Block, SkipCaptcha, Upload, Automoderated users, edit, move, protect
30,891
edits
Changes
Debate: Does the Magisterium have authority over the Bible, or does the Bible have authority over the Magisterium? (view source)
Revision as of 13:18, August 8, 2020
, 13:18, August 8, 2020→Refutation: 1 Peter 1:13 and 2 Peter 1:20 do not support Roman Catholic Magisterium: new subsection Proofs that condemnations of Catholic doctrine are false
::In 1 Corinthians 3:10 '''Paul''' says that '''he''' is the one who laid the foundation: "According to the commission of God given to me, like a skilled '''master builder I laid a foundation''', and another man is building upon it." ''But in the next verse he says'', "For no other foundation can any man lay than that which is laid, which is Christ Jesus." This is true! But a literalist would see in these two verses an absolute contradiction. Consider this: no man can lay the foundation of the church Jesus built; only God can lay the foundation, and Jesus is God ''and'' man. ''But Revelation says there are "twelve foundations"'', not "''one''". A literalist would see in these two statements an absolute contradiction in the Bible: ''how can there be twelve when there is only one?'' The '''twelve foundations''' of the new Jerusalem are not laid by man (human beings) but are laid only by God and man. A literalist would see in the one foundation and the twelve foundations a contradiction. The foundation of the apostles and prophets is laid by God the Spirit: "because no prophecy ever came by the impulse of man, but men '''moved by the Holy Spirit spoke from God'''." 2 Peter 1:21. The rock of salvation laid a foundation of rock that is twelve foundations chosen. The first was Peter, "a rock". One of them was "a devil" John 6:70-71. But this did not invalidate the word of the Lord. Afterward, the Eleven, led by Peter, chose another, guided by God: Matthias. The apostolic office was empty but then a successor was chosen by lot, just as the apostolic office of Peter vacated by death is filled by lots cast by the elders of the church from that day to this. The foundation of the twelve foundations of the church was built by the foundation (''the same foundation that Paul laid, which is Christ Jesus''), and laid by Him on a foundation of '''a rock-''Petros''''', the first of twelve foundations He laid, and was built up into a house of living stones by the living stone as a dwelling-place of God in the Spirit, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. There is no contradiction. --[[User:Dataclarifier|Dataclarifier]] ([[User talk:Dataclarifier|talk]]) 07:45, 7 August 2020 (EDT)
::In 1 Corinthians 3:10 '''Paul''' says that '''he''' is the one who laid the foundation: "According to the commission of God given to me, like a skilled '''master builder I laid a foundation''', and another man is building upon it." ''But in the next verse he says'', "For no other foundation can any man lay than that which is laid, which is Christ Jesus." This is true! But a literalist would see in these two verses an absolute contradiction. Consider this: no man can lay the foundation of the church Jesus built; only God can lay the foundation, and Jesus is God ''and'' man. ''But Revelation says there are "twelve foundations"'', not "''one''". A literalist would see in these two statements an absolute contradiction in the Bible: ''how can there be twelve when there is only one?'' The '''twelve foundations''' of the new Jerusalem are not laid by man (human beings) but are laid only by God and man. A literalist would see in the one foundation and the twelve foundations a contradiction. The foundation of the apostles and prophets is laid by God the Spirit: "because no prophecy ever came by the impulse of man, but men '''moved by the Holy Spirit spoke from God'''." 2 Peter 1:21. The rock of salvation laid a foundation of rock that is twelve foundations chosen. The first was Peter, "a rock". One of them was "a devil" John 6:70-71. But this did not invalidate the word of the Lord. Afterward, the Eleven, led by Peter, chose another, guided by God: Matthias. The apostolic office was empty but then a successor was chosen by lot, just as the apostolic office of Peter vacated by death is filled by lots cast by the elders of the church from that day to this. The foundation of the twelve foundations of the church was built by the foundation (''the same foundation that Paul laid, which is Christ Jesus''), and laid by Him on a foundation of '''a rock-''Petros''''', the first of twelve foundations He laid, and was built up into a house of living stones by the living stone as a dwelling-place of God in the Spirit, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. There is no contradiction. --[[User:Dataclarifier|Dataclarifier]] ([[User talk:Dataclarifier|talk]]) 07:45, 7 August 2020 (EDT)
====Proofs that condemnations of Catholic doctrine are false====
