Sola Scriptora

[Smalcald]

What is the difference between ignorance and differing biblical traditions and differing understanding of the bible?

I disagree with the RCC on this issue, but they base their understanding directly on scripture, directly on what Christ said to Peter about a Church on this earth with the power to both admit and deny entry into the Kingdom of God. How does our understanding of what a Church is, comply with what Christ said to Peter, how do we do that?

Here is another example, are Churches who ordain women ignorant, or is the ignorant label only for Catholics who disagree with us?

[jmwhalen]

Qestion to Shiloh & JWhalen:

Where was your church in 400AD?

Thanks,

Fiosh

__________________________

Your question(apparently) displays your ignorance(biblically, ignorant does not mean stupid-it merely means lack of knowledge), as does your previous posts, of the concept of "church"(it is not some hierarchial organization, such as the behemoth superstructure of the RCC-it is a spiritual organism of people). And because you do not "rightly divide the word of truth"(2 Timothy 2:15), you fail to distinguish the various "churches"(called out assembly) in the Holy Bible-there is more than one. For example:

"This is he, that was in the church in the wilderness with the angel which spake to him in the mount Sinai, and with our fathers: who received the lively oracles to give unto us:..." Acts 7:38

This was a "called-out assembly" of Jews-no "Christians"(by definition).

Many Catholics even try to argue that this is the RCC-"mental gymnastics"=another false doctrine-some "mystical RCC".

The "...church, Which is his body..."(Ephesians 1:22,23), the Body of Christ, in this current "...dispensation of the grace of God...."(Eph. 3:2), did not exist until the raising up of the apostle Paul, and is not to be confused with "the church identified in the OT(Acts 7:38), "the church" identified by the Lord Jesus Christ in Mt. 16:18, nor with "the church" identified at Pentecost. These are all different "called-out assembles."

If you would like to discuss this in detail, let me know.

In Christ,

John M. Whalen

John,

How are the distinctions between the "called-out assemblies" established, that is, without splitting hairs, and making too many subjective assessments? Just different Textual words?

Cherissa.

________________

The biblical answer:Study! Scripture after scripture commands us to study.

Much confusion exists today about the Biblical word CHURCH. A lack of proper understanding of the Biblical concept of this word has resulted in a proliferation of denominations and ORGANIZATIONAL HIERARCHIES, the prime example being the behemoth known as "The Roman Catholic Church". Most assume that, whenever they see the word "church" in the Holy Bible, it is a reference to "the Body of Christ" in this "dispensation of the grace of God"(Ephesians 3:2). This misunderstanding, the main cause being failure to "rightly divide the word of truth"(2 Timothy 2:15), results in being "...tossed to and fro, and carried about with every wind of doctrine...."(Ephesians 4:14).

Without studying it in scripture, which is the practice of most Catholics, because their "Magisterium" tells them they are too "unlearned and ignorant"(Acts 4:13) to understand it, most conclude this refers to a building, or meeting hall for worship, or some type of hierarchial structure. But the Holy Bible, if it is to be believed as the sole source of truth(and it is), and the sole source of authority(and it is) for doctrine(which Catholics, Mormons, Jehovah's Witnesses, and all cults deny), teaches that ALL FALLIBLE BELIEVERS are themselves the Church in this "...dispensation of the grace of God....(Eph. 3:2). People assume that anytime they find this word in scripture, it must refer to them, or truth for them, i.e., "I obey ALL of the scripture, since ALL DOCTRINE is written to me ". This is not true either. In fact, such a conclusion can, and often does, lead to a multitude of practical and doctrinal errors.

