Posted on 08/04/2021 2:19:35 PM PDT by MurphsLaw
The promotion of Biblical interpretations serving secular, liberal political agendas of sex and race is only the latest manifestation of a centuries-old trend.
The Bible makes no explicit condemnations of transgenderism. It makes no claims as to the morality of abortion. It encourages racial reparations. Such claims can be found virtually everywhere in corporate media like the Washington Post, New York Times, or CNN, which seek to promote the various political objectives of the Democratic Party.
During his campaign for president, Episcopalian Pete Buttigieg argued that Jesus never mentioned abortion and that Bible verses censuring homosexuality were culturally conditioned, not eternal truths. The Washington Post, in turn, cites secular academics, who offer Biblical exegesis of a progressivist, feminist, and racial identitarian variety.
Of course, the Bible has always been a political document. The Old Testament was not only a religious and liturgical text but one that had much to say about the governance of the ancient kingdom of Israel. Jesus told his followers to respect and pay taxes to the Roman Empire. St. Paul described the temporal ruler as “God’s servant for your good.” (Romans 13:3-4)
For most of ecclesial history, the primary interpreters of Holy Scripture were not journalists, politicians, or secular academics, but the Catholic Church herself. Most early Church Fathers were priests or bishops. Ecumenical councils like Nicea, Chalcedon, or Lyon made determinations on theology, morality, and the meaning of the Bible.
But beginning in the fourteenth century, scholars like Marsilius of Padua and William of Ockham began questioning the hierarchy’s hold on biblical interpretation. Instead, they proposed, the Bible should be under the authority of scholarly experts supported by secular political authorities. Though it would take several centuries for their ideas to proliferate, this thinking came to fruition in the Reformation and Enlightenment, and inspire trends in scriptural exegesis to this day.
This story is the focus of Scott Hahn’s and Benjamin Wiker’s book, The Decline and Fall of Sacred Scripture: How the Bible Became a Secular Book. Less than three-hundred pages, the book summarizes the central arguments of the authors’ 2012 Politicizing the Bible: The Roots of Historical Criticism and the Secularization of Scripture 1300-1700, which is more than twice the size. This is a welcome development; it makes their important contributions accessible to a larger audience.
While the story begins with Marsilius and Ockham and their Erastian belief in the supremacy of the state over the Church, the reader will encounter many familiar faces. John Wycliffe, esteemed by Protestants as the “Morning Star” of the Reformation, argued that “the pope ought, as he formerly was, to be subject to Caesar.” The monarch would then employ “doctors and worshipers of the divine law” to interpret the Bible. Martin Luther also called for the German princes to wrest ecclesial power away from corrupt bishops and the Roman pontiff, and grant him unequaled interpretive authority. Indeed, Luther asked the prince of Saxony to expel fellow reformer Andreas Bodenstein von Karlstadt because of the latter’s radical teachings. Around the same time, Machiavelli viewed the biblical text as material for furthering secular political ends.
All of these men influenced the court of English King Henry VIII, who recognized that the Reformation offered an opportunity to consolidate his political power. Thus, he pursued the Act of Supremacy in 1534 to grant him “supreme” headship over the Church of England, followed by the dissolution of monasteries, closure of shrines, and seizure of Church wealth. His King’s Book then declared that individuals must be subject to the “particular church” of the region in which they live, and obey the “Christian kings and princes” to whom they are subject.
Other Englishmen would further endorse this thinking. In Leviathan, Thomas Hobbes asserts that there is only “one chief Pastor” who is “according to the law of Nature. . .the civil sovereign.” Hobbes also rejected many of the supernatural elements of Scripture, as well as Heaven and Hell. John Locke, dismayed by the violence and distemper caused by the English Civil War, endorsed a state-controlled church whose most important feature would be “toleration,” since religious sentiments were private matters “of the mind.” For Locke, Jesus was ultimately a political messiah whose teachings focused on the perpetuation of a “civil morality.”
There are many other actors in this torrid tale – Baruch Spinoza, J. Richard Simon, John Toland – but enough is clear from the above to appreciate the consequences of these religio-political trends. Proto-Reformers called for dethroning the Catholic hierarchy’s supremacy over biblical interpretation. The Reformers, relying on princes and kings, put that wish into practice. And political philosophers and state-sanctioned scholars normalized it. Wherever the Catholic Church ceased to exert ecclesial authority, the state took up the reins.
