Where Did these Beliefs Come From?

[nPeace]

Wow @Deeje. Every household has infants. Certainly Cornelius' had.
The length people go in their reasoning, when they have no scriptural support is amazingly funny.
Atheists are truly more expert at scripture than the Christian is.
They see more than what is actually written.

 

[Muffled]

For those who are students or readers of God’s word, can anyone tell me where these beliefs, some of which are largely, (but not all) unique to Roman Catholicism, are found in the Bible?


Did Jesus ever claim to be part of a three headed god?

Did he ever solicit worship for himself?

Was Mary a figure in the Bible to be adored and given undue honor?

Was there a teaching that an immortal soul would depart from the body at death?

Is there such a place as Purgatory in the Bible?

Is there a "hell" of eternal fiery torment for the wicked?

Is infant baptism a scriptural?

Should images be used in worship?

Was the cross a religious symbol for Christians before Catholicism introduced it?

Were there "priests" officiating in massive cathedrals in original Christianity?

Were those who were shepherds in the congregation to wear distinctive garb and headgear and accept titles?


One at a time, or altogether.....please provide scripture in your response....

I believe there is no such verse and no Christian teaching that says so. Sounds like JW nonsense to me.

 

[Muffled]

answer is no to every question.

Was there a teaching that an immortal soul would depart from the body at death?

I can think of at least two verses that teach this.

 

[metis]

To the JW's, I just have to recommend that if you think the Catholic Church is wrongheaded about whatever, then maybe do not go to a Catholic mass.

Thus, your problem is now solved.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

Jesus promoted “sola scriptura” and so did the apostles.....”it is written” was his response to the devil’s temptations. These all quoted from the Hebrew Scriptures which Paul confirmed were inspired by God. (2 Timothy 3:16-17; Acts 17:2; Titus 1:9)
The apostles admonished other Christians to “preach the word” which was “the word of God”....the scriptures.

Jesus said that none his teaching originated from himself, (John 7:16-18) therefore what he taught came straight from the Creator who was his God and Father. No Christian can teach anything that is contrary to what is written.

Sorry for interrupting.

Curious-short question/short answer.

What is the context of these verses:

John 21:25 (If there are more scriptures not recorded, why sola scriptura?)

John 5:39 (If scriptures point to christ, why not go to the source and not what's written about him?

This has nothing to do with Catholicism; so that's irrelevant. Just curious about the interpretations of these verses.

 

[Deeje]

I believe there is no such verse and no Christian teaching that says so. Sounds like JW nonsense to me.

Well, if you had actually read the questions, you would see that you are partially correct....there is no such statement by Jesus that he was anything but the “son” and servant of his God and Father.

The trinity (a three headed god) is Christendom’s “nonsense”.

 

[Deeje]

Was there a teaching that an immortal soul would depart from the body at death?

I can think of at least two verses that teach this.

Please provide them and we will see exactly what the scriptures say about the “soul”....

 

[Jainarayan]

One at a time, or altogether.....please provide scripture in your response....

"I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven; whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven."

The Keys of the kingdom and the Kingdom of Heaven are popular Christian concepts and are quite significant in multiple denominations. While the "Kingdom of Heaven" is referenced elsewhere in the Bible, the "Keys of the Kingdom" is only referenced in this passage. "Keys" symbolize "authority" (cf. Isaiah 22:22: "key of the house of David".
The keys of the kingdom is given to Peter, which is explicated to mean that Peter has the authority to bind and loose (cf. Matthew 18:18). This is not to be understood as a statement about exorcism or the forgiveness of sins (cf. John 20:23), but Peter, being a sort of 'supreme rabbi of the kingdom', is given teaching authority, that 'his decisions stand'.

The verbs in future perfect tense—'will have been bound', 'will have been loosed'—suggest that 'the heavenly decision preceded Peter's declaration of it on earth'. "Bind" and "loose" are judicial terms denoting "forbid" and "permit". This expression is to contrast Peter's authority in teaching with that of the Pharisees and the scribes (cf. Matthew 23:13). In Matthew 18:18 the same authority is given to all of his Apostles. The Apostles then passed on this Authority through Apostolic Succession of their office (cf. Acts 1:20-26) unto the Bishops of the Catholic Church today.

Matthew 16:19 - Wikipedia

You’re welcome.

 

[Jainarayan]

To the JW's, I just have to recommend that if you think the Catholic Church is wrongheaded about whatever, then maybe do not go to a Catholic mass.

Thus, your problem is now solved.

Or maybe they should study Matthew 16:19 and Matthew 18:18 to see that Jesus gave Peter, and then his successors the authority to make these decisions and proclamations. Not bad for a non-Christian idol-worshiper, huh?

 

[Deeje]

Sorry for interrupting.

