“Sola Scriptura’s” Achilles Heel

by Steve Ray on June 22, 2012

The doctrine of Sola Scriptura states that we should believe only what we find clearly taught in the Bible;  the doctrine of Sola Scriptura is found nowhere clearly taught in the Bible;  so…???

{ 102 comments… read them below or add one }

Jeremy June 22, 2012 at 7:48 AM

I became a Christian from being an atheist about 18 months ago. Sola Scriptural seem like something so self evident it didn’t need to be codified.

If your faith isn’t based on that clearly in scripture and solely scripture, surely heresies like, indulgences can enter the fray.

Jeremy June 22, 2012 at 7:50 AM

*scriptura, iPad spell check got me!

The Sarge June 22, 2012 at 9:13 AM

The doctrine of Sola Scriptura, since it is not taught in the Bible, refutes itself.

Jeremy June 22, 2012 at 8:54 PM

Since joining a Baptist Church I’ve been taught that The reformation happened as there was a need to leave the Catholic Church in the 16th century due to; corruption in the Church, infidelity on the part of the Pope and a general belief that Catholic practice had moved away the reality of personal relationship with God, amongst other reasons. So Sola Scriptura was a logical conclusion of what to base the foundation of a new Church on, not a revelatory conclusion.

Anil Wang June 22, 2012 at 11:47 PM

Actually, to me this isn’t a convincing argument. In theory, sola scriptura might not be able to provide the full revelation of Tradition, but it could provide enough for salvation.

The theory would only work, however, if there were only a handful of denominations with nearly identical doctrines, and those doctrines did not change in the 500 years since the Protestant Revolution. If these were true, sola scriptura might well be true even if it isn’t explicitly mentioned in the Bible.

In practice, neither of these are true. In particular Calvin, Luther, Wesley, and even Zwingli wouldn’t be able to recognize most Churches that claim them as their founders and would denounce many of their doctrines.

*That* is the achilles heal of sola scriptura. If for the sake of example Presbyterians of 1900 would denounce as heretical the open communion, “any Church is okay as long as its Christian”, “contraception is a positive good”, “divorce and remarriage are okay”, “rapture theology”, …. of the typical modern Presbyterian church, then its clear that sola scriptura isn’t even able to preserve a denomination, much less lead to the “blessed assurance” of knowing you have “the right understanding” of scripture, and thus knowledge of what we need to be saved.

Jeremy June 23, 2012 at 4:28 AM

I have an open mind on Catholicism. Being a new Christian an having converted from atheism I’m open, I have an open mind, obviously a denominational change is a smaller move in belief. However, it seems clear to me from reading the Gospels that according to Jesus been saved consists of believing in Him in word and mind, loving God and neighbor, repenting, baptism and a few other requirements. None of them denomination specific.

So when a Catholic says, essentially, only Catholics go to heaven I have to roll my eyes. I can’t write more at the moment but your post is interesting.

De Maria June 23, 2012 at 4:34 AM

Hi Jeremy,
I became a Christian from being an atheist about 18 months ago. Sola Scriptural seem like something so self evident it didn’t need to be codified.

But Sola Scriptura says that if it isn’t codified, it isn’t valid.

If your faith isn’t based on that clearly in scripture and solely scripture, surely heresies

That’s what we are trying to tell you. Please provide the teaching of Sola Scriptura in Scripture. It isn’t there. Therefore, it is a heresy. It contradicts Scripture (2 Thessalonians 2:15).

like, indulgences can enter the fray.

According to Protestants, indulgences are used in order that one may pay their way into heaven.
This is what Jesus says about that:
Mark 10:21?Then Jesus beholding him loved him, and said unto him, One thing thou lackest: go thy way, sell whatsoever thou hast, and give to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven: and come, take up the cross, and follow me.

Since joining a Baptist Church I’ve been taught ….

You’ve heard on side of the story. Now learn the truth. Come to the Catholic Church, the Pillar and Foundation of the Truth (1 Tim 3:15).

Jeremy June 23, 2012 at 6:17 AM

Studying the history of the reformation, it seems to me people were completely fed up with what Catholicism was at the time. In many ways a political and financial institution, acting as a weight on them and corrupt and scandal ridden.

