Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Some unfiltered guidance as like:[indent]Hebrews 10:25
Let us not give up meeting together, as some are in the habit of doing, but let us encourage one another
Hebrews 10:24-26
23Let us hold fast the profession of our faith without wavering; (for he is faithful that promised
24And let us consider one another to provoke unto love and to good works:
25Not forsaking the assembling of ourselves together, as the manner of some is; but exhorting one another: and so much the more, as ye see the day approaching.
26For if we sin wilfully after that we have received the knowledge of the truth, there remaineth no more sacrifice for sins,
The whole reason to gather, is to encourage each other to LOVE and GOOD WORKS.
I wish to publicly retract what I've said in this thread. I offer my apologies to GoodToBeHome, DNick, and any others I may have confronted. I admit I may be wrong. I'm sorry.
I wish to publicly retract what I've said in this thread. I offer my apologies to GoodToBeHome, DNick, and any others I may have confronted. I admit I may be wrong. I'm sorry.
It's not weak at all. It clearly links that when you put biblical interpretation in the hands of individuals, chaos ensues. And the cause of all this chaos is sola scriptura. Your position of individual interpretation is indefensible and the evidence of it's falseness is everywhere.
Sola Scriptura doesn't necessarily equal individual interpretation. If you want an answer how this is so... look to the Eastern Orthodox church for a model. Yes, there are thousands of Protestant denominations (not "Churches", because with most Protestants if you are baptized and faithful to Jesus commandments, you are in the Church wheather or not you believe in particular theological points), but Protestants prefer it to an authoritarian papal claim based on hundreds of years of deceptions and politics (look up the Donation of Constantine).
I'd invite you to read about the Anglican and Wesleyan traditions if you want to understand why not all Protestants are individualists or biblicists, and need not be to resist the temptations of authority in Rome.
Plus, being Roman Catholic doesn't absolve one of the need to interpret. There are bishops that disagree about how to interpret the Magisterium's teachings, for instance. There is no way to avoid the responsibility to think for oneself and listen carefully to different teachings and authority figures.
That is not how Paul taught we are saved. Paul taught imputed righteousness---meaning we are given Christ's righteousness. We don't need to earn our own.
.
I view the Eastern understanding as superior to both Luther/Melcanthion and the RCC... we are saved by God dwelling in us through the Holy Spirit, not through doing a court acquital or legal trickery or bribes/merit. It is not merely external or nominal (imputed) as in Melcanthion's idea of being a dung heap covered in snow, nor is it something we merit or earn... it's God's work but we participate in that work. That's why I see EO theology as superior in many ways. It's also very close to the Charismatic/Pentecostal understanding of salvation.
Sola Scriptura doesn't necessarily equal individual interpretation. If you want an answer how this is so... look to the Eastern Orthodox church for a model. Yes, there are thousands of Protestant denominations (not "Churches", because with most Protestants if you are baptized and faithful to Jesus commandments, you are in the Church wheather or not you believe in particular theological points), but Protestants prefer it to an authoritarian papal claim based on hundreds of years of deceptions and politics (look up the Donation of Constantine).
I'd invite you to read about the Anglican and Wesleyan traditions if you want to understand why not all Protestants are individualists or biblicists, and need not be to resist the temptations of authority in Rome.
Plus, being Roman Catholic doesn't absolve one of the need to interpret. There are bishops that disagree about how to interpret the Magisterium's teachings, for instance. There is no way to avoid the responsibility to think for oneself and listen carefully to different teachings and authority figures.
I agree that Jesus Christ did establish His Church and that He always intended that there be "one Lord, one faith, and one baptism." Numerous different denominations, all teaching different things, cannot all be "the Church" He established. As to which of all the Churches now on the earth is the one He established (or even if said Church exists today) is a matter of opinion. I'm pretty sure that nobody on this forum thinks he belongs to a church that is not "true." That's kind of a no-brainer.
You judgement is correct. There is no contemporary church that has the Lord as its head. His church has been supplanted by a false sophisticated soteriological system that has reversed the crucifixion of Jesus from an individually accountable sin caused by bloodshed into an assumed direct benefit obtained by the sin of murder. Since no sin, irregardless of who committed the sin, is other than an infraction of the law. The soteriologocal proposal taught today has the unreasonable conjecture of assuming that it is only the sin of murder caused by bloodshed that has satisfactorily resolved all other issues of sin. This conjecture is an error of human judgement which subjects its holders to serve the law's penalty for only assuming that any sin is a direct benefit.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.