turbosixx
New member
I'm not aware of this. Could you please point out the passage this comes from?
Catholicism and the Bible
- Thread starter JudgeRightly
- Start date
I'm not aware of this. Could you please point out the passage this comes from?
Idolater
"Foundation of the World" Dispensationalist χρ
I have pointed out passages that depict the beginnings of Holy Orders, the laying on of hands. History then takes over as to what happened next, and what history tells us is that this practice continued. Beyond that, I don't know what you're looking for.
turbosixx
New member
You didn't point out any where an elder was appointed by the laying of hands.
I'm sorry but I don't hold history as inspired by God. We know that scripture is inspired by God and is sufficient.
2 Tim. 3:16 All Scripture is breathed out by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, 17 that the man of God may be complete, equipped for every good work.
I would think it would be blatantly obvious looking at the history of the RCC that we can't rely on the church for truth, only scripture.
Idolater
"Foundation of the World" Dispensationalist χρ
That's only because you don't believe that Timothy was an elder. You haven't told us yet what you think that he and Titus were.
I never said that it was. You're asking for evidence in Scripture, about what happened after Scripture was completed. It makes no sense.
Sufficient to know the Gospel, yes.
What are you trying to show in quoting this?
And here you are claiming to be a Bible-believer, which says that the Church is "the pillar and ground of the truth" 1Ti3:15KJV. :think:
turbosixx
New member
I believe they were evangelist. I won't say what the bible doesn't so what it does say is, in the case of Timothy, he was to teach.
1 Tim. 4:11 Command and teach these things.
I'm sorry if I miss understood you. I thought you had said that the laying of hands was unbroken and based on that I concluded you believed the leaders of the RCC were guided by the Spirit.
This is what I mean. Scripture is inspired by God. Going on 2,000 years after scripture has been completed, I can compare the teachings of someone to scripture. If I find it in scripture then it's from God, if not it's from man.
The reason I quoted that passage is because it tell us scripture is sufficient for everything we need.
2 Tim. 3:16All Scripture is breathed out by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, 17 that the man of God may be complete, equipped for every good work.
If it's not in scripture it's not from God.
The church is the "pillar and ground of the truth" but the RCC is not the church. Looking at it's history should be all anyone needs to do to see that. For example, the inquisitions. Were they from God or man?
Idolater
"Foundation of the World" Dispensationalist χρ
Do you say that pornography is wrong?
'Glad you've pointed out that 1st Timothy was written to Timothy, and not to the Church at large. We accept that 1st Timothy was written For the Church, but not specifically To the Church. :thumb: Whatever Timothy was, it was Timothy who was commanded by Paul to 'teach.' So if we know what Timothy was, what office he held, then we would be justified in applying that to someone else who is the same thing, or who holds the same office.
I did say that, and it is unbroken.
OK.
The 'leaders' are the bishops, and I also believe that the Orthodox bishops are valid bishops, and that therefore Orthodox sacraments are all valid, due to the same imposition of hands, Holy Orders.
The bishops, including the pope, do not have the authority to change anything Apostolic, and this concerns every matter of faith or morals. The Apostles were the ones to whom the Lord promised the Spirit of truth; as with 1st Timothy above, addressed to Timothy only, Christ Jesus promised the Spirit of truth to His future Apostles only; Scripture records this promise For the Church, but it is not made To the Church, just to the Apostles. Scripture/the Lord makes no promise to me and to you concerning the Spirit of truth. He promised to send the Spirit of truth to His Apostles; that is the guarantee. If we know what the Apostles taught, then we know the truth.
You had said that you "don't hold history as inspired by God," and I was just saying that I don't hold history as inspired by God either, but I don't reject history, just because it's not all in the Bible.
Agreed, and specifically here is why I agree. The Spirit of truth came to the Apostles, and they themselves, guided by the Spirit of truth, confirmed the Old Testament as Sacred Scripture, authorized New Testament books and epistles as Sacred Scripture, and wrote New Testament books and epistles that are 'de facto' Sacred Scripture, due to the Apostles being guided by the Spirit of truth.