Contrary to what most have been "brainwashed"/"spoon-fed" into thinking, mainly through failure to "rightly divide the word of truth"(2 Tim. 2:15), there is more than one church in scripture-there are 3: Acts 7:38, Matthew 18:17, Eph. 1:22,23. The Body of Christ, "the Church" for this "dispensation of the grace of God"(Ephesians 3:2), did not come into existence until it was revealed to the apostle Paul. The Body of Christ is a part of the mystery program, which "was kept secret, hidden(in God, not the OT scriptures) since the world began (Romans 16:25; Ephesians 3:5,9; Colossians 1:26), and not part of the prophetic program, which has as its core the LORD God's dealing with unbelieving Israel and the unbelieving nations in judgment and wrath, which was "spoken about since the world began"(Luke 1:68-70; Acts 3:21-24). God's mystery program regarding the Body of Christ was "unsearchable"(Eph. 3:8-=untraceable=no tracks or traces in the OT). As such, we cannot trace anything about the church for today in this dispensation in any scripture prior to the apostle Paul. Any attempts to "read" the Body of Christ back into the OT, or into Matthew-John, or into the events described at the feast of Pentecost in early Acts, , A JEWISH feast, results in confusion, as witnessed by the superstructure/organization known as the RCC. However, we will learn that scripture reveals the existence of more than one church.

The scriptural meaning of the word "church": The English word 'church' is a translation of the Greek word 'ekklesia', and in the scriptures was a simple word used to describe an assembly of "called out ones"('ek'=out of,'klesis'=a calling):

"There is one body, and one Spirit, even as ye are called in one hope of your calling."(Eph. 4:4) /"And let the peace of God rule in your hearts, to the which also ye are called in one body...."(Col.3:15)

-When translating from the Hebrew and Greek into English, words such as ""congregation"/"assembly" of the congregation"(Exodus 12:3, 6, 9, 47; James 2:2), "assembly and church"(Hebrews 12:23), etc.

-The term is used with great frequency, more than 25 times in 2 Chronicles, and more than 117 times in the New Testament.

-The term can be used to describe any group of people, from an angry mob(Acts 19:32), to a group of saints gathered from out of the world to worship.

Therefore, it is always critical, necessary, if we are to understand what God means by His word, to look carefully( to STUDY) at its context to see how it is being used-the context determines its application to which "called out ones" are in view. As we do this, we discover that scripture identifies 3 different churches that are specifically referring to "called out" believers:

1. "The church in the wilderness"-Acts 7:39

A. This church's prophet, or leader, was Moses(7:37). God calls Moses from Midian, to go to Egypt, and to lead Israel out of bondage(depart from Egypt="exodus"). God establishes his leadership before the captive nation and before a 'sin-hardened", "heart-hardened" Pharaoh through numerous miracles(Exodus 11:13).

God confirms Moses' leadership when israel later rebels against him. When the Israelites "complained" about their journey, God's judgment of fire was not abated until Moses prayed for them(Numbers 11:1-3). When the "called out ones" wept for meat, at the prayer of Moses God sent more meat that they could consume(Numbers 11"4-9, 31-35). When Mirian and Aaron spoke against Moses, and attempted to unsurp his authority and leadership, Marian was made leprous, and Aaron was relieved of his priesthood(Numbers 12). When the 250 sons of Korah challenged Moses' authority/leadership, God opened the earth and "swallowed them up"(Numbers 16:32).

Thus, God so validated the authority/leadership of Moses that, centuries after his death, his name is honored and revered in Israel(Acts 6:11). God used Moses to give divine laws, "lively oracles" that governed Israel for centuries after his death(Acts 7:38, Romans 3:2). It is significant that Israel revered the law of Moses well after the Lord Jesus Christ's death, burial, and resurrection. However, Romans 6:14 tells us today that we are "...not under the law, but under grace....". So, we must understand that we today, in this "...dispensation of the grace of God...."(Eph. 3:2), cannot be a part of "the church in the wilderness".

B. It's people were the children of the promise-Israel: Acts 7:17, 13:23, 13:32, 26:6; Romans 1:2, 4:13-21, 9:4--9, 15:8; Galatians 3:16-29, 4:23-28; Ephesians 2:12; Hebrews 6:12-17, 7;6, 9:15, 10:36, 11:9-39; James 2:5; 2 Peter 1:4, 3:13.

Stephen identifies this church as the Jews redeemed from Egyptian bondage-Acts 7:34.

