How well do you know Catholic Christianity?

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by RoyW on August 30, 2010 at 6:25am

Helen,

Nope, I am not a Greek scholar even though I did have to take a couple of semesters of it in college. I am confident that those who have given us the various translations of Scripture that we have today are pretty good at it.

As I have respectfully said and continue to say, we cannot come into agreement since we have different authority structure to which we refer. You are quoting that which I do not accept as evidence that the Apostles forgave sin. As I mentioned, I don't find that in Scripture, yet you say it is still an acceptable practice since of the authority you quote.

I have to respectfully disagree. I doubt that I am even close to being smart enough to persuade you. I have accepted the Canon of Scripture which you have not. That creates a divide that only the Spirit of God could help us with. This is the reason there are as many Protestants today as there are Catholics. However, the last I looked the Protestant Church is overtaking the Catholic Church but I know that doesn't mean anything and is really not worth talking about so forget about that.

I need to stay out of the discussion as you and David are doing a wonderful job. My only contribution has to do with which authority you subscribe to and as long as you are quoting an authority structure that we do not accept, I do not see the possibility of reconciliation but understanding is very good.

Good job.

Roy

Permalink Reply by Helen on August 30, 2010 at 6:36pm

Dearest David,

Many thanks for you comment again. Since I cannot reply to your reply, I will post my response her for the sake of clarity and for the benefit of those following the discussion.

In the light of your reply, I will try to re-formulate my answer to you on this issue of Confession in the same format as the author of this forum uses for her responses; because I find that either you missed some of my points or, most likely, I must have failed to make them clear enough for you.

Please see your comments in bold and my replies below them.

John 20:22 - the Lord "breathes" on the apostles, and then gives them the power to forgive and retain sins. 23 - Jesus says, "If you forgive the sins of any, they are forgiven. If you retain the sins of any, they are retained."

In order to understand the word of God correctly one must follow three rules:

1. Interpret the verse according to context.
2. Context
3. CONTEXT

R - Agreed, considering the context is imperative. I would hate to take things out of context.

These verses do not give authority to Christians to forgive sins. Jesus was saying that the believer can boldly declare the certainty of a sinner's forgiveness by the Father because of the work of His Son if that sinner has repented and believed the gospel. The believer with certainly can also tell those who do not respond to the message of God's forgiveness through faith in Christ that their sins, as a result, are not forgiven.

R- Correct. Indeed Jesus, like I said in my other reply to you, is NOT giving all his brethren authority to forgive anything. He is giving Authority to His CHOSEN Apostles, as it is plainly written:

Those whose sins you forgive are forgiven, and he whose sins you retain, are retained (Jn 20:22-23)

If the scripture above were given men authority to forgive sins then the scripture would be contradicting other verses where it's clearly shown that only God can forgive sins.

John 20:21 (New International Version)

21Again Jesus said, "Peace be with you! As the Father has sent me, I am sending you."

R - Dear David, two things: I am struggling to see where V21 contradicts V22 and V23. I am being honest.

‘Peace be with you’ or Shalom is a greeting that Jesus used throughout the Scriptures. And ‘As the Father has sent me I send you’ only reinforces my point. (Please refer to my reply to you, not to Roy).
Then, I am sorry if I am repeating myself, but again, you missed my points in the previous reply.

The Old Covenant people believed only God could forgive sins. Then Jesus, the Son of Man and Son of God, comes and say that He can forgive sins in the NAME of He who sent Him.

Then He tells the Apostles: “As the Father has sent me, I send you” and “ Those whose sins you forgive…[…] ( The Pharisees were outraged with Jesus’ boldness in forgiving sins, weren’t they? Who does he think he is, they thought)

Welcome to the New Covenant inaugurated by Christ!

David, I must admit, I've read your reply and I am afraid there is nothing in there that can Scripturally refute the Sacrament of confession. Really.

You are using the The Didache: Teachings of the 12 to make your case which is not a canonical literature. Many believe the 12 Apostles wrote it which is highly unlikely as well as the date assigned to it. I do not want to turn this into a technical debate so I will refrain from heading that route, but is unlikely, the work could be a direct result of the first Apostolic Council @ c.50 (Acts 15:28). There is no mention of this document in scripture.

R- I think you are being unfair here. Please again read my post (not to Roy) and you will see that I not only used Scriptural evidence to make my case (even if you don’t agree with my arguments, which is another problem), but I tried to the best of my ability to elaborate on the Scriptures NOT on The Didache. (Which IS indeed acknowledged and recognized as genuine document by scholars and historians alike).

For us is only "sola scriptura" the authority of scripture alone, while the RC is Church tradition and Scripture according to the interpretation of the Pope.

R- I am sorry David, but this is wrong, another misconception protestants have regarding the Catholic Church. In fact, the RCC teachings are SCRIPTURE and Sacred Tradition Based. Scripture first and capital T for Tradition! And it is not according to the interpretation of the Pope, another misconception...

As I have already explained in my other reply, Jesus promised to be with His disciples to end of times and to send them the Holy Spirit to guide them in ALL truth.

Popes are only infallible when exercising authority as an ex-cathedra. Only then, he and ALL Bishops in communion with him, guided by the Holy Spirit, as Jesus promised, can speak with Authority as the Church and the Bride of Christ.

SOLA SCRIPTURE

Can you support Sola Scripture Scripturally?

Since you deny the need for the Church Authority, I don’t quite see how that ONE Scripture, can result in 38 thousand plus different protestant churches with different interpretations. If there is ONE TRUTH, and we know there is, then HOW do you explain so many different interpretations?

