Results 1 - 9 of 9
|
|
|||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Ordered by Verse | ||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
1 | Titus 3:5 and washing of regeneration | Titus 3:5 | New Creature | 132515 | ||
Dalcent; Am I therefore correct in assuming that your personal view is that the church is the final authority on Scripture, and no trusted intrepretation is possible apart from what the church says Scripture means? New Creature |
||||||
2 | Titus 3:5 and washing of regeneration | Titus 3:5 | Dalcent | 132525 | ||
Hi there, Your statement is quite near to what I believe the Bible means when it asserts: 'that no prophecy of Scripture is a matter of one's own interpretation.' I would prefer to say: ‘That no interpretation is correct that contradicts, [opposes, denies] how the Church reads Scripture, appealing to the patristic consensus of the hundreds of years of writings by the Church Fathers, whose contemporaneous Council’s given us the great confessions of faith, the classical statements of Christology and the biblical canon.’ The biblical canon is a list you possess because of an authoritative decision of the Church. The list of New Testament books cannot be found within inspired Scripture. It is Church tradition. I would claim that you are unwittingly putting some of the Church’s biblical interpretation at the centre of your belief system. That is, whatever you discover in scripture about the Trinity or the dual natures of Christ united in one person, you will never dare oppose the Church’s conclusions formed at Nicea 325 and Chalecdon 451. The Catholic interpretation is cast in stone. We saw the shambles when one group tried reinterpreting the Trinity in their own light, the heresy of Oneness Pentecostalism (the return of Sabellianism). Going back to the Council of Jerusalem, (Acts15:22) it is written 'Then it seemed good to the apostles and the elders, with the whole church...' There is nothing about individual interpretation here. Furthermore, as a non-American, I really think this extreme individualistic interpretation popular with American evangelicalism has more to do with the individualistic charter your country is founded on than anything else. We share this to some extent in Europe with the same emphasis on the great 'I' since our so-called Enlightenment. Christianity is not meant to simply be a spiritualised form of the private individual 'I', with an emphasis on ‘my’ bible-reading, ‘my’ holiness, ‘my’ interpretation, etc. It was the Fall that shattered the human unity and brought individualism. Thankfully, the Good Shepherd brings back to the fold the whole of humanity fragmented by the Fall. As one early Christian wrote "Adam himself is therefore now spread out over the whole face of the earth. Originally one , he has fallen, and, breaking up as it were, he has filled the whole earth with the pieces." The Catholic Church joins and binds together its members in a bond of unity. There is nothing authentic about all those individual and opposed interpretations by ‘Bible-Christians’. It is rather 'that they may all be one; even as You, Father, are in Me and I in You, that they also may be in Us, so that the world may believe that You sent Me.' (John 17:12). Or as the Holman CSB puts it (v.23): I in them and You are in Me. May they be made completely one…' This nonsense about the Christian as a man alone, his own pope pontificating on his personal interpretations of Scripture, while claiming to possess divine truth comes not from the apostolic faith. Christianity is not meant to be a multitude of individuals, as numerous as sands of the seashore. Regards Dalcent, expect a few typos this was written at speed! |
||||||
3 | Titus 3:5 and washing of regeneration | Titus 3:5 | New Creature | 132529 | ||
Dalcent; you stated; "The Catholic interpretation is cast in stone" and, "This nonsense about the Christian as a man alone, his own pope pontificating on his personal interpretations of Scripture, while claiming to possess divine truth comes not from the apostolic faith. Christianity is not meant to be a multitude of individuals, as numerous as sands of the seashore." My thoughts; Has the Catholic interpretation always been "cast in stone" and infaliable? If so then why, at one time did the Popish church believe in the selling of "indulgences" and the matyrdom of those who desired to have the Bible printed in the common language of the people? Is it not accurate to say that because of such things, that the Popish church is itself responsible for the Reformation that took place, and the lack of trust in the ability of the Popish church to properly interpret Scripture? Wasn't it only when Martin Luther looked into Scripture for himself that he was able to Scripturally determine the errors of Popish teachings. When the church departed from Scriptural truth, such individuals had to part from such teachings. My point is; If the church was not totally reliable in it's interpretation in the past, how can we be so sure that it's interpretation is absolutely correct in our time? New Creature |
