Posted on 09/11/2023 9:23:22 AM PDT by ebb tide
Did I cast stones?
Would that constitute "A Good Act of Contrition"?
“COMMENT: If reading the Bible were a necessary means of salvation,”
That is a stupid argument, in as much as it insists on what Jesus said as what is important, and then dismisses that it is from the bible that we know anything of what Jesus said, as the oral history of knowing that was scribed by the new testament writers. No, salvation is not given for reading the bible, but understanding what Jesus preached is and reading the bible is how we come to understand that (and how new and successive preachers came to know it.
Does any of what I just said eliminate or try to override the fact that Jesus sent the Holy Spirit to be with us always, and to be our spiritual source of His authority? No. And the “stupid bible” tells us that as well.
Any religion that seeks to discredit the Bible in order to advance their doctrine, says all that needs to be stated.
Matthew 23:9
King James Version
9 And call no man your father upon the earth: for one is your Father, which is in heaven.
1 Timothy 4:2-4
King James Version
2 Speaking lies in hypocrisy; having their conscience seared with a hot iron;
3 Forbidding to marry, and commanding to abstain from meats, which God hath created to be received with thanksgiving of them which believe and know the truth.
4 For every creature of God is good, and nothing to be refused, if it be received with thanksgiving:
2 Timothy 3:16
King James Version
16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:
What am I missing here? Is he equating Jesus' miracles to Jesus' "doctrines"? (Same for the section later labeled "FIVE".)
...and you know this HOW?
sola mindreading
How is it that different churches teach different things?
For example, baptism:
some teachers baptism is absolutely necessary, others, unnecessary.
Some teach infants may be baptized, others only adults.
Some teach baptism has an effect on the soul, others that it is merely symbolic.
Some churches teach one can be baptized more than once, others that it is a one-time event.
That is eight different teachings on baptism. Each is “backed up” by its advocates using the Bible. How are we to know which is true?
NINE Why so much delay in compiling the New Testament? Prior to 397 A. D., the various books of the New Testament were not under one cover, but were in the custody of different groups or congregations. The persecutions against the Church, which had gained new intensity, prevented these New Testament books from being properly authenticated and placed under one cover. However, this important work was begun after Constantine gave peace to Christianity in 313 A.D., allowing it to be practiced in the Roman Empire. .COMMENT: This again shows how utterly impossible was the "Bible-only" theory, at least up to 400 A. D.
That seems to be saying "Since the churches didn't have the full Bible at their disposal, they must have had some other source of correct doctrine" (which you must think was some infallible information transmitted by word of mouth from the bishop of Rome or something??). That does not logically follow.
First, churches didn't need to have every single doctrine or historical fact. Did they need all the details about Paul's missionary journeys from Acts? Or course not. Second, they probably got things wrong.
The headline is dumb.
In fact in the bible itself, you see this was one of the main problems the Apostles were dealing with, and were the reason for the letters they were writing to the churches to begin with. Many of the epistles were the Apostles dealing with teaching/doctrinal problems in the new churches they were shepherding.
Absolutely, He is and has always has been perfect.
We are the ones who have and will continue to make mistakes while we attempt to understand Him, what He has done, and what He intends for us.
Ignore what Churches say. Especially apostate churches with priests and popes.
The word baptism literally mean "immerse" or "immersion". Christ gave us an example...he was immersed in the river himself. There's much more than that. For example archaeologists digging close to Jerusalem’s Temple Mount have discovered nearly 100 ritual baths, or bathing pools, dating to the first century BC and the first century AD. This explains how the disciples baptized so many so quickly in Acts 2. The truth is there in scripture. The preponderance of evidence in the bible, along with jewish tradition and archoalogicial evidence, shows full immersion was the way people were baptized. Or at least how the first century church did it. Things start going off the rail soon after biblical times.
Some of these predate the Council of Nicea:
Ambrose (340?-396), “How can we use those things which we do not find in the Holy Scriptures?” (Ambr. Offic., 1:23).
Athanasius (300?-375),
“The Holy Scriptures, given by inspiration of God, are of themselves sufficient toward the discovery of truth. (Orat. adv. Gent., ad cap.) The Catholic Christians will neither speak nor endure to hear anything in religion that is a stranger to Scripture; it being an evil heart of immodesty to speak those things which are not written,” (Athanasius, Exhort. ad Monachas).
“After speaking of the books of the Old and New Testament he says, “These are fountains of salvation, that they who thirst may be satisfied with the living words they contain. In these alone is proclaimed the doctrine of godliness. Let no man add to these, neither let him take ought from these. For concerning these the Lord put to shame the Sadducees, and said, ‘Ye do err, not knowing the Scriptures.’ And He reproved the Jews, saying, ‘Search the Scriptures, for these are they that testify of Me.”
