T
Timothy_Piper
Guest
I’m not the one whom said (paraphrased) “Mary and the Holy Spirit were spouses”; you did. I’m just pointing out the gross error that you are unable to admit because of “Pride”; I suppose.
- Status
T
Timothy_Piper
Guest
To teach is a gift of God; is that not what Scripture teaches? Where does the gift come from; what does Scripture say? Who can interpret Scripture according God; man or God leading the man? The Holy Spirit is the only One that can teach and guide the things of God.
I will tell you this much about me; I was sprinkled as an infant and I have a “god mother”. You are the only one I have said this to in this forum.
T
Timothy_Piper
Guest
**
Seth,**
I would check the Biblical record on that and see if it is true. If you look closely at the replacement of Judas Iscariot with Mattias, then you will know the truth of who ordains and what the Apostles believed in this regard as well as shown in verse 24 of Acts 1, but begin reading at verse 20 through 25 for the proper context.
You will see a complete contradiction to poinguy. There are other Scripture passages in context that can verify Acts 1 as well. This is an example of why it is important to know who leads Christians to the Truth of the “things of God”.
**1 Corinthians 2 **
"… Even so the {thoughts} of God no one knows except the Spirit of God. 12 Now we have received, not the spirit of the world, but the Spirit who is from God, so that we may know the things freely given to us by God, 13 which things we also speak, not in words taught by human wisdom, but in those taught by the Spirit, combining spiritual {thoughts} with spiritual {words.} 14 But ***a natural man does not accept ***the things of the Spirit of God,
T
Timothy_Piper
Guest
You make a point and I agree with exactly what you said; particularly that bolded in blue above. What does Scripture teach? That which is contrary to your correct point. It is the work of the of Holy Spirit to teach and to guide the Christian into the things of God, which are those He has chosen to reveal to each individual or in most cased not to reveal.
Pslam 86:11 says “Teach me your way Lord that I may walk by your truth”
Z
zach_dunn
Guest
I find this funny because anything that you don’t already believe will fail the “litmus test.”
Question 1: Why do you believe that God’s Word is limited to writing?
Question 2: Which books belong in the New Testament?
Z
zach_dunn
Guest
Acts of the Apostles 1:20-26
“20 For it is written in the book of Psalms, Let his habitation be desolate, and let no man dwell therein: and his bishoprick let another take. 21 Wherefore of these men which have companied with us all the time that the Lord Jesus went in and out among us, 22 Beginning from the baptism of John, unto that same day that he was taken up from us, must one be ordained to be a witness with us of his resurrection. 23 And they appointed two, Joseph called Barsabas, who was surnamed Justus, and Matthias. 24 And they prayed, and said, Thou, Lord, which knowest the hearts of all men, shew whether of these two thou hast chosen, 25 That he may take part of this ministry and apostleship, from which Judas by transgression fell, that he might go to his own place. 26 And they gave forth their lots; and the lot fell upon Matthias; and he was numbered with the eleven apostles.”
As you can plainly see, Matthais took Judas’ place in respect to Judas’ bishopric, this is called Apostolic Succession. In which the authority of the Apostles is passed on to the successor by the laying on of hands, just as the Apostles received all of their authority from Jesus (although not by the laying on of hands). This has continued through the Catholic Church all the way up to today which is why only the Church as the authority to interpret the Bible officially.
S
seth349
Guest
Zach,
Yes, it appears that is exactly what happened here. And this process continued and apparently grew into Priests, Cardinals, Bishops, and a Pope as the organization became larger. For some reason they seem compelled to choose someone to replace Judas and maintain the number eleven, but later they began expanding. I am wondering why it was so important to maintain the eleven, and at what point they felt an expansion was justified. Also, was there a natural leader of the eleven? At some point afrer Jesus was gone it seems logical they would have to get organized with a chain of command. I understand they had a rough time of it before Rome embraced the religion in the third century. It is amazing they survived.
po18guy
Well-known member
That is a huge “if” which begins your question. I doubt that Christ taught them every detail about every aspect of life. The Apostles were given authority, and included in that authority was the power to bind and loose. The council was evidence of the exercise of that authority. Here’s another “if”: If you doubt the Apostles abilities, what else do you doubt?
