If the Bible is infallible, why do so many Christians disagree on theology?

PeaceByJesus said:

Wrong argument mine adversary. Where did I ever say the apostles never ministered to people on the Sabbath and didn’t only met with such on the first day? Instead, I distinctly said "that the only specific day that the NT church, as a church, is mentioned meeting on is the 1st day," which is the reality. Acts ‭17:1-3‬; 13:13-16‬; ‭13:43-44‬; ‭18:2-4‬ are all synagogue services, not churches of believers, and Acts ‭16:12-13‬ is that of Jewish women meeting for prayer, not believers.

Rather, you have no actual examples and thus attempted to move the goal posts.

Sense? You mean doing what the NT church as a church is nowhere shown specifically doing? Since when did it make sense to come up with things like prayer to created beings in Heaven when Scripture does not even provide one example of any believer praying to anyone in Heaven except the Lord? Even despite the Holy Spirit inspiring the recording of over 200 prayers by believers , and in instruction teaches to address the Lord, and states that the only heavenly intercessor btwn God and man is the Lord Jesus, (1 Tim. 2:5), while the Holy Spirit in believer's heart cries out "Abba, Father," (Gal. 4:6) not "Mama, Mother?"

Which is what I said, that unless God had manifest in what ways the new covenant was different then they could not have judged that circumcision was not necessary.
Indeed, as shown and said, as the Holy Spirit guided them into what Scripture taught, versus having no OT scriptural basis to reach the conclusion, which was your demonstrably false change.

You are now starting to waste my time with sophistry and repeated indefensible fallacious arguments for a church falsely claiming to uniquely being the one true church.

Click to expand...

I would like to start by saying it is not my intention to be your adversary. I simply wanted to share what I have learned with other Christians. I would also like to point out that I am neither Catholic or Orthodox. I’m a nondenominational who has a tenancy to lean towards the Orthodox teaching. I’m not here to argue or debate anything. I’m simply here to share the other side of the story for people to take into consideration. Whether they choose to consider it or reject it is not my concern. The scriptures I quoted shows that Paul and others did meet in the synagogues on the sabbath regularly to teach. I wouldn’t be surprised if they had worshipped while they were there. The point is they met regularly on the sabbath. I find it hard to believe that they didn’t worship along with the other Jews while being there on the sabbath. The apostles were not against worshiping on the sabbath. They attended on the sabbath to bring the good news to others. As far as praying to the saints there is scriptural evidence to support prayers to the saints. Prayers of supplication and intercession are encouraged in the Bible. The saints are not dead they are very much alive with The Lord and still active members in the church. Personally I’ve never prayed to Mary or the saints. I’ve never thought it was necessary. I pray directly to God but I don’t see any reason to rebuke someone for praying to the saints for intercession and supplication as it is not a sin. I do that quite regularly for my brothers and sisters who are still here on earth. Whether or not the saints can hear their prayers I don’t know. It really doesn’t matter because I know God hears all prayers. So while I don’t practice it I also don’t see any reason to condemn it or those who practice it. Just because prayers to the saints isn’t in the Bible doesn’t mean it can’t be true. The Bible doesn’t say Jesus had black hair and brown eyes but it certainly is possible that He did. The Bible is not meant to explain all the mysteries of God, heaven, and the spiritual world. It only gives us a glimpse. Much of the scriptures were written by revelation from the Holy Spirit. I believe it is very likely that He has continued to reveal mysteries that are not mentioned in the scriptures. Typically I don’t proclaim them as being truth but usually take them into consideration as a possibility. Like for example Mary’s perpetual virginity. I don’t know for certain one way or the other but I do believe it is a possibility. So I remain neutral on the subject so as to not call someone else a liar when I really have no way of knowing for sure. Although I will say that in my opinion I believe such a topic would’ve been considered strictly taboo to discuss and most likely would not have been something revealed to the public or ever questioned or disclosed.

redleghunter said:

Paul went to where unconverted Jews were on the Sabbath to present the Gospel. That's the point.

Click to expand...

You don’t know that you are assuming. Why is it impossible that Paul a Jew and once a Pharisee himself who spent his entire life worshipping on the sabbath could go to a synagogue on the sabbath to worship and preach the gospel? Just because he went there to preach doesn’t mean he didn’t also go there to worship. The point is he went regularly and to think that he just sat there waiting until it was over and didn’t participate in the worship is ridiculous.

BNR32FAN said:

Just because he went there to preach doesn’t mean he didn’t also go there to worship. The point is he went regularly and to think that he just sat there waiting until it was over and didn’t participate in the worship is ridiculous.

Click to expand...

Now that is you who is assuming. The purpose was to preach the Gospel. Whether or not they participated in the recitation of the Shema and other prayers and then the reading from the Law and Prophets is not material to the verses you posted. It is that they reasoned with them about Christ from the Scriptures.

BNR32FAN said:

You don’t know that you are assuming. Why is it impossible that Paul a Jew and once a Pharisee himself who spent his entire life worshipping on the sabbath could go to a synagogue on the sabbath to worship and preach the gospel?

Click to expand...

What do you think that worship entailed? And where in the Law is it said one worships on the Sabbath at a synagogue (house of prayer)?

