Questions For Protestants

[marielapin]

Oh, and the use of rhetorical questions in that list above is classic.

"Where did Jesus give instructions that the Christian faith should be based exclusively on a book?". hah!

Ok, here's a more direct version of that question: Where did Jesus teach that the Bible would sufficient in and of itself? i.e. where did Jesus teach Sola Scriptora?

[CatholicAndFanatical]

Whether its a classic question or not is not important, its still a valid question and, when and if its ever answered, will weaken the erroneous armor in the prot churchs and belief. But not just this question, all of them above are great questions that are worthy of answering.

Cant speak for everyone, but I would be happy if just one question would be answered from above.

But I wont hold my breathe.

CatholicAndFanatical

[Undercover]

Where did Jesus tell His apostles to write anything down?

Well, Jesus may not have told them, but ...

Rev. 1:10,11 - John was told by the Spirit to write to the Churches.

1 Cor. 14:37

36

Did the word of God go forth from you? Or has it come to you alone?

37

If anyone thinks that he is a prophet or a spiritual person, he should recognize that what I am writing to you is a commandment of the Lord.

38

If anyone does not acknowledge this, he is not acknowledged.

(NAB)

I'm sure I could probably use 1. Cor 4:6 too, but I'm not sure that it would be in the correct context..

..however, 2 Cor. 3:2,3,4 seem to disprove the notion of "Sola Scriptora" (which I don't agree with either, there is more than JUST the Bible.. like how about a relationship with God and fellowship with other believers?)

Not sure this answers the question or clears up anything, but it's interesting.

Edited November 17, 2003 by Undercover

[Seek]

Well, Jesus may not have told them, but ...

Rev. 1:10,11 - John was told by the Spirit to write to the Churches.

Well done, undercover.

Though if you read on I think you will see that it is inDouche Jesus telling St. John to write down what he sees.

12: Then I turned to see the voice that was speaking to me, and on turning I saw seven golden lampstands,

13: and in the midst of the lampstands one like a son of man, clothed with a long robe and with a golden girdle round his breast;

14: his head and his hair were white as white wool, white as snow; his eyes were like a flame of fire,

15: his feet were like burnished bronze, refined as in a furnace, and his voice was like the sound of many waters;

16: in his right hand he held seven stars, from his mouth issued a sharp two-edged sword, and his face was like the sun shining in full strength.

17: When I saw him, I fell at his feet as though dead. But he laid his right hand upon me, saying, "Fear not, I am the first and the last,

18: and the living one; I died, and behold I am alive for evermore, and I have the keys of Death and Hades.

19: Now write what you see, what is and what is to take place hereafter.

I don't see the same thing in the other passages you quoted however. They appear to be claiming that the specific thing written is a command of the Lord not that the Lord commanded the writing of the thing.

Thanks for taking the time to answer.

[CatholicAndFanatical]

sure he might of said write these things down, but for who to read? Laymen or clergy?

Most people couldnt even read or write and they relied on the CHURCH to hear the teachings, it was only the Church that taught, not an individual doing his own interpretation.

But the question still stands, so Jesus said write what John saw down, but that in no where says that people should only believe what John was writting down and nothing else, meaning Sola Scriptura.

Even at the End of John's Gospel it states that not everything is written in this Book, we should rely on Sacred Tradition to learn more from the Apostles and Christs Church.

CatholicAndFanatical

[Undercover]

Even at the End of John's Gospel it states that not everything is written in this Book, we should rely on Sacred Tradition to learn more from the Apostles and Christs Church.

It doesn't say "rely on Sacred Tradition". It just basically says for brevity he left out some of the things of lesser importance.

[Paladin D]

It doesn't say "rely on Sacred Tradition".  It just basically says for brevity he left out some of the things of lesser importance.

Funny how you place yourself above the Early Church Fathers, the very first Christians... by not taking into account on what they have said in regards belief. They were the ones that canonized the Scriptures you have, making the Catholic Church... "Bible Masters" if you will.

I just can not understand how people can say "I believe in the Bible", yet seem to skip over the fact that the early Christians (who were Catholic, thus their beliefs being identical to that of the Catholic Church today), were the ones who spent years to finally canonize the Bible!

If we were the ones that canonized something that you place your trust fully upon, then why do you claim the Catholic Church to be wrong? Even before the canonization of the Bible (and also after), Sacred Tradition was taught just as important as the Scriptures.

I'm a former-Pentecostal, and I should know this. :o

Edited November 18, 2003 by Paladin D

[BLAZEr]

It doesn't say "rely on Sacred Tradition".  It just basically says for brevity he left out some of the things of lesser importance.

it doesn't say that either . . . why would you correct someone's interpretation with your own even poorer interpretation . . .

John 21:25 "But there are also many other things which Jesus did; were every one of them to be written, I suppose that the world itself could not contain the books that would be written."

This does not imply that it was of lesser importance. It just says that he couldn't possibly write everything. He's basically telling us "Jesus was more than just what we could write down." . . . Now, this comes at the end of a long discourse between Jesus and Peter. Jesus tells Peter to "feed his sheep" yet we don't have a gospel by Peter? Are we to assume that Peter didn't feed the sheep? Or that he did so orally? And funny how John uses Peter in this passage, the same one who was given the keys to the kingdom.

