• 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.

How Do I Know For Sure......Interpreting the Bible: Methods and Mistakes!!!

Status
Not open for further replies.

Borealis

Catholic Homeschool Dad
Dec 8, 2003
6,906
621
54
Barrie, Ontario
✟10,009.00
Faith
Catholic
Politics
CA-Conservatives
TSIBHOD said:
I think that it's great to look to those who are (or were) more mature for spiritual guidance, but I don't think that we can trust them as implicitly as we can the Bible. The Bible is right per se; in my opinion, no one's interpretation of the Bible is correct without question. There are people who have been led by the Spirit, and I would accept their words with great trustingness, but I wouldn't trust them so much that I could never challenge what they say if I disagree. This differs from the Bible, where I must not challenge it, even if I do disagree.

The Holy Spirit's interpretation of the Bible is correct without question. And for 2000 years, He has inspired the Magisterium of the Church to be equally as correct. Christ made that clear to his followers. So I'm listening to the Holy Spirit.

Now, I know that in your opinion, Borealis, there are certain people, or at least certain interpretations (CCC for example) that are always correct.

When the interpretation comes from the Magisterium, it's correct, yes.

But just because one person, or a lot of people, tells you that that is true doesn't mean you would believe it. You would still have to evaluate either Catholicism itself, or the people who told you to believe in Catholicism. You would have to decide for yourself whether or not you were going to trust what Catholicism teaches.

I have. At every turn, the Church has proven to be correct in its interpretation, because I know that the Holy Spirit has inspired them.

Just believing that Popes have been inspired is not enough; you would need to have some revelation from the Holy Spirit that this was the case, or else you would be basing your trust on nothing. Do you see what I mean? In this way, you can't get away from the fact that you have to have some personal revelation from the Holy Spirit -- you can't just trust others to have that, since you have to have it to even know that you really should be trusting them.

I have had a personal revelation from the Holy Spirit; I've had several. God told me very clearly seven and a half years ago that I needed to return to the Church. I was welcomed back, and since then I've begun learning the truth of the Catholic faith. As I said, I've not yet found the Church to be incorrect in its teachings.
 
Upvote 0

TheScottsMen

Veteran
Jul 8, 2003
1,239
14
Minneapolis, MN
✟23,995.00
Faith
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
Borealis said:
They didn't write it down at first, but they were certainly teaching. Those teachings have been passed down to our time as Sacred Tradition.
Ever pay pass it on in grade school? Where you tell the first person in line a sentence such as "Hey, Jon likes Mary", and by the time it gets to the last person, they are told, "May, Is very rainy!". Thats why when I was first in line and wanted to pass a message, I passed a note.
 
Upvote 0

tigersnare

Angry Young Calvinist
Jul 8, 2003
1,358
23
42
Baton Rouge, LA
✟1,636.00
Faith
Calvinist
TSIBHOD said:
Correct, they base their beliefs on verses about Peter. But others can reason validly and come to different conclusions about the same verses. So how do they know that they are right? They must have some leading of the Holy Spirit to bring them to the conclusion that Peter was indeed the first Pope, as Catholics believe.

Let's say one person, out of the hundreds of millions of Catholics throughout History, had the holy spirit confirm what they believe the bible says about Peter and the Church.

What happens to the rest of your argument here? It dies completely I think...because the truths of God's word does not, and can not change. If the spirit truely affirmed the meaning of that verse, it is the truth and all who follow that truth can not be in error following that same truth that was revealed once. Right?
 
Upvote 0

tigersnare

Angry Young Calvinist
Jul 8, 2003
1,358
23
42
Baton Rouge, LA
✟1,636.00
Faith
Calvinist
ischus said:
Many murders and psychotics have claimed the same HS revelations that you have.
Can you give us a process by which we can determine whether it is Satan or the HS who is giving us visions, etc.?

Really? Murders and Psychotics have revelations that tell them to go back to Church?


