Scripture and Mary

[jcrichton]

Anthony022071
jrichton

I want to answer the question raised about the different gospels but this is not the subject of this thread. Therefore I will begin a new thread entitled, “different gospels” in order to elaborate on what I said about Paul’s gospel. But I will not attempt to comment on what the early church fathers thought. One cannot imagine them believeing anything that places Peter in a bad light compared to Paul. I will only consult the Scriptures.

The other questions asked of me here can probably be answered on this thread.

Hi, Old Scolar!

For a person that professes to read and obey the Holy Scriptures you sure dance around them!

Did you not read about the division in the early Church? (1 Co 1:10-31)

Did Paul admonish or promote divisiveness? (1 Co 12:4 thru 14:33—especially verse 14:33)

Did Paul claim to be better than Cephas or any of the Eleven? (1 Co 15:1-11)

Did Paul not have errors in his human capacity? (Acts 13:13; 15:36-40)

Again I ask you to stop being so faithful to your denominational “church” and allow the Holy Spirit to enlighten you… ridiculing or demeaning an Apostle of Christ can only serve to demean and ridicule Christ Himself!:

Love can cause no harm to your neighbour, and so love is the fulfilment of the Law. (Romans 13:10)

…so let us throw off everything that belongs to the darkness and equip ourselves for the light. Let us live decently, as in the light of day; with no orgies or drunkenness, no promiscuity or licentiousness, and no wrangling or jealousy. Let your armour be the Lord Jesus Christ, and stop worrying about how your disordered natural inclinations might be fulfilled. (Romans 13:12-14)

Brothers, do not slander one another. Anyone who slanders a brother, or condemns one, is speaking against the Law and condemning the Law. But if you condemn the Law, you have ceased to be subject to it and become a judge over it.
There is only one law giver and he is the only judge and has the power to judge or to destroy. Who are you to give a verdict on your neighbour? (St. James 3:11-12)

Whoever claims to be in light
but hates his brother
is still in darkness.
Anyone who loves his brother
remains in light
and there is in him
nothing to make him fall away.
But whoever hates his brother
is in darkness
and is walking about in darkness
not knowing where he is going,
because darkness has blinded him. (1 St. John 2:9-11)

Please live up to the title you’ve given yourself… be Christ’s scholar!

Maran atha!

Angel

 

[jcrichton]

jrichton

We are told that a man of God will have no problem understanding the Word of God. See:

2 Tim 3:16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: 17) That the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works.

Those who do not believe in Jesus have very little understanding but those who have the spirit shall be given the ability to understand and have more abundance:

**For whosoever hath, to him shall be given, and he shall have more abundance: but whosoever have not, from him shall be taken away even that he hath. (Matthew 13:12) **

The holy Spirit will guide you through the Scriptures as through life if you have Him in your heart. This is the promise of God.
The Scripture of Peter you gave says that the unlearned and unstable wrest with the Scriptures to their own destruction.
Sorry if you have problems with that but you should not. Just read the Scriptures asking God for guidance and you will understand. There is no mystery that has not been disclosed.

Hi, Old Scholar!

I truly do not understand how you can come up with such interpretation… let us open this passage just a little:

You must keep to what you have been taught and know to be true; remember who your teachers were, and how ever since you were a child, you have known the holy scriptures—from these you can learn the wisdom that leads to salvation through faith in Christ Jesus. All scripture is inspired by God and useful for refuting error, for guiding people’s lives and teaching them to be upright. This is how someone who is dedicated to God becomes fully equipped and ready for any good work. (2 Tim 3:14-17)

Not once are we taught to depend upon human understanding! This passage is marked with long-lived involvement with the Holy Scriptures… it tells us that we must study them as a matter of life; that through the revelation of God they exist in order to benefit us and those who through our efforts are brought to Christ!

Compare 1 Co 2:1-16.

Though on your second passage you seem to expand on your original thought (easy as pie); you must realize that simply saying “I have the Holy Spirit’s guidance…” does not make it so. Just look at how divided Christendom is!

The Holy Spirit will never lead us to go against the Church. The Holy Spirit will never guide us into thinking that there are minor and mayor levels of the Holy Gospel. The Holy Spirit will never lead us to muck or debase one another!

