Protestant interpretations...

  • Thread starter Thread starter BrooklynBoy200
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Randy_Carson said:
You chose one of the several examples given and ignored all the rest. The doctrine you deny is very important to those who hold it…what right do you have to declare that these bible-believing Christians are wrong in their Spirit-led interpretation?

But more importantly, shall I bury you with dozens of contradictory and conflicting doctrines taught by Protestant denominations which all claim to follow the Bible Alone and to be led by the Spirit?

Tell me, does doctrine matter in the Church or are contradictory doctrines acceptable?
Click to expand...
Again you’re wrong I answered to examples of three.

Ginger
 
Ginger2 said:
lol, another belly laugh!! :clapping:

I must have been interrupted by my kids. I was responding to a verse you didn’t write. I’ve been looking all over for it, but you didn’t quote it.
Click to expand...
I quoted 2 John 12 in post #636.
 
Randy_Carson said:
Heh…okay, Ginger. …
But I feel it is important to pin you down on this, so here goes:

From The Zondervan Parallel New Testament in Greek and English, we read that the words Paul chose in 1 Co. 4:15 are *pateras *and gennao Both the KJV and the NIV translate the former word as “fathers” and the latter as “begotten you” and “became your father” respectively.

From The Hebrew/Greek Key Study Bible, we confirm that pateras (#3962) means “father” and that gennao means “to procreate properly of the father” or “begat”.

So, the bottom line, Ginger, is that Paul calls himself the “father” of the Corinthians;
Click to expand...
“and the foolish and uninstructed questions be avoiding, having known that they **beget **strife,” - 2Ti 2:23
 
JohnnyBeth said:
It is not foundation; it is support…big difference. Foundationis different in meaning and is not used in that passage. Hey, what does accuracy matter?
Click to expand...
So you’re comfortable saying that the Church is the “pillar and support of the truth” instead? How does that help you?

The Bible points to the Church and not itself. Go figure.

1 Timothy 3:15 (New International Version)
15if I am delayed, you will know how people ought to conduct themselves in God’s household, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and foundation of the truth.

1 Timothy 3:15 (King James Version)
15But if I tarry long, that thou mayest know how thou oughtest to behave thyself in the house of God, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and ground of the truth.

(Where is the foundation of a building? In the ground?)

1 Timothy 3:15 (New American Bible)
15 But if I should be delayed, you should know how to behave in the household of God, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and foundation of truth.
 
Randy_Carson said:
Oh?

She’s already been refuted on Paul’s use of the term “father” in response to her “call no man father” argument.
Click to expand...
Uh… I’m certain I was not the one who brought up the “call no man ‘father’” issue.

In fact, Isn’t that one that rinnie and I agreed on. I merely corrected you when you used a mistranslation to support your claims.

Funny how you keep claiming I am wrong in the form of false accusations 😛

Ginger
 
Ginger2 said:
Acts 19
Paul in Ephesus
1 While Apollos was at Corinth, Paul took the road through the interior and arrived at Ephesus. There he found some disciples
2 and asked them, “Did you receive the Holy Spirit when you believed?”
They answered, “No, we have not even heard that there is a Holy Spirit.”

3 So Paul asked, “Then what baptism did you receive?”
“John’s baptism,” they replied.
This is a good place to point out there are two Baptisms
4 Paul said, “John’s baptism was a baptism of repentance. He told the people to believe in the one coming after him, that is, in Jesus.”
5 On hearing this, they were baptized into the name of the Lord Jesus.
Here is where you need to stop and reflect on the order of events and the things Paul said
6 When Paul placed his hands on them, the Holy Spirit came on them, and they spoke in tongues and prophesied.

When the Bible speaks of the Holy Spirit, it is also speaking of two things: The person of the Holy Spirit who indwells us at the time of our Baptism, and the gifts of the Holy Spirit which could only be passed on by the Apostles.

Gifts today are not the same as then as the purpose was fulfilled by the end of the Apostolic age.

I know that is a lot for you to absorb in such a short time. But please reflect on these Scriptures and others before you simply dismiss them and interpret them the way you already believe.

Ginger
Click to expand...
You were asked to provide a verse which specifially states that the Apostles could not pass on their authority as you claimed in a previous post when you wrote, “But according to the Scriptures, those who received the gift thru the Apostles, couldn’t pass the gift along to others.”

Despite your rambling above, you have not provided the verse.
 
Randy_Carson said:
You were asked to provide a verse which specifially states that the Apostles could not pass on their authority as you claimed in a previous post.

Despite your rambling above, you have not provided the verse.
Click to expand...
Then I misspoke.

The Apostles could indeed pass on the gifts of the Holy Spirit. But those to whom they passed it on to could not pass it on. Thus, These specific gifts given to the Apostles ended with the Apostolic age.

Although all Christian still have spiritual gifts - just not the same as the Apostles.

**I don’t remember the verse right off, (maybe ACTS 8) but Philip could not pass on the gifts. **Peter and John had to come and lay hands on the people.

Still my previous post (quoting Scriptures on this topic) is good for understanding.

Ginger
 
Ginger2 said:
Uh… I’m certain I was not the one who brought up the “call no man ‘father’” issue.

