Jews used the Septuagint for years that contained all those books Luther cut out.
Then Christians were using it to convert Jews to Christianity(Wisdom chapter 2 is worth reading) and all of sudden their OT canon changes. Just like their Talmud has been known to be edited at their convenience.
So I personally donāt understand the logic in relying upon post incarnated-Christ Jews for any guidance whatsoever. These are the same people, or the kin of those who rejected Him, spat upon Him and even accused him of casting out demons by Beelzebul. They were blind as bats and Jesus called them snakes and children of the devil.
I think that alwayswill has demonstrated that no matter how vile the person may be, Godās sovereignty can work through them to do His will. therefore, using a canon defined by those who rejected Christ would be just as valid as Pilate ordering Jesus to be crucified.
Ok but that is pretty much what I said, without your twist . Scripture does not make decisions , but the church is to make decisions that are scriptural ,hence normative scripture (loosely, SS).
Blessings
Yes, we will agree that the Church is to make decisions that are scriptural, and that Scripture is normative. The problem is the lenses through which the reader looks. At the Reformation a break occurred with the Apostolic perspective infallibly preserved in the Church by the Holy Spirit. Since that time, āchurchā was redefined, as well as a number of other doctrines that were handed down to us from the Apostles.
SS does not advocate Writ in a vacuum. Some critics are wrong in seeing SS as just taking up oneās bible, curling up in a ball, and saying , "I am all set ".
I think the critics have a defensible position in criticizing such an approach. It is the pracitioners of it who are in the wrong. But how can they know any better? Most of those who practice it know little about the history of the Church, or of the origin of SS.
As you state, whilst in an SS environment, you were amongst "siblingsāā, and I assume not devoid of pastors, elders, teachers either. Further I am quite sure there was accountability in you baptist congregation, and you could not believe whatever you wanted or at least teach it. Another words, you were not under sole authority of scripture, but real "churchāā people, offices, and giftings also. SS is not āsole authorityā. You were in a ācongregationā, of the ecclesia.
Yes. I left them when they split in two, as many congregations do, over a difference of opinion about Scripture. The original community believed that the pentecostal gifts had āceasedā (been replaced by Scriputre as the perfect which had come), and the other half experienced a pentecostal renewal and began speaking in tongues and studying the gifts of the Holy Spirit. It is a good example of how different perceptions of Scripture can cause division in the congregation. Both parts of the congregation defended their postions with Scripture. Both were SS, both were sincere Christians.
Precisely.
I was told by a Anglican Priest that Matthew 5:28 creates āgray areaā.
I think it is fair to say there are many of these. The situation I described above was one of them. There is more than one way to interpret, understand, and apply the Scriptures.
If it is in line with Catholic attitude, why so much debative dialogue with him, unless you just came to realize his position is OK.(have not read all your postings with him, and you have both been around a long, long time, on CAF I mean).
JonNC is more Catholic than many Catholics I know.
I do not know anyone who rejects all councils, creeds, confessions, Catholic or Orthodox teachings, key word āallā or their proper roleā¦ However, 30,000 is a lot of ground to cover (gotta be a few odd balls in there).
There are far too many Christians who practice whatever verson of SS they espouse who know nothing of councils.
What I hope to find rare(r) is folks who misunderstand just what SS is and is not.
You may have an uphill battle with that, since there are so many different definitions of the concept. Some of them sound downright Catholic.:bigyikes:
I think we fail in a few teachings. Have you given of all that you own to the poor, and devoted yourself fully to the ministry ?
This is a good example of why the faithful need a teaching authority - a task Jesus gave to the Church.
It wasnāt in caps! But I enlarged the font on that question to get its attention. Trusting and relying on a Canon means believing the people who Confirmed that Canon were Inspired and led to do so by God. I donāt think it was a matter of merely believing it was correct. That is a foundation of the faith for certain! And relied upon for the men involved, for certain! But it had another component, and that is the authority to declare, over the Universal Church, a fixed Canon. This happened in the 4th century by the Church which also had Confirmed most all doctrines which we see today. And using this same method for establishing the canon, She can Confirm other matters which many Christians reject, like Infant Baptism, valid Eucharist, Papal Primacy, Confession to the Church, etc.