po18guy
Well-known member
Timothy, by your own reasoning, you have no reason to teach anyone anything about faith. Just hand them a bible and let the ‘spirit’ guide them. Even though they may disagree with you, and with one another, all are lead by the spirit, right? So, go your way and live on peace, knowing that the ‘spirit’ guides all Christians. I strongly suggest that you work on your protestant brethren, to heal the thousands of divisions that the ‘spirit’ has lead them to. Why so arrogant as to believe that God has sent you in some special capacity? Catholics are Christians and have the Holy Spirit - as a matter of fact one of our seven Sacraments is to receive the Holy Spirit in Confirmation. It appears that you have a self-appointed agenda to “Christianize” Catholics. You are dead wrong, and your time would be much better spent preaching to and teaching the unconverted.
T
twinc
Guest
finally and hopefully at last "we must each individually interpret intrepretations even of the Church or even by those as or for the Church for it is impossible to do any other - we are of course not to personally interpret any prophecy of scripture - twinc
po18guy
Well-known member
“Sprinkling” is not a recognized Christian Baptism, and the Catholic Church does not and has never “sprinkled”. I suggest that you research that and consider having a genuine Christian Baptism performed. Until then, do you really have the Holy Spirit, or some other? Your teaching of division suggests that it may not be the Holy Spirit. Just a cautionary note to a brother in Christ.
T
Timothy_Piper
Guest
I choose the standard bearer; there is no higher authority nor standard than His.
Scripture is God’s inspired Word; there is no other revelation other than what we have been given in the Word of God as written down in the Protestant Bible (this answers Q2). Creation and that written in Romans 1 & 2 are the exceptions for those that never heard the Word of God.
Inspired by God
Psalm 119:89 Forever, O Lord, Your word is settled in heaven.
2 Tim.3:16-17, Heb. 4:12, Matt.5:18 2 Pet 1:20-21
Scripture reveals on Glorious pattern:
Heb. 1:1-2
Psalm 19:7-8, Psalm 119:89
Scripture is the source of essential Truth:
1 Corinthians 10:12-13 “Therefore let him who thinks he stands take heed lest he fall. 13 No temptation has overtaken you except such as is common to man; but God is faithful, who will not allow you to be tempted beyond what you are able, but with the temptation will also make the way of escape, that you may be able to bear it.”
Heb. 4:12,& *Psalm 19:7-9 ***“The law of the Lord is perfect, converting the soul; The testimony of the Lord is sure, making wise the simple; "
**]
Scripture requires the Holy Spirit for understanding:
***1 Corinthians 2:13-16 ***13 These things we also speak, not in words which man’s wisdom teaches but which the Holy Spirit teaches, comparing spiritual things with spiritual. 14 But the natural man does not receive the things of the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him; nor can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned. 15 But he who is spiritual judges all things, yet he himself is rightly judged by no one. 16 For “who has known the mind of the Lord that he may instruct Him?” But we have the mind of Christ.”
Psalm 119:34, Luke 24:45
Scripture reveals the character of God:
Isa. 48:17-18, 2 Sam.7:28, 22:29, Ps. 12:6,
Scripture reveals divine judgment for sins:
Scripture reveals blessings for obedience.
Scripture reveals Jesus & His sacrifice
Scripture reveals God;s glory and Kingdom
We can know Scripture is true: Gal.1:12, Psalm 19:8, Matt. 5:18, 1 Peter 1:25, Joshua 23:14, Deut.30:14 & Isa. 40:8
Scripture is our weapon against Satan: Eph.6:11-13, 17, Heb. 4:12, Jer.23:29, Ro. 1:16 & Matt. 4:4
Scripture must be our greatest study: 2 Tim.2:15, Psalm 119:105, 1Tom. 4:13, Psalm 119:97, 2 Tim.3:16, 1Pet. 2:2 & Psalm 119:11 "Your word I have hidden in my heart, That I might not sin against You!"
T
Timothy_Piper
Guest
episkopē in verse 20 is used in this context as shown by verse 24 & 25. = that act by which God looks into and searches out the ways, deeds character, of men, in order to adjudge them their lot accordingly"
Verse 25 identifies the positions as “apostolē” - in the NT, the office and dignity of the apostles of Christ, apostleship
Verse 24 is the One who determined - God
You can twist it to fit your succession of Peter doctrine all you want, but that is the only way to remotely show it and even with the twist; it is slightly implictit at best. W/out a twist is not even implicit.
