ECT FAITH ALONE: DID JESUS TEACH IT?

[God's Truth]

Your problem is that you have never been able to prove that Protesants have not been sanctioned by Chirst to be teachers. You can prove that they don't come from your preferred man made tradition of Catholicisim, but you cannot prove that Jesus did not choose them. Your fallacy is your underlying assumption that since the papacy is so old it must be right. Any church founded on and rooted in the teachings of Christ is a church founded by Christ Himself. Remember what Jesus said, "Wherever two or more are gathered in my name, there I am in their midst." It's not about how old your church is, it's about Who your church worships.

Which protestant teacher are you exalting?

 

[CabinetMaker]

Which protestant teacher are you exalting?

None in particular. I have been to many small churches where the pastor works hard to mentor his congregation. They are small churches, limited in income but rich in biblical truth and ministry. They congregation is about helping each other as described in scripture. The church focus on biblical teachings on not on what a panel of men say the bible teaches.

 

[Cruciform]

The gates of Hades not prevailing against is about the gates of Hades not being able to keep Jesus in Hades after he died on the cross, for that is where he went after he died. That proves the church is Jesus' body. That is how the gate of Hell cannot prevail. Jesus is the church that was in Hell. The gates could not keep him there.There is no denomination which is the true church, for the true church are those in the body of Christ. Jesus' words are the authority. We are not to follow tradition or church laws or any human rules as authority for the church (Matthew 15:1-14; Colossians 2:8; Galatians 1:6-9; Proverbs 14:12; 2 John 9-11; Jeremiah 10:23).

Already answered in my previous post above. Thanks for perfectly proving the points made there.

 

[Cruciform]

Your problem is that you have never been able to prove that Protesants have not been sanctioned by Chirst to be teachers.

Not so. Given that the Catholic Church is in fact that one historic Church founded by Jesus Christ himself---and that your chosen recently-invented, man-made non-Catholic sect is decidedly NOT Christ's one historic Church (a fact that you have publicly admitted on this forum)---it follows that, since the opinions of your favored sect directly contradict the teachings of Christ's one historic Church, your preferred sect therefore can have been neither established nor sanctioned by Jesus Christ. It is a humanly-invented sect whose tenets can never rise above the level of mere human opinion---simply "the traditions of men."
[/quote]

Your fallacy is your underlying assumption that since the papacy is so old it must be right.

Merely a Straw Man Fallacy on your part (again). Rather, I maintain that because the Catholic episcopate is historically traceable back to Jesus Christ and the apostles, it therefore possesses the doctrinal authority with which Christ himself endowed it (Mt. 16:18-19/Is. 22:22; Mt. 28:18-20; Lk. 10:16; Ac. 16:4; 2 Thess. 3:4; 1 Tim. 3:15; 1 Jn. 4:6). A simple historical and biblical fact.

Any church founded on and rooted in the teachings of Christ is a church founded by Christ Himself.

Yet, the only way to know whether any particular teaching IS in fact "rooted in the teachings of Christ" is to compare it with the authoritative teachings of Christ's one historic Church herself. And since the teachings of your chosen recently-invented man-made non-Catholic sect are decidedly contrary to those of Christ's one historic Church, your preferred sect itself simply cannot have been founded by Christ. Here you've clumsily placed the cart before the horse.

Remember what Jesus said, "Wherever two or more are gathered in my name, there I am in their midst."

Now go ahead and indicate exactly where this text says anything whatsoever about "the Church."



Gaudium de veritate,

Cruciform
+T+

 

[CabinetMaker]

Not so. Given that the Catholic Church is in fact that one historic Church founded by Jesus Christ himself---and that your chosen recently-invented, man-made non-Catholic sect is decidedly NOT Christ's one historic Church (a fact that you have publicly admitted on this forum)---it follows that, since the opinions of your favored sect directly contradict the teachings of Christ's one historic Church, your preferred sect therefore can have been neither established nor sanctioned by Jesus Christ. It is a humanly-invented sect whose tenets can never rise above the level of mere human opinion---simply "the traditions of men."

This is your primary fallacy. This is not a given. It is an assertion that you support from your churches own writings. You cannot independently support this assertion. Every argument you attempt to make based on this assertion is, therefore, a fallacy.

Merely a Straw Man Fallacy on your part (again). Rather, I maintain that because the Catholic episcopate is historically traceable back to Jesus Christ and the apostles, it therefore possesses the doctrinal authority with which Christ himself endowed it (Mt. 16:18-19/Is. 22:22; Mt. 28:18-20; Lk. 10:16; Ac. 16:4; 2 Thess. 3:4; 1 Tim. 3:15; 1 Jn. 4:6). A simple historical and biblical fact.

That history does not make them automatically correct. Need I again post all the deep theological errors of the RCC sect?

Yet, the only way to know whether any particular teaching IS in fact "rooted in the teachings of Christ" is to compare it with the authoritative teachings of Christ's one historic Church herself. And since the teachings of your chosen recently-invented man-made non-Catholic sect are decidedly contrary to those of Christ's one historic Church, your preferred sect itself simply cannot have been founded by Christ. Here you've clumsily placed the cart before the horse.

