G
guanophore
Guest
It means “unto death”. A sin that separates us from God, and causes death to the soul.
- Status
T
toaslan
Guest
Kujo! I second the motion. Would love to hear these definitions from you!
M
MrS
Guest
I would third that request… but I feel he may be cutting and pasting from Mr/Dr White and his twisting and distorting of those terms… so be not suprised to see some confusion.
.
T
toaslan
Guest
I checked, and I agree, my RSV puts it “word of mouth”, and my KJ leaves it at “word”.
A side note: When you say the RV “misleads” that again is your gloss. It assumes what you set out to prove. It’s not being a literal translation at that point does not prove that it is a misleading translation. There are many translations of the bible out there, many of which have valid uses especially for scholars. Some are too literal–what’s that version called that translates rigidly one word for one word, producing an unreadable and incomprehensible text? Some are interpretations rather than translations (steer clear). There are gradations in between. Some are sound translations but spoiled by the biased footnotes.
In this case of the RSV, we have a fairly literal translation. One could view this “of mouth” as a way of making more clear that we have spoken words on the one hand and written words on the other. The complementarity of the phrasing is right there. “hold fast to what you have been taught whether by word or by epistle.” The “of mouth” underlines the “or” juxtaposition. Paul implies some kind of two halves making a whole.
The “of mouth” isn’t necessary to the Catholic point. We can argue about whether “word” is meant as verbal or non-verbal, but it just starts to defy common sense. For example, when two people “have words” it means they are enjoying a heated verbal exchange. That is the first way we take it. If it is a written exchange, that has to be made clear in some additional way–it would not be the first way in which the “words” would be understood.
This determination to have “word” mean only and always written word is contrived and artificial. It leaves out common usage. It also ignores, seems to me, the “yin/yang” character of St. Paul’s reference.
Seems to me that you would actually like to see St. Paul saying this: “Hold fast to the traditions that you were taught whether by my written word or by my letters.” Not.
And are we ignoring the traditions here that the faithful are to hold to? The way Catholics read the verse is, hold fast to the oral and written traditions that you have been taught. This reading has internally consistent logic.
Again, bad-willed Catholics thrusting and forcing! Another unnecessary gloss.
I, willing you good, gotta go for now!
G
guanophore
Guest
This is a very good example of how some of the protestant translations left certain things out, or changed the wording so that it would not sound too 'Catholic".
This is very true. I have been told that the Navarre Bible is very good, but I have not seen it yet.
This is true, and it explains why the Sola Scriptura approach is like a “readers digest” version of Christ’s teaching. It is accurate to a point, but missing some elements.
Especially since the Word is really a person, and neither the book nor the oral teachings. Also, Paul wrote: Let the Word of Christ dwell in you Richly" long before we had a New Testament!
I think I missed the reference for this last part, I will hav eto go back and look.
T
toaslan
Guest
MountainBoy says that in the Greek the verse does not read word “of mouth.” He says the Greek word for mouth does not appear in the Greek transcript. He says more literally the translation would be **word “of mine.” ** (or was it word of me…)
He objects to the RSV inserting word "of mouth". He says the KJ is more faithful to the Greek, because the KJ just says **“word”. **
So I guess he is saying that the RSV is a Catholic bible (it is? I know the Catholic edition of it is Catholic…), and that the RSV dishonestly put extra stuff in.
But I do agree with you that sometimes the Protestant bibles chose wording to distance themselves deliberately from sounding too Catholic. Perhaps an example of this is the uneven way the word “works” is translated.
M
Michael_Francis
Guest
This thread has been pruned of off topic posts.
Please remain on the topic of Sola Scriptura.
Any other topics will need to be opened in their own thread as per the Forum Rules.
MF
Please remain on the topic of Sola Scriptura.
Any other topics will need to be opened in their own thread as per the Forum Rules.
MF
K
kujo313
Guest
“I did, Mom. But if you ask him, I know he’ll listen to you.”
(Pssst! Our “Brother” (and Savior (Jesus)) SAID that through Him and Him alone, WE can GO to our Father. Jesus did NOT say to go through anybody else. So leave “mom” out of this. It’s an "A and B conversation.)
(By the way, it is written!)
