Will the Pope's Pronouncement Set Ecumenism Back a Hundred Years? (Challenge to Apostolicity)

Progressive Theology ^ | July 07

[D-fendr]

Yet over-riding this perception is the greater fact that...

I'm interested in how 'greater facts' are categorized - how they are determined to be both facts and greater.

[D-fendr]

That’s a very interesting listing that, as we see from the responses, raises some interesting questions.

thanks for your post..

[tiki]

The Evangelicals I know and a whole lot of Protestants take the binding and loosing verse to mean each Christian.

[betty boop]

That's a very good perhaps, though I'm not sure it requires quantum physics to explain it. :)

Probably not, D-fendr. :^)

[kosta50]

This is why (on threads involving spiritual matters) you see me making a few remarks - some of them labeled "musings" and then quoting many Scriptures. The spirit and life are in His words, not mine

But they are your choices based on your interpretation.

You make yourself sound like niothing is yours; you are just a vessel.

if that is so, then you probably walk on water...

[kosta50]

That’s a very interesting listing that, as we see from the responses, raises some interesting questions

It's fascinating because most poeple never bother to compare. There's tons more of this. I just don't have the time or desire to do their homework. They dismiss anyway. Or, better yet, their "indwelling spirit" does.

[Alamo-Girl]

You make yourself sound like niothing is yours; you are just a vessel.

Indeed, that is true. All that I am - including the clothes on my back - are His to do with according to His own will.

For ye are dead, and your life is hid with Christ in God. – Colossians 3:3

I am crucified with Christ: nevertheless I live; yet not I, but Christ liveth in me: and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by the faith of the Son of God, who loved me, and gave himself for me. – Galatians 2:20

But then you said:

if that is so, then you probably walk on water...

LOLOL!

Walking on water is not my job. But whatever God assigns me to do, He will see it done.

But Jesus beheld [them], and said unto them, With men this is impossible; but with God all things are possible. – Matthew 19:26

Praise God!!!

[hosepipe]

[.. Well then we cannot comprehend even the Bible, and that holds for all who claim otherwise, and God's revelation was for naught. ..]

Some cannot understand the bible, as per plan..
Jesus plainly taught this was so, and WHY?..
Jesus didn't Get along well with ambient clergy..
or them with him since they murdered him..

[RightWhale]

The hermeneutika was devised for that purpose. It goes back to Augustinus, through Luther and sola scriptura and onward through Schleiermacher and is now taken by some to be the fundamental philosophy. The organic philosophy from Bergson or Leibniz through Whitehead is not related.

[kosta50]

Perhaps we have a way to faithfully read the Holy Scriptures without insisting that they be strictly "logical.

This statement certainly flies in the face of many a scholastically-inclined western Christian who built whole doctrines based on the assertion that God is "logical" (and as such must follow the laws of logic—which is itself an illogical conclusion, given that God is also not subject to the laws of Creation!).

The Jews call God a "paradox." Indeed. How can God Who is limitless and timeless empty Himself into a womb and become flesh and blood in time and limited by space.

And while the Jews may not have any difficulty accepting God's "paradoxical" nature by which He can be uncircumscribed and circumscribed, within time and outside of time, dispassionate and passionate, they run into a stumbling block when it comes to accepting Jesus because—get this—man cannot become God!

All of a sudden, we have a short circuit, where we reverse the logic, and dispense with the paradox which tells us that with God all things are possible, and insist—purely based on one's own preconceived reality—that man cannot be God, rather than accept that God can be(come) a man.

You can appeal all you want to their noetic inclinations, and their spiritual gift as 'chosen' people, to conform their logic and reason to the paradox of God and not the other way around, but they will remain steadfast in their denial simply because that would mean calling everything they believed in until that point, their entire ego, even self, a lie, and that is just too threatening.

As far as depending on the leanings in the spirit, that is all fine and dandy, except that we can never know what that "spirit" is. It is not the spirit that leads us to select verses, but our intention to prove them to someone else (in effect to prove that we and not them are right). So, we skip conveniently over those verses that don't fit our preconceived answer and engage our verse generator to find the "right" verse for us.

