"Works Salvation"

[Eternally-Grateful]

2 Tim 3 16 does not sola scriptura or anything remotely similar.
Protestants always twist scripture to pretend it means what they say,
Which is why all of you disageee with each other on all the essentials.
indeed you can’t even agree on what is essential!

The false doctrine of sola scriptura is why the rest of your theology is your problem which contradicts what Jesus taught.
The faith handed down.

Now study the early church, find the truth instead . Which is catholic.
Find the mechanisms Jesus gave to resolve disputes . The apostolic succession can bind and loose.

Even your New Testif the inspired word of God is not our soul authority

we are bound to listen to men..

ament is a product of the power of the Catholic Church to bind and loose.

No

It is the power of God to bind and lose.. through his people

 

[Eternally-Grateful]

You have clearly never studied the early church of the apostles.
Study it.
All your assumptions are false.
And as you confirm 2 Tim says nothing about sola scriptura,
Indeed scripture identifies sources of truth outside itself.
So sola scriptura is neither historically, scripturally or logically true,

It is also why all Protestabts disagree with each other on all the basics .
Calvin didn’t agree with luther or Zwingli.
Calvinists do not believe what calvin did , Lutherans do not agree with Luther!
So sola scriptura doesn’t work. To quote Luther in despair of the monster he created he said “ every milkmaid now has their own doctrine”

The problem is if you only have tge words of scripture not the meaning you do not have the word of God.

Catholics believe the true church comprising scripture, and meaning provide by authority of councils and tradition handed down from the first.

Protestants only believe in their own arrogance combined with scripture, and schism if anyone disagrees,

Yet they are told not to “ lean on their own understanding” by scripture but to listen to those who were “sent”.
You don’t.

Here is an example of tradition, the faith handed down.
eg what John meant when he echoed Jesus words in John 6 , we know because he passed it to his disciples in succession.
So read ignatius to smyrneans who tells you what John taught him. The first generation of succession
A Eucharist of the real flesh valid only if presided by bishop in succession .
So that is what John 6 means.
And as Paul says “ stay true to what we taught you by word of mouth and letter”

Without tradition and authority you only have words , not the word of God

Catholics have the true faith, handed down from the start, as traditon , with the sources of authority Jesus gav3 to bind and loose. As Jesus promised the gates of hell would not prevail against His church.

For the first time, study the early church and what it believed. You clearly don’t know.

better yet. study the bible. stop listening to men/. this is a recommendations to everyone. catholic. calvinist or whoever.

eternity is to long to put our hope in men.

 

[FreeInChrist]

You have clearly never studied the early church of the apostles.
Study it.
All your assumptions are false.
And as you confirm 2 Tim says nothing about sola scriptura,
Indeed scripture identifies sources of truth outside itself.
So sola scriptura is neither historically, scripturally or logically true,

It is also why all Protestabts disagree with each other on all the basics .

What ARE you talking about.

I lived for nearly 50 years in the midst of a "Catholic" family and they all disagreed. Each parish in the local diocese is not unified within what it teaches... except for 2 things. The first is the elements in the Holy Eucharest actually turn to blood and flesh as consumed... and the perpetual virginity of Mary. Not only do I say poor Joseph, but also poo Mary.

If you want to know the why for the disagreements... which also affect the Jews of the world... I suggest a truly in-depth study
of Genesis 11: 5-9 and just maybe you will understand the why.

Calvin didn’t agree with luther or Zwingli.
Calvinists do not believe what calvin did , Lutherans do not agree with Luther!
So sola scriptura doesn’t work. To quote Luther in despair of the monster he created he said “ every milkmaid now has their own doctrine”

The problem is if you only have tge words of scripture not the meaning you do not have the word of God.

Catholics believe the true church comprising scripture, and meaning provide by authority of councils and tradition handed down from the first.

Protestants only believe in their own arrogance combined with scripture, and schism if anyone disagrees,

Yet they are told not to “ lean on their own understanding” by scripture but to listen to those who were “sent”.
You don’t.

Here is an example of tradition, the faith handed down.
eg what John meant when he echoed Jesus words in John 6 , we know because he passed it to his disciples in succession.
So read ignatius to smyrneans who tells you what John taught him. The first generation of succession
A Eucharist of the real flesh valid only if presided by bishop in succession .
So that is what John 6 means.
And as Paul says “ stay true to what we taught you by word of mouth and letter”

Without tradition and authority you only have words , not the word of God

Catholics have the true faith, handed down from the start, as traditon , with the sources of authority Jesus gav3 to bind and loose. As Jesus promised the gates of hell would not prevail against His church.

