DeoOmnisGloria.com

Jay,

Unfortunately, I don't have time right now to take up the challenge . . . sigh . . . however much I really really want to. Other than to say I believe I and others have already addressed each of your points adequately in other posts.

Maybe I'll jump in after another Protestant or two has posted.

In Christ,

Thomas

Thomas,
Frankly there's no answer for some of the above, like why Jesus showed absolutely no interest in creating a book. Or how we are supposed to interpret scripture infallibly without a Church guaranteed not to go the wrong way.

And the overall biggest problem remains one: the Bible does not teach Sola Scriptura. Period.

God bless,
Jay

Jay, excellent article.

I think a strong statement than this: The Word of God cannot exclude the oral Tradition passed down through the ages by the succession of apostles. can be made.

The Word of God cannot exclude the oral Tradition passed down through the ages by the succession of apostles by which it was decided which books were Scripture and which weren't.

I have a question: Why do Protestants believe the authority of the human being who tells them about Sola Scriptura but refuse to believe the "human" authority of the Church? Isn't that a logical fallacy?

Jay,

What I have to say is pretty much about the bulleted topics above in the first entry.

I will go with some easy ones. Abortion and contraception should NOT be allowed, I believe, because it is killing. BUT, I also believe in free will, so if someone thinks that they are right, I won't mess with them. I might TRY to change their mind, but if their mind is made up, then there is nothing I can do. In the long run, I don't really think that contraception and abortion should have been invented in the first place.

Now I'm sort of going in reverse order, but it gets the same thing accomplished.

For women as ministers, yes, I believe that there will be women in Heaven, so I also believe that they should be able to spread the word of God and be involved with his ministry.

Now...about homosexual ministers, that is a tough one. I DO believe that EVERYONE should be able to carry out God's ministry. What I DON'T believe in is practicing homosexuality, which is wrong. But we should not judge others, and I think that by all means, they should be able to practice their faith.

Baptism is nice, but it is not REQUIRED for God to accept you as one of his people. I think that if you believe in God, or if you are a good person at heart, God will recognize that and will accept you. I believe that some people who are baptized will NOT be part of God's heavenly Kingdom because, at heart, they were not of the faith.

Now about communion. I believe it is symbolic. at the Last Supper, were the disciples really eating his flesh. No, because Jesus was still there with them. When he went onto the cross, the nails pierced through real flesh. The meal symbolized his body and blood that would enter them and fill them.

Now, about worship on Sunday...Totally totally, TOTALLY wrong. The Sabbath was made by God at creation, it is HIS DAY.

"Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy. Six days shalt thou labor and do all thy work, but the seventh day is the Sabbath of the Lord thy God."

We all know this is what was supposed to be kept in the Old Testament. But what of the New Testament?

Christ made the Sabbath commandment, as well as everything else good. "All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made" John 1:3

When did Christ Worship?
"He came to Nazareth, where he had been brought up; and as his custom was, he went into the synagogue on the sabbath day, and stood up for to read" Luke 4:16

What day was the Sabbath?
"In the end of the sabbath, as it began to dawn toward the first day of the week, came Mary Magdalene and the other Mary to see the sepulchre." Matthew 28:1

Which day of the week did the women keep after the crucifixion?
"And they returned and prepared spices and ointments; and rest the sabbath day according to the commandment" Luke 23:56

As for Sunday...

The first day of the week is mentioned eight times in the New Testament
Mathew 28:1, Mark 16:1,2; Mark 16:9; Luke 24:1; John 20:1; John 20:19; Acts 20:7; 1 Cor. 16:2

The only one which says a religious meeting was held is Acts 20:7 "And upon the first day of the week, when the disciples came together to break bread, Paul preached unto them, ready to depart on the morrow; and continued his speech until midnight" This does not say that it was the sabbath, it does not say the sabbath was changed, and it does not say they came to worship. All it says is that he preached. You can preach on ANY day.

Did Christ change the Sabbath?
"Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfill. For verily i say Unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the laww till all be fulfilled" Matthew 5:17,18
This distinctly says that Jesus did not change any commandments. This means that the change is not from God.

Did the apostles make the change?
The bible says that hey always kept the same Sabbath that Jews observed because they were Jews. Acts 13:14,42,44 and Acts 17:1-3 and 18:4

Did God know this change would be made?
Of course he did, he knows all, and he gives us clues in Daniel 7:25 "And he shall speak great words against the most High, and shall wear out the saints of the most High, and think to change times and laws: and they shall be given into his hand until a time and times and the dividing of time"

The Papacy claims that it has the power to change God's law. In the council of Laodicea in AD 336 the Catholic Church transferred the sabbath from Saturday to Sunday. They think that they have power equal to God's which is why they tried to change his law, and succeeded in changing the mindsd of most religions, with the exception of a few.

There is not a single sentence in the New Testament that says anyone can change the Sabbath. There was no command from any Divine authority and gave permission for this change. God gave the Sabbath for a reason.

What is the sign that God is our Creator?
"Wherefor the children of Israel shall keep the sabbath, to observe the sabbath throughout their generations, for a perpetual covenent. It is a sign between me and the children of Israel for ever: for is six days the LORD made heaven and earth, and on the seventh day he rested and was refreshed." Exodus 31: 16,17

Of what else is the Sabbath a sign?
"Speak thou also unto the children of Isreal, saying Verily my sabbaths ye shall keep: for it is a sign between me and you throughout your generation; that ye may know that I am the LORD that doth sanctify you" Exodus 31:13

The Sabbath is a sign of God's sovereignty.

"Here is the patience of the saints: here are they that keep the commandments of God, and the faith of Jesus" Revelation 14;12

That Sabbath one was long, but there is just one more point, Baptism of infants.

If you are baptized it does not seal you in heaven. Baptism of infants is wrong because they do not know what they want yet and do not know what they are getting into. It is only right for them to get baptized at an age where they know what they are accepting.

Although much of this is my opinion, the text from the Bible is entirely scripture, the words of God. It doesn't matter if YOU believe it or not, it's true.

David

David,

I would like you to try a thought experiment - it may sound little ridiculous but bear with me.

Imagine two literate men who have no religious beliefs whatsoever live alone on two seperate islands. One day three books wash up on the shore of each island: a Bible (KJV, natch); the Koran; and the Book of Mormon.

Will these men be able to determine independently which of these books contains religious truth?

If, after a couple of years, they were rescued and interviewed, would they have the same set of beliefs?

I would suggest that there is no reason to expect that they would recognise the Bible as the word of God, and certainly no reason to expect that if the did recognise it, that they would develop identical belief systems. This is because no book can testify to it's own truth - which is why Jesus established His Church and gave it a leader.

Ask a devout Muslim and he will avow that the Koran is the word of God, ask dictated by an angel to the prophet. He will brook no argument on this, and will use exactly the came argument that you do: "I know." How can you convince him otherwise?

Despite what you mistakenly believe, there is not one jot of Catholic dogma or doctrine that contradicts the Bible. Take for example, your issue with the sabbath. The gentile converts held their religious meetings on Sunday (Acts 20:7; 1 Cor 16:2) and, with the disappearance of the Jewish Christian churches following the destruction of the temple in 70 A.D., this day was exclusively observed as "the Lord's Day" i.e. the day the Lord rose from the dead. This is clear from the fact that it is found in the apochryphal Gospel of Peter (150 A.D.), in the epistle of Ignatius of Antioch to the Magnesians (110 A.D.) and in the Didache (90 A.D.).

Fidens

I'm not sure what you're getting at with the whole island thing, but whatever. You said that the Bible can't testify to it's own truth, well, don't you think its true? If you and I know it's true, then that's all that matter right now.

For the sabbath issue, you said that the gentile converts held their religious meetings on Sunday. SO WHAT?! You can pray and hold a meeting on a Wednesday, does that make it the Sabbath. Your reasoning makes no sense. Acts 20:7 says "And upon the first day of the week, when the disciples came together to break bread Paul preached unto them, ready to depart on the morrow; and continued his speech until midnight"
Anyone can preach on ANY day of the week. That does not make it the sabbath. Again that's weak evidence. Even so, IF they said it was the sabbath, which they did not, that is incorrect because they are breaking a commandment of God. To add I did not see the word sabbath in that verse.

1 Corinthians 16:2 says "Upon the first day of the week let every one of you lay by him in store, as God has prospered him" All that says is that you should set aside some of the money the Lord has let you earn. I don't remember that saying that the first day is now the sabbath.

Where is it fidens? Where did it say that it was changed. I provided loads and loads of scripture that tells us when the sabbath is and that Jesus did not change it.

David,

I know the Bible is true because Christ established a Church and gave it the authority to teach in His name. I do not think for a moment that that if I were the guy on the island, I would instinctively know what the truth was just by reading it. People who believe in sola scriptura are committing a logical fallacy because no book can attest to its own veracity.

The "breaking of bread" refers not to 'religious meetings' as defined by you, but to the Mass, as instituted by Christ. This has been the practice and the teaching of the Church since the apostolic age. Reading more about the history of the early Church will help you understand this.

You believe things that are not explict in scripture too David.

Peace.

Fidens,

Unfortunately, the Church attests to its own verasity as well. So if there is a "logical fallacy" here, both Catholic and Protestants are committing it. That is the nature of appealing to a higher authority, at some point you can't go any higher to prove that it has authority, which brings in the necessity of faith.

In Christ,

Thomas

Hi Thomas,

Yes, ultimately we are talking about revealed truth, not truth provable by science. The advantage that the Church has is its unbroken history, which is why I keep harping on about it :)

The Catholic understanding is that God is active in the Church throughout history in a real way. Christ did not say "Here's a book, go now and read of it" but rather "I am with you always, even until the end of time".

Perhaps an example: Part of our life as Christians is to come to know God. It was the understanding of the earliest Christians that Jesus Christ, Son of the Living God, was divine. This was disputed by Arius in the early fourth century, who maintained that the Son of God was inferior to the Father.

By whose authority was the Arian heresy condemned at the Council of Nicea in 325? By the authority that Christ bestowed upon His Church. For some time, even after the council, Arians outnumbered Christians. How is it that the truth prevailed? By the protection of God.