You should allow for teachings that are not found in Scripture, but that also don't contradict Scripture, such as the teaching that pornography is gravely immoral.
And consider what you say here: "If I find it in scripture then it's from God, if not it's from man." Can you show me this in Scripture? Chapter and verse?
That was written when Scripture was the Old Testament. But even taking the New Testament, we see there the Bishop, a Church office, along with the Deacon. Who is your bishop? Mine's Seán O'Malley.
The Church due to her dramatic growth and success became entangled in civil authority in the 4th century. For centuries and centuries, 'simony,' which is the purchasing of a bishopric, was a rampant problem during this period, and many bishops, and even some popes, were holding office that really shouldn't have been there. But just because a poor candidate holds an office, doesn't disintegrate the office itself, the office remains after the poor candidate retires or dies. The Bishop survived the corruption, and now that the Church has been disentangling herself from civil authority, simony is no longer a problem. Simony was a problem because the bishops possessed real political power when there was no separation between Church and state, when religious liberty was not recognized and protected, and when the Church was the established religion.
The inquisitions were a violation of the right to religious liberty. The Reformation was over religious liberty. The First Amendment recognizes religious liberty. The LGBTQ civil rights movement is about religious liberty.
LOL!! What a joke! None of you have the slightest clue about the Catholic Church, let alone about Christianity in general. Most of you have lied through your teeth for years about the Catholic Church, telling the most vile atrocious, and ignorant, lies. This thread is laughable. The real thread on this subject is HERE.
So, I will interject the only truthful post in this thread:
QUOTE:
Among the Christian churches, only the Catholic Church has existed since the time of Jesus. Every other Christian church is an offshoot of the Catholic Church. The Eastern Orthodox churches broke away from unity with the pope in 1054. The Protestant churches were established during the Reformation, which began in 1517. (Most of today’s Protestant churches are actually offshoots of the original Protestant offshoots.)
Only the Catholic Church existed in the tenth century, in the fifth century, and in the first century, faithfully teaching the doctrines given by Christ to the apostles, omitting nothing. The line of popes can be traced back, in unbroken succession, to Peter himself. This is unequaled by any institution in history.
Even the oldest government is new compared to the papacy, and the churches that send out door-to-door missionaries are young compared to the Catholic Church. Many of these churches began as recently as the nineteenth or twentieth centuries. Some even began during your own lifetime. None of them can claim to be the Church Jesus established.
The Catholic Church has existed for nearly 2,000 years, despite constant opposition from the world. This is testimony to the Church’s divine origin. It must be more than a merely human organization, especially considering that its human members— even some of its leaders—have been unwise, corrupt, or prone to heresy.
Any merely human organization with such members would have collapsed early on. The Catholic Church is today the most vigorous church in the world (and the largest, with a billion members: one sixth of the human race), and that is testimony not to the cleverness of the Church’s leaders, but to the protection of the Holy Spirit.
FOUR MARKS OF THE TRUE CHURCH
If we wish to locate the Church founded by Jesus, we need to locate the one that has the four chief marks or qualities of his Church. The Church we seek must be one, holy, catholic, and apostolic.
The Church Is One (Rom. 12:5, 1 Cor. 10:17, 12:13)
Jesus established only one Church, not a collection of differing churches. The Bible says the Church is the bride of Christ (Eph. 5:23–32). Jesus can have but one spouse, and his spouse is the Catholic Church. His Church also teaches just one set of doctrines, which must be the same as those taught by the apostles (Jude 3). This is the unity of belief to which Scripture calls us (Phil. 1:27, 2:2). Over the centuries, as doctrines are examined more fully, the Church comes to understand them more deeply (John 16:12–13), but it never understands them to mean the opposite of what they once meant.
The Church Is Holy (Eph. 5:25–27, Rev. 19:7–8)
By his grace Jesus makes the Church holy, just as he is holy. This doesn’t mean that each member is always holy. Jesus said there would be both good and bad members in the Church (John 6:70), and not all the members would go to heaven (Matt. 7:21–23). But the Church itself is holy because it is the source of holiness and is the guardian of the special means of grace Jesus established, the sacraments (cf. Eph. 5:26).