For the first time, study the early church and what it believed. You clearly don’t know.

 

[Doug Brents]

Catholics believe the true church comprising scripture, and meaning provide by authority of councils and tradition handed down from the first.

So your are saying truth comes through councils and traditions?
That is exactly what the Pharisees believed. They had their traditions and ideas formulated through the Sanhedrin, but Jesus said they were a brood of vipers. That their traditions were nothing but man's doctrines. I say the catholic cult's priesthood is nothing more than the Pharisees' continued propagation.

Yet they are told not to “ lean on their own understanding” by scripture but to listen to those who were “sent”.
You don’t.

I do. But I know that the catholic priesthood is not among those who were sent. They blatantly violate direct instructions from God about who leads the Church, and what titles and offices they are allowed to take. They are NOT to be listened to.

Without tradition and authority you only have words , not the word of God

When tradition and "authority" contradict the Word of God, then you only have words; man's words.

Catholics have the true faith, handed down from the start, as traditon , with the sources of authority Jesus gav3 to bind and loose. As Jesus promised the gates of hell would not prevail against His church.

For the first time, study the early church and what it believed. You clearly don’t know.

I have studied the early Church, and it wasn't "catholic", there were no popes, no "fathers", no cardinals, none of the catholic cult's traditions. Those are a perversion of the early Church. The pope holds no authority over the Church, nor do any of those in the catholic "priesthood". They are sinful men who play at being God's messengers. I pray that they, and you, turn from your wicked ways and come to true understanding of God.

 

[mikepec]

better yet. study the bible. stop listening to men/. this is a recommendations to everyone. catholic. calvinist or whoever.

eternity is to long to put our hope in men.

You should start listening to Jesus and those to whom he handed the true faith on.

The Bible does not stand alone , it has a true meaning handed down by tradition and authority of the succession.

listen to those who were SENT, don’t lean on your own understanding, and take disputes on meaning to those Jesus appointed, the PILLAR OF TRUTH the physical church , given the power to “bind and loose” the true faith.

The reformationists severed the Bible from its true meaning and substituted the authority and tradition handed down with a myriad of conflicting personal opinions , it’s why they all disagree.

So all Protestants believe in different doctrines on every fundamental issue, and schism to form endless new churches in their own image not Gods. All are convinced they follow scripture while they have opposite meanings for it!

Protestants no longer have the word of God, they only have words.

Protestant man made traditions handed on as confessions or Calvin’s Tulip. . We know they were manmade we know who wrote them. Cranmer and his “ confession”.

Tradition is paradosis, handed down from the start, to which Paul tells you to stay true.

We know the Eucharist is the real flesh of Jesus valid only when presided by bishop in succession because that was what was handed down from the first , by those disciples of John and onwards from those appointed.
We know what they believed and did, and what John taught them because of their writings.

Protestants don’t get to choose what John 6 meant. Jesus true church handed it on from the beginning .

No protestant church has a true Eucharist because they have no bishop in succession.
That means they profane the true Eucharist which as Paul and the generations following him say can be fatal even.

 

[FreeInChrist]

You should start listening to Jesus and those to whom he handed the true faith on.

Pope Francis disagreed with this when he declared that a personal relation ship with Jesus was dangerous. And his very actions showed he did not himself cultivate such a relationship ...WHICH ONLY LEADS TO UNDERSTANDING as we listen and learn when he asked all watching to pray to Mary for his healing.... in stead of the Great Healer, Jesus... who is often referred to as the Great Healer due to his many acts of healing in the Gospels, where he healed the sick and performed miracles. This title reflects his role in both physical and spiritual healing for those who believe in him. So you now know where the faith of the head of that church really was. For that one was not handed the true faith for much of his time as the Holy See.

The Bible does not stand alone , it has a true meaning handed down by tradition and authority of the succession.

I dont even know where to start in this statement.... but I can assure you that the 4 corners of the Holy Scriptures are the authoritative and inspired writings of God, words of none other then our Father who sits in heaven.

With true meaning handed down by tradition and authority of the succession?

What does this mean????

The Holy Scriptures were written under inspiration from God on high. tradition and authority of the succession???
This is exactly why God has seen to it that there is no consensus among us.
How dangerous we would be if there was when we cannot even agree on a simple scripture meaning.

He destroyed the Tower of Babel and scattered the people for less then what we have done. Dont forget it.

listen to those who were SENT, don’t lean on your own understanding, and take disputes on meaning to those Jesus appointed, the PILLAR OF TRUTH the physical church , given the power to “bind and loose” the true faith.

