Fine.
But "the church" shouldn't go around and claim that the devil is the "great deceiver" and then turn right around and make the claim that "their church has the real answers" because isn't that EXACTLY the claim that the devil would make because he's the "great deceiver"?
Kinda of circular logic, isn't it?
In their defense most of their existence was before the printing press, so they kind of had to adopt policy of take our word for it let us interpret the Bible for you. They couldn't exactly give the average illiterate peasant access to a rare handwritten, handpainted animal vellum book that cost the equivalent of $100,000 today to make.
The Catholic Church makes the claim because Jesus founded a Church on Peter (Matt 16:18), which persists today. The interpretation of Scripture in the Church is never down to what one man has to say, but is rather based on the whole of Tradition received through the Apostles and carried forth by the Church Fathers.
The Bible is a liturgical document and cannot be separated from Tradition any more than you could separate say, stereo instructions from the actual physical device. Sola Scriptura is a heresy because without that interpretive tradition, all one is left with is a series of documents without historical or spiritual reference. Hence why everything from the Catholic and Orthodox Churches to (((Joel Osteen))) cannot be considered "Christian", because there is no single voice.
Granted, even within the Catholic Church there is debate on certain interpretations of some passages, but the overall message is one of persistant belief in the same thing for millenia (namely that one must have the sacraments to be saved).
Now go tell the other poster that - Yes, you can write a reply without calling somebody you know nothing about a "blasphemer".
It's called "civilised conversation".
Dude. No doubt. I had a 10 post back and forth and just gave up and prayed for him.
(post is archived)