What is the pillar and foundation of truth?

[racer]

Exactly. If the church is a "worldwide family of believers" with so many various interpretations of scripture, then how in the world could that be considered the "pillar and foundation" when its "truth" is really a hodgepodge of beliefs---- the variety of which is only limited by the number of churches and individuals. If you don't like the "truth" taught in one church, you can go to the "truth" in another church then another and another and another. Finally, you get to the real "truth"---you stay at home and decide for yourself what the "truth" is---and tell everyone on christian message boards how silly the idea of a very real church is.

Sound silly and illogical? Tell God. He supposedly invented the idea.

So, I'm asking you again, do you assert that Christianity is not a worldwide faith?

 

[racer]

Christians establish Christianity and the establishment of Christianity. It does not matter if you use the word institution or establishment. They both imply the samething. They both imply a community.

There can be no Christian establishment with out the individual Christian.

Peace

But, the basic argument amongst us is visual insitution vs. spiritual body of Christ. Your argument now appears to be more in agreement with ours than previous arguments--made by others, not necessarily you.

 

[racer]

Clearly the household as already mentioned above in Greek, is not about the ppl, nor the building...but the household is the [pillar] truth.

God dwells, and where He dwells there is a perfect truth.

Buildings, groups...etc. None of which hold that truth. But where God dwells.

Therefore, what Christ established and Ignatius penned Catholic is where that truth resides. [It is obvious it was not his idea to name the Church Catholic, but by what he was already taught. which was by the hands of the Apostles]

And to know who today has that truth, let us trace the roots of our established doctrines.


It is the doctrines Christ set down on HIS men who carried the Gospels and teachings and 'feeding' the sheep.

The sheep [laity] are not without error. The sheep need fed.
SO we should scratch the laity off the list.

The building is not alive to teach, scratch that off.

The Apostles have died leaving what they taught as truth to someone...BINGO.

What is left?

The Magisterium, [successors of the Apostles] who were told to receive the Spirit, and Peter told to feed the sheep.

Outside of the living teachings, nothing would have continued into today.

How else would we all be sitting here discussing the written words if living men did not carry them to our time?

And if living men carried them to our time, then they all came from the line of the Apostles.

Where Truth dwells, is the household of the Lord.

Therefore the first Church was the HOUSEHOLD of the Lord, and the gates of hell shall NOT prevail against that foundation.

This is what has been held for centuries...and centuries.

ONE [singular] Holy [sacred] Catholic [Universal in one mindedness], Apostolic [line of successors] Church. [Magisterium, Tradition, Scripture...and the sheep who are being FED]

WA,

Long time no see! Howuvya been? How are the pets? I pray all are well.

 

[racer]

Clearly the household as already mentioned above in Greek, is not about the ppl, nor the building...but the household is the [pillar] truth.

I respectfully disagree. It has clearly been shown that "household," is the family of believers--therefore it is the ppl who comprise the "pillar."

God dwells, and where He dwells there is a perfect truth.

He dwells in my heart . . . do you stand by this assertion?

2Cr 3:3; [Forasmuch as ye are] manifestly declared to be the epistle of Christ ministered by us, written not with ink, but with the Spirit of the living God; not in tables of stone, but in fleshy tables of the heart.
​

Buildings, groups...etc. None of which hold that truth. But where God dwells.

We agree--pretty much. Except you would probably limit your argument to the ppl who make up the household of God. I believe it applies to individual Christians as well>

Therefore, what Christ established and Ignatius penned Catholic is where that truth resides.

Since we know he obvious did not use catholic in the sense it is use by Catholics today, what do you understand him to be saying here?

And to know who today has that truth, let us trace the roots of our established doctrines.

How about we just read the written word of God. You could start with reading the bottom of your posts--the verses about knocking and seeking.

It is the doctrines Christ set down on HIS men who carried the Gospels and teachings and 'feeding' the sheep.

The doctrines we are able to identify because they have been preserved for us in writing.

