I didn’t say that, Mack. I said he accepted them as scripture. His view was that it was not to the level of the rest. That was in no way a rejection. It was a recognition of the history, and for him contemporary disputes regarding them.
Exactly.
Jon
- Status
Jon
A
Abu
Guest
JonNC has been totally unable to refute Christ in His establishment of His Catholic Church to teach with His authority “teaching them to observe all things that I have commanded you; and lo, I am with you always, even to the end of the world.” (Mt 28: 20).
His errors are starkly exposed further by the words of Christ as proclaimed to His Apostles:
“I will not leave you orphans; I will come to you." (John 14:15-18) “The Advocate, the holy Spirit that the Father will send in my name, he will teach you everything and remind you of all that I told you.” (John 14:26) “But when he comes, the Spirit of truth, he will guide you to all truth. He will not speak on his own, but he will speak what he hears, and will declare to you the things that are coming. He will glorify me, because he will take from what is mine and declare it to you. Everything that the Father has is mine; for this reason I told you that he will take from what is mine and declare it to you.” (John 16:13-15)
St Paul’s epistles have “some things hard to understand, which those who are unlearned and unstable twist to their own destruction, as they do also the rest of the Scriptures.” [2Pet 3:16]
“…no prophecy of Scripture is of any private interpretation, for prophecy never came by the will of man but, but holy men of God spoken as they were moved by the Holy Spirit.” [2Pet 1: 20-21].
So thus do the fiddlers twist the Scriptures to their own destruction.
His errors are starkly exposed further by the words of Christ as proclaimed to His Apostles:
“I will not leave you orphans; I will come to you." (John 14:15-18) “The Advocate, the holy Spirit that the Father will send in my name, he will teach you everything and remind you of all that I told you.” (John 14:26) “But when he comes, the Spirit of truth, he will guide you to all truth. He will not speak on his own, but he will speak what he hears, and will declare to you the things that are coming. He will glorify me, because he will take from what is mine and declare it to you. Everything that the Father has is mine; for this reason I told you that he will take from what is mine and declare it to you.” (John 16:13-15)
St Paul’s epistles have “some things hard to understand, which those who are unlearned and unstable twist to their own destruction, as they do also the rest of the Scriptures.” [2Pet 3:16]
“…no prophecy of Scripture is of any private interpretation, for prophecy never came by the will of man but, but holy men of God spoken as they were moved by the Holy Spirit.” [2Pet 1: 20-21].
So thus do the fiddlers twist the Scriptures to their own destruction.
M
mackbrislawn
Guest
Yes, that’s what I wanted to know. Scripture, but not inspired scripture.
Of course it is hard to understand what it means to say it was not to the level of the rest.
Universally attested ( homologumena ), and disputed (antilegomena), better explained here:
internetmonk.com/archive/thinking-about-the-canon-a-lutheran-view
Jon
While I never saw it as my role to "… refute Christ in His establishment of His Catholic Church to teach with His authority ‘teaching them to observe all things that I have commanded you; and lo, I am with you always, even to the end of the world.’”, I do appreciate your assessment.
Jon
E
ezeekl
Guest
Quote:
Originally Posted by mackbrislawn
"Yes, that’s what I wanted to know. Scripture, but not inspired scripture.
Of course it is hard to understand what it means to say it was not to the level of the rest."
Originally Posted by mackbrislawn
"Yes, that’s what I wanted to know. Scripture, but not inspired scripture.
Of course it is hard to understand what it means to say it was not to the level of the rest."
In other words the scriptures were decided by a sort of democratic vote and not by leaders of the church inspired by the Spirit. That goes along with the Lutheran idea of no church authority on doctrine but goes against history of the early church. And that is why whenever there are three protestants who disagree the result is one more denomination.
I thought you shook the dust off your shoes regarding me.
I suggest you read the article again, if that is what you took from it. I didn’t read any of this in it.
Jon
E
ezeekl
Guest
Quote:
Originally Posted by Abu
"JonNC has been totally unable to refute Christ in His establishment of His Catholic Church to teach with His authority “teaching them to observe all things that I have commanded you; and lo, I am with you always, even to the end of the world.” (Mt 28: 20).
His errors are starkly exposed further by the words of Christ as proclaimed to His Apostles:
“I will not leave you orphans; I will come to you." (John 14:15-18) “The Advocate, the holy Spirit that the Father will send in my name, he will teach you everything and remind you of all that I told you.” (John 14:26) “But when he comes, the Spirit of truth, he will guide you to all truth. He will not speak on his own, but he will speak what he hears, and will declare to you the things that are coming. He will glorify me, because he will take from what is mine and declare it to you. Everything that the Father has is mine; for this reason I told you that he will take from what is mine and declare it to you.” (John 16:13-15)
St Paul’s epistles have “some things hard to understand, which those who are unlearned and unstable twist to their own destruction, as they do also the rest of the Scriptures.” [2Pet 3:16]
“…no prophecy of Scripture is of any private interpretation, for prophecy never came by the will of man but, but holy men of God spoken as they were moved by the Holy Spirit.” [2Pet 1: 20-21].
So thus do the fiddlers twist the Scriptures to their own destruction."
Like the so called “protestant reformers” these men created their own tradition and set themselves up as an authority unto themselves. They had the golden calf as their symbol while the Lutherans have the Book of Concord as theirs.
Originally Posted by Abu
"JonNC has been totally unable to refute Christ in His establishment of His Catholic Church to teach with His authority “teaching them to observe all things that I have commanded you; and lo, I am with you always, even to the end of the world.” (Mt 28: 20).
His errors are starkly exposed further by the words of Christ as proclaimed to His Apostles:
“I will not leave you orphans; I will come to you." (John 14:15-18) “The Advocate, the holy Spirit that the Father will send in my name, he will teach you everything and remind you of all that I told you.” (John 14:26) “But when he comes, the Spirit of truth, he will guide you to all truth. He will not speak on his own, but he will speak what he hears, and will declare to you the things that are coming. He will glorify me, because he will take from what is mine and declare it to you. Everything that the Father has is mine; for this reason I told you that he will take from what is mine and declare it to you.” (John 16:13-15)
St Paul’s epistles have “some things hard to understand, which those who are unlearned and unstable twist to their own destruction, as they do also the rest of the Scriptures.” [2Pet 3:16]
“…no prophecy of Scripture is of any private interpretation, for prophecy never came by the will of man but, but holy men of God spoken as they were moved by the Holy Spirit.” [2Pet 1: 20-21].
So thus do the fiddlers twist the Scriptures to their own destruction."
The protestant, to include Lutheran, idea that there is no universal authority in the church flies in the face of scripture. Have we forgotten that in the Old Testament God always had an earthy leader for his church? If the New Testament protestant model of church without an universal leader is scriptural where do we it foreshadowed in the Old Testament? The only times the Old Testament church did not follow their earthly universal authority ended in their destruction and here I am thinking specifically of the ‘reformation’ of the people of Israel when Moses was on Mt. Sinai receiving the Ten Commandments. Those people who turned away from their universal leader and followed other men only to be destroyed.
Like the so called “protestant reformers” these men created their own tradition and set themselves up as an authority unto themselves. They had the golden calf as their symbol while the Lutherans have the Book of Concord as theirs.
Thank you for your assessment, as well.
It is, frankly, difficult to debate when the idea I am asked to defend is not mine. The idea that, for Lutherans, there is no universal authority in the Church, is contrary to what I have been taught.
We recognize the authority of the early Church in council, to decide doctrine, and issue concise statements of faith, the creeds, to which we bind ourselves. But since we do not recognize that the current Vatican description of universal authority, it is then assumed we reject any universal authority.
Perhaps it is I who should be “shaking the dust from my shoes”. If you wish to dialogue, I am happy to dialogue with those who want to define, describe, explain, and defend their faith, without claiming to define, describe, and explain mine. Otherwise, I am left trying to fend of caricatures of my faith which is, frankly, a waste of time.
Jon
E
ezeekl
Guest
Well Jon that only begs the question that if you accept the early church’s authority to decide doctrine then when did that authority leave the church? Apparently it seems that since you only accept the first seven councils as authoritative that sometime between the seventh and eighth councils something occurred that cause the church to lose its authority. What was it? According to my calculations the seventh council was the Second Council of Nicea in 787 AD and the eighth council was the Fourth Council of Constantinople in 869 AD. This starts with the council of Nicea in 325 and does not account for the Council of Jerusalem depicted in the book of Acts. So the first question is, in the 82 years between 787 and 869 AD what caused the church to lose it’s authority?
The second question is where is this foretold in scripture [or maybe better stated as: Did Jesus put a time limit on the binding and loosening powers of the church]?
By the way in case you assert that only the first seven are ecumenical then show us why you state that. Your reason cannot be that not all the bishops attended the councils held later because not all the bishops attended the first seven either. The councils called after the first seven are ecumenical because, like the first seven they were called and all bishops were invited to attend. That means they were no local or regional synod but for all of the church. For varying reasons some bishops did not attend but that does not detract from the council’s status as being ecumenical.
E
ezeekl
Guest
No Jon, that was not what was stated. Mere permission does not cut it. There must be a delegation of authority by a bishop for a priest to ordain another priest. Otherwise the alleged ordinations are null and void. Also, no priest can consecrate a bishop. Consecration of bishops can only be done by another bishop although usually there are at least three bishops involved to ensure that Apostolic Succession is passed on
- Status