Results 1 - 3 of 3
|
|
|||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Ordered by Verse | ||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
1 | Church Fathers? Part IV | Mark 7:9 | EdB | 243665 | ||
Does not that all depend on which side of the line your are standing. If there is two sides of the interpretation of scripture can not either side claim the other is trying to supersede scripture with their interpretation. Then if either position accepted by some can it not be said they are acting as if it is infallible? If someone is in a denomination that holds church only on Saturday night instead of Sunday morning can’t someone that disagrees say you are acting like your denomination leaders are infallible? To be a member of a denomination the worships only on Saturday don’t you for all practical purposes have to agree that the decision to do so was correct or infallible? |
||||||
2 | Church Fathers? Part IV | Mark 7:9 | DocTrinsograce | 243668 | ||
Hi, Ed... Assuming you really want to know: I cannot speak for everyone, of course. Most denominations do not hold to the infallibility of their leaders -- with, perhaps, the few that believe in moral perfectionism. Do Pentecostals believe that their pastors, teachers, etc. are infallible? Perhaps because of the high view of personal divine unction? I find that my own mind has often been ignorant of the truth, resistant to the truth, or entirely denied the truth. By the grace of God, I learned something of the truth when He saved me. But the process of becoming informed, ferreted out the lie, and submitting to the Word, is an ongoing process. I continue to pour over the Scriptures myself, and listen to others who have done so, putting it all to the test, and holding to what is good (Isaiah 8:20; 1 Thessalonians 5:21). If the pastors and teachers are given for this purpose (Ephesians 4), then it is my objective to listen to them (2 Timothy 4:2); i.e., to be ready to be reproved, rebuked, and exhorted. Over time I have noticed that I find some teachers to be more sound than others. I can give a couple of examples: I was very blessed by A. W. Tozer when I first came to the Lord. Yet, over time, I found that there seemed to be greater depth from Charles Spurgeon. I later began to appreciate Richard Baxter, but over time, I found some of his teaching questionable. Then I learned about John Owen, for whom I continue to have much respect -- even though reading him is like drinking from a fire hose. Chapter 1 of the 1689 London Baptist Confession of Faith, says it pretty well: "The supreme judge, by which all controversies of religion are to be determined, and all decrees of councils, opinions of ancient writers, doctrines of men, and private spirits, are to be examined, and in whose sentence we are to rest, can be no other but the Holy Scripture delivered by the Spirit, into which Scripture so delivered, our faith is finally resolved. (Matthew 22:29, 31, 32; Ephesians 2:20; Acts 28:23)" Thus, the old theologians were even including themselves! Thus, if someone confesses that "Jesus Christ is Lord" then it does not matter who they are or what they are, insofar as that statement, as I understand the words to mean, they are expressing the truth. Of course, as we interact with people more, and they start to define those words in ways that are not consistent with the Word, then we may begin to doubt their veracity. I don't know how it is in Pentecostalism -- I keep reading what I can find here and there -- but this is how it is for the Reformed, holding to the doctrine of sola Scriptura. I answered your question about doctrine; what we do arises directly from what we believe. Have we always chosen to do what is pleasing to the Lord? I do not think so. However, we work on it as our heads, hearts, habits, and hands are brought into the light of the Word. God is so gracious to have given us two thousand years of His Spirit's work in the church by which we are able to learn. In Him, Doc |
||||||
3 | Church Fathers? Part IV | Mark 7:9 | EdB | 243671 | ||
The word infallible conveys the idea of being not open to discussion as in, this is the doctrine of the denomination. Do you consider the Canon of scripture infallible? At first blush you would probably I certainly do not. Yet I think is it safe to say you think it is so accurate you do not question it. No Pentecostals do not hold to infallibly but yet we do believe that our doctrinal truths are certain as stated by church leadership. To doubt those statements of beliefs would put us outside the beliefs of Pentecostalism and therefore no longer Pentecostal. I believe the same holds true for you. You hold the tenets of faith of Calvinism as truths therefore defining you as a Calvinist. If however you if denied Calvin’s tulips you could no longer be considered a Calvinist. So you have to believe those concepts are true. Are they infallible? No but in effect that is how you treat them do you not? Here is a quote from http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/07790a.htm which makes the point perhaps better. “Without infallibility there could be no finality regarding any one of the great truths which have been identified historically with the very essence of Christianity; and it is only with those who believe in historical Christianity that the question need be discussed. Take, for instance, the mysteries of the Trinity and Incarnation. If the early Church was not infallible in her definitions regarding these truths, what compelling reason can be alleged today against the right to revive the Sabellian, or the Arian, or the Macedonian, or the Apollinarian, or the Nestorian, or the Eutychian controversies, and to defend some interpretation of these mysteries which the Church has condemned as heretical?†|
||||||