Non-Catholics: How do you know that the words of Jesus are true?

[benhur]

They were commanded to be subject to…

so practice and observe whatever they tell you, but not what they do

But Christ did not set up another “system” like the old, which was based on the Law of Works. This covenant is fed by the sacrificial love of the Son and Lamb of God.

His Apostolic leaders are set apart for a holy people who observe His commands out of love. We are all brothers, yet separate members with different duties, gifts, callings, positions and offices.

Those in high positions must serve in high capacity, yet if they lack in their devotion and performance, it does not grant us benefit to disregard them as leaders, but suffer in humility to win their conviction for misbehavior.

Totally agree (with obeying not conditional on whether we like the leader or his worthiness so to speak). The worthiness to obey comes from the worthiness of the command, being in full truth and spirit. And of course we obey out of love, and we are not in a system of works. Actually not sure the old was of works either but of faith and love also.

Again, I would still add the caveat that it goes much deeper than the your one verse, but must be in conjunction with the verse corresponding to it,“beware of bad doctrine” given by the “seat”. That clearly had to be considered then .The debate is that does that still apply in this new dispensation/covenant.

Blessings

 

[PRmerger]

Again, I would still add the caveat that it goes much deeper than the your one verse, but must be in conjunction with the verse corresponding to it,“beware of bad doctrine” given by the “seat”. That clearly had to be considered then .The debate is that does that still apply in this new dispensation/covenant.

Blessings

Firstly, where does the Bible say to “beware of bad doctrine” given by the “seat”?

Secondly, don’t forget about Korah’s rebellion (Numbers16, Jude 1:11). They refused to follow Moses (because Moses was indeed giving them “bad doctrine” and leading them in the WRONG direction in the desert). It didn’t turn out too well for them.

 

[Contarini]

Firstly, where does the Bible say to “beware of bad doctrine” given by the “seat”?

Matthew 16:6, clarified by v. 12. (Mark 8:15 also has the warning against “leaven” but doesn’t explain it as “doctrine.”)

Now admittedly, the Greek word “didache” could (and more often than not probably did in the NT) refer to practical instruction. It wasn’t as specific as our modern word “doctrine,” but it is the word rendered in Latin by “doctrina” and in both the KJV and the Douay-Rheims as “doctrine.” It may not mean what we mean by “doctrine,” but I can’t think of another word that Matthew would have been likely to use instead if he had meant what we mean by doctrine. (I seriously doubt whether the NT authors made the distinction modern Catholicism makes between doctrine and other kinds of teaching, but that’s another issue.)

Edwin

 

[PRmerger]

Matthew 16:6, clarified by v. 12. (Mark 8:15 also has the warning against “leaven” but doesn’t explain it as “doctrine.”)

Now admittedly, the Greek word “didache” could (and more often than not probably did in the NT) refer to practical instruction. It wasn’t as specific as our modern word “doctrine,” but it is the word rendered in Latin by “doctrina” and in both the KJV and the Douay-Rheims as “doctrine.” It may not mean what we mean by “doctrine,” but I can’t think of another word that Matthew would have been likely to use instead if he had meant what we mean by doctrine. (I seriously doubt whether the NT authors made the distinction modern Catholicism makes between doctrine and other kinds of teaching, but that’s another issue.)

Edwin

 

[benhur]

Matthew 16:6, clarified by v. 12. (Mark 8:15 also has the warning against “leaven” but doesn’t explain it as “doctrine.”)

Now admittedly, the Greek word “didache” could (and more often than not probably did in the NT) refer to practical instruction. It wasn’t as specific as our modern word “doctrine,” but it is the word rendered in Latin by “doctrina” and in both the KJV and the Douay-Rheims as “doctrine.” It may not mean what we mean by “doctrine,” but I can’t think of another word that Matthew would have been likely to use instead if he had meant what we mean by doctrine. (I seriously doubt whether the NT authors made the distinction modern Catholicism makes between doctrine and other kinds of teaching, but that’s another issue.)

Edwin

Thank you Edwin.

Here is the other thought. Is "Moses seat’’ and teaching from it, to be obeyed as Jesus told the folks, strictly teaching from what is found sacred scripture, and, did the Pharisees and Scribes add to that teaching, as in extra biblical “didache” and that some of that was “leaven” ? For example did God give 38 laws/guidelines and the pharisees expanded that to 44 ? (my numbers “for reference only”/not actual). This is how I see reconciling Jesus command to obey those speaking from Moses seat (pharisees/scribes) even though Jesus also warned they also taught some things that were wrong (leaven-which I would consider not to be part of Moses seat or “biblical”).

 

[Telstar]

Matthew 16:6, clarified by v. 12. (Mark 8:15 also has the warning against “leaven” but doesn’t explain it as “doctrine.”)

Now admittedly, the Greek word “didache” could (and more often than not probably did in the NT) refer to practical instruction. It wasn’t as specific as our modern word “doctrine,” but it is the word rendered in Latin by “doctrina” and in both the KJV and the Douay-Rheims as “doctrine.” It may not mean what we mean by “doctrine,” but I can’t think of another word that Matthew would have been likely to use instead if he had meant what we mean by doctrine. (I seriously doubt whether the NT authors made the distinction modern Catholicism makes between doctrine and other kinds of teaching, but that’s another issue.)

Edwin

I’ve always wondered about the reference Jesus made to ‘the leaven of the Pharisees’. First of all, what is ‘leaven’ and what does it do? It seems to be obvious from the Apostles’ reaction that it’s what we call yeast, that causes bread to ‘rise’. They thought that He was concerned because they didn’t bring enough bread with them, but He rebuked them for not understanding what He meant. I think it was a reference that connected Him to being the bread of life.

For Passover, the Jews would make sure that all of the ‘old leaven’ was used up before the feast day. Then, they made unleavened bread to remember that during their flight from Egypt, they didn’t have time to let their bread rise properly. It was a very significant part of the Passover feast, that the Jews would eat along with the Paschal lamb, and bitter herbs. It took on a whole new meaning when Jesus broke it and gave it to His Disciples, then declared that the unleavened bread of Passover, was actually His Body, the true Bread of Life.

So, what does ‘the leaven of the Pharisees’ have to do with this whole situation? As I said before, leaven causes bread to rise. IMHO, ‘the leaven of the Pharisees’ refers to their interpretations of the Law of Moses, and their own teachings (false doctrines/beliefs) that they constantly used against Jesus, to refute His teachings and miracles. It was also what finally caused them to conspire against Him, and kill Him. So, first of all, Jesus was warning the Apostles to beware the false teachings of the Pharisees, that came from their perverted view of the Law. But, He also knew that they were very dangerous and would not hesitate to find a way to kill Him, and all of His followers if they had the chance. He certainly knew they would kill Him.

Jesus had an excellent way of expressing Himself in words. He used word play all the time. There are many examples where He used certain words to say things, indirectly, that few people would understand until much later. In this instance, I think He was doing the same thing. Here we see that ‘the leaven of the Pharisees’ (their false doctrine) that was used against Jesus (the Bread of Life), to coerce the Romans into killing Him, ended up backfiring on the Pharisees. Why would I say that? Because, the ’leaven’ that was used on Jesus by His enemies, caused the Bread of Life to rise from the dead, triumphant over all of His enemies!

 

[rcwitness]

Luke 12

“Beware of the leaven of the Pharisees, which is hypocrisy."

Matthew 23

Jesus Denounces Scribes and Pharisees
23 Then said Jesus to the crowds and to his disciples, 2 “The scribes and the Pharisees sit on Moses’ seat; 3 so practice and observe whatever they tell you, but not what they do; for they preach, but do not practice. 4 They bind heavy burdens, hard to bear,[a] and lay them on men’s shoulders; but they themselves will not move them with their finger. 5 They do all their deeds to be seen by men; for they make their phylacteries** broad and their fringes long, 6 and they love the place of honor at feasts and the best seats in the synagogues, 7 and salutations in the market places, and being called rabbi by men. 8 But you are not to be called rabbi, for you have one teacher, and you are all brethren. 9 And call no man your father on earth, for you have one Father, who is in heaven.[c] 10 Neither be called masters, for you have one master, the Christ. 11 He who is greatest among you shall be your servant; 12 whoever exalts himself will be humbled, and whoever humbles himself will be exalted.

13 “But woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! because you shut the kingdom of heaven against men; for you neither enter yourselves, nor allow those who would enter to go in.[d] 15 Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for you traverse sea and land to make a single proselyte, and when he becomes a proselyte, you make him twice as much a child of hell[e] as yourselves.

16 “Woe to you, blind guides, who say, ‘If any one swears by the temple, it is nothing; but if any one swears by the gold of the temple, he is bound by his oath.’ 17 You blind fools! For which is greater, the gold or the temple that has made the gold sacred? 18 And you say, ‘If any one swears by the altar, it is nothing; but if any one swears by the gift that is on the altar, he is bound by his oath.’ 19 You blind men! For which is greater, the gift or the altar that makes the gift sacred? 20 So he who swears by the altar, swears by it and by everything on it; 21 and he who swears by the temple, swears by it and by him who dwells in it; 22 and he who swears by heaven, swears by the throne of God and by him who sits upon it.

