Ask A Baptist Pastor

[jam070406]

He probably believes as strongly as you do that he has been brought to where he is by God.

And maybe he was brought to CAF by God to learn the Truth. And maybe he came here to drive people from the Church Christ established.

 

[Betterave]

Not really. Because that’s not at all what I wrote. And it also seems to imply that you and your friend don’t believe in absolute Truth and that the Holy Spirit is not capable of leading one to it if they are open to it.

The point you made was correct (I believe), but the counter-point about how your comment was likely to be perceived was also correct (I believe). We probably all believe the Holy Spirit is capable of leading us, whatever Church we belong to (or don’t belong to). But simply emphasizing that abstract point doesn’t seem to be something that is likely to aid the Spirit in helping our brother Steve to actually recognize his particular errors. Instead we can do this with concrete reasons, which *ought *to have an effect on Steve if he *is *in fact open to the Spirit, given that his errors seem to include very basic breaches of common sense.

 

[reformissionary]

Reformissionary,
I’d like your comments about my posts #126 and #128.

Yes, Jesus died for the elect.

For your answer on Adam, look to Romans 5 which explains it well. Noah came after Adam, is from Adam. Noah didn’t introduce sin into the world like Adam. For example, v19…

For as by the one man’s disobedience the many were made sinners, so by the one man’s obedience the many will be made righteous.

As to Mary, is she omnipotent and omnipresent? Those are attributes of God. Mary is not God, and therefore very limited. Yet billions of Catholic prayers are rising to her. How does she hear them all? Only explanation is that she would have to be God, which of course you don’t believe. Yet you give her a role that only God could fulfill. That goes for other Saints too.

You can say “mystery” all you want. It’s not in Scripture, makes no sense out of limited humanity, and therefore is evidence of false teaching.

 

[jmcrae]

Once Saved Always Saved as Catholics have TOLD ME I believed is not what I believe. If you want to know if I believe it or what I believe, that would be more meaningful than assuming we all believe it in the way you have been told we do.

I am under the impression that the Once Saved, Always Saved doctrine is a core tenet of Baptist theology. If you don’t believe in it, are you disagreeing with Baptist teachings, and if so, what else do you disagree with them on, and on what basis?

 

[jam070406]

The point you made was correct (I believe), but the counter-point about how your comment was likely to be perceived was also correct (I believe). We probably all believe the Holy Spirit is capable of leading us, whatever Church we belong to (or don’t belong to). But simply emphasizing that abstract point doesn’t seem to be something that is likely to aid the Spirit in helping our brother Steve to actually recognize his particular errors. Instead we can do this with concrete reasons, which ought to have an effect on Steve if he is open to the Spirit, given that his errors seem to include very basic breaches of common sense.

I see your point. But, have you been reading the threads? It wasn’t stated in a vaccuum. Steve isn’t even open to the many thought out and in depth responses he has gotten from many learned Catholics. ( I exclude myself in this) He has not been open. Then why is he here? I was asking him, perhaps in a poor way, if he was open. It is apparant he is not.

 

[jmcrae]

As to Mary, is she omnipotent and omnipresent?

No - she’s in Heaven. She does not experience the passage of time in the same way that we do. She is outside of time, and can enter into the time line at any point she chooses to.

Mary is not God, and therefore very limited.

Mary is in Heaven. By comparison to God, certainly she is limited.

By comparison to us, she is extremely advanced, and extremely powerful. That’s what it means, to have reached human perfection in Heaven.

She has access to all the knowledge that humankind has ever or will ever produce. She can look at the Last Judgement with her own eyes and see who is being damned, and who is being saved. She sees every moment of time, from the Big Bang to the Last Day. She sees every place that has ever existed or will ever exist.

She’s in Heaven. She has perfect freedom to do absolutely anything she wants to do. She is not bound, blindfolded, and gagged. She is not impotent to act.

What kind of a Heaven would it be for us to look forward to, if it were not true that we will have perfect freedom, or that we will have the run of the whole Universe, with all of its time and space?