Acts 2:46Day by day continuing with one mind in the temple, and breaking bread from house to house, they were taking their meals together with gladness and sincerity of heart, 47praising God and having favor with all the people. And the Lord was adding to their number day by day those who were being saved.

The difference from what Jews did was that whilst temple was on Sabbath, the first Church met every day in different houses. And every believer contributed, both in offering revelation they received, as well as in checking if what was offered corresponded to what Scripture already taught.

Every believer drinks from the Rock, following baptism. To verify if the revelation is from God, or if it's just the result of too much pizza last night, believers must offer their understanding to the gathering of saints for critique. This is why we must not give up the assembling together of the saints. Their scrutiny is guided by the Holy Spirit, fire, just as your understanding is given by the Holy Spirit, fire. This is how even the most far flung church, the smallest church, two or more gathered in His Name, could receive correct doctrine.

1 Corinthians 14:26What then shall we say, brothers and sisters? When you come together, each of you has a hymn, or a word of instruction, a revelation, a tongue or an interpretation. Everything must be done so that the church may be built up.

Jeremiah 23:25“I have heard what the prophets say who prophesy lies in my name. They say, ‘I had a dream! I had a dream!’ 26How long will this continue in the hearts of these lying prophets, who prophesy the delusions of their own minds? 27They think the dreams they tell one another will make my people forget my name, just as their ancestors forgot my name through Baal worship. 28Let the prophet who has a dream recount the dream, but let the one who has my word speak it faithfully. For what has straw to do with grain?” declares the Lord. 29“Is not my word like fire,” declares the Lord, “and like a hammer that breaks a rock in pieces?

1 Corinthians 3:1510By the grace God has given me, I laid a foundation as a wise builder, and someone else is building on it. But each one should build with care. 11For no one can lay any foundation other than the one already laid, which is Jesus Christ.12If anyone builds on this foundation using gold, silver, costly stones, wood, hay or straw,13their work will be shown for what it is, because the Day will bring it to light. It will be revealed with fire, and the fire will test the quality of each person’s work. 14If what has been built survives, the builder will receive a reward. 15If it is burned up, the builder will suffer loss but yet will be saved—even though only as one escaping through the flames.

Unfortunately, churches today have no checks and balances. The old traditions are perpetuated by a system that does not allow challenge.

BNR32FAN said:

I would like to start by saying it is not my intention to be your adversary. I simply wanted to share what I have learned with other Christians. I would also like to point out that I am neither Catholic or Orthodox. I’m a nondenominational who has a tenancy to lean towards the Orthodox teaching. I’m not here to argue or debate anything. I’m simply here to share the other side of the story for people to take into consideration. Whether they choose to consider it or reject it is not my concern. The scriptures I quoted shows that Paul and others did meet in the synagogues on the sabbath regularly to teach. I wouldn’t be surprised if they had worshipped while they were there. The point is they met regularly on the sabbath. I find it hard to believe that they didn’t worship along with the other Jews while being there on the sabbath. The apostles were not against worshiping on the sabbath. They attended on the sabbath to bring the good news to others. As far as praying to the saints there is scriptural evidence to support prayers to the saints. Prayers of supplication and intercession are encouraged in the Bible. The saints are not dead they are very much alive with The Lord and still active members in the church. Personally I’ve never prayed to Mary or the saints. I’ve never thought it was necessary. I pray directly to God but I don’t see any reason to rebuke someone for praying to the saints for intercession and supplication as it is not a sin. I do that quite regularly for my brothers and sisters who are still here on earth. Whether or not the saints can hear their prayers I don’t know. It really doesn’t matter because I know God hears all prayers. So while I don’t practice it I also don’t see any reason to condemn it or those who practice it. Just because prayers to the saints isn’t in the Bible doesn’t mean it can’t be true. The Bible doesn’t say Jesus had black hair and brown eyes but it certainly is possible that He did. The Bible is not meant to explain all the mysteries of God, heaven, and the spiritual world. It only gives us a glimpse. Much of the scriptures were written by revelation from the Holy Spirit. I believe it is very likely that He has continued to reveal mysteries that are not mentioned in the scriptures. Typically I don’t proclaim them as being truth but usually take them into consideration as a possibility. Like for example Mary’s perpetual virginity. I don’t know for certain one way or the other but I do believe it is a possibility. So I remain neutral on the subject so as to not call someone else a liar when I really have no way of knowing for sure. Although I will say that in my opinion I believe such a topic would’ve been considered strictly taboo to discuss and most likely would not have been something revealed to the public or ever questioned or disclosed.

Click to expand...

That's a 520 word wall of text. Paragraphs are your friends.

I would like to start by saying it is not my intention to be your adversary. I simply wanted to share what I have learned with other Christians. I would also like to point out that I am neither Catholic or Orthodox. I’m a nondenominational who has a tenancy to lean towards the Orthodox teaching.

Click to expand...

Leaning on the everlasting arms (its a song) is the priority.

I’m not here to argue or debate anything.

Click to expand...

But yu are, whether you admit it or not.

I’m simply here to share the other side of the story for people to take into consideration.

Click to expand...

No, you are obviously here to contend for (erroneous) arguments, not just "sharing."

Whether they choose to consider it or reject it is not my concern.

Click to expand...

If that were true than you would not be laboring to argue against what refutes you.

