Reformed Presbyterians on here?

[Deleted member 5]

Nowhere is the Scripture does it even hint at or teach there would be any successor to the Apostles. They and no one else are the foundation of the New Testament teaching/doctrine that Jesus promised to THEM and no one else that THEY the Apostles/Disciples would be guided into all truth. That is and was an exclusive promise Jesus made to THEM. That He would bring to THEIR remembrance everything He has taught THEM. Ephesians 2:20- built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, with Christ Jesus himself as the chief cornerstone.

Amen, that's great!

Hey, I hope you score lots of points on the golf course today! Er...wait...nevermind!

 

[Mikeuk]

Nowhere is the Scripture does it even hint at or teach there would be any successor to the Apostles. They and no one else are the foundation of the New Testament teaching/doctrine that Jesus promised to THEM and no one else that THEY the Apostles/Disciples would be guided into all truth. That is and was an exclusive promise Jesus made to THEM. That He would bring to THEIR remembrance everything He has taught THEM. Ephesians 2:20- built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, with Christ Jesus himself as the chief cornerstone.

Which illustrates your problem With sola scriptura,
that’s your personal interpretation of scripture others disagree.

Take Matthias Paul and others, by laying of hands, many other places too,
Paul calls his status a divine office , and warns others about the ordination of others.
Then there’s Corinthians Thessalonians Titus hebrews Peter… where do i stop.
Also all the Old Testament precursors of ordination.
Sounds like you need to argue less and study more!

Many Protestants accept succession / ordination / laying of Hands.

So leading us back down the Same rabbit hole. what scripture means.

With onky Your opinion and with sola scriptura you have no way out of the hole.

Tradition and authority - both noted in scripture - are needed to choose meaning.

You should be grateful foRome and the power of councils. You would have neither New Testament or creed,and the church would have fallen victim to Gnosticism , marciinism , arianism, modalism, docetism to name but a few!! Or a valid Eucharist.

Tell me - why do you think Jesus wanted his church to fizzle out in one generation?
your answer is not only poot exegesis, it’s also got a really bad outcome!

 

[Mikeuk]

Amen, that's great!

Hey, I hope you score lots of points on the golf course today! Er...wait...nevermind!

Other than it being false . But falsehood never stopped a Protestant arguing…

 

[Deleted member 5]

Other than it being false .

No, actually, he was correct.

But falsehood never stopped a Protestant arguing…

Here is what is interesting about reading Catholic comments on here; They can dish it out, but the reported posts show they cannot take it.

We don't get reports of Catholic posts from the Reformed/Protestants, and we most certainly could.

 

[civic]

Which illustrates your problem With sola scriptura,
that’s your personal interpretation of scripture others disagree.

Take Matthias Paul and others, by laying of hands, many other places too,
Paul calls his status a divine office , and warns others about the ordination of others.

So leading us back down the Same hole. what scripture means.
Your opinion and with sola scriptura you have no way out of the hole.
Tradition and authority - both noted in scripture - are needed to choose meaning.

You should be grateful foRome and the power of councils. You would have neither New Testament or creed,and the church would have fallen victim to Gnosticism , marciinism , arianism, modalism, docetism to name but a few!!

I notice it’s all conjecture in your post with no scripture to support your ideas. I can support everything I said in my posts with the teaching of Jesus and the Apostles.

 

[Mikeuk]

I notice it’s all conjecture in your post with no scripture to support your ideas. I can support everything I said in my posts with the teaching of Jesus and the Apostles.

The appointing of Matthias and Paul are biblical events, that need no introduction. . As are the ordination of others By laying of hands, and Paul’s discussion of his office , which word presumes a succession.

if you don’t know where they are , you need to study more before contest what I said.

The problem of trading verses , which is the Protestant” thing”, is it ignores the elephant in the room which is knowing what the verses mean, and the need to go to authority and tradition to choose the right meanings, and also many verses are involved here.

My issue is aimed at understanding each other. Not more division.

It is important Protestants understand the reason we disagree.
we “includes millions of towering intellects for two millenia Studying scripture with a tooth comb.
I ppointed out Its the very same reason you all disagree with each other.
Sola scriptura is scripturally as well as logically false.
For meaning you must look beyond It.

