Login Register

All times are UTC - 5 hours




Post new topic This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies. Page 32 of 34   [ 673 posts ]   Go to page Previous  1 ... 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: A test for Sola Scripturists
PostPosted: Wed Apr 02, 2014 2:08 am 
Offline
Adept
Adept

Joined: Tue Dec 11, 2012 10:52 pm
Posts: 5848
Religion: Christian
A Ring Bearer wrote:
EtcumSpiri22-0 wrote:
A Ring Bearer wrote:

What I do deny is that belief that you have smuggled into "Scripture" that the Church must "raise people from the dead" to proclaim or express doctrines already established as "the word of God" by "word of mouth or by letter" by Jesus and the Apostles.



In 2 Thess 2:15 Paul is referring to what was taught before ( 15 Therefore, brothers, stand firm; and hold to the traditions you were taught by us, whether we spoke them or wrote them in a letter) as his teaching specifically related to the second coming which he reefers to in the previous verses in that chapter. There is no evidence that his use of the word tradition in that verse can be expanded to apply to anything else.


Read into it whatever you like. John Chrysostom preached the exact opposite of what you claim, as I showed above.

And it still doesn't solve your dilemma in regards to 1Tim 3:15.


LO. L. ... I love the way you preempt by projecting. :)

The context of 2 Thess 2:15 is clear.


As to 1Tim 3:15 ... The Greek and Russian Orthodox as well as all who profess that Jesus is Lord and Savior are certainly included.


Last edited by EtcumSpiri22-0 on Wed Apr 02, 2014 2:27 am, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: A test for Sola Scripturists
PostPosted: Wed Apr 02, 2014 2:12 am 
Offline
Sons of Thunder
Sons of Thunder
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jun 27, 2007 8:55 am
Posts: 4857
Location: Wherever my horse or pipe weed may take me.
Religion: Catholic
EtcumSpiri22-0 wrote:
A Ring Bearer wrote:
EtcumSpiri22-0 wrote:
A Ring Bearer wrote:

What I do deny is that belief that you have smuggled into "Scripture" that the Church must "raise people from the dead" to proclaim or express doctrines already established as "the word of God" by "word of mouth or by letter" by Jesus and the Apostles.



In 2 Thess 2:15 Paul is referring to what was taught before ( 15 Therefore, brothers, stand firm; and hold to the traditions you were taught by us, whether we spoke them or wrote them in a letter) as his teaching specifically related to the second coming which he reefers to in the previous verses in that chapter. There is no evidence that his use of the word tradition in that verse can be expanded to apply to anything else.


Read into it whatever you like. John Chrysostom preached the exact opposite of what you claim, as I showed above.

And it still doesn't solve your dilemma in regards to 1Tim 3:15.


LO. L. ... I love the way you preempt by projecting. :)


Thank you for proving my point once again.

Quote:
The context is clear.


It absolutely is. Its just not saying what you're trying to force it to.

Just as you try to manipulate and force Scripture to say a lot of other things which it doesn't actually say.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: A test for Sola Scripturists
PostPosted: Wed Apr 02, 2014 5:24 am 
Offline
Journeyman
Journeyman

Joined: Sat Mar 30, 2013 12:55 pm
Posts: 812
Location: Sydney Australia
Religion: Catholic
Ec2 wrote:

Quote:
cjg wrote:
Ec2, How did Jesus mentor Paul?

men·tor
ˈmenˌtôr,-tər/Submit
noun
an experienced and trusted adviser.

1.
advise or train (someone, esp. a younger colleague).a wise and trusted counselor or teacher.
2. an influential senior sponsor or supporter.

Galatians 1
11I want you to know, brothers and sisters, that the gospel I preached is not of human origin. 12I did not receive it from any man, nor was I taught it; rather, I received it by revelation from Jesus Christ.
13For you have heard of my previous way of life in Judaism, how intensely I persecuted the church of God and tried to destroy it. 14I was advancing in Judaism beyond many of my own age among my people and was extremely zealous for the traditions of my fathers. 15But when God, who set me apart from my mother’s womb and called me by his grace, was pleased 16to reveal his Son in me so that I might preach him among the Gentiles, my immediate response was not to consult any human being. 17I did not go up to Jerusalem to see those who were apostles before I was, but I went into Arabia. Later I returned to Damascus.
18Then after three years, I went up to Jerusalem to get acquainted with Cephas and stayed with him fifteen days. 19I saw none of the other apostles—only James, the Lord’s brother. 20I assure you before God that what I am writing you is no lie.



