Quote:

---

Originally Posted by De Maria

I believe you've misunderstood what that Catholic source said. Either that or you deliberately misrepresented what that Catholic source said.

---

I know that this must be rough on you - finding out that what you have been taught is not true, but before making false accusations, why not check it out for yourself. BTW, I have a great book written by a Catholic scholar on the Catholic decisions regarding the canon and the addition of the 7 books.

Quote:

---

Its hard for me to believe that a Catholic source worth its weight does not know that the Latin Vulgate produced by SAINT Jerome included within its pages the 73 books of the Catholic Canon.

---

Maybe once again you are mixing up the inclusion of reference material with your personal assumption that inclusion means that it was accepted as canonical. Check out the facts for yourself, but be prepared for some discomfort. If you are not prepared to be challenged, you may wish to avoid checking things out. It may be too much of a shock to your system!

BTW, perhaps you failed to note that the Catholic Encyclopedia did not stop with Jerome, but traced the events right through to the Council of Trent when the decision to add the books was made.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by De Maria

Not at all. I am simply stating that you have misunderstood what he wrote. Either that or you are twisting the meaning of his words, something which you have been prone to do in our discussions. I can point to several occasions where you have twisted the meaning of my words.

---

I know that it is rough on you to have anon-Catholic showing you things from Catholic sources that you did not know exist, but that is no reason to make false accusations.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

We are told in various ways by Eusebius that Constantine, in order to recommend the new religion to the heathen, transferred into it the outward ornaments to which they had been accustomed in their own. It is not necessary to go into a subject which the diligence of Protestant writers has made familiar to most of us. The use of temples, and those dedicated to the particular saints, and ornamented on occasion with branches of trees, incense, lamps, and candles; votive offerings on recovery from illness, holy water, asylums, holy days and seasons, use of calendars, proces­sions, blessings on the fields, sacerdotal vestments, the tonsure, the ring in marriage, turning to the East, images at a later date, perhaps the ecclesiastical chant and the Kyrie Eleison are all of pagan origin, and sanctified by adoption into the Church.
(Source: An Essay On The Development Of Christian Doctrine)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Quote:

---

I don't see where he says that Constantine started the new religion.

---

I highlighted for you to make it easy for you to read!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tj3

I know that it is rough on you to have anon-Catholic showing you things from Catholic sources that you did not know exist, but that is no reason to make false accusations.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

We are told in various ways by Eusebius that Constantine, in order to recommend the new religion to the heathen, transferred into it the outward ornaments to which they had been accustomed in their own. It is not necessary to go into a subject which the diligence of Protestant writers has made familiar to most of us. The use of temples, and those dedicated to the particular saints, and ornamented on occasion with branches of trees, incense, lamps, and candles; votive offerings on recovery from illness, holy water, asylums, holy days and seasons, use of calendars, proces­sions, blessings on the fields, sacerdotal vestments, the tonsure, the ring in marriage, turning to the East, images at a later date, perhaps the ecclesiastical chant and the Kyrie Eleison are all of pagan origin, and sanctified by adoption into the Church.
(Source: An Essay On The Development Of Christian Doctrine)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



I highlighted for you to make it easy for you to read!

---

You highlighted the words "new religion". That doesn't say that St. Constantine created a new religion but that he recommended it.

In order to recommend the new religion to the heathen,

So please, try again.

Sincerely,

De Maria

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by De Maria

You highlighted the words "new religion". That doesn't say that St. Constantine created a new religion but that he recommended it.

in order to recommend the new religion to the heathen,

So please, try again.

---

It was a new religion - that is all that is necessary. That in context with the rest of the passage, as we as the historical record makes it clear.

I don't need to try again.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tj3

It was a new religion - that is all that is necessary. That in context with the rest of the passage, as we as the historical record makes it clear.

I don't need to try again.

---

You do if you want to be accurate. But if you simply want to argue and don't care about the truth, then have it your way.

Correct, the Catholic Church was a new religion IN ROME. But not a religion created by St. Constantine which is what you alleged.

The fact of the matter is, and if you had paid attention in history class you would know, that St. Constantine, the Emperor of Rome, did away with the OLD Roman religion of "Emperor Worship" and recommended the NEW religion of Jesus Christ which was taught by the Catholic Church.

Sincerely,

De Maria

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by De Maria

You do if you want to be accurate. But if you simply want to argue and don't care about the truth, then have it your way.

---

Seems to me that is the approach that you are taking since you take a couple of words out of context and then declare your decree as to how the rest of us should understand it, despite what history tells us.

Quote:

---

Correct, the Catholic Church was a new religion IN ROME. But not a religion created by St. Constantine which is what you alleged.

---

I know that this may be more difficult to go through if you have not studied what happened with Constantine and the church in 325, but please at least read the whole statement from your Cardinal about how Constantine brought the pagan practices from the pagan Roman religion into the church.

Did you know that Constantine was the high priest of the pagan Roman religion? Did you know that the high priest was called the "Pontifex Maximus" or "Pontiff" for short? Who do you think holds that office today!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by De Maria

You do if you want to be accurate. But if you simply want to argue and don't care about the truth, then have it your way.

---

What I find most amusing is the use of Newman... a man who completely rejected the heresy of Protestantism and the foolishness of "sola scriptura".