Curious-short question/short answer.

What is the context of these verses:

John 21:25 (If there are more scriptures not recorded, why sola scriptura?)

In speaking about the apostle John, Jesus said....
“24 This is the disciple who gives this witness about these things and who wrote these things, and we know that his witness is true.

25 There are also, in fact, many other things that Jesus did, which if ever they were written in full detail, I suppose the world itself could not contain the scrolls written.”

So in context, the “witness” (testimony) given in the scriptures, including John’s (as the conclusion to the Bible’s canon for Christians) was all that we needed concerning Jesus’ teachings.

These “other things” were apparently not included because the scriptures had to become the instruction manual for Christ’s followers. What we needed was all there. Since we believe that “all scripture is inspired of God” (2 Timothy 3:16-17) what is contained in it, is what God considers necessary....it is what we need, but perhaps not all we want.

John 5:39 (If scriptures point to christ, why not go to the source and not what's written about him?

This has nothing to do with Catholicism; so that's irrelevant. Just curious about the interpretations of these verses.

Context is everything, and this is no exception....
John 5:31-40.....
“If I alone bear witness about myself, my witness is not true. 32 There is another who bears witness about me, and I know that the witness he bears about me is true. 33 You have sent men to John, and he has borne witness to the truth. 34 However, I do not accept the witness from man, but I say these things so that you may be saved. 35 That man was a burning and shining lamp, and for a short time you were willing to rejoice greatly in his light. 36 But I have the witness greater than that of John, for the very works that my Father assigned me to accomplish, these works that I am doing, bear witness that the Father sent me. 37 And the Father who sent me has himself borne witness about me. You have neither heard his voice at any time nor seen his form, 38 and you do not have his word residing in you, because you do not believe the very one whom he sent.

39 “You are searching the Scriptures because you think that you will have everlasting life by means of them; and these are the very ones that bear witness about me. 40 And yet you do not want to come to me so that you may have life.”

So again, we have an explanation for this statement....scripture always explains scripture.

If the ones whom Jesus was addressing did not believe John, whom they originally accepted as a prophet, Jesus said that his works had given a greater witness than John, but that the people, found excuses to reject them and to dismiss his teachings, based on the negative words of their religious leaders.

These Jews were relying on the Pharisees’ interpretation of scripture to save them, but they had missed the Messiah that God had sent and dismissed his teachings because he did not support their corrupt leadership. (Matthew 23)

Out of hatred and spite, they poisoned the minds of the people and led them away from God, just as Christendom is doing to their members right now.

 

[Deeje]

"I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven; whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven."

Matthew 16:19 - Wikipedia

You’re welcome.

Wiki is your ‘go to’ for expert advice on scripture....?

Beware of those who laugh the loudest......”he who laughs last...laughs best”.......isn’t that right?
Perhaps it is God who gets the last laugh.....?

And perhaps you need to stop pretending to know what the Bible teaches.....

Peter did not have authority, as much as he was assigned responsibility. He was not above his fellow apostles and never claimed to be, but was to use the “keys of the Kingdom” to open up some important aspects of the kingdom to both Jews, and later to Gentiles.

Jesus gave us a clue to as to what the keys would open up, when he said to the Jewish Pharisees: “Woe to you who are versed in the Law, because you took away the key of knowledge; you yourselves did not go in, and those going in you hindered!” (Luke 11:52) The keys, then, would have something to do with unlocking “knowledge”. They would unlock something that had been previously locked up for centuries. It would pertain to “the sacred secret” of God, his administration of the universe by his heavenly kingdom. (Romans 16:25; Colossians 1:26, 27)

While faithful men of ancient times had looked forward to the coming of the Messiah and his kingdom, it was never understood by them that associated with him would be humans taken from earth to heaven to be heavenly kings and priests. This aspect was not made known, until it was God’s time to announce it.

A short time after Jesus’ death, (at Pentecost, 33 C.E, after receiving the gift of holy spirit) Peter stood up and used the first of the keys of the Kingdom. Peter explained to the Jews that this miraculous occurrence that they were witnessing, was in fulfillment of Joel 2:28-32, and explained that Jehovah had resurrected Jesus and had exalted him to his right hand, giving him the promised holy spirit, which he was now pouring out upon these 120 disciples.

Peter then unlocked the door for those Jews by saying to them: “Repent, and let each one of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for forgiveness of your sins, and you will receive the free gift of the holy spirit.” (Acts 2:38) There were three thousand Jews that immediately grasped the opportunity for gaining theheavenly kingdom with the Messiah or Christ. Shortly after this thenumber grew to five thousand. (Acts 2:1-41; 4:1-4)

How did Peter use the second “key”?
God, by means of a vision and by his holy spirit, instructed Peter to accept an invitation by Cornelius’ (a Roman centurion who was not a Jewish convert) to his home in Caesarea. Peter had initially hesitated because it was not lawful for Jews to fraternise with Gentiles, but God gave him a vision to demonstrate that the way was open for those previously considered as spiritually “unclean” (from the Jewish standpoint because of their pagan worship) to come into his spiritual family.