That's right Ec2, & what medium did he use to mentor Paul? The Church!

Acts 9,
6 And he, dazed and trembling, asked, Lord, what wilt thou have me do? 7 Then the Lord said to him, Rise up, and go into the city, and there thou shalt be told what thy work is.

17 So Ananias set out; and as soon as he came into the house he laid his hands upon him, and said, Brother Saul, I have been sent by that Lord Jesus who appeared to thee on thy way as thou camest here; thou art to recover thy sight, and be filled with the Holy Spirit. 18 And with that, a kind of film fell away from his eyes, and his sight was recovered. He rose up, and was baptized; 19

If Jesus considered scripture to be the sole rule of faith surely He would have directed Paul back to restudying the OT but instead we see Jesus using His Church to minister to Paul. Paul submits to the authority of the church by allowing himself to be baptized.


Gal 1:18, where Paul says that he came to “confer” with Peter. The Greek word here is “historesai,” which means to “inquire” or “ask of,” as from an oracle! So, while Paul’s Apostolic commission came directly from Christ, he also took instruction from Peter and the other Apostles (Galatians 2:2).

Galatians 2:2:

I went in response to a revelation and, meeting privately with those esteemed as leaders, I presented to them the gospel that I preach among the Gentiles. I wanted to be sure I was not running and had not been running my race in vain.

So clearly Paul acknowledged church authority & not the authority of scripture alone.

Your claim that 1Tim 3:15 pertains to all "churches" is absurd. I'm sure Paul would disagree with you as to him it was important that he preached what the apostles preached.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: A test for Sola Scripturists
PostPosted: Wed Apr 02, 2014 11:06 am 
Offline
Adept
Adept

Joined: Tue Dec 11, 2012 10:52 pm
Posts: 5848
Religion: Christian
This is how Jesus verified that his words and all of Scripture was true and valid:
Matt 20:
17And Jesus going up to Jerusalem, took the twelve disciples apart, and said to them: 18Behold we go up to Jerusalem, and the Son of man shall be betrayed to the chief priests and the scribes, and they shall condemn him to death. 19And shall deliver him to the Gentiles to be mocked, and scourged, and crucified, and the third day he shall rise again.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: A test for Sola Scripturists
PostPosted: Wed Apr 02, 2014 3:09 pm 
Offline
Journeyman
Journeyman

Joined: Sat Mar 30, 2013 12:55 pm
Posts: 812
Location: Sydney Australia
Religion: Catholic
Ec2 wrote:

Quote:
This is how Jesus verified that his words and all of Scripture was true and valid:
Matt 20:
17And Jesus going up to Jerusalem, took the twelve disciples apart, and said to them: 18Behold we go up to Jerusalem, and the Son of man shall be betrayed to the chief priests and the scribes, and they shall condemn him to death. 19And shall deliver him to the Gentiles to be mocked, and scourged, and crucified, and the third day he shall rise again.


Muslims say that Mohamad's miracle was the koran.

Besides, ultimately you have to admit that your acceptance of the veracity of Matthew 20 relies on the church which determined that Matthew was an inspired book.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: A test for Sola Scripturists
PostPosted: Wed Apr 02, 2014 11:16 pm 
Offline
Sons of Thunder
Sons of Thunder
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jun 27, 2007 8:55 am
Posts: 4857
Location: Wherever my horse or pipe weed may take me.
Religion: Catholic
EtcumSpiri22-0 wrote:
This is how Jesus verified that his words and all of Scripture was true and valid.


Again, that's not the issue.

You've used Sproul to assert something that you both are reading into Scripture and are using that assumption to conclude that "the bible alone is the word of God."

The reason that the Church has never taught this or believed it is because the Church has always proclaimed that Jesus is the word of God, not the Bible alone. The Word of God is not only a book or a collection of books, it is a Person, a divine Person.

