[Tj3]

Nope. Where is it written that man's understanding MEANS private interpretation.

Look at the context of the passage. It is contrasting private interpretation to the teachings of men.

2 Peter 1:20-21
20 knowing this first, that no prophecy of Scripture is of any private interpretation, 21 for prophecy never came by the will of man, but holy men of God spoke as they were moved by the Holy Spirit.
NKJV

Are you a man? Do you understand the Scripture? Then you have a man's understanding of Scripture.

I do not rely on my understanding for truth. I submit my understanding to the word of God.

So your statement is proven false. Obviously, every Christian must have an understanding of the Word of God. And Scripture ITSELF commands that we must obey those men whom have been appointed our leaders:

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

Sigh! Do you think that the more times that you repeat it, the more likely that we will be to ignore the context?

First let's look at a better translation:

Heb 13:7-10
7 Remember those who rule over you, who have spoken the word of God to you, whose faith follow, considering the outcome of their conduct. 8 Jesus Christ is the same yesterday, today, and forever. 9 Do not be carried about with various and strange doctrines. For it is good that the heart be established by grace, not with foods which have not profited those who have been occupied with them.
NKJV

This refers to those who know and teach the word of God. I therefore do not need to follow those who do not faithfully teach the word of God. Second, why do you follow them? To learn sound doctrine so that you are not carried away by false teachings.

Nowhere does this say or even suggest that we must obey the church leaders blindly.

Read my comments which you quoted. I said that the Word of God is final authority. I didn't say that man's understanding was final authority. Obviously there can only be ONE final authority.

Good. Then you will agree that where your tradition, or the teachings of your denomination conflict with scripture, scripture is the standard that you are to follow.

[De Maria]

Look at the context of the passage. It is contrasting private interpretation to the teachings of men.

2 Peter 1:20-21
20 knowing this first, that no prophecy of Scripture is of any private interpretation, 21 for prophecy never came by the will of man, but holy men of God spoke as they were moved by the Holy Spirit.
NKJV

You make the illogical assumption that all traditions are traditions of men. You also make the illogical assumption that all understanding of men is in opposition to the Word of God.

However, that is not the case. That is why we are told to follow the understanding of our leaders.

I do not rely on my understanding for truth. I submit my understanding to the word of God.

You make the illogical assumption that your interpretation of Scripture is actually Scripture. But in fact, your interpretation of Scripture frequently contradicts Scripture.

Sigh! Do you think that the more times that you repeat it, the more likely that we will be to ignore the context?

First let's look at a better translation:

Heb 13:7-10
7 Remember those who rule over you, who have spoken the word of God to you, whose faith follow, considering the outcome of their conduct. 8 Jesus Christ is the same yesterday, today, and forever. 9 Do not be carried about with various and strange doctrines. For it is good that the heart be established by grace, not with foods which have not profited those who have been occupied with them.
NKJV

This refers to those who know and teach the word of God.

Correct. So you admit that we must obey and follow those who know and teach the Word of God?

I therefore do not need to follow those who do not faithfully teach the word of God.

In other words, if they don't agree with you, they are not following the Word of God. Again you equate your interpretation to the Word of God. But Scripture says you must bring them to the Church (Matt 18:17)

Second, why do you follow them? To learn sound doctrine so that you are not carried away by false teachings.

Correct. But I follow them? Do you? Or do you simply follow your own interpretations?

Nowhere does this say or even suggest that we must obey the church leaders blindly.

Nowhere did I suggest that either.

Good. Then you will agree that where your tradition, or the teachings of your denomination conflict with scripture, scripture is the standard that you are to follow.

The Catholic Church does not contradict Scripture. The Catholic Church is the Pillar of Truth.

Since Jesus Christ established a Tradition of a Teaching Church and gave that Church the authority and power to determine who believes and who doesn't, I will follow the teachings of that Church regardless of how others in conflict with that Church interpret the Scriptures.

Sincerely,

De Maria

[Tj3]

You make the illogical assumption that all traditions are traditions of men. You also make the illogical assumption that all understanding of men is in opposition to the Word of God.

If you claim otherwise, it is up to you to establish that from scripture.

You make the illogical assumption that your interpretation of Scripture is actually Scripture.

Where did I say that? I said the exact opposite in fact. Can we at least be honest in our discussions?

Correct. So you admit that we must obey and follow those who know and teach the Word of God?

I note that you add to what scripture said. So no. But if you say that we must, then because I teach the word of God, you must obey me - right?

The Catholic Church does not contradict Scripture. The Catholic Church is the Pillar of Truth.

The contradictions could fill several books, and your other comment is one of the contradictions.

I will follow the teachings of that Church regardless of how others in conflict with that Church interpret the Scriptures.

That means that your denomination is your standard of doctrine - mine is the Bible. That is where the root of our disagreement lies, and that is evidence of the contradictions between scripture and your denominational teachings.

[De Maria]

If you claim otherwise, it is up to you to establish that from scripture.

Sure. Not all traditions are traditions of men:

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

The understanding of men is not always opposed to God:
Exodus 31 1 And the Lord spoke to Moses, saying: 2 Behold, I have called by name Beseleel the son of Uri the son of Hur of the tribe of Juda, 3 And I have filled him with the spirit of God, with wisdom and understanding, and knowledge in all manner of work.

1 Corinthians 14 15 What is it then? I will pray with the spirit, I will pray also with the understanding; I will sing with the spirit, I will sing also with the understanding.

Ephesians 5 17 Wherefore become not unwise, but understanding what is the will of God.

Philippians 1 9 And this I pray, that your charity may more and more abound in knowledge, and in all understanding:

Therefore, your stance that all traditions are traditions of men and that all understanding of men is against God is illogical and against Scripture.

Where did I say that? I said the exact opposite in fact. Can we at least be honest in our discussions?

Every time I disagree with you, you claim I disagree with Scripture. But it isn't Scripture with whom I disagree but with your interpretation.

I note that you add to what scripture said. So no. But if you say that we must, then because I teach the word of God, you must obey me - right?

You don't teach the Word of God. You teach your interpretation of the Word of God.

On the other hand, because I obey the Scriptures, I obey the Church and the leaders appointed therein which you counsel me to disobey in contradiction of Scripture.

The contradictions could fill several books, and your other comment is one of the contradictions.

I only contradict you and those who contradict Scripture.

That means that your denomination is your standard of doctrine - mine is the Bible.

No, your standard is your personal interpretation of Scripture.

My standard is the one set by Scripture:

1 Timothy 3 15 But if I tarry long, that thou mayest know how thou oughtest to behave thyself in the house of God, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and ground of the truth.

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

That is where the root of our disagreement lies, and that is evidence of the contradictions between scripture and your denominational teachings.

Correct. The root of our disagreement is your insistence on interpreting Scripture independently of the Church. It is your embrace of a tradition of men called Sola Scriptura.

Sincerely,

De Maria

[Tj3]

Sure. Not all traditions are traditions of men:

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

But note that this refers to what the Apostles taught in two forms, written and oral, and they are no longer here, so we have the written and the Biblical command not to go beyond what is written

The understanding of men is not always opposed to God:
Exodus 31 1 And the Lord spoke to Moses, saying: 2 Behold, I have called by name Beseleel the son of Uri the son of Hur of the tribe of Juda, 3 And I have filled him with the spirit of God, with wisdom and understanding, and knowledge in all manner of work.

It was God's spirit who gave them the understanding - it was not their understanding. Perhaps you missed that important detail.

Every time I disagree with you, you claim I disagree with Scripture. But it isn't Scripture with whom I disagree but with your interpretation.

Then you should be able to deal with the issue solely from a scriptural perspective, without relying upon your denominations interpretation.

You don't teach the Word of God. You teach your interpretation of the Word of God.

God is my judge not you. God does not like those who want to take his place.

On the other hand, because I obey the Scriptures, I obey the Church and the leaders appointed therein which you counsel me to disobey in contradiction of Scripture.

If your denomination teaches contrary to scripture, then it is not only acceptable, but Biblical to stand with God's word rather than the teachings of men.

[De Maria]

But note that this refers to what the Apostles taught in two forms, written and oral, and they are no longer here, so we have the written and the Biblical command not to go beyond what is written

But they passed on the Tradition.
2 Timothy 2 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.

And that is exactly what the Church continues to do.

It was God's spirit who gave them the understanding - it was not their understanding. Perhaps you missed that important detail.

No I didn't. But perhaps you don't understand your own words. God gave them understanding. Therefore, they taught according to their understanding:

1 Corinthians 14 19 But in the church I had rather speak five words with my understanding, that I may instruct others also; than ten thousand words in a tongue.

Then you should be able to deal with the issue solely from a scriptural perspective, without relying upon your denominations interpretation.

I have provided the verse which supports everyone of my arguments. I have also pointed out the error in your interpretation of the same verses.

God is my judge not you.

But I do judge whom I will believe. The Bible tells me not to be instructed by those who will twist the Word of God:

2 Peter 3 16 As also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things; in which are certain things hard to be understood, which the unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, to their own destruction.

God does not like those who want to take his place.

Exactly my point.

If your denomination teaches contrary to scripture,

Which it does not.

then it is not only acceptable, but Biblical to stand with God's word rather than the teachings of men.

First you need to distinguish between your own interpretations and the Word of God.

Sincerely,

De Maria

[Tj3]

But they passed on the Tradition.
2 Timothy 2 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.

So lets' see - you redefine "tradition as teaching and preaching and then claim that if anyone teaches or preaches that is proof of your denominations tradition being scriptural.

Well, I can defend my position without the need to change definitions.

I have provided the verse which supports everyone of my arguments. I have also pointed out the error in your interpretation of the same verses.

In your own mind perhaps - but note above - you change word definitions to try to get scripture to support your private interpretation.

But I do judge whom I will believe. The Bible tells me not to be instructed by those who will twist the Word of God:

2 Peter 3 16 As also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things; in which are certain things hard to be understood, which the unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, to their own destruction.

So when the teachings of your denomination contradict scripture, why do you accept their words?

[De Maria]

So lets' see - you redefine "tradition as teaching and preaching and then claim that if anyone teaches or preaches that is proof of your denominations tradition being scriptural.

Yes. But more than that. I claim that any Sola Scripturist who claims that we only need the Bible because the Bible is perfectly clear and the only source of doctrine is contradicting himself in his behavior. Because in so teaching, he is putting himself beside the Bible and in teaching doctrine he is putting himself above the Bible. Therefore, he doesn't really believe in the Bible alone, but in his interpretation of the Bible.

Well, I can defend my position without the need to change definitions.

You haven't made a very good defense yet. You just keep asserting that you have, but the logic and intelligence of the Catholic position has derailed you continually.

In your own mind perhaps - but note above - you change word definitions to try to get scripture to support your private interpretation.

That is a simple assertion of yours without any proof. I've refuted it above as well.

So when the teachings of your denomination contradict scripture,

The teachings of the Catholic Church do not contradict Scripture.

why do you accept their words?

Because they are the Word of God.

Sincerely,

De Maria

[Tj3]

Yes. But more than that. I claim that any Sola Scripturist who claims that we only need the Bible because the Bible is perfectly clear and the only source of doctrine is contradicting himself in his behavior. Because in so teaching, he is putting himself beside the Bible and in teaching doctrine he is putting himself above the Bible. Therefore, he doesn't really believe in the Bible alone, but in his interpretation of the Bible.

That proves exactly what I said - you don't even know what sola scriptura is. Other than other hand, you DO promotes man's understanding and you follow man's private interpretation by following whatever your denomination says is the right interpretation.

I submit myself to God's word.

You haven't made a very good defense yet. You just keep asserting that you have, but the logic and intelligence of the Catholic position has derailed you continually.

I would not expect you to say anything else.

The teachings of the Catholic Church do not contradict Scripture.

On this board, several doctrines of you denomination have been shown to be at direct odds with scripture.

[De Maria]

De Maria, I think that your problem is that you don't have a relationship with Jesus, you don't even know Him.

You are wrong. I not only know Jesus Christ but I know His whole family. I know His Father, I feel His Spirit, I know His mother, I know His human step-father, I know His brothers who have died for Him and with Him.

I'm afraid it is you, who reject all who love Jesus who will find that Jesus is not too happy about that. I wonder what you'll say when you meet Him on Judgement day and He asks, did you keep the Commandment to honor my mother? And you'll look befuddled like the rest of the goats and say, "But when did I meet your mother?" And He'll say, if you didn't honor the woman who gave me life, then you didn't honor me. Get away from me you worker of iniquity.

You may know about Him, but you don't really KNOW Him as you best friend,

I know Him as my Brother. We share the same Father and Mother. We share the same Flesh and Blood which He gives me in the Holy Eucharist. We share the same Spirit.

some-one whom you would confide in, before you you seek advice from anybody else.

I am in communion with Jesus Christ 24/7.

But you DO have religion, BOY, do you have religion!

Thanks be to God who gave us His religion that we may honor and glorify Him as He wants to be honored and glorified.

I went onto a Catholic website and was reading the Catechism, it truly is mesmerizing. I can see how people want to accept it as truth, it sure fits with what Paul said to Timothy about the last days,

You're mistaken. The Catholic Church teaches the highest morality of any other religion. It is the morality of Jesus Christ. This is the reason why you and others like you have abandoned the Catholic Church. You can't live up to the moral precepts which She teaches and so you say, "I'm outa here!"

I have wood in my eye on that score as well. But I came back and God has showered graces upon me. THANKS BE TO GOD!! I have to this day, lived more successfully in the moral precepts of the Church. I pray that God keep me there.

2 Tim 4
3For the time will come when men will not put up with sound doctrine.
Instead, to suit their own desires, they will gather around them a great number of teachers to say what their itching ears want to hear. 4They will turn their ears away from the truth and turn aside to myths.

This is the truth. It is Protestants who embraced the following innovations which are against Scripture:

1. Sola Scriptura
2. Sola Fide
3. Divorce
4. Contraception

And there are many others far worse which are embraced by certain groups of Protestants. But the above are fairly universal in the Protestant Community.

And as he writes in Timothy about the end time church,"having a form of godliness but denying the power there-of."

Again, it is Protestants who deny that God can authorize men to have authority over us. Although that is clear in Scripture. It is Protestants who deny that God can establish an infallible Church.

But Catholics do not deny the omnipotence of God.

Where's the power in your church, when was the last time some-one was healed or delivered from demons or raised from the dead.

Virtually everyday these miracles occur in our Church. Throughout the world, it is the Catholic Church which proclaims the most miracles but Protestants proclaim them works of Satan. Have you heard of Lourdes, Fatima, Medjugorie, Guadalupe, and on and on.

From the Florida revivals, the last count was 16 people raised from the dead!

I'd like to see the coroners reports.

Of course, you would deny that power, why, you might say, would God work miracles in a "Prostestant" Church and not the Catholic Church.

Certainly not. The Holy Spirit blows where it will. But in the Catholic Church we test every Spirit in accordance to the teaching of Scripture. Whereas in the Protestant arena, every Tom, and Harry who proclaims a miracle is believed as though it were Gospel. Forgetting that Jesus Himself said:

Matthew 7 21 Not every one that saith to me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven: but he that doth the will of my Father who is in heaven, he shall enter into the kingdom of heaven. 22 Many will say to me in that day: Lord, Lord, have not we prophesied in thy name, and cast out devils in thy name, and done many miracles in thy name? 23 And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, you that work iniquity.

I will give you a hint, because His power is not there!

Who are you except a self appointed anti-Catholic? Why should I believe you over the Word of God?

You have to have a personal relationship with Jesus, or else He will say,

22Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? And in thy name have cast out devils? And in thy name done many wonderful works?

23And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity.

24Therefore whosoever heareth these sayings of mine, and doeth them, I will liken him unto a wise man, which built his house upon a rock:

I do have a personal relationship with Jesus. That is why I know and love His entire family. On the other hand, you don't.

And thanks for confirming that I know my religion. I got that way because I believe and obey the Word of God which says:

2 Timothy 2 15 Carefully study to present thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly handling the word of truth.

Get to know Jesus as your best friend, it's a must!

I suggest you take your own advice. Remember, he who abandons the mother ends up abandoning the Son.

Peace.:)

To you as well.

Sincerely,

De Maria

[Fr_Chuck]

No actually the Church has gotten closer to the word of God, it did have some time where it wondered due to the evil and power of man.
This is of course bibical, just like the Hewbrew people wondered from the path and then returned.

I think if anything it proves how the Church has been able to withstand everything and find its way back to the true faith of the church

One has to only compare its current teachings with that of the Eastern church and see how it has come fuller circil toward the word of God

[Fr_Chuck]

And again, attacking someone's personal relationshiip with Christ,

Not discussion but attacking, sad when they can't prove their points they attack

Thread closed.