Temporal Justification

[Darrell C]

2 Peter 3:16 “He writes the same way in all his letters, speaking in them of these matters. His letters contain some things that are hard to understand, which ignorant and unstable people distort, as they do the other Scriptures, to their own destruction.”

Luther came up with the idea that scripture interprets itself, a deadly error in the first instance and an obvious nonsense.
Peter points out misinterpretation leads to people’s destruction, it will kill you.
Does anyone listen to the Warning about misinterpretation of scripture, no, they never think it applies to them.

Great post. Interestedly, by the end of the 16th century, there were already nearly 300 different sects. 300 is an astonishing number.

Because Protestantism does not have a living authority to resolve exegetical disagreements, the fruit of doctrine of Sola Scriptura has been continual division, with the ultimate authority resting not in the Scriptures alone to decide what is or is not the faith, but rather in the subjective interpretation of the Scriptures by each individual adherent.

You can see that in nearly real time in these threads.

Another question for you guys: why is it that you are on a public forum teaching?

You are breaking your own commandment.

You are in violation of the very thing you condemn Protestants of.

And no wonder, for Scripture is true:


Romans 2:1

Therefore thou art inexcusable, O man, whosoever thou art that judgest: for wherein thou judgest another, thou condemnest thyself; for thou that judgest doest the same things.


I don't know about you, but this seems to resolve the conflict.

You can try to deny you are teaching, but that you are is in the public record.

Or are you guys official leaders in the Catholic Church?


God bless.

 

[Cathode]

“Of course, you would need to be a Priest to address my error, right? Wrong. You have a responsibility to care for my eternal destiny. Don't you? Or does your membership in the church remove that responsibility?”

Right, so you are an advocate of the self shepherding sheep theory?

We just follow ancient Traditional Apostolic interpretations of scripture not our noses. That’s guaranteed to end in trouble.

 

[Darrell C]

2 Peter 3:16 “He writes the same way in all his letters, speaking in them of these matters. His letters contain some things that are hard to understand, which ignorant and unstable people distort, as they do the other Scriptures, to their own destruction.”

Luther came up with the idea that scripture interprets itself, a deadly error in the first instance and an obvious nonsense.
Peter points out misinterpretation leads to people’s destruction, it will kill you.

Hmm, so if Luther uses a passage of Scripture to make a point, as you have done here, death is the inevitable result?

Doesn't look good for you, my friend.

Do you not do that very thing? Are you not pointing out that Scripture is the defining authority on the matter?

How will you justify your own private interpretation? You have not cited a Catholic source as the authority by which you speak.


God bless.

 

[Darrell C]

“Of course, you would need to be a Priest to address my error, right? Wrong. You have a responsibility to care for my eternal destiny. Don't you? Or does your membership in the church remove that responsibility?”

Right, so you are an advocate of the self shepherding sheep theory?

We just follow ancient Traditional Apostolic interpretations of scripture not our noses. That’s guaranteed to end in trouble.

So what is traditional about Indulgences, and where do we see the Apostles selling remission of sins?

The Apostles I know of, based on the authority of the Word of God, did not sell remission of sins. An Apostle said "...silver and gold have I none," and healed a man who immediately praised God. Yet the Catholic Church said, "...silver and gold have I none, so let's sell remission of sins so we can build our church."

Why do you keep avoiding this blatant departure from "apostolic tradition" and the Word of God and by doing so condone the heresy?


God bless.

 

[Cathode]

And you ignore what is actually said here:


2 Peter 3:16 King James Version

16 As also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things; in which are some things hard to be understood, which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, unto their own destruction.


You are the unlearned. You err because you do not know the Scriptures.

You are wresting the Scriptures in your denial of that which speaks against your views.

Laymen did in fact expound the Scriptures in the early church despite your insistence they did not.

Where is your address of that point?

You have not addressed the OP. And you know why? Because the Catholic Doctrine is as corrupt today as it was in Luther's Day. Luther's address of the error taught by the Catholic Church was incomplete. That is why there is so much confusion concerning the Doctrine of Justification.

And that is why you are trying to justify your own beliefs. That is why you cannot test the spirits that guide you.


1 John 4
King James Version

4 Beloved, believe not every spirit, but try the spirits whether they are of God: because many false prophets are gone out into the world.


Now, can you step up to the plate?

Can you show why your doctrine that laymen are not supposed to expound upon the Word of God is true, and the Scriptures given you do not support my point?


God bless.

Every group in Protestantism is wiser and more learned than anyone else it seems, that’s my point. They all claim they know Scripture better than anyone else.

There is no telling them otherwise, get a group “ Bible aloners” and ask them who has the objective truth of scripture and any man would walk away more confused than ever. This is what is called the great nullification of the Word.

