The Scriptures and Authority

[StTherese]

Actually the annointing in us teaches us. For everyone who has the Spirit of God in them are indeed the church..

So God is the author of confusion? Because that is what happens when we interpret the scriptures for ourselves....it causes division in beliefs. Why do you think we have so many different denominations of Christianity today? This can not be what He had intended. He wanted us to be of one mind and one body. You can not say that is true when we all believe different things.

 

[Rick Otto]

Don't project your confusion on us.
Division in beliefs have been there from the first & some of them are only about maturity, not veracity.
Of course we can say it's true & of course some variation is tolerable. There is some variation in every congregation.
You're being unrealistic.
Keep your ideal, but don't let it blind you to what's real.

 

[SpiritMeadow]

And that would be the body of believers.

It is what non-Catholics are alas forced to believe to maintain a basis for their faith...We are awaiting your return

 

[Hentenza]

It is what non-Catholics are alas forced to believe to maintain a basis for their faith...We are awaiting your return

And what Catholics refuse to believe to maintain a basis for their faith. We are awaiting His return also.

 

[Ormly]

Why do you think we have so many different denominations of Christianity today? This can not be what He had intended.

Simply because the message of the Kingdom of God got lost somewhere before the creeds were written.

The "church" at that time set itself up as the kingdom and not everyone agreed that "THAT" decision though by that time the people didn't realize the loss and from that time forward, the "organism" became an organization. Denominations were inevitible because God would always maintain a remnant of His Body of Christ. Enter Martin Luther to begin the much needed reformation.

 

[StTherese]

Simply because the message of the Kingdom of God got lost somewhere before the creeds were written.

I don't think so. Why would Christ institute a Church He knew would be lost within a few years....He promised that the gates of Hell would never prevail against it and He promised to always remain with us...do you think He broke His own promise?

The Church" at that time set itself up as the kingdom and not everyone agreed that "THAT" decision though by that time the people didn't realize the loss and from that time forward, the "organism" became an organization. Denominations were inevitible because God would always maintain a remnant of His Body of Christ.

With each new denomination the separation of His Body continues to grow...this can not be the will of God...He must have had another plan for His Church.

Enter Martin Luther to begin the much needed reformation.

OH, please.

You know, the Muslims say the same thing about Mohammed...

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

Enter Martin Luther to begin the much needed reformation.

And what Catholics refuse to believe to maintain a basis for their faith. We are awaiting His return also.

So are the Muslims

Btw, anyone know about this new Islamist Reformer? It was posted on the NCR board.

Sounds like the Martin Luther of Christianity.

http://foru.ms/t6295187-for-muslims-...had-manji.html

http://www.irshadmanji.com/

http://www.islam.tc/prophecies/jesus.html
I. Jesus (A.S.) In Islam

Muslims do believe that Isa (A.S.) was sent down as a Prophet of Allah (God), but he (Jesus) is not God or Lord, nor the son of God. Muslims do not believe that Isa (A.S.), also known as Jesus by Christians and others, is dead or was ever crucified. We believe that he was raised to heaven and is there, and will descend at the appointed time, end all wars, and bring peace to the world.

 

[Dorothea]

So are the Muslims

Btw, anyone know about this new Islamist Reformer? It was posted on the NCR board.

Sounds like the Martin Luther of Christianity.

http://foru.ms/t6295187-for-muslims-...had-manji.html

http://www.irshadmanji.com/

http://www.islam.tc/prophecies/jesus.html
I. Jesus (A.S.) In Islam

Muslims do believe that Isa (A.S.) was sent down as a Prophet of Allah (God), but he (Jesus) is not God or Lord, nor the son of God. Muslims do not believe that Isa (A.S.), also known as Jesus by Christians and others, is dead or was ever crucified. We believe that he was raised to heaven and is there, and will descend at the appointed time, end all wars, and bring peace to the world.

Yes, I've seen her on the Glenn Beck show.

 

[Ormly]

I don't think so. Why would Christ institute a Church He knew would be lost within a few years....

Did I say the church would be lost?? Perhaps you need read over again, for the first time, what I did say and not mis-represent my words.

He promised that the gates of Hell would never prevail against it and He promised to always remain with us...do you think He broke His own promise?

Again, I spoke concerning the message of the Kingdom of God getting lost in mix resulting in the great error of the historical church after the Apostlolic age..

With each new denomination the separation of His Body continues to grow...this can not be the will of God...He must have had another plan for His Church.

But it is the will of God anytime a "church" packages the message of the gospel and dispenses it in any way God hasn't sanctioned... and can't.