The reformationists severed the Bible from its true meaning and substituted the authority and tradition handed down with a myriad of conflicting personal opinions , it’s why they all disagree.

So all Protestants believe in different doctrines on every fundamental issue, and schism to form endless new churches in their own image not Gods. All are convinced they follow scripture while they have opposite meanings for it!

Protestants no longer have the word of God, they only have words.

Protestant man made traditions handed on as confessions or Calvin’s Tulip. . We know they were manmade we know who wrote them. Cranmer and his “ confession”.

Tradition is paradosis, handed down from the start, to which Paul tells you to stay true.

We know the Eucharist is the real flesh of Jesus valid only when presided by bishop in succession because that was what was handed down from the first , by those disciples of John and onwards from those appointed.
We know what they believed and did, and what John taught them because of their writings.

Protestants don’t get to choose what John 6 meant. Jesus true church handed it on from the beginning .

No protestant church has a true Eucharist because they have no bishop in succession.
That means they profane the true Eucharist which as Paul and the generations following him say can be fatal even.

They have men who actually are called by God. Not pedophiles , child molesters, and even fornicators within the church who wear the collar of a priest, that as far as the top in Rome hides away rather the exposes.

How much more profaning of the Eucharist can there be?

 

[mikepec]

Pope Francis disagreed with this when he declared that a personal relation ship with Jesus was dangerous. And his very actions showed he did not himself cultivate such a relationship ...WHICH ONLY LEADS TO UNDERSTANDING as we listen and learn when he asked all watching to pray to Mary for his healing.... in stead of the Great Healer, Jesus... who is often referred to as the Great Healer due to his many acts of healing in the Gospels, where he healed the sick and performed miracles. This title reflects his role in both physical and spiritual healing for those who believe in him. So you now know where the faith of the head of that church really was. For that one was not handed the true faith for much of his time as the Holy See.


I dont even know where to start in this statement.... but I can assure you that the 4 corners of the Holy Scriptures are the authoritative and inspired writings of God, words of none other then our Father who sits in heaven.

With true meaning handed down by tradition and authority of the succession?

What does this mean????

The Holy Scriptures were written under inspiration from God on high. tradition and authority of the succession???
This is exactly why God has seen to it that there is no consensus among us.
How dangerous we would be if there was when we cannot even agree on a simple scripture meaning.

He destroyed the Tower of Babel and scattered the people for less then what we have done. Dont forget it.

They have men who actually are called by God. Not pedophiles , child molesters, and even fornicators within the church who wear the collar of a priest, that as far as the top in Rome hides away rather the exposes.

How much more profaning of the Eucharist can there be?

You use all the ill researched memes
Francis said no such thing. Like scripture Protestants twist words.

I’m no fan of Francis. But I don’t have to be.


The Roman church has a huge number of people so has a lot of sinners.
Just like everywhere else. They are no more prevalent in the Roman church, they just get more media.

For example a report in Ireland concluded that despite the scandals children were far , far, more likely to be abused at home by someone they knew. And scouts. And their protestant church. And their playgroup. Their school.
Need I go on?


You clearly know nothing about Christianity. Even less about the Roman church. And where your New Testament canon came from.


So here’s lesson 1.

Jesus said “ do this “ not “ write this”
And SENT them to teach so they taught. Most didn’t write!

The apostles appointed others to teach .
So The faith as Paul tells us was handed down by “word of mouth and letter”
And Jesus gave HIS church - the power to resolve disputes. To bind and loose
That’s why the physical church - not scripture- is named the pillar of truth.
The custodians of the truth were the appointed succession, called bishops. The successors of apostles.
They are there even in the first generations , we know from a mass of other writings
Thats what Jesus wanted.

So for the very first time in your life, study christianity , the early church.

Then you will know what it believed because that was what was handed down
Paradosis. Traditon.

It took another 300 years for the church to finally decide scripture. Council of hippo.
Long after the Eucharist was decided. Johns disciples tell you that.

Which didn’t help ordinary people because each copy took a monk years to copy.
Are you saying there was no Christianity until the printing press came??

And for the first 300 years scripture was burned if the romans found it.
You have no concept of the early church.

The early church wasn’t sola scriptura, the false man made traditon of the reformation.
It certainly didn’t allow people like you to make up what you want to believe.

The church chose scripture because it conformed to traditon. Not the other way round.

Tell me. Why don’t you use the protoevangeluium of James? The Catholic Church didn’t choose it!
There were many competing books. The Catholic Church chose the canon from them.
The question is not why Catholics added books but Why did Protestants remove them?
Like JWs, Luther even tried to change the words to fit his doctrine that didn’t fit!

