Please help refute this....Sola scripture vs Roman Catholicism

suzyq_psu · #1 Mar 29, '12, 12:44 pm

Hello there, I am new to these forums but I am struggling between my faith and that of scripture alone. I keep going back and forth, it's torturous! Anyways I came upon this, so could you refute it, please? It talks about how the church wasn't built on Peter also he has other thread talking of how Catholics were pagans turned Christians and that's where we get most of the rituals.

http://prorege-forum.com/forum_entry.php?id=11558

Stilldreamn · #2 Mar 29, '12, 12:52 pm

"People with closed minds do not want to hear or read the truth" (quoted from the above link, referring to Catholics.

Definately needs a mirror to remove that beam from his own eye.

I wouldn't listen to this guy, honestly. You'll find more truth on all sides, here in this forum.

suzyq_psu · #3 Mar 29, '12, 12:55 pm

I truly want to believe that Roman Catholicism is the way but I also need reassurance, that's why I brought it here to be refuted, for some peace of mind. My soul has been tortured with this kind of stuff for too long, so I am asking the experts.

pablope · #4 Mar 29, '12, 12:59 pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by suzyq_psu

Hello there, I am new to these forums but I am struggling between my faith and that of scripture alone. I keep going back and forth, it's torturous! Anyways I came upon this, so could you refute it, please? It talks about how the church wasn't built on Peter also he has other thread talking of how Catholics were pagans turned Christians and that's where we get most of the rituals.

http://prorege-forum.com/forum_entry.php?id=11558

Just from what he wrote here......

In the Greek, we would read it as, Thou art Petros (meaning a stone) and upon this Petra (meaning a massive rock, referring to Peter's confession of Christ being the Son of the Living God) I will build my church, meaning not on a stone but upon a massive rock; and Scripture tells us that Christ was a Rock.

He is just picking arguments from anti-catholics. The native tongue of the apostles was Aramaic, so was Jesus....so these words were originally spoken in Aramaic, not greek....anyway, substitute petros and petra for Kepha...which is aramaic for Rock.....then you get the sense of it.

And besides, you cannot separate peter/cephas from his faith...both have to go together....you cannot have one over the other....so it was built upon the rock steady peter/cephas......

There is more here......http://www.thesacredpage.com/2011/08...dings-for.html

Isaiah 22 is clearly the background for the promise of the “keys to the Kingdom.” Aside from Judges 3:23-25, which has no thematic parallels, Isaiah 22 is the only passage of the Old Testament where the word “key” even occurs. The thematic parallels are strong: the promise to Eliakim concerning “opening” and “shutting” is repeated to Peter, although using the terms “binding” and “loosing.” “Binding” and “loosing” were technical terms in first century Judaism referring to the authority to decide matters of halakhah (lit. “the walk”, i.e. “the behavior” or “how one behaves”), that is, the practical application of divine law.

Stilldreamn · #5 Mar 29, '12, 1:02 pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by suzyq_psu

I truly want to believe that Roman Catholicism is the way but I also need reassurance, that's why I brought it here to be refuted, for some peace of mind. My soul has been tortured with this kind of stuff for too long, so I am asking the experts.

Since you indicate you are already Catholic, I advise you to stay there - by any definition, the RCC goes by Sola Scriptura, too. It's a matter of difference in who has the authority to interpret the meaning and intent of Scripture.

Life out here in Protestantland is not any clearer - why else would we be lurking on these forums, testing our own faiths?

Sometimes I feel like a hungry urchin, looking in a window at a well-fed, happy family.

And sometimes, not!

Peace

AdesteFideles · #6 Mar 29, '12, 1:06 pm

Hi Suzy.

I would recommend a nice and simple start to all of this; specifically, by going to the Pope Fiction section of EWTN's audio library. You could listen to these however you should like, but I think a great place to start would be episode number 2: St Peter Wasn't the Rock in the New Testament? Patrick Madrid, the presenter of these programs, is a very intelligent and kind person; and I think he outlines the basic Catholic response to these sorts of objections incredibly well.

To get a good start in this paganism subject, I'd recommend this article.

onemangang · #7 Mar 29, '12, 1:06 pm

In Regards to St. Peter
http://www.americancatholictruthsoci...arofChrist.mp3

And for some other listening pleasure here is more Servant of God Fulton Sheen

http://www.americancatholictruthsoci...cles/sheen.htm

Peace be to you!

pablope · #8 Mar 29, '12, 1:09 pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by suzyq_psu

I truly want to believe that Roman Catholicism is the way but I also need reassurance, that's why I brought it here to be refuted, for some peace of mind. My soul has been tortured with this kind of stuff for too long, so I am asking the experts.

http://www.catholic-pages.com/pope/hahn.asp

If you want to read more......http://chnetwork.org/resources/coming-home-journals/

Just one more thing...do you know which is the pillar and bulwark of Truth?