Fed up people said we want to re-establish a Church based on what Jesus said using the Bible put together by the Church they were leaving as the basis.

For me I don’t see how this point on Sola Scriptura not being clearly defined in the Bible is a crushing blow given the historic circumstances. Logic leeds in one in their situation in the direction they went. For example, a book of math proofs is a perfectly legitimate thing to base your belief in the truth of math on. But no math proof is ever going to prove math is a source of truth. That math is a source of truth must be presupposed. The Bible is the same, in fact if the truth of the Bible is presupposed Christianity becomes a nonsense. The difference between math and the Bible of course is no new revelation of truth is going to be added to the Bible. Knowing it is complete and a source of truth, it then becomes completely logical to base your belief on it solely.

Jeremy June 23, 2012 at 6:19 AM

*in fact if te truth of the Bible is NOT presupposed.

Not the iPad’s fault that time!

The Sarge June 23, 2012 at 7:50 AM

So, believing a doctrine that only doctrines taught in the Bible–a doctrine which is NOT taught in the Bible–should be believed despite the fact that it contradicts itself is logical?

Joel D'souza June 23, 2012 at 1:30 PM

How are we to reliably trust the teachings of men especially if they have a pedophile nature. Surely they will not have the in-dwelling Holy Spirit but a familiar spirit that will guide them to provide faulty teachings not on line with scripture.

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!”

So Sola scriptura is the only surest passport to heaven. 2 Thessalonians 2:15 refers to “traditions” of teachings taught by the Apostles and passed down from generation to generation and is not to be confused by the Sacred Tradition of the Roman Carholic Church. They are not one and the same.

De Maria June 23, 2012 at 6:45 PM

Hi Jeremy,
You said,
Studying the history of the reformation, it seems to me people were completely fed up with what Catholicism was at the time.

Then they were fed up with the Wisdom of God (Ephesians 3:10).

In many ways a political and financial institution, acting as a weight on them and corrupt and scandal ridden.

Jesus Himself said that the weeds would be amongst the wheat to the end (Matt 13:30). Yet, He still established the Church and said that it would not succumb to the Gates of Hell (Matt 16:18).

Fed up people said we want to re-establish a Church based on what Jesus said using the Bible put together by the Church they were leaving as the basis.

Because they have cast aside the institution which Christ built (Matt 16:18; Heb 13:17) and substituted themselves as authority over God’s word (Eph 2:2).

For me I don’t see how this point on Sola Scriptura not being clearly defined in the Bible is a crushing blow given the historic circumstances. Logic leeds in one in their situation in the direction they went. For example, a book of math proofs is a perfectly legitimate thing to base your belief in the truth of math on. But no math proof is ever going to prove math is a source of truth. That math is a source of truth must be presupposed. The Bible is the same, in fact if the truth of the Bible is presupposed Christianity becomes a nonsense. The difference between math and the Bible of course is no new revelation of truth is going to be added to the Bible. Knowing it is complete and a source of truth, it then becomes completely logical to base your belief on it solely.

The problem is that you are not relying upon the Bible. You are relying upon YOUR interpretation of the Bible and casting aside that Institution which Jesus built and which Scripture calls the Pillar of Truth (1 Tim 3:15).

De Maria June 23, 2012 at 6:57 PM

Hi Joel,
How are we to reliably trust the teachings of men especially if they have a pedophile nature.

You’ll have to tell me. We don’t have any teachings of men. And there are just as many pedophiles in your church as there are anywhere else. So, tell me how YOU rely upon them. We don’t.

Surely they will not have the in-dwelling Holy Spirit but a familiar spirit that will guide them to provide faulty teachings not on line with scripture.

You know better than I. Since you follow the men who have insulted the Holy Spirit (Heb 10:25-31).

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!”

Is this the same man who said, “If the wife is unwilling, let the maid come!”???

You might want to get your faith advice from someone who understood the Gospel of Jesus Christ a little better than the man who advised adultery.

So Sola scriptura is the only surest passport to heaven.

It is a passport to disobedience and disobedience a passport to eternal punishment:
Ephesians 5:6
Let no man deceive you with vain words: for because of these things cometh the wrath of God upon the children of disobedience.

2 Thessalonians 2:15 refers to “traditions” of teachings taught by the Apostles and passed down from generation to generation and is not to be confused by the Sacred Tradition of the Roman Carholic Church. They are not one and the same.

