The Gospel According to the Church Fathers

“Rome does a great job showing that NULL scriptura IS workable and completely fools millions of people.”

Nutjobs do a great job of showing that they’ll always be anti-Catholic.

What sola Scriptura REALLY is, not what I’ve seen you claim it is, which is in error.

I shall address you as you address me.

How hard is it for you to realize that doing ‘our own works’, are the works we dream up. God’s works are what he dreams up. And some of God’s works are MANDATORY. Hello?

Did Abraham obey God to fulfill the promise given him? Yes
Did Jesus Christ obey the Father to fulfill the promised redemption plan? Yes
Did the Apostles obey the Lord’s command to remit sins? Yes (the proof begins with Acts 2:38)
And by refusing to obey Acts 2:38, you can fulfill the Lord’s command to have your sins retained. (I don’t recommend that choice)

Aren’t I nice, I answered those questions for you. But, feel free to comment on them anyway.

Sure, the Law is done away with, but if you refuse to obey the Lord’s ordained conversion commands in Acts 2:38, do you really believe in him? Not in my opinion.

**You also ignored the vast majority of what I wrote**

You have four fingers pointing back at you.

**It’s annoying to have to respond and then repeat myself over and over again.**

Couldn’t have said it better myself. Cheerio!

“What sola Scriptura REALLY is, not what I’ve seen you claim it is, which is in error.”

Sola scriptura is an erroneous doctrine, a heresy. The varying shades of it per differing sect don’t make it less of a heresy.

I know you understand that God made grace possible when it was a hopeless situation for us. Jesus Christ is the Door. Want to enter into his grace? Obey Acts 2:38.

Some folks expect him to walk through the wall (”I already believe. I don’t have to do anything.)

Wait a minute. Did you just win the Internet? Now way! Do over!

So when the sick call for the elders how do you recommend handling the anointing and the blessing? How many times have you anointed a sick person? If never, why not?

As regards a human revelator, how did we get the Bible? Note Bene that no leaders of the Reform Movement ever claimed revelation.

Nutjobs do a great job of showing that they’ll always be anti-Catholic.

Bob, bob, BOB!

Such ANGER!

Such VITROL!!

Remember your BP!!!

Sola scriptura is an erroneous doctrine, a heresy.

Let's assume you are correct here.

What church teachings are absolutely necessary; that are NOT found in the Bible.

“What church teachings are absolutely necessary; that are NOT found in the Bible.”

That wouldn’t be the question. The question would be: if Sola scriptura is an erroneous doctrine, a heresy, why do Protestants believe in it when they can’t even show it’s in the Bible and is therefore self-refuting?

The Bible Whisperers have arrived. The Bible will bend to their will or else!

I'm happy to discuss anything in the Bible with you. I know your specialty and delight is Mormonism. Ironically, this is a Catholic thread on the Mother of God, Mary.

To the Bible-believing Christian, like myself, the Bible is clear on many points, where you haven't had pollution by the philosophies of men.

So to your point, what should the True Church of Jesus Chris look like.

First the context of the Epistles is that they are letters to believing saints. Letters of encouragement and correct because apostasy is the steady state of man. Have you ever heard or sung the Robert Robinson and John Wyeth's hymn hymn, Come Thou Font of Every Blessing?

Here's Sarah Noelle's version:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g3w9nvXuVnk

Prone to wander, Lord, I feel it, Prone to leave the God I love; - Most apostasy occurs for 'good' human reasons. It's apostasy nonetheless.

So what do we read in the Bible in Ephesians starting at 4:11? Let's use the Weymouth translation:

And He Himself [Jesus Christ]appointed some to be Apostles, some to be Prophets, some to be evangelists, some to be pastors and teachers, for the perfecting of the saints, to the work of serving, to the building up of the body of Christ; till we all of us arrive at oneness in faith and in the knowledge of the Son of God, and at mature manhood and the stature of full-grown men in Christ.

The first thing you might notice is that Christ must appoint the officers/officials of his church. This is clearly emphasized in Hebrews 5:4

http://biblehub.com/hebrews/5-4.htm

No man can take this honor upon himself or have it granted by another man via a graduation certificate, etc. Authority matters to God.

Before we delve into what the Bible has to say about the offices, let’s first look at the purposes as stated in Ephesians.

