Why should we listen to you?

[CatsAndDogs]

Quote:
Originally Posted by CatsAndDogs View Post
You shouldn’t. You should check what is said against what the Church says.

Why shouldn’t he check it with what the Bible says?

Because reading the bible is an act of interpretation, which is “private revelation”, which is great, but which STILL needs to be checked against the understanding of the Church.

We MUST read our bible, and be open to all the private revelations that that activity gives us, but private revelations of ANY TYPE must be checked against public revelation, which is authoritatively interpreted ONLY by the Magisterium.

:shamrock2:

 

[CatsAndDogs]

John 17:17 Sanctify them through thy truth: thy word is truth.

According to Jesus, the truth is the word of God: the Scriptures.

Incorrect.

The Word of God is Jesus.

The Church is the Body of Christ Jesus. We are sanctified through thy (God’s) truth: thy Word (Jesus) is truth.

The scriptures are a subset of the Deposit of Faith.

Why would it be better to rely on a misinterpretable subset of the Deposit of Faith instead of Jesus Christ Himself?

:shamrock2:

 

[Tantum_ergo]

OK, here’s a sentence:

I didn’t say that John stole the money.

Seems pretty straightforward, doesn’t it?

But depending on what word is emphasized, the meaning of the sentence changes dramatically.

I didn’t say that John stole the money.

I didn’t say that John stole the money.

I didn’t say that John stole the money.

I didn’t say that John stole the money.

I didn’t say that John stole the money.

I didn’t say that John stole the money.

Now, suppose you are just reading that sentence in a book. There’s context around, but the context could support virtually any of the readings.

How do you know which word (if any) was emphasized? Remember, there is a big difference between say, I didn’t say that John stole the money and I didn’t say that John stole the money.

People who read the Bible without any authority other than their own interpretation are pretty much reading blindly. Sure, sometimes they’ll be lucky and ‘guess’ the correct interpretation. But sometimes they’ll be thinking that Jesus emphasized one word when He actually emphasized another (so to speak) and they’ll be completely thrown off. . .because if they do this with enough, or with key Scriptural passages, they then try to ‘force’ other passages to ‘gibe’ with their erroneous inferences on OTHER passages. . .leading to this huge snowball effect of wrong emphases and skewed Scriptural interpretations.

 

[Gottle_of_Geer]

Sounds very dictatorial. I think of CAF as a place where we can share our knowledge about our faith and what we have learned about life.

​

I am student of life and of theology and have found out some great stuff in the course of my study. I hope some of it would be worth listening to!

As the second poster said to the thread-starter , “Backatcha !” ​

 

[Gottle_of_Geer]

This is irrelevant, and totally off topic. The first Christians were ONLY CATHOLIC. There were no different rites among the Apostles. Stop making an argument where none needs to be.

~Liza

**That is a matter of perspective. The Apostles were not members of any Church now existing: they were as: **​

• Orthodox
• Nestorian
• Monophysite
• Anglican
• Presbyterian
• Calvinist
• Baptist
• Lutheran
• etc.
  **as Catholic in the Papal sense (the Church Catholic is the Church universal - Catholic is now in effect a denominational name, nothing more ) **

**because all the divisions came later: before they came, the Church was as much **

Orthodox
Nestorian
Monophysite
Anglican
Presbyterian
Calvinist
etc.

**as it was Catholic; as Catholic as it was Protestant, & as Protestant as it was Catholic. The church of the Apostles’ day was none of these. That’s how it comes about that members of these later divisions can all claim to be related to the Apostolic Church, many of them by Apostolic succession of some sort. This is very different from saying that the Apostles, from their perspective at the beginning, would have recognised the Church in any present-day group almost 2000 years later. Maybe they would, maybe not. **

 

[brkn1]

By what authority, do you derive your power to try to influence others here, on religion, or the issues of faith and morals?

There seems to be many here, who are eager to give advice and try to define Christianity and I am wondering; by what authority do you do this?

Which authority, allows you to tell me and/or others here, what we should believe?

Why should we listen to you?

No person, except the Holy Spirit, has any true power to influence or persuade humans to come to the truth of the Gospel.

We all are commissioned (by Jesus) to spread the Gospel in some way, after God gives us the grace to savingly come to understand and accept the truth of the Gospel.

There is no power in that preaching of the Gospel, unless the Holy Spirit is behind it. It is all His power and not any of ours, that makes any good influence or persuasion come from that preaching.

 

[SSTeacher]

Read the bible without any preconceptions and you will be lead to truth.

I respectfully disagree. It seems to me that people who read the Bible wthout any preconceptions are far more likely to get confused than to be led to truth.

Cordially,
Mick

 

[SSTeacher]

Hi Jon,

Thank you very much for your excellent contribution. When I read what you’d written it struck me that you’d suggested a life application that all Christians including myself might benefit from at least considering.

If unity, as Christ commands, is important to you.

Our Savior prayed:
May they be brought to complete unity to let the world know that you sent me and have loved them even as you have loved me.

We should listen (not just hear) at least as much as we speak.

Saint James wrote:
If anyone considers himself religious and yet does not keep a tight rein on his tongue, he deceives himself and his religion is worthless.