C
captaincoog
Guest
Have you ever asked anyone to pray for you, to pass an exam, for a health concern, to be a better witness etc?
According to the above post, this is a complete lack of faith. Yet even St Paul asked for the prayers of others (Eph 6:19).
It is both Biblical and faith-filled to ask for another to pray for you.
St James says that the prayers of a righteous man are powerful and effective.
Who are the most righteous, but the Saints in Heaven? They have been utterly perfected, and complete detached from all sin, unlike you and I. Their prayers are the most effective and powerful. We can ask them for their intercession and they are happy to pray for us on our behalf.
This is the Communion of Saints, an ancient belief of the universal Church.
According to the above post, this is a complete lack of faith. Yet even St Paul asked for the prayers of others (Eph 6:19).
It is both Biblical and faith-filled to ask for another to pray for you.
St James says that the prayers of a righteous man are powerful and effective.
Who are the most righteous, but the Saints in Heaven? They have been utterly perfected, and complete detached from all sin, unlike you and I. Their prayers are the most effective and powerful. We can ask them for their intercession and they are happy to pray for us on our behalf.
This is the Communion of Saints, an ancient belief of the universal Church.
N
NotWorthy
Guest
G
guanophore
Guest
It is also written that those whom he called and chose are partakers with Him in His divine nature. We are “in Christ”, and as such we participate in his character and mission. Jesus came to reconcile the world to God, and he commissions and empowers us to partake of this ministry with Him.
11 Not only so, but we also rejoice in God through our Lord Jesus Christ, through whom we have now received our reconciliation. Rom 5:11
18 All this is from God, who through Christ reconciled us to himself and gave us the ministry of reconciliation; 19 that is, in Christ God was reconciling the world to himself, not counting their trespasses against them, and entrusting to us the message of reconciliation. 20 So we are ambassadors for Christ, God making his appeal through us. We beseech you on behalf of Christ, be reconciled to God. 21 For our sake he made him to be sin who knew no sin, so that in him we might become the righteousness of God." 2 Cor 5:18-21
"…for you are all partakers with me of grace…Phil 1:7
4 by which he has granted to us his precious and very great promises, that through these you may escape from the corruption that is in the world because of passion, and become partakers of the divine nature." 2 Peter 1:4
Because of who we are in Him, we can now do even greater things than He did.
Your refusal to recognize and participate in the communion of the saints will only truncate your experience of the ministry of reconciliation. God will of course honor your meager efforts alone, since you are doing the best you know how. But there is a great cloud of witnesses surrounding us, and some are already before the throne of God without the veil under which we live in our earthly bodies. If you do not wish to take advantage of their intercession, it is your choice, but you are missing out!
R
Randy_Carson
Guest
It is also written:
Romans 15:30-31
30I urge you, brothers, by our Lord Jesus Christ and by the love of the Spirit, to join me in my struggle by praying to God for me. 31Pray that I may be rescued from the unbelievers in Judea and that my service in Jerusalem may be acceptable to the saints there,
Ephesians 6:18-20
18And pray in the Spirit on all occasions with all kinds of prayers and requests. With this in mind, be alert and always keep on praying for all the saints. 19Pray also for me, that whenever I open my mouth, words may be given me so that I will fearlessly make known the mystery of the gospel, 20for which I am an ambassador in chains. Pray that I may declare it fearlessly, as I should.
Philippians 1:18-19
Yes, and I will continue to rejoice, 19for I know that through your prayers and the help given by the Spirit of Jesus Christ, what has happened to me will turn out for my deliverance.
Colossians 4:2-4
2Devote yourselves to prayer, being watchful and thankful. 3And pray for us, too, that God may open a door for our message, so that we may proclaim the mystery of Christ, for which I am in chains. 4Pray that I may proclaim it clearly, as I should.
Philemon 1:22
22And one thing more: Prepare a guest room for me, because I hope to be restored to you in answer to your prayers.
I can’t believe that Paul of all people asked other people to pray for him and for the success of his ministry.
Didn’t he know he should only go to God alone? :tsktsk:
M
MrS
Guest
Perhaps Paul said those things because “they” call him Paul, and “we” can call him St. Paul, the Catholic Apostle to the Gentiles
He certainly sounds Catholic to me!!
