SPLIT: What did Christ teach that wasn't written,and if it wasn't written how can you be sure He taught it?

[LittleDeb]

Flesh is filth of the dust of the earth.

theseason.org/2corin/2corin5.htm

You agree with the Gnostics now, too? Please land on a single belief sect and stick to defending it. This particular heresy that ‘the flesh is evil’ has long been disproved.

These “Bible studies” you quote don’t even agree with each other. There is ONE Truth. He is The Christ, Jesus. He built His Church on a Rock. These conflicting teachings you keep quoting cause division and confusion. Please look to the Church and not just random people’s personal interpretation.

 

[Gamera]

So how do you know when they are out of purgatory?

We don’t (barring some private revelation). I think from that point on, any further penance earned on that person’s behalf would go into the treasury of merit. In any event, i’d rather pray for someone who didn’t need it, than fail to pray for someone who needs it.

Since noone that has passed on can hear you,whats the use,also can you all pray silently in other words can they read your mind

Of course they can hear us.

also how can they hear millions of prayers at the same time?

Heaven is not bound by earthly constraints. That would include time. Are angels bound by time? Why would they be, since they aren’t part of the material world? Souls in heaven are no longer bound by time. They have, for lack of a better term, “all the time in the world.”

His authority is His Word which is scripture,

His authority is His Word which is both Scripture AND Apostolic Tradition.

and scripture says not to pray to the dead

No, it doesn’t. It says not to conjure the dead.

 

[Ignatius]

Are you saying that the Holy Spirit does not dwell in anyone who dos’nt follow the teachings of the Catholic Church?

No, he was just correcting your personal misinterpretation of Scripture. Jesus said to leaders of The Church, “he who hears you hears me, he who rejects you rejects me.” Jesus clearly rejected the kind of division that Protestantism has multiplied into thousands upon thousands of different sects all claiming to have the Holy Spirit as a guide. Jesus founded one Church. He didn’t even leave any writings, he left his teachings in the hands of The Apostles. The fullness of what Jesus taught was passed down through the generations by The Church. Eventually some was written down and became the New Testament. We can be sure of the Truths both written and unwritten in the same way, because it was passed down by The Pillar and Foundation of Truth.

What does the Bible say about this?
Does the Bible say that the Bible is the Pillar and Foundation of Truth?
NO! The most that Holy Scripture ever claims for itself is that it is profitable for reproof, for correction and for instruction.

Does the Bible say that The Church is the Pillar and Foundation of Truth?
You bet.

The Church and Scripture are inseparable. St. Paul of Tarsus says in his letter to the Ephesians that it is through The Church that the manifold wisdom of God is made known.
The Church was founded by Jesus Christ and was sustained by Sacred Tradition for many many years before a word of the New Testament was ever written. If you check into it, you will find that The Church came well before any of the writings of the New Testament.

You claim to be a bible christian and the Bible says that The Church is the Pillar and Foundation of Truth. So why don’t you follow the Bible? Why do you dispute what is written in The Word of God?

If you would like to learn more about the Truths of Jesus Christ and His Church, contact your local parish today. Or you can visit http://www.catholicscomehome.org/epic/epic120.phtml or http://www.chnetwork.org/

Your Servant in Christ

 

[guanophore]

Where are you when absent from the body?

II Corinthians 5:6 “Therefore we are always confident, knowing that, whilst we are at home in the body, we are absent from the Lord:”

This is physically speaking, that when you are living within your flesh body, you are not present with the Lord in heaven. This is not speaking spiritually, for when you are in Christ, He is in you. But physically your body is on earth and our Heavenly Father is in heaven. To understand this, we have to understand the three offices of the Godhead.

The Holy Spirit is in us and with us now in this age of the flesh. The Son of God, Jesus Christ will be coming back at the seventh trumpet to establish His Millennium thousand year kingdom, and He will be on earth in person living with us at this time. Though we are on earth, the age of this flesh and blood bodies will not be here, but we will all be living in our inner man bodies, the spiritual bodies that will be clothed in our righteous acts. Then after the Millennium age and after judgment day, the full Godhead will be here on earth and we will be living in a new heaven and a new earth, for the old heaven and the old earth will be passed away. It will be a rejuvenated earth.

