Posted on 06/09/2014 9:26:16 PM PDT by Salvation
This can only work on Catholics...People who read and believe the bible won't be fooled by this nonsense...
Absolutely everything a person needs to know about how to become saved is written in the books of John...There is nothing outside of scripture that can or will contribute one iota to the knowledge on how to become a born again Christian...
Scripture alone is ALL we need to become Christians...
Joh 20:31 But these are written, that ye might believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing ye might have life through his name.
1Jn_5:13 These things have I written unto you that believe on the name of the Son of God; that ye may know that ye have eternal life, and that ye may believe on the name of the Son of God. Joh 3:15 That whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have eternal life.
Joh 3:16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life
Joh 3:18 He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.
Joh 3:36 He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life: and he that believeth not the Son shall not see life; but the wrath of God abideth on him.
Joh 5:24 Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that heareth my word, and believeth on him that sent me, hath everlasting life, and shall not come into condemnation; but is passed from death unto life.
Joh 6:40 And this is the will of him that sent me, that every one which seeth the Son, and believeth on him, may have everlasting life: and I will raise him up at the last day.
1Jn 5:10 He that believeth on the Son of God hath the witness in himself: he that believeth not God hath made him a liar; because he believeth not the record that God gave of his Son.
1Jn 5:11 And this is the record, that God hath given to us eternal life, and this life is in his Son.
1Jn 5:12 He that hath the Son hath life; and he that hath not the Son of God hath not life.
1Jn 5:13 These things have I written unto you that believe on the name of the Son of God; that ye may know that ye have eternal life, and that ye may believe on the name of the Son of God.
1Jn 5:1 Whosoever believeth that Jesus is the Christ is born of God: and every one that loveth him that begat loveth him also that is begotten of him.
1Jn 5:5 Who is he that overcometh the world, but he that believeth that Jesus is the Son of God?
2Ti 3:16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: 2Ti 3:17 That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works.
And THAT proves Sola Scripture...Scripture alone...
Never has there been such a thorough reference as the two large volumes, running 1,699 pages, of the World Christian Encyclopedia, published by Oxford University Press. Barrett has doggedly visited most of the lands in person, collecting raw material, including national census figures and United Nations data, and recruiting the 444 specialists who feed him material. Among them: Vatican missions librarian Willi Henkel and editor J. Gordon Melton of the Encyclopedia of American Religions. Barrett's encyclopedia sought to count each human being in each religion and religious subcategory in each country as of 1900, 1970, 1990, 1995 and 2000, with projections to 2025.
The 2001 edition, successor to his 1982 first edition, which took a decade to compile, identifies 10,000 distinct religions, of which 150 have 1 million or more followers. Within Christianity, he counts 33,820 denominations.
Wrong.
As they traveled along the road they came to some water, and the eunuch said, “Look, there is water. What is to prevent my being baptized?” Then he ordered the chariot to stop, and Philip and the eunuch both went down into the water, and he baptized him. (Acts 8:36, 38)The early Christians baptized with water. What you have done is a classic example of forcing the Scriptures to agree with your predetermined theology. And it is this man-made Protestant theology that you are placing above the clear words of the Bible. So much for sola scripture.
And there you have a major problem with sola scripture. How can the Bible alone be a sufficient rule of faith if we cannot know what is the Bible. And note here that we are not talking about the dispute over the deuterocanonical books but of the Gospel of Mark. In fact, why do we accept Mark or Luke as Scripture since neither was an apostle nor a witness to our Lord? It is only on the authority of the Church which accepted them as Scripture. If it is not the church which can determine and authenticate the canon of Scripture who can?
If the doctrine is taught elsewhere in scripture then I will develop the evidence from that instead. Sound reasonable?
No, it does not! If this passage is authentic, which it is, then this is sufficient to accept the necessity of Baptism. Nor is this something that we can pass over as unimportant; one's very salvation is at stake.
This passage doesn't mention baptism, which passage is correct? Mark 16 or Romans 10?
It is not a question of either/or but of both/and. If a person believes then he believes in everything that Jesus taught and commanded, including the necessity of Baptism.
The allusion is that the flood of Noah prefigured Baptism. What is not an allusion is the simple statement: "… baptism, which saves you now." It is only because you are coming to Scripture with the preconceived notion that Baptism is not necessary for salvation that you must find ways to negate these passages. Thus this is just one example of Protestants putting the teaching of the Reformers above the plain words of the Bible.
If Peter is saying baptism is required for salvation, how can you possibly harmonize the Romans 10 passage (and an absolutely huge array of other passages) that do not mention baptism at all?
Quite simply, if you have faith then you believe all that Jesus taught and commanded, including the necessity of Baptism.