The arian heresy is still alive today in the Jehovah's Witnesses, who do not believe in the divinity of Christ. They use the same Bible as you and I (albeit a dodgy translation), but they interpret it incorrectly.

Peace.

Fidens,

I didn't see the word sabbath there. Also, yes, every shred of proof i have ever gotten has been from the Bible, just to tell you

Oh yeah, and Jehovah's witnesses are annoying. : ) I have nothing against them, its just that they keep stopping by my house!

David

David,

Please quote the Bible passage which explains he doctrine of the trinity.

Peace.

Jesus said in the Bible that He would send the Holy Spirit to guide people. Those who believe in Sola Scriptura either don't know that Jesus said that, can't understand that or don't want to accept that. If Jesus sent the Holy Spirit to guide us, then Sola Scriptura (the Bible alone as guide) was debunked by Jesus Himself.

Furthermore, for those Sola Scriptura followers, you should know that most of the New Testament books, apart from St. Paul's letters, were not actually written by the apostles themselves but by their scribes. The apostles thought Jesus was coming back in their lifetimes so they didn't bother to write anything down. The scribes heard their accounts ORALLY and wrote them down. The apostles taught ORALLY and the Book of John even says there were so many things Jesus did that they could not all be put down in the Book of John. Sola Scriptura is a theory that came about in the 1500s, produced by people who isolated themselves in Germany from the church scholars of Rome, before the information age. I think it's run its course.

Dear fidens:

What did jesus said to those who get baptise. To baptise in the name of the Father, The Son, and of the Holy spirit.

The point of this study is to examine the doctrine of the Trinity and to compare that to what the bible says. If you are ready to be challenged then read on.

Many Christians today believe that God is a Trinity and many would also say that the Trinity Doctrine is a major doctrine of Christianity. Others would say that it is the very foundation of Christianity itself. This study will look at the verses that seem to prove the Trinity and the verses that seem to say otherwise. We will also look at the history of this doctrine and will take a look into the Hebrew and Greek languages with regards to certain scriptures and some writings of the 2nd century (that pre-date the Nicene Creed), to see if they teach the Trinity. Finally this study leads onto a discussion forum where you can have your say, or read other peoples comments on this subject.

We know that scripture is here to guide us, teach us and correct us. If you find that scripture teaches contrary to any belief you hold then all I can say is that you need to humble yourself and align yourself with that truth and be encouraged that you are moving on in your faith. On the other hand, if the scriptures reinforce what we already believe, then we can be encouraged, knowing that our Father in heaven has already revealed those truths to us.

Moving on, I think it would be fair to say that most Christians who believe in the Trinity doctrine have never actually checked it out to see if it is so. They just assume that it must be correct. Many people think it is wrong to question doctrines like this, yet we are suppose to test all teaching, and to test the spirits, so that we do not become deceived.

Acts 17:11
These were more noble than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness of mind, and searched the scriptures daily, whether those things were so.

So searching the scriptures to see if what we believe or hear is scriptural is encouraged. I would also remind you that we must always be ready to provide a reason for the things that we believe.

1 Peter 3:15
But in your hearts set apart Christ as Lord. Always be prepared to give an answer to everyone who asks you to give the reason for the hope that you have. But do this with gentleness and respect,

I think it would be safe to say that many Christians who accept the doctrine of the Trinity, also remain confused and even those who have a deeper understanding of it, will admit that they do not understand it completely when challenged. The normal answer is that the Trinity is hard to understand because God is beyond our thinking.

I have also found out that a lot of people believe in 2 types of Trinity Doctrine. Some believe that God is one being that shows himself in 3 different ways like water shows itself in the form of ice, steam and liquid, others believe that the Trinity is made up of 3 distinct personalities and these 3 are in complete unity in love and purpose. This last explanation is probably the most common.

Now I guess is a good time to explain the Trinity doctrine.

The Trinity basically says that there is one God.
The Father is God, the Son is God and the Holy Spirit is God.
Hence God the Father, God the Son and God the Holy Spirit.
These three are one God. Each is co-equal and co-eternal.
God is described as a class or family, made up of the three personalities already mentioned.
This ancient diagram explains the Trinity quite well.

Dear fidens:

The Trinity basically says that there is one God.
The Father is God, the Son is God and the Holy Spirit is God.
Hence God the Father, God the Son and God the Holy Spirit.
These three are one God. Each is co-equal and co-eternal.
God is described as a class or family, made up of the three personalities already mentioned.
This ancient diagram explains the Trinity quite well.

Trinity Doctrine - Foundation of the Christian Faith
What is the Trinity Doctrine? In a nutshell, there is one God, eternally existing in three persons: Father, Son (Jesus Christ) and Holy Spirit. The three persons of the Godhead are coequal and co-eternal (Genesis 1:26, Isaiah 9:6, Matthew 3:16-17; 28:19, Luke 1:35, Hebrews 3:7-11, and 1 John 5:7).

Trinity Doctrine - How Can We Comprehend It?
The most difficult thing about the Trinity Doctrine is that there is no way to adequately explain it. The Trinity is a concept that is impossible for any human being to fully understand, let alone explain. God is infinitely higher than we are, therefore we should not expect to be able to fully understand Him. The Bible teaches that the Father is God (Exodus 3:14), that Jesus is God (John 8:58), and that the Holy Spirit is God (Acts 5:3-4). The Bible also teaches that there is only one God (Deuteronomy 6:4; James 2:19). How these two statements of doctrine can both be true is incomprehensible to the human mind. However, this doesn't mean that they're both not true.

Ramon,

Whoa brother! Thank you for that fullsome discourse on biblical references to the trinity... but you have totally missed the point of my question, which was addressed to David in the context of his remark: "every shred of proof i have ever gotten has been from the Bible".

We NOW know that God is the trinity, but neither you, nor I, nor David will find it *explicated* in the Bible. Nor was it always as evident as some would like to believe.

Adoptionism (condemned in 785, 794 and 1177); anomeanism; apollianarianism (condemned in 377 and 381); arianism (condemned in 325); macedonianism (condemned in 381); modalism; pricillianism; sabellianism; and subordinationism were all heresies against the trinity. It was the authority of the Church established by Christ which preserved the truth accepted by most protestants today - an infallible book needs an infallible interpreter.

Peace

Dear Fidens

The Holy Trinity is not worded that way in the bible, like everything we must Have FAITH, Faith is what makes us believe. One might say "How there a GOD, there is no Proof that God Existence". But we believe by Faith not by seeing things to believe, this is the same thing that St.Thomas fell in.

The doctrine of the Trinity begins with the assumption that the true God isnot totally comprehensible to man because God is not totally comprehensible to man. Any god we could fully understand and explain would be no greater
then what we are. Such a god would not be worthy of our worship, awe or praise. But although God is not FULLY comprehensible to man He is
comprehensible to man as much as He has revealed Himself to us. The inescapable truth is that God will and must always be greater than our finite
capacity to understand fully or to explain exhaustively.

Our failure or understand or explain fully the Trinity or any other aspect of God is not due to some defect in God or in His revelation but rather the result of the fact that God is infinite and we are finite and our abilities and intellects are limited.

If the Trinity were fully understandable, this in itself, would be an
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
indication that it is erroneous. Christians are not ashamed that the Trinity is
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
difficult to comprehend, that we are left with unresolved problems, and unanswered questions, because the Trinity is a mystery and we boast in it,1Cor 1:31.
FROM THE OLD TESTAMENT:

OT Evidence:

1. 9 different Hebrew words for "ONE"

Of these 9 words the words "man", "woman" and "soul" those used to indicate
"one thing" are never applied to God or express the oneness of God because
God is not a "man", "woman", or "a soul".

There is also a word which means "absolute oneness" Ps.68:6, and this word
is also never applied to God.

2. There are several words for one that are applied to God but these words
indicate a "compound oneness."

Gen 1:5 The first day, a combination with two things "the evening and
morning, one day".

Gen 2:24 Adam and Eve became "one flesh" but they were both still separate
individuals. They were two but one and one but two.

Gen 3:22 "the man has become one of us, to know good and evil;" Adam and
Eve became one with God yet they did not lose their personhood or God his
divinity. There is nothing in the text to infer that God is speaking to the
angels. Thus the "us" in the text is God HIMSELF referring to HIMSELF in the
plural.

Gen 11:6 "the people were one" they were "one and many" at the same time.

Gen 34:16,22 The Shechemites wanted to become "one people" with the Jews.

2Chron 30:12 God gave the people "one heart" but they were thousands of
individuals.

Ezra 2:64 The congregation, 42,360 persons, is called "one".

Jer 32:39 Under the New Covenant God will give His people "one heart".

3. Deut 6:4, the main verse Jews use to teach the oneness of God uses the
same Hebrew word for one that the above examples use to show "compound
oneness."

Dear fidens:

Im will continue....

4. In the OT both singular and plural nouns, pronouns, adjectives, and verbs
are used for God. Many scholars have tried to say that the use of plurals in the OT is simple the "plural of majesty." Which is the same argument that Muslims use to answer why Allah speaks of himself as "We" in the Quran.

Unfortunately this is a fundamental error. It is an attempt to take a modern monarchical idiosyncrasy and read it back into the ancient text. This was an unknown idea in OT times. Richard Davies pointed this out as long ago as
1891 (Doctrine of the Trinity p.227).
See Gen 3:22 God speaking about Himself
Gen 11:7-9 where there are both plural pronouns and verbs used of God
Isa 6:3 Where Isaiah is called as a spokes man for God and God
addresses himself in the plural.

5. Passages where more then one person is address as God:

A. Gen 19:24 A special passage because more then one person is addressed
as God. One person is on earth and one is in heaven
One "Jehovah" is on earth and brings down brimstone and fire from the second
"Jehovah" who is in heaven. Luther said "Moses mentions Jehovah twice to show
that there is but one God, but that in this one God there are distinct
persons."

