Roman Catholicism vs Protestantism.

[farout]

I see what I think that those on this thread are protestants.

Is anyone on this thread a catholic?

 

[Christ4Ever]

@farout
I do believe that Last Things is Catholic.
Hope that helps some.

 

[B-A-C]

A few more thoughts on Mary.

Roman Catholics believe in the "asumption of Mary". This is, Mary was bodily taken into heaven sometimes after she is mentioned in Acts 1:14;
Pope Pius XII, states that Mary was taken bodily into heaven much like Elijah and Enoch, both of which never really had a physical death
according to the Bible. ( Elijah was taken up in a chariot in a whirlwind of flame 2 Kings 2:11-12; ).

Roman Catholics also refer to mary as the "Queen of Heaven". Most protestants believe the "queen of heaven" to be an evil queen mentioned
in Jer 44:17; Jer 44:18; Jer 44:19; and Jer 44:25; ( Also see Rev 18:7; ) A number of paintings show Mary with a crown on her head.

 

[Chad]

I did not read all the responses in the thread but responding to the OP solely. As a man who grew up Catholic and spent 13 years in Catholic school, now a burn again non-denominational believer for 14 years, this is my stance:

Denominations do not come from God. Any belief or tradition or teaching outside the only Holy Bible becomes another doctrine, another religion and/or another denomination. It is wrong.

As for "are they Christians", let God decide. We're not called to judge like that nor figure it out. However, same question would apply to any denomination, even any religion. Kind of irrelevant in a way. Of course no offense to the brother who started the thread, it's a good topic nonetheless.

Keep preaching the Gospel as it is written, not anything else. And remember the last crucial verses in the book of Revelation:

I warn everyone who hears the words of the prophecy of this scroll: If anyone adds anything to them, God will add to that person the plagues described in this scroll. And if anyone takes words away from this scroll of prophecy, God will take away from that person any share in the tree of life and in the Holy City, which are described in this scroll. He who testifies to these things says, “Yes, I am coming soon.” Amen. Come, Lord Jesus. The grace of the Lord Jesus be with God’s people. Amen. Revelation 22:18-21

 

[Last Things]

A few more thoughts on Mary.

Roman Catholics believe in the "asumption of Mary". This is, Mary was bodily taken into heaven sometimes after she is mentioned in Acts 1:14;
Pope Pius XII, states that Mary was taken bodily into heaven much like Elijah and Enoch, both of which never really had a physical death
according to the Bible. ( Elijah was taken up in a chariot in a whirlwind of flame 2 Kings 2:11-12; ).

Roman Catholics also refer to mary as the "Queen of Heaven". Most protestants believe the "queen of heaven" to be an evil queen mentioned
in Jer 44:17; Jer 44:18; Jer 44:19; and Jer 44:25; ( Also see Rev 18:7; ) A number of paintings show Mary with a crown on her head.

Catholicism does not state whether or not she was alive at the time of of her assumption. Queen of Heaven (realm of God, angels) refers to the notion that an unmarried king's mother was acting queen. The queen of heaven mentioned in the OT refers to a pagan goddess of the sky. In that sense 'heaven' is sky, not the spiritual world. English is just funny that way.

 

[Last Things]

Denominations do not come from God. Any belief or tradition or teaching outside the only Holy Bible becomes another doctrine, another religion and/or another denomination. It is wrong.

What scripture are you basing this on? Where does the bible say you can only believe what is written down and to believe in anything that was not written down is wrong?

 

[Chad]

What scripture are you basing this on? Where does the bible say you can only believe what is written down and to believe in anything that was not written down is wrong?

Are you serious with that question? Here we go. First, explain why you or any believer would bother with man-made religious traditions or doctrines outside the only Holy Spirit authored Bible, the only true Word of God. When you explain that, I'll follow up.

