The Purpose of Marriage

  • Thread starter Thread starter SextusEmpiricus
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
I am simply saying that there is no other way to know that the Gospel of Mark, the epistle to the Hebrews, etc etc etc are the Word of God…

[SIGN]except through deferring to the authority of the Catholic Church.[/SIGN]

Just a short question;

Why wouldn’t you recognize the word of God as a believer? And/or - wouldn’t the Holy Spirit lead you to know/recognize the word?
 
I am simply saying that there is no other way to know that the Gospel of Mark, the epistle to the Hebrews, etc etc etc are the Word of God…

[SIGN]except through deferring to the authority of the Catholic Church.[/SIGN]

Just a short question;

Why wouldn’t you recognize the word of God as a believer? And/or - wouldn’t the Holy Spirit lead you to know/recognize the word?
Welcome to CAF.

Why wouldn’t you recognize the Deuterocanon as inspired? Wouldn’t the Holy Spirit lead you to know/recognize the word?
 
If you (personally) are referring to me personally, then I am afraid you (personally) are making an assumption that is incorrect.
I mean “you” as in “you who do not accept the Catholic canon.”
 
If something is not specifically prohibited, it is generally permitted. We both seem to agree on this. Do you care to provide a case where OT Law clearly and unambiguously prohibits polygamy? If not, then we must agree that the practice was permitted.
It was permitted by the culture, yes.

But permitted by God? Nope.

EDIT: In one sense, of course, all events are “permitted” by God. Including fratricide, genocide, adultery, etc. They could not happen without God’s permissive will.

However, to assume that polygamy is sanctioned by God, not so much.
 
Why wouldn’t you recognize the word of God as a believer? And/or - wouldn’t the Holy Spirit lead you to know/recognize the word?
Are you telling me that “Saul went into a cave to relieve himself” speaks to you that this is the inspired Word of God?

What about “My breath is offensive to my wife”?

If I give you a list of religious texts–some from the Bible, some not, would you be able to tell me which ones are inspired, and which ones are not (without consulting an outside source)?
 
I don’t know what you are saying here. :confused:
Luke 9:18-21
Mark 8:27-30
Matthew 16:13-20
**Luke 9:18-21
Who Is Jesus?
18 When Jesus was alone praying, his disciples came to him, and he asked them, “What do people say about me?”

19 They answered, “Some say that you are John the Baptist or Elijah or a prophet from long ago who has come back to life.”

20 Jesus then asked them, “But who do you say I am?”
Peter answered, “You are the Messiah sent from God.”

21 Jesus strictly warned his disciples not to tell anyone about this.**
This is the same question he asks mankind today, “Who do you say that I am?” Who is he for every man or woman who refers to themselves as a practicing Christian or a converted man or woman.

What is important to Jesus is our personal response to these great questions: Who Am I for you? What do I mean to you?

As when Jesus would be taken before Pilate and he would say: “Are you the King of the Jews?”, Jesus replied: “Does that question come from you or are you repeating what others told you about Me?” (John 18:33-34) In the same way, when we tell Him: “You are the Lord, You are God; You are the Son of God”, Jesus asks us: Do you say this of your own accord, or is it because you have heard it?

God Bless

Thank you for reading
Josh
 
Luke 9:18-21
Mark 8:27-30
Matthew 16:13-20

This is the same question he asks mankind today, “Who do you say that I am?” Who is he for every man or woman who refers to themselves as a practicing Christian or a converted man or woman.

What is important to Jesus is our personal response to these great questions: Who Am I for you? What do I mean to you?

As when Jesus would be taken before Pilate and he would say: “Are you the King of the Jews?”, Jesus replied: “Does that question come from you or are you repeating what others told you about Me?” (John 18:33-34) In the same way, when we tell Him: “You are the Lord, You are God; You are the Son of God”, Jesus asks us: Do you say this of your own accord, or is it because you have heard it?

God Bless

Thank you for reading
Josh
Josh, correct me if I’m wrong, but you seem to be arguing for a distinction between Jesus and the Church. Is not the Church the Body of Christ? Is not the Church the pillar and bulwark of Truth? And if you reject the Church, do you not also reject Christ? And if you know Christ, is it not through the Church?
 
Josh, correct me if I’m wrong, but you seem to be arguing for a distinction between Jesus and the Church. Is not the Church the Body of Christ? Is not the Church the pillar and bulwark of Truth? And if you reject the Church, do you not also reject Christ? And if you know Christ, is it not through the Church?
I’m saying that at the end of the day Jesus asks us, “Who do you say that I am?” Not “who does the Catholic Church say I am?” Just as he asked his disciples.

