1. Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

Sola Scriptura

Discussion in 'Other Christian Denominations' started by Dr. Walter, Jun 19, 2010.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
Top Posters
Page 4 of 16
  1. Thinkingstuff

    Thinkingstuff Active Member

    Joined:
    May 14, 2008
    Messages:
    8,248
    Likes Received:
    9
    Faith:
    Non Baptist Christian
     
    #61 Thinkingstuff, Jun 22, 2010
  2. DHK

    DHK <b>Moderator</b>

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2000
    Messages:
    37,982
    Likes Received:
    137
    You reject the Word of God.
    It is sanctified. It doesn't say you have to sanctify it. It is sanctified by the Word of God. It already has been sanctified. Why do you reject what the Word of God has already said.
    The Levitical Law was nailed to the cross.
    You are the one not using Acts 17:11--sola scriptura. Or do you confine yourself to just the NT in everything that you study these days. Is that your argument--never to use the NT at all?
    This has nothing to do with Catholicism. If it did we would only be eating fish on Fridays, not beef.
    Paul gave a vision to Peter and told him explicitly not to call unclean that which he has called clean. You reject God's Word. He wasn't just referring to people. This wasn't just an object lesson. He was referring to unclean animals in a sheet. It was a statement directly made to the animals in that sheet. You can close your eyes and say it had nothing to do with those animals. But you are wrong. It did. All animals are clean. That is what God told Peter, and that is what the Holy Spirit told Paul to write in the Scriptures that we have today. You are clearly in the wrong.
    You are adding to the Word of God.
    That statement is not there.
    You are the one that has failed, pulling Scripture out of context--using OT Scripture where it doesn't belong.
     
    #62 DHK, Jun 22, 2010
  3. DHK

    DHK <b>Moderator</b>

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2000
    Messages:
    37,982
    Likes Received:
    137
     
    #63 DHK, Jun 22, 2010
  4. Dr. Walter

    Dr. Walter New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2010
    Messages:
    5,623
    Likes Received:
    2
    I don't have much of a problem with most of what you have said. However, it is indisputable that there is "another gospel" which is "accursed" and there is no other gospel but that which Paul preached:

    Gal. 1:6 I marvel that ye are so soon removed from him that called you into the grace of Christ unto another gospel:
    7 Which is not another; but there be some that trouble you, and would pervert the gospel of Christ.
    8 But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed.
    9 As we said before, so say I now again, If any man preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed.

    Paul's gospe was the gospel "of Christ" not merely because it was about Christ but it was given to him by Christ (Gal. 1:10-12). It was the same gospel Christ gave the other twelve apostles (Gal. 2:9). It was the gospel "according to the Scriptures" (I Cor. 15:4-5) or Old Testament Scriptures. It was the gospel preached by all the prophets (Acts 26:22-23; 10:43; Heb. 4:2). Therefore it was the gospel Jesus preached himself (Jn. 3:16) as well as the gospel John the Baptist preached (Jn. 3:36) as any other gospel is "accursed."

    The "gospel" of Rome is "another gospel" and Paul says that those who preach are to be regarded as "accursed" (Gal. 1:8-9). Hence, you cannot be a "true" church of Christ and preach an "accursed" Gospel.

    Rome's sacraments preach "another gospel" Romes doctrines of salvation preach "another gospel."

    No one who has studied the ECF can fail to see they preached "another gospel" or baptismal regeneration.

    The doctrine of justification before God by grace alone, through faith alone in Christ alone is the heart of the gospel of Christ. Just look at John 3:16 or 3:36 or I Cor. 15:3-4 or Romans 4:23-25 and it is plain to see the gospel is about Christ and his provision for us obtained through faith WITHOUT works (Rom. 4:5-6), WITHOUT ordinances (Rom. 4:9-12) WITHOUT lawkeeping (Rom. 4:14-15) WITHOUT your personal assistance whatsoever but by justifying faith that has nothing more or less than the object of God's promise and His power to perform that promise as your hope of justification (Rom. 4:16-22).

    Those who preach "any other gospel" are "accursed" and any institution that goes astray on this point cannot possbly be regarded in any BIBLICAL sense a "true" church. This is true of th ECF, Ante, Nicene, Post-Nicene Fathers. This is true of the Eastern Orthodox.