Here's a little head start using scripture:

So then, brothers and sisters, stand firm and hold fast to the teachings we passed on to you, whether by word of mouth or by letter.
2 Thessalonians 2:15

So then, just as you received Christ Jesus as Lord, continue to live your lives in him, rooted and built up in him, strengthened in the faith as you were taught, and overflowing with thankfulness. See to it that no one takes you captive through hollow and deceptive philosophy, which depends on human tradition and the elemental spiritual forces of this world rather than on Christ.
Colossians 2:6-8

Preach the word; be prepared in season and out of season; correct, rebuke and encourage—with great patience and careful instruction. For the time will come when people will not put up with sound doctrine. Instead, to suit their own desires, they will gather around them a great number of teachers to say what their itching ears want to hear. They will turn their ears away from the truth and turn aside to myths.
2 Timothy 4:2-4

Here's an article worth reading
Tradition and the Bible: Human or Divine Authority in Religion?

Human Tradition
Just as religious people often follow other religious authority that differs from Gold's word, so they often follow human traditions that differ from God's word.
Jews follow many traditions that are human in origin and differ from God's word. The movie "Fiddler on the Roof" memorialized this in song. When asked the reason for their practice, the reason given was not a command in Scripture, but "tradition"!
The Catholic Church binds this as doctrine:
"Do we get from the Bible alone all our knowledge and certainty about what God has told us? No, there is also Sacred Tradition ... What is tradition? The Word of God handed on to us by the Apostles in their preaching and by their successors in the church to the present day ... Do you have to believe in tradition? Yes ... we are obliged to accept all the truths contained in the Bible and Tradition..." - Catechism, pp. 9,10.

 

[B-A-C]

@"Last Things"

Just to add to what Chad said. Where is the source of your doctrine? If it's not the Bible, it's it's not the Word of God, what is it?
Anything not in the Bible is either from Satan or Man or a combination thereof. I could make up a doctrine, a dogma, a tradition, and I could call it anything,
I could even call it a Holy Sacrament of the Church, but if God doesn't say it is, what does it matter what I say?

Jesus criticized the Pharisee's for this very thing.

Mark 7:1; The Pharisees and some of the scribes gathered around Him when they had come from Jerusalem,
Mark 7:2; and had seen that some of His disciples were eating their bread with impure hands, that is, unwashed.
Mark 7:3; (For the Pharisees and all the Jews do not eat unless they carefully wash their hands, thus observing the traditions of the elders;
Mark 7:4; and when they come from the market place, they do not eat unless they cleanse themselves; and there are many other things which they have received in order to observe, such as the washing of cups and pitchers and copper pots.)
Mark 7:5; The Pharisees and the scribes *asked Him, "Why do Your disciples not walk according to the tradition of the elders, but eat their bread with impure hands?"
Mark 7:6; And He said to them, "Rightly did Isaiah prophesy of you hypocrites, as it is written: 'THIS PEOPLE HONORS ME WITH THEIR LIPS, BUT THEIR HEART IS FAR AWAY FROM ME.
Mark 7:7; 'BUT IN VAIN DO THEY WORSHIP ME, TEACHING AS DOCTRINES THE PRECEPTS OF MEN.'
Mark 7:8; "Neglecting the commandment of God, you hold to the tradition of men."
Mark 7:9; He was also saying to them, "You are experts at setting aside the commandment of God in order to keep your tradition.
Mark 7:10; "For Moses said, 'HONOR YOUR FATHER AND YOUR MOTHER'; and, 'HE WHO SPEAKS EVIL OF FATHER OR MOTHER, IS TO BE PUT TO DEATH';
Mark 7:11; but you say, 'If a man says to his father or his mother, whatever I have that would help you is Corban (that is to say, given to God),'
Mark 7:12; you no longer permit him to do anything for his father or his mother;
Mark 7:13; thus invalidating the word of God by your tradition which you have handed down; and you do many things such as that."

Traditions are not more important than the Word of God. It is God who decides what things matter. Not Mary or the Pope, or a "canonized saint".
If it's not in the Bible, it's not a doctrine from God.

Rev 22:18; I testify to everyone who hears the words of the prophecy of this book: if anyone adds to them, God will add to him the plagues which are written in this book;
Rev 22:19; and if anyone takes away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God will take away his part from the tree of life and from the holy city, which are written in this book.

