You are a religous man, you base your belief on man's traditions and history which has everything to do with world history, but nothing to do with truth of scripture. You know nothing of God's spirit or spiritual truth; they are just dead words to you you use in your relious prayers. Your whole understanding is from the carnal man. "They that worship him must worship him in spirit and truth" are but empty words. So no I have nothing to say to you and you dead church history.
In the Name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit. Amen.
O heavenly King, O Comforter, the Spirit of truth, who art in all places and fillest all things; Treasury of good things and Giver of life: Come and dwell in us and cleanse us from every stain, and save our souls, O gracious Lord.
Holy God, Holy Mighty, Holy Immortal: have mercy on us. (Thrice)
Glory to the Father, and to the Son, and to the Holy Spirit: now and ever and unto ages of ages. Amen.
All-holy Trinity, have mercy on us. Lord, cleanse us from our sins. Master, pardon our iniquities. Holy God, visit and heal our infirmities for thy Name's sake.
Lord, have mercy. (Thrice)
Glory to the Father, and to the Son, and to the Holy Spirit: now and ever, and unto ages of ages. Amen.
Our Father, who art in heaven, hallowed be thy Name; thy kingdom come; thy will be done on earth, as it is in heaven. Give us this day our daily bread; and forgive us our trespasses, as we forgive those who trespass against us; and lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from evil.
Through the prayers of our holy Fathers, Lord Jesus Christ our God, have mercy on us and save us. Amen.
__________________
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Troparion - Tone 4
Commanders of the heavenly hosts, we who are unworthy beseech you, by your prayers encompass us beneath the wings of your immaterial glory, and faithfully preserve us who fall down and cry to you: “Deliver us from all harm, for you are the commanders of the powers on high!”
Holy Archangel Michael, pray to God for me.
"Why do you increase your bonds? Take hold of your life before your light grows dark and you seek help and do not find it. This life has been given to you for repentance; do not waste it in vain pursuits."~St. Isaac the Syrian
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Sir, I teach a class of nine catholic 5th graders about the basics of their faith. If I told them God is one God, in three divine persons, but whenever they asked a question I said...
Originally Posted by Spartan Warrior
Like I said... Why waiste my time.... You do not get it. You will never get it.
do you think I'd be a very good teacher?
Ignoring questions sir (belittling, actually) may work for 1st graders, but a bit of elaboration would be appreciated here.
Last edited by judechild; 19th November 2009 at 01:13 AM.
Hi all. A Happy New Year to you. I am new to these threads, and this is my first post, but I thought it worth throwing my hat in the ring anyway.
I agree with the poster here who said that "Church Authority VERSUS Biblical Authority" is a false dichotomy, because it supposes the two can or do contradict. This must be demonstrated rather than assumed.
The problem, as I see it, is that there simply is no theory-neutral position from which to read the Scriptures - each person brings to the Scriptures presuppositions which bear on the way they interpret the text, which is why there are so many conflicting doctrines among Protestants on such key issues as baptism, the Eucharist, and salvation. The Reformers for example operated with many ideas borrowed from Feudalism and Scholasticism. Therefore they read categories and emphases in to the Scriptures which the original authors may not have had in mind.
There is no question that the Scriptures are the Rule of Faith, but who is the judge that applies the rule? It boils down not to is the Church better than the Scriptures, but who has the authority to interpret the Scriptures in such a way that all Christians are obligated to believe it? Does it matter what we believe about the Holy Trinity, the Incarnation and Person of Christ, the nature and function of the Church, etc? I would think so. But what if we leave this to private judgment? We end up with a number of contrary opinions none of which can lay claim to authority, but say "this is how I interpret the Bible."
Mr. X interprets all the Scriptures from a Lutheran perspective, while Mr. Y interprets all the Scriptures from a Calvinist perspective - we therefore have differences about soteriology and what happens at the Eucharist, neither opinion happens to be authoritative. This are pretty important, no? Yet no Protestant body can give me anything like an authoritative doctrine because on Protestant principles every single doctrine, including the canon of Scripture itself, can in principle be revised.
If what God teaches does not change, and Protestant doctrine does every so many years, then what does that imply about Protestant doctrine? And this is important: if you hold to Sola Scriptura, you will have to answer the question of where in Scripture alone do the Scriptures tell you what count as Scriptures and what does not?
Hi all. A Happy New Year to you. I am new to these threads, and this is my first post, but I thought it worth throwing my hat in the ring anyway.
I agree with the poster here who said that "Church Authority VERSUS Biblical Authority" is a false dichotomy, because it supposes the two can or do contradict. This must be demonstrated rather than assumed.
The problem, as I see it, is that there simply is no theory-neutral position from which to read the Scriptures - each person brings to the Scriptures presuppositions which bear on the way they interpret the text, which is why there are so many conflicting doctrines among Protestants on such key issues as baptism, the Eucharist, and salvation. The Reformers for example operated with many ideas borrowed from Feudalism and Scholasticism. Therefore they read categories and emphases in to the Scriptures which the original authors may not have had in mind.
There is no question that the Scriptures are the Rule of Faith, but who is the judge that applies the rule? It boils down not to is the Church better than the Scriptures, but who has the authority to interpret the Scriptures in such a way that all Christians are obligated to believe it? Does it matter what we believe about the Holy Trinity, the Incarnation and Person of Christ, the nature and function of the Church, etc? I would think so. But what if we leave this to private judgment? We end up with a number of contrary opinions none of which can lay claim to authority, but say "this is how I interpret the Bible."
