Catechisms

Pharisee followers are Roman Catholic today. Legalistic and power driven.

 

The Scriptures themselves testify that the word is God is not confined to the written word...

1 Thessalonians 2:23 ---> And we also thank God constantly for this, that when you received the word of God, which you heard from us, you accepted it not as the word of men but as what it really is, the word of God, which is at work in you believers.


2 Thessalonians 2:15 ---> So then, brethren, stand firm and hold to the traditions which you were taught, whether by word of mouth or by letter from us.


Luke 10:16 ---> Whoever listens to you listens to me, and whoever rejects you rejects me, and whoever rejects me rejects the one who sent me.


Hebrews 13:7 ---> Remember your leaders, those who spoke the word of God to you...

 

Sure all scripture equals only scripture.

God doesn't speak to new people in authoritative fashion so that new revelation is being created. Or do you support the Quran and the Book of Mormon as a part of the Canon?

There is zero scripture that declares the leader of the church at Rome as being authoritative and the spokesperson of God. That title was directly usurped from the pagan priests at Rome who held the title before Christianity was made the State Church at Rome. When the church at Rome got that power it took the pagan title to gain more control. It is parallel to the Pharisees and Sadducees gaining political power in Judea. Empty of the Holy Spirit, it pressed on as a vessel from hell.

 

Sorry, but ALL does not mean ONLY.

Do you have access to a dictionary?

Non-sequitur. (Another one of your straw man.)

Who does Scripture call the protos?

 

[Mat 5:24 NASB] 24 leave your offering there before the altar and go; first[G4413] be reconciled to your brother, and then come and present your offering.

• being reconciled

[Mat 6:33 NASB] 33 "But seek first[G4413] His kingdom and His righteousness, and all these things will be added to you.

• His kingdom and His righteousness

[Mat 7:5 NASB] 5 "You hypocrite, first[G4413] take the log out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to take the speck out of your brother's eye.

• taking the log out of your eye

[Mat 8:21 NASB] 21 Another of the disciples said to Him, "Lord, permit me first[G4413] to go and bury my father."

• burying your father

[Mat 10:2 NASB] 2 Now the names of the twelve apostles are these: The first,[G4413] Simon, who is called Peter, and Andrew his brother; and James the son of Zebedee, and John his brother;

• Simon

[Mat 12:29, 45 NASB] 29 "Or how can anyone enter the strong man's house and carry off his property, unless he first[G4413] binds the strong [man?] And then he will plunder his house. ... 45 "Then it goes and takes along with it seven other spirits more wicked than itself, and they go in and live there; and the last state of that man becomes worse than the first.[G4413] That is the way it will also be with this evil generation."

• binding the strong man
• having an evil spirit

[Mat 13:30 NASB] 30 'Allow both to grow together until the harvest; and in the time of the harvest I will say to the reapers, "First[G4413] gather up the tares and bind them in bundles to burn them up; but gather the wheat into my barn."'"

• gathering up the tares

[Mat 17:10, 27 NASB] 10 And His disciples asked Him, "Why then do the scribes say that Elijah must come first?"[G4413] ... 27 "However, so that we do not offend them, go to the sea and throw in a hook, and take the first[G4413] fish that comes up; and when you open its mouth, you will find a shekel. Take that and give it to them for you and Me."

• Elijah
• a fish

[Mat 19:30 NASB] 30 "But many [who are] first[G4413] will be last; and [the] last, first.[G4413]

• the last

[Mat 20:8, 10, 16, 27 NASB] 8 "When evening came, the owner of the vineyard said to his foreman, 'Call the laborers and pay them their wages, beginning with the last [group] to the first.'[G4413] ... 10 "When those [hired] first[G4413] came, they thought that they would receive more; but each of them also received a denarius. ... 16 "So the last shall be first,[G4413] and the first[G4413] last." ... 27 and whoever wishes to be first[G4413] among you shall be your slave;

• laborers
• those hired
• the last
• your slave

[Mat 21:28, 31, 36 NASB] 28 "But what do you think? A man had two sons, and he came to the first[G4413] and said, 'Son, go work today in the vineyard.' ... 31 "Which of the two did the will of his father?" They said, "The first."[G4413] Jesus said to them, "Truly I say to you that the tax collectors and prostitutes will get into the kingdom of God before you. ... 36 "Again he sent another group of slaves larger than the first;[G4413] and they did the same thing to them.