 

[james1523]

The reason why following the Bible alone is so important, is that contained within it is a "snapshot" of God's truth before Christianity became so corrupt. If the Bible had been written, for example, how many false pagan and humanistic thoughts there would be contained within it.
With the death of the last apostle, the spiritual decline of Christianity had begun, as early as 100 AD. In as little as 100 years, Christianity was already incorporating many pagan (eg Greek) philosophical ideas into its teaching, and then later, the pagan ideas from Europe (Christmas, Easter, etc).
Many of Paul's, James, and John's writings to the church were spoken against the beginnings of the things which corrupted the church.. Judaism, gnosticism, Greek philosophy etc.
The darkest period for the church was around 1500 AD, at which time God raised up Martin Luther to bring the church back to the truth.
Therefore, if we follow the Word of God completely and only, we will be able to restore the true church of God once again.

 

[Last Things]

Are you serious with that question? Here we go. First, explain why you or any believer would bother with man-made religious traditions or doctrines outside the only Holy Spirit authored Bible, the only true Word of God. When you explain that, I'll follow up.

I asked where the bible says we should only believe in what was written down in the bible? I know that the earliest Christians did not have a New Testament. The writings of the NT began in the late 50s or early 60s and ended by the 120s. That means that at least one, to two of three generations of Christians did not follow a written Gospel, but a spoken Gospel. Am I wrong here? Mark was written in the 60s at the earliest. Now, given that many followers of Jesus would have died before the first written Gospel, much less the many other NT texts that would later come, what should I believe?

Furthermore, most Christians until the last few centuries could not read. Even if they could, bibles were hand written until the invention of the printing press, meaning that most people heard the Gospel and did not read it. Thus, the earliest Christians died without a written Gospel, while for 1500 years most died only hearing it. It took years before all the texts of the NT were even distributed to all Christian communities to be read by those who were able to read in Church.

In short, the Gospel was, from the very beginning, taught by leaders of the Church. I have read the writings of the early Christians, who believe things in accordance with the scriptures and say things which happen to be not included. Where does scripture say to only follow what was written and not what was passed down for generations?

Here's a little head start using scripture:

So then, brothers and sisters, stand firm and hold fast to the teachings we passed on to you, whether by word of mouth or by letter.
2 Thessalonians 2:15

This seems to follow exactly what I am saying- there is what is written and what is spoken by mouth.

So then, just as you received Christ Jesus as Lord, continue to live your lives in him, rooted and built up in him, strengthened in the faith as you were taught, and overflowing with thankfulness. See to it that no one takes you captive through hollow and deceptive philosophy, which depends on human tradition and the elemental spiritual forces of this world rather than on Christ.
Colossians 2:6-8

Again - what I am saying. Here scripture speaks of what is 'taught' - not what is written.

Preach the word; be prepared in season and out of season; correct, rebuke and encourage—with great patience and careful instruction. For the time will come when people will not put up with sound doctrine. Instead, to suit their own desires, they will gather around them a great number of teachers to say what their itching ears want to hear. They will turn their ears away from the truth and turn aside to myths.
2 Timothy 4:2-4

Here's an article worth reading
Tradition and the Bible: Human or Divine Authority in Religion?

I am not seeing anything there that suggests to only go by what is written. As far as I know, one can create false doctrines using scripture. For example, the prosperity Gospel, which tickles so many ears, is always supported by an interpretation of scripture.If you can show me where scripture says to only follow what scripture says, I will promptly reject everything taught since the beginning of Christianity that is not in scripture.

 

[Last Things]

@"Last Things"

Just to add to what Chad said. Where is the source of your doctrine? If it's not the Bible, it's it's not the Word of God, what is it?

Are you saying the word of God is only found in the bible? Where does the bible say the teachings of Christ and the apostles is only found in scripture? As far as I know, many early Christians died before the NT even existed.

I consider my doctrine to be what has been consistently taught since the first Century.

Anything not in the Bible is either from Satan or Man or a combination thereof. I could make up a doctrine, a dogma, a tradition, and I could call it anything,

What is your scriptural basis for this claim?

