Considering the early Church compiled the New Testament, what authority did they have to do so—and do you recognise that same authority today?

[for_his_glory]

Regarding the latter, the Church that gave you scripture teaches Mary's perpetual virginity. To say otherwise is heresy.

This is a fallacy of the teachings of the Catholic church not found in scripture as Mary and Joseph had other children after the birth of Jesus when Mary and Joseph were married.

Luke 1:26-38 Gabriel announces to Mary that of Christ's birth through her as she found favor in God. This all came about before her and Joseph were married so Joseph was not the biological father of Jesus.

Mark 6:3 Is not this the carpenter, the son of Mary, the brother of James, and Joses, and of Juda, and Simon? and are not his sisters here with us? And they were offended at him.

Mary and Joseph had other children after the virgin birth of Jesus. There names are James, and Joses, and Simon, and Judas and also had sisters, but they are not named in scripture. Matthew 13:55; Mark 6:3; John 2:12

 

[for_his_glory]

This is a fallacy of the teachings of the Catholic church not found in scripture as Mary and Joseph had other children after the birth of Jesus when Mary and Joseph were married.

Luke 1:26-38 Gabriel announces to Mary that of Christ's birth through her as she found favor in God. This all came about before her and Joseph were married so Joseph was not the biological father of Jesus.

Mark 6:3 Is not this the carpenter, the son of Mary, the brother of James, and Joses, and of Juda, and Simon? and are not his sisters here with us? And they were offended at him.

Mary and Joseph had other children after the virgin birth of Jesus. There names are James, and Joses, and Simon, and Judas and also had sisters, but they are not named in scripture. Matthew 13:55; Mark 6:3; John 2:12.

Sorry this went through twice.

 

[for_his_glory]

God speaks through the Church.

God speaks through His word way before there were any churches as the true Church, being the body of Christ with He being the head of the body, is not a building with a name fixed over the door. Disciple means a follower of Christ, not a follower of a particular church and their doctrines.

Act 11:25 Then departed Barnabas to Tarsus, for to seek Saul:
Act 11:26 And when he had found him, he brought him unto Antioch. And it came to pass, that a whole year they assembled themselves with the church, and taught much people. And the disciples were called Christians first in Antioch.

Col 1:15 Who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature:
Col 1:16 For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him:
Col 1:17 And he is before all things, and by him all things consist.
Col 1:18 And he is the head of the body, the church: who is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead; that in all things he might have the preeminence.

 

[for_his_glory]

LanaPodesta
The New Testament records the history of the church from approximately A.D. 30 to approximately A.D. 90. Nowhere in the New Testament will you find the one true church doing any of the following: praying to Mary, praying to the saints, venerating Mary, submitting to a pope, having a select priesthood, baptizing an infant, observing the ordinances of baptism and the Lord’s Supper as sacraments, or passing on apostolic authority to successors of the apostles.

The 2nd, 3rd, and 4th century (and following) church did not have the complete New Testament. Churches had portions of the New Testament, but the New Testament (and the full Bible) were not commonly available until after the invention of the printing press in A.D. 1440. The early church did its best in passing on the teachings of the apostles through oral tradition, and through extremely limited availability to the Word in written form found in the letters the Apostles wrote to the church.

The Protestant Reformation was followed very closely after the invention of the printing press and the translation of the Bible into the common languages of the people. Once people began to study the Bible for themselves, it became very clear how far the Roman Catholic Church/Orthodox had departed from the church that is described in the New Testament.

Scripture never mentions using "which church came first" as the basis for determining which is the "true" church. What it does teach is that one is to use Scripture as the determining factor as to which church is preaching the truth and thus is true to the first church. It is especially important to compare Scripture with a church's teaching on such core issues as the full deity and humanity of Christ, the atonement for sin through His blood on Calvary, salvation from sin by grace through faith, and the infallibility of the Scriptures. The “first church” and “one true church” is recorded in the New Testament. That is the church that all churches are to follow, emulate, and model themselves after.

 

[Free]

I didn't. All who belong to the LATTER (the visible Church) belong to the FORMER (the invisible Church). This can be said with certainty.

It absolutely cannot be said with certainty because it is absolutely false. Just look at what Jesus said:

Mat 13:24 He put another parable before them, saying, “The kingdom of heaven may be compared to a man who sowed good seed in his field,
Mat 13:25 but while his men were sleeping, his enemy came and sowed weeds among the wheat and went away.
Mat 13:26 So when the plants came up and bore grain, then the weeds appeared also.
Mat 13:27 And the servants of the master of the house came and said to him, ‘Master, did you not sow good seed in your field? How then does it have weeds?’
Mat 13:28 He said to them, ‘An enemy has done this.’ So the servants said to him, ‘Then do you want us to go and gather them?’
Mat 13:29 But he said, ‘No, lest in gathering the weeds you root up the wheat along with them.
Mat 13:30 Let both grow together until the harvest, and at harvest time I will tell the reapers, “Gather the weeds first and bind them in bundles to be burned, but gather the wheat into my barn.”’” (ESV)

Every church building and every tradition in Christianity has unbelievers. There is simply no way that the visible Church can be equated with the invisible Church. Belonging to a certain tradition, such as Catholicism or Eastern Orthodox, does not make a person a believer. Having true saving faith in Christ and his work is what makes a person a believer.