There has always been this tension between Church and state. St. Ambrose excommunicated the emperor Theodosius because of his execution of 7,000 citizens of Thessalonica. Pope Gregory VII excommunicated the Holy Roman Emperor Henry IV because of a dispute over investiture. And Thomas Becket’s resistance to English King Henry II’s attempts to control the Church resulted in his murder at Canterbury Cathedral.
There is actually something healthy about this tension: when the state and the Church both operate strong spheres of power and influence, they serve as checks upon one another. Kings and governments cannot pursue any policy without risking moral condemnation from ecclesial leadership that will undermine their popular support. And Church corruption and nepotism can be used by secular authorities eager to usurp power.
Hahn’s and Wiker’s history tracks the growing imbalance in favor of the state, a disparity whose roots can be traced back to the late Medieval period. The ubiquitous promotion of Biblical interpretations that serve secular, liberal political agendas related to sex and race is only the latest manifestation of this centuries-old trend. To reverse it requires a return to a more ancient understanding that the Bible is, before all else, the book of the Church, rather than the state or its acolytes in the media or the academy. Catholics need to support and celebrate churchmen who appreciate and seek to realize that essential mission.
So, how do you reconcile the ridiculous statement in the post above (#180), with Matthew 7:21-23?
21Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven.
22Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works?
23And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity/LAWLESSNESS.
I’m sure these people considered themselves saved/sealed with the Spirit, just like all of you do, right? I thought it was once saved, always saved? Claim to be a follower of Christ, Rape all the women you want, commit adultery and fraud, and STILL, nothing will keep you out of heaven.
What do you think?
You are absolutely correct in that the Spirit of God within a person cannot sin. It would be blasphemous to presume so, not to mention ridiculous.
We, in the flesh, can and certainly do sin. I’ve never met a sinless Christian on earth but I will in Heaven when the three “Ps” will have been accomplished.
No, what’s ridiculous is your continuing refusal to distinguish Israel from the Church. You still haven’t seen the light.
“Claim to be a follower of Christ, Rape all the women you want, commit adultery and fraud, and STILL, nothing will keep you out of heaven.”
Question for you, Phil. Was King David saved?
If so, was he still saved after he committed adultery and had Uriah killed or is he going to hell?
No. First, answer the question I asked you.
A simple yes or no will suffice.
And please note that it is you who has just referred to the Catholic Church as “the Whore of Babylon”, “the Anti-Christ”, Murph.
I have never done so.
You’re losing it.
SC: Question for you, Phil. Was King David saved?
Phil: Most likely.
SC: If so, was he still saved after he committed adultery and had Uriah killed or is he going to hell?
Phil: He committed a great sin. David sincerely REPENTED of those sins. God forgave him (you know that’s how it works, right?) I have every confidence that he will be in heaven.
Here’s what I know about King David:
He was saved by Grace, just like we are
He didn’t claim once saved, always saved.
He didn’t claim that even if his flesh/soul sins, his spirit can’t and therefore no matter what sins he commits, without sincerely asking for forgiveness, HE’S STILL GOING TO HEAVEN.
He certainly didn’t presume that he was automatically going to heaven.
He kept God’s commandments, and so did his son, King Solomon.
On his deathbed he told Solomon to “keep the charge of the LORD thy God, to walk in his ways, to keep his statutes, and his commandments, and his judgments, and his testimonies”
King Solomon mirrors that deathbed statement in Ecclesiastes 12: 13Let us hear the conclusion of the whole matter: Fear God, and keep his commandments: for this is the whole duty of man.
14For God shall bring every work into judgment, with every secret thing, whether it be good, or whether it be evil.
David and Solomon certainly knew what sin was. Plenty of other people in the OT chose another path and will probably not be in heaven. Same for much of the world today. Saul is probably one of those, as he ended up committing suicide AFTER THE SPIRIT OF THE LORD LEFT HIM.
Question for you, SouthernClaire: What gives you the right to teach Christians that they have a license to sin without penalty, to commit lawlessness, when Jesus Christ clearly tells us otherwise?
Psalm 19:7-14
King James Version
7 The law of the LORD is perfect, converting the soul: the testimony of the LORD is sure, making wise the simple.
8 The statutes of the LORD are right, rejoicing the heart: the commandment of the LORD is pure, enlightening the eyes.
9 The fear of the LORD is clean, enduring for ever: the judgments of the LORD are true and righteous altogether.
10 More to be desired are they than gold, yea, than much fine gold: sweeter also than honey and the honeycomb.
11 Moreover by them is thy servant warned: and in keeping of them there is great reward.
12 Who can understand his errors? cleanse thou me from secret faults.
13 Keep back thy servant also from presumptuous sins; let them not have dominion over me: then shall I be upright, and I shall be innocent from the great transgression.