Peter’s statement is that there are passages that are difficult to understand—not that there are difficult people who cannot understand them! He expands his thought by stating that those who are not humble to God will attempt to distort their meaning!

Too often we find this to be true even amongst those who claim to be Christians as they seek to validate their own personal interpretations of God’s Word.

I work not from my own understanding from the Holy Scriptures Teachings: humble yourself to God and He will lift you up! (St. James 4:10)

Maran atha!

Angel

 

[Old_Scholar]

***Again… are you simply skimming through?

You cite a passage of the Holy Scriptures that totally contradicts your statement:***

---

Paul is not saying that he went to Arabia to get schooled or instructed further. He went to do what was commanded of him; to preach Jesus Christ! He was clarifying that this wisdom came not from man but from God, Jesus Christ, our Lord and Savior!***

I’m not entirely sure what you are talkikng about here but I will try and answer you. Read this:

Acts 9:17 And Ananias went his way and entered the house; and laying his hands on him he said, “Brother Saul, the Lord Jesus, who appeared to you on the road as you came, has sent me that you may receive your sight and be filled with the Holy Spirit.”
18) Immediately there fell from his eyes something like scales, and he received his sight at once; and he arose and was baptized.
19) So when he had received food, he was strengthened. Then Saul spent some days with the disciples at Damascus.
20) Immediately he preached the Christ in the synagogues, that He is the Son of God.
21) Then all who heard were amazed, and said, “Is this not he who destroyed those who called on this name in Jerusalem, and has come here for that purpose, so that he might bring them bound to the chief priests?”
22) But Saul increased all the more in strength, and confounded the Jews who dwelt in Damascus, proving that this Jesus is the Christ.

Isn’t this saying that Paul visited with the disciples for some time, started preaching right away and increased all the more in strength? What do you think that means?

---

You are now entering the “better than yours” faith phase… I cannot respond to that. …as for a different Gospel? Are you sure you are getting that from the Holy Scriptures? Here’s what Paul had to say:***

Paul speaks of “his” Gospel and the only Gospel he would know would be the one Christ gave him. He did not say there were several. Christ gave him the Gospel of Grace and that had not happened before. The apostles until then had preached a Gospel of death for our sins, repentance and baptism. Not Grace. Or perhaps you could furnish Scriptures saying different. But be sure and list something that was written before Paul started preaching.

---

Conversely, Peter did not think that there were several Gospels nor that his was different or lesser or better than Paul:***

I agree that Peter did not believe in several Gospels but after he learned of Paul’s conversion and his being taught by Christ Himself, he started preaching Grace. Did he not?

---

There is One God, One Lord, One Spirit, one Gospel! (Ephesians 2:15-22)

Said Paul!

I’m sorry, I am not familiar with the “better than yours faith”???

Maran atha!

Angel***

 

[Old_Scholar]

---

Hi, Old Scholar!

Please, either read (not skim or selective reading) the Holy Scriptures or do not make contradicting statements using the Holy Scriptures as your basis:

You may deny it all you want but the Holy Scriptures tells us different. Paul unequivocably asserts that it is the Chruch that has the function to reveal God’s Plan to all!

Maran atha!

Angel

---

And the church is the body of believers and not an institution with power to change Scripture. Paul says often that it is the Scriptures that the church will teach.

 

[Old_Scholar]

Old Scholar,

If I am not mistaken, Jesus promise of the Holy Spirit was never to persons as individuals but to the Apostles as representatives and in context of their ministry within and for the Church.

The spiritual gifts Paul writes about is never given to and individual outside the context of ministry of the Church. 1 John 4 gives us the guide to test the spirits to see if they belong to God.
1 John 4 tells us not every spirit that comes to us comes from God and we should test all spirits, that proof that a spirit is from God is the acknowledgement “that Jesus Christ come in the flesh” (vs 3) and acknowledge that Jesus comes from God.

You may think, however, that this bolsters the concept of individual interpertation but I would disagree. In his letters to the Corinthians (1 Cor 12) that the Church is the Body of Christ and that within this Body are different ministries and charisms. But they are exercised within the Church and for the Church, not by individuals acting outside the ministry of the Church. It was to the Apostles (and later through the Apostles their sucessors the Bishops) who received the commission to preach the good news and make disciples of all nations. It was to the Apostles, not individuals, that Christ promised the Holy Spirit to guide them.