The scriptures I quoted shows that Paul and others did meet in the synagogues on the sabbath regularly to teach. I wouldn’t be surprised if they had worshipped while they were there. The point is they met regularly on the sabbath. I find it hard to believe that they didn’t worship along with the other Jews while being there on the sabbath. The apostles were not against worshiping on the sabbath. They attended on the sabbath to bring the good news to others.

Click to expand...

Why do you insist on repeating your goal-post moving misrepresentation of the issue? For the last time my statement was not that the apostles never ministered to people on the Sabbath and didn’t only met with such on the first day! Instead, I distinctly said "that the only specific day that the NT church, as a church, is mentioned meeting on is the 1st day," [1 Corinthians 16:2; Acts 20:7] which is the reality.

As far as praying to the saints there is scriptural evidence to support prayers to the saints. Prayers of supplication and intercession are encouraged in the Bible. The saints are not dead they are very much alive with The Lord and still active members in the church.

Click to expand...

Yikes. You assert there was no "OT scriptural basis to reach the conclusion that circumcision" was abrogated, yet you find scriptural evidence to support prayers to created beings in Heaven (PTCBIH). . Except that you do not, not even one single prayer out of over 200, and despite there always being plenty of created beings in Heaven to pray to, and as if the Holy Spirit would leave this practice out of Scripture if PTCBIH was sanctioned.
Yet what is recorded is pagan making supplication to invisible heavenly beings. And also conversations btwn angels and men when they were someone in the same realms.

But instead of actual instruction, examples or evidence, or promises, you must desperately extrapolate this out of earthly relations, without one ounce of evidence that saints above beings can ever hear all the mental prayers on earth, much less are prayed to.

Also, 4 beasts and 24 elders offering prayers as incense (Rv. 5:8) is not that of intercession rather than direct prayer to God, but is as a memorial, a sweet savour unto the Lord as in Lv. 2:2,15,16; 24:7; Num. 5:15, "an offering of memorial," much less is it that of them being addressed in prayer. Angels doing likewise in Rv 8:4,5 as a preclude to climatic judgments is also not that of them being prayed to and or being a delivery service rather than direct prayer to God, and the memorial is because when "He maketh inquisition for blood, he remembereth them: he forgetteth not the cry of the humble. (Psalms 9:12; cf. Genesis 4:10) and before judgment God brings forth testimony of the warrant for it. Which includes the cry of those martyred souls under the altar in Rv. 6:9, and with odors representing prayer, testifying to the persecutions of the saints by the devil and world that is fit to be punished.

After this manner therefore pray ye: Our Father which art in heaven, Hallowed be thy name. (Matthew 6:9) For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved. (Romans 10:13)

The Bible doesn’t say Jesus had black hair and brown eyes but it certainly is possible that He did.

Click to expand...

Which is why you do not make doctrines out of such.

Much of the scriptures were written by revelation from the Holy Spirit. I believe it is very likely that He has continued to reveal mysteries that are not mentioned in the scriptures.

Click to expand...

Private revelation and illumination by the Spirit, while all such are subject to testing by the the only wholly inspired substantive authoritative word of God, the Scriptures. '

Like for example Mary’s perpetual virginity. I don’t know for certain one way or the other but I do believe it is a possibility.

Click to expand...

But you do not make doctrines based upon what God could do.

For me .. my word means nothing here. Its His word. And again for ME its alive.. living. What gets me is.. were talking about a BOOK. And just WHO is the author. Was it man or God talking through man. On on and. But what gets me is.. this author.. is where? Billions trillions of miles away?

He is SO real to us .. just can't ask Him. Some believe in a GOD that never talks to them. But the God of Abraham Issac and Jaocb and God of the Christians.. is real. God of the living. You are the temple.. not made by man. He LIVES in you...and we go on and on about what WE know to be true..again our personal beliefs. Yet.. Christ in the Father the Father in Christ and Christ is in you.

The sweet sweet Holy Spirit will teach us ALL things. "But God hath revealed them unto us by his Spirit: for the Spirit searcheth all things, yea, the deep things of God." "For what man knoweth the things of a man, save the spirit of man which is in him? even so the things of God knoweth no man, but the Spirit of God." "Now we have received, not the spirit of the world, but the spirit which is of God; that we might know the things that are freely given to us of God."

So if we take what is written.. the best you will get here is the things of man. So we have the spirit of God..not the spirit of the world.. so we can know the things that are freely given to us by God.

My point and am NOT good at this is. Do you KNOW HIM? When Peter said.. where else are we going to go? You have words of ever lasting life. Jesus said.. Peter you didnt think that.. the spirit of GOD revealed it to you. As long as ONE walks in the natural.. you will never get to know Him nor ever understrand and the WORD will look like any other book written by man.

Allot of men are wise..but.. me.. yeah.. I go to the author

PeaceByJesus said:

That's a 520 word wall of text. Paragraphs are your friends.

Leaning on the everlasting arms (its a song) is the priority.
But yu are, whether you admit it or not.

No, you are obviously here to contend for (erroneous) arguments, not just "sharing."

If that were true than you would not be laboring to argue against what refutes you.