Notice the jump from the twist to the application of entire history, which is a huge leap in faith, imposition on history, not to mention Scripture and whatever else on might use to describe it.
T
Timothy_Piper
Guest
No one can understand Scripture unless you first become a Christian. You might be able to read the gospel message in the Bible and God may chose to remove the veil, then give further understanding.
The truth of God always irritates people; just as God said it would. Another reason i love the Word of God; it does what it says.
Z
zach_dunn
Guest
They did not “maintain the number eleven.” There were twelve Apostles, then Judas betrayed Christ, then the eleven remaining Apostles made Matthais an Apostle; all together, there would be twelve.
Yes, there was a natural leader among the Apostles, this leader was none other than Peter. Whether or not Protestants wish to admit it, the clear testimony of Scripture is that Peter was the “first among equals.”
P
PJM
Guest
***My dear friends in and with Christ,
There is but one single way to understand the Bible, and that is in light of and full conformity with CC Teachings.
In a sense the Bible in terms we understand today could be termed a “Mission Statement” and “assembly Instructions.”
God Mandate to Peter and the hirearchy of His New and Furture Church of “binding” and “loosing” [Mt. 16:19, 18:18] were authorization for automous Governing of His Church. Because the Bible is the most detailed and explict set rules and regulations, teachings, history and Traditions, one would error Griviously, in not understanding that the Holy Spirit’s guidance, AND the Warranty of God’s Truth is LIMITED to the the Catholic Church, and those trained and qualifed therein.
Personal understanding [as in not taught to others] is normal as God often speaks to us individually through His Diviely Inspired Words. But that understanding is most often, specific to us, our place in life and where we are in our walk with Christ.
What we teach MUST BE in full conformity to Catholic Teachings, always and everywhere.
COLOR]*Love and prayers,
Pat**
Z
zach_dunn
Guest
So what you’re telling me is that Matthias took up Judas’ apostleship? I’m glad we’re in agreement on that!
Actually, this passage makes Apostolic Succession explicit, Matthias took Judas’ apostleship as you agreed in the previous part of your post. All of Scripture and history is against you on this one Tim.
Nope, you haven’t even looked at the history of Apostolic Succession, have you. We can trace back every single successor of Peter, Eusebius kept record of that for us. It’s all in Scripture and history, Tim.
Z
zach_dunn
Guest
Contrary to your understanding, your “standard” is not the Bible, it is your interpretation of the Bible, which are two completely differing and opposed things.
Do you hold the Scriptures above Jesus’ actual oral teaching? Jesus did not hand out Bibles to people, he taught them by mouth and some (not all) of these teachings were written down:
John 21:25
“25 But there are also many other things which Jesus did; which, if they were written every one, the world itself, I think, would not be able to contain the books that should be written.”
Clearly everything Jesus did and taught is not contained in at least the Gospels, this is made explicit in another passage:
Acts of the Apostles 20:35
“35 I have shewed you all things, how that so labouring you ought to support the weak, and to remember the word of the Lord Jesus, how he said: ‘It is a more blessed thing to give, rather than to receive.’”
This teaching of Jesus is not found anywhere in the Gospels, it was passed on through oral teaching all the way down to Paul. There are also verses such as the following:
Matthew 13:34
“34 All these things Jesus spoke in parables to the multitudes: and without parables he did not speak to them.”
Mark 4:11, 33
“11 And he said to them: To you it is given to know the mystery of the kingdom of God: but to them that are without, all things are done in parables. . . . 33 And with many such parables, he spoke to them the word, according as they were able to hear.”
The majority of these parables do not appear in Scripture. Who are you, then, to completely throw out all of Jesus’ oral teaching and replace it with all that was simply recorded of Him? Another problem with Protestants and the Word of God is that they see “word,” “the Lord’s word,” and similar utterances and assume it is referring to Scripture: it is not. 99% of the time, the Lord’s word is referring to God’s spoken word, not what is written. An example:
1 Peter 1:25
“25 But the word of the Lord endureth for ever. And this is the word which by the gospel hath been preached unto you.”
Also:
Acts of the Apostles 8:25
“25 And they indeed having testified and preached the word of the Lord, returned to Jerusalem, and preached the gospel to many countries of the Samaritans.”
In these passages we see that the word of the Lord is preached, it’s spoken; the Bible is not given out to believers. The second passage is also important because we see that the spoken word of the Lord is synonymous with the gospel, Catholic Tradition is the complete gospel. There is a small portion of the biblical data on the word, it’s not simply written.
How do you know that those 26 books of the New Testament belong there? How do you know that you’re not missing one, or two? How do you know that you do not have an uninspired book that should not be included in the New Testament?
S
seth349
Guest
Zach,
Yes. Twelve. Don’t know what I was thinking. I got the feeling after reading the scripture that it was important to maintain twelve. Is that observation correct?
Z
zach_dunn
Guest
Psalm 119:88
“88 Quicken thou me according to thy mercy: and I shall keep the testimonies of thy mouth.”
The Psalmist was referring to God’s spoken word, not what the Psalmist himself was writing at that time. After all, all of Jesus’ teachings were spoken first.
2 Timothy 3:16-17
“16 All scripture, inspired of God, is profitable to teach, to reprove, to correct, to instruct in justice, 17 That the man of God may be perfect, furnished to every good work.”
One thing you miss in this verse is that it does not say that “Only Scripture is inspired of God . . . .” Not even close, this verse is making a distinction between inspired and uninspired Scripture and also, it doesn’t give us a canon. Plus, this verse doesn’t call Scripture the word of God, so this verse does nothing for you.
Heb 4:12 is difficult to interpret, it can go either way. No where in the context is Scripture mentioned, and since the vast majority of biblical data about the word of God points to oral teaching, it is more probable that this is what the sacred writer is talking about.
I don’t know what point you’re trying to make with Mat 5:18, could you explain? It’s really not related to the subject.
2 Pet 1:20-21 is the best you’ve got going for you, but in no way does this verse limit the word of God to writing. As I’ve showed, the word of God is also connected to oral teaching. It is therefore most logical to say that Divine Revelation comes in both written and oral flavors.
I don’t understand the relevance of these verses. First, in Hebrews 1:1 we read, “God . . . spoke in times past . . .” This was obviously oral; God did not write to the prophets, and He certainly did not rain down volumes of His wisdom on them, so this acts contrary to the point you are trying to make. This same reasoning apples to Psalm 19:7-8 as well. God’s testimony was spoken, it’s all spoken! Why do Protestants need to reduce God’s teaching and revelation to writing?
1 Cor 10:12-13 says that Scripture is good for correction, which it is; this fact is reaffirmed in 2 Tim 3:16-17. The thing you mess up on here is thinking that this verse says the only place to find truth is in the Scriptures, this is a completely false notion. Paul says “And we charge you, brethren, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that you withdraw yourselves from every brother walking disorderly, and not according to the tradition which they have received of us.” [2 Thess 3:6]. Also, Paul has this to say:
2 Timothy 1:13-14
“13 Follow the pattern of the sound words which you have heard from me, in the faith and love which are in Christ Jesus; 14 guard the truth that has been entrusted to you by the Holy Spirit who dwells within us.”
The truth was passed on orally. This is actually the norm if you think about it, the Bible wasn’t one book until the late fourth century, oral teaching was the only way to pass on the truth. Also, it wasn’t until the fifteenth century that most people become literate at all, the only way to teach the faithful was through preaching, art, and the liturgy. Believe it or not, there were no Bible studies for the first 16 to 17 hundred years of Christianity!
I agree that the without the Holy Spirit, we cannot discern spiritual things because it is in plain words right here. Your folly is in thinking that the Holy Spirit is given for interpretation to everyone, it’s not. At least, that’s what Peter says:
2 Peter 1:20
“20 Understanding this first, that no prophecy of scripture is made by private interpretation.”
How, then, can we interpret anything? Well, Jesus gave the Holy Spirit to the Apostles [Jn 14:16-17; 16:13; Acts 2:1-5], the Apostles have Christ’s (and the Holy Spirit’s) authority [Lk 10:16] to interpret the Scriptures, along with teaching authoritatively.
- Status