(https://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/npnf204.xxv.iii.iii.xxv.html)
“Again it is not tedious to speak of the [books] of the New Testament. These are, the four Gospels, according to Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John. Afterwards, the Acts of the Apostles and Epistles (called Catholic), seven, viz., of James, one; of Peter, two; of John, three; after these, one of Jude. In addition, there are fourteen Epistles of Paul, written in this order. The first, to the Romans; then two to the Corinthians; after these, to the Galatians; next, to the Ephesians; then to the Philippians; then to the Colossians; after these, two to the Thessalonians, and that to the Hebrews; and again, two to Timothy; one to Titus; and lastly, that to Philemon. And besides, the Revelation of John.
6 These are fountains of salvation, that they who thirst may be satisfied with the living words they contain. In these alone is proclaimed the doctrine of godliness. Let no man add to these, neither let him take ought from these. For concerning these the Lord put to shame the Sadducees, and said, ‘Ye do err, not knowing the Scriptures.’ And He reproved the Jews, saying, ‘Search the Scriptures, for these are they that testify of Me.’ ” (Athanasius, Festal Letter 39:5-6).
“Vainly then do they run about with the pretext that they have demanded Councils for the faith’s sake; for divine Scripture is sufficient above all things; but if a Council be needed on the point, there are the proceedings of the Fathers, for the Nicene Bishops did not neglect this matter, but stated the doctrine so exactly, that persons reading their words honestly, cannot but be reminded by them of the religion towards Christ announced in divine Scripture.” (Athanasius, De Synodis, 6).
Augustine (354-430) “Whereas, therefore, in every question, which relates to life and conduct, not only teaching, but exhortation also is necessary; in order that by teaching we may know what is to be done, and by exhortation may be incited not to think it irksome to do what we already know is to be done; what more can I teach you, than what we read in the Apostle? For holy Scripture setteth a rule to our teaching, that we dare not “be wise more than it behoveth to be wise; but be wise, as himself saith, “unto soberness, according as unto each God hath allotted the measure of faith.”Be it not therefore for me to teach you any other thing, save to expound to you the words of the Teacher, and to treat of them as the Lord shall have given to me.” (https://ccel.org/ccel/schaff/npnf103/npnf103.v.iv.iii.html)
Clement of Alexandria (150?-213?), “They that are ready to spend their time in the best things will not give over seeking for truth until they have found the demonstration from the Scriptures themselves,” (Stromata 7:16:3).
Cyprian of Carthage (200?-258), “Whence comes this tradition? Does it descend from the Lord’s authority, or from the commands and epistles of the apostles? For those things are to be done which are there written . . . If it be commanded in the gospels or the epistles and Acts of the Apostles, then let this holy tradition be observed,” (Cyprian of Carthage, Ep. 74 ad Pompeium).
Chyrsostom (344-386) “Wherefore I exhort and entreat you all, disregard what this man and that man thinks about these things, and inquire from the Scriptures all these things; and having learnt what are the true riches, let us pursue after them that we may obtain also the eternal good things.” (https://ccel.org/ccel/schaff/npnf112/npnf112.v.xiii.html)
Cyril of Jerusalem (315?-386), “Not even the least of the divine and holy mysteries of the faith ought to be handed down without the divine Scriptures. Do not simply give faith to me speaking these things to you except you have the proof of what I say from the divine Scriptures. For the security and preservation of our faith are not supported by ingenuity of speech, but by the proofs of the divine Scriptures,” (Cat. 4).
Irenaeus, (130-202), “We have known the method of our salvation by no other means than those by whom the gospel came to us; which gospel they truly preached; but afterward, by the will of God, they delivered to us in the Scriptures, to be for the future the foundation and pillar of our faith,” (Adv. H. 3:1).
Jerome (342?-420), “Those things which they make and find, as it were, by apostolical tradition, without the authority and testimony of Scripture, the word of God smites. (ad Aggai 1) As we deny not those things that are written, so we refuse those things that are not written. That God was born of a virgin we believe, because we read it; that Mary did marry after she was delivered we believe not, because we do not read it,” (Adv. Helvidium).
Origen (185?-252), “No man ought, for the confirmation of doctrines, to use books which are not canonized Scriptures,” (Tract. 26 in Matt.).
A bunch of questions is not an answer.
So now you’re labeling famous Catholic saints to be “protestants”?
Quite a stretch!
I have no idea what your question is getting at. Your claim is that nobody could figure out which books were canonical prior to the RCC's official declaration.
Catholics accuse Protestants of Sola Scriptura
Protestants accuse Catholics of Sola Ecclesia
Both accusations are incorrect.
Catholics believe PRIMA Ecclesia
Protestants believe PRIMA Scriptura
Both allow for Devine revelation.
Re: infant baptism: the Bible says households were baptized, and St Paul says baptism is the fulfillment of circumcision. 🤔
Re: the other three: then how is it that other churches teach differently and back up their claims from the Bible?
How do we reconcile that different people glean different meanings from the Bible? Or are we all supposed to agree with you in order to be correct?
I have no idea what you’re talking about.
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.