During this era/dispensation, God was dealing with Israel as a nation, focusing His ministry exclusively on Abraham's seed, as the Lord Jesus Christ was "... a minister of the circumcision for the truth of God, to confirm the promises made unto the fathers...."(Romans 15:8). Gentiles could approach God, but only through the nation of Israel as the channel, and only as proselytes. Throughout the OT, few Gentiles came to know the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. Nowhere in "the church in the wilderness" are gentiles measurably in view. All of this, as we shall discover, is in contrast to today's mystery program in this "dispensation of the grace of God"(Ephesians 3:2).

C. It's purpose was twofold: 1. The children of Israel were called out of Egypt to become a "separated", "severed", and "holy"(set apart) nation of people before the LORD God: Exodus 19:5,6, 33:16; Leviticus 20:7-26; Numbers 23:9; Deuteronomy 7;6, 14:2, 26:17-19; 1 Kings 8:53; Psalms 135:4; 1 Peter 2:9. 2. The Children of Israel were called out of the world to be a nation through whom God would demonstrate His power and exalt His name: Exodus chapter 14.

D. This church's past is traceable, searchable back to the OT. In contrast, Ephesians 3:8 teaches that today's church is "unsearchable" in the scriptures written previous to Paul's epistles. Therefore we must conclude that "the church in the wilderness" has no ties to God's mystery program for today.

2. "The kingdom church", or the "little flock": Matthew 16:16-18, 21:43; Luke 12:32

A. It's prophet, or leader, was Peter. He was not the first leader of these "called out" ones. John the Baptist was it's first leader on the scene in the early "gospels". Later, the Lord Jesus Christ proclaimed the same message as John, and many were called to eternal life through His ministry. The Lord Jesus Christ discipled 12 men to assist Him in His ministry to the lost. Of these 12, three, Peter, James, and John, are given particular attention. However, in Matthew 16, Peter is chosen by the Lord Jesus Christ to be the leader.

The reasons for Peter's appointment was due to the fact that the Lord would soon depart. In His absence, the Lord Jesus Christ appointed Peter as the "chief" to continue His ministry-the disciples and converts needed both a leader and spokesman. As authentication/validation/confirmation of their authority, unusual powers are promised all the disciples: Matthew 18;18-20; Luke 22:28-30; John 20:21-23.

B. It's people was composed of believing Jews. Scripture testifies that the Lord Jesus Christ went only to Jews(Matthew 15:24), forbad the 12 to go to gentiles(Matthew 10:5,6), and as late as Acts 11:19 there was no change in this program-consistent to the testimony given by Romans 15:8.

Since to only Jews was this ministry, this church was being called out of the rebellious and unbelieving nation of Israel. Understand that the Lord Jesus Christ's opposition came primarily from the leaders of Israel, remember His warnings about "...the leaven of the Pharisees...."( Matthew 16:6,11; Mark 8:15; Luke 12:1), and recall that the elders of Israel, and later most of the people of Israel, demanded His death.

The majority of Israel did not respond, but a "little flock" of people(Luke 12:32), a "nation bringing forth the fruits"(Matthew 21:43) from within this nation does recognize the Lord as the Messiah, the "Christ", and follows His instruction as to how to live for God.

C. The kingdom church's purpose was to prepare the nation for its promised millennial kingdom, i.e., they were to be the channel, the vessel of God's purpose to establish a literal, physical, earthly, Davidic, Messianic kingdom("...as the days of heaven upon the earth"-Deuteronomy 11:21), with Jesus Christ as the king of kings, ruling over the twelve apostles, who will rule over the twelve tribes of Israel, who will rule over the nations of this earth. This was spoken about by the prophets since the world began(Luke 1:70, Acts 3:21).

Old Testament passages such as Exodus 15:17-19, Deuteronomy 11:21, Daniel 2:44 and 7:13-14, Isaiah 2:1-4 and 9:7, Jeremiah 23:5, Zechariah 8:23 and 14:9, Joel 2:28-32 had promised Israel a king and a kingdom of great blessings(including miracles).

The theme throughout "the gospels" was: repent, for the kingdom of heaven, the kingdom of God is at hand(Matthew 3:2, 4:17, 10:7; Mark 1:15).