    In an earlier post I have listed 11 or 12 Biblical evidences that New Testament Christianity had a settled and determined state of faith and practice and Apostolic ordinances put in place to protect it and defend it against any CHANGE by others. So to say that New Testament Christianity was in state of change when it left the hands of the apostles is simply not true. The only state of PROGRESSIVE CHANGE is apostasy as that is its primary characteristic. You cannot apostatize or depart from something in a state of change!!!!

     
    #64 Dr. Walter, Jun 22, 2010
    Last edited by a moderator: Jun 22, 2010
  5. Dr. Walter

    Dr. Walter New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2010
    Messages:
    5,623
    Likes Received:
    2
    First trait of a False Church - Killers

    I have used John 16:1-5 and John 8:40-44 to demonstrate that apostate religions are characterized by Satan's characteristic -murder.

    Some have objected because the immediate context applies it to apostate Judaism as though Judaism EXHAUSTS all apostate religions and all characteristics of apostate religions. No, Judaism simply was the first in a long line of apostate religions that would be characterized by the same trait - murderer of the saints.

    Rome as well as Reformed Rome, Arianism, Islam all are apostate religions and all share this trait of an apostate religion.

    The second trait that I pointed out was CHANGE from the apostolic model. Apostasy is a DEPARTURE from the truth. There can be no departure if there is nothing to depart from.

    If Christianity as left by the Apostles was in a CHANGING condition there could be nothing to DEPART from as it is itself in the state of DEPARTURE or CHANGE.

    Anyone can look at the history of Apostasy preserved for us by Rome in the ECF, ante, nicene, post-nicene and see from the beginning it is a progressive change not toward truth but toward worse error. This is the hall mark of Apostasy.

    No other doctrine in the word of God is defended more by Paul than the gospel. Those who preach "another gospel" are to be regarded as "accursed" not as a "true" church. ECF preach "another gospel" - water regeneration. The ante-, nicene, post-nicene preach "another gospel." If there is one that that characterizes ALL true churches of Christ it is the gospel of Jesus Christ. Without that there is no possible way to even BEGIN to practice the Great Commission (Mt. 28:19-20). Without that there is no possible way to provide qualified membership to build churches (1 Pet. 2:5). Without this there is no one to baptize or observe the Lord's Supper. Without the true gospel THERE IS NO TRUE CHRISTIAN or CHRISTIANITY.
     
    #65 Dr. Walter, Jun 22, 2010
  6. Heavenly Pilgrim

    Heavenly Pilgrim New Member

    Joined:
    May 7, 2006
    Messages:
    9,295
    Likes Received:
    0


    HP: I would tell you that Scripture is sufficient alone in one sense and is NOT in another. No one could even begin to discern truth from Scripture apart from first truths of reason, matters of fact, and truths of immutable justice, understood by the mind as revealed to us intuitively and by reason by the Spirit of God, the Source of ALL truth. It is a failure to carefully examine all such avenues of God given truth that have been and remain the basis for so many false notions and doctrines.
     
    #66 Heavenly Pilgrim, Jun 22, 2010
  7. Zenas

    Zenas Active Member

    Joined:
    May 7, 2007
    Messages:
    2,704
    Likes Received:
    20
    What is Reformed Rome?
     
    #67 Zenas, Jun 22, 2010
  8. Thinkingstuff

    Thinkingstuff Active Member

    Joined:
    May 14, 2008
    Messages:
    8,248
    Likes Received:
    9
    Faith:
    Non Baptist Christian
    Most all protestant churches. This according to the fictional historical account excludes baptist since the hypothesis is that they've been hangin out since the begining. Though since there is no evidence for this it doesn't matter because Rome destroyed all their works however Rome couldn't destroy the NT nor Could Rome destroy the gnostics nor could Rome destroy the nestorians ad infinitum. The only one Rome was successful at erradicating all indications are the baptist.
     
    #68 Thinkingstuff, Jun 22, 2010
  9. Zenas

    Zenas Active Member

    Joined:
    May 7, 2007
    Messages:
    2,704
    Likes Received:
    20
    So Reformed Rome consists of the churches of the Reformation. Dr. Walter is saying that not only are Catholics and Orthodox apostate, but Anglicans, Methodists, Lutherans and Presbyterians as well? Surely you have misunderstood what Dr. Walter means. That's not what you mean, is it, Dr. Walter?
     