.
T
toaslan
Guest
Trouble: the two sentences above, seeking to support each other, instead read as contradictory regarding the point at issue. **You say **Paul’s point in 2Thess2:15 is that the folks should stick to the first written teaching letter Paul sent. But Paul says that the teaching was verbal–“telling.”
Then,
Why don’t we say (instead of “to receive as truth”) that he instructs them to “receive the tradition” that they were taught by him directly from his own lips.
What does St. Paul mean by “tradition”, that’s the question.
Well, nobody thinks it’s “second or third hand reports”. That would be what’s known as a straw man. Catholics don’t understand thus the tradition to which St. Paul refers.
We have a whole other view of the tradition–to which the folks are being told to adhere.
Well, it would be an error to have a tendency to be led astray by anything.
It would be an error to have false authority and spurious tradition doing any leading.
Both these things, agreed, would be really bad.
Thank God they are not Catholic things. (Will all due respect, I actually think they are protestant things. See, I think Sola Scriptura is spurious, man-made tradition. I think one constitutes oneself a false authority when one tests against oneself the truth or falsity of scripture. And see how these opinions are beside the point, besides being perhaps inflammatory! …)
The gloss asserts as true what you set out to show. It is a personal opinion, subjective, and unnecessarily pejorative. If the point you are expressing is solid, (and there is always some merit to any position), it will stand on its own two feet, if we all have good will about it.
I agree Paul was urging the Thessalonians to embrace the true teachings. But, he tells the folks they will be able to tell the difference between true and false teachings by recalling to mind what he said to them. In this letter (2Thess) he tells them to remember what he said, to disregard forged/imposter letters, and to hold fast to the traditions they have been taught whether by word or by letter.
This passage not only suggests, it directs us to, traditions handed on by word as well as letter. Don’t you see what wishful thinking your reading is? And how much work one has to do to get away from the clear direct reading of this passage?
If he urged that somewhere, it’s not in this passage. The written marks bit is about “make sure the letter is in this, my, Paul’s handriting, and not in some other handwriting, and/or make sure you see that the signature compares accurately with my signature that you already have…”
It’s about having common sense about accepting as genuine a letter in the wrong handwriting, without the right signature or some such. A practical point.
To take this as though it is an instruction on how to test all inspired teachings (and that therefore all inspired teaching is written) is just wild!
Rather, Paul just said stick to tradition, whether received by word or by letter.
T
toaslan
Guest
Is this more of a Catholic thing, to emphasize that, for Christianity, the first meaning of “word” is the Word Who is a person, the Second Person of the Trinity? I don’t see so far on this thread our protestant brothers alive to this point.
If we take, as the primary meaning of “word” neither the written nor the spoken word, but the Word Who is the person Christ Jesus; and if we remember St. Paul saying, “I preach Christ and Him crucified”, well, it seems this would help vaccinate against Sola Scriptura…
T
toaslan
Guest
The terrible trap MountainBoy struggles with in post #311 is I think what underlies the intellectual positions of Protestantism, including Sola Scriptura. I am glad he made the attempt to give the reasoning, because it’s kind of the unspoken nastiness between us all. I think protestants think they are conscience-bound to discern the state of holiness of another’s soul as a prerequisite to evaluating that person’s statements.
This is indeed a heavy burden, indeed impossible for anyone but God.
It is true that we see people who seem vicious do bad things; we see people who seem holy do virtuous things. But we also see people who seem vicious do good things, etc. If an otherwise holy person did an evil thing, that means one thing for Protestants, and another for Catholics. We say he fell, and he has to repent that fall and get right back up: he has to re-enter the process of his own salvation in which he is a participant. We say we are all sinners; those of us who are following Christ are always repenting and attempting to follow Him better.
Anyway, I think Randy Carson in post 314 responded thoroughly.
I would like to see this another round on this :bounce:
This is indeed a heavy burden, indeed impossible for anyone but God.
It is true that we see people who seem vicious do bad things; we see people who seem holy do virtuous things. But we also see people who seem vicious do good things, etc. If an otherwise holy person did an evil thing, that means one thing for Protestants, and another for Catholics. We say he fell, and he has to repent that fall and get right back up: he has to re-enter the process of his own salvation in which he is a participant. We say we are all sinners; those of us who are following Christ are always repenting and attempting to follow Him better.
