Z
zz912
Guest
So you know that Jesus and the Bible tells us to take it to the Church for resolution, you just don’t want to admit it.
- Status
B
benhur
Guest
Well I did admit it.(though perhaps not in the fashion you like).
Will you admit that two individuals have authority also , and three even more, that God must ultimately resolve in each man’s heart ?
Blessings
G
Gorgias
Guest
I explicitly addressed them, point by point.
Z
zz912
Guest
No, I don’t admit that two individuals hold authority. What authority do you claim they hold? Where is this in Scripture?
And to whom and where should you and I go for resolution on our disagreement on this matter? Please be specific.
S
steve_b
Guest
by addressing, are you meaning acknowledging the points, or are you meaning answering the points. Here’s your posts #274 , #288 , #299I explicitly addressed them, point by point.
In post #272 I gave this link ewtn.com/faith/teachings/ascna1.htm
Fr. William G. Most wrote
Forty days after his Resurrection, Jesus ascended into heaven. During this period between his
Resurrection and Ascension, He actually gave the primacy He had promised to Peter, as we read in John 21. The many events between His resurrection and ascension preclude the theory that He ascended on Easter. His ascension does not mean that heaven is somewhere up in space. This was a way of making clear that He was leaving the present mode of existence. St. Paul in Colossians 3:1 urges us to live our lives now as if we had already died, had risen, and had ascended with Him. In a mystical sense we have done that, in that our Head has done that. In the physical sense it is still in the future.
Then in post #276 I added the following from the Navarre bible commentary on Jn 20:17
“Do not hold me” the use of the negative imperative in the Greek reflected in the new Vulgate (Noli me tenere) indicates that the Lord is telling Mary to release her hold on Him, to let go, since she will have another chance to see Him before His ascension into heaven"
You seem to disagree with these links. When do you say Jesus ascended?
B
benhur
Guest
They hold authority as do three or more and as does the congregation/church. Righteousness is it’s own authority, and thus can be held at many levels. And there are levels the congregation being ultimate. This is found in the Lord’s discourse dealing with when your brethren has faulted you
Our respective churches have already ruled on the matter, so not sure what else you or I could do (that has not been done or tried already).
Blessings
T
Tomdstone
Guest
Not true according to the Orthodox Council of 1722 in Constantinople. An encyclical from that Council to the Orthodox of Antioch, referred, among other things, to the subject of the purifying fire. It said: “While the Latins affirm that there are three places to which the souls of the dead go, we the godly, following the truth and turning away from such innovations, confess and accept two places for the souls of the dead, paradise and hell, for the righteous and sinners, as the holy Scripture teaches us. We do not accept a third place, a purgatory, by any means, since neither Scripture nor the holy Fathers have taught us any such thing…”
P
PRmerger
Guest
Source for this, please? Original source to the document of the Orthodox Council of 1722.
Not a website that sites it secondarily.
Incidentally, in the site that you quoted (without referencing. You should do that, BTW. Otherwise it looks like you wrote what someone else actually wrote), it says:
"The Orthodox Church believes that “those who have offended forgivably and moderately hope to gain freedom through the unspeakable mercy of God”. And how do they obtain that mercy, "through Church prayers, supplications, liturgies, as well as memorial services and almsgiving."orthodoxservices.org - orthodoxservices Resources and Information.
…and what is that, except for another way to say…
we believe in…
purgatory.
Which is what I said originally. Even though they don’t say it, they actually do believe in it.
T
Tomdstone
Guest
For the text of the Encyclical published by the Council of 1722, see
I. Karmiris: Ta Dogmatika kai Symvolika mnimeia tis Orthodoxou Katholikis
Ekklisias (The Dogmatic and Symbolic Monuments of the Orthodox Catholic
Church) Graz, Austria, 21968, pp.861-870.
Z
zz912
Guest
So if I gather together 2 other Catholics and we tell you that you are in error, you will submit to our authority, correct?
No, righteousness is righteousness, and authority is authority. They are not the same and having righteousness does not give one authority.
Scripture citation for this claim that the congregation is the ultimate authority? (This will be hard for you, since the epistles written were mainly to congregations, correcting them in error and exercising authority over them, so there is NO WAY the congregation was the ultimate authority.)
The Lord say to take the matter to the Church (singular). What church or congregation can I take you to that will have authority over both of us? What church or congregation can I take you to that you will recognize as having authority over you? (here is the fatal flaw in your personal opinion, because there is one Church that Jesus built. I can’t take you to your local congregation as I don’t recognize their authority, and I can’t take you to the Catholic Church, because you don’t recognize hers. So your personal opinion renders this passage meaningless and the Lord’s command impossible.)
Where does your church receive special authority from Jesus? Authority that others do not possess?
B
benhur
Guest
No, but you yourself have the authority to correct me, just as two Catholics would, and finally as your whole church would with anthema or cutting off. No, I would not submit to your error as you would not also if I were to have to P’s , even a P church correct you with what you think is error.
Well they all stem from God,all.
Yes, the word is church, but "congregation’’ is ok and no claim is made that any more authority is needed in a matter dealing with "fault’’. Doctrine is something else where church, even council is appropriate, above a congregation. I mean even the CC has layers of authority within “church” , and one does not always have to go to the top.
