Infallibility of Church?

[mcq72]

just thought I would point out that yes iron does sharpen iron, but only when a master smelter or smith was originally involved

Well, it is also when one sword is hotter than the other, and the reference is not about any master iron worker but rather of one brother on another, not a rabbi on a brother (though it can be)…and the Lord’s truth in a man can light a fire in one’s belly, that aid the countenance of another…enough of instititionalizing that which is meant for brothers.

 

[MichaelP3]

True. But that was because they rejected His claim of divinity.

Jews actually do not believe they need a Messiah as Christians believe because the do not believe in original sin. I remember watching a documentary where a School of Rabi’s sat and said they do not see "original sin anywhere in the Torah "

Ps. It seems Jews are looking at this way different.

 

[mcq72]

Personally for me before I go into battle, I think I would rather have my sword sharpened by someone who’s been handing on the trade for the past 2000 years instead of from someone who claims they picked up the manual and understand the proper techniques.

Thank you for your thoughtful post. We certainly can learn from craftsman. I like stories about shepherds, about potters, about silversmiths, and your metalworkers here. Can get a lot insightful teaching

As to the craft of being spiritually astute, indeed there should be wisdom in age, but as Elihu says in the book of Job, not always, that God is the one who puts understanding in the heart of man, even into a youth, surpassing the aged.

There is wisdom in a multitude of counselors (except in Job’s case, only one was wise), and no one rejects two thousand years of any Christian HIStory. No one should operate in a vacuum and no one can start from scratch today with just a manual and get far astutely

 

[MT1926]

So point being. You can have faith in what you believe, as I as well. Well maybe that just points that I do not subscribe to what is your issue.

I get where you are going with this. But in the end wouldn’t this just boil down to your Faith in Christ just might be what you believe it should look like and not really what Jesus desires it to look like?

Makes me think of…

Matthew 7:21 “Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only the one who does the will of my Father in heaven. 22 On that day many will say to me, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name, and cast out demons in your name, and do many deeds of power in your name?’ 23 Then I will declare to them, ‘I never knew you; go away from me, you evildoers.’

Sure we can look at this verse (after the fact) and say well these people were really doing all of these things for their own personal gain and not really for the Lord. However, it is pretty evident from there words that they themselves believed they had faith in Christ.

I’m not saying you can’t have faith without an authority telling you what that faith is, the point I’m making is Jesus sure seems to be saying that we MUST do the will of the Father in order to enter the kingdom of heaven.

I’m not sure what your faith tells you to believe, but I do know, from my years here on CAF, there are plenty of opinions on what the Father’s will is. (Baptism, faith alone, OSAS, Eucharist, confession, doesn’t really matter as long as you TRULY believe, etc…)

I’m sure the one thing we can agree on is that the Father’s will doesn’t change from day to day. So from this we can come to the conclusion that all of those different beliefs (about the Father’s will) can’t all be right. Correct?

Once again not saying it’s all about Catholic Authority. All I’m saying is, if Jesus didn’t leave us an authority to hand down a teaching on exactly what the Father’s will truly is, how can we come to a definitive definition by out personal faith and belief? It’s obvious we can’t find it spelled out in the Bible, if we could there wouldn’t be so many varying opinions.

My main thought, on the Father’s will, is do we really want to take that chance?

God Bless

 

[MT1926]

the reference is not about any master iron worker but rather of one brother on another, not a rabbi on a brother

I know it’s not about a rabbi on a brother. You are missing the point I was making.

You used this as a response to this statement…

Just because our conscience says “do it”, that doesn’t make it the correct thing to do.

It seemed to me that what you meant was one does not form their conscience on their own (in a vacuum). I took the iron sharpens iron to mean one forms their conscience with those around them. This way if they have rust on them the sharper person will whisk it off.

Did I understand that correctly?

If so, my point was just because the sharper sword forms your conscience to say “do it”, that still doesn’t make it the correct thing to do.

That was my point if the sharper sword’s (conscience) is imperfectly forged then instead of whisking the imperfection off of you it might actually add another.

Lord’s truth in a man can light a fire in one’s belly, that aid the countenance of another…enough of instititionalizing that which is meant for brothers.

Let it go man. Quit thinking I’m trying to institutionalize everything. It is really getting in the way of you thinking with an open mind. Yes I totally agree that the Lord’s truth can light a fire in one’s belly and support another.

However, you must also admit that what someone believes is the Lord’s truth (but really isn’t) can also light a fire in one’s belly however instead of bringing that person closer to the will of the Father they might actually be bringing that person further away.

