Posted on 01/28/2014 7:27:17 PM PST by NKP_Vet
"If a teaching isn’t explicit in the Bible, then we don’t accept it as doctrine!" That belief, commonly known as sola scriptura, was a central component of all I believed as a Protestant. This bedrock Protestant teaching claims that Scripture alone is the sole rule of faith and morals for Christians. Diving deeper into its meaning to defend my Protestant faith against Catholicism about twenty years ago, I found that there was no uniform understanding of this teaching among Protestant pastors and no book I could read to get a better understanding of it.
What role does tradition play? How explicit does something have to be in Scripture before it can be called doctrine? Does Scripture tell us what is absolutely essential for us to believe as Christians? How can we determine the canon using sola scriptura? All these questions and more pointed to the central question: Where is sola scriptura itself taught in the Bible?
(Excerpt) Read more at catholic.com ...
Just mentioning unbiblical garbage that is believed by protestants.
Of course it’s incompatible with scripture. Christ is coming back one time, not twice. For the first 1,700 years after Christ that is exactly what all Christians believed. Then came the shysters in the 18th century to try and hoodwink gullible protestants for the purpose of selling a book.
Always been amazing that some protestants make fun of Catholics, but the same protestants believe the Bible is the inspired Word of God.........based on what Catholics decided to put in the Bible. Now that’s funny.
Jesus gave His church the authority to preach and teach the word of God (as “rightly divided). He did not give anyone, nor any particular body, organization, or institution the authority to overule His word, corrupt His word, rule via the traditions of man, nor add extra-biblical revelation to the revelation already reavealed in His word. Catholicism has twisted, marred, maligned, perverted, and adulterated the word of God. She is thus guilty of spiritual adultery, and the spreading of heretical teachings. Swift judgment will bring her destruction when the King returns to reveal His true bride, made up of those who have truly been “born-again,” and made spotless by His blood.
Do you not understand there is a difference between the Catholic bible (which has 73 books) and the Protestant Bible (which has 66 books)? By the way, there is no indication whatsoever that the Apostles and early disciples believed or taught what Catholics teach today — none whatsoever. If Jesus, Peter, John, or Paul, James, or Jude, walked into a Catholic church today and preached the truth, they would be ready to crucify them (just as the Pharisees of did). For they would proclaim the same message the reformer’s proclaimed in exposing the wretchedness corruption, and heretical teachings of Catholicism and the modern day Pharisees that lead it.
Jesus same once and is coming once more.
He sets up His thousand year reign, which is referenced heavily in Scripture, Satan is loosed to deceive the nations, and then the end comes. But Jesus remains on the earth.
When He comes to gather the His Bride in the rapture, He does not come down on to the earth.
Wasn't making fun of Catholics...Jut pointing out how your religion has to pervert the scriptures to justify any of its teaching...
And you would do good to research the history of bible manuscripts so you would be able to abandon this nonsense about your religion putting anything in my bible...
“Jesus gave His church the authority to preach and teach the word of God”
His “Church” was the Catholic Church, certainly not PROTESTants that broke away from it 1,500 years after He started it, have none of the sacraments and make fun of the Holy Eucharist.
Read Paul. He didn’t mince his words.
Indeed. So now you are no longer a Catholic! .
- - - - - - - - - - - - -
Chapter and verse of what?
This. From your previous post.....'but most often, God chooses to use "middle-men/middle-women" go-betweens to assist us on our paths to salvation.'
God says there's only ONE mediator between God and man, that being Jesus.
metmom (quoting the Bible): "1 Timothy 2:5-6 For there is one God, and there is one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus, who gave himself as a ransom for all, which is the testimony given at the proper time."
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Did you really read my post #91 'metmom'? You are proving my point perfectly with your response here and in your post #97.
You are quoting a text from the Bible, from the first letter of the Apostle Paul to Timothy. (Now, please rest your typing fingers completely for just a minute, and put on your reading cap.)
Did Almighty God choose to write "1 Timothy" directly Himself, or did God choose, in His Sovereign, Holy, Almighty Wisdom and Will to select a mere human being "middle-man" (the Apostle Paul) to write the Scriptural letter in God's Holy Written Word which we now call "1 Timothy"?
The truth is, God chose a mere human being "middle-man" to physically record / write every single word contained in "1 Timothy".