Tell me why Satan would tell someone to worship, praise, pray, fellowship, learn, and teach in the house of God?
 
Upvote 0

Borealis

Catholic Homeschool Dad
Dec 8, 2003
6,906
621
54
Barrie, Ontario
✟10,009.00
Faith
Catholic
Politics
CA-Conservatives
TheScottsMen said:
Ever pay pass it on in grade school? Where you tell the first person in line a sentence such as "Hey, Jon likes Mary", and by the time it gets to the last person, they are told, "May, Is very rainy!". Thats why when I was first in line and wanted to pass a message, I passed a note.

What, this excuse again? The Holy Spirit doesn't allow the teachings to be distorted. To claim otherwise is to deny the words of Christ. By your logic, the Gospels themselves are distortions of what Christ actually said, because they weren't written down right away; the earliest of them was written about 20 years after Christ died.

The teachings of the Church are the teachings of Jesus Christ. Do you think that the Holy Spirit changes its mind every few years or even months, thereby inspiring yet another group to splinter away from the Church and become just another one of the 30,000+ Christian denominations? Who's right? The Catholic Church is the only body to have remained true to the teachings of Christ for 2000 years. We have Scripture, we have Sacred Tradition, and we have Christ's promise. I'll put that triumvirate up against any 'evidence' you want to put in front of me.
 
Upvote 0

Borealis

Catholic Homeschool Dad
Dec 8, 2003
6,906
621
54
Barrie, Ontario
✟10,009.00
Faith
Catholic
Politics
CA-Conservatives
TSIBHOD said:
Correct, they base their beliefs on verses about Peter. But others can reason validly and come to different conclusions about the same verses. So how do they know that they are right? They must have some leading of the Holy Spirit to bring them to the conclusion that Peter was indeed the first Pope, as Catholics believe.

Here's where the argument falls apart completely. Why? Because the interpretation of the Catholic Church is the SAME INTERPRETATION as the Early Christians. THEY believed that Peter was the head of the Church. THEY believed that his successors as Bishop of Rome had the same authority that Christ passed on to Peter. And so do we. In other words, we're still holding true to the teachings of Christ himself, and his words. We base our beliefs on the words of Christ, the inheritors of his trust, and those who spread His word long before any of us existed.

Interpret the verses any way you choose; the Holy Spirit has already made their meaning clear. Ignore it if you wish; that's between you and God. For myself, I'll stick with the Church.

If you believe that others have the Holy Spirit simply because they themselves say so, -- and you do not discern that this is the case by the Holy Spirit interacting with your own spirit -- then you are acting irresponsibly.

The list of evangelists and preachers who expect people to accept their inspiration based solely on their word is longer than the Orthodox Bible.

If you are just trusting that they are right, without having some assurance of this in your own spirit, then you actually are trusting in man rather than God's Spirit.

I already have that assurance. God told me to return to the Catholic Church. He made that quite clear to me.

God's Spirit doesn't have to reveal every truth to you first, but His Spirit should reveal when something told to you is truth. You may not have come up with something, but God's Spirit is required for you to judge whether something is really true. We should not believe anything only because someone else tells us that it is true, no matter who that person is. I'm not saying we can't have faith, but that our faith must not be because we hear something from a certain person, and "he's always right." Our faith, when we hear a truth from any other individual, must be based upon the Spirit within showing us that we are hearing the truth.

I used to believe some of the lies spread about the Church; I didn't know any better. I was confused, unsure of the truth. Then I started reading and learning, and listening to the Holy Spirit. I've looked into every claim against the Church I could find; I've looked into the claims of the Church itself. At this point, the Church is batting a thousand.

To say that 'our faith must not be because we hear something from a certain person' denies the entire concept of the Christian Church. Of COURSE we base our faith one what someone told us; EVERYTHING we believe was first passed on orally. Christ's resurrection was not front-page news in the Jerusalem Times. CNN didn't have a camera crew standing by in Bethlehem awaiting his birth. Lazarus didn't write a tell-all book about his experiences before and after his death. And Jesus, greatest of all men and wisest teacher of all time, wrote nothing at all.

