Correct Addy:

is the new site, but if you click on that link, it may not go there. But if you put that addy in your URL box, it will go there.  The Invisionzone forum has many categories of Bible & Theology with special forums for each.  This Bravenet site here is the old general forum site.  We may eliminate that invision site because it is expensive and is not getting enough traffic.

Welcome!  You are at, which is the general forum for  Persons are invited to post on Bible and Theology (widely interpreted).  Some postings may be chosen to be reposted on  Give & receive love here. If you post here, please do not use "Anonymous" or the like. Choose your own screen names, but do not use one that you know is already being used by someone else. Please: 

1. You may debate with any ideas posted, but do not post objections to the topic, style, spelling, use of capital letters, or grammar of anyone's posting.  For example, you may debate whether the moon is made of green cheese, but kindly refrain from reviling a poster by telling him that it is politically incorrect to discuss green cheese.   

2. Do not post complaints or attacks vs. other posters.  

3. No obscene language,cuss words, or blasphemy may be used.   

4. Send complaints privately by e-mail to  If your posting is deleted, it could be because it violates forum rules or is just chosen for a short run on the forum.  

  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . If you want the password, register your screen names by e-mail, as password may be needed again if problems arise on the Forum. CHECK OUT THE search function, which is good: it checks the content of the postings.

Note that if you paste onto the Forum, for some reason Bravenet may change your quote marks and apostrophes into something else, like little boxes or funny U's.   Thanks for coming, participating, and for showing love . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Also try out our new site:

Start a New Topic 
View Entire Thread
Re: I Wait for Arch to Disprove Sola Scriptura

Re: I Wait for Arch to Disprove Sola Scriptura

I use capitalized Church to mean the Body of Christ, the universal (catholic) Church, as opposed to local church. This is not an error.

This is really a quibble to the discussing. I don't grant you a copyright on "Catholic Church," I'll grant you one on Roman Catholic Church & use RCC as an abbreviation to include all the papists.

I'll decide what to call myself, Arch; & ask no permiso from papists -- LOL.

I don't err when I speak of verbal prophecy that has not been written down. I don't claim that no verbal prophecy was ever written down.

You are making assertions now without proof. Realize that I don't accept it just because you say so.

How do you know that papal bulls were influenced by the Holy Spirit instead of an evil spirit? Where is your copy of the Sacred Tradition? I never heard of any such book. I don't follow you very well, since you seem to have left off proving thing & now are resorting to "I say so."

I still wait for you to prove that anything other than the 66 books readily & commonly available to men, is God's Word. If you think the Bulls are, then prove it. How do you know that the RCC teachings are Christ-intended? The RCC is vastly different from NT Christianity. Have you read the Bible even once, Arch?

Arch, I own more than one copy of the Apostolic Fathers. I have it in my computer & have read it. I have it both in Greek & in translation. Have you ever read it? Please answer my questions. For ultimately you need to read the Bible & compare it with the apocrypha & the Apostolic Fathers -- hopefully you can see the difference between God's word & the word of religious men.

How do u know that the Apostolic Fathers don't differ from RCC beliefs? Where is there any pope in the Apostolic Fathers?

"Given that St. Paul and the Twelve gave oral prophecies and teachings on Christ, it necessarily follows that these were written down at some time by an early Father of the Church."

You say that

A. Given oral prophecy

this implies

B. it was written down at some time by an early Church Father.

That simply is not logical. How do you know that all oral prophecy was intended to be written down & in fact was? Do you even find such a claim in the Apostolic Fathers? Where? I doubt that many RCC scholars would agree with you on that alleged implication.

The Sheep of the Catholic Church (my Church as opposed to the RCC) accept God's Word when they hear it. They never waited for ecclesiastical councils. It was accepted right away. It is self-evident that the Bible is God's Word. The Bible does not depend for authenticity upon any ecclesiastical councils. The councils are judged by the Word of God.

If you have some proof that ecclesiastical councils are superior in authority to the Bible, kindly present it.

How do you know that the apocrypha is God's word? Have you read it? How do you know that rejecting those books defies the Trinity? Why doesn't the NT ever quote the apocrypha to settle an argument or as the Word of God?

I still wait for you to prove that anything outside the 66 books generally & readily available to men is God's word. Kindly give proof, not a recitation of unproven assertions.

Where does the Bible say that Peter would be head of the Church? Where does it say that their would be successors to Peter. No where!

The YouTube claim was that RCC apologists disproved sola scriptura -- but neither they nor you have disproved the idea that the 66 books are the only generally & readily available Word of God.

Now you change the subject to my proving sola scriptura. I don't have to do that to demonstrate that your disproof failed.

As I have told you before, we agree that the 66 books are God's word. I accept that as self-evident. (I discuss it below on this site; faith, epistemology). Our agreement on the 66 books is common ground; we both accept it.

My testimony is that I have never read any other document for which it was self-evidently God's word. The NT doesn't say the apoc is God's word, tho it was available.

By this time in our discussion it has become apparent that you cannot prove any other available writing, other than the 66 books, is God's Word. Why don't you admit it? You have no proof, & no logical reason (traceable to axioms) to accept the apocrypha or anything else other than the 66 books.

