|
Title: In Defense of Rome for a Change Post by: AVBunyan on May 16, 2004, 10:06:27 PM Alright now, some of us have been accused of being hard on Rome. Let’s do this. Some of us keep saying that certain of Rome’s doctrine are unscriptural and this seems to have upset people so…let’s be more positive here. Let’s do this – instead of seeking out those teachings that are unscriptural let’s find major teachings of Rome that are scriptural.
All we need to do is list Rome’s other major, defining doctrines and list scripture for them. Remember the doctrine has to be supported by scripture in order to be listed. This way we are being more positive. Example: Rome says it believes in the Trinity. OK, I’ll buy that - Scripture – I John 5:7, 8; II Cor. 13:14; Matt. 28:19 Now, your turn. May God bless Title: Re:In Defense of Rome for a Change Post by: blainefabin on May 17, 2004, 02:10:39 AM Alright now, some of us have been accused of being hard on Rome. Let’s do this. Some of us keep saying that certain of Rome’s doctrine are unscriptural and this seems to have upset people so…let’s be more positive here. Let’s do this – instead of seeking out those teachings that are unscriptural let’s find major teachings of Rome that are scriptural. All we need to do is list Rome’s other major, defining doctrines and list scripture for them. Remember the doctrine has to be supported by scripture in order to be listed. This way we are being more positive. Example: Rome says it believes in the Trinity. OK, I’ll buy that - Scripture – I John 5:7, 8; II Cor. 13:14; Matt. 28:19 Now, your turn. May God bless what would be good is to first show us from scripture that the scripture is the sole authority concerning faith. but to support the catholic doctrine of Tradition by using scripture... "I commend you because you remember me in everything and maintain the traditions even as I have delivered them to you" (1 Cor. 11:2). the early church of acts "devoted themselves to the apostles’ teaching" (Acts 2:42) Act 20:35 I have shewed you all things, how that so labouring ye ought to support the weak, and to remember the words of the Lord Jesus, how he said, It is more blessed to give than to receive. which gospel do we find jesus saying this? how then apart from tradition did paul know christ ever said such a thing. Luk 1:1 Forasmuch as many have taken in hand to set forth in order a declaration of those things which are most surely believed among us, Luk 1:2 Even as they delivered them unto us, which from the beginning were eyewitnesses, and ministers of the word; Luk 1:3 It seemed good to me also, having had perfect understanding of all things from the very first, to write unto thee in order, most excellent Theophilus, luke is able to write the gospel because of tradition... he clearly was not an eyewitness. 2Th 2:15 Therefore, brethren, stand fast, and hold the traditions which ye have been taught, whether by word, or our epistle. Act 15:28 For it seemed good to the Holy Ghost, and to us, to lay upon you no greater burden than these necessary things; Act 15:29 That ye abstain from meats offered to idols, and from blood, and from things strangled, and from fornication: from which if ye keep yourselves, ye shall do well. Fare ye well. concerning circumcision it is clear that the church had as jesus said the power to bind and loose... mike Title: Re:In Defense of Rome for a Change Post by: Brother Love on May 17, 2004, 06:08:01 AM Alright now, some of us have been accused of being hard on Rome. Let’s do this. Some of us keep saying that certain of Rome’s doctrine are unscriptural and this seems to have upset people so…let’s be more positive here. Let’s do this – instead of seeking out those teachings that are unscriptural let’s find major teachings of Rome that are scriptural. All we need to do is list Rome’s other major, defining doctrines and list scripture for them. Remember the doctrine has to be supported by scripture in order to be listed. This way we are being more positive. Example: Rome says it believes in the Trinity. OK, I’ll buy that - Scripture – I John 5:7, 8; II Cor. 13:14; Matt. 28:19 Now, your turn. May God bless The only thing good in the religion of rome is "BINGO" :) Title: Re:In Defense of Rome for a Change Post by: ollie on May 17, 2004, 11:10:30 AM Alright now, some of us have been accused of being hard on Rome. Let’s do this. Some of us keep saying that certain of Rome’s doctrine are unscriptural and this seems to have upset people so…let’s be more positive here. Let’s do this – instead of seeking out those teachings that are unscriptural let’s find major teachings of Rome that are scriptural. All we need to do is list Rome’s other major, defining doctrines and list scripture for them. Remember the doctrine has to be supported by scripture in order to be listed. This way we are being more positive. Example: Rome says it believes in the Trinity. OK, I’ll buy that - Scripture – I John 5:7, 8; II Cor. 13:14; Matt. 28:19 Now, your turn. May God bless what would be good is to first show us from scripture that the scripture is the sole authority concerning faith. but to support the catholic doctrine of Tradition by using scripture... "I commend you because you remember me in everything and maintain the traditions even as I have delivered them to you" (1 Cor. 11:2). the early church of acts "devoted themselves to the apostles’ teaching" (Acts 2:42) Act 20:35 I have shewed you all things, how that so labouring ye ought to support the weak, and to remember the words of the Lord Jesus, how he said, It is more blessed to give than to receive. which gospel do we find jesus saying this? how then apart from tradition did paul know christ ever said such a thing. Luk 1:1 Forasmuch as many have taken in hand to set forth in order a declaration of those things which are most surely believed among us, Luk 1:2 Even as they delivered them unto us, which from the beginning were eyewitnesses, and ministers of the word; Luk 1:3 It seemed good to me also, having had perfect understanding of all things from the very first, to write unto thee in order, most excellent Theophilus, luke is able to write the gospel because of tradition... he clearly was not an eyewitness. 