The sheep [laity] are not without error. The sheep need fed.

The sheep are not only the laity, but also the teachers and leaders. They need feeding also.

SO we should scratch the laity off the list.

No we should not. I refer you back to 2Cr 3:3.

The building is not alive to teach, scratch that off.

This I agree with.

The Apostles have died leaving what they taught as truth to someone...BINGO.

Yep . . . with the church universal.

What is left?

All of us.

The Magisterium, [successors of the Apostles] who were told to receive the Spirit, and Peter told to feed the sheep.

And all of Christianity.

Outside of the living teachings, nothing would have continued into today.

That is why the Church was established and why the teachings were preserved in writing--so, they would continue on as God delivered them some 2000+ years ago.

How else would we all be sitting here discussing the written words if living men did not carry them to our time?

Well, once they were put in writing, it was pretty much a guarantee that even if the original teachers all parished, the teachings would continue to exist. Maybe, they would have remained stored somewhere in clay pots in caves only to be discovered centuries later . . . .

And if living men carried them to our time, then they all came from the line of the Apostles.

Even if the teachings were misplaced or hidden in clay pots, having been written by living men/Apostles and not discovered until centuries later by some sheppard boy, they still came from Jesus through a line of Apostles.

Where Truth dwells, is the household of the Lord.

Truth exists everywhere not just in the household of the Lord.

 

[lionroar0]

But, the basic argument amongst us is visual insitution vs. spiritual body of Christ. Your argument now appears to be more in agreement with ours than previous arguments--made by others, not necessarily you.

It's a matter of translation from Cathocalese to protestanese.

It's not a matter visual instituion vs spiritual body. Christianity is visible through out it's many churches. All of the different churches are visible.

This is part of what Catholics call the mystical body of Christ.

We don't deny that there is a spiritual body. In addition there is also the physical church. One that is in union in faith and practice. This is where the difference is.


Peace

 

[ThisRock]

I limit my knowledge of what the truth is to what is provided to me in the Bible. It is the only source to which I can turn that is known to be infallible, God breathed, and virtually unchanged for 2000 years. It's not some elusive oral tradition that even those who espouse it can not clearly identify for me.

Fine, that's your opinion and decision. Repeat---YOUR opinion and decision. Just don't try to pretend the practice is biblical and please don't try to pretend that your decisions are in any way, shape or form connected to the passage being discussed here.

Why don't you trust the very bible you say you hold so dearly???

Why don't you trust the religion you say you follow?

Is it because it is so much easier to sit home and decide for yourself what that "source of truth" says?

Tell me something, knowing how important God's Truth is what would his reasoning have been for providing us with an incomplete written text and leave the rest to be passed on by word of mouth only?

Why would God go against everything He had done before and suddenly put everything into written form?

If He put everything into written form, Why would He NOT just come out and say it instead of saying the complete opposite???

If He meant what you say He meant----Why did He not tell us this important point??????

 

[ThisRock]

Originally Posted by ThisRock
Exactly. If the church is a "worldwide family of believers" with so many various interpretations of scripture, then how in the world could that be considered the "pillar and foundation" when its "truth" is really a hodgepodge of beliefs---- the variety of which is only limited by the number of churches and individuals. If you don't like the "truth" taught in one church, you can go to the "truth" in another church then another and another and another. Finally, you get to the real "truth"---you stay at home and decide for yourself what the "truth" is---and tell everyone on christian message boards how silly the idea of a very real church is.Sound silly and illogical? Tell God. He supposedly invented the idea.

So, I'm asking you again, do you assert that Christianity is not a worldwide faith?

Silliness and obfuscation. Difficult points are raised here. Care to address them?

 

[ThisRock]

I respectfully disagree. It has clearly been shown that "household," is the family of believers--therefore it is the ppl who comprise the "pillar."

It hasn't even been close to being "clearly shown". In fact, it's illogical and incongruous with the bible passage we are discussing.