 

[JRKH]

Profitable doesn’t mean sufficient or insufficient. It means profitable. Useful. It’s not a word intended to point one way or another. “God-breathed” on the other hand, is crucial. Whatever isn’t God-breathed is inferior and fallible. You would agree, no?

Yes I would agree, except for a point ot clarification.
As jmcrea pointed out fallible or infallibe cannot be applied to the written text. the text is either contains error or does not contain error (is errant or inerrant)

This lead me back to a question I asked earlier
Please provide for me a list of “God Breathed Scripture” so that I may know which is which.

James, the church isn’t being as authoritative as Scripture here. It’s supporting it! It’s defending it! It’s using it (as it describes what the “sin” is) and then protecting the church by wielding the Word!

And so, when the Church in council, set aside most of the Mosaic Law in Acts 15, as it applied to Christians, was it acting in support of Scripture or was it, “being as authoritative as Scripture”?

Peace
James

 

[reformissionary]

So you would expect me to simply continue to accept your word for it that the 66 book bible is the real and true bible and that the 73 book bible is NOT the real and true bible.

In other words, it is not The Bible that you expect me to believe in the face of this dilemma of the canon, It is YOU that you expect me to believe.

You say that you would tell me that, “there are Christians who accept other books that aren’t God-breathed”. So how would you go about proving that these other books are NOT God breathed?

Peace
James

No, I’d ask them to believe the historic Christian faith. There was plenty of dispute on the books, including with the early church fathers. I do say they aren’t God-breathed. But guess what, we have 66 in agreement that compose nearly all of our theology. So we have plenty of room for discussion outside of canon issues.

I’m not trying to brush it aside, but I’m trying hard to not get spread too thin since that can get you in trouble here.

 

[reformissionary]

I see your point. But, have you been reading the threads? It wasn’t stated in a vaccuum. Steve isn’t even open to the many thought out and in depth responses he has gotten from many learned Catholics. ( I exclude myself in this) He has not been open. Then why is he here? I was asking him, perhaps in a poor way, if he was open. It is apparant he is not.

I’m completely open to compelling arguments. Completely open.

 

[utunumsint]

After a lot of recent, intentional interaction with local Catholics through attending their own studies & Mass (which I give significant time to as they are 31% of our local population) I am greatly concerned with much. A few examples…

1. “Real Presence” teaching of the Eucharist has lead to Eucharolatry. The symbol of Jesus has become an idol and therefore a false Jesus. The real presence of Jesus is with us in the Holy Spirit at the Lord’s Supper and in every place believers go.

My opinion of this is that a symbolic attitude towards the Eucharist can lead to a form of Gnosticism. I believe the real presense is a kind of continuation of the incarnation. Christ the man, communicates himself to us in such an intimate way that he gives himself as food.

1. Also, Catholics tend to abuse the idea of “mystery” by making it a placeholder for inconsistency and error rather than actual mystery. How God can be three persons and one God at the same time is a true mystery. It isn’t illogical. It’s just beyond our comprehension. The “accidents” of the Eucharist is another example. It’s the “real presence” of Jesus yet it still looks and tastes like bread and wine.

Well we just take what he says literally. If you go with this literal position, then how it occurs is a mystery. If it is symbolic, you simplify things for yourself so that you no longer have a mystery to deal with.

1. Catholics tend to build the most important aspects of the Christian life out of “speculative theology.” For example Marian teaching is not based on clear inspiration from God as found in Scripture. God could have been very clear on the Catholic version of Mary. He didn’t. Yet Catholics keep running with their speculations and making them dogmatic. I’ve found many Catholic women who have a personal relationship with Mary much more significant than with Jesus.

I’m sure Jesus doesn’t mind their attachment to Mary. That said, I for one, at least, do not worship Mary. As for the concept that Marian doctrine comes from speculative theology, I would rather say that it comes from Sacred Tradition, and through the development of doctrine. Have you ever read any of Newman’s works on the development of doctrine?

newmanreader.org/works/development/

If you haven’t, then I would suggest starting there. If you have, then I would be interested in understanding your objections to his ideas.

