Marie and Libby

[Xaquin44]

And this is what I love about the Church, and God's goodness in providing it for us. While others can argue that the Holy Spirit led them to such-and-such a conclusion, the next guy can make the same claim of Divine Guidance, yet come up with a different interpretation of the relevant Scripture. Who's right?
There is no way to categorically know for Bible Christians, although I will add that I do believe that many are sincere in their love for, and desire to do the will of, God.

I like that about church (religion in general) too. I just don't like that fact that people will take it too far and insist that anyone elses interpretations are wrong (and that they will burn for it).

It seems like it goes against the spirit of things.

edit: see below

=(

 

[ItalianScallion]

The point is that a charity sent a rug with a picture of God on it and the do-it-yourself types can't handle it. Well, people, the Commandments were not numbered in the Bible, the Bible did not come with chapter and verse numbers, so all this is arbirtary as to which phase is a commandment and which is part of another.
The reason we Catholics separate the cviting of your neighrbor's wife from his property was to show that wives were not property.

First off, who can make a picture of God when NO ONE has seen Him?
Next, if your church separates "cviting" into 2 sins, there should be 11 commandments, right? Let's be honest here my blind friend, there's BIG money in "graven images" for your church. As I told Libby earlier (so as not to go off topic), the issue is worship. You can make all the golden calves and angel or cherubim figures you want. My Mom did but she did NOT pray to or worship them.
And finally, if you really had the deposit of faith, there would be NO problem seeing which verses are commandments and which ones aren't.

 

[PsyOps]

And this is what I love about the Church, and God's goodness in providing it for us. While others can argue that the Holy Spirit led them to such-and-such a conclusion, the next guy can make the same claim of Divine Guidance, yet come up with a different interpretation of the relevant Scripture. Who's right?
There is no way to categorically know for Bible Christians, although I will add that I do believe that many are sincere in their love for, and desire to do the will of, God.

What is a "Bible Christian"?

 

[Radiant1]

What is a "Bible Christian"?

All Christians are Bible Christians per se but Libby would be referring to those who are "sola scriptura" meaning scripture alone, which as she pointed out can be rather confusing since every sola scriptura Christian interprets the same scripture differently, ironically because they are a sola scriptura Christian.

 

[PsyOps]

All Christians are Bible Christians per se but Libby would be referring to those who are "sola scriptura" meaning scripture alone, which as she pointed out can be rather confusing since every sola scriptura Christian interprets the same scripture differently, ironically because they are a sola scriptura Christian.

I've been a Christian a long time and never heard the term.

 

[ItalianScallion]

And this is what I love about the Church, and God's goodness in providing it for us. While others can argue that the Holy Spirit led them to such-and-such a conclusion, the next guy can make the same claim of Divine Guidance, yet come up with a different interpretation of the relevant Scripture. Who's right?
There is no way to categorically know for Bible Christians, although I will add that I do believe that many are sincere in their love for, and desire to do the will of, God.

LIBBY! GEEZZZ do not make those statements. You're sooo wrong about this. I don't want to get off topic so I'll just say this: The Holy Spirit will never contradict what is written in the Bible. I know your "church" doesn't believe this but it is true. God will not tell us to worship an idol then tell us NOT to later on.
The problem is that the Holy Spirit is speaking to some and He is NOT speaking to others who make claims in God's name. The way we know to whom He is and isn't speaking is by the Bible. If you and I come up with some different Scriptural interpretation that we say the Holy Spirit led us to, the ONLY way to know if it is right is by the "contextual" meaning in the Bible. Scripture MUST explain Scripture in many cases.
Another problem is when a verse is explained but the other person does not want to believe it. The Holy Spirit will tell people the meaning but they can also ignore Him if they want to. Lordy, lordy, lordy

 

[Xaquin44]

there it is again!

 

[Radiant1]

The Holy Spirit will never contradict what is written in the Bible. I know your "church" doesn't believe this but it is true.

Are you implying that the Catholic Church believes that the Holy Spirit will contradict scripture? That is patently untrue. You're not thinking straight today IS.