When Peter arrived and saw the Gentile people gathered there to hear the Kingdom message, he said: “For a certainty I perceive that God is not partial [now to the Jews], but in every nation the man that fears him and works righteousness is acceptable to him.” Heaven had thus directed Peter and he stood up and used the second key by preaching to those Gentiles about the Anointed One, Messiah the Leader, and how he died and was raised up. Cornelius’ whole household got baptized.

Next question.....

 

[Jainarayan]

Wiki is your ‘go to’ for expert advice on scripture....?

Beware of those who laugh the loudest......”he who laughs last...laughs best”.......isn’t that right?
Perhaps it is God who gets the last laugh.....?

Did you see the references, notes and citations? Or do you just use the boiler plate dismissal of Wiki as a counter when you have nothing else? Wikipedia didn’t write those Bible verses or the analyses. Your posts smack of arrogance, smugness and contempt for all beliefs except your own. Your attitude towards other beliefs and baiting comments have gotten old.

 

[Hockeycowboy]

Not specifically no. But there is a little scene in the Gospel of John where Jesus declares himself the Son of God and one and the same with the Father which almost gets him stoned to death for blasphemy by Jews.



He did solicit worship for God, the Father, so it doesn't take much of a stretch that if you put stock on the Gospel of John story above to believe he, de facto, requested worship for himself.



Nobody is owed "undue honor" by definition. That's what undue means. The question is more do you believe Mary has been given undue honors and why?



There is no specific mention on the nature of the afterlife though there is mention of an eternal life as some reward for following the reed



Nope and neither in the Catholic Church anymore. You can thank Benedict XVI, now unbaptized baby rot in hell like everybody else.



Some allusion to it Revelation and the OT which are debatable and an entire apocryphal Gospel that describes hell.



Baptism is supposed to be some sort of rite of passage and entry point into Christianity inspired by John the Baptist practice of immersion to purify the soul, a ritual by witch Jesus passed. There is no age requirement nor limit. Infant baptism vs child baptism vs adult baptism is simply a question of practice.



There is no prohibition or demand on that. It seems to be mostly a cultural practice.



The cross became a symbol of Christian before the formation of what we would call the Catholic Church by about 20 years.



No, they were not numerous enough and sometime subject to persecutions. Cathedrals are just really big churches. They emerged when Christian faith became very common and pretty much the norm for the needs of large congregations in major cities.



Neither though titles were common from early Christianity forward with the most prestigious one being that of Apostle of course. The garbs are something much newer that changes depending on time and era, but has remain fairly consistent since the Church established itself.

Umm....you missed this:

please provide scripture in your response....

Don’t you think that would be the authority? I do.

 

[metis]

Or maybe they should study Matthew 16:19 and Matthew 18:18 to see that Jesus gave Peter, and then his successors the authority to make these decisions and proclamations. Not bad for a non-Christian idol-worshiper, huh?

View attachment 52326

I'll give you an A+, so that and $5 can now get you a coffee at Starbucks!

 

[Jainarayan]

I'll give you an A+, so that and $5 can now get you a coffee at Starbucks!

Now that was genuinely funny! I know it won’t get very far but if I remember my high school judo, that was a “Soto makikomi”, a sacrifice throw.

 

[pearl]

John 21:25 (If there are more scriptures not recorded, why sola scriptura?)

Jn 21:24-25 identifies the Beloved Disciple as the witness who stands behind the Gospel narrative and certifies the truth of his testimony. It also reminds us that the whole Jesus cannot be captured in the pages of any book, even one as the Fourth Gospel!

John 5:39 (If scriptures point to christ, why not go to the source and not what's written about him?

Jn 5:1-47 is the combination of a miracle and a discourse/dialogue that brings out the miracle' sign-value and is a Johannine technique. Here has to do with an unnamed "feast of the Jews" that is also a Sabbath (5:9). Jesus cures a lame man who has been waiting to be healed at the pool of Bethesda. His instruction to take up the mat violates the Sabbath law, (later codified directives of the Mishna). The explanation that Jesus offers to "the Jew" does not appeal to humanitarian grounds, Luke 13: 15-16, but to the his supreme authority. Not only was Jesus breaking the Sabbath, worse, he was speaking of God as his own father, making himself equal to God. Five arguments are advanced as testimony as if they were advanced in synagogue debates.
Context is important. But the greater context that applies to Scripture is its relation to the 'whole', not just the individual Gospels.