Yeah, they are. It is Sola Scriptura which is the heresy contradicting the Word of God.

Jeremy June 23, 2012 at 10:09 PM

Do you believe that De Maria, that Baptists will reach the throne of God and God will ask, “Did you love Me? Did you love your neighbor? Did you follow My commands? Where you Baptised?”

“Yes Lord, I did all things to the best of my ability”

“Well done my good and faithful servant but too bad you weren’t Catholic off to hell with you”

Lolek Pugeda June 24, 2012 at 1:24 AM

POINTS OF CLARIFICATION:
1) The reformation was a product of a totally different time period, thus a question I would like to raise is why are the Protestants still “protesting”, when the sale of indulgences ended over 400 years ago?ANSWER: Because the protestants are as much caught up to the traditions of anti-catholicism as we ,Catholics, are to the holy traditions of the Church.

2) Why should we trust the current Church when it had a corrupt past?
ANSWER: The same reason why we can trust current Germany despite its Nazi past.

3) If the Bible is the only form of authority, then who will lead the illiterate?
ANSWER: The ordained. The bible was meant to be dissiminated among the people through legitimate clergymen ordained through the apostolic sacrament. (see #4 for support)

4) If the holy Eucharist and Baptism are the only legitmate sacraments, then who will administer them?
ANSWER: That’s why we have the sacrament of holy orders.

5) Why should we follow the opinion of the Pope on the gospels?
ANSWER: It’s not an opinion, it’s a product of over 1800 years of constructive analysis of the Bible. Thus its Theology.

6) Why can’t women be priests?
ANSWER: The same reason why men can’t be nuns. (Adding that being a nun is as much a privilege as being a priest.)

De Maria June 24, 2012 at 7:02 AM

Hi Jeremy,

Do you believe that De Maria, that Baptists will reach the throne of God and God will ask, “Did you love Me? Did you love your neighbor? Did you follow My commands? Where you Baptised?”

Jeremy, Jeremy, Jeremeeeee. God won’t ask any questions. Have you not read Matt 25:31-45? God will tell you what you good you did and what good you did not do. And only those who did the will of God on this earth will enter the Kingdom of Heaven (Matt 7:21).

“Yes Lord, I did all things to the best of my ability”

There will be no need for us to say a word. There will be no pop quiz, no multiple choice test. We might ask questions of God.

37 Then shall the righteous answer him, saying, Lord, when saw we thee an hungred, and fed thee? or thirsty, and gave thee drink? 38 When saw we thee a stranger, and took thee in? or naked, and clothed thee? 39 Or when saw we thee sick, or in prison, and came unto thee? 40 And the King shall answer and say unto them, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of these my brethren, ye have done it unto me.

How many times have you read the Scripture Jeremy? Or is that one of those that you consider surpasseed?

“Well done my good and faithful servant but too bad you weren’t Catholic off to hell with you”

I think He will say that to you. He’ll say, “Jeremy, too bad you didn’t listen to Ray and all my messengers that I sent to tell you about the Catholic Church. You would have saved yourelf a lot of suffering in Purgatory.” ; )

Bill912 June 24, 2012 at 8:49 AM

“…too bad you weren’t Catholic off to hell with you.”

Jeremy, the Catholic Church teaches no such thing. If you are going to criticize the Church, atleast find out from Catholic sources what she teaches and why.

Joel D'souza June 24, 2012 at 12:56 PM

De Maria:

You’ll have to tell me. We don’t have any teachings of men. And there are just as many pedophiles in your church as there are anywhere else. So, tell me how YOU rely upon them. We don’t.

By your comment it shows you are plainly irked at my comment because my comment was in generalization at not targeting a specific denomination. You have revealed the weakness of the Catholic Church. Therefore i must say this: “If the cap suits you, then by all means wear it”.

I am now a Baptist. I have been an ex-Catholic myself and I know I am writing of the things I know about and lived with.

De Maria June 24, 2012 at 4:24 PM

Hi Joel ,

You said:
By your comment it shows you are plainly irked at my comment

That is true.

because my comment was in generalization at not targeting a specific denomination.

Ha, ha, ha! I was born yesterday, but I wasn’t born last night. Let me put it like this. Riiiiiiight.