Quote:
Enter Martin Luther to begin the much needed reformation. .

OH, please.

You know, the Muslims say the same thing about Mohammed...

Really?? The Muslims weren't a people before Mohammed. Seems you are mistaken about that, as well.

 

[StTherese]

Did I say the church would be lost?? Perhaps you need read over again, for the first time, what I did say and not mis-represent my words.

You are claiming that the original Church that Christ established has been "lost" in mistranslations and for all these years God has been trying to get it back to the one that Jesus founded....I don't buy that. Jesus would not have instituted a Church that He knew would lead others into confusion...He built a Church upon "Rock" (aka...Peter) and promised the gates of Hell would never prevail against.

Again, I spoke concerning the message of the Kingdom of God getting lost in mix resulting in the great error of the historical church after the Apostlolic age..

What source do you get this info from?

But it is the will of God anytime a "church" packages the message of the gospel and dispenses it in any way God hasn't sanctioned... and can't.

My point exactly.

Really?? The Muslims weren't a people before Mohammed. Seems you are mistaken about that, as well.

And neither were the "Lutherans" before Luther, or the "Calvinist" before Calvin.....the list can go on.......

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

Just the Scriptures Ma'am, just the Scriptures.

 

[racer]

My point is when He said that, He was speaking of the existing scriptures...no?

Um . . . why would you say that? God exists outside of linear time does He not? The verse says that "all" Scripture is God breathed. That would mean any and all past Scriptures (OT), current Scriptures (some of Pauls writings were already being referred to as Scripture), any anything that God deemed Scripture after this particular verse.

He knew nothing of the NT or of Christianity for that matter...He did not know that the old law would be fulfilled by Jesus.

God did--it was His plan. Did you forget the part that said Scripture is God breathed--it's not a creation of invention of man.

You have to take things into context of when and under what circumstance it was written.

You need to do a little thinking for yourself and stop regurgitating the same old argument presented time and again by others before you. If you've noticed, this argument has pretty much gone to the wayside, because it has been refuted quite soundly.

We want to know what the intended message was of the inspired writers, not our own personal interpretation of it.

Then read the Bible and pray. If prayer and Scripture can lead you as far as the steps to your local RCC, it can lead you a bit further if you wish. Remember Augustine: he says that wisdom can easily be known by those who love it, seek for it, desire it, watch for it, think about it, care for it.The salvation of the mind and the way of happiness is pointed out by the concord of both Scriptures; . . . .

He says: may be able to comprehend with all saints what is the height, and length, and breadth, and depth, and to know the love of Christ, which passeth knowledge, that ye may be filled with all the fullness of God?"

So, as he asks, Could anything be more plainly expressed?

Just because something is written down does not make it true;

And your point? Our point is that because it was written down and preserved for us in writing, we can now verify whether or not what is taught or claimed to be Gospel is or isn't so. We are not simply taking somebody's word for it. God had the foresight to ensure this was done. Why else do you think he made sure it was written down and preserved for us?

the scriptures are true because they are inspired by God and passed down through His Church

You almost got it right, but you just can't help adding your own spin to the words of God. The Scriptures are true because they are God breathed. The men who wrote them down and compiled them into the bible were only writing untensils for God.

...the true meaning can get lost in personal interpretation...

Yes, and the only ones suffering from any delusions regarding that fact are the ones who have been convinced that since they have joined a particular church, they are no longer practicing personal interpretation--people, who used personal discernment of Scripture, intellect and private judgement to determine that they Church they have joined is the Church.

Scripture does not interpret scripture...the Church does.

People interpret Scipture, most pretty much make some errors in interpretation. And, nowhere do you find anyone quoting God bestowing the authority to interpret his words to an institution operated by men.

 

[racer]

So God is the author of confusion?

No. The confusion is the fault of human fallibility.

 

[Ormly]

You are claiming that the original Church that Christ established has been "lost" in mistranslations and for all these years God has been trying to get it back to the one that Jesus founded....I don't buy that. Jesus would not have instituted a Church that He knew would lead others into confusion...He built a Church upon "Rock" (aka...Peter) and promised the gates of Hell would never prevail against.

Again, you are [now wilfully] mis-representing my words.

I said the the message of the kingdom of God has been lost. The Church has never been the kingdom of God. Can we agree on that much? We can argue about the rest afterwards....

 

[StTherese]

Then read the Bible and pray. If prayer and Scripture can lead you as far as the steps to your local RCC, it can lead you a bit further if you wish. Remember Augustine: he says that wisdom can easily be known by those who love it, seek for it, desire it, watch for it, think about it, care for it.The salvation of the mind and the way of happiness is pointed out by the concord of both Scriptures; . . . .