And if just about anyone can interpret the Scriptures, without the risk of misinterpreting them, why do you think Peter would have said this? : (PLEASE, DO reply to this)

‘There are some things in them that are hard to understand, which the ignorant and unstable twist to their own destruction, as they do the other Scriptures. You therefore, beloved, knowing this beforehand, take care that you are not carried away with the error of lawless people and lose your own stability.(2Peter 3: 16-17)

God bless you and thank again!

Helen.

Permalink Reply by David Velasquez on August 30, 2010 at 10:14pm

Hello Helen,

I will follow your lead and repackage my response to you as well, because is obvious we are having a communication break down hahahha All your fault of course hahahha since I explained myself flawlessly hahahha J/K sis Ohhh man I am cracking myself up again. See that is why I enjoy this exchanges, not only can I say stuff like that without worrying about you kicking me or punching me (haha), but they do push us to become better communicators and mainly to study God's word.

Ok to the business of knocking your theological logic out haahaha J/K Ok – ok I will be serious now. :)

>>like I said in my other reply to you, (Jesus) is NOT giving all his brethren authority to forgive anything. He is giving Authority to His CHOSEN Apostles, as it is plainly written.

Ok lets go back to square one. The Lord has established his church, for now lets forget the argument of Jesus founding His church on Peter per RC belief, and rather lets look at the whole New Testament picture we get of God’s purposes for His people.

Was God’s intention for only certain elected people to evangelize or does He want all members of the body to share the gospel? Do we all have authority to tell someone, if you repent and believe in your heart and confess with your mouth Jesus as Lord you are saved and if you don’t, you are condemned already.

Christ's command to go and make disciples of all nations seems to be given to all His disciples, not just the first twelve (Matt 28:18-20).

Acts 8
1And Saul was there, giving approval to his death. On that day a great persecution broke out against the church at Jerusalem, and all except the apostles were scattered throughout Judea and Samaria. 2 Godly men buried Stephen and mourned deeply for him. 3 But Saul began to destroy the church. Going from house to house, he dragged off men and women and put them in prison. 4 Those who had been scattered preached the word wherever they went.

Who is scattered and who stays in Jerusalem?

Acts 11:19-21

19 Now those who had been scattered by the persecution in connection with Stephen traveled as far as Phoenicia, Cyprus and Antioch, telling the message only to Jews. 20 Some of them, however, men from Cyprus and Cyrene, went to Antioch and began to speak to Greeks also, telling them the good news about the LORD Jesus. 21 The LORD's hand was with them, and a great number of people believed and turned to the LORD.

1 Peter 1:1-2
1 Peter, an apostle of Jesus Christ, To God's elect, strangers in the world, scattered throughout Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia and Bithynia, 2 who have been chosen according to the foreknowledge of God the Father, through the sanctifying work of the Spirit, for obedience to Jesus Christ and sprinkling by his blood: Grace and peace be yours in abundance.

1Pet 3:15
15 But in your hearts set apart Christ as LORD. Always be prepared to give an answer to everyone who asks you to give the reason for the hope that you have. But do this with gentleness and respect,

Who is Peter writing to? What does he tell them to do?

Rom 1:14-15
14 I am obligated both to Greeks and non-Greeks, both to the wise and the foolish. 15 That is why I am so eager to preach the gospel also to you who are at Rome.

Is this simply a descriptive passage about Paul's desires as an apostle? Do they apply to each one of us today?

According to Acts 6:5, Philip was a deacon, which was a position not of spiritual oversight and leadership, but of service in the physical and financial matters of the church. Yet in Acts 8:5-6, 25-40, we see Philip engaged in cross-cultural evangelism

I could go on and on sis, but these verses should suffice for now. Everyone in the church is to evangelize and has the God given authority as a child of God to announce the good news. We can tell folks that their sins are forgiven if they Repent and believe in Christ as well as to tell them that their sins are not forgiven if they do not believe in Christ.

A new commandment I give to you, that you love one another, even as I have loved you that you also love one another. By this all men will know that you are My disciples, if you have love for one another (John 13:34-35).

The command to love applies to all Christians, and one intended effect of that command is evangelistic witness.

Romans 10:9 because, if you confess with your mouth that Jesus is Lord and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved. 10 For with the heart one believes and is justified, and with the mouth one confesses and is saved. 11 For the Scripture says, “Everyone who believes in him will not be put to shame.” 12 For there is no distinction between Jew and Greek; for the same Lord is Lord of all, bestowing his riches on all who call on him. 13 For “everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved.”14 How then will they call on him in whom they have not believed? And how are they to believe in him of whom they have never heard? And how are they to hear without someone preaching? 15 And how are they to preach unless they are sent? As it is written, “How beautiful are the feet of those who preach the good news!”

Acts 18 But you will receive power when the Holy Spirit has come upon you, and you will be my witnesses in Jerusalem and in all Judea and Samaria, and to the end of the earth.”

Do all believers receive the power describe here? Of course beloved and what will happen then?

They will be Jesus’ witnesses in Jerusalem and in all Judea and Samaria, and to the end of the earth. Hallelujah!!! Praise the name of my Lord. I have been empowered and commission to go and preach the Gospel.

Now sis – We see in Scripture that God gives gifts to all in the body Romans 12; 1 Corinthians 12 etc… But He also gives Ministry gifts to some He calls Ephes. 4. Among all these gifts and callings there are no priests or popes or etc…

If you say that in Acts 1:8 He was only speaking to the Apostle you are correct but also to those future believers. Did the Apostles take the Gospel to the end of the earth? Nope, we are still doing that.