Everything you believe as a Christian stems from the oral teachings of Jesus Christ, as well as those who witnessed His miracles of Christ especially the ultimate miracle of His resurrection. NONE of this was written down until long after his death. The earliest writings of the New Testament are the Pauline epistles, the first of which was written around 51 A.D. That's nearly twenty years after Christ died and rose again.

In other words, you're taking on faith that what you read in the Bible is true. You're taking on faith that the Holy Spirit inspired the writers of those letters and books to speak God's truth. The Catholic Church extends that faith to include the oral teachings of the Apostles, which have been passed down as Sacred Tradition. That Tradition extends to this day; the Magisterium does not change the teachings of the Church, it merely clarifies them and improves our understanding. For example, the doctrine of transubstantiation, often used by anti-Catholics to 'prove' the heresy of the Church, is simply an official clarification of that which was believed by Christians from the earliest days of the Church, namely that changing of the communion bread and wine into the Body and Blood of Our Lord, Jesus Christ. It was not officially called 'transubstantiation' until much later, but the doctrine itself was never changed.

The Bible was interpreted long ago by those who understood it best: those who walked with Christ, and those who were directly taught by Christ's disciples. Their teachings live on through the Church.

See, the problem you seem to be having with my belief is that you think I'm relying on 'men' to tell me what the Bible says. I'm not. I'm relying on the Holy Spirit. I'm just doing so indirectly, because God made it clear that it would be done that way. I have absolutely no doubt that the Holy Spirit has inspired the members of the Magisterium throughout history. I have no doubt whatsoever that the teachings of the Church today are those of the Church in the 1st Century. God has made it clear to me that the Church speaks in His name on matters of faith and morals. I'm going to do what He wants.
 
Upvote 0

Borealis

Catholic Homeschool Dad
Dec 8, 2003
6,906
621
54
Barrie, Ontario
✟10,009.00
Faith
Catholic
Politics
CA-Conservatives
tigersnare said:
Really? Murders and Psychotics have revelations that tell them to go back to Church?


Tell me why Satan would tell someone to worship, praise, pray, fellowship, learn, and teach in the house of God?

David Koresh. Jack Chick. Whose work were they doing? Certainly not God's.
 
Upvote 0

clinzey

Well-Known Member
Jan 9, 2004
791
15
46
California
✟23,544.00
Faith
Protestant
Borealis said:
The Holy Spirit's interpretation of the Bible is correct without question. And for 2000 years, He has inspired the Magisterium of the Church to be equally as correct. Christ made that clear to his followers. So I'm listening to the Holy Spirit.

Jesus never said anything about the Magesterium. And Popes have changed the rules whenever they wanted to. When the Pope wanted someone who didn't die for his faith declared a martyr in 1982 the Pope declared, "By virtue of my...authority I have decreed that ...[he] shall henceforth be venerated as a martyr." They change the rules whenever it suits them.
 
Upvote 0

uncle david

I'm a covenant man!
Nov 13, 2003
16
0
36
southern California
Visit site
✟15,127.00
Faith
Christian
study middle age history man! its sick the way the catholic church abused its political power to opress the masses. purgatory! where in scripture is that found? indulgences, c'mon. latin bibles only good translation? they changed a bunch of that stuff in the 1960's. were they right before? was truly the holy ghost dwelling in them? what about rich nobles buying positions in the church for their relatives so they can continue and expand their economic prosperity? the crusades! went around killing jews on the way! the pope said in a speech that christ commanded it and that if you fought you would automatichaly go to heaven. God is in a sacred blood covenant with the jews, abraham's offspring. do you think that God almighty would break that sacred covenant? im trying not to get a warning for anti catholic material, i love all of you catholics but c'mon!
 
