Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Tim staples is a convert to the Catholic faith and he believed in Sola Scriptura at one time himself but found out that is not true when he studied it closer.
There are many Ministries who confess `If it is not in the Bible than don`t believe it `.....Then turn around and teach on revelations which came through the Spirit of God but are not clear in the text of the Bible ......But then there is a legalism ideas which reject true faith and see things in a spirit less ideas , which would ignore Jesus Holy Spirit , and His ideas of truth which Jesus has a hard time leading through His spirit ................ Then there are some who ignore the prophetic gifting of Christ and go Word only Churches...............Then there is in the Word of God which Jesus taught that His Spirit would continue to show you new things and help you remember the Words which Jesus said from the comforter Holy Spirit ...... Then there is the dragon spirit of the devil who imposes to be God brings a Word in to the churches which sounds intriguing but are contemptuous and faithless and border on the spirit of the false prophet , but people believe and this goes un-discerned through Holy Spirit`s gifting ...........Then there are the lesser critics of Jesus and then greater critics of Lord Jesus who are weak in Jesus Holy Spirit and have a difficult time believing and spending their time being the critic of a faithless to God ......... Then there is the grammar critic who must see the literal text in the grammar of man to believe , as God does not prove His Word through grammar , but tries to be articulate in His languages through His Spirit ....... See there are some pro`s and con`s for believing revelations from Christ into the metaphor and literal truths by the text or through the prophetic gifting of Christ
Tim staples is a convert to the Catholic faith and he believed in Sola Scriptura at one time himself but found out that is not true when he studied it closer.
Tim just traded one church (Baptist) for another one. Both have their problems. Mary is the mother of God? Really? Mary is in heaven? Really? I was raised Catholic but made my exodus out of that into greater truth.
No, I'm not saying the Catholic Church is wrong on all points. I still fellowship with my Catholic counterparts from time to time. They are just another sect among 15,000 today.
Oh, and having 15,000 denominations does not mean they are not true churches. Even Paul had to deal with schisms and sectarianism in his day. Just read his first epistle to the Corinthians. Schism and sects are not new to Christianity. They began when the church began and will always be with us till Christ returns.
If all sects today joined the Catholic Church you would still have the problem of believing error. So what have they gained if they went back? Even Catholics are sectarian. They tell "Christians" if you aren't a member of the Catholic Church you can't be saved . . . except: http://www.ewtn.com/library/SCRIPTUR/EXTRAECC.TXT
For instance, in the link I provide above the Catholic Church states:
"They who without fault do not know the Gospel of Christ and His Church,
but yet seek God with a sincere heart, and try with the help of grace to
fulfill his will, known through the dictate of conscience, can attain eternal
salvation."
Balogna. Salvation is only through what Christ accomplished in His death, burial and resurrection for mankind.
The only way to be saved in this current administration of grace is to believe the evangel of
Christ dying for our sins, being entombed and God rousing Him from the dead. You can be as sincere
as you want. Sincerity does not save a gnat. Faith saves; the faith God gives to believe.
Later on all mankind will enter into salvation per 1 Timothy 2:4-6 and 4:10; Romans 5:18,19; 1 Corinthians 15:22-28
to name a few, all based upon what Christ accomplished in His death for all mankind.
Tim staples is a convert to the Catholic faith and he believed in Sola Scriptura at one time himself but found out that is not true when he studied it closer.
Dear jan,
The Achilles heal of the Protestant, is that the canon of the Sola Scriptura comes from the Roman church. Like mother like daughter. Whether Protestant or Catholic, both are either in the fire or in the frying pan. Both rely on either, or both, Peter and Paul, as their foundation. There is only one foundation that will not wash away, and that is the heeding of the testimony of Yeshua (Mt 7:24-25)
Matthew 7: 24 "Therefore everyone who hears these words of Mine and acts on them, may be compared to a wise man who built his house on the rock. 25 "And the rain fell, and the floods came, and the winds blew and slammed against that house ; and yet it did not fall, for it had been founded on the rock
Mt 24:35, "Heaven and earth will pass away, but my words will never pass away"
Tim staples is a convert to the Catholic faith and he believed in Sola Scriptura at one time himself but found out that is not true when he studied it closer.
The very best Catholic Apologists such as Scott Hahn, Jimmy Aikin, Peter Kreeft are former Protestants.
They converted because they spent too much time studying the history of Christianity.
Former Catholics that convert to Sola Scriptura are generally very anti-catholic. However, most of the time these folks have a poor understanding of Catholicism.
Tim just traded one church (Baptist) for another one. Both have their problems. Mary is the mother of God? Really? Mary is in heaven? Really? I was raised Catholic but made my exodus out of that into greater truth.