I post on the Presbyterian thread because it has more division than most.
It got a nickname split P because of it.

Let me make it clear.
I have met many holy people, Jesus is in all of the congregations.
but not all have the truth or fullness. Not having the truth is dangerous.

 

[Mikeuk]

No, actually, he was correct.

Here is what is interesting about reading Catholic comments on here; They can dish it out, but the reported posts show they cannot take it.

We don't get reports of Catholic posts from the Reformed/Protestants, and we most certainly could.

You pile on the catholic threads with misinformation.

The problem is undoubtedly the false doctrine of sola scriptura which leads to all the division.
Even luther despaired of how “ every milkmaid had their own doctrine “ because of his false sola which, by excluding Christs appointed authority noted in scripture, leaves nowhere to go except schism if people disagree, and that’s why you all schism.

I noted it here because the Presbyterian poster noted his recent split, and the presbyterian church is known for division. The split P.

Thats why Presbyterian ministers and theologians are frequent guests on the journey home , explaining what drew them back To Catholicism. Namely the divisions caused by sola scriptura , lack of authority, and the need to go back to early fathers to find the truth. Ask Scott Hahn.

this is not to win an argument.

i think it is important we all focus on WHY we disagree, not what we disagree Which in many cases is evident.

There are clever well informed people both sides.
and Jesus is in all places.

So The answer of why we disagree is the secret to understabding each other.
And so what we should do about it.

 

[Deleted member 5]

You pile on the catholic threads with misinformation.

Unsubstantiated drivel. Zero proof. Is this you pretending ex cathedra? Do you desire to be a pope? For the record? You're projecting.

The problem is undoubtedly the false doctrine of sola scriptura which leads to all the division.

More unsubstatated drivel. Sola Scriptura is the truth. Your post above shows a severe lacking in understanding the Kingdom, the parables, and shows a glaring lack of Biblical acumen.

Put out the incense and try reading your Bible, but not through the lens of the apostate sect you belong to.

Even luther despaired of how “ every milkmaid had their own doctrine “

I think you're mistaken here, but then again I don't follow Luther. I know he said this "Every milkmaid can milk cows to the glory of God."

because of his false sola which, by excluding Christs appointed authority noted in scripture, leaves nowhere to go except schism if people disagree, and that’s why you all schism.

It's hilarious how you want to point to Scripture as authority, but only when you THINK it's convenient. There have always been schisms in the church. You don't know Scripture, and this is why you are so hoodwinked.

In cults like yours there is the pretense of all are in total unity. Just like the JW's. Congrats!

I noted it here because the Presbyterian poster noted his recent split, and the presbyterian church is known for division. The split P.

You love to sow discord, and seek strife and division. You love that, don't you?

Thats why Presbyterian ministers and theologians are frequent guests on the journey home , explaining what drew them back To Catholicism.

No, that's called apostatizing from the faith.

Namely the divisions caused by sola scriptura , lack of authority, and the need to go back to early fathers to find the truth. Ask Scott Hahn.

Blah, blah, blah. The thing is you hate Scripture. I am Sola Scriptura, not Solo Scriptura, and even with that you try to discourteously brush it off.

this is not to win an argument.

LOL!!!!!!!! Mmmmm K!

i think it is important we all focus on WHY we disagree, not what we disagree Which in many cases is evident.

There are clever well informed people both sides.
and Jesus is in all places.

So The answer of why we disagree is the secret to understabding each other.
And so what we should do about it.

LOL!!!!!!!! Yes, I can see you are, after all your weak attempt at insulting attacks. Yes, you're out to "understabding" each other. Guess what? I'm smarter than you, and your flattery is disingenuous nonsense.

Here is the thing: Jesus saved me, and I will never lose salvation; John 6:37ff. When I die I will go straight to be with my LORD Jesus Christ. And He saved me without your sect, statues, incense, priests, nuns, monk, and baloney.

Now, you don't like that and would rather try to take me and others away from Christ, and that He saved us, to your apostate system.

But you can never do that. John 10:28.

