Post Reply
Page 77 of 82  •  Prev 1 ... 75 76 77 78 79 ... 82 Next
5 years ago  ::  Aug 19, 2009 - 11:36AM #761
smcisaac
Posts: 7,977

Aug 19, 2009 -- 10:48AM, Kevinponeill wrote:


I am not an inerrantist.  Surprised



I know that, but my comments that you responded to were in turn a reply to Roodog, who said something along the lines of "the Bible is always right".   I don't think speculating about possible inauthentic revisions to the text offers as tight a refutation of inerrancy as pointing out plain contradictions in the text.


IMHO your critical hermeneutical approach to the text is no less respectful of the authority and inspiration of Scripture than Roodog's approach, although I am guessing he would disagree. 

"Truth did not come into the world naked, but it came in types and images. The world will not receive truth in any other way."  Gospel of Philip, Logion 72

"Christ will regenerate all things; through Him all things will be purged, and return into eternal life. And when the Son shall deliver up the kingdom to the Father, all things will be God; that is, all things will still exist, but God will exist in them, and they will be full of Him." Fabius Manus Victorinus, c. 350 AD
Quick Reply
Cancel
5 years ago  ::  Aug 19, 2009 - 2:55PM #762
Matt16-18
Posts: 1,119

Campbellite: What muddies up the waters is trying to generalize a position taken by some Protestants to cover all Protestants. Sola Scriptura is a case in point.


It is impossible to take any generalized position about what all Protestants believe about divine revelation. That is why I wrote "The Protestant communities that teach sola scriptura would be inconsistent if they also asserted that their "communal discernment" carried any weight of authority ...". This was my attempt to acknowledge that only some Protestant sects accept sola scriptura as being true. For example, the Jehovah Witnesses do not accept sola scriptura doctrine:


Hence, besides individually possessing God's Word, we need a theocratic organization. Yes, besides having God's spirit of illumination, a Christian needs Jehovah's theocratic organization in order to understand the Bible. (Watchtower; June 15, 1951; p. 375)


Campbellite: The Bible did not just fall out of the sky. And any serious study of the Bible must needs include an understanding of its origins.


True indeed!


Campbellite: While many of us have a congenital aversion to the word "Tradition", we also are aware of the plain fact that we of the 21st Century are not the very first people to read, ponder, study and meditate on the Scriptures.


Most Mainline Protestants should be adverse to "Tradition" with a capital "T" because they have rejected Hoy Tradition.


Campbellite: And, because we are distrustful of "authorities", we see Biblical study as a "conversation" between us and fellow believers of all times and places.


The mainliners aren't distrustful of authority, because the trust their own assumed authority to interpret scripture. The mainliners are only distrustful of the interpretations preserved by Holy Tradition, and that is why the mainliners willingly accept so many novelties that are not part of Holy Tradition.


Campellite: What it boils down to is this: Our Lord Jesus Christ is head of the Church.


No, it does NOT boil down to this. Every Church with a two thousand-year history acknowledges that Jesus is head of the Church. There is NO dispute between Protestants, and the OO, EO and CC about Christ being the head of the Church.


The issue of contention is about is Protestants rejecting the authority of Holy Tradition and claiming that the Bible is the ONLY authority that they will acknowledge - an untenable position that is not even supported by the Bible. Sola scriptura is a mere tradition of men that was unknown by Christians until the Protestants made up this doctrine.


Campbellite: While no one of us can perfectly grasp everything, the collective wisdom and consensus of believers is sufficient for us to know enough of the Truth that we are led in the right Way.


And because this is the "collective" wisdom, and not the exclusive property of any one faith community, we all have need for all the others. The hand cannot say to the foot, I have no need of you.


You have tried to make this argument before, but it requires a perverse interpretation of 1 Cor 12 to make it.


When Paul writes that "the body does not consist of one member but of many", Paul does not have in mind that the Body of Christ being composed of thousands of bickering and contentious sects divided over doctrine. Paul is not saying that the feet represent the Gnostics, the eyes represent the Donatists, the ears the Nicolaitans, the hands the Judaizers, and that each of these heretical sects have some part of the truth, and that all together these heretical sects make up the Body of Christ.


Paul would utterly reject your idea that the Body of Christ has no unity of faith, and that the Body of Christ is composed of thousands of divided, bickering and contentious Protestants sects that are the creation of men.

If you would enter life, keep the commandments. 
Matthew 19:17
Quick Reply
Cancel
5 years ago  ::  Aug 19, 2009 - 3:00PM #763
Matt16-18
Posts: 1,119

katherineorthodoxie: ... Holy Tradition is holistic, and Scripture is a part of it. The Church, Holy Scripture, Holy Tradition are part of a whole. Holy Tradition is not the Bible alone, or the interpretations/opinions of one individual. The Bible without the Church removes Scripture from its context. Individual interpretations of Scripture are tested against Holy Tradition. One cannot and must not contradict the other.


I wholly agree with this.