You wrote giving references to Paul’s letter to Timothy but you reference fails to take into account that in this Letter Paul is instructing Timothy not because Timothy was a good christian but what Paul wrote to him in context of Timothy role as Bishop. The use of scriptures here is for Timothy’s use in his ministry.
Mt 12:13 Jesus is teaching his Disciples that it was the failure of the religious leaders - in their role of spiritual leadership - that forced him to speak in parables because they (religious leaders) “who has not” (proper understanding of the truth of the Law and Prophets (LK 24: 25 -27) and what little they did have (true knowledge of the scriptures and Law) would be taken away.
The two passages you cited must be seen in the context of charisms received in the exercised of the mandate the Apostles and their sucessors received from Christ.

The Holy Spirit was pronmised to all, not just the apostles. In fact on the day of Pentecost, there were over 70 disciples in the upper room and 3,000 were baptized and saved. Christ did not promise the Holy Ghost just to the church or just to the apostles.

 

[Old_Scholar]

anthony022071:
Anthony 022071

If the church fathers knew things were not written down, would you be so kind as to list for me the writings of the early church fathers who thought this? For example, the ones from the first and second centuries. I know they would have had lots to write about it if it were true. I maintain it is all false.

**Give me quotes from Polycarp, Ignatius, Barnabas, Clement, Papias, Justin martyr and Irenæus that say tradition can be different from Scripture. ** They all lived in the first two centuries. I don’t care what someone says hundreds of years later, because by then the heretics had taken over the church.

It is you who are incorrect about the words for cousin and brother. There is too much Scripture saying Christ had brothers and sisters for them to be cousins. What about James, the Lord’s brother? You are following the wrong trail.

If you don’t believe Paul had a different Gospel then you don’t believe Scripture. I would find that hard to believe. It was Paul who said and wrote about “his” gospel and Christ gave it to him directly through Ananias and during the next many days. Paul eventually took the Gospel to Peter and James and John in Jerusalem after he had been preaching it for three years and word had gotten to Jerusalem about Paul. Don’t you think it a little strange that Peter and James had no trouble believing Paul?

Unfortunately you are quoting writers from the fifth century, over 400 years after Christ. By then the heretics had control of the church and it was being split up rapidly. Those writers you quoted were even after the Emperor Constantine had called the council of Nicæa in order to try and get rid of the heretics. Instead, not too long after the council, Constantine embraced Arianus and his beliefs.

This is your quote:

**“If you produce from the divine scriptures something that we all share, we shall have to listen. But those words which are not found in the scriptures are under no circumstance accepted by us, especially since the Lord warns us, saying, In vain they worship me, teaching human commandments and precepts’ **(Mt 5:19)” Maximinus (Arch-Arian Heretic), Debate with Maximinus, 1 (c. A.D. 428).

I am a little surprised seeing you list that because it says that those traditions which cannot be found in Scripture will under no circumstances be accepted, since the Lord warns us, saying, In vain they worship me, teaching human commandments and precepts. (Matt 5:19)

That Scripture throws your traditions out the window, doesn’t it. It says those who want to ignore Scripture are heretics.

 

[Old_Scholar]

At least you can see that the early fathers had the sense to recognize that the two were equal in authority as Apostles and that their gospels were identical. Of course they would not believe anything that place Peter in a bad light compared to Paul, or the other way around, either! They were all in union with one another, one in doctrine, one in faith.

It is nice to see you say that Paul and Peter wer equal in authority. So many want to place Peter in a different position than the Scriptures place him.

Of course the early writers thought their gospels were identical. Peter and Paul preached the same gospel after Peter learned of Christ’s revelation to Paul. Paul’s gospel only added to what Peter had learned from Christ Himself.

 

[Old_Scholar]

This passage does not say what you assert that it does. Men of God do have trouble understanding the Word of God. Nicodemus was a righteous God - Seeker, but did not understand what Jesus was telling him about being born again.

But even Nicodemus, though righteous, was a Pharisee who understood what Christ had tole him once it was explained to him. At least we are not told he still did not understand. He certainly understood who Christ was.

