The Neverending Story (The New Christian Chronicles)

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

[malakhi]

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

Statesmen may plan and speculate for liberty, but it is religion and morality alone which can establish the principles upon which freedom can securely stand. The only foundation of a free constitution is pure virtue. - John Adams

Thread 162
TNS Archives

[vmatt]

Ephesians 4

11 And he gave some, apostles; and some, prophets; and some, evangelists; and some, pastors and teachers;

12 For the perfecting of the saints, for the work of the ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ:

13 Till we all come in the unity of the faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God, unto a perfect man, unto the measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ:

14 That we henceforth be no more children, tossed to and fro, and carried about with every wind of doctrine, by the sleight of men, and cunning craftiness, whereby they lie in wait to deceive;

This is one of the "other peoples mail" categorys in my mind. The bold shows where we are today because we have no apostles, prophets or evangelists, only claims. Sincere claims but only claims nonetheless. If there are such men, why have I found them so lacking and unconvincing? Wouldn't we all like to find this God given hiearchy? If it existed, wouldn't people be flocking to it with all the power and signs that this early church provided? I, for one would drop everything and head that way right now. Pray it happens soon, hope springs eternal.

[OLD REGGIE]

If Mary and her "sister" are both named Mary, then that gives credence to SoothingDaves contention that sister and brother might mean cousins or other family members because I can't conceive of having kids named the same name, unless your George Foreman or one of the Daryls.

Exactly.

Exactly incorrect!

John 19:25 (Four translations.)

RSV So the soldiers did this. But standing by the cross of Jesus were his mother, and his mother's sister, Mary the wife of Clopas, and Mary Mag'dalene.

VULGATE Near the cross of Jesus stood his mother, his mother's sister, Mary the wife of Clopas, and Mary Magdalene.

RHEIMS-DOUAY Now there stood by the cross of Jesus, his mother and his mother's sister, Mary of Cleophas, and Mary Magdalen.

NAB (10) Standing by the cross of Jesus were his mother and his mother's sister, Mary the wife of Clopas, and Mary of Magdala.

(10) It is not clear whether four women are meant, or three (i.e., Mary the wife of Cl[e]opas [cf Luke 24:18] is in apposition with his mother's sister) or two (his mother and his mother's sister, i.e., Mary of Cl[e]opas and Mary of Magdala). Only John mentions the mother of Jesus here. The synoptics have a group of women looking on from a distance at the cross (Mark 15:40).

Not even the NAB has the gaul to claim three women. Hint; any time an RC document doesn't use very "positive" wording, look for the "weasle words".

The weasle words? "It is not clear. Proof enough that even the NAB translators wouldn't claim the "three women" argument. EXACTLY!

[SoothingDave]

The bold shows where we are today because we have no apostles, prophets or evangelists, only claims. Sincere claims but only claims nonetheless. If there are such men, why have I found them so lacking and unconvincing?

Because your mind is clouded and we can not see all things clearly.

Wouldn't we all like to find this God given hiearchy? If it existed, wouldn't people be flocking to it with all the power and signs that this early church provided?

Signs like the miraculous healing at Lourdes? Your modern day fellow Christians scoff at such things. The signs are not so blatant as to make even the foolish have to believe. God will not beat us over the head with his obviousness. You have to discern the signs that are there and put aside the terrible blow to Christian unity brought about by Luther following his tormented mind.

SD

[Havoc]

Havoc, you changed the focus of the discussion in the middle. You were the one who threw in the reference to eternal life, which was not what we were talking about at the beginning of this discussion. We were talking about sin. You conceded the point that I wanted clarified, "One hasn't lost salvation because they sin", because it sounded like that was what you were saying, and I wanted to clarify that. Now, you're attempting to take the high ground by saying that I was saying something about eternal life, when I didn't. Do you have a problem with someone challenging you on things?

No, I didn't change the focus of discussion. You made a comment about being saved, then not, then saved again- attributing it to me by inferrance. In doing so, you situated yourself as believing that salvation and eternal life are one in the same. If you get saved, you are saved - I never said that committing a sin made you unsaved, and getting right made you saved again - that was your interpretation. The focus changed not because I shifted it; but, because you inferred that I said something I had not.