The Church Is Catholic (Matt. 28:19–20, Rev. 5:9–10)
Jesus’ Church is called catholic ("universal" in Greek) because it is his gift to all people. He told his apostles to go throughout the world and make disciples of "all nations" (Matt. 28:19–20). For 2,000 years the Catholic Church has carried out this mission, preaching the good news that Christ died for all men and that he wants all of us to be members of his universal family (Gal. 3:28). Nowadays the Catholic Church is found in every country of the world and is still sending out missionaries to "make disciples of all nations" (Matt. 28:19). The Church Jesus established was known by its most common title, "the Catholic Church," at least as early as the year 107, when Ignatius of Antioch used that title to describe the one Church Jesus founded. The title apparently was old in Ignatius’s time, which means it probably went all the way back to the time of the apostles.
The Church Is Apostolic (Eph. 2:19–20)
The Church Jesus founded is apostolic because he appointed the apostles to be the first leaders of the Church, and their successors were to be its future leaders. The apostles were the first bishops, and, since the first century, there has been an unbroken line of Catholic bishops faithfully handing on what the apostles taught the first Christians in Scripture and oral Tradition (2 Tim. 2:2). These beliefs include the bodily Resurrection of Jesus, the Real Presence of Jesus in the Eucharist, the sacrificial nature of the Mass, the forgiveness of sins through a priest, baptismal regeneration, the existence of purgatory, Mary’s special role, and much more —even the doctrine of apostolic succession itself. Early Christian writings prove the first Christians were thoroughly Catholic in belief and practice and looked to the successors of the apostles as their leaders. What these first Christians believed is still believed by the Catholic Church. No other Church can make that claim.
Pillar of Fire, Pillar of Truth
Man’s ingenuity cannot account for this. The Church has remained one, holy, catholic, and apostolic—not through man’s effort, but because God preserves the Church he established (Matt. 16:18, 28:20). He guided the Israelites on their escape from Egypt by giving them a pillar of fire to light their way across the dark wilderness (Exod. 13:21). Today he guides us through his Catholic Church.
The Bible, sacred Tradition, and the writings of the earliest Christians testify that the Church teaches with Jesus’ authority. In this age of countless competing religions, each clamoring for attention, one voice rises above the din: the Catholic Church, which the Bible calls "the pillar and foundation of truth" (1 Tim. 3:15).
Jesus assured the apostles and their successors, the popes and the bishops, "He who listens to you listens to me, and he who rejects you rejects me" (Luke 10:16). Jesus promised to guide his Church into all truth (John 16:12–13). We can have confidence that his Church teaches only the truth.
END EXCERPT QUOTE
SOURCE:
Idolater
"Foundation of the World" Dispensationalist χρ
:AMR: Show a single post of mine itt that's incorrect in any way.
turbosixx
New member
Yes. See comments below.
That is my understanding, that scripture was NOT written to us but is written for us.
I’m not sure what you mean by “applying that”. I agree with apostolic example as being authorized by Jesus.
I agree
I agree
I agree.
Yes, that is how I understand it and many are confused about this.
I kinda agree with you here but I’m not exactly sure because of how it’s worded, the “don’t contradict” part. I would say it this way. I agree teaching things that are not specifically found in scripture but that are supported by scripture (in context). Using the example of pornography, I believe it’s a form of sexual immorality.
Col. 3: 5 Put to death therefore what is earthly in you: sexual immorality, impurity, passion, evil desire, and covetousness, which is idolatry. 6 On account of these the wrath of God is coming.
1 Thess. 5:22 Abstain from every form of evil.
As far as “don’t contradict. I agree we cannot contradict scripture and that should be obviously wrong but things can be done that don’t necessarily contradict scripture yet are not supported by scripture and are therefore not authorized. For example, the Jewish Christians were trying to add circumcision to the gospel. God’s people being circumcised was required by God and can be found in scripture. I’m not aware of it contradicting anything in the gospel. The problem comes when man adds circumcision thus perverting the gospel as Paul argues in Galatians.