And Jesus reveals Himself to His Church through ways other than Scripture alone.


Last edited by Gandalf the Grey on Thu Apr 03, 2014 9:09 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: A test for Sola Scripturists
PostPosted: Thu Apr 03, 2014 7:22 pm 
Offline
Honeymoon King
Honeymoon King
User avatar

Joined: Sun May 25, 2003 4:39 pm
Posts: 44272
Location: in marital bliss
Religion: One Holy Roman Catholic and Apostolic
Church Affiliations: 3rd Degree K of C, L of M
A Ring Bearer wrote:
EtcumSpiri22-0 wrote:
This is how Jesus verified that his words and all of Scripture was true and valid.


Again, that's not the issue.

You've used Sproul to assert something that you both are reading into Scripture and are using that assumption to conclude that "the bible alone is the word of God."

The reason that the Church has never taught this or believed it is because the Church has always proclaimed that Jesus alone is the word of God. The Word of God is not a book or a collection of books, it is a Person, a divine Person.

And Jesus reveals Himself to His Church through ways other than Scripture alone.


Hold on a second! I know the point you are making here, but there is something in the wording that is not quite right. Jesus' words and all of the Scriptures are true and valid. The Church has always taught this and believed this. She has also taught and believed that not all of Jesus words are recorded in the Scriptures, and there are other means besides the Scriptures for gaining what is also true and valid.

Ok. Carry on :salut: .


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: A test for Sola Scripturists
PostPosted: Thu Apr 03, 2014 10:45 pm 
Offline
Sons of Thunder
Sons of Thunder
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jun 27, 2007 8:55 am
Posts: 4857
Location: Wherever my horse or pipe weed may take me.
Religion: Catholic
pax wrote:
A Ring Bearer wrote:
EtcumSpiri22-0 wrote:
This is how Jesus verified that his words and all of Scripture was true and valid.


Again, that's not the issue.

You've used Sproul to assert something that you both are reading into Scripture and are using that assumption to conclude that "the bible alone is the word of God."

The reason that the Church has never taught this or believed it is because the Church has always proclaimed that Jesus alone is the word of God. The Word of God is not a book or a collection of books, it is a Person, a divine Person.

And Jesus reveals Himself to His Church through ways other than Scripture alone.


Hold on a second! I know the point you are making here, but there is something in the wording that is not quite right. Jesus' words and all of the Scriptures are true and valid. The Church has always taught this and believed this. She has also taught and believed that not all of Jesus words are recorded in the Scriptures, and there are other means besides the Scriptures for gaining what is also true and valid.

Ok. Carry on :salut: .


Already made slight alteration to my wording, thanks.


My point is that proper ecclesiology says that the primary source and meaning of "the Word of God" is Jesus, and that Jesus is the head of His Body, the Church.

Through baptism and the Eucharist the people of God, the Church, abide with and in Christ through the Holy Spirit. So by virtue of the Covenant the Church IS Christ.

Therefore Jesus is the Church's "divine imprimatur" and why the Church is "the pillar and bulwark of the Truth."


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: A test for Sola Scripturists
PostPosted: Sat Apr 05, 2014 12:02 am 
Offline
Adept
Adept

Joined: Tue Dec 11, 2012 10:52 pm
Posts: 5848
Religion: Christian
Clearly Sproul's argument is that if anyone is going to presume to claim that their words are on the same level as Scripture then the bar, for validation, must be set at the same level that Jesus set ... and met.
He goes on to state that if that criteria were, in fact, met then those words should be made a part of the Bible... otherwise, not.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: A test for Sola Scripturists
PostPosted: Sat Apr 05, 2014 2:17 am 
Offline
Sons of Thunder
Sons of Thunder
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jun 27, 2007 8:55 am
Posts: 4857
Location: Wherever my horse or pipe weed may take me.
Religion: Catholic
EtcumSpiri22-0 wrote:
Clearly Sproul's argument is that if anyone is going to presume to claim that their words are on the same level as Scripture then the bar, for validation, must be set at the same level that Jesus set ... and met.

And Sproul's argument is circular and frankly rather absurd.