Listening is actually and really concentrating on what is being said, and not just a time when one plans what to say next.

Saint James wrote:
My dear brothers, take note of this: Everyone should be quick to listen, slow to speak and slow to become angry.

We should be willing to explore new ways of explaining what we believe that brings us closer together in understanding.

Saint Peter wrote:
But in your hearts set apart Christ as Lord. Always be prepared to give an answer to everyone who asks you to give the reason for the hope that you have. But do this with gentleness and respect.

Each one of us must also learn to speak in a way that at least makes it tolerable for the audience to listen. Condemnations, polemics, insults make listening impossible.

The writer of the Epistle to the Hebrews wrote:
But encourage one another daily, as long as it is called Today, so that none of you may be hardened by sin’s deceitfulness.

I’m very much encouraged by your words, Jon. May God bless you in all your endeavors.

In Christ,
Mick
:bounce:

 

[SSTeacher]

Howdy CatsAnd Dogs,

Because reading the bible is an act of interpretation, which is “private revelation”, which is great, but which STILL needs to be checked against the understanding of the Church.

We MUST read our bible, and be open to all the private revelations that that activity gives us, but private revelations of ANY TYPE must be checked against public revelation, which is authoritatively interpreted ONLY by the Magisterium.

:shamrock2:

I’m beginning to see the sense of this more and more every day. In practice, I very much doubt if there are (or ever have been) any Protestants who read their Bibles in isolation and then decide how to apply what they’ve read without reference to any other Authority whatsoever.

For example, thanks to the Englishman, Robert Raikes, we have Sunday schools. Sunday school teachers like me can exert a great deal of influence in that setting. And once people start listening to the thoughts and opinions of a Sunday school teacher or a pastor and allow themselves to be influenced by those thoughts and opinions, the doctrine of Sola Scriptura is, I think, somewhat compromised.

Biblically,
Mick

 

[JonNC]

Hi Jon,

Thank you very much for your excellent contribution. When I read what you’d written it struck me that you’d suggested a life application that all Christians including myself might benefit from at least considering.

Our Savior prayed:
May they be brought to complete unity to let the world know that you sent me and have loved them even as you have loved me.

Saint James wrote:
If anyone considers himself religious and yet does not keep a tight rein on his tongue, he deceives himself and his religion is worthless.

Saint James wrote:
My dear brothers, take note of this: Everyone should be quick to listen, slow to speak and slow to become angry.

Saint Peter wrote:
But in your hearts set apart Christ as Lord. Always be prepared to give an answer to everyone who asks you to give the reason for the hope that you have. But do this with gentleness and respect.

The writer of the Epistle to the Hebrews wrote:
But encourage one another daily, as long as it is called Today, so that none of you may be hardened by sin’s deceitfulness.

I’m very much encouraged by your words, Jon. May God bless you in all your endeavors.

In Christ,
Mick
:bounce:

Thank you, Mick, for your kind words.
Jon

 

[WindGirl]

Seems that hasn’t worked out so well for you.

Time will tell the tale.

By the authority of Holy Mother Church, as I have the grace to understand her teachings.

Does the “authority” of “Holy Mother Church” supercede the authority of God’s own written word? I don’t know why I’m asking that since I’m pretty sure I can predict the direction the response will take.

 

[ralphinal]

Time will tell the tale.

Does the “authority” of “Holy Mother Church” supercede the authority of God’s own written word? I don’t know why I’m asking that since I’m pretty sure I can predict the direction the response will take.

It does not supercede Scriptures because the two are cut from the same whole cloth.

 

[CatsAndDogs]

And once people start listening to the thoughts and opinions of a Sunday school teacher or a pastor and allow themselves to be influenced by those thoughts and opinions, the doctrine of Sola Scriptura is, I think, somewhat compromised.

Sola Scriptura is an obvious illusion. It can’t exist per se, for the very reason that you give.

The written word does not explain itself by it’s presentation. It merely presents itself for explanation.

We don’t hire books to teach our children, we hire people and call them teachers to teach from our books.

But, why should a believer in the illusion of Sola Scriptura listen to me? They listen to their own extra-scriptural traditions, which tells them that they have no extra-scriptural traditions, and certainly not to me!

:shamrock2:

 

[SIA]

By what authority, do you derive your power to try to influence others here, on religion, or the issues of faith and morals?

There seems to be many here, who are eager to give advice and try to define Christianity and I am wondering; by what authority do you do this?

Which authority, allows you to tell me and/or others here, what we should believe?

Why should we listen to you?

By our faith in the one and only Savior by which we can be given Salvation, that’s who. Only Jesus alone can save you. Not Mary, not Peter, not Catholicism and certainly not your priest. The Authority and Supreme Authority by the Lord of the Universe, Jesus Christ.

 

[ncgolf]

Time will tell the tale.

Does the “authority” of “Holy Mother Church” supercede the authority of God’s own written word? I don’t know why I’m asking that since I’m pretty sure I can predict the direction the response will take.

Let me ask then is there a Christian response to these issues … one that is absolutely, morally correct? If so … how do you know you are correct and how did you reach your conclusion?

