A question for all Protestants being lead by the Holy Spirit

[shawn38]

Paul wrote letters of instructions, corrections and even rebukes to all the Churches, These letters were shared among the ‘congregation’, even though they were written to those appointed in authority over the Churches.

If you read Hebrews 5 ‘entirely’, it supports my view, as opposed to your view. Let’s change the emphasis and see what happens. (For room to fit a response, I am using select verses and invite you to read the entire chapter.)

We see, when reading in the context of the entire chapter, Paul is addressing the authority over the Church, because they were slow to learn, and by that time, they should’ve been teachers, but were not.

Most of Heb 5 relates the love and sacrifices of the high priests of the OT to Christ which was applicable to all ibn Christ.

Yes, the letters would have gone to the church authority and disseminated to the congregation. Does it mean that it was only intended for the church authority, No.

This was not for every person of the Church. You know scriptures well enough to know there are specific requirements, for specific offices.

Paul appointed Timothy and wrote a letter of instruction to him, even instructing him to commend faithful men who shall be fit to teach others also. It wasn’t for everyone. There was a selection, acceptance process to who would be in authority, in offices within the Church.

You’re referencing back to 1 Tim 3 and Titus 1 perhaps. But how about, specifically because this is pretty concrete,

Eph 6:4 Fathers, do not exasperate your children; instead, bring them up in the training and instruction of the Lord

Addressed to Eph 1:1 “To the saints in Ephesus,a the faithfulb in Christ Jesus:”

Col 3:16Let the peace of Christ rule in your hearts, since as members of one body you were called to peace. And be thankful. 16Let the word of Christ dwell in you richly as you teach and admonish one another with all wisdom, and as you sing psalms, hymns and spiritual songs with gratitude in your hearts to God.

Addressed to Col 1:2 “To the holy and faithful brothers in Christ at Colosse:”

Rom 15:14 I myself am convinced, my brothers, that you yourselves are full of goodness, complete in knowledge and competent to instruct one another

Addressed to Rom 1:7 “to all in Rome who are loved by God and called to be saints:”

As you can see the letters do not address only the church authority, but the entire church. There are instances mentioned that address specifics such as 1 Tim 3 and Titus 1.

Again, does John 14:2-3 apply to only the apostles? Please answer this critical question

John 14:2-3 In my Father’s house are many rooms; if it were not so, I would have told you. I am going there to prepare a place for you. 3 And if I go and prepare a place for you, I will come back and take you to be with me that you also may be where I am.

 

[shawn38]

Christ clearly established an authoritative Church, with authoritative offices, filled by those He chose and appointed. With that authority, those men appointed other men. NO ONE appointed themself to a position, or someone else to a position without having the proper authority as established by Christ, Himself.

An authority of Deacons and overseers were established based on 1 Tim 3 and Titus 1.

But also a couple other verses:

Titus 2:3 Likewise, teach the older women to be reverent in the way they live, not to be slanderers or addicted to much wine, but to teach what is good. 4Then they can train the younger women to love their husbands and children, 5to be self-controlled and pure, to be busy at home, to be kind, and to be subject to their husbands, so that no one will malign the word of God. 6Similarly, encourage the young men to be self-controlled. 7In everything set them an example by doing what is good. In your teaching show integrity, seriousness 8and soundness of speech that cannot be condemned, so that those who oppose you may be ashamed because they have nothing bad to say about us.

Titus 2:3-8 speaks of older and younger women teaching, young men too.

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

Most of Heb 5 relates the love and sacrifices of the high priests of the OT to Christ which was applicable to all ibn Christ.

Yes, the letters would have gone to the church authority and disseminated to the congregation. Does it mean that it was only intended for the church authority, No.

You’re referencing back to 1 Tim 3 and Titus 1 perhaps. But how about, specifically because this is pretty concrete,

Eph 6:4 Fathers, do not exasperate your children; instead, bring them up in the training and instruction of the Lord

Addressed to Eph 1:1 “To the saints in Ephesus,a the faithfulb in Christ Jesus:”

Col 3:16Let the peace of Christ rule in your hearts, since as members of one body you were called to peace. And be thankful. 16Let the word of Christ dwell in you richly as you teach and admonish one another with all wisdom, and as you sing psalms, hymns and spiritual songs with gratitude in your hearts to God.

Addressed to Col 1:2 “To the holy and faithful brothers in Christ at Colosse:”

Rom 15:14 I myself am convinced, my brothers, that you yourselves are full of goodness, complete in knowledge and competent to instruct one another

Addressed to Rom 1:7 “to all in Rome who are loved by God and called to be saints:”

As you can see the letters do not address only the church authority, but the entire church. There are instances mentioned that address specifics such as 1 Tim 3 and Titus 1.

Again, does John 14:2-3 apply to only the apostles? Please answer this critical question

John 14:2-3 In my Father’s house are many rooms; if it were not so, I would have told you. I am going there to prepare a place for you. 3 And if I go and prepare a place for you, I will come back and take you to be with me that you also may be where I am.

See you refuse to accept my answer that we are blessed to see some of the things the Apostles are to teach us. This means certain things apply, other do not. There is no example of anyone assuming a position within the Church, in scriptures. I have repeated this several times now. Christ’s instructions and letters to the appointed men of the Church are for all of us to understand our faith, it is not for us to assume an authority. That is not taught in scriptures by Christ or the Apostles and there are no examples of it either.

Yes, a parents are to instruct their children in the faith as they raise them. This is short of appointing themselves or their children into a position of authority.

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

An authority of Deacons and overseers were established based on 1 Tim 3 and Titus 1.

But also a couple other verses:

Titus 2:3 Likewise, teach the older women to be reverent in the way they live, not to be slanderers or addicted to much wine, but to teach what is good. 4Then they can train the younger women to love their husbands and children, 5to be self-controlled and pure, to be busy at home, to be kind, and to be subject to their husbands, so that no one will malign the word of God. 6Similarly, encourage the young men to be self-controlled. 7In everything set them an example by doing what is good. In your teaching show integrity, seriousness 8and soundness of speech that cannot be condemned, so that those who oppose you may be ashamed because they have nothing bad to say about us.

Titus 2:3-8 speaks of older and younger women teaching, young men too.

Yes, in letters to those of authority who could appoint ‘candidates’.

 

[lutherlic]

I think the issue in this regard is authority. The Magisterium has the authority to accurately interpret Holy Scripture. They are led by the Holy Spirit. The rest of us (as well as all non-Catholics) are fallible when we do so on our own. Of itself, Sacred Scripture is incomplete without Sacred Tradition.

 

[shawn38]

See you refuse to accept my answer that we are blessed to see some of the things the Apostles are to teach us. This means certain things apply, other do not. There is no example of anyone assuming a position within the Church, in scriptures.

We are blessed to see anything related to Christ. But the teachings of the apostles were not regulated to the apostles alone as scripture shows.

Christ’s instructions and letters to the appointed men of the Church are for all of us to understand our faith, it is not for us to assume an authority. That is not taught in scriptures by Christ or the Apostles and there are no examples of it either.

The Holy Spirit is the authority if what you’re teaching is from the Holy Spirit. Your premise all along was that the church is the authority. I disagree. The Holy Spirit is the authority.

From EWTN in relation to the indwelling of the Holy Ghost in the CC.
What does the indwelling of the Holy Ghost ennoble the Church to do?
The indwelling of the Holy Ghost enables the Church to teach to sanctify, and to rule the faithful in the name of Christ.
(a) The Church must teach because otherwise men would not know the truths of divine revelation taught by Christ.
(b) The Church must sanctify, that is, bring grace to the world through the sacraments, because otherwise men could not be saved.

So the CC is being taught by Holy Ghost to sanctify and rule the faithful in the name of Christ.

a) If the church was taken out of this world, we would still have the Holy Spirit to teach us. The Holy Spirit said it would be with us forever.
b) It is the Holy Spirit that sanctifies, not the CC or any authority. The CC and other authorities claim to perform their works in the name of Christ.

Rom 15:16 to be a minister of Christ Jesus to the Gentiles with the priestly duty of proclaiming the gospel of God, so that the Gentiles might become an offering acceptable to God, sanctified by the Holy Spirit.

Yes, a parents are to instruct their children in the faith as they raise them. This is short of appointing themselves or their children into a position of authority.

The authority by which they are teaching is by that of the Holy Spirit.