This can not be a mention of the same "Jehovah" twice because,

1. Moses is contrasting heaven and earth here.
2. There are no passages like that in the Torah where the same name is
mentioned twice in the same verse for emphasis. There is no evidence
that Moses ever used that kind of literary style.

B. Ps 45:6,7 Here God, who is sitting on the throne of heaven anoints God
with oil. David address the one true God and identifies the throne as the
throne of God so this can not be applied to David or Solomon or any other
earthly king.

C. Isa 48:12-17 The speaker is identified as the "first and the last" a
title of God (Isa 44:6) and He is identified as doing things which only the
true God can do, 48:3-6,11,13,15.

But this one who is identified as the true God is peaking and says that He,
along with the HS, are sent by God, v16.

If the passage is interpreted in its natural and normal meaning there are three persons in this passage who are call God! The only way to deny this is to claim Isaiah is speaking and not God. But to say Isaiah is speaking at
the end of verse 16 you must say he is speaking the whole of the passage.

God identified as "the Father" in the OT

Deut 32:6 (Moses' time)
Isa 63:15; 64:8 (pre-exile)
Mal2:10 (post exile)

9. God identified as "the Son" in the OT

Ps. 2:12 "kiss the Son"
a. The "Anointed One" in v2 is called the "Son in v12.
b. Both Jewish and Christian scholars say this Psalm speaks of the Messiah.
c. God's works are applied to "the Son" (comp. Ps. 24:1,2; Job 34:24;
Jer 51:19-23
d. The "Son" is begotten (comp 2Sam.7:14; Acts 13:33)

Prov. 30:4 "His son's name"
a. Two separate persons are spoken of, "His name or His son's name"
b. This can not be a metaphor or impersonal force.
c. This is not Hebrew parallelism.

Isa. 9:6 "a son given"
a. "Wonderful Counselor" comp Judges 13:17,18
b. "born to us" comp Isa 7:14 - "God with us"
c. "Mighty God" comp Isa 10:21
d. "Eternal Father" better translation "Father of Eternal Life" - the one
who give eternity to others.
e. "Prince of Peace" the divine ruler. Ps 2:7-9

10. God the Spirit in the OT

1Sam10:10, 19:20,23
2Sam 23:1
1Kings 22:24
Neh 9:30
Ps 51:11
Isa 63:10,11
Micah 2:7

Deity of the HS in the OT

Job 33:4
Ps 104:30
Ps 139:7

Words of the HS called the words of God

1Sam 10:10
2Sam 23:2
Zach 7:12; 12:10 (comp Ps 84:11 who gives grace?)

Yea i know this a alot but read from the START please fidens, and there are lots of proof in the NT also.

And Fidens why do you believe in GOD, God dont want to do tricks to people (like show himself, move a cup when you tell him to)he wants us to believe in him by Faith. Faith is want holds us all together.

Ramon,

I already believe in the trinity, and I think you have totally missed my point again. There is no need to waste any more of your time cutting and pasting text from here: http://answering-islam.org.uk/Trinity/otreason.html
I can read it myself thank you.

As outlined in my last post, the truth of the trinity is not as self-evident as you believe it to be. It is the authority of the Church which has provided ALL Christians with the certainty they now enjoy.

Peace.

Dear Fidens:

ok, as long as you believe in it.

God Bless
Ramon

sigh....

Fidens,

What do you make of Matthew 28:19. "Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost"

You didn't really confront the sabbath issue very strongly. Saturday is the Sabbath.

David,

An assertion is not a valid argument, you must provide evidence to support your position. Here are the facts:

1. YOU SAY that Saturday is the Sabbath.

2. I AGREE that it is according to Mosaic law.

3. I NOTE, however, that since Christ's resurrection Sunday has been considered by the Church to be the day of worship. In support of my position I can point to scriptural quotes showing that the mosaic law, such as that governing diet and circumcision, is now redundant and to early records showing that Christians worshipped on Sunday, the Lord's day, in His honour. For example St. Ignatius, the Bishop of Antioch, wrote in his first century Epistle to the Ephesians:

"If, therefore, those who were brought up in the ancient order of things have come to the possession of a new hope, no longer observing the Sabbath, but living in the observance of the Lord's Day, on which also our life has sprung up again by Him and by His death -- whom some deny, by which mystery we have obtained faith, and therefore endure, that we may be found the disciples of Jesus Christ, our only Master -- how shall we be able to live apart from Him, whose disciples the prophets themselves in the Spirit did wait for Him as their Teacher? And therefore He whom they rightly waited for, being come, raised them from the dead. ...Be ye salted in Him, lest any one among you should be corrupted, since by your savour ye shall be convicted. It is absurd to profess Christ Jesus, and to Judaize. For Christianity did not embrace Judaism, but Judaism Christianity, that so every tongue which believeth might be gathered together to God."

Or the Letter of Barnabas, written in A.D. 74, where it is written:

"We keep the eighth day [Sunday] with joyfulness, the day also on which Jesus rose again from the dead."

4. YOU SAY that Saturday is the Sabbath.

This is a mere assertion. If you are right, then the early Christians must have worshipped on Saturday right? Please provide proof.

One last point: the Talmud (considered an authoritative record of rabbinic discussions on Jewish law) acknowledges that Christians worship on Sunday. From Abhodah Zarah, 6a, we read: "He is called a Christian who follows the false teachings of that man [Jesus Christ], who taught them to celebrate the feast on the first day of the Sabbath, that is, to worship on the first day after the Sabbath."

If you insist that Saturday is the Christian day of worship you should probably follow ALL the mosaic law.

Maybe you are Jewish and don't realise it :)

Peace.

David,

You asked:

'What do you make of Matthew 28:19. "Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost"'

As I said to Ramon, I understand that to be a reference to the Trinity, but I sure as heck didn't figure it out from the text - the Church taught me. Just like it taught you.

"IF" I were completely ignorant about Christianity and picked up a Bible, I might think that the passage you cited was just a formula for a ritual. I would NOT be able to tell simply by reading the passage, or any other part of the Bible, that the Father, the Son and the Holy Ghost were three persons, one in substance - the Triune God.

The fact that the dogma of the trinity was relentlessly attacked in the heresies I have previously outlined DEMONSTRATES that it is not self-evident from scripture. Those heretics weren't satanists: they *thought* they were following Christ's teachings. Jehovah's Witnesses, using a slightly different translation of the same Bible you read, still insist that Jesus is not God.

For a long time arians outnumbered Christians. It was the Church of Christ, protected by the Holy Spirit as promised by Christ Himself, that preserved the truth that you now defend.

No charge.

Peace

PS More history here:
http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/15047a.htm

Dear David:

I dont see the point that you say "Saturday is the Sabbath". How can saturday be the sabbath, if here in NYC we count Monday as the first day of week. God rested on the 7th day meaning Sunday not saturday. Its alright if go to church after midnight on saturday, but to say saturday is the Sabbate, i dont see that anywhere counting Sunday as being the first day of the week in the bible. anyway i say the sabbate is on Sunday. If we count back 2000yrs or so people counted Monday as the first day of the week.

God bless
Ramon

Fidens,

I guess you still don't get it. In all the things I saw your write, not one of them say anything about the Bible saying that the Sabbath was changed.

Sunday has NOT been considered the Sabbath since Christs Resurrection. I don't know where in the Bible you saw that. I remember in Luke 23:56 that after the crucifixion the women celebrated the sabbath according to the commandment.

Jesus tells us that we are to follow the commandments if we love Him. He did not come to destroy the commandments, but to fulfil them.

I know that Jews rejected Jesus, but God did not say that the commandments were now destroyed. The sabbath commandment is just as important as the others. It is a sign between God and His people. If you say that the sabbath commandment was destroyed, then what makes any of the other commandments valid to you either?

You want proof that the early Christians celebrated the Saturday sabbath? How about the Apostles. Yes, they were Christians because they believed that Jesus was Christ. Just read Acts 13:14, 42; 16:13 It shows you that they went to the synagogue on the SABBATH DAY. Matthew makes a distinction between the Sabbath and the FIRST DAY. In Matthew 28:1 he says "In the end of the sabbath, as it began to DAWN TOWARD THE FIRST DAY of the week, came Mary Magdalene and the other Mary to see the sepulchre" That just shows that he know that Saturday was the Sabbath and that the First day was NOT.

I don't care what St. Ignatius wrote. It says "Howbeit in vain do they worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men" Mark 7:7

Lastly, I don't remember Jesus teaching that Saturday was not the sabbath and the Sunday was. If you can find proof tell me. From what I heard him say, he wanted all of us to follow His (God's) commandments. Jesus was a Jew so he followed the commandments of God.

David

David,

Show me in the Bible where Jesus said to His disciples "Write all this stuff down and only do what is written in the book."

I'll go one better: here is my evidence that not everything that Jesus taught is written in the Bible:

-John 21:25 And there are also many other things which Jesus did, the which, if they should be written every one, I suppose that even the world itself could not contain the books that should be written.

Here's my evidence supporting my case that oral Tradition was vital in the apostolic age:

-Rom. 10-17: So then faith cometh by HEARING, and hearing by the word of God.

-Matt. 28-19: Go ye therefore and TEACH all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost.

-Mark 16-20: And the went forth, and PREACHED everywhere, the Lord working with them, and confirming the word with signs following. Amen.

-Mark 16-15: And he said unto them, Go ye into all the world, and PREACH the gospel to every creature.

(Not to mention the fact that the first Gospel was written ten years after the Ascension and Revelation completed in about 100 AD. Do you really think John provided handwritten copies to all the Churches? By fax maybe? What were they using if not the Bible?)

And here is my evidence that the early Church thought the same way:

-2 Thes. 2-15: Therefore, brethren, stand fast, and hold the traditions which ye have been taught, whether BY WORD, or our epistle.

-2 Tim. 2-2: And the things that thou hast HEARD of me among many witnesses, the same commit thou to faithful men, who shall be able to teach others also.

As I have said before, you believe truths that are not explicted in the Bible - you simply choose to ignore the contradiction.

If you are serious about following the old law, you should not eat pork, shellfish or rabbit, you should be circumcised, you should not switch a light on or drive a car on Saturday, you must not speak to a woman who is menstrating, you should not trim the hair on your temples or your beard etc. Are you doing all these things David?