Ok back to your post –

John-20:21(NIV)

21 Again Jesus said, "Peace be with you! As the Father has sent me, I am sending you."

>>R - Dear David, two things: I am struggling to see where V21 contradicts V22 and V23. I am being honest.

Beloved I never said that verse 21 contradicts verse 23. You got to read my comments patiently girl. Don’t be speeding through my hard work hahaha ohhh no I am cracking me self up again. :) hehe

What I was establishing with verse 21 is that He who has all power will be present with them, a help in time of need. He is a mighty, present and helping Savior. He will be with every believer until His coming. To help us in the commission He has given every believer. Verse 21 establishes that since the Lord is with us we can go and proclaim the good news telling people that their sins are forgiven or not, depending on them being born again or not.

We both agree that they have no such power within themselves of themselves, but because God is in us we have such authority or do you ignore that we have been sealed with the Holy Spirit?

I think I will stop here for now and deal with the other issues later on your post.

Blessings sis.

Permalink Reply by David Velasquez on August 31, 2010 at 3:40am

Beloved Helen,

Continuation of previous post to answer your latest comments to me :)

>>Indeed Jesus, like I said in my other reply to you, is NOT giving all his brethren authority to forgive anything. He is giving Authority to His CHOSEN Apostles, as it is plainly written:

To make my point super clear. Let me state here that Jesus was not given the 12 or anyone else the authority to forgive sins, but to declare the fact that if people believe in Christ they are forgiven and if they do not, their sins are not forgiven. The Gospel of John in chapter 20 has correlation with the Gospel of Matthew chapter 28; I trust you know, right? That is why I had mentioned verse 21 of John chapter 20 to make the correlation to the great commission found in Matthew 28.

>>The Old Covenant people believed only God could forgive sins. Then Jesus, the Son of Man and Son of God, comes and say that He can forgive sins in the NAME of He who sent Him. Then He tells the Apostles: “As the Father has sent me, I send you” and “ Those whose sins you forgive…

Jesus is God in the flesh so as I stated He can forgive sins anywhere, anytime, but as I have labored to explained to you the apostles and us, we are fully human with the divine nature in us (the Holy Spirit), but we are not God. Jesus did not give the apostles to forgive sins in the manner the RCC teaches otherwise the word of God would contradict itself.

>>Welcome to the New Covenant inaugurated by Christ!

Ahhh nope, the new covenant did not include humans forgiving sins. That is just wrong hermeneutics.

>>David, I must admit, I've read your reply and I am afraid there is nothing in there that can scripturally refute the Sacrament of confession. Really.

Really how did you missed the following scriptures:

If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness." 1 John 1:9

In the book of Acts, a man named Simon came to the alleged first pope, Peter, wanting to buy the power of the Holy Spirit. How did Peter respond to this sin? Did he suggest that Simon make a confession to him right there? No, Peter told him to repent and confess his sin to God and ask God to forgive him. (See Acts 8:18-22).

Can you provide me with one verse where the Apostles for gave some one sins?

I will give you some more so we do not have any misunderstandings anymore.

From and article by Dr. Max D. Younce

when you have placed your confidence in any priest or minister as mediator between yourself and God, you have acknowledged them as being equal with Christ. For any minister or priest to declare that you must go through him to obtain forgiveness of sins is ludicrous, apostate, and diametrically opposed to the Word of God.
"Howbeit in vain do they worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men."- Mark 7:7

"And he said unto them, Full well ye reject the commandment of God, that ye may keep your own tradition." -Mark 7:9

"Making the word of God of none effect through your tradition, which ye have delivered: and many such like things do ye." -Mark 7:13

"Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ." -Colossians 2:8

Every minister that loves the Lord Jesus Christ will not draw attention to himself, let alone claim the power to forgive sin. He will declare as Paul did to the Corinthians:

" 1st Corinthians 2:2 and 1:31...

For I determined not to know any thing among you, save Jesus Christ, and Him crucified." (2:2)

"...He that glorieth, let him glory in the Lord (not in himself)." (1:31)
To the Seventy who preached Christ and Him crucified, the Lord said concerning their hearers in Luke 10:16...

"He that heareth you heareth me; and he that despiseth you despiseth me; and he that despiseth me despiseth him that sent me."
Keep in mind, it was the message they preached that would be accepted or rejected. The message would save or condemn, and that God's Word is truth (John 17:17).

" And it shall come to pass, that whosoever shall call on the name of the Lord shall be saved." (Acts 2:21)

They were saved because of the Word of God Peter preached. They were then baptized as a public testimony of their faith. Notice Peter's Words in Acts 2:41...

"Then they that gladly received his word were baptized: and the same day there were added unto them about 3,000 souls."

God sent Peter to the Gentile named Cornelius, to show the Jews that the Gentiles could be saved also. Read Chapter 10 and nowhere do you find Peter EVER claiming the power to forgive anyone's sins. Peter directed the lost to Christ and Him alone. Here are Peter's Words in Acts 10:43...

"To him (Christ) give all the prophets witness, that through his (Christ's) name whosoever BELIEVETH IN HIM (Christ) SHALL RECEIVE REMISSION OF SINS."

1st Timothy blatantly declares in 2:5..."For there is one God, and ONE MEDIATOR BETWEEN GOD AND MEN, the man CHRIST JESUS."

Then they will realize that, not in all the New Testament nor in Peter's two epistles, was there the vestige, either claimed or exercised, of Peter forgiving anyone's sin. Who will you believe--man or God?

Romans 3:4 makes it perfectly clear concerning God's Word...

"God forbid: yea, let God be true, but every man a liar..."