14 Let the words of my mouth, and the meditation of my heart, be acceptable in thy sight, O LORD, my strength, and my redeemer.
“On his deathbed he told Solomon to “keep the charge of the LORD thy God, to walk in his ways, to keep his statutes, and his commandments, and his judgments, and his testimonies”
Kind of a quaint way to see it, because that’s not all King David said to Solomon at that time. :-)
But, whatever. Let’s get to your question: “Question for you, SouthernClaire: What gives you the right to teach Christians that they have a license to sin without penalty, to commit lawlessness, when Jesus Christ clearly tells us otherwise?”
Who said I ever did any such thing, Phil? You assume a lot, you know. Show me where I ever said such a thing.
What I have said and what I will continue to say is that you WILL sin after being saved. Period. You learn that fact about 15 minutes later. You may not realize it at the time as sin, however, because God has work to do in the saved person. A few years later, that thing is dropped entirely because God completed a work in the person. To God be the glory for it.
Said person may later pick up the same thing that was sin God removed. He may to try to enjoy it but will find that he cannot and that the appeal it once had is no longer there. And he can’t make it come back.
After his attempt to commit that sin, he feels guilty and a complete failure before God Almighty. He asks forgiveness.
You seem to want to lay a trap that he has so many times this can happen before God says, “You’re out, buddy.”
God can and does see and understand what you nor I can. Who was it that was tempted in all ways yet didn’t sin?
If you came from a relatively clean life when you were saved, then good for you. There are others who’ve come from whore houses, roadside ditches, drug rings, and lives spent in a bar. For some, that’s all they’ve ever known since childhood. That may sound terrible to you and so unfair because they didn’t lead a good enough life to be saved. You may see a Christian smoke a cigarette and have a drink in the other hand. What do you think? Are they still saved?
What you can’t see and what you can’t possibly know is from where they’ve come. Perhaps the person was a deadbeat crackhead whore monger who beat his wife and children every night. But now he’s holding a steady job and has his family in church every Sunday. God worked a miracle in that man’s life and will continue to work in his life until he’s gone from this world, but he won’t be perfected this side of Heaven.
What if he returned to the whore house and did some crack on a bad Friday night after work? You see, you’re saying God’s forgiveness cannot possibly cover that. You’re failing to understand that God has saved the man already. The man IS saved. He’s making a terrible mistake at the moment, but that does not negate or nullify his salvation. A saved person can still walk into a whore house, a bar, beat his wife, and even murder. A saved person can and will sin while still on this earth.
The man finally makes it home Monday afternoon to find he’s lost his job. Beats the kids, steals his wife’s money, goes back on crack and back to his old ways that week. BUT, to God be the glory, he can’t continue in it. There’s no way. He hates himself for it and hits his knees in prayer. And then what does he do? He gets up and he tries again. By God’s grace alone. This may happen many times in his life, but God won’t let go of him.
How many times can the man do this without losing his salvation? What number would you be willing to give the man? Well, it was the Spirit of God in the man that drew him back from sin. It was the flesh of the man that drew him TO the sin. The Spirit won’t allow him to enjoy his former life because the man is, in fact, a new creature who has God’s spirit in him. And, yes, he took God’s spirit into all that squalor and degradation, and that’s why he could not feel comfortable in his old life nor enjoy what he used to. It no longer has any appeal because of who God has made him now. The man will live a life in continual battle against his own flesh.
In the OT, people could lose the Holy Spirit. Not so after the cross. Christians are sealed ‘til the day of redemption. Sealed by the Holy Spirit of God. Your argument is with this fact.
You may not like that the man in heaven is saved, that is, if you make it there. But I and many others realize our sins are not different in God’s eyes than that man’s sin. We know what we are: failures in the flesh. But winners in the Spirit all day every day.
Ever enjoy a dirty joke? You just took God’s Holy Spirit into filth. Get angry in stalled traffic and curse? Same thing. See, you see yourself as already perfected and see those Christians whom you deem commit sin over and over as not saved. That’s presumptuous on your part and it’s not your call to make, is it? I thank my God, my Lord and Savior Christ Jesus, that He saveD me.
I’ll screw up before the day is over. Some days are better than others. Some days I can say something the wrong way to someone that leaves me in tears in prayer at night because I didn’t exalt the name above all names and instead ran my mouth when I shouldn’t have. I’m still a failure … in the flesh. Difference between you and I is that I know it.
