Challenges: sola scriptura questions.

[lovely]

Okay, straybullet, I am not a scholar, but I can tell you why I believe what I do. I apologize in advance for keeping it simple.

1)-Where in the bible does it say you should believe in only the authority of the bible?

I believe Scripture is the final authority because Scripture teaches this. Moses himself handed down the law so that the people could have it read to them that they may not sin against God.


John 8:31-32
2 Timothy 3-12-17 verse 17 containing the greek word exartizo having to do with being fitted for the task
2 Timothy 4:5
2 Timothy 4:14
Hebrews 4:12
and all of Psalm 119

This is a few



2)-If the bible is the final authority on all matters and infallible, then who was the infallible man who decided whichs book to include in the bible?

Again, the Bible itself teaches what is Scripture.

The Old Testament calls itself the Law of God...I think we agree, and I can provide references...a lot of them.

The Dead Sea Scrolls...both canonical books, and commentary pointing to those books were found.

Historical books pointed to the Old Testament books representing them as Scripture, and referring to them as they are today.

The New Testament also calls itself Scripture, and is quoted with Old Testament passages...both being indicative of Scripture.

The Apostles called each other's writings Scripture

This is an overview, obviously, to basically outline one side of an argument that we already know. It is difficult to answer this question in a short manner fully.

3)-Going by sola scriptura, how do you know what books to believe in and which not to. How do you know the Apocalype of John (Revelation) is true, but the Apocalypse of Peter is not? Both documents were read in the early Church.

The timing of this book being so late...2nd century. The author was not verifiable. The book relied on already cannonized books for it's construction. John's revelation focused on Christ, while "Peter's" did not, it's focus was with the afterlife, not the redeemer.

This is a very simple response, but that is what you asked of the person responding. This is why I believe that Scripture must be our final authority. Our creeds, traditions, experiences, etc. must be tested by Scripture to avoid error, and corruption, within the church.


The Lord bless all of you.

 

[thessalonian]

Okay, straybullet, I am not a scholar, but I can tell you why I believe what I do. I apologize in advance for keeping it simple.

1)-Where in the bible does it say you should believe in only the authority of the bible?

I believe Scripture is the final authority because Scripture teaches this. Moses himself handed down the law so that the people could have it read to them that they may not sin against God.

That something is written down does not mean that there are no other authorities. Does the judge not have authority because of the law?
The scriptures also teach that Moses spoken word had God's authority behind it. So was Moses violating Sola Scriptura when he demanded that the people follow his spoken word? Korah and company met a tragic fate for not following Moses spoken words. He didn't say, you won't listen to me. Hang on a second and I will write it down and then it will be God's word and have authority. Paul does not tell the Thessalonians only to follow what he says after he writes it down. He says "Hold FAST to the traditions you have received, whether BY WORD OF MOUTH, or in writing from us". Jesus said "he who hears you hears me". So the spoken word was authoritative as well. He tells Timothy that what you have HEARD FROM ME entrust to others who will teach others. 2 tim 2:2. He doesn't say he's what I've written now make copies and hand them out to everyone. No, the spoken as well as the written word had equal authority.

John 8:31-32

I would assume your referring to the phrase "continue in my word". You automatically equate word with scripture. Yes, scripture is the word of God but when Christ said "he who hears you hears me" did he expect them to write down what they were going to say first. When Paul says "hold fast to the traditions you have received, whether BY WORD OF MOUTH or in writing from us" does he say "write them down first".

2 Timothy 3-12-17 verse 17 containing the greek word exartizo having to do with being fitted for the task

Equipped is a good thing. However being fully Equipped does not mean that the scripture is the only piece of equipment necessary. If one goes mountain climbing would he be fully Equipped if he had a good pair of boots. Not if he didn't have the other equipment neccessary such as a rope and food. Having the words written down is great but if you do not have a correct understanding of those words they will not help your salvation.

2 Timothy 4:5
4] and will turn away from listening to the truth and wander into myths.
[5] As for you, always be steady, endure suffering, do the work of an evangelist, fulfil your ministry.

Your reading allot in to this to apply only the written word to it. Paul praises the Corinthians (1 Cor 11:2) for what he delivered to them. No indications that it was in writing. If it was in fact there would have had to be a 0 Cor.

2 Timothy 4:14

Not sure what Alexander the Copper smith has to do with Sola Scripture.

Hebrews 4:12

I don't see where in scripture you can make scripture equal to the WOG, not that scirpture isn't the WOG, but it is not if it is not properly understood. Further, Christ said "he who hears you hears me". The spoken word can be the WOG as well. It can be authoritative as well (2 These 2:15). Find me something that says that you can use WOG and scripture interchangeably.

and all of Psalm 119

Beautiful Psalm no doudt. The scriptures are authoritative, no doudt. But doesn't it also say in that very word "obey and submit to your leaders who have concern for your souls"? Doesn't Paul say once again "hold fast to the traditions you have received WHETHER BY WORD OF MOUTH or in writing from us. He was not teaching SS here. Could not have been.

This is a few



2)-If the bible is the final authority on all matters and infallible, then who was the infallible man who decided whichs book to include in the bible?

Again, the Bible itself teaches what is Scripture.

The Old Testament calls itself the Law of God...I think we agree, and I can provide references...a lot of them.

This betrays a lack of historical perspective regarding the canon.
Your looking through the lense of what we have today put together as scripture. But for the first 300 or so years of Church history. They did not have an Old Testament and a New one nicely bound with a table of contents in the front. They had a pile of scrolls and these scrolls did not neccessarily just contain the books that we call scripture today. In fact when the Councils of Hippo and Carthage met in around 400 AD, they considered around 200 books when they finalized the canon. Now how do each one of the books tell us that they should be in that canon? How did the council decide the canon that you hold in your hands today (minus 7 OT books)? By what criteria do you know the canon you have is the right one? No fair peaking at the Table of Contents, it was not written by the Apostles or prophets, sorry.

The Dead Sea Scrolls...both canonical books, and commentary pointing to those books were found.

Historical books pointed to the Old Testament books representing them as Scripture, and referring to them as they are today.[quote:d840e]

As I understand there are not complete copies in the DSS. There are also many other writings.

[quote:d840e]The New Testament also calls itself Scripture, and is quoted with Old Testament passages...both being indicative of Scripture.

See comments above regarding history of the canon. The early Christians did not have a NT. They had to determine from a whole pile of scrolls which were canonical. Not every NT and OT book says it is the WOG. Clement's writings contain OT passages. Yet it was not placed in the canon, though it was considered. The NT also quotes some pagan sources, so should they be considered scripture?

The Apostles called each other's writings Scripture

[/quote:d840e][/quote:d840e]

I recall Peter calling Paul's writings scripture. I don't recall anyone else doing so. Since we have writings from less than half the Apostles obviously writing down things wasn't the highest priority given them. Remember Mark and Luke were not Apostles either.

Blessings

 

[lovely]

Dear Thessalonian,

I am familiar with your arguments, thank you for taking the time to post a response to mine. I suspect that this particular topic between protestants and non-protestants (Orthodox and Catholics) will continued to be argued for a long time, by some more qualified than myself. In the interest of time, and length, I kept my response brief, and general. Maybe there are other protestant that can add to my outline that would respond to the things you have targeted. Frankly, I can not add anything to this debate that is not already known in a general way by both sides, I suspect. I believe I have a grasp on your argument, in greater detail even than what I have seen presented lately on this site. The honest answer is that I simply do not agree with your stance. As far as the Scripture being the WOG, and the spoken WOG...this is a debate involving revelation. There are so many topics rolled in here. Scripture only, new revelation and it's possible forms, Church authority, tradition, and proper interpretation...etc. I stayed away from all of this because it was slightly off topic, and because of Stray's restrictions on his questions...I basically wanted to answer them directly. Oh...and the Scripture concerning Alexander...lol...donno, must have been a typo. : I admit my post was not very involved, and I was just thumbing through my Bible for Scriptures that first came to mind. :-D I think a good place to start with a discussion on this topic is a defining of terms. We seem to say one thing, and mean another. Anyway, I pray the Lord bless all of you.

I did want to ask a sincere question, though. If the Church, or tradition, conflicts with Scripture...what is the final authority in that case? Does it rest with the Christian, the Word, or with the Church? If anyone want to answer, but not be involved with an open debate...feel free to pm me, I am interested in the answers.


In Christ,
Lovely

 

[Orthodoxy]

[quote="Biblical Orthodoxy":3ee95]What the fruit that falls from these trees, it'll kill ya!

I'm going to reply as to how we 'got' the canon of Scriptures, but due to the faulty logic used by the 'o'rthodox in this thread I'll start a new one.

I haven't treated anyone like dirt, but rather dust. :D

Why are you still here if you don't plan on answering simple, harmless, fair questions?[/quote:3ee95]

I could have sworn he said adios and so long you dust particles. Maybe is is lying?

If so then maybe the reformation has reformed un repentant sin right out of the Christian faith?

Orthodoxy

 

[Debtfree]

It is obvious that you can not answer simple questions, nor confess your inability to. Despite the discussions on sola scriptura, you do not address the subject, but make tangents that have nothing to do with it. You ramble on about how wrong the Catholic and Orthodox are, you attack our doctrine and Traditions, but you refuse to face the very heresy you believe in.

So, I will make this simple for you, simple questions with very simple rules. If what you believe is true and not a heresy, then you should be able to answer them. If you resort to tangents and attacks on our Churches, then you are confessing you believe in an unbiblical heresy because you can't answer.

1)-Where in the bible does it say you should believe in only the authority of the bible?
-Do not tell me that the bible should be used, nor that it is a good thing, we ALL agree that it is an inerrant source of information. The question is the bible alone, "sola scriptura' "by scripture alone".
-Do not bring up Tradition, this has nothing to do with Tradition.
-Do not bring up Doctrine, this has nothing to do with Doctrine.
-Do not bring up the Catholic or Orthodox Church, do not even mention them, because such attacks have nothing to do with the question.

2)-If the bible is the final authority on all matters and infallible, then who was the infallible man who decided whichs book to include in the bible?

3)-Going by sola scriptura, how do you know what books to believe in and which not to. How do you know the Apocalype of John (Revelation) is true, but the Apocalypse of Peter is not? Both documents were read in the early Church.

->DO NOT POST OUTSIDE LINKS BECAUSE THESE ARE VERY SIMPLE QUESTIONS AND SUCH ANSWERS AVOID THE QUESTION

You should be able to post sound, biblically based answers on your own to what is obbviously an important belief to you.
Outside links, attacking Doctrine, Tradition or other Churches are obvious attempts at avoiding the answer and let us know immediately you have heretical beliefs.
Answer away!

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Hey bullet head,

It seem obvious that you are not bornagain. No bornagain person questions this fundamental truth. Endless questioning and such garbage is the devils spin.

Luke 11:28 (Amplified Bible)
But He said, Blessed (happy and to be envied) rather are those who hear the Word of God and obey and practice it! Luke 11:27-29 (in Context) Luke 11 (Whole Chapter)

Matthew 4:4 (Amplified Bible)
But He replied, It has been written, Man shall not live and be upheld and sustained by bread alone, but by every word that comes forth from the mouth of God. Matthew 4:3-5 (in Context) Matthew 4 (Whole Chapter)
Titus 1:8-10 (Amplified Bible)
8But he must be hospitable (loving and a friend to believers, especially to strangers and foreigners); [he must be] a lover of goodness [of good people and good things], sober-minded (sensible, discreet), upright and fair-minded, a devout man and religiously correct, temperate and keeping himself in hand.
9He must hold fast to the sure and trustworthy Word of God as he was taught it, so that he may be able both to give stimulating instruction and encouragement in sound (wholesome) doctrine and to refute and convict those who contradict and oppose it [showing the wayward their error].
10For there are many disorderly and unruly men who are idle (vain, empty) and misleading talkers and self-deceivers and deceivers of others. [This is true] especially of those of the circumcision party [who have come over from Judaism].
Mark 7:13 (Amplified Bible)
Thus you are nullifying and making void and of no effect [the authority of] the Word of God through your tradition, which you [in turn] hand on. And many things of this kind you are doing. Mark 7:12-14 (in Context) Mark 7 (Whole Chapter)

There is your proof dude...get saved!