Mark 7:1; The Pharisees and some of the scribes gathered around Him when they had come from Jerusalem,
Mark 7:2; and had seen that some of His disciples were eating their bread with impure hands, that is, unwashed.
Mark 7:3; (For the Pharisees and all the Jews do not eat unless they carefully wash their hands, thus observing the traditions of the elders;
Mark 7:4; and when they come from the market place, they do not eat unless they cleanse themselves; and there are many other things which they have received in order to observe, such as the washing of cups and pitchers and copper pots.)
Mark 7:5; The Pharisees and the scribes *asked Him, "Why do Your disciples not walk according to the tradition of the elders, but eat their bread with impure hands?"
Mark 7:6; And He said to them, "Rightly did Isaiah prophesy of you hypocrites, as it is written: 'THIS PEOPLE HONORS ME WITH THEIR LIPS, BUT THEIR HEART IS FAR AWAY FROM ME.
Mark 7:7; 'BUT IN VAIN DO THEY WORSHIP ME, TEACHING AS DOCTRINES THE PRECEPTS OF MEN.'
Mark 7:8; "Neglecting the commandment of God, you hold to the tradition of men."
Mark 7:9; He was also saying to them, "You are experts at setting aside the commandment of God in order to keep your tradition.
Mark 7:10; "For Moses said, 'HONOR YOUR FATHER AND YOUR MOTHER'; and, 'HE WHO SPEAKS EVIL OF FATHER OR MOTHER, IS TO BE PUT TO DEATH';
Mark 7:11; but you say, 'If a man says to his father or his mother, whatever I have that would help you is Corban (that is to say, given to God),'
Mark 7:12; you no longer permit him to do anything for his father or his mother;
Mark 7:13; thus invalidating the word of God by your tradition which you have handed down; and you do many things such as that."

Traditions are not more important than the Word of God. It is God who decides what things matter. Not Mary or the Pope, or a "canonized saint".
If it's not in the Bible, it's not a doctrine from God.

Rev 22:18; I testify to everyone who hears the words of the prophecy of this book: if anyone adds to them, God will add to him the plagues which are written in this book;
Rev 22:19; and if anyone takes away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God will take away his part from the tree of life and from the holy city, which are written in this book.

The traditions of the Pharisees dealt with what had been taught in contradiction to scripture. Early Christians relied on tradition, on the spoken Gospel, for those many years before the Gospel was written down. When the 72 went out to preach the Gospel, which of the four Gospels were they reading from? When the apostles went out into the world to preach the Gospel, which written version did they carry?

It was not until the apostles were dying that the Gospel was being written. In fact, John makes it clear it was written after all the apostles died. Chapter 21 says that many Christians thought that John would live until the Second Coming.

 

[Last Things]

The reason why following the Bible alone is so important, is that contained within it is a "snapshot" of God's truth before Christianity became so corrupt.

If Christianity became corrupt, then how can you know that you understanding of the bible is the correct version? Muslims, JWs, Mormons, and so many others read the bible and learn how to 'interpret' it. It seems to me that I should follow what Christians have always believed.

With the death of the last apostle, the spiritual decline of Christianity had begun, as early as 100 AD. In as little as 100 years, Christianity was already incorporating many pagan (eg Greek) philosophical ideas into its teaching,

The writers of the bible were familiar with Greek philosophical ideas and wrote according to them. Philosophy is not 'pagan'. Greek philosophers were actually monotheistic in their quest for truth.

and then later, the pagan ideas from Europe (Christmas, Easter, etc).

How are Christmas and Easter pagan?

Many of Paul's, James, and John's writings to the church were spoken against the beginnings of the things which corrupted the church.. Judaism, gnosticism, Greek philosophy etc.

I never saw any condemnation of Greek philosophy. Can you show that in scripture?

The darkest period for the church was around 1500 AD, at which time God raised up Martin Luther to bring the church back to the truth.
Therefore, if we follow the Word of God completely and only, we will be able to restore the true church of God once again.

And how do you know your interpretation of scripture is correct? I seem to find many many different interpretations.

 

[Fragrant Grace]

@Last Things

For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus;
1 Timothy 2:5

Neither is there salvation in any other: for there is none other name under heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved.
Acts 4:12

That means no popes, no priests, no Mary's, no saints can ever intercede for us

No creed, no rosary, no catholic catechism......

All these are false and are additions to the word of God

You shall not add to the word which I command you, nor take anything from it
Deuteronomy 4:2

Thy word is true from the beginning: and every one of Thy righteous judgments endureth for ever.
Psalm 119:160

Add thou not unto His words, lest He reprove thee, and thou be found a liar
Proverbs 30:6

For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book, If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book: And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book.
He which testifieth these things saith, Surely I come quickly. Amen. Even so, come, Lord Jesus.
Revelation 22:18-20

 

[Last Things]

I was specifically curious if there is any scripture which says that you can only believe in what is written down.