2Th 2:15 Therefore, brethren, stand fast, and hold the traditions which ye have been taught, whether by word, or our epistle. Act 15:28 For it seemed good to the Holy Ghost, and to us, to lay upon you no greater burden than these necessary things; Act 15:29 That ye abstain from meats offered to idols, and from blood, and from things strangled, and from fornication: from which if ye keep yourselves, ye shall do well. Fare ye well. concerning circumcision it is clear that the church had as jesus said the power to bind and loose... mike 16. And I will pray the Father, and he shall give you another Comforter, that he may abide with you for ever; 17. Even the Spirit of truth; whom the world cannot receive, because it seeth him not, neither knoweth him: but ye know him; for he dwelleth with you, and shall be in you. John 14:22. Judas saith unto him, not Iscariot, Lord, how is it that thou wilt manifest thyself unto us, and not unto the world? 23. Jesus answered and said unto him, If a man love me, he will keep my words: and my Father will love him, and we will come unto him, and make our abode with him. 24. He that loveth me not keepeth not my sayings: and the word which ye hear is not mine, but the Father's which sent me. 25. These things have I spoken unto you, being yet present with you. 26. But the Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, he shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you. The words of Christ were given through the Holy Spirit to His apostles. They delivered the word to the world. Six of them put theirr words in writing, some in the form of letters to local churches, and this word still delivers along with the written word of two evangelists. It was compiled as "The Book". The church at Rome tries to take credit for this compilation, but much of the writings and scriptures had been collected and were in the hands of early local church bishops long before the local church at Rome took it upon themselves to predominate one bishop over all bishops in all local congregations. Sorry I strayed a bit from the topic of positive scriptural things of Rome. ollie Title: Re:In Defense of Rome for a Change Post by: blainefabin on May 17, 2004, 11:29:16 AM Quote The church at Rome tries to take credit for this compilation, but much of the writings and scriptures had been collected and were in the hands of early local church bishops long before the local church at Rome took it upon themselves to predominate one bishop over all bishops in all local congregations. The catholic church takes credit for the compilation not the roman church.. it should be understood that the reason for the compilation was, as in acts with circumcision, dispute. the bishops gathered and agreed and the pope closed the session. if disputes did not arise there would have been no need to compile the canon. while it is true that some bishops had lists of books, some even equalling the canon decided upon it is also a fact that some did not.... the canonization by the church put an end to what is authentic and what is not once and for all. also the predominance of Rome started way before the compiling of scriptures... since this thread is not really about the primacy of rome i will end it here but feel free to start a new thread... i can provide plenty of evidence that the bishop of rome carried the succession of peter. however, even if the earliest of the earliest bishop had a complete canon of scripture it would still prove the point that sacred tradition is valid. that early bishop could not appeal to the old testament to support his claim that this new testament was valid. In the same way the councils that decided the books to be canonized based their decisions on what had been passed down to them through tradition as valid scripture from the apostles. i have given sufficient bible evidence for the concept of sacred tradition as part of the valid word of God as well as existing before and being the cause of the written word. the catholic churches have believed this from the beginning, and so we really have no problem with it and it is supported in the bible. mike Title: Re:In Defense of Rome for a Change Post by: michael_legna on May 17, 2004, 01:12:17 PM Alright now, some of us have been accused of being hard on Rome. Let’s do this. Some of us keep saying that certain of Rome’s doctrine are unscriptural and this seems to have upset people so…let’s be more positive here. Let’s do this – instead of seeking out those teachings that are unscriptural let’s find major teachings of Rome that are scriptural. All we need to do is list Rome’s other major, defining doctrines and list scripture for them. Remember the doctrine has to be supported by scripture in order to be listed. This way we are being more positive. Example: Rome says it believes in the Trinity. OK, I’ll buy that - Scripture – I John 5:7, 8; II Cor. 13:14; Matt. 28:19 Now, your turn. May God bless Actually you are in luck. The Catholic Church unlike some non-denominational churches actually has the courage to put its doctrine in print for all to review and even critique if they like. It is called the Catechism of the Catholic Church. It has references to many scripture verses to support all of its major doctrines. You can find a copy on line to review at the following link: http://www.christusrex.org/www1/CDHN/ccc.html If upon reviewing it (something I can tell by your misrepresentation of the Church in your posts you have never done) you have any questions or are still not understanding the doctrine or just wish to disagree with anything I will be glad to discuss it with you point by point. Title: Re:In Defense of Rome for a Change Post by: Tibby on May 17, 2004, 03:59:33 PM Well, your website is good, Micheal, but it is missing one thing. Your missing the 3000-4000 plus citations from the bible in the Index of Citations. The very first secton of the Index of Citations, almost 3000-4000 verses, backing up every secton of the Catecism.
Title: Re:In Defense of Rome for a Change Post by: Brother Love on May 18, 2004, 06:32:49 AM I had Catecism twice in my life, three trips to the doctors took care of it.
Title: Re:In Defense of Rome for a Change Post by: I_Believe on May 18, 2004, 08:11:29 AM Brother,
One trip to the true healer, "Christ", would have taken care of it. ;) ;) When Jesus heard it, he said to them, "Those who are healthy have no need for a physician, but those who are sick do. But you go and learn what this means: 'I desire mercy, and not sacrifice,' for I came not to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance." (Mat 9:12-13) |