Tradition vs. Sola Scriptura (3)

Rick Otto · Jun 2, 2011

from Vine's:

Topic: Bind, Binding (see also Bound)

[SIZE=+1]<1,,1210,deo> [/SIZE]
"to bind," is used (a) literally, of any sort of "binding," e.g., Acts 22:5; 24:27, (b) figuratively, of the Word of God, as not being "bound," 2 Tim. 2:9, i.e., its ministry, course and efficacy were not hindered by the bonds and imprisonment suffered by the Apostle. A woman who was bent together, had been "bound" by Satan through the work of a demon, Luke 13:16. Paul speaks of himself, in Acts 20:22, as being "bound in the spirit," i.e., compelled by his convictions, under the constraining power of the Spirit of God, to go to Jerusalem. A wife is said to be "bound" to her husband, Rom. 7:2; 1 Cor. 7:39; and the husband to the wife, 1 Cor. 7:27. The Lord's words to the Apostle Peter in Matt. 16:19, as to "binding," and to all the disciples in Matt. 18:18, signify, in the former case, that the Apostle, by his ministry of the Word of Life, would keep unbelievers outside the kingdom of God, and admit those who believed. So with regard to Matt. 18:18, including the exercise of disciplinary measures in the sphere of the local church; the application of the Rabbinical sense of forbidding is questionable. See BOND, KNIT, Note. TIE.

Rick Otto · Jun 2, 2011

Topic: Loose <A-2,Verb,630,apoluo>
apo, "from," and No. 1, denotes (a) "to set free, release," translated "loosed" in Luke 13:12, of deliverance from an infirmity; in Matt. 18:27, AV, "loosed" (RV, "released"), of a debtor; (b) "to let go, dismiss," e.g., Matt. 14:15,22. See DEPART, DISMISS, DIVORCE, FORGIVE, LET (go), LIBERTY, PUT (away), RELEASE, SEND (away).

JacktheCatholic · Jun 2, 2011

Rick Otto said:
from Vine's:

Topic: Bind, Binding (see also Bound)

[SIZE=+1]<1,,1210,deo> [/SIZE]
"to bind," is used (a) literally, of any sort of "binding," e.g., Acts 22:5; 24:27, (b) figuratively, of the Word of God, as not being "bound," 2 Tim. 2:9, i.e., its ministry, course and efficacy were not hindered by the bonds and imprisonment suffered by the Apostle. A woman who was bent together, had been "bound" by Satan through the work of a demon, Luke 13:16. Paul speaks of himself, in Acts 20:22, as being "bound in the spirit," i.e., compelled by his convictions, under the constraining power of the Spirit of God, to go to Jerusalem. A wife is said to be "bound" to her husband, Rom. 7:2; 1 Cor. 7:39; and the husband to the wife, 1 Cor. 7:27. The Lord's words to the Apostle Peter in Matt. 16:19, as to "binding," and to all the disciples in Matt. 18:18, signify, in the former case, that the Apostle, by his ministry of the Word of Life, would keep unbelievers outside the kingdom of God, and admit those who believed. So with regard to Matt. 18:18, including the exercise of disciplinary measures in the sphere of the local church; the application of the Rabbinical sense of forbidding is questionable. See BOND, KNIT, Note. TIE.

Is this what you use for your catechism?

I did look up Vines: Vine's Expository Dictionary - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Who was responsible for gathering and organizing and interpreting for the Vine's Expository Dictionary?

Thanks again Rick Otto.

JacktheCatholic · Jun 2, 2011

JacktheCatholic said:
So who was with Jesus besides the Twelve and do you have scriptural support?

Thanks Rick Otto.

In case this was missed.

MATTHEW 18:18

Amen, I say to you, whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.

Rick Otto · Jun 2, 2011

JacktheCatholic said:
So who was with Jesus besides the Twelve and do you have scriptural support?

Thanks Rick Otto.

Matthew 18; is the scripture that supports that His "disciples" were with Him.

Vine's:
Topic: Disciple

[SIZE=+1]<A-1,Noun,3101,mathetes> [/SIZE]
lit., "a learner" (from manthano, "to learn," from a root math---, indicating thought accompanied by endeavor), in contrast to didaskalos, "a teacher;" hence it denotes "one who follows one's teaching," as the "disciples" of John, Matt. 9:14; of the Pharisees, Matt. 22:16; of Moses, John 9:28; it is used of the "disciples" of Jesus (a) in a wide sense, of Jews who became His adherents, John 6:66; Luke 6:17, some being secretly so, John 19:38; (b) especially of the twelve Apostles, Matt. 10:1; Luke 22:11, e.g.; (c) of all who manifest that they are His "disciples" by abiding in His Word, John 8:31; cp. John 13:35; 15:8; (d) in the Acts, of those who believed upon Him and confessed Him, John 6:1,2,7; 14:20,22,28; 15:10; 19:1, etc.
A "disciple" was not only a pupil, but an adherent; hence they are spoken of as imitators of their teacher; cp. John 8:31; 15:8.