You have revealed the weakness of the Catholic Church.

??? If you perceive a weakness in me, why do you then apply it to the Catholic Church? Are your weaknesses all applicable to your Protestant upbringing?

Therefore i must say this: “If the cap suits you, then by all means wear it”.

But I see that the cap fits you best. So, it is yours to wear.

I am now a Baptist. I have been an ex-Catholic myself and I know I am writing of the things I know about and lived with.

I was ex-Catholic for 15 years of my life. Then God opened my eyes to the truth of the Catholic Church and I returned as quick as I could. I hope that God, one day opens your eyes as well.

Sincerely,

De Maria

Jeremy June 24, 2012 at 6:58 PM

I’ve brought the One-Minute Apologist by Dave Armstrong to give Catholocisim a fair shake. I’ll visit a Mass as well.

Jeremy June 24, 2012 at 6:59 PM

*catholicism, sorry!

Joel D'Souza June 25, 2012 at 12:25 AM

St. Paul wrote the epistle to the Galatian church because, after his departure, ravening wolves (anti-sola scriptura) moved in, who perverted Paul’s Gospel of man’s free justification by faith in Christ Jesus.

The world bears the Gospel a grudge because the Gospel condemns the religious wisdom of the world. Jealous for its own religious views, the world in turn charges the Gospel with being a subversive and licentious doctrine, offensive to God and man, a doctrine to be persecuted as the worst plague on earth.

Lolek Pugeda June 25, 2012 at 5:02 AM

To Joel:
So your part of the baptist church? Which one? The westboro, new birth missionary, etc? I’m sorry its just that there are SO many!

Lolek Pugeda June 25, 2012 at 5:11 AM

To Joel:
So your part of a baptist church? Which one? The westboro, new birth missionary, etc? I’m sorry it’s just that there are SO many!

De Maria June 25, 2012 at 7:40 AM

Hi Joel,
St. Paul wrote the epistle to the Galatian church because, after his departure, ravening wolves (anti-sola scriptura) moved in, who perverted Paul’s Gospel of man’s free justification by faith in Christ Jesus.

That statement is proof of why Sola Scriptura doesn’t work. You, Joel, a sola scripturist adherent, feel free to add to Scripture. Now, if you don’t believe me, show me where these “ravening wolves” are described as being “anti-sola scriptura”?

It’s not there. You added that to Scripture.

The world bears the Gospel a grudge because the Gospel condemns the religious wisdom of the world.

Amen.

Jealous for its own religious views, the world in turn charges the Gospel with being a subversive and licentious doctrine, offensive to God and man, a doctrine to be persecuted as the worst plague on earth.

That is also true. But what you don’t recognize is that you, in attacking the doctrines of the Catholic Church, join those who attack the Gospel of Jesus Christ.

Sincerely,

De Maria

De Maria June 25, 2012 at 7:44 AM

Hi Jeremy,
I’ve brought the One-Minute Apologist by Dave Armstrong to give Catholocisim a fair shake. I’ll visit a Mass as well.

Good for you!

Corey June 25, 2012 at 9:16 AM

Great back and forth on this one but it all comes down to this…

1. Jesus established a Church on the Apostles, a Church to serve as the pillar and foundation of truth.
2. The Apostolic orders were to continue in succession, otherwise the Apostles would have never replaced Judas. This much is clear from anyone who picks up any of the writings from the disciples of the Apostles (Ignatius of Antioch, Polycarp of Smyrna, etc).
3. It is clear that the early Church was unified in its belief in the Real Presence, Communion of Saints, adherence to the Bishop as the institution of Christ, and other Catholic doctrines that Protestants no longer adhere to.
4. The Church came before the Bible. If the Church included the Apostles, Mark, Luke and whomever truly wrote Hebrews, then it follows that the Church gave us the Bible not the other way around. Protestants think that true churches are founded on the Bible. I guess this would exclude any pre-fourth century church.
5. Even Protestant scholars agree that the father of the new testament canon is St. Athanasius, a Catholic Bishop in the mid-fourth century. (Important fact for Joel to digest since he thinks Paul wrote Galatians to combat sola-scriptura. What scripture Joel?)
6. The new “testament” is a latin rooted word that simply means “covenant”. What does Jesus say the new “testament” is? Not a list of books, rather he refers to the new testament as his Blood as instituted in the Eucharist (Matthew 26:28). According to the New Testament, the New Testament was a Sacrament long before it was a list of books.
7. If Jesus promised that the Church would be guided by the Holy Spirit and that nothing would prevail against it until the end of time, the ONLY Church this can possibly refer to unless you are historically ignorant is the Catholic Church. In the first few centuries of Christianity, one of the early Church Fathers quipped: the Catholic Church is everywhere but united as one body; all of the heretical sects are likewise everywhere but divided and the only thing they are united against is their hatred of the Catholic Church which is the truth.