Quote:
He goes on to state that if that criteria were, in fact, met then those words should be made a part of the Bible... otherwise, not.

Which again is also circular and frankly rather absurd. We've already gone over how and why. No reason to go over it again.

Surely you have the right to have that opinion if you want. But let's not pretend that it's "scripture" much less true.

And it creates a plethora of problems for all of the protestant doctrines and practices which are at the least extra-biblical.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: A test for Sola Scripturists
PostPosted: Sat Apr 05, 2014 2:33 am 
Offline
Sons of Thunder
Sons of Thunder
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jun 27, 2007 8:55 am
Posts: 4857
Location: Wherever my horse or pipe weed may take me.
Religion: Catholic
Matthew 16:17And Jesus answered him, "Blessed are you, Simon Bar-Jona! For flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but my Father who is in heaven. 
[18] And I tell you, you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the powers of death shall not prevail against it. 
[19] I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven."

Over and over again Scripture confirms, as well as God's providence in history, that the Church, and not the Bible alone, speaks Jesus' words with His authority.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: A test for Sola Scripturists
PostPosted: Sat Apr 05, 2014 9:42 am 
Offline
Adept
Adept

Joined: Tue Dec 11, 2012 10:52 pm
Posts: 5848
Religion: Christian
A Ring Bearer wrote:
Matthew 16:17And Jesus answered him, "Blessed are you, Simon Bar-Jona! For flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but my Father who is in heaven. 
[18] And I tell you, you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the powers of death shall not prevail against it. 
[19] I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven."

Over and over again Scripture confirms, as well as God's providence in history, that the Church, and not the Bible alone, speaks Jesus' words with His authority.



Binding and loosing has absolutely nothing to do with creating new doctrine and giving it the level of scripture. Paul condemned anyone who would do that. In fact Paul severely rebuked Peter for falling into that trap almost immediately after Jesus went back to heaven ... and Paul marveled at the fact that Christians so easily fall into it.


Last edited by EtcumSpiri22-0 on Sat Apr 05, 2014 9:55 am, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: A test for Sola Scripturists
PostPosted: Sat Apr 05, 2014 9:53 am 
Offline
Adept
Adept

Joined: Tue Dec 11, 2012 10:52 pm
Posts: 5848
Religion: Christian
A Ring Bearer wrote:
EtcumSpiri22-0 wrote:
Clearly Sproul's argument is that if anyone is going to presume to claim that their words are on the same level as Scripture then the bar, for validation, must be set at the same level that Jesus set ... and met.

And Sproul's argument is circular and frankly rather absurd.


Quote:
He goes on to state that if that criteria were, in fact, met then those words should be made a part of the Bible... otherwise, not.

Which again is also circular and frankly rather absurd. We've already gone over how and why. No reason to go over it again.

Surely you have the right to have that opinion if you want. But let's not pretend that it's "scripture" much less true.

And it creates a plethora of problems for all of the protestant doctrines and practices which are at the least extra-biblical.


In that case Paul must have used circular absured reasoning as well when he stated that Peter could not add a new doctrine .. which was not doctrine at all..


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: A test for Sola Scripturists
PostPosted: Sat Apr 05, 2014 10:40 am 
Offline
Sons of Thunder
Sons of Thunder
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jun 27, 2007 8:55 am
Posts: 4857
Location: Wherever my horse or pipe weed may take me.
Religion: Catholic
EtcumSpiri22-0 wrote:
A Ring Bearer wrote:
Matthew 16:17And Jesus answered him, "Blessed are you, Simon Bar-Jona! For flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but my Father who is in heaven. 
[18] And I tell you, you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the powers of death shall not prevail against it. 
[19] I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven."

Over and over again Scripture confirms, as well as God's providence in history, that the Church, and not the Bible alone, speaks Jesus' words with His authority.



Binding and loosing has absolutely nothing to do with creating new doctrine and giving it the level of scripture. Paul condemned anyone who would do that. In fact Paul severely rebuked Peter for falling into that trap almost immediately after Jesus went back to heaven ... and Paul marveled at the fact that Christians so easily fall into it.


More eisegesis. :roll:

You have yet to prove that anything that the Church has ever taught or teaches is "new doctrine".