Let's read the bible. Let's stop taking one passage out of context and then twisting it to mean what we want it to mean.

The letters to Timothy and Titus are called the "pastoral letters" because they are letters to bishops of the church and are about church rules, governance and adherence to orthodoxy.

Don't take my word for it-----READ THEM.

1 This saying is trustworthy: whoever aspires to the office of bishop desires a noble task.

2 Therefore, a bishop must be irreproachable, married only once, temperate, self-controlled, decent, hospitable, able to teach,

3 not a drunkard, not aggressive, but gentle, not contentious, not a lover of money.

4 He must manage his own household well, keeping his children under control with perfect dignity;

5 for if a man does not know how to manage his own household, how can he take care of the church of God?

6 He should not be a recent convert, so that he may not become conceited and thus incur the devil's punishment.

7 He must also have a good reputation among outsiders, so that he may not fall into disgrace, the devil's trap.

8 Similarly, deacons must be dignified, not deceitful, not addicted to drink, not greedy for sordid gain,

9 holding fast to the mystery of the faith with a clear conscience.

10 Moreover, they should be tested first; then, if there is nothing against them, let them serve as deacons.

11 Women, similarly, should be dignified, not slanderers, but temperate and faithful in everything.

12 Deacons may be married only once and must manage their children and their households well.

13 Thus those who serve well as deacons gain good standing and much confidence in their faith in Christ Jesus.

14 I am writing you about these matters, although I hope to visit you soon.

15 But if I should be delayed, you should know how to behave in the household of God, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and foundation of truth.

16 Undeniably great is the mystery of devotion, Who was manifested in the flesh, vindicated in the spirit, seen by angels, proclaimed to the Gentiles, believed in throughout the world, taken up in glory.


Tolle lege! Tolle lege!

 

[racer]

Fine, that's your opinion and decision. Repeat---YOUR opinion and decision.

It is the belief (and I never presented as certain biblical truth) which I have arrived at after reading Scripture, instruction from my church, and studying the ECFs. I have come to believe the way I do employee the same process you have come to your beliefs. Gee, why are you so threatened by my beliefs?

Just don't try to pretend the practice is biblical

and please don't try to pretend that your decisions are in any way, shape or form connected to the passage being discussed here.

The burden of proof is upon you. You can't just spout things--even if you use read print--and expect that people take your word for it when you don't even bother substantiating your claims with any type of evidence.




But, I'm just curious, what about this statement are you asserting is not biblical:

I limit my knowledge of what the truth is to what is provided to me in the Bible. It is the only source to which I can turn that is known to be infallible, God breathed, and virtually unchanged for 2000 years. It's not some elusive oral tradition that even those who espouse it can not clearly identify for me.​

What about that statement implies that I'm trying to pass it off as any type of biblical teaching or truth? Certainly the fact that Scripture is God breathed is biblical. But, I don't need to tell you that do I?

Why don't you trust the very bible you say you hold so dearly???

Why don't you trust the religion you say you follow?

Why don't you trust God? Trust His ability to lead you to truth without a particular denomination defining what's truth for you?

Is it because it is so much easier to sit home and decide for yourself what that "source of truth" says?

Oh, so that's how you've been educated on the faith? So, naturally you assume that all other Christians have done the same? Now I understand your problem . . . .

Why would God go against everything He had done before and suddenly put everything into written form?

He wouldn't and He didn't.

If He put everything into written form, Why would He NOT just come out and say it instead of saying the complete opposite???

He certainly never said the complete opposite.

You know, your tactics here are very common and easily identified by all who read. When one answers questions with questions, we all know it's because 1) he can't answer the question, or 2) answering the question will only solidify his opponents arguments.

After, this long and fruitless exchange you and I have "enjoyed," your motives are very clear.

If He meant what you say He meant----Why did He not tell us this important point??????

He told us all Scripture is given by inspiration of the Holy Spirit. Where does anybody say that about tradition?

 

[racer]

Silliness and obfuscation. Difficult points are raised here. Care to address them?