The Eunuch was a God-seeker, and he did not understand the Word until Phillip explained it to him.

Again, once it was explained, he understood it.

After reading your other posts, I think you will say that Peter is not a real man of God, did not understand Jesus’ message, and was a deficient Christian, and that is why he found Paul’s letters hard to understand.

**I never said or even thought Peter was not a real man of God. Peter was the first disciple chosen and although he was an ignorant man, I do not believe his faith should be questioned. Although he was the one who kept denying Jesus and abandoned Him when the going got rough. **

Are you purporting that unlearned and unstable babes in Christ are incapable of misunderstanding the scriptures?

Not sure what this one is all about!

On another thread, I am in dialogue with a man who believes that baptism has nothing to do with water…

Just make sure the other man is not speaking of baptism by the Holy Spirit and is talking of water baptism. I believe there are three kinds of baptism mentioned in Scripture. There is baptism by water, by fire and by the Holy Spirit.

If he is saying there is no baptism by water—good luck!

 

[Old_Scholar]

Hi, Old Scolar!

For a person that professes to read and obey the Holy Scriptures you sure dance around them!

I hope you will be able to show me where I “dance around the Scriptures.”

Did you not read about the division in the early Church? (1 Co 1:10-31)

In 1 Cor 10:31, Paul is speaking of contentions he has heard of in the church and goes to great length in order to dispel them and teach that there is one church, the Church of Christ.

Did Paul admonish or promote divisiveness? (1 Co 12:4 thru 14:33—especially verse 14:33)

In 1 Cor 12:4 thru 14:33, Paul is doing his best to admonish divisiveness.

Did Paul claim to be better than Cephas or any of the Eleven? (1 Co 15:1-11)

In 1 Cor 15:1-11, Paul is being very humble and tells the truth of what he believes. I don’t believe you will find anywhere where he claims to be greater than the other apostles.

Did Paul not have errors in his human capacity? (Acts 13:13; 15:36-40)

I don’t understand what you mean by errors in Paul’s human capacity with the Scriptures you listed. Is it because he disagreed with Barnabas? Could Paul not be upset because John had deserted them prior? Paul never claimed to be perfect. Even Christ got upset. Maybe you can explain a little further…

Again I ask you to stop being so faithful to your denominational “church” and allow the Holy Spirit to enlighten you… ridiculing or demeaning an Apostle of Christ can only serve to demean and ridicule Christ Himself!:

Would you be so kind as to show me where I have ridiculed an apostle of Christ? I have not done so and I believe I am filled with the Holy Spirit as Christ promised me. That is why the truth seems to be so clear in Scripture to me. I am not the one who takes one passage of Scripture that is ambiguous at best and builds an entire religion on it.

Love can cause no harm to your neighbour, and so love is the fulfilment of the Law. (Romans 13:10)

…so let us throw off everything that belongs to the darkness and equip ourselves for the light. Let us live decently, as in the light of day; with no orgies or drunkenness, no promiscuity or licentiousness, and no wrangling or jealousy. Let your armour be the Lord Jesus Christ, and stop worrying about how your disordered natural inclinations might be fulfilled. (Romans 13:12-14)

Brothers, do not slander one another. Anyone who slanders a brother, or condemns one, is speaking against the Law and condemning the Law. But if you condemn the Law, you have ceased to be subject to it and become a judge over it.
There is only one law giver and he is the only judge and has the power to judge or to destroy. Who are you to give a verdict on your neighbour? (St. James 3:11-12)

Whoever claims to be in light
but hates his brother
is still in darkness.
Anyone who loves his brother
remains in light
and there is in him
nothing to make him fall away.
But whoever hates his brother
is in darkness
and is walking about in darkness
not knowing where he is going,
because darkness has blinded him. (1 St. John 2:9-11)

Please live up to the title you’ve given yourself… be Christ’s scholar!

I believe I am living up to the promise of Christ. It is not I who tends to stretch the Scriptures and believe what has been added to them, nor do I believe the false claims of man who has added to and subtracted from the Scriptures. I also believe in tradition but when tradition contradicts Scripture, then it is false and I will not believe it. I can’t imagine why anyone would.

Maran atha!