Upvote 0

Borealis

Catholic Homeschool Dad
Dec 8, 2003
6,906
621
54
Barrie, Ontario
✟10,009.00
Faith
Catholic
Politics
CA-Conservatives
uncle david said:
study middle age history man! its sick the way the catholic church abused its political power to opress the masses.

Yes, there were those in the Church who did succumb to the temptations of power. Not all of them did, however. Christ would not permit that.

purgatory! where in scripture is that found?

Ask and you shall receive. Sit down, this may take a while. This list comes from www.scripturecatholic.com, and I know you'll claim that some of these aren't 'Scripture.' Too bad.

Matt. 5:25,18:34; Luke 12:58-59 - these verses allude to a temporary state of purgation called a "prison." There is no exit until we are perfect, and the last penny is paid.

Matt. 5:48 - Jesus says, "be perfect, even as your heavenly Father is perfect." We are only made perfect through purification, and in Catholic teaching, this purification, if not completed on earth, is continued in a state we call purgatory.

Matt. 12:32 - Jesus clearly provides that there is forgiveness after death. Forgiveness is not necessary in heaven, and there is no forgiveness in hell. This proves that there is another state after death, and the Church for 2,000 years has called this state purgatory.

Luke 12:47-48 - when the Master comes (at the end of time), some will receive light or heavy beatings but will live. This state is not heaven or hell, because in heaven there are no beatings, and in hell we will will no longer live with the Master.

Luke 16:19-31 - in this story, we see that the dead rich man is suffering but still feels compassion for his brothers and wants to warn them of his place of suffering. But there is no suffering in heaven or compassion in hell because compassion is a grace from God and those in hell are deprived from God's graces for all eternity. So where is the rich man? He is in purgatory.

1 Cor. 15:29-30 - Paul mentions people being baptized on behalf of the dead, to atone for their sins. These people cannot be in heaven because they are still with sin, but they also cannot be in hell because their sins can no longer be atoned for. They are in purgatory.

Phil. 2:10 - every knee bends to Jesus, in heaven, on earth, and "under the earth" which is the realm of the righteous dead, or purgatory.

2 Tim. 1:16-18 - Onesiphorus is dead but Paul asks for mercy on him. But there is no need for mercy in heaven, and there is no mercy given in hell. Where is Onesiphorus? He is in purgatory.

Heb. 12:14 - without holiness no one will see the Lord. We need final sanctification to attain true holiness before God, and this process occurs during our lives and, if not completed, in the state of purgatory.

Heb. 12:23 - the spirits of just men who died in godliness are "made" perfect. They do not necessarily arrive perfect. They are made perfect after their death. But those in heaven are already perfect, and those in hell can no longer be made perfect. These spirits were in purgatory.

1 Peter 3:19; 4:6 - Jesus preached to the spirits in the "prison." These are the righteous souls being purified for the beatific vision.

Rev. 21:4 - God shall wipe away their tears, and there will be no mourning or pain, but only after the coming of the new heaven and the passing away of the current heaven and earth. But there is no morning or pain in heaven, and God will not wipe away their tears in hell. These are the souls experiencing purgatory.

Rev. 21:27 - nothing unclean shall enter heaven. Even the propensity to sin is uncleanliness. It is amazing how many Protestants do not want to believe in purgatory. Purgatory exists because of the mercy of God. If there were no purgatory, this would also likely mean no salvation for most people. God is merciful indeed.

Gen. 50:10; Num. 20:29; Deut. 34:8 - here are some examples of ritual prayer and penitent mourning for the dead for specific periods of time. The Jewish understanding of these practices was that the prayers freed the souls from their painful state of purificatioin, and expedited their journey to God.

Baruch 3:4 - Baruch asks the Lord to hear the prayers of the dead of Israel. Prayers for the dead are unnecessary in heaven and unnecessary in hell. These dead are in purgatory.

Zech. 9:11 - God, through the blood of His covenant, will set those free from the waterless pit, a spiritual abode of suffering which the Church calls purgatory.