There is no way that you can be in the presence of the Lord Jesus Christ while you are in the flesh body. I Corinthians 15:50; “Now this I say, brethren, that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God; neither doth corruption inherit incorruption.” When Jesus returns to earth all flesh is done away with, and all, good and bad alike are changed into their inner man bodies. Those spiritual bodies are the ones that we will live in through the Millennium age. Even now, while Jesus Christ is at the right hand of the Father, you can not stand in the presence of the Father while in the flesh body. Why? Flesh is filth of the dust of the earth.

theseason.org/2corin/2corin5.htm

And this verse leaves no doubt,so try again

Ecclesiastes 12:7 “Then shall the dust return to the earth as it was: and the spirit shall return unto God Who gave it.”

It is interesting to note that Jesus took his resurrected human body into heaven…

I wonder if maybe your notion of human flesh as “filth” is not really the way God sees His creation? sounds kind of gnostic actually.

 

[Sir_Knight]

1. 
   *]Revelation 2:11
   He who has an ear, let him hear what the Spirit says to the churches. He who overcomes will not be hurt at all by the second death.
   Revelation 2:10-12 (in Context) Revelation 2 (Whole Chapter)
   *]Revelation 20:6
   Blessed and holy are those who have part in the first resurrection. The second death has no power over them, but they will be priests of God and of Christ and will reign with him for a thousand years.
   Revelation 20:5-7 (in Context) Revelation 20 (Whole Chapter)
   *]Revelation 20:14
   Then death and Hades were thrown into the lake of fire. The lake of fire is the second death.
   Revelation 20:13-15 (in Context) Revelation 20 (Whole Chapter)
   *]Revelation 21:8
   But the cowardly, the unbelieving, the vile, the murderers, the sexually immoral, those who practice magic arts, the idolaters and all liars—their place will be in the fiery lake of burning sulfur. This is the second death."
   Revelation 21:7-9 (in Context) Revelation 21 (Whole Chapter)

1. 
   Randy, are you saying that the soul actually dies? I was under the impression that those damned to hell are very much alive and live forever in torment.

 

[Randy_Carson]

Randy, are you saying that the soul actually dies? I was under the impression that those damned to hell are very much alive and live forever in torment.

I’m simply pointing out where n2 is getting her vocabulary from…she’s probably up to her ears in the rapture, millenialism and other End Times novelties.

 

[Lisdogan]

First, the Bible is infallible. End of story; if you don’t believe it, you’re not a Catholic, and are in dire heresy. The Catholic Church teaches that the books contained in the bible are not

 

[NotWorthy]

Randy, are you saying that the soul actually dies? I was under the impression that those damned to hell are very much alive and live forever in torment.

Someone is dead when they are spiritually dead. When they are in a state of salvation and die (as we know it), it is often called “sleep”. Look at St. Stephen in Acts, Lazarus in John, and the story of Jarius’ daughter in the synoptics.

Or maybe I’m missing the context of Randy’s statements.

 

[cfrancis]

Back to the Thread.
Members of the Jesus Seminar (pace) and other current biblical scholars (Catholic, Protestant and agnostic) have written diligently and for the most part with wisdom about the historicity of the Bible, with particular attention to what has been written about Jesus the Christ. It is common cause, I believe, that much of what has been written in both OT and NT are, in a historical/archeological/scientific/theological sense, tainted by subjective memory or forgetfulness, elaboration by believers, or simply by the inevitable errors of oral transmission of knowledge.

The Bible tells its story, but it is not infallible, and it does not say it all. (See also encyclicals Providentissimus Deus and Divino Afflante Spiritu as well as John Paul II/Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger The Interpretation of the Bible in the Church.

I hestate to say this…but if you believe the Bible is not the infallible Word of God, you are not Catholic. Very nice of you to provide titles of encyclicals, but not one of them contradicts the Catechism of the Catholic Church:

[ARTICLE 3
SACRED SCRIPTURE

I. CHRIST - THE UNIQUE WORD OF SACRED SCRIPTURE ](Catechism of the Catholic Church - PART 1 SECTION 1 CHAPTER 2 ARTICLE 3)

II. INSPIRATION AND TRUTH OF SACRED SCRIPTURE

105 God is the author of Sacred Scripture. "The divinely revealed realities, which are contained and presented in the text of Sacred Scripture, have been written down under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit."69

"For Holy Mother Church, relying on the faith of the apostolic age, accepts as sacred and canonical the books of the Old and the New Testaments, whole and entire, with all their parts, on the grounds that, written under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, they have God as their author, and have been handed on as such to the Church herself."70

106 God inspired the human authors of the sacred books. "To compose the sacred books, God chose certain men who, all the while he employed them in this task, made full use of their own faculties and powers so that, though he acted in them and by them, it was as true authors that they consigned to writing whatever he wanted written, and no more."71

107 **The inspired books teach the truth. "Since therefore all that the inspired authors or sacred writers affirm should be regarded as affirmed by the Holy Spirit, we must acknowledge that *the books of Scripture firmly, faithfully, and without error ***teach that truth which God, for the sake of our salvation, wished to see confided to the Sacred Scriptures."72

 

[LittleDeb]

Just to clarify:

Scripture is inerrant. It means free from error.

The Holy Father in union with the Bishops can speak or proclaim Truth infallibly.

Edit to add: It is some of the same struggle n2 is having… to be infallible requires authority. A document can only be error free. Scripture is error free.

 

[FdeS2]

We do not have to accept their conclusions or propositions, but what they say helps us to think and to understand what we believe in more profound ways than if we are just taught/brainwashed about what we should believe.

To be taught what we should believe, especially considering that it is the truth, is absolutely not objectionable. There is no brainwashing in the Catholic Church, because there is no need for it. We as a Church teach all of God’s people (or at least those who will listen) the fullness of truth, using the authority passed down from Jesus himself.

I can agree that it is good to understand the point of view from which others come, but to look to them to the detriment of learning from the Catholic Church is simply wrong.

I am searching for the truth within the paradigm of the faith of the Catholic Church.

I would not really call or refer to the Catholic Church or her faith as a paradigm; rather, I would refer to it as what it truly is, and that is the Body of Christ. We are called to teach as Jesus taught, seeing as we are His hands, feet, mouth, etc… on earth.

P.S. Accolades to Little Deb and cfrancis!

Yours in Christ,
Daniel

 

[cfrancis]

Just to clarify:

Scripture is inerrant. It means free from error.

The Holy Father in union with the Bishops can speak or proclaim Truth infallibly.

Edit to add: It is some of the same struggle n2 is having… to be infallible requires authority. A document can only be error free. Scripture is error free.

You are absolutely correct, LittleDeb. I sit corrected.

Lisdogan, I apologize: I read “infallible” and understood “inerrant.” I hope you didn’t actually mean “inerrant” when you typed “infallible.”

 

[LittleDeb]

Other supposedly historical events in the Bible have not been historically or scientifically demonstrated by parallel evidence: the darkness during the crucifixion would surely have been mentioned by observers of the crucifixion - outside those reporting in the Bible; the census during Christ’s birth has not been traced historically; nor has the Pharoah of the Exodus. The list seems sorrowfully endless.

When we ask what did Christ teach that was not written, as this thread does, my own understanding is that the Bible is neither infallible or immutable, but that its authenticity is sanctified by the traditions of the Church, and certainly by those evidential truths that do exist.

And that therefore, we must, as practicing Catholic Christians, be able to look far outside the Bible, outside the Sacred Scriptures themselves, for a greater and more perfect understanding of Christ’s teachings. That does not detract in any way from the faith, for me.