If Jesus were to appear to you, how would you know that it was he, without the authority of the Catholic Church? and how does the CC determine what is the inspired Word of God?

The disciples didn’t have the authority of the CC to refer to, even worse they had the authority of the Teachers of the Law and the Pharisees telling them that Jesus was a false prophet. However all the signs, miracles and truths pointed to Jesus as the Son of God, all pointed to Jesus as the truth, the way and the life.

The question is, would you recognise him today without the authority of the CC telling you it was him?

God Bless

Thank you for reading
Josh
 
Are you telling me that “Saul went into a cave to relieve himself” speaks to you that this is the inspired Word of God?

What about “My breath is offensive to my wife”?

If I give you a list of religious texts–some from the Bible, some not, would you be able to tell me which ones are inspired, and which ones are not (without consulting an outside source)?
Let’s not forget the Jews, who pre-dated Catholicism. It was the Jews who determined that the Torah was the Word of God; it was the Jews who quoted authoritatively from the book of Psalms, or Proverbs. They knew all of these things, before the Roman Catholic Church existed; in fact, the Roman Catholic Church is indebted to the Jews for these texts.

Regarding the New Testament, a Protestant has a couple of different possible responses. One is that the early Church got Scripture right, but then – at some point – the Church fell into apostasy, at which point the torch was passed to the Protestant Reformers.

This is not dissimilar to Catholics who say that, at one time, the Jews were the primary guardians of the faith; they were the ones who, independently of Roman Catholic help or (name removed by moderator)ut, determined that the Torah was the Word of God. Moses did not need the Roman Catholic Church to determine this; he received confirmation on Mount Sinai.

Yet Catholics say, “at one time, Jews were the guardians of the faith, and much of our Scripture is their Scripture; yet the torch has been passed, Jews are no longer the primary guardians of the truth.” Protestants are saying the same thing – that the torch has been passed. They don’t need to deny that, at one time, Catholics (or the early Church) were the primary guardians of the faith,* just as Catholics can say this about Jews, * and not feel compelled to convert to Judaism.

So, at the very least, Protestants owe Roman Catholics respect for their historical role – just as Roman Catholics owe respect for the Jews. Roman Catholics can respect Judaism, yet still believe that they have insight into truths that Judaism lacks.

The other argument the Protestant has, is the historical one – as I believe you’ve argued, reason alone can determine that the Gospels are historically accurate, thus that Jesus was exactly who he said he was. I’m assuming that, per this argument, non-inspired books of the Bible will not, and cannot, be shown to be “historically accurate” in their claims? 🤷
 
Until I confront [non-Catholic Christians] with the question: how is it that you believe that the Gospel of Mark is the inspired Word of God, except through the authority of the CC?
…]And, TS, I absolutely give you permission to use this question, as an atheist, when you are in dialogue with non-Catholic Christians.
No thanks. Questions on consistency or resolution of conflicts for one’s religious disposition can quite easily be interpreted as a personal attack. I’ve found that even the phrase “I’m not a Christian” has been taken as an attack or made people uncomfortable. I think your question would be better received when asked by some one else that is at least a Christian.
(And I’ve never heard of the protein thing, so I can’t comment on that.)
It’s a description from an external perspective of the dietary practices during Fridays in Lent.
 
inocente;11068626:
Nope. Baptists don’t really have any doctrine, you don’t get to join a church unless you’re invited, and you’re not invited unless you have made friends in the church and others can see you’re baptized in the Spirit
, so we’re used to disagreeing and finding what we have in common, it’s no biggy.
In Matthew 25:40-43 Jesus speaks about the final judgment. This is how the King, the Son of Man, will judge those brought before his throne who failed to do good works. “I was a stranger and you did not welcome me, naked and you did not give me clothing, sick and in prison and you did not visit me.” Then they also will answer, "Lord, when was it that we saw you hungry or thirsty or a stranger or naked or sick or in prison, and did not take care of you?” Then he will answer them, “Truly I tell you, just as you did not do it to one of the least of these, you did not do it to me.’ And these will go away into eternal punishment, but the righteous into eternal life.”

So are Baptists free to view the above words by Jesus as not a doctrine to be obeyed? Are they free to disagree with what Jesus preaches? If they are free to do so, why do they call themselves Christians? If they are not free to do so, then you have doctrines.

Which is it?
A Baptist church is a congregation who meet together. If it is small then everyone knows each other, if it is larger there will be house-groups of up to twelve or so friends. Everything is done on a personal basis, and you don’t get invited to join the church until those who know you (and your pastor) believe you’re ready.

Your inward decision to come to Christ is symbolized by water baptism, which is not thought of as supernatural or anything and is one of the few rituals we have. (Children aren’t baptized until they are old enough to make their own decision).