• a son
• tax collectors and prostitutes (via Christ's analogy)

[Mat 22:25, 38 NASB] 25 "Now there were seven brothers with us; and the first[G4413] married and died, and having no children left his wife to his brother; ... 38 "This is the great and foremost[G4413] commandment.

• a dead brother
• a commandment

[Mat 23:26 NASB] 26 "You blind Pharisee, first[G4413] clean the inside of the cup and of the dish, so that the outside of it may become clean also.

• cleaning the inside of a cup

[Mat 26:17 NASB] 17 Now on the first[G4413] [day] of Unleavened Bread the disciples came to Jesus and asked, "Where do You want us to prepare for You to eat the Passover?"

• feast of Unleavened Bread (implied 'day')

[Mat 27:64 NASB] 64 "Therefore, give orders for the grave to be made secure until the third day, otherwise His disciples may come and steal Him away and say to the people, 'He has risen from the dead,' and the last deception will be worse than the first."[G4413]

• deception

That is just the Gospel of Matthew.
A lot of things and people and actions come first ... it all depends on the context.
[that was one of those answers that has a double meaning ... snicker.]

 

Let me rephrase my question in the context of the previous poster's objection to an individual being an authoritative leader and spokesperson for God...

---> Which Apostle does Scripture call the protos?


Let's establish and identify this person and then we can see if this person truly was an authoritative leader and spokesperson for God.

 

We are taught the highest priority is Love. Not Spiritual Hitler.

 

"Sure all scripture equals only scripture. "
You should at least finish high school.

 

It's hard to take these folks seriously with statements like that.

 

Yep, all scripture means all scripture.

There is no verse that says "All edicts from the Church at Rome are equal to God's word."

Sola Scriptura is the final authority...above Roman Church edicts.

 

Are you calling the Roman Church, "Spiritual Hitler?" Good for you if you are. The genocide the Roman Church has enacted on humanity is Hitler-like.

 

Correct, ALL Scripture means ALL Scripture.

ALL Scripture does not mean ONLY Scripture.

The Protestant doctrine is sola Scriptura, not omnis Scriptura.

Straw man. (No one has posited this.)

Special pleading fallacy (double standard).

To avoid this logical fallacy —> You must post the verse which states sola Scriptura is the final authority.

If you cannot, you have put your own edict above that of Scripture and thereby fail and violate your own rule.

 

Yes, "Scripture says more than one thing about that stone God laid in Zion.", and you stayed focused in the preachings of the ancient prophets of the LORD about the Stone. That is good, very good.

But if you look well my post, what the own Stone testified through my post it is a better testimony than yours, because what I wrote was/is the own Stone who is speaking from he himself through my post, as follows:

Quoting my post above: "Jesus(the Stone) asked to the Jews: Did ye never read in the Scriptures? The Stone (JESUS speaking of he himself) which the builders rejected, the same is become the head of the corner: this is the Lord's doing, and it is marvellous in our eyes?
Therefore say I unto you, The kingdom of God shall be taken from you, and given to a nation bringing forth the fruits thereof. And whosoever shall fall on this Stone shall be broken: but on whomsoever it shall fall, it will grind him to powder" .

As you and all can see, I quoted what the own Stone said of he himself, understand? In other words, the testimony of the own Stone about he himself in my post, is better than your testimony about Him when you make a mere reference about the prophecies of the prophets that would fulfil after many many time.

Well, God, who at sundry times and in divers manners spake in time past unto the fathers by the prophets, has in these last days (last two days or last two thousand years)spoken unto us by His Son-the Stone of corner-, whom He hath appointed heir of all things, by whom also He made the worlds; Who being the brightness of His glory, and the EXPRESS image of His person, and upholding all things by the Word of His power, when He had by Himself purged our sins, sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high: (Hebrew 1:v.1-3)

 

We don't believe God grants a particular spiritual white skin to some and a damned black skin to the rest.