It is quite clear on the statement: Kepha (Peter) is the kepha (rock) on which Jesus will build his church. But more to the point, the two of us have a dispute over this and many other issues of the faith. Jesus commanded that we should go to the church, not merely search the Scriptures. Where is this church that we can submit this dispute?
Most problems come from people adding to or removing words from the scripture, or, just not believing what they read...
May I lend you a mirror?
Protestant mythology. The very reason the Latin Vulgate was produced is because Latin was the vernacular in the West. There were numerous translations of the Bible before Luther or the King James. What was objected to were mistranslations. Even Luther admitted that he added "alone" to the phrase "by faith alone" in Romans.
wanting services that people’could understand in their own language, ditto.
Which is why, I guess, that the Church promoted the use of hand Missals with a vernacular translation of the Mass. Not very smart if you do not want anyone to understand the liturgy.
the rcc kept the laity uneducated and in the dark and totally dependent on them, on purpose.
Again, which is why, I guess, the Catholic Church established all those great universities during the Middle Ages. Rather than trying to keep anyone uneducated the Church was the only institution that preserved education during the Middle Ages. The various colleges at Oxford and Cambridge were originally founded as institutions to support the poor attending those universities.
Saved? Yes or No.
may have had it at one time, but certainly not now in light of the emphasis place on Mary.
Seeing as there IS no "canon of tradition" that can be proven to have been passed down through the Apostles that is not also declared in the ONLY infallible and divinely-inspired writings of Scripture, the Catholic Church declares essentially that it can invent new doctrines at will. I do not believe for a minute that this is what Paul told Timothy nor what St. Peter had in mind when he referred to Paul's writings to the churches as "Scripture". What is absolutely certain is there can be no tradition that contradicts or cannot be proved BY Scripture.
As Irenaeus stated in Against Heresies III.1.1:
We have learned from none others the plan of our salvation, than from those through whom the Gospel has come down to us, which they did at one time proclaim in public, and, at a later period, by the will of God, handed down to us in the Scriptures, to be the ground and pillar of our faith.
It is clear that Jesus wasn't referring to Peter since Peter is a stone...And secondly, Jesus was speaking to Peter and said , 'this' rock, NOT 'you'...Jesus wasn't even referring to Peter...
Just like a Catholic to rely on a foreign translation that the bible wasn't even written in to prove his point...
But more to the point, the two of us have a dispute over this and many other issues of the faith. Jesus commanded that we should go to the church, not merely search the Scriptures.
Joh_5:39 Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me.
Mat 22:29 Jesus answered and said unto them, Ye do err, not knowing the scriptures, nor the power of God.
Right from the lips of Jesus...
The scriptures, the words of God are all sufficient...Those scriptures provide the way of salvation while at the same time condemn your religion...
You say follow the (your) church...Jesus says follow the scriptures to know that you have salvation and, to know if you have the right church...
Jesus tells us to stay away from that church that attacks his scriptures...
If this be the case, then why isn't the Bible sufficient? They wrote these teachings down so we would have them for later. It's still about Christ today as it was then. The story of the NT hasn't changed.
While I agree the initial message was given to the apostles, you have to start somewhere, there is nothing to suggest that only the apostles are the ones who can continue to share/teach the Gospel. This would contradict the teachings regarding spiritual gifts which are given to all followers of Christ in one form or another according to 1 Corinthians. Some apostles, teachers, some prophets, and so on.
Do we really think the initial apostles were the only ones able to share the Gospel? Acts 8:4 records that those who had been scattered went about preaching the word. Later in Acts 11:19-20 we learn they where in Phoenicia, Cyprus and Antioch. They spoke to the Jews first and then men from Cyprus and Cyrene who went to Antioch and began speaking to the Greeks preaching the Lord Jesus Christ.
So here we have evidence that non-apostles can preach and teach just as the apostles did. Why? They're preaching and teaching the same message.
The church grows by people like you and me sharing the Gospel with people we encounter. It happens everyday all around the world.
Praise God that He allows us to share in His Kingdom and to share His glorious offering of forgiveness through His Son Jesus Christ!
1. There is no list of Traditions - or you would post it. No list, no traditions.
2. “The Bible denies that it is sufficient as the complete rule of faith. “
This is simply a misrepresentation of sola scriptura. The inspired Scriptures are completely sufficient for salvation and Christian maturity. There is nothing equal to God’s inspired Word.
“Within Christianity, he counts 33,820 denominations.”
Fantastic! This is good news. It prevents the corruption of the Body that comes from central authority and religious dogma.
“If it is not the church which can determine and authenticate the canon of Scripture who can?”
There was a day, where it was the roman church who “authenticated” the canon. They largely got it right. After the Reformation, this has been revisited with far more detail and authenticated by protestants, correcting earlier errors.