You and apostate Rome can have your 1 John 2:19 apostates who come to you from the truth, and prove they were never of us.

Take care.

 

[Arial]

It is no wonder that in times past and still some today I am sure(and maybe they are right, I can't say)thought the pope was the antichrist. He has set himself up by authority of the RCC as God in the temple of God.
Eph 2:20-22 Built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Christ Jesus Himself being the cornerstone, in whom the whole structure, being joined together grows into a holy temple in the Lord. In Him you also are being built together into a dwelling place for God by the Spirit.

When it is said by the RCC that they have a higher authority than God's word, that their tradition carries more weight than His word, that they have the power to add to and take away from His word, they have set themselves up above Him and therefore as being God. No matter how it is spun. And who else was it that said "I will ascend into heaven, I will exalt my throne above the stars of God; I will also sit on the mount of the congregation on the farthest sides of the north; I will ascend above the heights of the clouds, I will be like the Most High." Is 14:13-14

 

[Carbon]

It is no wonder that in times past and still some today I am sure(and maybe they are right, I can't say)thought the pope was the antichrist. He has set himself up by authority of the RCC as God in the temple of God.
Eph 2:20-22 Built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Christ Jesus Himself being the cornerstone, in whom the whole structure, being joined together grows into a holy temple in the Lord. In Him you also are being built together into a dwelling place for God by the Spirit.

When it is said by the RCC that they have a higher authority than God's word, that their tradition carries more weight than His word, that they have the power to add to and take away from His word, they have set themselves up above Him and therefore as being God. No matter how it is spun. And who else was it that said "I will ascend into heaven, I will exalt my throne above the stars of God; I will also sit on the mount of the congregation on the farthest sides of the north; I will ascend above the heights of the clouds, I will be like the Most High." Is 14:13-14

So true. And the blood of the saints, being drunk with te blood of the saints. And I saw the woman drunk with the blood of the saints, and with the blood of the witnesses of Jesus. When I saw her, I wondered greatly. Rev 17:6.

Not being able to buy and sell. That's another big one. In the dark ages, in lands that were claimed Christian/Catholic, if you didn't honor the pope and the Church they confiscated your stuff and your home, and you couldn't buy, sell, or trade. and the RCC tortured and murdered many, many, saints.

 

[Mikeuk]

Unsubstantiated drivel. Zero proof. Is this you pretending ex cathedra? Do you desire to be a pope? For the record? You're projecting.

More unsubstatated drivel. Sola Scriptura is the truth. Your post above shows a severe lacking in understanding the Kingdom, the parables, and shows a glaring lack of Biblical acumen.

Put out the incense and try reading your Bible, but not through the lens of the apostate sect you belong to.

I think you're mistaken here, but then again I don't follow Luther. I know he said this "Every milkmaid can milk cows to the glory of God."

It's hilarious how you want to point to Scripture as authority, but only when you THINK it's convenient. There have always been schisms in the church. You don't know Scripture, and this is why you are so hoodwinked.

In cults like yours there is the pretense of all are in total unity. Just like the JW's. Congrats!

You love to sow discord, and seek strife and division. You love that, don't you?

No, that's called apostatizing from the faith.

Blah, blah, blah. The thing is you hate Scripture. I am Sola Scriptura, not Solo Scriptura, and even with that you try to discourteously brush it off.

LOL!!!!!!!! Mmmmm K!

LOL!!!!!!!! Yes, I can see you are, after all your weak attempt at insulting attacks. Yes, you're out to "understabding" each other. Guess what? I'm smarter than you, and your flattery is disingenuous nonsense.

Here is the thing: Jesus saved me, and I will never lose salvation; John 6:37ff. When I die I will go straight to be with my LORD Jesus Christ. And He saved me without your sect, statues, incense, priests, nuns, monk, and baloney.

Now, you don't like that and would rather try to take me and others away from Christ, and that He saved us, to your apostate system.

But you can never do that. John 10:28.

You and apostate Rome can have your 1 John 2:19 apostates who come to you from the truth, and prove they were never of us.

Take care.

Let’s start at the beginning.
Sola scriptura defines a hierarchy Of truth, putting what is in scripture at the top.