I object to the characterization of the Christian walk as being something that is so precarious, so frought with danger that at any given moment, we could be lost in spite of the saving work of Jesus, when we have received His work in our lives and are trying to live by the Word. That was why I took on your hypothetical scenario, and tried to make a case for a more balanced view of salvation and forgiveness of sin. You take a very hard-line approach which seems to discount the Grace of God, and our position in Christ.

Nothing personal; but, I don't care what you object to. It was Paul who said we each work out our own salvation in trembling before the Lord. God isn't standing by just waiting to do us all in. He is faithful and just; but, many haven't a clue what justice is. He is faithful to forgive us when we repent and ask forgiveness; but, nowhere in the Bible does it say that the saved are incapable of sin. And Paul addresses these issues quite well. Salvation is a precarious thing. If it weren't, it would not be such a narrow path. It's not for people who think they can do it themselves. No one is righteous in themselves. But, No one with unrepented sin is entering heaven. That, again, is scripture. The Catholics want around this through their construct of purgatory. Others want around this begging the reasoned argument of how God Luuuvs us. The Bible says keep yourself free of sin, for you know not what hour the Master returns. There is penalty if the Master finds you in your sin. Heaven isn't it.

..free to do righteousness, not free to sin. I never, ever said we are free to sin, and you know it. I never, ever said obedience and righteousness weren't necessary, either. You're putting words in my mouth that I never said. You think I'm "soft on sin", which is not the case. The Christian walk should be one of joy, of gratitude, of blessedness in all circumstances. Even when things are bad, we have hope. Things won't always be sweetness and light, there will be trials, there will be tribulations, there will be times when we are tempted to be in despair, but our God is Lord of all, and He has saved us, and we are His. We do the things He requires out of joy and gratitude, not out of fear of reprisal!

First of all, I put no words in your mouth, I restated what I have been saying. The christian walk is one of joy, blessedness and all that if it is done right. Obeying God's word does not diminish that a whit. And your argument is lost in that. We may do things out of joy and gratitude; but, not sinning is something we abstain from because we know better and we love God. One need not walk in fear of reprisals unless one has something to fear. Thieves look over their shoulders and wonder who will find them out. The Good guys walk with head held high and with a free conscience. I notice you haven't produced any more scripture - too. telling. You keep speaking in terms of opinion and appeal to reason and with no scripture. I've presented plain straight forward scripture. Do we all have a problem with scripture? Again, I don't have a problem with you; but, I don't care what you think. I know what the scriptures say. And they don't make us a bunch of scared worriers hoping we don't do the wrong thing. It gives us hope that if we do goof and get right with God, God is faithful to forgive. We are not under condemnation if we are saved and walking in his spirit. If we are not, however, we're fooling ourselves to think he owes us anything!

[PayNoAttentionManBehindCurtain]

Did you know that back in Jesus times when a sheep continually strayed from the flock the shepherd would break the legs of the sheep then put him on his shoulders and carry him around so that the sheep learned to stay with the shepherd and flock. God will not let us stray, he will not turn his back on us, if he has to break our legs to keep us in the fold that is what he will do. That is why Jesus used the analogy of the shepherd and his sheep. The peope understood what the shepherd does to keep his sheep safe.

Becky

[RobbyS]

Shakespeare gives an example of how the devil uses truth, in what the witches tell MacBeth. Everything they say comes true, but not in the way that MacBeth wishes.

[ksen]

This is one of the "other peoples mail" categorys in my mind. The bold shows where we are today because we have no apostles, prophets or evangelists, only claims.

Do you also claim that there are no pastors or teachers? Why did you leave those two off of your list of things that we are lacking?

Sincere claims but only claims nonetheless. If there are such men, why have I found them so lacking and unconvincing?

In what way are they lacking or unconvincing?

Wouldn't we all like to find this God given hiearchy? If it existed, wouldn't people be flocking to it with all the power and signs that this early church provided? I, for one would drop everything and head that way right now. Pray it happens soon, hope springs eternal.

vmatt, I think you are treading on dangerous ground. There is coming a time when great signs and wonders will be done, but they won't be from God.