There are many throughout all Christian traditions who have not done so and simply think they're a true believer because their parents were, or they were baptized as an infant, or had first communion, or go to church, etc. But none of those things makes anyone, or is evidence of anyone being, a true believer.

Regarding the latter, the Church that gave you scripture teaches Mary's perpetual virginity. To say otherwise is heresy.

No. No it definitely isn't. A heresy is something that goes against Scripture and is of first order importance; it's a salvific issue. The doctrine of Mary's perpetual virginity is nowhere in the Bible and therefore 100% false. While such a false teaching in and of itself does nothing to affect one's salvation, it could lead to all sorts of other false doctrines, which may affect one's salvation or give one a false belief that they're saved.

Wait, where are you getting this from? It doesn't say it in scripture. So how can you comment on it?

Because that is simply what those things mean. It doesn't need to be in the Bible to understand and comment on. The visible Church is the physical, outward expression of those who gather together, most often done on Sunday mornings, although not always. The invisible Church is the true believers, whom only God really knows and sees. The two are absolutely not the same.

 

[LanaPodesta]

This is a fallacy of the teachings of the Catholic church not found in scripture

The Church GAVE you scripture.

The founding of the Church is explicitly recorded in Scripture, but the doctrine of sola scriptura—that Scripture alone is the sole infallible rule of faith—is not taught in Scripture.

1. The Church is founded by Christ:

“And I tell you that you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my Church, and the gates of Hades will not overcome it.”
— Matthew 16:18

1. The Church is the pillar of truth:

“...the household of God, which is the Church of the living God, the pillar and foundation of the truth.”
— 1 Timothy 3:15

1. Sola scriptura is not taught in Scripture:
   No verse states that Scripture alone is the sole authority for faith.
   While 2 Timothy 3:16 says Scripture is “profitable” for teaching, etc., it does not claim exclusivity:

“All Scripture is inspired by God and is profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness.”
— 2 Timothy 3:16

If “profitable” meant “sufficient alone,” then by the same logic, anything else profitable would also be sufficient, which is not the case.

Why would the institution that GAVE you scripture make up something in contradiction with it? What would the Church have to gain from this?

 

[LanaPodesta]

It absolutely cannot be said with certainty because it is absolutely false. Just look at what Jesus said:

Mat 13:24 He put another parable before them, saying, “The kingdom of heaven may be compared to a man who sowed good seed in his field,
Mat 13:25 but while his men were sleeping, his enemy came and sowed weeds among the wheat and went away.
Mat 13:26 So when the plants came up and bore grain, then the weeds appeared also.
Mat 13:27 And the servants of the master of the house came and said to him, ‘Master, did you not sow good seed in your field? How then does it have weeds?’
Mat 13:28 He said to them, ‘An enemy has done this.’ So the servants said to him, ‘Then do you want us to go and gather them?’
Mat 13:29 But he said, ‘No, lest in gathering the weeds you root up the wheat along with them.
Mat 13:30 Let both grow together until the harvest, and at harvest time I will tell the reapers, “Gather the weeds first and bind them in bundles to be burned, but gather the wheat into my barn.”’” (ESV)

Every church building and every tradition in Christianity has unbelievers. There is simply no way that the visible Church can be equated with the invisible Church. Belonging to a certain tradition, such as Catholicism or Eastern Orthodox, does not make a person a believer. Having true saving faith in Christ and his work is what makes a person a believer.

There are many throughout all Christian traditions who have not done so and simply think they're a true believer because their parents were, or they were baptized as an infant, or had first communion, or go to church, etc. But none of those things makes anyone, or is evidence of anyone being, a true believer.


No. No it definitely isn't. A heresy is something that goes against Scripture and is of first order importance; it's a salvific issue. The doctrine of Mary's perpetual virginity is nowhere in the Bible and therefore 100% false. While such a false teaching in and of itself does nothing to affect one's salvation, it could lead to all sorts of other false doctrines, which may affect one's salvation or give one a false belief that they're saved.

Because that is simply what those things mean. It doesn't need to be in the Bible to understand and comment on. The visible Church is the physical, outward expression of those who gather together, most often done on Sunday mornings, although not always. The invisible Church is the true believers, whom only God really knows and sees. The two are absolutely not the same.

None of that scripture you shared mentions any kind of 'church'.

 

[Free]

None of that scripture you shared mentions any kind of 'church'.

How is that at all relevant? If Jesus says that there are tares among the wheat, then there are tares among the wheat.

 

[LanaPodesta]

How is that at all relevant? If Jesus says that there are tares among the wheat, then there are tares among the wheat.

We're talking about the Church. Not wheat. Theology, not agriculture.

 

[Free]

We're talking about the Church. Not wheat. Theology, not agriculture.