Why do you insist on repeating your goal-post moving misrepresentation of the issue? For the last time my statement was not that the apostles never ministered to people on the Sabbath and didn’t only met with such on the first day! Instead, I distinctly said "that the only specific day that the NT church, as a church, is mentioned meeting on is the 1st day," [1 Corinthians 16:2; Acts 20:7] which is the reality.

Yikes. You assert there was no "OT scriptural basis to reach the conclusion that circumcision" was abrogated, yet you find scriptural evidence to support prayers to created beings in Heaven (PTCBIH). . Except that you do not, not even one single prayer out of over 200, and despite there always being plenty of created beings in Heaven to pray to, and as if the Holy Spirit would leave this practice out of Scripture if PTCBIH was sanctioned.
Yet what is recorded is pagan making supplication to invisible heavenly beings. And also conversations btwn angels and men when they were someone in the same realms.

But instead of actual instruction, examples or evidence, or promises, you must desperately extrapolate this out of earthly relations, without one ounce of evidence that saints above beings can ever hear all the mental prayers on earth, much less are prayed to.

Also, elders and angels offering prayers in memorial (Rv. 5:8; 8:4,5) , like as in Lv. 2:2,15,16; 24:7; Num. 5:15, "an offering of memorial," is not that of them being addressed in prayer, nor is it described as being a delivery service, but is a preclude to judgment before the final judgments upon the earth, testifying to the persecutions of the saints by the devil and world that it fit to be punished.

After this manner therefore pray ye: Our Father which art in heaven, Hallowed be thy name. (Matthew 6:9) For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved. (Romans 10:13)

Which is why you do not make doctrines out of such.

Private revelation and illumination by the Spirit, while all such are subject to testing by the the only wholly inspired substantive authoritative word of God, the Scriptures. '

But you do not make doctrines based upon what God could do.

Click to expand...

Christ gave the church authority to bind and loose, which is a Jewish rabbinical term for scriptural interpretation. Christ gave the church authority. To rule. On what was valid and what was not valid church practice.

Hypothetically. You could claim. That after the first century. The church imbued by Christ. With Interpretive Authority. After the first century. Decided to allow Prayers to the Saints. Because those Saints had been the most cherished members and often martyrs of their communities. And those communities. Loved them and cherished their memory and wanted to continue to commune with them in the next life.

Humoring. Their congregations, humoring their flocks, perhaps hypothetically, the second and third century churches. Decided to allow a fresh and a new prayers to Saints?

Technically. Prayers Towards Saints. Do not invalidate scripture. Nobody worships human Saints as anything other than foul mortal human beings. Just that we cherish their memories. And invoke their names to maintain. Their living memory.

So since it doesn't out right flat out conflict with invalidate or overturn or Upturns Scripture. I think it would be theoretically possible to argue. That the second and third century church. Utilizing the authority Christ gave them in the first century when the New Testament was written. Decided suddenly as it were to allow prayers to Saints, which tradition has continued since that time since say the second or third century.

PeaceByJesus said:

That's a 520 word wall of text. Paragraphs are your friends.

Leaning on the everlasting arms (its a song) is the priority.
But yu are, whether you admit it or not.

No, you are obviously here to contend for (erroneous) arguments, not just "sharing."

If that were true than you would not be laboring to argue against what refutes you.

Why do you insist on repeating your goal-post moving misrepresentation of the issue? For the last time my statement was not that the apostles never ministered to people on the Sabbath and didn’t only met with such on the first day! Instead, I distinctly said "that the only specific day that the NT church, as a church, is mentioned meeting on is the 1st day," [1 Corinthians 16:2; Acts 20:7] which is the reality.

Yikes. You assert there was no "OT scriptural basis to reach the conclusion that circumcision" was abrogated, yet you find scriptural evidence to support prayers to created beings in Heaven (PTCBIH). . Except that you do not, not even one single prayer out of over 200, and despite there always being plenty of created beings in Heaven to pray to, and as if the Holy Spirit would leave this practice out of Scripture if PTCBIH was sanctioned.
Yet what is recorded is pagan making supplication to invisible heavenly beings. And also conversations btwn angels and men when they were someone in the same realms.

But instead of actual instruction, examples or evidence, or promises, you must desperately extrapolate this out of earthly relations, without one ounce of evidence that saints above beings can ever hear all the mental prayers on earth, much less are prayed to.

Also, elders and angels offering prayers in memorial (Rv. 5:8; 8:4,5) , like as in Lv. 2:2,15,16; 24:7; Num. 5:15, "an offering of memorial," is not that of them being addressed in prayer, nor is it described as being a delivery service, but is a preclude to judgment before the final judgments upon the earth, testifying to the persecutions of the saints by the devil and world that it fit to be punished.

After this manner therefore pray ye: Our Father which art in heaven, Hallowed be thy name. (Matthew 6:9) For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved. (Romans 10:13)

Which is why you do not make doctrines out of such.

Private revelation and illumination by the Spirit, while all such are subject to testing by the the only wholly inspired substantive authoritative word of God, the Scriptures. '

But you do not make doctrines based upon what God could do.

Click to expand...

Did the NT epistles come from scripture or revelation?

Erik Nelson said:

Christ gave the church authority to bind and loose, which is a Jewish rabbinical term for scriptural interpretation. Christ gave the church authority. To rule. On what was valid and what was not valid church practice.

Click to expand...