I’m sure every anti-Catholic on the web would agree with this last statement. However, they would say this is exactly what the Catholic Church does on a daily basis.

God Bless

 

[mcq72]

However, when it comes to the teachings of our Lord we have know (no ?) way of knowing (on our own) if our conscience led us to the Lord or away, until the time of our final judgement.

Totally disagree with this. Reminds me of those who say they “hope” they are going to heaven, and then give scriptures to prove it can only be a hope, and not a certainty, that faith can not apprehend the certainty , the knowing of it.

Again it is not all on our conscience, which should be aligned and formed by the spirit, heart and mind that is one with Christ, a new creation, where His Spirit bears witness to our spirit that we His child, that we have been adopted. This can also be attested visibly by the testimony of others, even the corporate church.

St, John says that unction of His Spirit leads us children to “know all things”. The thief on the on the cross more than hoped in arriving in paradise, hope being defined more as a knowing, an inner assurance, not based on anything, anything of his, but on the gift from the knowledge of whom was crucified next to Him, and His words, “You shall be with me”.

Certainly giving hope, but on a more definitive plain.

Even this is not in a vacuum and certainly one can discuss eternal security and perseverance to the end, and abiding etc, but they do not negate the power of the Spirit to be able to complete that which He started in a believer, and that faith can appehend beyond a shadow of a doubt, that you know that you know that you know, you are His and He is yours.

 

[Gorgias]

That is the “default answer” and I am very well aware of that. And yet our Orthodox brothers also understand it differently. In fact all “Apostolic or not” understand it somewhat different than the CC.

As @mcq72 and I were discussing, it’s a problem in the greater church that folks want to interpret for themselves. It’s noteworthy, though, to point out that this “default answer” really was the agreed-upon answer for all Christians… until they decided that they wanted a share of the authority for themselves… and then it wasn’t a good enough answer anymore.

 

[Wannano]

MT1926:

However, when it comes to the teachings of our Lord we have know (no ?) way of knowing (on our own) if our conscience led us to the Lord or away, until the time of our final judgement.

Totally disagree with this. Reminds me of those who say they “hope” they are going to heaven, and then give scriptures to prove it can only be a hope, and not a certainty, that faith can not apprehend the certainty , the knowing of it.

Again it is not all on our conscience, which should be aligned and formed by the spirit, heart and mind that is one with Christ, a new creation, where His Spirit bears witness to our spirit that we His child, that we have been adopted. This can also be attested visibly by the testimony of others, even the corporate church.

St, John says that unction of His Spirit leads us children to “know all things”. The thief on the on the cross more than hoped in arriving in paradise, hope being defined more as a knowing, an inner assurance, not based on anything, anything of his, but on the gift from the knowledge of whom was crucified next to Him, and His words, “You shall be with me”.

Certainly giving hope, but on a more definitive plain.

Even this is not in a vacuum and certainly one can discuss eternal security and perseverance to the end, and abiding etc, but they do not negate the power of the Spirit to be able to complete that which He started in a believer, and that faith can appehend beyond a shadow of a doubt, that you know that you know that you know, you are His and He is yours.

“You shall be with me” is in my opinion very close to " …I will come again and receive you unto my self, so that where I am, you may be also."

 

[mcq72]

As @mcq72 and I were discussing, it’s a problem in the greater church that folks want to interpret for themselves

Hi Gorgias,

Yes but I thought I left it that this interpreting for ourselves, or " as we see fit" is both a blessing and a curse. That it is a right and responsibility to do so, on an individual level and also collectively on a corporate, ecclesial level.

That some people get it wrong, this interpreting, does not do away with it , or call for any different system of “verification”, thru any different kind of authority.

 

[Gorgias]

Yes but I thought I left it that this interpreting for ourselves, or " as we see fit" is both a blessing and a curse. That it is a right and responsibility to do so, on an individual level and also collectively on a corporate, ecclesial level.

From the original perspective of the Church, though, there wasn’t this ability to “interpret as we see fit”. In fact, throughout the history of the Church – from the very beginning – we see that such attempts were always seen as contrary to the will of Jesus.

That some people get it wrong, this interpreting, does not do away with it , or call for any different system of “verification”, thru any different kind of authority.

True – it does not “do away with it”, but it should be an indication that, with fruits like that, there’s something wrong with the tree… no?

 

[mcq72]

You shall be with me” is in my opinion very close to " …I will come again and receive you unto my self, so that where I am, you may be also."

I will never forget a beloved pastor many years ago who often would say those words, " that you know that you know that you know". That was an Assembly of God church, and half the folk were “Catholic” ( no such thing as a x is there?), and it resonated quite well with them as good news they preciously now too experienced. Some would laugh and say they use to get mad at people who would espouse such arrogant assurance, until they themselves came to believe in such a salvation as that also.

 

[mcq72]

rom the original perspective of the Church, though, there wasn’t this ability to “interpret as we see fit”. In fact, throughout the history of the Church – from the very beginning – we see that such attempts were always seen as contrary to the will of Jesus.

Yes agree that " as I see fit " can have a negative connotation, and that is why others use it to describe those who have opposing views.

But if you look deeper, it is not negative and is a reality that we all do and is not contrary to History. The apostle Paul certainly did what he saw fit to do, as inspired and justified by God, both before AND after his conversion.

I am pretty sure Paul was fully convinced that his actions were righteous before and after his horse fall. Obviously one in error, and one not, and as he so said himself. But I wouldn’t have Paul be any other way but to be fully convinced that the way he was seeing it, was right. I think God wouldn’t have it any other way either, not a robot, but a true partner with God, in all his God like attributes.

 

[Gorgias]

The apostle Paul certainly did what he saw fit to do, as inspired and justified by God, both before AND after his conversion.

Interesting perspective. And true.

But, would you say that his actions prior to his conversion actually were ‘God breathed’? If not, then the measure of an act is not really that we act as our conscience tells us, but rather, that our conscience is telling us the truth!

So, Martin Luther can shout from the rooftops that he must act in concert with his conscience – and be correct about that! – but he’s missing the other part: one must form his conscience properly, so that he doesn’t lead himself astray!

 

[mcq72]

True – it does not “do away with it”, but it should be an indication that, with fruits like that, there’s something wrong with the tree… no?

My point is whose tree ? We are all part of the same tree.(body)

And yet I agree, we have come to have distinct “congregations”, each bearing fruits, to be discerned. Yes , like the seven churches in Revelations, one generation after Christ, and only two of the seven I believe had no fault in them. They had good fruit. The others a mixed bag, one even had bad doctrine. These congregations were part of the body of Christ on earth, but that privelege was conditional, and a few of those churches did not exist much longer.

 

[mcq72]

But, would you say that his actions prior to his conversion actually were ‘God breathed’? If not, then the measure of an act is not really that we act as our conscience tells us, but rather, that our conscience is telling us the truth!

Well Paul himself says he indeed had zeal but was ignorant of the truth. He had not been born again, transformed, made a new creature in Christ , he would later say. This is much more than conscience.

 

[mcq72]

So, Martin Luther can shout from the rooftops that he must act in concert with his conscience – and be correct about that! – but he’s missing the other part: one must form his conscience properly, so that he doesn’t lead himself astray!

Totally agree and said so in many posts. Conscience is not alone in a vacuum and must be made to conform to the image of Christ in us , along with our total new being that is heart , mind soul and spirit., and the witness of others, even the ecclessia.

 

[Wannano]

Gorgias:

But, would you say that his actions prior to his conversion actually were ‘God breathed’? If not, then the measure of an act is not really that we act as our conscience tells us, but rather, that our conscience is telling us the truth!

Well Paul himself says he indeed had zeal but was ignorant of the truth. He had not been born again, transformed, made a new creature in Christ , he would later say. This is much more than conscience.

I think Paul before his conversion would have genuinely thought he was fulfilling God’s will by stamping out those Christian heretics!

 

[MT1926]

Totally disagree with this. Reminds me of those who say they “hope” they are going to heaven, and then give scriptures to prove it can only be a hope, and not a certainty, that faith can not apprehend the certainty , the knowing of it.

Sure you are free to disagree with these Christians, however you have to admit that’s as far as you can go. You honestly can’t say they are wrong in their belief nor do you have any way of proving that they are wrong.

This can also be attested visibly by the testimony of others, even the corporate church.

But what good is the testimony of a corporate church that admits they might be wrong?

that you know that you know that you know

So basically repeat these words 3 times and it qualifies that you are going beyond mere emotional and intellectual assent. Got it

God Bless

 

[MT1926]

on an individual level and also collectively on a corporate, ecclesial level.

Just curious what happens when the individual disagrees with the ecclesial level?

That some people get it wrong, this interpreting, does not do away with it , or call for any different system of “verification”, thru any different kind of authority.

If there is no verification system how does one even claim that “some people get it wrong”?

God Bless

 

[mcq72]

If there is no verification system how does one even claim that “some people get it wrong”?

did not say there is no verification system, no iron to iron.

Posted :
That it is a right and responsibility to do so (discern), on an individual level and also collectively on a corporate, ecclesial level.