kosta: I agree, but that hardly explains the role of St. Paul, or the book entitled "Revelation of John" (aka the Book of Revelation).
Paul, no doubt, was witness to the many events of Christ and had a direct revelation of Christ and was confirmed by the other Apostles as an Apostle. John, the author of Revelations, was a direct Apostle and witness.
That's possible, but the "help for the Holy Spirit" is a faith-based assumption and should correctly be stated "and we believe with the help of the Holy Spirit," as a matter of faith, rather than as a matter of fact.
No need to dictomize between faith and fact. Matters of faith could be fact. You place faith in atheist scholars and in some instances the trust you place in their conclusions may turn out to be fact.
It's all [Scripture] based on copies of copies and on a priori faith. If faith is salvific, then there is no need for scriptures. You don't learn how to believe through the Bible. In order for the Bible to "make sense" you already have to believe. But if you already believe, what are you going to change? Is believing in God not enough?
Is seeing the face of God in creation a priori? No, I know God by experiencing creation. Is seeing the face of God through my conscience a priori? No, I know God by my experiences of conscience. Is seeing the face of God in Scripture a priori? No, I know God by experiencing him through Scripture. Faith is not salvic. Christ is salvic. Faith is merely the instrumentality that appropriates Christ's righteousness. It's impossible to believe in the true God unless you believe he revealed himself. Since God revealed himself in Christ and we can know of Christ through Scripture then one must believe in the divinity of Scripture in order to trust Christ and appropriate his righteousness.
those who believe [can't] prove anything by quoting the bible.
Trusting in the promises of him who is completely trustworthy really has nothing to prove. All we can do is point to where he has shown his trustworthiness. If you don't trust the record of his trustworthiness then you won't trust the promises.
Yet another 10-4!
I would rather say faith is the gift through which God bestows (rather than "appropriates" with an indeterminate subject) Christ's righteousness, and I would have put a paragraph break after "righteousnss" and before "It's". But for my money these sentences are the saddharma.
Now there's plenty of room of RC/Prot disagreement about the, sort of, quality of the necessity of revelation, so this isn't a kumbaya fest. But these are good words.
Sounds great. Now if you could only prove it...You take it on blind faith. The myth perpetuated through Acts is that they all kissed and made up. The evidence shows that was not the case.
The myth that claims that John of the Revelation was an Apostle and a witness is manifested by the fact that nothing has divided the Church to this day more than that uncalled for book. But don't take that to be the "atheist Greek Church" position: it's mine.
All we know is that St. Paul claims he was instantly converted, and even that account is not really flawlessly matching the one in Acts.
All we have is that St. Paul claims to be preaching the Gospel of Christ, when he never met Christ in person. His gospel, as he calls it, is not the same as the Gospels (of which only two of four are actual witnesses); One must wonder what happened to the other 7 Apostles? Could they not write?
No need to dictomize between faith and fact. Matters of faith could be fact. You place faith in atheist scholars and in some instances the trust you place in their conclusions may turn out to be fact
Oh, baloney! I don't place "faith" in scholars. I look at their the evidence they present to match their claims, which is leaps more than any evidence offered for abracadabra superstitions some people offer as "proof" when it comes to the Bible.
It's impossible to believe in the true God unless you believe he revealed himself
It's impossible to believe...unless youj believe... oxymoron of the week!
Is seeing the face of God in creation a priori?
Where is God in creation if not in your mind? You are assuming God created the world. At one time people believed lightening was God's "anger," and diseases were "demonic possessions." Man's fancy creates all sorts of things.
Since God revealed himself in Christ and we can know of Christ through Scripture then one must believe in the divinity of Scripture in order to trust Christ and appropriate his righteousness
Actually, to be correct, God revealed Himself in Jesus (Christ is a title, or at least it was until St. Paul made it Jesus' "last name."). But the correct wording should be "Since we believe that God revealed Himself in Jesus..."
Trusting in the promises of him who is completely trustworthy really has nothing to prove
Christ did not offer only promises; he also offered miracles, i.e. "proofs." And even then not everybody believed. Trust me.
***Paul, no doubt, was witness to the many events of Christ ***
Paul experienced Christ once on the road to Damascus.