That’s where I’d disagree. A Catholic can say, with confidence, that he’s following the Holy Spirit when he follows the teachings of the Church Christ founded and gave authority. Our rock isn’t an unauthorized person’s opinion of an interpretation of Scripture – it’s the teaching of an assembly that Christ founded and to which He gave authority to “bind and loose”!
Still not the original source – just the “first source they ran into”…!
I cant say that. Say the “authority”, the Church Jesus built on the man, He renamed Peter is the same church called the Catholic church. Its not the same… but it is one of God’s church that is on the path that leads us to God. It’s just not the same church, but maybe now that I understand how to use the CCC, God will help me understand why people believe this is the same Church.
We started talking about this before… we never finished it did we?
It’s not? Let’s look at that claim.
I can’t recall. Did we? I thought it ended with you saying “well, I don’t believe that”. No?
… depends if you are following apostles and their successors or Jesus Christ.
I don’t remember… I thought we had a discussion on binding and losing… maybe it was just in my head.
So, if we have one group who follows the successors of those to whom Christ gave authority, are they following Jesus?
Yes, as long as those with authority are following Jesus
Yes as long as they are following Jesus
Great! (That’s the Catholic Church, by the way.)Gorgias:
Yes, as long as those with authority are following Jesus
Great! By the way: Jesus set up a Church, and set up the leadership of the Church to teach and govern. If you leave that Church, disavow its teachings and set up your own governance… are you really following Jesus?
Probably. Here’s the definition, though: “a new and novel set of doctrines which were not part of the Church’s belief and Scriptural teachings, and never had been, up until the time that they were proposed by someone who did not have the authority to develop doctrinal teaching.”
Yes, if the reason you left was because the teaching, governs and doctrines began to go against Jesus’s teachings.
That is true, you can not pick and choose what you want when it comes to following Jesus. You either accept all of Him or be prepared for Him not to know you.
Fair enough. If the Church that Jesus founded actually “went against Jesus’ teachings”, wouldn’t that make Him a liar when He said that “the gates of hell will not prevail against” His Church?
I think I’d ask two questions: why do I think that the Church taught false doctrine for 1500 years? And, why do I think that I have the authority to make that judgment – did Christ give me that authority, and if not, why is it valid for me to do so?
What doctrine of the Catholic Church in the 1500s “went against God”?
Luther kept some Catholic doctrines and abandoned others. Did he not, then, “pick and choose”?
It didn’t God’s Church still stands. We attend it every day. Us, here teaching each other about God is proof His Church still stands. Whenever someone comes to God, drops to their knees, humbles themselves before the Father is proof His Church still stands. Every time someone repents, is baptized, opens the Bible, thanks God for anything that happened in their life, is proof His Church still stands. Anytime 2-3 are gathered for the praise and worship of God or does anything in God’s name is proof God’s Church still stands. The one Jesus Christ built on the man named Peter, because he knew Jesus, and knew He was the way to The Father.
We are still talking about doctrine not gospel? What does St Augustine say about doctrine?
And yet, Luther thought he had to leave it. And make up a whole brand-new theology that hadn’t been seen previously. Why was that? (Mind you – not the stuff about indulgences – I’m talking about his novel theology!)
Two thoughts (and I suspect you’ll disagree with them):
OK, then: where in the Bible does Jesus say that the Holy Spirit gives you the authority to interpret doctrine? Doesn’t it say precisely the opposite (“Scripture is not a matter of private interpretation”)?
Ahh, but the Pope has the authority – given by Jesus to Peter, and handed down ever since. You and I don’t have that authority! And it’s not in Scripture that we do, is it?
Well, I’d say “Luther couldn’t pick and choose gospel”… but he kinda did. He ignored large swathes of the NT, and cherry picked the ones he liked.
He’s talking about the teaching of Christ. You don’t get to pick and choose, ‘cause then, you’re just reflecting your preferences and not following Jesus’ commands.
The Church does not teach that the catechism, per se, is the inerrant word of God in the same way that she speaks of Scripture. And yet Scripture, itself, is often vague, sometimes even seemingly contradictory as to certain meanings; interpretations can vary widely. So the teaching authority of the Church, when it comes to interpreting and understanding either Scripture or Tradition, is superior to any other claimed authority. This is one of her primary roles; God established the Church to receive, preserve, and proclaim the true gospel. And the catechism is one of the main expressions of that authority, of that voice.
He didn’t leave the Church that Jesus gave to Peter, he left the leader of the Catholic church who was misrepresenting God’s truth and knew it had to be corrected. You’d have to give me something more specific, so I can research it, to understand what you’re asking. Theology is a study of God right… Lutheran is different from the Catholic, but still on the foundation of Jesus Christ, our Lord and Savior.
Not necessarily…
I didnt, I said the Holy Spirit will guide you to God’s truth, will guide you to do God’s will. If you see someone or hear someone misrepresenting God’s truth the Holy Spirit will guide you to know what should be done. The fact that the Holy Spirit is with in you is what gives you the authority to say Jesus is the way to Salvation, Jesus is your Lord and Savior, Jesus is the way to the Father and who so ever believes in Him shall have ever lasting life… for example. Anyone who says any different should be corrected.
There’s a thread about this…
other then the 7 books in the OT… you have to be more specific so I can research it… maybe you’ll tell me something that will help me understand one church over the other.
What are you talking about???
It’s not like he took a pass on the pope but stayed within the Church, now, right? He left the whole organization and started his own.
Sure. He made the claims that
Sure – but just because you call something “theology”, it doesn’t mean it’s correct.
Great. What doctrine, then, did Catholics teach untruthfully?
… but what if what you say is inaccurate?
Sure. Let’s start with another one, if you’ve gotten through the other two, above: Luther claimed that the Bible alone was the central authority. Where in the Bible does it say this? Moreover, if the Church had taught apostolic authority in teaching (and used the Bible as one of the tools for liturgy and teaching), then how does Luther get away with changing that teaching, 1500 years into the history of the Church?
He wanted to remove Hebrews, James, Jude, and Revelation essentially because they contradicted his new theology.
Wanted too, but didn’t… man wants to do many things, God’s will is always stronger.
it might take me a bit. Remember I misunderstood what doctrine means.For example, Luther did not consider the book of James inspired but the reality is that it went against his doctrine of faith alone saves. James specifically states we are not saved by faith alone.Wanted too, but didn’t… man wants to do many things, God’s will is always stronger.
@Gorgias still researching and