The Neverending Story (The Christian Chronicles) -- Thread 154

Southern Baptists ending talks with Catholic Church ^ | 3/24/01 | AP

[malakhi]

The Neverending Story
An ongoing debate on Scripture, Tradition, History and Interpretation.

We have no government armed with power capable of contending with human passions unbridled by morality and religion...Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other. - John Adams

Threads 1-50

Threads 51-100

Threads 101-150

Thread 151

Thread 152

The Neverending Story (The Christian Chronicles) -- Thread 153

[PayNoAttentionManBehindCurtain]

You guys abuse the Bible and hail your traditions. We point out scripture that addresses that and the name calling and excuses, etc. would be entertaining if it weren't sad.

No truer words have been spoken today!!!

Amen preach on brother there on the run!

BigMack

[Havoc]

Either that, or my use of the name "David" is used to signify a wholly different person than the Biblical David. I realize that is confusing to some people.

Having missed my point, you turned right around and made it for me again. We can find contextual issues to check scripture against scripture by looking to other scripture. Ya'll just look for any old thing that looks close and claim final authority in a bunch of inconsistant wannabes that can't get anything straight between themselves and don't agree with the Bible. You call them "fathers" and contest the authority of the Bible. If the Bible writers had first hand knowledge, how is the word of someone who 'knew somebody that heard that x might be the case' from the 2nd century better and more reliable than the guys who wrote from the trenches. If I want the War story from the point of view of a soldier, I go to a soldier, not somebody that once heard a story about a soldier that lived 130 years ago. If you have the story of the soldiers in writing, who needs the xth hand information of a bunch of wannabes from the 2nd century?

[Havoc]

And you ran away from the question, because Our Lord never wrote nor did he imply that a book would be written which would contain the whole Gospel. The Gospel canot be be contained.

I don't remember seeing anyone run away from the question, I saw it addressed rather plainly. The problem is the question states a false premise - that scripture is the only authority. God and His scriptures combine to be a final authority for us. It's just that some give lip service to God and badmouth his Scriptures in favor of Tradition and a bunch of confused old men that couldn't agree on the color of crap.

[the808bass]

Will you affirm for me that the Catholic Church did not translate the Bible into Latin as a dead language, but raher as the common tongue of those who could read in the Western Empire?

Reasonable enough. Of course it gets troubling later on when they don't want any new translations despite the fact that Latin was no longer the "common tongue."

[SoothingDave]

Reasonable enough. Of course it gets troubling later on when they don't want any new translations despite the fact that Latin was no longer the "common tongue."

Thank you. If you go back far enough, I even mentioned this and deliberately separated the Church's sluggishness to abandon Latin in favor of modern tongues. But for the purposes here, I was strictly referring to the Church's motive in creating a Latin Bible.

SD

[pegleg]

Oops. Realized I chopped off the answer on my first response.

Where in the Bible do we find Peter assuming and exercising the role of a Catholic pope?
This is based on Matt 16:18. In the interest of thread space I will provide one example. Jesus says, "I am the good shepherd" (Jn.10:14) and to Peter "Feed my sheep" (Jn.21:15-17) which means "teach my Church." So we view Peter and his successors as the chief shepherd of His church. Christ is the invisible head of the Church, the Peter and his successors are the visible head.

[PayNoAttentionManBehindCurtain]

And you ran away from the question, because Our Lord never wrote nor did he imply that a book would be written which would contain the whole Gospel. The Gospel canot be be contained.

I don't remember seeing anyone run away from the question, I saw it addressed rather plainly. The problem is the question states a false premise - that scripture is the only authority. God and His scriptures combine to be a final authority for us. It's just that some give lip service to God and badmouth his Scriptures in favor of Tradition and a bunch of confused old men that couldn't agree on the color of crap.

I was going to answer that but don't think I need to now. :) Thanks Havoc

Move along, move along, nothing to see here

BigMack

[ChinaGotTheGoodsOnClinton]

...A bunch of confused old men who can't agree on the color of crap

Well Havoc, once again we find a topic that we agree you must be the world's finest expert at!

[PayNoAttentionManBehindCurtain]

I thought China gave a farewell address a while back.....

Someone must of pulled the steak out of his heart....Oh well.

BigMack

[SoothingDave]

He's still doing "cameos" apparently.

SD

[Havoc]

And finally, I'll give you my 10 million (fake) dollar challenge. Quote one bit of theological oral tradition from the first century AD.

I'll triple it if he can prove who said it.

[Havoc]

God love's you China. I'll pray that he delivers you from your contentious spirit. And I'll ignore you until you actually say something. Have a nice day.

[dadwags]

Ref,154.post 149
Actually, Dave, (I may be wrong about this)Greek was the language of the scholars and Latin was the language of the "common" people . Most probably couldn't read it but they understood it when it was read to them .That's my understanding of the LATIN VULGATE .

[The_Reader_David]

Equal in honor, and in faith, but not sharing the office, as indeed the case of another Isapostolos, St. Constantine the Emperor shows. He presided as parliamentarian at some session of the First Council of Niceae, but did not presume to speak on doctrinal matters. (Indeed to judge by his choice of chaplain at his baptism, he seem to have Arian sympathies, but subordinated these to the decision of the council.)

On comfort, though, if you want to cite our titling of Saints as Equal-to-the-Apostles, you can't be one of those protestants who want to claim Constantine hijacked the Church. :-)====

[Havoc]

you can't be one of those protestants who want to claim Constantine hijacked the Church. :-)====

Forgive the expression but I'd say it was more like two vampires feeding off each other. Constantine used the Church for everything he could get from it and otherwise couldn't seem to have cared less other than for the appearances. The Church in turn used Constantine for what they could get out of him and was happy to maintain appearances for him. Being Baptized doesn't mean your saved any more than wearing a Jesus T-shirt does. Both may be a witness to the Lord, but neither is a garauntee of anything. And Constantine practiced his Pagan rites the whole time he was manipulating and being manipulated. He was enterred under Pagan rites. One cannot serve Satan and Christ and pretend to be saved. Constantine was about as much a saint as a doorstop. The makings of the Catholic church wasn't much better.