||||||
4 | Titus 3:5 and washing of regeneration | Titus 3:5 | Dalcent | 132533 | ||
'When the church departed from Scriptural truth, such individuals HAD to part from such teachings' is completely false. What about reforming, mending and healing from within. You would do this in a marriage wouldn't you? Never walk away! The bankruptcy of Martin Luther's position can be seen in his German Bible translation adding "alone" to the word faith in Romans 3:28. The phrase "faith alone" appears nowhere in the Bible except James 2:24. Would you TRUST a man who infamously mistranslated his Bible. A man who wrote a book called 'On the Jews and their Lies (1542), and who drowned Anabaptists because they 'wanted to be baptised full immersion as adults.' The Church opposed corrupted Protestant versions of the Bible only, i.e. like the above. If you want to read about history in 'comic-land' then that's your business. If you decide to get 'deep in history' as Newman wrote you just might 'cease to be Protestant.' At least you will be informed. There are loads of history books by non-Catholics on the true history of Christianity. I would recommended reading the ultimate collection on Church history by Jaroslav Pelikan (Lutheran later Orthodox) starting with The Emergence of the Catholic Tradition (The Christian Tradition : a History of the Development of Doctrine, Vol 1). There are 5 volumes covering 2,000 years of Christian history. The distinguished academic and historian Jack Chick has a catalogue that you could send off for too(only joking). Calling the Catholic Church the Popish church is kindergarden. Luther's legacy is tragic. The national Churches in Europe hold about 2 percent of their populations. The Catholic nations have huge proportions of their people strong in faith and crowding the Churches every Sunday. The Cathedrals of the historic Protestant denominations in Europe are nearly empty: museum pieces. Catholicism has chronic vigour. Lutherism didn't. Regards Dalcent |
||||||
5 | Titus 3:5 and washing of regeneration | Titus 3:5 | Dalcent | 132534 | ||
If you want to talk martyrs maybe you should read about the 350 who were martyred for the Catholic faith, near to where I write. http://www.tyburnconvent.org.uk/martyrs/martyrs_main.html |
||||||
6 | Titus 3:5 and washing of regeneration | Titus 3:5 | New Creature | 132540 | ||
Are you attempting to say that the Catholic history of selling indulgences is myth? Why then did Martin Luther and other individuals who were once part of the Cathloic faith themselves, report and personally obsrerve them? Was Luther and other respected men making all that up? Why did Luther risk his life, if that was untrue? Who is historically being lied to? Who has the most to gain or lose by lying? |
||||||
7 | Titus 3:5 and washing of regeneration | Titus 3:5 | Dalcent | 132541 | ||
I don't believe the selling of indulgences proves the Catholic Church needed to be abandoned. Corruption occurs in every Church. It was wrong: it isn't denied; the selling of indulgences is extinct. Luther drowned Anabaptists and that is history too. I'm fairly sure that all would benefit by reading Church history. There is a lot to be learned from 313AD - 1517AD. The pre-Nicene period is a goldmine too. One hefty book by practically any decent historian will broaden minds. I visited an evangelical bookshop this year, I found thousands of lightweight books by Christians, many academic books on Greek, concordances etc. but nothing on Church history. I found the label but there was nothing; this really is ignorance. Dalcent |
||||||
8 | Titus 3:5 and washing of regeneration | Titus 3:5 | New Creature | 132544 | ||
Dalcent; The following two web-sites have alot of historical works. http://www.ccel.org/ http://www.torreys.org/bible/ Perhaps you are already familar with them New Creature |
||||||
9 | Titus 3:5 and washing of regeneration | Titus 3:5 | Dalcent | 132546 | ||
Thanks for this. I must admit I do most of my study from books as I get eye strain reading from the screen. However this is a very comprehensive collection! Dalcent |
||||||