The $100,000 Roman Catholic Question.

[Rufus_1611]

Exactly. Pretrib or you're gonna burn in Hell.


I'm thinking the Nicene "homoousius" isn't found in Scripture, nor is, for that matter, the word "Trinity."

The Biblical word is "Godhead" and would you believe it shows up three times in the Holy Bible?

"Forasmuch then as we are the offspring of God, we ought not to think that the Godhead is like unto gold, or silver, or stone, graven by art and man's device." - Acts 17:29

"For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse:" - Romans 1:20

"For in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily." - Colossians 2:9​

 

[tragic_pizza]

The Biblical word is "Godhead" and would you believe it shows up three times in the Holy Bible?

"Forasmuch then as we are the offspring of God, we ought not to think that the Godhead is like unto gold, or silver, or stone, graven by art and man's device." - Acts 17:29

"For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse:" - Romans 1:20

"For in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily." - Colossians 2:9​

Interesting. I was not, and do not, claim that the theological concept of the Trinity is extraBiblical. I'm gonna look up "Godhead" when I get home to my books...

 

[av1611jim]

Most reliable manuscripts do not include this verse.

"Reliable" to whom????

MY Bible includes that verse. Perhaps you need a new Bible.

(sorry dhk. I saw your admonitions after posting this. Can't really delete it so i will apologize instead.)

 

[Eliyahu]

When we think about the OP subject, the important question is how we treat the deutrocanonical documents ( Apocrypha, etc) when they contradict Bible.
For example, if APocrypha encourage or justify Idol worship or prayer to the, can we excuse such behavior? Can Apocrypha override or supersede the Bible?. Isn't that a stupid question?
If any group believe Apocrypha over Bible, we must call them Apocrypha church., not the Christian church.
As for Purgatory, Paul says that ;
- the dead people are sleeping
- the dead people will be raised when Jesus comes
- they will live with Jesus forever
Read 1 Thess 4:14-17

When is the time while the dead people are to be purified in the purgatory? Did the Robber at the Cross get the purification at the Purgatory?

 

[Eliyahu]

As for 1 John 5:7, this BB dealt with it many times.
The main result from the debate is that, without the COMMA, there is a critical, grammartical problem with the next verse.
The next verse mentions the spirit, water, the blood which are all neuter gender, but the pronouns are masculine gender. This type of grammartical inconsistency cannot be found elsewhere.
In this case it doesn't override or supersede the other Bible teachings, but coincide with them very well, while Apocrypha disagree with Bible in the matter of Prayer to the Dead, etc.

 

[Ps104_33]

QUOTE:
What is it, may I ask, that you are truly looking for? How are you defining "oral" and "extrabiblical?" And what do you consider "necessary" for the faith and practice of the Church? And which church are you referring to?


You see? When talking to a Romanist it always boils down to a definition of terms. ALWAYS! Why dont you tell me?

To you as a RC, How would you define "oral?, "extrabiblical"?, "necessary"?.
I didnt know they had more than one meaning.

 

[tragic_pizza]

PS, I think that defining your terms is important because the parts of the Scriptures you put the most weight upon define your theology. Parts of every denominational theology are inferred from our understanding of Scripture, and other denoms won't see the same inference. Take, for example, the always-raging Calvinism v. Arminianism debate: same Bible, same God, same Christ, but wildly different theological results.

 

[DHK]

PS, I think that defining your terms is important because the parts of the Scriptures you put the most weight upon define your theology. Parts of every denominational theology are inferred from our understanding of Scripture, and other denoms won't see the same inference. Take, for example, the always-raging Calvinism v. Arminianism debate: same Bible, same God, same Christ, but wildly different theological results.

Tragic why are you bringing up red herrings. Stay on topic.
Surely you can see the difference in the discussion of legitimte Biblical discussion of doctrines that are taught in the Bible in which Bible-believers have differences. That is not in questioin here, nor is the topic. It is a red herring and off topic.
What is the topic is extra-biblical doctrines of the Catholic Church.
Doctrines such as purgatory, assumption of Mary, indulgences, infallibility of the Pope, perpetual virginity of Mary, praying to the dead, transubstantiation, etc. All these extra-biblical doctrines must be found in Catholic tradition because they are not found in the Bible. Stick with them, not a discusson of Biblical doctrine which you find in the Baptist Only section of the BB.

 

[DHK]

QUOTE:
What is it, may I ask, that you are truly looking for? How are you defining "oral" and "extrabiblical?" And what do you consider "necessary" for the faith and practice of the Church? And which church are you referring to?

What do you consider necessary to salvation.
Salvation is by faith and faith alone in the shed blood of the Lord Jesus Christ. He died, was buried and rose again, taking the penalty of our sins upon himself. That is the gospel message. We are sinners in need of a Saviour. We either accept Christ as Saviour or reject Him. It is not the church, baptism or any other rite that can save us. It must be our decision. It is by faith alone in the sacrifice that Christ paid on the cross.
The man-made doctrines of the Catholci church have nothing to do with that, such as the ones that I have already listed from time to time.

 

[tragic_pizza]

DHK, for crying in a bucket. The doctrine I cited was an example. An EXAMPLE.

 

[tragic_pizza]

Doctrines such as purgatory

Already discussed. DHK, my friend, discussions don't always limit themselves to terms you, yourself define.

 

[D28guy]

My favorite is the New King James, with the New American Standard as my 2nd favorite.

Mike

 

[DHK]

Already discussed. DHK, my friend, discussions don't always limit themselves to terms you, yourself define.

Go the to the OP. The question was clearly set forth. Some were confused; I was not for I have seen the question many times, and many times has it been discussed in this forum through past years. Therefore I am at an advantage to explain and define the terms of the challenge in the OP for you. If you don't know what is being discussed in the OP then I can't help you any further.

 

[DHK]

Already discussed. DHK, my friend, discussions don't always limit themselves to terms you, yourself define.

If Purgatory was clearly discussed show me the discussion where it was demonstrated that:
#1. It is a Biblical doctrine.
#2. That it is a Biblical doctrine relating to salvation or necessary for salvation.

 

[tragic_pizza]

If Purgatory was clearly discussed show me the discussion where it was demonstrated that:
#1. It is a Biblical doctrine.
#2. That it is a Biblical doctrine relating to salvation or necessary for salvation.

Remember when I mentioned the Deuterocanonicals? It's in there, and the Catholci church considers those books authoritative. That makes it (to them) Biblical.

And, no, it doesn't matter that you or I don't.

 

[D28guy]

tragic pizza,

"That makes it (to them) Biblical."

No it doesnt. They are decieved. Those books are not the scriptures of God, but rather the scriptures of another spirit, so they are not to be heeded.

Purgatory is not scriptural.

Mike

 

[tragic_pizza]

OK, I give up.

 

[EdSutton]

OK, I give up.

Guess you won't win the $100K! :tonofbricks: :laugh: :laugh: :1_grouphug:

Ed

 

[DQuixote]

Getting back to the OP...........

Can you name one oral, extrabiblical tradition, demonstratively traceable to the apostolic age, which is necessary for the faith and practice of the Church of Jesus Christ?

It's a great question. I was hoping someone would try to answer it. The simple truth is that nothing in this context is necessary. RCC continues to strike out.

:wavey:

 

[Ps104_33]

Just as I thought.



Let me put the question in another way.
The Roman Catholic Church states the the Bible alone does not contain all that a person is bound to believe in order to obtain salvation.

Now. Lets take this one step at a time.

Can some Roman catholic list these "necessary" "oral" traditions.

So far Purgatory is the only one that was mentioned.