Catholicism vs Protestantism
- Thread starter Roughsoul1991
- Start date
-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
B
I'm not sure what comment you are referring to but a few posts ago I wrote:
I'm willing to discuss the scriptural basis for any belief but I'm not accepting I have to provide a few explicit verses. Often many scriptures have to be used to explain or even infer something that is not explicit. Evidence is sometimes cumulative.
I'm willing to discuss the scriptural basis for any belief but I'm not accepting I have to provide a few explicit verses. Often many scriptures have to be used to explain or even infer something that is not explicit. Evidence is sometimes cumulative.
B
Time for a little light relief. 
And when this letter is read before you, have it read also in the church of the Laodiceans, and you yourselves read the one from Laodicea (Col 4:16).
The Scene – Church of Sola Scriptura, somewhere in Asia Minor, circa 400 AD…
In rushes a dishevelled Salvinus,
“Tychus, that Baptism you are doing this morning; you are not to baptise the baby.”
Tychus: “Why ever not”
Salvinus: “Elder Marcus has just had the official list of what books are in scripture. He’s been up all night checking them out and apparently infant baptism isn’t explicitly mentioned in them.”
Tychus: “But we’ve always baptised infants”
Salvinus: “Not any more apparently”
Tychus: “Where did this official list come from”
Salvinus: “Rome”
Tychus: “Rome! But do we take any notice of Rome?”
Salvinus: “Well not normally, but apparently this list is final, everyone’s accepting it, and Elder Marcus says we ought to go along with it, although he personally would dump the letter of James.”
Tychus: “But we’ve always baptised infants, everyone baptises infants, Paul did when he baptised the jailer’s family, and Peter baptised Cornelius’ family – it’s here in Acts”, takes down scroll and winds through it.
Salvinus: “But it doesn’t explicitly mention infants being baptised”.
Tychus: “Wait, wait, there’s that letter from Paul to the Laodocians. I remember Paul mentions baptising a baby. Let me find it.” Rummages at the back of the scroll cupboard. “Here it is”. Reads, “And I baptised the whole family from Erebus to baby Gallius”
Salvinus: “No good, that letter is not on the official list. The Laodocians didn’t pass it around. We only got a copy because Quintus happened to be there.”
Tychus: “Not pass it around! Why not?”
Salvinus: “Well you know what the Laodicians were like, lazy, lukewarm.”
Tychus: “Can’t we send it to Rome? Get it put in the list?”
Salvinus: “Too late, Marcus says it’s all sealed and finalised. Others may carry on baptising infants but not us. We are strictly Sola Scriptura.”
Tychus: “So no more infant baptisms then for us! And this letter is useless”.
Throws scroll in bin.
Paul’s Lost Letter To The Laodocians
And when this letter is read before you, have it read also in the church of the Laodiceans, and you yourselves read the one from Laodicea (Col 4:16).
The Scene – Church of Sola Scriptura, somewhere in Asia Minor, circa 400 AD…
In rushes a dishevelled Salvinus,
“Tychus, that Baptism you are doing this morning; you are not to baptise the baby.”
Tychus: “Why ever not”
Salvinus: “Elder Marcus has just had the official list of what books are in scripture. He’s been up all night checking them out and apparently infant baptism isn’t explicitly mentioned in them.”
Tychus: “But we’ve always baptised infants”
Salvinus: “Not any more apparently”
Tychus: “Where did this official list come from”
Salvinus: “Rome”
Tychus: “Rome! But do we take any notice of Rome?”
Salvinus: “Well not normally, but apparently this list is final, everyone’s accepting it, and Elder Marcus says we ought to go along with it, although he personally would dump the letter of James.”
Tychus: “But we’ve always baptised infants, everyone baptises infants, Paul did when he baptised the jailer’s family, and Peter baptised Cornelius’ family – it’s here in Acts”, takes down scroll and winds through it.
Salvinus: “But it doesn’t explicitly mention infants being baptised”.
Tychus: “Wait, wait, there’s that letter from Paul to the Laodocians. I remember Paul mentions baptising a baby. Let me find it.” Rummages at the back of the scroll cupboard. “Here it is”. Reads, “And I baptised the whole family from Erebus to baby Gallius”
Salvinus: “No good, that letter is not on the official list. The Laodocians didn’t pass it around. We only got a copy because Quintus happened to be there.”
Tychus: “Not pass it around! Why not?”
Salvinus: “Well you know what the Laodicians were like, lazy, lukewarm.”
Tychus: “Can’t we send it to Rome? Get it put in the list?”
Salvinus: “Too late, Marcus says it’s all sealed and finalised. Others may carry on baptising infants but not us. We are strictly Sola Scriptura.”
Tychus: “So no more infant baptisms then for us! And this letter is useless”.
Throws scroll in bin.