It's lookin' less & less like a badge of ecclesiastical authority...

JacktheCatholic · Jun 2, 2011

Rick Otto said:
Matthew 18; is the scripture that supports that His "disciples" were with Him.

Vine's:
Topic: Disciple

[SIZE=+1]<A-1,Noun,3101,mathetes> [/SIZE]
lit., "a learner" (from manthano, "to learn," from a root math---, indicating thought accompanied by endeavor), in contrast to didaskalos, "a teacher;" hence it denotes "one who follows one's teaching," as the "disciples" of John, Matt. 9:14; of the Pharisees, Matt. 22:16; of Moses, John 9:28; it is used of the "disciples" of Jesus (a) in a wide sense, of Jews who became His adherents, John 6:66; Luke 6:17, some being secretly so, John 19:38; (b) especially of the twelve Apostles, Matt. 10:1; Luke 22:11, e.g.; (c) of all who manifest that they are His "disciples" by abiding in His Word, John 8:31; cp. John 13:35; 15:8; (d) in the Acts, of those who believed upon Him and confessed Him, John 6:1,2,7; 14:20,22,28; 15:10; 19:1, etc.
A "disciple" was not only a pupil, but an adherent; hence they are spoken of as imitators of their teacher; cp. John 8:31; 15:8.

It's lookin' less & less like a badge of ecclesiastical authority...

Why is that???

You have not shown who was with Jesus accept his disciples and we know the Apostles are His disciples. The contention is not with the Twelve but that other(s) were there.

sensational · Jun 2, 2011

1. Those that embrace the Rule of Scripture do not agree with the RCC that the ONLY interpretation that matters is the interpretation of self (CCC 85, etc.).

your understanding of the RCC position of Scripture is erroneous,hopefully you are repeating your strawman fallacies secondary to misunderstanding and not intellectual dishonesty. The false implication you present here is that Catholics do not embrace scripture as a norm.... they do! BTY after reading your repeated polemic against the RCC im sure you believe that your Lutheran or personal interpretation matters and the RCC doesnt. Am I right? If so dont you smell a little bit of double standard?

2. Scripture is largely KNOWABLE. It exist in black and white objective, knowable, unalterable words. This, to me, seems to be a better Rule than 50,000 different constantly changing phantom editions of "tradition." PERFECT? Maybe - but the use of it may not be (same is true of the 50,000 phantom "tradition")

Its not just Catholics but all Christians that do their best interpreting the literal meaning of scripture (what the the authors intended and how it was understood by their recipients nearly 2000 yrs ago). The fact is with so many varying interpretations to use your analogy people are driving at varying speeds and therefore the speed limit has very limited intended effect.

3. Consider the Rule of Law (similar to the Rule of Scriptue - however Scripture is inerrant, the Law isn't; Scripture is divine, the Law isn't; Scripture is typically seen as "done," the Law isn't). As you drive down the road, which do you think would be BETTER: the Rule of Law looking to a written, knowable, objective, unalterable law above ALL and to which ALL are equally accountable - or 50,000 ever changing phantom traditions of driving?

Again you are providing a false dichotomy here. Nobody is promoting the idea to use tradition independently of scripture. This type of repeated polemic is not necessary.

A question for arbitration (beyond the scope of this thread and not permitted here). But there's only ONE on the entire planet that insists that the ONLY one who is to interpret Scripture and the ONLY interpretation that matters is SELF -and that's the RCC (CCC 85, etc.). If you have a problem with that (and I can totally understand that), take that up with the ONLY one that does that (and insists on it): The RCC

again and again repeated polemic without substance. You have not responded to anything in my prior post. why not?
In Christ,
JMS

JacktheCatholic · Jun 2, 2011

Rick Otto,

I think that when reading from Matthew 10 we will see that Jesus walked with the Twelve and taught them as His disciples. Teaching them even what the crowds failed to understand in asides.

