About claiming scriptural authority...

Stabat Mater dolorosa

Jesus Christ today, yesterday and forever!
Supporter
Jun 18, 2014
17,708
8,068
Somewhere up North
✟293,971.00
Country
Norway
Faith
Traditional. Cath.
Marital Status
Single
How did I know this was somebody lauding the Magesterium of the Roman Catholic Church, before I had even finished reading it?

Power tends to corrupt and absolute power corrupts absolutely, is the answer to the Pope's pretensions to be the world's last absolute monarch, with a hotline to God.

It is the Bible and Nicene Creed which will ensure that the various branches of Christianity remain recognisably the same religion, inspite of their differences.

I take it you didn't care to read through the thread. Don't worry I commit the same mistake all to often i here.

Well that being said, you know that I didn't say it had to be Rome?

As I said to keep Christianity from getting secularized and privatised we should and must keep an open theological dialogue.

I'm not a found of ecumenism as practiced today, but I'm fully behind true ecumenical work. Testing the arguments and reasoning for our doctrine and theology in a multi denominational theological forum of some sort.

This is not possible with arrogant and "infallible" faiths of the lone wanderer.

If you have read my thread you'll see that it's a rather transparent way of looking at theology and I even highlight the tragedy of unchallenged normative theology in the church and for the church herself.
The Catholic church as any other church need to be able to discuss, defend and in some cases if proven wrong by good theological arguments found in scripture (or in tradition, as part of a inner dialectic exercise) articulate a new and improved doctrine.

We need not to barricade ourselves, but to engage in a qualified dialogue.
What the church, be that lutheran, Catholic, orthodox etc ultimately choose to go with is for the authorities themselves to decide, but we must have a free and honest discussion forum if not we'll stagnate, then die as a normative source of moral in society.

This is not possible with the extremists who singlehandedly claim superiority and personal infallibility.
 
Upvote 0

Halbhh

Everything You say is Life to me
Supporter
Mar 17, 2015
17,172
9,191
catholic -- embracing all Christians
✟1,152,592.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Do you translate your own bibles?
If not you have to trust that others have done a honest and good job, which in most cases fortunately they do.

You cannot trust scripture and distrust theologians at the same time without letting go of any sort of logic.

It's so inconsistent.

Translations -- not usually a problem, and here's why. When I have compared many for various key verses or key words, hundreds of times now, from 5 to 15 translations, and also occasionally go to commentaries about the Greek, most all agree pretty well if you are reading fully with context. I have occasionally found a translation here and there that is less good, but...

Each time, the real meaning of words becomes clear from the broad context finally, which often is from the passage, but many times needs more, such as the full book, and sometimes several books together.

Put into different wording, to hear we must be listening (instead of trying to do the talking).

If we are listening, we will be reading through, because He is talking, and would you just walk off and forget He was continuing to talk?..... No.

I think this isn't what you are trying to discuss here in the thread though, whether we can learn from context -- learn from listening.

We cannot learn what scripture is saying except with listening (thus context follows), and I'd guess you'd already agree. In other words, I'm pointing out why most people make the errors they do, lack of context, pulling verses away from context. Anyone that read through fully in a gospel will quickly realize they can understand many things Christ says that are quite challenging and that His Words are all too clear, and that's why we need to be so humble, because otherwise we will want to discount things like "love your enemy" and try to make it mean something different than love your enemy.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

amariselle

Jesus Never Fails
Sep 28, 2004
6,648
4,194
The Great Northern Wilderness
✟60,500.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
CA-Conservatives
Problem is that you are infallible as interpreter yourself in your own eyes.

Have you solved the problem yet, the one about reading translations of fallible men and their thousands of choices as to what a Greek word with several meanings should be translated into?

Already by opening your bible you're accepting tradition and the scholastics you despise so much, if not you'd do as the queeker in here who rely on nothing but his own empiricism.

I have never once claimed to be "infallible", and I would not dare to do so, so please do not attempt to put words in my mouth.

Also, I do not "despise" tradition and "scholastics". Just because someone claims that all Christians should be able to search the Scriptures and study them for themselves, does not mean they despise others.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Phil 1:21
Upvote 0

amariselle

Jesus Never Fails
Sep 28, 2004
6,648
4,194
The Great Northern Wilderness
✟60,500.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
CA-Conservatives
I take it you didn't care to read through the thread. Don't worry I commit the same mistake all to often i here.