Angel

 

[Old_Scholar]

Hi, Old Scholar!

I truly do not understand how you can come up with such interpretation… let us open this passage just a little:

You must keep to what you have been taught and know to be true; remember who your teachers were, and how ever since you were a child, you have known the holy scriptures—from these you can learn the wisdom that leads to salvation through faith in Christ Jesus. All scripture is inspired by God and useful for refuting error, for guiding people’s lives and teaching them to be upright. This is how someone who is dedicated to God becomes fully equipped and ready for any good work. (2 Tim 3:14-17)

Not once are we taught to depend upon human understanding! This passage is marked with long-lived involvement with the Holy Scriptures… it tells us that we must study them as a matter of life; that through the revelation of God they exist in order to benefit us and those who through our efforts are brought to Christ!

I certainly agree that the Scriptures never once tells us that we should depend upon human understanding. That is why I maintain that the “tradition” the RCC places so much faith in is erroneous and places too much emphasis on human understanding. Are we to believe those who were not inspired or even claim to have been eyewitnesses? Shouldn’t we believe those who were inspired and were eyewitnesses rather than someone who has interpreted, erroneously, what they said and wrote some hundreds of years later?

If we are to believe any human beings other than the writers of the New Testament (and of course the Old Testament), then surely we should believe the very early writers such as Polycarp, who was a companion of an apostle, Ignatius, who was a companion of Polycarp and Clement, as well as Justin Martyr, Papias and Barnabas. We could believe them because they were there during the right time and were not confounding what was said hundreds of years later and not elaborating on what was not said. Irenæus was only 100 years after Paul and Peter died and he spent a great deal of time trying to get the heretics out of the church. Who were the heretics then? They were those who wanted to add to or subtract from the Scriptures and those who were advocating false doctrines, such as the RCC has today. Those are the ones we should read and believe, not those heretics that wrote much later.

Compare 1 Co 2:1-16.

Though on your second passage you seem to expand on your original thought (easy as pie); you must realize that simply saying “I have the Holy Spirit’s guidance…” does not make it so. Just look at how divided Christendom is!

If you are a Christian and if you will pray before you study the Bible and ask God to send the Holy Spirit to guide you in your studies, then you can’t do any more than that. It is when you listen to others who may not have the Holy Spirit that gets you in trouble. Are you aware that some RCC bishops don’t even own a Bible?

The Holy Spirit will never lead us to go against the Church. The Holy Spirit will never guide us into thinking that there are minor and mayor levels of the Holy Gospel. The Holy Spirit will never lead us to muck or debase one another!

The Holy Spirit will never lead us to go against the Scriptures. The Church of Christ will never go against the Scriptures. If the Scriptures are distorted, added to or subtracted from then that church is not a Church of Christ.

Peter’s statement is that there are passages that are difficult to understand—not that there are difficult people who cannot understand them! He expands his thought by stating that those who are not humble to God will attempt to distort their meaning!

Peter is correct but realize that Peter was not an educated man. He was ignorant and some things came much harder for him than for others. In comparison, Paul was a extremely well educated man and it is possible that some of the mysteries were easier to understand for him. However Peter never had any problem with what Paul taught. He taught the same thing after he heard Paul tell of the gospel Christ gave him.

Too often we find this to be true even amongst those who claim to be Christians as they seek to validate their own personal interpretations of God’s Word.

I subscribe to "Quod non est biblicum non est theologicum"
What is not Biblical is not theological. My method of hermeneutics and my stage of truth takes the following into account: Experience, emotions, general revelation, tradition, reason and then Scripture. Scripture trumps everything else. If it goes against Scripture, then it is wrong.

I work not from my own understanding from the Holy Scriptures Teachings: humble yourself to God and He will lift you up! (St. James 4:10)

Maran atha!