After the Lord Jesus Christ's ascension, in the early Acts period, the kingdom church's message remained the same: repent, and the Lord Jesus Christ will return with what was promised from Genesis throughout the Old Testament-"the times of refreshing"(Acts 3:19), "the refreshing"(Isaiah 28:12), the time in which the LORD will "sprinkle clean water"(Ezekiel 36:24), and the Exodus 31:17 "seventh day" in which they will "rest" and be "refreshed", i.e., Israel's promised kingdom.

These believers, these "called out ones", then, comprise the kingdom church, because of it's message, hope, and purpose is centered in Israel's millennial kingdom.

C. It's past is promised and traceable throughout the Old Testament.

Not only can the promises of Israel's literal kingdom be traced throughout the Old testament scriptures, Ezekiel 11:19 and 36:24-27, Jeremiah 31:33 and 32:39 predict "new hearts" within believers in Israel, a time when they will not "...walk any more after the imagination of their evil heart...."(Jeremiah 3:17), but instead they will "...walk in my statutes, and keep mine ordinances, and do them...."(Ezekiel 11:20).

This picture was exactly what was ocurring amongst the Jewish "called out" ones in early Acts, a "foretaste" of the coming blessings associated with the millennial kingdom. We all know that Lord Jesus Christ was the only man that has ever walked the earth to this point in time(2005) perfectly, who had no sin: 2 Cor. 5:21; Hebrews 4:15,7:26; 1 John 3:5; Luke 23:4; John 18:38,19:4-6 The promised future "new heart" also explains John 1:47, in which a sinful creature, Nathanael, is characterized as a man on earth "...in whom is no guile....". Thus, in John 1;47, the Lord Jesus Christ, in the context of his office "the Prophet", was looking into the future, and providing a glimpse of the ideal conditions that will exist in forthcoming , and promised, millennium kingdom, characterized by the righteous reign of the Lord Jesus Christ, and, as J. Dwight Pentecost summarized , a time of peace, joy, comfort, justice, the removal of the curse, no sickness, healing of the deformed, no immaturity, economic prosperity, and Holiness. This holiness will be manifested through the King and the King's subjects, the JEWS, the "kingdom church". This holiness, this trait of Jews("an Israelite"-John 1:47) having "...no guile", is realization of the promise of the New Covenant, and this is what the Lord Jesus Christ was alluding to in John.

Since this church's history and promise is traceable to the Old Testament, it's calling/purpose is distinct, and it's hope is different from the church, the Body of Christ, in this "dispensation of the grace of God"(Ephesians 3:2), then passages where this kingdom church is found cannot refer to the Body of Christ.

We must conclude that the Old Testament, the "gospel" accounts, and the early part of Acts is written about both the believing remnant of Israel, and not to the Body of Christ today for doctrine.

3. "the Church, the body of Christ": Romans 12:4,5; 1 Corinthians 10:16,17, 12:12-27; Ephesians 1:22,23, 2:16, 3:6 , 4:4,12, 5:23,30; Colossians 1:18, 2:17, 3:15

A. The Body of Christ's prophet, or leader, is the apostle Paul, "...the apostle of the Gentiles...."(Romans 11:13). Just as Israel followed Moses, believers in this dispensation are commanded by the risen, ascended, and glorified Lord Jesus Christ to follow Paul: 1 Corinthians 4:16, 11:1; Philippians 3:17, 4:9; 1 Thessalonians 1:6; 2 Thessalonians 3:9; 1 Timothy 1:16. His writings are scripture, the inspired word of God(1 Thessalonians 2:13; Titus 1:3; 2 Peter 3:15,16), and are the Lord Jesus Christ's words and commands in this dispensation: Romans 15:18; 1 Corinthians 14:37; 2 Corinthians 13:3; 1 Thessalonians 4:2; 1 Timothy 6:3 . The Lord Jesus Christ appointed Paul as :

-our apostle(not Peter, nor "the 12"): Romans 11:13; 2 Corinthians 11:5; Galatians 2:8; 1 Timothy 2:7; 2 Timothy 1:11

