I agree we should study and even question the teacher in a private setting (respecting the authority). A teacher can indeed learn from a student. But when it comes to scripture, if it's a new idea, it's been examined before. The ancient way works the best.
Paul was the perfect example of someone left alone with a bible and a blank interpretation.
If we found a remote island and gave the people on the island a bible with no religious denominational influence, what would they probably believe following the just bible in context.
THEY WOULD:
- know God created everything
- know not to worship other Gods
- know the story of creation, how sin entered the world, why God made laws, and what happened to those who didn't keep Gods laws through out the OT
- keep the Sabbath & keep the biblical Holy Days
- follow the dietary laws of the bible
- know tithing was food and not money and it was a OT law
- believe in the immaculate conception
- see the law is to point out their sin and shows a need for a savior
- confess with their mouth and believe Jesus is Lord to be saved
- know they are saved by grace as a free gift from God
- believe in Baptism and why they should be baptized
- know that the only way to the father is through Jesus only
- know Jesus died on the cross for their sins and rose from the grave on the 3rd day and ascended to heaven 40 days later to be at the right hand of his Father
- take up an offering on Sundays to help the needy and might come together to meet on a Sunday too
- believe Jesus is the Son of God and not God himself and the Holy Spirit is from God
- know Jesus is coming back again for his followers and we will give and account at the judgement seat of Christ before we go into the millennial reign with Christ and afterwards we enter eternity with him and God
- know that those who reject Christ will die in the lake of fire
-They would not have 30-40,000 different beliefs about the bible without denominational influences
How would they get that nonsense from the Bible?
Ah, you must be Catholic. Only a Catholic would believe it's OK to keep repeating a false claim that's been debunked many, many times.
That's a good example of that "Catholic taqiyya" I was talking about in another post.
That's what you would believe because that is what your denomination taught you.
If there were two people on the Island they would believe two different things.
Jesus didn't give us a book, he gave us a Church.
He wants us to be one as he and the Father are one. That is only possible if there is a single Church with a central guiding authority.
Oh, you mean they would believe exactly like you?
Unlikely.
I even suspect that they would change their views over time.
Why anyone expects any individual or groups of imperfect people to come to identical conclusions on every matter is quite unreasonable and has actually proven nearly impossible.
We can read examples where nearly everyone who came out of Egypt failed at the law and were destroyed because of unbelief...and yet there are people who think they can improve those odds.
Strange to say the least.
s
How would they get that nonsense from the Bible?
Ah, you must be Catholic. Only a Catholic would believe it's OK to keep repeating a false claim that's been debunked many, many times.
That's a good example of that "Catholic taqiyya" I was talking about in another post.
How did you arrive at that conclusion?
Im not saying to believe like me. Im saying when you read the bible in context with out all the denominational influences thing ties together better without the need for 40,000 different beliefs.
If we found a remote island and gave the people on the island a bible with no religious denominational influence, what would they probably believe following the just bible in context.
THEY WOULD:
- know God created everything
- know not to worship other Gods
- know the story of creation, how sin entered the world, why God made laws, and what happened to those who didn't keep Gods laws through out the OT
- keep the Sabbath & keep the biblical Holy Days
- follow the dietary laws of the bible
- know tithing was food and not money and it was a OT law
- believe in the immaculate conception
- see the law is to point out their sin and shows a need for a savior
- confess with their mouth and believe Jesus is Lord to be saved
- know they are saved by grace as a free gift from God
- believe in Baptism and why they should be baptized
- know that the only way to the father is through Jesus only
- know Jesus died on the cross for their sins and rose from the grave on the 3rd day and ascended to heaven 40 days later to be at the right hand of his Father
- take up an offering on Sundays to help the needy and might come together to meet on a Sunday too
- believe Jesus is the Son of God and not God himself and the Holy Spirit is from God
- know Jesus is coming back again for his followers and we will give and account at the judgement seat of Christ before we go into the millennial reign with Christ and afterwards we enter eternity with him and God
- know that those who reject Christ will die in the lake of fire
-They would not have 30-40,000 different beliefs about the bible without denominational influences
yogosans14 said:That scripture NO where implies Mary was born sinless.
Because it is in Matthew and Luke.
And you clearly have never read any of by posts before if you think me of all people are catholic. Please research before you form such ridiculous opinions.
Yes, in context the virgin birth makes no sense at times as to why God would preserve a line of men for 3000 yrs and at the last minute go with a virgin birth, but the bible says we are to have faith, so if its in 2 different books of the bible, I will go by faith and believe it.
catholichomeschooler said:Jesus didn't give us a book, he gave us a Church.
He wants us to be one as he and the Father are one. That is only possible if there is a single Church with a central guiding authority.
It also assumes that if you could give the bible to a community that had no context and that if they did arrive at a consensus understanding that that would be the correct understanding.MoreCoffee said:They'd discover that paper burns well and is good for starting firesYou are presuming that they'd know how to read, that they'd have a written language, and that somebody translated the bible into their language. All those assumptions imply a fairly stable and advanced culture which would very likely have developed its own religions. The idea is, in short, kind of silly.
They'd discover that paper burns well and is good for starting fires
You are presuming that they'd know how to read, that they'd have a written language, and that somebody translated the bible into their language. All those assumptions imply a fairly stable and advanced culture which would very likely have developed its own religions. The idea is, in short, kind of silly.
-snip-
The Catholic argument is that Mary must have been sinless, because Jesus couldn't have been born to a sinful host, but following that line of logic, why wasn't Mary's mother sinless? After all, if Jesus' host had to be sinless, why not Jesus' host's host? And what about Mary's mother's mother? -snip-
You ever look at a wheat field and recognize that no two grains are exactly alike. We all have unique individual reflections, even though we may have many similarities.
That's what theology is really like.
There isn't 40,000 different reflections. Each person is individually subjective, so there are in fact countless billions of reflections.
That's what God is really like with His creation.
I've learned to appreciate that.
People may say they reflect the same but in reality it's impossible.
The Bible would have to be in their language first. As to the rest you're guessing what primitives would do.
Cargo Cult - YouTube
The Cargo Cults of the South Pacific
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?