Why would I want to go further than the full truth? In all my searching and prayer, I am just shown over and over again that the CC is the Church Christ instituted over 2000 years ago.

He says: may be able to comprehend with all saints what is the height, and length, and breadth, and depth, and to know the love of Christ, which passeth knowledge, that ye may be filled with all the fullness of God?"

That would mean that all believers are of one mind and one body...I don't see that with Protestantism.

And your point? Our point is that because it was written down and preserved for us in writing, we can now verify whether or not what is taught or claimed to be Gospel is or isn't so. We are not simply taking somebody's word for it. God had the foresight to ensure this was done. Why else do you think he made sure it was written down and preserved for us?

You are talking about a book that is more complicated than your average book. There is no guarantee that when you pray and read scripture that you will come to the correct interpretation of it. If that were the case, don't you think that all the different denominations and those who started a new "faith based tradition" would have all came to the same conclusion? But, they didn't. They all have differences in beliefs. Can they all be the 100% truth? No. There is only one truth and only one Church that Christ established which contains the fullness of truth.
Are all protestant denominations of one mind? Do they all believe the same thing? Do they all interpret scripture the same way?

The Scriptures are true because they are God breathed. The men who wrote them down and compiled them into the bible were only writing untensils for God.

I agree.

Yes, and the only ones suffering from any delusions regarding that fact are the ones who have been convinced that since they have joined a particular church, they are no longer practicing personal interpretation--people, who used personal discernment of Scripture, intellect and private judgement to determine that they Church they have joined is the Church.

So then explain why there are different interpretations within protestant denominations? What does it mean to be of one mind?

People

interpret Scipture, most pretty much make some errors in interpretation. And, nowhere do you find anyone quoting God bestowing the authority to interpret his words to an institution operated by men.

Well, Christ instituted a Church in which He founded upon "Rock" (Peter). He gave him the "keys to the kingdom of heaven". He also said to him, "what you bind on earth will be bound in heaven." To the apostles He gave the power to bind and loose and to forgive sin...
Did you read that part in your Bible?

Do you not believe Christ said those things?

The only way to read the Bible and interpret scripture without making errors in interpretation is to read it with the knowledge of the author's intended message...the only way to know this is through history...history shows that this message has been passed down to us through Christ's Church in whom He gave authority (keys to the kingdom of Heaven) and in whom He said..."what you bind on earth, will be bound in heaven...."

 

[Ormly]

[/color][/color][/size]
Why would I want to go further than the full truth? In all my searching and prayer, I am just shown over and over again that the CC is the Church Christ instituted over 2000 years ago.

That's a sad commentary. I would never tell anyone that...

That would mean that all believers are of one mind and one body...I don't see that with Protestantism.

.... I don't either.

You are talking about a book that is more complicated than your average book. There is no guarantee that when you pray and read scripture that you will come to the correct interpretation of it.

Meaning someone must interpret the word of it to us. Is that it? Maybe a pope or someone?

Well, Christ instituted a Church in which He founded upon "Rock" (Peter). He gave him the "keys to the kingdom of heaven". He also said to him, "what you bind on earth will be bound in heaven." To the apostles He gave the power to bind and loose and to forgive sin...
Did you read that part in your Bible?

Did you read the part where it is the "Rock" of revelation given to Peter upon which Christ established His Church. You will find that in the context of the gospel.

The only way to read the Bible and interpret scripture without making errors in interpretation is to read it with the knowledge of the author's intended message...the only way to know this is through history...history shows that this message has been passed down to us through Christ's Church in whom He gave authority .......

Which is neither the organizational Eastern CC nor the RCC. It is obvious that they aren't.

And since the Bible is revelational truth, it must be understood by revelation and that by the Holy Spirit who will guide you into all the truth. Will you deny that??


BTW, Before the RCC came about there were several bishops of Rome. Which one was Peter's successor?

 

[StTherese]

Did you read the part where it is the "Rock" of revelation given to Peter upon which Christ established His Church. You will find that in the context of the gospel.

Actually, Jesus had just renamed him Peter "Rock", from Simon. Why would He rename him "Rock" if he was not the "Rock" He was speaking of?
This is my point of misinterpretations......

Which is neither the organizational Eastern CC nor the RCC. It is obvious that they aren't.

What makes it so obvious to you? It is pretty obvious to me that it IS the Church Christ established.