OTOH there are several things which protestants teach which are "new doctrine". :wave


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: A test for Sola Scripturists
PostPosted: Sat Apr 05, 2014 2:57 pm 
Offline
Journeyman
Journeyman

Joined: Sat Mar 30, 2013 12:55 pm
Posts: 812
Location: Sydney Australia
Religion: Catholic
Ec2 wrote:

Quote:
Clearly Sproul's argument is that if anyone is going to presume to claim that their words are on the same level as Scripture then the bar, for validation, must be set at the same level that Jesus set ... and met.
He goes on to state that if that criteria were, in fact, met then those words should be made a part of the Bible... otherwise, not.



Quote:
Binding and loosing has absolutely nothing to do with creating new doctrine and giving it the level of scripture. Paul condemned anyone who would do that. In fact Paul severely rebuked Peter for falling into that trap almost immediately after Jesus went back to heaven ... and Paul marveled at the fact that Christians so easily fall into it.


Binding & loosing has everything to do with it. It is because Christ conferred upon St Peter & the apostles the authority to bind & loose that they did in fact "claim that their words are on the same level as scripture"......

Genesis 17:10-14 – The Covenant of Circumcision

...."But an uncircumcised male who is not circumcised in the flesh of his foreskin, that person shall be cut off from his people; he has broken My covenant.".....

This is what Peter said:

'"My brothers, you know that ... God made a choice ... that I should be the one through whom the Gentiles would hear the message of the good news and become believers. And God, who knows the human heart, testified to them by giving them the Holy Spirit, just as he did to us; and in cleaning their hearts by faith he has made no distinction between them and us. Now therefore why are you putting God to the test by placing on the neck of the disciples a yoke that neither our ancestors nor we have been able to bear? On the contrary we believe that we will be saved through the grace of the Lord Jesus just as they will."' (Acts 15:7b-11)

so here you have St peter the 1st Pope & the leader of the early church arguing against circumcision & therefore scripture. At the council of Jerusalem Peter & the apostles contradicted scripture by deciding circumcision was not required thus creating a new doctrine.

You make too much of Paul's rebuke of Peter. It doesn't change the fact that St Peter excercised his authority to bind & loose & created a new doctrine.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: A test for Sola Scripturists
PostPosted: Sat Apr 05, 2014 3:45 pm 
Offline
Adept
Adept

Joined: Tue Dec 11, 2012 10:52 pm
Posts: 5848
Religion: Christian
A Ring Bearer wrote:
EtcumSpiri22-0 wrote:
A Ring Bearer wrote:
Matthew 16:17And Jesus answered him, "Blessed are you, Simon Bar-Jona! For flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but my Father who is in heaven. 
[18] And I tell you, you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the powers of death shall not prevail against it. 
[19] I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven."

Over and over again Scripture confirms, as well as God's providence in history, that the Church, and not the Bible alone, speaks Jesus' words with His authority.



Binding and loosing has absolutely nothing to do with creating new doctrine and giving it the level of scripture. Paul condemned anyone who would do that. In fact Paul severely rebuked Peter for falling into that trap almost immediately after Jesus went back to heaven ... and Paul marveled at the fact that Christians so easily fall into it.


More eisegesis. :roll:

You have yet to prove that anything that the Church has ever taught or teaches is "new doctrine".

OTOH there are several things which protestants teach which are "new doctrine". :wave




If there's no new doctrine then we're agreed that the Bible is sufficient.


Last edited by EtcumSpiri22-0 on Sat Apr 05, 2014 4:59 pm, edited 3 times in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: A test for Sola Scripturists
PostPosted: Sat Apr 05, 2014 4:33 pm 
Offline
Journeyman
Journeyman

Joined: Sat Mar 30, 2013 12:55 pm
Posts: 812
Location: Sydney Australia
Religion: Catholic
Ec2 wrote:

Quote:
A Ring Bearer wrote:
Matthew 16:17And Jesus answered him, "Blessed are you, Simon Bar-Jona! For flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but my Father who is in heaven.
[18] And I tell you, you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the powers of death shall not prevail against it.
[19] I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven."

