Is Scripture MISSING Dogmas? (2)

[Souldier]

Holiness only becomes authentic to the extent that we freely, willingly love God with our whole heart, soul, mind, and strength and our neighbor as ourselves. This is the purpose and goal of man's liberty, which God nonetheless will not interfere with-or else it couldn't be liberty at all. The purpose of grace, of God's indwelling, of communion with Him, is growth in this knowledge of and relationship with God which transforms us into His image. Teachers, such as Philip with the Eunuch or others who spread the good news, implant the seed, God's word, which is intended to sprout into a fully blossomed plant. It generally needs to be watered, nurtured, and guided as well.

"...for, “Everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved.”

How, then, can they call on the one they have not believed in? And how can they believe in the one of whom they have not heard? And how can they hear without someone preaching to them? And how can anyone preach unless they are sent? As it is written: “How beautiful are the feet of those who bring good news!” Matt 10:13-15

The bible has plenty of seed, water and sunlight. However to seek holiness we must seek the kingdom. Its all about separation from this world by seeking the kingdom. The parable of the sower shows us who sows the word and it shows the importance of seeking the kingdom which is true holiness. Going to church doesn't have a lot to do with that because many churches today actually don't teach about seeking the kingdom at all. They lead people astray by not teaching them to seek the kingdom. This is because they themselves are not seeking the kingdom. A good church will always try to get their flock to learn from Christ Himself. Thats my opinion.

 

[fhansen]

The bible has plenty of seed, water and sunlight. However to seek holiness we must seek the kingdom. Its all about separation from this world by seeking the kingdom. The parable of the sower shows us who sows the word and it shows the importance of seeking the kingdom which is true holiness. Going to church doesn't have a lot to do with that because many churches today actually don't teach about seeking the kingdom at all. They lead people astray by not teaching them to seek the kingdom. This is because they themselves are not seeking the kingdom. A good church will always try to get their flock to learn from Christ Himself. Thats my opinion.

Yes, and seeking the kingdom is a result of hearing about the kingdom. Even the bible was a production of man, while inspired by God.

 

[fhansen]

Don't leave.

I'm tired of it too.

They use this as their wiggle out responsibility for crimes:
Even it was the pope, it wasn't "the church".
Even a cabal within the magesterium might be guilty of heinous crimes like the "Donation of Constantine" forgery, but "the church" is off the hook because "the church" isn't those people.
So "the church" is always spotless.
Hmmm.

And yet wasn't it Luther that coined the term 'simultaneously justified and a sinner'. The only way one can have the luxury of themselves pontificating on the bad behavior of any church is to stay conveniently outside of them. Because all churches/denominations end up showing the human side, actually validating the church's own doctrine of Original Sin, by not heeding the very gospel as it was received. Many saints- Francis of Assisi comes to mind-were ostracized by leaders and other church members for taking seriously and radically practicing the core gospel values; the church's teachings were right, not always so for the church's people. ref Matt 23:1-3

 

[BobRyan]

According to the bible, the Church and Christ are one and the same.

But, I admit, when you have an infallible church backed by an inerrant book, it's hard not to be confident.

Not in the actual Bible.

We could "quote you" for that idea - but I myself prefer to go with the actual Bible.

Christ "Loves the church and gave Himself for her" but no text says "Christ is the church".

in Christ,

Bob

 

[BobRyan]

Anything and anyone can be a source. The bible is for verifying that information.
The best example I know of is where Paul uses OT scripture to help the Bereans verify that Jesus is the messiah.

"They studied the scriptures daily to SEE IF those things were so" as spoken to them by the Apostle Paul - Acts 17:11.

Just as we see in Mark 7;6-13 where Christ hammered the magesterium of His day "sola scriptura" for daring to contradict the Word of God via the traditions of the nation-church of Israel.

in Christ,

Bob

 

[fhansen]

You're telling everyone that they can't be wrong in faith and in morals but that they aren't better than everyone else... sorry, but every man that I know can be wrong (even though they can't admit it) so obviously it's better to not be wrong than it is to be wrong.



Then evidently these men are better than all other men who can actually be wrong in matters of faith and morals.

I don't know why you're so concerned about them being "better", or what you're even getting at with it. It almost sounds like its coming from some kind of jealousy. They aren't innately better in some way: the gift of infallibility comes with the territory, with the office of the papacy, in that case. A police officer isn't better because he's given a certain authority due to his position; he just plays a necessary role by virtue of that authority. Or, from a different perspective, a woman isn't better than a man because she's capable of giving bith; she just has a different role to play.