1. Catholics tend to defend their faith by saying they** don’t do things they do**. Just saying that isn’t what you are doing doesn’t make it so. Doing is as doing does, not as the doer says. For example, “We don’t worship Mary!” Ok. Let’s talk about what worship is, what the incommunicable attributes of God are, etc. Let’s ask if what is ascribed to Mary is something to be ascribed to God alone or not.

So for me, the worship of God is to Love God above all things, and to love my neighbour as myself. Praying to the saints has more to do with our understanding of the communion of saints.

God bless,
Ut

 

[LindaSK]

That’s a great question and I appreciate you asking it. I’ll answer, and I’d like you to answer your own question for me too. What would it take for you to convert to Protestantism?

There are many hangups for me. I imagine a number of those would have to be dealt with sufficiently.
**
It’s Scripture that keeps Protestants from Catholicism.** So I’d have to see the entire system of Popes and Catholic leadership from one brief passage in Mt 16. I’d have to see Scripture pointing to an equal authority outside itself. I’d have to see praying to Saints from Scripture. I’d have to see baptizing infants in Scripture. I’d have to see real presence from Scripture. Etc.

First let me say that I, too, have a life, so, I have not read past this. I, also, will not be able to stick around.

As a convert, I must respond by saying that you cannot speak for all of us. It was scripture, and coming to a better understanding of it, that led me from Protestantism to Catholicism. Reverting, to me, would be like losing ground. I do see all these things in scripture, and truly know I have come Home to the Church that Christ started, and the the Holy Spirit breathed life into at that first Pentecost.

You can also choose to find all this in scripture. You have chosen not to. All the rhetoric in the world will not change your mind if you are not open to a larger Truth. Mind you, I know I am where God wants me to be, and I keep growing in my Faith. I ask plenty of questions, am not always pleased with the answers, so, I keep asking more questions. Your arguments/comments will not cause me to take a step backwards, they just confirm me in my Faith.

God bless,
Linda

 

[Philthy]

1. There’s no such thing as “pretty God-breathed.” It is or it isn’t, and the distinction is crucial to being the church or falsely assume you are the church.

The fact that something IS God-breathed does not mean that it “sounds” God breathed. You have made a logical error here in equating the two.

1. With that you could say you or I would be just as authoritative as the Pope. We all have the Ghost, if we are His.

This is also a logical error. No where in the text is the particular gift of retaining/forgiving sins, which was passed on to the Apostles, implied to have been given to anyone else. Again, your conclusion is invalid.

1. This is more directly to and about the Apostles. They had the authority through their role and in the power of the Spirit as Apostles (eyewitnesses) to give us Scripture. The church after the Apostles does not have the same sense of authority to write Scripture or something equal. And Scripture doesn’t say they/we do.

I see, so the Apostles had a unique authority through the power of the Holy Spirit to pen scripture, but somehow above you extrapolate that another authority given through the HS magically is transferred to all of us? Isnt that a little odd how you conveniently exempt us all from having the power to pen Scripture but extend it to all of us in the case of forgiving sin? My guess is that you have a personal need to reconcile your beliefs and it is clouding your objectivity - just a guess.
And, for the record, Scripture doesnt anywhere tell us that the Apostles were given any such unique ability to pen Scripture. In fact, we know that half of the gospels were written by non-Apostles.

1. Forgiving/Retaining sins are perfect-tense verbs – past completed action with continuing results. So I we don’t go about saying, God has given us the authority to forgive sins! We instead say to non-Christians, If you believe in Jesus your sins are forgiven. If not they are retained. The Scriptures defines forgiveness, we now have the authority to proclaim it.

Once again, your analytical skills have betrayed you. The fact that past sins have been forgiven - as a “past completed action with continuing results” in no way implies that future, unconfessed, unforgiven sins have been forgiven. In fact, Scripture tells us point, “IF we confess our sins…he cleanses us from all unrighteousness”. No indication that a “one time” confession of being a sinner satisfies this criteria. Confession of sins and the forgiveness that Christ offers is a completed action for those sins that have been confessed, but it is also an ongoing requirement for those sins that remain yet committed and yet confessed.

Lastly, you mentioned early on that it was possible to fall into idolatry of Mary ( and even the Eucharist) when attributes of created things are given the attributes of God. My question to you is, “Is it possible (yes or no) to fall into idolatry of Scripture?”

Blessings!

 

[Betterave]

I see your point. But, have you been reading the threads? It wasn’t stated in a vaccuum. Steve isn’t even open to the many thought out and in depth responses he has gotten from many learned Catholics. ( I exclude myself in this) He has not been open. Then why is he here? I was asking him, perhaps in a poor way, if he was open. It is apparant he is not.

I can certainly understand the frustration and I didn’t mean to suggest that your remark should not have been made. I think your remark should in fact be a useful reality check for Steve. If Steve is honest with himself he should be able to see that when he points out (as anticipated) that he could have said the same thing to you (post 192), he is undermining his own position, not yours: we cannot simply appeal to the authority of scripture and the guidance of the Holy Spirit to establish the truth when the very people we disagree with are doing the very same thing… unless the Truth can contradict itself (Himself), which is the absurd logical conclusion of Steve’s position.

 

[jmcrae]

No, I’d ask them to believe the historic Christian faith.

The historic Christian faith (via the Councils of Hippo and Carthage) gives us a 73-book Bible.

There was plenty of dispute on the books, including with the early church fathers.

All of which were resolved when Pope Innocent I accepted the findings of the Councils of Hippo and Carthage, and defined and declared that the canon (lists) of Scripture proposed by those Councils shall be considered the Holy Scriptures, and gave the command to St. Jerome to have them translated into Latin and placed in a codex (a bound book) to be copied for the Churches, and to be read out at every Mass during the Liturgy of the Word.

 

[JRKH]

No, I’d ask them to believe the historic Christian faith. There was plenty of dispute on the books, including with the early church fathers. I do say they aren’t God-breathed. But guess what, we have 66 in agreement that compose nearly all of our theology. So we have plenty of room for discussion outside of canon issues.

I’m not trying to brush it aside, but I’m trying hard to not get spread too thin since that can get you in trouble here.

I understand your trying not to get spread to thin. You are in a tough spot here and I appreciate that you are fighting hard. It really makes me believe that if and when you decide to come into the Church, you’ll make a great evangelist and apologist.

OK, back to the discussion. You do say that teh items not found in the JKV are not God breathed. Please provide a listing of th eBooks that ARE God breathed.

I’m glad that you would ask tehm to believe the historic Church, for then they would choose the 73 book canon, just as I did, even before returning to full communion iwth the Catholic Church.
The Historical Church clearly demonstrates that all of the 73 books in the Catholic Canon are “God Breathed”. In fact there may even be more, for the Orthodox Church which uses a larger canon that the RCC is just as ancient and uses most of the Septuigent.

In fact I believe that St Paul affirms the larger canon when he famously says “All Scripture is God Breathed…” Of course he says this to Timothy, a bishop operating in a “Greek Speaking” area, as did Paul work almost exclusively in the Greek Speaking world, and thus most likely they were using the Septuigent and not the “Hebrew” texts. Thus St Pauls reference to “All Scriptures” can be easily seen to include ALL of the accepted Scriptures in the Septuigent.

Peace
James

 

[jam070406]

I can certainly understand the frustration and I didn’t mean to suggest that your remark should not have been made. I think your remark should in fact be a useful reality check for Steve. If Steve is honest with himself he should be able to see that when he points out (as anticipated) that he could have said the same thing to you (post 192), he is undermining his own position, not yours: we cannot simply appeal to the authority of scripture and the guidance of the Holy Spirit to establish the truth when the very people we disagree with are doing the very same thing… unless the Truth can contradict itself (Himself), which is the absurd logical conclusion of Steve’s position.