And (like I said already in my post #91, 'metmom'), you cannot read one single word in the entire Bible that God did not solemnly choose in His Almighty, Holy Will, to select some mere human being "middle-man" to physically record / write it for Him.
Likewise, God did not tell you the stories of Jesus, or any of the other things contained in the Bible directly by Himself, but, rather, God chose some mere human being "middle-men / middle-women" (such as parents, teachers, preachers, some other human being go-betweens) to tell you those stories and other Biblical teachings for Him.
Like I said, in all of human history, God most often used (and still uses) mere human being "middle-men / middle-women" go-betweens to carry out His Sovereign Holy Will.
The context is that we can talk to God directly but God *most often* uses *middlemen*.
God ALWAYS speaks to us directly. We don’t need to go THROUGH another human being and reading what was penned or printed by another human being is NOT going through them to get to God.
I do not understand the Catholic obsession with giving people credit for what belongs to God alone. You all go through priests to get to God and saints to get to God. I have yet to see a Catholic claim or admit that God spoke to them directly through the Holy Spirit. Some person along the way is always getting the credit for it.
- - - - - - - - - - - - -
So you don't believe the Apostle Paul wrote that letter (1 Timothy) to Timothy?
Open your Bible right now and see for yourself. (Every Bible usually gives the Apostle Paul credit for writing the epistle (letter) we call "1 Timothy" -- is your Bible different?)
God Himself chose the Apostle Paul (and many other human "middle-men") to write every single word in the Bible, and the Bible itself gives those "middle-men" credit for their writings in the "Written Word of God", when it is known who actually wrote them for God as God's "middle-men".
You should really start a thread on prophecy. That would be interesting.
As metmom stated good Christians can differ on eschatology. The line is drawn as such we know there will be a literal Second Coming of Jesus Christ the same way as He ascended into Heaven (see Acts 1 for the ascension; Revelation 1 and 19-20 for the second coming).
In Revelation 20 we see a physical reign of Jesus Christ on earth as King of Kings for 1,000 years. I don’t know where you get the claim others assert “He leaves again and then come back.” I have never seen such a claim. The release of Satan is stated in the same chapter 20 and then we see the eternal Kingdom of God ushered in with no end.
Some believe all of the above events will be literally fulfilled; some believe it is allegory and some believe Revelation applies to all ages. Most Protestants, Evangelicals and non-denominational welcome all views at the Lord’s Table. There may be some spirited debates, but we depart such debates in love and peace.
There is, however, another view which should give you more pause and concern than pre-trib rapture adherents. That would be the full prederist view. That view believes the second coming of Christ happened back in 70 AD. I think we both would see a problem with that. And I will note that the seeds of prederism did come from a Roman Catholic but it did not “stick” and never an official belief given such would violate scriptures and several confessions.
So this is a case within evangelical churches et. al. that such claims as the pre-trib rapture, although has scriptural basis, such basis is thin and good theology never rests on one or even a few verses or passages. So pre-trib rapture is a theory to be explored as is the mid trib (or last trumpet) theory or the just before the second coming rapture. Fact is the “caught up” (we get rapture from the Latin) will happen no later than just before the second coming of Christ. That much is certain from scriptures; and was also the understanding of Ireneaus in “Against Heresies” Book V chapter 24-25. Yes he was a classic historical futurist with regards to prophecy.
**Christians can differ on eschatology**
Oh, really?
These things that come at the end of life:
Death
Heaven
Hell
Catholics, of course, have Purgatory on that list also. But don’t we all agree on the first three?
Please read my post again. I stated there is a line. That would be the second physical coming of Christ. We all agree on this. Heaven and hell (lake of fire) only prederists and the annihilation groups would argue with us. All addressed and confirmed by Jesus Christ.
Even Rome believes in a great tribulation to come, with the Jews being granted repentance. But broadly denies the literal 1k year reign of Christ, and spiritualizes it as pertaining to the saints in Heaven.
I see the “rapture” as the resurrection of the just, meeting the Lord to go with Him to the battle of Armageddon, then reigning with Him for 1k years, and then being part of the jury in the final judgment.
Too late for details.
>>>But then Luther wasn’t around until 1500 years AFTER Christ and the founding of the Catholic Church, was he?<<<
I wonder how many Luthers there would have been if the evil RCC had not killed them?
Philip
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.