"23 Then if any man shall say unto you, Lo, here is Christ, or there; believe it not. [24] For there shall arise false Christs, and false prophets, and shall shew great signs and wonders; insomuch that, if it were possible, they shall deceive the very elect. [25] Behold, I have told you before. [26] Wherefore if they shall say unto you, Behold, he is in the desert; go not forth: behold, he is in the secret chambers; believe it not." - Mt 24:23-26

The reason the early church had such "signs" was to confirm that they were truly from God. Today we have the complete Bible, their testimony of the things that have happened, that is to be our "sign" today.

"[8] Charity never faileth: but whether there be prophecies, they shall fail; whether there be tongues, they shall cease; whether there be knowledge, it shall vanish away. [9] For we know in part, and we prophesy in part. [10] But when that which is perfect is come, then that which is in part shall be done away." - I Co 13:8-10

Tongues, Knowledge, and Prophecies were all Revelatory gifts. They were needed at the time because the NT was not yet complete. The churches did not have the complete testimony from God. Now we do, so those Revelatory gifts have passed away.

-ksen

[PayNoAttentionManBehindCurtain]

We are not under condemnation if we are saved and walking in his spirit.

I think you guys are saying the same thing. If someone just says the prayer and thinks their saved, and then goes on about their life of sin, without a change taking place in their life about not turning from sin, they were probably not saved in the first place.

BigMack

[the808bass]

Does Sarah prefigure Mary?

I think a case could be made for this.

Not if Elizabeth is "filled with the Holy Spirit," surely.

Fair enough (would you accord the same level of inspiration to every believer (as we are filled with the Holy Spirit)?).

Are there no demonstrative pronouns in Greek?

Certainly there are. To say that the lack of a demonstrative pronoun makes the statement general to the point of including every potential child she might have is not demonstrable.

It's obvious to you & me because we have perfect hindsight.

It was obvious to Elisabeth, too, as the next verse suggests quite plainly (IMO). "But why am I so favored, that the mother of my Lord should come to me?" It seems plain that the Lord is the fruit of the womb of which she is speaking.

[SoothingDave]

I think you guys are saying the same thing. If someone just says the prayer and thinks their saved, and then goes on about their life of sin, without a change taking place in their life about not turning from sin, they were probably not saved in the first place.

No, you guys say that we are "saved" and that our actions, good or bad, will be rewarded in Heaven. Unless I am mistaken, Havoc is saying that if we do not avoid sin we will go to hell.

SD

[malakhi]

Ta da!

Announcing the creation of the new Neverending Story contingency site, to be used (if you choose) when FR goes down, which has happened a lot in the last week.

BOOKMARK THIS LINK

Unless you already have an ezboard.com username, you will need to register before you post. You can click on "Add Reply", and then on (Register Here).

Sorry about the pop-up ads. If we use the site enough to justify it, I'll spring for the cost of removing them.

[ksen]

Good afternoon Dave. Here is an excerpt from the Council of Ephesus:

DECREE AGAINST NESTORIUS

As, in addition to other things, the impious Nestorius has not obeyed our citation, and did not receive the holy bishops who were sent by us to him, we were compelled to examine his ungodly doctrines. We discovered that he had held and published impious doctrines in his letters and treatises, as well as in discourses which he delivered in this city, and which have been testified to. Compelled thereto by the canons and by the letter (anagkaios katepeichthentes apo te ton kanonon, kai ek tes epistoles, k.t.l.) of our most holy father and fellow-servant Celestine, the Roman bishop, we have come, with many tears, to this sorrowful sentence against him, namely, that our Lord Jesus Christ, whom he has blasphemed, decrees by the holy Synod that Nestorius be excluded from the episcopal dignity, and from all priestly communion.

This can be found here, just scroll down to about the middle of the page.

Doesn't it seem kind of presumptuos for a group of men to say that when they make a pronouncement against someone or something that it is Christ Himself that is speaking?

I am SLOWLY but surely making my through the Councils.

-ksen

[vmatt]

Signs like the miraculous healing at Lourdes?

