Beehumble asked a really good thread worthy question...

[joe370]

Very interesting Sufjon…You said:

But to answer the question, yes, I think you are dealing with the actual Body of Christ.

How could Jesus provide us, (with certainty) - with the means to know that we are indeed dealing with the actual Body of Christ as opposed to a symbol, other than passing this teaching on to his apostles, who of course would pass this teaching on to their successors, who of course would do the same until Jesus returns, with Jesus, ever present in His church, in every century, guiding this transmission of truth from generation to generation? Certainly this successive transmission of truth form generation to generation, starting with the apostles, is the most plausible way to know with certainty that we are indeed dealing with the actual Body of Christ as opposed to a symbol? Your thoughts friend…

joe370;7187865:

Hi Sufjon

Hi Joe370: Yes, it is rather complex. My sense is that it all comes out on the wash if you step back and look at things from a different view. It’s the illusion of separateness that causes problems in our minds such as “is this the Body of Christ, or is it not?” Once we strip away this stubbornly persistent illusion of duality (to steal a phrase Einstein used on another subject), the answer is clear. Even if exposed to such a concept in detail, most people would shy away from it, because it requires that you lose yourself. This is a thing most people would find hard to imagine let alone actually do, but in doing so, I think it is very possible to come face to face with God. It just takes a very slight shift in thinking that I believe is consistent and not counter to any faith - Catholic, Protestant, Muslim, whatever. It all comes together. But to answer the question, yes, I think you are dealing with the actual Body of Christ. Only in a much bigger way than we expected. But to realize it, we first have to do away with the idea of Sufjon and the idea of Joe370.

Your friend,
Sufjon

 

[Jolly_Jumbuck]

Beehumble asked a really good question.

If God has not provided the world with a way to teach and learn infallibly, vis-a-vis infallible truth found in the bible, and interpret infallibly, those teachings found in the bible, then how can God judge any of us for failing to act on an infallible truth that could not, with certainty, be infallibly discerned???

Wouldn’t it be unfair for God to judge us as having failed to act on Truth if said truth cannot be infallibly known with certainty, which seems to be the protestant consensus here at CAF???

The only logical conclusion to draw is that God did in fact give us a way to infallibly discern truth and infallibly interpret the bible; His church!!! Yes, no, maybe???

**
Jesus said that His sheep know His voice.

May I make the assumption that His voice is the word of God as revealed in the scriptures?

If this is true, then why are only the bishops qualified to interpret
what should be so easy to discern? **

 

[tester]

Joe370,
You certainty have started many threads in this “Non-Catholic Religions” forum.
And a lot of your threads are directed to non-Catholics or Protestants, but because this is Catholic website, most of the replies are understandably from Catholics.

Have you considered checking some of the Protestant apologetic websites (No I’m not suggesting the Chick site or the CARM message boards) or some of the conservative Protestant Christian sites?

Some of you exact questions are addressed in many of these apologetic sites.

PM me if you would like some suggestions.

 

[Jolly_Jumbuck]

The way I see it is: there can be only one truth regarding any one teaching, in life, or in Christianity. Jesus said to His apostolic church that he would send the holy spirit to His apostolic church to guide His church (not churches) - into all truth (regarding revealed truth which goes without saying) - and that He would be with His church until the end of time. John 14:16 I don’t believe its about claiming to be right or wrong as much as it is about how much we can trust what Jesus said to His church almost 2000 years ago.

**Did Jesus promise the indwelling of the Counsellor to the church as a whole or to individuals within His church?

How does one qualify for the indwelling of the Holy Spirit? **

 

[SteveVH]

"Surely then, if the revelations and lessons in Scripture are addressed to us personally and practically, the presence among us of a formal judge and standing expositor of its words, is imperative. It is antecedently unreasonable to suppose that a book so complex, so unsystematic, in parts so obscure, the outcome of so many minds, times and places, should be given us from above without the safeguard of some authority; as if it could possibly, from the nature of the case, interpret itself. Its inspiration does but guarantee its truth, not its interpretation. How are private readers satisfactorily to distinguish what is didactic and what is historical, what is fact and what is vision, what is allegorical and what is literal, what is idiomatic and what is grammatical, what is enunciated formally and what occurs obiter, what is only of temporary and what is of lasting obligation? Such is our natural anticipation, and it is only too exactly justified in the events of the last three centuries, in the many countries where private judgment on the text of Scripture has prevailed. The gift of inspiration requires as its compliment the gift of infallibility." (John Henry Newman, On the inspiration of Scripture)

Unless one is an expert in all facets of literary genres, fluent in Aramaic, Hebrew and Greek, extremely knowledgeable in the ancient Semitic cultures in which Sacred Scripture was written over several thousand years, familiar with the various idioms of the day and is certain that they are being led by the Holy Spirit in each and every interpretation, I would suggest that you need an infallible authority.

 

[Sufjon]

Very interesting Sufjon…You said:

But to answer the question, yes, I think you are dealing with the actual Body of Christ.

How could Jesus provide us, (with certainty) - with the means to know that we are indeed dealing with the actual Body of Christ as opposed to a symbol, other than passing this teaching on to his apostles, who of course would pass this teaching on to their successors, who of course would do the same until Jesus returns, with Jesus, ever present in His church, in every century, guiding this transmission of truth from generation to generation? Certainly this successive transmission of truth form generation to generation, starting with the apostles, is the most plausible way to know with certainty that we are indeed dealing with the actual Body of Christ as opposed to a symbol? Your thoughts friend…
Sufjon;7188067:
Hi Joe 370: remember, this is only my opinion on that matter, but here goes:

Well, I believe He told us these things very directly. It’s in the things He said, and it’s all very direct. The problem in my thinking is that there was a lot of “handling” going on with the earliest scriptures. What we have are copies of copies of copies of copies of copies of translation after translation until we end up with even the first fragment of John that we have in possession, which is a copy of a copy of a copy of a copy of a copy of what one group of followers was walking around with until it all got pulled together. I think a lot of “noise” got injected by the copiers and translators. In spite of that, some HUGE truths shine through it all here and there. The big one is “the one commandment.” It totally says everything that needs to be said in a few short sentences. I think you could keep that couple of sentences and use the rest of the Bible as a coffee table decoration. When Jesus said to Love God with all your heart and love your neighbor as yourself, He is giving you a lot more than a code of conduct. It is indeed a great code of conduct, but the secret to everything is right there. It ties together every science, every thought, and every religion as far back as Hinduism and as far forward as LDS and beyond. Perhaps It means that you are seeing God every day, because there is only God, experiencing what He creates through the things He creates. Consider that our sense organs and minds are only measuring devices. To the devices themselves, Sufjon for instance, they create the illusion of a separate self, when behind it all is only one consciousness. What then would be the gateway sin to all other sin? I think maybe that it’s not seeing the true nature of things and becoming attached instead to the illusion of I, me and mine. But if we could know the truth, we could love God with all our hearts, and love our neighbor as ourselves. We would even be able to really love ourselves. Who then could we sin against? This is how I can say “yes” it’s the Body of Christ, and be sure. I think He could have held up a stone and said “Body of Christ” and of course it’s true. It all exists within Him, not outside. Every particle, every creature, plants, trees, water, planets, suns, and the universe - one big organism with one trans-local consciousness.

Well, that’s just Sufjon’s belief on the matter.

Your freind
Sufjon

 

[joe370]

Jolly Jumbuck, I agree with you. What is also revealed in scripture is:

This is a symbol of my body according to most Protestants/evangelical Christians.

and

This is my body according to Catholics, Lutherans, Anglicans and Eastern orthodox Christians.

The word of God as revealed in the scriptures cannot resolve this matter. Who can???

**
Jesus said that His sheep know His voice.

May I make the assumption that His voice is the word of God as revealed in the scriptures?

If this is true, then why are only the bishops qualified to interpret
what should be so easy to discern? **

 

[Jolly_Jumbuck]

"Surely then, if the revelations and lessons in Scripture are addressed to us personally and practically, the presence among us of a formal judge and standing expositor of its words, is imperative. It is antecedently unreasonable to suppose that a book so complex, so unsystematic, in parts so obscure, the outcome of so many minds, times and places, should be given us from above without the safeguard of some authority; as if it could possibly, from the nature of the case, interpret itself. Its inspiration does but guarantee its truth, not its interpretation. How are private readers satisfactorily to distinguish what is didactic and what is historical, what is fact and what is vision, what is allegorical and what is literal, what is idiomatic and what is grammatical, what is enunciated formally and what occurs obiter, what is only of temporary and what is of lasting obligation? Such is our natural anticipation, and it is only too exactly justified in the events of the last three centuries, in the many countries where private judgment on the text of Scripture has prevailed. The gift of inspiration requires as its compliment the gift of infallibility." (John Henry Newman, On the inspiration of Scripture)

Unless one is an expert in all facets of literary genres, fluent in Aramaic, Hebrew and Greek, extremely knowledgeable in the ancient Semitic cultures in which Sacred Scripture was written over several thousand years, familiar with the various idioms of the day and is certain that they are being led by the Holy Spirit in each and every interpretation, I would suggest that you need an infallible authority.

**
Cardinal Newman found the scriptures difficult to interpret and he is one of those bishops who are supposed to interpret the scriptures. Newman was obviously not an expert in all facets of literary genres, fluent in Aramaic, Hebrew and Greek, extremely knowledgeable in the ancient Semitic cultures.

But Newman is part of that infallible authority. Did Newman have a special hotline to the Holy Spirit? Is it possible for an ordinary christian to have enough faith to ask the Holy Spirit or do you have to be a bishop to make contact with God? **

 

[Jolly_Jumbuck]

I think a lot of “noise” got injected by the copiers and translators.

**Can you prove this is the case and are you suggesting that the word of God is now unreliable as a result?
**

 

[joe370]

Sure Tester…Could you throw some at me. I have been to CARM and I was, let’s just say - not embraced…and I like to keep things friendly and light. They were not like you and others here at CAF. It’s always a joy talking you and others. In the end, if we cannot agree, we part ways as friends and brothers in Christ. Plus, the moderator told me that I could not proselytize, even though I wasn’t. I was just doing what I do here at CAF.

Joe370,
You certainty have started many threads in this “Non-Catholic Religions” forum.
And a lot of your threads are directed to non-Catholics or Protestants, but because this is Catholic website, most of the replies are understandably from Catholics.

Have you considered checking some of the Protestant apologetic websites (No I’m not suggesting the Chick site or the CARM message boards) or some of the conservative Protestant Christian sites?

Some of you exact questions are addressed in many of these apologetic sites.

PM me if you would like some suggestions.

 

[Jolly_Jumbuck]

Jolly Jumbuck, I agree with you. What is also revealed in scripture is:

This is a symbol of my body according to most Protestants/evangelical Christians.

and

This is my body according to Catholics, Lutherans, Anglicans and Eastern orthodox Christians.

The word of God as revealed in the scriptures cannot resolve this matter. Who can???

Jesus said that **For my flesh is real food and my blood is real drink. ** John 6:55

**The Spirit gives life; the flesh counts for nothing. The words I have spoken to you are spirit and they are life. **John 6:63

**to others I speak in parables, so that,
”‘though seeing, they may not see;
though hearing, they may not understand. **Luke 8:10

Understanding seems to be the key!

 

[joe370]

Jolly Jumbuck;7188228]**Did Jesus promise the indwelling of the Counsellor to the church as a whole or to individuals within His church?

How does one qualify for the indwelling of the Holy Spirit? **

Both, in different ways. I was not there on Pentecost when the holy spirit descended upon Jesus’ one church built on Kepha with Jesus as the divine cornerstone holding the whole thing together, so for me to start my own church and suggest that my church is the church founded by Jesus circa AD 33, on Pentecost, forever guided by the HS would be inaccurate. My sister belongs to a church founded by someone and that someone started his church in 1978 or somewhere around that time. Does he derive his authority from Jesus to teach, or would I for that matter, if I started my own church?

Individually the HS descends upon all of us once baptized - right? But that does not mean that the HS is guiding each and every individual into all truth. In other words, John 16:13 and John 14:16 do not apply to me personally, yes, no maybe…? He promised the Counsellor to the church He founded circa AD 33, but that’s just my humble opinion…

 

[joe370]

Jolly Jumbuck. I respectfully disagree. I know that I was not entrusted with the authority to tell you that you are wrong and vice versa, so, is there any way to know, with certainty, who is right and who is wrong? The bible, by itself, is not helping us to resolve this matter. A little help friend…

Jesus said that **For my flesh is real food and my blood is real drink. ** John 6:55

**The Spirit gives life; the flesh counts for nothing. The words I have spoken to you are spirit and they are life. **John 6:63

**to others I speak in parables, so that,
”‘though seeing, they may not see;
though hearing, they may not understand. **Luke 8:10

Understanding seems to be the key!

 

[Jolly_Jumbuck]

Jolly Jumbuck;7188228]**Did Jesus promise the indwelling of the Counsellor to the church as a whole or to individuals within His church?

How does one qualify for the indwelling of the Holy Spirit? **

Both, in different ways. I was not there on Pentecost when the holy spirit descended upon Jesus’ one church built on Kepha with Jesus as the divine cornerstone holding the whole thing together, so for me to start my own church and suggest that my church is the church founded by Jesus circa AD 33, on Pentecost, forever guided by the HS would be inaccurate. My sister belongs to a church founded by someone and that someone started his church in 1978 or somewhere around that time. Does he derive his authority from Jesus to teach, or would I for that matter, if I started my own church?

Individually the HS descends upon all of us once baptized - right? But that does not mean that the HS is guiding each and every individual into all truth. In other words, John 16:13 and John 14:16 do not apply to me personally, yes, no maybe…? He promised the Counsellor to the church He founded circa AD 33, but that’s just my humble opinion…
**
If the Holy Spirit descended only on those present at the original Pentecost, then we are all in trouble. The Spirit was promised to individuals The RCC claims those individuals are the bishops who are allowed to interpret the scriptures, even when they lack the expertise of bible scholars. Biblical expertise is thus not a qualification. Could faith in that the Counsellor would teach us all things be what is needed? Or could it be that His sheep know His voice (Scriptures) be enough? **

 

[PRmerger]

If this is true, then why are only the bishops qualified to interpret
what should be so easy to discern?

Firstly, JJ, you are under the misapprehension that only bishops are qualified to interpret Scripture. This is incorrect.

Here’s an example: I’m planning a dinner party for 40 people and I’m stressing out about food preparation. Before the party I decide to go to Adoration, and before the Blessed Sacrament I open the Word randomly to the story of Jesus and the Multiplication of the Loaves.

I am certainly free to interpret that verse as, “Don’t worry, PR! I will take care of you! No one will go away from your home hungry.”

 

[PRmerger]

Is it possible for an ordinary christian to have enough faith to ask the Holy Spirit or do you have to be a bishop to make contact with God?

Oh, any “ordinary Christian” can indeed “make contact with God”…

if he has the Eucharist.

In fact, this “contact with God” is the most sublime, intimate union there is…

the One Flesh Union.

 

[Jolly_Jumbuck]

**Jesus said that For my flesh is real food and my blood is real drink. **John 6:55

The Spirit gives life; the flesh counts for nothing. The words I have spoken to you are spirit and they are life. John 6:63

**to others I speak in parables, so that,
”‘though seeing, they may not see;
though hearing, they may not understand. **Luke 8:10

Understanding seems to be the key!

Jolly Jumbuck. I respectfully disagree. I know that I was not entrusted with the authority to tell you that you are wrong and vice versa, so, is there any way to know, with certainty, who is right and who is wrong? The bible, by itself, is not helping us to resolve this matter. A little help friend…

Could you explain exactly where I was wrong, even though you do not have the authority to tell me? This would really help me to understand!

 

[Jolly_Jumbuck]

CCC 85 *“The task of giving an authentic interpretation of the Word of God, whether in its written form or in the form of Tradition, has been entrusted to the living teaching office of the Church alone. Its authority in this matter is exercised in the name of Jesus Christ.” This means that the task of interpretation has been entrusted to the bishops in communion with the successor of Peter, the Bishop of Rome.
*

Firstly, JJ, you are under the misapprehension that only bishops are qualified to interpret Scripture. This is incorrect.

 

[Jolly_Jumbuck]

Oh, any “ordinary Christian” can indeed “make contact with God”…

if he has the Eucharist.

In fact, this “contact with God” is the most sublime, intimate union there is…

the One Flesh Union.

**If ordinary Catholics can make contact with God, then why do the bishops have sole right to interpretation? Even bible scholars who have contact with God cannot interpret the scriptures. Please help me to understand. **

 

[PRmerger]

CCC 85 *“The task of giving an authentic interpretation of the Word of God, whether in its written form or in the form of Tradition, has been entrusted to the living teaching office of the Church alone. Its authority in this matter is exercised in the name of Jesus Christ.” This means that the task of interpretation has been entrusted to the bishops in communion with the successor of Peter, the Bishop of Rome.
*

Yes, JJ. We are not free to interpret Scripture divorced from the living Tradition of the Church, however, we are indeed free to interpret Scripture. Indeed, the Church has no official commentary on Scripture.

In Sacred Scripture, God speaks to man in a human way.** To interpret Scripture correctly, the reader must be attentive to what the human authors truly wanted to affirm, and to what God wanted to reveal to us by their words** CCC 109

“The liberty of the Scripture interpreter remains extensive. Taking due consideration of the factors that influence proper exegesis,** the Catholic Bible interpreter has the liberty to adopt any interpretation of a passage that is not excluded with certainty by other passages of Scripture, by the judgment of the magisterium, by the Church Fathers, or by the analogy of faith.** That is a great deal of liberty, as only a few interpretations will be excluded with certainty by any of the four factors circumscribing the interpreter’s liberty.” source