This is how some claim God repents and other don't. The Bible is full of either choice. Take your pick and then pick your audience and you can "prove" just about anything with the Bible in this way, except that what guides you is the "indwelling spirit."

To the ego, covered with pride, the Gnostic heresy is dear and near and is all over the New Testament.

As for you, the anointing you received from him remains in you, and you do not need anyone to teach you—1 John 2:26

You do not need anyone to teach you...we will "know" the truth "internally." That will be our "proof." You speak of the observer problem. There it is: in individual interpretations and rationalizations of the Bible, making them fit the paradigm of one's own solipsistic (virtual) reality. We all have a God in a book, after our own image. Especially those who deny it while claiming the Spirit leads them. but the God they find in the book is entirely a God of their own making, their alter ego.

[hosepipe]

[.. Yet over-riding this perception is the greater fact that... / I'm interested in how 'greater facts' are categorized - how they are determined to be both (1)facts and (2)greater. ..]

1) Spiritual reality..
2) Permanent not temporal data..

[D-fendr]

Well, you know I’m gonna ask you to define those terms now..

[kosta50]

In temporal time, when it may seem to us God has "changed His mind," it is in order to further teach us how to live according to His precepts

And who determines when the Bible is to be understood literally and when allegorically? You? Why, fundamentalists (of any creed) take their scriptures literally. Now you are telling me that there is a condition of "temporal appearance" which is not to be take literally. Wow! The power of rationalizations is endless, isn't it?

The Bible says on 13 or so occasions (all OT by the way) that God does indeed change His mind, i.e "repents," and you are telling me these are "temporary appearances?"

A system that cannot fail because its contradictions are not contradictions! You can find whatever you want in it and it will be "true," even if within the same book the author(s) contradict each other. The contradictions are dismissed as "with God everything is possible." So, why bother reading the Bible? Even the Bible tells us that we don't need to be taught by anyone (cf. 1 John 2:26).

"His will be done, on earth as it is in heaven."

That's right! Just go with the flow...

[kosta50]

In context, verse one of Math 18 establishes that jesus si speaking to the Apostles.

Then why does He tell them to take it to the church?

Verses 15-17 are about one thing (brother sinning again you). Verse 18 is about something else (Christ's promise to the Apostles). They are not related.

[kosta50]

lol. I've lost count how many times that excuse has been used by the RCC (and now you) in order to deprive the sheep of God's assurance, to make His promises only to a select few (the Apostles) and not to every one of His children for all time

At that time the disciples came to Jesus and asked, "Who is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven?"--Mat 18:1

He speaks to the disciples. It's in the Bible. I am sorry you think there were others as well. It's a conjecture.

[hosepipe]

[.. Well, you know I’m gonna ask you to define those terms now..]

-LoL...

1) Spiritual reality are observations in spirit/Spirit..
2) Permanent data are/is Eternal conclusions..

[hosepipe]

[.. And who determines when the Bible is to be understood literally and when allegorically? ..]

Good question actually..
A hard question too.. Seeing and understanding allegory in scripture is a gift.. Some miss most of the allegorical(metaphorical) truth.. and some make cartoons of the allegory trying to force "vision" of the image of it... yet others grasp the images of some allegory and miss others..

You have stumbled (I think) on a deep truth of scripture..
Scripture is hidden in the text seeing allegory from the literal takes blessing from the Holy Spirit..

[kosta50]

Kosta: You make yourself sound like nothing is yours; you are just a vessel.

AG: Indeed, that is true.

LOL!

Walking on water is not my job

LOL! "It's not my job" excuse.

 

[kosta50]

You have stumbled (I think) on a deep truth of scripture

Yeah, like "truth is what I think it is..."?

Scripture is hidden in the text seeing allegory from the literal takes blessing from the Holy Spirit..

You know a loving God would have made things a lot easier for an average dummy to understand and believe. Perhaps that's what God intended, but then all sorts of egos got in the way.

[D-fendr]

thanks..

-How do you differentiate an “observation in Spirit” from an observation not in Spirit? How do you tell the difference? What the the key differentiating characteristics?

-How is an eternal conclusion differentiated from one that is not?