How Do You Read? (Luke 10:26) [New Church, Open]

"Knowing what is withheld is knowing the Holy Spirit is withheld and furthermore the following verses make it clear that this will be a delusion according to the working of Satan.

I’m not the least bit embarrassed at reading an entire passage rather than accepting what one ignorant person chooses to pretend is the meaning of a single out of context verse."

Is that your organization's answer also? I accept you do not think that the passage means that God will send a deluding influence, but you have claimed in one of your posts that you are not among those who spout "rote" answers, so please confirm to us that this is your organization's perspective. The RCC actually says, "And for this reason God will send upon them a deluding influence so that they might believe what is false,..." does not mean that it is God deluding the unbelievers?

"Is that your organization's answer also?"

Oh, only for the past sixteen hundred years according to preserved sermons with a rather lengthy written study of the Holy Spirit that explains those verses along with others a mere eight hundred plus years ago.

God sent the “deluding influence”. Do you not believe that the Holy Spirit sent that “deluding influence”? Wouldn’t that be the Holy Spirit causing that person to fall for a “deluding influence”?

this is my point exactly, who amongst the ‘bible alone’ churches isnt being ‘deluded’ then???

who decided that church had it right and the other didnt?

that is my question.....this isnt supposed to be a crap shoot where folks all gamble on their own church’s so-called spirit-led view, and hope for the best.....

and no one will give a concrete answer.....

I don't believe using His Word as a weapon is effective in spreading His Good News.

And yet in the Apostle Paul's description of the "Whole Armor of God" a Christian is to take up in spiritual warfare, the only offensive weapon is the Word of God. It is called the "Sword of the Spirit" (Ephesians 6:17). So it certainly must be effective in winning souls if we are commanded to use it that way. There are a lot of false religions, false gods, false prophets, false scriptures and false teachers out in the world - even more so than the first century A.D. How else is someone to know truth from error without an objective and authoritative source?

I appreciate your study on being a "refresher' for our brothers and sisters in Christ as we journey on this road together. I just found it out of place that you threw in that little sentence at the end of this post. I get it that God's word is there for us so that we can know truth from error, and we don't "clobber" someone over the head with the Bible to win them to Christ, but it most certainly IS the offensive weapon given to us to wage the battle for men's souls. It wouldn't be right to only have on defensive armor on a battlefield - that would make you a sitting duck, wouldn't it?

Whatever this man was teaching needs to be help up against the Bible and the Bible alone. God's words do not need a "looking glass" to be read and understood by the honestly seeking. He gave us his Spirit for that.

Amen to that! Some people tread dangerous spiritual ground when they count on seeing "signs" to confirm whether or not something, or someone, is true. It can be extremely difficult to pry that experience away from them when what it came with is shown to be error from Scripture.

The "signs and wonders" God gifted to the early disciples were to be utilized to confirm the Gospel they were preaching. But, just as what Moses experienced when he went before Pharaoh, some things can and WILL be copied and perverted by the wrong people. That's why we have the Bible today, to give us an objective authority by which to judge truth claims. Diligent and sincere seekers of truth will not be drawn into theatrics and magic acts.

I don't think it is a matter of nobody giving a "concrete answer" so much as the answer has maybe been unacceptable to you. Many have said all along that the term sola Scriptura does NOT mean only the Bible can be used to understand and know the doctrines of the Christian faith, but that the Bible is the authority by which ALL truth claims must be measured. Numerous Early Church Fathers said the same that if what they preached could not be proved by Holy Scripture, they were not to be accepted.

No one doubts the essential value of the church which is to be the "ground and pillar of the truth". But the church is NOT the creator of the truth, God is and He gave us His divinely-inspired Scriptures, preserved all these thousands of years, for just that reason. The church is to teach what Scripture teaches and if they ignore it in an attempt to supersede God's word with man-made traditions, then they have perverted their authority and God will judge them.

As to your contention that so many non-Catholic Christian churches disagree sharply with each other on major doctrines of the Christian faith, I will answer that, as Dutchboy88 did, there are many denominations that have fallen away from the orthodox doctrines of the faith. There are many reasons why that happens, but blaming the Bible, and the dependence we are to have upon it, as the reason for that divergence is short sighted and wrong. Even in the first century there were heresies that departed from the faith and many of those same errors still exist today, they just pop up under different labels but the lie is still there. Even having a "universal" church so close to the original Apostles did not prevent the error from seeping in. That is the Devil's work - the sowing of the weeds among the wheat. When a church adheres to Scripture and continues to teach what it clearly does, they are right. When a church strays away from Scriptural teachings and goes down the path of "going along to get along", then they will be wrong and will bring judgment upon themselves. The same thing happens even in the so-called "orthodox" churches that claim antiquity. Many of their teachings have gone through a long stage of "development" and only vaguely resemble, or even don't at all, the early church they claim to still be.