Over and over again Scripture confirms, as well as God's providence in history, that the Church, and not the Bible alone, speaks Jesus' words with His authority.



Binding and loosing has absolutely nothing to do with creating new doctrine and giving it the level of scripture. Paul condemned anyone who would do that. In fact Paul severely rebuked Peter for falling into that trap almost immediately after Jesus went back to heaven ... and Paul marveled at the fact that Christians so easily fall into it.





Initially, Protestant apologists attempted to distort the clear meaning of Mt 16:18-19 with the
bogus argument that Jesus declared he would build his Church on faith not the man Peter.
However, this approach collapsed within Protestant circles when Oscar Cullmann in his famous
book Peter, Disciple, Apostle, Martyr convincingly demonstrated that Christ meant Peter
himself and not Peter’s faith or profession. Subsequently, numerous Protestant scholars
conceded Peter’s primacy.1


http://www.scborromeo.org/papers/Papal% ... ective.pdf

It seems your interpretation of scripture is at odds even with your fellow protestant brothers & sisters.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: A test for Sola Scripturists
PostPosted: Sat Apr 05, 2014 4:50 pm 
Offline
Adept
Adept

Joined: Tue Dec 11, 2012 10:52 pm
Posts: 5848
Religion: Christian
cjg wrote:
Ec2 wrote:

Quote:
A Ring Bearer wrote:
Matthew 16:17And Jesus answered him, "Blessed are you, Simon Bar-Jona! For flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but my Father who is in heaven.
[18] And I tell you, you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the powers of death shall not prevail against it.
[19] I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven."

Over and over again Scripture confirms, as well as God's providence in history, that the Church, and not the Bible alone, speaks Jesus' words with His authority.



Binding and loosing has absolutely nothing to do with creating new doctrine and giving it the level of scripture. Paul condemned anyone who would do that. In fact Paul severely rebuked Peter for falling into that trap almost immediately after Jesus went back to heaven ... and Paul marveled at the fact that Christians so easily fall into it.





Initially, Protestant apologists attempted to distort the clear meaning of Mt 16:18-19 with the
bogus argument that Jesus declared he would build his Church on faith not the man Peter.
However, this approach collapsed within Protestant circles when Oscar Cullmann in his famous
book Peter, Disciple, Apostle, Martyr convincingly demonstrated that Christ meant Peter
himself and not Peter’s faith or profession. Subsequently, numerous Protestant scholars
conceded Peter’s primacy.1


http://www.scborromeo.org/papers/Papal% ... ective.pdf

It seems your interpretation of scripture is at odds even with your fellow protestant brothers & sisters.


Peter wanted us to be judaisers. Paul uncompromisingly followed Jesus and rebuked Peter for not doing the same. He called those that were judaisers anathema.

People can say whatever they think and come up with any justification that suits their conclusion. The Church is built on Christ.


Last edited by EtcumSpiri22-0 on Sat Apr 05, 2014 5:15 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: A test for Sola Scripturists
PostPosted: Sat Apr 05, 2014 5:11 pm 
Offline
Journeyman
Journeyman

Joined: Sat Mar 30, 2013 12:55 pm
Posts: 812
Location: Sydney Australia
Religion: Catholic
Ec2 wrote:

Quote:
People can say whatever they think and come up with any justification that suits their conclusion. The Church is built on Christ.


Are you speaking ex-cathedera? ::):

But doesn't Jesus describe himself as the builder in Matt 16:18.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: A test for Sola Scripturists
PostPosted: Sat Apr 05, 2014 5:17 pm 
Offline
Adept
Adept

Joined: Tue Dec 11, 2012 10:52 pm
Posts: 5848
Religion: Christian
cjg wrote:
Ec2 wrote:

Quote:
People can say whatever they think and come up with any justification that suits their conclusion. The Church is built on Christ.


Are you speaking ex-cathedera? ::):

But doesn't Jesus describe himself as the builder in Matt 16:18.


Im not into ridicule/ games.

Jesus is Lord. I follow him. You can follow whomever you choose.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies. Page 32 of 34   [ 673 posts ]   Go to page Previous  1 ... 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34  Next


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests


Jump to: