When something has been sanctified.

[StormyOne]

As a Catholic, I can believe anything I want provided what I believe does not go against Catholic teaching. Because Catholicism says Sacred Scripture is inspired by God I must accept it. Granted there are some things in Sacred Scripture that leave my mouth hanging open but I let those issues rest with the Church.

as a human one of God's children I can believe anything and question anything regardless of who teaches it.... I especially question those who say they speak for God, and I do not accept anything just because a church says so... while I understand that you have deferred to the church, that is not something that concerns me as I would never do so..... thanks for the dialog....

 

[Pythons]

as a human one of God's children I can believe anything and question anything regardless of who teaches it.... I especially question those who say they speak for God, and I do not accept anything just because a church says so... while I understand that you have deferred to the church, that is not something that concerns me as I would never do so..... thanks for the dialog....

Acts 15, specifically verse 24 unequivocally states that "The Church" has authority to authorize who teaches faith and morals.

We have heard that some went out from us without our authorization and disturbed you, troubling your minds by what they said.

Verse 28 goes on to state that "The Church" had / has the power to "Bind" the believers in matters of faith and morals. Based off some of your previous statements I'm not sure where you stand on the authority of Scripture.

 

[StormyOne]

Acts 15, specifically verse 24 unequivocally states that "The Church" has authority to authorize who teaches faith and morals.



Verse 28 goes on to state that "The Church" had / has the power to "Bind" the believers in matters of faith and morals. Based off some of your previous statements I'm not sure where you stand on the authority of Scripture.

works for you.... that's cool.... I don't share your view....

 

[Pythons]

What authority do you derive your take-it-to-the-bank assurance my view isn't the correct view? Nothing sarcastic intended it's just that this discussion is moving into an area I'm not familiar with.

 

[StormyOne]

What authority do you derive your take-it-to-the-bank assurance my view isn't the correct view? Nothing sarcastic intended it's just that this discussion is moving into an area I'm not familiar with.

and what area might that be? I don't subscribe to the idea that there is just one correct view... there may be several correct views....

 

[Pythons]

and what area might that be? I don't subscribe to the idea that there is just one correct view... there may be several correct views....

From what you've previously said, at worst, your theology rejects that the Bible is inspired and at best the true teachings of Jesus have been distorted as early as the Apostles.

If you reject Sacred Tradition as well as the Bible itself being Inspired by God then who's authority bolsters your premise?

 

[StormyOne]

From what you've previously said, at worst, your theology rejects that the Bible is inspired and at best the true teachings of Jesus have been distorted as early as the Apostles.

If you reject Sacred Tradition as well as the Bible itself being Inspired by God then who's authority bolsters your premise?

tradition? yeah it can be discarded, the bible is a vehicle that can be used to point one to Christ, while parts of it may be inspired by God it is not "God's word" nor did God write it....

What authority bolsters my premise? I do not need someone or something i.e. "the church" to tell me what I should believe...

 

[Avonia]

If you reject Sacred Tradition as well as the Bible itself being Inspired by God then who's authority bolsters your premise?

Bolstering a premise by claiming authority is a poor substitute for inquiry.

Scholars from different churches reading the same scripture have been arriving at different conclusions on many issues for a long time.

 

[StormyOne]

Bolstering a premise by claiming authority is a poor substitute for inquiry.

Scholars from different churches reading the same scripture have been arriving at different conclusions on many issues for a long time.

so in the end we will probably choose those scholars who agree with us....

 

[Byfaithalone1]

so in the end we will probably choose those scholars who agree with us....

I agree. And I appreciate the fact that you used the collective "we" and "us," as this seems to be nearly universal. I have been guilty of doing this in the past, and I am probably unaware of the ways in which I am currently guilty.

BFA

 

[Pythons]

tradition? yeah it can be discarded, the bible is a vehicle that can be used to point one to Christ, while parts of it may be inspired by God it is not "God's word" nor did God write it....

What authority bolsters my premise? I do not need someone or something i.e. "the church" to tell me what I should believe...

Both the Old Testament and Gospels were generated from Sacred Tradition, which is why, for me, I would have a hard time discounting an ounce of either of them in favor of my private interpretation. Since this is a discussion forum I'll do my best to explaine why I don't discard Sacred Tradition.

and the sons of Eliab were Nemuel, Dathan and Abiram. The same Dathan and Abiram were the community officials who rebelled against Moses and Aaron and were among korah's followers when they rebelled against the LORD.

There is no way out of it from what I can see. Korah and those who followed him "rebelled against the Lord" by rebelling against the Lord's appointed Authority (Moses). The ground didn't open up and take Korah because God was bored.

Tradition and Sacred Scripture are one in the same thing. The first Gospel of Jesus Christ was written years after the death of Christ which would mean that oral Tradition cared for the Gospel until it was recorded in writting.

Can someone be saved without the Bible? Of course they can and there are enough examples of that within Scripture I would not argue against it. Place yourself back at the time of Acts 15. Would you reject the Authority of the Apostles when they "bound" the believers on what was and wasn't to be observed in the Church?

 

[sentipente]

Would you reject the Authority of the Apostles when they "bound" the believers on what was and wasn't to be observed in the Church?

That's not quite the question since anyone who wanted to be a part of the church would accept the authority of the Apostles. The question is whether those who submitted to the authority of the apostles were better positioned before the Creator than those who did not.

 

[StormyOne]

Both the Old Testament and Gospels were generated from Sacred Tradition, which is why, for me, I would have a hard time discounting an ounce of either of them in favor of my private interpretation. Since this is a discussion forum I'll do my best to explaine why I don't discard Sacred Tradition.

that works for you and no one is suggesting that you do differently... just don't suggest to me that I must do as you do....

There is no way out of it from what I can see. Korah and those who followed him "rebelled against the Lord" by rebelling against the Lord's appointed Authority (Moses). The ground didn't open up and take Korah because God was bored.

assuming what is described in the narrative actually occurred.....

Tradition and Sacred Scripture are one in the same thing. The first Gospel of Jesus Christ was written years after the death of Christ which would mean that oral Tradition cared for the Gospel until it was recorded in writting.

to you perhaps, not to me...

Can someone be saved without the Bible? Of course they can and there are enough examples of that within Scripture I would not argue against it. Place yourself back at the time of Acts 15. Would you reject the Authority of the Apostles when they "bound" the believers on what was and wasn't to be observed in the Church?

I don't think they did what you are suggesting, but that's your view....

 

[Pythons]

That's not quite the question since anyone who wanted to be a part of the church would accept the authority of the Apostles. The question is whether those who submitted to the authority of the apostles were better positioned before the Creator than those who did not.

Just like Korah's case in the O.T. the N.T. is emphatic that those who reject the authority of the Apostles reject God.

He who listens to you listens to me; he who rejects you rejects me; but he who rejects me rejects him who sent me."

The Apostles were not selling juicers.

Again Jesus said, "Peace be with you! As the Father has sent me, I am sending you

Senti, is your view of Scripture similar to Stormy's? I'm trying to find something I can brace myself against here that you will accept as authoritative to proceed with the discussion. With Stormy, I obviously can't use Sacred Tradition or Sacred Scripture which leaves me with only conjecture.

 

[StormyOne]

Senti, is your view of Scripture similar to Stormy's? I'm trying to find something I can brace myself against here that you will accept as authoritative to proceed with the discussion. With Stormy, I obviously can't use Sacred Tradition or Sacred Scripture which leaves me with only conjecture.

lol conjecture..... actually it doesn't.... it leaves you with what you personally believe..... unless you are telling me that what the church believes and what you believe are exactly the same. If that is the case, then I suppose we can move on to another topic.........

 

[Avonia]

There is no way out of it from what I can see.

This is the nature of an entrenched position.

 

[Avonia]

The question is whether those who submitted to the authority of the apostles were better positioned before the Creator than those who did not.

Good question then - good question now.

 

[Avonia]

Senti, is your view of Scripture similar to Stormy's? I'm trying to find something I can brace myself against here that you will accept as authoritative to proceed with the discussion.

Orienting via reference to the familiar may not be helpful in discovering something new.

 

[Pythons]

lol conjecture..... actually it doesn't.... it leaves you with what you personally believe..... unless you are telling me that what the church believes and what you believe are exactly the same. If that is the case, then I suppose we can move on to another topic.........

Conjecture:

1.the formation or expression of an opinion or theory without sufficient evidence for proof. 2.an opinion or theory so formed or expressed; guess; speculation.

I'm basing "my belief" in the witness of Sacred Tradition and Sacred Scripture which secular history corroborates. If Christianity is the true religion then one would first need to be instructed correctly.

Searching for a Church that teaches what you personally believe is no different then going to a restraunt where you like the food.

I'm saying that what the Church believes is taught to believers who accept it. This is where I'm at and I believe Sacred Scripture, Sacred Tradition and secular history validates my position.

 

[StormyOne]

I'm basing "my belief" in the witness of Sacred Tradition and Sacred Scripture which secular history corroborates. If Christianity is the true religion then one would first need to be instructed correctly.

Searching for a Church that teaches what you personally believe is no different then going to a restraunt where you like the food.

I'm saying that what the Church believes is taught to believers who accept it. This is where I'm at and I believe Sacred Scripture, Sacred Tradition and secular history validates my position.

validation means nothing to those who are not interested in stepping onto your field of play.... I can tell you that I can play basketball better than Michael Jordan, but if you have no desire to play me in basketball, then the point is moot.... what you have said is important to you, it may or may not be important to me or someone else, the key is can you talk to me one on one, or must you always recite chapter and verse about the things you think are important?

Secular history undermines what you believe is your position because there is scant proof for much of what is found in the bible.... but, thanks for clarifying.....