[Tj3]

You made an accusation which you never substantiated.

I pointed them out when you did it over and over. Again, an indication that you are not reading what I said.

Sure. But if you read it in context, St. Peter is saying, we were inspired by the Holy Spirit, therefore listen to us.

Who are you referring to as "we". That refers to those who penned scripture.

Show me.

I have.

For instance. Sola Scriptura is no where mentioned in Scripture.

Keep saying it - maybe eventually you'll believe that it is true.

But Scripture says that the Church is authoritative and the Pillar of Truth and that we should keep the Traditions in word and Scripture. So it seems that Sola Scriptura contradicts Scripture. While Catholic doctrine follows Scripture to the letter.

Again, "church" refers to the body of all believers as I showed you previously, not your denomination. Thus this has nothing to do with your claims of "tradition".

You yourself have said you don't follow any denomination. Therefore you follow your own teaching based on your understanding of the Bible.

There is no co-relation. Jesus and the Apostles, and indeed all early Christians followed no denomination because they did not exist. Were they wrong?

Yes. Catholics still follow Scripture. But we follow all Scripture.

Good, then that ends the discussion. We can all follow scripture as the standard of truth rather than denominational teachings!

I use the word "Church" in all its senses. I accept that the Church is an institution built by Christ. That is one of the ways in which Scripture uses the term and one of the ways in which the Church which wrote the Scriptures uses the term as well.

"Church" does not have the same meaning in every context, and yet you try to make every place where the word appears to mean your denomination, the one thing that it could not possibly mean because your denomination did not exist then.

True. Jesus said believers and unbelievers would be in His Church.

No, He said that they would be his church.

At the same time any institution can "claim" to be the Body of Christ. Whether they can prove it is another story.

Any institution which claims to be the body of Christ is wrong according to scripture.

As I have shown, but which you have continually ignored, the Catholic Church considers Her members to be members of the Body of Christ.

Anyone can believe what they want - that does not make it true.

Correct. Because their members are baptized.

Receiving Christ as Saviour saves, not baptism.

But its members are members of the Body of Christ.

Some maybe, but membership does not confer salvation.

True. But being an obedient and practicing member of the Catholic Church does save you.

Ah, so you are saying that the cross of Christ was not necessary - you are saying that there is another way to be saved.

And why is the Church called the Body of Christ in Scripture?

Good question. The church that Christ founded is the body of Christ, not a denomination. This is what I have been trying to tell you dozens of times.

I don't wear glasses.

Maybe that is the problem. Maybe you should!

I don't see the words, "Constantine formed the Catholic Church"

When you get those glasses, read it again.

Man, this is like pulling teeth. Are you now saying that you accept that the term Church is:

1. The institution built by Christ with authority to bind and loose.
2. The gathing place for Christian worship.
3. As well as the body of Christ.

It is like pulling teeth - why not make it easy by reading what I said about the church and respond to that.

Sure. I understand. Believe me, I feel the same way.

Then why don't you start dealing honestly and seriously with the points that I have raised.

I have. The point I made is that the Bible says the word of God is SPOKEN. You seem to be caught up on whom the word of God was spoken TO.

That is the point. No one argues that the word of God cannot be read out loud. Again don't waste your time and mine with these strawman arguments.

[De Maria]

I pointed them out when you did it over and over. Again, an indication that you are not reading what I said.

No, you didn't point them out. You simply said, "you are making a straw man".

To point something out, I would expect you to say, "You said that I said, such and such. But I didn't, I said such and so."

Now, unless you point out and explain exactly where you perceive that I made an error, I can't know what you are talking about. I'm not a mind reader.

Who are you referring to as "we". That refers to those who penned scripture.

Himself and the other Holy men of God who spoke the prophecy of Scripture.

I have.

Show me again or point to where you showed me before.

Keep saying it - maybe eventually you'll believe that it is true.

I know that the doctrine of Sola Scriptura is not in Scripture. I've searched for it over and over. No one can show it to me. I've asked so many times that I've lost count.

The first time I searched for it in earnest for my own edification. But after months of searching and of asking others to show me where it was, I was finally convinced that it isn't there.

But I kept searching. Then one day I realized. Not only is it not in Scripture, but it contradicts that which is in Scripture. And there is an old saying, "Two statements which contradict each other can't both be true at the same time."

That means that if Sola Scriptura is true, the Bible is false. And if the Bible is true, Sola Scriptura is false. Therefore, Sola Scriptura is false, because the Bible is truth.