Angel

MGB

 

[Old_Scholar]

I’m not trying to monopolize this thread. It is just that so many had asked me questions, it took a great deal of space to answer them all. I hope I didn’t leave any out…

 

[jcrichton]

Originally Posted by jcrichton
Again… are you simply skimming through?
You cite a passage of the Holy Scriptures that totally contradicts your statement:

Paul is not saying that he went to Arabia to get schooled…

I’m not entirely sure what you are talkikng about here but I will try and answer you. Read this:

Acts 9:17 And Ananias went his way and entered the house; and laying his hands on him he said, “Brother Saul, the Lord Jesus, who appeared to you on the road as you came, has sent me that you may receive your sight and be filled with the Holy Spirit.”
18) Immediately there fell from his eyes something like scales, and he received his sight at once; and he arose and was baptized.
19) So when he had received food, he was strengthened. Then Saul spent some days with the disciples at Damascus.
20) Immediately he preached the Christ in the synagogues, that He is the Son of God.
21) Then all who heard were amazed, and said, “Is this not he who destroyed those who called on this name in Jerusalem, and has come here for that purpose, so that he might bring them bound to the chief priests?”
22) But Saul increased all the more in strength, and confounded the Jews who dwelt in Damascus, proving that this Jesus is the Christ.

Isn’t this saying that Paul visited with the disciples for some time, started preaching right away and increased all the more in strength? What do you think that means?..

I agree that Peter did not believe in several Gospels but after he learned of Paul’s conversion and his being taught by Christ Himself, he started preaching Grace. Did he not?

***Hi, Old Scholar!

…we are going in circles…

Please refer to your original post where you state that Paul spent 3 years getting his “Gospel.”

Now, either Paul is wrong or you are since Paul attests that he did not receive his knowledge from any man but that it was Jesus Christ Himself that enfused (taught) it to him–if he is wrong, then you are promoting a liar as a better Gospel giver!

Please understand that the only difference is in your thought not in the Body of Christ. There is no other Gospel! Paul himself testefies to this:

I was resolved that the only knowledge that I would have while I was with you was knowledge of Jesus, and of him as the crucified Christ. (1 Corinthians 2:2)

we are preaching a crucified Christ;… (1 Corinthians 1:23)***

Maran atha!

Angel

 

[jcrichton]

***Hi, Old Scholar!

…as I said before… we are going in circles…

Your original statement was that Paul had a Gospel which not even Peter had because Peter was so unskilled and illiterate that Jesus needed Paul, from your insinuation, a scholar.

You seem to forget that it is the Holy Spirit not man who will guides the Body of Christ… you also forget that Jesus is God Himself and that it was Him that chose Peter and the others… you forget that it is the Holy Scriptures that place Peter in a singular position within the group of intimate Disciples of Christ… you forget that it was only to Peter that Jesus told of the Church and of the Keys… you forget that it was only to Peter that Jesus gave the specific stewarship of the Church… you forget that it was Jesus Himself that came to Peter and told him about Paul’s conversion…

My reply is to remind you that the Body is one not a subdivision of a subdivision of a subdivision… that when problems arose, as when Paul refused to continue the mision with John (Mark), the Apostles did not start a different “church” but that they labored to restore the unity… though you do not seem to see it, you are demeaning Peter for the sake of reducing him to a lesser Apostle–as you continue to place Paul in a greater light (read your other posts).

I asked that you read the passages to remind yourself that Paul did not seek to be a bigger and better but a servant of Christ… as difficult as it may be for you, I ask you to read the Holy Scriptures (and the replies you receive on this forum) not seeking to demean or detract the Body but seeking to understand, heal, and unite to Christ’s Church!

Maran atha!

Angel***

 

[jcrichton]

I certainly agree that the Scriptures never once tells us that we should depend upon human understanding. That is why I maintain that the “tradition” the RCC places so much faith in is erroneous and places too much emphasis on human understanding. Are we to believe those who were not inspired or even claim to have been eyewitnesses? Shouldn’t we believe those who were inspired and were eyewitnesses rather than someone who has interpreted, erroneously, what they said and wrote some hundreds of years later?

If we are to believe any human beings other than the writers of the New Testament (and of course the Old Testament), then surely we should believe the very early writers such as Polycarp, who was a companion of an apostle, Ignatius, who was a companion of Polycarp and Clement, as well as Justin Martyr, Papias and Barnabas. We could believe them because they were there during the right time and were not confounding what was said hundreds of years later and not elaborating on what was not said. Irenæus was only 100 years after Paul and Peter died and he spent a great deal of time trying to get the heretics out of the church. Who were the heretics then? They were those who wanted to add to or subtract from the Scriptures and those who were advocating false doctrines, such as the RCC has today. Those are the ones we should read and believe, not those heretics that wrote much later.

