Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Is the church a pillar & pedestal of truth?
triablogue ^ | September 08, 2008 | Steve

Posted on 03/25/2015 2:25:45 PM PDT by RnMomof7

Is the church a pillar & pedestal of truth?

I’ve discussed this verse (1 Tim 3:15) on more than one occasion, but since Catholics keep citing it as a prooftext for Catholicism, I have to correct them more than once.

To some extent I’ll repeat myself since they repeat themselves, but I’m also going to expand on some points.

Catholics always quote this out of context. But what questions should we ask ourselves when we approach this verse?

1. How should we render the Greek phrase? The Greek construction is anarthrous. There is no definite article. Therefore, there’s no reason to automatically translate the phrase as “the Church of God.”

2. Even if, for the sake of argument, we use a definite article, notice what the verse doesn’t say. It doesn’t say, “the Church of Rome is a pillar and pedestal of truth.”

3. So what church is Paul talking about? What’s the destination of the letter? The church of Ephesus (1 Tim 1:3).

4. So Paul is talking about a local church, and the referent is the church of Ephesus.

5. Why did Paul write 1 Timothy in the first place? What occasioned this letter?

The church of Ephesus had been infiltrated by false prophets. Paul sent Timothy to function as a troubleshooter and letter courier.

Now, think about that for a moment. Is a local church that’s been infiltrated by false teachers a “pillar and pedestal” of truth? Would such a church be a source of false teaching rather than sound doctrine?

Why did Paul write them in the first place? Why did he leave Timothy behind? To combat false teachers in the church of Ephesus.

6. And this is not the only example by any means. Was the church of Corinth a “pillar and pedestal” of truth? No, it was a source of false teaching. He had to write to correct their false teaching.

Were the churches of Galatia pillars of truth? No, they were teetering on the brink of apostasy. What about the church of Colossae? No, he wrote that church to combat the Colossian heresy. What about the church of Thessalonica? No, he wrote that church to combat the Hymenaean heresy.

And it isn’t limited to Paul. Were all seven churches of Asia Minor (Rev 2-3) pillars of truth? No. What about the Christian communities to which Peter addressed 2 Peter and Jude addressed his epistle? No. What about the destination of 1 John and the letter of Hebrews? No and no.

Because Catholics fall back on traditional prooftexting, and think in abstract rather than historical terms, they don’t stop to consider the concrete circumstances of the NT churches.

7. Catholics only quote 1 Tim 3:15b. But what’s the immediate context of that clause? 1 Tim 3:14-15a.

Does Paul say that in his absence, the church of Ephesus can get along just fine without him since the church is a pillar and foundation of truth? That Ephesian Christians can learn everything they need to learn from the Magisterium or teaching office of the Church?

No, he says nothing of the kind. To the contrary, he is writing to them so that they will know how to conduct themselves in church. They aren’t getting this from the church. They are getting this from him. From his teaching to the church (e.g. the household code in 1 Tim 2:1-3:13).

He is writing them because he can’t teach them in person—at the moment. But in any case, their source of sound doctrine comes from him. Not from the church, as a pillar and pedestal of truth.

In context, 1 Tim 3:15 is the very antithesis of a prooftext for ecclesiastical authority.


TOPICS: Catholic; Charismatic Christian; Evangelical Christian
KEYWORDS: apologetic; church; truth; uphold
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-32 next last

1 posted on 03/25/2015 2:25:45 PM PDT by RnMomof7
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Boogieman; Alex Murphy; bkaycee; blue-duncan; boatbums; CynicalBear; daniel1212; Gamecock; ...

Ping


2 posted on 03/25/2015 2:26:32 PM PDT by RnMomof7
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RnMomof7

“The Church” is, not the “church”.


3 posted on 03/25/2015 2:32:11 PM PDT by sagar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RnMomof7

4 posted on 03/25/2015 2:33:43 PM PDT by WVKayaker (Impeachment is the Constitution's answer for a derelict, incompetent president! -Sarah Palin 7/26/14)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RnMomof7

“Popery is contrary to Christ’s gospel and is the antichrist” - Charles Spurgeon


5 posted on 03/25/2015 2:56:15 PM PDT by Dr. Thorne (The night is far spent, the day is at hand.- Roman 13:12)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Comment #6 Removed by Moderator

Comment #7 Removed by Moderator

Comment #8 Removed by Moderator

Comment #9 Removed by Moderator

To: sagar

“since Catholics keep citing it as a prooftext for Catholicism, I have to correct them more than once”

so that means you must be divinely inspired to determine what “The Church” means kind of like protestants’ individual interpretations of Scripture.

what makes you think that only YOUR interpretation can possibly be correct one??

AMDG


10 posted on 03/25/2015 3:04:14 PM PDT by LurkingSince'98 (Ad Majoram Dei Gloriam = FOR THE GREATER GLORY OF GOD)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: RnMomof7

There is no way the Catholic Church can claim that distinction. Their leadership doesn’t even qualify to be in leadership positions per Paul.