Today, for me, searching for Sola Scriptura in the Bible is an exercise which I recommend to nonCatholics because I believe, if they search the Scriptures themselves for this doctrine, perhaps they will also be convinced that it isn't there.

It has been almost 20 years since that first time. And in those twenty years, not one person has been able to show me where it is.

Again, "church" refers to the body of all believers as I showed you previously, not your denomination. Thus this has nothing to do with your claims of "tradition".

As I showed you, Church refers too much more than just body of believers. It also refers to the Istitution of the Church and to the Worship Space. And since the Church carries and teaches the traditions of God by word and Epistle, it has a great deal to do with tradition.

There is no co-relation. Jesus and the Apostles, and indeed all early Christians followed no denomination because they did not exist. Were they wrong?

Jesus taught the traditions which the Catholic Church now teaches. The Apostles followed and taught the same traditions which the Catholic Church now passes on and teaches.

Good, then that ends the discussion. We can all follow scripture as the standard of truth rather than denominational teachings!

Well, our denominational teaching is Scripture. Why do you ignore the Scripture teaching that the Church is the Pillar of Truth?

"Church" does not have the same meaning in every context, and yet you try to make every place where the word appears to mean your denomination, the one thing that it could not possibly mean because your denomination did not exist then.

Not so. It is you who try to make the Church the "body of all believers" in every context. But it is clear, in Matt 18:17, Jesus is speaking of the Church as an identifiable institution with the authority to reslved disputes and assess discipline.

If Jesus, when He said, "take him to the Church", meant that one had to take him to the body of all believers, one could never assemble all believers in one place in order to do so. However, once can easily take someone to the local Church or even to the Vatican.

No, He said that they would be his church.

Show me.

Any institution which claims to be the body of Christ is wrong according to scripture.

Show me.

Anyone can believe what they want - that does not make it true.

I agree. But it doesn't make it false either.

Receiving Christ as Saviour saves, not baptism.

We receive Christ as Saviour in Baptism. How do you receive Christ as Saviour?

Some maybe, but membership does not confer salvation.

That is true.

Ah, so you are saying that the cross of Christ was not necessary - you are saying that there is another way to be saved.

Aren't you putting words in my mouth? When did I say, "that the cross of Christ was not necessary" or that "there is another way to be saved."? Please quote me.

Good question. The church that Christ founded is the body of Christ, not a denomination. This is what I have been trying to tell you dozens of times.

Thanks, but that doesn't answer my question. I asked:
And why is the Church called the Body of Christ in Scripture?

In order to answer that question you need to begin a response with the word "because". Now I believe the Church is called the Body of Christ because She is Christ on earth. Her members are Christ's hands and feet doing Christ's work in the world. Her leaders are Christ's mouthpiece, speaking the Word of God to the world.

Why do you think that the Church is called the Body of Christ?

Maybe that is the problem. Maybe you should!

Nah. I see real well.

When you get those glasses, read it again.

Funny! Lol!

It is like pulling teeth - why not make it easy by reading what I said about the church and respond to that.

I'm trying but you keep dodging the issue.

Then why don't you start dealing honestly and seriously with the points that I have raised.

I think I'm dealing quite honestly with you.

That is the point. No one argues that the word of God cannot be read out loud. Again don't waste your time and mine with these strawman arguments.

Can the Word of God be explained?
Can the Word of God be put into practice? If the Word of God is put into practice and someone sees that practice and learns from it, is that Tradition?

See, the Catholic Church has it all together. Just because She wrote the Word of God in the Bible doesn't mean She will stop teaching the Word of God.

Math teachers didn't stop teaching algebra when they wrote the book, did they?

Sincerely,

De Maria

[Tj3]

Well, since you are not dealing honestly with me and since you refuse to actually discuss anything from scripture but rather simply promote the private interpretation of your denomination, and refuse to consider the responses, but rather just repeat the same old same old, I see no value in continuing.

I will stand on what God's word says, not the private interpretation of your denomination or any other denomination.

If yopu decide at some future point that you wish to discuss this openly and honestly with me, let me know.

[De Maria]

Well, since you are not dealing honestly with me and since you refuse to actually discuss anything from scripture but rather simply promote the private interpretation of your denomination, and refuse to consider the responses, but rather just repeat the same old same old, I see no value in continuing.

I will stand on what God's word says, not the private interpretation of your denomination or any other denomination.

If yopu decide at some future point that you wish to discuss this openly and honestly with me, let me know.

Thanks for the discussion. I'll see on the forum.

Sincerely,

De Maria