 

[libby]

LIBBY! GEEZZZ do not make those statements. You're sooo wrong about this. I don't want to get off topic so I'll just say this: The Holy Spirit will never contradict what is written in the Bible. I know your "church" doesn't believe this but it is true. God will not tell us to worship an idol then tell us NOT to later on.
The problem is that the Holy Spirit is speaking to some and He is NOT speaking to others who make claims in God's name. The way we know to whom He is and isn't speaking is by the Bible. If you and I come up with some different Scriptural interpretation that we say the Holy Spirit led us to, the ONLY way to know if it is right is by the "contextual" meaning in the Bible. Scripture MUST explain Scripture in many cases.
Another problem is when a verse is explained but the other person does not want to believe it. The Holy Spirit will tell people the meaning but they can also ignore Him if they want to. Lordy, lordy, lordy

See now, IT, this is where things get very frustrating. I posted why I believe what I do, and I posted why I am confused about the theology of a Bible Christian. I even went so far as to say that many Bible Christians are very sincere lovers of the Lord. I refrained from saying, "Bible Christians are wrong. Take it up with God". That approach is totally unproductive and completely lacks charity.

And since I started the thread, you have my blessing to get off topic. It cannot be disputed that personal interpretation breeds differing opinions at best, contradictory opinions in the middle, and heresy at the worst. It is your contention that erroneous personal interpretation has led to apostacy/abuse/whatever, in the Catholic church. Some will argue that Joseph Smith's personal interpretion led to a cult called Mormon (I'm not saying that I personally consider it a cult, although the theology confuses me, too) and I will argue that personal interpretation, i.e. rejection of the authority established by Christ in Matthew 16:18, has led to moral relativism, step by step.
All of this is said while I earnestly repeat that I do not think I have some great wisdom and holiness that a Christian of another faith lacks. It is entirely likely that God is more pleased with the purity of your heart than mine.

 

[Xaquin44]

I like you Libby.

 

[libby]

I like you Libby.

 

[ItalianScallion]

Are you implying that the Catholic Church believes that the Holy Spirit will contradict scripture? That is patently untrue. You're not thinking straight today IS.

No, but if the Holy Spirit says something that "your church" doesn't agree with, what do they do? They do what they want anyway and say it's from God, which is what Libby was asking about in the first place.
What I meant in my earlier post is that "your church" doesn't believe in the Bible ALONE as the final authority. Without the Bible there is NO credible standard of absolute truth. People would have to rely on word of mouth and you know how credible that can be.

 

[ItalianScallion]

....And since I started the thread, you have my blessing to get off topic. It cannot be disputed that personal interpretation breeds differing opinions at best, contradictory opinions in the middle, and heresy at the worst. It is your contention that erroneous personal interpretation has led to apostacy/abuse/whatever, in the Catholic church. Some will argue that Joseph Smith's personal interpretion led to a cult called Mormon (I'm not saying that I personally consider it a cult, although the theology confuses me, too) and I will argue that personal interpretation, i.e. rejection of the authority established by Christ in Matthew 16:18, has led to moral relativism, step by step.
All of this is said while I earnestly repeat that I do not think I have some great wisdom and holiness that a Christian of another faith lacks. It is entirely likely that God is more pleased with the purity of your heart than mine.

Good post Libby. A personal interpretation (at times) can do what you said. The problem is when it becomes dangerous as it does in certain cases; (JW"s, Mormons, Moonies, Koresh, Farrakhan, Jeffs, etc.) On some issues it really isn't too big a deal because it might not be salvation affecting but, in the interest of knowing the full truth, it is important that we be on the same page or cults & denominations can grow out of it as they have done already.
Yes, my contention is that without true faith, without knowing God's Words (the Bible) and not allowing Scripture to explain Scripture, many have been led in a deadly wrong direction. This is why I am so adamant about correctly interpreting the Bible.
It's like this:
1) Some things we'll never understand while we're on earth.
2) Some things we won't understand until God feels that we're ready to know them.
3) Some things we'll understand only after reading other verses that clarify them.
4) Some things we'll understand without any difficulty because they are just straight forward, clear verses.
I've explained Matthew 16 v 18 before and the problem with your church's misunderstanding of it, so I won't repeat it here.
As far as; "God being more pleased with the purity of my heart than yours", I'll say this with NO disrespect to you intended. You can be a very sincere Christian but never get out of first grade (so to speak) because of a refusal to learn, acknowledge & accept the truth. It can also come from taking man's opinion over God's, listening to bad teachers or staying in a "first grade" church. By that I mean ANY church that doesn't "grow" it's members with proper teachings. This is why Hebrews 5 v 11-14 tells us that some go on to become Pastors and teachers and some, after many years, are still on "infant milk".
I hope you can hear the concern I have for you and others here when I say what I say. I have spoken boldly & passionately at times because of the seriousness of the topics but there has never been one iota of hatred, even for the "scoffers" who post here. Have a safe happy weekend Libby.

 

[libby]

No, but if the Holy Spirit says something that "your church" doesn't agree with, what do they do? They do what they want anyway and say it's from God, which is what Libby was asking about in the first place.
What I meant in my earlier post is that "your church" doesn't believe in the Bible ALONE as the final authority. Without the Bible there is NO credible standard of absolute truth. People would have to rely on word of mouth and you know how credible that can be.

I've explained Matthew 16 v 18 before and the problem with your church's misunderstanding of it, so I won't repeat it here.

Okay, IT, pick a doctrine, any doctrine, of the Roman Catholic Church, and we'll go over the way in which "they do what they want anyway and say it's from God".
Keep in mind, this must be a doctrine, not an abuse by individual people. In the same way you would not want others to judge the validity of the Bible by our personal sins, please do not condemn doctrines of the RCC based on individuals who have abused this-or-that.
Let's go over the doctrines themselves, and I will provide the Scripture and reason (at least, insofar as my feeble mind is able) to explain them to you (and anyone else who gives a hoot).

 

[ItalianScallion]

Okay, IT, pick a doctrine, any doctrine, of the Roman Catholic Church, and we'll go over the way in which "they do what they want anyway and say it's from God".
Keep in mind, this must be a doctrine, not an abuse by individual people. In the same way you would not want others to judge the validity of the Bible by our personal sins, please do not condemn doctrines of the RCC based on individuals who have abused this-or-that.
Let's go over the doctrines themselves, and I will provide the Scripture and reason (at least, insofar as my feeble mind is able) to explain them to you (and anyone else who gives a hoot).

Haven't we played this game before? There's nothing more to discuss that hasn't been said. If the Bible says don't do it and the RCC does it, isn't that enough? I know we've discussed these things before and you got upset but neither of us changed our minds.
There are many doctrines that the RCC violates:
1) The sinlessness of Mary
2) The blasphemous "mother of God" statement
3) The Pope fiasco of Matthew 16
4) The mediatrix lie
5) The assumption of the "assumption of Mary"
6) The priest forgiving sins
7) The lie of original sin
8) Baptism forgiving original sin
9) Trans-substantiation of the communion host
10) Purgatory
11) Praying to the dead
12) Jesus going to hell after He died
I could go on much more but why? Comment on any of these you want to but you know that I'm going right to the Bible to refute ANY statements made in favor of the above docrtines.
Again, Libby, this is why we MUST have a standard so that the churches don't go off in a wrong direction as many did. Without it, anything goes and who'se to say who'se right?

 

[libby]

Haven't we played this game before? There's nothing more to discuss that hasn't been said. If the Bible says don't do it and the RCC does it, isn't that enough? I know we've discussed these things before and you got upset but neither of us changed our minds.
There are many doctrines that the RCC violates:
1) The sinlessness of Mary
2) The blasphemous "mother of God" statement
3) The Pope fiasco of Matthew 16
4) The mediatrix lie
5) The assumption of the "assumption of Mary"
6) The priest forgiving sins
7) The lie of original sin
8) Baptism forgiving original sin
9) Trans-substantiation of the communion host
10) Purgatory
11) Praying to the dead
12) Jesus going to hell after He died
I could go on much more but why? Comment on any of these you want to but you know that I'm going right to the Bible to refute ANY statements made in favor of the above docrtines.
Again, Libby, this is why we MUST have a standard so that the churches don't go off in a wrong direction as many did. Without it, anything goes and who'se to say who'se right?

We've gone over this before, yes. But, I've gotten upset? Like, what kind of upset? Flustered because I couldn't defend my faith upset? Doubt that. Upset because someone on the board insisted on putting forth an erroneous idea about the Catholic Church? Yeah, I can see that.
Why list 12? Are you trying to make it impossible to go over them in a thoughtful way? I'm asking you to pick something specific that you think the CC does that is a contradiction of Scripture. (not, BTW, you're interpretation of Scripture.)
Yeah, we must have a standard, but that standard is not sola scriptura, it is the Church. Christ never said "write down what I tell you". He didn't drop the Bible down from Heaven at Pentecost. If the written word is the only source of true faith, then where does that leave everyone prior to the advent of the printing press? There couldn't have been more than a few hundred copies floating around, and I hear the CC had them under lock and key. (to keep the truth from people, so you say. Y'know, to replace a lost letter/book wasn't a matter of a trip to Barnes and Noble at that time)
IT, let's pretend that all of your interpretations are correct (let's leave me out of the equation for a second) because you've done as you've told others to do. That is, you've used Scripture to interpret Scripture, etc. That means you have/claim to have, the very charism you deny the office of Peter.

 

[Radiant1]

I could go on much more but why? Comment on any of these you want to but you know that I'm going right to the Bible to refute ANY statements made in favor of the above docrtines.

You're right, and then Libby and/or myself would give scripture references in support thereof, and it would be nothing but a scripture sling fest.

Again, Libby, this is why we MUST have a standard so that the churches don't go off in a wrong direction as many did. Without it, anything goes and who'se to say who'se right?

Exactly, and that standard is the magisterium, i.e. the aposotlic church (Catholic Church) which was founded by Christ Himself and was the only church until the reformation some 1400-1500 odd years later. Obviously that standard can't be scripture alone, for even "bible only" Christians can't agree on it's meanings.

 

[Xaquin44]

I'm asking you to pick something specific that you think the CC does that is a contradiction of Scripture. (not, BTW, you're interpretation of Scripture.)

His interpretations are the only ones that are right.

Where have you been libby?

 

[libby]

His interpretations are the only ones that are right.

Where have you been libby?

Yep, I've seen that. I don't expect him to agree with me. I guess my hope is that IT, or anyone else, will at least understand that the CC doctrines are not made up at the whim of a pope, and that they are grounded in the Bible.

 

[Marie]

Hi IT,
Of course I would agree that worship is the defining factor, but that is not what Marie said. She is admonishing the makers of a rug, and (and I'll admit this is an assumption) I would bet the farm that no one intended to worship the rug.
I will re-iterate, is the prohibition on images found on this earth, or in Heaven and Hell?

Hi Libby,

My beef there, is a prayer rug is not instituted as part of worship.
I dont belive personally that were are to add additional things as part of worship. I believe in the The Regulative Principle of Reformed Worship

Consider this statement of the principle: "The acceptable way of worshiping the true God is instituted by himself, and so limited by his own revealed will, that he may not be worshiped according to the imaginations and devices of men, or the suggestions of Satan, under any visible representation, or any other way not prescribed in the holy Scripture" (WCF, XXI:1).

Not a few today are questioning how we should worship God. Is not the answer already implied when we say the Bible is the only infallible rule of our faith and practice? The principle--taught in both the Old and New Testaments--is summed up in these words of Moses: "Do not add to what I command you and do not subtract from it, but keep the commands of the Lord your God that I give you" (Deut. 4:2). This applies to all of life, of course, and not only to worship. But nowhere else is it as vital to exclude every human invention as it is in this sphere.