11 posted on 03/25/2015 3:08:20 PM PDT by CynicalBear (For I decided to know nothing among you except Jesus)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: CynicalBear; WVKayaker; RnMomof7; metmom; daniel1212; Elsie

I always thought it was God who is the pillar and pedestal of truth, not some church.


12 posted on 03/25/2015 3:18:55 PM PDT by Mark17 (Beyond the sunset, O blissful morning, when with our Savior, Heaven is begun. O glorious dawning)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: RnMomof7
Regarding Peter and the church, Galatians 2 is food for thought.

Peter "stood condemned" because his "conduct was not in step with the truth of the gospel". Because of the actions of Peter and the other Jews, "even Barnabas was led astray".

Should we just accept anything we hear in church as the truth? How can we measure or verify what we hear? Should we just follow our betters without question?

13 posted on 03/25/2015 3:36:04 PM PDT by Tao Yin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mark17; WVKayaker; RnMomof7; metmom; daniel1212; Elsie
>>I always thought it was God who is the pillar and pedestal of truth, not some church.<<

1 Timothy 3:15 But if I tarry long, that thou mayest know how thou oughtest to behave thyself in the household of God, which is the assembly of the living God, the pillar and ground of the truth. It is the assembly of God that is to uphold and support the truth of God here on earth. That "household" consists of all true and faithful followers and believers in Christ. One of the "truths" contained in scripture is that anyone who aspires to leadership in that household is to conform to the ( ) set by the Holy Spirit through Paul.

1 Timothy 3:2 A bishop then must be blameless, the husband of one wife, vigilant, sober, of good behaviour, given to hospitality, apt to teach; 3 Not given to wine, no striker, not greedy of filthy lucre; but patient, not a brawler, not covetous; 4 One that ruleth well his own house, having his children in subjection with all gravity;

The Catholic Church couldn't even uphold that basic truth. The Catholic Church doesn't qualify.

14 posted on 03/25/2015 3:41:52 PM PDT by CynicalBear (For I decided to know nothing among you except Jesus)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: RnMomof7

I’m of the opinion that what he is describing as a “pillar and foundation of the truth” is actually not the church, but the words that directly precede that description: “the living God”. That is consistent with other verses about God being described as “the chief cornerstone” (Eph. 2:20) and “sure foundation” (Isaiah 33:6).


15 posted on 03/25/2015 3:43:50 PM PDT by Boogieman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: CynicalBear; Mark17

I have to side with Mark17 on this question. The wording is not cut and dry, as the phrase in question could be describing “the church of the living God”, or simply the directly preceding “the living God”.

So I think this is a case where one needs to look to the rest of Scripture to see which is the more likely interpretation. It is God, not the church, that is consistently described in the rest of Scripture with symbols like “the rock”, “the chief cornerstone”, “the sure foundation”, etc. So, I think it is more in line with the rest of Scripture to read this description as meant to apply to God, not the church.


16 posted on 03/25/2015 3:52:52 PM PDT by Boogieman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Tao Yin
How can we measure or verify what we hear?

I think all we can do, is what the Berean's did. Search the scriptures daily, to see if these things are so.

17 posted on 03/25/2015 4:01:20 PM PDT by Mark17 (Beyond the sunset, O blissful morning, when with our Savior, Heaven is begun. O glorious dawning)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Boogieman; CynicalBear
So I think this is a case where one needs to look to the rest of Scripture to see which is the more likely interpretation.

I always try to interpret the more difficult to understand verses, in light of the clear teaching of the Bible, not the other way around. Make sense?

18 posted on 03/25/2015 4:04:05 PM PDT by Mark17 (Beyond the sunset, O blissful morning, when with our Savior, Heaven is begun. O glorious dawning)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Mark17
>How can we measure or verify what we hear? <

I think all we can do, is what the Berean's did. Search the scriptures daily, to see if these things are so.

THIS!!!!!!!

19 posted on 03/25/2015 4:08:10 PM PDT by ealgeone
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: LurkingSince'98; RnMomof7; Tao Yin
... since Catholics keep citing it as a prooftext for Catholicism, ...

Catholics don't "proof-text," generally. Not the way Protestants do.

Steps 3 and 4 are not logically necessary. As arguments there is NO WAY they're self-sufficient.

Should we just accept anything we hear in church as the truth?

Catholic teaching IN NO WAY says you should accept anything you hear in church. We argue with our priests and with our bishops. We write letters to Rome complaining about false teaching in our local pulpits or in our dioceses.

(Sometimes Rome actually responds. A very heterodox bishop in Virginia had his chain severely yanked.)

We write papers, start periodicals, give lectures, start prayer and study groups -- yes, yes, INCLUDING Scripture study.

And we have been known to remind our Popes of Peter's behavior.

Big
Fat
Straw
Man!
as usual.

Keep on shadow boxing. At least it keeps y'all off our backs.

20 posted on 03/25/2015 4:13:48 PM PDT by Mad Dawg (In te, Domine, speravi: non confundar in aeternum.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-32 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson