- Aug 11, 2017
- 25,558
- 8,296
- Country
- United States
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Non-Denom
- Marital Status
- Married
I’m sorry I didn’t realize this was a Calvinist only forum. So I can’t comment on this thread.
Upvote
0
Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
According to the bible, what then becomes of them?
I’m sorry I didn’t realize this was a Calvinist only forum. So I can’t comment on this thread.
I think the rules say non calvinists can post here also.
Why not?Sorry didn’t realize I can’t post here.
I’m sorry I didn’t realize this was a Calvinist only forum. So I can’t comment on this thread.
Why not?
Show me in the scripture where it says that.
"That's commentary, not scripture. He actually writes that the animal sacrifices did provide cleansing in at least two places in Hebrews."- You are blind by the fact that you too are using your own commentary to try and understand the book of Hebrews - and the rest of the Bible - but you are coming to erroneous conclusions about it because either:
A.) You are relying on your own private interpretation of Scripture.
B.) You are relying on the interpretation of others in error.
"Councils of men have never decided canon. The church did that by around 140 AD."- What a silly comment. Councils of men in the unity of the Holy Spirit (Which constitutes the Church) is exactly who decided what the Canon of Scripture would be.
Also, please provide your evidence that "the church did that by around 140" please and thank you.
"It isn't about pride."- This is exactly what it is. But only one the humble could see it. You reject the authority of the clergy because you would rather just consult yourself on spiritual matters. At best you go cherry picking interpretations of Scripture from among others who reject the New Covenant Priesthood just like you do. This is certainly pride in full swing. This is the forewarned "rebellion of Korah" that St.Jude(1:11) warns you against.
"Paul tells us we can read and understand the scriptures. He was inspired by the Holy Spirit to write that it was so."- While this same Holy Spirit through St.Peter in 2nd Peter(3:15-16) states that St. Paul's writings can be confusing, and that untaught and unstable people twist and contort the Sacred Scripture to their own destruction.
So all books do this so we junk the creeds?"Surely you have heard about the administration of God’s grace that was given to me for you, 3 that is, the mystery made known to me by revelation, as I have already written briefly. 4 In reading this, then, you will be able to understand my insight into the mystery of Christ, 5 which was not made known to people in other generations as it has now been revealed by the Spirit to God’s holy apostles and prophets
It is intended that we are able to understand.
Read some history. The church councils have no authority to determine what is already written and delivered anyway. 200 years before the Council of Rome the 27 books of the New Testament were in common use among the churches. Read Shelley's "A History of the Church in Plain Language."
By as early as 120 - 140 there were already known lists of the 27 books now accepted as canon without a single church council convened.
This is just an accusation. Ad hominem and has nothing to do with whether or not God plainly said in the Old Testament that the law provided sin remission or that Paul overturns God's words in Hebrews.
In other words, to misunderstand you have to intentionally twist the meaning or be taught by somebody who has twisted its meaning.
But the scriptures also tell us who God will welcome to Him in Acts 10:34-35.
“Opening his mouth, Peter said: "I most certainly understand now that God is not one to show partiality, but in every nation the man who fears Him and does what is right is welcome to Him.”
Acts 10:34-35 NASB
Creeds are from men who presume to have authority. Only Christ and the apostles have authority over what the doctrine is of the church. They delivered that through inspiration of the Holy Spirit and wrote it down.So all books do this so we junk the creeds?
Creeds record what the early church believed.Creeds are from men who presume to have authority. Only Christ and the apostles have authority over what the doctrine is of the church. They delivered that through inspiration of the Holy Spirit and wrote it down.
But it doesn't say that one is saved first. It says that man's works are what cause him to be accepted. Not just any works. The works which God has prepared before hand for us to walk in.
"Surely you have heard about the administration of God’s grace that was given to me for you, 3 that is, the mystery made known to me by revelation, as I have already written briefly. 4 In reading this, then, you will be able to understand my insight into the mystery of Christ, 5 which was not made known to people in other generations as it has now been revealed by the Spirit to God’s holy apostles and prophets
It is intended that we are able to understand.
Read some history. The church councils have no authority to determine what is already written and delivered anyway. 200 years before the Council of Rome the 27 books of the New Testament were in common use among the churches. Read Shelley's "A History of the Church in Plain Language."
By as early as 120 - 140 there were already known lists of the 27 books now accepted as canon without a single church council convened.
This is just an accusation. Ad hominem and has nothing to do with whether or not God plainly said in the Old Testament that the law provided sin remission or that Paul overturns God's words in Hebrews.
In other words, to misunderstand you have to intentionally twist the meaning or be taught by somebody who has twisted its meaning.
"Read some history."- I have. Reading into Church history shows quite plainly that the early Church was Catholic. It is a matter of historical fact, this one is not up for your interpretation.
"The church councils have no authority to determine what is already written and delivered anyway."- You have no idea what you are talking about at this point. The first council that was convened is evidenced in Acts 15.
I have already given you the reference. Here's the other proof which you will have to read for yourself. By the time Justin Martyr wrote his letters, the church fathers, including Polycarp, had quoted all but two scriptures of the entire New Testament in their own writings, including Mark 16:9-20 which some "scholars" have said was added in the second or third century."200 years before the Council of Rome the 27 books of the New Testament were in common use among the churches. Read Shelley's "A History of the Church in Plain Language.""- I am asking you to here right now quote and paste your evidence from this book or any book that shows that the Canon of Scripture had been decided on before 140 AD -which was your claim. Prove it.
"By as early as 120 - 140 there were already known lists of the 27 books now accepted as canon without a single church council convened."- Prove it with a reference. Thank you.
We weren't even discussing that. If you mean the church was a church with a pope and celibate priests, then you're way off.
And that council was guided by the apostles and the Holy Spirit. In other words, authorized by God and directed by him to decree the letter written by the bishop of the Jerusalem church, James, not Peter.
I have already given you the reference. Here's the other proof which you will have to read for yourself. By the time Justin Martyr wrote his letters, the church fathers, including Polycarp, had quoted all but two scriptures of the entire New Testament in their own writings, including Mark 16:9-20 which some "scholars" have said was added in the second or third century.
We have the Muratorian fragment which lists virtually all of the books that were accepted and puts others out of favor. Some date it between 155 and 200. This is over 100 years prior to the council of Nicea which didn't even discuss canon. In fact, as I said, the 27 books of the New Testament were printed for that council without any discussion. It was already accepted that those 27 books were authentic. There wasn't even any controversy at that time.
Speaking of Pride. We weren't even questioning Catholicism but you've brought it up because you think this is an opportunity to assert faith in a human institution's decisions about doctrine and canon. Clearly you think men have more authority over doctrine and canon than the church without their guidance. If the councils were correct and canon could only be decided by their members, you've relegated a few centuries of Christians to be in error until the church councils could set them straight.
Ok I wasn’t sure.
Since this is debate the calvinist forum anyone can post, but when there are multiple non-calvinists debating the other non-Calvinists it confuses the issues as to what Calvinists believe.
My husband and I are calvinist, however I'm a new enough Christian that I'm sometimes worried about misrepresenting the belief because of my own misunderstanding on a topic matter. So I rather see my answers as a toss up, and will often either skip posting here or ask my husband to confirm before posting.
This time I just posted because of the dearth of people answering in an informed manner.. but you can always post here.
Thank you sister for you kind words and may God bless us both with understanding of His word.
I’m sorry I didn’t realize this was a Calvinist only forum. So I can’t comment on this thread.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?