This does not translated into innovation of that which is not what Scripture teaches.

• Over 200 prayers by believers via the inspiration of the Holy Spirit ;
• Who only instructs and examples prayer to Heaven being addressed to God;
• Who only is shown able to hear all prayer;
  
• Who states only God knows the hearts (and motives) of all the children of men - 2 Chronicles 6:30;
  
• And only records pagans making supplication to invisible heavenly beings who are as omniscient - Jeremiah 44:17;
  
• And who presents Christ as the only heavenly mediator btwn God and man - 1 Timothy 2:5;
• And who Himself cries out to the Father - Galatians 4:6;

And you want to make out the NT church praying to created beings in Heaven, based upon autocratic authority to call things that are not as if they were?
.
The power of binding loosing, like that of "any thing that they shall ask," is not an autocratic power, one that can add to the word of God such as inventing ordained church offices, but such is subject to the will of God, and conformity with Scripture. This applies to the church and it also did to the Scribes and Pharisees. Who, though they sat in the seat of Moses, were reproved by the Lord from Scripture for teaching as doctrines the traditions of men. Based on Catholic logic, they had that power, however, the Lord makes it clear they were not above Scripture. (Mark 7:2-16)

The power of binding loosing actually flows from the OT, judicially to bind or loose one from guilt, (Dt. 17:8-13) and even civil courts have that power (Matthew 18:34) as well as husbands or fathers to bind or loose a wife or daughter to her vow. (Numbers 30:1-15) Yet formal judicial actions by the church are executed under leadership, not autocratically but in union with all the church. (Matthew 18:16-18; which text in context deals with personal disputes). The formal corporate judicial binding and loosing is seen in action in 1 Corinthians 5:3-5. Likewise is the corporate nature of forgiveness by the body that was harmed by public sin. (2 Corinthians 2:10-11)

But as seen in Matthew 18:19-20 and James 5:16-18, the spiritual power of binding and loosing are is not restricted to clergy, but as many of Elijah-type righteousness and fervent prayer (Elijah bound and loosed the heavens), though that is sadly not me.

Hypothetically. You could claim. That after the first century. The church imbued by Christ. With Interpretive Authority. After the first century. Decided to allow Prayers to the Saints.

Click to expand...

Sorry, but is your comma key replaced with a period one?

Because those Saints had been the most cherished members and often martyrs of their communities. And those communities. Loved them and cherished their memory and wanted to continue to commune with them in the next life

Click to expand...

Desire is not the basis for doctrine.

Technically. Prayers Towards Saints. Do not invalidate scripture. Nobody worships human Saints as anything other than foul mortal human beings. Just that we cherish their memories. And invoke their names to maintain. Their living memory.

Click to expand...

It does violate Scripture, as being able to hear all prayer, incld. mental ones, and their motives, "for thou, even thou only, knowest the hearts of all the children of men" (1 Kings 8:39) and being addressed and answering all prayer is His manifest unique prerogative, which is nowhere shown given to man. "O thou that hearest prayer, unto thee shall all flesh come. (Psalms 65:2)

So since it doesn't out right flat out conflict with invalidate or overturn or Upturns Scripture. I think it would be theoretically possible to argue. That the second and third century church. Utilizing the authority Christ gave them in the first century when the New Testament was written. Decided suddenly as it were to allow prayers to Saints, which tradition has continued since that time since say the second or third century.

Click to expand...

It need not flat out conflict Scripture to be wrong, any more than endocannibalism needs to as a normal consensual practice. It simply has no precedent, despite being prayer being a most basic practice, and with plenty of warranted opportunities and objects for it, and is contrary to what is taught in addressing prayer and abundantly evidenced. Zero actually Scriptural justification and instead thus its attempted justification is under the premise of autocratic presumption. Give it up. No believer did it or practiced or taught this novelty, including the greatest. But it is no wonder many Catholics things they need it, and their heavenly goddess.

BNR32FAN said:

Did the NT epistles come from scripture or revelation?

Click to expand...

They came just as OT revelation did, under the plenary inspiration of God, and discerned as such before there was a church which presumed that what the uninspired words of popes and his prelates say is the word of God is necessarily equal with it.

PeaceByJesus said:

They came just as OT revelation did, under the plenary inspiration of God, and discerned as such before there was a church which presumed that what the uninspired words of popes and his prelates say is the word of God is necessarily equal with it.

Click to expand...

You are refuting the church that determined which writings were inspired or not. And how did they reach that decision? Ecumenical council.

BNR32FAN said:

You are refuting the church that determined which writings were inspired or not. And how did they reach that decision? Ecumenical council.

Click to expand...

No, once again you are in apparent noncomprehension of the factual argument, which is not that denying what a council said - which in the case of an indisputable canon for a church would be Trent, over 1400 years after the last book was penned - but that an infallible council was not and thus is not necessary for an extensive body of writings to be established as being Scripture and authoritative by the time of Christ.

Which is the historical reality, as evidenced by the abundant references to writings of that body by the Lord and His own, enabling the church to have "mightily convinced the Jews, and that publickly, shewing by the scriptures that Jesus was Christ," (Acts 18:28) which writings those who sat in the seat of Moses never contended were not Scripture.

