Why 'the church isn’t perfect' line has become a cop-out; Christians cannot use this as an excuse to ignore sin.

Christian Post ^ | 09/07/2020 | Robin Schumacher

[metmom]

So the author states that his Christian daughter of 19 has an Instagram account that routinely gets hit on. Sometimes vigorously to the point she has to examine the people carefully and in detail. Maybe he should examine the behavior and message she is Putting out via instagram. His message and drama sounds exactly like what a 19 year old girl likes to talk about. This is from experience.

That's no different than blaming the rape victim for being raped.

It doesn't matter what message she's putting out.

HE should NOT be biting.

But he needs to take a look at the message his daughter is putting out before writing this type of long winded self absorption.

While that is worth considering, and she does need to be corrected if wrong, a married man has NO business engaging like that. He should not have gone there and if she's sending out the wrong message, he should be telling her so.

[Luircin]

You go first.

***

Care to try again without invoking a logical fallacy?

[Bishop_Malachi]

You do realize there were lots of Christian communities sprouting up in far fling areas of the Mediterranean.

Paul’s letters are among the very oldest of Christian writings. They pre-date the Gospel writings of Mathew, Mark, Luke, and especially John.

No one is saying that the Roman Catholic Church wrote the OT. It existed in its entirety centuries before Jesus was even born.

You do realize also that there were tons of writings about Jesus that developed over time. Some deemed authoritative, some deemed false, and some deemed “borderline”. The early Church scrutinized all known writings and between 200 and 350 AD settled on a group of writings largely synonymous with the 27 books that are accepted as canon today.

But to argue that the complete Bible was floating around from the earliest years after Jesus’ death is nonsense. If that were true, then the Christian community that Paul was writing to would have had no need for his letters, right? They would have already had “The Bible” as you say.

[Luircin]

Peter recognizing Paul’s writing as scripture does not imply that any old interpretation of Paul is inerrant.

***

This is hilarious.

The Catholic who claims that Roman authority comes from apostolic succession is arguing that the Apostle Paul is wrong.

LOL.

[Luircin]

But to argue that the complete Bible was floating around from the earliest years after Jesus’ death is nonsense.

***

[Bishop_Malachi]

Care to try again without invoking a logical fallacy?

________________________________________________

What would that logical fallacy be?

[Bishop_Malachi]

Paul’s epistles were circulating at the time he was still alive, which proves that Catholicism’s claims to giving us Scripture and relying on tradition until much later, was a complete lie fabricated by those within Catholicism who wanted to be on par with God.

________________________________________________

Well, of course they were circulating when he was alive. He wrote them. But there were Christians practicing PRIOR to Paul writing his letters (and prior to any Gospel writings existing).

[Luircin]

What would that logical fallacy be?

***

Looking at the text of my post.

Looking at you.

ENGLISH, BISHOP, DO YOU READ IT!?

Now prove to me that “tradition,” specifically YOUR “tradition” is authoritative.

You made the claim; you defend it.

[Luircin]

Well, of course they were circulating when he was alive. He wrote them. But there were Christians practicing PRIOR to Paul writing his letters (and prior to any Gospel writings existing).

***

And this makes Paul's writings NOT inspired by God... how?

Are you going for like an achievement or something? Trying to get the fallacy royal flush?

[Bishop_Malachi]

Paul is not the only Apostle.

Apostolic Authority comes from the Apostles acting together and agreeing, not one of them alone.

Paul is a man (like you and I). He is also prone to statements that could be erroneous if interpreted the wrong way. The Book of James addresses some of Paul’s less than stellar theological points.

[Luircin]

Paul is not the only Apostle.

Apostolic Authority comes from the Apostles acting together and agreeing, not one of them alone.

***

...you are claiming that the Apostles taught literally the exact opposite from each other?

Is that what you’re claiming?

[Bishop_Malachi]

You seem to post memes indirect proportion to losing the argument.

Really....you’re starting to look silly now. The point I made was clear. There was a time that Christians were practicing without ANY New Testament scripture. It has nothing to do with the legitimacy of Paul’s scripture.

[Luircin]

You seem to post memes indirect proportion to losing the argument.

***

And the memes seem to be getting under your skin too.

Answer the question about why I should believe that your specific tradition is the authority I should follow instead of the actual words of the actual Apostles and the actual Lord, and I'll stop posting memes.