On the upside, you are allowed to keep slaves.

Peace

Dear David:

Sunday is our Lords day. Jesus rose from the dead on sunday.

Read this
http://www.pointsouth.com/fbs/lordsday.htm

Go to this site and read.

Sunday, is the new Christian Sabbath. It commemorates the resurrection of the Lord Jesus Christ. It is the Lord's Day and has replaced the seventh-day Sabbath by the authority of the inspired Apostles and, therefore, by Christ himself. Christians are certainly under obligation to observe it."
All the Ten Commandments are quoted or reaffirmed in the New Testament except the fourth one, the Sabbath commandment. Therefore it is not a part of the New Covenant, but only of the Old. God does have commandments He expects men to follow today, but these are not the Mosaic Law found in the Old Testament, but those found in the New Testament.
Yes, Christ kept the Sabbath; He kept the Law perfectly. Because He lived under the Law, He went frequently to the synagogue on the Sabbath (Matthew 12:9-12; Luke 6:1-5; Mark 2:27). But this is no reason for Christians to keep it. He lived under the Old Covenant, having not yet brought in the New.

Ok if the first day of the week is on sunday then in common sense there are indications from the New Testament that Christians met on the first day of the week for worship, and we know from church history and writings that this was the practice. There is no proof at all that the Sabbath law is a command of God for Christians. Thus Christians should keep the Lord's Day.
There is no Biblical evidence for moving the day of worship from Saturday to Sunday, and these people invariably quote Old Testament verses while at the same time denying New Testament verses which are contrary to their teaching.
Sabbatarians refer to the ten commandments of Ex 20:1-17, but ignore Matt 22:34-40, where Jesus is asked what is the great commandment IN THE LAW. Jesus grouped all ten commandments as listed in the law, into only two. Love GOD, which are in commandments 1-3, and love your neighbor which are in 4-10. Love of GOD includes keeping a "day of rest" which is the real meaning of Sabbath. Not one word did Jesus say that this day would continue to be a Saturday.

Isaiah 1:13, "Offer sacrifice no more in vain: incense is an abomination to Me. The new moons, and the Sabbaths, and your festivals I will not abide."
Compare this prophecy with its fulfillment in Colossians 2:16-17.

Jer 31:31-34, "...and I will make a New Covenant...not according to the covenant which I made with their fathers...the covenant which THEY MADE VOID..."

Lam 2:6, "And he has destroyed his tent as a garden, he has thrown down his tabernacle. The Lord has caused feasts and Sabbaths to be forgotten in Zion, and has delivered up king and priest to reproach, and to the indignation of his wrath."

Hosea 2:11, "And I will cause all her mirth to cease, her solemnities, her new moons, her Sabbaths, and all her festival times."

God bless
Ramon

Dear David:

Continue..

lets say the first day of the week is sunday, then this is true.

Luke affirms Sunday as the sabbath observance among early Christians: "Upon the first day of the week, when the disciples came together to break bread, Paul preached unto them..." [Acts 20:7]. Also, Paul states in First Corinthians 16:2 that believers met on the first day of the week.)

Fidens,

You thought you had me there didn't you? You asked if I do those things. In fact, I don't eat ANY of those things. I DO follow the old law because it was never taken away, except,...i don't have a beard yet..hehe.

Ramon, you're going to base that Sunday Sabbath doctrine on that one text that you misinterpreted when I'm basing the Saturday Sabbath on the commandments of God. In that Acts verse, did they even say the word sabbath in there one time? You know, I'm going to do an experiment and see if there is any possible way that some person could meet with another person on the first day. I know it seems hard, but it can happen. ; ) We might even eat bread too...

That is SLANDER. The Apostles NEVER changed the Sabbath. They followed it according to the commandments.

If you say Christ changed the commandments, then why did he say "I come not to destroy the commandments or the prophets"

or "If ye love me, keep my commandments"

Oh and if you read Genesis, it says God rested the Seventh Day!

Ramon, do you have a calendar? Sunday is the first day of the week if you've learned to use one yet.

If you say that Sunday is the sabbath with those TWO TEXTS, ill challenge that, and I'll find...let's see 15 verses that totally go against that. Those two texts did not say "sabbath" ONE TIME. Now it seems you guys are the ones that can't read.

OH yeah..and Ramon? There is no use trying to disprove the Saturday Sabbath with Old Testament scripture. You guys already determined that the Sabbath was of the Old Covenant, which Jesus didn't agree with when he said "If ye love me keep my commandments" Again...God's commandments are Jesus, they are the same.

Oh yeah, back to Joe. Don't you think that if the Oral Tradition contradicts the Bible, that the Oral Tradition is wrong? Just a thought.

David

Dear David:

You missing the point again. Christians in the NT worship and pray and did everything on the first day each week (Sunday), the Apostles also did this. Unless you trying to say that they all sin and therfore are going to HELL then you making a very mad statement.

Nowhere in the New Testament are Christians commanded to worship or meet on the Saturday Sabbath. Rather, Christians are recorded as meeting on the first day of the week, Sunday. Consider the following verses:

1 Corinthians 16:1,2, Christians giving money for the collection on the first day of the week.

Acts 20:7 Paul preached to Christians at Troas whose practice was to meet to break bread on the first day of the week.

John 20:19,26 Jesus, after His resurrection met with the disciples on the first day of the week.

Romans 14:5,6 Paul, when discussing which day to meet, did not say that you must meet on the Saturday Sabbath, (as SDAs say),rather: "Let every man be fully persuaded in his own mind."

In stark contrast, SDAs have no early quotes to show that early Christians met on Saturday.

Col. 2:16-17 shows conclusively that the sabbath law is no longer binding:

"Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of an holy day, or of the new moon, or of the sabbath days: which are a shadow of things to come; but the body is of Christ."

SDAs claim St. Paul kept the sabbath because he went to synagogues on sabbaths. This is faulty reasoning, however. It does not prove he consciously kept the sabbath law any more than his going to the feasts in Jerusalem proves he kept the laws governing feasts.

The actual reason Paul visited synagogues on the sabbath was to preach the Gospel to the Jews. See Acts 13:14-44; 16:13-14; 17:2-4; 18:4. "And Paul, as his manner was, went in unto them, and three sabbath days reasoned with them out of the scriptures."

Isaiah 56:1-7 and 58:1-13, which are used by Adventists to support the doctrine of a sabbath-preaching last days remnant church, say absolutely nothing about such a thing.

David you are dont thinking, Early on christians will meet on the first day of every week (Sunday). Even the Apostles did this, are you calling them a sinner?

And David i do know how to read a calendar, maybe you should try Reading the NT instead of following a Calendar, it will do you some good. You will see that everybody will meet on the First day of every week.
There are 8 references in the Christian Scriptures to the "first day of the week", as Sunday was referred to in those days.

Five of them refer to events during Resurrection Morning -- the day when the tomb where Jesus was laid was found to be empty. The other three are:
John 20:19 describes events on what we would call Sunday evening. The disciples were gathered together. Some have speculated that this might have been the first Sunday worship service. Others suggest that the text seems to imply that they were gathered together for their own protection, out of fear of attack by the Jews.
Acts 20:7: Paul is described as preaching on a Sunday evening. It was evening, because the passage refers to lamps being lit. Some Christians promote this text as demonstrating that Paul held a religious service on a Sunday. Others suggest that he gave the teaching on what he would call Sunday evening but we would call Saturday evening; the first day of the week started at sundown on Saturday in 1st century CE Palestine. If Paul considered Sunday to be the Sabbath then he would not have set out on foot to Assos on Sunday morning.
1 Corinthians 16:2: Paul instructs the Christians at Corinth that each of them is to lay aside some money every Sunday that would later be collected for the Christians at Jerusalem. Some interpreters believe that this might refer to a collection of money at a Sunday religious service. Others suggest that the text implies that the money was to be laid aside by each believer separately and privately, and to be saved up by each person independently.

Two texts have been cited as support for moving the Sabbath from Saturday to Sunday:
Colossians 2:16-17: Paul writes: "...do no let anyone judge you...with regard to a religious festival, a New Moon celebration or a Sabbath day. These are a shadow of the things that were to come; the reality, however, is found in Christ" (NIV). Some people interpret the reference to "Sabbath" in this passage as authorizing Christians to celebrate (or not celebrate) the weekly Sabbath in any way that they wish. Others suggest that the "Sabbath" in this passage apparently refers to the Ceremonial Sabbaths, not the Weekly Sabbaths. The verse in Colossians duplicates the text of Ezekiel 45:17 which reads: "...at the festivals, the New Moons and the Sabbaths - at all the appointed feasts of the house of Israel."
Romans 14:5: Paul writes: "One man considers one day more sacred than another; another man considers every day alike. Each one should be fully convinced in his own mind." Some people interpret this passage as allowing Christians to either recognize or ignore the Sabbath, - or perhaps to select any day as the Sabbath. But others suggest from a reading of the subsequent verses that Paul is discussing fasting here, not religious observance. They would suggest that verse 1 of this chapter indicates that the passage relates to "disputable" matters (such as when or if to fast); the day of the Sabbath was not a disputable matter; it was a commandment from God. The phrase "considering every day alike" might means that every day from Sunday to Friday were treated the same, as in the passage describing the collection of manna in Exodus 16:4

Again david read from the start of my post and ye shall Learn the truth.

God bless
Ramon

Including the slaves?

Fidens,

No, not the slaves, sorry to disappoint you. No sarcasm intended in this question, but I honestly am not sure. Did they own slaves in the Old Testament, or were they called servants? What is the difference?

Ramon

"You missing the point again. Christians in the NT worship and pray and did everything on the first day each week (Sunday), the Apostles also did this. Unless you trying to say that they all sin and therfore are going to HELL then you making a very mad statement."

Yes Ramon, this is you speaking. Okay, so if they did everything on the first day of the week, then how is that any different from the other days of the week? You aren't supposed to work on the Sabbath. I'm not sure if that's what you meant, but if it isn't, I'd rephrase that. Also, when did I say that they were going to hell?? Don't try to put words in my mouth. You're just pulling things out of the air.