God and His Word are One...LIKE IT OR NOT! Ask Christ to come into your life and be your LORD and Savior. Then you will receive the spiritual eyes to see and hears to hear. You are obviously spiritually blind, deaf and dumb!


Sorry dude...I just call it as I see it!


You be blessed,

Debtfree :-D

 

[Orthodox Christian]

It is obvious that you can not answer simple questions, nor confess your inability to. Despite the discussions on sola scriptura, you do not address the subject, but make tangents that have nothing to do with it. You ramble on about how wrong the Catholic and Orthodox are, you attack our doctrine and Traditions, but you refuse to face the very heresy you believe in.

So, I will make this simple for you, simple questions with very simple rules. If what you believe is true and not a heresy, then you should be able to answer them. If you resort to tangents and attacks on our Churches, then you are confessing you believe in an unbiblical heresy because you can't answer.

1)-Where in the bible does it say you should believe in only the authority of the bible?
-Do not tell me that the bible should be used, nor that it is a good thing, we ALL agree that it is an inerrant source of information. The question is the bible alone, "sola scriptura' "by scripture alone".
-Do not bring up Tradition, this has nothing to do with Tradition.
-Do not bring up Doctrine, this has nothing to do with Doctrine.
-Do not bring up the Catholic or Orthodox Church, do not even mention them, because such attacks have nothing to do with the question.

2)-If the bible is the final authority on all matters and infallible, then who was the infallible man who decided whichs book to include in the bible?

3)-Going by sola scriptura, how do you know what books to believe in and which not to. How do you know the Apocalype of John (Revelation) is true, but the Apocalypse of Peter is not? Both documents were read in the early Church.

->DO NOT POST OUTSIDE LINKS BECAUSE THESE ARE VERY SIMPLE QUESTIONS AND SUCH ANSWERS AVOID THE QUESTION

You should be able to post sound, biblically based answers on your own to what is obbviously an important belief to you.
Outside links, attacking Doctrine, Tradition or other Churches are obvious attempts at avoiding the answer and let us know immediately you have heretical beliefs.
Answer away!

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Hey bullet head,

It seem obvious that you are not bornagain. No bornagain person questions this fundamental truth. Endless questioning and such garbage is the devils spin.

Luke 11:28 (Amplified Bible)
But He said, Blessed (happy and to be envied) rather are those who hear the Word of God and obey and practice it! Luke 11:27-29 (in Context) Luke 11 (Whole Chapter)

Matthew 4:4 (Amplified Bible)
But He replied, It has been written, Man shall not live and be upheld and sustained by bread alone, but by every word that comes forth from the mouth of God. Matthew 4:3-5 (in Context) Matthew 4 (Whole Chapter)
Titus 1:8-10 (Amplified Bible)
8But he must be hospitable (loving and a friend to believers, especially to strangers and foreigners); [he must be] a lover of goodness [of good people and good things], sober-minded (sensible, discreet), upright and fair-minded, a devout man and religiously correct, temperate and keeping himself in hand.
9He must hold fast to the sure and trustworthy Word of God as he was taught it, so that he may be able both to give stimulating instruction and encouragement in sound (wholesome) doctrine and to refute and convict those who contradict and oppose it [showing the wayward their error].
10For there are many disorderly and unruly men who are idle (vain, empty) and misleading talkers and self-deceivers and deceivers of others. [This is true] especially of those of the circumcision party [who have come over from Judaism].
Mark 7:13 (Amplified Bible)
Thus you are nullifying and making void and of no effect [the authority of] the Word of God through your tradition, which you [in turn] hand on. And many things of this kind you are doing. Mark 7:12-14 (in Context) Mark 7 (Whole Chapter)

There is your proof dude...get saved!

