|
|
Post by Cepha on May 26, 2009 9:06:45 GMT -5
Teresa- My final authority is the Bible, not myself. Like I said, discipleing orally was appropriate until the Bible was completed. But now, we no longer should play telephone but read, believe, and teach the Living Word of God. "Which" bible though? The Holy Bible? The King James bible? The New International Versioni bible? All are different. Only The Holy Bible is the real Bible. If you're not reading The Holy Bible, then you are being led by a man-made version based on The Holy Bible. You shouldn't put your faith in a book for ultimate authority. Only The Holy Spirit guides one to truth (not paper and ink). |
|
|
|
Post by Cepha on May 26, 2009 9:07:35 GMT -5
Teresa- My final authority is the Bible, not myself. Like I said, discipleing orally was appropriate until the Bible was completed. But now, we no longer should play telephone but read, believe, and teach the Living Word of God. By the way, The Bible itself states that it is The Church that upholds The Trugh, not The Bible. So, why isn't The Church your "pillar of the truth"? |
|
|
|
Post by Cepha on May 26, 2009 9:08:14 GMT -5
Which Bible do you use Emily? I hope that you don't use the one that has had entire books removed by the "reformers"? Even if you use the whole Bible, do you think that your interpretation of it is correct? LOL! There you go again! My sister!  |
|
|
|
Post by Cepha on May 26, 2009 9:10:28 GMT -5
I use the KJV, and I do not interpret it. I rightly divide the word of Truth, and put precept upon precept, line upon line, here a little and there a little. Of course it bothers me that Christians choose to interpret the BIble on their own...thus messing things up. All Believers are one. We all want to serve Christ and will all end up in the same place. The Bible is the Word of God...why wouldn't it be my final authority? The HS helps us understand God's Word, so I guess in a way it is part of the final authority (God and what God says). Nothing the HS says will be in disagreement with the Word. The "Church" (I'm assuming you mean the Catholic Church) has and does mess up all the time.........if it is protected by God, it wouldn't... Why don't you use The Holy Bible? And, The Holy Spirit is not "part of" final authority "in a way", it is THE AUTHORITY. What are you learning at church? That a "book" saves definitely and that The Holy Spirit contributes to helping out? That's idolatry. That's completely backwards Em. It is The Holy Spirit that reveals truth when you read it in scripture (whether it be The Bible or just a passage). |
|
|
|
Post by Cepha on May 26, 2009 9:11:12 GMT -5
[/b] [/quote]There are many false teachings within the RCC.[/quote] Easier listed than alleged, don't you think? List them. |
|
|
|
Post by Cepha on May 26, 2009 9:12:07 GMT -5
Are you tired? Is that your only rebuttal? You have said that time after time but never talked about much besides "the millennium". If we say we are "Bible believing Christians" yet disagree with you, you would have absolutely no way to prove who was right. We do believe the Bible and take it literally, so there is absolutely no way for you to accuse someone of having false teachings if you have no way to prove that your teachings are true. Watchman, is there one person that you know that agrees 100% with you on all your interpretations of the Bible? My wife ;D However I do not claim to be infallible as does the RCC. The millennium is not the only thing they are wrong about. The perpetual virginity of Mary is another and there are many more, and it can be proving incorrect through scripture. Further many ''Bible believing'' christian believe many thing that are contrary to the Bible not just the RCC, but for you to claim the RCC is infallible is simply not true. Jesus claimed The Church would be infallible. Want the scripture? |
|
|
|
Post by Cepha on May 26, 2009 9:13:01 GMT -5
Most non-Catholic sects declare that the Holy Spirit is 'teaching' them the truth. However, there can be only one truth. Since the advent of Sola Scriptura and individual interpretation of Scripture, how can the Holy Spirit be in each of the thousands of sects, teaching all of them opposing viewpoints? It is to be noted that all of the following denominations teach from the same Bible, so why the differences in teaching?
1. How can the Holy Spirit tell the Lutherans the Eucharist is the true presence of Christ, and then tell the Baptists it is only a symbol?
2. How can the Holy Spirit tell the Methodists it is alright to have female ministers, and then tell the Baptists it is unbiblical?
3. How can the Holy Spirit tell the Seventh Day Adventists that Saturday is the day of worship, and then tell the Presbyterians the day of worship is Sunday and not Saturday?
4. How can the Holy Spirit tell the Lutherans that the Blessed Virgin Mary was and remains always virgin, and then tell the Baptists she had other children?
5. How can the Holy Spirit tell the Baptists, 'once saved always saved', and then tell the Church of Christ that Sola Fides is unscriptural?
6. How can the Holy Spirit tell Episcopalians to baptize infants and then tell Pentecostals infant baptism is invalid?
7. How can the Holy Spirit tell Mormons that the Holy Trinity is three separate persons, and then tell Methodists the Trinity is three persons in one GOD? home.inreach.com/bstanley/sorigin.htmExactly. Catholics only have "1" truth. Protestants have "33,000+" truth(s). Which one is right since they all can't be right? |
|
|
|
Post by Cepha on May 26, 2009 9:13:54 GMT -5
13But when he, the Spirit of truth, comes, he will guide you into all truth. (John 16) You see, Jesus said that the Holy Spirit would guide the Apostles into all truth. I'm not the one claiming that there would be an infallible Church, Jesus did. According to that, Watchman and his wife must be the only ones who The Holy Spirit is guiding.  |
|
|
|
Post by Cepha on May 26, 2009 9:16:39 GMT -5
John 14:26 But the Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, he shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you.
1st John 2:27 But the anointing which ye have received of him abideth in you, and ye need not that any man teach you: but as the same anointing teacheth you of all things, and is truth, and is no lie, and even as it hath taught you, ye shall abide in him.I need not that man teach me anything, but I have the Spirit of God in me that reveals to me His truth. You do need men to teach you. Even when Jesus walked The Earth, He didn't multiply Himself into 12 other Jesuses, but commissioned 12 other men to do it and they in turn commissioned other (The Church Fathers) and so on. And God always reveals The Truth to every living human being on earth...it's up to them to accept it as is, water it down to their own capacities to believe or to reject it. Remember, The Word of God is written on everyman's heart. |
|
|
|
Post by Cepha on May 26, 2009 9:17:54 GMT -5
13But when he, the Spirit of truth, comes, he will guide you into all truth. (John 16) You see, Jesus said that the Holy Spirit would guide the Apostles into all truth. I'm not the one claiming that there would be an infallible Church, Jesus did. That church is not the RCC, so where is this infallible church. Not according to The Church Fathers that you claim to believe in. Are you now going to deny Polycarp? Ireneaus? Ignatius? All whom literally state that the one true Church was founded in Rome and that Saint Peter was the First Pope? |
|
|
|
Post by Cepha on May 26, 2009 9:18:49 GMT -5
Really? So the only one that agrees with your doctrines is your wife? Do you believe that you may be wrong about certain interpretions of the Bible? I would not be so vain as to believe that I could not be wrong. However if I knew I was wrong about something then I would change my view. What I do is stick to what I can confirm with scripture, and what God confirms in my spirit. That's the clincher..."how" would you know if you were wrong with not outside authority? That's why God created The Church...to keep men from leading themselves. ;D |
|
|
|
Post by Cepha on May 26, 2009 9:21:05 GMT -5
It is the same Church that brought us the infallible Bible. They very well may have, that proves nothing. Many of their teaching directly contradict scripture, so either the Bible is not infallible or the RCC is not infallible. I am putting my money with the Bible. No, many of our teachings directly contradict your ability to receive them as truth. Your inability to accept these teachings don't make them true. It makes your inability to accept them faulty. You're putting your money on The Bible created by The Catholic Church? Ok. So, we're right enough to create The Holy Bible, but then God took away our wisdom after that? God "used" The Catholic Church then dumped it to the side to be ravaged by the wolves of deceipt? That makes God sound like a user...but that is what He has to be in order for you to be right. |
|
|
|
Post by Cepha on May 26, 2009 9:23:18 GMT -5
You have twisted my words, I never said I knew I was wrong. I said ''I would not be so vain as to say I couldn't be''. However I do not care what other non catholics teach, they are wrong on many things, and I do know this for a fact, because scripture proves them wrong. Furthermore Catholics too can be proven wrong with scripture. So since I cannot trust man, I will lean on God and only God for my understanding. Being a non-denominational Christian (which is an oxymoron becuase non-denominational Christianity by "not" being Catholic makes it Denominational anyway) is like being an Independant these days...they can rant against both Democratsa and Republicans without ever takine a position. I'm still waiting for you to prove what "sanctified" meant in the scripture Paul used if not "holy". If it's so easy, why haven't you proven what it meant? |
|
|
|
Post by Cepha on May 26, 2009 9:25:07 GMT -5