If you are a Christian and if you will pray before you study the Bible and ask God to send the Holy Spirit to guide you in your studies, then you can’t do any more than that. It is when you listen to others who may not have the Holy Spirit that gets you in trouble. Are you aware that some RCC bishops don’t even own a Bible?

The Holy Spirit will never lead us to go against the Scriptures. The Church of Christ will never go against the Scriptures. If the Scriptures are distorted, added to or subtracted from then that church is not a Church of Christ.

Peter is correct but realize that Peter was not an educated man. He was ignorant and some things came much harder for him than for others. In comparison, Paul was a extremely well educated man and it is possible that some of the mysteries were easier to understand for him. However Peter never had any problem with what Paul taught. He taught the same thing after he heard Paul tell of the gospel Christ gave him.

I subscribe to “Quod non est biblicum non est theologicum”
What is not Biblical is not theological. My method of hermeneutics and my stage of truth takes the following into account: Experience, emotions, general revelation, tradition, reason and then Scripture. Scripture trumps everything else. If it goes against Scripture, then it is wrong.

MGB

***Hi, Old Scolar!

…the circle thing…

…patiently, read your own words…

…did you notice how upset you are with Christ’s Church?

You continue to claim one thing while simultaneously stating the opposite:

the Holy Spirit; but human intellect is better…

unity in Christ; but only those who are no longer around…

since you are a Christian the Holy Spirit will give you excellent understanding; but not if you are Peter…

By your definition all non-Catholic “Christians” are guided by the Holy Spirit to the Truth (yet 30,000 plus different interpretations are just what the Holy Spirit wants); you reject error of the Church from hundreds of years ago but you do not see any error with a divide Body of Christ!

…just look at your own words!

Are you aware that SOME RCC (ROMAN CATHOLIC) BISHOPS DON’T EVEN OWN A BIBLE?***

Do you not see the prosecution of the Church in your own words?

You make Christ’s words so pronounced and real:

I have told you all this
so that you may not fall away.
They will expel you
from the synagogues,
and indeed the time is coming
when anyone who kills you
will think he is doing
a holy service to God.
They will do these things
because they have never known
either the Father or me. (St. John 16:1-3)

Maran atha!

Angel

 

[Gottle_of_Geer]

When the Fathers of the Church write about Mary’s perpetual virginity, they refer to Ezekiel 44:2. This verse was mentioned early in this thread:

We know from Luke 24:27 that Jesus instructed His disciples about the OT verses that referred to Him:

Luke doesn’t list the OT verses Jesus interpreted. But who can doubt that the disciples on the road to Emmaus passed on what they learned from Jesus that day. And we know that Ezekiel was among the OT Scriptures Jesus interpreted. Since the Church Fathers comment in their writings that this verse refers to Jesus, and since we know that Jesus instructed His disciples about which OT verses refer to Him, we can reasonably be sure that we get this interpretation of Ezekiel 44:2 directly from Jesus.

If Jesus instructed the disciples that Ezekiel 44:2 refers to Him and His Incarnation-- which all the early Church Fathers taught that it did–then we must consider the meaning of this verse in light of the NT.

And what verse tells us is: that Jesus is God, that He entered into the world throught a “gate,” and that the “gate” would be shut ever after. Since Jesus came to the world through Mary’s womb, it is her womb that is the “gate.” Therefore, it is her womb that is shut ever after and by which “no man will enter.”

We have to thank one of the Fathers for that impressively awful interpretation of that verse Why would an OT prophet want to refer to Our Lord ? He had no reason to do so, as Ezekiel 44 is not about Christ - it’s part of several chapters which are about the Temple. Granted, all Scripture is ultimately Christ-centred - but not always in an obvious way.​

Besides, any assertion of a prediction in prophecy has to contend with the objection that it is deterministic - it’s all very well to assert that prophecy X is predictive, but how does that not require those whose acts are predicted to be mindless robots ?

Jesus also came into the world through His Father’s Will - does that mean His Father’s Will is referred to in Ezekiel 44.2 ?