For this Young’s Literal is especially edifying: unto the perfecting of the saints, for a work of ministration, for a building up of the body of the Christ,

http://biblehub.com/ephesians/4-12.htm

The three-fold mission of the Church is iterated clearly as:

1. Perfecting the Saints

2. Missionary work

3. Building up the body of Christ (which as you know, said Christ opened the Gates of Hades)

#2 “for a work of ministration is best understood by knowing the Greek diakonía ("ministry") specifically refers to Spirit-empowered service guided by faith. The “Spirit-empowered service guided by faith” must be the spreading of the Gospel. What more better service could one man do for another than to share the Good News?

What about the necessary offices of the True Church of Jesus Christ as named in the Bible?

They are named as:

1. Apostles

2. Prophets

3. Evangelists

4. pastors

5. teachers

6. deacons

Do they have special roles?

Apostles are special witnesses of Jesus Christ, particularly his resurrection. You’ll likely recall from the Book of Mark that the first lie told about Christ’s resurrection was that it was fake. The witness that Christ lives is a critical one.

Prophets perform the function as you’d expect as an astute reader of God’s Holy Word.

Evangelists prove a sticky wicket for some. The Greek can bring some clarification: euaggelistḗs (from euaggelízō, "evangelize") – properly, an "evangelist"; someone with a vocational calling from God to announce the good news of the Gospel (see Eph 4:11).

Note Bene the call must come from God, but what is this ‘good news’? God saves individually. There is no group Salvation by Christ. It is one to one. So an Evangelist would bring the good news of the Gospel to… you personally.

Pastor/Overseer/Bishop is a role that is self-explanatory in that they watch over groups of Christ’s flock. Teachers is self-explanatory and Deacons is an errand runner and another office that an Elder in Christ’s Church may hold.

As for prophetesses, I don't know much about that. The Bible is fairly silent on women's roles in the Church. Take a look at 1 Corinthians 11:4-5 where reference is given to both men and women prophesying.

4Every man who has something on his head while praying or prophesying disgraces his head. 5But every woman who has her head uncovered while praying or prophesying disgraces her head, for she is one and the same as the woman whose head is shaved.

http://biblehub.com/context/1_corinthians/11-4.htm

I suspect our modern understanding is flawed in this case. Prophesying means forthtelling which reveals the mind (message) of God in a particular situation.

As you can see from above it is closely conjoined with prayer and I suspect may be the natural outcome of that conversation with the Divine. In this case, the personal response of God to prayer for an individual, married couple, family, etc. as they go about trying to live godly lives in a wicked world. The world of the NT was extremely wicked.

Do women prophesy in your church?

What other Bible questions do you have? If none, go my son and sin no more.

This is a common mistake, particularly when one desires to adhere to one’s beliefs. This is classic eisegesis.

Paradise is not Heaven. Our Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ, had and has the choice of the proper words. He chose ‘paradise’ for the thief on the cross, not ‘heaven’.

See here for reference:

http://biblehub.com/text/revelation/2-7.htm

http://biblehub.com/text/luke/23-43.htm

http://biblehub.com/text/2_corinthians/12-4.htm

Words have meaning and God’s words are chosen carefully.

If I were to postulate on what ‘paradise’ is I’d suggest one of the Heavens spoken of by Paul. Remember that Paul’s experience is unclear and whether it was a physical or spiritual one is irrelevant.

Paradise as described in Revelations sounds like a place higher than earth, but lower than Heaven, much like the Garden of Eden was.

Hope this helps. Call on me for all your hardest Bible questions. So far your questions have been very easy to someone with as little knowledge of the Bible as I have.

I love to help you on your journey to Christ.

The OT Jews were given many ordinances because of the hardness of their hearts (and their heads).

Ordinations occur on the road to sanctification/consecration. Consecration simply means the closer association with the sacred.

Maybe if you read the Word’s of the Lord, Jesus Christ, with that in mind, you’ll see his every word as a command, decree, or what He has ordained.

Don’t get caught up in the verbiage. Pray for an open mind and the truth will come.

20. Ambrosiaster (fourth century): “God has decreed that a person who believes in Christ can be saved without works. By faith alone he receives the forgiveness of sins.”

Source: Ambrosiaster, Commentary on 1 Corinthians 1:4.

21. Ambrosiaster (again): “They are justified freely because they have not done anything nor given anything in return, but by faith alone they have been made holy by the gift of God.”