This is in the Bible...and it is not the Bible.

**Della** · #9 Mar 29, '12, 1:09 pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by suzyq_psu

I truly want to believe that Roman Catholicism is the way but I also need reassurance, that's why I brought it here to be refuted, for some peace of mind. My soul has been tortured with this kind of stuff for too long, so I am asking the experts.

First of all, and I write this in all love and kindness, why bother with this kind of thing? If only you knew how silly these "argments" are! I was a former "Bible only" Christian and I can tell you that nothing this person writes is anywhere near the truth about the Catholic Church.

First of all, the Bible is the Catholic Church's book. It was the Catholic Church that compiled its books and decided on which ones would be included in it and why, so this person wouldn't even have a Bible if it weren't for the Church he hates.

Secondly, there is plenty of biblical evidence for Peter's primacy among the other Apostles. Those who deny this either ignore this evidence or don't want to see it there because of their bias.

Thirdly, there is nothing wrong with using robes and candles and so on in the rites of the Church just because other religions also use them. Each item used in Catholic liturgies has a name and a purpose. They weren't just stolen from the pagans. Once again, this person doesn't know what he's talking about. Many of our liturgies and practices have their roots in the Old Testament not in pagan Rome.

Lastly, people like this love to use scare tactics to unsettle the faith of others. Anyone who devotes himself to attempting to destroy faith in people is not doing God's work. Stop reading this garbage and read your own Church's teachings instead. Pick up a Catechism of the Catholic Church or go online to read it if you want to know what Catholics really believe.

iohanne · #10 Mar 29, '12, 1:12 pm

I highly encourage you to do your own research on the history of our Church. That way you can stand your own ground and be confident in what you believe in.

For now, I'd like to remind you of the fact that a lot of things that Catholicism is being criticised for by Protestants are things that exist in Eastern Orthodoxy, Oriental Orthodoxy and the Assyrian Church of the East - four big Churches that all existed before the schism. We all have origins in that first early Church and we have all inherited things from it that Protestants have rejected. Think about it this way: we've been separated from the Coptic Orthodox Church since the 451 A.D - that's 1, 561 years and yet we have much, much, much more in common with them than with Protestants. Like the worship in the Jewish temple which used incense and liturgies and set forums, we all use holy water, holy oil, incense, candles, chanting, holy images, infant baptism, liturgical calendars, veneration of saints, etc. Furthermore, all of us believe that these developments which we all share in common and have safeguarded throughout all the centuries are legitimate and organic developments that are inspired by the Holy Spirit:

"Upon this rock, I shall build my church and the gates of Hell shall not prevail against it." Matthew 16:18

"I have much more to say to you, more than you can now bear. But when he, the Spirit of truth, comes, he will guide you into all the truth." John 16:12-13.

"I am with you always even until the end of the time." Matthew 28:20

The Church as a whole cannot apostatise and the Holy Spirit leads her to grow, like a seed into a beautiful flower. The Protestant Reformation was reacting to legitimate corruption in the Catholic Church but went too far in the extreme and began to attempt to turn the flower back into a seedling. Now you have Protestant Churches who believe things and practice things that the original Reformers would have considered unthinkable and downright heretical. Martin Luther for example believed in the Real Presence - he was just down on the sacrificial aspect of the Mass. Martin Luther believed that Mary was truly the Mother of God. Martin Luther's Mass is even more conservative than the modern Novus Ordo Mass - he thought it was "too" progressive to even pull the altars away from the walls and have priests look at the people.

* * *

The Bible is a part of Church Tradition - it took us centuries to figure out what's definitively part of the Biblical canon and what's not. And even once we did figure it out, the vast majority of the laity was illiterate so even the Bible was Oral Tradition for even more centuries after that - people relied on icons, stained glass windows, statues and Church art and architecture to teach them about the faith. People relied on the Mass to listen to the Scriptures read out loud. I'm going to give you a Youtube video on the history of the Bible but it's told from an Orthodox perspective but Catholics should have no problem with it.