Anyway, I think Randy Carson in post 314 responded thoroughly.
I would like to see this another round on this :bounce:
H
HailMary
Guest
I honestly think if anyone reads
21 Reason to Reject Sola Scriptura
by Joel Peters
they will never again fall into this heresy.
21 Reason to Reject Sola Scriptura
by Joel Peters
they will never again fall into this heresy.
K
kujo313
Guest
HOW do you know if the saint that you’re praying to says “no”? Where in the Bible does it say that the saints say “yes, I’ll pray” or even IF they pray at all?
Why would you go to a saint when you can go directly to God, Himself, through Jesus?
Am I wrong if I decide to go to God and not through a saint?
K
kujo313
Guest
Not missing out at all. The Church’s “mission” on earth is to reconcile the earth to God. Jesus is the Way.It is also written that those whom he called and chose are partakers with Him in His divine nature. We are “in Christ”, and as such we participate in his character and mission. Jesus came to reconcile the world to God, and he commissions and empowers us to partake of this ministry with Him.
11 Not only so, but we also rejoice in God through our Lord Jesus Christ, through whom we have now received our reconciliation. Rom 5:11
18 All this is from God, who through Christ reconciled us to himself and gave us the ministry of reconciliation; 19 that is, in Christ God was reconciling the world to himself, not counting their trespasses against them, and entrusting to us the message of reconciliation. 20 So we are ambassadors for Christ, God making his appeal through us. We beseech you on behalf of Christ, be reconciled to God. 21 For our sake he made him to be sin who knew no sin, so that in him we might become the righteousness of God." 2 Cor 5:18-21
"…for you are all partakers with me of grace…Phil 1:7
4 by which he has granted to us his precious and very great promises, that through these you may escape from the corruption that is in the world because of passion, and become partakers of the divine nature." 2 Peter 1:4
Because of who we are in Him, we can now do even greater things than He did.
Your refusal to recognize and participate in the communion of the saints will only truncate your experience of the ministry of reconciliation. God will of course honor your meager efforts alone, since you are doing the best you know how. But there is a great cloud of witnesses surrounding us, and some are already before the throne of God without the veil under which we live in our earthly bodies. If you do not wish to take advantage of their intercession, it is your choice, but you are missing out!
Once a person is saved and dies, one mission accomplished.
Next!
It’s like a “lifeboat”, if I may say.
Boat is sinking. The people working on the boat put the passengers on the lifeboats where they can be safe. Once a passenger is on the lifeboat, the “worker” can concentrate on the next passenger.
The people on earth are the passengers. It’s the Believer’s “job” to get them saved keep them that way. Once a saint dies, that “job” is done.
H
HailMary
Guest
Job 42: 7-11
Earth to everyone: we worship the SAME GOD as Job did! If you think you God will hear your prayers in all circumstances, you have a problem because God would NOT hear certain people prayers unless other pray for them.
Eliphaz and his two friends had to ask for the INTERCESSION of Job to obtain pardon for their sins, it was ONLY through Jobs cooperation in his FREE WILL that moved God to save those men.
We are not saying you are wrong to God directly, but the Saints in Heaven are experiencing the Beatific vision and are already united in Spirit to God and their prayers are much more powerful than ours.
Revelation 5:8
and in
Revelation 8:3-4
But if the saints in heaven are offering our prayers to God, then they must be aware of our prayers (by God’s will). They are aware of our petitions and present them to God by interceding for us.
Some might try to argue that in this passage the prayers being offered were not addressed to the saints in heaven, but directly to God. Yet this argument would only strengthen the fact that those in heaven can hear our prayers, for then the saints would be aware of our prayers even when they are not directed to them!
In any event, it is clear from Revelation 5:8, and Revelation 8:3-4 that the saints in heaven do actively intercede for us. We are explicitly told by John that the incense they offer to God are the prayers of the saints. Prayers are not physical things and cannot be physically offered to God. Thus the saints in heaven are offering our prayers to God mentally. In other words, they are interceding.
- Status