The Bible tells its story, but it is not infallible, and it does not say it all. (See also encyclicals Providentissimus Deus and Divino Afflante Spiritu as well as John Paul II/Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger The Interpretation of the Bible in the Church.

Where to look is the problem, and that is probably the problem for the original poster. It is certainly the problem for me.

In Christ

You have a few things correct here, but you also have a few things very wrong which might be at the root of your struggle. As I clarified earlier, Scripture is inerrant. From what you write here it sounds like you might not even believe that. I am also not sure if you understand what it means to be infallible. Many new Catholics and non-Catholics do not understand it, so it might be best to leave it out of the conversation for now. Scripture is inerrant.

Your “it does not say it all” leads me to see where you are possibly going off track. Sacred Scripture was never intended to “say it all.” Scripture itself records that “all the books in the world could not contain” everything Christ did. The Church has always studied from outside the direct scope of the Bible. That is what Sacred Tradition IS. Tradition produced Scripture, but they are not at odds with each other.

Where we look is to the Church. The Church has the authority to teach. The Church has preserved Sacred Tradition and the Church has preserved and produced Sacred Scripture from those many other non-inspired documents out there. Those are the three legs that are the Church.

 

[n2thelight]

RandyCross

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sir Knight
Randy, are you saying that the soul actually dies? I was under the impression that those damned to hell are very much alive and live forever in torment.

I’m simply pointing out where n2 is getting her vocabulary from…she’s probably up to her ears in the rapture, millenialism and other End Times novelties.

Are you saying that the soul does not die,and that scripture is wrong,or am I once again, as you all say misinturpting scripture?

You all seem to follow scripture pretty well when it fits your teachings but when it dos’nt well you get the point,and for the record its not she.

 

[LittleDeb]

You all seem to follow scripture pretty well when it fits your teachings but when it dos’nt well you get the point,

Actually that statement is very true of the many divided sects within Christianity. You disagree with each other and then state, “You’re not following Scripture here.”

Basically it comes down to one question, “Says who?”

Where we “follow Scripture” (by your standards,) just means that you happen to agree with Church teaching on a particular subject. So let’s say the hot topic of stem cell research. What did Christ teach on it? Please remember by your own standards, you must use Scripture as your final authority. Teachings from “random guy” aren’t going to cut it.

In all fairness, I can understand your appeal to others who have already stated something you agree with. You are taking on quite a chunk by coming to a Catholic site to discuss this. Please know that I do have a lot of respect for you for coming here in the first place.

 

[LittleDeb]

You are absolutely correct, LittleDeb. I sit corrected.

“Sit corrected” I love that!

Lisdogan, I apologize: I read “infallible” and understood “inerrant.” I hope you didn’t actually mean “inerrant” when you typed “infallible.”

Since Lisdogan also said that he/she believes that Scripture is not immutable, it looks like s/he believes it is not inerrant either. The LDS believe scripture (note the small s) is not immutable either. Their scripture changes frequently. They believe the Bible is not inerrant.

 

[n2thelight]

LittleDeb

Quote:
Originally Posted by n2thelight
Flesh is filth of the dust of the earth.

theseason.org/2corin/2corin5.htm

You agree with the Gnostics now, too? Please land on a single belief sect and stick to defending it. This particular heresy that ‘the flesh is evil’ has long been disproved.

These “Bible studies” you quote don’t even agree with each other. There is ONE Truth. He is The Christ, Jesus. He built His Church on a Rock. These conflicting teachings you keep quoting cause division and confusion. Please look to the Church and not just random people’s personal interpretation.

I agree with no man,that does not agree with the Word of God which is the Holy Scriptures.When I say the flesh is evil,I mean that it is impossible to live in the flesh and not sin.

When you say Christ built His Church on a rock,Im I correct in saying that you mean Peter,if so that is false,for Christ is the Rock.

As for conflicting teachings,I don’t feel Ive posted any.

 

[NotWorthy]

I agree with no man,that does not agree with the Word of God which is the Holy Scriptures.When I say the flesh is evil,I mean that it is impossible to live in the flesh and not sin.

