote:
Originally posted by themax:
quote:
Why is the Catholic CHurch the oldest and largest Church in the world if it is so wrong??

...points to ponder...



Maybe because wide is the gate and broad is the way that leads to destruction, and there are many go in by it.


And that was my point to ponder.
Remember guys, there will be a more people lost ( in hell ) than there will be saved (heaven).

That is something we don't mention much on here. But if you are a believer then you know that is what the Bible teaches.

Just a point to ponder on.


max,

Your Bible will teach you anything thing you want it to max.

you don't know what you don't know.

Add Reply

Post

Untitled Document
×
×
×
×
Link copied to your clipboard.
×