We don't believe God is EVIL who ordain's and decree's the rape of children for his glory.

Some of which GOD has ALWAYS HATED, Since before they were born he hated them, he is happy for His glory that they should be tortured eternity, its music to his ears.

We don't teach that God has always hated a person even before he creates them, and that he created them to be hated. And why does he hate them? Unconditional. No reason other then a hateful god's pleasure.

My father is not a hateful God. My Father wants what is best for everyone. My father follows the exact character of Jesus Christ.

You hate finding out God loves everyone, because you are a hateful person.

 

There is no need to directly quote the words Sola Scriptura in the Bible, just as there is no need to find the word Trinity in the Bible.

2 Timothy 3:16-17 All Scripture is breathed out by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, that the man of God may be complete, equipped for every good work.

2 Peter 3:15-18 And count the patience of our Lord as salvation, just as our beloved brother Paul also wrote to you according to the wisdom given him, as he does in all his letters when he speaks in them of these matters. There are some things in them that are hard to understand, which the ignorant and unstable twist to their own destruction, as they do the other Scriptures. You therefore, beloved, knowing this beforehand, take care that you are not carried away with the error of lawless people and lose your own stability. But grow in the grace and knowledge of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. To him be the glory both now and to the day of eternity. Amen.

Revelation 22:18-19 I warn everyone who hears the words of the prophecy of this book: if anyone adds to them, God will add to him the plagues described in this book, and if anyone takes away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God will take away his share in the tree of life and in the holy city, which are described in this book.

Sola Scriptura

Not once do we see Apostolic Succession. Not once do we see the Roman Church marked out as the sole church who rules them all (eerily like Sauron don't you think).

 

Your church just killed millions with no regard for them, as if they were animals. They supported the slave trade to South America and the Caribbean. They supported the hiding of Nazis in Argentina and approved of the slaughter of Jews.
Shall I go on to talk of the pedophile sodomites in your church?

 

I'm not asking for the words sola Scriptura. I'm asking for teaching affirming it (that the Scriptures are the final authority).

Unless you can post a verse from Scripture testifying to this, then it fails it's own test.

Nothing here about Scripture being the final authority.

Strike one.

Nothing here about Scripture being the final authority.

Strike two.

Nothing here about Scripture being the final authority.

Strike three.

Please post the verse affirming it. Thus far you are batting 0.0000.

Apostolic succession ---> "And it was known unto all the dwellers at Jerusalem; insomuch as that field is called in their proper tongue, Aceldama, that is to say, 'The field of blood.' For it is written in the book of Psalms, 'Let his habitation be desolate, and let no man dwell therein: and his bishoprick let another take.' Wherefore of these men which have companied with us all the time that the Lord Jesus went in and out among us, beginning from the baptism of John, unto that same day that he was taken up from us, must one be ordained to be a witness with us of his resurrection. And they appointed two, Joseph called Barsabas, who was surnamed Justus, and Matthias. And they prayed, and said, 'Thou, Lord, which knowest the hearts of all men, shew whether of these two thou hast chosen, that he may take part of this ministry and apostleship, from which Judas by transgression fell, that he might go to his own place.' And they gave forth their lots; and the lot fell upon Matthias; and he was numbered with the eleven apostles." - Acts 1:19-26


I have always maintained Protestantism is merely a hodge-podge of previously condemned heresies. Their anti-institutional model of succession is but another example, for the Gnostics rejected the concept of physical and individual lineages as being necessary. They beat the Protestants to the punch so to speak and were the first to advocate the concept of pneumatological / “invisible churches.” In order to combat this growing heretical sect, the post-Apostolic Church used their trump card: Appealing to their physical connection from Christ to themselves in order to demonstrate their faith as being the true representative of orthodox Christianity and thus as having valid orders. In other words, the faith can never be isolated and maintained apart from true Apostolic succession. Anything not part of this vine was the simplest litmus test for what was not authentic Christianity. The early Church could demonstrate this empirically, by simply pointing to the sees where the Apostles themselves had been active and who in turn chose men to succeed them in their work by the “laying on hands.” These sees became the reference points for orthodoxy and oversight (later dioceses) for the true faith and for valid orders to perpetuate the teaching and sanctifying via the sacraments which Christ instructed to continue.