As for the collection of Money on Sunday, guess what? I'm collecting money for UNICEF this whole week.

Also, when Jesus met with disciples on the first day of the week, did he say that it was the sabbath? No. And you know what? I believe He met with his disciples on other days of the week as well.

You said "The actual reason Paul visited synagogues on the sabbath was to preach the Gospel to the Jews. See Acts 13:14-44; 16:13-14; 17:2-4; 18:4. "And Paul, as his manner was, went in unto them, and three sabbath days reasoned with them out of the scriptures."

Was that Sunday, if so tell me where it refers to sunday as sabbath.

Do you honestly think that everyone in the New Testament celebrate the sunday Sabbath??

Let us review shall we?

"He came to Nazareth where he had been brought up and as his custom was, he went into the synagogue on the sabbath day, and stood up for to read" Luke 4:16 Since you seem to think that the Sunday Sabbath was to commemorate Christs resurrection, this could only mean it was on Saturday that he went to the synagogue.

Another
"And they returned and prepared spices and ointments; and rested the sabbath day according to the commandment" Luke 23:56

Next Jesus said " if ye love me, keep my commandments" We all know this, yet Ramon doesn't want to confront it.

How about Matthew 5:17 "Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets, I am come not to destroy but to fulfill"
What do you make of that Ramon.

"In the end of the sabbath, as it began to dawn toward the first day of the week, came Mary Magdalene and the other Mary to see the sepulchre" Matthew 28:1 this is still a valid verse.

here is one i didn't tell you before Ramon.

"And when the sabbath was past, Mary Magdalene, and Mary the mother of James, and Salome had bought sweet spices, that they might come and anoint him. And very early in the morning the first day of the week, they came unto the sepulchre at the rising of the sun...Now when Jesus was risen early the first day of the week, he appeared first to Mary Magdalene, Out of whom he had cast seven devils" Mark 16:1,2,9.

Here it says AFTER THE SABBATH HAD PAST, jesus went to cast out devils on the first day of the week.

Christ made the Saturday Sabbath. "All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made" John 1:3

As for your agrument for romans 14:5, well, if you can call it that. You seemed to have proven my point. You said "the sabbath was not a disputible matter, it was a commandment from God"

Out of all the explanations you gave, they all seem to be the same. They are just what people may think they are and they are no really concrete answers. however, why don't you just take the Bible the way it is Ramon? Those texts you provided show nothing about Sunday being the Sabbath.

"Again david read from the start of my post and ye shall Learn the truth."

I guess I did learn the truth, and the truth is that Saturday is the Sabbath. But on the plus side, you were really clever in how you used YE in the sentence.

David

Dear David:

I think by now i know that you cant read. You just skip words, you read to get rid of it not to understand it. First of all i never said you said " they going to hell".Unless you trying to say that they all sin and therfore are going to HELL then you making a very mad statement." "unless you trying" that means are you trying to say that? I never put words in your mouth. You are unless you have not figure that out by now.

Next Jesus said " if ye love me, keep my commandments" We all know this, yet Ramon doesn't want to confront it. HUH, Have i said that? i think not.( You must be a SDA) Christians (all)gattter on the first day of every month to worship and pray and do other stuff. If everyday are alike then how so many christians in the NT gather on the first day of every month and did the exact did as a Sabbate day should be?
You may ask?
Why do Christians worship on Sunday (the first day of the week) instead of on the Sabbath?

The Church consisted of a majority of Jews for many years. They would have gone to the Synagoge on the Sabbath, following the Jewish tradition. To worship in a Christian setting they would meet again on the first day of the week (see Acts 20:7 and 1Cor. 16:2 as two examples). As Gentiles were added to the Church, many Gentiles would have only met during the worship services on Sunday.

When the Church became predominantly Gentile and unfortunately anti-semitic to one degree or another, the tradition of meeting on Sunday continued. Since Paul had already stated that all days were the Lord's and of equal value, there was no felt need to switch the day. Bondage to a particular day as being "the day" is as wrong if not more so than taking a Sabbath's day rest.

Actually, the Church met almost every day for centuries but the Sunday service was the primary one since Jesus rose again on the first day of the week. The Church celebrated Easter every Sunday! The Eucharist, also known as communion, the Mass, the Lord's Table, the breaking of bread among many names, was also celebrated (Eucharist means celebration) every Sunday, again, as part of the thankfulness for our salvation and the expectation of the soon coming return of Christ, something that has often been lost in churches that do not celebrate at the Lord's Table every Lord's Day (but that is for a different study ).
Yea David no where in the bible is the word "sunday" there, but has time progress the church have know that the "first day of every week" (sunday if you dont know) is our day of rest.
Worship on this day was begun by Jesus when He met with His disciples "on the evening of that day, the first day of the week" (John 20:1, 19). He met again with the disciples on the next Sunday night (John 20:26). This practice of meeting on the first day of the week was continued throughout church history. We have evidence of this in three New Testament Scriptures. Luke wrote that some early Christians "On the first day of the week . . . were gathered together to break bread" and to hear Paul preach to them (Acts 20:7). Paul wrote to the Corinthians, "On the first day of every week, each of you is to put something aside" (I Corinthians 16:2). And John wrote that he "was in the Spirit on the Lord's day" (Revelation 1:10). These all suggest that Christians should meet together on the Lord's Day, i.e., the first day of the week.
Although there is no New Testament commandment that Christians must meet on the first day of the week and not on the Jewish Sabbath, the Scriptures mentioned strongly suggest this was the early church's practice. And there are ample early church writings that show this day, and not the Jewish Sabbath, was used throughout the early church. The early chruch (Christ) used the first day of every month.
The Mosaic Law was done away with by Christ. Paul taught that "before faith came, we were confined under the law, kept under restraint until faith should be revealed. So that the law was our custodian until Christ came, that we might be justified by faith. But now that faith has come, we are no longer under a custodian; for in Christ Jesus you are all sons of God, through faith" (Galatians 3:23-26). He taught this so strongly that later he wrote in the same book, "How can you turn back again to the weak and beggarly elemental spirits, whose slaves you want to be once more? You observe days, and months, and seasons, and years!" (Galatians 4:9, 10). And he stressed that those who "are led by the Spirit . . . are not under the law" (Galatians 5:18). And im not going to repeat myself from the post from way back. CHRISTIANS concider sunday the day of rest, im not saying that we hate the Saturday sabbte but we learn form early on that the first day of week was consider the day of rest for Christians, Jewish still follow the Saturday sabbate.
The record of history, from the Resurrection of Christ, Christians have always worshipped on the first day of the week (Sunday) and never on the Sabbath (7th day).
Apostles in 33 AD introduced Sunday worship.

In addition to Acts 20:7 and 1 Cor 16:1-2. there also Historical proof.
Also this is another point. The Sinai law is no longer the instructor of God’s people (Galatians 3:24-25). Our instructor is Christ, who instructs us through the Holy Spirit (John 14:26). We are not under the Sinai law (1 Corinthians 9:20-21). We are under the law of Christ (1 John 3:21-24). Still, the Spirit uses the law of Moses as one of the ways he instructs us. This is important to understand. It is right to say that Christians are not under the law of Moses: Paul makes that plain in passages such as Romans 7:6 and 1 Corinthians 9:20. Unless you are a JEW?, i can understand that. Are you a Jew?

God Bless
Ramon

Dear David:

On the side note: The commandments that Jesus gave are not the same as the ten commandments in the O.T. Jesus gave us New Commandments to keep which are not in the O.T.

Im praying for you so that you can come to the truth.

God bless
Ramon

"You missing the point again. Christians in the NT worship and pray and did everything on the first day each week (Sunday), the Apostles also did this. Unless you trying to say that they all sin and therfore are going to HELL then you making a very mad statement."UNLESS YOU TRYING TO SAY THAT THEY ALL SIN AND THEREFORE ARE GOING TO HELL...

YES THAT WAS YOU RAMON.

Oh yeah, and when did I get rid of words?

Ramon said: Next Jesus said " if ye love me, keep my commandments" We all know this, yet Ramon doesn't want to confront it. HUH, Have i said that? i think not.( You must be a SDA) ....

The reason I said that is becuase I used that text before and you never had an answer for it. And you dont have to SAY that you don't want to confront it, you either do it or you don't, end of story.

I'm tired.

David

Dear David:

Can you not READ?

I think by now i know that you cant read. You just skip words, you read to get rid of it not to understand it. First of all i never said you said " they going to hell".Unless you trying to say that they all sin and therfore are going to HELL then you making a very mad statement." "unless you trying" that means are you trying to say that? I never put words in your mouth. You are unless you have not figure that out by now.
I was not putting words in your mouth, im asking you a question. I forgot to put the question mark, but if you will just READ CAREFULLY, you know im not putting words in your mouth. IM ASKING A QUESTION
Christians worship the first day of the week, not the seventh (Sabbath is the Hebrew word for seventh, hence seventh day). Jesus kept the sabbath but objected to the exagerated legalism of the Pharisees' ways. The end of Exodus 31 tells me the law of the sabbath was intended for Israel only. The church worships Sunday, and it is not to be treated like a legalistic Sabbath, but a day of thanks for what Christ has done for us.
And David its pointless to keep on with this Debate because its not that you dont understand, its you dont want to be told the Truth.

Last thoughts:
Colossians 2 v 16-17
So don't let anyone critize you for what you eat or drink,or for not celebrating Jewish holidays and feasts or new moon ceremonies or Sabbaths. For these were only temporary rules that ended when Christ came.They were only shadows of the real thing-of Christ himself.

God bless
Ramon

I have a question for Catholics, Ramon Ill get back to you later.

Do Catholics believe that the stories in the Bible are true, or that some of the Old testament stuff is just stories? Just wondering, this is based on what a friend in school said to me before.

