Posted on 10/03/2001 9:38:09 AM PDT by malakhi
| Of all the dispositions and habits, which lead to political prosperity, Religion, and Morality are indispensable supports. -- In vain would that man claim the tribute of Patriotism, who should labor to subvert these great pillars of human happiness, these firmest props of the duties of Men and Citizens. -- The mere Politician, equally with the pious man, ought to respect and to cherish them. -- A volume could not trace all their connections with private and public felicity. -- Let it simply be asked where is the security for property, for reputation, for life, if the sense of religious obligation desert the oaths, which are the instruments of investigation in Courts of Justice? And let us with caution indulge the supposition, that morality can be maintained without religion. -- Whatever may be conceded to the influence of refined education on minds of peculiar structure -- reason and experience both forbid us to expect, that national morality can prevail in exclusion of religious principle. — George Washington |
| Threads 1-50 | Threads 51-100 | Threads 101-150 |
| Thread 151 | Thread 152 | Thread 153 |
The Neverending Story (The Christian Chronicles) -- Thread 154
"Feed my sheep" (Jn.21:15-17)
When I read this, the thought occurred to me: what would be the consequences of a literal interpretation of this passage? Would we have the Gospel according to PETA? (Sorry for the bad pun). [/silliness]
Um, angelo? Vmatt has a direct line to both gods. Don't forget.
LOL! I did forget. Thanks for the clarification. ;o)
Will you affirm for me that Latin was not a dead language, was in fact the common language of literacy, when the Bible was translated into it?
Yes I will. Not only that, but it was of course not necessary to translate the Bible into Greek. There was already the Septuagint, and the Christian scriptures were written in Greek. So between the Greek and the Latin versions, any literate person in and near the Roman Empire would be able to read the scriptures in their common tongue.
SD
Augustine ("De unitate ecclesiae", [on the Unity of the Church 3):
"Let us not hear, this I say, this you say; but thus says the Lord. Surely it is the books of the Lord on whose authority we both agree and which we both believe. There let us seek the Church, there let us discuss our case."
He goes on: "Neither dare one agree with catholic bishops if by chance they err in anything, with the result that their opinion is against the canonical Scriptures of God."
I don't know. You tell me.
I think you and several others here are operting on the mistaken notion that there are things that Catholics believe that are contradictory to Scripture. That the magisterium has the power to negate parts of the Bible.
This is not so.
So Augustine is correct in saying that if Catholic bishops were contradicting the Scripture we should obey the Scripture.
The problem is that nobody has shown that the Catholic Church is contrary to Scripture. Isolated, jerked out of context and just plain dubious interpretations of Scripture appear to indict the Church. But properly understood Scripture harmonizes with the Church.
So, I ask for the third time, what settles an argument between two men on the meaning of a Scripture passage?
SD
I love you man! :)
BigMack
The same thing that settles an argument between two men on the meaning of a Constitutional passage - the Constitution.
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
Having missed my point, you launch into the same old tirade about second century "wannabes" sowing the devil's seeds into the pure and fully developed (yet consisting of only a foundation, how odd) Church.
Your point is that there is mention of a goddess called "the Queen of Heaven" in Jeremiah. And that Catholics are so enthralled by the devil that we don't even recognize or care that we worship this same goddess today, pretending that she is Mary, the Mother of the fleshy container which held the spirit of God.
That seems to be your point. When you hear a name you look in your concordance and look it up. "Hey, lookee here Cletus, "Queen of Heaven." Seems to be some type of pagan goddess. Those stupid Catholics."
That is, you take a name from usage today and look it up in the Bible and assume that the name refers to the same thing as it used to. This is as asinine as looking at my name "David" and assuming I am the Old Testament King.
Mary is the Queen of Heaven because she is the mother of the King. Period. That the name happens to match one used ofor a pagan goddess of old is immaterial.
SD
Surely you jest. Or have you taken up feeding us straight lines now?
The Constitution is as inert as the Bible. It just sits there. Men must look at the characters, organize them into words reflecting concepts and objects and imbue them with meaning.
The Constitution does not rule on cases about its meaning -- its official interpreters do.
SD
That's s good, honest, modern answer. If two men disagree upon the meaning of Scripture there is often noone who can mediate the dispute.
SD
Have I ever said there was one? Are you guilty of twisting words?
I was asking because you rejected Paul's "personal opinion" about women, his misogyny, interjected in the middle of an otherwise inspired epistle. You further stated that you don't see a problem with women pastors or preachers. I was asking if Jesus appointed any women apostles, as they were the leaders of the Church.
Do you think Jesus erred in not placing women in positions of authority?
SD
Havoc, I've had about enough of your disrespect and downright ignorance. I realize you won't affirm that the Church translated Scripture into Latin so people who were literate could read it, because that would violate you policy of never giving the Catholics any credit.
But can you step back for a minute and at least pretend that I am a fellow Christian and that when I read the Bible I read different things into the words than you do? I think that you recognize when, for instance, Calvinists and Arminians aruge free will, that both sides honestly are trying to use Scripture to bolster their points. They're not being devious, it's just that certain truths occur to certain people as more important than others.
Can you step back? Can you see that arguments over what the Bible means are not arguments "attacking" God and the Bible? Can you?
SD
Disagree. The Bible does not "just sit there." It is God-breathed. It is living, active and sharper than any two-edged sword, piercing even to the dividing of the joints and marrow and is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart.
its official interpreters do.
And how, praytell, should they do this?
As I did on the last thread (and shall continue to do until some of it sinks in), I will point out that this is a false premise. Sola Scriptura does not, REPEAT, DOES NOT believe that the Christian faith should be based exclusively on a book. ONLY PRIMARILY ON THE BOOK.
Did the early church err in placing women in positions of authority? Psst - sometimes whole churches were just women because Christianity spread, not surprisingly, the fastest in the underclass. In an early document (can't remember the name of it offhand, but it can be found in Paganism and Christianity by MacMullen and Lane (my Greek mentor)), instructions are given to traveling evangelists who come to churches where there are no men. So it was obviously a known quantity. What to do? I guess they just sat around waiting for the men to show up.
I stand fast, your the one on the run and anyone with a half a brain can see your very very weak posts. All you guys can do is attack when the truth is put before you. Wheres your truth?
And as having Havoc as an ally you bet, I much rather have him sharing a fox hole with me than you.
Hes one of the few on this board that is not afraid to point out the false and damming teaching of the catholic church. It is sad you cannot see the truth it will set you free if you ever do.
BigMack
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.