In fact, Isn’t that one that rinnie and I agreed on. I merely corrected you when you used a mistranslation to support your claims.

Funny how you keep claiming I am wrong in the form of false accusations 😛

Ginger
Click to expand...
You referenced the “call no man father” argument in these posts: 627, 635, 640 & 678.

Specifically, you wrote, “Show me the verse where someone, anyone, refers to one of the Apostles, anyone, as “father”.”

I provided numerous examples for you.
 
It is in Acts 8:

12 but once they began to believe Philip as he preached the good news about the kingdom of God and the name of Jesus Christ, men and women alike were baptized.
13 Even Simon himself believed and, after being baptized, became devoted to Philip; and when he saw the signs and mighty deeds that were occurring, he was astounded.
Notice Philip had authority from god to do signs and mighty deeds that astounded the crowd
14 Now when the apostles in Jerusalem heard that Samaria had accepted the word of God, they sent them Peter and John,
15 who went down and prayed for them, that they might receive the holy Spirit,
16 for it had not yet fallen upon any of them; they had only been baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus.
17 Then they laid hands on them and they received the holy Spirit.

Since Philip obviously had the authority pass on to him to do signs and wonders, why was he not able to pass this gift on to the new believers?

Ginger
 
Randy_Carson said:
You referenced the “call no man father” argument in these posts: 627, 635, 640 & 678.

Specifically, you wrote, “Show me the verse where someone, anyone, refers to one of the Apostles, anyone, as “father”.”

I provided numerous examples for you.
Click to expand...
Yes, I referenced someone else’s comment and discovered I agree with rinnie on this one point. From there you brought me into a debate.

I was all set to acknowledge you showed me something I hadn’t seen before and I was going to humbly thank you for doing so…

But then I went to verify your claim and discovered it wasn’t true. Just another mistranslation used by Catholics to promote your beliefs. 😦

Ginger
 
Ginger2 said:
Well, I see there is more than one that has been mistranslated,
Click to expand...
Oh. Okay. All these professional scholars and theologians are wrong in their translations of not one but several passages of scripture. How do we know this? Because your interpretation of scripture is different.
but it is you who has a "problem … with …misinterpretation of the Scriptures.

BEGOTTEN:
b) in a Jewish sense, of one who brings others over to his way of life, to convert someone
Click to expand...
Well, if that is your definition of “father” then there should be no problem with Catholics calling their religious leaders “father”.

Our usage of the term corresponds to the spiritual fatherhood that one would expect of those who lead others to conversion.

You have moved from condemning the Catholic position to advocating it.

Thanks for that.
 
Ginger2 said:
Again you’re wrong I answered to examples of three.
Click to expand...
But you failed to answer the fundamental question: Does doctrine matter in the Church or are conflicting and contradictory doctrines acceptable?
 
Randy_Carson said:
Well, if that is your definition of “father” then there should be no problem with Catholics calling their religious leaders “father”.
Click to expand...
I’ve already stated I have no problem calling priests “father”

What I have a problem with is misquoting Scriptures - whether intentionally or because you have a bad translation is irrelevant.
Randy_Carson said:
You have moved from condemning the Catholic position to advocating it.

Thanks for that.
Click to expand...
I haven’t “moved” I am right where I started.

But you’re welcome just the same.
 
Ginger2 said:
“and the foolish and uninstructed questions be avoiding, having known that they **beget **strife,” - 2Ti 2:23
Click to expand...
The Bible tells us that we must hold and teach correctly, Ginger.

Titus 1:9
He must hold firmly to the trustworthy message as it has been taught, so that he can encourage others by sound doctrine and refute those who oppose it.

Titus 2:1
You must teach what is in accord with sound doctrine.

Unfortunately, I do not find that you are teaching sound doctrine. Instead, another passage comes to mind:

[2 Timothy 4:3](http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=2 Timothy+4:3&version=NIV)
For the time will come when men will not put up with sound doctrine. Instead, to suit their own desires, they will gather around them a great number of teachers to say what their itching ears want to hear.
 
Ginger2 said:
Then I misspoke.

The Apostles could indeed pass on the gifts of the Holy Spirit. But those to whom they passed it on to could not pass it on. Thus, These specific gifts given to the Apostles ended with the Apostolic age.

Although all Christian still have spiritual gifts - just not the same as the Apostles.

**I don’t remember the verse right off, (maybe ACTS 8) but Philip could not pass on the gifts. **Peter and John had to come and lay hands on the people.

Still my previous post (quoting Scriptures on this topic) is good for understanding.

Ginger
Click to expand...
Thank you for being more precise. I think that is really important in discussion such as this.

Now, precisely which gifts were the disciples of the Apostles (not the Apostles themselves) unable to pass on?
 
Randy_Carson said:
But you failed to answer the fundamental question: Does doctrine matter in the Church or are conflicting and contradictory doctrines acceptable?
Click to expand...
How much more clear can I be? I showed you the “Baptize in the name of the Trinity” or just Jesus is not something worth fretting over since the Bible says both ways - and I provided the verse. Also Jesus is God! There are not 3 gods. There is One.

I also said speaking in tongues is not a requirement for salvation because the Bible doesn’t say it is.

Ginger
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top