-our pattern; 1 Timothy 1:16

-the minister of Jesus Christ to the Gentiles in this dispensation: Romans 15:16; Ephesians 3:7,8; Colossians 1:23-25

-a preacher: 1 Timothy 2:7 2 Timothy 1:11; Titus 1:3;

- a teacher of the Gentiles: 1 Corinthians 4:17; 1 Timothy 2:7; 2 Timothy 1:11

- a prophet: 1 Corinthians 14:37

-the masterbuilder, having laid the foundation of the Body of Christ: 1 Corinthians 3:10

-a steward of the mysteries of God: 1 Corinthians 4:1

-the administrator, "steward", for the present dispensation of the grace of God: Ephesians 3:1-9

-authoritative: Titus 2:15; 2 Corinthians 13:10

Paul calls The LORD God to witness more often than any other biblical writer, and no other biblical writer spoak with an oath more than Paul: Romans 9:1; 2 Corinthians 1:18, 11:10,31; Galatians 1:20; Philippians 1:8; 1 Timothy 2:7

The church, the body of Christ, in this dispensation, is comprised of Jews and Gentiles without distinction as in the past-Galatians 3:28; 1 Cor. 10:17, 12:13(the significance of this point/distinction is made in Mt. 15:21-28-notice Gentiles are referred to by the Lord Jesus Christ as "dogs").

One of the purposes of the body of Christ is to call men and women unto salvation out of all nations, irrespective of nationality(in times past, all had to "go through Israel", hence, "proselytes", and this gives sense to the Lord Jesus Christ's seemingly puzzling statement in John 4:22, "....salvation is of the Jews.").

However, with the rejection of God the Father in the OT(consummation:"... now make us a king to judge us like all the nations.... Give us a king to judge us. And the LORD said unto Samuel, Hearken unto the voice of the people in all that they say unto thee: for they have not rejected thee, but they have rejected me, that I should not reign over them...."-1 Samuel 8:5-7), . the rejection of the only begotten Son in both the OT(most of what we call the NT in Matthew-John is actually OT)and NT(consummation: Calvary), and the rejection of God the Holy Spirit in the NT(consummation: the stoning of Stephen in Acts 77:51: "...Ye stiffnecked and uncircumcised in heart and ears, ye do always resist the Holy Ghost: as your fathers did, so do ye."), Israel's religious, "corporate" standing of priviledge/blessings/favor/preimminence has been temporarily set aside- "Three strikes-you're out"(temporarily). Today, in this unprophesied dispensation, salvation is offered freely without distinction, i.e. without Israel being the "channel"(the LORD God will resume His dealings with Israel and this Christ-rejecting world, but only after this dispensation is concluded, after the "...fulness of the Gentiles be come in...."(Romans 11:25), which coincides with the Body of Christ being "...deliver(ed) from this present evil world...."(Gal. 1:4) in the rapture-another subject!). This dispensation's past, and the Body of Christ's past, is "unsearchable"(Eph. 3:1-9=untraceable in the OT-forget about looking for it in the OT-it was a mystery, hid, not made known, untrackable in the OT) outside the letters of Paul. Today's church and doctrines were not revealed until Paul. Until Paul was given, by revelation, the mystery of this dispensation by the risen, ascended, and glorified Lord Jesus Christ from heaven, everything about the church, which is his body, was kept secret by the LORD God(Romans 16:25; Eph. 3:5, 9; Col. 1:25,26).

Again, in this dispensation, today's one true church is not a denomination-this means absolutely nothing to the LORD. The important concept is to whom or what have we been called. The 'ekklesia', the "called out ones", the 'church' of God is not an institution nor an organization-it is a people , a living organism whose members are born of the Spirit of God. This Church, "...the Church, Which is his Body...."(Eph. 1:22,23) is those who are temples of the living God, both individually and collectively:

"Unto the church of God which is at Corinth, to them that are sanctified in Christ Jesus, called to be saints...."(1 Cor. 1:2-'sanctified' means to be set apart).