So, again, your question about "Bible only" churches and who is and who isn't being deluded, the simple answer is that if they are true to Scripture AND the leading of the Holy Spirit, they will be in unity on the basic tenets of the Christian faith. When Scripture is not clear or where it is silent, then they will have liberty. In all things there should be charity. Jesus said the world will know we are His disciples by our love for one another.

well bb, i would think that you should actually read the church fathers and note what they say about the teaching authority of the church, and its sole authority to interpret scripture, not just cherry pick a vague statement as if that was all that has been said.

Christ gave us a teaching church, as you noted, is the pillar and foundation of truth, not a bible, in fact were it not for His church, there would be no bible, which has protected it over the centuries.

It is the authoritative teaching church, that Christ himself built on Peter, and his successors, the Sacred Tradition and the Word itself....LONG BEFORE ANY BIBLE WAS EVER PUT TOGETHER.....

the church fathers knew this then, and we know it now, it would seem it is YOU who chooses to deny the history that is so readily available for review and study.

“I should not believe the Gospel except as moved by the authority of the Catholic Church.”
Saint Augustine (354-430), Against the Letter of Mani, 5,6, 397 A.D..

“Let us note that the very tradition, teaching, and faith of the
Catholic Church from the beginning, which the Lord gave, was preached
by the Apostles, and was preserved by the Fathers On this was the Church founded;
and if anyone departs from this, he neither is nor any longer ought to be called a Christian.”
St. Athanasius, Letter to Serapion of Thmuis, 359 A.D..

“Although you have already subscribed to the letter I addressed to Arius and his fellows, exhorting them to renounce his impiety, and to submit themselves to the sound Catholic Faith, and have shewn your right-mindedness and agreement in the doctrines of the Catholic Church: ...”
Deposition of Arius by St Athanasius, 360 A.D.

“Let us not listen to those who deny that the Church of GOD is able to forgive all sins. They are wretched indeed, because they do not recognize in Peter the rock and they refuse to believe that the keys of the kingdom of heaven, lost from their own hands, have been given to the Church.” Christian Combat 31,33, 396 A.D. St Augustine.

“The Catholic Church is the work of Divine Providence, achieved through the prophecies of the prophets, through the Incarnation and the teaching of Christ, through the journeys of the Apostles, through the suffering, the crosses, the blood and the death of the martyrs, through the admirable lives of the saints. When, then, we see so much help on God’s part, so much progress and so much fruit, shall we hesitate to bury ourselves in the bosom of that Church? For starting from the Apostolic Chair down through successions of bishops, even unto the open confession of all mankind, it has possessed the crown of teaching authority.”
The Advantage of Believing, 391 A.D. St. Augstine.

NEED I GO ON?

We are to rightly divide the word not play silly games.

I agree, we may not learn every thing there is to know and we may disagree on some points but at least we will not apt to be off on some teaching that Jesus did not teach.

Many people will actually add or take away from Christs teaching because they read what Paul or even some one a hundred and fifty years ago said that seems to contradict it.

Many Church leaders try to be every thing to every one and and simply will not admit that there is any thing they do not know, so instead of simply saying i do not know they will come up with some silly explanation that may be far off from the truth.

However i will disagree on one thing and that is understanding the original language, i am a grade school drop out so it is unlikely that i would understand Greek or Hebrew.

And it is even more unlikely that i would believe what some college educated person who has done absolutely nothing except go to school had to tell me, simply because words and meanings can be twisted around too easily, and also misunderstood by people who have not walked the walk.

You've got to read the whole story. (Usually, a lawyer was also a scribe.)

Luke 10

25

And behold, a lawyer stood up to put him to the test, saying, "Teacher, what shall I do to inherit eternal life?"

26	He said to him, "What is written in the law? How do you read?"

27	And he answered, "You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your strength, and with all your mind; and your neighbor as yourself."

28	And he said to him, "You have answered right; do this, and you will live."

29	But he, desiring to justify himself, said to Jesus, "And who is my neighbor?"

30	Jesus replied, "A man was going down from Jerusalem to Jericho, and he fell among robbers, who stripped him and beat him, and departed, leaving him half dead.

31	Now by chance a priest was going down that road; and when he saw him he passed by on the other side.

32	So likewise a Levite, when he came to the place and saw him, passed by on the other side.

33	But a Samaritan, as he journeyed, came to where he was; and when he saw him, he had compassion,

34	and went to him and bound up his wounds, pouring on oil and wine; then he set him on his own beast and brought him to an inn, and took care of him.

35	And the next day he took out two denarii and gave them to the innkeeper, saying, `Take care of him; and whatever more you spend, I will repay you when I come back.'

36	Which of these three, do you think, proved neighbor to the man who fell among the robbers?"

37	He said, "The one who showed mercy on him." And Jesus said to him, "Go and do likewise."

“Let us note that the very tradition, teaching, and faith of the
Catholic Church from the beginning, which the Lord gave, was preached
by the Apostles, and was preserved by the Fathers On this was the Church founded;

Which bible does the Catholic Church read and where does it say to the Apostles to Change the Sabbath from the seventh day of the week to the first day of the week?

Where does it say to hail Mary mother of God,or how many our fathers?