 

[synergy]

So your are saying truth comes through councils and traditions?
That is exactly what the Pharisees believed. They had their traditions and ideas formulated through the Sanhedrin, but Jesus said they were a brood of vipers. That their traditions were nothing but man's doctrines. I say the catholic cult's priesthood is nothing more than the Pharisees' continued propagation.

The Apostles convened a Council at Jerusalem where they decided that circumcision was no longer to be required for the faith. Are you against that Council?

When tradition and "authority" contradict the Word of God, then you only have words; man's words.

(2 Th 2:15) Therefore, brethren, stand fast and hold the traditions which you were taught, whether by word or our epistle.

"By word" is oral traditions and "our epistle' is written tradition. The Apostles gave us oral traditions as contained in the Early Church. Have you studied the oral traditions (the liturgy) of the Early Church?

I have studied the early Church, and it wasn't "catholic", there were no popes, no "fathers", no cardinals, none of the catholic cult's traditions. Those are a perversion of the early Church. The pope holds no authority over the Church, nor do any of those in the catholic "priesthood". They are sinful men who play at being God's messengers. I pray that they, and you, turn from your wicked ways and come to true understanding of God.

There were ἐπίσκοπος (Episkopos), πρεσβύτερος (Presbyteros), and διάκονος (Deaconos) offices mentioned in the Bible. Are you against that also?

 

[FreeInChrist]

You use all the ill researched memes

You mean memes like this from EWTN

Global Prayers for Pope Francis: Faithful Unite for His Recovery

Thousands gathered this week in St. Peter’s Square to join the cardinals resident in Rome in their Rosary for Pope Francis.

www.ewtnvatican.com

EWTN Vatican, 2025-03-01
World Praying for Pope Francis

By: Andreas Thonhauser

May Mary Mother of God intervene for the Holy Father.

“For 2000 years the Christian people have prayed for the Pope, we entrust him to the powerful intercession of the Most Holy Mary, may she, our caring Mother, sustain him in this time of illness and trial and help him to recover his health soon,” the words of Cardinal Pietro Parolin, Vatican Secretary of State, as he began the Rosary Initiative praying for the health of Pope Francis.

Francis said no such thing. Like scripture Protestants twist words.

It has been scrubbed... as expected... just like his life before becoming Pope.

He said all things that I ever post because it is coming out of his mouth...

I’m no fan of Francis. But I don’t have to be.


The Roman church has a huge number of people so has a lot of sinners.
Just like everywhere else. They are no more prevalent in the Roman church, they just get more media.

For example a report in Ireland concluded that despite the scandals children were far , far, more likely to be abused at home by someone they knew. And scouts. And their protestant church. And their playgroup. Their school.
Need I go on?


You clearly know nothing about Christianity. Even less about the Roman church. And where your New Testament canon came from.

Ummmm. A member here keeps assuring us all of where it comes from... @Keiw1

And that it is wrong. So, I am fast becoming a convert to their way of thinking.

At least I dont tell people Mary was a perpeyual virgin or when I am debating that on another forum was told that the
statement found from this Catholic source.

Douay-Rheims Bible
And he knew her not till she brought forth her firstborn son: and he called his name JESUS.

means that he never knew her because till or until means it never happened.

I would give you the link to those debates.. but you would figure I had them planted and not believe
YOUR fellow Catholic Brothers and Sisters

So if I am not a Christian... so what.

I admit to being more Messianic then Christian so no skin off my nose.

So here’s lesson 1.

Jesus said “ do this “ not “ write this”
And SENT them to teach so they taught. Most didn’t write!

And how is that working out for you? You say a lot. It is countered by @Eternally-Grateful .

So you say more and it is counter by me or someone else.

Words are wonderful but with out hard copy they do not cut it for man is incapable of handing down the truths with out embellishments.

You say " And SENT them to teach so they taught. Most didn’t write!"
Then how exactly do you know the precise meaning from 2000 years ago because I can assure you
it has been scrambled with no written word to back it up

Proof? Go look into the debates on James view of works and Pauls.

Toodles

The apostles appointed others to teach .
So The faith as Paul tells us was handed down by “word of mouth and letter”
And Jesus gave HIS church - the power to resolve disputes. To bind and loose
That’s why the physical church - not scripture- is named the pillar of truth,

So for the very first time in your life, study christianity , the early church.

Then you will know what it believed because that was what was handed down
Paradosis. Traditon.

It took another 300 years for the church to finally decide scripture. Council of hippo.
Long after the Eucharist was decided. Johns disciples tell you that.

