Beehumble asked a really good thread worthy question...

  • Thread starter Thread starter joe370
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Rwillenburg: I sympathize with your thought here, since I am not big on “feelings”, either. I do think that perhaps the language people use to describe thought and how we react to thought may play a part here.

Note that when the Holy Spirit came among the disciples at Pentecost (Acts) one of the signs was that they were able to speak in “tongues” (languages) to the crowd. The miracle is not an upswelling of emotion or feeling, but better communication to the foreigners in the crowd. Many NT references are in this vein, that the Holy Spirit facilitates understanding, speaking, communicating. The Spirit’s work doesn’t seem (to me, anyway) to be so much feeling (hair stands on end, shivers, butterflies in stomach), but more like the moments when you finally “get” something, like when you solve a math problem and realize: “Eureka! I see the solution!” Sometimes this happens quickly, or at odd moments, so people speak of “flashes of inspiration” or “sudden intuition”.

I’ll give an example from my own experience of how this thouhgt process can work. I was once at mass at a church near my home parish. It is a rather odd-shaped church with the altar directly in the middle of the sanctuary and with circular (actually four directions) seating all around. The presider was the regional bishop in my area (it was a special occassion) and he was in the middle of his homily. Because of the odd shape of the room, the bishop rotated as he talked, so that he could face the congregation and not have his back to one section of the room the whole time. The layout distracted me, and the impression I had was of a giant “lazy susan”, with the bishop rotating like a salt shaker on the edge. I admit I was plainly distracted by the room and its layout, and a thought stuck me: “Where is the crucifix?” There is no wall behind the altar for it to hang on, so I found it high up on the ceiling, hanging at an angle (it depends on where you sit) on a rafter. When I looked at the crucifx, however, I was suddenly struck (see, it sounds more dramatic to write this way :rolleyes:) with a thought that faith is something we might be called to die for. More specifically, I had the thought that I, personally, could one day face such a choice, and that at the bottom of Christianity was this fact: martyrdom is a testament to the faith.

Please note, I am not claiming that the Holy Spirit was necessarily speaking to me at that point. What I wanted to illustrate is how my thought proceeded, and that the feelings and emotion followed. The incident was so striking that, even though it happened years ago I still think about it today. Intellectually, it was probably not the fist time I thought about martyrdom, but it might have been the first time I understood it as “Hey, this could mean me.”
Thanks for your thoughts on this. I do appreciate it. 🙂
 
I’m really glad to see such great posts on this thread, and especially that everyone is being so polite. This is good stuff. I am still having trouble discerning whether there has been any general consensus on the initial question. Is it the Christian point of view that someone has to be right and someone has to be wrong, or is it possible that the HS speaks to different people in different ways, albeit to the same end? My sense is that some posters are leaning toward the latter, but I’m not sure if I am reading right. Guess I’m still confused.

Your friend
Sufjon
 
Hi Todd…
joe,
If God firmly believed as you,
then why wasn’t he more explicit in the bible
Why did he leave it open for interpretation,
so that so many believe with all thier heart and soul they are following God
They feel the presence of the Holy Spirt,
Yet, they are not in agreement with you
Maybe you are wrong?
Well, he did leave us with an inspired interpreter: His church guided by the holy spirit into all truth. I was once like you and simply did not believe that to be the case, but not anymore. If I start a church tomorrow and base my teachings on the bible and teach something that you totally reject because it does not conform to your interpretation of scripture, am I being guided by the holy spirit or are you? The simple fact is: either we ere are our own authority or we defer to the authority of a church. I believe that we can rely on our interpretation as long as said interpretation lines up with the teaching of the church founded by God. They can teach and interpret correctly for the simple fact that Jesus is the one safeguarding revealed truth in His church as opposed to a church founded by me or some else. I don’t see what the big deal is???

Either Jesus has made certain that his revealed teachings (truth) - are available to the world or he has not, and therefore Jesus cannot judge me for something that was not, with certainty, made available to me. Jesus said that the holy spirit would guide his fledgling apostolic church into all truth, and yet Sola scriptura advocates want me to believe that all truth was only available to the 1st century Christians. That’s what you want me to believe, otherwise you would admit that there is a way to know with certainty whether or not Jesus meant:

This a symbol of my body

or

This my body…

You do not believe that any one church can teach infallibly (via the guidance of the holy spirit) - regarding this critical teachings, and I do. However, you have no problem believing that this teaching was knowable in the 1st century. I wonder what those Christian would have to say about the question I just asked you regarding the Eucharist? Jesus did not leave us with an infallible teaching that has to do with eternal life, with no way to infallibly interpret it. That’s a hard pill for me to swallow…and of course that is just my fallible opinion; I defer, as Paul commanded, to the authority of the church founded by God.

