"For I have given unto them the words which thou gavest me; and they have received them, and have known surely that I came out from thee, and they have believed that thou didst send me." John 17:8

Notice in this verse Jesus said he gave his believers the Father's words.

Are believers who have lived for the past 1900 years and who live today the believers Jesus was speaking about? Where are these words now then?
They are the Old and New Testament Scriptures. I believe we have had them in the English language since they were translated into English in the 1500s, the KJV being the latest most accurate translation in English. The reason it is the most accurate is because it is the latest version to be translated from the Received Text.

DisplacedMaritimer(Bert) wrote:
Wayne,
Is it a false Gospel to preach Salvation by Faith and Works?

You do err on this. Do you understand the meaning of the word "grace"? The word grace as used in the Bible means the undeserved favour of God exercised toward the undeserving sinner. It is something given irrespective of any worthiness in man. When Rome introduces works or merit into any part of the system, the nature of grace is frustrated and destroyed.

Just because it is grace, it is given not on the basis of any preceding merits. It cannot be earned. That is why it is called "grace". It is entirely gratuitous.

Man, in his fallen nature, is enslaved to sin until he receives this unmerited favour of God or "grace". He can do nothing on his own. Everything he has done deserves only punishment, not favours or gifts. But God, in his mercy, has decreed that he will give grace to a large number of sinful persons who are entirely undeserving.

It is part of human nature to think that man should "earn" his salvation, but that is not in accord with God's Word.

The RCC officially rejects(see canons of Council of Trent) and in practice completely rejects salvation by faith alone; it teaches you must have the sacraments and good works. This is a false gospel. There is no salvation in a false gospel or a false church.

The apostle Paul makes it clear in Romans chap. 4 that we are justified by faith alone and he gives Abraham as an example.

"So also David declares the blessedness of the person to whom God credits righteousness apart from works: 'Blessed are they whose iniquities are forgiven and whose sins are covered. Blessed is the man whose sin the Lord does not record.' Romans 4:6-8
"Abraham believed God, and it was credited to him as righteousness." Rom 4:3b The righteousness of God is imputed or credited to the sinner who believes in Christ and His atonement as a complete sacrifice for his sins. This is called justification by faith.

James was talking about works being proof to our fellow man that we have faith; he was not teaching salvation by works; otherwise that would contradict Romans and other Scriptures.

You are trusting in a false dogma of the papacy. There is no biblical warrant for the Pope and Peter never was or considered himself as a Pope.

What Christ meant was that Peter was a little stone (petros) and Christ would build His church on another large rock, (petra). Christ was simply saying Peter was one stone in the church, but that Christ Himself was the foundation stone (1 Corinthians 3:11).

Read Peter's testimony in 1 Peter 2:4-8 where he denies he is the rock, but with all believers he is a little stone in the true Church. Christ never would have built his church on a fallible human beiing.

There is no historical record among early church fathers or in the Scripture that Peter ever was in Rome. There was no record of such a claim until centuries after. Don't you think it is kind of odd?

He was an apostle to the scattered Jews in other places.

DisplacedMaritimer (Bert) wrote:
If you can find another interpretation, I'd like to hear it.
Incidentally, the Church's interpretation is in line with Matt 16:19. Matt 18:18 and is a logical follow on to John 20:21.

Matt. 16:19 and 18:18 do not mention anything about auricular confession and therefore offer no support for it.

The meaning of the keys is explained in Bible commentaries.

Barton W. Johnson's says:
"19. I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of the heaven. That is, of the church. The office of the keys is to open the doors, or close them. On Pentecost, Peter first opened the doors and declared the conditions of which men could have their sins forgiven, be bound or loosed, and thus enter into the church. Seven years later at Cæsarea he declared the same conditions to the Gentiles. While Peter took the lead the keys were given to all the apostles, and to no other mortal. See Matt. 18:18, and John 20:19-28. All that is here said to Peter is said to all the apostles."

DisplacedMaritimer (Bert) wrote:
Wayne,
The Catholic Church has added nothing to Sacred Scripture.

The truth is John 20:23 is not meant to be taken the way the RC interprets it. To interpret a verse correctly, the sense of the rest of the Bible must be taken into consideration. You can't just take a verse alone and out of context if your interpretation is contrary to the rest of the Bible.

That interpretation runs contrary to all the other verses I quoted to you. Did you read any of them? You did not comment on the fact that the overwhelming number of verses teach salvation is by faith in Christ as Saviour. Why do you ignore all these verses?

DisplacedMaritimer (Bert) wrote:
It means that the Apostles have the authority to forgive sins. This is also in agreement with what Jesus says in Matt 16:19.