If you would enter life, keep the commandments. 
Matthew 19:17
Quick Reply
Cancel
5 years ago  ::  Aug 19, 2009 - 3:35PM #764
KatherineOrthodixie
Posts: 3,689

"The mainliners aren't distrustful of authority, because they trust their own assumed authority to interpret scripture. The mainliners are only distrustful of the interpretations preserved by Holy Tradition."



I must say, charlie, though it pains me, that this is a prevailing attitude. It does indeed seem as if there is ultimate trust in the authority of an individual or individual churches to interpret Scripture. Look at the Jimmy Carter thread and what roodog and creed say about the SBC and Baptist theology. Folks on bnet are contemptuous of Holy Tradition even though they don't have the least idea what it really means.

“The Law of the Church is to give oneself to what is given not to seek one’s own.” Fr. Alexander Schmemann
Quick Reply
Cancel
5 years ago  ::  Aug 19, 2009 - 4:01PM #765
Matt16-18
Posts: 1,119

Whisper01: ... the message is 100% perfect and the listeners are anywhere from 0% to 99% perfect ...


Agreed, individuals vary in their understanding of the Faith. What is your point? I don't understand what you are trying to say.


Whisper01: So how close to Gods Holy Truth is your interpretation these days?


Why do your even ask me about MY interpretation? I am saying that it is the interpretation of the Bible by the Church that Christ founded that matters, and NOT my individual interpretation of the Bible that matters!


Whisper01: ...your are correct in that we, you and I and Catholic and Protestant can not have our own truth APART from Christ. But, at the same time, whom is to say ones own perception of the truth is THE truth of Christ and which is not?


My private interpretation of the Bible carries no weight of authority at all, and neither does yours. What is your point? Are you saying that that the Church founded by Christ did not and does not understand the NT scriptures that she wrote?  How then did she write them, if she understood not what she was writing?


Whisper01: You know, it is just possible that both Catholics and Protestants have a part of THE truth and that is the reason God created them to have "eyes" that see differently?us on earth with no way of know with certainty what Christ's Church teaches?


Who can doubt that Protestants see things differently ... there are thousands upon thousands of Protestants sects that see things very differently, sects that are divided over fundamental doctrinal matters concerning our eternal life. Which is why I ask the question, does it make any sense at all that Christ would found a visible Church on earth, and then leave those of us on earth with no way of know with certainty what His Church teaches? That makes no sense to me.


Many Protestants claim that we have no way of knowing with certainty what Christ revealed to man. I don't believe that, but I can understand why one might want to believe such a thing. Such thinking allows the individual to be the ultimate arbiter of what one will believe.  Such thinking opens the door to the cafeteria where one is free to pick and choose along the buffet line. 


Give me a heaping pile of God's mercy, but keep that doctrine of mortal sin off my plate!


 

If you would enter life, keep the commandments. 
Matthew 19:17
Quick Reply
Cancel
5 years ago  ::  Aug 19, 2009 - 5:49PM #766
Roodog
Posts: 10,168

Most RC's I know use Birth Control of some kind. That'll be news to them that they're Protestant.

For those who have faith, no explanation is neccessary.
For those who have no faith, no explanation is possible.

St. Thomas Aquinas

If one turns his ear from hearing the Law, even his prayer is an abomination. Proverbs 28:9
Quick Reply
Cancel
5 years ago  ::  Aug 20, 2009 - 11:47AM #767
anyuta64
Posts: 1,536

Aug 19, 2009 -- 7:34PM, Kevinponeill wrote:


Aug 19, 2009 -- 5:49PM, Roodog wrote:


Most RC's I know use Birth Control of some kind. That'll be news to them that they're Protestant.




So would South African Roman Catholic Bishop Kevin Dowling be surprised to learn that he is a Protestant.  But he is!  According to Matt 16-18's definition. (see the Bishop's repudiation of the RC Church's official teaching: www.usnews.com/articles/news/2008/04/10/...)


Since most Roman Catholics do not follow or accpt all the official teachings of the RC Church, and are (according to Matt 16-18) de facto excommunicated, and Protestant, that means that the The Church "founded by Christ" is existentially dependent on Protestants! Surprised





or non existant.


does a CHruch exist is everyone in it is de facto excommunicated?

Passion is inversely proportional to the amount of real information available.

NOTE: This post is a natural product. The sleight variations in spelling and grammar enhance its individual charicter and beauty and in no way are to be considered flaws or defects.
Quick Reply
Cancel
5 years ago  ::  Aug 20, 2009 - 1:37PM #768
Roodog
Posts: 10,168

If that be the case, we assume that they are XRCs and invite them to church.

For those who have faith, no explanation is neccessary.
For those who have no faith, no explanation is possible.

St. Thomas Aquinas

If one turns his ear from hearing the Law, even his prayer is an abomination. Proverbs 28:9
Quick Reply
Cancel
5 years ago  ::  Aug 20, 2009 - 2:35PM #769
Whisper01
Posts: 2,673

"Agreed, individuals vary in their understanding of the Faith. What is your point? I don't understand what you are trying to say."


