Replies

Well, you see, the problem with talking about it is that when the laws of the excluded middle and of non-contradiction are tossed, then what are we doing?

I would suggest that not acknowledging the promises God makes to the Apostles and the Church is an instance of "diminishing" His word. (And, of course, we are told that mostly we "add" to it.)

SO I would say that to submit to God would imply a duty to acknowledge the Catholic Church. And so I have to say that I do not think that the position you take really involves submission only and entirely to God. I think this school of one-on-one, God and me, stuff is a tradition arising in the past couple of centuries, though it cropped up among the Montanists and others earlier on.

To me it seems to be picking and choosing among His commands. I quite understand that it looks different from over there where you are.

So, much as I love the Colossians, Galatians and Romans passages you quoted, it seems to me they work either way. I can say them (and frequently do!) with as much fervor and resolve as you.

(typing with cat leaning on my arm here ...)

Who disputes that "God is greater than all?" Not me.

Who says one gift is "more important" than another? Not me. However, your stand seems to be precisely that of hand saying to another member, "'I have no need of thee.' because God speaks to me directly and my perception is so reliable that I don't need to go to other members of the body, especially to those members whose office is thought by some to be to check such things."

Have you ever heard a preacher who did not have the gift of preaching? He does more harm than good.

The same holds for any person, council or assembly that holds itself to be the head of the body of Christ, the church. Christ is the head of the church.

Of COURSE Christ is the head of the Church. Are YOU (not the others whom you pinged. I've read too many times what they say about us.) seriously saying that Catholics don't think so? "He is the head of the Body the Church! that must come up in evening prayer once a week or so.

So no one is asking you to submit to the doctrines and traditions "of men", anymore than Paul submitted to the cotrines and traditions of men when he went to check if he was running or had run in vain. Are you greater than Paul? Is your closeness to God and knowledge of His will greater than Paul's? How is what you are saying different from claiming that Paul submitted himself to the doctrines and (very young) traditions of men.?

Sanctification is certainly a process, a "walk" (or, for Paul, a "run"), but you're saying it's a walk in which you are your own guide because you have a greater certainty that you are not running in vain that Paul does, since he checked with Cephas and those of repute.

Further, I would say that you put down and pick up the principles of logic at will. You have presented an argument in the two posts to which I am responding. Without the principles of logic it's just noise.

So when you adduce the "of Paul... of Apollos" passage, you are implying that the Catholic Church is one "denomination" among many, and further that to focus on a denomination is to focus on "doctrines and traditions of men".

But there WERE no "denominations" as such, no need for the term, even, until someone said, "I am of Luther,": and another "I am of Calvin," and another, "I am of Henry VII" and another I am of Menno Sims" or "Johann Hus" and so forth. (There were "factions", yes, but not denominations.) We and the Orthodox, despite our own quarrels, (and we were maybe more alert to so-called "Reform" because it was being taken out of our hide -- or our part of it) looked upon this new "I am of the Wesley Brothers" stuff with sadness, horror and, regrettably, anger.

But we have no reached a point where there are some as well saying,"I am of Christ" (I Cor 1:12). And so we have "non-denominational" Christians, because the earlier "Disciples of Christ" (aka "Christians" - ended up being as much a denomination now as they were a "faction" when Paul wrote to them in the church at Corinth. And if you listen you will hear that "non-denominational" is becoming as much a "denomination" as anything else these days.

To appeal for the authority of the Orthodox or Catholic Churches is NOT to substitute a head for Christ, or even to claim a "Denomination" or "religion" (in hosepipe's lingo) but to accept His word to Cephas and to those in the upper room who later approved Paul's ministry and produced a letter in which they seemed unabashedly to claim that they could speak for the Holy Spirit.

(Hosepipe insists it's a family. Well who is it who calls their leader "Papa"?)

We all agree that these leaders are the same people who forsook Christ and fled, and that their leader denied Him thrice. We are not under any illusions about who they are when not filled with the Spirit and power, and we certainly don't think of them as head in PLACE of Christ! What nonsense it is to pretend that we do! I may be stupid, but I am not THAT stupid.

But you have thrown over board the tools of conversation -- although you seem ready to recover them to argue or explain your points. And, unless I misunderstand, you appear to claim that you are closer to God and given more assurance than Saint Paul was, and so close that the examples of the saints of the Bible need not apply to you personally.

I don't mean this in a finger-wagging way. What may seem to you like diffidence is in fact confidence that God can work it out. And you are so generous and graceful in your manner that I think we can disagree without enmity. But, well, let's say that While the things of God seem like foolishness to those carnally wise, it's not true that every time something looks like foolishness the person who thinks so is carnally wise. Some things seem foolish even to the saints.

But let us indeed give Him the glory first, for His mercies endure for ever.

Thank you so much for sharing your views, dear Mad Dawg!

Well, you see, the problem with talking about it is that when the laws of the excluded middle and of non-contradiction are tossed, then what are we doing?

This:

Howbeit we speak wisdom among them that are perfect: yet not the wisdom of this world, nor of the princes of this world, that come to nought: But we speak the wisdom of God in a mystery, [even] the hidden [wisdom], which God ordained before the world unto our glory: Which none of the princes of this world knew: for had they known [it], they would not have crucified the Lord of glory.

But as it is written, Eye hath not seen, nor ear heard, neither have entered into the heart of man, the things which God hath prepared for them that love him.

But God hath revealed [them] unto us by his Spirit: for the Spirit searcheth all things, yea, the deep things of God. For what man knoweth the things of a man, save the spirit of man which is in him? even so the things of God knoweth no man, but the Spirit of God.

Now we have received, not the spirit of the world, but the spirit which is of God; that we might know the things that are freely given to us of God. Which things also we speak, not in the words which man's wisdom teacheth, but which the Holy Ghost teacheth; comparing spiritual things with spiritual.

But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know [them], because they are spiritually discerned.

But he that is spiritual judgeth all things, yet he himself is judged of no man. For who hath known the mind of the Lord, that he may instruct him? But we have the mind of Christ. - I Corinthians 2:6-16

You also said (emphasis mine:)

I am not my own guide:

[There is] therefore now no condemnation to them which are in Christ Jesus, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit.

For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus hath made me free from the law of sin and death.

For what the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh, God sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh: That the righteousness of the law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit.

For they that are after the flesh do mind the things of the flesh; but they that are after the Spirit the things of the Spirit. For to be carnally minded [is] death; but to be spiritually minded [is] life and peace. Because the carnal mind [is] enmity against God: for it is not subject to the law of God, neither indeed can be. So then they that are in the flesh cannot please God.

But ye are not in the flesh, but in the Spirit, if so be that the Spirit of God dwell in you. Now if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his. – Romans 8:9

Likewise, Paul did not receive the Gospel from men - nor did he imagine it:

But I certify you, brethren, that the gospel which was preached of me is not after man. For I neither received it of man, neither was I taught [it], but by the revelation of Jesus Christ.

For ye have heard of my conversation in time past in the Jews' religion, how that beyond measure I persecuted the church of God, and wasted it: And profited in the Jews' religion above many my equals in mine own nation, being more exceedingly zealous of the traditions of my fathers.

But when it pleased God, who separated me from my mother's womb, and called [me] by his grace, To reveal his Son in me, that I might preach him among the heathen; immediately I conferred not with flesh and blood: Neither went I up to Jerusalem to them which were apostles before me; but I went into Arabia, and returned again unto Damascus.

Then after three years I went up to Jerusalem to see Peter, and abode with him fifteen days. But other of the apostles saw I none, save James the Lord's brother. – Galatians 1:11-19

Moreover, the doctrine/tradition of requiring Gentiles to be circumcised would have continued had Paul not confronted the apostles and elders (Acts 15.) Or to put it another way, Paul was led correctly by the direct revelation of Jesus Christ. The men from Judea in verse 1 were led incorrectly by men.

For the record, I’m not non-denominational either. I eschew all of the doctrines and traditions of men across the board. I’m a Christian, plain and simple.

And yes, God is indeed raising a family. We are born into His family as adopted children. It is not "about" this heaven and earth, it is about the next one (Genesis to Revelation, Alpha and Omega.)

But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, [even] to them that believe on his name: Which were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God. – John 1:12-13

For ye have not received the spirit of bondage again to fear; but ye have received the Spirit of adoption, whereby we cry, Abba, Father. - Romans 8:15

To God be the glory!