The apostles never practiced the form of confessions and absolution practiced by RC priests. You will not find that in th N.T. They only preached forgiveness of sins and salvation through faith in Christ. That is the clear teaching throughout the N.T. Check Acts 4:12 and 1 John 2:1,2. The apostle John does not mention the RC style of confessional and absolution. See John 3:36. Various others verses teach forgiveness is by faith. 1 John 1:9; Rom. 3:28; Rom 5:1; Eph. 2:8 Acts 16:31; Rom 4:5,6. All these verses prove it is by faith in Jesus Christ. The RC adds to this which is condemned the last vs in Bible. In Galatians, God pronounces an anathema on those who preach another gospel. You are adding another mediator. See also Rom.11:6; Gal.3:11; 2 Tim 1.9; Titus 3:5; Luke 17:10; 1 Cor 15:10; 2 Cor 3:5; John 3:16; Acts 13:39; Gal 2:16; Phil3:9.

DisplacedMaritimer(Bert) wrote:
John 20:23 is very clear that Jesus gave the Apostles the authority to forgive sins. As a check, I also looked up both Acts 13:38 and John 20:23 in the original Greek to see if they used the same word for "sin": they did (hamartia). So, if you argue that Jesus was not talking about forgiving sins in John 20:23, then you would have to accept that the forgiveness of sins cannot be preached as being through Jesus as is written in Acts 13:38. Since few Christians would accept the latter then the former must be true as well.

DisplacedMaritimer(Bert) wrote:
Jesus gave the Apostles the authority to fogive sins in John 20:23.

The apostles did not have the power to remit sins themselves; neither do RC priests.

God the Father sent Jesus to die to make a complete remission of sins.

Jesus then commissioned His apostles to preach the Gospel. What is that gospel? The answer is summarized in these verses:

"Moreover, brethren I declare unto you the gospel which I preached unto you, which also ye have received, and wherein ye stand; By which also ye are saved, if ye keep in memory what I preached unto you, unless ye have believed in vain. For I delivered unto you first of all that which I also received, how that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures; And that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures:" 1 Corinthians 15:1-4

"Be it known unto you therefore, men and brethren, that through this man is preached unto you the forgiveness of sins: And by him all that believe are justified from all things, from which ye could not be justified by the law of Moses." Acts 13:38,39

DisplacedMaritimer(Bert) wrote:
So, not all Traditions are taken strictly from Sacred Scripture. They must not violate anything in Sacred Scripture but they can have other origins.

You are being very deceptive here. First you admit the RC teaching, which I quoted, is Scripture and tradition are both to be venerated and accepted; then you contradict this by saying Scripture will always trump tradition. You can't have it both ways.

Almost all RC dogmas were invented down through the ages and contradict Scripture. But you are taught to just accept RC interpretation on the strength of their claim it is tradition. This in effect nullifies Scripture. Scripture has no authority to you because you accept the RCC as your authority.

2 Thess 2:15 refers to the verbal and written teaching of the Apostles and Prophets at that time because the New Testament was not yet completed. Once it was completed, all doctrine was written in Holy Scriptures and nothing new could be added under the heading of "tradition". Jesus condemned tradition. "But in vain they do worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men." Matthew 15:9

DisplacedMaritimer(Bert) wrote:
Hi Wayne,
I'm running out of ways to answer your questions, Wayne. I have corrected your claim that the Catholic Church holds Tradition, etc equal to Sacred Scripture many times yet you persist in your error.

If you are really a Roman Catholic, then you must know what they teach on such a basic issue. I have a book "Instructions in the Catholic Faith" by Parish Priests with the Imprimatur of "Most Rev. Cletus F. O'Donnell, J.C.D. revised 1980.

Quote
Lesson 3 Para. G. TRADITION
"Sacred tradition is the word of God entrusted by Christ the Lord and the Holy Spirit to the Apostles, and handed on to their successors in its full purity, so that led by the light of the Spirit of truth, they may in proclaiming it preserve this word of God faithfully, explain it, and make it more widely known. Consequently, it is not from sacred Scripture alone that the Church draws her certainty about everything which has been revealed. Therefore, both sacred tradition and sacred Scripture are to be accepted and venerated with the same sense of loyalty and reverence. Unquote

DisplacedMaritimer(Bert) wrote:
John,
Remember, many of the greatest theologians in history were Catholic. Do you know something they didn't?
opened eyes,

The false teachings of the RCC developed gradually over the centuries. There were some well-known theologians in the early centuries such as Augustine. I don't know much about them. I do know some "church fathers" contradicted others. Unanimity was rare if non-existent.

Possibly what some of them taught is not what is believed and taught be the RCC today. However, it would be an endless debate to get into who said what. The only real way to determine what is truth is with the Holy Scriptures.

Unfortunately the RCC places the interpretation of Church Fathers, decrees by Church councils, Popes, etc. on an equal level with Scripture. If you cling to that way of interpreting the Bible, you will never know what it is saying.

I would like to give you a challenge again. What is your hope or what are you trusting in for your salvation?