One would have to outright deny the Word of God and call Jesus Christ a liar by not acknowledging that Christ, and He alone, is the only One Who can forgive our sins. He has not given that authority to anyone.

1st John 1:8-10,
"If we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us." If we confess our sins, he (Christ) is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness." (vs. 9)


"
Who are we to confess sins to? Answer: Jesus Christ.

Who is faithful to forgive our sins? Answer: Jesus Christ.

Who is able to cleanse us from all unrighteousness? Answer: Jesus Christ.

Ok – You should have plenty now.

Blessings.

Permalink Reply by David Velasquez on August 31, 2010 at 3:49am

Dear Helen,

ok - this is the third and final response to your latest post.

>>Can you support Sola Scripture Scripturally?

http://www.gotquestions.org/sola-scriptura.html

Question: "What is sola scriptura?"

Answer: The phrase sola scriptura is from the Latin: sola having the idea of “alone,” “ground,” “base,” and the word scriptura meaning “writings”—referring to the Scriptures. Sola scriptura means that Scripture alone is authoritative for the faith and practice of the Christian. The Bible is complete, authoritative, and true. “All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness” (2 Timothy 3:16).

Sola scriptura was the rallying cry of the Protestant Reformation. For centuries the Roman Catholic Church had made its traditions superior in authority to the Bible. This resulted in many practices that were in fact contradictory to the Bible. Some examples are prayer to saints and/or Mary, the immaculate conception, transubstantiation, infant baptism, indulgences, and papal authority. Martin Luther, the founder of the Lutheran Church and father of the Protestant Reformation, was publicly rebuking the Catholic Church for its unbiblical teachings. The Catholic Church threatened Martin Luther with excommunication (and death) if he did not recant. Martin Luther's reply was, “Unless therefore I am convinced by the testimony of Scripture, or by the clearest reasoning, unless I am persuaded by means of the passages I have quoted, and unless they thus render my conscience bound by the Word of God, I cannot and will not retract, for it is unsafe for a Christian to speak against his conscience. Here I stand, I can do no other; may God help me! Amen!”

The primary Catholic argument against sola scriptura is that the Bible does not explicitly teach sola scriptura. Catholics argue that the Bible nowhere states that it is the only authoritative guide for faith and practice. While this is true, they fail to recognize a crucially important issue. We know that the Bible is the Word of God. The Bible declares itself to be God-breathed, inerrant, and authoritative. We also know that God does not change His mind or contradict Himself. So, while the Bible itself may not explicitly argue for sola scriptura, it most definitely does not allow for traditions that contradict its message. Sola scriptura is not as much of an argument against tradition as it is an argument against unbiblical, extra-biblical and/or anti-biblical doctrines. The only way to know for sure what God expects of us is to stay true to what we know He has revealed—the Bible. We can know, beyond the shadow of any doubt, that Scripture is true, authoritative, and reliable. The same cannot be said of tradition.

The Word of God is the only authority for the Christian faith. Traditions are valid only when they are based on Scripture and are in full agreement with Scripture. Traditions that contradict the Bible are not of God and are not a valid aspect of the Christian faith. Sola scriptura is the only way to avoid subjectivity and keep personal opinion from taking priority over the teachings of the Bible. The essence of sola scriptura is basing your spiritual life on the Bible alone and rejecting any tradition or teaching that is not in full agreement with the Bible. Second Timothy 2:15 declares, “Do your best to present yourself to God as one approved, a workman who does not need to be ashamed and who correctly handles the word of truth.”

Sola scriptura does not nullify the concept of church traditions. Rather, sola scriptura gives us a solid foundation on which to base church traditions. There are many practices, in both Catholic and Protestant churches, that are the result of traditions, not the explicit teaching of Scripture. It is good, and even necessary, for the church to have traditions. Traditions play an important role in clarifying and organizing Christian practice. At the same time, in order for these traditions to be valid, they must not be in disagreement with God’s Word. They must be based on the solid foundation of the teaching of Scripture. The problem with the Roman Catholic Church, and many other churches, is that they base traditions on traditions which are based on traditions which are based on traditions, often with the initial tradition not being in full harmony with the Scriptures. That is why Christians must always go back to sola scriptura, the authoritative Word of God, as the only solid basis for faith and practice.

On a practical matter, a frequent objection to the concept of sola scriptura is the fact that the canon of the Bible was not officially agreed upon for at least 250 years after the church was founded. Further, the Scriptures were not available to the masses for over 1500 years after the church was founded. How, then, were early Christians to use sola scriptura, when they did not even have the full Scriptures? And how were Christians who lived before the invention of the printing press supposed to base their faith and practice on Scripture alone if there was no way for them to have a complete copy of the Scriptures? This issue is further compounded by the very high rates of illiteracy throughout history. How does the concept of sola scriptura handle these issues?

The problem with this argument is that it essentially says that Scripture’s authority is based on its availability. This is not the case. Scripture’s authority is universal; because it is God’s Word, it is His authority. The fact that Scripture was not readily available, or that people could not read it, does not change the fact that Scripture is God’s Word. Further, rather than this being an argument against sola scriptura, it is actually an argument for what the church should have done, instead of what it did. The early church should have made producing copies of the Scriptures a high priority. While it was unrealistic for every Christian to possess a complete copy of the Bible, it was possible that every church could have some, most, or all of the Scriptures available to it. Early church leaders should have made studying the Scriptures their highest priority so they could accurately teach it. Even if the Scriptures could not be made available to the masses, at least church leaders could be well-trained in the Word of God. Instead of building traditions upon traditions and passing them on from generation to generation, the church should have copied the Scriptures and taught the Scriptures (2 Timothy 4:2).