I hope I can explain this in a way that makes sense. Here it goes.
When Jesus’s authority was questioned He asked a question in return. Matt. 21: 25 The baptism of John, from where did it come? From heaven or from man?” And they discussed it among themselves, saying, “If we say, ‘From heaven,’ he will say to us, ‘Why then did you not believe him?’
We see there are two sources, heaven and man. I suggest to you that is still true today.
in vain do they worship me,
teaching as doctrines the commandments of men
Idolater
"Foundation of the World" Dispensationalist χρ
Paul's instructions to Timothy, we could presume that they would also apply to anybody holding the same Church office as Timothy did. So while these epistles were written specifically to Timothy, we can apply Paul's instructions to other people who are of the same status in the Church as Timothy was, whatever office he held.
Hmm. I don't think there have been any other Apostles since the Twelve died off, and I don't think there will be any more either. So their example is of limited value, but their teachings are of eternal value. Just to explain a bit more, what the Apostles taught was and is still considered to be authoritative, since the teaching authority of the Apostles was Christ's own teaching authority, that He gave to them, when He commissioned them. He didn't and doesn't give this authority to anybody else, which is why the Bishop is so important to the Church. They, as I said, have no authority to change anything the Apostles taught, since all Apostolic teaching is authoritative and infallible, because it is Christ's own teaching. The Bishop has the task of preserving and disseminating that teaching, but they have no authority to change anything in matters of faith and morals, as these are the Apostolic teachings that are infallible; the teachings of Christ Himself. The Bishop preserves and distributes this teaching.
OK, but here you're introducing biblical interpretation, which is an art or a science, but is not just quoting Scripture. iow you're introducing something new to the Scripture, if you're going to argue that something not explicit in Scripture, is 'supported by' Scripture. Who's authorized to definitively declare infallibly what is, and what is not, 'supported by' Scripture? There's nobody. Not all the M.Divs and PhDs in the world can validly claim this authority. But when we consider the Bishop, this office also doesn't have the authority to declare that something is or is not supported by Scripture; their job is to relay to the world all that the Apostles taught explicitly, or that they specifically approved that someone else taught, by either written word, or by their spoken word.
It's a distinction I'm careful to make since many non-Catholics and even Catholics are sometimes mistaken in believing that the Bishop alone has the authority to interpret the Bible, but that is not the task of the Bishop; they are a conduit for truth, porting to the world all that the Apostles actually taught. It is the Apostles' teaching that is authoritative, it the Apostles who are authorized to interpret the Bible, because the Apostles only taught what Christ Himself taught them, and commanded them to teach the world. Consider the book of Hebrews, and all the Scripture quotes, and expositions therein. This was either written by an Apostle, or it was approved by them as authentic Christian teaching, just the same as all the rest of the Bible, Old and New Testaments included.
What about Galatians 5:2 KJV? Maybe I'm not following you....
It is still true today. It's something that the Church maybe should do a better job at distinguishing between these two things, although for someone willing to do the work, you'll find it there clear as day, even recently. For example, recently Catholics pressed the bishops to see about the ordination of women priests and bishops, and the Church has said that the matter is closed, and it's specifically because the teaching that only men are eligible for ordination is from God, and not from man. On another matter, the discipline of only ordaining single men, vowed to celibacy, is from man, and not from God. It is within the authority of the bishops, as authentic pastors of the Church, to decide on such policies. The Apostles didn't teach that only single, celibate men could be ordained, that's something that the bishops have decided themselves, as is their right, as authentic administrators of the Church.
turbosixx
New member
I believe we are in agreement what is scripture and the source of authority.
I hope you see by now that I am totally opposed to "introducing" anything new.
I suggest this is ultimately each of ours responsibility. We will individually stand and give account for ourselves.
You say the bishops only relay the truth and do not change it but it appears to me they do. For example, Jesus said:
Mark. 16:16 Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved, but whoever does not believe will be condemned.
The Catholic church does not practice this. They baptize the unbelieving to save them. I see this nowhere in scripture.