You can hate the Church all you want, but it is the only Church that was there at the beginning and still standing 2,000 years later.

Joel D'souza June 25, 2012 at 10:43 AM

Corey:

You will have to give a clear definition of what a “Church” really means and whether the definition attributes to the same as laid out in the New Testament. Also does it mean “Church” = Catholic Church is also = Roman Catholic Church? What i see here very slyly and subtly, “Church” and “Catholic Church” are used interchangeably for ulterior motives.

Keep in mind according to the scriptures that the first Church was a Christian Church at Antioch and the followers of Christ were first called “Christians” at Antioch as per Acts 11:26. You will not find a single verse in the Bible that explicitly has the the words “Catholic” or “Protestant”. Because Christ, Jesus Christ, Christians, Christianity are deeply related to each other.

Joel D'souza June 25, 2012 at 10:53 AM

Lolek Pugeda:
POINTS OF CLARIFICATION:
1) The reformation was a product of a totally different time period, thus a question I would like to raise is why are the Protestants still “protesting”, when the sale of indulgences ended over 400 years ago?

I am quite sure that I cannot be wrong, but the current pope very recently announced that Catholics could buy indulgences if they not able to make the trip to one of the Marian shrines.

I must say you are still asleep and not aware of what is happening around you. That’s why I pity you gotta “Cradle-catholic” tag hanging around you neck.

So your part of the baptist church? Which one? The westboro, new birth missionary, etc? I’m sorry its just that there are SO many

Do you have a problem if there are so many?. And what makes you say One has the truth while the SO many are liars and will go to Hell???

Bill912 June 25, 2012 at 11:05 AM

Exactly where did Lolek Pugeda say that “…while the SO many are liars and will go to Hell???”

Joel D'souza June 25, 2012 at 1:01 PM

De Maria:

That is also true. But what you don’t recognize is that you, in attacking the doctrines of the Catholic Church, join those who attack the Gospel of Jesus Christ.

I attack only doctrines of the Catholic church that are in not in agreement with scripture. Lets not pretend there isn’t contentious issues. You have to accept the fact that there are discrepancies existing. If the Catholic church says Scripture plus Tradition .. – why can’t they be in harmony instead of contradictory? For e.g. The Catholic Church says Mary assumed bodily into heaven. However It is not supported in scripture. The result: I cannot obey what the Catholic Church teaches in its traditions but only what the scripture teaches. In this case I treat scripture as authority above in issue stated.

Joel D'souza June 25, 2012 at 1:04 PM

Bill912:

it is obviously implied.

Jerry June 25, 2012 at 2:23 PM

One-Minute Apologist by Dave Armstrong to give Catholocisim a fair shake.

I converted to the Catholic Church in 1997 and I did a year of research and study on the Catholic Church before I came in. I read the arguments of James White, William Webster, Dave Hunt, Robert Zins to name a few. I don’t think just reading a basic book by Dave Armstrong gives a fair shot to Catholocisim at all.

Jeremy June 25, 2012 at 5:16 PM

I don’t think just reading a basic book by Dave Armstrong gives a fair shot to Catholocisim at all.

Well, to be honest I’d rather put my effort into reading the Bible and words of Jesus. I’ll read a book of basic arguments by one of the leading modern Catholic Apologists and if not convinced I’ll put my effort in the Bible, to revisit the issue of denominations after my understand of Jesus and faith has grown.

De Maria June 26, 2012 at 12:56 AM

Hi Joel,

You said,
You will have to give a clear definition of what a “Church” really means

It is the Corporation (body of Christ) which Christ founded. He set upon it a Chairman and 11 officers to guide it at its foundation (Matt 16:18; Rev 21:14). And He gave this Church authority to discipline its members (Matt 18:17).

and whether the definition attributes to the same as laid out in the New Testament.