David

David,

The Church teaches:

"All Scripture (both Old and New Testament) is inspired by God and useful for teaching, for reproving, for correcting, for instruction in justice that the man of God may be perfect, equipped for every good work." - Dogmatic Constitution on Divine Revelation, Section 11

"The books of Scripture must be acknowledged as teaching firmly, faithfully, and without error, that truth which God wanted put into the sacred writings for the sake of our salvation." - Dogmatic Constitution on Divine Revelation, Section 11

The Bible is an ancient book, the product of a civilization and of conditions quite different from ours. It was written by people whose ways of thinking and speaking were unlike ours, and in languages that we at times do not well understand.

Since at times our data are only what we find in the Bible, we lack the necessary information to reconstruct a given incident with all its details. Occasionally the Bible embodies hyperboles, allegories, parables, etc. To determine what the sacred writer meant to teach in a particular instance, we must first determine the literary form into which he cast his teaching. Again, we must make some allowances for poetic license in those books of the Old Testament which are poetry.

Fidens,

I truly believe that every story in the Bible is true. But I have a specific question about it. Do you think that Adam lived..what was it, about 930 years LITERALLY? And what about Methusela? 969?

Were those true? I think they were, but my friend thinks it wasn't.

See, recently, I've been getting into more "new testament" things, but I have gotten rusty on learning things about the Old Testament.

I look forward to the answer.

David

Dear David:
Your question was not for me but i got to say something.

I think those were true. I believe that every word in the Bible is true and none are false. Those who do not accept that the whole Bible is true,then they not accepting Christ either.

As we read: John 1
In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2 The same was in the beginning with God.

God Bless
Ramon

Ramon,

Does Jesus really want you to cut your own hand off if it causes you to sin? Can't we just, you know, stop sinning?

Was the world, and all it contains, really created in seven days?

Two problems with biblical literalism are that it can sometimes fail to accomodate changes in our understanding of the natural world and that it makes it harder to convince rationalists of the truth of the Gospel.

I also do not agree with your conflating of Christ and Bible. "The Word" in John 1 is a reference to Christ, not to scripture. Your not suggesting that the Bible is God are you? You wouldn't worship a Bible would you?

Peace

Dear Fidens:

You said "Does Jesus really want you to cut your own hand off if it causes you to sin? Can't we just, you know, stop sinning?"

He does mean to actually do it.The whole context of Christ's command was to show us that, if physical life is worth such drastic action, then spiritual life is worth even more. And we cant stop Sinning, we just Humans, we not Perfect. But we must try not to do it again.

You said "Was the world, and all it contains, really created in seven days"
Yes if we believe that the Bible is the word of God then its true. If we dont think its true then we calling God a Lier.
You said "Your not suggesting that the Bible is God are you? You wouldn't worship a Bible would you?"
No. Do you believe that the Bible is the word of God? Therefore cannot be false?

God Bless
Ramon

Nice response Ramon. I agree.

To whom it concerns in Christ Jesus
(from Daniel)

Wow, I must say after reading everyones comments for the last hour or so I'm both much encouraged and disheartened in the lack of unity in Christ.
(Ephesians 4:3 Make every effort to keep the unity of the Spirit through the bond of peace.) One's first instinct in the flesh is to quickly try to correct one another with the Word (2 Timothy 3:16) as to justify one's own belief according to the Truths that have been revealed according to each ones faith. I don't recall who quoted the verse in there comments but I believe it was right on the money so to speak when they quoted Romans 14:22So whatever you believe about these things keep between yourself and God. Blessed is the man who does not condemn himself by what he approves. 23But the man who has doubts is condemned if he eats, because his eating is not from faith; and everything that does not come from faith is sin.

So I'm inspired that much of this dicussion has produced much reading of God's Word, which is producing faith, but still saddened by the division it easily produces. What should our attitude be toward others? If you have a belief contrary to mine and I to yours then by design this should produce a longing to search the scriptures. As (proverbs 25:2 It is the glory of God to conceal a matter, But the glory of kings is to search out a matter.) But as I quoted earlier be careful and diligent to keep the oneness of the Spirit in the uniting bond of peace. (Eph 4:3) And we know from Eph. 2:14 that Christ Himself is our peace. Have you experienced Christ as such a One as peace. Christ gives me the Love to fellowship with all who call apon His name, whatever their doctrinal beliefs might be. All by disign that the Body of Christ would be as diverse as we are, making fellowship both sweet and convicting us at times to draw near to the Lord of peace that we might have unity with such a person. I end this comment with some verses that you will either say "amen" to or "huh" with conviction by the spirit, in either case "the Word of God is living and active and sharper than any two-edged sword, and piercing as far as the division of soul and spirit, of both joints and marrow, and able to judge the thoughts and intentions of the heart." Hebrews 4:12

Colossians 2
6So then, just as you received Christ Jesus as Lord, continue to live in him, 7rooted and built up in him, strengthened in the faith as you were taught, and overflowing with thankfulness.
8See to it that no one takes you captive through hollow and deceptive philosophy, which depends on human tradition and the basic principles of this world rather than on Christ.
(all of Colossians 2 in context for the wise)

1 Timothy 1
5 But the goal of our instruction is love from a pure heart and a good conscience and a sincere faith.
6 For some men, straying from these things, have turned aside to fruitless discussion,
7 wanting to be teachers of the Law, even though they do not understand either what they are saying or the matters about which they make confident assertions.
8But we know that the Law is good, if one uses it lawfully,
9realizing the fact that law is not made for a righteous person, but for those who are lawless and rebellious, for the ungodly and sinners, for the unholy and profane, for those who kill their fathers or mothers, for murderers
10 and immoral men and homosexuals and kidnappers and liars and perjurers, and whatever else is contrary to sound teaching,

(The following is a little repeative but seems to hit the hammer on the nail so to speak as to God's heart with His diverse Church)
Romans 14:13 Therefore let us stop passing judgment on one another. Instead, make up your mind not to put any stumbling block or obstacle in your brother's way. 14As one who is in the Lord Jesus, I am fully convinced that no food[b] is unclean in itself. But if anyone regards something as unclean, then for him it is unclean. 15If your brother is distressed because of what you eat, you are no longer acting in love. Do not by your eating destroy your brother for whom Christ died. 16Do not allow what you consider good to be spoken of as evil. 17For the kingdom of God is not a matter of eating and drinking, but of righteousness, peace and joy in the Holy Spirit, 18because anyone who serves Christ in this way is pleasing to God and approved by men.
19Let us therefore make every effort to do what leads to peace and to mutual edification. 20Do not destroy the work of God for the sake of food. All food is clean, but it is wrong for a man to eat anything that causes someone else to stumble. 21It is better not to eat meat or drink wine or to do anything else that will cause your brother to fall.
22So whatever you believe about these things keep between yourself and God. Blessed is the man who does not condemn himself by what he approves. 23But the man who has doubts is condemned if he eats, because his eating is not from faith; and everything that does not come from faith is sin.

In Christ,
Daniel

Daniel,

Then how do we preach to people of other faiths?

I just came to a realization. If Sola Scriptura isn't Biblical, then what is the Catholic interpreation of Isaiah 8:20

"To the law and to the testimony: if they speak not accoording to this word, it is becuase there is no light in them"

So pretty much, if what you say isn't in the Bible, isn't it wrong? Or better yet, if it contradicts the Bible, is it wrong?

Daniel,

I would have to disagree with you on what is appropriate and what isn't in terms of sharing the Gospel.

Was it not our Lord who said...

"Do not think that I have come to bring peace on earth; I have not come to bring peace, but a sword." - Mt 10:34

And then again...

Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you... - Mt 28:19-20

As heated as some of these discussions might get I believe we are all here in sincerity...it is our love for Christ and for one another that we attempt to tackle these difficult "issues." If we all kept dancing around the "issues" that divide us nothing would ever be accomplished and we would all remain in a state of relativism.

We are simply seeking out our brothers and sisters in Christ who we believe have gone astray and attempting to lead them to a logical and reasonable acknowledgement of the Truth. Many of the challenges posed by our Protestant brothers and sisters, as well as those of other religious beliefs, have provided us with an opportunity to gain a greater understanding of what they believe but, more importantly, a greater appreciation for our Catholic Faith through study and prayer.

I hope that you will continue to visit us and participate in our discussions...out of love for the brethren.

In Christ,
Joe

Greetings David and Joe

2 Timothy 3:16-17 probably says it the best, (16 All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness, 17so that the man of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work.)

And we know from Ephesians 2:10 what good work (10 For we are God's workmanship, created in Christ Jesus to do good works, which God prepared in advance for us to do.)

David, from these verses and many more I gather that in order to truly see change in others around us we have to be changed ourselves by the Word, "trained in righteous" to me means walking out your faith in the good works God has already prepared for you. And by doing so your faith will grow, your light will shine into those dark places in others lives and as 1 John 5-7 (5 This is the message we have heard from him and declare to you: God is light; in him there is no darkness at all. 6 If we claim to have fellowship with him yet walk in the darkness, we lie and do not live by the truth. 7 But if we walk in the light, as he is in the light, we have fellowship with one another, and the blood of Jesus, his Son, purifies us from all sin.)

Walking in the light in its simpliest state means living according to the Word in all areas of our lifes, confessing to one another our sins and struggles, keep each other accountable, and studying the Word together with the vision to gain more of Christ.

I guess that's what I'm getting at with my last comment and that is that we need to be aware of our vision or goal in teaching, correcting, rebuking and training in righteousness. Is our goal that we and other would gain more of Christ or does our self live once again need to be put to death in our comments to others.

I must confess that I've been guilty of an unpure heart many times in the past, but through God's grace and much prayer prior to a comment I've been able to see the futility of my efforts apart from God's drawing and His "prepared good works."

We can see this in the gospels before the Lord had a full day of sermons and healings and fed thousands He also spent a good portion of morning before the sun came up in prayer to God.