Private interpretation has made scripture incoherent to millions and irrelevant to billions.

 

[Darrell C]

The “rapture “ is just another interpretive misadventure in scripture from a long line of misinterpretations.

The word we use for the Rapture comes from the Latin.

That there is a Rapture found in Scripture is simply a Bible fact.

That you reject the Doctrine shows you are quite willing to throw out Scripture's teachings.

Does Paul teach that the Church will be caught up? Or not?

Either way you answer, it will be Scripture that has the final say. It is the authority that will resolve the dispute over this question.


God bless.

 

[Darrell C]

Every group in Protestantism is wiser and more learned than anyone else it seems, that’s my point. They all claim they know Scripture better than anyone else.

That is not relevant to the discussion, Cathode. What is relevant is that your doctrine has stopped your mouth. You cannot defend yourself, and you cannot answer questions that arise from your own doctrine:


Now, can you step up to the plate?

Can you show why your doctrine that laymen are not supposed to expound upon the Word of God is true, and the Scriptures given you do not support my point?


Step up, Cathode. Or stop violating your own doctrine and teaching on a public forum.


God bless.

 

[Cathode]

So what is traditional about Indulgences, and where do we see the Apostles selling remission of sins?

The Apostles I know of, based on the authority of the Word of God, did not sell remission of sins. An Apostle said "...silver and gold have I none," and healed a man who immediately praised God. Yet the Catholic Church said, "...silver and gold have I none, so let's sell remission of sins so we can build our church."

Why do you keep avoiding this blatant departure from "apostolic tradition" and the Word of God and by doing so condone the heresy?


God bless.

Catholics get an indulgence for reading our bible each day, among other indulgences.

It’s part of the binding and loosing power on earth and in Heaven of a Church with actual authority.

 

[Cathode]

The word we use for the Rapture comes from the Latin.

That there is a Rapture found in Scripture is simply a Bible fact.

That you reject the Doctrine shows you are quite willing to throw out Scripture's teachings.

Does Paul teach that the Church will be caught up? Or not?

Either way you answer, it will be Scripture that has the final say. It is the authority that will resolve the dispute over this question.


God bless.

Scripture will teach private interpreters exactly what they thought all along.

 

[Darrell C]

Every group in Protestantism is wiser and more learned than anyone else it seems, that’s my point. They all claim they know Scripture better than anyone else.

Romans 3:19
Now we know that what things soever the law saith, it saith to them who are under the law: that every mouth may be stopped, and all the world may become guilty before God.

You realize that "the Law" in view here is the Written Word, right?

Now let's see Scripture define itself:


20 Therefore by the deeds of the law there shall no flesh be justified in his sight: for by the law is the knowledge of sin.



KNow why the word "therefore" is used in Scripture? To point out when something is being defined.

Now let's apply that to the sect you foilow: Whatsoever the Catholic Church saith, it saith to them that are under the Catholic Church. That all her subjects might not speak, and the world become guilty if they do not adhere to whatever the Catholic Church teaches.

You are a servant of the Catholic Church, not a servant of Christ. You admit that in your denial that anyone but the leadership has authority. You have no authority to expound upon the Word of God, yet in violation of her principles, you do so anyway.

That is lawlessness.

Your position simply doesn't hold up. And if you can't recognize these simple truths I am very sorry for you, my friend. You teach the law of the Catholic Church, yet you do not yourself abode in it. Doesn't make those of us who recognize the Authority want to either, so in that sense it is another example of you teaching, and violating your own principles.


God bless.

 

[Darrell C]

Darrell C said: ↑

The word we use for the Rapture comes from the Latin.

That there is a Rapture found in Scripture is simply a Bible fact.

That you reject the Doctrine shows you are quite willing to throw out Scripture's teachings.

Does Paul teach that the Church will be caught up? Or not?

Either way you answer, it will be Scripture that has the final say. It is the authority that will resolve the dispute over this question.


God bless.


Scripture will teach private interpreters exactly what they thought all along.

Doesn't answer the question.

See how your mouth is stopped?

See how your doctrine binds you in chains?

Are you denying there is a rapture, a catching away taught by Paul in Scripture?

I am not asking for an interpretation, nor giving one, I am simply pointing out that it is found in Scripture, and you cannot even answer that.

So can you give a straight answer?


God bless.

 

[Cathode]

Hmm, so if Luther uses a passage of Scripture to make a point, as you have done here, death is the inevitable result?

Doesn't look good for you, my friend.

Do you not do that very thing? Are you not pointing out that Scripture is the defining authority on the matter?

How will you justify your own private interpretation? You have not cited a Catholic source as the authority by which you speak.


God bless.