When you say Christ built His Church on a rock,Im I correct in saying that you mean Peter,if so that is false,for Christ is the Rock.

As for conflicting teachings,I don’t feel Ive posted any.

Except for the fact that Christ tells Peter that he is the Rock. You, my friend, are full of conflicting teachings.

 

[n2thelight]

NotWorthy

Except for the fact that Christ tells Peter that he is the Rock. You, my friend, are full of conflicting teachings.

Jesus was speaking of Himself, not Peter.

Matt 16:16-18
16 And Simon Peter answered and said, Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God.
17 And Jesus answered and said unto him, Blessed art thou, Simon Barjona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven.
18 And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. KJV
The specific words that are key to understanding this are “Peter” and “rock,” for they are both derivatives of the same word meaning rock. But the word translated to “Peter” in the verse above (and below) is petros, and the word translated to “rock” is petra. Also, the word “rock” below has the definite article in the Greek (although it is not seen in the English language translation), whereas the word “Peter” (although capitalized in the English translation) does not have the definite article. (Illustration to follow.)

But simply stated, a petros is a small rock; while petra is a large rock, even a solid foundation of stone.

Matt 16:18
18 And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. KJV
Peter: Greek word #4074 Petros (pet’-ros); apparently a primary word; a (piece of) rock (larger than NT:3037); as a name, Petrus, an apostle: KJV - Peter, rock. Compare NT:2786.

rock: Greek word #4073 petra (pet’-ra); feminine of the same as NT:4074; a (mass of) rock (literally or figuratively): KJV - rock.

(The definite article): Greek word #3588 ho (ho); including the feminine he (hay); and the neuter to (to); in all their inflections; the def. article; the (sometimes to be supplied, at others omitted, in English idiom): KJV - the, this, that, one, he, she, it, etc…

Below is a copy of the original Greek words of the key part of the verse.  Notice the definite article (tee -Grk. word #3588) preceding "rock":

 Also, the word "and" (between "Peter" and "upon") in the above illustration is kai in the Greek and can also be translated to the word "but" in the English.  This of course changes the way that this verse is commonly understood.  Observe:

and: Greek word #2532 kai (kahee); apparently, a primary particle, having a copulative and sometimes also a cumulative force; and, also, even, so then, too, etc.; often used in connection (or composition) with other particles or small words: KJV - and, also, both, but, even, for, if, or, so, that, then, therefore, when, yet.
But to give you a sense of the meaning of the word petra (“rock”), there is a city carved out of the side of a mountain, located in modern day Jordan, which is called Petra. “Peter” (petros) was a movable stone, a smaller piece; petra (translated “rock”) was a solid foundation; and incidentally, that Rock was Christ:
1 Cor 10:4
4 And did all drink the same spiritual drink: for they drank of that spiritual Rock [petra] that followed them: and that Rock [petra] was Christ. KJV
Rock: Greek word #4073 petra (pet’-ra); feminine of the same as NT:4074; a (mass of) rock (literally or figuratively): KJV - rock.

biblestudysite.com/answers26.htm#2

 

[guanophore]

I agree with no man,that does not agree with the Word of God which is the Holy Scriptures

Each person interprets what they read in the light of their own experience and education. You interpret in the light of your own life. Your interpretation differs from that which has come down to us from the Apostles.

expectthebest:

.When I say the flesh is evil,I mean that it is impossible to live in the flesh and not sin.

This is an error that you have been taught. Jesus does not command us to do things that He does not enable us to do. When He commanded that we are to “be perfect, as your heavenly father is perfect”, He intended for us to follow His commandment.

expectthebest:

When you say Christ built His Church on a rock,Im I correct in saying that you mean Peter,if so that is false,for Christ is the Rock.

Both are rocks. Jesus grafted Peter into His own rock-ness. Peters statement is also a solid rock of truth upon which we can build.

expectthebest:

As for conflicting teachings,I don’t feel Ive posted any.

I am sure that you believe all of your teachings are internally consistent.