R
Remnant1
Guest
If you are not sure what I am saying, how can you disagree.
- Status
K
KendraDZ1902
Guest
I disagree with your interpretation of the bible. I don’t disagree with The Church’s interpretation of the bible because The Church is the pillar and foundation of the truth.
P
pablope
Guest
No, not the Bible…with your interpretation.
Your interpretative tradition does not go back to the Apostles…it starts sometime in the 1800s…through the eyes of EGW.
We all have interpretative traditions, Remnant…whether you realize it or not…whether you recognize it or not…whether you want to play blind or not.
Catholic interpretative traditions trace back to even before the Bible was put together. It was put together to reflect Catholic teachings.
For the Nth time…His (Remnant or SDA) interpretation picks out what counts as tradition, and then this tradition informs his interpretation
Ecclesial Deism
calledtocommunion.com/2009/07/ecclesial-deism/
‘Tradition’ becomes whatever one agrees with in the history of the Church, such as the Nicene Creed or Chalcedonian Christology…What makes it ‘authoritative’ for Mohler is that it agrees with his interpretation of Scripture. If he encounters something in the tradition that seems extra-biblical or opposed to Scripture he rejects it. For that reason, tradition does not authoritatively guide his interpretation. His interpretation picks out what counts as tradition, and then this tradition informs his interpretation.
P
pablope
Guest
No. Let me ask you…if you wanted to know the manner of how to go to confession…where does the Bible say the manner of how to go about to confession?
If you cannot find this in the Bible…where will you go to look for the answer?
If you wanted to know the proper manner and way of worship…where does the Bible say this?
If you cannot find this in the Bible…where will you go look for the answer?
R
Remnant1
Guest
Kendra, 1Cor2: For I determined not to know any thing among you, save Jesus Christ, and him crucified., confirms the fact in 2Thess.2:15Therefore, brethren, stand fast, and hold the traditions which ye have been taught, whether by word, or our epistle., that the traditions taught by word or epistle are one and the same thing. This is a matter of logic and takes no interpretation. So if you or your church disagree you are disagreeing with the bible not my interpretation. I think I will stick with the bible.
God is love
Remnant1
P
pablope
Guest
K
KendraDZ1902
Guest
It isn’t and you are wrong. They aren’t one and they same. I’m not the only one who feels this way. You seem to be the only one who doesn’t understand.
R
Remnant1
Guest
It isn’t what?
P
pablope
Guest
If you go put this in context…and go the very first verse, and look at it not in isolation, then what St. Paul says becomes more evident:
1 Corinthians 2
And so it was with me, brothers and sisters. When I came to you, I did not come with eloquence or human wisdom as I proclaimed to you the testimony about God.[a] 2 For I resolved to know nothing while I was with you except Jesus Christ and him crucified.3 I came to you in weakness with great fear and trembling. 4 My message and my preaching were not with wise and persuasive words, but with a demonstration of the Spirit’s power, 5 so that your faith might not rest on human wisdom, but on God’s power.
Paul is not saying anything about whether oral or written here. He is talking about his first time he came to Corinth, and his testimony about Jesus.
2Thes2: 15
15 So then, brothers and sisters, stand firm and hold fast to the teachings[c] we passed on to you, whether by word of mouth or by letter.
2Thes is talking about holding fast to what has been taught…by epistle or word of mouth.
So where is the connection between the two passages, Remnant?
Or are you trying to force an interpretation to confirm your preconceived interpretation?
R
Remnant1
Guest
P
pablope
Guest
pablope;10914325:
Okay!
I don’t know how much clearer I can make it. 1Cor2:2Says that Paul says that he knew nothing among the Corinthians save Jesus Christ and Him crucified.
Okay…so how did the Corinthians know about Jesus before Paul came to them? (this seem to be what you are saying?)
1 Corinthians 2
And so it was with me, brothers and sisters. When I came to you, I did not come with eloquence or human wisdom as I proclaimed to you the testimony about God.[a] 2 For I resolved to know nothing while I was with you except Jesus Christ and him crucified.3 I came to you in weakness with great fear and trembling. 4 My message and my preaching were not with wise and persuasive words, but with a demonstration of the Spirit’s power, 5 so that your faith might not rest on human wisdom, but on God’s power
1 Corinthians 2
And so it was with me, brothers and sisters. When I came to you, I did not come with eloquence or human wisdom as I proclaimed to you the testimony about God.[a] 2 For I resolved to know nothing while I was with you except Jesus Christ and him crucified.3 I came to you in weakness with great fear and trembling. 4 My message and my preaching were not with wise and persuasive words, but with a demonstration of the Spirit’s power, 5 so that your faith might not rest on human wisdom, but on God’s power.
Loooking at this in the greater context…Paul is not saying anything about whether oral or written here. He is talking about his first time he came to Corinth, and his testimony about Jesus.
Are you hung up on this phrase…“For I resolved to know nothing”?
This seems to mean Paul resolved to learn anything from the Corinthians except to proclaim Jesus and the gospel…
K
KendraDZ1902
Guest
Remnant1;10914379:
Okay…so how did the Corinthians know about Jesus before Paul came to them? (this seem to be what you are saying?)