God is building(as opposed to a "kingdom", which is "set up"(Daniel 2:44) by force) his one true church which, in his inspired word, he has identified as HIS BODY in Eph 1:22,23, and this definition excludes any time of "hierarchial organization", which Scripture calls "carnal" in 1 Cor. 3:4: "For while one saith, I am of Paul; and another, I am of Apollos; are ye not carnal? And in Eph. 4:4 he states "There is one body...". So no denominational "religion" fits the description given for the one true church in the word of God, and this includes the monstrasety of the RCC.. His body, the church, or," the church, Which is his body..."(Eph. 1:22,23), is made up of all who believe "the gospel of the grace of God"(Acts 20:24) preached by the apostle Paul, as outlined in 1 Cor. 15:1-4.....any Jew, any Gentile, for there is "neither Jew nor Greek.....for ye are all one in Christ Jesus"(Gal. 3:28).

Contrary to what most have been "brainwashed"/"spoon-fed" into thinking, mainly through failure to "rightly divide the word of truth"(2 Tim. 2:15), there is more than one church in scripture-there are 3: Acts 7:38, Matthew 18:17, Eph. 1:22,23. The Body of Christ, "the Church" for this "dispensation of the grace of God"(Ephesians 3:2), did not come into existence until it was revealed to the apostle Paul. The Body of Christ is a part of the mystery program, which "was kept secret, hidden(in God, not the OT scriptures) since the world began (Romans 16:25; Ephesians 3:5,9; Colossians 1:26), and not part of the prophetic program, which has as its core the LORD God's dealing with unbelieving Israel and the unbelieving nations in judgment and wrath, which was "spoken about since the world began"(Luke 1:68-70; Acts 3:21-24). Any attempts to "read" the Body of Christ back into the OT, or into Matthew-John, or into the events described at the feast of Pentecost in early Acts, , A JEWISH feast, results in confusion. The solution: Study, by "rightly dividing"(2 Tim. 2:15)!

In Christ,

John M. Whalen

[Pax]

Shiloh,

This idea that the Baptist Church can trace its roots back to the time of Jeuse Christ is unfounded. You are misleading people by telling them this. I grew up an American Baptist, and never once head this. I also looked into the history of the Baptist Church before I converted. The Baptist Church was founded by a man named John Smythe who was an English Puritan in 1609 or 1612 depending on the source. Baptist had issues with infant Baptism (hence the name Baptist).....they read the Bible and decided that infants shouldn't be Baptised like they had been for the previous 1,600 years, so they splintered off and formed their own Church. This was a common theme and still is. Of course then the Baptist split up on other various issues and we now have Southern Baptist, the largest Baptist denomination in the U.S.A roughly 15 million. American Baptist, which was the Church I grew up in, roughly 1.5 million in the U.S.A, and finally the National Baptist which make up 5-8 million in the U.S.A. Shiloh has been misinformed by either a pastor or some website. Any scholar of early Church history would laugh at this idea that the Baptist were not a product of the Prostestant Reformation....they clearly were.

[Guest shiloh357]

Shiloh,

This idea that the Baptist Church can trace its roots back to the time of Jeuse Christ is unfounded. You are misleading people by telling them this. I grew up an American Baptist, and never once head this. I also looked into the history of the Baptist Church before I converted. The Baptist Church was founded by a man named John Smythe who was an English Puritan in 1609 or 1612 depending on the source. Baptist had issues with infant Baptism (hence the name Baptist).....they read the Bible and decided that infants shouldn't be Baptised like they had been for the previous 1,600 years, so they splintered off and formed their own Church. This was a common theme and still is. Of course then the Baptist split up on other various issues and we now have Southern Baptist, the largest Baptist denomination in the U.S.A roughly 15 million. American Baptist, which was the Church I grew up in, roughly 1.5 million in the U.S.A, and finally the National Baptist which make up 5-8 million in the U.S.A. Shiloh has been misinformed by either a pastor or some website. Any scholar of early Church history would laugh at this idea that the Baptist were not a product of the Prostestant Reformation....they clearly were.

I am not going to debate Baptist history with you in this thread. I was simply answering a question from Fiosh. I don't really care what you think about Baptist history. You don't know enough about it to argue with me.

