PRIEST'S WORDS SPARK WALKOUT IN CHURCH

Troy Record ^ | March 25, 2003 | Jeff Buell and Kate Perry

[Conservative til I die]

It's not about God for some priests.

[Conservative til I die]

Aren't they too busy getting all the child molesters out of the church?

Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz.....

Does anyone even think these comments are clever anymore?

[vrwc1]

It is not a matter of grammar - it is a matter of meaning. You are (in addition to making unwarranted ad hominem attacks on me claiming I am inventing a grammar, which I am plainly not doing) arguing that "perfect" does not mean "perfect". Let me give you a couple definitions from Websters:

1. Lacking nothing essential to the whole; complete of its nature or kind.
2. Being without defect or blemish.

If I am wholly complete, without defect or blemish by scripture, what else could I possibly need? There is nothing else you can add to make me any more complete - that is impossible, as I am already fully complete. Therefore, there is nothing besides scripture that can make me more perfect. If you add something to perfection it becomes imperfect.

Your comparison between the two sentences is invalid because you are comparing perfection with imperfection.

[Conservative til I die]

and is profitable for doctrine

Notice it says "profitable" and not "solely sufficient"

[Conservative til I die]

I thought the Pope was supposed to be "infallible". If that's the case, can't he claim that his political judgements carry more weight than President Bush's or Prime Minister Blair's?

How many times does the doctrine of papal infallability have to be explained here?

You're in over your head junior.

[Notwithstanding]

...small people think such things are clever...
...and small "Christians" think such things are going silence the pope...

...while some of us wonder why these small people pay any attention at all to the pope's words...

[Conservative til I die]

But where do I find Paul's oral teachings?

Where you find the teachings of the other apostles and church fathers, in the teachings of the Catholic Church.

[Conservative til I die]

Amazing - if you think the inspired word of God is not sufficient for your faith and salvation and you feel that you need to add to it, then I am sorry and afraid for you.

Seriously, do you worship the Bible? Or just have a fetish for it?

[RobbyS]

and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness, that the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works." The Scripture he is talking about, is, I think, the Old Testament. But even conceding that Paul also had a Christian canon in mind. this says only that by reading Scripture we can know how a righteous person should act.

[Notwithstanding]

newsflash: meaning depends upon grammar

pointing out your logical error is by no means an "ad hominem attack" (nice command of Latin, by the way)

Many things can combine to bring about perfection. This does not diminish perfection.

This is not even a theological issue - it is grammatical. You NEED desperately for this passage to mean what you say it means. Otherwise you would use the reason God gave you by which you can then read His word without adding meaning that is not present.

[Conservative til I die]

it simply tells us how generous God is and how wonderful scripture is - and what it can do for us.

It all boils down to profitable vs. sufficient.

[Conservative til I die]

in addition to making unwarranted ad hominem attacks on me claiming I am inventing a grammar, which I am plainly not doing

That's not an ad hominem attack.

[Conservative til I die]

...while some of us wonder why these small people pay any attention at all to the pope's words...

My honest guess is that they would have no religious beliefs of their own if they didn't have the Pope to base them off of. Notice how few of them actually post on other Christianity related threads?

[Notwithstanding]

Indeed it does boil down to just that.

Scripture is "profitable" or "helpful" in helping a man become perfect. (BTW, if it were sufficient, then Jesus's establishment of the Church would contradict this passage!)

vrwc1's bible teacher switched words on him.

[Conservative til I die]

and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness, that the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works." The Scripture he is talking about, is, I think, the Old Testament.

You're definitely correct here. Weren't all of Paul's letters written before the Gospels even?

[Conservative til I die]

vrwc1's bible teacher switched words on him.

The more I think about it, I really cannot see how anyone could confuse the words sufficient and profitable. It's pretty clear as day.

[Notwithstanding]

I agree with your definition of perfect. But you disagree with the definition of profitable. It means helpful. It does not mean necessary or sufficient. This passage does not even mean that the bible is necessary for salvation. Clearly it is not. People can be saved without ever hearing one word of scripture.

---

From Websters's:

\Prof"it*a*ble\, a. [F. profitable.] Yielding or bringing profit or gain; gainful; lucrative; useful; helpful; advantageous; beneficial; as, a profitable trade; profitable business; a profitable study or profession.

What was so profitable to the empire became fatal to the emperor. --Arbuthnot. -- Prof\"it*a*ble*ness, n. -- Prof\"it*a*bly, adv.


Source: Webster's Revised Unabridged Dictionary, © 1996, 1998 MICRA, Inc.

[Notwithstanding]

Agreed. Only those who tried very hard to get it wrong could get it that wrong.

Now, why is it that anyone would try to get it so wrong?

[Conservative til I die]

Agreed. Only those who tried very hard to get it wrong could get it that wrong. Now, why is it that anyone would try to get it so wrong?

Culturally they've been raised to believe that Catholic beliefs are not just wrong they're Satanic? Really, are there *any* beliefs Bible-only Evangelicals share with Catholics outside of the Trinity?

[vrwc1]

Seriously, do you worship the Bible? Or just have a fetish for it?

I worship Jesus Christ, and he himself said the scripture could not be broken, and that at the last day his word will condemn the one that rejects him and does not accept his words. Since the Bible is the only record that we have of his words, I want to be very sure that I do not deviate from it by either removing from or adding to it.

So yeah, I guess you could say I have a fetish for it. ;o)