Prodigal's Isle

[JRKH]

I post this to encourage discussion on the term “Body of Believers”. In particular I am interested in the views of my Non-Catholic Christian Brothers.

I start with a few givens:
“In the beginning was the Word.”
“The Word became Flesh and dwelt among us.”
The Word taught us with our words (human language) to convey the Word of God.
The Word died and rose again that we might be reconciled to The Father.
The Father, by The Word, sent to us The Holy Spirit that He might dwell in us and write His Word upon our hearts.
All who seek the Word, The Lord, Through the Prayerful guidance of the Holy Spirit will find wisdom.
The Word founded, through His Followers, a community of Believers (ecclesia or church).

Now - I leave out any community titles here and ask the following:

When the “Community of Believers” find that two or more of their number have serious and diametrically opposed, differences on what “The Spirit” is telling them, how does the “Community of Believers” determine which is correct?
Let us assume that the opposing views are among people who are learned, well versed in Scripture, well respected members of the community, and can convincingly offer scriptural, historical, philosophical and rational arguments for their positions. Each side has prayed hard on this and Each side solemnly declares “Spirit Guidance” for their position.
How does, “The Community of Believers” determine which is correct?

Peace
James

 

[Socrates4Jesus]

I guess you will have to explain to me why you think these two things are opposites.

Peace
James

Well, to say
(a) = not (a)
is a logical contradiction and always untrue. An example: If i were to say
a. I own **only **one dog
and
b. I own more than one dog
then that means that i’m saying both (a) and (b) are true. But it is logically impossible for both to be true, because
(b) = not (a)
and it’s never true that
not (a) = (a)
Reason tells us this is an impossibility.

---

So if i say that
a2. **Only **Peter can bind and loose
and
b2. Not only Peter can bind and loose
then that means that i’m saying both (a2) and (b2) are both true. But it is logically impossible for both to be true, because
(b2) = not (a2)
and it’s never true that
not (a2) = (a2)
Reason tells us this is an impossibility. So either (a2) or (b2) but not both can be true. See what i mean?

 

[michaelsmth626]

Hi Michael.

I must confess that something in your exposition eludes me too.

Please see post 980 I used an other verse where Jesus told them all to ask what ever they desired and it shall be done. John 15. That is much clearer understanding of what is ment and the asking for what ever certainly encompasses the keys and binding and loosing.

 

[JRKH]

It is exactly what it means to bind and loose, but it comes with conditions and it was said to Peter first. It is for any mature christian that is a part of the vine. The vine and the branches define that this is not an open ended license to do as you please, it also available to all born of the Spirit. In this verse below Jesus says ask what ever you wish does that mean I get a Maserati? It does if you take it out of context like presuming Peter has a license to kill.

Please define for me and Socrates what determines a “mature Christian” How do we recognize such a one?

Peace
James

 

[Socrates4Jesus]

Perhaps Christ DID carefully use and craft his words here. Perhaps it is not a problem with ambiguous words but with ambiguous understanding. heh? …

Please tell me which of these statements you think is true, and which two are false.

• Peter is the rock on which the Church is built
• Peter’s profession of faith is the rock on which the Church is built
• Jesus Christ is the rock on which the Church is built

 

[JRKH]

Well, to say
(a) = not (a)
is a logical contradiction and always untrue. An example: If i were to say
a. I own **only **one dog
and
b. I own more than one dog
then that means that i’m saying both (a) and (b) are true. But it is logically impossible for both to be true, because
(b) = not (a)
and it’s never true that
not (a) = (a)
Reason tells us this is an impossibility.

---

So if i say that
a2. **Only **Peter can bind and loose
and
b2. Not only Peter can bind and loose
then that means that i’m saying both (a2) and (b2) are both true. But it is logically impossible for both to be true, because
(b2) = not (a2)
and it’s never true that
not (a2) = (a2)
Reason tells us this is an impossibility. So either (a2) or (b2) but not both can be true. See what i mean?

OK, then tell me where Jesus told Peter ONLY he could bind and loose?