@Last Things

For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus;
1 Timothy 2:5

Neither is there salvation in any other: for there is none other name under heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved.
Acts 4:12

That means no popes, no priests, no Mary's, no saints can ever intercede for us

Not sure what you mean here. The Pope is just the unofficial name of the Bishop of Rome. The NT had bishops - called overseers (Obispo) or elders, did they not? The word priest comes from presbyter. Intercede means to speak for in this sense - to pray for. Mary and the saints have no power for Catholics to do anything other than pray. Christians pray for each other, so I am not sure how having them pray for us is against scripture?

No creed, no rosary, no catholic catechism......

I am not sure how these relate to your posts about being saved by Christ. For Catholics, those do not save. The creed, as far as I have seen, is supported by scripture, every part of it can be referenced to the NT. Is this not the case? The Creed is a summary of scripture - which part of it disagrees with scripture? The rosary is a meditation on the Gospel - the events of the Gospel account while reciting the Our Father and Hail Mary (spoken by the ArcAngel) - so what is the issue there?
I do not get how the Catechism is a problem with what you quoted?

All these are false and are additions to the word of God

Can you explain how they are false? The idea of people praying for us seems scriptural, as does priests and bishops. I do not see how any of them are additions to the word of God.

You shall not add to the word which I command you, nor take anything from it

Deuteronomy 4:2

I agree that we should not add to the word - but where does the bible say the word is only found in what was written down?

Thy word is true from the beginning: and every one of Thy righteous judgments endureth for ever.

Psalm 119:160

Add thou not unto His words, lest He reprove thee, and thou be found a liar
Proverbs 30:6

Not sure how this supports that you can only believe in what was written, or that what was written was the only thing revealed?

For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book, If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book: And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book.

He which testifieth these things saith, Surely I come quickly. Amen. Even so, come, Lord Jesus.
Revelation 22:18-20

This seems to be in reference to adding to the Book of John. Nevertheless, adding to any of the written books would be wrong. But where does the bible say only to believe in what was written?

 

[Christ4Ever]

I was specifically curious if there is any scripture which says that you can only believe in what is written down.

Sorry for butting in, but I couldn't help myself

Reply to your question. Of cause not, but why should we when all that is being done is either adding or taking away what is already contained in the Holy Bible?

Do you believe that we might lose something of significance that is not found in the Holy Bible that God has not already included?

If so, is that not the same argument that Mormons, JW, and others would use and do use to support what they believe? Why would they be wrong and RCC right or for that matter the Protestant Churches if that were the case? Keep in mind that the same justifying answer you'll probably give, they too will give, if with a slightly different twist.

For as long as it has been around. It's been taken out of context, ridiculed, spit upon, burned and the list goes on and on. Yet it's still standing, while those who have done so or are still doing these things have or will be turned to dust. Everything else will pass away, but the Word of God is forever.

Love you Last Things
C4E
John 13:34-35

 

[B-A-C]

At one time, the Roman Catholic church excommunicated the astronomer Galileo because he stated the earth was not at the center of the universe.
Some of the other dogma of the Roman Catholic church has just been added in the last 200 or so years. Did God change during that time?

As for the Bible being our guide, I personally think it's how you interpret some scriptures. In Psalms 119 for example. Count how many times it says...
your Word, your statutes, your commandments, your Laws, your testimonies, your precepts, ...etc... (all of these things ARE the Bible).
Your word is a lamp unto my feet and a light unto my path. This the same as saying the Bible is to be our guide.
The book of Morman is in it's 31st edition (possible newer, that information is a few years old) at one time black people weren't allowed in heaven, for a long time polygamy was OK, but then they said it
wasn't OK. So did God change during this time? What about the people who thought what they were told a hundreds ago by the church was correct?

The Bible says there is but ONE mediator between man and God. Anything else is incorrect. There are no other verses that say otherwise.
The Bible says Jesus is our high-priest and that earthly priests are no longer necessary. Anything else is incorrect.
I've covered other things in previous posts, but you get the idea.