2 Macc. 12:43-45 - the prayers for the dead help free them from sin and help them to the reward of heaven. Those in heaven have no sin, and those in hell can no longer be freed from sin. They are in purgatory. Luther was particularly troubled with these verses because he rejected the age-old teaching of purgatory. As a result, he removed Maccabees from the canon of the Bible.

Heb. 12:29 - God is a consuming fire (of love in heaven, of purgation in purgatory, or of suffering and damnation in hell).

1 Cor. 3:10-15 - works are judged after death and tested by fire. Some works are lost, but the person is still saved. Paul is referring to the state of purgation called purgatory. The venial sins (bad works) that were committed are burned up after death, but the person is still brought to salvation. This state after death cannot be heaven (no one with venial sins is present) or hell (there is no forgiveness and salvation).

1 Cor. 3:15 - Paul says though he will be saved, "but only" through fire. The phrase "but only" in the Greek is "houtos" which means "in the same manner." This means that man is both rewarded and saved by fire.

1 Cor. 3:15 - when Paul teaches that those whose work is burned up will suffer loss, the phrase for "suffer loss" in the Greek is "zemiothesetai." The root word is "zemioo" which also refers to punishment. This means that there is an expiation of temporal punishment after our death, which cannot mean either heaven (no need for it) or hell (expiation no longer exists).

1 Cor. 3:13 - when Paul writes about God revealing the quality of each man's work by fire and purifying him, this purification relates to his sins (not just his good works). Protestants, in attempting to disprove the reality of purgatory, argue that Paul was only writing about rewarding good works, and not punishing sins (because punishing and purifying a man from sins would be admitting that there is a purgatory).

1 Cor. 3:17 - but this verse proves that the purgation after death deals with punishing sin. That is, destroying God's temple is a bad work, which is a mortal sin, which leads to death.

1 Cor. 3:14,15,17 - purgatory thus reveals the state of righteousness (v.14), state of venial sin (v.15) and the state of mortal sin (v.17).

1 Peter 1:6-7 - Peter refers to this purgatorial fire to test the fruits of our faith.

Jude 1:23 - the people who are saved are being snatched out of the fire. People are already saved if in heaven, and there is no possibility of salvation if in hell. These people are being led to heaven from purgatory.

Rev. 3:18-19 - Jesus refers to this fire as what refines into gold those He loves if they repent of their sins.

Dan 12:10 - Daniel refers to this refining by saying many shall purify themselves, make themselves white and be refined.

Wis. 3:5-6 - the dead are disciplined and tested by fire to receive their heavenly reward.

Sirach 2:5 - for gold is tested in the fire, and acceptable men in the furnace of humiliation.

Zech. 13:8-9 - God says 2/3 shall perish, and 1/3 shall be left alive, put into the fire, and refined like silver and tested like gold.

Mal. 3:2-3 - also refers to God's purification of the righteous at their death.

latin bibles only good translation?

Not once the invention of the printing press made it feasible and affordable to mass produce Bibles. It appears to be a common Protestant myth that Luther was the first to translate the Bible into German. He wasn't; the Catholic Church had already authorized FOURTEEN (14) German translations before Luther did it in 1517.

they changed a bunch of that stuff in the 1960's. were they right before?

What did they change? The language of the mass? Yes, to make it more accessible to laymen. Unfortunately, the secularization of society and the mass dumbing down of education took Latin largely out of schools. That made it harder for many devout Catholics to participate fully in the mass.

I'd like to know what you define as 'a bunch of that stuff.'

was truly the holy ghost dwelling in them?

Absolutely. Still does, too.

what about rich nobles buying positions in the church for their relatives so they can continue and expand their economic prosperity?

Cite, please.

the crusades! went around killing jews on the way! the pope said in a speech that christ commanded it and that if you fought you would automatichaly go to heaven.

Are you talking about Catholics or Muslims? Which pope, and what speech? If you're going to claim it, you'd better be able to provide evidence.

God is in a sacred blood covenant with the jews, abraham's offspring. do you think that God almighty would break that sacred covenant? im trying not to get a warning for anti catholic material, i love all of you catholics but c'mon!

