C
ckempston
Guest
Well, the church doesn’t hold that position, does it? So, I guess Augustine was wrong.
Protestants: How Do You Know That Your Interpretation of the Bible is the Right one? Part II
- Status
C
ckempston
Guest
Really? Is it your understanding that the Catholic Church is the true church?
C
CHESTERTONRULES
Guest
Absolutely, but Divine Providence.Really? Is it your understanding that the Catholic Church is the true church?
I don’t lean on my own understanding, I submit to the Church founded by Christ.
C
CHESTERTONRULES
Guest
The Church does hold that position.
FYI:
816 "The sole Church of Christ [is that] which our Savior, after his Resurrection, entrusted to Peter’s pastoral care, commissioning him and the other apostles to extend and rule it. . . . This Church, constituted and organized as a society in the present world, subsists in (subsistit in) the Catholic Church, which is governed by the successor of Peter and by the bishops in communion with him."267
The Second Vatican Council’s Decree on Ecumenism explains: "For it is through Christ’s Catholic Church alone, which is the universal help toward salvation, that the fullness of the means of salvation can be obtained. It was to the apostolic college alone, of which Peter is the head, that we believe that our Lord entrusted all the blessings of the New Covenant, in order to establish on earth the one Body of Christ into which all those should be fully incorporated who belong in any way to the People of God."268
M
MrS
Guest
Perhaps on some level of understanding.SDcatholic: I guess I chose 2 Samuel 14:14, because I wanted to see iff anyone else saw it as a reference to Jesus;“But God does not just sweep life away; instead He devises ways to bring us back when we have been separated from Him.” Is my interpretation correct?
But after the first scene (verses 1-7) Amnon has been eliminated. Absalom is the rightful heir, but his ambition/crimes mean that he does not deserve it, because according to the law, every violent death requires the death of the guilty party. Only David, as king, can show mercy for sufficient reason. Absalom is pardoned. The parable of Tekoa is reminiscent of what Nathan told David when he acknowledged his crime and implored the forgiveness of the Lord. Now David must forgive his son. Then he listened to, now he must hear the prayer of the mother.
The second scene (v 8-24) centers on the diologue between wise Tekoa and king David. She describes Absalom as “my son” the “banished one” and the king as the “angel of God”. Ignoring Joab’s trick, the king agrees.
The Church knows that Tekoa pre-figures Mary, who, after the loss (death and resurrection) of Jesus, her first-born, intercedes for all mankind, who are also children of hers.
.
C
ckempston
Guest
Actually, I misspoke. I retract that statement and agree that what you said is indeed what Augustine was saying.
C
ckempston
Guest
That’s somewhat circular. Catholics make a decision to submit themselves to the church, and therefore, are leaning on their own understanding.Absolutely, but Divine Providence.
I don’t lean on my own understanding, I submit to the Church founded by Christ.
M
MrS
Guest
It is called Faith. And he who hears you(the Church) hears me. He who rejects you, rejects Me and the One Who sent Me.
In light of the huge number of disagreeing faith communities, you can’t possibly think Jesus meant he who hears any Christian, can you?
Unfortunately, many do not learn from the errors of the Reformers… and those who do not learn from history are bound to repeat it… a new faith community almost daily springs up somewhere…
.
S
SD_Catholic
Guest
Yep that’s exactly what I said
(you love the eyeroll)… Do you understand the doctrine? Obviously you have a problem with authority… you’ve expressed it continually and you get uptight any time someone talks about it.You once told me to lighten up… why don’t you take your own advice. Re-read my post… I said, “I hate to hear people drive nails into Jesus, especially during Easter”… You implied that I’m saying it’s worse during Easter… That’s you putting words in that didn’t exist… The season highlights the sin, and can make us more aware of it… That’s it, that’s the point… GET IT!!!
SD
J
JRKH
Guest
Not really - No matter how you slice it, there is no sense to the argument that any group is going to compile a core document that does not reflect their beliefs.
As to the language issue. The Scriptures that were chosen were all in Greek which was the most common “international” language of the time and then copied into Latin, which was the more common language in the Roman Empire.
While it is true that most people were probably functionally illiterate, there certainly would have been enough people able to read the Scriptures in either Greek of Latin to provide a check.
The Jews were indeed thickheaded - Just as Christians are. However, the Jews, as God’s Chosen People were never Apostate. God made a covenent with the Jews and He kept it. He chastized the Jews severely at times, but He kept his covenent even to the sending of the Messiah to them.
Christ made a covenent with His Church and He has Kept it. he has chastized His Church and His people, but He has also preserved Her through external persecution, internal corruption. The Church stands today only because Christ Protects Her.
You may have a valid point here, I don’t know. I do know that the Church relies on the time honored combination of Scripture, Sacred Tradition and the Teaching office of the Magisterium to determine and verify dogmatic teachings. The exact Balance between written Scripture and Tradition would have to be looked at on a doctrine by doctrine basis.
Ground and Pillar, but not Sole Authority. Especially when that “Ground and Pillar” clearly gives authority to “The Church” and not to “Scripture”.
Peace
James
J
JRKH
Guest
Any time we get into such a discussion there has to be an understanding of the unwritten caveat of “To the best of my knowledge”. This appies in this case as well.
When someone Chooses to join the Catholic Church, they certainly CAN be said to be relying on their own understanding at that time. - OR - They can be considered as having been enlightened by God with the wisdom to come home to the Church. Which would be, not their understanding but God’s action in them.
Non-catholics on the other hand, have a similar issue only multiplied. When you read and try to understand the Bible, how do you discern if you are leaning on your own understanding each time or are being given understanding by the Holy Spirit?
The Catholic, by prayerfully submitting his will to Christ Through the Church, enjoys the advantage of having the sum total of nearly 2000 years of Scholarly thought and magisterial teaching to go on. Each non-catholic must, “reinvent the wheel” for himself.
I didn’t explain that very well - so please don’t hold my feet to the fire on it.
I guess what I am trying to say is that, as far as a faith decision goes it is hard to call it ciercular reasoning or the action of God.
Peace
James
J
JRKH
Guest
No you could not be a true catholic and deny the doctrine of Papal Infallibility. If you, as a catholic, have issues with it then you would need to do one of two things. 1) Simply accept the doctrine as a article of faith without any deep understanding, or 2) Investigate the particulars of the issue to find the whats whens whys and hows of the doctrine.
One of the things I have Dicovered since being back to the Church is how much sense things make that I use to think didn’t. Not because I came back and all of a sudden I just accept things, (I still carry a lot of skepicism around) but because in learning about them I see the logic. It doesn’t mean I have had all my questions answered on every issue, but I have had my faith strengthened rather than weakened by this study.
For instance, in regards infallibility, when I discovered 1) how narrowly it is defined, 2) how seldom it is ever invoked, 3) how closely the Pope works with the magisterium, and indeed ALL the Bishops, and 4) how long and prayerfully the issues are studied before any pronouncement is made, my concerns about the doctrine faded away.
There are other doctrines that I still struggle with, but accept because tehy are Church doctrines and I know they were not promulgated lightly or without due dilligence.
Peace
James
S
SteveGC
Guest
I wouldn’t classify anyone (Catholic or non-Catholic) who is sincerely and genuinely trying to seek God the best they know how as “leaning on their own understanding”. I think that vice is reserved for those who try to figure everything out about their world and environment without acknowledging God as being their Creator and ultimate source of Truth.
I do, however, think non-Catholic’s lean on their own interpretation of Scripture at times, or at best, they lean on the interpretation of other men and women who themselves lean on their own interpretation. Or, somewhere down the lineage of the humans that they learn from are self-interpreting Sacred Scripture. However you slice it, non-Catholics of today are ‘victims’ (so to speak) of unprotected human interpretation, whether it’s traced back to Luther himself, or one of the many offshoots who jumped on his bandwagon through the following centuries. Luther opened the flood gates that gave many the ‘green light’ to make whatever they wanted out of Scripture, abandoning The True Church in the process.
All Catholics lean one way…on The Church, which is virtually the same as saying they lean on Christ. It is not circular to say so. A circular argument is one where proof is attempted to be shown about something, by relying only on that same something to prove it. Non-Catholics try to do this with the Bible. They have no necessary outside party to declare something to actually be what they claim it is.
God Bless
I do, however, think non-Catholic’s lean on their own interpretation of Scripture at times, or at best, they lean on the interpretation of other men and women who themselves lean on their own interpretation. Or, somewhere down the lineage of the humans that they learn from are self-interpreting Sacred Scripture. However you slice it, non-Catholics of today are ‘victims’ (so to speak) of unprotected human interpretation, whether it’s traced back to Luther himself, or one of the many offshoots who jumped on his bandwagon through the following centuries. Luther opened the flood gates that gave many the ‘green light’ to make whatever they wanted out of Scripture, abandoning The True Church in the process.
All Catholics lean one way…on The Church, which is virtually the same as saying they lean on Christ. It is not circular to say so. A circular argument is one where proof is attempted to be shown about something, by relying only on that same something to prove it. Non-Catholics try to do this with the Bible. They have no necessary outside party to declare something to actually be what they claim it is.
