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

[PRmerger]

As you like to ask, what is the point, like OK and what about it ?

The point is, ben, that you defer to the authority of the CC to know that anything written by Barnabas is NOT inspired, and that the 27 book canon of the NT is theopneustos.

And you believe that the CC made this decision infallibly.

 

[benhur]

In 1 Corinthians 6 Paul is talking about personal disputes and grievances. These are trivial matters which Paul was criticizing some for not acknowledging the ability of the local Church and Her wiser members to deal with according to faith.

Amen. But Jesus also exhorts in similar fashion about same things when one brother has faulted another, the church being the last and final resort.

While this still gives testimony to the practice of believing that God Himself provided a means to resolve all disputes and divisions, it is not addressing the more weightier issues which also must be taken to the Church for resolution.

Agreed but with both scriptures (Paul’s and the Lord’s).

Paul Himself was sent by a local Church, as representing the case for Gentiles being accepted in the Church, to a Council of the highest authorities in the Church. Paul also, by way of revelation, spent 15 days with Peter to lay out the Gospel and ministry he was preaching. He did This for Confirmation.

Yes, but was the revelation needed to properly go to the church, or was the revelation that the wisest way to solve the Judaizers was thru the church at Jerusalem where the heart of the Judaizers were? The revelation and the action by Paul is for mixed reasons, not just only what you propose correctly.

Also, Jesus told His Apostles, that when matters of discerning morality, the Church’s decision has His own guidance.

That is right, that by His guidance what is in heaven shall be on earth. I wouldn’t want any other kind of binding.

You see, when an issue over something regarding faith and morals is brought before the judgment of the Church, it can be appealed as far as an individual or group feels justifiable. If the issue is brought all the way to the Bishop of Rome, and the Bishop hears, considers, and gives a statement or address to the Church at large, then This is him using the keys (or the authority of Christ) to bind a decision. The conditions of infallibility have been defined. When They are met, that is the binding and losening.

Understand and sometimes this works out great. I also see this as an evolved structure, and not specifically spelled out in scripture. But this is an old topic of papal authority and councilarism, I think.

Blessings

 

[benhur]

The point is, ben, that you defer to the authority of the CC to know that anything written by Barnabas is NOT inspired, and that the 27 book canon of the NT is theopneustos.

And you believe that the CC made this decision infallibly.

Yes, but she is still batting .500 for I think she got the NT index right but not the OT, but very close but still a foul ball by inches.

Play ball!

Blessings

 

[rcwitness]

Understand and sometimes this works out great. I also see this as an evolved structure, and not specifically spelled out in scripture. But this is an old topic of papal authority and councilarism, I think.Blessings

Good stuff dronald.

i think we have quote a bit of common ground to have deep discussions. We have our differences which we try to articulate, but ours are things that need a long time to contemplate and grow in understanding.

The only time Church judgement would “not work” is when ecclesial Law is abused. Such a case would be Joan of Ark. Kinda like Jesus’ own trial too. But in the new Covanent Jesus promises He will be there. I believe the conditions which the Church have defined in Law can be relied on.

 

[mek42]

Ok. Tabor claims Paul was writing in an apocalyptic vein, that the earth was going to change to become completely spiritually one in Christ soon, which is why earthly entanglements such as marriage should be avoided. Assuming that Paul was writing apcolyptically, since the world is still kicking along close to 2,000 years later, it seems clear he was wrong, thereby casting doubt on his entire personal revelation.

 

[Eric_Hilbert]

How about we close it up at 1200 guys, or thereabouts?

 

[icamhif]

Also, I am frankly hesitant to assign my intellect to proffer a vigorous defense, as I take the millstone warning seriously and do not want the responsibility of leading someone astray if Christianity is correct.

How very noble of you! You may even be doing better at this than I am!

 

[Telstar]

If someone has doubts about what’s in Scripture, why would that person have fewer doubts about the authority and reliability of an institution such as the Catholic Church to confirm the authenticity of Scripture?

From a Catholic perspective, the chances of our having doubts about the authenticity of Scripture are much less likely, since it was the Catholic Church that canonized which books are included, in the first place. At the time the list was first proposed, the authenticity of those books was much more fresh in the minds of the Early Fathers. They knew which books were already being used in the liturgy of the Mass, particularly in Rome, which would have been closer to the teachings that came from Peter. They knew which were the oldest, where they came from and who wrote them.

This is all based on the Sacred Tradition of the Church, which concerns what was passed down orally from the Apostles, that was not contained in the Scriptures, themselves. This is also the major difference between Catholicism and Protestantism. Protestants rejected Sacred Tradition, which is where many Catholic Doctrines, that were also rejected by them (such as Purgatory, praying to the Saints, devotion to Mary, etc.), derived their basis. They came from the teachings of the early Church Fathers, who originally received them from the Apostles or their direct disciples.

This is also why Apostolic succession is so important in determining the truth of what should be believed by all Christians. The practice of “the laying on of hands” which began with the Apostles, has continued in an unbroken chain ever since that time. That’s how the full power of the Holy Spirit is transferred from one person to another. Once that chain is broken, the original connection is lost until it can be repaired, and reattached to the original chain.

Someone having personal doubts about certain aspects of the faith, is an entirely different story. We all have struggles with that from time to time. But, most Catholics firmly believe that as long as we hold onto whatever the Church teaches us about faith and morals, we can never go wrong. We have a solid guarantee from Jesus that the Church will always be led into all truth by the Holy Spirit, who will protect the Church from teaching error, even though individuals within the Church are certainly capable of doing that on their own.

 

[rcwitness]

If someone has doubts about what’s in Scripture, why would that person have fewer doubts about the authority and reliability of an institution such as the Catholic Church to confirm the authenticity of Scripture?

It’s not doubts about what’s in Scripture, but the fact that Scripture was settled by an authority a long time ago by a unified Church which gave recognition to the Bishop of Rome.

 

[benhur]

Ok. Tabor claims Paul was writing in an apocalyptic vein, that the earth was going to change to become completely spiritually one in Christ soon, which is why earthly entanglements such as marriage should be avoided. Assuming that Paul was writing apcolyptically, since the world is still kicking along close to 2,000 years later, it seems clear he was wrong, thereby casting doubt on his entire personal revelation.

Hi m

Thanks for info on Tabor. Does Tabor throw out the baby with the bath water ? That is, is Paul wrong on the when (Christ’s return) but right on other things ?

I disagree that Paul was zealous in only spiritual things because of emminent return of Christ soley. He gives his preference (celibacy, and it is his preference, by his own words, and says it is not from revelation or from Christ . He gives the reason , to focus more soley on the work of the kingdom, and not because of soon return necessarily. In fact he chides the Corinthians for thinking they were more spiritual to divorce themselves from their spouses.

Blessings

 

[Protector]

icamhif;13060824 I am content with being a Christian. The question of what denomination teaches the fullness of God’s truth, though, is another issue.

Simply pray for the Holy Sprit to guide you. However, a simple test to narrow down your search is to eliminate any denomination which has Doctrines and teachings not in line with Scripture.

Protector.

 

[PRmerger]

Yes, but she is still batting .500 for I think she got the NT index right

Based on what?

What prior info do you have for knowing that the CC got it right here? Do you know from some other source that 1 and 2 Clement aren’t theopneustos?

 

[Thorolfr]

It’s not doubts about what’s in Scripture, but the fact that Scripture was settled by an authority a long time ago by a unified Church which gave recognition to the Bishop of Rome.

What I was saying is that if I have doubts about Scripture (which I do), why would I have fewer doubts about the authority claimed by the Catholic Church? And there are plenty of well known scholars on early Christianity who would dispute that early Christianity was all that unified or that the Bishop of Rome was given the recognition now claimed by the Catholic Church.

 

[PRmerger]

Simply pray for the Holy Sprit to guide you. However, a simple test to narrow down your search is to eliminate any denomination which has Doctrines and teachings not in line with Scripture.

Protector.

That would eliminate…let’s see…2 denominations maybe?

Every other denomination, of the tens of thousands, could justify each and every one of their doctrines with a verse of Scripture.