Have you ever been told to do something by someone with authority (ie boss)? Probably. So you were doing the work by the authority of your boss. Same thing. Just as the CC claims to be lead by the Holy Spirit, we believe the Holy Spirit teaches the individual through a personal relationship with Christ.

If John 14:2-3 does not reserved for just the apostles, but all those in Christ, why should not John 16:13 apply to all those in Christ?

 

[shawn38]

This means certain things apply, other do not.

Unless specifically stated, you’re picking and choosing what you want.

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

We are blessed to see anything related to Christ. But the teachings of the apostles were not regulated to the apostles alone as scripture shows.

Not true. You have not shown anyone that assumed an authority, or appointed themself or others, without the proper authority. You have made quite an argument, but the scriptural support for just anyone to assume an authority is not there.

The Holy Spirit is the authority if what you’re teaching is from the Holy Spirit. Your premise all along was that the church is the authority. I disagree. The Holy Spirit is the authority.

The explain all the different teachings, from people all claiming guidance of the Holy Spirit? Give an example of that from scriptures.

So the CC is being taught by Holy Ghost to sanctify and rule the faithful in the name of Christ.

a) If the church was taken out of this world, we would still have the Holy Spirit to teach us. The Holy Spirit said it would be with us forever.
b) It is the Holy Spirit that sanctifies, not the CC or any authority. The CC and other authorities claim to perform their works in the name of Christ.

Christ told that to the offices of His Church and He said the even the gate of hell shall not prevail against it.

Rom 15:16 to be a minister of Christ Jesus to the Gentiles with the priestly duty of proclaiming the gospel of God, so that the Gentiles might become an offering acceptable to God, sanctified by the Holy Spirit.

The authority by which they are teaching is by that of the Holy Spirit.

And the teaching is coming from the authoritative men of the Church, rightfully appointed.

Have you ever been told to do something by someone with authority (ie boss)? Probably. So you were doing the work by the authority of your boss. Same thing. Just as the CC claims to be lead by the Holy Spirit, we believe the Holy Spirit teaches the individual through a personal relationship with Christ.

If John 14:2-3 does not reserved for just the apostles, but all those in Christ, why should not John 16:13 apply to all those in Christ?

Show me where Christ had the multitudes ‘teach’ or ‘preach’ under His authority? Not there. The Apostles appointed men and they appointed men, that’s Apostolic succession of offices from and through the authoritative Church.

Without examples of someone in scriptures assuming an authority, it’s not correct.

 

[po18guy]

I think the issue in this regard is authority. The Magisterium has the authority to accurately interpret Holy Scripture. They are led by the Holy Spirit. The rest of us (as well as all non-Catholics) are fallible when we do so on our own. Of itself, Sacred Scripture is incomplete without Sacred Tradition.

This concept can be quite difficult for some protestants to grasp, since the bible was derived from the Church. Sola scriptura faith communities are derived from the bible, since that is all they have. Thus, an incomplete bible (Luke 3:18, John 20:30, John 21:25, Acts 2:40, 1 Corinthians 11:34) can produce only an incomplete deposit of faith. And yet, their love of Christ is great and they do an extreme amount of good with only two Sacraments. Let us pray for unity through the Holy Spirit.

 

[CMatt25]

God gave us free will. Who am I to try and take that away? All I can do is share my experience and the things I learned through an honest research with my cup emptied out for Him to fill, instead of what I had filled it with. There’s serving Him the way He wants to be served and there’s serving Him the way some are willing to serve…only one of them is obedience, in my honest opinion.

Prod, you assume those who disagree with your interpretation do not have their cups emptied out for Him. But I totally agree with your last statement about in your opinion. :clapping: God bless you Prod and peace.

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

Prod, you assume those who disagree with your interpretation do not have their cups emptied out for Him. But I totally agree with your last statement about in your opinion. :clapping: God bless you Prod and peace.

I believe a lot of Protestantism is filling one’s cup with what one wants, or what one thinks He wants. Letting Him fill your cup, is letting Him have His will.

I hope I have articulated it a little better.

BTW, by assuming me to be wrong, is assuming your interpretation to be right. See how that becomes a circular argument?

