What is the true church?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Odell
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Philthy,
So the short end of my confusion is how you conclude that the promise to the Apostles becomes the same promise to each individual believer in Corinth.
Click to expand...
Well, the same way you, and the rest of the Catholic Church interprets Jesus’ words to the Apostles in Matt. 26:26, 27 as not exclusive to the Apostles, but all inclusive for all Christians… By the words of Paul in 1 Cor. 11:26.

I have proven that the same type of revelation described to the Apostles, and supposed by you to be exclusive to the Apostles is in fact not exclusive, but all inclusive for all Christians… By the words of Paul in 1 Cor. 2.

Which is further proven to be all inclusive in Paul’s first letter to Timothy…
1Timothy 2:4 Who will have all men to be saved, and to come unto the knowledge of the truth.
Click to expand...
According to Paul, God does not want anyone to be void of truth… which is why He sent His Son as a propitiation for our sins… so we might be saved, and able to come to a knowledge of truth.

John
www.gideonsword.net
 
Philthy and Eden,
One little problem though - you haven’t presented any proof that people actually drank “new wine”. If they did drink it, it wouldn’t be around long enough to burst a wineskin, would it?
Click to expand...
“No longer drink only water, but use a little wine for the sake of your stomach and your frequent ailments” (1 Tim. 5:23). In an age in which modern water purification methods and food storage techniques were unknown, the antiseptic effect of alcoholic wine could play a significant role in preventing gastroenteritis (non-alcoholic wine would not have this effect). Paul thus counseled Timothy to take advantage of its medicinal benefits.
Click to expand...
Let’s move this to another thread… Would you care to start one?

John
www.gideonsword.net
 
bibleapologist said:
Odell,
No, the truth we would be preaching would be truthful… but not infallible… to be infallible means that something is not able to be corrupted, God is infallible and He alone is the originator of truth… since we speak what we learn from Him… we speak truthfulness.
John
Click to expand...
So is our truthfulness able to be corrupted?
 
bibleapologist said:
Philthy and Eden,
Let’s move this to another thread… Would you care to start one?

John
Click to expand...
Actually John this Has nothing to do with who is the true Church. It is only content between us which dosnt matter. Remember.

Lets concentrate on what you said to be marks of true Church. You said belivers baptism and total imersion. Is a mark of the true Church. But its not so woul you please start a thred on belivers baptism a mark of the true Church. I would love to show how your belifes on baptism are not biblical. And the true Church believs how the catholics do regarding baptism.

It would be good for your web page. To show what catholics realy believe regarding baptism. And gives us a chance to refute the post you have on your web-page about baptism which happens not to be truthfulness.
 
Odell,
So is our truthfulness able to be corrupted?
Click to expand...
Truthfullness is only a reiteration of truth received from the origin… if Odell made a truthful statement, and Philthy heard that statement and repeated it a little different so as to change the meaning a little… Philthy’s statement wouldn’t be truthful… Philthy’s statement couldn’t be considered as the origin of truth… Philthy’s statement would only be an attempt to reiterate a truth he heard… second hand.

So, Philthy’s statement would not be a corrupted truth, only a misinterpretation of that truth, and Odell’s version could only be considered a correctly interpreted version of truth.

John
www.gideonsword.net
 
Odell,
But its not so woul you please start a thred on belivers baptism a mark of the true Church. I would love to show how your belifes on baptism are not biblical. And the true Church believs how the catholics do regarding baptism.
Click to expand...
Thanks to NotWorthy, there is such a thread which I’m sure will cover the above mentioned doctrines eventually… you are welcome to join us:)

Actually I think It might be better to start a thread that would cover the doctrine of baptism, and the differences between the Catholic understanding and the Baptist understanding. I could see it becoming a very good debate…

Here is the New thread called… “Baptism… And the True Church”

John
www.gideonsword.net
 
bibleapologist said:
Odell,

Truthfullness is only a reiteration of truth received from the origin… if Odell made a truthful statement, and Philthy heard that statement and repeated it a little different so as to change the meaning a little… Philthy’s statement wouldn’t be truthful… Philthy’s statement couldn’t be considered as the origin of truth… Philthy’s statement would only be an attempt to reiterate a truth he heard… second hand.

