How do we know . . . .

[Uphill Battle]

since all use the scrptures, we must have another means to measure.

why?

if everyone uses a Chinese Abacus to do their sums, but they get different answers, the fault does not lie in the equipment.

 

[sunlover1]

since all use the scrptures, we must have another means to measure.

Why?

If two carpenters use rulers and get different
measurements, it only means one or both are
reading it wrong. The measure isnt the culprit.

We COULD turn to the ECF, but then again, we
run into the same issues, (besides, ECF views
arent necessarily inspired )

The sower sowed the 'seed'.
The seed wasnt the problem,
it was the SOIL that it fell on.

 

[Asinner]

Why? Because truth cannot be so subjective, based on each person's rendering of God's word.

I was thinking about love and the fruits of the spirit . . . stuff like that, lol!

 

[Asinner]

When I say we need to use another measure, I meant in conjunction with the Scriptures. Sorry, should have clarified . . . The Holy Scriptures are the very heart of Tradition.

 

[Mathetes the kerux]

The Orthodox do not ascribe to a physical change, never the less, the change is real.

Forgive me...

I can agree to what you have put forth . . . (but the whole I cannot say as I know not).

 

[JacktheCatholic]

We COULD turn to the ECF, but then again, we
run into the same issues, (besides, ECF views
arent necessarily inspired )

Some of the ECFs were taught by the Apostles. They shared daily conversations with the Apostles.

Unlike today where people are seperated by close to 2,000 years and many false teachings.

Just a thought Sun.

God Bless

 

[Uphill Battle]

we've got your truth here! nothing but the truth here! you can only GET it HERE! step up ladies and gents!

 

[GenemZ]

Which is in defiance of Jesus who said not all who call "Lord! Lord!" will be saved

But you'd know better

If you read the passage that you were referring to, you would see it speaks of a specific type of ministry. One that we would label today as a holy roller "signs" church. The Benny Hinns - Kenneth Copeland, ilk.

The ones that perform all sorts of what appears to be miracles in Jesus name, and then slams you with a false system of theology.


And, Jesus said that there will be MANY such leaders claiming to know the way for Christ.

Matthew 7:21-23 (New International Version)
"Not everyone who says to me, 'Lord, Lord,' will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only he who does the will of my Father who is in heaven.

Many will say to me on that day, 'Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name, and in your name drive out demons and perform many miracles?'

Then I will tell them plainly, 'I never knew you. Away from me, you evildoers! "
​

These false teachers performed miracles and signs not from God, yet in Jesus name! It was a demonically charged and enabled (pseudo grace) ministry that was not only by words, but with action to back it up BY SIGHT.

Faith is not by sight! Its a trusting in the integrity of the one you place your faith. Sight evidence is not what constitutes faith. These men work with anti-faith, in the name of faith. Signs and wonders never gave Pharaoh faith. If they could? Pharaoh would have been more saved than all of us. Yet, today, some believe one can not have faith unless someone produces signs and wonders. These ones seek spiritual psychedelics. They are religion addicts.




In Christ, GeneZ






.

 

[JacktheCatholic]

"Snake Oil Promotions" sounds like the many different variations of scams that were used by men and travelled from town to town and were unregulated by government and full of deceipt.

Reminds me of Protestantism...

 

[ticker]

Where does the Gospel say this?

?

...where does the gospel say that living in a cave, waiting for the world to end is false?

And...have you been following the news much?

 

[GenemZ]

Some of the ECFs were taught by the Apostles. They shared daily conversations with the Apostles.

Unlike today where people are seperated by close to 2,000 years and many false teachings.

Just a thought Sun.

God Bless

I know of men today who sat under those who are considered to be great teachers. Yet? These ones who sat? Sometimes contradict what they were taught.

2 Peter 2:1 (New International Version)
"But there were also false prophets among the people, just as there will be false teachers among you. They will secretly introduce destructive heresies, even denying the sovereign Lord who bought them—bringing swift destruction on themselves."
​

In the early years? Could ignorant peasants who had no access to a Bible, know who these men were? Many a false tradition got its start that way. Later on? Luther did not simply feel things were wrong. He went back to the writings of the Apostles and Prophets to see what had gone bad.

So? One must go back to the actual writings of the great teachers... Not depend on those who followed them. If both agree? Then! FINE!

1 Thessalonians 5:21 (KJV)
"Prove all things; hold fast that which is good."
​

Your version? Do not prove anything! Just do as you are told!

That's a bad way of thinking to those who know how to think...






In Christ, GeneZ




.
.

 

[JacktheCatholic]

Sounds like Luther was trying to do what the Catholic Church has been doing consistantly for 2,000 years.

I think that Luther was not sufficient to the task and I know he did not see Lutherism start the way he intended. But no one man could do what Jesus did with his Apostles. It is best not to reinvent the wheel especially when God designed the first one.

It would have been best if Luther had not been so inflated with himself and trusted God more. God's Church was not lost.

I am grateful to God to have me in His Catholic Church which always refers to the Apostolic teachings for verification. I am also glad I have the Eucharist which is far more awesome then any healing or prophecy taking place today.

I feel truly Blessed.

 

[racer]

There was one church then. Which church is the rightful church NOW is irrelevant.

Well, when you’re making up your own rules as you go along, I suppose you can say what is and isn’t relevant.

By compiling it, they did create it.

So, now you assert that the words “compile” and “create” are synonymous.

You lose points for trying to create a distinction that doesn't exist in that context.

Oh, I forgot you’re making up the rules, so if you want to assert that two words are synonyms you can.

Here’s the thing. Suppose Steven King dies today. Well, after an acceptable period of grief, his wife, Tabitha, decides she needs to go into his office and start clearing it out. A good friend of the family, King’s publisher, editor and a couple of other people offer to help. So, in sorting through all the manuscripts in his office, short stories, etc . . . they find many unpublished texts. Being knowledgeable on his work, experts/authorities they recognize that some of the texts/manuscripts clearly are not works of his, but examples submitted to him by wannabe writers. Once they’ve weeded out those that he did not write and sorted through the ones that best represent his style and technique, and toss out those that seem to have so much in common they appear redundant, they come up with a collection that the feel should be published posthumously. Do these people have the authority to copywrite this material under their own names? Do they have the authority to take credit for his creativity? Do they have the authority to represent his work in anyway that is contrary to the way he intended it to be? Do they have the authority to rewrite it or assert it means something it does not?

They are only authorities of his work due to their knowledge and expertise concerning Mr. King and his work. This does not give them authority over his work. I’m sure this analogy escapes your comprehension abilities, but I keep putting it out there for those who trust their own common sense.

By the fact that they concluded which books to contain within it. They chose the books. The books didn't choose them.

That does not give them authority over interpretation of what the books mean, and it does not mean they “created” these texts. If they didn’t write ‘em, they didn’t create 'em. To claim otherwise is plagiarism. But, alas, it wasn't the men who compiled these books that made such grandiose assertions is it?

If I appoint you to a job I must have 'authority' in order to do so.

Yeah, like God through divine inspiration appointed the authors of scripture to write and through the same inspiration appointed the men who compiled the Bible to do so. So, how does that establish that they have authority to define what is contained in the texts?


So, who is it you’re asserting is appointing someone else to do something?

That's the way a heirarchy works. You seem to think that the book being created was authorising them to do that to it.

Your analogy failed. You only affirmed that God had the authority to inspire the men who wrote and the men who preserved Scripture to do so.

No. I act like that's all you read.

Is that what you believe to be the truth about me?

Look at the examples in the NT when someone converts there's a laying on of hands by those in charge. Through them the Holy Spirit comes.

It was a yes or no question? Besides, that’s not always the case did Jesus lay his hands on the woman who touch the hem of his robe? Did he lay his hands on Lazarous when he told him to rise from the dead?

Mar 2:9 Whether is it easier to say to the sick of the palsy, [Thy] sins be forgiven thee; or to say, Arise, and take up thy bed, and walk?


Jhn 5:8 Jesus saith unto him, Rise, take up thy bed, and walk.

Did Jesus lay his hands upon the Apostles when he commissioned them to spread His gospel or did He breath on them. What about Pentecost. Did the Apostles touch each and everyone of the convert thousands, thereby filling them with the Holy Spirit?

Maybe you should spend a little more time reading Scripture, specifically Acts 2.

 

[racer]

That's false reasoning.

If I claim "Orthodoxy is the Church" and someone else claims "Catholicism is the Church" that does not mean we are both wrong.

That’s self-delusion. I never implied that it indicated that “both” were wrong, but we know both can’t possibly be right, and three certainly can’t.

So the Apostles teaching the truth founded a church that doesn't teach the truth?

That does not make the “Truth” and the “Church” synonyms. Glory, do you know the definition of synonym? If something happens to teach the “truth” that doesn’t make the “something” the “truth.”

Only by your weird creation of a house that's got faulty foundations but might still be a house of “truth.”

You just can’t help twisting words to comfort yourself can you. Just because a foundation is faulty does not mean it will collapse. God never promised that the Church would be perfect, nor that the people leading it would be infallible. He charged the church with preserving, protecting, and teaching his Gospel. He did not give the Church rule over it.

 

[racer]

There are many references to 'truth', such as Jesus saying "I am the way, the truth and the light"

Still doesn't make the church the truth.

And he said to Peter, and thence to the other Apostles that he will found the church on them (the rock), and they're the foundation. If you think that the church they founded is not 'the truth', of which they are it's 'foundation' - which is the truth then you've a strange creation.

Still doesn't make the church the truth.

We know the tree by the fruit it bears.

MMM, hmmm!

IF the church is founded on the Apostles (and their truthful teachings) it must be 'the truth'.

Their truthful teachings?! What happened to Jesus? Your logic fails miserably?

 

[racer]

You only have to look at where Protestants both argue that no 'practice' matters (because you're all part of the one invisible church of believers), and yet within that one church you differ over what you do. Even within one Protestant church; Anglicanism, you've got people who disagree over women priests, gay priests, the 'real presence' within the Eucharist.

Yeah, we know the RCs and the Orthodox have no differences . . . that argument is so ridiculous that I can't believe intelligent people keep spewing it out. There is one truth, the fact that "people" disagree with what that truth is does not negate the fact that there is but one truth. Just like just because people disagree over scriptural interpretations does not nullify Sola Scriptura. It just means, people are human and subject to be wrong.

Some churches handle snakes. Others speak in tongues.

So. How does that disprove Sola Scriptura?

Compare this to Paul's admonishings of the church to unity of faith.

Well, when the Orthodox submit to the Church of Rome, then you can come preaching to the choir.

 

[racer]

Racer's view of church is that it is not 'true' even though its foundations are?

Is that correct a summary?

That's a completely nonsensical statement. Tell me how is the Church "true?"

 

[GenemZ]

Sounds like Luther was trying to do what the Catholic Church has been doing consistantly for 2,000 years.

I think that Luther was not sufficient to the task and I know he did not see Lutherism start the way he intended. But no one man could do what Jesus did with his Apostles. It is best not to reinvent the wheel especially when God designed the first one.

It would have been best if Luther had not been so inflated with himself and trusted God more. God's Church was not lost.

I am grateful to God to have me in His Catholic Church which always refers to the Apostolic teachings for verification. I am also glad I have the Eucharist which is far more awesome then any healing or prophecy taking place today.

I feel truly Blessed.

Aaaah! .... Feelings.

That's what really matters?


But, rather... the following is what matters.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/faith/article3492299.ece

"Pope Benedict XVI is to rehabilitate Martin Luther, arguing that he did not intend to split Christianity but only to purge the Church of corrupt practices.


Pope Benedict will issue his findings on Luther (1483-1546) in September after discussing him at his annual seminar of 40 fellow theologians — known as the Ratzinger Schülerkreis — at Castelgandolfo, the papal summer residence. According to Vatican insiders the Pope will argue that Luther, who was excommunicated and condemned for heresy, was not a heretic."



​

You should read the entire article. And, maybe that high horse can from here on in, be placed in a closet to collect dust from now on?






As always...



In Christ, GeneZ





.

 

[Philothei]

Soooo... the Apostles were not teaching the truth? They were not inspired by the Holy Spirit? And when Christ talked about the Church? Or now we chose to transliterate the Bible ...and twist what it says ... about the Apostles establishing it? Are all the Acts of the Apostles invalid? Peter did not establish churches? Those churces were void of the HS? Christ truth ends there and then alas... 1500 AD the "true" churche(s) immerge... all in imisunity and different doctrines... Yes, that makes so much sense... hmmmmm.....

 

[GenemZ]

Soooo... the Apostles were not teaching the truth?.

Where are you coming from? What post are you reacting to?