Is Scripture MISSING Dogmas?

[BobRyan]

But to say that the way we choose to live our lives has no effect on our eternal destiny doesn't work either. Or to say that God gave us no chance; we're either predestined to heaven or hell.

"He came to HIS OWN and His own received Him not" John 1:11.

God works to save those whom He "foreknows" will reject Him.

in Christ,

Bob

 

[BobRyan]

In this post we see that doctrine is included in the Bible and that all doctrine is to be tested sola scriptura #381

Christ hammers the magisterium of His day on this point.

Read the opening post.

It is what I was taught before I became a Lutheran. And we see many (not just or only Catholics) who insist that their unique dogmas come from the very thing the opening post presents - we see this apologetic OFTEN. It's foundational to an understanding of "apostolic tradition" in SOME Christian communities.

If you've never heard of this and if you believe all the dogmas and teachings tuaght by Jesus and the Apostles that we know of are clearly found in the words of the Bible, then obviously you don't know or agree with the position being discussed (and you are free to so state).



A blessed Holy Week to you and yours.


- Josiah

Having said that - if we go back to the OP - I don't necessarily object to the idea that new doctrine is discovered over time - but all of it is to be tested against the Bible to "see IF" it contradicts or is in harmony with what has already been given.

in Christ,

Bob

 

[fhansen]

"He came to HIS OWN and His own received Him not" John 1:11.

God works to save those whom He "foreknows" will reject Him.

in Christ,

Bob

God works to save all humankind.

 

[CaliforniaJosiah]

I

- if we go back to the OP -

There's a thought!

I don't necessarily object to the idea that new doctrine is discovered over time - but all of it is to be tested against the Bible to "see IF" it contradicts or is in harmony with what has already been given.

I don't either. See the "MY RESPONSE" at the bottom of the opening post.

But yes - EXACTLY - that absolutely makes it OUR stuff. And just baseless to try to circumvent and deny accountability and responsibility by insisting that JESUS and thus ALL THE APOSTLES and thus "ALL IN THE EARLY CHURCH" taught it.... while admitting they have nothing.... absolutely nothing.... nothing whatsoever to show that claim as true.

I think you have gotten a handle on the whole issue of the opening post and this "spin" we hear so often (and as I was so powerfully taught by teachers in two denominations prior to becoming a Lutheran).



Blessings to you and yours....


- Josiah

in Christ,

Bob[/quote]

 

[MoreCoffee]

Not every Christian agrees that one's beliefs must be tested by a bible that isn't quite the bible they believe.

 

[BobRyan]

Originally Posted by BobRyan

"He came to HIS OWN and His own received Him not" John 1:11.

God works to save those whom He "foreknows" will reject Him.

in Christ,

[/quote]
​

God works to save all humankind.

True - I am just pointing out that this includes those He knows will not accept the gospel.

in Christ,

Bob

 

[Albion]

God works to save all humankind.

I'm not sure that we can say that, based upon anything specific.

 

[MoreCoffee]

And by the way, what's so great about allowing only the poster being addressed to report a flame? This has the effect of permitting even the most vulgar comments (like we see on the political forums) to be posted with impunity since they can be just statements without an identifiable object. For instance, "Lots of pure horse s***." That's not a hypothetical example. We know that speaker's politics and so we know whom he hates. But he wasn't addressing any poster here in particular.

But who gets to report it as a flame? If it doesn't immediately follow a post that seems related to this comment, it's no one. So how does that help things when some other poor sucker can be blindsided by an adversary deciding to paraphrase something much milder and claim that it's tantamount to a personal attack?

Posted in the wrong thread?

 

[Root of Jesse]

Why twist my words, or the words of the holy scriptures?

The holy scriptures are perfectly clear in teaching us that God worked effectually in Peter for the Apostleship of the Circumcision, just as He worked mightily in Paul toward the Gentiles. (See Galatians 2:8)

His letters reflect this as well as he writes to the twelve tribes scattered abroad, because that is his ministry.

Also, why would the LORD raise up Paul to go to the Gentiles when He already had TWELVE Apostles of the Circumcision ready to go?

That's extra credit if you're up for it.

But it does nothing to preclude that Peter couldn't preach to the Gentiles, or that Paul could preach to the Jews. In fact, Paul went into synagogues, mostly, to teach them.
The point is Jesus never told Peter "You stick to the Jews", or to Paul "Only to the Gentiles will you go." All the apostles preached where the Holy Spirit sent them, excluding no one.