I would return to the Mary questions. Why pray to her? Why venerate her? Why name churches after her and not Jesus? Why statues of her and not Jesus?
Does the Bible say to do this anywhere? Or is this a teaching of the R.C. church that conflicts with other verses of the Bible?

Mal 3:6; "For I, the LORD, do not change; therefore you, O sons of Jacob, are not consumed.
Heb 13:8 Jesus Christ is the same yesterday and today and forever.
Jas 1:17; Every good thing given and every perfect gift is from above, coming down from the Father of lights, with whom there is no variation or shifting shadow.

The Word of God is all we need. Anything else added or taken away is suspect.

 

[Bob Tangent]

At one time, the Roman Catholic church excommunicated the astronomer Galileo because he stated the earth was not at the center of the universe.

I do not believe he was excommunicated, rather he was called into a trial for apparently violating scripture which seemed to support the Sun orbiting the Earth. No definitive judgment was ever reached. He was no longer able to publish. Keep in mind that Copernicus actually came up with the idea a century before. Galileo was pushing for universal acceptance, even though he could not explain certain aspects of his theory.

Some of the other dogma of the Roman Catholic church has just been added in the last 200 or so years. Did God change during that time?

As I recall, the Roman Catholic Church proclaims dogma what they believe has always been believed.

As for the Bible being our guide, I personally think it's how you interpret some scriptures. In Psalms 119 for example. Count how many times it says...
your Word, your statutes, your commandments, your Laws, your testimonies, your precepts, ...etc... (all of these things ARE the Bible).

How does this go against Roman Catholicism?

Your word is a lamp unto my feet and a light unto my path. This the same as saying the Bible is to be our guide.

That is assuming the bible is the only source of God's word. Keep in mind that for Catholics, Orthodox, Coptics, Lutherans, Anglicans, and others, the bible contains God's word but is not exclusively God's word. Non-liturgical Christians forget that for many Christians, God's word is what is revealed, not specifically what is written.

The Bible says there is but ONE mediator between man and God. Anything else is incorrect. There are no other verses that say otherwise.

It is my understand that all Christians believe this.

The Bible says Jesus is our high-priest and that earthly priests are no longer necessary. Anything else is incorrect.

Can you explain why the NT mentions presbyters? From which we get the word priest?

I would return to the Mary questions. Why pray to her? Why venerate her? Why name churches after her and not Jesus? Why statues of her and not Jesus?
Does the Bible say to do this anywhere? Or is this a teaching of the R.C. church that conflicts with other verses of the Bible?

I believe liturgical churches have statues of Jesus and Mary. Churches generally take on the names of people or events in the Gospel. It should be said that these names do not intend to take away from the accomplishments of Christ, but rather show their fruit.

The Word of God is all we need. Anything else added or taken away is suspect.

I think the question of this topic is if God's word is only what is written. Sola Scriptura was developed in the 16th Century.

 

[B-A-C]

rather he was called into a trial for apparently violating scripture which seemed to support the Sun orbiting the Earth. No definitive judgment was ever reached. He was no longer able to publish.

The point is, the church made a mistake. Something considered dogma was incorrect.

As I recall, the Roman Catholic Church proclaims dogma what they believe has always been believed.

Perhaps, but if there was no record of it, how would anyone know?

That is assuming the bible is the only source of God's word. Keep in mind that for Catholics, Orthodox, Coptics, Lutherans, Anglicans, and others, the bible contains God's word but is not exclusively God's word. Non-liturgical Christians forget that for many Christians, God's word is what is revealed, not specifically what is written.

And that is the problem. Revealed? by Who? God doesn't change, there are no "new doctrines" and the doctrines that do exist, don't go against the Bible.
The Bible is the plumb line everything else is measured against.

I think the question of this topic is if God's word is only what is written. Sola Scriptura was developed in the 16th Century.

Well first of all, all protestants do not believe in the 5 solae. For many of us, "sola scriptura" would have been invented in the 1st century.
Rev 22:18; I testify to everyone who hears the words of the prophecy of this book: if anyone adds to them, God will add to him the plagues which are written in this book;
Rev 22:19; and if anyone takes away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God will take away his part from the tree of life and from the holy city, which are written in this book.

The Bible says there is but ONE mediator between man and God. Anything else is incorrect. There are no other verses that say otherwise.
----- It is my understand that all Christians believe this.