From the word of God that lives and abides for ever. My faith doesn't come from fallible men but by the word of God.

Yes, but how do you know that you, ThatTrueLight, are right about the bible being God's word? We know one thing with historical certainty: it was written by men. So your contention that the bible was inspired by God and my contention that both the bible and the church were/are inspired by God are no different in kind.

Next you'll probably tell me that the men in your assembly actually authored the word of God, right?

The church did so-those men were inspired, not mavericks. And there's never been more than one church. And they, themselves, were likewise not "better" than anyone else for being inspired; that was God's handiwork. They were otherwise quite fallible IOW.

 

[David4223]

MOD HAT ON

This thread has undergone a cleanup. If your post is missing, please review the CF rules before posting, including:

Flaming and Goading
● Please treat all members with respect and courtesy through civil dialogue.
● Do not attack another member's character or actions in any way, address only the content of their post and not the member personally.
● NO Goading. This includes images, cartoons, or smileys clearly meant to goad.
● Stating or implying that another member or group of members who have identified themselves as Christian are not Christian is not allowed.


MOD HAT OFF​

 

[tadoflamb]

Not in the actual Bible.

We could "quote you" for that idea - but I myself prefer to go with the actual Bible.

Christ "Loves the church and gave Himself for her" but no text says "Christ is the church".

in Christ,

Bob

.

“For this reason a man shall leave [his] father and [his] mother
and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh.”
This is a great mystery, but I speak in reference to Christ and the church. (Ephesians 5:31:32)

 

[Albion]

The church did so-those men were inspired, not mavericks. And there's never been more than one church.

That's very true, but there's never been any shortage of those who think that their particular corner of it--and theirs alone--is Christ's church.

 

[Root of Jesse]

Did the magesterium approve this information, or is it just non-authoritative scientists?

Galileo should have gotten such respect.

Where do you get the idea that Galileo didn't get the respect he deserved?

can·ni·bal·ism
\ˈka-nə-bə-ˌli-zəm\
noun
1 :the usually ritualistic eating of human flesh by a human being.

Just the facts.

Well, technically speaking, we don't eat human flesh. We eat divine flesh. Just the facts.

 

[Root of Jesse]

Here is an observation i have made. Although the scripture says that we need no teacher, we dont actually believe it. If anyone tries to suggest that we dont need a teacher we think they are nuts, or an apostate/heretic, or some kind od cult member. I know because i use to think like that myself, so i know what others are thinking about this. Its quite possible to misuse that scripture to suggest that we dont need scripture to guide us and that is heresy as far as im concerned, or at least its a misunderstanding that needs corrected, at the least.


However have we actually ever wondered why Christ said he would teach us all things? Why God said he would put His laws in our hearts and minds? Why John says we need no teacher?

I believe this refers to liberty in the spirit. I myself now believe this is very possible and is to be coveted above any other religious thing we have.

Where does Scripture say "We don't need a teacher?" And who do you think our teacher is, those of us who think we need one?

 

[tadoflamb]

Where does Scripture say "We don't need a teacher?" And who do you think our teacher is, those of us who think we need one?

Not here:

And he gave some as apostles, others as prophets, others as evangelists, others as pastors and teachers,(Ephesians 4:11)

(emphasis mine)

 

[Root of Jesse]

And yet wasn't it Luther that coined the term 'simultaneously justified and a sinner'. The only way one can have the luxury of themselves pontificating on the bad behavior of any church is to stay conveniently outside of them. Because all churches/denominations end up showing the human side, actually validating the church's own doctrine of Original Sin, by not heeding the very gospel as it was received. Many saints- Francis of Assisi comes to mind-were ostracized by leaders and other church members for taking seriously and radically practicing the core gospel values; the church's teachings were right, not always so for the church's people. ref Matt 23:1-3

Hear, Hear!

 

[Root of Jesse]

That's very true, but there's never been any shortage of those who think that their particular corner of it--and theirs alone--is Christ's church.

And how is that the problem of the Church itself? No Christian assembly actually teaches that they, and they alone, are Christians. It's individual members who say and believe their assembly is the only one.
Catholic Church teaches that all Trinitarian baptized people are brothers in Christ.

 

[Souldier]

Where does Scripture say "We don't need a teacher?" And who do you think our teacher is, those of us who think we need one?

If you dont know the answer to that then you do need a teacher.

 

[Root of Jesse]

If you dont know the answer to that then you do need a teacher.

Oh, slam! The truth is it doesn't say we don't need a teacher. That's why Jesus taught his apostles and disciples, and they taught their disciples, and so on...

 

[Souldier]

Oh, slam! The truth is it doesn't say we don't need a teacher. That's why Jesus taught his apostles and disciples, and they taught their disciples, and so on...

I posted the scriptures many times that showed the truth. I cant remember for sure but i think i did post them here. Maybe they were removed, i dont know. Anyway, why should i debate it further? Im happy in the knowledge of this truth, but i cant beg others to share it with me. If they dont want it then thats on them.

 

[ThatTrueLight]

I don't know why you're so concerned about them being "better", or what you're even getting at with it. It almost sounds like its coming from some kind of jealousy. They aren't innately better in some way: the gift of infallibility comes with the territory, with the office of the papacy, in that case. A police officer isn't better because he's given a certain authority due to his position; he just plays a necessary role by virtue of that authority. Or, from a different perspective, a woman isn't better than a man because she's capable of giving bith; she just has a different role to play.

Simply stating the facts here.

And so, IF the men in your assembly canot be wrong concerning faith and morals, THEN does that put them in a 'better' situation than those who can error with regard to faith and morals.. wouldn't you even agree to that?

Yes, but how do you know that you, ThatTrueLight, are right about the bible being God's word? We know one thing with historical certainty: it was written by men. So your contention that the bible was inspired by God and my contention that both the bible and the church were/are inspired by God are no different in kind.

I know because "Never a man spake like this Man".. that's how I know. When a person is born again by the incorruptible seed of the word of God, then they know it. It's a result of itself. It also reveals the enemies of the truth and highlights everything there is to know about that sort of thing.

The church did so-those men were inspired, not mavericks. And there's never been more than one church. And they, themselves, were likewise not "better" than anyone else for being inspired; that was God's handiwork. They were otherwise quite fallible IOW.

And they were all Jews, every one. And Paul tells us that the oracles of God were entrusted to the Jews. The church of God is built upon the foundation of the Apostles and the Prophets with the Lord Jesus Christ being its chief cornerstone.

 

[Root of Jesse]

Simply stating the facts here.

And so, IF the men in your assembly canot be wrong concerning faith and morals, THEN does that put them in a 'better' situation than those who can error with regard to faith and morals.. wouldn't you even agree to that?

Well, your IF proposal is wrong. They can be wrong, but if they're in communion with the Pope and Magisterium and Scripture, it's true, they can't be wrong. I don't know if it puts them in a better situation-they're responsible for so many souls! It's God's place to determine if they're better.

I know because "Never a man spake like this Man".. that's how I know. When a person is born again by the incorruptible seed of the word of God, then they know it. It's a result of itself. It also reveals the enemies of the truth and highlights everything there is to know about that sort of thing.

So it's you who believes you're better. All of us baptized are born again. And yet some will fail and go to hell.

And they were all Jews, every one. And Paul tells us that the oracles of God were entrusted to the Jews. The church of God is built upon the foundation of the Apostles and the Prophets with the Lord Jesus Christ being its chief cornerstone.

Jesus is the cornerstone, Peter is the head of the Church on earth, him and his successors.

 

[ThatTrueLight]

Well, your IF proposal is wrong. They can be wrong, but if they're in communion with the Pope and Magisterium and Scripture, it's true, they can't be wrong.

You just said that it's wrong and then affirmed that it's correct.. you're too funny Brother!

I don't know if it puts them in a better situation-they're responsible for so many souls! It's God's place to determine if they're better.

Oooooh.. the men in your assembly are responsible for all of their souls?

So it's you who believes you're better.

No different than any other born into the body of Christ by that SAME Spirit.

All of us baptized are born again. And yet some will fail and go to hell.

I would guess it's because those men responsible for their souls can't help that.

Jesus is the cornerstone, Peter is the head of the Church on earth, him and his successors.

Peter is the apostle to the circumcision as Paul is the Gentiles.

Peter, James, and John are pillars for the circumcision and they gave the right hand of fellowship to Paul and to those who took their ministry to the Gentiles.