And since the Bible is revelational truth, it must be understood by revelation and that by the Holy Spirit who will guide you into all the truth. Will you deny that??

The Holy Spirit guides the CC into all truth...we individually are not given the same authority as was given to the apostles and their successors.

BTW, Before the RCC came about there were several bishops of Rome. Which one was Peter's successor?

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/12272b.htm


The word "Catholic" was applied to the Church that was already in existence. It was coined by a bishop, Ignatius of Antioch (who was previously student of the Apostle John) in a letter he wrote in which Catholic was used to denote all Christians.

 

[racer]

Why would I want to go further than the full truth?

Who said anything about going further than the full truth? Is that even possible? I've merely shown you where Augustine believe that the "fullness" of truth can be found in the Scriptures.

In all my searching and prayer, I am just shown over and over again that the CC is the Church Christ instituted over 2000 years ago.

In all my searching and prayer, I find differently. So, why do you think you're right and I'm wrong? BTW, you've just admitted that you've engaged in personal interpretation by determining that your Church is the Church Christ instituted 2000 years ago.

That would mean that all believers are of one mind and one body...I don't see that with Protestantism.

That's because Protestantism is not a "single" denomination. Orthodoxy and Catholocism are two of the many different churches that exist today--no matter what they may claim for themselves.

You are talking about a book that is more complicated than your average book.

And, you presume I don't know this . . . why exactly? An algebra book is more complicated that an basic math book, and a Calculus book is likely more complicated than an algebra book. That does not nessecitate the conclusion that one can not make sense of it. Do we need guidance and instruction? Yes. Nobody here denies the "teaching" authority of the church.

There is no guarantee that when you pray and read scripture that you will come to the correct interpretation of it.

Who says there is? Not God, nor did God say that we could look to any particular church to get it 100% correctly, either. Because, there is no way around engaging your own interpretation, even if it is to determine that the RCC is the one true church. You, just as I have, have employed private judgement when arriving at your beliefs. Therefore, you are just as capable of being wrong as am I.

If that were the case, don't you think that all the different denominations and those who started a new "faith based tradition" would have all came to the same conclusion?

All I or "St. Augustine" are arguing is that the fullness of truth can be obtained--not that it always would be. Nobody has that guarantee. That's why we continue to pray and continue to study--forever learning.

Do you really think God cares that we get it all 100% correct or that we may not attend the church that supposedly possesses the whole truth?

But, they didn't. They all have differences in beliefs.

Yep, because they are all human and subject to human fallibility--as is the RCC and the EOC.

Can they all be the 100% truth? No.

Nobody claims 100% truth but the RCC and the EOC, and since we know they're not in complete agreement with each other, we can bet one of them is wrong. Which do you propose it is?

There is only one truth and only one Church that Christ established which contains the fullness of truth.

But, according to St. Augustine, a father and Doctor of the Catholic church taught that the Scripture contains the fullness of truth, and that all who seek it, care for it, love it, etc . . . can have it. He does not say at what point in our lives we may obtain it or that we for certain will, only that we can. It all depends upon the amount of faith we place in God and His ability to lead us individually to His truth. Do you really think He only guides individually until we discover the RCC, then abandons us at the door, leaving the rest of our guidance to the RCC?

Are all protestant denominations of one mind? Do they all believe the same thing? Do they all interpret scripture the same way?

Are the RCC, EOC, and the Church of the Latter Day Saints in complete agreement on Church Doctrine? Just as Protestants adhere to Sola Scriptura, the churches I've asked you assert that they are the "one true church" established by Christ and that they possess the "fullness of truth." Do you believe this fact discredits the assertions of your faith?

So then explain why there are different interpretations within protestant denominations? What does it mean to be of one mind?

Because of two words--human fallibility. This, also, explains why the RCC and EOC have gotten a few things wrong.

Well, Christ instituted a Church in which He founded upon "Rock" (Peter).

Says you and the RCC. Saying this to reassure yourself that you belong to the right church doesn't sway anybody, else. Such statements are a waste of time and pointless--unless you intend to get off into the long drawn out debates as to why your assertions are wrong.

He gave him the "keys to the kingdom of heaven".

Again, Let me refer you to St. Augustine:

. . . . After all, it isn’t just one man that received these keys, but the Church in its unity. So this is the reason for Peter’s acknowledged pre–eminence, that he stood for the Church’s universality and unity, when he was told, ‘To you I am entrusting,’ what has in fact been entrusted to all.