23 “Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for you tithe mint and dill and cummin, and have neglected the weightier matters of the law, justice and mercy and faith; these you ought to have done, without neglecting the others. 24 You blind guides, straining out a gnat and swallowing a camel!

25 “Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for you cleanse the outside of the cup and of the plate, but inside they are full of extortion and rapacity. 26 You blind Pharisee! first cleanse the inside of the cup and of the plate, that the outside also may be clean.

27 “Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for you are like whitewashed tombs, which outwardly appear beautiful, but within they are full of dead men’s bones and all uncleanness. 28 So you also outwardly appear righteous to men, but within you are full of hypocrisy and iniquity.

29 “Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for you build the tombs of the prophets and adorn the monuments of the righteous, 30 saying, ‘If we had lived in the days of our fathers, we would not have taken part with them in shedding the blood of the prophets.’ 31 Thus you witness against yourselves, that you are sons of those who murdered the prophets. 32 Fill up, then, the measure of your fathers. 33 You serpents, you brood of vipers, how are you to escape being sentenced to hell?[f] 34 Therefore I send you prophets and wise men and scribes, some of whom you will kill and crucify, and some you will scourge in your synagogues and persecute from town to town, 35 that upon you may come all the righteous blood shed on earth, from the blood of innocent Abel to the blood of Zechari′ah the son of Barachi′ah, whom you murdered between the sanctuary and the altar. 36 Truly, I say to you, all this will come upon this generation.**

 

[benhur]

Firstly, where does the Bible say to “beware of bad doctrine” given by the “seat”?

Your thumbsup to edwin’s answer is first class and heartwarming.

Secondly, don’t forget about Korah’s rebellion (Numbers16, Jude 1:11). They refused to follow Moses (because Moses was indeed giving them “bad doctrine” and leading them in the WRONG direction in the desert). It didn’t turn out too well for them.

Reminds me of our discussion of God allowing in His wisdom some dirtiness in the water with the baby to which you said, not per His will. Yet, if I recall correctly was not God leading the Israelites with signs and clouds/fire etc.? Moses only following correctly. This might be a perfect case of God’s will allowing some dirty water to be with the baby as in perfect wisdom. God led them in a quite inefficient and wandering fashion for forty years. God also tells us why revealing His justice and wisdom and mercy.
He perfectly led the Israelites imperfectly.

Jesus’s perception of the Pharisees leaven is not comparable to Korah’s perception of Mose’s leadership other than a right and a wrong comparison. There is clearly a time not to obey leadership and clearly a time to obey them.

Blessings

 

[rcwitness]

There is clearly a time not to obey leadership and clearly a time to obey them.

Blessings

If there is Teaching which has been confirmed through the Magisterium, then no. There is no release from this obedience. But if there is teaching which does not conform to the Church Teaching, then yes… we bring it to the Church to judge, or suffer to convict whoever is acting outside the Church.

“Whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven…”

 

[benhur]

I’ve always wondered about the reference Jesus made to ‘the leaven of the Pharisees’. First of all, what is ‘leaven’ and what does it do? It seems to be obvious from the Apostles’ reaction that it’s what we call yeast, that causes bread to ‘rise’. They thought that He was concerned because they didn’t bring enough bread with them, but He rebuked them for not understanding what He meant. I think it was a reference that connected Him to being the bread of life.

For Passover, the Jews would make sure that all of the ‘old leaven’ was used up before the feast day. Then, they made unleavened bread to remember that during their flight from Egypt, they didn’t have time to let their bread rise properly. It was a very significant part of the Passover feast, that the Jews would eat along with the Paschal lamb, and bitter herbs. It took on a whole new meaning when Jesus broke it and gave it to His Disciples, then declared that the unleavened bread of Passover, was actually His Body, the true Bread of Life.

So, what does ‘the leaven of the Pharisees’ have to do with this whole situation? As I said before, leaven causes bread to rise. IMHO, ‘the leaven of the Pharisees’ refers to their interpretations of the Law of Moses, and their own teachings (false doctrines/beliefs) that they constantly used against Jesus, to refute His teachings and miracles. It was also what finally caused them to conspire against Him, and kill Him. So, first of all, Jesus was warning the Apostles to beware the false teachings of the Pharisees, that came from their perverted view of the Law. But, He also knew that they were very dangerous and would not hesitate to find a way to kill Him, and all of His followers if they had the chance. He certainly knew they would kill Him.