Let me wish you the best. If you would trust the Lord Jesus as your only & sufficient Savior, I think you would understand these things much better.

I wish you the best & every blessing.

Re: I Wait for Arch to Disprove Sola Scriptura

It is a universal truth that Catholic designates my denomination and catholic the entire Christian church, I was not trying to claim copyrights, just using the English language correctly.

Regardless of that, I have already stated where this discussion will be renewed if you so desire.

The original topic of MY post has still not even been addressed by you.

I promise I will prove where the Word of God is seen outside of the Bible as soon as you prove sola scriptura from within the bounds of the Bible.

THAT is the discussion, do not change the topic because you cannot prove it.

Admit defeat on that point before you ask me your questions pr else prove your case.

Which will it be:
Surrender or proof?

Those are your ONLY two choices.

Re: I Wait for Arch to Disprove Sola Scriptura

QUOTE: "It is a universal truth that Catholic designates my denomination and catholic the entire Christian church, I was not trying to claim copyrights, just using the English language correctly."

It is true that in the USA the term Catholic is commonly used to refer the Roman Catholic Church or the papal system. However, it is not a universal truth as you claim, since I am in the universe, and many deny the validity of seizing the term catholic and claiming ownership. I think your denomination is called The Roman Catholic Church, which may e called an oxymoron, as Rome is not the universe.

As a matter of fact a great number of denominations recite "I believe in the Holy Catholic Church" in their liturgy, with no ref to the papacy at all.

Similarly, the expression "The Church" is often used (wrongly) to refer to the RCC. But if you live in Utah, it will probably mean the "Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints."

"The original topic of MY post has still not even been addressed by you."

I have addressed the content of your posts extensively. I do let you know that I do not except your framing of the debate.

I suggest you stop attacking a straw man. My POV is that the only source of God's Word which I have ever found (readily available to me) is the 66 books.

I don't need to prove that the 66 books are God's Word to you since we agree on it. You need to prove that something else (generally & readily available) is God's Word, since we do not agree on it. I don't think you can do it.

Do you admit your error & recant?

Re: I Wait for Arch to Disprove Sola Scriptura

It is a matter of semantics with which you argue.
Only the Catholic Church (all rites inclusive) are capital C Catholic.
All other Christian churches are lower case c catholic.

You call the title of the RCC an oxymoron.
I call your misunderstanding of the title moronic.
Did you not know that the RCC is not the only Catholic Church under the Papacy as institued by Christ? There are some 20 or so different Catholic Churches under the Pope. The RCC is not universal, but the Catholic Church is.

You err again, other churches say "I believe in the holy catholic church" not "I believe in the Holy Catholic Church" like we do. I have delineated the difference between the two already.

You still have not proven your point of sola scriptura so truly it should be you who admits your error and recants.

However, I don't want you to make youself look like a fool again by using irrelevent verses to support your heresy.

I have a extra biblical simple tradition that you cannot deny: the Canon of Scripture.

Is this canon contained within Scriputre itslef anywhere? No, it is not.
Thus, we know that because the exact table of contents is inspired in and of itself, that at least this outside of Scripture is truly God's Word.

I STill Wait for Arch to Disprove Sola Scriptura

I don't agree with you. I capitalize Church when it means the Body of Christ, the true Catholic, Universal Church. The Bible never speaks of this Church having "rites." What is your proof that it has "rites" acknowledged by God?

There is no such thing as "other Christian churches." I challenge you to quote even one Bible verse where there is a group of "other Christian churches." The Bible never uses Church (ekklesia) to refer to a denomination. It uses ekklesia to refer to a (secular) assembly, a group of Christians in a geographical region, like the Church of Ephesus, for a group that meets in someone's house (house church) -- see start of Philemon, and for the Body of Christ (Church universal). Never for any denomination, any so-called "rite," never for a building.

"You call the title of the RCC an oxymoron.
I call your misunderstanding of the title moronic. "


Let me see your proof that there is more than one Catholic Church. There is ONE CHURCH CATHOLIC in the Bible. Just one. Yours are figments of your imagination.

1 Cor

" we, who are many, are one body in Christ,"

" For in one Spirit were we all baptized into one body, whether Jews or Greeks, whether bond or free; and were all made to drink of one Spirit. "

" There is one body, and one Spirit, even as also ye were called in one hope of your calling; 5 one Lord, one faith, one baptism, 6 one God and Father of all, who is over all, and through all, and in all. "

"And let the peace of Christ rule in your hearts, to the which also ye were called in one body; and be ye thankful."

Arch when you say "other churches say,"
again you err. There are not OTHER CHURCHES, just one!

From an anglicanhistory site: "And in the two great Creeds of Christendom, the Creeds which declare the Faith as it has been held by Christians all over the world from the beginning, the Apostles' Creed and the Nicene Creed, we say, I believe in One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church."

My Point is that sola (only) the 66 books have been shown to me to be God's Word. We agree on the 66. If you have proof on anything else, please give it or recant. It is axiomatic & common group that the 66 books are God's word. Sola: Nothing else is common ground; I have no evidence that anything else readily available to the common person is God's Word. If you have the proof give it, or admit you do not have such proof. Do you give it or admit?


God's Word is recognizable by all born-again Christians.
They did not & do not wait for ecclesiastical councils.