Incorrect. Completely incorrect. The only way know whether a particular teaching is correct to get on your knees and pray. The wisdom of men is folly and if you rest your faith on the teachings of men, men such as the Catholic Magisterium, then your foundation is built on sand.

Now go ahead and indicate exactly where this text says anything whatsoever about "the Church."



Gaudium de veritate,

Cruciform
+T+

That's correct. You don't need any particular church or sect for Jesus to be there with you.

 

[God's Truth]

None in particular. I have been to many small churches where the pastor works hard to mentor his congregation. They are small churches, limited in income but rich in biblical truth and ministry. They congregation is about helping each other as described in scripture. The church focus on biblical teachings on not on what a panel of men say the bible teaches.

We do not need pastors, except the Shepherd, Jesus Christ. We have God's written Word, and if we obey, God will reveal Himself to us, just as He says.

 

[Tambora]

We do not need pastors, except the Shepherd, Jesus Christ. We have God's written Word, and if we obey, God will reveal Himself to us, just as He says.

I want to laugh at you so hard, but you are in a sad situation which is harmful to you and those who believe what you say.

 

[steko]

We do not need pastors, except the Shepherd, Jesus Christ. We have God's written Word, and if we obey, God will reveal Himself to us, just as He says.

Evidently, the Lord thinks otherwise:


Eph 4:11 And he gave some, apostles; and some, prophets; and some, evangelists; and some, pastors and teachers;
Eph 4:12 For the perfecting of the saints, for the work of the ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ:
Eph 4:13 Till we all come in the unity of the faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God, unto a perfect man, unto the measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ:
Eph 4:14 That we henceforth be no more children, tossed to and fro, and carried about with every wind of doctrine, by the sleight of men, and cunning craftiness, whereby they lie in wait to deceive;

 

[God's Truth]

Evidently, the Lord thinks otherwise:


Eph 4:11 And he gave some, apostles; and some, prophets; and some, evangelists; and some, pastors and teachers;
Eph 4:12 For the perfecting of the saints, for the work of the ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ:
Eph 4:13 Till we all come in the unity of the faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God, unto a perfect man, unto the measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ:
Eph 4:14 That we henceforth be no more children, tossed to and fro, and carried about with every wind of doctrine, by the sleight of men, and cunning craftiness, whereby they lie in wait to deceive;

We have the written Word of God now. We are not waiting for letters and visits from the apostles.

 

[Tambora]

We have the written Word of God now. We are not waiting for letters and visits from the apostles.

You have many misunderstandings about God and Jesus.

 

[HisServant]

I want to laugh at you so hard, but you are in a sad situation which is harmful to you and those who believe what you say.

The problem as always, is actually finding someone that is a pastor.

In my 55 years on this planet, I have only run into a couple people I would consider a pastor according to the biblical qualifications and Paul's model.

A pastor would have to be an unpaid elder that has the gift of being a pastor. A pastor cannot be a young man, or someone that came out of seminary..

 

[steko]

Eph 4:11 And he gave some, apostles; and some, prophets; and some, evangelists; and some, pastors and teachers;
Eph 4:12 For the perfecting of the saints, for the work of the ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ:
Eph 4:13 Till we all come in the unity of the faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God, unto a perfect man, unto the measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ:
Eph 4:14 That we henceforth be no more children, tossed to and fro, and carried about with every wind of doctrine, by the sleight of men, and cunning craftiness, whereby they lie in wait to deceive;

We have the written Word of God now. We are not waiting for letters and visits from the apostles.[/QUOTE]

Apostles/prophets were the foundation of the body, but pastors, teachers and evangelists abide still.

 

[God's Truth]

Apostles/prophets were the foundation of the body, but pastors, teachers and evangelists abide still.

So says you, the Catholics, Mormons, Pentecostals, and all the other denominations.

 

[genuineoriginal]

I want to laugh at you so hard, but you are in a sad situation which is harmful to you and those who believe what you say.

1 Corinthians 1:27 27 But God hath chosen the foolish things of the world to confound the wise; and God hath chosen the weak things of the world to confound the things which are mighty;​

:think:

 

[God's Truth]

1 Corinthians 1:27 27 But God hath chosen the foolish things of the world to confound the wise; and God hath chosen the weak things of the world to confound the things which are mighty;​

:think:

This is good. You are exactly right. That is perfect timing.

 

[Tambora]

This is good. You are exactly right. That is perfect timing.

Then apply it to yourself when you said the exact same thing.

 

[Cross Reference]

=steko;4650304]

We have the written Word of God now. We are not waiting for letters and visits from the apostles. . .GT

Apostles/prophets were the foundation of the body, but pastors, teachers and evangelists abide still.

Why not Apostles [ones who establish like a missionary] and Prophets [those that speak the Living Word of God]?

 

[steko]

=steko;4650304]

Why not Apostles [ones who establish like a missionary] and Prophets [those that speak the Living Word of God]?