    #69 Zenas, Jun 22, 2010
  10. lori4dogs

    lori4dogs New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2008
    Messages:
    1,429
    Likes Received:
    0
    Anglicans, Methodists, Lutherans and Presbyterians are all baby-baptizing sacramentalists which means they are all degenerates and are kissing-cousins of the 'Great Whore'. Didn't you know that?
     
    #70 lori4dogs, Jun 22, 2010
  11. Gerhard Ebersoehn

    Gerhard Ebersoehn Active Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2004
    Messages:
    9,025
    Likes Received:
    8
    Faith:
    Non Baptist Christian
    GE:
    Yes, and That Law was the Living Jesus, Christ of God. Castigated and castaway, broken and trampled underfoot to dust, done away with and obliviated from the face of the universe. Dusting his hands gleefully man turned about and walked from the scene of his utter pleasure and delight: he destroyed the Law of God and extinguished its fire and nullified its vengeance for ever ..... or so thought he.
     
    #71 Gerhard Ebersoehn, Jun 23, 2010
  12. BobRyan

    BobRyan Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2002
    Messages:
    32,913
    Likes Received:
    71
    Faith:
    Non Baptist Christian
    Apparently your Bible translation debunks your idea as much as my NASB debunks your idea.

    Turns out Lev 11 "is" The Word of God.

    Turns out that honoring and accepting the Word of God is the path of sanctification. Acting in rebellion against it is never "the sanctified" path of the Bible.

    Wrong - our debt of sin was nailed to the cross - our "certificate of debt" NASB. Instead of God dying on the cross so that you can eat rats - Christ died so that the debt for your sins can be paid. This is only surprising to those who want to make the eat-more-rats kind of argument.

    Lev 19:18 - "Love your Neighbor" quoted by Christ in Matt 22, quoted by Paul in Rev 13, quoted by James in James 2.

    Lev 19:3 command to honor parents - also affirmed by Paul in Eph 6.

    1Cor 9 8 I am not speaking these things according to human judgment, am I? Or does not the Law also say these things?
    9 For it is written in the Law of Moses, "" YOU SHALL NOT MUZZLE THE OX WHILE HE IS THRESHING.''


    I find your logic illusive at that point - in fact down right innnexplicable.

    And 3 times Peter refuses to eat rats or cats. Then Peter gives the interpretation 3 times - telling everyone each time that the "lesson" was not "eat more rats" (as you are so anxious to render it) but rather "call no MAN unclean" (as statement not actually found in the vision itself).

    in Christ,

    Bob
     
    #72 BobRyan, Jun 23, 2010
    Last edited by a moderator: Jun 23, 2010
  13. Thinkingstuff

    Thinkingstuff Active Member

    Joined:
    May 14, 2008
    Messages:
    8,248
    Likes Received:
    9
    Faith:
    Non Baptist Christian
    Unfortunately, that is exactly what Dr. Walter would want you to believe.
     
    #73 Thinkingstuff, Jun 23, 2010
  14. Dr. Walter

    Dr. Walter New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2010
    Messages:
    5,623
    Likes Received:
    2
    What is "fictional" is your assertion that there is no evidence. There is evidence from the writings of Roman historians, there is evidence from the writings and claims of the Paulicians, there is evidence from the writings of the Waldenses. There is evidence from the writings of the Reformation Anabaptists.

    However, the New Testament itself provides the greatest evidence that clearly identifies the traits of predicted apostate Christianity to be a KILLER, preacher of a false gospel, and in constant DEPARTURE from truth toward error.

    The Ante-, Nicene, Post-Nicene prove Rome to be an apostate church - in constant departure from truth toward more and more error. Prove it teaches a false gospel. Prove it has one of the cheif characteristics of Satan - murderer.

    What you do not want to confront is THE FACTS that Rome by every Biblical characteristic has all the Biblical traits of an APOSTATE church which leaves only those they consistently called "anabaptists" who opposed all these characteristics as the only historical viable candidate of Great Commission (Mt. 28:19-20) characteristics in history.
     
    #74 Dr. Walter, Jun 23, 2010
  15. Dr. Walter

    Dr. Walter New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2010
    Messages:
    5,623
    Likes Received:
    2
    Any church/denomination which preaches the false gospel of justification by works is essentially apostate in character. Any denomination that has murdered other Christians is Apostate in character and all of the above are characterized by one or the other trait or both.
     