Which didn’t help ordinary people because each copy took a monk years to copy.
Are you saying there was no Christianity until the printing press came??

And for the first 300 years scripture was burned if the romans found it.
You have no concept of the early church.

The early church wasn’t sola scriptura, the false man made traditon of the reformation.
It certainly didn’t allow people like you to make up what you want to believe.

The church chose scripture because it conformed to traditon. Not the other way round.

Tell me. Why don’t you use the protoevangeluium of James? The Catholic Church didn’t choose it!
There were many competing books. The Catholic Church chose the canon from them.
The question is not why Catholics added books but Why did Protestants remove them?
Like JWs, Luther even tried to change the words to fit his doctrine that didn’t fit!

 

[synergy]

Ummmm. A member here keeps assuring us all of where it comes from... @Keiw1

Please elaborate.

And that it is wrong. So, I am fast becoming a convert to their way of thinking.

Whose way of thinking? Keiw1?

At least I dont tell people Mary was a perpeyual virgin or when I am debating that on another forum was told that the
statement found from this Catholic source.

Douay-Rheims Bible
And he knew her not till she brought forth her firstborn son: and he called his name JESUS.

means that he never knew her because till or until means it never happened.

I would give you the link to those debates.. but you would figure I had them planted and not believe
YOUR fellow Catholic Brothers and Sisters

The Bible often uses the word "until" in a way that does not imply a change of state after the time mentioned, which differs from typical modern usage. Below are several examples that prove this.

2 Samuel 6:23 says, “Therefore Michal the daughter of Saul had no child until the day of her death.” This cannot mean she had children after she died. The word “until” here simply sets a limit, not a change—she never had children, even after death.

1 Timothy 4:13 says, “Until I come, devote yourself to the public reading of Scripture...” This does not mean that Timothy should stop devoting himself to the reading Scripture after Paul arrives. It simply marks a focus or emphasis on an action up to a point in time, not a change afterward.

Psalm 110:1 says, “Sit at my right hand until I make your enemies your footstool.” This verse is quoted often in the New Testament about Christ. Yet Christ continues to sit at the right hand of God even after His enemies are made His footstool. So “until” here also does not imply He ceases sitting afterward.

And how is that working out for you? You say a lot. It is countered by @Eternally-Grateful .

EG is not the authority here. The Bible is.

So you say more and it is counter by me or someone else.

Words are wonderful but with out hard copy they do not cut it for man is incapable of handing down the truths with out embellishments.

You say " And SENT them to teach so they taught. Most didn’t write!"
Then how exactly do you know the precise meaning from 2000 years ago because I can assure you
it has been scrambled with no written word to back it up

Are the Catacombs 'hard copy" enough for you, with their icons, intercession requests, and eucharistic practices?

Proof? Go look into the debates on James view of works and Pauls.

Proof of what? Please elaborate.

 

[Doug Brents]

The Apostles convened a Council at Jerusalem where they decided that circumcision was no longer to be required for the faith. Are you against that Council?

The Apostles were given the authority to govern the early Church as a whole, and were commanded to establish elders in each congregation to carry on the governance of that local congregation. There is no commandment, allusion, inference, or hint of Church governance that extends beyond the local congregation.

(2 Th 2:15) Therefore, brethren, stand fast and hold the traditions which you were taught, whether by word or our epistle.

"By word" is oral traditions and "our epistle' is written tradition. The Apostles gave us oral traditions as contained in the Early Church. Have you studied the oral traditions (the liturgy) of the Early Church?

Mark 7:8-9 and Col 2:8 warn of human traditions and rejecting the Word of God in favor of human traditions. I am not against traditions in general, but I am against holding on to traditions that are contrary to Scripture. The catholic tradition of a priesthood that is separate from the rest of the Church is a man-made tradition that is contrary to Scripture. The tradition of calling these men "father" violates Scriptural commandment.

There were ἐπίσκοπος (Episkopos), πρεσβύτερος (Presbyteros), and διάκονος (Deaconos) offices mentioned in the Bible. Are you against that also?

These positions within the Church are for the local congregations. There is no provision in Scripture for a global hierarchy to govern the diverse congregations of the Church. The elders/presbyters/shepherds/pastors (all of these mean the same thing are are one office) are to be the governing body within the Church. They have the mandate to manage, teach, discipline, and grow the Church. The deacons are to be their hands and feet, managing the daily operation of the Church so that the elders can spend more of their time in the Word, dealing with conflicts, and strategizing the expanding of the Church to the lost.

 

[synergy]

The Apostles were given the authority to govern the early Church as a whole, and were commanded to establish elders in each congregation to carry on the governance of that local congregation. There is no commandment, allusion, inference, or hint of Church governance that extends beyond the local congregation.

Where does it say that the Council of Jerusalem was strictly a one time occurrence?

Mark 7:8-9 and Col 2:8 warn of human traditions and rejecting the Word of God in favor of human traditions. I am not against traditions in general, but I am against holding on to traditions that are contrary to Scripture. The catholic tradition of a priesthood that is separate from the rest of the Church is a man-made tradition that is contrary to Scripture. The tradition of calling these men "father" violates Scriptural commandment.

These positions within the Church are for the local congregations. There is no provision in Scripture for a global hierarchy to govern the diverse congregations of the Church. The elders/presbyters/shepherds/pastors (all of these mean the same thing are are one office) are to be the governing body within the Church. They have the mandate to manage, teach, discipline, and grow the Church. The deacons are to be their hands and feet, managing the daily operation of the Church so that the elders can spend more of their time in the Word, dealing with conflicts, and strategizing the expanding of the Church to the lost.

The provision within Scripture is the Council of Jerusalem. Without a council that can take care of Church-wide issues, each local congregation will go off into its merry way. As a matter of fact, that's exactly what Protestant, Reformist, and Restorational Churches are guilty of.

 

[Doug Brents]

Where does it say that the Council of Jerusalem was strictly a one time occurrence?

It doesn't, and I never did either.

The provision within Scripture is the Council of Jerusalem. Without a council that can take care of Church-wide issues, each local congregation will go off into its merry way. As a matter of fact, that's exactly what Protestant, Reformist, and Restorational Churches are guilty of.

There is a LOT of leeway given to the Church on most matters. Matt 18:18-20 tells us that, in things that are not directly specified by Scripture, God will hold each group within the Church to what they believe. Rom 14 is even more explicit, in that it tells us that there are some who, from a strong faith, can eat anything they want; while there are others who, from a weak faith, refrain from eating certain things. Both are righteous in what they believe. For the weak one, if he eats what he believes to be wrong, then he sins. But for the strong one, his eating what the weak believes to be wrong is not wrong for him. The only way it can be wrong for the strong one is if his eating causes the weak one to violate his conscience and eat too.

There is no mandate that every congregation of the Church believe the same things about all subjects. Only what is specified in Scripture needs to be agreed upon, and that is very little indeed.

 

[synergy]

It doesn't, and I never did either.

There is a LOT of leeway given to the Church on most matters. Matt 18:18-20 tells us that, in things that are not directly specified by Scripture, God will hold each group within the Church to what they believe. Rom 14 is even more explicit, in that it tells us that there are some who, from a strong faith, can eat anything they want; while there are others who, from a weak faith, refrain from eating certain things. Both are righteous in what they believe. For the weak one, if he eats what he believes to be wrong, then he sins. But for the strong one, his eating what the weak believes to be wrong is not wrong for him. The only way it can be wrong for the strong one is if his eating causes the weak one to violate his conscience and eat too.

There is no mandate that every congregation of the Church believe the same things about all subjects. Only what is specified in Scripture needs to be agreed upon, and that is very little indeed.

Councils are vital for confirming critical truths such as not only that Jesus is God but how can he be both human and God (Hypostatic Union).

Without Councils, Protestantism and Reformation are results.

 

[Doug Brents]

Councils are vital for confirming critical truths such as not only that Jesus is God but how can he be both human and God (Hypostatic Union).

Without Councils, Protestantism and Reformation are results.

We don't need councils to determine that Jesus is God. Scripture tells us that quite clearly.

But with councils you end up with man-made religions like catholicism, where man is at the head, man makes the rules, and the man-appointed priests seek to inflate their own wealth through selling "indulgences" and similar nonsense.

 

[synergy]

We don't need councils to determine that Jesus is God. Scripture tells us that quite clearly.

Without the Nicean Creed, the Church that was mostly Arian would have remained Arian. That's what your anti-Councils attitude would have produced.

But with councils you end up with man-made religions like catholicism, where man is at the head, man makes the rules, and the man-appointed priests seek to inflate their own wealth through selling "indulgences" and similar nonsense.

With the Nicean Creed, you end up with the Church becoming Trinitarian. That's why you don't like Councils.

 

[mikepec]

The Apostles were given the authority to govern the early Church as a whole, and were commanded to establish elders in each congregation to carry on the governance of that local congregation. There is no commandment, allusion, inference, or hint of Church governance that extends beyond the local congregation.

