A Challenge for Kenneth, Michael, and Jamey

greenspun.com : LUSENET : Catholic : One Thread

Hey guys,

No fair for you guys to ask all the questions. Here's a good one for you.

Were the four Gospels written by people who actually knew Jesus Christ personally? If so, how do you know?

-- David Palm (djpalm64@yahoo.com), June 24, 1999

Answers

<< kick to the top >>

-- David Palm (djpalm64@yahoo.com), June 24, 1999.

I know,iknow,the pope told me!

-- kenneth (bulldawg1@hotmail.com), June 24, 1999.

YES!!!

How do i know?

Just as the people who wrote the four gospels knew Jesus Christ personally , I do so also. His spirit is in my heart along with his commandments( the will of the Father). I do not need any mans interpretation or physical facts to show me so. You see, it is all spiritual, that is God's way, that is the way it was supposed to be from the begining. You as a catholic profess "mysteries of God", yet you do not see or hear the real "mystery" in how he has preserved his word in our hearts. Truly Jesus does make the blind see and the deaf hear, but you must be blind and deaf to the world to understand that! I would really question my faith if i had to see to believe!

But, I must ask you , is this question really worth while? Isn't the words written in the books the same that were in the old testament?

(Genisis 3:22) I chose to put forth my hand and ask for the tree of life(JESUS).

Now how about a challenge to you:

How do you know that the RCC is not the sucessors of the false doctrine and antichrists that were among the apostles as they spoke in the N.T. ? Please show me the fuits of the RCC.

-- Michael(non-catholic) (mdroe@erinet.com), June 24, 1999.


Great, kenneth, you're making progress ;-D. I'll take your non-answer as your inability to answer.

Michael, you claim for yourself more authority and more knowledge of infallible absolute truth than any pope ever claimed for himself. Hey, if God just beams all this infallible truth into your head why don't you just write a commentary on the whole Bible and answer all the questions everybody has ever had? We'll just follow your infallible interpretation.

Now, would either of you care to answer the question?

-- David Palm (djpalm64@yahoo.com), June 25, 1999.


Please do not accuse me of being infallible "Mr. No one can answer my question" unless they pay homage to the RCC. I have answered your question to the best of my abillity. If you do not agree that does not make my answers wrong nor a liar , it just makes a difference of opinion. I must say though if you really follow the teachings of Jesus Christ you would not call someone a liar, may you be judged how you judge. The answer has been said quite a few times but, i guess that you are not able to understand the word "FAITH". Maybe that is something you do not or can not have. That simple word "FAITH" is seeing and hearing with your heart and soul in contrast to seeing with factual evidence and man's doings to believe. I believe in the word of God written by his people. God's people do not contradict themselves and most importantly do not teach men to transgress the law of God, that is how you know it is truth. You shall know them by their fruits. The RCC's tree produces rotten fruit and i have the word of God to back me up , not a false tradition of man. Tell me where is the word of God in the RCC, it can not be the Bible for you (RCC)teach to transgress it's laws. You continually speak of "tradition" but, fail to recognize that the tradition came from Judasism of which the son of my Father was. I have asked a simple question on another thread= Why Jesus? It seems funny that most answers point me to the word of God to tell me about the Mesiah yet when we worship God we must turn to man for the way(NOT!). BABYLON!!!

So to make it real simple the answer is "FAITH" and without it you get "BABYLON"! Old Neb had to see to believe and poor Daniel with only his "FAITH" withstood the fire and lions. I stand with Daniel!

-- Michael(non-catholic) (mdroe@erinet.com), June 25, 1999.



I must say though if you really follow the teachings of Jesus Christ you would not call someone a liar, may you be judged how you judge.

Who called whom a liar?

-- Lane Core Jr. (elcore@sgi.net), June 25, 1999.


Now, would either of you care to answer the question?

Obviously, they lack either the desire or the ability, or both, to answer your question.

-- Lane Core Jr. (elcore@sgi.net), June 25, 1999.


