Mariology

[racer]

God didnt give me the authority to decide truth. He gave me the ability to humbly (ideally) accept what He has ordained despite what my own proud opinions may tell me.

Did he give you the ability to recognize truth?

So far as that goes, He didn't give any-living-body the authority to decide truth. He's already done that. However, since He expects each and every Christian to abide by His truth, and since He will judge us according to His truth, it's a sure bet He expects that we will know truth when we see it.

 

[Hentenza]

God didnt give me the authority to decide truth. He gave me the ability to humbly (ideally) accept what He has ordained despite what my own proud opinions may tell me.

We are men of God and receive illumination through the Holy Spirit.

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

 

[jckstraw72]

So far as that goes, He didn't give any-living-body the authority to decide truth. He's already done that. However, since He expects each and every Christian to abide by His truth, and since He will judge us according to His truth, it's a sure bet He expects that we will know truth when we see it.

i completely agree with all of this.

We are men of God and receive illumination through the Holy Spirit.

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

of course. i trust the consistent illumination of the past 2000 yrs, and i try to live in a manner that will allow me to see the Spirit's illumination in my own life -- but if htat illumination contradicts the illuminations of hte past then i must recognize it is wrong.

 

[Trento]

We are men of God and receive illumination through the Holy Spirit.

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

So why are you teaching us your tradition again? Remind me, it must have gotten lost in the shuffel. Cuz apparently the bible alone isn't enough without your guidance and interpretation.
The Catch 22 of the bible aloner. If you truly believe in bible alone, stop preaching and teaching. There definitely wouldn't be a need to convert us, would there, since we would have the bible you handed us now, wouldn't there? And you would never have the need to ever once try to undermine how we read the bible alone now would there?
The winging it method never existed, and still doesn't. The church practiced the sacred scripture before there was sacred scripture. To deny that is to either be completely and willfully ignorant (I'm not trying to be mean) or hardened heart delusional. If the church needed the bible first, one must admit (unless they are completely stupid) the church never existed until the apostles wrote some of it down, which was quite a bit later. If the church needed the bible to practice the faith (and no one could read by the way, very very few, and no one ever could afford a bible until recently after the advent of the printing press) then the faith wasn't practiced at all, because they had no bible to guide them.

 

[Kepha]

We are men of God and receive illumination through the Holy Spirit.

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

Incorrect. The man of God was not just someone who confessed with his mouth and believed but was one who was taught and learned from the Apostles. That verse he was speaking to Timothy and with Scripture and a good understanding of what he learned, it could complete him but NOT complete him only. I already have an example of this way back.

 

[IamAdopted]

Incorrect. The man of God was not just someone who confessed with his mouth and believed but was one who was taught and learned from the Apostles. That verse he was speaking to Timothy and with Scripture and a good understanding of what he learned, it could complete him but NOT complete him only. I already have an example of this way back.

The man of God was one whom believed on Christ and confessed and was born again from above. With the Holy Spirit now residing In him. The Lord has opened the eyes of His people to understand the scriptures.

 

[ScottBot]

The man of God was one whom believed on Christ and confessed and was born again from above. With the Holy Spirit now residing In him. The Lord has opened the eyes of His people to understand the scriptures.

Really, they why do they see different things?

 

[Trento]

The man of God was one whom believed on Christ and confessed and was born again from above. With the Holy Spirit now residing In him. The Lord has opened the eyes of His people to understand the scriptures.

First In the Old Testament, the name "man of God" occurs more than sixty times and consistently refers to those who receive direct revelation from God. For example:

• Deuteronomy 33:1 And this is the blessing, wherewith Moses the man of God blessed the children of Israel before his death.
• 1Kings 17:24 And the woman said to Elijah, "Now I know that you are a man of God, and that the word of the LORD in your mouth is truth."
• 2Kings 5:8 But when Elisha the man of God heard that the king of Israel had rent his clothes, he sent to the king
• Nehemiah 12:24 ...give thanks, according to the commandment of David the man of God

In the New Testament, the term "man of God" or "men of God" occurs only three times. When used in 2Peter 1:21 (KJV/NKJ), it refers to prophets and thus repeats the Old Testament usage. Then Paul used the name "man of God" in reference to apostle Timothy: "as for you, man of God, aim at righteousness, godliness, faith, love, steadfastness, gentleness" (1st Tim 6:11). Given this overall biblical pattern, "man of God" is an exclusive name designating those of highest authority - it does not refer to each and every believer. Therefore the third and final reference to "man of God" in the New Testament, again found in Paul's letter to apostle Timothy, is significant:

All scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, that the man of God may be complete, equipped for every good work. I charge you [apostle Timothy] in the presence of God...preach the word, convince, rebuke, and exhort, be unfailing in patience and in teaching...discharge all the duties of your ministry (2nd Timothy 3:16-4:5).​

Indeed we find Timothy as Bishop of Ephesus in AD 65, where he served for 15 years. In 80, Timothy tried to halt a pagan procession of idols, ceremonies, and songs. In response to his preaching of the Gospel the angry pagans beat him, dragged him through the streets, and stoned him to death.​

Since the bible places apostles at the center of biblical interpretation, applies the name "man of God" in an exclusive fashion, and indeed calls apostle Timothy a "man of God" (1st Tim 6:11) - the weight of evidence indicates that "man of God" above refers to apostles. Certainly had Paul intended to reference all Christians in 2nd Timothy 3:17, then saying instead "...that the saints may be complete..." would have properly made the point by harmonizing with the sixty plus uses of the common word "saint" or "saints" in the New Testament. Yet Paul chose the rare and exclusive term. And indeed the underlined words above show the connection to the formal work of a minister. ​

I will offer the same to you.If the bible were sufficient without tradition, then you would never ever have uttered another word here to try and teach us your doctrine or try to undermine the church. You should have just handed us a bible and left it up to us to decide what was true and what was not.

But you couldn't.

You're posting itself proves tradition, any time you speak you prove us right. For it is tradition, the transmission of the deposit of faith, how to do things, what you practice, what your beliefs about the bible are. Unfortunately you are using the bible as a blueprint. But the church preceeded the bible. We are the blueprint.

 

[IamAdopted]

First In the Old Testament, the name "man of God" occurs more than sixty times and consistently refers to those who receive direct revelation from God. For example:

• Deuteronomy 33:1 And this is the blessing, wherewith Moses the man of God blessed the children of Israel before his death.
• 1Kings 17:24 And the woman said to Elijah, "Now I know that you are a man of God, and that the word of the LORD in your mouth is truth."
• 2Kings 5:8 But when Elisha the man of God heard that the king of Israel had rent his clothes, he sent to the king
• Nehemiah 12:24 ...give thanks, according to the commandment of David the man of God

In the New Testament, the term "man of God" or "men of God" occurs only three times. When used in 2Peter 1:21 (KJV/NKJ), it refers to prophets and thus repeats the Old Testament usage. Then Paul used the name "man of God" in reference to apostle Timothy: "as for you, man of God, aim at righteousness, godliness, faith, love, steadfastness, gentleness" (1st Tim 6:11). Given this overall biblical pattern, "man of God" is an exclusive name designating those of highest authority - it does not refer to each and every believer. Therefore the third and final reference to "man of God" in the New Testament, again found in Paul's letter to apostle Timothy, is significant:

All scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, that the man of God may be complete, equipped for every good work. I charge you [apostle Timothy] in the presence of God...preach the word, convince, rebuke, and exhort, be unfailing in patience and in teaching...discharge all the duties of your ministry (2nd Timothy 3:16-4:5).​

Indeed we find Timothy as Bishop of Ephesus in AD 65, where he served for 15 years. In 80, Timothy tried to halt a pagan procession of idols, ceremonies, and songs. In response to his preaching of the Gospel the angry pagans beat him, dragged him through the streets, and stoned him to death.​

Since the bible places apostles at the center of biblical interpretation, applies the name "man of God" in an exclusive fashion, and indeed calls apostle Timothy a "man of God" (1st Tim 6:11) - the weight of evidence indicates that "man of God" above refers to apostles. Certainly had Paul intended to reference all Christians in 2nd Timothy 3:17, then saying instead "...that the saints may be complete..." would have properly made the point by harmonizing with the sixty plus uses of the common word "saint" or "saints" in the New Testament. Yet Paul chose the rare and exclusive term. And indeed the underlined words above show the connection to the formal work of a minister. ​

I will offer the same to you.If the bible were sufficient without tradition, then you would never ever have uttered another word here to try and teach us your doctrine or try to undermine the church. You should have just handed us a bible and left it up to us to decide what was true and what was not.

But you couldn't.

You're posting itself proves tradition, any time you speak you prove us right. For it is tradition, the transmission of the deposit of faith, how to do things, what you practice, what your beliefs about the bible are. Unfortunately you are using the bible as a blueprint. But the church preceeded the bible. We are the blueprint.

I don't see this in scriptue. The church is not the blue print. The scriptures are the blueprint to the man of God. Or the woman of God. For they are Gods breathe to His people. The bible is His statutes. We see in Revelation that most of the churches there had somethings to repent of. Each individual person that comes to Christ can read Gods word and it will be alive to them. For God opens the eyes so we can see and He gives us the ear so we can hear. For Jesus said we would know HIS voice and that no other would we follow. That is why we get into His word and read and eat and live on every word that comes out of the Mouth of God so when some other teaching comes along we will not follow this for it is not the voice of the Good shepherd..