Where did the (not be respecters of persons )go? how did the hirelings come to be Gods servants?

How did the religious leaders become from what Jesus called them, white washed sepulchers to leaders in his Church, where did the cardinals come from?

What happened to the words Jesus said about preaching the word freely, how can some one call them selves a slave for God if they are getting rich or even living high on the hog from doing it?

raven, you are asking questions assuming that bible alone, sola scriptura is true.

you need to see that the early history, as recorded, even in the few (i can provide hundreds more on all aspects of the faith)quotes from these few church fathers, that there is the teaching church, sacred tradition, and the word of God, all combined to make a coherent whole.

Again, read the church fathers THEY WERE THERE, THEY WALKED AND TALKED WITH APOSTLES...when the foundation of the church was built on Peter.

Do you really think that Christ ascended back to heaven and dropped down a KJV with his words in red, saying ‘let the holy spirit guide you’.....HE BUILT AN AUTHORITATIVE CHURCH, with an orderly line of leaders, from Peter, and the first bishops, etc, thru their successors we see today.

raven, you are asking questions assuming that bible alone, sola scriptura is true.

It is plain that i am not getting an answer, i do believe in the Bible alone, i do not believe God would have allowed the Scriptures to be put into a book for every one to read if it were not so.

Jesus said it is finished, the apostles started the Church of God for the purpose of preaching the Gospel of Jesus, and he told us the truth.

Many of the Church doctrines say that Jesus did not tell us the truth. but i will not go into them as if you take the word of the Church doctrine above some very understandable words of Jesus it would be useless.

I answered your question, your questions to me ASSUME that the bible alone is a true doctrine (not mentioned anywhere in the bible of course, but thats as may be), my answer was that the HISTORY of the church shows an authorative teaching church built upon peter by Christ himself, to continue through his successors.

This church, along with the Sacred Tradtion and the word of God, all form a cohesive whole.

History shows that. There was no bible for over four hundred years after Christ ascended into heaven.

The Holy Spirit led the catholic church to put the books that Christ wanted, into one volume.....

Who do you think was teaching the faith from the time of the ascension to the time the bible was put together????

Ask yourself, ‘hmmm, was i there two thousand years ago, or were there others there at the time who witnessed and taught the faith in the first few centuries....and wrote down the history’.....

If you choose not to investigate history, that is your loss.

Who do you think was teaching the faith from the time of the ascension to the time the bible was put together????

Who were the false teachers that Peter, John and Paul warned us about that would if possible deceive the very elect and who do the Catholic Church get their doctrine from??????

again, instead of doing the smart thing and checking history of the church, you decide to continue ignoring history as it doesnt suit your world view.

Peter, John, and Paul were all part of the catholic church, hello? are you getting this? Peter was the first in the long line of leaders of the church THAT CHRIST BUILT ON HIM.

John and Paul went out and taught, WHAT CHRIST HAD HANDED ON IN THE DEPOSIT OF FAITH TO THE APOSTLES AND THEIR SUCCESSORS, in the church.

The catholic church has been fighting heresies from day one, usually from folks who think they can interpret the word of God on their own.....

This is my last words on this, you may have the last word as I am sure you will ignore the historical writings of the church fathers.

If one does not bother to learn the original languages then you are dependent on someone else’s translation. That is dangerous. Moreover the fact that you would ignore someone’s education tells me all I need to know about you.

God did not give you a cpu He gave you a brain. it is to be used to the fullest possible extent that one can. You have no basis for any of the so called ‘opinions’ that you will ‘develop’. That is exactly how the LDS church came into being and the Jehovah’s Witnesses.....I don’t need someone writing sermons and preaching to me who has no knowledge or understanding of context and original language

If one does not bother to learn the original languages then you are dependent on someone else’s translation. That is dangerous. Moreover the fact that you would ignore someone’s education tells me all I need to know about you.

Ok, i admit that i am pretty ignorant, i am going on 77 and am not about to spend the rest of my life learning at least two other languages so if i have to do that to be saved then i will not be saved.

I presume that you do not think you are the only one or one of a very few who are educated enough to speak another language, but you do realize that i would need a tutor.

So which one do you think i should get?

Some great educated one who believes in the tribulation before the rapture.

Some great educated man who believes in the rapture before the tribulation.

Some great educated man that believes in mid tribulation rapture.

Or a great educated man that does not believe in the rapture at all.

Should i get The man who is educated enough to know that Jesus actually sweat blood.

Or should i get the one who is education enough that he very well knows the difference between sweat and blood.

That is dangerous. Moreover the fact that you would ignore someone’s education tells me all I need to know about you.

The only reason you will need to know any thing about me at all is if you decide to tutor me, and if you say you are the only possible one for the job will make me think the price will be a little steep.

again, instead of doing the smart thing and checking history of the church, you decide to continue ignoring history as it doesnt suit your world view.

It would be time consuming just checking the history of the church but that would be easy compared to checking all of the doctrines made by the Church and comparing them to the scriptures to see if they were the truth or not, so why not just read the bible and save twenty years.