Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
LOL!
And you know all this because the HS told you!
THe problem describing itself?
Again you claim to an answer given somewhere else. Cite one!It's been tried numerous times.
I don't think you're open to even considering it.
Well, Whoopdedoo, none of this is at all new. The most one can garner from the above articles is the statement from the Archbishop of Canterbury, Colin Rowe that, "(this issue) raised very serious questions". In fact, the numerous divorces of of Henry VIII also raised "very serious questions" in its day, but the RCC managed to survive quite nicely, thank you, and maintains that it is not divided, nor was the Anglican Communion divided.
We don't deny that even the interpretations have to be understood (interpreted) by the individual for that individual to honestly believe them.
And the way we feels is fit to interpret is by using scripture to define itself thru multiple uses & references about a difficult word or phrase.
Same way a dictionary works.
Same way a dictionary works.
I vote that the "norm" we should use for inter-faith dialogue is the first 7 ecumenical councils as well as scripture. Anyone else with me?
I vote that the "norm" we should use for inter-faith dialogue is the first 7 ecumenical councils as well as scripture. Anyone else with me?
Why not Scripture?I vote that the "norm" we should use for inter-faith dialogue is the first 7 ecumenical councils as well as scripture. Anyone else with me?
What's it mean that Councils are the norm for Scripture?
... if the Councils are the rule - and Scriptures must agree with such.
Or is Scripture the rule - and the Councils are to agree with such?
You can't have TWO equal riders of a horse, you can't have TWO equal drivers of a car.
IMO, I'd get a lot of credence to the Councils as a sound interpretation and application of Scripture (but then I tend to embrace Sola Scriptura) but I would place God above man, Gods' words above our words - and thus Scripture above Councils. Are the Councils accountable to Scripture or Scripture accountable to the 7 Councils?
Not much help with the distinctive RCC DOGMAS - the issues of the highest level that make the RCC the RCC: Purgatory, Transubstantiation, the INFALLIABILITY of the Pope in the city of Rome, the Assumption of Mary, the Immaculate Conception of Mary, etc. But of some significance to the EO. And to the OO if we're only looking at the first 4.
.
We don't deny that even the interpretations have to be understood (interpreted) by the individual for that individual to honestly believe them.
And the way we feels is fit to interpret is by using scripture to define itself thru multiple uses & references about a difficult word or phrase.
Same way a dictionary works.
But why not just use Scripture to begin with?The non-ecuemenical councils (after 1054) may be dismissed along the same lines that we dismiss LDS. If Roman Catholics would like to defend their councils, please have at it. If you don't, then obviously you can't.
What has to be shown is contradictions, if any, between the first 7 and scripture. Then, the decision about which to follow becomes easier.
IF those Councils are the norm for Scripture, then that would make us all Eastern Orthodox.....
Most Christians would be united - with the world's Catholics being converted to Orthodoxy. Personally, I would not lament that, lol - I think it would be a general improvement.
I vote that the "norm" we should use for inter-faith dialogue is the first 7 ecumenical councils as well as scripture. Anyone else with me?
False analogy.... if the Councils are the rule - and Scriptures must agree with such.
Or is Scripture the rule - and the Councils are to agree with such?
You can't have TWO equal riders of a horse, you can't have TWO equal drivers of a car.
The non-ecuemenical councils (after 1054) may be dismissed along the same lines that we dismiss LDS. If Roman Catholics would like to defend their councils, please have at it. If you don't, then obviously you can't.
What has to be shown is contradictions, if any, between the first 7 and scripture. Then, the decision about which to follow becomes easier.
But why not just use Scripture to begin with?
That's what I'm talkin about!
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?