So if scripture is the top, scripture must say “ sola scriptura” somewhere, or it fails even the simplest logical Test.

But it doesn’t .
It does identify the foundation of truth . And it isn’t scripture,
So not only does scripture not support sola scriptura, it actively opposes it, by declaring truth outside of itself in terms like “ foundation” and “ bulwark”
Its because we rever scripture, I can quote so much of it. And what it meant to the early church.


Lets start there .
lit is the reason why we disagree on so much else.
[edit by mod: leave out your personal insults of others]

 

[Deleted member 5]

Let’s start at the beginning.

I have with God's word. Not your cult, priests, statues, incense, transubstantiation, indulgences, penance, priests, monks, nuns, fake Mary, Mariolatry, homobiblia, rosary beads, statues of dead saints, charms, false teachings &c &c &c. You can keep your idolatry.

Sola scriptura...

That's it right there.

I'm not trading what God has said, i.e. God's word, for your myths and fables; 2 Timothy 4:1-4.

Isn't it amazing folks to watch how angry the Catholic apostates are that we are secure in our salvation in Christ, and in what God has spoken in His word? They can't be having anyone saved outside their mess.

Notice also how they don't preach the Gospel at all? It's come to "the mother" not to Christ?

Hood.

Winked.

 

[Mikeuk]

I have with God's word. Not your cult, priests, statues, incense, transubstantiation, indulgences, penance, priests, monks, nuns, fake Mary, Mariolatry, homobiblia, rosary beads, statues of dead saints, charms, false teachings &c &c &c. You can keep your idolatry.

That's it right there.

I'm not trading what God has said, i.e. God's word, for your myths and fables; 2 Timothy 4:1-4.

Isn't it amazing folks to watch how angry the Catholic apostates are that we are secure in our salvation in Christ, and in what God has spoken in His word? They can't be having anyone saved outside their mess.

Notice also how they don't preach the Gospel at all? It's come to "the mother" not to Christ?

Hood.

Winked.

As well as a heap of falsehoods - That post is a deliberate flame. I will not respond to you again

I suggest you try to justify sola scriptura from the Bible. It is a total fail. It is logically false.

 

[Deleted member 5]

As well as a heap of falsehoods - That post is a deliberate flame. I will not respond to you again.

Wow, as stated, the romanists can certainly dish it out, but they cannot take it.

My friend, I couldn't care less if you never respond to me again.

Nothing I stated was false. It is duly noted that the teachings of your own sect when lined out are considered falsehoods by you.

It is apparent catholics hate the fact that any person was saved and given eternal life by Jesus Christ outside their "mother."

I suggest you try to justify sola scriptura from the Bible. It is a total fail. It is logically false.

This is where you dish and cannot take. The above is inflammatory by your own definition. But to me, it doesn't offend me.

You've already made up your mind and believe in an army of straw men, so why would anyone waste time trying to show you the truth? You won't sell all of your sects wares in order to buy it anyhow; Proverbs 23:23.

 

[Deleted member 5]

Which illustrates your problem With sola scriptura,
that’s your personal interpretation of scripture others disagree.

Take Matthias Paul and others, by laying of hands, many other places too,
Paul calls his status a divine office , and warns others about the ordination of others.
Then there’s Corinthians Thessalonians Titus hebrews Peter… where do i stop.
Also all the Old Testament precursors of ordination.
Sounds like you need to argue less and study more!

Many Protestants accept succession / ordination / laying of Hands.

So leading us back down the Same rabbit hole. what scripture means.

With onky Your opinion and with sola scriptura you have no way out of the hole.

Tradition and authority - both noted in scripture - are needed to choose meaning.

You should be grateful foRome and the power of councils. You would have neither New Testament or creed,and the church would have fallen victim to Gnosticism , marciinism , arianism, modalism, docetism to name but a few!! Or a valid Eucharist.

Tell me - why do you think Jesus wanted his church to fizzle out in one generation?
your answer is not only poot exegesis, it’s also got a really bad outcome!

@civic? The above poster states you have no way out of "your hole." Looks like he nailed you.

What say you?