1 Corinthians 2
And so it was with me, brothers and sisters. When I came to you, I did not come with eloquence or human wisdom as I proclaimed to you the testimony about God.[a] 2 For I resolved to know nothing while I was with you except Jesus Christ and him crucified.3 I came to you in weakness with great fear and trembling. 4 My message and my preaching were not with wise and persuasive words, but with a demonstration of the Spirit’s power, 5 so that your faith might not rest on human wisdom, but on God’s power
1 Corinthians 2
And so it was with me, brothers and sisters. When I came to you, I did not come with eloquence or human wisdom as I proclaimed to you the testimony about God.[a] 2 For I resolved to know nothing while I was with you except Jesus Christ and him crucified.3 I came to you in weakness with great fear and trembling. 4 My message and my preaching were not with wise and persuasive words, but with a demonstration of the Spirit’s power, 5 so that your faith might not rest on human wisdom, but on God’s power.
Loooking at this in the greater context…Paul is not saying anything about whether oral or written here. He is talking about his first time he came to Corinth, and his testimony about Jesus.
Are you hung up on this phrase…“For I resolved to know nothing”?
This seems to mean Paul resolved to learn anything from the Corinthians except to proclaim Jesus and the gospel…
R
Remnant1
Guest
Remnant1;10914379:
Okay…so how did the Corinthians know about Jesus before Paul came to them? (this seem to be what you are saying?)
1 Corinthians 2
And so it was with me, brothers and sisters. When I came to you, I did not come with eloquence or human wisdom as I proclaimed to you the testimony about God.[a] 2 For I resolved to know nothing while I was with you except Jesus Christ and him crucified.3 I came to you in weakness with great fear and trembling. 4 My message and my preaching were not with wise and persuasive words, but with a demonstration of the Spirit’s power, 5 so that your faith might not rest on human wisdom, but on God’s power
1 Corinthians 2
And so it was with me, brothers and sisters. When I came to you, I did not come with eloquence or human wisdom as I proclaimed to you the testimony about God.[a] 2 For I resolved to know nothing while I was with you except Jesus Christ and him crucified.3 I came to you in weakness with great fear and trembling. 4 My message and my preaching were not with wise and persuasive words, but with a demonstration of the Spirit’s power, 5 so that your faith might not rest on human wisdom, but on God’s power.
Loooking at this in the greater context…Paul is not saying anything about whether oral or written here. He is talking about his first time he came to Corinth, and his testimony about Jesus.
Are you hung up on this phrase…“For I resolved to know nothing”?
This seems to mean Paul resolved to learn anything from the Corinthians except to proclaim Jesus and the gospel…
That is exactly right and that “knowing” included preaching traditions by word or epistle which is exactly what the bible teaches. So the words and epistles talked about in 2Thess.2:15 are teaching the same thing and that is Jesus Christ and Him crucified, which is exactly what the bible teaches.
God is love
Remnant1
P
pablope
Guest
F
ffg
Guest
It is interesting to run into someone who has an answer for what most bible alone friends can’t answer - the timeline aspect.
Though it’s not one that I would buy, if you gave it to me free.
Blending time to say world history was set to be written, and it was, therefore = bible alone is clever.
But it has a very sandy foundation. I’m not building in that neighborhood.
Though it’s not one that I would buy, if you gave it to me free.
Blending time to say world history was set to be written, and it was, therefore = bible alone is clever.
But it has a very sandy foundation. I’m not building in that neighborhood.
R
Remnant1
Guest
P
pablope
Guest
R
Remnant1
Guest
R
rfournier103
Guest
Where does it say ANYTHING AT ALL about Scripture alone??? Paul was preaching ORALLY. Hundreds of years before the Bible. The Scriptures were written by men with the Devine Inspiration of the Holy Spirit. It says nothing about the Bible/Scripture alone. There is NOTHING here definitive one way or another. Try another prooftext. You might do better.
I respectfully ask that you try to be a little more clear. Not many people here seem to be pickin’ up what you’re layin’ down…
If your argument is resting on “My message and my preaching were not with wise and persuasive words, but with a demonstration of the Spirit’s power, so that your faith might not rest on human wisdom, but on God’s power…”, That’s kind of weak. The Catholic Church doesn’t “make it up as we go along”, but our Scriptures and our Tradition have been handed down to us from the time of Christ. The Church has God’s and Christ’s Authority to do so.
The Catholic Church was founded by Jesus Christ. Human wisdom plays no role in the THEOLOGY of the Church. The Holy Spirit and the Authority granted by Christ Himself guide the One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church.
Trust me… no other “church” can say that.
P
pablope
Guest
[SIGN]
[/SIGN]
I think you are confused and you are going in circles. You are trying to force a meaning in the passage about your preconceived idea, which is to rationalize your own thought.
I am not saying this.
What I am saying is the passage of 1cor 2:2, when taken into its general context, is not saying what you are saying, but it is about Paul and his resoluteness to focus his teachings to the Corinthians about Christ and christ alone. He is not talking about what he has handed down yet, but what he is about to hand down.
How hard is that to understand? Shall we keep banging heads…??? :banghead::banghead::banghead:
Paul in this context, is talking about the start of his Corinthian mission. He is not talking about oral or written traditions at this point of his Corinthian mission. He has not written anything yet at the start. His writings came later, at the end of his missions.
- Status