How can God ensure that His teachings are given correctly? Is that what you are asking me? Are you saying that God cannot enfluence the contents of a teaching?
I meant that your view is that the Bible is inerrant NOT because God says so, but because your hierarchy took a vote and declared it so. Likewise, the writings of any particular Father are declared infallible by a similar vote.
Do you know what a circular argument is? That is exactly what you continue to do when you say "the Bible is the Word of God - because the Word of God is the Bible." Break this vicious circle and prove to me that the Bible is the Word of God WITHOUT the Church. The Bible CANNOT prove itself.
I'm not accusing anyone of lying, but I do think that when it came to the Bible, there was a different standard. Men are capable of error, and so I believe that the Bible was effectively taken out of the hands of man to ensure its inerrancy.
Are you trying to eat my cake?! What makes you think that? What evidence do you have to make such a presumption?
Your case would be stronger if any of the true writings of the Apostles was rejected as uninspired. To my knowledge, that did not happen. Writings of Fathers were rejected many times.
As were writings of men who claimed to be Apostles, such as the Gospel of Thomas. The reason why it was rejected was its content, not its author. As such, the Church used the same criteria for judging ALL the books of the NT. Did they meet the criteria established by the Apostles' teaching - oral and written - without contradiction? The fact of the matter is that you really don't have much to stand on to reject such things that are well established as Apostolically taught, such as infant baptism. What holds you back is theological issues, not any search for the truth. We accept many things as true that are not in Scriptures...
I wrote :FK, this is something that ONLY the Spirit can enable us to comprehend. It is not something that can be explained and understood with the man of the flesh: ...
You wrote : Since this is a Catholic belief, I thought you were saying that all others are "men of the flesh", thus, unregenerate.
What I am saying is that our human nature's brain cannot understand transubstantiation. As Christ said, it takes the Spirit coming to man and giving supernatural faith from the Father to believe in the Eucharist.
But since God's system of justice is not like man's, His unilateral promises are always binding on Him. This is not in the sense that God "owes" us, it is in the sense that God owes His own nature, since it is axiomatic that God is not a liar. He can't say "just kidding" because it isn't true to His nature.
Which is why Catholics say we can merit. God binds Himself based on His revelation that He is Just. By following His commands, through His graces, God has bound Himself to save us.
That would be true only if your definition of justice was the only one. God's justice is different.
There you go eating that cake again... Than we shouldn't call God "just" if it doesn't even meet human standards of justice. When we say God's ways our not our ways, it doesn't mean that God is WORSE! It means that God EXCEEDS our expectations!
I wrote I ask you to consider what would be the point of Jesus telling the elect to persevere if they are infallibly saved? Or the non-elect to persevere if they cannot but sin?
You responded: He tells them to persevere because that is part of the salvation model revealed in scripture, and that is part of the human experience. (We all experience choosing to persevere.) He also tells them that none of His sheep will be lost.
You are not answering the question... How does God expect man to persevere if man cannot do ANYTHING, even when empowered by God?
The principle that it must/will happen for the elect is the same for both of us, right?
God foresees our perseverance. We don't. That is why we don't know we are of the elect. It makes no sense that God will ask the "elect" to persevere - to be on guard. This is a senseless command if man cannot do anything. Our differences on this stems from you taking God's point of view and trying to foist it upon man's knowledge of his eternal destiny. We don't know - thus, we are told to persevere. IF we persevere, salvation is ours, and we were the elect all along. IF we DO NOT persevere, we were one of those who said "Lord, Lord" - and Jesus will respond "I never knew you". Think on that...
The Bible is the literal word of God and should be interpreted as it was intended to be.
The Bible is NOT the "literal" word of God! Does the Bible say that anywhere? God works through mediators - throughout history. He inspired men to write the Scriptures.
It seems logical to me that whatever verse says that women should not speak in church is of this kind.
This is an example of how God speaks through a human writer. If woman speak in church, then they go against the "literal" word of God! Is God's Word unchanging or not? This is the problem with Islam, for heaven's sake! The Pope has written about this very subject - and why Islam cannot reform itself - because it believes that the Koran is the literal word of God - while he points out that Christians do NOT see the Bible as the "literal" word of God - but subject to interpretation by different times and societies - the People of God in time.
Regards
How can God ensure that His teachings are given correctly? Is that what you are asking me? Are you saying that God cannot enfluence the contents of a teaching?