 

[civic]

@civic? The above poster states you have no way out of "your hole." Looks like he nailed you.

What say you?

Well his argument is with Jesus and the Apostles since they are the foundation which was laid while the Apostles were living. There is no succession, no more apostles. Paul under inspiritaion of the Holy Spirit declared he was the last one- so there is no "succession" . That is heresy. His problem is not with me but with the Authority of Jesus, the Apostles and Scripture.

 

[Deleted member 5]

Well his argument is with Jesus and the Apostles since they are the foundation which was laid while the Apostles were living. There is no succession, no more apostles. Paul under inspiritaion of the Holy Spirit declared he was the last one- so there is no "succession" . That is heresy. His problem is not with me but with the Authority of Jesus, the Apostles and Scripture.

Exactly and thank you! I hope Christ gets him out of that "hole."

 

[Eleanor]

Let’s start at the beginning.
Sola scriptura defines a hierarchy Of truth, putting what is in scripture at the top.

So if scripture is the top, scripture must say “ sola scriptura” somewhere, or it fails even the simplest logical Test.

But it doesn’t.

It doesn't say it, but Jesus shows it. To repeat myself:

Jesus believed:
the OT was the "word of God" in every detail (Mt 15:6, Lk 5:1, Lk 11:28, Jn 10:35),
that it was the truth of God vested with the authority of God and backed by the power of God (Mt 5:17-19).
He treated arguments from Scripture as having clinching force. When he said, "It is written," that was final. There was no appeal against Scripture, for "the scripture cannot be broken." (Mt 4:5, Mt 4:7, Mt 4:10, Jn 10:35). God's word holds good forever.
He constantly scolded the Jews for their ignorance and neglect of Scripture: "Are you not in error because you do not know the Scriptures?". . . "Have you not read. . .?". . ."Go and learn what this means. . ." (Mk 12:24, Mt 12:3, Mt 12:5, Mt 19:4, Mt 21:16, Mt 21:42, Mt 9:13).
Likewise, Jesus himself submitted to the OT as the word of God:
he lived a life of obedience to Scripture (Lk 4:17-21, Mt 8:16-17, Mt 11:2-5).
and then he died in obedience to Scripture (Lk 18:31, Mk 8:31, Mk 9:31, Mk 10:33-34, Mt 26:24, Lk 22:37, Mt 26:53-56),
when he arose, he explained who he was by the Scriptures (Lk 24:44-47, Lk 24:27), and
he presented himself to the Jews as the fulfiller of Scripture (Jn 5:39-40, Jn 5:46-47).

Bellief in the authority and truth of the OT Scriptures was the foundation of Jesus' whole ministry.

 

[Mikeuk]

It doesn't say it, but Jesus shows it. To repeat myself:

Jesus believed:
the OT was the "word of God" in every detail (Mt 15:6, Lk 5:1, Lk 11:28, Jn 10:35),
that it was the truth of God vested with the authority of God and backed by the power of God (Mt 5:17-19).
He treated arguments from Scripture as having clinching force. When he said, "It is written," that was final. There was no appeal against Scripture, for "the scripture cannot be broken." (Mt 4:5, Mt 4:7, Mt 4:10, Jn 10:35). God's word holds good forever.
He constantly scolded the Jews for their ignorance and neglect of Scripture: "Are you not in error because you do not know the Scriptures?". . . "Have you not read. . .?". . ."Go and learn what this means. . ." (Mk 12:24, Mt 12:3, Mt 12:5, Mt 19:4, Mt 21:16, Mt 21:42, Mt 9:13).
Likewise, Jesus himself submitted to the OT as the word of God:
he lived a life of obedience to Scripture (Lk 4:17-21, Mt 8:16-17, Mt 11:2-5).
and then he died in obedience to Scripture (Lk 18:31, Mk 8:31, Mk 9:31, Mk 10:33-34, Mt 26:24, Lk 22:37, Mt 26:53-56),
when he arose, he explained who he was by the Scriptures (Lk 24:44-47, Lk 24:27), and
he presented himself to the Jews as the fulfiller of Scripture (Jn 5:39-40, Jn 5:46-47).

