How do I choose a Church?

[emeraldisle]

David followed the customs of the Jews under the Covenant of Moses in these matters.

So David could pray directly to God and confess his sin directly to God. If you think he couldn’t would you please show me from the Scriptures why he couldn’t. Also please post the Scripture verses and references.

He was inspired by God to write his Psalms, just as poets and painters are inspired by sunsets and other beautiful things. God’s was the beauty that inspired David’s human writing.

So we are agreed that God inspired men to write His written word.

.

 

[jmcrae]

So David could pray directly to God and confess his sin directly to God.

Through the Mosaic covenantal system of sacrifices and fasting, yes. Not by himself, with nobody around, or silently in his head, or anything like that.

So we are agreed that God inspired men to write His written word.

Yes. But not in the sense of the Bible being like the I Ching, where the words are believed to have the power to change reality.

The verses of the Bible are not magical incantations that you can recite, to make the sacrificial system of the Old Testament, or the Sacraments of the New Testament, go away and be replaced by a novel theology of egotism.

We have to read the Bible in the context of who wrote the words (the human being who wrote them down), what that person is attempting to convey, and the social/cultural conditions at the time of the writing.

 

[emeraldisle]

So David could pray directly to God and confess his sin directly to God. If you think he couldn’t would you please show me from the Scriptures why he couldn’t. Also please post the Scripture verses and references.

Through the Mosaic covenantal system of sacrifices and fasting, yes. Not by himself, with nobody around, or silently in his head, or anything like that.

Emeraldisle:
So we are agreed that God inspired men to write His written word.

Yes. But not

Either we agree that God inspired men to write His written word or we don’t, no buts.

.

 

[jmcrae]

Either we agree that God inspired men to write His written word or we don’t, no buts.

.

What is your definition of “inspired”?

Do you believe the Bible to be a kind of I Ching, where you can change reality by quoting from it?

 

[Kay_Cee]

And this is why you don’t understand what Davids statement means.

.

Okay, I have explained this over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over . . .

I have stated all along that it is necessary to go to the context of the passage. I said way back in post #383:

if you want to argue that it means confessing directly, you’ll have to go to the context of the verse, including its historical context. However, since jmcrae is more knowledgable in this area, I’ll let the two of you slug that out.

My objection to your argument was your taking the verse all by itself and declaring it meant we are to confess to God alone when that verse, all by itself, has two possible interpretations, confessing either directly or indirectly.

I proved this by giving you my own, made-up verse and asking you to interpret it. You complained you couldn’t tell because it was only one sentence.

***That has been my point all along!!! ***You cannot tell just from the statement “I will confess my transgressions to the Lord” if the confession is direct or indirect.

So, thank you for finally proving my point!

 

[emeraldisle]

What is your definition of “inspired”?

Do you believe the Bible to be a kind of I Ching, where you can change reality by quoting from it?

Why did you ignore what I posted to you in post #420 & #422?

So David could pray directly to God and confess his sin directly to God. If you think he couldn’t would you please show me from the Scriptures why he couldn’t. Also please post the Scripture verses and references.

.

 

[jmcrae]

Why did you ignore what I posted to you in post #420 & #422?

.

Read the Book of Leviticus. This was the Law that David both followed and upheld, as King of Israel.

 

[emeraldisle]

B]I have stated all along that it is necessary to go to the context of the passage. I said way back in post #383:

and you stated the following re Psalm 32:5;

the text does not have to specifically mention a priest in order for that to be the method used because the idea of a priest is already present in the definition of the word “confess.”

Make your mind up, either you interpret what David said in Psalm 32:5 in the context of Psalm 32 and 2 Samuel 12 or you interpret what he said by your dictionary definition and by the Catholic religions teaching.

I proved this by giving you my own, made-up verse and asking you to interpret it. You complained you couldn’t tell because it was only one sentence.

All you have proved is that Davids statement in the context of Psalm 32 and 2 Samuel 12 means he confessed his sins directly to God.

This has been my point all along.

.

 

[emeraldisle]

Read the Book of Leviticus. This was the Law that David both followed and upheld, as King of Israel.

So David could pray directly to God and confess his sin directly to God. If you think he couldn’t would you please show me from the Scriptures why he couldn’t. **Also please post the Scripture verses and references. **

.

 

[jmcrae]

So David could pray directly to God and confess his sin directly to God. If you think he couldn’t would you please show me from the Scriptures why he couldn’t. **Also please post the Scripture verses and references. **

.

The Book of Leviticus shows that he went to the priests and made animal sacrifices for his sins. (Have you read it?)

The Bible is not a magic writing that changes historical reality whenever you take a verse out here or there. The idea of “confess your sins to God directly” did not even exist on the earth until some time in the 1700s.

 

[emeraldisle]

The Book of Leviticus shows that he went to the priests and made animal sacrifices for his sins. (Have you read it?)

The Bible is not a magic writing that changes historical reality whenever you take a verse out here or there. The idea of “confess your sins to God directly” did not even exist on the earth until some time in the 1700s.

So David could pray directly to God and confess his sin directly to God. If you think he couldn’t would you please show me from the Scriptures why he couldn’t.** Also please post the Scripture verses and references.**

.

 

[jmcrae]

So David could pray directly to God and confess his sin directly to God. If you think he couldn’t would you please show me from the Scriptures why he couldn’t.** Also please post the Scripture verses and references.**

.

Read the Book of Leviticus. Read the whole thing. A bits-and-pieces approach to the Scriptures will not help you. The Book of Leviticus is the Law that as King he was required both to follow and to uphold for the Kingdom of Israel. Ergo, he followed the rules of confessing his sins to a priest and sacrificing the appropriate animals, to atone for his sins. This, he did for God.

 

[emeraldisle]

Read the Book of Leviticus. Read the whole thing. A bits-and-pieces approach to the Scriptures will not help you. The Book of Leviticus is the Law that as King he was required both to follow and to uphold for the Kingdom of Israel. Ergo, he followed the rules of confessing his sins to a priest and sacrificing the appropriate animals, to atone for his sins. This, he did for God.

For the last time I’m asking you to post the evidence from the Scriptures to show that although David could pray directly to God he couldn’t confess his sins directly to God.

.

 

[jmcrae]

For the last time I’m asking you to post the evidence from the Scriptures to show that although David could pray directly to God he couldn’t confess his sins directly to God.

.

Of course he could confess his sins directly to God. He just couldn’t be forgiven of them until he had been to see the priest and had made the appropriate sacrifices.

Why is that so hard to understand?

 

[emeraldisle]

Of course he could confess his sins directly to God. He just couldn’t be forgiven of them until he had been to see the priest and had made the appropriate sacrifices.

Why is that so hard to understand?

So David said to Nathan, “I have sinned against the LORD.” And Nathan(not a priest) said to David, “The LORD also has put away your sin; you shall not die. 2 Samuel 12:13

.

 

[jmcrae]

So David said to Nathan, “I have sinned against the LORD.” And Nathan(not a priest) said to David, “The LORD also has put away your sin; you shall not die. 2 Samuel 12:13

.

Nathan (a man who was a priest) gave David the Absolution in this case, yes. Nathan was a priest/prophet; it was his role to do this.

 

[emeraldisle]

Nathan (a man who was a priest) gave David the Absolution in this case, yes. Nathan was a priest/prophet; it was his role to do this.

Of course you say Nathan is a priest & prophet but God says in His written word that Nathan was a prophet and He doesn’t say he was a priest. I believe God.

that the king said to Nathan the prophet, “See now, I dwell in a house of cedar, but the ark of God dwells within tent curtains.” 2 Samuel 7:2

Behold, while she was still speaking with the king, Nathan the prophet came in. 1 Kings 1:22

Now the acts of King David, from first to last, are written in the chronicles of Samuel the seer, in the chronicles of Nathan the prophet and in the chronicles of Gad the seer, 1 Chronicles 29:29

.

 

[jmcrae]

I think we have strayed way off topic here.

My apologies for my role in this.

Back to the subject: If a Catholic wanted to convert to Protestantism, how would they discern which Protestant Church is the one that has taken up the mantle of Apostolic Authority, after it was apparently “lost” by the Catholic Church at some unspecified time prior to Luther’s rebellion?

 

[johnnydigit]

I think we have strayed way off topic here.

My apologies for my role in this.

Back to the subject: If a Catholic wanted to convert to Protestantism, how would they discern which Protestant Church is the one that has taken up the mantle of Apostolic Authority, after it was apparently “lost” by the Catholic Church at some unspecified time prior to Luther’s rebellion?

it’s not about authority, it’s about which church they feel teaches the Bible the best to them. how do they know? well they feel it. i think it’s a holy spirit or something…

the only way to find authority is to trace history, and well, you know where that goes… so there’s proximity, looks, music, preacher, kindness, childcare availability, and overall cut of their jib…
truth? well… Jesus is truth, so if they have Jesus, then we’ve got a good jib. the ones that appeal to youth seem to attract the most. they got cool music and spirit filled youth.

 

[Kay_Cee]

and you stated the following re Psalm 32:5;

Make your mind up, either you interpret what David said in Psalm 32:5 in the context of Psalm 32 and 2 Samuel 12 or you interpret what he said by your dictionary definition and by the Catholic religions teaching.

I said the text, by itself, had two possible interpretations. Why can’t you see that is what I said?

All you have proved is that Davids statement in the context of Psalm 32 and 2 Samuel 12 means he confessed his sins directly to God.

Now you are putting words in my mouth. I never discussed context–in fact, I made a point of the fact that I was not discussing context. So to say that I have proven anything using context is either a deliberate lie, or a complete and total misunderstanding on your part.

This has been my point all along.

.

Forget it. You will never admit that the verse, by itself, has more than one possible interpretation, even though I have proved that several times.

I agree with jmcrae. The thread needs to get back on topic. So this is the end of my discussion regarding this.