The fact remains that this is just another in a series of futile attempts to deflect attention from Sola Scriptura, and your lack of true evidence against it. Please try to stay on topic.

[Guest shiloh357]

Part of the problem that I see, is that Fiosh and Pax thought that this debate on Sola Scriptura would be slam dunk for them. They are discovering that is not as easy as that, and that rod they have used to measure Sola Scriptura is entirely inaccurate.

[Smalcald]

There is a visible Church, and there is an invisible true Church of true believers.

However, the invisible true Church is a subset of the visible Church, NOT a separate entity. Christians if they have faith will not seek to exist outside of a visible Church which is administering God's Word and Sacrament. Paul talks directly about the mundane details of administering a hierarchy. Who should be Bishops, who should be elders and Deacons, what should happen in these assemblies of believers, how the Sacrament of the Alter should be administered, how we should prepare etc.

We are to take communion, you can't do that by yourself, we are to baptize you can't do that by yourself. I am not a proponent of the idea that the only one true Church is the Roman Catholic Church, but we cannot reject the authority granted to men of God to organize and administer visible Churches in accordance with Holy Scripture.

Part of this rejection of the visible Church and Church authority is simply the Americanized ideal of going it alone of individualism, which is not biblical we are to be under the authority of men of God. This is not a burden, but a help to us in our walk.

[Pax]

Part of the problem that I see, is that Fiosh and Pax thought that this debate on Sola Scriptura would be slam dunk for them. They are discovering that is not as easy as that, and that rod they have used to measure Sola Scriptura is entirely inaccurate.

Shiloh,

Like EricH said we have gone as far as we can on the Issue of Sola Scriptora. Fiosh and I gave you several problems with Sola Scriptora that you never answered and can't. I just wanted to correct you on this crazy notion that Baptist can trace their roots back to the time of Christ. Also I find it interesting that you think Fiosh and I are so unitelligent and you are so smart. Be careful, there is this little thing called Pride that Satan uses to bring people down all the time. I also want to make one more point on Sola Scriptora, but I am going to lunch. I will write more later.

[Smalcald]

So what teaching do you adhere to Mark?

It seems to me that you are just adhering to the teachings of the Church of Mark.

[Fiosh]

Qestion to Shiloh & JWhalen:

Where was your church in 400AD?

Thanks,

Fiosh

__________________________

Your question(apparently) displays your ignorance(biblically, ignorant does not mean stupid-it merely means lack of knowledge), as does your previous posts, of the concept of "church"(it is not some hierarchial organization, such as the behemoth superstructure of the RCC-it is a spiritual organism of people). And because you do not "rightly divide the word of truth"(2 Timothy 2:15), you fail to distinguish the various "churches"(called out assembly) in the Holy Bible-there is more than one. For example:

"This is he, that was in the church in the wilderness with the angel which spake to him in the mount Sina, and with our fathers: who received the lively oracles to give unto us:..." Acts 7:38

This was a "called-out assebly" of Jews-no "Christians"(by definition).

Many Catholics even try to argue that this is the RCC-"mental gymnastics"=another false doctrine-some "mystical RCC".

The "...church, Which is his body..."(Ephesians 1:22,23), the Body of Christ, in this current "...dispensation of the grace of God...."(Eph. 3:2), did not exist until the raising up of the apostle Paul, and is not to be confused with "the church identified in the OT(Acts 7:38), "the church" identified by the Lord Jesus Christ in Mt. 16:18, nor with "the church" identified at Pentecost. These are all different "called-out assembles."

If you would like to discuss this in detail, let me know.

In Christ,

John M. Whalen

First of all thanks for calling me ignorant for asking an honest question.

Secondly, you presume to know alot about me from ~6 words.

I am merely trying to determine YOUR view of what constituted the early Church.

You guys really make a girl wanna jump the fence and join your side with all your Christian warmth!