What points have you bothered addressing or refuting? Good grief, how stupid do you believe the people participating in this forum are?

You have not refuted one single point I've made. I assume that you are an intelligent person by your preference of using big words. Do something constructive with your intelligence, and show us you can substantiate even one of your ridiculous assertions.

 

[racer]

It hasn't even been close to being "clearly shown". In fact, it's illogical and incongruous with the bible passage we are discussing.

Wait a minute, you deny this: It has clearly been shown that "household," is the family of believers--therefore it is the ppl who comprise the "pillar."

Let's read the bible.

Yes, let's do--read the Bible.

Let's stop taking one passage out of context and then twisting it to mean what we want it to mean.

You first.

The letters to Timothy and Titus are called the "pastoral letters" because they are letters to bishops of the church and are about church rules, governance and adherence to orthodoxy.

The what to Timothy and Titus? Oh, the LETTERS. The Bishops of the Church were instructed in WRITING! Imagine that . . . for all to read and know. They were given church rules of governance and rules for adherence to orthodoxy in written form. Why pray tell?

Don't take my word for it-----READ THEM.

That I can do. It's those other elusive (T)radtions of which you speak, but can not identify or direct me to for which I'm left to take your word.

1

This saying is trustworthy: whoever aspires to the office of bishop desires a noble task.

Rom 12:3; For I say, through the grace given unto me, to every man that is among you, not to think [of himself] more highly than he ought to think; but to think soberly, according as God hath dealt to every man the measure of faith.

Rom 12:4; For as we have many members in one body, and all members have not the same office:

Rom 12:5; So we, [being] many, are one body in Christ, and every one members one of another.

Rom 12:6; Having then gifts differing according to the grace that is given to us, whether prophecy, [let us prophesy] according to the proportion of faith;

Rom 12:7; Or ministry, [let us wait] on [our] ministering: or he that teacheth, on teaching;

Rom 12:8; Or he that exhorteth, on exhortation: he that giveth, [let him do it] with simplicity; he that ruleth, with diligence; he that sheweth mercy, with cheerfulness.

See it in full context above.

2 Therefore, a bishop must be irreproachable, married only once, temperate, self-controlled, decent, hospitable, able to teach,

Okay . . . I agree. What's your point?

3

not a drunkard, not aggressive, but gentle, not contentious, not a lover of money.

Yes, dagnabbit, we know how a bishop must behave because we have been blessed with Scripture given to us by inspiration of the Holy Spirit.

4

He must manage his own household well, keeping his children under control with perfect dignity;

Wondering how you think this disproves or discredits my arguments . . . .

5

for if a man does not know how to manage his own household, how can he take care of the church of God?

Still wondering . . . . . . .

6

He should not be a recent convert, so that he may not become conceited and thus incur the devil's punishment.

How does this even apply to our discussion?

7

He must also have a good reputation among outsiders, so that he may not fall into disgrace, the devil's trap.

8 Similarly, deacons must be dignified, not deceitful, not addicted to drink, not greedy for sordid gain,

9 holding fast to the mystery of the faith with a clear conscience.

10 Moreover, they should be tested first; then, if there is nothing against them, let them serve as deacons.

11 Women, similarly, should be dignified, not slanderers, but temperate and faithful in everything.

12 Deacons may be married only once and must manage their children and their households well.

13 Thus those who serve well as deacons gain good standing and much confidence in their faith in Christ Jesus.

14 I am writing you about these matters, although I hope to visit you soon.

15 But if I should be delayed, you should know how to behave in the household of God, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and foundation of truth.

16 Undeniably great is the mystery of devotion, Who was manifested in the flesh, vindicated in the spirit, seen by angels, proclaimed to the Gentiles, believed in throughout the world, taken up in glory.

Yep, Glory to God! Thanks be for having Holy Scripture at our disposal so that we may know how people, laity and ministers, are to behave in the household of God. It is for this reason these people can be held accountable for their actions.