So, in reality, what you propose, Protector, is not helpful at all in determining what denomination to join.

I suggest finding the Church Christ established, and then conforming your views to what the Church has professed.

 

[mek42]

Hi m

Thanks for info on Tabor. Does Tabor throw out the baby with the bath water ? That is, is Paul wrong on the when (Christ’s return) but right on other things ?

I disagree that Paul was zealous in only spiritual things because of emminent return of Christ soley. He gives his preference (celibacy, and it is his preference, by his own words, and says it is not from revelation or from Christ . He gives the reason , to focus more soley on the work of the kingdom, and not because of soon return necessarily. In fact he chides the Corinthians for thinking they were more spiritual to divorce themselves from their spouses.

Blessings

Tabor suggests the apocalyptic nature of Paul’s writing. The rest was my own reasoning. As for the baby with the bath water analogy, I was recently called to jury duty. One of the jury instructions was that if we found part of a testimony non-credible, we were free to disregard the testimony in entirety.

 

[rcwitness]

What I was saying is that if I have doubts about Scripture (which I do), why would I have fewer doubts about the authority claimed by the Catholic Church? And there are plenty of well known scholars on early Christianity who would dispute that early Christianity was all that unified or that the Bishop of Rome was given the recognition now claimed by the Catholic Church.

Right… if you have doubts about whether certain writings should be inin Sacred Scripture OR doubts about the contents of Scripture, then the fact that they are Confirmed Scripture by the Church may not help you. It usually benefits Christians who belong to the Church, for the Church’s Confirmation to have credibility. At the point of Scripture being joined to one “book” all Christians were of one acccord, one faith, one body and so one Church.

If you have doubts about Church Teaching, Scripture may not help you either.

Both are from the same Spirit.

"The Spirit and the Bride say, ‘come’ ".

 

[icamhif]

Simply pray for the Holy Sprit to guide you. However, a simple test to narrow down your search is to eliminate any denomination which has Doctrines and teachings not in line with Scripture.

Protector.

Thanks, Protector

 

[Reuben_J]

From a Catholic perspective, the chances of our having doubts about the authenticity of Scripture are much less likely, since it was the Catholic Church that canonized which books are included, in the first place. At the time the list was first proposed, the authenticity of those books was much more fresh in the minds of the Early Fathers. They knew which books were already being used in the liturgy of the Mass, particularly in Rome, which would have been closer to the teachings that came from Peter. They knew which were the oldest, where they came from and who wrote them.

This is all based on the Sacred Tradition of the Church, which concerns what was passed down orally from the Apostles, that was not contained in the Scriptures, themselves. This is also the major difference between Catholicism and Protestantism. Protestants rejected Sacred Tradition, which is where many Catholic Doctrines, that were also rejected by them (such as Purgatory, praying to the Saints, devotion to Mary, etc.), derived their basis. They came from the teachings of the early Church Fathers, who originally received them from the Apostles or their direct disciples.

This is also why Apostolic succession is so important in determining the truth of what should be believed by all Christians. The practice of “the laying on of hands” which began with the Apostles, has continued in an unbroken chain ever since that time. That’s how the full power of the Holy Spirit is transferred from one person to another. Once that chain is broken, the original connection is lost until it can be repaired, and reattached to the original chain.

Someone having personal doubts about certain aspects of the faith, is an entirely different story. We all have struggles with that from time to time. But, most Catholics firmly believe that as long as we hold onto whatever the Church teaches us about faith and morals, we can never go wrong. We have a solid guarantee from Jesus that the Church will always be led into all truth by the Holy Spirit, who will protect the Church from teaching error, even though individuals within the Church are certainly capable of doing that on their own.

This.

This cannot be emphasized enough of the position of the Catholic Church. Scared Tradition and apostolic succession.

Edit: Long before the Scriptures were canonized (officially), they were already in use and read and proclaimed in the celebration of the Holy Eucharist in the catacombs in Rome and early churches.