Mark 7:8-9 and Col 2:8 warn of human traditions and rejecting the Word of God in favor of human traditions. I am not against traditions in general, but I am against holding on to traditions that are contrary to Scripture. The catholic tradition of a priesthood that is separate from the rest of the Church is a man-made tradition that is contrary to Scripture. The tradition of calling these men "father" violates Scriptural commandment.

These positions within the Church are for the local congregations. There is no provision in Scripture for a global hierarchy to govern the diverse congregations of the Church. The elders/presbyters/shepherds/pastors (all of these mean the same thing are are one office) are to be the governing body within the Church. They have the mandate to manage, teach, discipline, and grow the Church. The deacons are to be their hands and feet, managing the daily operation of the Church so that the elders can spend more of their time in the Word, dealing with conflicts, and strategizing the expanding of the Church to the lost.

It’s true there is man made tradition:

Protestants created your man made human tradition of sola scriptura and then you all add your personal interpretation to take over from what Jesus meant.

And because of human arrogance you all swear blind that your own personal man made interpretation is correct, so you all disagree on every matter of substance. You have the words of scripture not meaning, so you do not have the word of God, just words.

It’s time you listened to those who were SENT and those they appointed to teach you!

Study the writings of the early Christian’s , who were disciples of the apostles and sent by them.
Read ignatius , irenaus , Justin martyr etc, and discover for the first time the REAL church, what was handed down to them and by them by letter, and word f mouth, not your twisted reformationist man made tradition view of it.

Do you hold Christ in such contempt that you think he let his church go off the rails, that between him, John and ignatius the truth was lost!

Do you hold Christ in such contempt that you think he could not keep his promise that the gates of hell would not prevail against his church, or when he promised the gospel would be preached to the end of time?

Do you think Christ too stupid to not provide for succession as proven by history?

Are you so arrogant , and you think Jesus so impotent , you think he needs YOU to bring his church back on the rails?!!

Jesus church has preached the Eucharist is his real flesh since the first years till now. His church is one.
Yours isn’t.

We see the truth in John 6. You see in the first generation of succession ignatius and polycarp the meabing that the Eucharist is valid only if presided by a bishop in succession . Iraneus speaking of such as you When he said they are heretics” because they confess not the Eucharist to BE the body of our Lord.”

Fast forward till now, it is still catholic dogma unchanged confirmed by Christ himself in eucharistic miracle. The Eucharist really is Him. Councils confirmed it with the power to “ bind and lose” resolve disputes.

The truth does not change.
Protestant dogma changes. So itcannot be the truth,

How is it your man made tradition on eucharist is different?


Calvin, luther , and Zwingli couldn’t agree on Eucharist. Proof sola scriptura is a total fail.
And none of calvin luther or Zwingli had the power to bind and loose.
The succession did. It’s there in early church writings what scripture MEANS

The Catholic Church has run for 2000 years as all other institutions and empires have folded. And despite the attempts of sinful,men to wreck it. Something holds it together, not men. It is Christ!

Napoleon once said he would destroy the church. A cardinal replied to him, you are welcome to try. We’ve tried our best to destroy it, and failed , so if we can’t you can’t either!

 

[Doug Brents]

Without the Nicean Creed, the Church that was mostly Arian would have remained Arian. That's what your anti-Councils attitude would have produced.

With the Nicean Creed, you end up with the Church becoming Trinitarian. That's why you don't like Councils.

There have always been false teachers who pretend to be part the Church, and there always will be. Arian was a false teacher, and while this may have been pointed out to the Church at large by this council, it did not take the council to make his teaching false. Anyone who reads the Scripture can readily see that Jesus is God, and that there is a trinity within God, just as there is a trinity within man (body, soul, spirit). I do not dispute the trinity, so clearly that cannot be why I don't like councils.

It is not that I dislike councils in general. I dislike councils that stand on man's authority, and that result in man-made decisions that do not reflect Scripture. In the first Century, councils of the Apostles were needed to cement within doctrine the right and true will of God. But there are no longer any Apostles, and we now have the Apostles' writings which are Scripture, which answer all the questions we need answered about Christian doctrine.

 

[Doug Brents]

It’s true there is man made tradition:

Protestants created your man made human tradition of sola scriptura and then you all add your personal interpretation to take over from what Jesus meant.

And because of human arrogance you all swear blind that your own personal man made interpretation is correct, so you all disagree on every matter of substance. You have the words of scripture not meaning, so you do not have the word of God, just words.

It’s time you listened to those who were SENT and those they appointed to teach you!

Who is it that you think was "sent"?

I know I was. I was sent by God just as surely as the Apostles were.