Sure does.

Also does it mean “Church” = Catholic Church is also = Roman Catholic Church? What i see here very slyly and subtly, “Church” and “Catholic Church” are used interchangeably for ulterior motives.

The Catholic Church is the Church described in Scripture.
The Church in Scripture has a Shepherd assigned by Christ (John 21:17), has authority (Matt 18:17), is infallible (1 Tim 3:15; Eph 3:10), passes on Tradition (2 Thess 2:15), condemns faith alone (James 2:17), preaches the Sacraments (Mark 16:16), offers the Eucharist (John 6:51), etc. etc.

Not one Protestant Church has all those attributes.

Keep in mind according to the scriptures that the first Church was a Christian Church at Antioch and the followers of Christ were first called “Christians” at Antioch as per Acts 11:26.

That is where member of Christ Church were first called Christians. That is not where the Church was established.

You will not find a single verse in the Bible that explicitly has the the words “Catholic” or “Protestant”. Because Christ, Jesus Christ, Christians, Christianity are deeply related to each other.

However, you will find the attributes and doctrines of the Church described. And they are all Catholic.

Sincerely,

De Maria

De Maria June 26, 2012 at 1:13 AM

Hi Joel and Lolek,

Lolek said:
1) The reformation was a product of a totally different time period, thus a question I would like to raise is why are the Protestants still “protesting”, when the sale of indulgences ended over 400 years ago?

Joel responded:
I am quite sure that I cannot be wrong, but the current pope very recently announced that Catholics could buy indulgences if they not able to make the trip to one of the Marian shrines.

Indulgences continue to be provided by the Catholic Church. It is a true doctrine established by Jesus Christ:
Luke 11:41
But rather give alms of such things as ye have; and, behold, all things are clean unto you.

There is however, a wrong way to manage this practice. This is partially illustrated in Scripture (Acts 8:17-19).

The unlawful use of indulgences has been condemned and in fact, has never been permitted. Those who unlawfully offered them in olden times have paid for their offense.

I must say you are still asleep and not aware of what is happening around you. That’s why I pity you gotta “Cradle-catholic” tag hanging around you neck.

And we pity you. May God forgive you your Pharisaic attitude.

Joel, you said:

Do you have a problem if there are so many?.

You should too (Ephesians 4:5).

And what makes you say One has the truth while the SO many are liars and will go to Hell???

Scripture says so (1 Tim 3:15; 4:1; 4:16; and Matthew 7:13-15).

Sincerely,

De Maria

De Maria June 26, 2012 at 1:26 AM

Hi Jeremy,

Well, to be honest I’d rather put my effort into reading the Bible and words of Jesus. I’ll read a book of basic arguments by one of the leading modern Catholic Apologists and if not convinced I’ll put my effort in the Bible, to revisit the issue of denominations after my understand of Jesus and faith has grown.

Rightly understood, the Bible will lead you to the Catholic Church. There’s an excellent Bible Study here..

You’ll find that Catholic Theology is by far the most systematic and logical of any other. And by far the most Biblical.

Sincerely,

De Maria

Bill912 June 26, 2012 at 6:35 AM

“Bill912

it is obviously implied”

No, you put words in his mouth. Putting words in another’s mouth is a form of lying.

johnnyc June 26, 2012 at 7:42 AM

“Rightly understood, the Bible will lead you to the Catholic Church. There’s an excellent Bible Study here..”

That is an excellent one De Maria. Here is another one Jeremy that is very good.

http://www.agapebiblestudy.com/index.html

Lolek Pugeda June 26, 2012 at 8:45 AM

To Joel:
I didn’t say that others are going to hell, its your fellow baptists who are saying it (I.e. Westboro)

Corey June 26, 2012 at 8:47 AM

De Maria:
I couldn’t have said it better myself.