I praise His Holy Name and thank Him that He always forgives me. He had done so before He saved me. He knew I’d screw it up every day because He sees all and knows all. There’s nothing I can do that will shock Him. He knew I was going to do that thing before He saved me, but glory be to Him that I am sealed by His Holy Spirit.
Philsworld does not realize the difference in the Holy Spirit work from with Israel and with the age of Grace. In King Davids times as in Adam’s time the Holy spirit rested upon a person. In the Age of grace, the Holy Spirit abides IN the person who is born again from above. The works based religions are stuck at that difference, believing they must do in order for what God did to continue for them. GOD abiding IN a man makes a paert where God is abiding a place of sinlessness, for God cannot sin nor wilol He abide where there is any sin. And He has told us He abides int he born agains forever more.
l would challenge. We are not told much about the character of Adam but we know that he was corruptable he was mortal,(1 Cor. 15:53) and he was naked which signifies a lack of righteousness (Rev 19:8) and we know what happened. Is this perfect harmony?
Adam and Eve were created sinless (mortal, but created sinless). And, they did not recognize their nakedness until AFTER they had sinned.
Before sin: Gen 2:25 And they were both naked, the man and his wife, and were not ashamed.
After sin: Gen 3:7 And the eyes of them both were opened, and they knew that they were naked; and they sewed fig leaves together, and made themselves aprons.
God formed Adam and Eve with his own hands. And, he communed with them (they recognized His voice after their sin and hid in the garden, which suggests that He had been there before with them, talking face to face). That is perfect harmony, before sin.
We are saved by Grace BECAUSE of Christ’s death on the cross (after we accept Christ as our savior). He died BECAUSE humanity would have otherwise had to die. He took our place. We were all condemned to die (condemnation under the law) because of Adam and Eve’s sin. Blood had to be shed because of that. HIS LAW DEMANDED IT and even He couldn’t change that. So, the author of the law took our place so we would not all be condemned to death. He loved us that much (and that’s a lot).
You and your other Friends TEACH that Christians now get a free pass for continual sinning. You and your Friends TEACH that there are no WAGES of sin, for Christians, BECAUSE CHRISTIANS CAN’T SIN.
WRONG! Paul says otherwise, and emphatically, at that….GOD FORBID!
Romans 6:
14For sin shall not have dominion over you: for ye are not under the law, but under grace.
15What then? shall we sin, because we are not under the law, but under grace? God forbid.
16Know ye not, that to whom ye yield yourselves servants to obey, his servants ye are to whom ye obey; whether of sin unto death, or of obedience unto righteousness?
“To suppose that being under grace means that the believer is now at liberty to disobey the moral law of God with impunity is to misunderstand completely God’s whole purpose in the plan of salvation. It was man’s violation of God’s law in the first place that caused God in His love to offer grace to the sinner. By the grace of God man is released from sin’s rule. How then can anyone conceive it to be right or reasonable deliberately to place himself back in the old bondage? To disobey God’s law is to become once again the servant of sin, for disobedience to divine law is sin (1 John 3:4), and whoever goes on sinning is the servant of sin (John 8:34). To continue in the indulgence of sin after accepting the pardoning and transforming grace of God is to deny the very purpose of that grace. Whoever refuses to allow the grace of God to bring him into more and more perfect obedience to divine law is rejecting grace itself and thereby turning his back on freedom and salvation.” SDA bible commentary
And, I’m just going to step out on a limb and say YOU HAVE NO IDEA WHAT THE TERM “UNDER THE LAW” even means.
Grace through faith does NOT give us a license to sin. Christians are therefore under an even GREATER obligation to keep God’s law.
Romans 3: 28Therefore we conclude that a man is justified by faith without the deeds of the law. 29Is he the God of the Jews only? is he not also of the Gentiles? Yes, of the Gentiles also: 30Seeing it is one God, which shall justify the circumcision by faith, and uncircumcision through faith. 31Do we then make void the law through faith? God forbid: yea, we establish the law.
GOD FORBID; YEA, WE ESTABLISH THE LAW (he said it a second time….GOD FORBID)
You are in effect saying “look at me, I’m a Christian and I’m saved by Grace. I’m no longer under God’s law and therefore I can’t sin, because the Spirit resides in my person.” “I CAN’T SIN” (Well, maybe my fleshy soul can, BUT NOT MY SPIRIT. Nope, Christ died on the Cross to keep me from sinning. Nope, it wasn’t just the sins up to my conversion to Christianity that were wiped clean, but every other one AFTER, until I die and see Jesus coming in the clouds (or get raptured up first). “I will not be judged for any UNREPTANTANT sin I commit, BECAUSE I CAN’T SIN. (Oops, my Spirit can’t sin).