What's more. In John's Gospel, John uses himself to represent all of the Church. Following Christ in that chapter is Peter and peter turns and guess who is behind him??? John, in other words, The Whole Church, all believers! Are you behind Peter?

Edited November 18, 2003 by BLAZEr

[BLAZEr]

Paladin, go to bed!!

[cmotherofpirl]

Undercover if you take everything Jesus said and did its about several months worth of stuff.

Jesus peached for 3 YEARS.

He spent that time picking and teaching Peter and the other Apostles who were the foundations of the Church.

The New Testament is a glimpse of what Jesus was doing: books written with clear theological purpose and order. they were chosen from many possibilities by the Catholic Church to reflect Church at the time. Remember the Church had been in existance for 4 centuries before the canon was finalized.

Nowhere does it say the bible is the sole rule of faith, that is a tradition of man, spefically the heresy of Luther.

[Undercover]

my intention wasn't to prove Sola Scriptura or anything, just to point out that your line of questioning is wack. If you look at what I said, I actually don't agree with Sola Scriptura.

I just want to point out that I *did* answer one of your questions, and yet that doesn't prove a thing.

In any case, the argument for me isn't as much the roots of the Church, etc.. because the Jewish priesthood could claim roots farther back and such, and can claim the writing of the Old Testament and preservation of it. Yet they deny Christ, which is unnaceptable. The question for me is whether or not the Catholic Church would be the most beneficial to my relationship with Christ.

The problem for me is that I have seen far too many Catholics who aren't representing, and don't even know what their Catholic Church believes (or what they believe), let alone why.

I see imperfection in man's structural organization (just as there was imperfection in the Jewish Traditions). [i know you're gonna spit a bunch of references to me about the Holy Spirit leading the Catholic Church to perfection, but I see insufficient proof, in fact, I see proof otherwise, so save your breath]

I also find problems in Protestant Churches and belief systems, so I don't claim that they're exempt either..

My basis is on God, and my relationship with him, and what he shows me through scripture, and the fellowship I have with other believers.

[Paladin D]

I do agree with you, there are Catholics who do not know of their faith and/or don't practice it. Mainly because, the Catholic Church does not alter it's teachings just for people who don't want to live faithful lives.

The reason why many Protestants seem as if they're "truely serving God", is because there are many many different denominations and churches for them to choose from. If they don't agree with one church, they just find another one that best fits their needs.

And if they can't find one, they just start one.

[Undercover]

But what option do they have when it's not them that's at fault, it's the Church? I think there are two different scenarios, and you're leaving out the one where the Church is not doing it's job.

I agree with what you said above, and it's a shame that people think it's the Churches fault when it is them with the fault, but this isn't always the case. And sometimes a lot of hurt can happen while a person doesn't realize that the Church is imperfect, and that only God is perfect.

[CatholicAndFanatical]

I dont remember reading in the Gospels anywhere where Jesus said "Upon this Rock I will build a PERFECT Church"...The errors that the people in the Church have done in no way cast's out the mere fact that you can trace its History back to Christ. You cannot do that with any other Christian Church. Except maybe the Eastern Rite Church but they are closer to Catholic than any prot hopes to be.

If you would rather look at the people in the Church who are sinners rather than the actual Teachings of the Church then the sin is on you. You cannot have a relationship with Christ if you deny His Church.

What did Christ say to Paul before His convertion? Paul was killing Christians, who were Catholic. Christ knocked him off his horse and said "Saul...Saul..why are you persecuting ME" If you deny the Church He built, you deny Him who created it.

Also, as far as Jewish Religion, dont bash em, they are God's chosen people, God has a convenant with the Jewish people, he will never go against that Convenant with them..never.

What some Prots like to say is that Jewish people are some how damned because they 'killed' Jesus..so far from the truth.

Jesus didnt come to earth to die an old man. He came here to Die when it was His time to die. The Romans and Jewish leaders just did what God called them to do. Doesnt take away from the fact that Jews are Gods chosen people, we should respect that.

CatholicAndFanatical

[Jake Huether]

I dont remember reading in the Gospels anywhere where Jesus said "Upon this Rock I will build a PERFECT Church"

Your following sentences clarify your point. However, I wanted to point out that Christ did, in effect say, "upon this Rock I will build a [Perect] Church." Because he followed with, "and the gates of hell will not prevail against it.

The Church is perfect. It's members are not.

I know you already said that, and meant it. But just to be clear...

Also,

The Romans and Jewish leaders just did what God called them to do.

I don't know about that. God "calls" all people to worship and glorify Him. He didn't pre-destine these folks to kill His Son and die a burning death in hell. God knew that they would choose this, in their free will - the will of Satan ultimately, and that is how it happened. God let it happen, he didn't command it to happen. He engineered the outcome, not the "means".

Christ is out of Time, becaue He is God. We continue to nail him to the Cross at Calvary. We are the Jews and Romans. Are sins are just as horrible as theirs. Even worse if you ask me. They might not have known he was the Son of God. WE do, yet we still keep on pounding away at the nails. Yet, God isn't calling us to do that. He's calling us away from it.

The Jews now a days shouldn't be so up tight about the historical Jewish leaders who had Christ killed. Anymore than white folks now should feel culpable for slavery. Or Germans for the holocaust.

Jews are God's chosen people. "Chosen by him", but they also must "Choose him". The Jews who swing the hammers didn't choose him.