Generally the only question you are asked, just before being baptized, is “do you accept Christ as your personal savior?”. That’s the only doctrine/creed I was ever asked to formally commit to, everything else is based around those personal relationships.

Note the phrase “personal savior” in the question. I’d expect every Baptist to agree with the passage you quoted, not as an instruction from a rule book but because of that personal relationship. I wouldn’t call it “doctrine” myself but if you want to then fine.
 
The signs, miracles and truths to it.

God Bless

Thank you for reading
Josh
The Book of Mormon, Koran and other religious texts also claim to have signs, miracles and truths.

Why do you not believe they are theopneustos?

Also, the epistle of Clement, epistle of Barnabas, Didache, Gospel of Thomas, protoevangelium of James all have signs, miracles and truths to them.

Why do you not believe they are theopneustos?
 
Let’s not forget the Jews, who pre-dated Catholicism. It was the Jews who determined that the Torah was the Word of God; it was the Jews who quoted authoritatively from the book of Psalms, or Proverbs. They knew all of these things, before the Roman Catholic Church existed; in fact, the Roman Catholic Church is indebted to the Jews for these texts.
Indeed.

So Sola Scriptura advocates hold an untenable position in that they cannot claim to know the Word of God without the authority of some other entity.
Regarding the New Testament, a Protestant has a couple of different possible responses. One is that the early Church got Scripture right, but then – at some point – the Church fell into apostasy, at which point the torch was passed to the Protestant Reformers.
I’m fine with that.

But they are still acknowledging:

-an authority OUTSIDE of Scripture to tell them God’s revelation.
-that the Church was given the charism of infallibility, at least as it applies to the canon of the NT, on MULTIPLE occasions.
 
The other argument the Protestant has, is the historical one – as I believe you’ve argued, reason alone can determine that the Gospels are historically accurate, thus that Jesus was exactly who he said he was. I’m assuming that, per this argument, non-inspired books of the Bible will not, and cannot, be shown to be “historically accurate” in their claims? 🤷
Out of the over 400 ancient Christian texts, (which I don’t claim to have read), I propose that 99% of them are historically accurate.

So it would not be a helpful criterion.
 
No thanks. Questions on consistency or resolution of conflicts for one’s religious disposition can quite easily be interpreted as a personal attack. I’ve found that even the phrase “I’m not a Christian” has been taken as an attack or made people uncomfortable. I think your question would be better received when asked by some one else that is at least a Christian.
Ok.
It’s a description from an external perspective of the dietary practices during Fridays in Lent.
You consider abstaining to be a quirky behavior?
 
Everything is done on a personal basis, and you don’t get invited to join the church until those who know you (and your pastor) believe you’re ready.
Based on what?
Your inward decision to come to Christ is symbolized by water baptism, which is not thought of as supernatural or anything and is one of the few rituals we have. (Children aren’t baptized until they are old enough to make their own decision).
Generally the only question you are asked, just before being baptized, is “do you accept Christ as your personal savior?”. That’s the only doctrine/creed I was ever asked to formally commit to, everything else is based around those personal relationships
Would your church let a white supremacist who professes Jesus Christ as his personal savior to join?
 
The Book of Mormon, Koran and other religious texts also claim to have signs, miracles and truths.

Why do you not believe they are theopneustos?

Also, the epistle of Clement, epistle of Barnabas, Didache, Gospel of Thomas, protoevangelium of James all have signs, miracles and truths to them.

Why do you not believe they are theopneustos?
I have never read them, so I don’t know.

You say you know the Gospels to be the inspired Word of God only because the CC tells you so. This is an answer to when Jesus say’s “Who do people say that I am?” but not to the question he puts to us “Who do you say that I am?”

Do you believe the Gospels are the inspired Word of God, or has the CC told you this about them?

Pilate said “Are you the King of the Jews?”, Jesus replied: “Does that question come from you or are you repeating what others told you about Me?” (John 18:33-34)

Jesus told him. “I was born into this world to tell about the truth. And everyone who belongs to the truth knows my voice.” (John 18:37)

Like I said to stewstew03, the question is, would you recognise him today without the authority of the CC telling you it was him?

The fact that the CC tells us this certainly helps, but it is not the only reason why I believe that the Gospels are the inspired Word of God.

God Bless

Thank you for reading
Josh
 
I believe the Gospels are the inspired Word of God and therefore I am Catholic, because they currently teach and practice the fullness of the truth including the Gospels (e.g. such as the absolute truth to the Holy Eucharist).

It’s not -

I’m Catholic and therefore that’s why I believe the Gospels are the inspired Word of God etc.

God Bless

Thank you for reading
Josh
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top