Part 1 - The Old Testament : http://youtu.be/p7H6wJ43K_s

Part 2 - The New Testament : http://youtu.be/5ztfwfS6FEc

Part 3a - Development of the New Testament : http://youtu.be/wpmHZzURwZY

Part 3b - Development of the New Testament : http://youtu.be/yVEM-vZXWOI

Part 4 - Refuting Sola Scriptura : http://youtu.be/tpMEJNLp0Cw

Try and watch it all rather than skipping to Part 5 because you need context to really understand.

suzyq_psu · #11 Mar 29, '12, 1:33 pm

Thank you to EVERYONE who has replied, such thoughtful responses!

And as to the reasoning as to why I am here...and no I do not take offense. The exact reason why I am here is to learn more about my faith and to grow in it, so when I have doubts I like to have reasons to refute those doubts from others who are more versed in scripture and the faith. I am turning to all of you to help me be more confident so that in hopes one day I can defend my faith to others.

I will be on more tomorrow, I need to go pick up my kids from school and I will return when I have more time to discuss (usually baby's naptime)

Thank you all again.
Suzanne

**po18guy** · #12 Mar 29, '12, 1:46 pm

Ask yourself how some 5 year old website, run by strangers (with no authority to interpret scripture), could possibly lead you to the truth. Please avoid all such web sites like the plague that they are. They serve only to confuse and cause doubt - which is of the enemy. They claim to follow the bible but they are hypocrites - privately interpreting scripture, which the bible prohibits. Notice who it was that wrote that we are not to privately interpret scripture: Peter (2 Peter 1:20). Strange, huh? Please consider getting a copy of Catholicism for Dummies and reading through it. It will teach you the truth about the Church.

SteveVH · #13 Mar 29, '12, 2:12 pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by Stilldreamn

Since you indicate you are already Catholic, I advise you to stay there - by any definition, the RCC goes by Sola Scriptura, too. It's a matter of difference in who has the authority to interpret the meaning and intent of Scripture.

Sola Scriptura is not a practice or belief of the Catholic Church, so I think your comment is more than a little misleading. The Catholic Church is the authentic interpreter and guardian of the deposit of faith handed down by the Apostles through Sacred Tradition. Sacred Scripture is that part of Sacred Tradition committed to writing and is not exhaustive of its belilefs or practices. Sacred Tradition along with Sacred Scripture encompass the fullness of truth found in the Catholic Church. The Catholic Church is an Apostolic Church, not a Bible Church. The Bible came from the Church, not the Church from the Bible.

We have someone here with questions between the two, so let's please be clear and not add to their confusion.

awsiukiewicz · #14 Mar 29, '12, 2:14 pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by Della

First of all, and I write this in all love and kindness, why bother with this kind of thing? If only you knew how silly these "argments" are! I was a former "Bible only" Christian and I can tell you that nothing this person writes is anywhere near the truth about the Catholic Church.

First of all, the Bible is the Catholic Church's book. It was the Catholic Church that compiled its books and decided on which ones would be included in it and why, so this person wouldn't even have a Bible if it weren't for the Church he hates.

Secondly, there is plenty of biblical evidence for Peter's primacy among the other Apostles. Those who deny this either ignore this evidence or don't want to see it there because of their bias.

Thirdly, there is nothing wrong with using robes and candles and so on in the rites of the Church just because other religions also use them. Each item used in Catholic liturgies has a name and a purpose. They weren't just stolen from the pagans. Once again, this person doesn't know what he's talking about. Many of our liturgies and practices have their roots in the Old Testament not in pagan Rome.

Lastly, people like this love to use scare tactics to unsettle the faith of others. Anyone who devotes himself to attempting to destroy faith in people is not doing God's work. Stop reading this garbage and read your own Church's teachings instead. Pick up a Catechism of the Catholic Church or go online to read it if you want to know what Catholics really believe.

Stilldreamn · #15 Mar 29, '12, 2:25 pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by SteveVH

Sola Scriptura is not a practice or belief of the Catholic Church, so I think your comment is more than a little misleading. The Catholic Church is the authentic interpreter and guardian of the deposit of faith handed down by the Apostles through Sacred Tradition. Sacred Scripture is that part of Sacred Tradition committed to writing and is not exhaustive of its belilefs or practices. Sacred Tradition along with Sacred Scripture encompass the fullness of truth found in the Catholic Church. The Catholic Church is an Apostolic Church, not a Bible Church. The Bible came from the Church, not the Church from the Bible.

We have someone here with questions between the two, so let's please be clear and not add to their confusion.

I did not intend it to be misleading - my point actually was that the OP should not imagine that the Protestant claims of Sola Scriptura was an indication that Catholic teachings were not founded upon those same scriptures.