Joel: You said “you will not find a single verse in the Bible that explicitly has the the words “Catholic” or “Protestant”. Because Christ, Jesus Christ, Christians, Christianity are deeply related to each other.” I understand what you are saying and don’t disagree that all Christians have some truth and are deeply related. However, a lie becomes stronger when mixed with truth. Having part of the truth does not imply that all paths are equal. I think you would agree with that. We are all called to be of the same mind and remain united as one body (1 Corinthians 1:10, Philippians 2:2, Ephesians 4:3, Romans 15:6). But one can hardly say that all Christians are united. We can only agree that we are all united to a lesser degree. If I were to poll even Protestants and ask what are the minimum set of beliefs are for salvation, you will get wildly different opinions in the over 34,000 different denominations that now exist as a consequence of the reformation.

Jesus gave the Apostles unprecedented power (Matthew 18:18). He instructed them to make disciples of all nations and teach them to observe ALL that He commanded (Matthew 28:19-20) and this includes sacred Tradition (2 Thess 2:15). Not some, not a little, not just what you want to follow or deem important. With the reformation came the view that absolute truth and salvation comes mostly from a few commands in the Bible (love and accept Jesus as Lord and Savior). But believing in Christ while refusing to conform one’s life to ALL that he commands is a lie (1 John 1:4-6, James 2:19). Peter even warns that the lawless will twist the words of Paul to their own destruction (2 Peter 3:15-17). So then what is the outcome?

As the late Bishop Fulton Sheen once said, “if you don’t live what you believe, you will end up believing what you live”. This is the only natural outcome of disunity and rejection of authority. I choose a lifestyle and hold that it doesn’t matter what I do since I am once saved, always saved. The pastor tells me I’m doing something wrong, I just go find a church that teaches otherwise. There are over 34k to choose from. This is what I call “billboard Christianity”. Drive down any stretch of highway and you’ll find billboard after billboard of churches claiming to have the truth. The problem is that with such a broad view of Christianity as Protestants hold, moral relativism sets in and the “customer” ends up being the one with the power to define what they believe to be the truth.

Lolek Pugeda June 26, 2012 at 8:49 AM

To Joel:
You typed that its “obviously implied”, is that the method by which you interpret the bible?

Lolek Pugeda June 26, 2012 at 9:07 AM

The problem with protestants is that they assume that the Catholic church would rob the people of their free will to interpret the bible, but if their is ONE God then logically there has to be ONE interpretation. The Catholic church can lay just claim on it because it’s foundation is Jesus’ blessing on Caesarea Philippi. Remember the first protestant church broke away FROM the Catholic church, meaning they deviated from the path intended rather than establish the path.

De Maria June 26, 2012 at 9:16 AM

Hi Jeremy,

Well, to be honest I’d rather put my effort into reading the Bible and words of Jesus. I’ll read a book of basic arguments by one of the leading modern Catholic Apologists and if not convinced I’ll put my effort in the Bible, to revisit the issue of denominations after my understand of Jesus and faith has grown.

Rightly understood, the Bible will lead you to the Catholic Church. There’s an excellent Bible Study here..

You’ll find that Catholic Theology is by far the most systematic and logical of any other. And by far the most Biblical.

Sincerely,

De Maria

De Maria June 26, 2012 at 9:19 AM

Sorry for the duplicate. It didn’t seem to take last night, so I simply came back and submitted it again this morning. Only to discover that it was already there.

Sincerely,

De Maria

Joel D'souza June 26, 2012 at 12:39 PM

Lolek Pugeda
To Joel:
I didn’t say that others are going to hell, its your fellow baptists who are saying it (I.e. Westboro)

To Joel:
You typed that its “obviously implied”, is that the method by which you interpret the bible?

That is Official teachings of the Catholic Church. The CC also teaches that ONLY those baptised as babies in the CC will enjoy eternal bliss. What about Muslim, Budshist babies will go Hell?

Joel D'souza June 26, 2012 at 12:50 PM

De Maria:

Indulgences continue to be provided by the Catholic Church. It is a true doctrine established by Jesus Christ: Luke 11:41 But rather give alms of such things as ye have; and, behold, all things are clean unto you.

Yeah i know .. its funny how you can buy your relatives out of “purgatory” and say Jesus approves it in luke 11:41. Just pop-in the coins into the coffer and your relatives will simply pop-out into eternal bliss. With the result Jesus went to the cross of no use.