How many times did the Jews themselves break God's sacred blood covenant in Exodus and Numbers alone? A dozen? He sent His only Son to redeem us all, knowing that many would reject Him. The Church spread far beyond Judaism; Jews no longer have sole propriety of God's covenant, because Christ died for all of us, not just the Jews.
 
Upvote 0

tigersnare

Angry Young Calvinist
Jul 8, 2003
1,358
23
42
Baton Rouge, LA
✟1,636.00
Faith
Calvinist
Borealis said:
David Koresh. Jack Chick. Whose work were they doing? Certainly not God's.

Um Mr......If you read the post alittle better and see where the quote that I used, came from, you'll see that he was saying your revelation from God was possibly bogus, and you'll also see that I was taking up for you....and pointing out that Satan would never tell a man to go back to the Church of God, in your case the Catholic Church.

:scratch:

Not sure why you decided to bring up those two examples against me, is what I"m saying.
 
Upvote 0

TSIBHOD

Voice of Reason
Feb 13, 2004
872
44
39
Arkansas
✟23,756.00
Faith
Pentecostal
Marital Status
Single
Borealis said:
Of COURSE we base our faith one what someone told us.
I don't. I don't base my faith on the Bible or on man's testimony, or on anything but God's Spirit. Story time...

A few years back, I went to an Easter Play. It depicted people being thrown into Hell because they hadn't really believed in Jesus, but had merely gone to church superficially. I guess this was intended to give some lukewarm Christians a wakeup-call, and probably to scare non-Christians into getting "saved." However, it just plain scared me. I was only 12 or 13 at the time, and after that play, I was in constant fear that I had done something wrong, or hadn't said the right words, or hadn't fulfilled some requirement, and that I would go to Hell. No authority of any person on Earth could still my fear, because I knew that 999,999,999 chances out of 1,000,000,000 of getting to Heaven wasn't good enough, because that 1 chance could still happen, and there would be no going back. I was so scared that I was going to die and go to Hell and be stuck there forever.

Gradually, I got over that, and now I have a personal relationship with God. There is no need for me to wonder about my salvation. Someone may ask me how I know God exists, but that is like asking how I know my sister exists. I may not be able to prove it to you, but it is plain as day to me; I just talked to her a few minutes ago.

All that to say that no man can tell me the truth of God; only God can do that. He can use human instruments, but He must be speaking. I think you would agree. But what I mean is that I don't just trust that someone is moved by the Holy Spirit because a lot of people think that, and it seems to be true. I have to have the Holy Spirit confirm it to me to be sure of it. The HS is the only thing I can trust; anything else is fallible. If someone else is being moved by the HS, good and well, but I can't be sure of that totally unless the HS moves me to know that they are speaking the truth. Even you, when you trust that everything your church teaches is true, must be moved by the HS to believe that. Otherwise, you are just believing man's traditions. It doesn't matter whether it is really true or not if you are believing just because someone tells you. You need to believe in God and in doctrines because you know them yourself.

Another way of saying this: I had leukemia. My doctors could give you a great explanation of what cancer is like. They know what cancer feels like. But I tell you, I KNOW what cancer feels like. You can take someone else's word for anything in Christianity, any doctrine, any teaching about Jesus. But knowing about God is not good enough by a long shot. The Pharisees knew all about God, just like doctors can know all about cancer. But I knew that cancer, and I know God. There is no replacement for that. I cannot trust that someone else is moved by the HS for any reason other than the HS communicates this to me.

"The kingdom of God is not demonstrated in logos (something said, or a reasoning), but in dunamis (mighty ability, power and miraculous, supernatural strength)." [I Corinthians 4:20]

Anyway, if you know that God wants you in the Catholic church, Borealis, that's great, and I'm happy for you, that you know God's will for your life and are following it. As for me, I know that it definitely not His will for me to be in the Catholic church. I am right where I need to be right now, and I am "growing in wisdom and in stature, and in favor with God and man" (Luke 2:40).
 