DisplacedMaritimer(Bert) wrote:
I have been able to respond to every claim that the Church is unBiblical with quotes from Scripture supporting the Church. You should really ponder that, John. If the Church was as bad as you think, I shouldn't have been able to do that.

Being able to give the RCC's answer to an argument proves nothing. Don't you think a well-studied Jehovah's Witness or Mormon could do the same thing in defence of his religion. So what does it prove? It certainly doesn't prove you are right any more than a JW or Mormon would be correct.

Remember the Pharisees and scribes who Jesus rebuked. They might have had a lot of head knowledge about religion, but they didn't have the truth. John in the UK is correct. You need to clear your mind out somehow, maybe be alone for a time, and just read and accept the plain truth in the Bible.

The Psalmist David said "Blessed is he whose transgression is forgiven, whose sin is covered. Blessed is the man unto whom the Lord imputeth not iniquity, and in whose spirit there is no guile." Psalm 32 vs 1,2.

DisplacedMaritimer(Bert) wrote:
If you believe in the intercession of Saints, then the quote "And she is truly a mediatress of peace between sinners and God." makes perfect sense. Mary intercedes for us to obtain God's Grace for us.

There is no record of the Apostles ever praying to Mary (or any other saints for that matter). Neither did they show Mary any special honour. The Apostles Peter, Paul, John, and James do not mention her in their epistles which they wrote to the churches. John took care of Mary until she died, but he does mention her in his three epistles or in the book of Revelation.

When the church was instituted on Pentecost, there was only one name given by which we must be saved. "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 This verse should tell you that it is a waste of time to pray to Mary or the saints. They are not omnipresent; they therefore cannot hear your prayers. The Scriptures make it clear Jesus is the only mediator between God and men.

You say provide the proof the RCC is unbiblical.

The proof is there in the Bible if you are willing to accept it.

Several areas which the Bible shows are unbiblical and prove it is a false church are:

The mass. No more sacrifice for sins can be made. Christ made a full atonement for sin.

Worship of Mary. We are commanded to worship God alone. Ten commandments EXodus Ch20. There are no other mediators. 1 Timothy 2:5 and other places.

Human priesthood not authorized. Study Hebrews.
We are to confess our sins to God through Jesus Christ. (one mediator)

Authority of scripture was not given to churchmen to be the final interpreters. The Holy Spirit is our teacher (John ch16) 1 John 2:27

Adding man-made inventions to religion down through the ages. Statues, images, holy water, pilgrimages, idolatry, worship of the host (Jesus is claimed to be physically in the host is a misinterpretation of John ch6).

Claiming followers must confess to a priest and he has the power to forgive sins (absolution) is false too. The various sacraments which have no warrant in Scripture. The only two ordinances/sacraments today are the Lord's Supper (memorial) and Baptism.

Claiming Baptism makes a person a christian is false.

DisplacedMaritimer(Bert) wrote:
Even the statement that you made in your last post about the Catholic Church being built on "unbiblical teachings of men" shows how far out to lunch this guy is

He quotes Bishop Alphonse de Liguori's book "The Glories of Mary" to show how Mary is worshipped.

"And she is truly a mediatress of peace between sinners and God. Sinners receive pardon by ...Mary alone" (pp 82,8l3)etc.

"The Holy Church commands a WORSHIP peculiar to Mary" (p.130)

"The Way of Salvation is open to none otherwise than through MARY," and since 'Our salvation is in the hands of Mary...He who is protected by Mary will be saved, he who is not will be lost" (pp.169,170).

DisplacedMaritimer (Bert) wrote:
Catholic Priests do not sacrifice animals on the Altar as the OT Priests did. But, they do still perform "Priestly" duties.

May I ask you to study Paul's Epistle to the Hebrews. As you study Hebrews, ask God to reveal the truth to you. I don't think you have really studied it with an open mind. There is not much use discussing the priesthood if you are not willing to read Hebrews and listen to what God's Word says Bert. Do you believe the Bible or only what the church or priest tells you?

Christ is the believer's only high priest today. There are no more sacrifices to be offered for sin. To try to offer sacrifices for sin is denying what Christ has already done. Christ has already made a complete atonement.

Your problem seems to be you have not yet accepted the Bible as God's revelation to mankind. You still think you need a priest, bishop, pope, or church council to interpret it for you. You will never come to the truth until you realize God wrote the Bible to ordinary believers, and not to church officials to interpret it for ordinary people. That is why we needed the Reformation.

DisplacedMaritimer (Bert) wrote:
Hi Wayne,
The reviews I have come accross of Boettner's work a typically like [URL=http://www.catholic.com/library/The_Anti_Catholic_Bible.asp]]]this one[/URL]. They point out that the book Roman Catholicism is not a scholarly work for many reasons including lack of references for some of his claims and for using heresay as verified data.
I think your last sentence "He found the RC Church to be built mainly on unbiblical teachings of men." sums up his work rather well because it is wrong and he has no evidence to support it. Not exactly what you would expect from a scholarly work.