One correction in your otherwise good response. Tim Staples was raised Southern Baptist which he "fell away" from as an adolescent. While in The Marines he enrolled in the Jimmy Swaggart Bible College studying youth ministries for the Pentecostal Assemblies of God. Along the way he converted to Catholicism, studied for the priesthood, then decided to become an apologist. His DVD Jimmy Swaggart Made Me A Catholic details his conversion. Jimmy Swaggart Made Me Catholic DVD: Tim Staples: 9781933919843: Amazon.com: Books
The very best Catholic Apologists such as Scott Hahn, Jimmy Aikin, Peter Kreeft are former Protestants.
They converted because they spent too much time studying the history of Christianity.
Former Catholics that convert to Sola Scriptura are generally very anti-catholic. However, most of the time these folks have a poor understanding of Catholicism.
This book contains the moving testimonies of fifty priests who found their way, by the grace of God, out of the labyrinth of Roman Catholic theology and practice into the light of the gospel of Christ. But this is not a narrowly polemical work, nor is its relevance limited to the ongoing controversy between Rome and the churches of the Reformation. The love and concern felt by the former priests for those they left behind, and their fervent desire that they too should experience the joy and peace of salvation in Christ are seen throughout. The wider relevance of the experiences described will also be felt in many contexts remote from Roman Catholicism where human pride and presumption have erected rival sources of authority between people and the Word of God, so obscuring the way of salvation by grace alone, through faith alone, and in Christ alone.
The fact these former priests are not some polemicists, but loving and concerned is a refreshing change from Tim Staple's rhetoric.
Here's an interesting open letter with no copyright from James White to Tim Staples following their debate:
11/19/96
TO: Tim Staples, St. Joseph Catholic Radio
FROM: James White, Alpha and Omega Ministries
RE: The Debate in Review: An Open Letter to Tim Staples
Dear Tim:
It's truly amazing what a good 40+ mile bike ride will do for you. It was great to get back home, see my wife and kids, pick up my bike from the shop (replete with a new frame, no less!), and head out on the road. This time, though, I wasn't listening to tapes of you speaking, I was recalling specifics of a most memorable evening in Fullerton.
Now I note right off that I don't have the tapes of our debate as yet. I assume they will arrive in a few days. So, I'm going from memory, and from my notes. Hence, some things I will leave for later refutation, as I will want to double-check the specific citations with the tapes. But a number of specific statements have stuck in my mind, and I wish to bring them to your attention. Let me also note that this is an open letter. It is being uploaded to Internet mailing lists, and will be posted on our web page. If you would like to write a response, we could post it as well [ as of 2/25/97, no response, public or private, has been received].
Allow me first to say that I felt things went quite well Saturday night, at least as far as the facilities and organization went. Plummer Auditorium is a fine facility, and though I think we got kicked out a tad bit early, in general it was a good location for the debate.
I was much less excited, however, by a number of things that detracted a good bit from the debate, at least from a professional viewpoint. While the moderator took great pains to be fair, you took advantage of him many times, and went over your time limit again and again and again. I have found this a common thing amongst Roman Catholic apologists: Gerry Matatics can't restrain himself, either. I hope in the future you will show more respect for your opponent, and the audience, by paying attention to that issue.
On a personal level, I was quite simply shocked at the amount of ad-hominem argumentation you utilized in our debate. Of course, I find such tactics indicative of a lost cause, Tim, but I also get the feeling that you were doing what you had been instructed to do by folks like Patrick Madrid, who likewise uses the "insult, deprecate, and impugn your opponent" means of debating. I had honestly hoped for something better.