De Maria June 26, 2012 at 3:53 PM

Hi Joel,

Yeah i know .. its funny how you can buy your relatives out of “purgatory” and say Jesus approves it in luke 11:41. Just pop-in the coins into the coffer and your relatives will simply pop-out into eternal bliss.

1. I don’t remember saying any such thing.
2. However, I do remember proving that Sola Scriptura and Sola Fide CONTRADICT SCRIPTURE (1 Tim 3:15; 2 Thess 2:15; James 2:17; Romans 2:13; etc.)
3. As for indulgences, Luke 11:41 is one of the verses upon which we stand to support the doctrine of indulgences which is implied in Scripture. I you ever bothered to look, Scripture also says:
Treasure in heaven-Mark 12:43; Matt 6:20; 13:52; 19:21; Luke 12:33; Luke 18:22
Parent’s prayers save their children-Matthew 15:28; 17:15; Mark 9:21-27; Luke 9:38-42
Friend’s prayer save their friends-Matt 8:8; 9:2

Therefore the Teaching of Indulgences is strongly implied in Scripture. Whereas the Protestant doctrines not only absent, but contradict the Word of God.

With the result Jesus went to the cross of no use.

It is because Jesus went to the Cross and died for our sins, that we are now permitted to approach the Throne of God and through the Sacraments, be washed in His Blood (Matt 26:28; Heb 10:29).

Sincerely,

De Maria

Lolek Pugeda June 27, 2012 at 6:11 AM

To Joel:
Tell me where you got your information that only baptized Catholics go to heaven. (Remember it has to be an AUTHENTICALLY Catholic personage.)

Here’s mine
“As regards children who have died without baptism, the Church can only entrust them to the mercy of God.” Catechism of the Catholic Church, #1261

Also, you ask me if Muslim and Buddhist children will go to heaven? They could even considering that most have NOT even read the scriptures nor believe in it. While, Catholicism says that scripture and tradition are two inter-related means to live a WHOLESOME Christian life (Assuming you’re Christian.)

Scripture alone would seem sufficient but lacking, thus, to be WHOLLY Christian you need both. Understand also that dogmas and tradition are an extension of God’s will in the contemporary era.

Lastly, you didn’t really answer my question. You typed that it was “obviously implied”, is that the method by which you interpret the bible?

Joel D'souza June 27, 2012 at 12:27 PM

To Lolek Pugeda:
One Roman Catholic tradition names a limbo for children who die before their baptisms or die outside of the Roman Catholic religion. Ir is removed from the CCC after Ratzinger became pope. There is no biblical support for this view, however. It is merely a religious opinion (not official Catholic teaching) which has been handed down by Catholic theologians. Read the document http://www.catholicdoors.com/courses/salvatio.htm especially what the popes infallibly stated on Salvation outside the Catholic Church and other issues.

The closest biblical account for a “limbo” concerns “Abraham’s bosom” and “paradise” in the parable of the rich man and Lazarus (Luke 16:19-31). Although it is a parable to teach a truth concerning prophecies declaring the kingdom of God, the places mentioned must exist or Jesus would not have used them. Parables are not based upon imaginary objects and locations, but on things which are real. So before the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ, there were two places souls went upon death. One place is at the side of Abraham (often described as Abraham’s bosom); this would be for people who died in faith in God’s promised Messiah, just as Abraham did, and were declared righteous by faith (Genesis 15:4-6; Romans 4:13-24). Those who died in unbelief went to a place of torment. The Greek word used is hades and probably is the best Greek word for the Jewish sheol, literally “the lowest pit.” It is clearly a place of great torment.

But this is also a temporary limbo. These souls will appear at the second resurrection before the great white throne of Revelation 20:11-13. These people are not in the Book of Life because they do not have eternal life through faith in Christ, and they are cast into their final destination in the “Lake of Fire / Gehenna.” The idea of limbo as a realm in between heaven and hell, sort of another purgatory, is not biblical. If there is any sort of a limbo, it is the temporary holding place of the wicked (Hades / Sheol), which will eventually be emptied into the lake of fire (Revelation 20:11-15).

Lastly, you didn’t really answer my question. You typed that it was “obviously implied”, is that the method by which you interpret the bible?

The tone of your post dated implied that “..Being SO many” – implied worthless and without truth and also what the popes infallibly taught.

Leave a Comment

 

Previous post:

Next post: