How do we know . . . .

[JacktheCatholic]

Aaaah! .... Feelings.

That is all you comment on from my post?

I guess you cannot comment on the rest.

 

[JacktheCatholic]

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.....

That sounds like Blasphemy...

 

[racer]

Can 50,000,000 souls be so easily dismissed as "numbers"? 50 million martyrs in one century is significant. Also, I mentioned more than martyrdom. I mentioned "selflessness, unceasing prayer to the Holy Trinity, humility, meekness, love, or the gifts of the Spirit." As for these being specific to the Orthodox Church -YES! I know of no other Christian group that has had 50 million martyrs in the last century, do you? And although I have found love, meekness, and selflessness among many Christians outside of Orthodoxy, I have yet to meet one that has accomplished unceasing prayer accompanied with these virtues, nor have I even begun to attain this. But I have hope that it is attainable because those who have gone before me have attained unto the Likeness of Christ.

We can argue theology all day, but what stands out in the end is sacrifice for Christ and manifestation of the Holy Spirit. To me, this is what distinguishes truth. This is rarely discussed though. Anyone's interpretation of Scripture can be argued.

This is how we know truth . . . in the people of Christ. Therein is the proof. Not in whose interpretation is better, or who can discern the writings of Augustine more clearly, or who is the better orator/persuader . . . all is vanity. Let us look where is Christ. Christ is found in His people and they will not be of this world.

Love,
Christina

Sorry, Christina I had typed out a response and lost it. Don't have time to retype it today, maybe tomorrow . . .

 

[racer]

No . . . I am saying that the letters and Gospels and such were inspired by the Spirit to the authors that penned them . . . not one scripture asserts that the copies of the originals would be carried along by the Spirit in the same way . . . the inspiration (in the sense of inerrancy/infallability) does not carry over to the hundreds of thousands of people who choose to pick up a pen (or quill, or whatever) and ink.

Umm . . . still a bit confused . . .

 

[racer]

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.....

Teaching the truth and being the truth are not the same things. How hard can that be to grasp?

 

[racer]

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.....

All glory goes to God, not to the Apostles, not the the authors of Scripture, not to Peter, not to the RCC, EOC, or OOC.

 

[Asinner]

Am I the only one who can't see who is on?

 

[Uphill Battle]

Am I the only one who can't see who is on?

no, you're not the only one.

 

[Asinner]

no, you're not the only one.

Is this a permanent thing I wonder, or a bug they have yet to fix? Anyway, it is annoying.

 

[sunlover1]

I know very well where you stand . . . I know you are not RC.

I do not think that ANY church system ANYWHERE from ANY time has it all down . . . ALL of us are heretics somewhere . . . the question is whether or not the issues are of primary doctrinal importance or secondary. Primary warrant split . . . secondary warrants fellowship with deferance.

This will always be the state of a church full of redeemed sinners until the day of the redemption of our bodies and the Glorious wedding feast of the Lamb.

We know in part.

Anyway, how do you know? Well, if it is a false gospel it will eventually lose it's luster, because it will ultimately not produce any good fruit in you. For me, I went to church every week and got absolutely nothing out of it. So, with the lack of truth around, I eventually left.

It's the Holy Spirit that produces the fruit,
but I understand what you're saying, I've
also gone to churches that seemed dead.

Sunlover1 claimed that the message taught by Paul in both Scripture and by word is EXACTLY the same.

Based on what?

Hi Montalban, dont be a bully k?

It is real food in the spiritual ense.

Interesting, and true!!

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

Nope, the truth isnt subjective.
But as you said, it's not the Scripture that's
the problem, it's the readers.

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

Praise God!

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.

What I do is use other tools but the Scripture as
the measure.

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

Awesome isnt that!
And even more awesome would be to have
been taught by Jesus, but we do still
have God IN us.
Jesus did say he'd not leave us with out help.
Right now, I'm trying to learn to be more
worshipfull, and merciful.
Thanks Dear Jack.

 

[Uphill Battle]

Is this a permanent thing I wonder, or a bug they have yet to fix? Anyway, it is annoying.

I'm afraid I don't know.

 

[GenemZ]

That is all you comment on from my post?

I guess you cannot comment on the rest.

That was not all I said. Here:

.

Anyone who wants to look at my post you quoted from, will see that you are not telling the truth about what I said.

Why are you doing this? Are we still children?


I do not want to play your game.


Anyone looking to my original post would see that you are simply playing a silly game and not telling the truth. I said much more than you claimed I did.

How can you do that? What are you thinking? My post is there for all to see. Reminds me of Hillary dodging bullets... then the video showed different.




In Christ, GeneZ




.

 

[JacktheCatholic]

 

[Mathetes the kerux]

Umm . . . still a bit confused . . .

Ok . . . the doctrine of inspiration has always held that ONLY the original work written by the original author is inspired in the sense of categorized as Scripture. So if Joe Schmoe picks up a copy of the Greek NT and translates it into English . . . the English is NOT inspired.

Likewise, if a scribe picks up the Gospel of Mark and begins to copy the Gospel . . . that COPY is not considered infallible . . . ONLY THAT WHICH WAS WRITTEN BY MARK IS INFALLIBLE.

The reason? Because we have SO MANY TEXTUAL VARIANTS. Like the whole last portion of the Gospel of Mark (v 9ff) which is NOT in the earliest extant MSS . . . but is in many later MSS. So we have an issue . . . how did it get there . . . should it be there . . . and is it inspired. If it was NOT written by Mark . . . but the clever work of a later scribe that represented the commonly held beliefs and traditions of his time . . . then the latter portion that has been added is NOT inspired as the rest of the Gospel . . . though it may give some neat insight into the common thought of the era.

Likewise with Phillip's "repent and be baptized . . . " to the Ethiopian Eunich which is phraseology completely foreign to Luke and an insert not in the early MSS . . . and the Johannine commata in 1 Jhn 5:7 . . .

So, with all the variants (the overwhelming majority being inconsequential) inspiration CANNOT be said to be transmitted to the copies because the copies are not in unanimous agreement with each other . . . and thereby are not inerrant nor infallible. ONLY the authors are given the ascription of being "carried along by the Holy Spirit."

Better?

 

[Mathetes the kerux]

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.....

Being a means and channel of the truth dear does not make one THE truth . . . as some here asserted about the church and the apostles.

All we are saying is that the means and channel are NOT the same as the source. All these other things that you are going on about here have nothing to do with what we have asserted.

 

[Mathetes the kerux]

That sounds like Blasphemy...

I think she was arguing ad absurdum . . . meaning taking what she thinks are the absurd logical conclusion of what she THOUGHT we were saying and showing their inconsistent absurdity to make the point that "it don't fly."

But her post doesn't hit the mark because she is not accurately understanding what we were saying.

 

[racer]

The wine becomes the blood of Christ

Yeah, that's what some churches believe and teach . . .

and we can probably never have enough of that.

Baptism is being washed in Jesus blood and receiving the Holy Spirit, I don't believe that drinking his blood is required or even possible.

 

[OrthodoxyUSA]

That is what THE CHURCH teaches.

Forgive me...

 

[racer]

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

What would that measure be?

 

[Thekla]

Ok . . . the doctrine of inspiration has always held that ONLY the original work written by the original author is inspired in the sense of categorized as Scripture. So if Joe Schmoe picks up a copy of the Greek NT and translates it into English . . . the English is NOT inspired.

Likewise, if a scribe picks up the Gospel of Mark and begins to copy the Gospel . . . that COPY is not considered infallible . . . ONLY THAT WHICH WAS WRITTEN BY MARK IS INFALLIBLE.

The reason? Because we have SO MANY TEXTUAL VARIANTS. Like the whole last portion of the Gospel of Mark (v 9ff) which is NOT in the earliest extant MSS . . . but is in many later MSS. So we have an issue . . . how did it get there . . . should it be there . . . and is it inspired. If it was NOT written by Mark . . . but the clever work of a later scribe that represented the commonly held beliefs and traditions of his time . . . then the latter portion that has been added is NOT inspired as the rest of the Gospel . . . though it may give some neat insight into the common thought of the era.

Likewise with Phillip's "repent and be baptized . . . " to the Ethiopian Eunich which is phraseology completely foreign to Luke and an insert not in the early MSS . . . and the Johannine commata in 1 Jhn 5:7 . . .

So, with all the variants (the overwhelming majority being inconsequential) inspiration CANNOT be said to be transmitted to the copies because the copies are not in unanimous agreement with each other . . . and thereby are not inerrant nor infallible. ONLY the authors are given the ascription of being "carried along by the Holy Spirit."

Better?

if I understand you correctly, we have no extant "inspired" scripture