 

[Xavierlives]

The great commission, yes we’ve discussed it and apparently I didn’t make myself clear, or you missed it. Christ was only speaking to those He chose and appointed. The ‘great commission’ was not to the multitudes.

Hold on now. So you are telling me the Catholic stance on the Great Commission is it was spoken to those select people?

If so, I dare ask one question: why include it in the Bible?

 

[Xavierlives]

I believe a lot of Protestantism is filling one’s cup with what one wants, or what one thinks He wants. Letting Him fill your cup, is letting Him have His will.

I hope I have articulated it a little better.

BTW, by assuming me to be wrong, is assuming your interpretation to be right. See how that becomes a circular argument?

Well, not that this is any new news, but many protestants view Catholicism as “filling one’s cup with what one wants.” It is a do what you want religion and when the time comes, confess, make things right through pentance or indulgences.

Of course there are faithful on both sides. There are those who walk closely with their Lord. The problem is you are broadcasting of these stereotyped misconceptions of the “beliefs” of another faith, which does nothing for either faith. It just gets feathers ruffled.

I’ll repeat a former post with the hope that a Catholic will answer:

Just a question: Have you ever been reading the scripture and think you know what is being said, only to go to some Catholic reference to find out you were way off? So at that moment, you were being led by something other than the Holy Spirit because if you were unified, you would know the answers immediately.

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

Hold on now. So you are telling me the Catholic stance on the Great Commission is it was spoken to those select people?

If so, I dare ask one question: why include it in the Bible?

I know alot of people only scan these posts, but for your convenience, I’ll repeat something I have repeated more times than I care to count.

We are all called to share that hope which is within us. This does not however, replace the fact that Christ established an authoritative Church.

Do you not agree that reading something in context, is reading the audience of what was spoken?

I’ve asked many and I’ll ask you, where in scriptures did Christ instruct ‘multitudes’, those other than the ones He chose and appointed, to ‘teach’ or ‘preach’? Where in scriptures did Christ do ‘blanket’ appointments over multitudes?

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

Well, not that this is any new news, but many protestants view Catholicism as “filling one’s cup with what one wants.” It is a do what you want religion and when the time comes, confess, make things right through pentance or indulgences.

Of course there are faithful on both sides. There are those who walk closely with their Lord. The problem is you are broadcasting of these stereotyped misconceptions of the “beliefs” of another faith, which does nothing for either faith. It just gets feathers ruffled.

I’ll repeat a former post with the hope that a Catholic will answer:

This does not take away from the fact that Protestantism came from Catholicism, not the other way around. People began filling their cups differently, based on private interpretations, and many disagreements between them.

Catholicism is erroneously viewed as a ‘do what you want’ religion, by those who don’t understand the faith. If you truly understood Catholicism, you’d understand there is more obedience in accepting His Church, as opposed to the ‘mall’ of Churches where one can pick and choose the theology that more closely fits their lifestyle. That is my honest opinion.

There are faithful on both sides. Speaking of feathers ruffled, it seems many Protestant posters only come here to post rejections of anything a Catholic states is their belief, only to ruffle those feathers. This is sterotypical misconceptions.

I post what I believe and will not stop because you feel it sterotypes anything. I was raised Protestant and know alot of the misconceived teachings that went with those years. Some Protestants do even view Catholics as Christians, or claim Catholics worship ‘another’ Christ. This is total ignorance. There is only one Christ, born of the virgin Mary, the only begotten Son of the Father, who suffered, died and was buried, for our salvation. He arose again on the third day and ascended into heaven and is seated at the right hand of the Father. He will come again in glory to judge the living and the dead and His kingdom will have no end.

 

[CMatt25]

I believe a lot of Protestantism is filling one’s cup with what one wants, or what one thinks He wants. Letting Him fill your cup, is letting Him have His will.

I hope I have articulated it a little better.

BTW, by assuming me to be wrong, is assuming your interpretation to be right. See how that becomes a circular argument?

Prod, I don’t assume I am nor anyone is completely right or wrong. We are human beings and fallible.

 

[Xavierlives]

Just a question: Have you ever been reading the scripture and think you know what is being said, only to go to some Catholic reference to find out you were way off? So at that moment, you were being led by something other than the Holy Spirit because if you were unified, you would know the answers immediately.