He also came into the world through Israel, the Chosen People - is that people therefore referred to in that verse ? These questions answer themselves.

This is what comes of allegorising the Prophets - what they actually meant, is lost sight of completely, & all one is left with is a far-fetched allegory that ignores text & context alike. This is not exposition of the Bible - it’s the use of it as a peg for one’s ingenuity. No wonder people have loopy ideas about the Bible, if they aren’t encouraged to treat the literature in it intelligently

If Ezekiel 44:2 does refer to Jesus, like the early Christians taught, then belief in the perpetual virginity of Mary is a vital Christian doctrine.

Like some of them - not all.​

That apart, St. Thomas points out that one cannot establish a doctrine on an allegorical interpretation of the Bible; the reason being, that an allegorisation of a text which is not an allegory in the first place, is not the proper sense of the text. Only the proper sense of the Bible can be the basis for establishing doctrine from the Bible - I just wish I could remember where he says this Judges 9 contains an allegorical parable, & Galatians 4 contains an allegory (St. Paul tells us that himself) - Ezekiel 44, OTOH, is not an allegory. He does use allegory, in chapters 16 & 23: but not in 44.

Besides, what does the context of that verse mean, if that one verse is meant to be a prediction in the form of an allegory ?

 

[TOME]

Goggle of Geer,
How can the predictions of the OT cause those of the NT who acted in the way that fulfilled them to become mindless robots? I ask this especially since throughout the Gospel of John and especially the passage from Luke cited by Janet S I think states pretty clearly that the followers of Christ did not make this connection (that is the OT pointing towards Christ) until after the Resurrection itself and the Church’s post -resurrectional experience of the Risen Christ Jesus?

 

[Gottle_of_Geer]

Goggle of Geer,
How can the predictions of the OT cause those of the NT who acted in the way that fulfilled them to become mindless robots? I ask this especially since throughout the Gospel of John and especially the passage from Luke cited by Janet S I think states pretty clearly that the followers of Christ did not make this connection (that is the OT pointing towards Christ) until after the Resurrection itself and the Church’s post-resurrectional experience of the Risen Christ Jesus?

The problem is, that if X predicts that Y will do such-&-such, Y is for all that a free agent, so he might not do the predicted action: & that would mean the prophecy was a false prophecy. Saying that God tells X about Y does not really mend matters, because Y is still a free agent.​

This issue was extensively discussed in Antiquity, & in mediaeval Judaism: it’s a fascinating topic. So if you hear of the Sea-Battle paradox, you’ll know what it is - it’s about future contingents

More on them here: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Problem_of_the_futures_contingents

Sea Battles, Future Contingents, and Relative Truth:

• “If it is not now determined whether there will be a sea battle to-morrow, can an assertion that there will be one be *true *?”
  Which is the problem in a nutshell

 

[Ginger2]

Scripture is explicit.

“Then said the LORD unto me; This gate shall be shut, it shall not be opened, and no man shall enter in by it; because the LORD, the God of Israel, hath entered in by it, therefore it shall be shut.” (Ezekiel 44:2)

What do you think the next verse means?
Eze 44:3 [It is] for the prince; the prince, he shall sit in it to eat bread before the LORD; he shall enter by the way of the porch of [that] gate, and shall go out by the way of the same.

How can Mary be the gate when Jesus himself is the gate?
Luk 13:24 Strive to enter in at the strait gate: for many, I say unto you, will seek to enter in, and shall not be able.

 

[Ginger2]

Scripture is explicit.

“Then said the LORD unto me; This gate shall be shut, it shall not be opened, and no man shall enter in by it; because the LORD, the God of Israel, hath entered in by it, therefore it shall be shut.” (Ezekiel 44:2)

What do you think the next verse means?
Eze 44:3 [It is] for the prince; the prince, he shall sit in it to eat bread before the LORD; he shall enter by the way of the porch of [that] gate, and shall go out by the way of the same.

 

[teachccd]

What do you think the next verse means?
Eze 44:3 [It is] for the prince; the prince, he shall sit in it to eat bread before the LORD; he shall enter by the way of the porch of [that] gate, and shall go out by the way of the same.

I’m stumped. Why don’t you tell us who this prince is??
And why must he enter and exit through the vestibule??