Study the writings of the early Christian’s , who were disciples of the apostles and sent by them.
Read ignatius , irenaus , Justin martyr etc, and discover for the first time the REAL church, what was handed down to them and by them by letter, and word f mouth, not your twisted reformationist man made tradition view of it.

I have read many of their writings, and they consistently point to errors in the catholic doctrine.

Do you hold Christ in such contempt that you think he let his church go off the rails, that between him, John and ignatius the truth was lost!

No, I think that the catholic priesthood hijacked the Church and for many hundreds of years dragged it further and further from Truth, to the point where a man began to think that he was God's infallible representative on Earth.

Do you hold Christ in such contempt that you think he could not keep his promise that the gates of hell would not prevail against his church, or when he promised the gospel would be preached to the end of time?

Nope, I believe both of those things. But I also believe that the gates of Hell have never attacked the Church (gates are for defense, not attack).

Do you think Christ too stupid to not provide for succession as proven by history?

You harp on this "succession" (I am assuming you mean of the priesthood) that is not identified, indicated, mandated, or even speculated about in Scripture. Your man-made religion is far from what Christianity should be.

Are you so arrogant , and you think Jesus so impotent , you think he needs YOU to bring his church back on the rails?!!

Nope. He doesn't need me at all. I need Him. And I submit to His Word, not man's doctrines or traditions.

Jesus church has preached the Eucharist is his real flesh since the first years till now. His church is one.
Yours isn’t.

The Lord's Supper (eucharist, whatever you want to call it) is no more His literal flesh than the flesh of the lambs that Jesus ate at Passover were the literal flesh of the original Passover lambs. Jesus had not yet shed His blood, but He said that the cup was His blood (figuratively). He had not yet died, nor had He cut pieces of Himself off, but He said that the bread was His flesh (again, figuratively). The "meal" we eat today does not mystically become His flesh and blood; it is symbolic.

We see the truth in John 6. You see in the first generation of succession ignatius and polycarp the meabing that the Eucharist is valid only if presided by a bishop in succession . Iraneus speaking of such as you When he said they are heretics” because they confess not the Eucharist to BE the body of our Lord.”

Which is why Iraneus is not Scripture. There is nothing in Scripture about a "succession".

Fast forward till now, it is still catholic dogma unchanged confirmed by Christ himself in eucharistic miracle. The Eucharist really is Him. Councils confirmed it with the power to “ bind and lose” resolve disputes.

The truth does not change.
Protestant dogma changes. So itcannot be the truth,

How is it your man made tradition on eucharist is different?

I am not "protestant", I am a Christ follower (what many call a "Christian"). If you are catholic, then you place your church above Christ (which is demonstrated in that many of your congregations worship Mary, this or that saint, and other people than Christ Jesus (I have actually only ever seen one catholic worship place dedicated to Christ Jesus)).

Calvin, luther , and Zwingli couldn’t agree on Eucharist. Proof sola scriptura is a total fail.
And none of calvin luther or Zwingli had the power to bind and loose.
The succession did. It’s there in early church writings what scripture MEANS

I have the power and authority to bind and loose, why didn't Calvin, Luther, or Zwingli?

The Catholic Church has run for 2000 years

Closer to 1700 years, sorry to burst your bubble.

as all other institutions and empires have folded. And despite the attempts of sinful,men to wreck it. Something holds it together, not men. It is Christ!

Napoleon once said he would destroy the church. A cardinal replied to him, you are welcome to try. We’ve tried our best to destroy it, and failed , so if we can’t you can’t either!

The "cardinal" was part of the group (catholic "priests") guilty of wrecking it a thousand years before Napoleon was even thought of.

 

[synergy]

There have always been false teachers who pretend to be part the Church, and there always will be. Arian was a false teacher, and while this may have been pointed out to the Church at large by this council, it did not take the council to make his teaching false. Anyone who reads the Scripture can readily see that Jesus is God, and that there is a trinity within God, just as there is a trinity within man (body, soul, spirit). I do not dispute the trinity, so clearly that cannot be why I don't like councils.

It is not that I dislike councils in general. I dislike councils that stand on man's authority, and that result in man-made decisions that do not reflect Scripture. In the first Century, councils of the Apostles were needed to cement within doctrine the right and true will of God. But there are no longer any Apostles, and we now have the Apostles' writings which are Scripture, which answer all the questions we need answered about Christian doctrine.

I choose to follow Biblical practices like Councils that affirm what has been handed down to us by the Apostles such as Church practices and their Epistles. It is silly to follow only a portion of what the Apostles have bequeathed to us by not following their Church practices such as Councils.