What is happening here is the Catholic Church is teaching Catholics what the Holy Spirit says. This is quenching the Holy Spirit.

I know alot of people only scan these posts, but for your convenience, I’ll repeat something I have repeated more times than I care to count.

We are all called to share that hope which is within us. This does not however, replace the fact that Christ established an authoritative Church.

Do you not agree that reading something in context, is reading the audience of what was spoken?

I’ve asked many and I’ll ask you, where in scriptures did Christ instruct ‘multitudes’, those other than the ones He chose and appointed, to ‘teach’ or ‘preach’? Where in scriptures did Christ do ‘blanket’ appointments over multitudes?

I am just trying to get a clear understanding of your point.

With this logic, we can toss the epistles since they were specifically written to a group.

That really condenses the Bible.

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

I am just trying to get a clear understanding of your point.

With this logic, we can toss the epistles since they were specifically written to a group.

That really condenses the Bible.

Deliberate misrepresentation of what I’ve said in this thread?

We can learn, from the Apostolic succession, as well as those things written for them to teach us.

Aren’t you in law school? Did they just hand you the school books, or did they issue school books with a certified instructor to teach you? Would the instructor have been enough, or did the books help you understand what the instructor taught you?

It’s really that simple.

The extras, ‘we can toss the epsitles’, are just misrepresentations to maintain the view being espoused.

Do we read the documents of the country and appoint ourselves to be the authority, or do we go through the proper channels to gain certification? Would God have setup an authoritative Church requiring less than men?

 

[Xavierlives]

This does not take away from the fact that Protestantism came from Catholicism, not the other way around. People began filling their cups differently, based on private interpretations, and many disagreements between them.

Catholicism is erroneously viewed as a ‘do what you want’ religion, by those who don’t understand the faith. If you truly understood Catholicism, you’d understand there is more obedience in accepting His Church, as opposed to the ‘mall’ of Churches where one can pick and choose the theology that more closely fits their lifestyle. That is my honest opinion.

There are faithful on both sides. Speaking of feathers ruffled, it seems many Protestant posters only come here to post rejections of anything a Catholic states is their belief, only to ruffle those feathers. This is sterotypical misconceptions.

I post what I believe and will not stop because you feel it sterotypes anything. I was raised Protestant and know alot of the misconceived teachings that went with those years. Some Protestants do even view Catholics as Christians, or claim Catholics worship ‘another’ Christ. This is total ignorance. There is only one Christ, born of the virgin Mary, the only begotten Son of the Father, who suffered, died and was buried, for our salvation. He arose again on the third day and ascended into heaven and is seated at the right hand of the Father. He will come again in glory to judge the living and the dead and His kingdom will have no end.

The problem with your stereotyping is the polarizing effect. You do not want a catholic church, you want a Catholic Church. Otherwise you would educate, not rail. You would find unifying points not separating ones. You would mention that we have a similar foundational belief, but instead you say “we were here first.”

I do not expect you to change, just as I know some protestants won’t change. But I believe in a catholic church. I believe that when the back-biting stops and we realize we are a catholic church, much will be gained for Christ.

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

The problem with your stereotyping is the polarizing effect. You do not want a catholic church, you want a Catholic Church. Otherwise you would educate, not rail. You would find unifying points not separating ones. You would mention that we have a similar foundational belief, but instead you say “we were here first.”

I do not expect you to change, just as I know some protestants won’t change. But I believe in a catholic church. I believe that when the back-biting stops and we realize we are a catholic church, much will be gained for Christ.

Again, you’re mistaken. I accept the Catholic Church as the Church Christ wanted, and established. The unifying points are in scriptures. The Church was meant to be one. There was no difference in the Churches in scriptures. In a way, those ‘new’ Churches are a man made tradition, just as scriptures are the ‘final authority’ and that scriptures should be interpreted by each individual. Christ built the first Church. His was first and will be everlasting.

The Catholic Church is the ‘catholic Church’. Just as new interpretations were given to scriptures, new definitions of ‘Catholic’ are a new attempt to justify different teachings/doctrines of many denominations. It’s nothing I did, Christ built one Church and as I mentioned above, all the Churches in scriptures had the same teachings/doctrines. Your ‘beef’ is not with me…