Under my understanding of Catholic free will, God can certainly influence the intellect to give correct teaching. However, God CANNOT ensure that it will actually happen because free will, in Catholicism, can always override what God wants. So, God can give the best advice in the world, which He always does, but there can be no guarantee that the correct teaching will actually be given by a priest or bishop, or anyone else, because free will is ALWAYS a wildcard.
FK: "...but I do think that when it came to the Bible, there was a different standard. Men are capable of error, and so I believe that the Bible was effectively taken out of the hands of man to ensure its inerrancy."
What makes you think that? What evidence do you have to make such a presumption?
It's the same as above. In Catholicism, men always have the freedom to do whatever they want, for or against God. I can't believe God left it to chance that all the authors of the Bible would never choose to ignore His grace on what to write. So, I think it makes sense, that for something as important as His word to His Church, that He would eliminate all possibility of error. And God's foreknowledge is of no help here, because you would still have to believe in an amazing freak of luck that no author strayed, seeing as how "hands-off" you believe God is.
What I am saying is that our human nature's brain cannot understand transubstantiation. As Christ said, it takes the Spirit coming to man and giving supernatural faith from the Father to believe in the Eucharist.
OK, I see what you're saying.
[FK responding to JK:] He tells them to persevere because that is part of the salvation model revealed in scripture, and that is part of the human experience. (We all experience choosing to persevere.) He also tells them that none of His sheep will be lost.
You are not answering the question... How does God expect man to persevere if man cannot do ANYTHING, even when empowered by God?
I could be misunderstanding this question, but I'll try. God does not expect any of His elect to persevere on his own, and He does not expect any of the non-elect to persevere at all. God expects all of His elect to obey, and He gives all of them the necessary tools to do so. Nevertheless, sometimes the elect choose to disobey. This breaks God's wish, and is sin, but it doesn't break God's expectation, since He already knew and expected that the person was going to sin at that moment.
Whenever the elect "choose" to do good, then it is God working through them, and on all of those occasions, the person does not choose to disobey. So, perhaps we are using different meanings of the word "expect". Speaking only about myself, since I do not believe in a deeds-based salvation model, I do not believe God "expects" the elect to perform "X" number of good deeds to merit salvation. Perseverance comes completely from God, so with every good deed I do, I, personally, get 0 points in meeting God's expectations.
God foresees our perseverance. We don't. That is why we don't know we are of the elect. It makes no sense that God will ask the "elect" to persevere - to be on guard. This is a senseless command if man cannot do anything.
It's a perfect revelation of God's will, and therefore a wonderful teaching tool to seekers. It's also a reminder to us that God DOES care whether and how often we choose to sin. These are exactly the types of passages that remind me that, even though I believe I am saved, that I CANNOT go back to a life of unchecked sin. This is what these verses are for! :) Man can choose to sin, so these types of verses help him to not choose to do so.
God COULD have set up a system where He chooses His elect, lets them know it, and then doesn't care whether they ever sin again or not. If the Bible was silent on the issue, I might come to this conclusion. Thank God the Bible is not silent at all, He gives us His will that we are to persevere. So now I know.
IF we persevere, salvation is ours, and we were the elect all along. IF we DO NOT persevere, we were one of those who said "Lord, Lord" - and Jesus will respond "I never knew you". Think on that...
I don't put the burden on my shoulders to perform to such and such a level. God already says He will take the burden for us.
The Bible is NOT the "literal" word of God! Does the Bible say that anywhere? God works through mediators - throughout history. He inspired men to write the Scriptures.
We must disagree on what "literal" literally means. :) What do you think of this verse? :
Matt. 5:18 : I tell you the truth, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished.
The "every jot and tittle" verse. The "Law" that Jesus was referring to was the Law found plainly in the scriptures. Here, was Jesus submitting Himself to the work of men? I can't believe that He is. Rather, He is submitting Himself to the "literal" word of God, down to the last jot and tittle. I don't believe that imperfect men could come up with something that Jesus seems to think is THAT perfect.
This is an example of how God speaks through a human writer. If woman speak in church, then they go against the "literal" word of God! Is God's Word unchanging or not?
God's "literal" word was intended to be interpreted at times. Jesus tells us that. God knows that humans relate well to stories which incorporate things familiar to us. He knows that method works, so He uses it. It's how He built us. For the same reason there is a lot of repetition in the Bible. God knows that works too. It makes perfect sense and helps us in our sanctification. He literally intended to include some allegory, so some of His literal words are literal allegory.