When Newman believed the Church began is of no real consequence to me... I prefer to look to sources a bit closer to the nascent Church and Nicea for that... and all evidence (Scriptural and historical from the ECF's) show a church that has a sacramental ecclesiology and is centered around a hierarchy of Bishops who have final authority on doctrine.


Peace be with you.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ScottRC

What I find most amusing is the use of Newman.... a man who completely rejected the heresy of Protestantism and the foolishness of "sola scriptura".

---

I am not a protestant, but protestantism comes a whole lot closer to Biblical Christianity than the errors of Roman Catholicism.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tj3

Seems to me that is the approach that you are taking since you take a couple of words out of context and then declare your decree as to how the rest of us should understand it, despite what history tells us.



I know that this may be more difficult to go through if you have not studied what happened with Constantine and the church in 325, but please at least read the whole statement from your Cardinal about how Constantine brought the pagan practices from the pagan Roman religion into the church.

Did you know that Constantine was the high priest of the pagan Roman religion?

---

No. St. Constantine was not a priest at all but the monarch of the Roman Empire.

Quote:

---

Did you know that the high priest was called the "Pontifex Maximus" or "Pontiff" for short? Who do you think holds that office today!

---

The Pontiff or Pope, is the Vicar of Christ, successor of Peter who was placed there by Jesus Christ precisely to be the visible head of His Church. Why do you think He named him Rock?

Have you not noticed that in Scripture, there is only one Rock and that Rock is Christ?

So, when Jesus Christ named Simon, Peter, which means Rock, He was signifying that Peter would rule in His stead. This is not something new. God did it before when He sent Moses in His stead to rule over Pharoa:

Exodus 7 1 And the Lord said to Moses: Behold I have appointed thee the God of Pharao: and Aaron thy brother shall be thy prophet.

That is why God covered Moses in the cloud:
Exodus 19 9 The Lord said to him: Lo, now will I come to thee in the darkness of a cloud, that the people may hear me speaking to thee, and may believe thee for ever. And Moses told the words of the people to the Lord.

And therefore people came to Moses to know God's will:
Exodus 18 15 And Moses answered him: The people come to me to seek the judgment of God.

And that is precisely the role that the Pope and the Church play for us today.

Sincerely,

De Maria

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by De Maria

No. St. Constantine was not a priest at all but the monarch of the Roman Empire.

---

Then you have not studied history of the Roman Empire. I also provided you a link which apparently you chose not to check out. Denying the facts does not change reality.

Quote:

---

The Pontiff or Pope, is the Vicar of Christ, successor of Peter who was placed there by Jesus Christ precisely to be the visible head of His Church. Why do you think He named him Rock?

---

Jesus is the Rock. Scripture says so. Peter was a Stone. That is explicitly stated in scripture - references were given earlier. Maybe you ignored those also.

Quote:

---

Have you not noticed that in Scripture, there is only one Rock and that Rock is Christ?

---

This is what I told you earlier. If you know this, certainly you realize the blasphemy of claiming Peter to the Rock.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by De Maria

In the meantime, I find the three prong Catholic Tradition is confirmed in Scripture:

First we are instructed to listen to the Church:

Matthew 18:17
And if he shall neglect to hear them, tell it unto the church: but if he neglect to hear the church, let him be unto thee as an heathen man and a publican.
De Maria

---

The church would be the balance to reflect righteousness in judgement of right and wrong when needed. In other words if a righteous man needed help in showing right from the wrong, he then would ask the church to confirm the righteousness of his action or what is spoken.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by De Maria

Two, we are instructed that the Word of God is passed on orally:
1 Thessalonians 2:13
For this cause also thank we God without ceasing, because, when ye received the word of God which ye heard of us, ye received it not as the word of men, but as it is in truth, the word of God, which effectually worketh also in you that believe.
De Maria

---

Amen to that.. Ye receive the Word of God that they teach or minister with and in Truth

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by De Maria

As well as by Scripture, and therefore it follows; three, that we keep traditions by word and scripture.
2 Thessalonians 2:15
Therefore, brethren, stand fast, and hold the traditions which ye have been taught, whether by word, or our epistle.

Perhaps we could analyze these Scriptures to see whether or not they contradict the notion that Scripture is the only standard for Christian doctrine.

Sincerely,

De Maria

---

2 Thessalonians 2:15 Therefore, brethren, stand fast, and hold the traditions which ye have been taught, whether by word, or our epistle.

Traditions = a giving over which is done by word of mouth or in writing, i.e. tradition by instruction, narrative, precept, etc. a) objectively, that which is delivered, the substance of a teaching b) of the body of precepts, esp. ritual, which in the opinion of the later Jews were orally delivered by Moses and orally transmitted in unbroken succession to subsequent generations, which precepts, both illustrating and expanding the written law, as they did were to be obeyed with equal reverence

Whether by word = 1) of speech a) a word, uttered by a living voice, embodies a conception or idea b) what someone has said 1) a word 2) the sayings of God 3) decree, mandate or order 4) of the moral precepts given by God 5) Old Testament prophecy given by the prophets 6) what is declared, a thought, declaration, aphorism, a weighty saying, a dictum, a maxim In John, denotes the essential Word of God, Jesus Christ, the personal wisdom and power in union with God, his minister in creation and government of the universe, the cause of all the world's life both physical and ethical, which for the procurement of man's salvation put on human nature in the person of Jesus the Messiah, the second person in the Godhead, and shone forth conspicuously from His words and deeds.

or our epistle = a letter, Act 15:30, Romans 16:22, 1 Corthinaims 5:9 a letter of commandation,

Note now: go back to, 2 Thessalonians 2:10-14 And with all deceivableness of unrighteousness in them that perish; because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved.

