Does the Pope sit on Nimrod's throne? Who is Bishop Damasus?
http://bupc.montana.com/whores/Popeseat.html
http://bupc.montana.com/whores/Popeseat.html
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
JHC Newman replied to this a while backNetDoc said:II Timothy 3:14 But as for you, continue in what you have learned and have become convinced of, because you know those from whom you learned it, 15 and how from infancy you have known the holy Scriptures, which are able to make you wise for salvation through faith in Christ Jesus. 16 All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness, 17 so that the man of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work.
What do you make of "thouroughly equipped for every good work."?
You say it's not enough, but the Bible says that I will be thouroughly equipped for every good work.
NetDoc said:The scripture didn't fail. You may not have understood it, you may not follow it, you may twist it's meaning, but it does not fail. Let's look at the scripture again.
NetDoc said:Now you have claimed that I have defined "thourough" as "only". Well the
word I see is thouroughly, and the web defines it as such:
1. Exhaustively complete: a thorough search.
2. Painstakingly accurate or careful: thorough research.
3. Absolute; utter: a thorough pleasure.
So take your pick, I am cool with any of those. I don't need to hide behind the Greek on this one, as the translators have done a pretty good job with exartizo, though I might have used "completely" instead. Consequently, if they are able to make me COMPLETELY READY for every good work, what else do I need? Nada.
NetDoc said:You are constantly quoting men who are adding to the scriptures. Can you see how that FLYS in the face of this scripture. A couple points... these Galations are in the first Century and they are ALREADY way off track. Men do that! They put their ideas forth as equal to or better than scripture. Why? PRIDE. Go check out Adam in the garden. Consequently, it is only reasonable and prudent to look upon anything after this as corrupt and tainted. Don't accept anything but the original. Not even the first copy.
NetDoc said:Of course not. But the books were not about John's beliefs. They were what God wanted to be revealed to us. God used some of Peter's writings, some from John, a lot from Paul, also some other apostles and possibly some we will never know about until we get to heaven. It doesn't matter who or how that they came together... for it was God's will and not man's that they exist today. God wishes no man to perish, so he has provided ALL that ANYONE needs to believe. Unbelief is not God's fault. All you need is an eensy teensy tiny bit of faith... about like a mustard seed... to move all of the spiritual mountains that need to be moved.
NetDoc said:I have no problems with traditions AS LONG as they are not codified as other than that.
My Lord spoke of traditions once:
Mark 7:8 You have let go of the commands of God and are holding on to the traditions of men." 9 And he said to them: "You have a fine way of setting aside the commands of God in order to observe your own traditions!
Traditions should always be "optional". They are not the "command of God".
NetDoc said:I too believe the "Word of the Lord" as it exists today is NOT the scriptures, but Godly men teaching how the scriptures apply to our lives right now.
NetDoc said:But this tendency towards apostasy is exactly why God had the New Testament assembled. So that we would have our foundation laid before us at all times. The Bible contains all of our core values. We need nothing more for salvation. The Bible tells us how to become a Christian. Let those who would change this re-read Galations 1 and shudder!
Sorry, I can't remember..... I have a bunch of Newman's writings saved on my computer.No*s said:Good quote SOGFPP. What book is that from?
No*s said:...
For the sarcasm, I must apologize. That is antichristian.
I didn't. You are reading something that isn't there... I said that -I- didn't need to hide behind them. I have a tendency (as do most people honest with themselves) to try and prove a point instead of trying to find out just what the REAL point is. One way to do that is to "bend" a translation rather than to find out it's true meaning.why you say I was "hiding behind Greek."
As opposed to the non-fantastical easily verifiable scriptures that were chosen?Equally, the idea that there was a wide selection of scriptures to choose from is not quite as clear cut as that. Many of the rejected texts are blatantly fabulous in their subject matter, and obvious forgeries.
linwood said:As opposed to the non-fantastical easily verifiable scriptures that were chosen?
www.newmanreader.orgNo*s said:As for Newman, thanks for it anyway. Are there any sites with his writings? I really liked that section. It was logical, well-reasoned-out, but it was also willing to take things on faith.
I did not think you were an angel. Are you?jvi said:"On who's authority do you pull up the weeds growing in the masters field?"
I guess it would be on God's authority.If God wasn't ready to allow it then it wouldn't be happening.In the second coming there is a harvest.The tares get pulled up first then the wheat is gathered into the barn.
Actually, that's the point. They can't come up with a BIBICAL Scripture to support this concept. You can't even find "Catholic" or "Catholicsim" in the Scriptures. Consequently they have deemed the Scriptures as "not enough". How convenient.Considering the Catholic Churches claim to authority is based on Biblical scripture I`d say I was on topic.
Yes, I understand that and cannot disagree but for the most part I`ll have to agree with the bulk of Catholic apologists debating you here.NetDoc said:Actually, that's the point. They can't come up with a BIBICAL Scripture to support this concept. You can't even find "Catholic" or "Catholicsim" in the Scriptures. Consequently they have deemed the Scriptures as "not enough". How convenient.
I cannot argue with this either Doc.Thankfully the power of God exceeds that of the Catholic church and we have all we need to understand God, salvation and how to worship. Any deviation from the New Testament is an merely an excersize in apostasy.
NetDoc said:First off I didn't see any sarcasm in your writings, and I surely didn't intend any.
NetDoc said:I didn't. You are reading something that isn't there... I said that -I- didn't need to hide behind them. I have a tendency (as do most people honest with themselves) to try and prove a point instead of trying to find out just what the REAL point is. One way to do that is to "bend" a translation rather than to find out it's true meaning.
NetDoc said:As for my knowledge of NT Greek, it could be far, far better than it is. As a Russian major in college, it was easy enough to pick up the writing and it seemed to come easily to me. Your use of the Greek does not "bother" me if it is truly germaine to the discussion at hand. Some will use it merely to establish a "higher authority" which does not wash well with me. I am a simple man, and try to keep things as simple as possible.
NetDoc said:As for your idiom... I took you at your word. It is not a universal idiom as you pointed out. Discussion is best when it is clear. Please do not ask me to "translate" your words based on context here.
Considering the Catholic Churches claim to authority is based on Biblical scripture I`d say I was on topic.