 

[benhur]

Tabor suggests the apocalyptic nature of Paul’s writing. The rest was my own reasoning. As for the baby with the bath water analogy, I was recently called to jury duty. One of the jury instructions was that if we found part of a testimony non-credible, we were free to disregard the testimony in entirety.

Ok. I have heard that all apostles believed in emminent return but have not studied it. I also do not see how that shapes some of doctrine , or how it differs from other writings. Saints and leaders thru the ages have felt that "emminence’’ but I would not discredit them. Now what is bad is when folks start predicting the exact time or day and start selling their houses or quitting their jobs etc , but that is not Paul’s case. As a matter of fact, he sets up some criteria for His return not unlike other prophetic writings, that had not occurred yet in Paul’s time, so I am not so sure that he got ahead of the game. Again,even today there is varied discussion as to just when Christ will return and how and what will happen to us etc etc… Is all Christianity out of wack then?

But I appreciate your candor. One certainly can make a judgement if one is wrong with a skewed view, as you say Tabor suggests about Paul and toss the whole thing out . The OT suggests the stoning of false prophets, that is to say something God said would happen from divine revelation then it doesn’t happen. Very serious. Just that Paul says to many other things that are corroborated by others, that is right, that would make me think maybe Paul is right and Tabor is wrong. So it works both ways, even in a jury.

I mean I could find something wrong with any church, any Christian, at one time or another. Do I then become a Buddhist, and deny all the extraordinary Godly behavior one can find in any church or Christian , from time to time ? But then what about the bad in Buddhists from time to time or even their extraordinary behavior? How about the OT and some of the antics of the Jewish patriarchs ? And Jesus was a Jew, from the line of a harlot, a murder and adulterer, and liars, and connivers?

Scripture says then let every man be called a liar , for only God is true. And there is always an excuse, a shock absorber, to avoid the abrupt and deep, persistent calling of God.

Blessings again m

PS. I heard some NY city slickers think Terrytown is upstate NY. What is “up” to you ?

 

[mek42]

Ok. I have heard that all apostles believed in emminent return but have not studied it. I also do not see how that shapes some of doctrine , or how it differs from other writings. Saints and leaders thru the ages have felt that "emminence’’ but I would not discredit them. Now what is bad is when folks start predicting the exact time or day and start selling their houses or quitting their jobs etc , but that is not Paul’s case. As a matter of fact, he sets up some criteria for His return not unlike other prophetic writings, that had not occurred yet in Paul’s time, so I am not so sure that he got ahead of the game. Again,even today there is varied discussion as to just when Christ will return and how and what will happen to us etc etc… Is all Christianity out of wack then?

But I appreciate your candor. One certainly can make a judgement if one is wrong with a skewed view, as you say Tabor suggests about Paul and toss the whole thing out . The OT suggests the stoning of false prophets, that is to say something God said would happen from divine revelation then it doesn’t happen. Very serious. Just that Paul says to many other things that are corroborated by others, that is right, that would make me think maybe Paul is right and Tabor is wrong. So it works both ways, even in a jury.

I mean I could find something wrong with any church, any Christian, at one time or another. Do I then become a Buddhist, and deny all the extraordinary Godly behavior one can find in any church or Christian , from time to time ? But then what about the bad in Buddhists from time to time or even their extraordinary behavior? How about the OT and some of the antics of the Jewish patriarchs ? And Jesus was a Jew, from the line of a harlot, a murder and adulterer, and liars, and connivers?

Scripture says then let every man be called a liar , for only God is true. And there is always an excuse, a shock absorber, to avoid the abrupt and deep, persistent calling of God.

Blessings again m

PS. I heard some NY city slickers think Terrytown is upstate NY. What is “up” to you ?

Near Syracuse.

Tabor makes a very convincing case that the Pauline Christianity was not in accord with the Messianic Judaic Christianity of James, brother of Jesus, Simon Cephas (Peter) and the other Apostles who had followed Jesus as a man. I need to do more reading before deciding to agree with his thesis - I’m just saying now that he makes a very compelling argument.

Regarding the hot and cold bit, are you saying that God would have more respect for an atheist who flat out rejected the idea of a god than an agnostic making an effort to live by JudeoChristian behavior in their interaction with others?