That any religion, Catholics included DO NOT understand the FULL WILL OF GOD. They simply understand that the message is flawless and that they themeselves being flawed do not comprehend the full message, even the Pope (I know, more heresy...). So, it comes down to you have your vision of God with eyes given by God, and the protestants have thier vision of God, with eyes given by God. Both are just fine... unless one starts bashing the other of course.



Why do your even ask me about MY interpretation? I am saying that it is the interpretation of the Bible by the Church that Christ founded that matters, and NOT my individual interpretation of the Bible that matters!"


Your intrepretation is what is apart of the discussion I thought, without it is there a point of discussion at all?


In respons what I am attempting to state is that he "CHURCH" of your above post is a combination of Catholic & Protastant togethor, that makes up the church, not one or the other. So the "interpreation of the bible" is by you and by me and by the Catholics and by the Protestants and by EVERYONE. That is unless you are simply taking another mans interpretation on faith in that man instead of faith in ones God? All things being equal the Pope and the Catholic Heirarchy are simply men with interpreations, just like you and me. So, your interpretation IS what matters, not thiers in this discussion my friend.


"My private interpretation of the Bible carries no weight of authority at all, and neither does yours. What is your point? Are you saying that that the Church founded by Christ did not and does not understand the NT scriptures that she wrote?  How then did she write them, if she understood not what she was writing?"


If both mine and yours interpretations of the Bible carry no weight, then whos does? The Churches? We are the church buddy! You, me, everyone else, we are the Church!


Now you state that it was the Church that wrote the Bible and not God himself inspiring human writers to do so? The Bible was not, repeat NOT, written by the Catholic Church, not a wit of it. It was written by men, not Catholic or Protestant, inspired by God. So yes, the Catholic Church can easily not understand the Bible that it itself DID NOT write. "The Church" on the other hand the Catholic Church is apart of. "The Church" has no final or binding authority of any Bible, they are Gods books that the Church is allowed to use only, not have Authority over. This is not rocket science...


Who can doubt that Protestants see things differently ... there are thousands upon thousands of Protestants sects that see things very differently, sects that are divided over fundamental doctrinal matters concerning our eternal life.


Yes, but that is human nature. The Catholic church as well is full of it, divisions on beliefs, divisions on scripture, divisions on almost everything because that good Catholic Church is made up of "human beings" and it is "human nature" is have opinions on everything.


"Which is why I ask the question, does it make any sense at all that Christ would found a visible Church on earth, and then leave those of us on earth with no way of know with certainty what His Church teaches? That makes no sense to me."


Christ Church is teaching all forms of messages for the many ears that hear. These "ears" that God made are not all the same and do hear the message in many different ways. Humans are different, each and every one and while Gods messages are Infinate and Perfect human ears are not, nor are human tongues so any teaching of the scriptures is going to be imperfect through human eyes reading it, human minds understanding it, and human mouths expressing it. It is the GOAL to understand it better, not to fully understand it. For it is still a mystery and mysteries are Good too... Ever attempt to unravel Revelation? Take a crack at it, it's fun, but if you think you have come up with the one and only answer then beware the spectre of pride and ego.  :-)


Many Protestants claim that we have no way of knowing with certainty what Christ revealed to man.


They do? I am guessing here that this is why people here do not think you understand the Protestant faith.


I don't believe that, but I can understand why one might want to believe such a thing. Such thinking allows the individual to be the ultimate arbiter of what one will believe.  Such thinking opens the door to the cafeteria where one is free to pick and choose along the buffet line. 


I am under the understanding personally that YOU yourself chose a religion, and you researched that religion, and you liked the people in that religion, and you liked the theology in that religion and YOU chose that religion. You could have chosen any other religion in the Cafeteria. Now considering that why are you possibly deriding your brothers for picking thier religions? I'm at a loss...


I'm a protestant and I am the final arbiter of what I will believe, because I am me and no one else is me ergo I choose for me and no one else can because they are not me. I choose with "Faith" in God just like you do, we all do. Catholisism is simply one more choice in a long list of "Cafeteria", as you put it, choices in religion and faith, just one more... Now why is this an issue?


:-)

Quick Reply
Cancel
5 years ago  ::  Aug 20, 2009 - 3:03PM #770
KatherineOrthodixie
Posts: 3,689

"I'm a protestant and I am the final arbiter of what I will believe, because I am me and no one else is me ergo I choose for me and no one else can because they are not me. "



Well, that's what I thought, but charlie said I was wrong.

“The Law of the Church is to give oneself to what is given not to seek one’s own.” Fr. Alexander Schmemann
Quick Reply
Cancel
Page 77 of 82  •  Prev 1 ... 75 76 77 78 79 ... 82 Next
 
    Viewing this thread :: 0 registered and 1 guest
    No registered users viewing
    Advertisement

    Beliefnet On Facebook