Well that being said, you know that I didn't say it had to be Rome?

As I said to keep Christianity from getting secularized and privatised we should and must keep an open theological dialogue.

I'm not a found of ecumenism as practiced today, but I'm fully behind true ecumenical work. Testing the arguments and reasoning for our doctrine and theology in a multi denominational theological forum of some sort.

This is not possible with arrogant and "infallible" faiths of the lone wanderer.

If you have read my thread you'll see that it's a rather transparent way of looking at theology and I even highlight the tragedy of unchallenged normative theology in the church and for the church herself.
The Catholic church as any other church need to be able to discuss, defend and in some cases if proven wrong by good theological arguments found in scripture (or in tradition, as part of a inner dialectic exercise) articulate a new and improved doctrine.

We need not to barricade ourselves, but to engage in a qualified dialogue.
What the church, be that lutheran, Catholic, orthodox etc ultimately choose to go with is for the authorities themselves to decide, but we must have a free and honest discussion forum if not we'll stagnate, then die as a normative source of moral in society.

This is not possible with the extremists who singlehandedly claim superiority and personal infallibility.

Does that last bit not precisely describe the Papacy throughout history?
 
Upvote 0

OrthodoxyUSA

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Jul 6, 2004
25,285
2,868
59
Tupelo, MS
Visit site
✟142,274.00
Country
United States
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
Did you know that though you consider doing so when confronted by the challenging theology of others pious, you actually undermine and falsify them by patronizing their faith and position.

This actually leads to the opposite of what you probably thought, you're helping the secularization of Christianity all together.

If theology falls into the fallpit where there's no room for challenges and/ or need for good reasons to uphold doctrine and normative theology without being ostracized, then in the end Christianity will end up as a private matter, a faith where everyone claim orthodoxy in their interpretation of scripture and no theology is open for discussion.

If all Christians saw theology this way then we'd face a completely privatised and secular, subjective religion.

The reason why this is the case?
If no-one's allowed to question any part of what constitutes your faith in God then the door into a fruitful theological discussion is forever closed.

So, to all you in here (and there are several of you) who seek to toss your own subjective interpretation of scripture on others and do your best to strangle discussion by claiming superior insight in scripture.

You end up in that ditch, you run the errand of the world, a world who seek to undermine Christianity and shatter the faithful and spreading them around, cut of the rest of the Christian world. The world wants to see Christianity torn apart and privatised to the level where even evangelizing people will be ilegalised.

Sola Scriptura with every man as interpreter can easily be the end of Christianity as a cultural and moral voice in a increasingly anti Christian world.

#QuotedforTruth

Forgive me...
 
Upvote 0

Robert76

Robert
Jul 19, 2017
135
110
Central Ohio
✟7,841.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Did you know that though you consider doing so when confronted by the challenging theology of others pious, you actually undermine and falsify them by patronizing their faith and position.

This actually leads to the opposite of what you probably thought, you're helping the secularization of Christianity all together.

If theology falls into the fallpit where there's no room for challenges and/ or need for good reasons to uphold doctrine and normative theology without being ostracized, then in the end Christianity will end up as a private matter, a faith where everyone claim orthodoxy in their interpretation of scripture and no theology is open for discussion.

If all Christians saw theology this way then we'd face a completely privatised and secular, subjective religion.

The reason why this is the case?
If no-one's allowed to question any part of what constitutes your faith in God then the door into a fruitful theological discussion is forever closed.

So, to all you in here (and there are several of you) who seek to toss your own subjective interpretation of scripture on others and do your best to strangle discussion by claiming superior insight in scripture.

You end up in that ditch, you run the errand of the world, a world who seek to undermine Christianity and shatter the faithful and spreading them around, cut of the rest of the Christian world. The world wants to see Christianity torn apart and privatised to the level where even evangelizing people will be ilegalised.

Sola Scriptura with every man as interpreter can easily be the end of Christianity as a cultural and moral voice in a increasingly anti Christian world.

This is a great call-out and something I can never be reminded of too much. The underlying message I get from this is to remember I do not know everything about scripture (just because I wear the badge of "Christian") and need to be open to different points of view and when I encounter a view that is in opposition to my own view, I need to research the topic and seek the advice of others in developing a comprehensive basis for supporting my position (whether it remains as it was or changes as a result of digging into scripture more). Further, because we are all brothers and sisters in Christ, my responses should be in a spirit of engaging and positive debate.