-
1
- Show all
The God-inspired books/writings of our current Bible are scripture. (2 Tim. 3:16-17, 2 Peter 1:20-21) Scripture does not evolve whereas traditions of men do.
The following is an excerpt from biblestudytools.com that addresses further your question:
"What is Canon?
Spurred by these dilemmas the church developed its list of canonical books. The following are guidelines for accepting a book into the New Testament:
1. Was the book written by a prophet of God?
2. Was the writer confirmed by acts of God?
3. Does the message tell the truth about God?
4. Did it come with the power of God?
5. Was it accepted by God’s people?
These are the marks of canonicity. “Canon” is a Greek word meaning “rule” or “measuring stick.” These five questions are used to determine which books “measure up” to being labeled divinely inspired. They exhibit “the marks of canonicity.”
Turn to a Bible’s table of contents and you’ll see that each of the books was written by either a prophet or apostle (Ephesians 2:20), or by someone with a direct relationship to one.
Miracles were the means by which God confirmed the authority of his spokesmen. In Exodus 4, Moses was given miraculous powers to confirm his call. In 2 Corinthians 12:12, Paul teaches that the mark of an apostle is “signs, wonders and miracles.”
Truth cannot contradict itself, so agreement with the other books of Scripture was only logical. As was historical accuracy. If the facts of a book were inaccurate, it couldn’t have been from God.
The inner witness of the Spirit was equally important. A key question these early Christians asked was, When we read this, is there an inner sense from God that what is written is right and true?
Initial acceptance by people to whom the work was addressed was crucial. What was the original audience’s sense? Did they accept the book as an authoritative word from God? Daniel, who lived within a few years of Jeremiah, called Jeremiah’s book “Scripture” in Daniel 9:2. Paul called the Gospel of Luke “Scripture” in 1 Timothy 5:18. Peter affirmed that Paul’s letters were “Scripture” in 2 Peter 3:16."
The following is an excerpt from biblestudytools.com that addresses further your question:
"What is Canon?
Spurred by these dilemmas the church developed its list of canonical books. The following are guidelines for accepting a book into the New Testament:
1. Was the book written by a prophet of God?
2. Was the writer confirmed by acts of God?
3. Does the message tell the truth about God?
4. Did it come with the power of God?
5. Was it accepted by God’s people?
These are the marks of canonicity. “Canon” is a Greek word meaning “rule” or “measuring stick.” These five questions are used to determine which books “measure up” to being labeled divinely inspired. They exhibit “the marks of canonicity.”
Turn to a Bible’s table of contents and you’ll see that each of the books was written by either a prophet or apostle (Ephesians 2:20), or by someone with a direct relationship to one.
Miracles were the means by which God confirmed the authority of his spokesmen. In Exodus 4, Moses was given miraculous powers to confirm his call. In 2 Corinthians 12:12, Paul teaches that the mark of an apostle is “signs, wonders and miracles.”
Truth cannot contradict itself, so agreement with the other books of Scripture was only logical. As was historical accuracy. If the facts of a book were inaccurate, it couldn’t have been from God.
The inner witness of the Spirit was equally important. A key question these early Christians asked was, When we read this, is there an inner sense from God that what is written is right and true?
Initial acceptance by people to whom the work was addressed was crucial. What was the original audience’s sense? Did they accept the book as an authoritative word from God? Daniel, who lived within a few years of Jeremiah, called Jeremiah’s book “Scripture” in Daniel 9:2. Paul called the Gospel of Luke “Scripture” in 1 Timothy 5:18. Peter affirmed that Paul’s letters were “Scripture” in 2 Peter 3:16."
One could conclude from your comments that you neglect to even read the answers provided that contradict your belief. This was addressed in Post 2654:
"Of course, there were many deeds and sayings of the Lord not recorded in Scripture. Nonetheless, Scripture is the authoritative record that Holy God has given His people. We do not have a single sentence that is authoritatively from the Lord, outside of what is in the written word. To appeal to a tradition for authority, when Holy God did not give it, is futile. The idea that somehow sayings and events from the Lord have been recorded in tradition is simply not true." Excerpt from Christiananswers
What exactly is it that you do not understand about what causes a person to be found a liar?
"Every word of God is pure: he is a shield unto them that put their trust in him.
Add thou not unto his words, lest he reprove thee, and thou be found a liar." Prov 30:5:6
"Of course, there were many deeds and sayings of the Lord not recorded in Scripture. Nonetheless, Scripture is the authoritative record that Holy God has given His people. We do not have a single sentence that is authoritatively from the Lord, outside of what is in the written word. To appeal to a tradition for authority, when Holy God did not give it, is futile. The idea that somehow sayings and events from the Lord have been recorded in tradition is simply not true." Excerpt from Christiananswers
What exactly is it that you do not understand about what causes a person to be found a liar?
"Every word of God is pure: he is a shield unto them that put their trust in him.