Read [http://www.catholicapologetics.info/apologetics/protestantism/w.bible.htm '''Where We Got the Bible: Our Debt to the Catholic Church, by the Right Rev. Henry G. Graham'''] <br>and the [https://www.vatican.va/archive/ccc_css/archive/catechism/ccc_toc.htm '''''Catechism of the Catholic Church''''']
Reverend Graham says in his Introduction:
:“IF all were true that is alleged against the Catholic Church in her treatment of Holy Scripture, then the proper title of these papers should be [not] ‘How we got', but 'How we have not got the Bible'. The common and received opinion about the matter among non-Catholics in Britain, for the most part, has been that Rome hates the Bible-that she has done all she could to destroy it—that in all countries where she has held sway she has kept the Bible from the hands of the people—has taken it and burned it whenever she found anyone reading it. Or if she cannot altogether prevent its publication or its perusal, at least she renders it as nearly useless as possible by sealing it up in a dead language which the majority of people can neither read nor understand. And all this she does, (so we are told), because she knows that her doctrines are absolutely opposed to and contradicted by the letter of God's written Word—she holds and propagates dogmas and traditions which could not stand one moment's examination if exposed to the searching light of Holy Scripture. [...]
:“The Protestant account of pre-reformation Catholicism has been largely a falsification of history. All the faults and sins that could possibly be raked up or invented against Rome, or against particular bishops or priests, were presented to the people of this unhappy land, and all her best acts misconstrued, misjudged, misrepresented, and nothing of good told in her favour. She has been painted as all black and hideous, and no beauty could be seen in her. Consequently people came to believe the tradition as a matter of course, and accepted it as history [...]
:“But nowadays many are enquiring—Is it really so? Are we sure of our facts? Are we not building up mountains of abuse and calumny on a false suppositon? Just as all have come to know that the sun, as a matter of fact, does not rise or set but stands still, that there never was a Pope Joan but his name was John, that monasteries and convents are homes of learning and sanctity and charity, and that no Catholic ever pays or ever could pay a single farthing to get his sins remitted—and all this through the spread of knowledge and education and enlightenment and study—so also I venture to think that people will now be rightly considered ignorant and blameworthy, and at the least behind the times, if they do not learn that the notion I have alluded to above about the Catholic Church and the Bible is false and nonsensical—historically false and inherently nonsensical. By a calm consideration of the facts of history and a mind open to conviction on genuine evidence, they will be driven by sheer force of honesty to the conclusion that the Catholic Church, so far from being the monster of iniquity that she is painted, has in very truth been the parent, the author and maker under God, of the Bible; that she has guarded it and defended it all through the ages, and preserved it from error or destruction; that she has ever held it in highest veneration and esteem, and has grounded her doctrines upon it; that she alone has the right to call it her book; that she alone possesses the true Bible and the whole Bible, and that copies of the Scriptures existing outside of her pale, are partly incorrect and partly defective, and that whatever in them is true, is true because derived from her who alone possesses the Book in its fulness and its truth. If they were Catholics, they would love God's Holy Word more and more; they would understand it better; they would adore the Divine Providence that took such a wise and sure means of preserving and perpetuating it; and they would profoundly admire the Catholic Church for her ceaseless vigilance, untiring zeal, and unswerving fidelity to the commission entrusted to her by Almighty God.”
The '''''Catechism of the Catholic Church''''' represents the actual doctrine of the Church. Condemnations of the doctrine are examples of [[straw man argument]]s, based on [[misrepresentation]] and [[specious reasoning]], which are all demonstrably [[falsehood]]s of [[error]]. People who have read it have come to believe the actual truth of the doctrine is perfectly biblical. They have found the [[Catholic Church]] in all its forms to be the most biblical Church on earth.
Keep in mind that what people say about Catholic doctrine is not necessarily true.<br>Keep in mind that the scandal of bad and sinful behavior does not invalidate doctrine. <br>Keep in mind that [[hypocrites]] are found in every Christian denomination. Their bad example has never proved that [[Christianity]] itself is false.
==Scripture has authority over the Roman church==
==Scripture has authority over the Roman church==