Think "prayer to Saints" basically boils down to "asking Saints in heaven to pray for us, as they did in life, and endorse our prayers on towards God's Throne"

Orthodox & Catholics maintain that the living can pray for the otherwise (per 2 Maccabees), and that Saints in heaven can still pray for those on earth...

i.e. that relationships persist, even when one party is already "asleep" (as Saint Paul calls the next life in the NT)

PeaceByJesus said:

This does not translated into innovation of that which is not what Scripture teaches.

• Over 200 prayers by believers via the inspiration of the Holy Spirit ;
• Who only instructs and examples prayer to Heaven being addressed to God;
• Who only is shown able to hear all prayer;
  
• Who states only God knows the hearts (and motives) of all the children of men - 2 Chronicles 6:30;
  
• And only records pagans making supplication to invisible heavenly beings who are as omniscient - Jeremiah 44:17;
  
• And who presents Christ as the only heavenly mediator btwn God and man - 1 Timothy 2:5;
• And who Himself cries out to the Father - Galatians 4:6;

And you want to make out the NT church praying to created beings in Heaven, based upon autocratic authority to call things that are not as if they were?
.
The power of binding loosing, like that of "any thing that they shall ask," is not an autocratic power, one that can add to the word of God such as inventing ordained church offices, but such is subject to the will of God, and conformity with Scripture. This applies to the church and it also did to the Scribes and Pharisees. Who, though they sat in the seat of Moses, were reproved by the Lord from Scripture for teaching as doctrines the traditions of men. Based on Catholic logic, they had that power, however, the Lord makes it clear they were not above Scripture. (Mark 7:2-16)

The power of binding loosing actually flows from the OT, judicially to bind or loose one from guilt, (Dt. 17:8-13) and even civil courts have that power (Matthew 18:34) as well as husbands or fathers to bind or loose a wife or daughter to her vow. (Numbers 30:1-15) Yet formal judicial actions by the church are executed under leadership, not autocratically but in union with all the church. (Matthew 18:16-18; which text in context deals with personal disputes). The formal corporate judicial binding and loosing is seen in action in 1 Corinthians 5:3-5. Likewise is the corporate nature of forgiveness by the body that was harmed by public sin. (2 Corinthians 2:10-11)

But as seen in Matthew 18:19-20 and James 5:16-18, the spiritual power of binding and loosing are is not restricted to clergy, but as many of Elijah-type righteousness and fervent prayer (Elijah bound and loosed the heavens), though that is sadly not me.

Sorry, but is your comma key replaced with a period one?

Desire is not the basis for doctrine.

It does violate Scripture, as being able to hear all prayer, incld. mental ones, and their motives, "for thou, even thou only, knowest the hearts of all the children of men" (1 Kings 8:39) and being addressed and answering all prayer is His manifest unique prerogative, which is nowhere shown given to man. "O thou that hearest prayer, unto thee shall all flesh come. (Psalms 65:2)

It need not flat out conflict Scripture to be wrong, any more than endocannibalism needs to as a normal consensual practice. It simply has no precedent, despite being prayer being a most basic practice, and with plenty of warranted opportunities and objects for it, and is contrary to what is taught in addressing prayer and abundantly evidenced. Zero actually Scriptural justification and instead thus its attempted justification is under the premise of autocratic presumption. Give it up. No believer did it or practiced or taught this novelty, including the greatest. But it is no wonder many Catholics things they need it, and their heavenly goddess.

Click to expand...

PeaceByJesus said:

They came just as OT revelation did, under the plenary inspiration of God, and discerned as such before there was a church which presumed that what the uninspired words of popes and his prelates say is the word of God is necessarily equal with it.

Click to expand...

Jews, and the oldest Christian movements which sprung from them (Orthodox & Catholic), all unanimously view Oral Tradition (of Rabbis, & Church Fathers, respectively) as Authoritative, on a par comparable to Written Scripture

The Jews have their Talmud of Rabbinical discussions & rulings, and OC / RCC have their Church Fathers Writings

Disavowing the Church Fathers is akin to asking Jews to disavow Rabbinical authority

Jesus did not condemn Oral Tradition in all cases, He condemned hypocritical combinations of application / non-application of standards of Judgement

From this perspective, Sola Scriptura is very innovative, not reflecting any earlier (known) Judeo-Christian practices

Erik Nelson said:

Jews, and the oldest Christian movements which sprung from them (Orthodox & Catholic), all unanimously view Oral Tradition (of Rabbis, & Church Fathers, respectively) as Authoritative, on a par comparable to Written Scripture

The Jews have their Talmud of Rabbinical discussions & rulings, and OC / RCC have their Church Fathers Writings

Disavowing the Church Fathers is akin to asking Jews to disavow Rabbinical authority

Click to expand...

Thank you for effectively admitting that Catholic tradition and uninspired so-called church "fathers" no more warrants being followed as leadership says than Jewish tradition and uninspired commentators do.

Jesus did not condemn Oral Tradition in all cases, He condemned hypocritical combinations of application / non-application of standards of Judgement

Click to expand...

Not just hypocritical, but for tradition unscriptural traditions, even by additions, as doctrines. He would do the same for PTCBIH .

From this perspective, Sola Scriptura is very innovative, not reflecting any earlier (known) Judeo-Christian practices

Click to expand...