In contrast, I do wish that the views and interpretations on scripture were more 'unified'. I can tell you from first-hand experience in having visited the Friendly Atheist forum many times to try dispelling false views and assumptions that Atheists/Agnostics make about Christians & Christianity in general, one of the biggest arguments used in support that the God of the Bible does not exist is because we have so little consensus on many scriptural topics and the meaning of various texts in the Bible.

I think most of us here agree that we are saved by grace through faith in Jesus Christ alone and that Jesus is the way, the truth and the life; that He is the Son of God and died for our sins that we may have His righteousness and spend eternity with Him. Beyond that though, my limited experience thus far has shown that on most secondary (non foundational) issues, there is a surprising amount of disparity in understanding--everything from the creation account, levitical law and on through to the rapture and tribulation period/end times. First and foremost we are brothers and sisters in the faith; however, I feel (just my opinion) there should be an allowable degree to which we can admonish one another when it someone has clearly strayed from the truth or grossly misinterpreting scripture. Is this a gray area? You bet. So, this must be done carefully in love... if it feels like "strangling" then it's not being done in love and is probably being done more so out of pride.
 
Upvote 0

Halbhh

Everything You say is Life to me
Supporter
Mar 17, 2015
17,172
9,191
catholic -- embracing all Christians
✟1,152,592.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Each time the intended meaning of words in scriptures becomes clear from the broad context finally -- passage, sometimes full book, and sometimes several books together.

Put into different wording, to hear we must be listening (instead of trying to do the talking).

If we are listening during a gospel, we will be reading through, because these are the Eternal Words of Life, and He is talking.

W
ould any of us really just walk off and forget He was continuing to talk?.....

No!

And so we must read this way, as if there, listening.
 
Upvote 0

redleghunter

Thank You Jesus!
Supporter
Mar 18, 2014
38,116
34,054
Texas
✟176,076.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Ireneaus was a great scholar and we owe him big time. It's good to see that you appreciate his work, as do I.
I'm glad Against Heresies mostly survived (some fragments have been found in the past century). It is great to see how the early church debated heresies.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Servantleader

Member
Jul 21, 2017
19
12
Pasadena
✟15,842.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Thank you kindly for your post. I think it is by grace that we even get to utter or proclaim a gospel that many died for in the early church. I am honored daily to live in a world where I can proclaim a faith in Christ and not fear for my life or my family's life in the act of such public proclamation.

As we read in the book of Proverbs, cultivating wisdom involves knowing when to listen and when to speak. Personally, I am learning that you do not always have to respond to the voices that challenge your faith openly because sometimes, people express their faith more to hear themselves and believe more, than to speak over what you belief. I pray that the Body of Christ learn to give each other more grace when we are recipients of opposing faith perspectives to listen more than we speak and pray more than we pick theology fights.
 
Upvote 0

Vicomte13

Well-Known Member
Jan 6, 2016
3,655
1,816
Westport, Connecticut
✟93,837.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
Correlation does not imply causation - Wikipedia

In statistics, many statistical tests calculate correlations between variables and when two variables are found to be correlated, it is tempting to assume that this shows that one variable causes the other.[1][2] That "correlation proves causation," is considered a questionable cause logical fallacy when two events occurring together are taken to have established a cause-and-effect relationship. This fallacy is also known as cum hoc ergo propter hoc, Latin for "with this, therefore because of this," and "false cause." A similar fallacy, that an event that followed another was necessarily a consequence of the first event, is the post hoc ergo propter hoc (Latin for "after this, therefore because of this.") fallacy.​


What exactly is the logical fallacy here? There is no FACTUAL error. The established, old Churches of any size - with the sole exception of the Quakers - have a bloody history of murder and oppression since the 1500s. They all justified themselves theologically in killing people by appealing to scripture and theological reason, and they did so from the top, so the very highest officials and theological authorities of each of these churches developed the theology, upheld it, and never renounced it in their day. In our day, they ACKNOWLEDGE the sins of the past, but do not admit their forebears were in clear theological error and promoted outright demonic EVIL by what they taught (burning people alive is demonic evil - it cannot be defended by a real Christian argument).

All of these things are so.