He told Peter that he could Bind and Loose,
The He told the Apostles they could bind and loose
Both of these things are in the context of giving authority to His Church (Note the term Church used in both places and these are the only two verses in the Gospels where “Church” is used)

The above demonstrates that your premise is flawed.
I own a car, because I am married, my wife owns the same car. Therefore WE own a car.
Someone asks me If I own a car. My answer is Yes I own a car.
Someone asks us if WE own a car, the answer Yes WE own a car.

I have a Bank account. Because I am married It is a joint Bank account - therefore WE have a bank account. I can transact upon that Bank account. My Wife can transact on that Bank account.
Someone asks if I have a bank account. May answer is Yes I have a bank account.
Someone asks us if WE have a bank account, the answer is Yes we have a bank account.

So the fact that Jesus Gave Peter, as the Rock of the Church, the power to bind and loose in mt 16 does not negate or contradict his giving power to bind and loose to the Apostles, acting in concert as “The Church”, in Mt 18.

Peace
James

 

[Pax]

It is exactly what it means to bind and loose, but it comes with conditions and it was said to Peter first. It is for any mature christian that is a part of the vine. The vine and the branches define that this is not an open ended license to do as you please, it also available to all born of the Spirit. In this verse below Jesus says ask what ever you wish does that mean I get a Maserati? It does if you take it out of context like presuming Peter has a license to kill.

**The underlined [If you abide in Me, and My words abide in you, you will ask what you desire, and it shall be done for you.] would include the keys and everything else that Jesus possess. But it comes with a condition, it is not your own it is the Lord working His will and good pleasure threw you. **
To bind and loosen is to be with Christ born and trained up threw the HS. Like I said a good Father teaches, and disciplines, you are raised in to maturity, it is not something that is immediately bestowed on a man.

If you cant figure out the difference between a mediator and direct communication threw the HS you are over thinking a simple statement. Did you not read and understand the catholic official statements to the world that they are the only conduit to God.

There are others that are worded more directly in the presumption that the CC occupies the apex of the hour glass as mediator to Jesus on earth. That is the function of the HS. If you can’t see that mat 16:18 is establishing the old Covenant and a mediator then IMHO you will never see the fist grade. You may well receive the HS but you will never grow an inch until you come to terms with the true gospel. I am of the opinion that people dont receive the HS until they sort out the garbage and find the true meaning enlightened by the HS’s gentle prodding form those who speak it, for a person yet to receive its a still small voice barely heard in the sea of tossing waves. Only Jesus commands the wave to be silent.

michaelsmth in Christ,

This is your own preconceived notion about mediation, the church, and the Holy Spirit. I see nothing in scripture to support your view, but I see plenty that contradicts it. Let me give you some scriptural examples that defy your view concerning authority and binding and loosing.

Authority:

Scripture denies your claim. Please note that Jesus gave authority and power to the apostles that He did not give to others. This is made quite clear in Matthew 16:19, Matt 18:18, Mark 3:15, John 20:21, and John 20:23. Moreover, the NT church clearly has positions and lines of authority as outlined by the following passages:

Pauls says:

Titus 1:7-11
For a bishop, as God’s steward…… must hold firm to the sure word as taught, so that he may be able to give instruction in sound doctrine and also to confute those who contradict it. For there are many insubordinate men, empty talkers and deceivers….they have no right to teach.

Hebrews 13:17
Obey your leaders and submit to them; for they are keeping watch over your souls, as men who will have to give account. Let them do this joyfully, and not sadly, for that would be of no advantage to you.

2 Cor 13:10
I write this while I am away from you, in order that when I come I may not have to be severe in my use of the authority…

Titus 2:15
Declare these things; exhort and reprove with all authority. Let no one disregard you.​

And then we have these statements:

3 John 1:9
I have written something to the church; but Diotrephes, who likes to put himself first, does not acknowledge my authority.

Acts 14:23
And when they had appointed elders for them in every church, with prayer and fasting, they committed them to the Lord in whom they believed.

Acts 15:2
And when Paul and Barnabas had no small dissension and debate with them, Paul and Barnabas and some of the others were appointed to go up to Jerusalem to the apostles and the elders about this question.

1 Cor 12:28-30
And God has appointed in the church first apostles, second prophets, third teachers, then workers of miracles, then healers, helpers, administrators, speakers in various kinds of tongues. Are all apostles? Are all prophets? Are all teachers? Do all work miracles?
Do all possess gifts of healing? Do all speak with tongues? Do all interpret?

1 Tim 3:1-5
THE SAYING is sure: If any one aspires to the office of bishop, he desires a noble task.
Now a bishop must be above reproach, the husband of one wife, temperate, sensible, dignified, hospitable, an apt teacher, no drunkard, not violent but gentle, not quarrelsome, and no lover of money. He must manage his own household well, keeping his children submissive and respectful in every way; for if a man does not know how to manage his own household, how can he care for God’s church?

This is but a smattering of the available verses that indicate that there are various positions of authority within the Church by way of scripture. Do you need more? Does any of this negate the “one mediator” position of Jesus? Does this negate the Holy Spirit? I don’t think so, but maybe you do. If so please explain.

God bless.

 

[Socrates4Jesus]

…
But you see here you are falling into the SS Trap.
First thing to consider:
Did Christ write a book or found a church? …

He commanded the Apostles to be His witnesses, so He commanded them to write the books of the New Testament, just as the prophets before them wrote the books of the Old Testament.

 

[JRKH]

Please tell me which of these statements you think is true, and which two are false.

• Peter is the rock on which the Church is built
• Peter’s profession of faith is the rock on which the Church is built
• Jesus Christ is the rock on which the Church is built

All three are true and none are false.

Just as God is three persons in one God, so is the Rock upon which The Church is built comprised of different components or elements.

Peace
James

 

[Socrates4Jesus]

…
Second thing to consider:
How long was the Gospel preached before any of the Biblical texts were recorded? …

Matthew, one of Jesus’ disciples, wrote his gospel while still alive, of course.

Paul’s letters were penned before that.

Luke’s gospel was written before Acts, and Acts was written prior to 70 AD and the destruction of the Jewish Temple, and prior to Peter going to Rome, for it ends before Paul’s trial in Rome.

In fact, all of the epistles and gospels must have been penned before 70 AD, because none of them mention the Roman-Jewish War and destruction of the Temple.

 

[Socrates4Jesus]

…
Third thing to consider:
How many Texts were recorded during apostolic times that were not included in the canon of the Bible? …

Biblical texts? None. Do you think there was something written that God intended be included, but was not?

 

[Socrates4Jesus]

… How long was the Gospel preached before the Canon of the Bible was officially determined. …

From what i understand, most of the books of the current Canon were quoted by the earliest Church Fathers. I can look up the books that were quoted, the early Church Fathers who quoted them, and the dates of the quotations, if you want.

 

[Socrates4Jesus]

… The answers to the above, should demonstrate that Christ founded a chuch based upon Oral teachings which were passed on orally and then some were written down…

Based on the answers to your questions, i don’t see how these answers (which are premises) lead to your conclusion that Christ founded His Church based on oral (but not written) teachings. Are my answers not factual? I can look up specific dates, etc. to show that i have not made any factual errors.

 

[michaelsmth626]

Hi Michael.

I must confess that something in your exposition eludes me too.

Am I to understand that the power to bind and loose belongs to every member of the invisible Church, ie those who speak *in the power and knowledge of Jesus * ?
You also say that,being born of the Spirit, you see how foolish is to belong to a visible church.​

The power we are speaking about is given in Matthew 18.

16But if he does not listen, take one or two others along with you, that every charge may be established(A) by the evidence of two or three witnesses. 17If he refuses to listen to them,(B) tell it to the church. And if he refuses to listen even to the church,(C) let him be to you as(D) a Gentile and a tax collector. 18Truly, I say to you,(E) whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed[a] in heaven.

You may note the you Jesus is using here is clearly plural in greek. HE’s is not saying

if one of you, any of you binds…

he is speaking collectively here. Differently from 16.19, where the singular is used in addressing Simon Peter.
Therefore we cannot safely state any one hearer is given such power acting by himself . Hearers where the disciples, likely the Apostles, BTW.

I wonder then how I can know that Jesus is speaking even to any single member of the invisible church.

---

The Lord just told them to tell it to the church. That means I can find an invisible church or assembly, speak to it, listen to its voice, assuming it has one.

You have been to many visible churches and
found brothers in the Spirit in many. But mostly what I see are those that think they are born of the spirit.

In other words you can see those who belong …to the invisible church, and those who do not.
Whereas many others think they belong to it, but they do not.

Whence can I know whether I can see who belongs to the invisible church,
or whether on the contrary I myself am deceived into believing I am a member ?

Bless you.

Don’t the sheep know the Shepherds voice? they will not follow another. You speak as a blind and death man. The Spirit of God is at work all around for those that have eyes and ears. Why do think Jesus said it the gates of hell will never overturn it. Its because We are the temple of God the Spirit resides in the temple. You can’t find or know the truth unless the source has the stamp of Rome on it? If you quit looking for the ECF stamp of approval and start listening to the Spirit within you, you may be quite surprised. I did not say I could see them but as we speak the Spirit within us confirms that we are Born of the same.

 

[Socrates4Jesus]

… My dear Sorates, this is my long winded way of saying tha tyou are falling into the trap of trying to understand the Church from the Bible instead of the Bible from the Church. REmember your “Chicken and egg” question earlier? Well which came first, the “Bible” (as we know it today with the OT and NT), or The Church.

Peace
James

Perhaps you are correct. But at the moment your quiche seems a little half baked. If you need a little more time in the kitchen to prepare a meal i can swallow, that’s OK. Let me know when it’s done cooking and i’ll taste and see if it’s good.

 

[Socrates4Jesus]

                Originally Posted by **Socrates4Jesus**

Fascinating! If that is so, then would you say that the keys to heaven were not given to Peter alone, but to all of the Apostles (since they were all given the authority to bind and loose)?

 

[Socrates4Jesus]

…

   		 			 				John 15:5 “I am the vine, you are the branches. He who abides in Me, and I in him, bears much fruit; for without Me you can do nothing

But there is something i don’t understand. Are you saying that binding and loosing is a matter of asking or acting?

 

[JRKH]

He commanded the Apostles to be His witnesses, so He commanded them to write the books of the New Testament, just as the prophets before them wrote the books of the Old Testament.

There is no command for writing of book from Christ in the NT that I am aware of. Can you show me one? Witnesses, in the ancient times almost always involved Oral testimony, not written.

If he had told the Apostles to write these things down, don’t you think they would have done so immedialtely instead of waiting until 20 + years had passed? Don’t you think there would have been a single - “composite” Gospel, carefully copied and preserved, based on the testimony of all 12 instead of four seperate ones?

But let’s take your statement at face value and agree that Jesus “Caused the Books to be written”, which is surely true.
Why would Jesus cause the references to “Church and Authority” (bind and loose), to appear only twice and both times together? Why would He permit the ECF’s and those who followed them to fall into error for 1500 years before righting the ship? Especially when He promised to be with us till the end of time?

Peace
James

 

[Socrates4Jesus]

… If you cant figure out the difference between a mediator and direct communication threw the HS you are over thinking a simple statement. Did you not read and understand the catholic official statements to the world that they are the only conduit to God.

   		 			 				In this Church of Christ the Roman Pontiff, as the successor of Peter, to whom Christ entrusted the care of his sheep and his lambs

Yes, but isn’t there a difference between mediation and authority? I mean, a mediator in a dispute has no authority to tell either party what to do, does he? All he can do is suggest and create a means whereby the two parties can reach an agreement. Isn’t this true?

 

[Socrates4Jesus]

http://www.mchenrybowl.com/images/firworks.gif

Wooo Hooo! we broke a thousand!