What did they not receive? Truth.. Found where? In Truth = The Word = scripture

Thessalonians 2:11 And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie: 2:12 That they all might be damned who believed not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness 2:13 But we are bound to give thanks always to God for you, brethren beloved of the Lord, because God hath from the beginning chosen you to salvation through sanctification of the Spirit and belief of the truth: 2:14 Whereunto he called you by our gospel, to the obtaining of the glory of our Lord Jesus Christ.

Note now you can take 2:15 and remember or understand what traditions were, what the word spoken is, and what their episle is... 2 Thessalonians 2:15 Therefore, brethren, stand fast, and hold the traditions which ye have been taught, whether by word, or our epistle.

Note: The last verse 2 Thessalonians 2:17 Comfort your hearts, and stablish you in every good word and work.

That is am important verse also. It does not say comfort you heart in traditions 1.stablish where? The Word 2. and what service of work? Servant to God Our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ

None of this say make up traditions to follow, nor does it put traditions that were established, above that of Word of truth. Follow the Light in Christ because it does say God will send those who do not strong delusion

~In Christ

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sndbay

The church would be the balance to reflect righteousness in judgement of right and wrong when needed. In other words if a righteous man needed help in showing right from the wrong, he then would ask the church to confirm the righteousness of his action or what is spoken.



Amen to that.. Ye receive the Word of God that they teach or minister with and in Truth



2 Thessalonians 2:15 Therefore, brethren, stand fast, and hold the traditions which ye have been taught, whether by word, or our epistle.

Traditions = a giving over which is done by word of mouth or in writing, i.e. tradition by instruction, narrative, precept, etc. a) objectively, that which is delivered, the substance of a teaching b) of the body of precepts, esp. ritual, which in the opinion of the later Jews were orally delivered by Moses and orally transmitted in unbroken succession to subsequent generations, which precepts, both illustrating and expanding the written law, as they did were to be obeyed with equal reverence

Whether by word = 1) of speech a) a word, uttered by a living voice, embodies a conception or idea b) what someone has said 1) a word 2) the sayings of God 3) decree, mandate or order 4) of the moral precepts given by God 5) Old Testament prophecy given by the prophets 6) what is declared, a thought, declaration, aphorism, a weighty saying, a dictum, a maxim In John, denotes the essential Word of God, Jesus Christ, the personal wisdom and power in union with God, his minister in creation and government of the universe, the cause of all the world's life both physical and ethical, which for the procurement of man's salvation put on human nature in the person of Jesus the Messiah, the second person in the Godhead, and shone forth conspicuously from His words and deeds.

or our epistle = a letter, Act 15:30, Romans 16:22, 1 Corthinaims 5:9 a letter of commandation,

Note now: go back to, 2 Thessalonians 2:10-14 And with all deceivableness of unrighteousness in them that perish; because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved.

What did they not receive? Truth.. Found where? in Truth = The Word = scripture

Thessalonians 2:11 And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie: 2:12 That they all might be damned who believed not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness 2:13 But we are bound to give thanks alway to God for you, brethren beloved of the Lord, because God hath from the beginning chosen you to salvation through sanctification of the Spirit and belief of the truth: 2:14 Whereunto he called you by our gospel, to the obtaining of the glory of our Lord Jesus Christ.

Note now you can take 2:15 and remember or understand what traditions were, what the word spoken is, and what their episle is... 2 Thessalonians 2:15 Therefore, brethren, stand fast, and hold the traditions which ye have been taught, whether by word, or our epistle.

Note: The last verse 2 Thessalonians 2:17 Comfort your hearts, and stablish you in every good word and work.

That is am important verse also. It does not say comfort you heart in traditions 1.stablish where? The Word 2. and what service of work? Servant to God Our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ

None of this say make up traditions to follow, nor does it put traditions that were established, above that of Word of truth. Follow the Light in Christ because it does say God will send those who do not strong delusion

~In Christ

---

I agree with everything you've said in this message.

So our difference lies elsewhere.

I am of the impression and I believe I can prove it, that the tradition known as Sola Scriptura is man made and that it contradicts Scripture.

Would you care to show me where this tradition is taught in Scripture?

Sincerely,

De Maria

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by saintjoan

Of course we know that divine tradition takes precidence over the word of God.

---

That is incorrect.

"As a result the Church, to whom the transmission and interpretation of Revelation is entrusted, "does not derive her certainty about all revealed truths from the holy Scriptures alone. Both Scripture and Tradition must be accepted and honored with equal sentiments of devotion and reverence."
(CCC #82 cf. DV 9)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ScottRC

That is incorrect.