I mean, to show you that it is the Church which has received the keys of the kingdom of heaven, listen to what the Lord says in another place to all his apostles: ‘Receive the Holy Spirit;’ and straightway, ‘Whose sins you forgive, they will be forgiven them; whose sins you retain, they will be retained’ (Jn 20:22-23). This refers to the keys, about which it is said, ‘whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven, and whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven’ (Mt 16:19). But that was said to Peter. To show you that Peter at that time stood for the universal Church, listen to what is said to him, what is said to all the faithful, the saints: ‘If your brother sins against you, correct him between you and himself alone’ (John Rotelle, Ed., The Works of Saint Augustine (Hyde Park: New City, 1994), Sermons, III/8 (273-305A), On the Saints, Sermon 295.1-3, pp. 197-198).

So, do you, also, know more than Augustine?

He also said to him, "what you bind on earth will be bound in heaven." To the apostles He gave the power to bind and loose and to forgive sin...

Did you read that part in your Bible?

Yep, I read that in Matt 16:18. By chance have your read Matt 18:18 where He bestows the same authority on the other eleven apostles?

Do you not believe Christ said those things?

Please don’t condescend. We both know what Jesus did and didn’t say.

The only way to read the Bible and interpret scripture without making errors in interpretation is to read it with the knowledge of the author's intended message...the only way to know this is through history...history shows that this message has been passed down to us through Christ's Church in whom He gave authority (keys to the kingdom of Heaven) and in whom He said..."what you bind on earth, will be bound in heaven...."

Well, you might want to read what some of the ECFs actually did say for yourself, instead of simply taking your churches word for it.

 

[Ormly]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ormly
Did you read the part where it is the "Rock" of revelation given to Peter upon which Christ established His Church. You will find that in the context of the gospel.

Actually, Jesus had just renamed him Peter "Rock", from Simon. Why would He rename him "Rock" if he was not the "Rock" He was speaking of?
This is my point of misinterpretations......

How can Jesus be the Rock and Peter, at the same time?

Again, the "Rock" of revelation concerning Christ in Jesus, was what Jesus saw in Peter. Peter was indeed the only one in the bunch who began to understand what the issues were and that was very little.

The name Peter means "part of a larger rock. Think about it. Peter was wimp, a denier. Even after Pentecost he was wishy washy until Paul straightened him out on a few issues. Peter at one time was even used by Satan and suffered the rebuke of Jesus.

No, This thing of the ECC and RCC as being descendent of the Christ Jesus was something conjured up well after the Apostolic Church ceased to exist. That's history no one should objectively need to explain nor defend.

Quote:
Which is neither the organizational Eastern CC nor the RCC. It is obvious that they aren't.
What makes it so obvious to you? It is pretty obvious to me that it IS the Church Christ established.

How can you even think that in light of the atrocities propagated from behind its "closed doors"? Ever read "Foxes Book of Martyrs"? Do you really need the history of the RCC explained to you?

Quote:

And since the Bible is revelational truth, it must be understood by revelation and that by the Holy Spirit who will guide you into all the truth. Will you deny that??
The Holy Spirit guides the CC into all truth...we individually are not given the same authority as was given to the apostles and their successors.

Who sez except those you revere as the church. Why don't you investigate as to how it was they came to such a disasterous reasoning?

BTW, Before the RCC came about there were several bishops of Rome. Which one was Peter's successor?

You did not answer this last part.

 

[racer]

You are talking about a book that is more complicated than your average book. There is no guarantee that when you pray and read scripture that you will come to the correct interpretation of it. If that were the case, don't you think that all the different denominations and those who started a new "faith based tradition" would have all came to the same conclusion? But, they didn't. They all have differences in beliefs. Can they all be the 100% truth? No. There is only one truth and only one Church that Christ established which contains the fullness of truth.

Here's something else Augustine said:

http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/15011.htm

Chapter 37.—How God Enlightens Every Person.

That statement, therefore, which occurs in the gospel, "That was the true Light, which lights every one that comes into the world," John 1:9 has this meaning, that no man is illuminated except with that Light of the truth, which is God; so that no person must think that he is enlightened by him whom he listens to as a learner, although that instructor happen to be—I will not say, any great man—but even an angel himself. For the word of truth is applied to man externally by the ministry of a bodily voice, but yet "neither is he that plants any thing, neither he that waters; but God that gives the increase." 1 Corinthians 3:7 Man indeed hears the speaker, be he man or angel, but in order that he may perceive and know that what is said is true, his mind is internally besprinkled with that light which remains for ever, and which shines even in darkness. But just as the sun is not seen by the blind, though they are clothed as it were with its rays, so is the light of truth not understood by the darkness of folly.