Paradoxically, if the Protestant concept of Apostolic succession were true (that of simply teaching Apostolic doctrine), they would be obliged to submit to the one Apostolic see the early Church declared all sees must agree with: That of the Church of Rome. For by virtue of St. Peter, Rome was the standard for true and authentic Apostolic doctrine. The early Church used the Roman Church as the litmus test for what was true and authentic doctrine. St. Irenaeus in his defense of orthodoxy against the “pneumatological / invisible church” proponents of his time – the Gnostics - famously wrote all Churches must be in agreement with that of the Church of Rome. For Rome was the standard for authentic tradition and doctrine of the Christian faith. Even the first Christian historian, Eusebius, records his history of Apostolic succession beginning not in Jerusalem, but rather from Rome. Thus in the Church’s infancy, we see the Roman see as the place from whence pure doctrine is safeguarded and transmitted. It should also be noted that this acknowledgement of the primacy of the Church of Rome actually precedes the canon of the New Testament. In other words, the early Christians knew what see protected the doctrine of the faith before they knew what books were to be considered inspired Scripture. So, if the Protestants want to define Apostolic succession as merely the transmission of right doctrine, they should be looking to Rome instead of Wittenberg or Geneva!

If you want to see how the early Church safeguarded true Apostolic succession, one need simply read Canon 4 of the Council of Nicea, whereby the Fathers prescribe consecration procedures to ensure valid succession. This is still practiced today in the Catholic Churches.

 

Of course you reject scripture to affirm scripture.
Yet, there is no Apostolic Succession in scripture and you claim it. There is no perpetual virgin and yet you claim it. There is no veneration of relics and yet you claim it.
So many false teachings by your church with zero biblical support. The only means by which we can determine truth is to do what the Bereans are commended for doing...consult scripture as the final authority.

Since you reject scripture as the sole authority, what is your claim?

 

Re-read my post, as I added to it after you replied.

I posted an explicit example of Apostolic succession (that of Matthias).

I always find it humorous when Protestants try to lay claim to the Bereans, given that there has NEVER been a Protestant church in Berea (modern day Veria), EVER. Not even today. Furthermore, Berea was a Greek-speaking city and hence the Scriptures that they studied were logically the Greek Septuagint. According to Acts many Jews and Greeks believed as result of Paul and Silas' teaching. The fact the Greeks were part of the synagogue community further demonstrates that the Greek Scriptures were what the Bereans examined. In addition, Paul and Silas's preaching had to be extra-biblical teaching since the books of the New Testament had not been written, and a complete version of the New Testament was centuries away. The gospel that Paul and Silas preached was only available in spoken form. Thus the description in Acts shows the validity of the Septuagint Scriptures and the value of what Protestants would call extra-biblical teachings, both of which violate the modern doctrine of sola Scriptura. For example...

What Scriptures would the Bereans have found that confirmed what St. Paul was telling them - that a man named Jesus, who had died and rose from the dead and is the Christ - was true? (Be specific.)

Things to consider...

- Think about who the Bereans were. (Greek-speaking Jews)

- Think about what St. Paul was telling them about Jesus - that He is the Christ who suffered, died and rose again. (Acts 17:3)

- What prophesy in the Old Testament matches this - stating a man who claims to be the actual Son of God would suffer, be put to death and in the end be triumphant?

- What verse of from Scripture do the Jewish rulers quote to Jesus at the foot of the cross? (cf Luke 23:35)

Hint: It's not in the Protestant Bible!

 

Mattias equals apostolic succession? Hardly. God chose him. Just as God chose Paul without any of the other Apostles having a vote.
But, your pope was picked by the Roman government and your pope spent over a thousand years killing people and butchering anyone he of which he was afraid.
So, the scripture I shared places scripture over your pope and popes who falsely claimed God has picked them. No servant of God would do the wicked things the popes have done over the centuries.