So, you're saying the kingdom of God has nothing to do with the Church, correct?

 

[LanaPodesta]

So, you're saying the kingdom of God has nothing to do with the Church, correct?

Nope. You're the one who posted scripture, that doesn't even include the word 'church', and then started talking about wheat for some reason.

 

[Free]

Nope. You're the one who posted scripture, that doesn't even include the word 'church', and then started talking about wheat for some reason.

Okay, so you simply don't understand Jesus's use of the parable. Perhaps this is the problem when certain traditions in Christianity teach that lay persons cannot interpret Scripture for themselves. Would that be a fair assessment? That then leads to what is perhaps the core issue--the lay persons cannot then understand what is and isn't taught in Scripture, making it easier to teach false doctrines and maintain power.

 

[LanaPodesta]

Okay, so you simply don't understand Jesus's use of the parable. Perhaps this is the problem when certain traditions in Christianity teach that lay persons cannot interpret Scripture for themselves. Would that be a fair assessment? That then leads to what is perhaps the core issue--the lay persons cannot then understand what is and isn't taught in Scripture, making it easier to teach false doctrines and maintain power.

You mentioned 'wheat', did you not?

If Jesus says that there are tares among the wheat, then there are tares among the wheat

Right. There are 'tares among the wheat'. What does that have to do with the Church, then?

 

[Free]

You mentioned 'wheat', did you not?

Jesus did, in speaking of the kingdom of heaven. It's a parable, right?

Right. There are 'tares among the wheat'. What does that have to do with the Church, then?

What does the kingdom of heaven have to do with the Church? Understand the parable and you'll answer your question.

 

[LanaPodesta]

Jesus did, in speaking of the kingdom of heaven. It's a parable, right?

Who says?

What does the kingdom of heaven have to do with the Church? Understand the parable and you'll answer your question

You mentioned 'wheat'. Please stay on topic.

 

[Free]

Who says?

You mentioned 'wheat'. Please stay on topic.

I honestly can't tell if you're being serious or just trolling. At this point, it seems rather like you're trolling, so I suggest you take this seriously.

 

[LanaPodesta]

I honestly can't tell if you're being serious or just trolling. At this point, it seems rather like you're trolling, so I suggest you take this seriously.

I am. You posted scripture that didn't mention the word 'church' and then started talking about wheat. Can you make your point clear please.

 

[Free]

I am. You posted scripture that didn't mention the word 'church' and then started talking about wheat. Can you make your point clear please.

It is clear; it is quite clear, at least is should be to anyone who knows how to read and understand the Bible.

I asked: "you're saying the kingdom of God has nothing to do with the Church, correct?"

You replied: "Nope."

That means, you agree with me that the kingdom of God/heaven as something to do with the Church. But, you also followed that with: "You're the one who posted scripture, that doesn't even include the word 'church', and then started talking about wheat for some reason."

That suggests that you actually do believe that the kingdom of heaven has nothing to do with the Church. It shows that you do not understand the parable, at all.

When you then stated: "You mentioned 'wheat', did you not?"

I replied: "Jesus did, in speaking of the kingdom of heaven. It's a parable, right?"

But you replied: "Who says?"

So, either you're saying it's not a parable, or you are denying that Jesus mentioned wheat in speaking of the kingdom of heaven. However, it definitely is a parable and Jesus most certainly mentioned wheat in speaking of the kingdom of heaven. I posted the passage.

You also stated: "There are 'tares among the wheat'. What does that have to do with the Church, then?"

I replied: "What does the kingdom of heaven have to do with the Church? Understand the parable and you'll answer your question."

When does Jesus say that the wheat and tares are to be harvested? Harvest time. When do you think harvest time is, has it happened or is it yet to happen? Based on those things, what does the kingdom of heaven have to do with the Church?

 

[LanaPodesta]

It is clear; it is quite clear, at least is should be to anyone who knows how to read and understand the Bible.

But one's understanding of the Bible is personal, right? If Jesus talks about wheat, he's talking about agriculture, right?

However, it definitely is a parable and Jesus most certainly mentioned wheat in speaking of the kingdom of heaven.

That's YOUR interpretation. Cos we all have our OWN interpretation, right?

That suggests that you actually do believe that the kingdom of heaven has nothing to do with the Church. It shows that you do not understand the parable, at all.

Nope.

When does Jesus say that the wheat and tares are to be harvested? Harvest time. When do you think harvest time is, has it happened or is it yet to happen? Based on those things, what does the kingdom of heaven have to do with the Church

Maybe he's just talking about farming. Who can say? It's all just personal interpretation, right?

 

[Free]

But one's understanding of the Bible is personal, right? If Jesus talks about wheat, he's talking about agriculture, right?

That's YOUR interpretation. Cos we all have our OWN interpretation, right?

Nope.


Maybe he's just talking about farming. Who can say? It's all just personal interpretation, right?

Do you want to stay in this discussion or not? Your trolling is very disrespectful and against the ToS. Either get serious or you won't remain in this thread.