M
mcq72
Guest
That would be funny if in fact we hadn’t done that to each other in our history (shut another’s mouth).
Last edited:
- Status
M
mcq72
Guest
It’s poetic writing. The only speaker who didn’t motor was the wife ( for once? ouch).
M
mcq72
Guest
Very few think that the " church" has no authority.
And a few think it can only be an entity.
There were 3 “entities” that Christ spoke of as having corrective authority: a brethren, two brethren, and finally the church.
Finally, it is not so much about who has authority, or who has it right, but where understanding comes from, and to whom it is given.
For sure God is sovereign and chooses a covenant people to be the light of the world. He infuses the light. He desires all to have it, thru the foolishness of preaching of said covenant.
One must be careful as to discern whom God uses within the covenant to speak understanding, otherwise making God a respector of persons. There is a fine line between being a Korah and one who rejects the prophetic because from whom it is coming from. Covenant people have been known to cross that line from time to time, shutting up the mouths of the prophetic.
In Job we know who spoke with understanding (which you refuse to see?). On that great judgement day we shall also see whose faith has apprehended the truth on any matter, and whether it was right to refuse any understanding from a Waldo or a Hus or a Wycliffe or a Tyndale and other covenant people.
Last edited:
J
Julius_Caesar
Guest
Those brethren are part of the Church. And even there, the Church is the final authority.
So Paul should never have wrote Galatians.
We already know. Many refuse to acknowledge the answer.
Last edited:
M
mcq72
Guest
Of course, covenant people. Last I heard even the CC agrees that baptism is certainly at least representative of entering the covenant.
I believe divine revelation and following such understanding led the church to lay hands on him, and sent as an apostle. It was not just because they could and were right.
And many refuse the Physician because…self implied righteousness?
Just because one is a patient of the great Physician does not mean we are immune to being a bad patient on occassion.
Well you should know. If one has an unction from the Holy Ghost they can know all things. Such an unction is not a respector of persons, and so is being wrong on occassion.
Last edited:
J
Julius_Caesar
Guest
Heresy is a different mode all the way together. Heresy and the Spirit don’t mix.
There. It’s fixed.
M
mcq72
Guest
Heresy can be indeed be heresy, but just as well a soothing ointment for refusing to listen.
Can’t escape the long history of discernment of a Korah or a silenced prophet, one that any church / community is not immune from . If anyone thinks they are is already on unhealthy ground?
Last edited:
M
mcq72
Guest
Except for the presumed capital C?
Last edited:
J
Julius_Caesar
Guest
It’s not presumption if it’s true. And it’s been proven many times on this thread.
J
Julius_Caesar
Guest
A prophet must be shown to be of God in order to be true.
A
annad347
Guest
Totally lost track of this thread… if anyone had a question for me can you ask it again?
V
Vico
Guest
Those with greater merit have greater glory in heaven with a greater Beatific Vision.Julius_Caesar:
No but you get an extra prize for preaching as an apostle?
Last edited:
M
mcq72
Guest
Evidences are not proof per say on faith matters?
M
mcq72
Guest
Well, if it is true they are of God. I think you have it backward, yet very Catholic?
Yes, thank you. Apparently they are called levels. There is disagreement as to whether one can not just gain levels but lose some also.
J
Julius_Caesar
Guest
Nope. They just aren’t accepted as fact.
J
Julius_Caesar
Guest
Except Paul’s not talking about losing levels. He’s speaking of losing salvation.
M
mcq72
Guest
Ok, so I will understand that you mean one can lose both salvation and levels/ merit of heaven, but Paul specifically in said texts is referring to salvation loss only. Ok. I will continue to say some think he refers to latter only, (irregardless of Calvin or Arminian view of ssalvation).
M
mcq72
Guest
Correct. Some of the tenets ( of “church” and history) of the Roman Catholic Church are not considered factual.
Still, the best view is ascertained by divine revelation of His Word and history via faith. I mean we were not there otherwise.
Last edited:
J
Julius_Caesar
Guest
A departure from traditional understanding.
John Chrysostom says this:
1 Corinthians 9:24
Lest by any means, having preached to others, I myself should be a rejected.
Now if Paul feared this who had taught so many, and feared it after his preaching and becoming an angel and undertaking the leadership of the whole world; what can we say?
For, think not, says he, because you have believed, that this is sufficient for your salvation: since if to me neither preaching nor teaching nor bringing over innumerable persons, is enough for salvation unless I exhibit my own conduct also unblameable, much less to you.
Last edited:
J
Julius_Caesar
Guest
Which according to said Word is not the final source.
- Status