Who knows how you define this, but the fact is that God manifestly made writing His most-reliable means of preservation. (Exodus 17:14; 34:1,27; Deuteronomy 10:4; 17:18; 27:3,8; 31:24; Joshua 1:8; 2 Chronicles 34:15,18-19, 30-31) Psalm 19:7-11; 119; John 20:31; Acts 17:11; Revelation 1:1; 20:12, 15; Matthew 4:5-7; 22:29; Luke 24:44,45; Acts 17:11)

And thus as abundantly evidenced , as written, Scripture became the transcendent supreme standard for obedience and testing and establishing truth claims as the wholly Divinely inspired and assured, Word of God. Thus the veracity of even apostolic oral preaching could be subject to testing by Scripture, (Acts 17:11) and not vice versa.

Which materially provides for recognition of writings of God and the establishment of a canon.

Erik Nelson said:

Think "prayer to Saints" basically boils down to "asking Saints in heaven to pray for us, as they did in life, and endorse our prayers on towards God's Throne"

Orthodox & Catholics maintain that the living can pray for the otherwise (per 2 Maccabees), and that Saints in heaven can still pray for those on earth...

i.e. that relationships persist, even when one party is already "asleep" (as Saint Paul calls the next life in the NT)

Click to expand...

Think "prayer to Saints" is not restricted to just them, but angels as well, and basically boils down to (based on what we do read in the Bible),

• Presuming that believers are to engage in what only pagans are shown doing in making supplication to invisible created heavenly beings who can know hearts and minds.
  
• Presuming that this is what believers in Scripture did despite ZERO examples of such in Scripture, and despite there being over 200 prayers by believers in the Bible, and despite there plenty of created beings to pray to, and needful opportunities to do so or to give thanks to such, and despite this being a common Catholic practice;
  
• Presuming the Holy Spirit would neglect to record or not see as warranted recording this normal Catholic practice if indeed Biblical believers did so;
• Presuming to attribute uniquely Divine attributes to departed saints of knowing the hearts and minds of supplicants, and thus their motives, and the ability to hear multitudinous prayers to Heaven.
  
• Presuming to provide men as possessing the unique Divine power and privilege of being the only Heavenly being addressed in prayer to Heaven.
  
• Presuming with no actual evidence of sanction, and with contacting the departed only being prohibited or shown negatively, that earthly two-way communications in this realm must be able to continue btwn those on earth and in Heaven, while IIRC two-way communications in Scripture required both beings from their respective realms to somehow be in the same realm and conversing by words, not mental thoughts.
  
• Presuming the Holy Spirit would present Christ as the only heavenly mediator btwn God and man -(1 Timothy 2:5) and elaborate in priestly functions (in the book of Hebrews) yet not once mention that created beings function as mediators.
• Presuming that while believers, being priests, have boldness to enter the holy of holies in Heaven through the blood of Jesus Christ, (Heb. 10:19) for by Him they have access by His Spirit to the Father, (Eph. 2:18) yet they should regularly present their requests to secretaries instead of directly to God.

PTCBIH is simply unholy presumption, and an insult to God and His Holy Spirit, and contrary to what He does teach on prayer to Heven.

Why not just admit that it is indeed a late tradition*, with the veracity of it resting upon the basis of ensured magisterial veracity?


..

quintessentialramble said:

If the Bible is infallible, why do so many Christians disagree on theology?

Click to expand...

They shouldn't dogmatically be teaching things other than what is commonly believed by all Christians, things such as: the Nicene Creed, the canon of scripture, the inerrancy of the Bible, and so forth.

PeaceByJesus said:

No, once again you are in apparent noncomprehension of the factual argument, which is not that denying what a council said - which in the case of an indisputable canon for a church would be Trent, over 1400 years after the last book was penned - but that an infallible council was not and thus is not necessary for an extensive body of writings to be established as being Scripture and authoritative by the time of Christ.

Which is the historical reality, as evidenced by the abundant references to writings of that body by the Lord and His own, enabling the church to have "mightily convinced the Jews, and that publickly, shewing by the scriptures that Jesus was Christ," (Acts 18:28) which writings those who sat in the seat of Moses never contended were not Scripture.

Click to expand...

The council of Trent was a Roman Catholic council as was the council of Florence in 1439AD both of which are rejected by the Orthodox Church (apostolic Church of God). Rome was excommunicated in 1054AD so their councils are not authoritative and do not reflect the decision of the Church of God.

So, you're saying that "prayer to Saints" is some sort of syncretization, comparable to (allegedly) sliding Holy Days around on the calendar so to align with, and thereby coopt, previous pagan festivals (Winter Solstice < Christmas, Spring Equinox < Good Friday) ?

If so, it may have been expedient & superficially beneficial for the Church at the time. Maybe early Christians viewed the Saints as their spiritual Fathers & Mothers and Ancestors, in the Church, and wanted to continue to "pray to their ancestors" as maybe pagans did, e.g. in the movie Gladiator, Maximus prays to his ancestors through small figurines.

PeaceByJesus said:

Think "prayer to Saints" is not restricted to just them, but angels as well, and basically boils down to (based on what we do read in the Bible),

• Presuming that believers are to engage in what only pagans are shown doing in making supplication to invisible created heavenly beings who can know hearts and minds.
  
• Presuming that this is what believers in Scripture did despite ZERO examples of such in Scripture, and despite there being over 200 prayers by believers in the Bible, and despite there plenty of created beings to pray to, and needful opportunities to do so or to give thanks to such, and despite this being a common Catholic practice;
  
• Presuming the Holy Spirit would neglect to record or not see as warranted recording this normal Catholic practice if indeed Biblical believers did so;
• Presuming to attribute uniquely Divine attributes to departed saints of knowing the hearts and minds of supplicants, and thus their motives, and the ability to hear multitudinous prayers to Heaven.
  
• Presuming to provide men as possessing the unique Divine power and privilege of being the only Heavenly being addressed in prayer to Heaven.
  
• Presuming with no actual evidence of sanction, and with contacting the departed only being prohibited or shown negatively, that earthly two-way communications in this realm must be able to continue btwn those on earth and in Heaven, while IIRC two-way communications in Scripture required both beings from their respective realms to somehow be in the same realm and conversing by words, not mental thoughts.
  
• Presuming the Holy Spirit would present Christ as the only heavenly mediator btwn God and man -(1 Timothy 2:5) and elaborate in priestly functions (in the book of Hebrews) yet not once mention that created beings function as mediators.
• Presuming that while believers, being priests, have boldness to enter the holy of holies in Heaven through the blood of Jesus Christ, (Heb. 10:19) for by Him they have access by His Spirit to the Father, (Eph. 2:18) yet they should regularly present their requests to secretaries instead of directly to God.

PTCBIH is simply unholy presumption, and an insult to God and His Holy Spirit, and contrary to what He does teach on prayer to Heven.

Why not just admit that it is indeed a late tradition*, with the veracity of it resting upon the basis of ensured magisterial veracity?

Spoiler: a latter development among some Jews, flowing from paganism.

.it should come as no surprise that we do find instances, particularly in the domain of popular belief, in which non-Christians prayed for the suffering dead in the other world...

These practices developed around the beginning of the Christian era. They were a phenomenon of the times, particularly noticeable in Egypt, the great meeting ground for peoples and religions. Traveling in Egypt around 50 s.c., Diodorus of Sicily was struck by the funerary customs: "As soon as the casket containing the corpse is placed on the bark, the survivors call upon the infernal gods and beseech them to admit the soul to the place received for pious men. The crowd adds its own cheers, together with pleas that the deceased be allowed to enjoy eternal life in Hades, in the society of the good.

The passage cited earlier from the Second Book of Maccabees, which was composed by an Alexandrian Jew during the half-century preceding Diodorus's journey, should no doubt be seen against this background... It then becomes clear that at the time of Judas Maccabeus--around 170 s.c., a surprisingly innovative period—prayer for the dead was not practiced, but that a century later it was practiced by certain Jews. (The Birth of Purgatory By Jacques Le Goff. pp. 45,46 , transcribed using Free Online OCR - convert scanned PDF and images to Word, JPEG to Word, emp. mine)

..

Click to expand...

Erik Nelson said:

So, you're saying that "prayer to Saints" is some sort of syncretization, comparable to (allegedly) sliding Holy Days around on the calendar so to align with, and thereby coopt, previous pagan festivals (Winter Solstice < Christmas, Spring Equinox < Good Friday) ?

If so, it may have been expedient & superficially beneficial for the Church at the time. Maybe early Christians viewed the Saints as their spiritual Fathers & Mothers and Ancestors, in the Church, and wanted to continue to "pray to their ancestors" as maybe pagans did, e.g. in the movie Gladiator, Maximus prays to his ancestors through small figurines.

Click to expand...

Catholicism did indeed engage in religion syncretism to some degree (and PTCBIH is one of them).

Even Newman states,

"...the rulers of the Church from early times were prepared, should the occasion arise, to adopt, or imitate, or sanction the existing rites and customs of the populace , as well as the philosophy of the educated class..."

"We are told in various ways by Eusebius [Note 16], that Constantine, in order to recommend the new religion to the heathen, transferred into it the outward ornaments to which they had been accustomed in their own. It is not necessary to go into a subject which the diligence of Protestant writers has made familiar to most of us."

"The use of temples, and these dedicated to particular saints, and ornamented on occasions with branches of trees; incense, lamps, and candles; votive offerings on recovery from illness; holy water; asylums; holydays and seasons, use of calendars, processions, blessings on the fields; sacerdotal vestments, the tonsure, the ring in marriage, turning to the East, images at a later date, perhaps the ecclesiastical chant, and the Kyrie Eleison [Note 17], are all of pagan origin , and sanctified by their adoption into the Church.." {374} "The introduction of Images was still later, and met with more opposition in the West than in the East." (John Henry Newman, An Essay on the Development of Christian Doctrine, Chapter 8. Application of the Third Note of a True Development—Assimilative Power; Newman Reader - Development of Christian Doctrine - Chapter 8)

However, syncretism is not that of Biblical teaching, which attackers assert it is (some refutations: http://www.tektonics.org/copycathub.html)

As for expedient & superficially beneficial for the Church at the time, yes, if you want numbers and coverts that do not let go of paganism, but that is not what the NT church was taught, (2 Corinthians 6:14-14) which is what we are to seek to conform to (and I come short of).