Upvote 0

tigersnare

Angry Young Calvinist
Jul 8, 2003
1,358
23
42
Baton Rouge, LA
✟1,636.00
Faith
Calvinist
TSIBHOD said:
I don't base my faith on the Bible or on man's testimony, or on anything but God's Spirit.

The irony here is killing me....

In the beginning was what? The word....

The word was what? With God

And the word was what? God!

Tell me how God's spirit is leading you to not base your faith on the word?

It's not, it can not!

Good luck with that one friend. You're young, (*disclaimer, I'm 21 and I don't pretend to know anything or be any less immature than you), you're on fire for Jesus. That's great, but don't be so hasty to rebuke/correct/teach people who quite possibly have been serving the lord longer than you've been alive.







TSIBHOD said:
But what I mean is that I don't just trust that someone is moved by the Holy Spirit because a lot of people think that, and it seems to be true. I have to have the Holy Spirit confirm it to me to be sure of it.

And hopefully as I've pointed out, the holy spirit, like you would agree is perfect and is trustworthy, it's our ability to discern what is or isn't the holy spirit that wavers.

TSIBHOD said:
The HS is the only thing I can trust; anything else is fallible.

Just to drive it home....except the Word. (for protestants, as opposed to the Pope on rules of faith and morals)



TSIBHOD said:
I cannot trust that someone else is moved by the HS for any reason other than the HS communicates this to me.

You are putting all of the faith here in your own ability to discern. Do you agree or not?

TSIBHOD said:
I am "growing in wisdom and in stature, and in favor with God and man" (Luke 2:40).

Whoa...careful buddy....Wisdom rests quietly in the heart of a man of understanding, but it makes itself known even in the midst of fools.
 
Upvote 0

artybloke

Well-Known Member
Mar 1, 2004
5,222
456
66
North of England
✟8,017.00
Faith
Christian Seeker
Politics
UK-Labour
In the beginning was what? The word....

The word was what? With God

And the word was what? God!

Tell me how God's spirit is leading you to not base your faith on the word?

And the Word (the eternal Logos) is Christ, not a bunch of 2000 year old and more writings. We do not worship a book. We're not Muslims, and we're not biblioloatrists.

Not that we can do without the Bible, because it shows us something very important about the Word, but that's a very different thing from putting it on a pedestal and thinking that a bunch of words written by a bunch of human beings (inspired though they were by the Word Himself) could ever encapsulate the eternal Word himself.

The Bible is not the Word of God. Christ is. The Bible contains words about the Word of God.
 
Upvote 0

artybloke

Well-Known Member
Mar 1, 2004
5,222
456
66
North of England
✟8,017.00
Faith
Christian Seeker
Politics
UK-Labour
The Holy Spirit's interpretation of the Bible is correct without question.

That may be so. Unfortunately, our interpretation of the Holy Spirit isn't. And it doesn't matter who you are - Pope, Magisterium, pastor of your local congregation or whatever - you are still capable of errors in understanding, through lack of knowledge, sin or whatever. We are all of us broken vessels. The church may have avoided serious error for the last 2000 years; but's it's no more infalible than any other large institution. Infalibility is a chimera.

Certainty is nice; it can give you a warm glow and a feeling of superiority for most of your life if you want it to. But don't trust it.
 
Upvote 0

Borealis

Catholic Homeschool Dad
Dec 8, 2003
6,906
621
54
Barrie, Ontario
✟10,009.00
Faith
Catholic
Politics
CA-Conservatives
artybloke said:
That may be so. Unfortunately, our interpretation of the Holy Spirit isn't. And it doesn't matter who you are - Pope, Magisterium, pastor of your local congregation or whatever - you are still capable of errors in understanding, through lack of knowledge, sin or whatever. We are all of us broken vessels. The church may have avoided serious error for the last 2000 years; but's it's no more infalible than any other large institution. Infalibility is a chimera.

When Christ makes it clear that the Holy Spirit will not allow errors in the teaching and interpretation of His Word, you're not going to make errors. You can make mistakes in how you apply the interpretations, yes. But the interpretations themselves can't be in error. God doesn't allow it; he told us he wouldn't.
 
Upvote 0

tigersnare

Angry Young Calvinist
Jul 8, 2003
1,358
23
42
Baton Rouge, LA
✟1,636.00
Faith
Calvinist
artybloke said:
And the Word (the eternal Logos) is Christ, not a bunch of 2000 year old and more writings.

Tell me, how do you come to know God? How do you come to know what Christ did, said, commanded, rebuked, taught, approved, condemed, etc etc etc....

"In these last day he as spoken to us through his son". Ok I can see how you would love to run off and say, the Word is Christ, not the bible.

How do we know what his son said? BECUASE IT'S CONTAINED IN THE WORD OF GOD AKA THE BIBLE! And that is the only way we can know.






artybloke said:
Not that we can do without the Bible, because it shows us something very important about the Word,

I disagree, I believe they show us...everything we know about the Word(Christ).

artybloke said:
but that's a very different thing from putting it on a pedestal and thinking that a bunch of words written by a bunch of human beings (inspired though they were by the Word Himself) could ever encapsulate the eternal Word himself.


artybloke said:
The Bible is not the Word of God. Christ is. The Bible contains words about the Word of God.

Once again, is the bible not how we are to come to know God? Do you not agree that the Bible is God's final, perfect, and infallible revelation to man. Perhaps you should do a study on what the Bible says about itself.

I would suggest starting with Psalm 119.

"How can a young man keep his way pure? By guarding it according to your word"

"I have stored up your word in my heart that I might not sin against you"

"My soul clings to dust, give me life according to your word"

"Before I was afflicted, I went astray, but now I keep your word"

"I have hoped in your word"

"Forever Lord your word is firmly fixed in the heavens."

"Your word is a lamp to my feet and a light to my path"

"The unfolding of your words gives light"

"I rejoice at your word...."

"Deliever me according to your word"


Good luck proving to anyone that David is talking about only Christ and not the litteral word of God....you know those bunch of words, written by a bunch of human beings. :rolleyes:


David, "a man after God's own heart", sure seemed to think they were some pretty important words. He hoped in God's word! He rejoiced at God's word!

And that's just one psalm....
 
Upvote 0

johnd

Well-Known Member
Nov 30, 2003
7,257
394
God bless.
Visit site
✟9,564.00
Faith
Messianic
Marital Status
Married
The long and the short of it is simply this: what is God's version of the matter?

The Bible can be proven (by the supernatural aspect of fulfilled predictive prophecy) to have been inspired by God. It is thus the Word of God. And it behoves us to find out what God says in it and how HE meant it.

It matters not what MAN thinks or has written on it. What does GOD think? That's what matters. And God wrote his Word through his prophets in such a way that it is its own best commentary. This is in fact how the books of the Bible were canonized (by their consistency with the rest of God's Word).

You want to find out what 666 is, for example, searcgh the scriptures for the clues rather than some system outside the Bible.

Use your exhaustive concordance and you will find there are only four passages in the Bible with 666 in it. And to "calculate the number" you simply need to calculate the number of years on the Hebrew calendar between the dates the two Jewish Temples were destroyed. The dates of their creation and destruction of the first temple is in the Bible. The destruction of the second Temple is prophesied in the Bible (Luke 19:41-44) and ocurred on the exact same calendar date as the first (tisha b'Av) 666 years (to the day) after the destruction of the first Temple.

Revelation 13:18 Here is wisdom. Let him that hath understanding count the number of the beast: for it is the number of a man; and his number is Six hundred threescore and six.

Interesting that 2 of the other 3 scriptures having 666 in them point to King Solomon... builder of the first Temple.

Regards,
 
Upvote 0
Status
Not open for further replies.