Add thou not unto his words, lest he reprove thee, and thou be found a liar." Prov 30:5:6
-
1
- Show all
In order to understand what Jesus meant by His words in Luke 24:45-49 one must search out what new information concerning repentance and remission of sin was presented beginning in Jerusalem.
We know that John the Baptist introduced the concept of water baptism of repentance for the remission of sin. (Luke 3:3-4) However, one’s sins could not actually be remitted until after Jesus’ death, burial and resurrection.
Peter’s instruction pertaining to repentance and water baptism differed in only one way. Water baptism was to be done in the name of the Lord Jesus: “Repent, and be baptized everyone of you in the name Jesus Christ FOR this remission of sin…” This amendment to water baptism as introduced by John the Baptist was presented to mankind on the Day of Pentecost in Jerusalem. Jesus said this message would be preached AMONG ALL NATIONS beginning at Jerusalem.
Jesus’ words made it clear that without His death, burial and resurrection water baptism was just an empty ritual. However, obeying the command and submitting to it in the name of the one who was crucified for you brought about a spiritual reality where an individual’s sins were remitted/washing away.
Notice how Jesus concludes His statement. He said He would send the promise of the Holy Ghost. (the gift)
This entire scenario points directly to what Peter instructed those to do on the day the New Testament church was birthed, and makes it clear that it is still a required of everyone. Jesus said the message would be preached among all nations.
Acts 2:38-41
‘Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.
For the promise is unto you, and to your children, and to all that are afar off, even as many as the Lord our God shall call.
And with many other words did he testify and exhort, saying, Save yourselves from this untoward generation.
Then they that gladly received his word were baptized: and the same day there were added unto them about three thousand souls.
We know that John the Baptist introduced the concept of water baptism of repentance for the remission of sin. (Luke 3:3-4) However, one’s sins could not actually be remitted until after Jesus’ death, burial and resurrection.
Peter’s instruction pertaining to repentance and water baptism differed in only one way. Water baptism was to be done in the name of the Lord Jesus: “Repent, and be baptized everyone of you in the name Jesus Christ FOR this remission of sin…” This amendment to water baptism as introduced by John the Baptist was presented to mankind on the Day of Pentecost in Jerusalem. Jesus said this message would be preached AMONG ALL NATIONS beginning at Jerusalem.
Jesus’ words made it clear that without His death, burial and resurrection water baptism was just an empty ritual. However, obeying the command and submitting to it in the name of the one who was crucified for you brought about a spiritual reality where an individual’s sins were remitted/washing away.
Notice how Jesus concludes His statement. He said He would send the promise of the Holy Ghost. (the gift)
This entire scenario points directly to what Peter instructed those to do on the day the New Testament church was birthed, and makes it clear that it is still a required of everyone. Jesus said the message would be preached among all nations.
Acts 2:38-41
‘Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.
For the promise is unto you, and to your children, and to all that are afar off, even as many as the Lord our God shall call.
And with many other words did he testify and exhort, saying, Save yourselves from this untoward generation.
Then they that gladly received his word were baptized: and the same day there were added unto them about three thousand souls.
B
Who wrote the gospel of Mark? Answer from scripture only.
Who wrote the letter to the Hebrews? Answer from scripture only.
Etc. etc. for most books.
The table of contents is a man made tradition.
Where does scripture tell us what books belong to scripture.
1. Was the book written by a prophet of God? Even if you know who the author of a book was how do you know he/she was a prophet of God?
2. Was the writer confirmed by acts of God? What acts of God confirm an author if you do not know who wrote it?
3. Does the message tell the truth about God? How do you know it is the truth about God?
4. Did it come with the power of God? How do you know it comes by the power of God?
5. Was it accepted by God’s people? Who are God's people that accepted a particular book?
Do you realise the canon of the NT took centuries to be finalised (until the end of the 4th century).
Who wrote the letter to the Hebrews? Answer from scripture only.
Etc. etc. for most books.
The table of contents is a man made tradition.
Where does scripture tell us what books belong to scripture.
1. Was the book written by a prophet of God? Even if you know who the author of a book was how do you know he/she was a prophet of God?
2. Was the writer confirmed by acts of God? What acts of God confirm an author if you do not know who wrote it?
3. Does the message tell the truth about God? How do you know it is the truth about God?
4. Did it come with the power of God? How do you know it comes by the power of God?
5. Was it accepted by God’s people? Who are God's people that accepted a particular book?
Do you realise the canon of the NT took centuries to be finalised (until the end of the 4th century).
I agree, though I suspect that we mean very different things.
I hold that there is no authoritative word of God outside of Scripture; that is, that "revelation" outside of Scripture is not for everybody. Any extrabiblical revelation is at best for a small group of people such as a single congregation or family, and more commonly, for an individual.
