How do You verify spiritual truth

  • Thread starter Thread starter AmateurPianist
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
A

AmateurPianist

Guest
See the Scripture in my signature:

But examine everything carefully; hold fast to that which is good

As everybody knows, there is a lot of conflicting stuff that is put forth as Spiritual truth. My question how do you verify something put forth as spiritual truth.
 
See the Scripture in my signature:

But examine everything carefully; hold fast to that which is good

As everybody knows, there is a lot of conflicting stuff that is put forth as Spiritual truth. My question how do you verify something put forth as spiritual truth.
That’s why we have apostolic authority. One of Christ’s statements was that He would “guide into all the truth”. And at the time He was talking to the apostles. That authority has been handed down through the centuries.

He also declared clearly to Peter that what he bound or loosed on earth would be bound or loosed in heaven. That’s a lot of authority to give a man. That became understood with the passage of time (although the church fathers also stated) that the Bishop of Rome was the eminent authority, as the See of Peter. Peter died in Rome, as did Paul. Christ was establishing an authoritive office, with the power to bind and loose. And Christ said it. It’s not a figment of the Catholic church’s imagination.

If you’re just going to use the Bible, plus your own reason, without any other authority, you run up against the problem of differing personal opinions. Thus we have SDA’s for example who insist that Saturday is the Sabbath, and should be adhered to because it was an OT law, despite the fact the Church was in the habit of meeting on Sunday’s from the earliest days.

We have fundamentalists who insist Rome is Babylon, and when Saddam Hussein was in control, some insisted it was the literal Babylon based in Iraq. Some say it simply stands for any world system which opposes Christ.

We have those who insist the KJV Bible is the only version, despite the fact it didn’t exist for 1500 years. And so on. Some insist on a version of communion close to the C****atholic; others insist it is purely symbolic. Most Protestants have two sacraments; the Catholic Church has seven.

Some insist on a literal 7 day, 24 hour creation; some say evolution; and some say a mixture.

And that’s why we have what might be called Catholic teaching. Or to quote my old Protestant pastor, “When it comes to theology, Protestants couldn’t agree how far to spit!” And that was from a wise, prophetic old Protestant pastor.

Without central authority, guided by the Holy Spirit, you *can’t * have certainty that any particular “spiritual” truth is in fact, true.

And I can also tell you from personal experience that what might be called “personal spiritual experiences” are also equally uncertain - at first glance you don’t know if they’re from God or the devil.
 
That’s why we have apostolic authority. One of Christ’s statements was that He would “guide into all the truth”. And at the time He was talking to the apostles. That authority has been handed down through the centuries.

He also declared clearly to Peter that what he bound or loosed on earth would be bound or loosed in heaven. That’s a lot of authority to give a man. That became understood with the passage of time (although the church fathers also stated) that the Bishop of Rome was the eminent authority, as the See of Peter. Peter died in Rome, as did Paul. Christ was establishing an authoritive office, with the power to bind and loose. And Christ said it. It’s not a figment of the Catholic church’s imagination.

If you’re just going to use the Bible, plus your own reason, without any other authority, you run up against the problem of differing personal opinions. Thus we have SDA’s for example who insist that Saturday is the Sabbath, and should be adhered to because it was an OT law, despite the fact the Church was in the habit of meeting on Sunday’s from the earliest days.

We have fundamentalists who insist Rome is Babylon, and when Saddam Hussein was in control, some insisted it was the literal Babylon based in Iraq. Some say it simply stands for any world system which opposes Christ.

We have those who insist the KJV Bible is the only version, despite the fact it didn’t exist for 1500 years. And so on. Some insist on a version of communion close to the C****atholic; others insist it is purely symbolic. Most Protestants have two sacraments; the Catholic Church has seven.

Some insist on a literal 7 day, 24 hour creation; some say evolution; and some say a mixture.

And that’s why we have what might be called Catholic teaching. Or to quote my old Protestant pastor, “When it comes to theology, Protestants couldn’t agree how far to spit!” And that was from a wise, prophetic old Protestant pastor.

Without central authority, guided by the Holy Spirit, you *can’t * have certainty that any particular “spiritual” truth is in fact, true.

And I can also tell you from personal experience that what might be called “personal spiritual experiences” are also equally uncertain - at first glance you don’t know if they’re from God or the devil.
Oh…before I get started I welcome participation by both Protestants and Catholics here. My intention is not as much debate as it is asking questions. I think if you ask questions back enough you will find different assumption.

In fact I will admit I start with two assumptions: (1) Jesus is who He claimed to be (2) The Bible is what it claims itself to be. And maybe a third (3) The Bible I possess is the Bible God intends me to have.

So let me understand. The key sentence from what I am reading is
That’s why we have apostolic authority.
So my questions are…

(1) Are you assuming that anything that originates from the apostles can be trusted as Spiritual Truth?
(2) The apostles penned Scripture. Can Scripture be trusted as Spiritual Truth?
(3) Is there anything else that originates from the apostles that is not found in Scripture. Assuming the answer to (1) is yes, how do you know it comes from the apostles as opposed to say an ancient urban legend.

As to the rest.
If you’re just going to use the Bible, plus your own reason, without any other authority, you run up against the problem of differing personal opinions.
Of course this is a question for those who say they use just Scripture to verify spiritual truth. How do you know you are accurate in separating what God actually is saying in the Bible from your opinion on what God is saying in the Bible?
 
See the Scripture in my signature:

But examine everything carefully; hold fast to that which is good

As everybody knows, there is a lot of conflicting stuff that is put forth as Spiritual truth. My question how do you verify something put forth as spiritual truth.
Personally I start with -
Mt 22:36-40 36 “Teacher, which is the great commandment in the Law?” 37 And He said to him, " YOU SHALL LOVE THE LORD YOUR GOD WITH ALL YOUR HEART, AND WITH ALL YOUR SOUL, AND WITH ALL YOUR MIND.' 38 "This is the great and foremost commandment. 39 "The second is like it, YOU SHALL LOVE YOUR NEIGHBOR AS YOURSELF.’ 40 “On these two commandments depend the whole Law and the Prophets.”

I compare things against the “Law of Love”.
Of course there sometimes needs to be prayer and research in which case I look to the Catachism of the Catholic Church for guidance.
But overall - everything has to conform to the central Law of Love.

Peace
James
 
That is why we have a church…Christ called us to be one.

The church teaches everything we need for salvation as well as providing the Sacraments that nurture.

However, that does not mean holiness can be achieved by its members. It is up to each person to cooperate with Christ’s grace or not. No one individual has any monopoly on holiness.
 
AmateurPianist;6532824:
I’ll assume the same basic assumptions. I’ll also comment that before we start, the Bible won’t make much sense unless the Holy Spirit indwells a person. Back in my atheist days, I’d occasionally pick up a Bible and read bits of it. Except for the Gospels, it made hardly any impact whatsoever.

I also think that for anyone to understand the Bible, they need a bit of training from an external source - eg. a pastor, book or other agency explaining Jewish history, where the prophets fit in, some Roman customs etc.
That is fair. At a minimum somebody needs to know not to start with Genesis and read it in order. You will get lost by the end of Exodus.
I’m assuming that when God spoke to or through an apostle in relation to Jesus Christ, then it will be spiritual truth. If an apostle gave me a tip for Saturday’s races, I would not assume it was spiritual truth. It would probably run last.
That is what I meant of course. That makes sense.
This question conflicts with your assumption that you believe “The Bible I possess is the Bible God intends me to have.” You can’t say you believe it is, then in the next breath ask if it’s true. There is an assumption operating here, based on faith, and you cannot get away from that.
Never mind. That is not what I meant. And I forgot what I meant.
There is nothing that originates from the Apostles, or apostolic authority, that is not found in Scripture. For example, the Catholic emphasis on Marianism can be traced back to a number of Scriptural references eg. Gabriel’s comment - “Greetings, favoured one! The Lord is with you.” And in Genesis, “I will put enmity between you and the woman…”. At the crucifixion, to the (unnamed) John (we assume), “Behold, your mother”, a statement made to all His disciples. When the archangel Gabriel turns up and tells you personally you’re the “favoured one”, the rest of us should sit up and take note.

The same comment can be made about Purgatory, not mentioned specifically, but implied in Scripture (eg. “There you will stay, I tell you, until you have paid every last penny of your fine”, prayers for the dead as mentioned by Paul and other implications).

Ditto - Sacraments, Papal authority, Apostolic authority, Reconcilation and forgiving sin - not forgiving sin … these can all be traced to Scripture in some way or another.

Note however that Christ’s comment that Peter, or his successors, can “bind” or “loose” indicates that they can change their mind. A policy at one time that may be “binding” may at another time be seen to be less that wise, and be “loosed”.

The Catholic Church doesn’t transcend Scripture - it builds on it.
How do you know that the interpretation of Scripture that you claim supports the Catholic “distinctives” is the correct interpretation?
 
That is why we have a church…Christ called us to be one.

The church teaches everything we need for salvation as well as providing the Sacraments that nurture.

However, that does not mean holiness can be achieved by its members. It is up to each person to cooperate with Christ’s grace or not. No one individual has any monopoly on holiness.
So is your method of verifying spiritual truth is to line it up against what your particular church believes? If it is a match then it must be true, if not then it must not be true?

Then do I assume that you start with the assumption that everything your particular church teaches must be truen?
 
Unless “spiritual truth” impacts my life in such a way that it brings me more in line with the Spirit of Christ so that the Fruit of the Spirit is more evident in my life…I don’t consider it to be very useful as “spiritual truth” goes.

Unless my heart becomes more compassionate…and my words kinder…my service deeper…my walk with God closer…any “spiritual truth” that I would consider important is verified not by what any particular religious institution might claim…but how this Truth impacts my life in the service of others. That’s the only valid criteria I could see.
 
Unless “spiritual truth” impacts my life in such a way that it brings me more in line with the Spirit of Christ so that the Fruit of the Spirit is more evident in my life…I don’t consider it to be very useful as “spiritual truth” goes.

Unless my heart becomes more compassionate…and my words kinder…my service deeper…my walk with God closer…any “spiritual truth” that I would consider important is verified not by what any particular religious institution might claim…but how this Truth impacts my life in the service of others. That’s the only valid criteria I could see.
So let me understand you…to you this whole question is not that important
 
So let me understand you…to you this whole question is not that important
So let me understand you(:))…the title “How do You verify spiritual truth?”…you want something more than to have the question answered?

Any “spiritual truth” that has no impact on our lives and brings us closer to the One who loves us most and understands us best…is not “spiritual truth”…IMO…if you’d like me to give a different answer to the question “How do You veriry spiritual truth”…I’d appreciate what you’d like to have me write.🙂
 
So let me understand you(:))…the title “How do You verify spiritual truth?”…you want something more than to have the question answered?

Any “spiritual truth” that has no impact on our lives and brings us closer to the One who loves us most and understands us best…is not “spiritual truth”…IMO…if you’d like me to give a different answer to the question “How do You veriry spiritual truth”…I’d appreciate what you’d like to have me write.🙂
Perhaps, just as a clarification and example, you could suggest a “spiritual truth” that does not impact our lives or bring us closer to, “the One who loves us most and understands us best”, which I assume means God.

peace
James
 
Perhaps, just as a clarification and example, you could suggest a “spiritual truth” that does not impact our lives or bring us closer to, “the One who loves us most and understands us best”, which I assume means God.

peace
James
I think that’s the point…there are no “spiritual truths” if embraced that do not bring us closer to the One who loves us most and understands us best. All else is “fluff”…if I considered it “spritual truth”…I would seek to embrace it.

If you mean “spiritual disiplines”…there are many I do not find leading me into a deeper relationship with the Eternal.
 
I think that’s the point…there are no “spiritual truths” if embraced that do not bring us closer to the One who loves us most and understands us best. All else is “fluff”…if I considered it “spritual truth”…I would seek to embrace it.

If you mean “spiritual disiplines”…there are many I do not find leading me into a deeper relationship with the Eternal.
I don’t “mean” anything. Just trying to “clarify” for the OP.

You opened the door to the questioning when you asked this:
Unless “spiritual truth” impacts my life in such a way that it brings me more in line with the Spirit of Christ so that the Fruit of the Spirit is more evident in my life…I don’t consider it to be very useful as “spiritual truth” goes.
Which seems to indicate that there are “spiritual truths” that impact and "spiritual truths that don’t.
See the possible confusion?

Peace
James
 
I don’t “mean” anything. Just trying to “clarify” for the OP.

You opened the door to the questioning when you asked this:
Unless “spiritual truth” impacts my life in such a way that it brings me more in line with the Spirit of Christ so that the Fruit of the Spirit is more evident in my life…I don’t consider it to be very useful as “spiritual truth” goes.
Which seems to indicate that there are “spiritual truths” that impact and "spiritual truths that don’t.
See the possible confusion?

Peace
James
I understand how confusion could occur…any Truth that does not impact our spiritual lives for the better…isn’t Truth…but religious speculation.

Truth, at least in my very limited knowledge and experience, will impact our lives…it will change us inwardly and spiritually…any “truth” that does not lead us into deeper relationship with the Light and one another…isn’t “truth”.
 
See the Scripture in my signature:

But examine everything carefully; hold fast to that which is good

As everybody knows, there is a lot of conflicting stuff that is put forth as Spiritual truth. My question how do you verify something put forth as spiritual truth.
Would you mind clarifying your question by giving two examples of “spritual truth” that conflict with each other?

Cordially,
Mick
👍
 
Would you mind clarifying your question by giving two examples of “spritual truth” that conflict with each other?

Cordially,
Mick
👍
Gladly

(1) The JW come knocking on your door. Now you might let them in and chat or blow them off. But how do you verify that what they are proposing is incorrect.

(2) You visit my church where the gifts of the Holy Spirit are practiced and encouraged. Then you read “Charismatic Confusion” by John MacArthur where he claims they have been abolished and all of us are woefully deceived. What is the process you use to embrace the one and reject the other (cited because I went through this a while back).
 
I understand how confusion could occur…any Truth that does not impact our spiritual lives for the better…isn’t Truth…but religious speculation.

Truth, at least in my very limited knowledge and experience, will impact our lives…it will change us inwardly and spiritually…any “truth” that does not lead us into deeper relationship with the Light and one another…isn’t “truth”.
One question/observation that comes to mind is this…how do you know whar impact a proposed truth will have on your life before you embrace it.

Say you are sick with cancer and somebodyh proposes to you that if you have enough faith (including rejecting treatment) God will heal you. Well if this proposition is correct, you can see the benefit. And if it is incorrect, you die. But you do not know beforehand whether this proposition will work as claimed or not. So you have to decide up front whether to trust this proposition or let it pass without knowing whether it will work for you or not.

Maybe this is not the best example for you, but it is what I come up with offhand.
 
One question/observation that comes to mind is this…how do you know whar impact a proposed truth will have on your life before you embrace it.

Say you are sick with cancer and somebodyh proposes to you that if you have enough faith (including rejecting treatment) God will heal you. Well if this proposition is correct, you can see the benefit. And if it is incorrect, you die. But you do not know beforehand whether this proposition will work as claimed or not. So you have to decide up front whether to trust this proposition or let it pass without knowing whether it will work for you or not.

Maybe this is not the best example for you, but it is what I come up with offhand.
I would look at the benefits of such a proposition…and weigh it against my own God-given intellect to at least research the proposed treatments. If the proposed treatments went against common sense…“God will heal you if I annoint you with oil and your faith is strong enough”…is a non-sensical statement, at least to me. In my understanding of how God works in this world…while faith is a great asset to have when facing a life threatening illness…through faith is not the only way God works…God also has given humanity the capacity for intellect and knowledge of our natural world. If those in the medical profession have a treatment that potentially could cure me of cancer and I choose to “believe God” then perhaps I am not listening to the voice of God…

Kind of like the story of the man stuck on his rooftop during a flood…and God told him He would rescue him…several people came by to rescue the man…but he believed God would rescue him and decided to wait for God to do so…the flood waters rose and the man died…when he stood in the Presence he asked God why he was not rescued after God had promised to do so…God responded…“I sent you three different people to rescue you and you chose not to get in the rescue boat.”

I would like to think that I at least am spiritually aware enough to know if a certain “spiritual truth” if embraced would impact my life and those around me in a positive way…I have scripture…testimony from others…my own God-given capacity to seek God in prayer and expect answers from the One who does not give us a stone when we ask for bread.
 
(1) The JW come knocking on your door. Now you might let them in and chat or blow them off. But how do you verify that what they are proposing is incorrect.
Firstly I take it to prayer. I verify what they are proposing by investigating their claims. Talk to people I trust with intimate knowledge of the JW faith. Investigate the knowledge obtained by me from the sources I trust and then make a reasoned decision whether or not to accept the claims made by the JW.
40.png
AmateurPianist:
(2) You visit my church where the gifts of the Holy Spirit are practiced and encouraged. Then you read “Charismatic Confusion” by John MacArthur where he claims they have been abolished and all of us are woefully deceived. What is the process you use to embrace the one and reject the other (cited because I went through this a while back).
Firstly I take it to prayer. I verify what he is proposing by investigating his claims. Talk to people I trust with intimate knowledge of the faith I profess. Investigate the knowledge obtained by me from the sources I trust and then make a reasoned decision whether or not to accept the claims made by my faith tradition.

Both situations are handled the same. Actually, both situations apply to my own faith journey. My wife was a former JW and therefore I investigated their claims. I found the claims made by the JW to be false. I also have had my Catholic faith challenged and instead of blindly accepting what my faith taught, I investigated it and found that my faith has not only been vindicated in it’s teachings, but instead were enhanced. To this day I enjoy my faith being challenged (tested if you will) for me to delve deeper into it’s mysteries and if it still holds true. Each and every time, I have found that my faith not only remains in tact, but is strengthened by each challenging experience.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top