Why do i care?Is the bible Gods Word or not,would you care to answer? See,you've got your mind on mans doctrine,your trying to justify how the rcc changes the Word by saying if God used them,why not the pope,but your inability to understand that God used whoever He decided to,TO PEN THE BIBLE.Now the bible starts off in Genesis,and ends in Revelation.Beginning and the end,alpha and omega.It doesn't require a rocket scientist to figure out that if God is perfect,how could anything that He put in the Bible be changed,incomplete or perverted.You see,all you need is the Bible,all this other "doctrine"is utterly useless.It's really not hard to understand,very simple,Holy Bible.That's what i use to shoot down all falshoods,yours and anybody else's.If you can't prove what you say by it,then you lie.Plain and simple.

-- kenneth (bulldawg1@hotmail.com), June 25, 1999.

Where must I go to the Bible to find the instruction that all I need is the Bible to discern all truth?

I don't agree with you, discerning someone who is distorting truth, and naming them a liar is not the same as judging souls - but it is still serious. I don't want to call someone a liar (as you suggest) simply because they rely on the Tradition of the Church as the pillar and bulwark of Truth. (1Tim 3:15). So before I join you, please show me where the Inspired Word of Gods says that anything not in the Bible is a lie.

Thanks.

cl

-- cl (cl@sky.com), June 26, 1999.


Michael and David,

Another question for you. Did Christ come to destroy the Law or to fulfill it???

-- ubi (ubi@petros.com), June 26, 1999.



Ubi,

To fullfill the law but, not all will be fullfilled until heaven and earth have passed!

-- Michael(non-catholic) (mdroe@erinet.com), June 26, 1999.


Cl,

Why is it so hard to understand that God's word is truth and anyone who speaks of and lives his word speaks truth? Although, anyone who changes or discredits his word speaks a lie. If there is a person who does not know the truth and i personally tell them "read the Bible, believe in the creator, and accept Jesus as their savior" i may not be speaking word for word the Bible but, am i not speaking the word of God?

I am non-denominational but concerning the RCC i am a protestant cause truly i protest the RCC. The RCC recognizes the Bible as the word of God doesn't it? Their Bible has more books than mine which, i have not read. Does the other books in the RCC's Bible say that you can discredit the other parts and change them at your will???

-- Michael(non-catholic) (mdroe@erinet.com), June 27, 1999.


Michael,

I'm sorry, I didn't understand your answer. Where in the Bible do I find the doctrine of "only in the Bible"?

-- cl (cl@sky.com), June 27, 1999.


Michael,

What does the Law say about how one should treat their parents?

-- ubi (ubi@petros.com), June 27, 1999.


Deuteronomy 32:4 He is the Rock,his work is perfect:for all his ways are judgement:a God of truth and without iniquity,just and right is he.Is the bible his work,therefore it has to be perfect.What is the opposite of truth,a lie.Is the word the truth,if so anything that changes its meaning in any way is a lie.It has to be,there is no way around it.

-- kenneth (bulldawg1@hotmail.com), June 27, 1999.


Kenneth,

Thanks, I think I'm starting to get it. God is Perfect, His Word is Perfect, and so the written Word of God is Perfect. Right???

Ok, help me out. God's Word is Perfect. It was written down by imperfect infallible hands of the Apostles and Evangelists. God's written Word, Perfect in all ways, through the inspiritation of the Holy Spirit via imperfect creatures - imperfect pens in the Hands of the Perfect Author. Right???

So far so good. But the same Perfect Word of God was also spoken by our Lord to the same imperfect human creatures. Is the Word of God that was passed on by the Apostles in verbal form a less Perfect Word than those Words that our Lord spoke that were committed to writing? Where does the Bible say to disregard the spoken Word of God and rely strictly on the written Word of God? You must help me out here, I don't see how the papists can be accused of following a doctrine of man because they believe the Word of God handed down verbally - simply because the Apostles were imperfect creatures. We must not limit the power of God Almighty to work Perfectly using imperfect "pens" or "voices". Could not an unbeliever accuse you of following a doctrine of man, because the Bible was committed to paper by imperfect creatures? Can not the same Almighty God who protected the Word of God from error as it was being passed on in written form ALSO protect the Word of God from error as it was being passed on in verbal form?