Source: Ambrosiaster, Commentary on Romans 3:24.

22. Ambrosiaster (again): “Paul tells those who live under the law that they have no reason to boast basing themselves on the law and claiming to be of the race of Abraham, seeing that no one is justified before God except by faith.”

Source: Ambrosiaster, Commentary on Romans 3:27.

23. Ambrosiaster (again): “God gave what he promised in order to be revealed as righteous. For he had promised that he would justify those who believe in Christ, as he says in Habakkuk: ‘The righteous will live by faith in me’ (Hab. 2:4). Whoever has faith in God and Christ is righteous.”

Source: Ambrosiaster, Commentary on Paul’s Epistles; CSEL 81 ad loc.

The Church Fathers and Sola Fide (Justification By Faith Alone)

James White gave me the following challenge (on Julie Staples Message Board -- November 2002): JW> I have missed where you provide an in-depth response to Ambrosiaster's teaching of sola fide, or to the repeated references to the elect in Clement's epistle to the Corinthians, or to the Epistle to Diognetius and its clear reference to imputational righteousness. >>

St. Clement of Rome has been discussed in depth by Matt1618 (see links below) so I don't need to cover him here. Ambrosiaster would be the main focus, as well as Theodoret.

Ambrosiaster did use the term "faith alone," however, he did not use it in the Protestant sense. He used the word "faith" that would include good works or love. "Faith" according to his definition was to walk in love. We Catholics don't have problems with this. He says:

"God by his mercy has saved us through Christ. By his grace, we, born again, have received abundantly of his Holy Spirit, so that relying on good works, with him helping us in all things, we might be able thus to lay hold of the inheritance of the kingdom of heaven." (Ambrosiaster, Commentary on Titus 3:7 cited by Robert B. Eno "Some Patristic Views on the Relationship of Faith and Works in Justification" in Justification By Faith: Lutherans and Catholics in Dialogue VII [1985], page 115)

"For justification, faith alone in love is necessary. For faith must be fortified with brotherly love for the perfection of the believer." (Ambrosiaster, Commentary on Galatians 5:6, ibid 116)

And a comment from Alister McGrath, an Anglican Protestant scholar:

"Like many of his contemporaries, for example, he [Ambrosiaster] appears to be obsessed with the idea that man can acquire merit before God, and the associated idea that certain labours are necessary to attain this." (Alister McGrath, IUSTITIA DEI, volume 1, page 22 -- his reference is to Souter's The Earliest Latin Commentaries on the Epistles of St. Paul [Oxford, 1927] pages 65, 72-73, 80).

And Robert Eno, who Protestants like to quote because of his somewhat negative book on the Papacy, wrote this in the Lutheran-Catholic dialogue on Ambrosiaster's views:

"Despite our initial justification by God's mercy, our subsequent life, our works, will determine whether we are justified or damned ultimately. As can be seen, Ambrosiaster has no difficulty with merit language for the justified person. Having been washed, we must merit receiving the promise." (Eno, in Justification By Faith, page 117)

That wouldn’t be the question.

Yes; it IS the question.

Rome says that we prots do NOT have ENOUGH to sustain us.

I want to know what we lack, and WHY is it necessary.

To the Bible-believing Christian, like myself, the Bible is clear on many points, where you haven't had pollution by the philosophies of men.

Sounds quite MORMON to me!

8 We believe the Bible to be the word of God as far as it is translated correctly; we also believe the Book of Mormon to be the word of God.

https://www.lds.org/scriptures/pgp/a-of-f/1.8?lang=eng

Don’t get caught up in the verbiage.

"Did GOD really say...

“Yes; it IS the question.”

Nope.

“Rome says that we prots do NOT have ENOUGH to sustain us.”

No, the Catholic Church says you do not have the full faith. And the Church is right, of course.

“I want to know what we lack, and WHY is it necessary.”

I don’t think you do. Publicly renounce sola scriptura and the false gospel of sola scriptura and I might believe you.

And the Church is right, of course.

“I want to know what we lack, and WHY is it necessary.”

I don’t think you do...

Well; you've assumed wrong.

Perhaps your confusion has arisen from the fact that my wanting to know is so that any LURKERS would understand the 'correct' view of Catholicism and not be confused by the incorrect one of Protestantism.

Would you be so kind as to fill in THEIR lack of knowledge?