The word 'apostolos' means delegate, one who is sent on a mission. In this sense all believers are sent to carry the word of reconciliation through the gospel of grace.

In the official sense, the Apostles were hand-picked by the Lord Jesus for a founding mission with signs and wonders to confirm their office.

There is a movement going on today in which there are men claiming the same authority as the founding Apostles.

When Paul said that he believed that the Lord had set His Apostles last, I believe that office was completed in the first century. Now, two-thousand years later, one wouldn't take a foundation and lay it on the roof.

To me, the use of the word Apostle as applied to believers today only brings confusion.

1Co_4:9 For I think that God hath set forth us the apostles last, as it were appointed to death: for we are made a spectacle unto the world, and to angels, and to men.


1Co 12:28 And God hath set some in the church, first apostles,

Eph 2:20 And are built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ himself being the chief corner stone;


I don't know how anyone today could legitimately claim the office of an Apostle in the sense of the twelve and Paul.

 

[Cruciform]

This is your primary fallacy. This is not a given. It is an assertion that you support from your churches own writings.

It is a CONCLUSION that is reached based upon the recorded history of the Christian faith itself. This is simply how the authenticity of the Christian faith---or any event rooted in history---is established.

You cannot independently support this assertion.

Now go ahead and define exactly what you mean by "independent support."

Every argument you attempt to make based on this assertion is, therefore, a fallacy.

The Christian faith itself, then, is "a fallacy," since my approach is exactly that employed by the apostles themselves in the New Testament. On the basis of your assumption, therefore, you must throw out the entire Christian faith in general. So when do you plan to reject Christianity as a whole?

Need I again post all the deep theological errors of the RCC [Church]?

I'd be profoundly surprised if you could post even ONE. So far, you've produced exactly nothing.

Incorrect. Completely incorrect. The only way know whether a particular teaching is correct to get on your knees and pray.

Where exactly do you get such an assumption?

The wisdom of men is folly...

...including the utterly subjective feelings and notions that a man pridefully mistakes for "what God told me."

...and if you rest your faith on the teachings of men, men such as the Catholic Magisterium, then your foundation is built on sand.

Interesting, since it was Jesus Christ himself who established the Magisterium and endowed it with his very own doctrinal authority. For example, see THIS.

That's correct. You don't need any particular church or sect for Jesus to be there with you.

Neither does your proof-text have anything whatsoever to do with answering the question of the role of Christ's Church in the believer's life. One must turn to other biblical texts for that information---something which you simply refuse to do.



Gaudium de veritate,

Cruciform
+T+

 

[CabinetMaker]

It is a CONCLUSION that is reached based upon the recorded history of the Christian faith itself. This is simply how the authenticity of the Christian faith---or any event rooted in history---is established.

It is your conclusion but it is not a valid conclusion. It is your conclusion based on the Magisterium declaring that it must be your conclusion to be Catholic. What kind of logic is that?

Now go ahead and define exactly what you mean by "independent support."

Writings not prepared by the RCC.

The Christian faith itself, then, is "a fallacy," since my approach is exactly that employed by the apostles themselves in the New Testament. On the basis of your assumption, therefore, you must throw out the entire Christian faith in general. So when do you plan to reject Christianity as a whole?

Urm, you were not chosen by nor educated by Christ as the apostles were. You have hitched your wagon to the RCC star and follow it without question. I threw Catholicism to the wolves where it belongs and embrace Christianity (faith in Christ) fully.

I'd be profoundly surprised if you could post even ONE. So far, you've produced exactly nothing.

Sadly, post 518 has long since been purged. It was a post the addressed the theological errors in the RCC interpretations of scriptures that mention Mary. It was a post that you were unable to refute in any meaningful way. You have worked so hard to avoid it that I am not surprised that you are reluctant to mention it here.

Where exactly do you get such an assumption?

What did Jesus do when He found Himself struggling with difficult times? Did He go to His Apostles or did He do something else? If He turned to His Father in prayer, why wouldn't we?

...including the utterly subjective feelings and notions that a man pridefully mistakes for "what God told me."

The Magisterium is plagued with such pride.

Interesting, since it was Jesus Christ himself who established the Magisterium and endowed it with his very own doctrinal authority. For example, see THIS.

Sorry, Catholic propaganda is not evidence. You do not have a full record of every person that was sent forth from the churches that the Apostles founded. You cannot account for every missionary that was sent forth from the early churches. As such, you cannot say with absolute certainty that ONLY your sect is the seat of authority. Authority, true authority is derived only from God, not from a council of men.

Neither does your proof-text have anything whatsoever to do with answering the question of the role of Christ's Church in the believer's life. One must turn to other biblical texts for that information---something which you simply refuse to do.



Gaudium de veritate,

Cruciform
+T+

It's not proof texting. It is simply what Jesus said. If you gather in My name I will be there with you. It is a promise from Jesus. Can you show us where Jesus intended that He would only honor that promise in Catholic churches?