So, Philthy’s statement would not be a corrupted truth, only a misinterpretation of that truth, and Odell’s version could only be considered a correctly interpreted version of truth.

John
www.gideonsword.net
Click to expand...
The Truth handed down to us and protected by the Holy Spirit is not a telephone game. Your illustration of how truth can be corrupted works if we were talking about celebrity gossip, but you underestimate the power of the Holy Spirit to protect the deposit of faith.
 
bibleapologist said:
Philthy,
Well, the same way you, and the rest of the Catholic Church interprets Jesus’ words to the Apostles in Matt. 26:26, 27 as not exclusive to the Apostles, but all inclusive for all Christians… By the words of Paul in 1 Cor. 11:26.

I have proven that the same type of revelation described to the Apostles, and supposed by you to be exclusive to the Apostles is in fact not exclusive, but all inclusive for all Christians… By the words of Paul in 1 Cor. 2.

Which is further proven to be all inclusive in Paul’s first letter to Timothy…

John
www.gideonsword.net
Click to expand...
This is literally the fifth or sixth time I have had to retype my response to this post! The others kept getting lost - perhaps that is a hint…
I will simply say that what you believe constitutes a “proof” does not even remotely constitute a proof in my mind. The fact that Paul wrote more than one letter to Timothy would be, in my opinion, prima facia proof that Paul did not expect the holy Spirit to guide Timothy to all truth.
In addition, the multiple divisions within Christianity (and the Baptist denomination) would also seem to be a glaring reality which contradicts your notions.
I do believe the holy Spirit guides individuals to truth - dont get me wrong - but I believe the full Truth comes to the entire body of Christ and is recognized as such by those with the gift of discernment received from the holy Spirit.
 
Philthy said:
The fact that Paul wrote more than one letter to Timothy would be, in my opinion, prima facia proof that Paul did not expect the holy Spirit to guide Timothy to all truth.
Very true. Timothy posessed the virtue of humility, and realized that Paul was a more mature Christian, and saw great value from listening and learning from another Christian.
Click to expand...
 
bibleapologist said:
Odell,

Truthfullness is only a reiteration of truth received from the origin… if Odell made a truthful statement, and Philthy heard that statement and repeated it a little different so as to change the meaning a little… Philthy’s statement wouldn’t be truthful… Philthy’s statement couldn’t be considered as the origin of truth… Philthy’s statement would only be an attempt to reiterate a truth he heard… second hand.

So, Philthy’s statement would not be a corrupted truth, only a misinterpretation of that truth, and Odell’s version could only be considered a correctly interpreted version of truth.

John
www.gideonsword.net
Click to expand...
What if Philty repeated it exactly the same would that be truth then?
 
Eden,
The Truth handed down to us and protected by the Holy Spirit is not a telephone game. Your illustration of how truth can be corrupted works if we were talking about celebrity gossip, but you underestimate the power of the Holy Spirit to protect the deposit of faith.
Click to expand...
And if you believe an Omnipotent God can orchestrate the undefiled translation of truth from one generation to another, why do you have a hard time believing that same God can orchestrate the preservation of His written word through the first three centuries, and even until now?

And why would that same Omnipotent and Omniscient God send His Son Jesus, to die for the purpose of reuniting sinful man with Him; if He would then turn around and mediate that new relationship with a Church institution?

John
www.gideonsword.net
 
Odell,
What if Philty repeated it exactly the same would that be truth then?
Click to expand...
It would only be another reiteration of a truthful statement, but that does still not negate the fact that Philthy could have misinterpreted the truth… it only means that he didn’t.

John
www.gideonsword.net
 
bibleapologist said:
Philthy,

I’ll take that as evidence that you don’t have any other arguments to substantiate the Catholic claim that drinking alcohol is OK.

John
www.gideonsword.net
Click to expand...
Ill take that as evidence that you will purposely distort fact to suit your agenda. I neither confirm nor deny whether I have additional arguments to substantiate that drinking alcohol is OK. I have simply stated that I have no INTEREST in starting a separate thread on it. Whether you choose to retract your conclusion - which in its present state bears false witness - or whether you choose to continue to deny reality in favor of your agenda is entirely your choice for which you will be held fully accountable.

Phil
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top