"As a result the Church, to whom the transmission and interpretation of Revelation is entrusted, "does not derive her certainty about all revealed truths from the holy Scriptures alone. Both Scripture and Tradition must be accepted and honored with equal sentiments of devotion and reverence."
(CCC #82 cf. DV 9)

---

Actually, what we find, and have seen on here, is that no matter what scripture says, the Roman Church interprets it according to their denominational tradition. That gives the denominational tradition precedence over the Word of God (the Bible).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tj3

Actually, what we find, and have seen on here, is that no matter what scripture says, the Roman Church interprets it according to their denominational tradition.

---

That is according to Scripture:

2 Thessalonians 2
14 Therefore, brethren, stand fast; and hold the traditions which you have learned, whether by word, or by our epistle.

Quote:

---

That gives the denominational tradition precedence over the Word of God (the Bible).

---

No. That is simply acknowledging what Scripture teaches. That the Traditions of God, either by word or by scripture are both the Word of God:

Acts Of Apostles 13 5 And when they were come to Salamina, they preached the word of God in the synagogues of the Jews. And they had John also in the ministry.

Acts Of Apostles 13 46 Then Paul and Barnabas said boldly: To you it behoved us first to speak the word of God: but because you reject it, and judge yourselves unworthy of eternal life, behold we turn to the Gentiles.

2 Timothy 2 9 Wherein I labour even unto bands, as an evildoer; but the word of God is not bound.

Hebrews 13 7 Remember your prelates who have spoken the word of God to you; whose faith follow, considering the end of their conversation,

Therefore the traditions do not take precedence one over the other but hand in hand they confirm the truth of one and the other. Oral Tradition confirms Scripture and Scripture confirms Oral Tradition.

Sincerely,

De Maria

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rhadsen

agrees: What De Maria is assuming that what Paul taught in person was a separate body of truths from what he taught by epistle. This contradicts 2 Thess. 2:5; 2 Peter 1:12...

---

No actually. The same truths taught in person are the same taught in epistle. If one deviates from the other, there is a problem.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by De Maria

That is according to Scripture:
2 Thessalonians 2
14 Therefore, brethren, stand fast; and hold the traditions which you have learned, whether by word, or by our epistle.

---

Note that what Paul was teaching was given 2 ways - word and epistle. Paul is no longer here to speak to us, so we have the epistle.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by saintjoan

The acceptance of church traditions must be our final authority, even if it contradicts what is taught in the word of God.

---

Tradition is the Word of God:

97 "Sacred Tradition and Sacred Scripture make up a single sacred deposit of the Word of God" (DV 10) in which, as in a mirror, the pilgrim Church contemplates God, the source of all her riches.
CCC Search Result - Paragraph # 97

Sincerely,

De Maria

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tj3

Note that what Paul was teaching was given 2 ways - word and epistle. Paul is no longer here to speak to us, so we have the epistle.

---

Note that St. Paul did not say, "Tim, I'm sending you this epistle that you may pass it around and let everyone read it".

Nor is he saying, "Tim, I've said everything in my epistles that need be said. No need for you to repeat it."

Instead St. Paul urged St. Timothy to:

2 Tim2 2 And the things which thou hast heard of me by many witnesses, the same commend to faithful men, who shall be fit to teach others also.

3 16 All scripture, inspired of God, is profitable to teach, to reprove, to correct, to instruct in justice, 17 That the man of God may be perfect, furnished to every good work.


4 1 I charge thee, before God and Jesus Christ, who shall judge the living and the dead, by his coming, and his kingdom: 2 Preach the word: be instant in season, out of season: reprove, entreat, rebuke in all patience and doctrine. 3 For there shall be a time, when they will not endure sound doctrine; but, according to their own desires, they will heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears: 4 And will indeed turn away their hearing from the truth, but will be turned unto fables. 5 But be thou vigilant, labour in all things, do the work of an evangelist, fulfill thy ministry. Be sober.

In other words, St. Paul is saying, "preach! teach! Remember to use the Bible, it is useful for that purpose, but by all means pass on what you've heard of me and preach, teach, rebuke and correct in all doctrine and wisdom!"

That isn't Sola Scriptura, that is Tradition in word and epistle.

Sincerely,

De Maria

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by De Maria

Note that St. Paul did not say, "Tim, I'm sending you this epistle that you may pass it around and let everyone read it".

Nor is he saying, "Tim, I've said everything in my epistles that need be said. No need for you to repeat it."

Instead St. Paul urged St. Timothy to:

2 Tim2 2 And the things which thou hast heard of me by many witnesses, the same commend to faithful men, who shall be fit to teach others also.

3 16 All scripture, inspired of God, is profitable to teach, to reprove, to correct, to instruct in justice, 17 That the man of God may be perfect, furnished to every good work.


4 1 I charge thee, before God and Jesus Christ, who shall judge the living and the dead, by his coming, and his kingdom: 2 Preach the word: be instant in season, out of season: reprove, entreat, rebuke in all patience and doctrine. 3 For there shall be a time, when they will not endure sound doctrine; but, according to their own desires, they will heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears: 4 And will indeed turn away their hearing from the truth, but will be turned unto fables. 5 But be thou vigilant, labour in all things, do the work of an evangelist, fulfill thy ministry. Be sober.

In other words, St. Paul is saying, "preach! teach! Remember to use the Bible, it is useful for that purpose, but by all means pass on what you've heard of me and preach, teach, rebuke and correct in all doctrine and wisdom!"

That isn't Sola Scriptura, that is Tradition in word and epistle.

Sincerely,

De Maria

---

“And if necessary use words” – somebody help me out, who said that, was it St. John of the Cross? It's driving me crazy! I've googeled it every way I know how. I know I read it somewhere!

Frustrated Hillbilly

JoeT

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JoeT777

“And if necessary use words” – somebody help me out, who said that, was it St. John of the Cross? It's driving me crazy! I've googeled it every way I know how. I know I read it somewhere!

Frustrated Hillbilly

JoeT

---

The actual quote: “preach the gospel at all times, and if necessary, use words”. It is normally attributed to St. Francis of Assisi. (1182 – 1226 A.D.)

John of the Cross Juan, de Yepes Alvarez (1542 – 1591 A.D.) close; only missed it by 365 years, that's within 18% of 2008 years of Catholic history. Not bad!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by De Maria

In other words, St. Paul is saying, "preach! teach! Remember to use the Bible, it is useful for that purpose, but by all means pass on what you've heard of me and preach, teach, rebuke and correct in all doctrine and wisdom!"

That isn't Sola Scriptura, that is Tradition in word and epistle.

Sincerely,

De Maria

---

It only violates sola scriptura if you claimk that Paul was preaching something other than sound Bible based doctrine.

Are you calling Paul a heretic?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tj3

It only violates sola scriptura if you claimk that Paul was preaching something other than sound Bible based doctrine.

---

Obviously St. Paul isn't teaching the Bible alone since he expects everyone to believe and obey him regardless of what they understand in the Bible.

2 Timothy 4 3 For there shall be a time, when they will not endure sound doctrine; but, according to their own desires, they will heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears:

Quote:

---

Are you calling Paul a heretic?

---

No. I'm saying that St. Paul is a perfect example of the Magisterium. The teaching Church. He, a Bishop of Christ's Church, teaches the truths of Jesus Christ and teaches others to pass on those teachings BY WORD AND EPISTLE. Not by Scripture alone.

Sincerely,

De Maria

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by De Maria

Obviously St. Paul isn't teaching the Bible alone since he expects everyone to believe and obey him regardless of what they understand in the Bible.

---

Not true.

Acts 17:10-12
10 Then the brethren immediately sent Paul and Silas away by night to Berea. When they arrived, they went into the synagogue of the Jews. 11 These were more fair-minded than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness, and searched the Scriptures daily to find out whether these things were so.
NKJV

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by De Maria

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tj3

It only violates sola scriptura if you claimk that Paul was preaching something other than sound Bible based doctrine.

---

Obviously St. Paul isn't teaching the Bible alone since he expects everyone to believe and obey him regardless of what they understand in the Bible.

---

De Maria:

So which version of the Bible do you think was in vogue during Paul’s sojourns? Do you think he used the King James Version?

JoeT

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JoeT777

De Maria:

So which version of the Bible do you think was in vogue during Paul’s sojourns? Do you think he used the King James Version?

JoeT

---

Excellent point!! I think it was the Septuagint.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tj3

Not true.

Acts 17:10-12
10 Then the brethren immediately sent Paul and Silas away by night to Berea. When they arrived, they went into the synagogue of the Jews. 11 These were more fair-minded than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness, and searched the Scriptures daily to find out whether these things were so.
NKJV

---

If this were an example of the Bible alone, why did Paul and Silas first explain the doctrine? Then the Bereans searched for it in the Old Testament. Not the New Testament. That is important. The Bereans were searching the Old Testament Scriptures to confirm what Paul and Silas taught them about Jesus Christ!!

This is an example of oral Tradition, Scripture and the teaching Church.

Sincerely,

De Maria

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by De Maria

If this were an example of the Bible alone, why did Paul and Silas first explain the doctrine?

---

References please - what are you referring to here? Vague claims do not cut it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tj3

References please - what are you referring to here? Vague claims do not cut it.

---

We're discussing Acts 17:10 - 12 which you posted.

Acts 17:10-12
10 Then the brethren immediately sent Paul and Silas away by night to Berea. When they arrived, they went into the synagogue of the Jews. 11 These were more fair-minded than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness, and searched the Scriptures daily to find out whether these things were so.
NKJV

If this were an example of the Bible alone, why did Paul and Silas first explain the doctrine? Then the Bereans searched for it in the Old Testament. Not the New Testament. That is important. The Bereans were searching the Old Testament Scriptures to confirm what Paul and Silas taught them about Jesus Christ!!

This is an example of oral Tradition, Scripture and the teaching Church.

Sincerely,

De Maria

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by De Maria

We're discussing Acts 17:10 - 12 which you posted.

---

Good.

Quote:

---

Acts 17:10-12
10 Then the brethren immediately sent Paul and Silas away by night to Berea. When they arrived, they went into the synagogue of the Jews. 11 These were more fair-minded than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness, and searched the Scriptures daily to find out whether these things were so.
NKJV

If this were an example of the Bible alone, why did Paul and Silas first explain the doctrine?

---

Do you see an issue with preaching or explaining Biblical doctrine? I don't - in fact that sola scriptura promotes.

Quote:

---

Then the Bereans searched for it in the Old Testament. Not the New Testament. That is important. The Bereans were searching the Old Testament Scriptures to confirm what Paul and Silas taught them about Jesus Christ!!

---

What? You think that the Old testament does not speak about Jesus? Here is another spot where Paul is speaking about the Old testament.

2 Tim 3:14-16
14 But you must continue in the things which you have learned and been assured of, knowing from whom you have learned them, 15 and that from childhood you have known the Holy Scriptures, which are able to make you wise for salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus.
NKJV

I often use the Old Testament to witness to Jehovah's Witnesses and others about the truth of Jesus Christ and who He is. If you do not know about the wealth of teachings about Jesus and in fact His appearances in the Old Testament, then you need to spend much more time studying the Old testament.

Quote:

---

This is an example of oral Tradition, Scripture and the teaching Church.

---

Two out of three. No man made tradition in this passage.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tj3

Do you see an issue with preaching or explaining Biblical doctrine? I don't - in fact that sola scriptura promotes.

---

Illogically in that respect. Because obviously, when one preaches his understanding of the Scriptures he is declaring himself an authority. If there is only one authority, Sola Scriptura, then those Sola Scripturists who claim to believe in the sole authority of Scripture, are contradicting themselves.

Quote:

---

What? You think that the Old testament does not speak about Jesus?

---

It is Catholic doctrine that Jesus Christ is hidden in the Old Testament and revealed in the New. But since you think that the Old Testament is speaking about Jesus Christ explicitly, show me where he is mentioned by name.

[quote] Here is another spot where Paul is speaking about the Old testament.

2 Tim 3:14-16
14 But you must continue in the things which you have learned and been assured of, knowing from whom you have learned them, 15 and that from childhood you have known the Holy Scriptures, which are able to make you wise for salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus.
NKJV[quote]

Great. Now show me how one can read the Old Testament alone and learn the Gospels without the interceding of Church teaching.

Quote:

---

I often use the Old Testament to witness to Jehovah's Witnesses and others about the truth of Jesus Christ and who He is. If you do not know about the wealth of teachings about Jesus and in fact His appearances in the Old Testament, then you need to spend much more time studying the Old testament.

---

Thank you. Exactly the Catholic point. Note how you are teaching the Jehova witnesses where to find references of Jesus Christ in the Old Testament.

Without your help they would not find them.

That very same fact is reflected in this Scripture verse, the Apostles were teaching the Bereans where the Old Testament referred to Jesus Christ. The Bereans would not have found those references otherwise since the Old Testament does not refer to Jesus Christ explicitly.

Therefore, the Catholic Church does not teach Scripture alone, but Tradition, Scripture and Magisterium.

Quote:

---

Two out of three. No man made tradition in this passage.

---

Even if it is two out of three it means that it isn't Scripture alone.

But what you call man made tradition, we call Sacred Tradition. In this case the mandate of Jesus Christ that we should teach what He taught.

Sincerely,

De Maria

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by De Maria

Illogically in that respect. Because obviously, when one preaches his understanding of the Scriptures he is declaring himself an authority.

---

That makes no sense. Maybe some of your preachers are so arrogant, but I would not stay in any church for one minute if I saw any preachers preaching anything which was not scriptural, and if the preacher tried to establish himself rather than scripture as the authority. If that is the w3ay it is in your church, get out now.

Quote:

---

It is Catholic doctrine that Jesus Christ is hidden in the Old Testament and revealed in the New. But since you think that the Old Testament is speaking about Jesus Christ explicitly, show me where he is mentioned by name.

---

Saintjoan already did. But even if He were not mentioned by name, He is mentioned explicitly and speaks in the Old Testament. He is not hidden as your denomination's private interpretation says.

Quote:

---

Great. Now show me how one can read the Old Testament alone and learn the Gospels without the interceding of Church teaching.

---

That is a whole other topic. I would suggest that you start a new thread rather than trying to further sidetrack this one. Even if you have not studied the Old testament enough to be aware of it, is it not enough that Paul says that it is there in God's inspired word? Are you saying that the Bible errs?

Quote:

---

Thank you. Exactly the Catholic point. Note how you are teaching the Jehova witnesses where to find references of Jesus Christ in the Old Testament.

---

And I have taught Roman Catholics, too.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tj3

Good.

I often use the Old Testament to witness to Jehovah's Witnesses and others about the truth of Jesus Christ and who He is. If you do not know about the wealth of teachings about Jesus and in fact His appearances in the Old Testament, then you need to spend much more time studying the Old testament.

---

Was Jesus teaching scripture on the cross, or was He proclaiming what had been written 1000 year before it happened?

Psalm 22

Matthew 27:46 And about the ninth hour Jesus cried with a loud voice, saying, Eli, Eli, lama sabachthani? That is to say, My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sndbay

Was Jesus teaching scripture on the cross, or was He proclaiming what had been written 1000 year before it happened?

Psalm 22

Matthew 27:46 And about the ninth hour Jesus cried with a loud voice, saying, Eli, Eli, lama sabachthani? that is to say, My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?

---

I would suggest that He was fulfilling prophecy.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tj3

That makes no sense. Maybe some of your preachers are so arrogant, but I would not stay in any church for one minute if I saw any preachers preaching anything which was not scriptural, and if the preacher tried to establish himself rather than scripture as the authority. If that is the w3ay it is in your church, get out now.

---

Take the wood out of your eye. You are teaching against Scripture.

Quote:

---

saintjoan already did.

---

No she didn't.

Quote:

---

but even if He were not mentioned by name,

---

You know that He isn't mentioned by name. So why the pretense?

Quote:

---

He is mentioned explicitly

---

If He is not mentioned by name, then He is not mentioned explicitly.

Quote:

---

and speaks in the Old Testament. He is not hidden as your denomination's private interpretation says.

---

Then why didn't all the Jews recognize Him immediately when He arrived?

Quote:

---

That is a whole other topic.

---

No it isn't. You simply want to leave the subject because you know you've been proven wrong.

It is Jesus who gave the key to understanding the Old Testament:

John 5 46 For if you did believe Moses, you would perhaps believe me also; for he wrote of me.

Luke 24 44 And he said to them: These are the words which I spoke to you, while I was yet with you, that all things must needs be fulfilled, which are written in the law of Moses, and in the prophets, and in the psalms, concerning me.

Therefore, the Jews did not recognize Jesus in the Old Testament until He told them so.

Quote:

---

I would suggest that you start a new thread rather than trying to further sidetrack this one.

---

No. This is precisely what we are talking about. Jesus commanded that the Apostles teach:

Matthew 28 19 Going therefore, teach ye all nations; baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost.

The Catholic Church continues to obey the Traditions which Jesus Christ established. Therefore, it is Church, Sacred Tradition and Scripture. Sola Scriptura is not taught in Scripture.

Quote:

---

Even if you have not studied the Old testament enough to be aware of it, is it not enough that Paul says that it is there in God's inspired word?

---

What are you talking about now. Obviously you have changed the subject because you don't want to admit you are wrong.

Quote:

---

Are you saying that the Bible errs?

---

Nope. As I've said over and over. It is your interpretation of the Bible which is wrong.

Quote:

---

And I have taught Roman Catholics, too.

---

If you taught them what you proclaimed above, you taught them error.

Sincerely,

De Maria

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by De Maria

Take the wood out of your eye. You are teaching against Scripture.

---

I am quoting scripture, not following denominational teachings of men.

Quote:

---

No she didn't.

You know that He isn't mentioned by name. So why the pretense?

If He is not mentioned by name, then He is not mentioned explicitly.

Then why didn't all the Jews recognize Him immediately when He arrived?

No it isn't. You simply want to leave the subject because you know you've been proven wrong.

---

Just the same old, same old denials.

Quote:

---

It is Jesus who gave the key to understanding the Old Testament:

John 5 46 For if you did believe Moses, you would perhaps believe me also; for he wrote of me.

Luke 24 44 And he said to them: These are the words which I spoke to you, while I was yet with you, that all things must needs be fulfilled, which are written in the law of Moses, and in the prophets, and in the psalms, concerning me.

Therefore, the Jews did not recognize Jesus in the Old Testament until He told them so.

---

Jesus - not your denomination. Jesus is God and He sent the Holy Spirit, not your denomination.

Quote:

---

No. This is precisely what we are talking about. Jesus commanded that the Apostles teach:

---

No one is arguing against teaching. I teach the Bible also.

Quote:

---

The Catholic Church continues to obey the Traditions which Jesus Christ established.

---

You keep saying this but refuse to show where Jesus "commanded tradition". Is the same Jesus that left your church and appointed someone else in his place because he had to leave?

My Jesus is omnipotent and omnipresent and never left. I'd be happy to introduce you.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tj3

I am quoting scripture, not following denominational teachings of men.

---

You are quoting Scripture and then attributing erroneous explanations to the quotes.

Quote:

---

Just the same old, same old denials.

---

I'm pretty thorough about explaining my denials. Just as I'm doing in this message.

Quote:

---

Jesus - not your denomination. Jesus is God and He sent the Holy Spirit, not your denomination.

---

Jesus established the Catholic Church and He sent her to teach.

Quote:

---

No one is arguing against teaching. I teach the Bible also.

---

Then you have just proved that Scripture alone is a false teaching. If you need to teach the Bible, then the Bible is not alone.

Quote:

---

You keep saying this but refuse to show where Jesus "commanded tradition".

---

Right here:
Matthew 28 20 Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and behold I am with you all days, even to the consummation of the world.

Matthew 28 19 Going therefore, teach ye all nations; baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost.

1 Corinthians 11 23 For I have received of the Lord that which also I delivered unto you, that the Lord Jesus, the same night in which he was betrayed, took bread. 24 And giving thanks, broke, and said: Take ye, and eat: this is my body, which shall be delivered for you: this do for the commemoration of me. 25 In like manner also the chalice, after he had supped, saying: This chalice is the new testament in my blood: this do ye, as often as you shall drink, for the commemoration of me.

Quote:

---

Is the same Jesus that left your church

---

Jesus did not leave the Church. He is still the Head.

Quote:

---

and appointed someone else in his place because he had to leave?

---

But He did appoint someone to rule in His place.

Quote:

---

My Jesus is omnipotent and omnipresent and never left. I'd be happy to introduce you.

---

If you truly knew Jesus, you would embrace His Church.

Sincerely,

De Maria

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by De Maria

You are quoting Scripture and then attributing erroneous explanations to the quotes.

---

If that were true, you'd be able to go to the context and refute what I said - but you can't.

Quote:

---

Jesus established the Catholic Church and He sent her to teach.

---

Why would Jesus come to earth in the 1st century and start a denomination in the 4th?

Quote:

---

Then you have just proved that Scripture alone is a false teaching. If you need to teach the Bible, then the Bible is not alone.

---

I never said that I believed in scripture alone. In fact I have said the opposite many times. I believe in sola scriptura. If you think that they are the same thing, then I would suggest that you do some reading on the topic before trying to engage those knowledgeable in it.

And if you think that teaching the Bible is somehow contrary to sola scriptura, then I don't believe that you have even gottne to ground level in understanding sola scriptura.

Quote:

---

Jesus did not leave the Church. He is still the Head.

---

He did not leave my church, but you said that left someone else in charge of yours. It must be a different Jesus, or for someone reason Jesus left your church and stayed at mine. If I were you, I'd be concerned ab out that.

Quote:

---

But He did appoint someone to rule in His place.

---

Jesus stayed to rule at my church.

Duid you church say something that made Him want to leave? :D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tj3

If that were true, you'd be able to go to the context and refute what I said - but you can't.

---

I've done so every time.

Quote:

---

Why would Jesus come to earth in the 1st century and start a denomination in the 4th?

---

That is your twisting of the facts. Jesus established His Church in the 1st Century.

Matthew 16 18 And I say to thee: That thou art Peter; and upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.

Quote:

---

I never said that I believed in scripture alone. In fact I have said the opposite many times. I believe in sola scriptura.

---

Sola Scriptura means Scripture alone. The word "Sola" is Latin for "alone". The word "Scriptura" is Latin for Scripture.

Quote:

---

If you think that they are the same thing, then I would suggest that you do some reading on the topic before trying to engage those knowledgeable in it.

---

They do mean the same thing:

Sola scriptura - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Sola scriptura (Latin ablative, "by scripture alone") Is the assertion that the Bible as God's written word is self-authenticating, clear (perspicuous) to ...
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sola_scriptura

Scripture Catholic - SCRIPTURE ALONE ("SOLA SCRIPTURA")
Scripture Catholic.com provides citations regarding SCRIPTURE ALONE - SOLA SCRIPTURA.
www.scripturecatholic.com/scripture_alone.html

Soli Deo Gloria! For the Glory of God Alone - the Five Solas of...
Sola Scriptura: The Scripture Alone is the Standard. The doctrine that the Bible alone is the ultimate authority was the "Formal Principle" of the ...
Soli Deo Gloria! For the Glory of God Alone - the Five Solas of the Reformation

It would seem you don't know what Sola Scriptura means. Above we have a representative sample. A neutral site, Wikipedia, a Catholic site, and a Reformed site all define Sola Scriptura as Scripture alone.

Quote:

---

And if you think that teaching the Bible is somehow contrary to sola scriptura, then I don't believe that you have even gottne to ground level in understanding sola scriptura.

---

In essence then, you have proved the illogical aspect of Sola Scriptura. If you have the authority to teach Scripture, then Scripture is not alone.

If you believe the Bible teaches that you must teach Scripture, then you have proven that the Bible does not teach Scripture alone, but Scripture and Teaching. Which is exactly what the Catholic Church teaches. That is why She accepts the Magisterial mission. Magisterium is Latin for "Teacher".

Quote:

---

He did not leave my church, but you said that left someone else in charge of yours.

---

Yes. He is our Shepherd. But the Shepherd left Peter to "feed" His sheep:

John 21 17 He said to him the third time: Simon, son of John, lovest thou me? Peter was grieved, because he had said to him the third time: Lovest thou me? And he said to him: Lord, thou knowest all things: thou knowest that I love thee. He said to him: Feed my sheep.

Quote:

---

It must be a different Jesus, or for someone reason Jesus left your church and stayed at mine. If I were you, I'd be concerned ab out that.

---

Are you sure? Because Jesus left us His peace when He left:

John 14 26 But the Paraclete, the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, he will teach you all things, and bring all things to your mind, whatsoever I shall have said to you. 27 Peace I leave with you, my peace I give unto you: not as the world giveth, do I give unto you. Let not your heart be troubled, nor let it be afraid. 28 You have heard that I said to you: I go away, and I come unto you.

And He told us that if He didn't leave us we would not receive the Holy Spirit:

John 16 7 But I tell you the truth: it is expedient to you that I go: for if I go not, the Paraclete will not come to you; but if I go, I will send him to you.

The Paraclete is the Holy Spirit.

Quote:

---

Jesus stayed to rule at my church.

---

Then, according to Scripture, you haven't received the Holy Spirit.

Quote:

---

Duid you church say something that made Him want to leave? :D

---

Lol!! Very funny. ;)

Actually, it is in our Church where He remains, but in Sacramental fashion. His Real Presence in the guise of Bread and Wine. In the Body of Christ His Church and in the Word of God Tradition and Scripture.

Sincerely,

De Maria

Ruler Over Heaven or Earth

Colossians 1:16 For by Him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him: And He is before all things, and by him all things consist.

Colossians 1:18-19 And He is the head of the body, the church: who is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead; that in all things He might have the preeminence .For it pleased [The Father] that in Him should all fulness dwell And, having made peace through the blood of His cross, by Him to reconcile all things unto Himself; by Him, I say, whether they be things in earth, or things in heaven