Possibly and maybe not . My understanding can apply better to a congregation, where you say it can not. Can different congregations deal on a matter of sin/fault? If both churches have same understanding of a particular sin as “one” they can admonish the sinner. That is two churches (acting as “one”) can admonish the perpetrator, who is part of one of those churches.If I rob you you certainly can go before my congregation to hopefully get me to repent. No, this will not work in all cases and does not take away from the Lord’s discourse on the matter.
Again , I do not limit authority to be in one church but limit authority to the extent that she speaks correctly. As in above scenario both our churches are correct to say stealing from another is wrong. Both churches are authoritative on the matter of me stealing.
Again the context of the scripture is when dealing with faults, not so much as "doctrine’’, for we are to be one in that anyways. Jesus deals with false teachers elsewhere, but not here explicitly as He does with “fault”.
No, I said both our churches have authority. Does one have authority not possessed by others you ask ? Absolutely. Where there is error, and only a few profess no error, there should not be authority. For instance even the Roman government, and the Sanhedrin had authority over the apostles, and they willingly obeyed, so long as it was not contrary to their God given understanding (not against God’s dictates).
Blessings
P
PRmerger
Guest
Where did you find the text? From the website I cited?
Or do you actually have this book?
Z
zz912
Guest
How in the world do you correct someone without authority? Yes, they MAY listen to you, but if they don’t, you have to take them to the Church as Jesus commanded. You nullify this teaching of His because you deny there is one Church we can go to for resolution. How did St. Paul excommunicate several as we see in his letters? He had to have authority, and there was only ONE Church, which taught ONE faith.
Sorry benhur, but this is a fatal flaw of your personal theology.
J
JMM1957
Guest
Right, God is the ultimate authority, so if you take this one step further, the Church then, would exercise God’s authority here on earth. That is, the Church Jesus established.
B
benhur
Guest
Well it is one step backward , from God the ultimate authority. I mean all governments exercise much God given authority as do parents over their children etc etc. But as far as light to the world, yes the church is ultimate, and we are part of that . We are His finger on the Earth.
Blessings
B
benhur
Guest
There are different types of authority an levels. You have authority to tell me stealing from you is wrong.You do not have authority to put me out ,hand me over to Satan.The church does that.
Listening is not the qualification, for I can listen to you and go my way stealing. I can listen to two of you and go my way stealing .I can listen to your whole church and go my own way stealing. I can listen to a full council and go my way stealing. That does not diminish each of those authoritative levels.
First I do not nullify because i do not deny for I posted now several times: "and finally as your whole church ". Secondly you avoid the first two steps of the authority of reconciliation/correction that Jesus talks about.
I do not deny the churches authority and i do not think you deny the individual or several brothers from speaking God’s truth on a matter (fault) authoritatively (not to excommunicate but to judge righteously).
I acknowledged the authority to excommunicate, anathematize,turn over to Satan.
blessings
J
JMM1957
Guest
Its funny how you have to go in a complete circle around what I said just to agree with me.
Z
zz912
Guest
You deny there is ONE Church that could excommunicate or hand over to satan. If Bob, who goes to First Baptist Church, is excommunicated from them, can walk right down the street and start attending Calvary Baptist Church, or First Methodist Church. So you DO deny the ability to excommunicate, because you deny a single, unified Church.
G
Gorgias
Guest
No, the links are fairly reasonable. I just disagree with your (implicit, here) assertion that Jesus was never in the presence of the Father until the Ascension. You left out the assertion you’d made earlier that Jesus had so much stuff to do that He could barely fit it all in within the 40 days, anyway.
So: did Jesus ascend to Heaven finally on the Ascension, as recorded in the Bible? Of course He did. Did Jesus not ever get into the presence of His Father prior to the Ascension? That seems problematic. After all, in the very verse you quote, Jesus tells Mary Magdalene, “I am ascending to the Father.” Not “I will ascend to the Father”, in the future tense, whether that’s “in 40 days” or even “in some indefinite time.” No, Jesus uses the present tense: “I am ascending.” It’s difficult to understand how you can make the claim that He really didn’t mean what He said, but only meant “I am ascending… in 40 days… so take your hands off me now.”
J
JMM1957
Guest
Well, it depends on the translation, because my Bible (NAB) says, " I have not yet ascended to the Father." This is not a present tense either.No, the links are fairly reasonable. I just disagree with your (implicit, here) assertion that Jesus was never in the presence of the Father until the Ascension. You left out the assertion you’d made earlier that Jesus had so much stuff to do that He could barely fit it all in within the 40 days, anyway.
So: did Jesus ascend to Heaven finally on the Ascension, as recorded in the Bible? Of course He did. Did Jesus not ever get into the presence of His Father prior to the Ascension? That seems problematic. After all, in the very verse you quote, Jesus tells Mary Magdalene, “I am ascending to the Father.” Not “I will ascend to the Father”, in the future tense, whether that’s “in 40 days” or even “in some indefinite time.” No, Jesus uses the present tense: “I am ascending.” It’s difficult to understand how you can make the claim that He really didn’t mean what He said, but only meant “I am ascending… in 40 days… so take your hands off me now.”
- Status