No, like these.

Mark 16

17 And these signs shall follow them that believe; In my name shall they cast out devils; they shall speak with new tongues; 18 They shall take up serpents; and if they drink any deadly thing, it shall not hurt them; they shall lay hands on the sick, and they shall recover.

19 So then after the Lord had spoken unto them, he was received up into heaven, and sat on the right hand of God.

20 And they went forth, and preached every where, the Lord working with them, and confirming the word with signs following. Amen.

[JohnnyM]

Yes I know the promise is to the sheep, and I am saying the sheep are the ones who are saved. Only God knows who His sheep are, the other sheep do not. It is presumptious and dangerous for us to start making these kind of judgments which are preserved for the Holy Spirit. The parable of the tares and wheat tells it all. If you go out and try to separate the tares from the wheat, you will accidently pull some wheat in the process. The wheat represents the saved, the tares the unsaved. So if you are a sheep, then you are saved and there is nothing anyone can do, including yourself, to change that.

JM

[DouglasKC]

If Jesus had said "Truly, truly I am a door", and repeated it a half dozen times you might have had an argument.

If that's the standard, then what do you make of John 3:

Joh 3:3 Jesus answered and said unto him, verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born again, he cannot, see the kingdom of God

Where he says "truly truly" (verily verily) and then as to say this at least 3 or 4 times and explain it to Nicodemus. Why not take this one literally too?

[hopefulpilgrim]

You're back and forth, in and out, I'm saved, I'm damned stuff is really all about you trying to overcome sin on your own.

Been there; done that. I didn't fully understand the grace of God nor the work of the Holy Spirit. Don't want to go back there, either. : )

[Havoc]

I think you guys are saying the same thing. If someone just says the prayer and thinks their saved, and then goes on about their life of sin, without a change taking place in their life about not turning from sin, they were probably not saved in the first place.

The scripture is talking about the saved walking in the flesh, not the unsaved. That is my point. One can be saved and still walking after the flesh and not following God. For them, eternal life is not promised. It comes down to being a sheep. One must hear, obey and follow or one isn't a sheep. Can a sheep do wrong, yep, out of willful disobedience anyone can do wrong. If you get right you've nothing to worry about. If you don't, the scripture warns us plainly of the consequence. Willful disobedience without repentance drives a wedge between us and the Lord - it is rebellion.

What gets me is how people put up all these reasoned arguments about living in fear of the lord should they do anything wrong.. That is garbage. Men who obey the law do not walk around in fear of the police. It is those who are thieves, murderers, rapists, etc. that must walk around looking over their shoulders. The Bible puts it in perspective for those who'll listen and read. But trouble starts to pop up when people start saying "I think" instead of "the scripture says". Catholicism has been playing "I think" for centuries. If you want to play that game, just look to Catholicism and Mormonism and ask yourself if that's where you want to be; because that's where it came from - the ideas of man rather than the word of God.

[hopefulpilgrim]

I forgot this:

"What then? Shall we sin because we are not under law but under grace? May it never be! Do you not know that when you present yourselves to someone as slaves for obedience, you ARE slaves of the one whom you obey, either of sin resulting in death, or of obedience resulting in righteousness? But thanks be to God that though you were slaves of sin, you became obedient from the heart to that form of teaching to which you were committed, and having been freed from sin, you became slaves of righteousness." Romans 6:15-18

[SoothingDave]

Doesn't it seem kind of presumptuos for a group of men to say that when they make a pronouncement against someone or something that it is Christ Himself that is speaking?

Not if you are being infallibly led by the Holy Spirit. Not if you are direct recipients of the power, handed down from the Apostles and Jesus Himself to "Declare bound what is bound in Heaven."

SD

[SoothingDave]

Signs like the miraculous healing at Lourdes?

No, like these.

Mark 16
17 And these signs shall follow them that believe; In my name shall they cast out devils; they shall speak with new tongues; 18 They shall take up serpents; and if they drink any deadly thing, it shall not hurt them; they shall lay hands on the sick, and they shall recover.

Oh, you mean like the miraculous healing that takes place at Lourdes?

SD