Jesus built the church
and
it was the church that gave us the bible
so
pay attention to His church
and
it was the church that gave us the bible
so
pay attention to His church
Standing Up To Rome
- Thread starter WeberHome
- Start date
SaulToPaul 2
Well-known member
:chuckle:
ok doser
lifeguard at the cement pond
what if he's an irresponsible dog owner?
that is how God tests me
Cruciform
New member
Already answered---and corrected---in Post #14 above.
Cruciform
New member
I hold to the doctrine of Papal Infallibility, yes.
Cruciform
New member
No one disputes that. Again:
According to whose infallibly binding interpretations of the Bible do you claim that the Catholic Church "disagrees with the Bible and Christ"?
Cruciform
New member
...declares one who himself "has no infallible and binding authority" whatsoever. :yawn:
Cruciform
New member
Not if one correctly understands the doctrine of Papal Infallibility. (See Post #28 above.)
Cruciform
New member
Your question has already been answered in Post #28 above.
everready
New member
These men women and children understood all too well:
http://biblebelievers.com/foxes/findex.htm
everready
Cruciform
New member
Don't bother.
Back to Post #28.
PureX
Well-known member
I agree. And that's not a religious dogma, that's just the plain facts. Because as we show love to others, it will be shown in return, to us (generally; not in every instance). And we don't need to join a religion to recognize this truth, or to practice it.
WeberHome
New member
-
Q: Where in the Bible do you find where it says apostolic traditions exist only
in the Bible's texts? What about 2Thss 2:15? "Therefore, brothers, stand
firm and hold fast to the traditions that you were taught, either by an oral
statement or by a letter of ours."
A: The New Testament canon was incomplete when Paul penned his second
letter to the Thessalonian believers; and in the really early days of
Christianity, the primary source of New Testament teaching wasn't from
books at all, but was totally via word of mouth; viz: itinerant evangelism.
No doubt everything that Paul and Silvanus meant to pass on to their friends
as tradition, via word of mouth and/or via letters, was eventually put down
in writing, authored by not only Paul and Silvanus, but also by Peter, James,
John, and Jude too; as those men all preached a unified, homogenous,
harmonious message (cf. Gal 1:15-2:9, 2Pet 3:15-16). And whatever's
supposedly missing from the sacred texts, is dangerously subject to human
error, private ambition, bias, and a fertile imagination.
If Paul and his associates should show up here in Oregon at a speaking
engagement, then I will listen to the traditions that they teach by mouth.
Until that happens, I will obey his command to hold fast to the traditions he
and his associates taught by letter rather than what Rome claims those men
taught by mouth; and I would advise everyone to do the same.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-==
Q: Where in the Bible do you find where it says apostolic traditions exist only
in the Bible's texts? What about 2Thss 2:15? "Therefore, brothers, stand
firm and hold fast to the traditions that you were taught, either by an oral
statement or by a letter of ours."
A: The New Testament canon was incomplete when Paul penned his second
letter to the Thessalonian believers; and in the really early days of
Christianity, the primary source of New Testament teaching wasn't from
books at all, but was totally via word of mouth; viz: itinerant evangelism.
No doubt everything that Paul and Silvanus meant to pass on to their friends
as tradition, via word of mouth and/or via letters, was eventually put down
in writing, authored by not only Paul and Silvanus, but also by Peter, James,
John, and Jude too; as those men all preached a unified, homogenous,
harmonious message (cf. Gal 1:15-2:9, 2Pet 3:15-16). And whatever's
supposedly missing from the sacred texts, is dangerously subject to human
error, private ambition, bias, and a fertile imagination.
If Paul and his associates should show up here in Oregon at a speaking
engagement, then I will listen to the traditions that they teach by mouth.
Until that happens, I will obey his command to hold fast to the traditions he
and his associates taught by letter rather than what Rome claims those men
taught by mouth; and I would advise everyone to do the same.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-==
turbosixx
New member
Thank you for your testimony. My wife’s story is similar to yours. She was sprinkled as an infant, when through catechism, First Holy Communion and Confirmation but all she knew was church doctrine. She didn’t know the bible. When she came to church with me and heard sermons preached from the bible, she was blown away.
As far as JW, I see them as a new version of the Catholic church. They both have men telling them what the bible says using other writtings.
turbosixx
New member
We have this from Jesus himself, who promised the apostles and their successors the bishops, the magisterium of the Church: "He who hears you hears me" (Luke 10:16), and "Whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven" (Matt. 18:18).
I don't see where Jesus says "your successors". What verses would you use to support successors?
In my understanding the Holy Spirit guided the NT writers and when we read that is how we are guided. I fail to see the necessity of successors and new revelation. I find the canon to be sufficient.
To be blunt, Jesus already stood up to Rome and the powers and principalities of his day and ours.
The mistake the church made was when it got into bed with the Holy Roman Empire in the 4th century. It became a state religion and inherited all of the patriarchy, violence and bureaucracy in any totalitarian regime.