Replies

You pluck individual verses from Scripture and present them as if they are the whole, with no regard to whether they are prose or poetry, threnody or occasional letter.

You confuse me with Rome that has only proof texts to support their "doctrine"

On this thread i believe I have given full chapters or series of connecting verses for John 6, the beatitudes, the sheep and the goats ..and I have actually corrected Catholics here by presenting the verse they used by giving the context..

A check will find one of my favorite sayings , the most important thing in reading scripture is Context, context , context..

But what I have found is most Catholics can not understand the context..

Even on the purely literal level (as opposed to moral, allegorical or anagogical), tone and context and purpose must be taken into account for understanding -- unless you're reading something of the "complexity" of The Little Engine That Could.

You mean like "I am tjhe bread of life" or "I give you the keys of the kingdom" or Whos sins you shall forgive?" LOL

If one has discernment and reads the scriptures in context, suddenly the "mystic" Catholic church fades away

You studiously avoid other verses, even one as central in all the history of Christianity as "And the second is like to it: Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself." (Still waiting for the Calvinist take!)

Do you?

Remembering the gospels are pre New Testament, and still point to the law ..can any man love his neighbor as himself? or like the law it summarizes does it point us to our need for a Savior?

If one has discernment and reads the scriptures in context, suddenly the "mystic" Catholic church fades away

AMEN!

Consider how often RCs tell us the Bible is confusing, contradictory, incomplete and basically unknowable which necessitates its filtration through the rusting sieve of a fallible bunch of old men in Rome.

They need to pick up a Bible and read it for themselves. To trust God to guide them. To trust the Holy Spirit to enlighten their understanding. To trust God alone.

Remembering the gospels are pre New Testament, and still point to the law ...can any man love his neighbor as himself? or like the law it summarizes does it point us to our need for a Savior?

Your simple yet profound question reveals the lie at the heart of Romanism -- legalism saves.

Scripture corrects that lie and clearly teaches that men are saved by grace alone through faith alone in Christ alone. Or how else can sinners by saved?

You confuse me with Rome that has only proof texts to support their "doctrine"

The "proof text" has been dead as a tool of debate since the 18th century. I suspect you still don't understand how I'm using the term.

and I have actually corrected Catholics here by presenting the verse they used by giving the context..

Can you link to an example or give the post number?

You apparently don't care about context with your "filthy rags" cite from Isaiah -- compare: Filthy Rags. Not a Catholic source, but the author actually reads the verse in the context of Isaiah.

The statement, "All our righteousness is like filthy rags", is found in the middle of a Biblical poem in Isaiah (Isa 64:4-9). The saying has caused a deep struggle in many hearts. Does the statement mean that it's pointless us trying to do righteous deeds? Does it mean our righteousness has no value in God's eyes? No, it doesn’t.

Remembering the gospels are pre New Testament, and still point to the law

This remains one of the most utterly bizarre contentions I have ever seen. I have no idea just what the Mennonite pastor you cite was getting at, but my impression was that Protestants in general insist that the OT canon was closed with Ezra around 400 BC, and they thus argue that the Deuterocanonicals (Apocrypha to you) cannot be canonical. It would seem to follow that to place the Gospels with the OT would logically eliminate them from any place in the canon at all.

You argue that the New Covenant was not established until the Last Supper. I (and others) maintain that it's truer to say that Christ Himself is the New Covenant, even if He only fully revealed Himself as such at the Last Supper.

I've heard criticism of those who would have Christianity "without the Cross" -- this is the first time I've heard a "Christianity without Christ" proposed.

can any man love his neighbor as himself? or like the law it summarizes does it point us to our need for a Savior?

Do you mean -- as you seem to -- that there's no point in trying to keep the commandments of Christ or even to understand what they mean? He also commands us to believe in Him. Why do you take the one as valid and the other as nothing -- do you imagine it's possible to have such faith without believing His words and taking them seriously? Anyone can say he believes anything -- maybe even fool himself into thinking he does.