God and His Word are One...LIKE IT OR NOT! Ask Christ to come into your life and be your LORD and Savior. Then you will receive the spiritual eyes to see and hears to hear. You are obviously spiritually blind, deaf and dumb!


Sorry dude...I just call it as I see it!


You be blessed,

Debtfree :-D

Hello debtfree, and welcome to the forum:
One word before I deal with the content of your post: it is unnecessary and unacceptable to engage in name-calling, nor engage in personal attacks and calling into question the salvation of another poster.

IF you are confident in your sense of biblical truth, there is no need to pound it home with a sledge hammer.

Ok, now to content:

The challenge was

Where in the bible does it say you should believe in only the authority of the bible?

But you seem to have answered it as if the question was

Where in the bible does it say you should believe in the authority of the bible?

First: You have not answered the 'only' part

Secondly, you should realize that Matthew 4:4, when it says that man lives by the word of God, it is not logos or graphe(scripture), but rhema, which means a now word, a word in your spirit.

Thirdly, the verse from Titus, actually is logos, word, which may or may not refer to scripture as we have it, but moreso the instruction or doctrine of the Apostles.

Fourth, the graphe word that Christ was referring to in Mark 7 was the Law and Prophets, or as you may know it, the Old Covenant.


It is without dispute that the Holy Scriptures are God-breathed. What is at question is where authority resides. Protestants say in the scriptures alone- but scriptures do not say this....unless you can provide us with a scripture that does.

And, should you endeavor to do so, don't do so by attacking the man, so to speak: just make your point dismounted from the high horse, if you please.

Thanks

By the grace of God
James

 

[Debtfree]

God's Word First Place, Final Authority!

James,

True believers do not question the Word of God in the sense that they can not trust it to be their guide for living. That is why I question his salvation. Jesus was, is and always will be God. What He said is the Truth. He cannot lie.

I don't believe every word in the Bible is true because there were times when people made false statements (as in the case of Job --no time to get into that). But, the threads that are throughout the Bible are 100% true: Salvation, prosperity, freedom from sin, the return of Christ in the rapture etc.

God has established absolutes...His Word, the Ten Commandments (not the ten suggestions).

Without absolutes we have absolutely no foundation to base our faith on.

To say that God's Word is not absolute truth and the only source for basing our lives is to say we no longer have a 100% sure foundation.

Luke 6:48
He is like a man which built an house, and digged deep, and laid the foundation on a rock: and when the flood arose, the stream beat vehemently upon that house, and could not shake it: for it was founded upon a rock. Luke 6:47-49 (in Context) Luke 6 (Whole Chapter)

Luke 6:49
But he that heareth, and doeth not, is like a man that without a foundation built an house upon the earth; against which the stream did beat vehemently, and immediately it fell; and the ruin of that house was great.
Luke 6:48-50 (in Context) Luke 6 (Whole Chapter)

God has given us His Word as our foundation for building our lives. It is the only absolute that we have on this earth that anyone can see and read. God is Spirit...He can not be seen with the natural eye. But, the Word of God can be seen, and understood.

You and others are entitled to believe whatever you choose, BUT without absolutes you will NEVER have a firm foundation upon which to build your life.

If the bullet doesn't believe God's Word is absolute, then he doesn't have a firm foundation for his faith. That to me is foolishness. Why believe in something that you can not support and be sure is the truth?

Sorry, if it looks like a duck and acts like a duck...It mostlikely is a duck!

