re: Much Needed Clarity Regarding the Pope and the Recent Document Regarding Blessings

quote:

---

Your official Catholic dogmas say Mary is sinless, Mary remained a virgin her entire life, and Mary was born without original sin. Your own catechism calls Mary a co-mediatrix and Co-redemtrix.

---

He right you know

quote:

---

It's bizarre how quickly they align to the media on this when they would always, for every other subject, question the media. The media does not like the Catholic church. Probably more than they dislike Christians jn general. They have been trying for decades to change the church through pressure. You layer that on top of the ongoing complexity of the church - this being targeted at the German church really, and not giving proper context, and boom... division created. In the Church, in Christianity at large, etc. All Christians need to wake up.

---

All of this is true of course but if you are not aware that the current pope is the one aiding and abetting the enemy, intentionally then you are not paying attention

quote:

---

Honestly it’s mostly because of the enumerable and complex nature of Protestant heresies.

---

Yeah. That’s the reason

quote:

---

Yeah. That’s the reason

---

I mean...it kinda is. Looking throughout the course of history, from the Council of Jerusalem in AD 49, to the first seven ecumenical councils ranging from AD 325 to AD 787, the vast majority of theological conclusions reached in those discussions were vast and complex. Thus they required extensive explanations.

I wasn't going to get involved in another "Catholic bashing" thread but I can't let this go regarding 2 Tim. 3:16.

quote:

---

a - The passage doesn't say "only scripture" or "scripture alone". It just says that scripture is God-breathed, or Theopneustos, which it is.

---

The passage that "Scripture" (by itself, because nothing else is added to the word in this passage) is sufficient for what the task.

quote:

---

b - The passage doesn't say that scripture is "sufficient". The man of God is made sufficient, not by having the scriptures alone, but through teaching, rebuking, correcting, and training in righteousness. Scripture is described as being useful for those things, but not entirely and singularly sufficient for those things.

---

Read the passage again, in particular verse 17. Scripture is what is sufficient for making the man of God "complete, equipped for every good work".

Which good works are the Scriptures sufficient to prepare for? Every good work. That means every type and instance of what is considered a "good work" must be supported by the Scriptures alone, if the Scriptures alone equip for them. Whatever the Roman Catholic Church teaches is a good work must be taught from the Scriptures.

This, combined with point a, shows the sufficiency of Scripture. Paul explains that because all Scripture is "God breathed", that it is the basis for why the Scriptures can and do make the man of God complete for every good work.

It should be noted that only Scripture is stated to be "God breathed", because it is the very word of God. Nothing else has that descriptor.

quote:

---

I would agree if the argument were "material sufficiency", but that's not the argument. Sola scriptura argues "formal sufficiency". If the formal sufficiency of the scriptures alone were true, the Ethiopian Eunuch in Acts 8 wouldn't have needed Philip to teach him what the scroll of Isaiah he was reading meant. That passage supports material sufficiency.

---

How can you claim this passage supports any kind of "sufficiency" (material sufficiency) when just before, you say "the passage doesn't say that scripture is "'sufficient'"? In one breath you say that the passage doesn't say "sufficient" while in another, you say it teaches some form of sufficiency. If the passage clearly teaches any form of sufficiency, then of course it doesn't need to use that very word; we can infer words based on context. The sufficiency of Scripture is based on the context, where Paul by the Spirit teaches that the Scriptures by themselves (remember nothing else is added to them in this context) make the man of God complete and equipped for every good work.

Acts 8 doesn't teach against 2 Tim. 3 on this point of the sufficiency of Scripture. What it teaches is that the types and shadows of the Old Testament Scriptures--especially prophetic passages like Isaiah 53--are clarified and revealed through Jesus Christ, as given in the New Testament Scriptures. The necessary works of Jesus Christ that allow us to understand the OT passages like in Isaiah 53 are recorded in the Scriptures for us, so we can use Scripture to interpret Scripture. Just as Jesus had to provide clarity to His disciples on these matters, so too do the preachers of God's word preach the gospel of Jesus Christ for clarity. That's exactly what Philip did to this man. Romans 10:14-17 gives us in paradigm what Acts 8 gives us by example, namely God has commissioned ministers to proclaim the good news of Jesus Christ for salvation.

Acts 8 actually supports sola scriptura as the doctrine is actually taught, because Scripture is sufficient for interpreting the Scriptures, acting as the very guide that Philip was now that the Apostles have all died and the revelation of God has ceased. The reason why preachers are so helpful is because study is required, and not everyone has the time for such in-depth study. That's the role of the minister of the gospel.

quote:

---

c - It says all scripture is inspired (Theopneustos), but it does not say that all inspiration is only in the scriptures. This would be like me saying that all faithful and practicing Calvinists are Christians, and therefore, Sola Calvinismus is true, or that only Calvinists are Christians. This statement doesn't mean that Baptists, Lutherans, Anglicans, etc are not Christians though, only that Calvinists are.