    #75 Dr. Walter, Jun 23, 2010
  16. Dr. Walter

    Dr. Walter New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2010
    Messages:
    5,623
    Likes Received:
    2
    You can moan and groan all day and all night long but you cannot deal with the facts of the traits of apostasy that I have laid out in detail which characterize Rome and Reformed Rome in regard to (1) Another gospel = accursed not a "true" church/denomination; (2) Progression in changing doctrine and practice = apostate = departure from "the faith ONCE delivered" - manifested clearly in ECF. (3) Murderers trait of apostate religions.
     
    #76 Dr. Walter, Jun 23, 2010
  17. Thinkingstuff

    Thinkingstuff Active Member

    Joined:
    May 14, 2008
    Messages:
    8,248
    Likes Received:
    9
    Faith:
    Non Baptist Christian
    The fact that you've applied what Jesus was specifying to the Jews and Judaism and in a way not originally intended apply it accross the board for any thing that has a similarity in your OPINION to what Jesus was mentioning for the jews is considered an Apostate Church. Note this term is not used by Jesus nor the Apostles. It is a derivative of your misapplication of the text of scripture to suit your needs. Just like you disaproval of the statement that women played a prominant role in the early church. You in a way have aplied midieval consepts to your faith. Do you require woment to cover their heads in church? Not to speak to anyone save their husband or father? I rather doubt it.
     
    #77 Thinkingstuff, Jun 23, 2010
  18. Thinkingstuff

    Thinkingstuff Active Member

    Joined:
    May 14, 2008
    Messages:
    8,248
    Likes Received:
    9
    Faith:
    Non Baptist Christian
    Does this sound like departure from the "faith once delivered" to you?
    Clement to the Corinthians. I think in your misaprehended view of Christian history you apply your belief and incert it on the Christians converted by the apostles themselves and say this is what they believed as the faith once delivered missing two irreconcilable points. The baptist distinctiveness did not exist in the 1st Century. 2 the record of these very same christians argue against your view.
     
    #78 Thinkingstuff, Jun 23, 2010
  19. Dr. Walter

    Dr. Walter New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2010
    Messages:
    5,623
    Likes Received:
    2
    What you are accusing me of is absolutely absurd. I noted in my application that it was the characteristic of apostate Judaism but as a characteristic of Satan (Jn. 8:44) it is a general characteristic of ALL APOSTATE RELIGIONS (I Tim. 4:1).

    Your logic is so looney that if followed out it would demand there are NO APOSTATE RELIGIONS after the Jewish one because THEY ARE NOT IDENTIFIED BY NAME IN THE PAGES OF THE NEW TESTAMENT!!!!!!!!!!! And that is an absurd line of reasoning. It is the characteristics of apostasy found in those which are named in Scriptuers that serve as the MODEL for all future ones whether they are named or not.

    You cannot possibly deny that the three characteristics I have given characterize APOSTATE religions or that Rome and Reformed Rome are not characterized by one or more of them:

    1. Another Gospel - "accursed" rather than a "true" church.

    2. Apostasy is DEPARTING from something that is not transitional and changing but firm and delivered as a standard of truth (2 Thes. 3:6; Rom. 16:17; Jude 3; etc.). ECF and Rome are characteristic of DEPARTING from truth to more and more error.

    3. MURDERERS - Rome and Reformed have blood on their hands and lots of it.

     
    #79 Dr. Walter, Jun 23, 2010
  20. Thinkingstuff

    Thinkingstuff Active Member

    Joined:
    May 14, 2008
    Messages:
    8,248
    Likes Received:
    9
    Faith:
    Non Baptist Christian
    Unfortuantely, for you my logic is clear. Look at John 8
    Very basics of exegesis. To whom is Jesus speaking? Clue its bolded. Further evedence for this
    Again in the passage to whom is Jesus speaking? The Jews about whom? Jews. So in the context of the passage the verses you use
    is directed to the Jews about Judaism. Its very clear from scriptures. Then you apply 1 Timothy 4:1 to the passage in John 8 which has nothing to do with each other. Timothy the young pastor that he was was being warned about what in a future time
    some believers or some members of the church body will leave the faith and follow false teaching. The two scriptures have nothing to do with each other. You are attempting to force scripture to your view. Its clear to anyone who reads scripture what you are doing. This is your teaching and you force scripture to meet it connecting two verses that have nothing to do with each other.
     
    #80 Thinkingstuff, Jun 23, 2010
Page 4 of 16
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
Loading...