Again, traditions are not the problem. Unbiblical traditions are the problem. The availability of the Scriptures throughout the centuries is not the determining factor. The Scriptures themselves are the determining factor. We now have the Scriptures readily available to us. Through the careful study of God’s Word, it is clear that many church traditions which have developed over the centuries are in fact contradictory to the Word of God. This is where sola scriptura applies. Traditions that are based on, and in agreement with, God’s Word can be maintained. Traditions that are not based on, and/or disagree with, God’s Word must be rejected. Sola scriptura points us back to what God has revealed to us in His Word. Sola scriptura ultimately points us back to the God who always speaks the truth, never contradicts Himself, and always proves Himself to be dependable.

Blessings beloved

Permalink Reply by David Velasquez on August 29, 2010 at 8:05pm

Hello Helen,

Many thanks for being a good sport and taking the time to give such a detail response. It is not easy for me to point out the doctrinal discrepancies in the RCC because I know many here love the Catholic Church as you do friend. The RCC is so rich in history and practices that make one feel religious in the good sense of the word.

Your posts make me think you are bright and a Spiritual young lady. I am sure you have a desire to worship God in Spirit and in truth more than all else. Over the years I been in Christ I have had to revise my biblical beliefs pertaining to various doctrines a few times, because I continue to study the word and what God’s people have written about the word throughout the ages. I imagine that a Catholic must feel fortunate to have a Catechism and so many other documents to guide them, but what if some of those practices and doctrines are wrong. It is only recently that the members of the Catholic Church are somewhat encourage to read the word. Your average Catholic is full of teaching from priests and other clergy, but not direct enlightenment from the Holy Spirit. Most members are not equipped to discern right from wrong doctrine. One of the most beautiful attitudes a person can posses is a teachable attitude. A person who is willing to grow and change when confronted with facts is precious to the Lord. I know i am digressing hahaha Sowweee but please bear with me.

None of the participants here when making a case for their views state that the official Pentecostal or Baptist etc... view of a subject is this or that. Instead you find a group of folks who through personal study of scripture and also a study of the writings of the many beautiful men and women God has used throughout Church history have come to believe what they do. We examine everything against scripture and if it does not aligned with it we do not embrace it. If enough practices of a church do not align with scripture then that is not a healthy Church. One must move on regardless of the discomfort that may bring about or the controversies that may rise within the family. Worshiping God in Spirit and in truth is much more important.

However Catholics don't deal with the topics as most Christians would. RCC's always quote what "The Church" believes about the issue. I would love for my Catholic bros and sis to put the Catechism aside and pick up a bible and read it for themselves and allow the Spirit of the Lord to guide them to all truth.

John 16:12-15
12 "I have yet many things to say to you, but you cannot bear them now.13 When the Spirit of truth comes, he will guide you into all the truth; for he will not speak on his own authority, but whatever he hears he will speak, and he will declare to you the things that are to come.

What would you give to know all truth! Truth is not something we create nor is it something found in a church structure, but in the pages of the word of God. Some Churches align close to the truth of God and others don’t. Truth is the gift of God through the enlightenment of the Holy Spirit as we study His word. Jesus tells his disciples that it is the role of the Holy Spirit to reveal what is true.

You need no man to teach you, (I am called to teach, so I am not against teachers:) but the Holy Spirit. God has given us the teachers of teachers so we can be guided to all truth primarily by the Spirit. Sis can you contend for your Catholic believes by using the word of God primarily and when confronted with the protestant interpretations of the verses can you then tell me why our interpretation is in error with scripture. Do you pray on the interpretation given to you and ask God to lead you help accepted if it be the truth or do you automatically discounted as false? Are you stopping to view the verses we point to in context using good hermeneutics?

You have a beautiful attitude. How I wish all Christians could touch on these difficult topics with the love, patience you exemplify. If I ever offend you please know is not intentional and do let me know so I can explain.
Just so you know sis I am familiar with ecclesiastical history including the RCC’s history. I enjoy reading the writing of the church fathers including some that were RC’s. I truly enjoy the writings of St. Augustine and his disciple Thomas Aquinas. Brilliant minds.

Ok I better get to your post or this will turn in to a book. Actually I will stop here and add another post to response to your latest one in order to keep this post from becoming to extensive.

Ok – Bendiciones amiga / since you want to use Latin I will use Spanish hahaha

Permalink Reply by Helen on August 29, 2010 at 9:04pm

Hi David,

I have just read your comment, thank you and I am sorry for not properly replying to it now, I need to go to bed because its late.

But I would not be able to do it if I didnt say this to you:

As much as you may think that I love the Catholic Church, I have to say to you this very IMPORTANT secret: I LOVE JESUS more! This does not mean I dont appreciate the RCC for all she has done for Christianity (even if some anti-catholic refuse to see it this way).

I am here STRIVING to prove my point to the whole lot of people that Catholics ARE CHRISTIANS, just as Methodists, Baptist and so on are.

Believe me, Catholics in America are treated with contempt. I know of a family who could not enrole their children in a Christian home schooling program because they were Catholics!!

I work for my Church for the LOVE I have for Christ. I want other people to respect and accept us. Many dont believe that Catholics can have a personal relationship with Jesus, the Church gets in the way, they say...But that is so untrue... I wish you could have more personal contact with pious Catholics and you would see.


Now good night and God Bless

Helen

Permalink Reply by David Velasquez on August 30, 2010 at 12:51am

Hey Helen,

You made my day by telling me that secret. I won't tell anyone - Ok LOL

Loving Jesus more Rocks!