So, I ask again, WHERE in the Bible does it say written Word of God only, NO verbal Word of God permitted??? The papists agree that what is written in the Bible is perfect and without error and will agree with the scripture you quoted me. You have done nothing to convince me. Where is the Scripture to show "Bible only". I can agree with "Word of God Only", but that includes written AND spoken Word of God (unless you can show me a contrary scripture). After all John 21:25 says that not all Jesus did was written down - the earth could not hold the volumes that would be written. If I could have walked the earth in our Lord's time, I would hang on every Word. Surely in his 33 years of life and 3 years of public ministry he said more than what the Scripture records. Were not the unwritten Words of Jesus divine? And remember, Jesus commanded in Matthew 28:20 "teach them to observe ALL things whatsoever I have commanded you...: All things - not just the written ones.

Again I repeat my request - show me the Scripture that says "Scripture only".

-- cl (cl@sky.com), June 27, 1999.


Michael,

Does your Bible have an inspired, infallible index? The papists have more books than you. You quote a scriptural admonition not to add to the Scripture, but doesn't the same scripture also admonish those who would take away books from the scripture? If there are two different lists of scripture, and there is no divine "index", then there must be a definitive source of authority outside the Bible to settle the matter. After all, Martin Luther took out the book of James, and demoted the book of Revelation by putting it into an index.

Where does the Bible tell me I can find the authority to settle this arguement among fellow Christians regarding which books are inspired? Could it be that Christ established a Church, promised the Paraclete to guide it into all Truth, promised to be with it "even unto the end of time", and even went so far as to have Scripture refer to the Church as the "pillar and bulwark of Truth" (1Tim 3-15).

Unless someone can provide me with a Scripture to show "Bible Only", I am being more convinced that Christ founded a Church and promised to guide this Church via the Holy Spirit in the same way the Bible writer's were used. Don't you agree? Then the problem becomes identifying the attributes of the Church Christ founded and seeing which Church matches these attributes. Or am I missing something?

-- cl (cl@sky.com), June 27, 1999.


CL,

Don't hold your breath waiting for an answer from those two (especially not on a biblical internal proof of sola scriptura - there isn't one).

-- ubi (ubi@petros.com), June 27, 1999.


Ubi and Cl,

Show me where Christ said, that the books the Jews(including himself) were reading at that time were not the "WORD OF GOD"?

Cl wrote***I'm sorry, I didn't understand your answer. Where in the Bible do I find the doctrine of "only in the Bible"?***

I haven't found it yet either. All i have found and try to comunicate is that if it transgresses the law of God it is not truth.

Ubi wrote***What does the Law say about how one should treat their parents?***

Honour thy Father and thy Mother.

Cl wrote***Then the problem becomes identifying the attributes of the Church Christ founded and seeing which Church matches these attributes. Or am I missing something?***

Exactly my point , what are the fruits of the RCC?

-- Michael(non-catholic) (mdroe@erinet.com), June 28, 1999.


Michael,

Like you, I cannot find a Scripture verse that states "Bilble alone". I suspect that it is an invention of Martin Luther during the reactionary excesses and polemics of the reformation and counter- reformation. If it is not in the Bible, then I fear that (by your own standards as stated in an earlier post) "Bible only" is a lie.

I recommend that we start a new thread to identify the attributes of the New Testament Church started by Christ. Then we could proceed to look at the "fruits" of the Catholic Church and other candidates to see which best fits the bill. I think I am open-minded to consider all. You seem to have a chip on your shoulder regarding the papists and the Catholic Church. If "Bible alone" is not Scriptural, but a doctrine of man - then we must be open to the possibility that the Catholic Church (among other candidates) could be the Church Christ established.

I think it would be an interesting quest. Are you able to get past your anger to consider all possibilities? If we are seeking Truth, we need to consider all who claim to possess and embrace it. Especially if one of our own coveted truths turns out to be false (Bible alone is not Scriptural). What say you brother?