My understanding of scripture is not my opinion, it is 2000 year old Apostolic Tradition.

 

[Darrell C]

Catholics get an indulgence for reading our bible each day, among other indulgences.

It’s part of the binding and loosing power on earth and in Heaven of a Church with actual authority.

Again you cannot give a direct answer: we are not talking about what the Catholic Church is teaching today concerning Indulgences, we are talking about the supposed "Apostolic Tradition" of selling indulgences and selling remission of sin for money.

Where do we see the Apostles doing this?

Where do we see the early church "getting indulgences for reading their bibles?" lol

And what is the point in reading the Bible if you aren't allowed to interpret what you read?

Please, a direct answer.


God bless.

 

[Darrell C]

My understanding of scripture is not my opinion, it is 2000 year old Apostolic Tradition.

It is your opinion, thus a private interpretation, because you cannot show the Apostles selling indulgences for remission of sin.

You can only see them preaching the Gospel of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins.

Your mouth is stopped. You cannot speak freely, lest you expose the corruption of your leadership.


God bless.

 

[Cathode]

Romans 3:19
Now we know that what things soever the law saith, it saith to them who are under the law: that every mouth may be stopped, and all the world may become guilty before God.

You realize that "the Law" in view here is the Written Word, right?

Now let's see Scripture define itself:


20 Therefore by the deeds of the law there shall no flesh be justified in his sight: for by the law is the knowledge of sin.



KNow why the word "therefore" is used in Scripture? To point out when something is being defined.

Now let's apply that to the sect you foilow: Whatsoever the Catholic Church saith, it saith to them that are under the Catholic Church. That all her subjects might not speak, and the world become guilty if they do not adhere to whatever the Catholic Church teaches.

You are a servant of the Catholic Church, not a servant of Christ. You admit that in your denial that anyone but the leadership has authority. You have no authority to expound upon the Word of God, yet in violation of her principles, you do so anyway.

That is lawlessness.

Your position simply doesn't hold up. And if you can't recognize these simple truths I am very sorry for you, my friend. You teach the law of the Catholic Church, yet you do not yourself abode in it. Doesn't make those of us who recognize the Authority want to either, so in that sense it is another example of you teaching, and violating your own principles.


God bless.

Catholics can defend and explain what they are taught, who told you they couldn’t?

 

[Cathode]

It is your opinion, thus a private interpretation, because you cannot show the Apostles selling indulgences for remission of sin.

You can only see them preaching the Gospel of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins.

Your mouth is stopped. You cannot speak freely, lest you expose the corruption of your leadership.


God bless.

Indulgences are remissions of punishment due to sin, you need get your facts straight here.

 

[Campion]

Here is an indulgence explained by St. Paul from 2 Cor 2...

"...But if any have caused grief, he hath not grieved me, but in part: that I may not overcharge you all. Sufficient to such a man is this punishment, which was inflicted of many. So that contrariwise ye oughtrather to forgive him, and comfort him, lest perhaps such a one should be swallowed up with overmuch sorrow. Wherefore I beseech you that ye would confirm your love toward him. For to this end also did I write, that I might know the proof of you, whether ye be obedient in all things. To whom ye forgive any thing, I forgive also: for if I forgave any thing, to whom I forgave it, for your sakes forgave I it in the person of Christ..." (2 Cor 2:5-10)


The Corinthian is given a penance / punishment---> He expresses sorrow / contrition ---> The penance / punishment is relaxed.


Indulgences 101

 

[Cathode]

Hmm, so if Luther uses a passage of Scripture to make a point, as you have done here, death is the inevitable result?

Doesn't look good for you, my friend.

Do you not do that very thing? Are you not pointing out that Scripture is the defining authority on the matter?

How will you justify your own private interpretation? You have not cited a Catholic source as the authority by which you speak.


God bless.

The Bible is a Catholic source, it didn’t come from Protestantism.

 

[Darrell C]

Catholics can defend and explain what they are taught, who told you they couldn’t?

You did, in your attempt to do so.

And again I will raise the point that you are either a part of the leadership of the Catholic Church or you are violating your own teaching.

Are you a Priest or a plow-boy, Cathode?


God bless.

 

[Darrell C]

Indulgences are remissions of punishment due to sin, you need get your facts straight here.

The distinction is meaningless: if one is forgiven the penalty of sin then one is forgiven his sin.

You are the one that needs to get the facts straight.

Here it is again: the Catholic Church sold Indulgences for the remission of sins (which extends to the remission for the penalty of that sin, the source for the penalty).

Hence they sold remission of sin for money.

Hence they departed from "Apostolic Tradition" and makes themselves liars because there is no such "apostolic tradition."

It's that simple, those are the facts.


God bless.