Then why do they call Mary mediatrix? Why do they pray to her?

The Bible says Jesus is our high-priest and that earthly priests are no longer necessary. Anything else is incorrect.


----- Can you explain why the NT mentions presbyters? From which we get the word priest?

The word priest was around long before the word presbyter, in fact priests are mentioned in books of Genesis and Leviticus written around 4500 BC.
Presbyter just means "old man" or "over-seer". Many protestants have presbyters. These are usually regional directors, the purpose of a priest was to do
sacrifices. Of course this is no longer necessary.

 

[Bob Tangent]

The point is, the church made a mistake. Something considered dogma was incorrect.

I am not aware of any part of that incident being considered dogma?

Perhaps, but if there was no record of it, how would anyone know?

What do you mean - the early church has a long history of writings recording what was believed through the centuries.

And that is the problem. Revealed? by Who? God doesn't change, there are no "new doctrines" and the doctrines that do exist, don't go against the Bible.
The Bible is the plumb line everything else is measured against.

No one is saying there is to be new ideas - rather upholding what was always believed. Revealed is by God through the apostles and taught over time. Who decides what books go into the bible and which are excluded?

Well first of all, all protestants do not believe in the 5 solae. For many of us, "sola scriptura" would have been invented in the 1st century.
Rev 22:18; I testify to everyone who hears the words of the prophecy of this book: if anyone adds to them, God will add to him the plagues which are written in this book;
Rev 22:19; and if anyone takes away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God will take away his part from the tree of life and from the holy city, which are written in this book.

I am not sure how this supports sola scriptura? No one is advocating adds words to Revelation, much less the bible.

The Bible says Jesus is our high-priest and that earthly priests are no longer necessary. Anything else is incorrect.


----- Can you explain why the NT mentions presbyters? From which we get the word priest?

The word priest was around long before the word presbyter, in fact priests are mentioned in books of Genesis and Leviticus written around 4500 BC.
Presbyter just means "old man" or "over-seer". Many protestants have presbyters. These are usually regional directors, the purpose of a priest was to do
sacrifices. Of course this is no longer necessary.

Presbyter does not mean overseer, you are thinking of bishop. For more Christians, for 1500 years, there was a presbyter or priest to offer the Eucharist - communion. It was not but within the last 500 years that certain groups said the Eucharist was only bread and thus did not need a priest.

 

[james1523]

I don't like arguing the Bible or church traditions with Catholics - they are normally right and will always win, they have hundreds of years of scholars and theologians on their side. Bible teaching is usually pretty good and the evangelical and charity work is second to none really - Catholics have gone into nearly every country in the world, even in places that evangelicals are still trying to penetrate.

I think it is more effective to discuss the real issues, which is the pagan origins and practices of Catholic and Protestant church tradition.

Emperor Constantine copied the idea of clergy from the pagan religions, and gave them exalted status and separated them from the rest of the believers. These clergy also needed a way to support themselves and this was the introduced "Christian tithe", or church tax. Anglican, Lutheran et al. also copied this practice, because they knew no better, and being a priest in society was a fairly cushy and highly respected vocation at the time.

Having been in Buddhist, Hindu and other pagan temples, they all have these things in common:
Pews (or hard seats), singing, prayer, and a special priestly class that perform the rites or service, and separation of the clergy from the laity, and giving of donations. Many figurines of created and evil creatures, gods, demons, etcs - just like they have in Catholic Cathedrals.
The first thing I realized was that this was not much different from my local Anglican, Lutheran or Catholic church.
No wonder many people think that all religions are the same.
These places are spiritually dirty with the same evil religious spirits that frequent the Buddhist and Hindu temples.
That's why Catholic priests use holy water etc to ward off the evil in their churches. Buddhist and Hindu etc do the same thing.
Why do Catholic Priests use holy water, candles, incense, and sign of the cross to ward off evil, and how is this not different to the pagan practices of Hinduism and others?
I think it must work to some extent, but that's not the point. The point is it's pagan and these evil things are not supposed to be in the church to begin with.

If the Catholics could please explain why the Cathedrals of Europe have many superstitious things inside them, such as figurines of animals, that are supposed to be stroked to bring good luck, that are unrelated to the Bible or Christianity. Why they contain many sanctified superstitions of pagan Rome?