Joe, the sword in Matthew 10:34, I believe, was refering to was the sword of the Spirit in Hebrews 4:12 which is able to divide soul and spirit. Now we are talking once again what the Lord is doing after we have spoken His Word. Where as heated discussions more often then not find themselves involving interpretation and opinions which do not bring change as we see in Hebrews. The soul (mind, emotion, will) of one person can not help divide the soul of another from their spirit. That being one goal of God to restore man back to His first state he was created where the Spirit of God and spirit of man is one new man and the soul is simply carrying out what God has already planned. But as we know because of the fall Sin has caused the soul and spirit to be joined and even after a person is saved there is still a constant need to take up the cross of Christ and follow Him, meaning to put to death the deeds of the flesh (soul) and live by the spirit. Living out the victory the Lord has already accomplished in defeating Satan on the Cross.(Several verses can be provided, but this should be common doctrine in any faith)

David, here's another great verse to encourage us in our walk.

1 Corinthians 1:18 For the message of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God.

The power of God is found in the message of the cross. This tells me that if I'm not seeing change in others, if there's no power in the words, then the message that I'm sending as I live is not that of the cross, "death in me, but life in you," and "It is no longer I that live but Christ who lives in me."

How about a greater appreciation for Christ. Only then is the "us" taken away and Christ truly becomes the center for all fellowship. For Christ is not found with logic or reason, but with a broken and contrite heart as psalms 51:17 teaches us. If there is anything I've learned to be true in my 10 plus years as a follower of Christ is that ones can not be pursaded with our logic and reason to come to the full knowledge of Christ, who is our way, truth and life, but only through revelation that God reveals to them and then draws them. We might plant and we might water, but God causes the growth. 1 Corinthians 3:7

Well I hope this encourages some as I know it has for me. If our comments encourage one another to dig into God's Word and search the mysterys of Christ then amen, Christ is glorified. I just hope each one of us examines our hearts as to the goal of our words before hitting the post button. I know the Lord is.

In Christ,
Daniel

I'm so amazed at what I've been reading.The only one who has got it right is David.God Bless You David. There is no point in arguing over it with anyone. Stick to the scriptures and endure to the end and Jesus will count you faithful to Him.
I believe that the Papacy is the beast. They will weasle there way around it, but in time it will be revealed to the world beyond a doubt.By the way its Sabbath Saturday and I was studying scriptures when I ran across this sight. Happy Sabbath all!!!!!Resting on the same day that God did at creation is such a wonderful blessing.You should deny yourself all your worldly points of view and try it!!!!The Holy Spirit lead me to the truth about the Sabbath and I accepted with faith.
God will not condem me because I obey all His commands. It shows that he can count on me to be faithful to the end. By the way FOX's Book of Martyers really explains what the early Roman church did to all Christians who didn't go along with their false, man made teachings which contradict the bible terribly. Us who remain absolutely faithful to God will be persicuted by those who don't. WE must be strong and firm in our faith. It will pay off when we spend eternity with Jesus face to face. God Bless You All!!!

" Or haven't you read in the Law that on the Sabbath the priests in the temple desecrate the day and yet are innocent?"(Matt. 12:5)

Then he said to them, "The Sabbath was made for man, not man for the Sabbath. (Mark 2:27)

Some of the Pharisees said, "This man is not from God, for he does not keep the Sabbath." But others asked, "How can a sinner do such miraculous signs?" So they were divided. (John 9:16)

"Therefore do not let anyone judge you by what you eat or drink, or with regard to a religious festival, a New Moon celebration or a Sabbath day."(Colossians 2:16)

I guess those who don't keep the Sabbath are in good company if the Lord Jesus didn't. After all He called it "man's day" and that He was Lord of the Sabbath. I believe the Lord is saying essentially that whatever day you hold as your Sabbath, whether man's day or the Lord' day, let it be unto the Lord and let yourself be fully convinced of what you believe and don't drag others through the mud for whom Christ died by what you believe. Certainly hasn't been any unity through Sabbath discussions even if the Word of God is searched faithfully because of it. With the wrong motives of not wanting to see Christ and know Him, many can be led astray in endless doctrines. God Bless, Daniel.

Faith4ever,

Yes!

Someone finally goes by the Bible!! What religion are you right now? And what were you before?

This is so cool! :)

PS I'm just sort of excited. I was just baptized.

David

Faith4forever,

Since you ONLY go by the Bible...please show me where it states that the papacy is the beast ;-)

Secondly, since you obey all of God's commands please show me where He (Jesus) commanded us ONLY to adher to the Scriptures for authoritative truth.

Third, since you obey all of God's commands...I assume that you "eat His flesh and drink His blood"...as He commanded us (John 6).

Finally, I've never heard of Fox's Book of Martyers...but how does he know what happened in the early church? What are his references? I've been to the catacombs in Rome and from all archeological evidence the early Christians were distinctly Catholic.

David, glad to hear you finally were baptized. May the grace of Christ, now lead you to the fullness of truth.

In Christ,
Joe

Joe,

Early Christians were not distinctly Catholic, i dont know where you came up with that. Early Christians according to the bible were distinctly Jewish. They followed Christ and the commandments.

Isaiah 8:20 "to the law and to the testimony, if he speaks not according to this word, there is no light in him"

I'm not sure why the Old Testament doesn't apply to Catholics, because every time i try to use it you disapprove. The law is the first five books, and the testimony is the rest of scripture.

The papacy IS the beast if you look at the Revelation. The revelation is prophecy. The other beast is also the United States. It looked like a lamb but spoke as a dragon. That symbolized the US, they started out good, but the way they enforce, rule, and go about doing things gives them those characteristics. Also, it said they came out of the land, meaning a place that was inhabited. The sea represents a place where there are already people living.

The Pope calls himself the Vicar of Christ. If you go by definition, vicar means acting in place of or representing.

I see similarities in this and the beast who is trying to replace Christ, to deceive people. I don't think the pope is trying to do that, but the position itself is the beast, and will be the beast in the Last days.

Revelation 13:15 says that the people who will not worship the beast will be killed. I'm not sure who in the world has that power besides the papacy. It sure isn't the United States. Our country is already over 8 trillion dollars in debt. The Pope is a very powerful worldwide religious leader.

In revelation, there is a dragon, the beast, and the false prophet. The dragon is satan, the beast is the papacy, and the false prophet is the United States.

2 Thess. 2:3,4
"Let no man deceive you by any means: for that day shall not come, except there come a falling away first, and that man of sin be revealsed, the son of perdition; Who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped; so that he as God sitteth in the temple of God, shewing himself that he is God"

The Pope is the highest seat of religious authority according to Catholics.

Of course, it didn't just say "the papacy is the beast". The papacy wasn't around when the Bible was written. But, if you know how to interpret Bible prophecy, you will know the answers.

Oh yeah, and the woman in revelation is not Mary. It represents any church, the remnant Church.

There are also two different women in the Revelation. There is one in purple riding the beast. She is the defiled, corrupted Church. The other woman is the remnant of God. It isn't a specific named church, it is just the people of God.

David

Dear Joe:

I want to ask you a question. Do you believe that very doctrine that is taught in any church should be base on the Bible? For example if a man in a chruch made a doctrine up by any reason and its wrong when compare to the bible would you follow him and what he believes?

Dear David:
Im glad you got baptise, praise the lord, i always get happy when people get baptise. Im happy for you and i hope that God guide you every step of your life.

God Bless
Ramon

David,

You never cease to amaze me ;-) So the early Christians were distinctly Jewish and followed Christ... I don't need to point out the problem with this statement do I? Well for the sake of this discussion I will. Unlike most Jews, who refused to acknowledge Christ as the Messiah, the Early Church...

devoted themselves to the apostles' teaching and fellowship, to the breaking of bread and the prayers. - Acts 2:42

In terms of your interpretation of Revelations...how do you think early Christians interpreted it...since the Papacy (which you claim didn't exist) and the US (which obviously didn't exist) are the beasts.... enough said...

In Christ,
Joe

Ramon,

I believe, with the Catholic Church, that:

107 The inspired books teach the truth. "Since therefore all that the inspired authors or sacred writers affirm should be regarded as affirmed by the Holy Spirit, we must acknowledge that the books of Scripture firmly, faithfully, and without error teach that truth which God, for the sake of our salvation, wished to see confided to the Sacred Scriptures."72

108 Still, the Christian faith is not a "religion of the book." Christianity is the religion of the "Word" of God, a word which is "not a written and mute word, but the Word is incarnate and living".73 If the Scriptures are not to remain a dead letter, Christ, the eternal Word of the living God, must, through the Holy Spirit, "open [our] minds to understand the Scriptures."74

109 In Sacred Scripture, God speaks to man in a human way. To interpret Scripture correctly, the reader must be attentive to what the human authors truly wanted to affirm, and to what God wanted to reveal to us by their words.75

110 In order to discover the sacred authors' intention, the reader must take into account the conditions of their time and culture, the literary genres in use at that time, and the modes of feeling, speaking and narrating then current. "For the fact is that truth is differently presented and expressed in the various types of historical writing, in prophetical and poetical texts, and in other forms of literary expression."76

111 But since Sacred Scripture is inspired, there is another and no less important principle of correct interpretation, without which Scripture would remain a dead letter. "Sacred Scripture must be read and interpreted in the light of the same Spirit by whom it was written."77

The Second Vatican Council indicates three criteria for interpreting Scripture in accordance with the Spirit who inspired it.78

112 1. Be especially attentive "to the content and unity of the whole Scripture". Different as the books which compose it may be, Scripture is a unity by reason of the unity of God's plan, of which Christ Jesus is the center and heart, open since his Passover.79

The phrase "heart of Christ" can refer to Sacred Scripture, which makes known his heart, closed before the Passion, as the Scripture was obscure. But the Scripture has been opened since the Passion; since those who from then on have understood it, consider and discern in what way the prophecies must be interpreted.80

113 2. Read the Scripture within "the living Tradition of the whole Church". According to a saying of the Fathers, Sacred Scripture is written principally in the Church's heart rather than in documents and records, for the Church carries in her Tradition the living memorial of God's Word, and it is the Holy Spirit who gives her the spiritual interpretation of the Scripture (". . . according to the spiritual meaning which the Spirit grants to the Church"81).