 

[BobRyan]

But yes - EXACTLY - that absolutely makes it OUR stuff. And just baseless to try to circumvent and deny accountability and responsibility by insisting that JESUS and thus ALL THE APOSTLES and thus "ALL IN THE EARLY CHURCH" taught it.... while admitting they have nothing.... absolutely nothing.... nothing whatsoever to show that claim as true.

I think you have gotten a handle on the whole issue of the opening post and this "spin" we hear so often (and as I was so powerfully taught by teachers in two denominations prior to becoming a Lutheran).

I believe the doctrine can be discovered over time - but to be safe in that case - one must hold it to strict accountability to scripture

2 Tim 3
16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:
17 That the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works.

I will side with the Bible in that debate.



Mark 7

7 Howbeit in vain do they worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men.
8 For laying aside the commandment of God, ye hold the tradition of men, as the washing of pots and cups: and many other such like things ye do.
9 And he said unto them, Full well ye reject the commandment of God, that ye may keep your own tradition.
10 For Moses said, Honour thy father and thy mother; and, Whoso curseth father or mother, let him die the death:
11 But ye say, If a man shall say to his father or mother, It is Corban, that is to say, a gift, by whatsoever thou mightest be profited by me; he shall be free.
12 And ye suffer him no more to do ought for his father or his mother;
13 Making the word of God of none effect through your tradition, which ye have delivered: and many such like things do ye.



Christ hammers the magisterium for making stuff up - making up their doctrine - and argues in Mark 7 that it should not be done.

Notice how the traditions of man - and the commandments of men are condemned by Christ when they contradict scripture.

So then "making stuff up" as man is wont to do - is not on par with scripture and when it contradicts scripture it is positively bad.

in Christ,

Bob

 

[Root of Jesse]

I believe you've over-generalized.
It took a considerable while for most Christians to form an opinion on the trinity, and come up with the term "hypostatic union".

This gets back to the whole statement about a doctrine of the Trinity not being laid out in Scripture, doesn't it?

 

[fhansen]

True - I am just pointing out that this includes those He knows will not accept the gospel.

in Christ,

Bob

OK, and I agree.

 

[bbbbbbb]

As God allowed Adam to fall, and evil to enter by man's choice, so does He allow us to reject/disobey Him now, or turn away again if we've entered communion with Him at some point. Our free will consists in His not forcing His will upon us, even as He draws us to Himself by His grace. This is so due to His choice, according to His wisdom. He's certainly not constrained in any way from doing otherwise.

Thanks. What do you think of Augustine's views on this issue? Augustine's Doctrine of the Bondage of the Will

 

[bbbbbbb]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hDcw_-16j7Q

Very interesting. Thanks. Of course, Catholics here will tell you that he is not the Pope and is not actually presenting Catholic doctrine, but there is no doubt that he is not speaking merely for himself.

 

[bbbbbbb]

God works to save all humankind.

But, according to you God merely provides mankind with the opportunity to do what is necessary to be saved; He does not actually save anyone.

 

[Rick Otto]

This gets back to the whole statement about a doctrine of the Trinity not being laid out in Scripture, doesn't it?

Not really. Its more about a myth about an unrealistic notion of an original unity of belief, and its importance to the other myths it becomes part of a support system with.

 

[Rick Otto]

But, according to you God merely provides mankind with the opportunity to do what is necessary to be saved; He does not actually save anyone.

This is a great example of the Arminian doublespeak that used to drive me crazy before I finally found the canons of the synod of Dordt.
It would make my head spin to hear I was saved but could still end up in hell.

 

[fhansen]

But, according to you God merely provides mankind with the opportunity to do what is necessary to be saved; He does not actually save anyone.

Actually, according to me, Augustine, the CC, and others, man cannot possibly be saved without God, yet God elects not to save us without us, without our role to play, dependent on our capabilities. Now, according to many others, some men can't possibly be saved at all!

 

[bbbbbbb]

Actually, according to me, Augustine, the CC, and others, man cannot possibly be saved without God, yet God elects not to save us without us, without our role to play, dependent on our capabilities. Now, according to many others, some men can't possibly be saved at all!

That is assuredly not the view believed and taught by Augustine.

 

[Root of Jesse]

That is assuredly not the view believed and taught by Augustine.

sez bbbbbbb