Jesus had an excellent way of expressing Himself in words. He used word play all the time. There are many examples where He used certain words to say things, indirectly, that few people would understand until much later. In this instance, I think He was doing the same thing. Here we see that ‘the leaven of the Pharisees’ (their false doctrine) that was used against Jesus (the Bread of Life), to coerce the Romans into killing Him, ended up backfiring on the Pharisees. Why would I say that? Because, the ’leaven’ that was used on Jesus by His enemies, caused the Bread of Life to rise from the dead, triumphant over all of His enemies!

Hi T. Well generally leaven is sin and it’s infectious, growing trait. Unleavened bread is symbolic for purity or holiness (onenes in purpose as in quick food for sustenance in exodus mission and just that , not pleasure for the palate).

As to your analogy or play on words , I have to think on that. But yes generally sin backfires by His grace ,and soon all will be made well totally. And yes sin put Christ on the Cross, even yours and mine also.

Not sure “leaven” made Him rise (it surely put Him to death). In fact He rose specifically because He had no leaven and was pleasing to the Father.

Otherwise I love your thinking, and agree He is the master of communication, even the inventor of it. I am often floored and in awe of His responses, and even as it also comes from some of His creations from time to time, even here on CAF.

Blessings

 

[benhur]

“Whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven…”

I think it is more what ever is bound in heaven shall be bound on earth. Meeting that condition is expanding the kingdom here on earth.

 

[benhur]

If there is Teaching which has been confirmed through the Magisterium, then no. There is no release from this obedience. But if there is teaching which does not conform to the Church Teaching, then yes… we bring it to the Church to judge, or suffer to convict whoever is acting outside the Church.

Again, that is the issue. Is the OT and NT the same on this issue, or is there perfection (infallibility) now where there was not then for respective magisteriums ?

For sure in this new covenant and dispensation of the Holy Spirit, with His indwelling and empowerment , where a neighbor will not need teach his neighbor but God will write the" law" on and in new hearts of every believer, we have an advantage. I just don’t read it as infallibly so, just as surely as the Holy Spirit did work in the OT also.

 

[rcwitness]

I think it is more what ever is bound in heaven shall be bound on earth. Meeting that condition is expanding the kingdom here on earth.

Luke 12

41 Peter said, “Lord, are you telling this parable for us or for all?” 42 And the Lord said, “Who then is the faithful and wise steward, whom his master will set over his household, to give them their portion of food at the proper time? 43 Blessed is that servant whom his master when he comes will find so doing. 44 Truly, I tell you, he will set him over all his possessions. 45 But if that servant says to himself, ‘My master is delayed in coming,’ and begins to beat the menservants and the maidservants, and to eat and drink and get drunk, 46 the master of that servant will come on a day when he does not expect him and at an hour he does not know, and will punish[f] him, and put him with the unfaithful. 47 And that servant who knew his master’s will, but did not make ready or act according to his will, shall receive a severe beating. 48 But he who did not know, and did what deserved a beating, shall receive a light beating. Every one to whom much is given, of him will much be required; and of him to whom men commit much they will demand the more.

It is not for us to determine who God has placed as our rulers. We pray for them and rejoice when they live out the commands laid down since Christ and up to this day. Vengence and judgement is for the Lord. We strive and suffer in the kingdom with what we are given.

Romans 13:1-7

Being Subject to Authorities
13 Let every person be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and those that exist have been instituted by God. 2 Therefore he who resists the authorities resists what God has appointed, and those who resist will incur judgment. 3 For rulers are not a terror to good conduct, but to bad. Would you have no fear of him who is in authority? Then do what is good, and you will receive his approval, 4 for he is God’s servant for your good. But if you do wrong, be afraid, for he does not bear the sword in vain; he is the servant of God to execute his wrath on the wrongdoer. 5 Therefore one must be subject, not only to avoid God’s wrath but also for the sake of conscience. 6 For the same reason you also pay taxes, for the authorities are ministers of God, attending to this very thing. 7 Pay all of them their dues, taxes to whom taxes are due, revenue to whom revenue is due, respect to whom respect is due, honor to whom honor is due.

 

[rcwitness]

Again, that is the issue. Is the OT and NT the same on this issue, or is there perfection (infallibility) now where there was not then for respective magisteriums ?

For sure in this new covenant and dispensation of the Holy Spirit, with His indwelling and empowerment , where a neighbor will not need teach his neighbor but God will write the" law" on and in new hearts of every believer, we have an advantage. I just don’t read it as infallibly so, just as surely as the Holy Spirit did work in the OT also.

I think of it like this:

John 11

49 But one of them, Ca′iaphas, who was high priest that year, said to them, “You know nothing at all; 50 you do not understand that it is expedient for you that one man should die for the people, and that the whole nation should not perish.”[a] 51 He did not say this of his own accord, but being high priest that year he prophesied that Jesus should die for the nation,

I believe prophecy comes through our leaders. It is up to us to be led by the Holy Spirit and seek their meaning. This is different from privately interpreting the prophecy of Scripture. I mean understanding the Spirit in a message without contradicting Teaching (CCC for example)

Now, dont think I am referring to the pope as a high priest in the sense that he makes sin offerings for us. But rather that he, and the bishops in union, have authority and are ministers of Jesus, giving food at the proper time.

There are those who behave against the will of God, unfortunately. These bring heavy burdens on us. They may require us to keep difficult customs and suffer unjust accusations. Or just fail to be an example by ‘doing’ what is Taught.

 

[rcwitness]

Benhur,

I also don’t want to imply that we, who are Christians, do not or are unable to prophesy. But not all are in positions of leadership. Even still, the lowest in rank could prophesy to a leader, and that leader be responsible to the authority behind that prophesy (if it be from above). But the whole Church is not bound to the interpretation of prophecy unless the Church leadership accepts it and Teaches it.

 

[PRmerger]

Your thumbsup to edwin’s answer is first class and heartwarming.

Reminds me of our discussion of God allowing in His wisdom some dirtiness in the water with the baby to which you said, not per His will. Yet, if I recall correctly was not God leading the Israelites with signs and clouds/fire etc.? Moses only following correctly. This might be a perfect case of God’s will allowing some dirty water to be with the baby as in perfect wisdom. God led them in a quite inefficient and wandering fashion for forty years. God also tells us why revealing His justice and wisdom and mercy.
He perfectly led the Israelites imperfectly.

You’re really not saying that the tens of thousands of Christian denominations is something that we should view with tolerance, right?

Surely you and I are in agreement that Christ founded one Church and that it is His Will that all be part of His Church, yes?

Jesus’s perception of the Pharisees leaven is not comparable to Korah’s perception of Mose’s leadership other than a right and a wrong comparison. There is clearly a time not to obey leadership and clearly a time to obey them.

Blessings

No. But Jesus’ perception of the Pharisees seat is comparable to Moses seat which is comparable to Peter’s seat.

And that perception was: obey them whether you agree or not. Even if they’re leading you in the wrong direction.

God will, indeed, correct.

 

[benhur]

You’re really not saying that the tens of thousands of Christian denominations is something that we should view with tolerance, right?

Surely you and I are in agreement that Christ founded one Church and that it is His Will that all be part of His Church, yes?

No. But Jesus’ perception of the Pharisees seat is comparable to Moses seat which is comparable to Peter’s seat.

And that perception was: obey them whether you agree or not. Even if they’re leading you in the wrong direction.

God will, indeed, correct.

If we are being led in the wrong direction, what is the sin in the church (CC or P) that God should do so ? ( God led the Israelites in “wrong direction” because of sin).

Sin is not always doctrinal. To follow a leader in sin might be ok , but not if it causes you to sin also. So following a wandering Moses was ok, but not when leaders make a golden calf to worship for example.

 

[PRmerger]

If we are being led in the wrong direction,

Who do you mean by “we”?

 

[benhur]

You’re really not saying that the tens of thousands of Christian denominations is something that we should view with tolerance, right?

The question is not what we/you do with thousands of denominations, but what you do with what is universal to them that is not with the Catholic Church.

What do you do with the baby in dirty water ? Is there something to being more scriptural and less traditional ? Is there something to being more faith based and less work based ? Is there something about questioning efficacy of “church membership” and pursuing more actual rebirth by any fashion? Is there something different to CC heirarchy, as Orthodox show ?

All of these questions can be brushed off and ignored by citing the “dirty water” they come from, just as surely we can brush off some of your questions posed because of our perceived dirty water that you are in.

We all have the challenge to really see what the Spirit would say thru each other, and be wary of "excuses’’.

Blessings

 

[PRmerger]

The question is not what we/you do with thousands of denominations, but what you do with what is universal to them that is not with the Catholic Church.

What do you do with the baby in dirty water ? Is there something to being more scriptural and less traditional ? Is there something to being more faith based and less work based ? Is there something about questioning efficacy of “church membership” and pursuing more actual rebirth by any fashion? Is there something different to CC heirarchy, as Orthodox show ?

All of these questions can be brushed off and ignored by citing the “dirty water” they come from, just as surely we can brush off some of your questions posed because of our perceived dirty water that you are in.

We all have the challenge to really see what the Spirit would say thru each other, and be wary of "excuses’’.

Blessings

Sorry. I don’t understand your point nor your analogy. I have difficulty following your pronouns, your referents and your analogs.