Mr. X interprets all the Scriptures from a Lutheran perspective, while Mr. Y interprets all the Scriptures from a Calvinist perspective - we therefore have differences about soteriology and what happens at the Eucharist, neither opinion happens to be authoritative. This are pretty important, no? Yet no Protestant body can give me anything like an authoritative doctrine because on Protestant principles every single doctrine, including the canon of Scripture itself, can in principle be revised.
If what God teaches does not change, and Protestant doctrine does every so many years, then what does that imply about Protestant doctrine? And this is important: if you hold to Sola Scriptura, you will have to answer the question of where in Scripture alone do the Scriptures tell you what count as Scriptures and what does not?
Hi Drichards!
Welcome to CF. I trust that you will find your experience here as profitable and as enjoyable as I have. I think you will find some of us to be relatively blunt and direct. By no means should you take it personally as there is generally no ill will intended.
One evidence of church authority vs. biblical authority can be seen, for example, in the Catholic dogma of the Perpetual Virginity. This is a unique dogma held only by the Catholic Church and none other. It runs afoul of biblical authority where three gospel writers in five independent accounts state that Jesus Christ had brothers and sisters (there are several threads on that topic, which I can link for you if you are interested in reading them),
This dogma was not proclaimed an infallible dogma of the Catholic Church until 1950. Prior to that it was just a doctrine. Now, the problem is that either Mary never bore any other children other than Jesus Christ - or she did and He had brothers and sisters as stated clearly in the Bible. Whose authority do you believe - that of the Catholic Church or that of the Bible?
One evidence of church authority vs. biblical authority can be seen, for example, in the Catholic dogma of the Perpetual Virginity. This is a unique dogma held only by the Catholic Church and none other
Eastern Orthodox, Oriental Orthodox, and the Assyrian Church of the East all believe in the perpetual virginity of the Virgin Mary. Luther , Zwingli, John Wesley, and Calvin all believed that the Virgin Mary remained a virgin her whole life as well.
I believe that He was made man, joining the human nature with the divine in one person; being conceived by the singular operation of the Holy Ghost, and born of the blessed Virgin Mary, who, as well after as before she brought Him forth, continued a pure and unspotted virgin."
-John Wesley
__________________
+++
"The Devil cunningly induces us- instead of arousing us against himself-to notice our neighbors' sins, to make us spiteful and angry with others, and to awaken our contempt twoard them, thus keeping us in enmity with them, and with the Lord God himself."
+ + +
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts. St John of Kronstadt To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
From your post it seems that the basis of your belief that Catholic tradition and the Bible are in opposition is a specific interpretation of the Bible. Sorry, but that will not suffice for a demonstration that the two really do contadict and here is why. First, it assumes what you attempt to prove: that there can be any conflict between authority of the Church and that of the Bible. What is needed is an argument to the effect that a conflict between these authority sources is even possible, because I do not think it is. To appeal to a specific interpretation simply assumes the truth of your interpretation, but there are multiple interpretations of any passage of Scripture. I could provide alternative exegeses to the passages you reference, but no interpretation is theory-neutral.
A good question for those who believe in the primacy of the Bible over against Church Tradition is, on what authority do you believe in Sola Scriptura? Can this doctrine be found in Scripture alone? Also, why is anyone obliged to accept the "Protestant 66" since there are alternate canons accepted and used by others? Do Protestant assemblies have the authority to alter the canon itself, as Luther wanted to excise the epistle of St. James? What, in the end, is the final authority - the Bible, or individuals? I believe these questions have to be answered before I can respond to your question about the Ever-Virginity of the Theotokos.
Eastern Orthodox, Oriental Orthodox, and the Assyrian Church of the East all believe in the perpetual virginity of the Virgin Mary. Luther , Zwingli, John Wesley, and Calvin all believed that the Virgin Mary remained a virgin her whole life as well.
-John Wesley
None of these churches you have cited have ever stated this doctrine to be dogmatic truth which must be accepted and believed to be saved. None, by the way, have anything resembling the Catholic dogma of papal infallibility which would even make such dogmas possible.
There are members and leaders within these bodies which do not embrace this doctrine and who, as a result, are not anathematized for not embracing it. Only in the Catholic Church is this so.
There are members and leaders within these bodies which do not embrace this doctrine and who, as a result, are not anathematized for not embracing it.
I'm not aware of any Bishops in my Church who rejects the perpetual virginity of the Theotokos. I can guarantee you they wouldn't keep their position that long if they came out publicly against it. It is the teaching of the Fathers that she remained a virgin and it is an important doctrine of our Church. The fact that we don't have a Pope doesn't imply that we don't have binding canons, councils, or the authority to anathmatize people as a Church. In fact the Orthodox Church seems to do a better job at keeping it's Bishops inline with the dogmas of our Church than many other Churches do.
__________________
+++
"The Devil cunningly induces us- instead of arousing us against himself-to notice our neighbors' sins, to make us spiteful and angry with others, and to awaken our contempt twoard them, thus keeping us in enmity with them, and with the Lord God himself."
+ + +
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts. St John of Kronstadt To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Linear Mode