But until you do that, this is for you~

[Bishop_Malachi]

...you are claiming that the Apostles taught literally the exact opposite from each other?

Is that what you’re claiming?

_______________________________________________

I made this in my last point, but I’ll say it again. The Epistle of James was a rebuke of the One-and-Done Faith position that could be attributed to Paul. Here’s what Martin Luther (a famous lover of the Apostle Paul) said about the Book of James:

“Therefore St James’ epistle is really an epistle of straw, compared to these others, for it has nothing of the nature of the Gospel about it.”

[metmom]

But to argue that the complete Bible was floating around from the earliest years after Jesus’ death is nonsense.

So who is claiming that? Why did you throw that in your comments?

If that were true, then the Christian community that Paul was writing to would have had no need for his letters, right? They would have already had “The Bible” as you say.

They had SCRIPTURE.

It doesn't matter if it was not compiled into one handy compendium and called *The Bible*.

Scripture is authoritative by it's very nature being that it's GOD speaking to us.

It needs no other corroboration for it to be so.

Paul's letters ARE Scripture. You seem to be missing that point in its entirety.

[Luircin]

I made this in my last point, but I’ll say it again. The Epistle of James was a rebuke of the One-and-Done Faith position that could be attributed to Paul. Here’s what Martin Luther (a famous lover of the Apostle Paul) said about the Book of James:

“Therefore St James’ epistle is really an epistle of straw, compared to these others, for it has nothing of the nature of the Gospel about it.”

*** HAVE ANOTHER MEME!

Actually, have a two for one! First:

And next, you get your second strawman fallacy for the evening.

Making inane statements and either claiming or insinuating that they're what I believe? That's not just a logical fallacy; that's a sin.

[Bishop_Malachi]

And the memes seem to be getting under your skin too.
______________________________________________

Your memes are stupid. But keep posting them. I could care less.

You still can’t escape the reality that Scripture was created by the very Apostolic Tradition you deny. For the record...it is not merely a Roman Catholic tradition. It is simply a Christian Tradition. The early Church Fathers did not think of themselves as “Roman Catholics”. I am no longer a practicing Roman Catholic. I go to a Protestant church for the time being. But the idea that the very earliest Christians were having anything close to Bible/Scripture studies is ludicrous.

[metmom]

Well, of course they were circulating when he was alive. He wrote them. But there were Christians practicing PRIOR to Paul writing his letters (and prior to any Gospel writings existing).

And...???????

Luke 24:25-27 And he said to them, “O foolish ones, and slow of heart to believe all that the prophets have spoken! Was it not necessary that the Christ should suffer these things and enter into his glory?” And beginning with Moses and all the Prophets, he interpreted to them in all the Scriptures the things concerning himself.

Luke 24:32 They said to each other, “Did not our hearts burn within us while he talked to us on the road, while he opened to us the Scriptures?”

John 17:17 Sanctify them in the truth; your word is truth.

Acts 17:2-3 And Paul went in, as was his custom, and on three Sabbath days he reasoned with them from the Scriptures, explaining and proving that it was necessary for the Christ to suffer and to rise from the dead, and saying, “This Jesus, whom I proclaim to you, is the Christ.”

Acts 17:11 Now these Jews were more noble than those in Thessalonica; they received the word with all eagerness, examining the Scriptures daily to see if these things were so.

2 Timothy 3:14-17 But as for you, continue in what you have learned and have firmly believed, knowing from whom you learned it and how from childhood you have been acquainted with the sacred writings, which are able to make you wise for salvation through faith in Christ Jesus. All Scripture is breathed out by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, that the man of God may be complete, equipped for every good work.

You do realize that all anyone needs to come to Jesus is the OT, don't you?

[metmom]

Well, of course they were circulating when he was alive. He wrote them. But there were Christians practicing PRIOR to Paul writing his letters (and prior to any Gospel writings existing).

What do you mean *What were they practicing?*

What does what they were allegedly practicing (which I doubt you actually know) have to do with Scripture and Paul's letters being said Scripture?

[Luircin]

Your memes are stupid. But keep posting them. I could care less.

***

I will, thanks!

After all, as Scripture says: “Answer a fool according to his folly, lest he be wise in his own eyes.”