1. Cloning
2. In vitro fertilization
3. Stem cell research
4. Contraception

Is there somewhere in God’s written word something that you can use to address these issues and be absolutely sure you are correct?

 

[SSTeacher]

Sola Scriptura is an obvious illusion. It can’t exist per se, for the very reason that you give.

The written word does not explain itself by it’s presentation. It merely presents itself for explanation.

We don’t hire books to teach our children, we hire people and call them teachers to teach from our books.

But, why should a believer in the illusion of Sola Scriptura listen to me? They listen to their own extra-scriptural traditions, which tells them that they have no extra-scriptural traditions, and certainly not to me!

:shamrock2:

Elegantly stated. I agree.

Cheerfully,
Mick

 

[brkn1]

Sola Scriptura is an obvious illusion. It can’t exist per se, for the very reason that you give.

The written word does not explain itself by it’s presentation. It merely presents itself for explanation.

We don’t hire books to teach our children, we hire people and call them teachers to teach from our books.

But, why should a believer in the illusion of Sola Scriptura listen to me? They listen to their own extra-scriptural traditions, which tells them that they have no extra-scriptural traditions, and certainly not to me!

:shamrock2:

You have effectively said that God’s Word cannot be understood by a “fisherman as Peter was” or some uneducated laborer etc.
God’s inspired Word is not clear enough and sufficient by your standards.
You must add another book of traditions to complicate everything and then say that we must surrender our minds and will to the Magisterium and the Pope.
Where does Jesus saying that the “Truth will set you free.” come into this equation?

 

[ncgolf]

You have effectively said that God’s Word cannot be understood by a “fisherman as Peter was” or some uneducated laborer etc.
God’s inspired Word is not clear enough and sufficient by your standards.
You must add another book of traditions to complicate everything and then say that we must surrender our minds and will to the Magisterium and the Pope.
Where does Jesus saying that the “Truth will set you free.” come into this equation?

I will ask again … how do you use God’s inspired word to know how to deal with

Stem cell research
Cloning
Contraception
… How do you know what God’s word has to tell you how to deal with these complicated areas … is there a morally right or wrong position on these topics?

 

[brkn1]

I will ask again … how do you use God’s inspired word to know how to deal with

Stem cell research
Cloning
Contraception
… How do you know what God’s word has to tell you how to deal with these complicated areas … is there a morally right or wrong position on these topics?

God’s law is written on a saved person’s heart (soul and spirit). The Holy Spirit will guide a person to the right position on any matter that life throws at him. It may be that the Holy Spirit uses another person to present the correct position so that one deals with it correctly, after the HS confirms the correctness of what is presented. That does not mean that the other person has the right to decide for me exactly how every position must be dealt with. I don’t necessarily want an unmarried man pretending to know exactly how dealing with my wife must proceed, when that man has no real experience with such dealings. He better just use scripture in his arguments for the correct position. I can do the same also, with the HS guidance.

The idea that another fallible human or group of humans has the sole final say on all such matters goes against the very “free will” that you claim to have. Your “free will” seems to be based on deciding to obey others, who do the choosing for you. Life becomes a sort of rule book (like the Mosaic law), whereby you follow the “directions” and then hope to get saved at the end. I choose to follow the gift of common sense and a “sound mind” that God gives to all of His children. The indwelling Holy Spirit is Who I choose to submit my will to. God’s Will is made clear with the HS guidance in His Word.

 

[ncgolf]

God’s law is written on a saved person’s heart (soul and spirit). The Holy Spirit will guide a person to the right position on any matter that life throws at him. It may be that the Holy Spirit uses another person to present the correct position so that one deals with it correctly, after the HS confirms the correctness of what is presented. That does not mean that the other person has the right to decide for me exactly how every position must be dealt with. I don’t necessarily want an unmarried man pretending to know exactly how dealing with my wife must proceed, when that man has no real experience with such dealings. He better just use scripture in his arguments for the correct position. I can do the same also, with the HS guidance.

The idea that another fallible human or group of humans has the sole final say on all such matters goes against the very “free will” that you claim to have. Your “free will” seems to be based on deciding to obey others, who do the choosing for you. Life becomes a sort of rule book (like the Mosaic law), whereby you follow the “directions” and then hope to get saved at the end. I choose to follow the gift of common sense and a “sound mind” that God gives to all of His children. The indwelling Holy Spirit is Who I choose to submit my will to. God’s Will is made clear with the HS guidance in His Word.

I will ask again … use Scripture or your own reasoning … what does Jesus want us to know (as Christians) on what or how to approach an issue like cloning.

Is cloning is acceptable or something abominable.

By your reasoning then men should not have a say about abortion since it is a woman’s body … and I doubt very much we know much about that.

Our sound mind was broken by the sin of Adam … it is good but not perfect. That is sin … we know something is wrong and we do it anyway … so the common sense and sound mind is sometimes shaky at best.

What do you do when two arguments use Scripture to arrive at two differenct conclusions?

I admire your sincerity but in practice you have not explained how it works with a tough, real and current ethical dilemma. Scripture must be able to speak in these instances … tell me then.