Be blessed,
Debtfree

 

[thessalonian]

Dedtfree,

I will let bullet speak for himself but I am quite sure he believes, contrary to what you say, that every word of scripture is true. But the problem is in what context is it true? One group things that we should baptize the dead because a verse in Cornithians speaks of such a practice. Is that true? Why don't you baptize the dead df? Lutherans believe in Sola Scriptura as you do, yet they practice infant baptism and have sacraments. There are tons of disagreements in Protestantism about what scripture teaches and I am sure you have your beliefs about what it teaches that contradict others. Now did God intend for us not to know the truth about his holy word? He said "you shall KNOW THE TRUTH and the truth shall set you free". He also so "those who worship me must worship in spirit and in TRUTH". Now I am sure you think everything you believe that scripture says is true. But is it? Straybullet, I am quite certain simply trusts in God's word that there is a way to KNOW THE TRUTH! He trusts in scriptures but he does not trust in his own understanding of them (see prov 3:5) except where it co-incides with the shepherds in God's Church who are to give knowledge and understanding (see Jer 3:15). The Church is the pillar and support of the truth. Not every man and his bible or some health and wealth Gospel preacher.

Blessings

 

[Debtfree]

God's Word Is Still First Place, Final Authority!

Hey Everyone,

Here is the bottom line of this senseless debate:

2 Timothy 3:16 (Amplified Bible)
Amplified Bible (AMP)
Copyright © 1954, 1958, 1962, 1964, 1965, 1987 by The Lockman Foundation

16Every Scripture is God-breathed (given by His inspiration) and profitable for instruction, for reproof and conviction of sin, for correction of error and discipline in obedience, [and] for training in righteousness (in holy living, in conformity to God's will in thought, purpose, and action),

What do we need? God has given us His Word, and the Holy Spirit to help us understand His Word...what more do we need?????

He is the Truth. His Word is the Truth. If He wasn't the Truth, then His Word could be questioned or thought of as unrelieable. But, He is not a liar.

God's Word can be trusted...whether bullet think so or not!

Proverbs 18:17
He who states his case first seems right, until his rival comes and cross-examines him. Proverbs 18:16-18 (in Context) Proverbs 18 (Whole Chapter)

Go to God Himself and go to His Word!

Oh, I almost forget. Yes, I am a Word of Faith preacher!

Debtfree :-D

Ps. You have a nice day!!!

 

[thessalonian]

Re: God's Word Is Still First Place, Final Authority!

Hey Everyone,

Here is the bottom line of this senseless debate:

2 Timothy 3:16 (Amplified Bible)
Amplified Bible (AMP)
Copyright © 1954, 1958, 1962, 1964, 1965, 1987 by The Lockman Foundation

16Every Scripture is God-breathed (given by His inspiration) and profitable for instruction, for reproof and conviction of sin, for correction of error and discipline in obedience, [and] for training in righteousness (in holy living, in conformity to God's will in thought, purpose, and action),

What do we need? God has given us His Word, and the Holy Spirit to help us understand His Word...what more do we need?????

He is the Truth. His Word is the Truth. If He wasn't the Truth, then His Word could be questioned or thought of as unrelieable. But, He is not a liar.

God's Word can be trusted...whether bullet think so or not!

Proverbs 18:17
He who states his case first seems right, until his rival comes and cross-examines him. Proverbs 18:16-18 (in Context) Proverbs 18 (Whole Chapter)

Go to God Himself and go to His Word!

Oh, I almost forget. Yes, I am a Word of Faith preacher!

Debtfree :-D

Ps. You have a nice day!!!

Are you an infallible word of faith preacher such that whatever you preach comes straight from the holy spirit and is absolutely true? If you have a particular verse but don't have a correct interprutation of it do you have the Word of God? Where in scripture does it says WOG = Scripture? Don't get me wrong, scripture is the WOG, but only if one has the correct interprutation it seems to me. You Protestant equate the two but I don't see in scripture where it does. I am quite sure that Bullet does believe the WOG can be trusted. It is you and the thousands of preachers who contradict you, yet claim sola scriptura and the Holy Spirit who cannot be trusted. That's the problem you cannot seem to grasp. Once again I ask, if one has a Bible verse but has the wrong interprutation of the Bible verse, does he have the WOG? I'll be looking for those verses that say WOG and scripture are interchangable. A thus says Dedtfree doesn't cut it for me. Sorry.

You have a nice day.

 

[Debtfree]

Sola Scriptura

:-D

I could care less about some theological concept i.e. Sola Scriptura.

My issue is that the Word of God can be trusted. Whether I like what it says all the time or not.

Anyone who challenges the truth of God's Word I will fight tooth and nail with them on this issue.

God and His Word are ONE! You and your word are ONE. You are what you say. Like it our not. If God can be trusted, then so can His Word.

Furthermore, I believe there may be more than one correct view of what a single Scripture teaches. It isn't always just one way!

You are obviously catholic. I've seen your site. Many of my closest friends are bornagain catholics. I think it is great that you are a bornagain catholic. God bless you...I mean that whole heartedly. Word of Faith people are not against other groups who are not WoF.

I surely do not know it all, but I do know this...God's Word is true and it can be trusted to guide my life. I have been allowing His Word to guide me for almost 30 yrs now.

He and His Word have never let me down. He has always pointed me in the right direction...that doesn't mean I always chose the right direction. When I didn't follow His direction I almost always ended up in a world of hurt.

I didn't ask you to trust me...I could care less if you trust me or not.

But, I do care if you trust the Word of God (the Bible). He is trustworthy.

Answer to your question:
There is not always just one view of Scripture that is true. God's Word is so multifacited that one could view it from many different angles.

This is possible providing that these viewpoints do not contradict the whole of Scriputre. God's Word must be interpreted in the light of Scripture and not just on one verse.

God is not the god of confussion. All view points must correspond with the whole of Scriputre. It must be out of the mouth of 2 or 3 witnesses (or in this case at least 2-3 verses to support the viewpoint).

Again, I think it is great that you are a bornagain catholic. God bless you...I mean that whole heartedly.

Debtfree ;-)

 

[thessalonian]

I trust God's word as well and so does Stray Bullet I am quite certain. He will confirm that when he comes online. As for there being more than one understanding of a verse, I do agree to some extent, but they can never be contradictory. As Catholic we understand multiple sense of scripture. There is the literal sense, the allegorical sense, the anagogical sense, and the moral sense. Jesus for instance used the story of Jonah and the whale, in allegorical fashion to speak of his death and resurrection. It is also literally about Jonah and his reluctance to do God's will, thus suffering God's discipline. One can speak about God's discipline and about the three days Christ spent in the tomb from that verse. No contradiction. But one cannot say that when Jesus says "unless you eat the flesh of the son of man and drink his blood you shall have no life within you" and "my flesh is true food, my blood is true drink" that there is no literal sense in which these things are true. Most non-catholics do deny this literal sense.

God bless you too.

 

[Debtfree]

I Agree With Your Interpretation!

I trust God's word as well and so does Stray Bullet I am quite certain. He will confirm that when he comes online. As for there being more than one understanding of a verse, I do agree to some extent, but they can never be contradictory. As Catholic we understand multiple sense of scripture. There is the literal sense, the allegorical sense, the anagogical sense, and the moral sense. Jesus for instance used the story of Jonah and the whale, in allegorical fashion to speak of his death and resurrection. It is also literally about Jonah and his reluctance to do God's will, thus suffering God's discipline. One can speak about God's discipline and about the three days Christ spent in the tomb from that verse. No contradiction. But one cannot say that when Jesus says "unless you eat the flesh of the son of man and drink his blood you shall have no life within you" and "my flesh is true food, my blood is true drink" that there is no literal sense in which these things are true. Most non-catholics do deny this literal sense.

God bless you too.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Thessalonian,

I truly agree with your interpretations from your previous post.
I just wanted to let you know.

I have a really close from of almost 20 yrs. who is a Charismatic Catholic. We have kept in touch for many years.

I have attend services with him in the San Diego area. The church is called: Our Lady of Grace. The services I have attended were much like my present AofG church in Colorado. If you ever get a chance to visit that church it is well worth the visit!

I am glad that we are able to agree on some of these issues.

God bless and keep you,
Debtfree 8-)