On the second page of this discussion I told Sharon the following:

The Catholic Church has done great things for the kingdom of God throughout history and I am a firm believer that there are saved Catholics as there are saved Protestants. However due to the abundance of false doctrines in the Catholic Church I do not believe it to be conducive for Christian growth.

I can't speak for every member, but I do know that most Christians consider Catholics Christians. One of my oldest and dearest friends is a RC.

I will be honest with you of what I think and this is not to offend you, but simply to disclose my mind to you. I believe that a Catholic can have a relationship with Christ but not a good knowledge of scripture, because how can someone have good knowledge of scripture and not see the discrepancies between RCC doctrines/practices and the word? Some are so obvious.

Thank you for giving me a smile. Back at you :)

Blessings sis

Permalink Reply by RoyW on August 31, 2010 at 5:33am

Helen,

In this post you said something I consider very important. I have a question: can you belong to the catholic church and still maintain some personal beliefs? Or, do your beliefs have to pretty much measure up with the church. If you differ, are you still welcomed? It is obvious that you can either be pro-choice or pro-life and still be catholic. Could a Calvinist be a Catholic? Could a person who believed the canonized Bible was the supreme authority still be Catholic? I used to worship with a bunch of charismatic Catholics. However, we eventually parted ways - some moved (my case) and others just dissipated. The problem I saw in our group was that we didn't have a common authority which I still believe it all comes down to.

I must admit that the Catholics really knew how to worship God. I was taken a little off guard when I seemed to be having some kind of experience that I didn't understand. I was taken to a place by the Priest where I never had been before. I have always wondered about that experience. This much I can tell you as far as I could tell: those people really loved Jesus and so did I. We did have that in common. I can agree with you that I love Jesus more than anything else. But, there are just so many unbiblical ideas. I will also admit that I love watching the EWTN channel sometimes, especially when they have their worship conventions. I very much dislike some of the other Christian channels.

But, in my life His Word is the rule for my faith and practice. I am not going to speak evil of you because I really do believe you love Jesus. I will also admit that the rosary is not my favorite thing from the Catholics.

God bless you. I am really enjoying your and David's comments.

A brother,
Roy

Permalink Reply by Helen on August 31, 2010 at 9:50am

Dear Roy,

I honestly regret if I have offended you with my reply (below). I sincerely apologize if I did so. It was not my intention.

Please, feel free to participate in the discussions, I am sure your input will be much cherished. I am not an expert in Roman Catholicism myself, I am a Catholic, yes, but that does not make me equipped to 'lecture' on the subject. I would have to have a lot more time to study if I were to explain deeply all the Doctrines of my Church.

With that said, I do not want you to assume that I do not know the reasons for the Church’s doctrines and teachings. Every Catholic does know them, one better then others, but explaining them in the light of antagonistic comments can be quite a challenge because, again, I am not a scholar apologist.

I am, however, a Christian and Jesus is my Saviour. So, should feel like joining us in this forum, you'll be most welcome.

Thanks again and God bless you!

Helen

Permalink Reply by Helen on August 31, 2010 at 4:04pm

David, I am replying to your post where you start: "I will follow your lead and repackage my response to you as well, because is obvious we are having a communication [...]" PLEASE, do not reply to this until I have replied to the other 2 replies you posted.

This Reply is to be refered as PART 01/03

As usual, your comments are in bold. I will be as brief as possible.

Ok lets go back to square one. The Lord has established his church, for now lets forget the argument of Jesus founding His church on Peter per RC belief, and rather lets look at the whole New Testament picture we get of God’s purposes for His people.

David, I can’t simply drop the argument of Jesus founding His Church, because without clearing this point, we will not be able to move on to anything, because you refuse to see/accept where the Authority of the Church comes from. Without this understanding it is not possible, at least not for me (there might be some Catholics Apologists & theologians out there who are) to prove my point.

Hence, I will elaborate my reply to you anchored by the understanding that indeed Jesus founded His Church upon Peter, that He gave Peter the Keys of the Kingdom and promised that the gates of Hades would NOT prevail against His Church; and that the Father would send the Holy Spirit to reveal ALL TRUTH to the Apostles, who would them, just as the Father had sent Jesus, go and make disciples of all nation.

I can’t drop all this simply because all this is written plainly and clearly in the Scripture and refuting it would be a grave misinterpretation of my part.

Now, to your comments:

Was God’s intention for only certain elected people to evangelize or does He want all members of the body to share the gospel? Do we all have authority to tell someone, if you repent and believe in your heart and confess with your mouth Jesus as Lord you are saved and if you don’t, you are condemned already.

I will reply to your FIRST question with some questions:

1-What is Evangelize?
Teach the Truth of the Gospel without error, correct?
2- Can we consider anyone who teaches a mistaken interpretation of the Gospel an GOOD Evangelizer?
No, because if there is error, than the Truth of God is compromised.
3- Who then can teach anything, any subject?
Those who know and have a solid and sound understanding of the subject, correct?
4- Who can read the Scripture and through their own interpretation put them in practice in their lives?
Anyone, every Christian should read the Scriptures and try and live what they teach.
5- Can we make mistakes when we do that?

Bear in mind that our Lord's patience means salvation, just as our dear brother Paul also wrote you with the wisdom that God gave him. He writes the same way in all his letters, speaking in them of these matters. His letters contain some things that are hard to understand, which ignorant and unstable people distort, as they do the other Scriptures, to their own destruction. (2 Peter 3:15-16)


Therefore, yes, it is POSSIBLE that one might misunderstand, not through all their own fault, but rather unintentionally, one might misunderstand some things the Scriptures teach.