I reject the idea that there are writings inspired by the Holy Spirit and intended by Him to be authoritative that are not part of the "protestant" canon of 66 books.
I hold that there is no authoritative word of God outside of Scripture; that is, that "revelation" outside of Scripture is not for everybody. Any extrabiblical revelation is at best for a small group of people such as a single congregation or family, and more commonly, for an individual.
I reject the idea that there are writings inspired by the Holy Spirit and intended by Him to be authoritative that are not part of the "protestant" canon of 66 books.
-
2
- Show all
sounds like we have the potential for a great discussion!
well, if they said that, the magisterium would still have to be expressed in practice through documents from councils and popes.
well, we can talk about what you and I say.
I can see that final authority is the central issue.
but what all are you disagreeing with?
do you disagree that the Bible is a set of words?
do you disagree that what we are talking about here is beliefs, attitudes, and actions based on what we read in the Bible?
and that happens as we read the Bible?
well, the Eastern Orthodox people that I know are very clear that it was the Western church under the bishop of Rome who split from the rest of the church.
of course, they pray for unity, that the pope will come back.
I was speaking from the Orthodox point of view.
of course they view themselves as the church,
if they didn't, they would become something else.
could you please explain how, in your view, the final authority works in a step-by-step fashion?
or, if you have done this already and I missed it, could you please point me to that post?
well, if they said that, the magisterium would still have to be expressed in practice through documents from councils and popes.
well, we can talk about what you and I say.
I can see that final authority is the central issue.
but what all are you disagreeing with?
do you disagree that the Bible is a set of words?
do you disagree that what we are talking about here is beliefs, attitudes, and actions based on what we read in the Bible?
and that happens as we read the Bible?
well, the Eastern Orthodox people that I know are very clear that it was the Western church under the bishop of Rome who split from the rest of the church.
of course, they pray for unity, that the pope will come back.
I was speaking from the Orthodox point of view.
of course they view themselves as the church,
if they didn't, they would become something else.
could you please explain how, in your view, the final authority works in a step-by-step fashion?
or, if you have done this already and I missed it, could you please point me to that post?
Sadly when one refuses to accept the bible as the final authority concerning Godly principles, discussion is pretty much futile. However, since faith comes by hearing and hearing by the word of God I will express the truth again in hopes that a light will go off.
Jesus said to use a name during baptism. (Matt 28:19) And, the biblical record consistently shows the use of the name of the Lord Jesus. (Acts 2:38, 8:12-17, 10;44-48, 19:2-6, 22:16)
The word itself clarifies that God's truth concerning any given subject is stated in more than one place in His Word. Truth can only be understood through the process of gathering all scriptures pertaining to a topic such as water baptism, etc. in order to see the whole picture:
"But if he will not hear thee, then take with thee one or two more, that in the mouth of two or three witnesses every word may be established." Matt 18:16
"Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth." 2 Tim 2:15
"All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:
That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works." 2 Tim 3:16-17
Jesus said to use a name during baptism. (Matt 28:19) And, the biblical record consistently shows the use of the name of the Lord Jesus. (Acts 2:38, 8:12-17, 10;44-48, 19:2-6, 22:16)
The word itself clarifies that God's truth concerning any given subject is stated in more than one place in His Word. Truth can only be understood through the process of gathering all scriptures pertaining to a topic such as water baptism, etc. in order to see the whole picture:
"But if he will not hear thee, then take with thee one or two more, that in the mouth of two or three witnesses every word may be established." Matt 18:16
"Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth." 2 Tim 2:15
"All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:
That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works." 2 Tim 3:16-17
B
Accepting the Bible as the final authority is not itself biblical.
The Bible never claims to be the final authority.
You keep recycling the same refuted quotes. Repeating errors tdoes not make them true.
But you are not accepting that the Bible is the final authority yourself.
The Bible is the word of God and God said "Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit,"
That was the name that Jesus himself said to use when baptising. How much clearer do you want it to be?
The Bible never claims to be the final authority.
You keep recycling the same refuted quotes. Repeating errors tdoes not make them true.
But you are not accepting that the Bible is the final authority yourself.
The Bible is the word of God and God said "Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit,"
That was the name that Jesus himself said to use when baptising. How much clearer do you want it to be?
-
1
- Show all
My brother bede, if it about something in the Bible like heaven or hell, we believe before we see it.
We talking about, is apostle Paul able te hear and talk to us like abraham talk to the rich man?
All we need to do is talk to him and as loving apostle, he will talk back to us if he can.
I love my son, if he call me I answer, I talk back to him. Why apostle Paul never talk to me? Is He ever talk to you?
We talking about, is apostle Paul able te hear and talk to us like abraham talk to the rich man?
All we need to do is talk to him and as loving apostle, he will talk back to us if he can.
I love my son, if he call me I answer, I talk back to him. Why apostle Paul never talk to me? Is He ever talk to you?