It was the civil authorities that removed the practical power of the churches to enforce their theologies. They did not recant them or repent them - they had the sword stripped from their hands by armed state actors. After the fact, some of them repented of the evil, but they did not repent of the structures of thinking that created the evil.

And they still do not.

The OP asked us to suspend the supremacy of our own personal judgment of things in favor of the "superior" judgment of theological leaders of the Church. My response was no, the fruit they have borne over the centuries has been too bitter.

As the OP was specifically about the need to subordinate one's self to the spiritual authority of a church, rather than relying on one's own inspiration, I used the example of the Quakers - their rich fruit - as proof that the diametrically opposite approach has produced the best fruit over the past 5 centuries.

I didn't spell out each individual step, but there was no logical fallacy in any of it. When Jesus said "You will know them by their fruit", HE was making the direct link between what people DO and what they BELIEVE and GOD. He always said that God judges on what we DO, and that those who follow him will DO as he did.

So, I have their fruit, and I have their APPROACH, which is to individually turn to the Holy Spirit, and then collectively sit together and let the Holy Spirit bring them to a common mind.

That is the very opposite of what the OP suggested, and I said that the fruit of the Quakers versus the bloodshed and crime of the churches who all do it the other way proves, using Jesus' own standard of proof, that the Quakers are right and everybody else is wrong.

That's not a logical fallacy, it's a proof.
I guess I had to spell it out more explicitly.
So I just did.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Haipule
Upvote 0

Goatee

Jesus, please forgive me, a sinner.
Aug 16, 2015
7,585
3,621
59
Under a Rock. Wales, UK
✟77,615.00
Country
United Kingdom
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Divorced
Upvote 0

bbbbbbb

Well-Known Member
Jun 9, 2015
27,803
13,115
72
✟362,269.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Pope is not infallible. You need to read 'when' the church says he is .

Which is exactly why I posted the link. The Catholic Church does have a very specific dogma related to papal infallibility which is quite unique among all of the branches of Christianity.
 
  • Like
Reactions: amariselle
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Haipule

Well-Known Member
Jun 20, 2017
681
439
64
Honokawai, Maui HI
✟32,461.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Every believer articulate normative theology off of Scripture either based upon the solid work of clergy with knowledge far beyond your own or by yourself (which is as subjective as anything).
Dude! "Far beyond your own?" How do you know this?

I've been studying theology and the autographed languages for decades! Longer then most clergy have been alive. And I consider my own book the greatest commentary on the bible ever written to date.

I have no moral opinion on science. I've also been studying many sciences for years including theology which should be the science of God and not the showcase of man's goofy ideas.

I've been translating for years! Here is an example of what I do:

“About the ninth hour Jesus cried out with a loud voice, saying, " ELI, ELI, LAMA SABACHTHANI?" that is, "MY GOD, MY GOD, WHY HAVE YOU FORSAKEN ME?" Math 27:46 NASB

Let’s look at just the underlined words: first we have the nominative masculine vocative singular: the'e = God!

Then we have the genitive 1st person singular, personal/progressive(ownership) pronoun: mou = of-me/mine. Then these words are repeated (idiom of strong entreaty).

God! of-Me, God! of-Me,...

Then we have the conjunction: hina = that(purpose), usually establishing a purpose clause.

God! of-Me, God! of-Me, that(purpose)...

Then we have the accusative neuter singular, interrogative(begs a question)/indefinite(anything, anyone) pronoun: ti = why?-anything>...

In Greek, the entire population, or large segment, is always in the masculine gender. Masculine groups are masculine. Female groups are feminine. Whereas, a smaller mixed group is always neuter.

God! of-Me, God! of-Me, that(purpose) why?-anything>...

Then we have the accusative 1st person singular, enclitic personal/possessive pronoun: me = <mine.

God! of-Me, God! of-Me, that(purpose) why?-anything> <mine... Not "stuff"--people! His associates, family, friends and disciples.

Then we have the 2nd person singular, aorist active indicative compound verb: egkatelipes. Which is first the prefixed preposition: en = in, prefixed to a verb usually connotes (continuing)in.

Then we have the proposition: kata = down(from), which is a two terminus word where the authority is up and the action is down.

Then we have the verb: leipO = desert, abandon, leave, leave as destitute.

God! of-Me, God! of-Me, that(purpose) why?-anything> <mine You-(continuing)in-down(from authority)-leave-destitute*

By virtue of the enclitic personal/possessive pronoun me, the enclitic to ti, there is no way this should have been translated as, "WHY HAVE YOU FORSAKEN ME"!