God Bless
1
1beleevr
Guest
Wow, MrS: what a bargain; I asked if one verse was a reference to Jesus, and I get the whole(dang near) chapter explained We know that evidence of Jesus, was all through the Bible, from Genesis to Revelation("Let US make man in our own image) In the beginning was the WORD, and the Word was with God, and the WORD was God! Exodus 12, was the story of salvation! Was this woman in 2 Samuel 14, from Tekoa, or named Tekoa? And please give me scripture to show that she pre-figures Mary, because it sounds kind of like gobbledy-gook to me
We know that evidence of Jesus, was all through the Bible, from Genesis to Revelation("Let US make man in our own image) In the beginning was the WORD, and the Word was with God, and the WORD was God! Exodus 12, was the story of salvation! Was this woman in 2 Samuel 14, from Tekoa, or named Tekoa? And please give me scripture to show that she pre-figures Mary, because it sounds kind of like gobbledy-gook to me
M
MrS
Guest
Re: gobbledy-gookWow, MrS: what a bargain; I asked if one verse was a reference to Jesus, and I get the whole(dang near) chapter explained
I wondered how that was spelled.
Anyway, I did not settle on just the verse you offered for one big reason. Picking one verse out of the context of the surrounding verses and chapter often leads to a variety of interpretations. Thus I researched what I could find about the “rest of the story” for you. I apologize if you took offense.
Next, you ask if she was or if she was from. I now wonder if you read the whole story.
Next, you ask me to " give me scripture to show…". That implies that only Scripture is the basis for your acceptance. Yet a proper use of Scripture would also include “give me a scripture that denies…” That is what causes the chaos protestantism “enjoys” without proper and Christ-given authority.
To one who wants to deny and reject so much, no evidence is sufficient (even if it is plain to see)
To one who believes in the Authority of the Church founded by Christ Himself, no evidence is necessary (but it is all there regardless).
There is much in the OT that prefigures those in the NT. That is another reason why the Catholic Church has always taught that the NT fulfills the OT.
When the evidence becomes overwhelming, the usual result is that one crosses the Tiber.
.
C
ckempston
Guest
Special pleading. So, when a Catholic makes a personal decision it’s “enlightenment” but when a Protestant does it it’s self-reliance.
I didn’t explain that very well - so please don’t hold my feet to the fire on it.
I guess what I am trying to say is that, as far as a faith decision goes it is hard to call it ciercular reasoning or the action of God.
Well, this is all well and good, but let’s look at the original scripture mentioned, because it was misused and taken out of context to begin with. I just went along with it to make the point that Catholics have the same problem as Protestants. Proverbs 3 is about personal devotion (i.e. reading and meditating on God’s commands - personally).
Proverbs 3:5-6 Trust in the LORD with all your heart and lean not on your own understanding; in all your ways acknowledge him, and he will make your paths straight.
This is not suggesting that you surrender your intellect to someone else, but that you acknowledge God by following his commands (per verses 1-4). As in many cases, the Catholic interpretation simply doesn’t jive with the rest of the chapter. First Solomon tells “his son” to remember the teaching, keep the commands, meditate on them, etc., and then he tells him not to do these things based on the Catholic interpretation of vs 6?
C
ckempston
Guest
You know, you bring up some good points, but I think it must be pointed out that the vast majority of the Bible requires no interpretation. “Give to the poor.” “Don’t be sexually immoral.” Not a whole lot of interpretation required there.
S
SteveGC
Guest
I don’t agree it’s the ‘vast majority’, but I do agree that some of Scripture provides some salvific and moral guidance for someone reading it on their own, under no authority. But here’s a couple things to think about…
- Scripture is not, as you know, a book written by one person over the course of a few years, or even their own lifetime. It was written over the course of hundreds of years by several persons, all under the guidance of the Spirit. But at the same time, it collectively tells a unified story of salvation, and this entire story is actually what is most important to Christians. So, it is not enough to be satisfied with the fact that some verses or paragraphs are relatively clear and can be universally interpreted correctly. The entire, contextual story must be properly discerned in order to ensure the fullness of God’s message is revealed. And this takes an outside, Christ-appointed authority on earth to help us with.
- A verse like “baptism now saves you”, would appear to be a commonly interpreted message. But it isn’t. So, even things which “seem” obvious, are not to everyone. This is because people, whether they admit it or not, come to the pages of Scripture under the influence of persuasive erroneous teaching…and it often proves far too difficult to properly cleanse your mind of this influence when you attempt to interpret ‘clear’ messages from the Bible.
- The Bible was never meant to be used for this purpose to begin with. It was not to be a do-it-yourself manual of Christianity. It’s not to be used outside of the authority vested in Christ to safeguard and interpret the faith and moral truths revealed within it.
C
CHESTERTONRULES
Guest
M
MrS
Guest
ckempston;5056244:
; he who rejects you rejects me; but he who rejects me rejects him who sent me."
Matthew 18
17If he refuses to listen to them, tell it to the church; and if he refuses to listen even to the church, treat him as you would a pagan or a tax collector.
1 Timothy 3
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.
So clear…
Sad that our separated brethren need to re-invent the wheel… day after day after day
.
- Status