Throughout the debate you accused me of misrepresentation, out-of-context citation, and toward the end, direct "misquoting" of Augustine and Athanasius. Sadly, you never proved those accusations, nor, as we both know, could you. I saw what resources you had, and you did not have the original contexts of any of the citations I gave. I saw your list of short quotes from the Fathers-it was all you had with you. You can't hardly prove I've been misquoting someone when you don't even have the quotes I've been given! I, on the other hand, had the entire Eerdman's set on my hard-drive, the volume of Athanasius sitting on my desk, and a good ten times the amount of cited material in your packet in my own notes. I'm sure your followers will accept your claims without question, and will never bother to look up what Athanasius actually said. However, what of those who are not your followers, Tim? What of the person who is simply seeking the truth? Will they not notice that it makes no sense to accuse me of misrepresenting someone on the basis of citations from Athanasius' words to Serapion since I was not citing that material? You see, the fair and scholarly thing to say would be, "I believe you are misrepresenting Athanasius' entire doctrine of authority and tradition, and here is a citation that supports my assertion." But, of course, your citation didn't provide that kind of basis, so it seems better to simply cloud the emotions with strong assertions that do not accurately reflect the reality. I simply point out, Tim, that you did not respond to a single reference I gave to Athanasius, Augustine, Theodoret, Basil, or anyone else, in the context in which it was given. You did not even attempt to deal with the extensive material I provided, based upon the original writings of Athanasius in the Greek language, in my article in the book, Sola Scriptura! The Protestant Position on the Bible (pages 27-62, specifically, endnotes 41 through 46). What makes this even more important is that I cited from Athanasius' letter to Serapion in that article, and provided a strong passage indicating his assertion of the self-sufficiency of Scripture, and the passage you cited did not in any meaningful way contradict that. Tragically, you continue to ignore the corrections offered on your misunderstanding of sola scriptura, and on the basis of that, think you have found contradictions to it in patristic sources. Your unwillingness to stand corrected, Tim, is loud testimony to the correctness of my charge: you believe in sola ecclesia.
I give you the opportunity now, Mr. Staples, to document and substantiate your accusations that any passage I cited in our debate, or in my written works, is "mis-cited" or is in fact "out of context" in any way, shape, or form. In fact, allow me to be of assistance to you in your attempt to substantiate the accusations you made so easily Saturday evening, and that were so readily accepted by your devoted followers. I quoted four passages from Athanasius. I here provide you not only with the passages themselves, but with the immediate context, in Greek, of each one. I look forward to the demonstration on your part, Tim, of how any of these passages is "out of context." I will use the standard source here: Migne, volume and page. First, Migne 25:196:
The fact these former priests are not some polemicists, but loving and concerned is a refreshing change from Tim Staple's rhetoric.
Well, Al, that really doesn't address the point that those who convert to Sola Scriptura (a bankrupt doctrine anyway) most often become polemical.
The point of this thread remains true: that Sola Scriptura is as much an Achilles' Heel as claiming that an organization of men has that authority both views seek in the wrong places.
Tim just traded one church (Baptist) for another one. Both have their problems.
- as all institutions comprised of fallen men have problems, but the fact that all institutions are comprised of mere men does not mean that all institutions are equal.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eusebius
Mary is the mother of God? Really?
- yes, really. Jesus Christ is God.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eusebius
Mary is in heaven? Really?
- yes, even if you refuse to believe in Marian appearances, miracles, early tradition, and scriptural references, there would be no reason to believe the MOTHER of Christ does not have a favored place in Heaven. To suggest she does not is, quite frankly, evil.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eusebius
No, I'm not saying the Catholic Church is wrong on all points. I still fellowship with my Catholic counterparts from time to time. They are just another sect among 15,000 today.
-As if you are in any position to judge the venerable Catholic church, and its standing with
Christ ? And to equate this 2,000 year old church with over a billion members with any other pea-brained sect ? says a lot.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eusebius
Oh, and having 15,000 denominations does not mean they are not true churches. Even Paul had to deal with schisms and sectarianism in his day. Just read his first epistle to the Corinthians. Schism and sects are not new to Christianity. They began when the church began and will always be with us till Christ returns.
- a banal point of no value, laced with relativist suggestion.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eusebius
For instance, in the link I provide above the Catholic Church states:
"They who without fault do not know the Gospel of Christ and His Church,
but yet seek God with a sincere heart, and try with the help of grace to
fulfill his will, known through the dictate of conscience, can attain eternal
salvation." Balogna. Salvation is only through what Christ accomplished in His death, burial and resurrection for mankind.
Illogical. It was impossible for those before Christ's incarnation to
believe mindfully in Him, yet He saved many of them. Time is no barrier to God. Those who never
hear the Gospel can still be touched by the Holy Spirit in their consciences and souls. Job had
faith in his physical resurrection before Christ was incarnate. The Chinese who lived
during the time of Christ are not in some non-salvific limbo or hell just because they didn't
hear the good news.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eusebius
Later on all mankind will enter into salvation per 1 Timothy 2:4-6 and 4:10; Romans 5:18,19; 1 Corinthians 15:22-28 to name a few, all based upon what Christ accomplished in His death for all mankind.
No, that's not what these words say. They say that God's sacrifice made our salvation possible, and that He wants all to be saved, but cannot save all who reject Him in deed or call good-evil and evil-good. That is the unpardonable sin never to be forgiven, as Christ said, and those who refuse God
or rebel against Him in this way are not going to Heaven. There is sacrifice involved in loving Christ and God as HE WANTS to be loved. God will say He never knew many who will call His name but did not live
according to what He has said IS good.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
