How do we know . . . .

[racer]

The reason we know the scriptures are the Word of God is because we trust in the Church which is the Pillar and Foundation of the Truth.

When you say "we" please be specific. Because, where you choose to give credit to your Church, I choose to give it to God--alone!!!

 

[OrthodoxyUSA]

Anybody know who "Simeon the God Receiver" is and why it relates to the subject at hand.

Forgive me...

 

[Thekla]

Because they are still useful . . . but they are not inerrant. The message remains the same . . . as we have with English.

Do you know how many MSS of the NT we have? About 5000 from extant to pieces . . . do you know how many of them agree exactly? Very little. Even the MSS that are in Greek are NOT INERRANT . . . inerrancy ONLY extends to the ORIGINAL . . . not the copies . . . either Hebrew (OT) or Greek (NT)



Could you clarify? Thanks.

then we have no inerrant scripture as we only possess copies

 

[racer]

And you submit to nobody... on earth. Typical Western.

Forgive me...

You say that like it's a bad thing.

In all seriousness, do I submit unquestionably or abandon my own intellect to those who should for whatever reason be considered more in the "know" than I? Of course not? But, I do submit to certain authorities, probably just not to the degree you have fooled yourself into believing that you and those of your faith have.

Tell me in ten word or less, OUSA, how does one know if he or she is being taught a false Gospel?

 

[OrthodoxyUSA]

1Ti 3:15 But if I tarry long, that thou mayest know how thou oughtest to behave thyself in the house of God, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and ground of the truth.

Forgive me...

 

[racer]

then we have no inerrant scripture as we only possess copies

Do you not tire of the useless game of semantics to which so many resort when they have no sufficient response to refute legitimate arguments?

 

[Thekla]

Do you not tire of the useless game of semantics to which so many resort when they have no sufficient response to refute legitimate arguments?

its not a "semantic argument", though. We do not posess original copies of the Gospels. If only the originals are inspired, then nothing we have is inspired. We cannot compare for interpolation and error ...

further; if, as is thought, one of the Gospels was written in Aramaic and translated into Greek, we have only 3 Gospels.

It was not my assertion that only the originals are inspired.

 

[racer]

1Ti 3:15 But if I tarry long, that thou mayest know how thou oughtest to behave thyself in the house of God, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and ground of the truth.

Forgive me...

1Ti 3:14; These things write I unto thee, hoping to come unto thee shortly:

Hmm. Go figure, he didn't trust his messager to relay his instructions accurately in oral form . . . . but, we're supposed to believe the Church preserved certain privileged information in oral form for 2000+ years. That's odd . . .

 

[racer]

Anybody know who "Simeon the God Receiver" is and why it relates to the subject at hand.

Forgive me...

Nope. You up to typing more than a line or two and educating us about him?

 

[racer]

its not a "semantic argument", though.

When you start twisting others' words to purposefully distort what is said or meant, it's a "game of sematics."

We do not posess original copies of the Gospels.

So? What does that have to do with anything?

If only the originals are inspired, then nothing we have is inspired. We cannot compare for interpolation and error ...

I don't believe any sane or right-minded Christian made that argument. If they did, feel free to show me and extract an apology.

further; if, as is thought, one of the Gospels was written in Aramaic and translated into Greek, we have only 3 Gospels.

What is your point?

It was not my assertion that only the originals are inspired.

Then who did? Just refer me to the quote number.

 

[Philothei]

I fail to see the relevance of this question to the quote you have cited here? The Church had many councils, and even the ECFs debated what consituted the "canon."

Excuse me, try to play what up again? If you are paying attention at all that is the whole purpose of "MY" OP, if you don't like the subject, feel free to "unsubscribe" as OUSA frequently does. If you really want to get into using brash commanding language, let me know and we'll be on . . .

I do? How do you know that?

It was the Church.. wow... lots of threats.... And no I do not have to "unsubcribe" ...like USA does, that is him not me. Is this the only way for you to eliminate/abandon an oponet and an argument?

 

[Thekla]

Then who did? Just refer me to the quote number.

#713

 

[racer]

Thekla,

This is where the non-Sola Scripturists let's their misunderstanding of the ideology get in the way of gaining an understanding of it.

Sola Scriptura does not necessitate that we all possess it in original written form. Scripture is the Gospel. Is it written down and recorded as Jesus spoke it verbatim? Well, if it were, would we have "four (4) Gospels?"

We simply argue the only affirmation or validation of the Gospel that we have to measure what we are taught--at our disposal--by is Scripture. Anything left out and not recorded therein, is not verifiably legitimate according to the belief of Sola Scripturist proponents.

Even this explanation will be found lacking. It's a difficult concept for some people to wrap their brains around, but for most of us it's really very simple.

 

[racer]

It was the Church..

Huh? What was the church?

wow... lots of threats....

Define "lots." ***actually, I made no threats.

And no I do not have to "unsubcribe" ...

Did I say you had to? Did I even suggest that you do? Before you answer those two questions, you might want to reread what I "did" say.

like USA does, that is him not me. Is this the only way for you to eliminate/abandon an oponet and an argument?

Yep! When they refuse to see things my way, I just tell 'em to leave . . .

 

[racer]

#713

Already found it. See post #733 for explanation.

 

[Philothei]

Even this explanation will be found lacking. It's a difficult concept for some people to wrap their brains around, but for most of us it's really very simple.

Some people cannot pass through their eliticism ....true elements of gnosticism.... The scripture is only open to those who are of higher intelligence or elected.... So, where it that in the Scripture? That those of us with lower intelligence can not grasp it?

 

[JacktheCatholic]

When you say "we" please be specific. Because, where you choose to give credit to your Church, I choose to give it to God--alone!!!

There is a great Christian who said that you cannot have God for the Father without the Church for your Mother.

There is a Church that the Apostles wrote about and that Church has continued since the Apostles with unbroken successions to this day. If you seek this church then you will find it with the RCC and the EOC and the OOC, the Catholic Church (as was written about 100 AD by the Bishop of Antioch).

 

[racer]

Some people cannot pass through their eliticism ....true elements of gnosticism.... The scripture is only open to those who are of higher intelligence or elected.... So, where it that in the Scripture? That those of us with lower intelligence can not grasp it?

Never said any such things or implied them. I firmly believe that you can grasp it, just as did St. Augustine. It is the RC/EOs who argue that we are not to trust private judgement and cite verse:

2Pe 3:16 As also in all [his] epistles, speaking in them of these things; in which are some things hard to be understood, which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, as [they do] also the other scriptures, unto their own destruction.

 

[OrthodoxyUSA]

You say that like it's a bad thing.

In all seriousness, do I submit unquestionably or abandon my own intellect to those who should for whatever reason be considered more in the "know" than I? Of course not? But, I do submit to certain authorities, probably just not to the degree you have fooled yourself into believing that you and those of your faith have.

Tell me in ten word or less, OUSA, how does one know if he or she is being taught a false Gospel?

Sorry, The Church has never defined that in under ten words. I refer you back to post #11... It's short enough, and I agree with it completely.

Forgive me...

 

[racer]

There is a great Christian who said that you cannot have God for the Father without the Church for your Mother.

What, you don't remember his name? If not, he could not have been too great.

There is a Church that the Apostles wrote about and that Church has continued since the Apostles with unbroken successions to this day. If you seek this church then you will find it with the RCC and the EOC and the OOC, the Catholic Church (as was written about 100 AD by the Bishop of Antioch).

Do you even see how your own argument negates itself? I hope so, because I'm too tired to explain it to you.