Nah, just “rightly dividing the Word of Truth” as the Holy Spirit, through Paul, tells us to do. I am so sorry that this has escaped you! You confuse the “kingdom” of the gospels with the Body of Christ. You fail to understand that the 12 are apostles to the circumcision. And I really believe that you don’t know the gospel by which one is saved.Paul writes that he is the “apostle to the Gentiles” [Romans 11:13]. Peter and the twelve were apostles to the circumcision (Israel) [Galatians 2:8,9]. Christendom seems to have missed this distinction. Notice who Peter is addressing
• Acts 2:22 – ye men of Israel
• Acts 2:36 – house of Israel
• Acts 3:12 – ye men of Israel
• Acts 4:10 – all the people of Israel
• Acts 5:31 – a Prince and a Savior to give repentance to Israel
• 1 Peter 1:1 – to the sojourners scattered…….
Note to whom James addresses his epistle:
• James 1:1 – to the twelve tribes scattered abroad
John writes to “my little children” – 1 John 2:1. In light of Galatians 2:8,9, we know that these are the Jews.
The “dispensation of the grace of God,” the present church-age, was first revealed to Paul.
Ephesians 3:2 – “If ye have heard of the dispensation of the grace of God WHICH IS GIVEN ME toward you.”
Ephesians 3:3 – “How that by revelation He made known unto me THE MYSTERY (as I wrote before) in few words.” Do you know what THE MYSTERY is?
Colossians 1:25,26 – “Of which I am made a minister, according to the dispensation of God WHICH IS GIVEN TO ME for you, to FULFILL the WORD of GOD. EVEN THE MYSTERY WHICH HATH BEEN HIDDEN FROM AGES AND GENERATIONS, BUT NOW [Gk. Nuni – just now and at no other time] is made manifest to His saints.”
Romans 16:25 – “Now to Him that is of power to ESTABLISH YOU, ACCORDING TO MY GOSPEL, [and] the preaching of the [Lord] Jesus Christ ACCORDING TO THE REVELATION OF THE MYSTERY, WHICH WAS KEPT SECRET SINCE THE WORLD BEGAN.”
Believers in this dispensation of the grace of God are “established” by Paul’s “my gospel,” the preaching of [the Lord] Jesus Christ according to the REVELATION OF THE MYSTERY….” Are you established? Do you know what the preaching of the Lord Jesus Christ according to the revelation of the mystery is???
Paul was also given the marching orders for the Body of Christ. He writes: “And to make all men see what is the fellowship [Gk koinonia] of the MYSTERY, which from the beginning of the world hath been hidden in God……” Ephesians 3:9.
“Now then we are ambassadors for Christ, as though God did beseech you by us; we beg you in Christ’s stead, be ye reconciled to God.” 2 Corinthians 5:20
Ambassadors represent their sovereign in a foreign land. They ARE NOT SENT UNTIL THEY HAVE BEEN THOROUGHLY TRAINED.
What kind of price did Paul pay for preaching the Lord Jesus Christ according to the revelation of the mystery? On every hand, Paul faced opposition for preaching THE MYSTERY. He was in prison in Rome for this. Notice what he writes in his last epistle:
“Wherein I suffer trouble as an evil doer, even unto bonds.” 2 Timothy 2:7-9.
Paul’s almost constant suffering had its effect upon timid souls. Others, who saw the truth and glory of his message, lacked the courage to stand with Paul in making the mystery known. Some, who started with him, were tempted to, and did turn back. Notice 2 Timothy 4:10-18. But Paul, thanks to the grace of God, persevered. 2 Timothy 1:7,8.
If you stand firmly for Paul’s “my gospel,” you too will “suffer trouble as an evil doer…”
We are not talking about potatoes now are we? We are talking about whether the Bible lessons are meant for all people or only the people the authors were addressing. When Jesus preached the Sermon on the Mount, was he only talking to the people directly in front of him at that particular time or are the lessons applicable to you and I 2000 years later? I think its pretty clear that he wasn’t speaking only to the people in attendance because if he was and if for example. Paul was addressing only the people in Corinth in ~50AD with his letters to the Corinthians, then it would mean that the Bible is completely worthless , would it not.Let’s say you are giving a lecture on “potatoes”, for example and you brought to the lecture room 40 sacks of different potatoes. At the beginning of the lecture you inform your audience that you’ll be talking, specifically, about the 12 sacks you have marked with a large red “X”.