Thank you. This is what I meant. By letting his guard down, I meant stepping outside the box (bible) and viewing the entire context of salvation History, including what the early Church taught and believed (still believes), the Fathers, etc. It’s been stated many times before so I didn’t feel it necessary to repeat it again.
I just worded it poorly and got jumped on by a “dissident” Catholic who happen to jump into the middle of the discussion. Hopefully, we can move forward now?

 

[reformissionary]

First let me say that I, too, have a life, so, I have not read past this. I, also, will not be able to stick around.

As a convert, I must respond by saying that you cannot speak for all of us. It was scripture, and coming to a better understanding of it, that led me from Protestantism to Catholicism. Reverting, to me, would be like losing ground. I do see all these things in scripture, and truly know I have come Home to the Church that Christ started, and the the Holy Spirit breathed life into at that first Pentecost.

You can also choose to find all this in scripture. You have chosen not to. All the rhetoric in the world will not change your mind if you are not open to a larger Truth. Mind you, I know I am where God wants me to be, and I keep growing in my Faith. I ask plenty of questions, am not always pleased with the answers, so, I keep asking more questions. Your arguments/comments will not cause me to take a step backwards, they just confirm me in my Faith.

God bless,
Linda

Catholics, please take note. I responded honestly and Linda has refused to answer in any meaningful way the same question she asked me.

 

[Murphs10]

It supports, protects and promotes the truth. That has nothing to do with the church having an authority on par with Scripture.

I know this doesn’t address your comment directly, but I just wanted to point something out. Scripture is the Truth in writing. They are not two separate entities. How can the Church protect and promote the Truth if it doesn’t know what the Truth is? The answer is it can’t.

That is why this naturally follows:

Mat 18
17: If he refuses to listen to them, tell it to the church; and if he refuses to listen even to the church, let him be to you as a Gentile and a tax collector.

The Truth would include the correct interpretation of Scripture.

 

[tjm190]

I didn’t say “believe what I believe” I said allow the Holy Spirit to guide him to the FULLNESS OF TRUTH. Which, if you are Catholic, you BELIEVE resides in the Catholic Church. Truth is not relative and the Holy Spirit is not the author of chaos.

fix’d.

You aren’t going to convinced anyone by telling them that is they open their mind they will end up agreeing with you.

Both sides agree that there is an absolute Truth, both sides believe the Holy Spirit has led them to it. One of them must be wrong- so, a rational discussion is needed or there must be an agreement to disagree.

For all you know, the Holy Spirit has guided him to fullness of Truth and he’s been sent here by God to share it with you.

All I’m asking is that you understand that telling him “My side has the right answer” is not going to get you anywhere.

 

[reformissionary]

I understand your trying not to get spread to thin. You are in a tough spot here and I appreciate that you are fighting hard. It really makes me believe that if and when you decide to come into the Church, you’ll make a great evangelist and apologist.

Oh, you are too kind.

Please provide a listing of th eBooks that ARE God breathed.

You know what they are. In the Bible Protestants use.

I’m glad that you would ask tehm to believe the historic Church, for then they would choose the 73 book canon, just as I did, even before returning to full communion iwth the Catholic Church.
The Historical Church clearly demonstrates that all of the 73 books in the Catholic Canon are “God Breathed”. In fact there may even be more, for the Orthodox Church which uses a larger canon that the RCC is just as ancient and uses most of the Septuigent.

I’ve read several books on canon issues that deal with the RC position. I don’t see 73 “clearly.”

In fact I believe that St Paul affirms the larger canon when he famously says “All Scripture is God Breathed…” Of course he says this to Timothy, a bishop operating in a “Greek Speaking” area, as did Paul work almost exclusively in the Greek Speaking world, and thus most likely they were using the Septuigent and not the “Hebrew” texts. Thus St Pauls reference to “All Scriptures” can be easily seen to include ALL of the accepted Scriptures in the Septuigent.

Peace
James