No, they only contradict your private interpretation of scripture (and probably your misunderstandings of the Church's teachings). If the Catholic Church is not infallible, then the Bible is not infallible. The Church not only wrote the New Testament, but also decided which books should be included in it. The Church also preserved the Bible from the time it was written until the present day. If you say the Church is not infallible, then you would be saying that the entire Church was left without the complete truth until the Bible was canonized. You would also be denying the words of the Lord that the gates of Hell would not prevail against the Church. And that the Church is the "pillar and foundation of truth". You are wrong on many side of this post. The Bible plainly states that Joseph did not know his wife until Jesus was born. It is not a [private interpretation to realize he knew her after Jesus was born it is common since that a child should have, and take indoctrination to not realize. Further more I do not believe the church was fallible until the Bible was form. I believe the RCC is fallible. I also do not discount the words of Christ who said the gates of Hell shall not prevail against His church. I know how it ends. It ends with Satan, Hell, and all who reject Christ being cast into the Lake of fire, and God's true church, the multitude of believers from all time, and all denoms ect... living with Christ in New Jerusalem. Teresa, He doesn't accept the definition of the word "until" as it is defined. To him, it doesn't mean "before". I asked him for proof that it means something besides "before", but I never got it. So, I asked him for a scripture that states they had relations or that Joseph "knew" Mary after Jesus was born. Never got one scripture. Not one. None. Therefore, the belief is proven to be "unbiblical". |
|
|
|
Post by alfie on May 26, 2009 9:25:11 GMT -5
By being a Catholic you avoid all personal responsibility for your spiritual welfare because you blindly follow the teachings of your church. That is just plain scary. A Catholic will stand before a Holy God at the white throne judgement for idolatry because he worshiped a wafer instead of the true God so don't think you can fall back and use the excuse that the Roman Catholic Church told me it was real body of Christ. It's all on your hands. In the book of Revelations 3:3 it says "Blessed is he who reads and those who hear the words of this prophecy , and keep those things which are written in it; for the time is near. The book of Revelation was sent to the seven churches mentioned in the book. I find it funny that Catholics don't think that copies of the various books of the Bible weren't made for all of the churches that the Apostles founded. There were many copies of the Old Testament made by the Jews and the Old Testament is larger than the New Testament. It wouldn't take as long to make copies of the books from the New Testament to give to each church. |
|
|
|
Post by Cepha on May 26, 2009 9:28:09 GMT -5
The Roman Catholic Church teaches things that Jesus never commanded them to teach. How do you know this? Only The Church would know what Jesus commanded them. Don't forget, not everything that Jesus did is literally written in The Holy Bible are we to ignore these orally passed on traditional teachings because their not in The Holy Bible? John 22:25And there are also many other things which Jesus did, which if they were written in detail,
I suppose that even the world itself would not contain the books that would be written. |
|
|
|
Post by Cepha on May 26, 2009 9:28:43 GMT -5
I don't think agreeding on certain issues shuld be the main focus. All born-again Bible-believing Christians are one...simply because they love God and His Word and want to follow it to the best of their ability. The rest is just pety stuff that should be worked out in time. Now you're really talking like a true Christian.  |
|
|
|
Post by Cepha on May 26, 2009 9:34:57 GMT -5
By being a Catholic you avoid all personal responsibility for your spiritual welfare because you blindly follow the teachings of your church. That is just plain scary. That's the complete opposite of Catholic teaching that stresses presonal responsibility and something I bet you've never heard taught in your church called "culpability". It's Protestantism that believes in OSAS, not us. And, Jesus said whoever doesn't follow the Church, rejects not only Him, but God too. I'll follow Jesus' instructions to "not" reject The Apostles and their teachings. Oh, you dont' believe in John 6 (the whole chapter) then. I guess you reject The Word of God. Ok. Jesus said consecrated unleavened bread (that which you refer to as a wafer) is the body of Christ. All we do is follow what He said in The Bible. Do you reject The Word of God when it says the following: Matthew 26:26-29 (King James Version) 26And as they were eating, Jesus took bread, and blessed it, and brake it, and gave it to the disciples, and said, Take, eat; this is my body. Was Jesus lieing? Is there some "other" meaning to the consecrated unleavened bread being his body? If there is, please list it. |
|
|
|
Post by Cepha on May 26, 2009 9:38:17 GMT -5
[]I agree that the body of Christ was visible in the first century, but that Church was not the RCC. I also agree with emily that the church is still visible today, you just have to know what you are looking for to see it. Ahhh yes, the dissappearing "church" theory. How could The Church be like a shining beacon on a hill, then dissappear?  |
|
|
|
Post by watchman on May 26, 2009 9:39:13 GMT -5
13But when he, the Spirit of truth, comes, he will guide you into all truth. (John 16) You see, Jesus said that the Holy Spirit would guide the Apostles into all truth. I'm not the one claiming that there would be an infallible Church, Jesus did. According to that, Watchman and his wife must be the only ones who The Holy Spirit is guiding. I guide my wife, just as scriptures I should. |
|