-- cl (cl@sky.com), June 28, 1999.


Cl,

Thank you , finally a catholic on this forum who is willing to do exactly what i have been trying for. I do not belong to a denomination so i am not prejudice but i truly do not see with my heart and soul that the RCC or other denominations are completely the truth. I would love to discuss this with you without a denominational bias and no "this is right because the RCC says so" either. I think that this disscusion is exactly what Christ means by when two or more are gathered in his name so shall he be also. Excellent lets start you go first!

-- Michael(non-catholic) (mdroe@erinet.com), June 28, 1999.


Michael,

Sure, I think that this could be a very enlightening experience, for all whose eyes are not clamped shut. I believe that before we begin, the search for a Biblical source of "Bible Alone" be thorough and complete. If "Bible Alone" can be proved Scripturally, then the RCC can be dismissed and the discussion taken elsewhere.

If however, "Bible Alone" is really an invention of man, and cannot be found in the Scriptures, then the Catholic Church must be included in the list of candidates. I would suggest the process follow: 1. Develop the attributes of the New Testament Church. 2. Discuss how to determine what constitutes legitimate growth and development of the New Testament Church foundation. 3. Develop a list of Churches to test against the list of attritubes. 4. Find primary documents which state first hand the doctrines, practices and structures of these churches. These sources should be accurate and authoritative representations, not hearsay or assumptions.

Let me know when you have completed your search for a Scriptural Basis for "Bible Alone". When you are convinced that this doctrine is not Scriptural, then we can begin in earnest. Until then, I suggest that limit our discussion to item #1 (above).

Let me know if you think this is a valid process. Of course all who seek Truth are invited, but try to keep the outcome open-minded and don't allow the answer you are biased towards to limit the data gathering.

-- cl (cl@sky.com), June 28, 1999.


Michael,

Have you finished your search yet? I am pretty well convinced that "bible alone" is an extra-biblical lie fabricated by man. Has your search been any more fruitful than mine?

-- cl (cl@sky.com), July 01, 1999.


To cl: I cannot find a verse in Scripture that says "Catholics alone" or "popes alone".

Now, enlighten me.

Jeffrey (Anonymous)

-- Jeffrey (noemail@no.email.com), August 17, 2000.


Jmj

Jeffrey,
I see that you are rummaging around in the musty "attic" of this site. Since "cl" posted his message in mid-1999, I will be very surprised to see him/her return to reply to your comment.
Permit me to make a response, please.

Your reply to "cl" was that you could not find "a verse in Scriputre that says 'Catholics alone' or 'popes alone.'" Your reply is irrelevant and inappropriate, Jeffrey, because "cl" had been asking to be shown a "scriptural basis for the 'Bible alone'" theory. He/she had NOT been claiming that there are verses supporting "Catholics/popes alone."

The point "cl" was making was that "the 'Bible alone' as sole rule of faith" is a self-refuting theory, unless that very theory itself can be shown to be taught clearly in Scripture. Therefore he/she has the right to require that the clear passages be produced. [Hint: They cannot be produced.]

You, on the other hand, do not have the right to require that "cl" produce verses on another subject, because he/she never claimed that his faith is based on the "Bible alone."

God bless you.
John
PS: Thanks for the progress shown in letting us know your name. Now if you show your e-mail address, you will gain full respect. I have been hit by just a tiny barrage of "unpleasant" anti-Catholic e-mails because I have revealed my address. But I have also been blessed to receive beautiful notes from Catholics and non-Catholics alike because I have revealed my address. Think of the Christians who have suffered loss of job, limb, or life in Communist or Islamic nations for not being afraid to be known as followers of Jesus. You face no such great suffering -- but only a small possibility of harrassment, offset by the potential reward of pleasant communications. Won't you consider being a more courageous witness [Greek: martyr] for Christ? Can the rest of us take a frightened person seriously?

-- J. F. Gecik (jgecik@desc.dla.mil), August 18, 2000.

Moderation questions? read the FAQ