 

[Deeje]

Now, getting back to the OP.....

What about these.....? We have addressed some of the questions but these three are all related.

Was there a teaching in the Bible where an immortal soul would depart from the body at death and go somewhere else?

Is there such a place as Purgatory in the Bible?

Is there a "hell" of eternal fiery torment for the wicked spoken about by Jesus or any other Bible writer?

If there is no immortal soul that is a conscious, spiritual entity that separates from the body at death and continues to live, then purgatory and hell cannot exist. If you eliminate an immortal soul, you have to eliminate any kind of immediate life after death.

So where in the Bible will we find any indication of some conscious part of us that lives on, after a body stops breathing?
Is there a separate spiritual part of us that can exist apart from the body?

If this teaching is in the Bible, then please present the scripture you believe supports it.

 

[epronovost]

Is there such a place as Purgatory in the Bible?

No, there is no mention of such place anywhere in any scripture. Purgatory was only integrated in Christian dogma in the 12th century, but the concept of some sort of temporal period of punishment before everlasting peace was common in a variety of pagan faith and folk religions. It was integrated to Christian belief thanks to the following passages 2 Maccabees 12:42–45. Though it was abandoned progressively and then renounced as it was seen as a very weak excuse at best.

Is there a "hell" of eternal fiery torment for the wicked spoken about by Jesus or any other Bible writer?

Didn't I mentioned to you the Apocalypse of Peter makes a pretty vivid description of both heaven and hell with specific punishments for specific sins?

 

[Deeje]

Didn't I mentioned to you the Apocalypse of Peter makes a pretty vivid description of both heaven and hell with specific punishments for specific sins?

And didn't I mention that scripture was to be included in your responses. Chapter and verse please....some ransom mention of Peter is not good enough, sorry. I have never heard of "the Apocalypse of Peter"....that was John's department.

 

[epronovost]

And didn't I mention that scripture was to be included in your responses. Chapter and verse please....some ransom mention of Peter is not good enough, sorry. I have never heard of "the Apocalypse of Peter"....that was John's department.

The Apocalypse of Peter is now an apocryphal book. While it was part of the Alexandrine Canon, it wasn't included in the Roman Canon (the one voted on in Nikea in 323 AD and with which you are familiar). Since it wasn't integrated in the Roman Canon, the Apocalypse of Peter was never written in the Chapter and Verse style which would only start to be used in the mid 16th century anyway. There is only fragment of the text, but here is a short description of Heaven in the Apocalypse of Peter which almost follow your beloved Geneva Bible Standards of Chapter and Verses.

11 We, then, seeing the beauty of them were astonied at them, for they appeared suddenly. 12 And I drew near to the Lord and said: Who are these? 13 He saith to me: These are your (our) righteous brethren whose appearance ye did desire to see. 14 And I said unto him: And where are all the righteous? or of what sort is the world wherein they are, and possess this glory? 15 And the Lord showed me a very great region outside this world exceeding bright with light, and the air of that place illuminated with the beams of the sun, and the earth of itself flowering with blossoms that fade not, and full of spices and plants, fair-flowering and incorruptible, and bearing blessed fruit. 16 And so great was the blossom that the odour thereof was borne thence even unto us.

17 And the dwellers in that place were clad with the raiment of shining angels, and their raiment was like unto their land.

18 And angels ran round about them there. 19 And the glory of them that dwelt there was all equal, and with one voice they praised the Lord God, rejoicing in that place.

20 The Lord saith unto us: This is the place of your leaders (or, high priests), the righteous men.

Here is a short description of Hell in the Apocalypse of Peter

21 And I saw also another place over against that one, very squalid; and it was a place of punishment, and they that were punished and the angels that punished them had their raiment dark, according to the air of the place. 22 And some there were there hanging by their tongues; and these were they that blasphemed the way of righteousness, and under them was laid fire flaming and tormenting them.

23 And there was a great lake full of flaming mire, wherein were certain men that turned away from righteousness; and angels, tormentors, were set over them.

24 And there were also others, women, hanged by their hair above that mire which boiled up; and these were they that adorned themselves for adultery.

And the men that were joined with them in the defilement of adultery were hanging by their feet, and had their heads hidden in the mire, and said: We believed not that we should come unto this place.

The Apocalypse of Peter (translation by M. R. James)

As you can see from these passages. The Apocalypse of Peter present very clear implication that there is an afterlife in the form of heaven and hell where the dead live anew. Now, its unclear if they are spirits or raised whole in some sort of other plane of existence, but it does give you scriptural support for the existence of a literal hell and heaven and very good argument for the existence of souls. There is no mention of the purgatory in this text and the punishment and rewards are implied to be eternal.