30,000 of them are Protestant denominations, I read. Amazing, isn't it, the diversity of faiths that God implanted.
From Google:
The Eastern Catholic Churches are autonomous, self-governing particular churches in full communion with the Pope. Together with the Latin Church, they make up the Catholic Church as a whole. They preserve many centuries-old Eastern liturgical, devotional, and theological traditions, shared in most cases with the various other Eastern Christian churches with which they were once associated, such as the Eastern Orthodox Church and Oriental Orthodox Church.
The Eastern Orthodox Church, officially called the Orthodox Catholic Church, and also referred to as the Orthodox Church and Orthodoxy, identifies itself as the present-day continuation of the theology and episcopacy established by Jesus Christ through his Apostles. The Orthodox Church is the second largest Christian church in the world, with an estimated 225–300 million adherents,primarily in Eastern Europe (especially Greece and Southeastern Europe), throughout the Middle East and across Russia.
===============================
I'm starting to get cross eyed. Time to shut down and think of beddy-bye.
It's 8:38 P.M., still light and some poor bird is singing outside, TOTALLY confused, NOT knowing that s/he should be in beddy-bye by now.
No, you are wrong for exactly the reasons you state. The very Church that authoritatively selected what books constitute the Bible and what “teaching” was to be rejected must authoritatively interpret scripture. This authority comes from Christ given to Peter to go forth and teach…That is, teach one truth, a revelation from not only the Bible, but from tradition, handed down ritual, forms of worship, and revelation. Christ as the Son of God did not put forth a basis for contradictory teaching. This is an absurd proposition for anyone to make.
Acts 11:15 “As I began to speak, the Holy Spirit came on them as he had come on us at the beginning. 16 Then I remembered what the Lord had said: ‘John baptized with water, but you will be baptized with the Holy Spirit.’ 17 So if God gave them the same gift he gave us who believed in the Lord Jesus Christ, who was I to think that I could stand in God’s way?”
This one notes the difference between Baptism with Water and Baptism with The Holy Spirit:
Acts 8: 14 When the apostles in Jerusalem heard that Samaria had accepted the word of God, they sent Peter and John to Samaria. 15 When they arrived, they prayed for the new believers there that they might receive the Holy Spirit, 16 because the Holy Spirit had not yet come on any of them; they had simply been baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus. 17 Then Peter and John placed their hands on them, and they received the Holy Spirit.
Water is not necessary for Baptism with the Holy Spirit
Acts 1: 5 For John baptized with water, but in a few days you will be baptized with the Holy Spirit.”
6 Then they gathered around him and asked him, “Lord, are you at this time going to restore the kingdom to Israel?”
7 He said to them: “It is not for you to know the times or dates the Father has set by his own authority. 8 But you will receive power when the Holy Spirit comes on you; and you will be my witnesses in Jerusalem, and in all Judea and Samaria, and to the ends of the earth.”
I say this more from experience than reading the scriptures, but I find the scriptures very supporting of my experience.
There is a big difference between being Baptized with the Spirit and being Baptized with Water. The water is merely a metaphor for the cleansing that takes place in order for the Holy Spirit to enter a person. While it is important, it is not the end result desired. Baptism with water is not necessary for Baptism with the Holy Spirit.
” I have heard several folks say they’ve read the same passages several times at’different times and have found something new, every time.”
Very true. Jesus taught in parables as not all have ears to understand. When the Holy Spirit fills you it acts as a translator and all of a sudden the same scriptures have new meaning. Knowing Jesus becomes experiential rather than just theoretical. It becomes based upon knowing which is stronger than believing/faith.
However, there is much power in the scriptures and you must be careful giving it to people who are not ready, lest they take your pearls and turn and devour you. Thanks to God, the Holy Spirit entered me after I died, left my body and returned. So when people ask me how to do what I do when their motive is for power and not for growing spiritually, I merely say to them, “Die and come back and you can do it as well.” That usually keeps them at bay.
My best advice to those who are seeking is to read the Bible and meditate & pray for guidance to learn and follow its teachings. Then the same gifts will be bestowed upon you as the disciples of Jesus. But do not seek the gifts as what becomes the rung on the ladder to pull you up to one level becomes the anchor that holds you back from climbing higher if you attach yourself to the gift as your identity.
I was not a Bible believer when I experienced the Holy Spirit. However the Bible quickly became my operating manual to understand what I had experienced. It’s really profound as all of a sudden your perception of reality and the people around you changes as you begin to perceive from your soul or spirit rather than your physical senses. (Not 100% true statement as your soul/spirit (and other people’s) is also physical when you perceive with the Holy Spirit within you.)
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.