114 3. Be attentive to the analogy of faith.82 By "analogy of faith" we mean the coherence of the truths of faith among themselves and within the whole plan of Revelation.
- Catechism of the Catholic Church

In Christ,
Joe

Dear Joe:
I would have to agree with david, Early on people were not Cathoics, the bible tells us clear they were jew and from there we can conclude that different religion spark out, Cathoics, SDA, Pentecostal, Baptise, you name it.
The Papacy is the beast. Believe it or not.
The pope is the beast spoken of in Revelation 13. Verse 1 says that he wears crowns and has “blasphemous names” written on his head. Verse 18 says that the numerical value of his name adds up to 666. The pope’s official title in Latin is Vicarius Filii Dei (Vicar Son of God). If you add that up using Roman numerals, you get 666. The pope’s tiara is emblazoned with this title, formed by diamonds and other jewels.
"And I beheld another beast coming up out of the earth; and he had two horns like a lamb, and he spake as a dragon. And he exerciseth all the power of the first beast before him, and causeth the earth and them which dwell therein to worship the first beast, [Revelation 13:11-12] This is the Second Beast of Revelation 13, and he is following Antichrist, who is the First Beast. This Second Beast is popularly known as the False Prophet, a deceptive "Christian" religious leader who will actively support the activities of Antichrist. Notice, this Scripture says exactly that. The False Prophet will exercise the same occult power as the First Beast [Antichrist], and he uses this power to convince the peoples of the world to worship Antichrist.

"And he causeth all, both small and great, rich and poor, free and bond, to receive a mark in their right hand, or in their foreheads: And that no man might buy or sell, save he that had the mark, or the name of the beast, or the number of his name. Here is wisdom. Let him that hath understanding count the number of the beast: for it is the number of a man; and his number is Six hundred threescore and six. (666) " [Revelation 13:16-18]

Most people do not realize that it is the False Prophet who forces everyone in the world to accept the Mark of the Beast, not the Antichrist. Further, the context of the assignment of the Number of the Beast, 666, is such that it identifies the False Prophet as much as it does Antichrist. In fact, this occult number, 666, applies equally to both Antichrist and False Prophet.

Therefore, it is highly relevant when the future False Prophet carries out a public demonstration of receiving a mark on his forehead. Let us examine now this prophetic Mark of the Beast. From this Scripture, Revelation 13:16-18, Bible scholars have been able to deduce that the world will be shaped in very particular manner just prior to the arising of Antichrist. Pope John the II recieve a mark in his forhead, i dont know the exact detail of it but that what happend. I think it was the Pope's public acceptance of the Shiva Mark. Most people has arise and said that the date that Pope John the II is the mark of beast.
The date and time of death of pope John Paul II was 9:37 PM. April 2, 2005 (April being the 4th month) Run the numbers and we get: 9 x 37 x 4/2 = 666. Of course this ignores the year, 2005. However, it also works with the year added: 9 x 37 x 4/2 x 200 x 5 = 666,000. What do cathoics say to this, i want to know Joe.

God Bless

Yeah, early Christians WERE Jewish. when they accepted Christ they became Christian, not Catholic.

And again, on Revelation, of course those things, the Papacy and the US, didn't exist.

Almost the entire book is symbolic and ALL of it is prophecy.

Those things SYMBOLIZE the united states and Papacy. And prophecy meaning, you know, in the FUTURE. I don't know how they interpreted it back then. It must have been tough, I know, but it was written as a book of prophecy nonetheless.

David

David and Ramon,

Guys...please. Let's try to remain rational...

Ramon, the numbers game is simply a pathetic ploy used by people who lack the ability to judge a man/woman by the fruits that they bear (as Christ told us to do)...why don't you try to find ONE thing in the writings or teachings of Pope John Paul II that is contrary to the teachings of Jesus Christ. I doubt many Protestants would have the nerve to question his commitment to Jesus Christ. Many Protestant and Jewish leaders mourned with the Catholic Church his passing, recognizing in him a witness to Christ and the Gospel.

David, your interpretation of Revelations is just that...your own. Why don't you provide us with some reputatable references that support your claims. Please provide at least a few historical references. By the way, it is foolish to think that a certain book, namely Revelations, is strictly applicable to "our times." There is plenty of sound biblical exegisis out there on Revelations. I recommend you look into it.

In terms of what early followers of Christ were called, we know historically and factually that the term "Catholic" was used as early as the 1st Century. Yet it is not simply a matter of "titles" but beliefs held to. The beliefs of the early followers of Christ were distinctly Catholic. Please provide factual, historical proofs that they weren't....

In Christ,
Joe

Dear Joe:

You said "Ramon, the numbers game is simply a pathetic ploy used by people who lack the ability to judge a man/woman by the fruits that they bear (as Christ told us to do)...why don't you try to find ONE thing in the writings or teachings of Pope John Paul II that is contrary to the teachings of Jesus Christ. I doubt many Protestants would have the nerve to question his commitment to Jesus Christ. Many Protestant and Jewish leaders mourned with the Catholic Church his passing, recognizing in him a witness to Christ and the Gospel."
Im not trying to question Pope John II commitment with Jesus Christ. Im well aware of his good deeds on earth and his commitment to christ. But with all of these going around you just got to wonder........... No one can question his commitment to jesus christ because we do not know whats inside his heart and what he thinking only God can. (when he was alive, God Rest his soul).

God bless
Ramon

Ramon,

If you are "well aware of his good deeds on earth and his commitment to christ" why even bring it up? Why in the world even imply that he is the "beast?" Did not our Lord say,

"For no good tree bears bad fruit, nor again does a bad tree bear good fruit; for each tree is known by its own fruit. For figs are not gathered from thorns, nor are grapes picked from a bramble bush. The good man out of the good treasure of his heart produces good, and the evil man out of his evil treasure produces evil; for out of the abundance of the heart his mouth speaks. - Luke 6:43-45

In Christ,
Joe

Dear Joe:
When i said " "well aware of his good deeds on earth and his commitment to christ" i meant i know that he did good deeds. Do you not know that jesus said that everybody will say Amen praise God and not be a true christian.His commitment to christ was shown on the outside but christ looks within the hearts of men and women. Was he really connected to God within his heart and mind?, we both cannot answer this. And calling him the beast, well they are alot of these that points him being the beast, but i wont go back to that again. Right now i dont agree or disagree with this. Im kind in the middle, but there are things that protray him as the beast. But anyway lets move on. I will read about him some more with that book you told me to read.

Also do you disagree in the fact that they should be a women pope, or i dont know what a name for a women pope. Alot of cathoics disagree with this. Joe is this possible.

God Bless
Ramon

dear Joe:
I think is either a women Priest or a women pope, i dont know which one it was.

God bless
Ramon

Ramon,

Did you even read the Scripture passage I quoted above?

Yes...only God knows the heart, but "the fruit" reveals the heart as Luke 6:45 CLEARLY states. If his heart wasn't good then his works would not have been good. I am certain that John Paul II is now with Christ in heaven and I am confident that one day, in the near future, he will be canonized a saint.

I'm not sure what you are asking about in terms of a woman priest or pope? If you are asking where I stand on the ordination of women to the priesthood, I stand with the Church. It is never going to happen as both Pope John Paul II and Pope Benedict XVI have made explicitly clear.

In Christ,
Joe

Greetings brothers and sisters in Christ Jesus,
(from Daniel)
Interesting discusions on both sides. One side has one conviction and the other another. Both maybe well thought out and maybe even believed by faith through the hearing of the message of Christ. But in all of this dare I ask the motive and goal when we come together in the Lords name. May the Lord open the eyes of our heart that we may see our own motive for sharing our convictions. I remember when a close brother once expressed his heart on this matter of fellowship with other believers. It included two very important biblical principles, first one being only to give Christ to others in your speaking. This brother explained how if we only come together to talk about the church or doctine or the things of the world but never touch on and give each other Christ in our speaking with them then we cheat that person from what they really need which is more life, more truth and more direction (the way). I'm sure you've felt that way at some point in your walk with the Lord. Just coming away from a conversation or e-mail and feeling drained in spirit. We are all looking for fellowship, a commonality, a oneness and unity that Christ has done on the cross. But this fellowship Christ offers is not doctrine or that of prophecies or traditions of men, but rather Himself Christ and Him crucified. I love what the apostle Paul said in 1 Corinthians 2:2 "For I resolved to know nothing while I was with you except Jesus Christ and him crucified." and backing up in 1 Corinthians 1:18 we read that the message of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to those who are being saved it is the POWER of God. Knowing the power of God wouldn't it be wise as stewards of the gospel to only impart that life changing power which only comes through the cross. Maybe we first need to pray and ask the Lord to impart wisdom through reading His word on what the message of the cross really means. Sometimes this cross we are asked to take up daily is dying to our opinions and convictions for the sake of the fellowship and wanting to impart Christ and Him crucified. Think about it, are the words that we speak imparting life eternal or death and separation? Apply that principle to all who outwardly show good deeds. Is there truely unity in our message or is does the veil still remain at the reading of the law as read in 2 Corinthians 3:15-18. The bible tells us that there will be one sitting on the throne in the temple that brings outward peace for a time and this will be the antichrist and he will lead many astray. No doubt someone who can harmonize the scriptures to seemly unity many so that they fall away from the simplicity of knowing Christ and Him crucified. And many will say on the day of judgement "Lord, Lord," and God will say "Depart from me evil doers for I never knew you." We all will say yes want to know Christ? And moreover we want to be known by Christ? But what path has God chosen for this knowing of His only begotten savior of the world and beloved son, the path of cross(His power portrayed through this ultimate act of love). This should be the heart of every believer, to refresh others and to be refreshed with a newness of Christ in our speaking. Hopefully this principle has been revealed to you by the Lord and you are faithfully obeying Him as He asks you to hold nothing from this world and to take up our cross and follow Him. And the second closely related and probably of greatiest importance is to only give to others out of the overflow of Christ. Biblically speaking if Christ is the river of life and we have a well in our spirit, then we need to be filled up with Christ before we can overflow as fountains and impart life to others. Otherwise, I would be recieving fellowship not from God, but from man's effort. Whereas the overflow is not contrived or forced but rather released as others impart Christ into your own well