Hmmmm . . . is it really a wonder why some work so hard to dismiss the authority of Scripture and its significance?

Tolle lege! Tolle lege!

Yeah, sure, whatever . . . . . .

 

[ThisRock]

You agree that the letter to Timothy is directly about a very real church as opposed to a shapeless idea of a family of believers but you ask "What's the point?"








You read the background chapter to that verse and see it is about church governance and you ask "How does this even apply to our discussion?"







Anyone else wanna give the "Family of Believers is the Pillar and Foundation of Truth" argument a shot?

Anyone else feel like attempting to prove that Paul writes "truth" to mean scripture ONLY?

Anyone else want to try to prove that Paul writes "pillar and foundation" to mean "in 300 years there will be a collection of scripture called "The Bible" and this will be your only guidance" ?

"The church is the pillar and foundation of truth."

 

[racer]

You agree that the letter to Timothy is directly about a very real church as opposed to a shapeless idea of a family of believers but you ask "What's the point?"

What shapeless idea of a family of believers? That is your totally wrong and misleading understanding of "spiritual body of beleivers." I'm not talking about any shapeless anything.

You might get with the discussion and try your best to stay on topic.

You read the background chapter to that verse and see it is about church governance and you ask "How does this even apply to our discussion?"

Uh, yeah! And if you think I'm as dense as your response implies, help me out here and explain to me how it addresses our discussion.

Anyone else wanna give the "Family of Believers is the Pillar and Foundation of Truth" argument a shot?

Anyone else? How about you give it a try? Back up all your big talk.

Anyone else feel like attempting to prove that Paul writes "truth" to mean scripture ONLY?

Who's trying to prove that? Is that what you've been arguing? Gee, I guess I missed . . . .

Anyone else want to try to prove that Paul writes "pillar and foundation" to mean "in 300 years there will be a collection of scripture called "The Bible" and this will be your only guidance" ?

Geewillickers! Is that what you've been saying all along? I think you've been sleeping through Catechism.

"

The church is the pillar and foundation of truth."

Okay, so where've you been during the last 14 or 15 pages of discussion? Let me go back to page two for you and show you once again how "household" is defined:

Main Entry: 1house·hold ​

Pronunciation: 'haus-"hOld, 'hau-"sOld​

Function: noun​

: those who dwell under the same roof and compose a family; also : a social unit composed of those living together in the same dwelling ​

It is the "family" which makes up the household of God. Family includes all members, not just the "head of household."

 

[racer]

Here’s another response I’ve posted in the past:

Eph 3:3 How that by revelation he made known unto me the mystery; (as I wrote afore in few words,

Eph 3:4 Whereby, when ye read, ye may understand my knowledge in the mystery of Christ)

Eph 3:5 Which in other ages was not made known unto the sons of men, as it is now revealed unto his holy apostles and prophets by the Spirit;

Eph 3:14 For this cause I bow my knees unto the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ,

Eph 3:16 That he would grant you, according to the riches of his glory, to be strengthened with might by his Spirit in the inner man;

Eph 3:18 May be able to comprehend with all saints what [is] the breadth, and length, and depth, and height;

Eph 3:19 And to know the love of Christ, which passeth knowledge, that ye might be filled with all the fulness of God.

Scripture is the guidebook the Church must follow when teaching the Gospel. It was delivered orally for teaching purposes and for those who could not read for themselves and in written form to serve as a guide for instruction and preservation.

I really can not fathom how you would use these passages in your argument. They serve as good argument in favor of Sola Scriptura. You talk about the authority of the Church when at the very beginning you have Paul and Barnabas going to the Church to correct it.

Act 15:2 When therefore Paul and Barnabas had no small dissension and disputation with them, they determined that Paul and Barnabas, and certain other of them, should go up to Jerusalem unto the apostles and elders about this question.

Act 15: 4 And when they were come to Jerusalem, they were received of the church, and [of] the apostles and elders, and they declared all things that God had done with them.

The Church listened to Paul and Barnabas and adjusted their teaching accordingly. Now, how did the Church choose to deliver it’s decisions? Well, let’s just look:

Act 15:20 But that we write unto them, that they abstain from pollutions of idols, and [from] fornication, and [from] things strangled, and [from] blood.

Act 15:23 And they wrote [letters] by them after this manner; The apostles and elders and brethren [send] greeting unto the brethren which are of the Gentiles in Antioch and Syria and Cilicia:

Act 15:24 Forasmuch as we have heard, that certain which went out from us have troubled you with words, subverting your souls, saying, [Ye must] be circumcised, and keep the law: to whom we gave no [such] commandment

Act 15:25 It seemed good unto us, being assembled with one accord, to send chosen men unto you with our beloved Barnabas and Paul

Act 15:26 Men that have hazarded their lives for the name of our Lord Jesus Christ.

Act 15:17 We have sent therefore Judas and Silas, who shall also tell [you] the same things by mouth.

Act 15:30 So when they were dismissed, they came to Antioch: and when they had gathered the multitude together, they delivered the epistle:

Act 15:31 [Which] when they had read, they rejoiced for the consolation.

Act 15:32 And Judas and Silas, being prophets also themselves, exhorted the brethren with many words, and confirmed [them].

Oral teachings solidify and clarify what is instructed in writing.

 

[CaliforniaJosiah]

Okay, so where've you been during the last 14 or 15 pages of discussion? Let me go back to page two for you and show you once again how "household" is defined:

Main Entry: 1house·hold ​

Pronunciation: 'haus-"hOld, 'hau-"sOld​

Function: noun​

: those who dwell under the same roof and compose a family; also : a social unit composed of those living together in the same dwelling ​

It is the "family" which makes up the household of God. Family includes all members, not just the "head of household."

And not the house itself...
A household is PEOPLE.

 

[racer]

These verses address the argument that I can't biblically support my assertion that since the laity are also "parts of the church/household of God," I can't argue they are parts of the "pillar and foundation of truth:"

1Pe 2:5; Ye also, as lively stones, are built up a spiritual house, an holy priesthood, to offer up spiritual sacrifices, acceptable to God by Jesus Christ.

2Cr 5:1; For we know that if our earthly house of [this] tabernacle were dissolved, we have a building of God, an house not made with hands, eternal in the heavens.

2Cr 5:2; For in this we groan, earnestly desiring to be clothed upon with our house which is from heaven:

 

[Montanaman]

And not the house itself...
A household is PEOPLE.

Given the context of this whole letter, it's clear that Paul is speaking about more than the amorphous "brotherhood of all true believers." He's talking about the institution--not the literal building--and definitely not JUST the total number of people. This is a letter from an apostle to a bishop. He's dealing with administrative matters.

As said elsewhere (a thousand times, no doubt), to believe that the Church is "everyone" is to believe that doctrinal chaos is somehow the "truth." In theory, the "body of believers only" definiton of Church as the pillar and ground of the truth is nifty, but in practice an utter failure.

 

[racer]

Even as individuals we can possess the fullness of truth, and clearly as such we can "support and uphold" the Truth:

Eph 3:17; That Christ may dwell in your hearts by faith; that ye, being rooted and grounded in love,

Eph 3:18; May be able to comprehend with all saints what [is] the breadth, and length, and depth, and height;

Eph 3:19; And to know the love of Christ, which passeth knowledge, that ye might be filled with all the fulness of God.

 

[racer]

Given the context of this whole letter, it's clear that Paul is speaking about more than the amorphous "brotherhood of all true believers."

Oh, lordy, there's that word again . . . .

 

[Montanaman]

Oh, lordy, there's that word again . . . .

Which word? Amorphous? Of?

Do we need to do a little defining of terms?

Maybe we can just take the day off, and in the spirit of holiday brotherhood, come together as one thankful body and agree to agree that I'm right.