---

As a Calvinist, I understand what is necessary for salvation from the Scriptures and that Calvinists are not the only ones who meet the requirements for salvation according to the Scriptures. There needs to be good and necessary reasons for proclaiming exclusivity. Jesus said He is the way, the truth, and the life, and that no one comes to the Father except through Him. That statement alone is sufficient to understand the exclusive nature of Christianity. Sola scriptura is based on the exclusivity of the Scriptures as a standard of authority being the only one described as "God breathed" for Christians after the revelation of God through the Apostles has ceased.

If there is another "God breathed" standard, you need to prove that such a standard is "God breathed", because the Scriptures don't provide such a standard as described in that way.

quote:

---

d - It never defines what "all scripture" is. 2 Timothy was not the last book of the New Testament to be written. If we were to take the strong and most often used interpretation of that passage to be accurate, this would mean that at the time 2 Timothy was written, only the currently existing books of the New Testament were enough. This puts the books of 2 Peter, Hebrews, Jude, John, 1 John, 2 John, 3 John, and Revelation all in a very weird spot.

---

Paul doesn't have to define what particular Scriptures because he is speaking of a category, not specific books. Ruth was considered Scripture, but Ruth doesn't teach the same things in the same way or in the same clarity as Exodus, or Isaiah. Paul was talking about the Scriptures as a canon or as a set of teachings from God. Therefore, whatever is considered Scripture--whatever God has inspired and recorded as Scripture--is sufficient for making the man of God complete and equipped for every good work. If Paul's own writings are considered Scripture, that doesn't invalidate his own statement or exclude his own writings from that category. Paul doesn't add anything that contradicts the rest of Scripture, and yet His writings, as Scripture, clarify what came before in God's progressive revelation.

Finally, I believe I should clarify what sola scriptura is, because Catholics frequently describe it incorrectly. What it doesn't teach is that only the written Scriptures have ever been the authoritative word of God, excluding the authority of the verbal word that was given by the Prophets, the Apostles, and by Jesus, Himself. What it does teach is that only those things that are recorded as the God-breathed Scriptures are authoritative for Christians in a post-Apostolic world where those with the authority have gone to glory and new revelation has ceased.

In essence, it teaches that God has given us His revelation through the Prophets and Apostles, and He has preserved it through the Scriptures. Tradition is not a God breathed authority because it was not recorded as Scripture.

quote:

---

I mean...it kinda is. Looking throughout the course of history, from the Council of Jerusalem in AD 49, to the first seven ecumenical councils ranging from AD 325 to AD 787, the vast majority of theological conclusions reached in those discussions were vast and complex. Thus they required extensive explanations.

---

Good explanation. Arianism was perhaps the strongest early heresy. It took many decades of scholarly work and prayer to discern the truth about Arianism.

I notice that Revelator never talks about his own particular religious congregation. He has stated long ago that he is a Baptist, but, since he's become a hateful rube around here, he avoids the issue.

Baptists themselves, as a group, believe many different doctrines and that's why there are so many separate Baptist churches in even the very small towns of the American South. There's plenty of topics for Revelator to debate with his fellow Baptists. But, Rev is not here for debate. He is here to wage war with a hateful heart - against Catholics.

quote:

---

I think Pope Francis has fairly normal liberal naivety that clouds judgement, with a mix of prideful "putting his stamp on the church,"

---

There is some naivety going on but it’s not the pope who is naive.
Ruppnik still has a job. Cardinal Burke does not.
Bishop Strickland does not.
Macarick was coddled by Francis.
Also look at the division that is occurring in the church caused by this latest proclamation.
1000 bishops have openly disobeyed this blessing document.
(As they should)
You will know them by their fruit.
I believe in the papacy but not this guy.

quote:

---

No we don't.

---

Yeah, you do. There is no hierarchical structure and each Baptist church is completely autonomous from the other. Thus there are no official set of theological beliefs. Differences in theology and doctrine can be subtle or large. For instance, the vast majority of churches in the Southern Baptist Convention outright condemns abortion while the American Baptist Convention does not.

quote:

---

but are simply clarified.

---

Yes, it's been clarified. Thanks for helping us to deepen our understanding of the how the Catholic teaching authority works.

Catholics have a special love for the Mother of God, Mary, who gave birth to the Second Person of the Trinity. She was a wonderful mother and suffered much to see her Son abused and Crucified. She will always be loved and blessed by us Catholics.

Do you not feel the same way towards Mary, Mother of God?

quote:

---

she also had other children by Joseph

---

If this were true then Christ would not have entrusted St. John the Apostle with her care in his final moments on the cross. Jewish custom dictated that the eldest child care for their parents as they got into old age.

That's the biggest tell against Mary having other children. It's more likely that the "brethren of the Lord" were extended family members from Joseph's side of the family.