____________________

My comment:

Repetition is learning-"ignorant" is a good biblical word(Paul uses it over and over), and does not mean "stupid". The word means, biblically, "lack of knowlegde". My post was in response to your question, a question that you gave no context, or reason as to its relevance to the issue at hand. Do not confuse your lack of understanding, yes, your ignorance of the biblical concept of the word "church", given your question, as opposed to the convoluted and unscriptural defintion of the word embraced by the RCC(you?), with error on the part of what I wrote, and do not confuse your lack of understanding, yes, your ignorance of the biblical definition of the word "ignorance", with any supposed lack of "Christian warmth" on my part. If correcting someone on doctrine, which all Christians are commanded to do by the LORD God, then you have either 1. not read the Holy Bible, which from Genesis to Revelation is a testimomy to the importance of "sound doctrine", or 2. confused tolerance for ideas(rationality), with tolerance for people(see my previous posts on this board re. "tolerance").

In Christ,

John M. Whalen

Don't confuse disagreement with your opinion with ignorance.

[Guest shiloh357]

Part of the problem that I see, is that Fiosh and Pax thought that this debate on Sola Scriptura would be slam dunk for them. They are discovering that is not as easy as that, and that rod they have used to measure Sola Scriptura is entirely inaccurate.

Shiloh,

Like EricH said we have gone as far as we can on the Issue of Sola Scriptora. Fiosh and I gave you several problems with Sola Scriptora that you never answered and can't. I just wanted to correct you on this crazy notion that Baptist can trace their roots back to the time of Christ. Also I find it interesting that you think Fiosh and I are so unitelligent and you are so smart. Be careful, there is this little thing called Pride that Satan uses to bring people down all the time. I also want to make one more point on Sola Scriptora, but I am going to lunch. I will write more later.

Fiosh and I gave you several problems with Sola Scriptora that you never answered and can't.

Oh please... You and Fiosh have offered a total TWO problems with Sola Scriptura and EricH and I have addressed them ad nauseum. All you can come up with, is to blame Sola Scriptura for the ordination of homosexuals in certain denoms, and the presence of denoms themselves. That is all that you have brought forth as your indicators as to the failure of Sola Scriptura.

Eric and I have demonstrated over and over again, that since homosexuality and other aberrant sins exist in both Sola, and Non Sola Scriptura environments, that this argument fails. The presence of homosexuals in certain denoms demonstrates that such denoms hold to a theology that is the antithesis of Sola Scriptura, as they reject the Bible as having any moral authority over them.

Secondly, it has been pointed out that the difference in certain theological distinctives between denoms is the product of hermeneutic disagreements about how something is translated, not WHO has the the right to interpret a given passages of Scripture.

Neither argument that you and Fiosh have hammered on is germane to a discussion on Sola Scriptura. The only issue that Sola Scriptura is concerned with is whether or not a person is required to submit to the Catholic Magisterium as the only infallible authority on earth allowed to interpret Scripture for all of Christendom.

You and Fiosh have been requested over and over again to provide an Non Catholic, independent (perferably biblical) witness that can be demonstrated as coming directly from God Himself, stating that He has vested the Magisterium with the authority they claim to possess. Where did that authority come from??? That is what is up to you to demonstrate in order to prove that Sola Scriptura is invalid. So far, the two of you have either ignored that request, or simply want to deflect attention away from your inability to provide such a witness.

The burden of proof is upon the Magisterium to prove their authority. It is not enough to claim such authority, but to demonstrate that it is from God.

So far, you and Fiosh have been trying to get us to use our own private judgement to agree with you that we are not allowed to use private in the first place.

Tell you what chief... when you can come up with something that some credibility I would surely like to see it.

I just wanted to correct you on this crazy notion that Baptist can trace their roots back to the time of Christ.

I have no need to accept correction from you in this matter. Baptists reach much further back than John Smythe. He might have founded a particular kind of Baptists, but was not the sole progenitor of the Baptist denom.

Also I find it interesting that you think Fiosh and I are so unitelligent and you are so smart. Be careful, there is this little thing called Pride that Satan uses to bring people down all the time.

You have me confused with someone else. I have said nothing about your intelligence. As for pride, the Magisterium is full of it. It is the height of pride to think that you have the power to tell everyone else what the Bible means and that you are 100% correct in every word, and that everyone should submit to your every infallible word just because you say so. THAT is where the pride exists.