Bellief in the authority and truth of the OT Scriptures was the foundation of Jesus' whole ministry.

Alas all you prove is that , you as indeed we regard scripture as being truth, valuable etc.

But sola scriptura is WAY more than that, it regards it as the supreme truth.
Now if sola scriptura is the supreme truth to be logically consistent it must say so.

But worse than that it identifies truth outside it self which it calls the “ pillar and foundation of truth” which sounds supreme to me.
And that’s the church , the household of God,

Much of what we all argue about is the meaning of scripture - eg symbolic or eucharist of real flesh,

i answer saying at the time of Jesus scripture was the OT. So the writing of NT , and the choice of it is way in the future,
Between the two the faith was handed down by tradition, and nothing says the resulting scripture is a complete record of oral tradition.
I can show that those taught by John the apostle believe a valid Eucharist of the real flesh is valid only if performed by a bishop in succession. That’s tradition. Faith handed down. Does anyone believe John got his own teaching wrong on meaning of John 6 .?

Tradition adds meaning to scripture where we disagree,

The prime point is - and I would rather remove the catholic issue here - if you reach an impasse where all disagree where can you go as a sola scriptura adherent.?

Jesus answers that - just as in the OT time “ binding and loosing “ was giving definite answer to disputes on meaning of Torah so how to live it. We see that given to the apostles together and Peter alone, that’s why we can trust the judgement of councils. Indeed the choice of New Testament,

I am not here to tell anyone they are right or wrong whatever they may believe.

As far as I am concerned any who believe the creed are Christian’s and Jesus is with them

I am trying to explain why we all disagree is the meaning ( and content) of scripture.
And the disregarding of tradition -and authority in resolving disputes.
it’s why Presbyterians like hahn and grodi left.

I am trying to get others to recognise the serious problem that when you only have sola scriptura, in doctrinal disputes there is nowhere to go except schism, and it happens too frequently in Protestant churches which is sad. Even the main reformers Zwingli Calvin and Luther didn’t agree on fundamental things,

 

[civic]

Alas all you prove is that , you as indeed we regard scripture as being truth, valuable etc.

But sola scriptura is WAY more than that, it regards it as the supreme truth.
Now if sola scriptura is the supreme truth to be logically consistent it must say so.

But worse than that it identifies truth outside it self which it calls the “ pillar and foundation of truth” which sounds supreme to me.
And that’s the church , the household of God,

Much of what we all argue about is the meaning of scripture - eg symbolic or eucharist of real flesh,

i answer saying at the time of Jesus scripture was the OT. So the writing of NT , and the choice of it is way in the future,
Between the two the faith was handed down by tradition, and nothing says the resulting scripture is a complete record of oral tradition.
I can show that those taught by John the apostle believe a valid Eucharist of the real flesh is valid only if performed by a bishop in succession. That’s tradition. Faith handed down. Does anyone believe John got his own teaching wrong on meaning of John 6 .?

Tradition adds meaning to scripture where we disagree,

The prime point is - and I would rather remove the catholic issue here - if you reach an impasse where all disagree where can you go as a sola scriptura adherent.?

Jesus answers that - just as in the OT time “ binding and loosing “ was giving definite answer to disputes on meaning of Torah so how to live it. We see that given to the apostles together and Peter alone, that’s why we can trust the judgement of councils. Indeed the choice of New Testament,

I am not here to tell anyone they are right or wrong whatever they may believe.

As far as I am concerned any who believe the creed are Christian’s and Jesus is with them

I am trying to explain why we all disagree is the meaning ( and content) of scripture.
And the disregarding of tradition -and authority in resolving disputes.
it’s why Presbyterians like hahn and grodi left.

I am trying to get others to recognise the serious problem that when you only have sola scriptura, in doctrinal disputes there is nowhere to go except schism, and it happens too frequently in Protestant churches which is sad. Even the main reformers Zwingli Calvin and Luther didn’t agree on fundamental things,

The only serious problem is with the heresy known as succession , it’s unbiblical as I have demonstrated from Scripture, the believers source of authority. You believe your church has authority over scripture which is backwards.

hope this helps !!!