MATTHEW 10:1 Then he summoned his twelve disciples 2 and gave them authority over unclean spirits to drive them out and to cure every disease and every illness. 2 The names of the twelve apostles 3 are these: first, Simon called Peter, and his brother Andrew; James, the son of Zebedee, and his brother John; 3 Philip and Bartholomew, Thomas and Matthew the tax collector; James, the son of Alphaeus, and Thaddeus; 4 Simon the Cananean, and Judas Iscariot who betrayed him.

JacktheCatholic · Jun 2, 2011

'sensational' I cannot tell by your quotes who you are quoting? Is it CliforniaJosiah? Usually there is in the quote a link to the original.

Rick Otto · Jun 2, 2011

JacktheCatholic said:
Rick Otto,

I think that when reading from Matthew 10 we will see that Jesus walked with the Twelve and taught them as His disciples.

No one disputes that, or any other usage of the word, so...what about Matt 18?

Rick Otto · Jun 2, 2011

quote=sensational;your understanding of the RCC position of Scripture is erroneous,hopefully you are repeating your strawman fallacies secondary to misunderstanding and not intellectual dishonesty.

Hopefully we can assume the same of you!

The false implication you present here is that Catholics do not embrace scripture as a norm.... they do! BTY after reading your repeated polemic against the RCC im sure you believe that your Lutheran or personal interpretation matters and the RCC doesnt. Am I right? If so dont you smell a little bit of double standard?

Talk about polemic! lol. He did not say they don't embrace it as a norm per se, he obviously realizes they embrace it with their own tradition, which is one of self-authorization.

Its not just Catholics but all Christians that do their best interpreting the literal meaning of scripture (what the the authors intended and how it was understood by their recipients nearly 2000 yrs ago).

Thank you very much.

The fact is with so many varying interpretations to use your analogy people are driving at varying speeds and therefore the speed limit has very limited intended effect.

Regardless of your assessment of how chaotic the eorld is, the fact remains, I can explain what I dare to believe. I do not resort to suspension of rationality in exchange for an intellectual "wild card" called mystery.

JacktheCatholic · Jun 2, 2011

Rick Otto said:
No one disputes that, or any other usage of the word, so...what about Matt 18?

Matthew 18, also the previous chapters to 10, are a string of events along the path the Twelve are taking with Jesus. We have not been introduced to other disciples yet. The author mentions crowds or individuals along the way but does not refer to any other as a disciple at this point in the telling. So, we can only believe that the Twelve are the disciples that Matthew 18 mentions. So, is there any scriptural evidence that any other(s) were present or that came to be taught as His disciple at this point in the author's telling?

From scripture it seems apparent Jesus is still speaking of the Twelve and addressing them as His disciples, as we read in Matthew 10.

patricius79 · Jun 2, 2011

Rick Otto said:
JacktheCatholic said:

The book and chapter we are addressing has Jesus speaking to the 12 disciples he chose. Right?

This was something Jesus said to these men he had chosen as he prepared them for the days ahead when Jesus would have to leave so the Paraclete could come. It is to these men that Jesus gives the power to Loose and Bind.

Unless, you can show me that Jesus was speaking to someone else besides those twelve that Jesus chose?[/quotI thought that was what the difference in "apostle" & "disciple" meant.

Click to expand...

the whole cultural context assumed Apostolic Succession, the idea we find in the early Church, such as in Augustine

the crucial issue is always interpretation. the need for that--seen in Acts 15--has been needed throughout Churhc history e.g. the Arian crisis

sunlover1 · Jun 2, 2011

JacktheCatholic said:
Binding and Loosing are having to do with a form of judicial authority. In legalize we will commonly see the term "bind" used, even today.

I copied from the free webster-merriman dictionary a portion:

We also know that a demon or spirit can be bound. This usually involves knowing the Spirit's name. In cases where there is demonic possession the one driving the demon out typically tries to learn the name so as to be able to command the demon. This is a form of "binding" as well. Like putting chains on the demon.

In law it is a similar use in that a contract will be binding, like chains. Or, to put it another way, you cannot get out of the contract if it is "binding".

We can now consider "loose" which is used with "binding" when Jesus gives the Twelve the power (or authority) to "bind and loose". They are antonyms of one another. If we use the webster-merriman dictionary again and go to the thesaurus we will find that the antonyms for bind include loose.

But let us for a moment consider 'legalize' and an example of how "bind" might be used:
*from wiki under legalize*

We can see that "bind" is still a common word in legalize. Loose we saw is the opposite action of binding. We also see where scripture used these terms in spiritual ways. Such as binding a demon.

Not to be rude but why are we going to wiki when I already gave examples
of binding and loosing from Scripture>
Isn't this what they mean as done here?:
He "loosed" the woman with the issue of blood
He said to "bind" the strong man.

This is terminology for judicial practices of the spirit world. The Twelve received a power to act as God. To be able to bind and loose on Earth and Heaven. This is an awesome power, to act with God's authority. Not only do their judgments in what is to be bound and loosed affect the Earthly kingdom but in Heaven as well. So, what does this mean?

It means the Apostles were the Heads of the Church after Jesus left. Jesus gave men the power to act as God. As incredible as this sounds it is what Jesus said (Matthew 18):

But we all have that same Spirit.
We all have that SAME power.
Did you think it was just them? And then the population
grows and grows and folks have to run to Matt or Jimmy
to get loosed?
WE can do it.
I had to do it today in fact. I was SO mad and bothered too
and I even started getting anxious for a minute, then I remembered
who's I am. MY daddy is God and I look something like Him.
So I did what I'd seen Him do.

But, Jesus also said he had to go so another could come. The Paraclete. The Paraclete was sent to help those with such awesome authority in guidance and to protect the teachings.

The Spirit was sent to live through us.. many many things He
does IN and THROUGH us according to Scripture and yes, leading
us into truth is ONE of those things, ..He reveals things to us, He
is building His church ON revelation, AMEN!
:clap:

Rick Otto · Jun 2, 2011

quote=sunlover1;Not to be rude but why are we going to wiki when I already gave examples of binding and loosing from Scripture>
Isn't this what they mean as done here?:
He "loosed" the woman with the issue of blood
He said to "bind" the strong man.

Not judicial enough.
But we all have that same Spirit.
We all have that SAME power.

We are all "disciples" & if you believe "The Great Comission" was to you, then you must be an "apostle" too, just not one of the 12.

Did you think it was just them? And then the population
grows and grows and folks have to run to Matt or Jimmy
to get loosed?
WE can do it.
I had to do it today in fact. I was SO mad and bothered too
and I even started getting anxious for a minute, then I remembered
who's I am. MY daddy is God and I look something like Him.
So I did what I'd seen Him do.

Stay loose! ^_^

Standing Up · Jun 2, 2011

JacktheCatholic said:
Binding and Loosing are having to do with a form of judicial authority.

Not sure what this has to do with the OP

JacktheCatholic · Jun 2, 2011

Rick Otto said:
We are all "disciples" & if you believe "The Great Comission" was to you, then you must be an "apostle" too, just not one of the 12.

So you interpret scripture to include yourself as one of those disciples?

In other words, when Matthew wrote that Jesus spoke to the Twelve: "Amen, I say to you, whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven." that this was directed to you as well?

Thank you Rick Otto for providing answers so far.

Standing Up · Jun 2, 2011

JacktheCatholic said:
So you interpret scripture to include yourself as one of those disciples?

In other words, when Matthew wrote that Jesus spoke to the Twelve: "Amen, I say to you, whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven." that this was directed to you as well?

Thank you Rick Otto for providing answers so far.

Doesn't it apply to Pope Benedict? If so, why?

JacktheCatholic · Jun 2, 2011

sunlover1 said:
But we all have that same Spirit.
We all have that SAME power.
Did you think it was just them? And then the population
grows and grows and folks have to run to Matt or Jimmy
to get loosed?
WE can do it.
I had to do it today in fact. I was SO mad and bothered too
and I even started getting anxious for a minute, then I remembered
who's I am. MY daddy is God and I look something like Him.
So I did what I'd seen Him do.

Sunlover1, where in scripture does it give you the power to bind and loose?

Thanks

JacktheCatholic · Jun 2, 2011

Standing Up said:
Not sure what this has to do with the OP

The Topic is Tradition vs Sola Scriptura and this is a valid point that was raised by some of the other members earlier to this same topic. Is there some reason you think they are unrelated?

Tradition vs. Sola Scriptura (3)

The Dude Abides

The Dude Abides

Praise be to Jesus Christ. Now and forever.

Praise be to Jesus Christ. Now and forever.

The Dude Abides

Praise be to Jesus Christ. Now and forever.

Newbie

Praise be to Jesus Christ. Now and forever.

Praise be to Jesus Christ. Now and forever.

The Dude Abides

The Dude Abides

Praise be to Jesus Christ. Now and forever.

Called to Jesus Through Mary

Beloved, Let us love one another

The Dude Abides

On and on

Praise be to Jesus Christ. Now and forever.

On and on

Praise be to Jesus Christ. Now and forever.

Praise be to Jesus Christ. Now and forever.

Similar threads