6- Who doe the Scriptures say to have received ALL the Truth from God?

Christ’s Apostles.

“I still have many things to say to you, but you cannot bear them now. When the Spirit comes, he will guide you into ALL TRUTH.” (Jn16:12-13)

“And Jesus came and said to them, "All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me. Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you. And behold, I am with you always, to the end of the age." (Matt 28:18-20).

7- Who was in the upper room when the Holy Spirit descended revealing ALL the TRUTH?

ALL the Apostles and Mary, Jesus’ Mother.

8- What did they do immediately after being ‘filled’ with the Holy Spirit?

Went out and to proclaim the Good News of the Gospel in all sorts of Languages. This was to fulfil Jesus’ command to them to : Go and MAKE disciples of ALL nations

9- When they came out full of the Holy Spirit. Who stood up and addressed the crowds?

Peter, the Rock, the leader chosen by Jesus.

Peter’s leadership is consistently shown in the Gospel according Matthew. In many, many instances Peter is the one who speak as leader in the name of the twelve.

For instance, when Jesus came back for Caesarea and asked His disciples, 'Who do men say that the Son of Man is?' And they said, 'Some say John the Baptist, others say Elijah, others Jeremiah or one of the prophets'." Then Jesus asks them, but who do YOU think I am?

10- Who answers Jesus?

"Peter replied, 'You are the Christ (the Messiah), the Son of the Living God.' (Matt 16: 16).

11- Does the Scriptures say that God revealed His Truth to anybody else in the NT who was not in the Upper room?

Yes, for instance St. Paul, when he was blinded on his way to Damascus was selected by Jesus to become an Evangelizer, an Ambassador of Christianity. After that experience, as we see in 2 Peter3:15, Paul received “the wisdom that God gave him”

12- Therefore, can we support the understanding that whosoever reads the Scriptures has the Authority or the wisdom to teach it?

No, based on what the Scriptures tell us, we cannot make that statement.

In reply to your second question: Do we all have authority to tell someone, if you repent and believe in your heart and confess with your mouth Jesus as Lord you are saved and if you don’t, you are condemned already.

This question is rather complex as it involves justification and salvation more than it does authority. But for the sake discussion, I think we should begin by looking at Matthew 18: 15-19.

15"If your brother sins against you, go and show him his fault, just between the two of you. If he listens to you, you have won your brother over. 16But if he will not listen, take one or two others along, so that 'every matter may be established by the testimony of two or three witnesses. 17If he refuses to listen to them, TELL IT TO THE to CHURCH; and IF HE REFUSES TO LISTEN even TO THE CHURCH, treat him as you would a pagan or a tax collector. 18"I tell you the truth, whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven. 19"Again, I tell you that if two of you on earth agree about anything you ask for, it will be done for you by my Father in heaven. 20For where two or three come together in my name, there am I with them."


Here we see that, although the members of the Church are encouraged to entice repentance and solve conflicts, the final authority is given to the leaders of the Church. When it comes to ’salvation’ you might appreciate that the RCC does not agree with the Protestant view of it being a one-time event, but I URGE you NOT to divert from the Subject of Confession, AS WE can discuss Salvation and Justification, which are two completely separated subject to CONFESSION, later on down the line. Please, David.

Christ's command to go and make disciples of all nations seems to be given to all His disciples, not just the first twelve (Matt 28:18-20).

Acts 8
1And Saul was there, giving approval to his death. On that day a great persecution broke out against the church at Jerusalem, and all except the apostles were scattered throughout Judea and Samaria. 2 Godly men buried Stephen and mourned deeply for him. 3 But Saul began to destroy the church. Going from house to house, he dragged off men and women and put them in prison. 4 Those who had been scattered preached the word wherever they went.

Who is scattered and who stays in Jerusalem?

The Apostles were not scattered, but the believers, what is your point?
Are you trying to argue that because the members of the church were located in various locations they were made authoritive evangelizers?

Acts 11:19-21

19 Now those who had been scattered by the persecution in connection with Stephen traveled as far as Phoenicia, Cyprus and Antioch, telling the message only to Jews. 20 Some of them, however, men from Cyprus and Cyrene, went to Antioch and began to speak to Greeks also, telling them the good news about the LORD Jesus. 21 The LORD's hand was with them, and a great number of people believed and turned to the LORD.

Perfect. But who from they had learned the GOOD NEWS? From those who had received it first hand, right? Are you defending oral Tradition now? Or did they Go about ‘reading the New Testament’ that didn’t even exist at that time?

This, my dear brother in Christ, if ANYTHING, supports my point about oral Tradition the Authority of the Disciples NOT the authority of the whole Body of the believers!!!

Furthermore, lets not forget what Jesus told the Apostles: “Go and make DISCIPLES of all Nations”. And after making disciples, the Apostles would then ‘oversee’ their disciple’s ministry. These is evident in the Letters sent out by Peter, Paul and Timothy (a disciple of Paul himself and so on..).

Keep watch over yourselves and all the flock of which the Holy Spirit has made you overseers.[a] Be shepherds of the church of God, which he bought with his own blood. ( Acts 20:28)

Please note that the word [a]“overseers” is a translation of the Episcopos,the Greek root for Bishops. Therefore, Apostolic Church bishops such as Clement of Rome, Ignatius of Antioch and Polycarp of Smyrna were all successors of the chosen Twelve through the laying of hands (1 Tim 4:14).

Who is Peter writing to? What does he tell them to do?

