Posted on 08/17/2018 8:40:24 AM PDT by wardaddy
If one in a church rapes a boy in the back seat of his car, and gets caught, he also can get arrested, tried, and sent to jail, and there is no protection against that, except that as far as the church is concerned, it is to make its own investigation and determine if the charge is credible, and execute its own chastisement or punishment.be
For while the state must be conditionally obeyed in all that it has jurisdiction over, it is a mistake to make it the supreme standard on what is moral in any country. Yet in this issue being dealt with here, the state is acting more diligently than the church, or at least those which are called by that name, to the shame of the latter.
Whether we must report every violation of the law we see someone engage in, and they are to do the same on us, is another question.
That’s because a typical Protestant does not know when his theological fantasies have been demolished.
If I ever become interested in Protestant theology, I’ll be sure to ask.
Yes.
I don't care about protestant or catholic or orthodox theology.
I care about Biblical Theology.
If that is the case, please state, "I am now demolishing your theological fantasy."
We would appreciate the entertainment.
Also, please ping me to any thread where you are in the act of demolishing any theology.
I'd really like to witness you in action!
If I ever become interested in Protestant theology, I’ll be sure to ask.
***
Personally I would think that obedience to teaching of Jesus and the Apostles would be the top priority for anyone who claims to be a disciple of Christ.
Am I wrong, and that paying attention to the teaching of Jesus and the Apostles is for Protestants only?
Because if true, that would explain so much.
And just why it is suddenly so hard for you to discern the two questions (replete with question marks) in post 357 in response to your assertion? (That is a question also.)
I see. So since it was the Church that produced the Holy Inerrant Scripture from Hebrew sources therefore the Church was not founded upon the basis of warrant from an established body of wholly inspired authoritative writings (since this recognition required the infallible Church)? On what basis then is assurance that the church is what it claims to be?
Those are also questions.
Jesus is the rock of our salvation, and that the teaching of the Apostles—which is the teaching of Jesus himself—should be what we base our faith on.
Yes.
***
Excellent.
Okay, so next question: Where do we find the teachings of Jesus and the Apostles?
The teachings are recorded in Scripture; I hope that we can both agree on that.
But if we’re going to go beyond what’s written in Scripture and claim that it’s from the Apostles, how are we to tell if it’s not false teaching?
Should we not constantly be comparing theological claims to what we know that Jesus and the Apostles DID teach, and everything else should be compared to what we KNOW is truth?
Does this apply to any country? Where do you see in Scripture that the state is to be relied upon first to judge moral matters occurring in church services by members? Does your position apply to any country?
There are a lot of people on FR that WANT to believe that this is false and that these priests are no worse than any other “population.”
Its bad and deplorable, however, the little reported sad reality is that sexual abuse of students in schools is likely more than 100 times the abuse by priests.https://www.cbsnews.com/news/has-media-ignored-sex-abuse-in-school/ Forgotten Study: Abuse in School 100 Times Worse than by Priests .
Scripture? Are you shitting me? These guys are raping kids in America. They should be in jail. Where in scripture does it say it’s OK to rape kidsif you are a priest?
You should go talk to some of these kids. Their lives are ruined by these animals.
Many refer to a Council of Jamnia as authoritatively setting the Hebrew canon around 100 A.D., but modern research no longer considers that to be the case, or that there even was a council, while some scholars argue that the Jewish canon was an achievement of the Hasmonean dynasty (140 and c. 116 B.C.). See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Council_of_Jamnia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Development_of_the_Hebrew_Bible_canon#Council_of_Jamnia
The city of Jamnia had both a rabbinical school (Beth ha- Midrash) and court (Beth Din, Sanhedrin) during the period A.D. 70-135, if not earlier. There is no conclusive evidence for any other rabbinical convocations there...But no text of any specific decision has come down to us (nor, apparently, even to Akiba and his students). Rather, it appears that a general consensus already existed regarding the extent of the category called Scripture, so that even the author of 4 Ezra, though desiring to add one of his own, was obliged to recognize this consensus in his distinction between public and hidden Scripture." — Robert C. Newman, "THE COUNCIL OF JAMNIA AND THE OLD TESTAMENT CANON ," Westminster Theological Journal 38.4 (Spr. 1976) 319-348
However, it is incontrovertible that an authoritative body of wholly inspired Scripture had been established by the time of Christ.
The first claim is dubious (see above post), while as regards the second, the historical reality is that In reality, scholarly disagreements over the canonicity (proper) of certain books continued down through the centuries and right into Trent, until it provided the first "infallible," indisputable canon - after the death of Luther. Who had some significant RC support for his non-binding canon.
And so your logic is that the historical instruments and stewards of Divine revelation (oral and written) means that such are the infallible authorities on what it means, and thus are to be submitted to? If not, of what polemical weight does your statement have?
Neither Scripture nor me ever said it’s OK to rape kids if you are a priest, but just the opposite. Besides your misunderstanding, the problem is your dangerous disregard of the function of both church and state, and of making the latter necessarily the first recourse to what happens under church jurisdiction, and the supreme judge on what is moral (which would include communist and Islamic governments). But which recourse becomes the case when the state is acting more according to Scripture than the church.
I understand the Catholic view of scripture all too well. It just happens to be wrong. It isn't any different then the Latter Day Saints, the Jehovah Witnesses, or the Pharisees. They make the same claim just as any cult will state the same thing. And, I might add, their devoted followers will say the same thing.
There isn't anything to ask about. It would be frustrating if Christ hadn't experienced the same thing.
I agree with AMPU. I don’t care about catholic/Protestant theology much. I DO, however, care about the plan of salvation, of which I am intimately familiar. If you are interested in going to Heaven, it would behoove you to ask. If you are NOT interested, then whatever happens in eternity, is on you bro. Good luck with that. 😇
“I think, I explained the position of the Church in full to you.”
You did indeed. I stated that it’s far different from what Jesus said.
You’correct according to the doctrine of the RCC.
I’m correct according to Jesus.
Have a pleasant evening.
L
Only one so deceived would not see a contradiction.
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.