Peace Todd…🙂
 
I understand your concern friend…a “Quaker maxim”…“Thee will say Christ saith this, and the apostles say this, but what canst thou say? Art thou a child of Light and hast thou walked in the Light, and what thou speakest is it inwardly from God?”

I read scripture each morning…but those words are empty unless experienced inwardly. I don’t necessarily order my life from what “the scriptures say”…but rather from the Light Within, the Inspirer of scripture…scripture is a source of truth…but not the Source or Truth Himself…unless God is experienced and “incarnated” in this world as His Body…this world will never change…“the only hands He hath is thee” is another Quaker maxim.

We all must Listen to the Present Teacher and Guide…how you do so is what you must “work out…in fear and trembling”…so too, must I…the scriptures contain the “Truth”…but they are not truth itself. Jesus was instructing Jewish apostles as a Jewish Messiah…He wasn’t authorizing a new “mikvah” to be perpetulally practiced…those Jewish rituals and rites eventually gave way and were no longer practiced…there is One Baptism…in which you and I share…we each have been Baptized into the Body of Christ directly by Christ Himself in the Person and work of the Holy Spirit.
I’m sorry, my friend but I don’t understand.

Either “we each have been Baptized into the Body of Christ directly by Christ Himself,” or we should “teach all nations: baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost”.

How do you reconcile this?
 
Hey Fly…
God did leave a way to know truth or to have it revealed to us. It is the Holy Spirit.

Okay, so let’s ask the holy spirit the following question, and see what he has to say:

Did Jesus mean, this is a symbol of my body

or

did Jesus mean, this is MY body?

How do you and I know, with certainty, that my interpretation is absolutely wrong? We both defer to the holy spirit and yet we do not have a definitive answer to that question, yet you tell me that the Holy spirit has infallibly revealed this truth to both of us. :confused:

Does the holy spirit reveal this infallible truth to each and every fallible individual? If so then why is Christianity divided on this Eucharistic doctrine??? :confused::confused::confused:
So what’s the truth
 
I’m sorry, my friend but I don’t understand.

Either “we each have been Baptized into the Body of Christ directly by Christ Himself,” or we should “teach all nations: baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost”.

How do you reconcile this?
I don’t pretend to “reconcile” the two passages. If you have found a faith that answers your basic questions concerning the Eternal…and this faith that you embrace gives you joy and calls you to live a life of peace, kindness, mercy, compassion and grace toward others…wonderful.

I do not embrace ‘rites and rituals’ as “means of grace”. I do not believe Jesus of Nazareth intended to exchange the old rituals required by the Law for new rituals now required by gospel. No human is capable of performing a ritual or rite on or for my behalf. I can approach God directly without priest, minister, book or creed. No rituals are required to walk in Christ…If you are happy and content with your beliefs, I rejoice with you.

My beliefs tell me we are “baptized into One Body” by Christ Himself…no “ritual bath” is necessary…it is a fulfilled requirment of the Law…nailed to the cross…it is an “outward form”…I believe it only points to the Baptism of the Spirit…the True Baptism…if you do not find that belief to be in accordance with your understanding…I’m ok with it…I need not “reconcile” my faith with the necessity of any ritual requirements…there are no ritual requirments under grace.🙂
 
Well said Publisher. 👍

What was your response to my original post?
All teachings and beliefs must be viewed in the light of how well they move one to treat others…

The story of the last judgement never asks “what did you believe?” “what church did you belong to?” “were you baptized?” “do you believe in transubstanitation?”…but instead…“I was hungry…I was thirsty…I was in prison…and you did not…to me.”

How we deal with the ills of THIS WORLD and serve it’s people who wear the very face of Christ is what we will be judged upon…if indeed we do face a “last judgement”…

We have a Present Teacher to lead us and guide us…but this Present Teacher and Guide is more concerned about how you treat, address, serve the person sitting next to you than He is about your doctrinal beliefs and religious affiliation.
 
JHow, good point. Like, who are the 2 witnesses in the book of Revelations, however, I am referring to revealed truth, such as the Eucharist.👍
I think we should note first of all, that there is much in the Bible which He did not leave open to interpretation: “Thou shalt have no other gods before me…”, “This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased…”, “…narrow is the way, which leadeth unto life, and few there be that find it”.

Part of the answer also lies in the fact that God is Love, yes, but also He is the God of reason and logic, as well as justice. If two views are really in opposition they can’t both be right. Similarly, sin can be forgiven, but not tolerated, otherwise there would be no justice.
 
Well said Publisher. 👍

What was your response to my original post?
There is no “infallible” teaching body…“we see through a glass darkly”. We “walk by faith and not by sight”.

Any “body” that claims infallibility doesn’t possess it…IMO…IF however you wish to ascribe “infallibility” to a body in order for you to be “secure” in your faith tradition…great…but no single “teaching body” is guaranteed “infallibility”.🙂

The Truth is evident in any doctrine by how it inspires it’s adherants to service to others…any doctine or dogma that when embraced inspires or causes no “inward change”…it of no use…IMO.
 
=Bluegoat
;7186889]No, because your initial assumptions are incorrect. Paul tells us quite clearly how those who are not given the Law are judged.

Agreed. So, based on that you believe that Jesus did not leave us with a way to know, with certainty, what truth is regarding, say, the Eucharist, just as the 1st century Christians knew what truth was regarding the Eucharist as they were taught by the apostles??? We cannot know, as they did in the 1st century???
And even the Catholic Church does not claim that any individual can have infallible knowledge.
Regarding revealed truth such as this is my body, the fallible leaders of the CC do believe they have infallible truth.
I am not sure why you keep saying that they do in various threads, because it is incorrect. Although they teach that the CC has infallible knowledge on some things, that is not the same as saying an individual does or can.
No one in the CC is infallible. I fee that I have made that point very clear at my other threads.
]How does God judge us fairly if we do not have access to infallible knowledge? Well, I hope that he takes into account what we do know. I think the teaching of the Church clearly points us in that direction (but I don’t know it infallibly!)/]
I couldn’t agree more. All I am suggesting is that Jesus left us with a way to discern the revealed truths found in the bible. For example: Jesus left us with His church to discern the truth regarding John 6, and yet my protestant friends tell that he did not. They tell me that we have no one in an authoritative position to settle this matter for everyone. If they are right then what’s the point of the teaching if it’s unknowable? Why were the followers of the apostles privy to this truth but not the 21st century Christians? :confused:
 
Hey Sufjon…🙂
=Sufjon;7187575]I’m really glad to see such great posts on this thread, and especially that everyone is being so polite. This is good stuff. I am still having trouble discerning whether there has been any general consensus on the initial question.
I am still waiting too. I know what the catholic position is; I still do not know what the unanimous position is, of the Protestant churches.
Is it the Christian point of view that someone has to be right and someone has to be wrong, or is it possible that the HS speaks to different people in different ways, albeit to the same end?
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 He really mean the following:
  • But I tell you the truth, it is better for you that I go. For if I do not go, the Advocate will not come to you. But if I go, **I will send him to you.

Code:
But when he comes,** the Spirit of truth,**** he will guide you to all truth.** He will not speak on his own, but he will speak what he hears, **and will declare to you the things that are coming.**
  • He will glorify me, because he will take from what is mine and declare it to you.*
Code:
Everything that the Father has is mine; for this reason I told you that he will take from what is mine and declare it to you.
If so then All we have to do (in my humble opinion) - is locate that 1st century church in the world today. That church (the Catholic Church) - can be found in every part of the world. That church is truly catholic (universal) - in the sense that that church has its beginning in the 1st century, on Pentecost, in Jerusalem and has existed in every century since Pentecost, and still exists everywhere in the world today. Pretty cool stuff…👍
 
Hi Sufjon
joe370;7187686:
Hey Fly…

Hi joe370: Sounds like the question you have is the same question I have. If we operate from a perspective of materialistic dualism, then someone is on the wrong side of the Eucharistic question that has been raised in this thread. Again, the problem only exists in duality, that is, the idea of separateness. Materialistic dualism, which is predominant in western thought is the assumption that matter, or the physical world is the primary reality and that mind is separate from, but dependent upon, matter. In this view, mind is an epiphenomenon of the material world. Outside of this mode of thought, the problem of whether the Body of Christ is or is not actually His body does not exist.

Your friend
Sufjon
Well, that is certainly one way to look at it. I had to read that twice. Phew…pretty complex thinking. It could be just as simple as what the bible claims: Jesus left us with His church and entrusted His church with doctrinal truth. He left us with a way to infallibly interpret the infallible bible, and that “way” is His church. What good is Jesus’ infallible teaching (Eucharist for example) - if there is no way to infallibly discern it; you know what I mean friend???
 
Publisher, was there an infallible teaching body (comprised of all fallible people of course) - provided for Jesus followers, in the 1st century when the fallible apostles taught?
There is no “infallible” teaching body…“we see through a glass darkly”. We “walk by faith and not by sight”.

Any “body” that claims infallibility doesn’t possess it…IMO…IF however you wish to ascribe “infallibility” to a body in order for you to be “secure” in your faith tradition…great…but no single “teaching body” is guaranteed “infallibility”.🙂

The Truth is evident in any doctrine by how it inspires it’s adherants to service to others…any doctine or dogma that when embraced inspires or causes no “inward change”…it of no use…IMO.
 
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??? :confused:

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???
Out of curiousity, what of the Jews before Christ? They had no infallible pope or magesterium. How did God judge them?

It certainly seems from scripture that God’s law is written on our hearts be Jew or Gentile and that’s enough for God to hold us accountable. Why is this not good enough for you?

Do you feel the need to have an infallible interpreter in other areas of your life? What about at work? Do you require an infallible boss to guide you through your day? When you were in school were all of your teachers infallible? If not how in the world did you go about obtaining your education? You must have suffered greatly.

How do you know you understand your church’s teachings correctly? For that matter how do you know our church is infallible?

You seem to think that one must have an infallible guide to be able to have any degree of certitude about anything.

.
 
Is it the Christian point of view that someone has to be right and someone has to be wrong, or is it possible that the HS speaks to different people in different ways, albeit to the same end?
Hi Sufjon,
I wouldn’t call it the “Christian point of view”, but rather the logical point of view. See, some of the diversity of views held by various Christians are mutually exclusive, and constitute an exhaustive set.

The simplest and most important example I can think of is baptism. Some Christians hold that baptism is necessary for salvation, while others hold that baptism is not necessary for salvation. It seems pretty clear that not both of those are true. However, each Christian on each side feels they have been led by the Holy Spirit to get there.
 
Hi fly,
I have heard this general answer before, but if you don’t mind taking the time for me to probe a little bit deeper, it’s an answer I’ve never quite understood.
I have a friend, for example, non-Catholic, I cannot recall her denomination, who disagrees with her pastor on many things and so is now looking for a new church. I asked her ‘How do you know you’re right, and he’s wrong?’ She said ‘I feel it. I feel that the HS has guided me towards a different interpretation.’ And I said ‘But, don’t you think the pastor is equally guided? You’ve always described him as a very upright man, who has devoted himself to Jesus Christ. Don’t you think he is also being led by the HS?’
She wasn’t sure of her answer.
I guess what I wonder is, how do we know that each of us individually is getting our interpretation right. I don’t mean to bring abortion into this, and I don’t want to derail any thread, but there are many people who consider themselves devout Christians (and I would consider them devout Christians, too) who feel that abortion is a perfectly acceptable way to end an unplanned pregnancy. These are people who say they are guided by the HS, and their prayer and Bible-reading life certainly speaks to that. Others who consider themselves devout Christians, and again, I would certainly think they are, say that abortion is murder and a grave sin in the eyes of God. So who to believe? Again, I’m not asking the answer regarding the abortion question, I am asking which source should I trust? The one I agree with?
I suppose I would say that you listen to the Holy Spirit as He speaks to you. Gain your own personal testimony and follow it. Others may claim they follow the HS, and they may conflict with each other, and they may be sincere in their claim, but you cannot tell unless you receive your own answer.
Some may confuse their own desires for the HS, it is hard to tell since no one else experienced what they did.
'Could you also expand on your last statement a bit, too? I don’t understand what you’re saying. I mean, either Christ was God or he was not. He couldn’t be God for some people and not God for others. He would be who he independent of my, or your, existence, right? So, if the HS can only tell us the truth, and the HS says he’s divine, then he is. If the HS says he is NOT divine, then he is not. In this scenario, SOMEONE MUST be wrong, and someone MUST be right. But, what if both people say the HS led them to their conclusion? How does one know which direction to turn and how does one know they are discerning correctly?
What I mean is that, a non-Christian can receive a testimony from the HS for something specific in their faith. I used the divinity of Christ as an example. Let’s say someone has faith that you should love your enemies and pray for them, they don’t have to be Christian to receive a confirmation of that truth as it transcends religious lines. They can have the HS testify to them of that truth, but then they can mistakenly project that confirmation onto everything else they believe
 
Hi Sufjon
Sufjon;7187774:
Well, that is certainly one way to look at it. I had to read that twice. Phew…pretty complex thinking. It could be just as simple as what the bible claims: Jesus left us with His church and entrusted His church with doctrinal truth. He left us with a way to infallibly interpret the infallible bible, and that “way” is His church. What good is Jesus’ infallible teaching (Eucharist for example) - if there is no way to infallibly discern it; you know what I mean friend???
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 Joe370m and entertain the idea that they are only passing shapes. 🙂

Your friend,
Sufjon
 
Hi Sufjon,
I wouldn’t call it the “Christian point of view”, but rather the logical point of view. See, some of the diversity of views held by various Christians are mutually exclusive, and constitute an exhaustive set.

The simplest and most important example I can think of is baptism. Some Christians hold that baptism is necessary for salvation, while others hold that baptism is not necessary for salvation. It seems pretty clear that not both of those are true. However, each Christian on each side feels they have been led by the Holy Spirit to get there.
Hi Spirithound: You’re right - My mistake. Christian point of view probably wasn’t the best phrase for me to use. Western point of view would probably been more accurate. I always intermingle the two, and that’s incorrect.

BTW, was your screen name inspired by Francis Thompson’s poem “Hound of Heaven”? I always liked that poem.

Your friend
Sufjon
 
SemperReformada
Out of curiousity, what of the Jews before Christ? They had no infallible pope or magesterium. How did God judge them?
When you say magisterium you simply mean the teachers (magisters) - of the CC, just as every church has teachers - right? Can we both agree that no one is infallible? Even the apostles were fallible yet they taught and wrote infallibly; how did they achieve that??? You don’t believe that the Jews (leaders) - before Christ could infallibly interpret scripture? When I say infallible, I mean truth vs error. I don’t mean that these people are personally irreproachably impeccable. They too were fallible sinners, just as the leaders of the CC are fallible sinners, who can be just as wrong about things as you and I can, with the exception of passing on revealed truths taught by Jesus. Jesus passed on his teachings to the apostles, who passed on those teachings to their successors, etc. etc…and the holy spirit is guiding this process. At what point in history did these teachings become erroneous or lost?
It certainly seems from scripture that God’s law is written on our hearts be Jew or Gentile and that’s enough for God to hold us accountable.
Agreed…So why the need for pastors and teachers, regardless of denomination since God’s law is written on our hearts?
Why is this not good enough for you?
Well, my sister tells me one thing regarding the Eucharist; you tell me another, and I don’t agree with either of you, and you are saying that Jesus did not provide a way for us to know the truth, and furthermore it does NOT matter??? So what you are saying is that it doesn’t matter if Jesus meant, this is my body or if he meant, this is a symbol of my body, and Jesus did not provide us with a way to know with certainty?

Did they know, with certainty, in the first century when the fallible apostles were teaching?
Do you feel the need to have an infallible interpreter in other areas of your life?
An error free interpretation by a fallible person, then yes.
What about at work? Do you require an infallible boss to guide you through your day? When you were in school were all of your teachers infallible? If not how in the world did you go about obtaining your education? You must have suffered greatly.
My teachers (Math for example) - were fallible folks who could provide infallible (error free teaching). Again, no one is infallible. When I say that 5+5= 10 for example, that is an infallible interpretation by a fallible person. Certainly you would want those engineers building air planes to steer clear of errors?
How do you know you understand your church’s teachings correctly?
Well, if I don’t understand my church’s teachings that is on me, and it does not mean that they are teaching fallibly.
For that matter how do you know our church is infallible?
People are fallible and Jesus said to His fallible apostles:
But I tell you the truth, it is better for you that I go. For if I do not go, the Advocate will not come to you. But if I go, I will send him to you.
But when he comes,** the Spirit of truth, he will guide you to all truth.** He will not speak on his own, but he will speak what he hears, and will declare to you the things that are coming.
He will glorify me, because he will take from what is mine and declare it to you.
Everything that the Father has is mine; for this reason I told you that he will take from what is mine and declare it to you.
Are we in agreement regarding the following:

If we lived when the apostles were teaching infallibly vis-a-vis the teachings of Jesus, would All truth spoken of in John 16, be available to us, just as all truth was available to the 1st century followers of the apostles???
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top