Now, when you use expressions like “all the potatoes” or “every potato” how would the audience interpret what you mean by it? Would they ignore or forget what you said right at the beginning of the lecture and assume you were referring to all the potatoes in the 40 sacks?
If Jesus said that he had come specifically for “the lost tribes of Israel” and the Angel proclaimed that he would be given the throne “of his father David” why do you interpret this as referring to every Tom, Dick or Harry in the world?
inkaneerNo, the Maker guides His tool.
Well first off I am glad for your acknowledgement, “*Just because the Lord God used the Catholic Church to sort out and set forth that which should be in print in the future for all to read.”. *Because He sure could not have used any protestant denominations in the fourth century now could He? No, He sure couldn’t. So having established that, can you tell me by what authority the protestant denominations removed seven books from that Bible canon that God used the Catholic Church to determine in the fourth Century? The canon determined by God using the Catholic Church consisted of 73 books. But protestants only have 66 books in their Bible. Was that an OOPSIE on the part of God? Was the Catholic Church wrong even though you acknowledge that it was guided by God? Or, heaven forbid, could those protestant forefathers have violated the Canon originally established by God? Who is wrong here, protestants, or God?
Because Catholics know that God is not limited to the scriptures. Aso the scriptures are not the only definitive authority. Jesus established a church with authority. The binding and loosening power mentioned in Mattthew 16 and 18 alone clearly states that. One has to be blind not to see the connection with the OT chief Steward in Isaiah 22. The Church functioned very well, thank you, before the canon of scripture was set. It functioned based on Apostolic Tradition of which scripture is only part. It continues to do so. You also follow some of that Apostolic Tradition not contained in scripture. Where, for instance, does scripture say we are to worship on the first day [Sunday] of the week? It doesn’t. So why do protestants do it? Why do some protestants baptize infants while others do not? Because scripture doesn’t give the answer one way or the other. Those who baptize infants are following Apostolic Tradition. This whole sola scriptura idea of encasing God within the covers of a book and limiting Him to just those words written in red ink was never a part of the church until the 16th century.
The potato analogy is correct and yes, Jesus was addressing those present and Paul’s letter to the Corinthians was meant for that church only. The same as when Confucius or Mohamed spoke they were speaking to their respective audiences at the time. And just as any other wise words from other people are quoted as moral teachings so are those of the founders of various religions. Such sayings are timeless.We are not talking about potatoes now are we? We are talking about whether the Bible lessons are meant for all people or only the people the authors were addressing. When Jesus preached the Sermon on the Mount, was he only talking to the people directly in front of him at that particular time or are the lessons applicable to you and I 2000 years later? I think its pretty clear that he wasn’t speaking only to the people in attendance because if he was and if for example. Paul was addressing only the people in Corinth in ~50AD with his letters to the Corinthians, then it would mean that the Bible is completely worthless , would it not.
Quite frankly your response is disengenuous. Instead of facing the questions I brought up you completely ignored them and went off on a tangent claiming, in essence, that God could do anything He pleased. But did you ever consider that it pleased God to do it through His Church? Let’s face it, you boxed yourself into a corner when you acknowledged that God used the Catholic Church to determine which writings were inspired. Of course, you really had no choice because if you denied that God guided the Catholic Church in selecting the canon then the canon is nothing more than someone’s personal interpretation and subject to being personally interpreted again and again and again and again. Because there is no way to prove that any book in the Biblke is inspired by God. There is no inspired Table of Contents. Given the way protestants wield personal interpretation around there could be untold hundreds or thousands of canons circulating. Potentially the number of canons could equal the number of protestant denominations which most sources place in the tens of thousands. You may doubt that but if tens of thousands of denominations cannot agree on what is said using the same canon then what causes you to believe they could agree on one canon?inkaneer
thanks for the reply Who formed Heaven and earth? Who had a say in the forming of Heaven and earth? Then who has a say in the Lord’s forming of His Church? You?, me? the Catholics? the Protestants? The Lord will do what pleases Him, and He need not apologize for it. He owes nothing to any one, but He will keep His Word. Didn’t He tell Israel that they would be as lone as there was a sun and a moon? But yet what has happen to them in the passed 1900 years? But they still are a people aren’t they?
It is God’s promise to us that is kept, not our interpretation thereof. If He says His Spirit is poured out over the earth then let it be so.
Let’s get specific. When Jesus said to love your enemies in the Sermon on the Mount, does that mean that only those who were present have to love their enemies and that every one else is exempt?The potato analogy is correct and yes, Jesus was addressing those present and Paul’s letter to the Corinthians was meant for that church only. The same as when Confucius or Mohamed spoke they were speaking to their respective audiences at the time. And just as any other wise words from other people are quoted as moral teachings so are those of the founders of various religions. Such sayings are timeless.
The Sermon on the Mount refers, primarily, to the Essenes who considered themselves to be “the poor in spirit”, “the meek”, “those that mourn”,etc. but have been adopted by all those who consider themselves as such
If I understand you correctly, you don’t follow the teachings of Jesus because you think that was meant only for the Jews. Instead you follow only what you understand Paul to say because you are a Gentile and you think he was the only Apostle commissioned to preach to the Gentiles.Nah, just “rightly dividing the Word of Truth” as the Holy Spirit, through Paul, tells us to do. I am so sorry that this has escaped you! You confuse the “kingdom” of the gospels with the Body of Christ. You fail to understand that the 12 are apostles to the circumcision. And I really believe that you don’t know the gospel by which one is saved.
But, “…if our gospel be hid it is hid to those who are lost…”
Protestants have a saying [borrowed from Hebrews 13:8] that says:The potato analogy is correct and yes, Jesus was addressing those present and Paul’s letter to the Corinthians was meant for that church only. The same as when Confucius or Mohamed spoke they were speaking to their respective audiences at the time. And just as any other wise words from other people are quoted as moral teachings so are those of the founders of various religions. Such sayings are timeless. The Sermon on the Mount refers, primarily, to the Essenes who considered themselves to be “the poor in spirit”, “the meek”, “those that mourn”,etc. but have been adopted by all those who consider themselves as such
AvflfThe potato analogy is correct and yes, Jesus was addressing those present and Paul’s letter to the Corinthians was meant for that church only. The same as when Confucius or Mohamed spoke they were speaking to their respective audiences at the time. And just as any other wise words from other people are quoted as moral teachings so are those of the founders of various religions. Such sayings are timeless.
The Sermon on the Mount refers, primarily, to the Essenes who considered themselves to be “the poor in spirit”, “the meek”, “those that mourn”,etc. but have been adopted by all those who consider themselves as such
I’ll just repeat what I said above “And just as any other wise words from other people are quoted as moral teachings so are those of the founders of various religions. Such sayings are timeless” If you have a Bible handy and look at the references given (mine is a KJV and the notes are in the middle of the page separating two sets of scripture) you’ll note that most, if not all, of this sermon had already been written in the OT. So there is no new revelation.Let’s get specific. When Jesus said to love your enemies in the Sermon on the Mount, does that mean that only those who were present have to love their enemies and that every one else is exempt?
And by the way, how do you know that Jesus was preaching to the Essenes on the Mount?
They do because we adopted them. We could have adopted the Code of Hammurabi, from which most of Moses’ laws were taken, but because Christianity adopted the Jewish OT and not Hammurabi’s sayings we go by the 10 commandments, although the precepts they convey are as old as human civilization.Avflf
Trying to get my mind around your comments. Do you mean that since Moses was instructed to give the 10 Commandments to the Jews in the desert that they do not apply to us today?
Teachers and teachings cannot contradict scripture.=Philthy;6654428]How does it do this?
It doesn’t. The Church does, using the practice. We have teachings that rightly reflect scripture, often similar to Catholic teaching, most of which are documented in the Lutheran Confessions. They, like your Catechism, communicate to the faithful the faith.How does it communicate to the faithful that it has done this?
For Lutherans, through the Church and the Lutheran Confessions.How do the faithful know that it has been definitively communicated to them by “the practice of sola scriptura”?
Sure. Zwingli taught, in direct contradiction to scripture, that the Lord’s Supper was symbolic. The Lutheran Confessions reflect scripture and the teaching of the whole history of the Church that the Eucharist is the true and substantial body and blood of Christ.Can you provide a single example of the practice of sola scriptura holding a teacher or a teaching accountable?
Any Tradition that does not contradict scripture, or distract from the Gospel.Which Tradition, exactly, does it include?
For Lutherans the early ecumenical councils, the three ecumenical creeds, the Lutheran Confessions.Which councils, creeds and confessions does it include?
It doesn’t. It is a practice of the Church, and doesn’t have a will of its own. It is simply a practice. It is not hermeneutics, it does not establish the canon. It is simply the practice of holding teachers and teachings accountable. For Lutherans, there is no infallibile person or group that can claim a doctrine outside of scripture.How does sola scriptura reveal its will to the faithful?
Wow, you liken Catholicism to a business and you claim that it was created by the Roman empire? Where is your support for such a radical statement.They do because we adopted them. We could have adopted the Code of Hammurabi, from which most of Moses’ laws were taken, but because Christianity adopted the Jewish OT and not Hammurabi’s sayings we go by the 10 commandments, although the precepts they convey are as old as human civilization.
Once you understand that the OT was written by Jews for Jews and the writers of the NT were also Jews, you begin to see why it is written that the messiah came to save “his” people from their sins, why the messiah himself defined the scope of his ministry to “the children of Israel” and why he will be given “David’s throne” and would reign over the “house of Jacob”. It had to do with Israel and Israel alone. That the churches chose to spiritualize this to incorporate the whole world was probably due to the lack of converts among the Jewish population and they had to make it palatable to the heathen. Hey! It’s OK. Business ventures must expand, otherwise they perish. Until the adoption of Catholicism by the Roman empire, Christianity was divided in a multitude of sects each with their own interpretation of what was the right way. Once the power of Rome backed one of those sects the rest were doomed to extinction as their books were burned, the followers persecuted and killed as “heretics” and their doctrines forbidden from being propagated. From the time of the “proto-orthodox” about the 2nd century to the 4th century where the orthodox became the religious views of Rome the Scriptures were compiled, according to their particular beliefs, and those that did not fit the mould were discarded. Hope it helps you.
You call yourself a “believer” but just what do you believe in? You seem to think Christianity is just another Religion, and you don’t think there is any revelation in scripture that actually applies to you, since it was written for the Jews, or perhaps more specifically for the Essenes.I’ll just repeat what I said above “And just as any other wise words from other people are quoted as moral teachings so are those of the founders of various religions. Such sayings are timeless” If you have a Bible handy and look at the references given (mine is a KJV and the notes are in the middle of the page separating two sets of scripture) you’ll note that most, if not all, of this sermon had already been written in the OT. So there is no new revelation.
Read it in a book on the Essenes, that they referred to themselves as such. I’ve got it somewhere in my library.
Jon,Teachers and teachings cannot contradict scripture.
It doesn’t. The Church does, using the practice. We have teachings that rightly reflect scripture, often similar to Catholic teaching, most of which are documented in the Lutheran Confessions. They, like your Catechism, communicate to the faithful the faith.
For Lutherans, through the Church and the Lutheran Confessions.
Sure. Zwingli taught, in direct contradiction to scripture, that the Lord’s Supper was symbolic. The Lutheran Confessions reflect scripture and the teaching of the whole history of the Church that the Eucharist is the true and substantial body and blood of Christ.
Any Tradition that does not contradict scripture, or distract from the Gospel.
For Lutherans the early ecumenical councils, the three ecumenical creeds, the Lutheran Confessions.
It doesn’t. It is a practice of the Church, and doesn’t have a will of its own. It is simply a practice. It is not hermeneutics, it does not establish the canon. It is simply the practice of holding teachers and teachings accountable. For Lutherans, there is no infallibile person or group that can claim a doctrine outside of scripture.
Jon
It is an interesting conspiracy theory, but not historically accurate. In fact, Catholicism was not “adopted” by the Roman Empire until centuries later. What happened in 325 was the Edict of Milan, which decrimanalized Christianity. There is a world of difference here. Think about it this way. If California decriminalizes marijuana, that means they will no longer charge people that use it or sell it with a crime. That is a far cry from “adopting” marijuana, in the sense that everyone in CA starts smoking it!They do because we adopted them. We could have adopted the Code of Hammurabi, from which most of Moses’ laws were taken, but because Christianity adopted the Jewish OT and not Hammurabi’s sayings we go by the 10 commandments, although the precepts they convey are as old as human civilization.
Once you understand that the OT was written by Jews for Jews and the writers of the NT were also Jews, you begin to see why it is written that the messiah came to save “his” people from their sins, why the messiah himself defined the scope of his ministry to “the children of Israel” and why he will be given “David’s throne” and would reign over the “house of Jacob”. It had to do with Israel and Israel alone. That the churches chose to spiritualize this to incorporate the whole world was probably due to the lack of converts among the Jewish population and they had to make it palatable to the heathen. Hey! It’s OK. Business ventures must expand, otherwise they perish. Until the adoption of Catholicism by the Roman empire, Christianity was divided in a multitude of sects each with their own interpretation of what was the right way. Once the power of Rome backed one of those sects the rest were doomed to extinction as their books were burned, the followers persecuted and killed as “heretics” and their doctrines forbidden from being propagated. From the time of the “proto-orthodox” about the 2nd century to the 4th century where the orthodox became the religious views of Rome the Scriptures were compiled, according to their particular beliefs, and those that did not fit the mould were discarded. Hope it helps you.
On the contrary, every time Jesus says “but I say to you” he is giving new revelation to His disciples. He distinguishes this by saying “you have heard it was said…but I say…”I’ll just repeat what I said above “And just as any other wise words from other people are quoted as moral teachings so are those of the founders of various religions. Such sayings are timeless” If you have a Bible handy and look at the references given (mine is a KJV and the notes are in the middle of the page separating two sets of scripture) you’ll note that most, if not all, of this sermon had already been written in the OT.** So there is no new revelation**.
Been reading the Church’s Authorized Version of History, have you?It is an interesting conspiracy theory, but not historically accurate. In fact, Catholicism was not “adopted” by the Roman Empire until centuries later. What happened in 325 was the Edict of Milan, which decrimanalized Christianity. There is a world of difference here. Think about it this way. If California decriminalizes marijuana, that means they will no longer charge people that use it or sell it with a crime. That is a far cry from “adopting” marijuana, in the sense that everyone in CA starts smoking it!
Heresies were doomed to extinction from the day Jesus founded His Church, because He promised that the gates of hell would not prevail against it, and embracing heresy is passing through the gates of hell.
You also seem to have no awareness of the Eastern Church, which at the time was larger and older than the “Roman” Church. The Church began in Jerusalem, and spread East to Antioch of Syria. When the Empire split, Rome no longer held jursidiction over the Eastern Provinces.
The Bible was formed by the successors of the Apostles, who had nothing to do with Roman polity.
Was he repudiating the Law, expanding its meaning or starting a new doctrine? Before you answer compare these commandments Ex 21:24 “Eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot,” to Mat 5:39 “But I say unto you, That ye resist not evil: but whosoever shall smite thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also.”On the contrary, every time Jesus says “but I say to you” he is giving new revelation to His disciples. He distinguishes this by saying “you have heard it was said…but I say…”
A “believer” means just that. I didn’t qualify what I believed in. Lets leave it at that. Christianism IS just another religion and a very recent one at that. Judaism is also a religion, much older than Christianity. Islamism is younger that the two but is also a religion. Mormonism is also a religion, a later-day one to be sure. And every one of them claim pre-eminence over the others. Go figure.You call yourself a “believer” but just what do you believe in? You seem to think Christianity is just another Religion, and you don’t think there is any revelation in scripture that actually applies to you, since it was written for the Jews, or perhaps more specifically for the Essenes.