Jesus is not a wimp crying for himself! He is crying for His own possession--the people He loved dearly! Just like David, whom Jesus is quoting in Psalm 22:1, whom is crying for his people Israel and not himself!

2,000yrs later and no one has taught this? I think it's cool!
 
Upvote 0

Goatee

Jesus, please forgive me, a sinner.
Aug 16, 2015
7,585
3,621
59
Under a Rock. Wales, UK
✟77,615.00
Country
United Kingdom
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Divorced
Which is exactly why I posted the link. The Catholic Church does have a very specific dogma related to papal infallibility which is quite unique among all of the branches of Christianity.

All the way back to Peter. Correct!
 
Upvote 0

Goatee

Jesus, please forgive me, a sinner.
Aug 16, 2015
7,585
3,621
59
Under a Rock. Wales, UK
✟77,615.00
Country
United Kingdom
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Divorced
Dude! "Far beyond your own?" How do you know this?

I've been studying theology and the autographed languages for decades! Longer then most clergy have been alive. And I consider my own book the greatest commentary on the bible ever written to date.

I have no moral opinion on science. I've also been studying many sciences for years including theology which should be the science of God and not the showcase of man's goofy ideas.

I've been translating for years! Here is an example of what I do:

“About the ninth hour Jesus cried out with a loud voice, saying, " ELI, ELI, LAMA SABACHTHANI?" that is, "MY GOD, MY GOD, WHY HAVE YOU FORSAKEN ME?" Math 27:46 NASB

Let’s look at just the underlined words: first we have the nominative masculine vocative singular: the'e = God!

Then we have the genitive 1st person singular, personal/progressive(ownership) pronoun: mou = of-me/mine. Then these words are repeated (idiom of strong entreaty).

God! of-Me, God! of-Me,...

Then we have the conjunction: hina = that(purpose), usually establishing a purpose clause.

God! of-Me, God! of-Me, that(purpose)...

Then we have the accusative neuter singular, interrogative(begs a question)/indefinite(anything, anyone) pronoun: ti = why?-anything>...

In Greek, the entire population, or large segment, is always in the masculine gender. Masculine groups are masculine. Female groups are feminine. Whereas, a smaller mixed group is always neuter.

God! of-Me, God! of-Me, that(purpose) why?-anything>...

Then we have the accusative 1st person singular, enclitic personal/possessive pronoun: me = <mine.

God! of-Me, God! of-Me, that(purpose) why?-anything> <mine... Not "stuff"--people! His associates, family, friends and disciples.

Then we have the 2nd person singular, aorist active indicative compound verb: egkatelipes. Which is first the prefixed preposition: en = in, prefixed to a verb usually connotes (continuing)in.

Then we have the proposition: kata = down(from), which is a two terminus word where the authority is up and the action is down.

Then we have the verb: leipO = desert, abandon, leave, leave as destitute.

God! of-Me, God! of-Me, that(purpose) why?-anything> <mine You-(continuing)in-down(from authority)-leave-destitute*

By virtue of the enclitic personal/possessive pronoun me, the enclitic to ti, there is no way this should have been translated as, "WHY HAVE YOU FORSAKEN ME"!

Jesus is not a wimp crying for himself! He is crying for His own possession--the people He loved dearly! Just like David, whom Jesus is quoting in Psalm 22:1, whom is crying for his people Israel and not himself!

2,000yrs later and no one has taught this? I think it's cool!

Can you write that in plain English now. Lol
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Godlovesmetwo

Fringe Catholic
Mar 16, 2016
10,398
7,257
Antwerp
✟17,860.00
Country
Djibouti
Faith
Christian Seeker
Marital Status
Married
Politics
CA-Others
Here is what it comes down to for many of these folks: pride. The idea that they should be under the spiritual authority or guidance of another is offensive to them. They say that our Lord Jesus is their authority. They say that Sacred Scripture is their authority. But they will never once say that a church or a pastor is their authority, because putting themselves under the authority of a church or a pastor does not allow them to be in control and to believe anything and everything that they want to believe, all the while claiming to be guided by the Holy Sprit as a pretense.
Agree to some extent but conscience will always play a big part in my faith journey, over pray and obey the Church.
 
Upvote 0