David, you saved me a lot of work quoting so many passages that actually support my point, NOT yours: 1 Peter 1:1-2 ,1Pet 3:15, Rom 1:14-15

In these passages and all the others that you mentioned the overseer, in this case of Peter‘s letters, Peter is giving directions to others that He or another Apostles selected and anointed as a subordinated minister. This is so clear that I cannot understand how you refuse to see it, I have even used them myself in article that I wrote some time ago.


Is this simply a descriptive passage about Paul's desires as an apostle? Do they apply to each one of us today?

According to Acts 6:5, Philip was a deacon, which was a position not of spiritual oversight and leadership, but of service in the physical and financial matters of the church. Yet in Acts 8:5-6, 25-40, we see Philip engaged in cross-cultural evangelism

See, again you are helping me make my case. Philip, as a Deacon is not a leader, but a follower. Follower of what? Of the instructions given by the leader. What does the leader have? The authority to lead.


A new commandment I give to you, that you love one another, even as I have loved you that you also love one another. By this all men will know that you are My disciples, if you have love for one another (John 13:34-35).

The command to love applies to all Christians, and one intended effect of that command is evangelistic witness.

Agreed 100%!!! But this passage is not relevant for our discussion because it pertains something else, talks about being witness not Authority.

Romans 10:9 because, if you confess with your mouth that Jesus is Lord and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved. 10 For with the heart one believes and is justified, and with the mouth one confesses and is saved. 11 For the Scripture says, “Everyone who believes in him will not be put to shame.” 12 For there is no distinction between Jew and Greek; for the same Lord is Lord of all, bestowing his riches on all who call on him. 13 For “everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved.”14 How then will they call on him in whom they have not believed? And how are they to believe in him of whom they have never heard? And how are they to hear without someone preaching? 15 And how are they to preach unless they are sent? As it is written, “How beautiful are the feet of those who preach the good news!”

The above passage, as verse 9 CLEARLY states it, is about confessing or professing the FAITH in Jesus, NOT confessing SINS, the subject of our discussion. I hope that is clear. Thus, it is not relevant for our discussion.
Verse 15 is AGAIN reinforcing the command to GO spread the news, make disciples of all nations and so on. IT IS NOT talking about authority of LEADERSHIP.

Acts 18 But you will receive power when the Holy Spirit has come upon you, and you will be my witnesses in Jerusalem and in all Judea and Samaria, and to the end of the earth.”

The verse above says quite plainly that those who are touched by the Holy Spirit and will be WITNESS not Authority.

Do all believers receive the power describe here? Of course beloved and what will happen then?

Yes!!! Just like YOU and I, as believers have received it. But does it STATE what kind of Power? Emphatically NO!

What are the powers or Gifts of the Holy Spirit?

As Paul puts it there are more than one: Gift of Love, Tongues, Wisdom, Prophesy and so on…

So which is that Spripture dealing with?

Simply we do not know, because it doesn’t say it! So I reject your evidence.


They will be Jesus’ witnesses in Jerusalem and in all Judea and Samaria, and to the end of the earth. Hallelujah!!! Praise the name of my Lord. I have been empowered and commission to go and preach the Gospel.

Indeed you have been enlightened by the Light of Jesus. But as we can see, you cannot tell me with 100% authority that you HOLD the TRUE INTREPRETATION of the Gospel. Like Peter and the other apostles held. Simple as that!

How do I know believing in Jesus does not give us an automatic access to an infallible interpretation of the Scriptures?

Look at us, we are both Christians, followers of JESUS Christ, we both love Jesus with all our hearts and yet we CANNOT agree on the SAME SCRIPTURE!

According to you, we should both KNOW the Truth. Aren’t we BOTH “empowered” to interpret and teach it?

David, GOD’s Truth is ONE, and as such it CANNOT have MORE than ONE TRUE interpretation. So I rest my case. God revealed the 12 all the Truth. The RCC has for 2 millennia through her Fidei Depositum guarded and protect the divine revelation. Which is why I am a Catholic and always will be.

You mentioned some where that you know what the RCC teaches, but yet you stated that the we believe in the Popes interpretation of the Scriputures!!!

Dear David, I will quote a Catholic scholar to clarify that for you:

The Church teaches in a simple summary that the Holy Father, the Pope, the Bishop of Rome, as the successor to Peter and the Vicar of Christ, when he speaks as the universal teacher from the Chair of Peter in defining faith and morals does so with an infallible charism or an infallible gift through the Holy Spirit so that we can give to him the full assent of our intellect and our will, and we can hear the voice of Christ coming to us through the voice of the Pope when he is speaking in this capacity.

Therefore David, ALL truth has already been revealed, there is not more to add, the Church only guards it for whoever wants to follow her authority, namely Christian Catholics.


You have written some more, but I don’t think I need to reply anymore because I trust my case has been made pretty soundly already.

I will read your other comments and reply them in the next couple of days or sooner.

If you want to comment on this reply, feel free to do so, but I would be great if you could wait until I finish the other 2 responses.

Like I said, ALL I need to support was the Authority of the Apostles and the Apostolic Succession of RCC. Having cleared that, we can move on to just about anything you fancy. But I can discuses the Sola Scripture first one in the list, because that is the easiest one to refute. Please let me know and don’t make work so hard!!!

Love,
Helen

PS. Can you please wait untill I post the other replies? Thanks.

Permalink Reply by David Velasquez on August 31, 2010 at 9:49pm

Dear Helen,

I hope you do not mind me placing this videos here. I wil not respond to your comments.

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• 2
• 3
• 4
• …
• 17
• Next ›
• Page