 

[Oblio]

We do not rely upon man either still walking on earth or not. We rely upon our mighty God. How do you not know that these prayers that are being offered are not prayers already answered?

Then why do we ask others to pray for us ?

 

[ScottBot]

I have been doing a word compasison, and I for the life of me cannot find any place where "profitable" is synonymous with "sufficient".

 

[Oblio]

I have been doing a word compasison, and I for the life of me cannot find any place where "profitable" is synonymous with "sufficient".

Apparently we are looking in the wrong church dictionary

 

[icedtea]

Where is that verse (Acts, probably) where someone is seen reading the Word. Someone comes upon them and says Do you understand what you are reading? He answers How can I, unless someone explains it to me?
thanks.

 

[jckstraw72]

thats the Ethiopian Eunuch and Phillip I think. Acts 8 maybe?

 

[Trento]

The man of God was one whom believed on Christ and confessed and was born again from above. With the Holy Spirit now residing In him. The Lord has opened the eyes of His people to understand the scriptures.

I don't see this in scriptue. The church is not the blue print. The scriptures are the blueprint to the man of God. Or the woman of God. For they are Gods breathe to His people. The bible is His statutes. We see in Revelation that most of the churches there had somethings to repent of. Each individual person that comes to Christ can read Gods word and it will be alive to them. For God opens the eyes so we can see and He gives us the ear so we can hear. For Jesus said we would know HIS voice and that no other would we follow. That is why we get into His word and read and eat and live on every word that comes out of the Mouth of God so when some other teaching comes along we will not follow this for it is not the voice of the Good shepherd..

If engineers interprted blueprints the way Protestants interpret the bible i would hate to see the results of a bridge or building.

 

[ScottBot]

Where is that verse (Acts, probably) where someone is seen reading the Word. Someone comes upon them and says Do you understand what you are reading? He answers How can I, unless someone explains it to me?
thanks.

b....b....but, that's different.

 

[IamAdopted]

If engineers interprted blueprints the way Protestants interpret the bible i would hate to see the results of a bridge or building.

Well our Chief builder is Christ for it is His word. There was the word before there was the Church. For Jesus is the Word made flesh. There was not church before Jesus came. We are told if the Lord builds not the house then they labor in vain. We are also told this.
Mat 7:24 "Therefore everyone who hears these words of Mine and acts on them, may be compared to a wise man who built his house on the rock.
Mat 7:25 "And the rain fell, and the floods came, and the winds blew and slammed against that house; and yet it did not fall, for it had been founded on the rock.
Mat 7:26 "Everyone who hears these words of Mine and does not act on them, will be like a foolish man who built his house on the sand.
Mat 7:27 "The rain fell, and the floods came, and the winds blew and slammed against that house; and it fell--and great was its fall."

 

[Hentenza]

So why are you teaching us your tradition again? Remind me, it must have gotten lost in the shuffel. Cuz apparently the bible alone isn't enough without your guidance and interpretation.
The Catch 22 of the bible aloner. If you truly believe in bible alone, stop preaching and teaching. There definitely wouldn't be a need to convert us, would there, since we would have the bible you handed us now, wouldn't there? And you would never have the need to ever once try to undermine how we read the bible alone now would there?
The winging it method never existed, and still doesn't. The church practiced the sacred scripture before there was sacred scripture. To deny that is to either be completely and willfully ignorant (I'm not trying to be mean) or hardened heart delusional. If the church needed the bible first, one must admit (unless they are completely stupid) the church never existed until the apostles wrote some of it down, which was quite a bit later. If the church needed the bible to practice the faith (and no one could read by the way, very very few, and no one ever could afford a bible until recently after the advent of the printing press) then the faith wasn't practiced at all, because they had no bible to guide them.

You kidding me, right? Scriptures will always take precedence over tradition.
The "universal" church practiced tradition while the apstles were alive and the NT was being written. After that, tradition has to be compared to what the apostles teached to be of any value, otherwise is just mythology with no basis in scripture. I thought we had discussed this already.

 

[icedtea]

Well our Chief builder is Christ

Ours too!

 

[Hentenza]

of course. i trust the consistent illumination of the past 2000 yrs, and i try to live in a manner that will allow me to see the Spirit's illumination in my own life -- but if htat illumination contradicts the illuminations of hte past then i must recognize it is wrong.

The past 2000 years worth of traditions will never equal 2000 years worth of scipture. Illumination comes from the Holy Spirit not from man.