The truth is that WE WILL ALL BE JUDGED BY THE LAW OF GOD!
Romans 2:
11For there is no respect of persons with God.
12For as many as have sinned without law shall also perish without law: and as many as have sinned in the law shall be judged by the law;
13(For not the hearers of the law are just before God, but the doers of the law shall be justified.
So, for YOU to tell me that Christians can’t sin, and even if they do in their flesh/soul (that makes no sense) they won’t be held accountable for that sin, regardless. THAT IS WHAT YOU ARE SAYING AND TEACHING.
I wonder, is this poster capable of comprehending the BIBLE'S assertion that it is God who is in a Christian, and that there is a difference between soul and spirit? I suppose some people are unable to not keep repeating a lie they want to be the fact.
Said person may later pick up the same thing that was sin God removed. He may to try to enjoy it but will find that he cannot and that the appeal it once had is no longer there. And he can’t make it come back.
It looks like Ravi did enjoy it, over and over again. And, he came back for more (not saying he did it, but if he did...)
But YOU ALL (you and all) say that no matter what Ravi did, and it certainly sounds like he was unrepentant in his continued pattern of sin, HE’S STILL GOING TO HEAVEN. His reward will just be a little less (whatever that means), BECAUSE HIS SPIRIT CAN’T SIN (he was just having fun with his flesh/soul). Ravi and all Born Agains get a free pass on sin.
“How brain injured does someone have to be to keep posting the following false characterization (read lie) of what Christians are: “You and your Friends TEACH that there are no WAGES of sin, for Christians, BECAUSE CHRISTIANS CAN’T SIN.”
- - -
The only thing that comes to my mind? CULT, CULT, CULT. Where someone is to read and understand the Bible the way the CULT orders it read and understood rather than allow God to speak through His word. If they don’t, then they’ll suffer either from the cult itself or from its wrong theology.
I’m going to assume that some who grow up in cults cannot, nor will they ever, see the light because they have believed that just being in the cult has somehow saved them with their “religion.” Everyone else? Well, they’re all just wrong and condemned to hell.
Pffft.
I wonder, is this poster capable of comprehending the BIBLE’S assertion that it is God who is in a Christian, and that there is a difference between soul and spirit?
Too bad no one told Saul that.
1 Samuel 15:10 Then came the word of the LORD unto Samuel, saying,
11It repenteth me that I have set up Saul to be king: for he is turned back from following me, and hath not performed my commandments. And it grieved Samuel; and he cried unto the LORD all night.
1 Samuel 16:14: But the Spirit of the LORD departed from Saul, and an evil spirit from the LORD troubled him
“King Saul was commanded by God kill and destroy all the Amalek and their property but Saul spared Agag, the best of sheep, oxen, fatlings and all that was good. This was DISOBEDIENCE. And it is for this reason the Spirit of God departed from King Saul.”
Why the Holy Spirit Departs and How to Know if He has Departed
1: Sin
2: Disobedience and Rebellion
3: Unbelief
4: Mixing with the world
5: Departing from the Truth
6: Not Repenting
I agree with THIS part of the article
https://www.christiantruthcenter.com/why-the-holy-spirit-departs-and-how-to-know-if-he-has-departed/#:~:text=King%20Saul%20was%20commanded%20by%20God%20kill%20and,the%20Spirit%20of%20God%20departed%20from%20King%20Saul.
Pffft.
Snort
Very good post, MHG, and amen.
I suppose some people are unable to not keep repeating a lie they want to be the fact.
I suppose some people are unable to recognize a lie in the first place because... (you know this text, right?)
8And then shall that Wicked be revealed, whom the Lord shall consume with the spirit of his mouth, and shall destroy with the brightness of his coming:
9Even him, whose coming is after the working of Satan with all power and signs and lying wonders,
10And with all deceivableness of unrighteousness in them that perish; because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved.
11And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie:
Did you read not one line of my previous post to you, Phil?
I’m sorry to say that it seems you believe yourself to be a perfect human being whom God must allow into Heaven. Once there, do you plan to tell Jesus to move over ‘cause there’s now two of you?
You are not perfect. You sin. Tell me you don’t. I dare you. Go ahead, make God a liar.
Did you walk in Ravi Zacharias’ shoes? Did you face daily the same temptations he did? Tell me. And are you able to make the same temptations a reality in your life?
In other and blunter terms, do you have the means to do what he’s been accused of doing? Are you an internationally recognized figure who has to walk into temptation every single day?
You are supposed to help a brother not condemn him to hell.
What’s wrong with you?
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.