Posted on 03/24/2008 3:36:37 PM PDT by annalex
How so?
That’s quite a list of non-sequiturs you’ve got going there! It’s a veritable tribute to Ronald Reagan’s quip about people who “know so much that isn’t so.”
For example: You equate the Bible with “The Word of God.” You even say “Without the Bible we could not know these things.”
If this is true, how do you explain the story of Simeon in the temple?
It doesn't have to be written for those who have the spirit of troof for it gives them rears to hear!
Okay, these are a good start. But the obvious answer is so much simpler than he makes it. The true church is the corporate body of individual believers. Jesus said something very simple- 'wherever two or three are gathered together in My name, there am I in their midst.' It's amazing how complicated we've made that by coming up with a priesthood, 'full-time ministers', offices, ministries, etc etc ad nauseum.
Here's my contention- if we gather together to edify the Body of Christ (one another), leadership will arise naturally from the relationships that emerge. Gifts and talents will be made manifest, and a degree of weight will be attributed to the words of those who deserve it.
In my opinion, Luther stopped way too soon. He simply replaced one corrupt hierarchy with another- and it persists to this day.
As for me and my family, we meet in homes with other believers. We have the Lord's Supper (a meal), we worship, we pray together, we teach or encourage or just talk with one another about life and the victories and challenges that we encounter.
And this type of ecclesia produces spiritual independence- we rely on Jesus Himself rather than some man or institution who presumes to insert himself between the Bridegroom and His bride.
If this arrangemet sounds 'risky', as if we're going to go off the deep end (a common argument), ask yourself this-- do you really trust the Holy Spirit to keep those that He has sealed? Or does He need man's help?
By applying it. Where are you suggesting logic isn't up to the task?
Here am I. Send me. ;O)
“If this is true, how do you explain the story of Simeon in the temple?”
He along with Anna knew their Old Testament prophecies.
Isa 7:14 Therefore the Lord himself shall give you a sign; Behold, a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel.
Amen.
This is one of the most appalling displays of ignorance I have seen in writing-and I mean this in the most kindness sense.
These articles are all the same...."the Bible is the inspired word of God, but we don't really know what is inspired...except that we do know what was inspired...but what we mean is the Church knows what was inspired...except the Church didn't know what was inspired until we confirmed what was inspired at Trent then everyone knew what was inspired although what we were quoting from as inspired was inspired until the Church officially said that stuff wasn't inspired..."
Ad infinitum... It is almost laughable if it was so serious. And this comes from the "great thinkers" of the Church??? Claiming to be wise, they become fools.
And that relieves his vocational quandry, how?
I've long maintained a simple answer, as often as not, shows a lack of understanding the question.
Jesus said something very simple- 'wherever two or three are gathered together in My name, there am I in their midst.'
Fine, you've established Jesus is in their midsts: and little else. If such passages were so simple, we'd be overrun with "two or three in agreement" lottery winners!
Here's my contention- if we gather together...etc.
The experience of several thousand denominations says you're wrong.
As for me and my family...etc.
That's all very nice, but if your gathetings were the spiritual equivalent of little girls playing "tea party," who or what has the authority to convince you of it?
And this type of ecclesia produces spiritual independence-
What make you sure that's a good thing?
we rely on Jesus Himself rather than some man or institution who presumes to insert himself between the Bridegroom and His bride.
This is what Sartre called "bad faith." You are playing an active role in the situation, yet denying it. You can't have it both ways and maintain credibility.
If this arrangemet sounds 'risky', as if we're going to go off the deep end (a common argument), ask yourself this-- do you really trust the Holy Spirit...
The Holy Spirit isn't at issue: you are. Nutty cults never start out being nutty.
Do you need me to layout the problem? Either you don’t see it, or you’re avoiding it.
I see everything but a refutation in your post.
I couldn't agree more.
Right. Have fun with your religion.
I wasn't refuting anything; I was refering to Dr. E's post. But while we are at it I would agree with Dr. E's post #57 of scripture being self-authenticating and Calvin's excellent article in Chapter 7 of the Institutes.
The Spirit isn't at the same level as the Pope. I hope you don't believe that.
Sorry. My mistake. Your first sentence:
This is one of the most appalling displays of ignorance I have seen in writing-and I mean this in the most kindness sense.makes much more sense in that light.
But while we are at it I would agree with Dr. E's post #57 of scripture being self-authenticating...
authenticated for what? How can the Scripture self-authenticate a claim it doesn't make for itself?
“Do you need me to layout the problem?”
There is no problem. Luke says he was waiting “for the consolation of Israel” (Isa. 40:1) and the Holy Spirit designated him as a “measuring” life for the coming of Immanuel. For him to understand who the “consolation” and “light” was he first had to know the scriptures (Isa. 9:2).
Under your "Spirit recognizes Spirit" reasoning, what would be the outcome of the hypothetical below?
A 25 year old man has lived on a tropical island alone for as far as he can remember. Assume he was baptized as a child (thus removing any impediments of Original Sin). He lives an idyllic life, perfectly content. One day, a crate of 100 books appears on his beach. This crate contains, individually bound, the 77 books of Catholic canon. It also contains - the Koran, some Vedic scriptures, Augustine's Confessions, The Summa Theologica, Nichomachean Ethics, Oprah's The Secret, and a bunch of the Christian books recognized as non-Canon (Infancy Gospel, Gospel of Thomas, etc.). Each book in this crate is bound with the same material, and no markings indicate which is which.
Ok, so, my question is, if this man alone found this crate and sincerely desired to know how to live his life, what books would he choose? Am I correct in assuming you believe he would pull the 66 books chosen by Calvin? Again, I am just asking this to clarify my own understanding - nothing more.
Fascinating . . .
instead of apology, more insult.
More excellent ‘lived theology’
from the marvelously mangled Mother Earth magicsterical, no doubt.
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.