John's Gospel & Epistles

[trying2understand]

Originally posted by tragic_pizza:
It is, however, an interpretation of Scripture, and not something created from whole cloth. There is, at least, some measure of control over the fantasies of mankind.

You have to be kidding right?

Like "premarital sex is marraige" is an interpretation of Scripture, right?

 

[tragic_pizza]

Originally posted by trying2understand:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by tragic_pizza:
It is, however, an interpretation of Scripture, and not something created from whole cloth. There is, at least, some measure of control over the fantasies of mankind.

You have to be kidding right?

Like "premarital sex is marraige" is an interpretation of Scripture, right? </font>[/QUOTE]Why do you think that the Bible is so adamantly against premarital sex and adultery?

 

[trying2understand]

Originally posted by tragic_pizza:
Why do you think that the Bible is so adamantly against premarital sex and adultery?

Lev 20:10 The man who commits adultery with another man’s wife, he who commits adultery with his neighbor’s wife, the adulterer and the adulteress, shall surely be put to death.

Pro 6:32 Whoever commits adultery with a woman lacks understanding; He who does so destroys his own soul.

Col 3:5,6 Therefore put to death your members which are on the earth: fornication, uncleanness, passion, evil desire, and covetousness, which is idolatry. 6 Because of these things the wrath of God is coming upon the sons of disobedience,

Heb 13:4 Marriage is honorable among all, and the bed undefiled; but fornicators and adulterers God will judge.

1 Th 4:3-8 For this is the will of God, your sanctification: that you should abstain from sexual immorality; 4 that each of you should know how to possess his own vessel in sanctification and honor, 5 not in passion of lust, like the Gentiles who do not know God; 6 that no one should take advantage of and defraud his brother in this matter, because the Lord is the avenger of all such, as we also forewarned you and testified. 7 For God did not call us to uncleanness, but in holiness. 8 Therefore he who rejects this does not reject man, but God, who has also given us His Holy Spirit.

 

[thessalonian]

Originally posted by Bro. Curtis:
[QB] Paul says " I delivered them to you".

Where does Paul give the tradition of the assumption ?

Come now Curtis. You must be joking. There are roughly 2 hours worth of Paul's writings in the NT if you opened them up and started reading. Do you think that everything that Paul ever said in the 30 or so years he was a Christian is recorded. He must have been kind of a quiet guy. Point is you don't know what all the traditions he left were and you can't possibly say that he did not ever speak to anyone about what happened to Mary.

"If he didn't give it, what are it's origins ?"

Well, that is why we call it Apostolic Tradition. You figure it out.

 

[thessalonian]

Trajic,

"How about the fact that these words and epistles and traditions were delivered by Paul himself, not some latter individual claiming the office of Paul? How's that work for ya? "

Why trajic, you have hit on something incredible. All the traditions must come from the Apostles or they would not be true. Brilliant. Oh wait, someone else came up with that idea long before you. The Catholic Church. We call all the traditions APOSTOLIC TRADITIONS.
But it is amazing how you came to the same conclusion on this that the Catholic Church did.

So you say they were recieved from the Apostle Paul. All well and good and true but.....
The point of 2 Tim 2:2 is that they were supposed to pass them on. That is what a tradition is after all.

2 Timothy 2:2
The things which you have heard from me in the presence of many witnesses, entrust these to faithful men who will be able to teach others also.


People would be kind of out of luck if they had to hear everything from an Apostle and they didn't happen to have their pocket apostle in their back pocket.

[ February 12, 2003, 01:10 PM: Message edited by: thessalonian ]

 

[Bro. Curtis]

Originally posted by thessalonian:
?

Come now Curtis. You must be joking. There are roughly 2 hours worth of Paul's writings in the NT if you opened them up and started reading. Do you think that everything that Paul ever said in the 30 or so years he was a Christian is recorded. He must have been kind of a quiet guy. Point is you don't know what all the traditions he left were and you can't possibly say that he did not ever speak to anyone about what happened to Mary.

"If he didn't give it, what are it's origins ?"

Well, that is why we call it Apostolic Tradition. You figure it out.

No, you are the one telling me that tradition is equal to scripture, so you should be willing to give me the tradition's origins, unless you can't.

And I do believe that if it's important to us, God would have preserved it for us, in a written word, and not given to someone else in secret.

That is the source of my disdain for tradition. Too many places where it contradicts God's word, and I will bet my salvation that God would want me to trust his word, over what was written hundreds of years after the fact.

 

[trying2understand]

Originally posted by Bro. Curtis:
That is the source of my disdain for tradition. Too many places where it contradicts God's word, and I will bet my salvation that God would want me to trust his word, over what was written hundreds of years after the fact.

And yet you still cling to your own traditions.

Soul liberty is one.

Independence of churches is another.

 

[Bro. Curtis]

Two things...

I don't know what soul liberty is, so I'm not addressing that one.

Second, Jesus Christ is the head of our Church, so that would make all churches autonomous, meaning no chain of command. The Pastor needs salvation as badly as the whole congregation, and he needs to follow the leading of the Holy Spirit, just like the congregation. Nobody to answer to, 'cept God. That is most biblical.

 

[trying2understand]

Originally posted by Bro. Curtis:
Second, Jesus Christ is the head of our Church, so that would make all churches autonomous, meaning no chain of command. The Pastor needs salvation as badly as the whole congregation, and he needs to follow the leading of the Holy Spirit, just like the congregation. Nobody to answer to, 'cept God. That is most biblical.

Then what was up with Paul writing to all those churches?

Why didn't he just leave it up to the pastor?

When exactly would the meddleing have stopped?

Got a Bible verse that says, "from this day forward, all churches are independent."

Did Paul believe that he had some sort of authority over the local churches?

And where do we see Paul getting such authority?

 

[tragic_pizza]

Originally posted by thessalonian:
Trajic,

"How about the fact that these words and epistles and traditions were delivered by Paul himself, not some latter individual claiming the office of Paul? How's that work for ya? "

Why trajic, you have hit on something incredible. All the traditions must come from the Apostles or they would not be true. Brilliant. Oh wait, someone else came up with that idea long before you. The Catholic Church. We call all the traditions APOSTOLIC TRADITIONS.
But it is amazing how you came to the same conclusion on this that the Catholic Church did.

So you say they were recieved from the Apostle Paul. All well and good and true but.....
The point of 2 Tim 2:2 is that they were supposed to pass them on. That is what a tradition is after all.

2 Timothy 2:2
The things which you have heard from me in the presence of many witnesses, entrust these to faithful men who will be able to teach others also.


People would be kind of out of luck if they had to hear everything from an Apostle and they didn't happen to have their pocket apostle in their back pocket.

The Catholic Church holds the market on Apostolic Succession because the Catholic Church says so. So much for noncircular reasoning, huh?

Yeah, a pocket apostle, what a good idea... oh, wait, that's the Bible!

 

[Bro. Curtis]

I see Paul's letters as admonishments to various churches to bring themselves to Biblical Christianity. I don't think he had any authority, but God spoke to those Churches thru Paul, and it is preserved so.

Actually, you do have a point, if the Churches stayed with Biblical christianity from the beginning, maybe he wouldn't have written all those letters, eh ?

But those letters contain some pretty fair advice to us regular Christians, also.

 

[GraceSaves]

Originally posted by Bro. Curtis:
And in speaking of a Christain "tone", I think it's pretty unChristian to preach unbiblical doctrines, so your point is moot. You think I'm the heretic, I think you are. See ? It's a circle.

Curtis,

This was your resonse to telling someone that they were not worth talking to. You took a poster, and assigned "worth" to them. And you justify this how? With a "he started it!" comment. You see, it's only circular because instead of apologizing for a completely uncalled for statement, you just point and say, "He's as bad as I am!" That may be true, but that doesn't excuse yourself from your share of the blame.

By the way, if we're all heretics and "unChristian", you certainly aren't showing us the Christian attitude that we should instead be following.

God bless,

Grant

 

[GraceSaves]

Originally posted by Bro. Curtis:
I see Paul's letters as admonishments to various churches to bring themselves to Biblical Christianity. I don't think he had any authority, but God spoke to those Churches thru Paul, and it is preserved so.

Actually, you do have a point, if the Churches stayed with Biblical christianity from the beginning, maybe he wouldn't have written all those letters, eh ?

But those letters contain some pretty fair advice to us regular Christians, also.

So basically, everything in Paul's epistles to those churches were only "recommendations," but they didn't have to follow them as long as the local church, by majority, thought that Paul's understanding was incorrect?

If not, then Paul had authority over them to show them their error and reproach them.

God bless,

Grant

 

[Bro. Curtis]

Grant, good-bye. You also, are not worth talking to.

From now on, I'll just point to my Bible, and leave the arguing out. It produces zero fruit discussing doctrine with those who elevate tradition to the same, if not, above, authority of scripture.

 

[GraceSaves]

Curtis,

I certainly hope your Baptist brethern do not agree with your method of assigning worth to other people, which does nothing but to elevate yourself above those who you think are inferior.

Or maybe you just finally realized that your one-liner answers of "It's all lies," or "Where is that in the Bible?" or "Prove it to me" have finally been exhausted, and you realize you have no valid arguments, which is why you have contributed very little to this discussion other than tearing others down and elevating yourself.

Or am I simply not worth the time to share your doctrine with? If you are correct, why are you giving up? I would hate to see you in the mission field trying to convert people to Jesus Christ because they put up a fight.

Quitter.

God bless,

Grant

P.S. I asked a completely reasonable question RE: Paul's epistles right above your post to me. No answer for it, I guess, since you decided to instead tell me that I'm not worth an answer.

 

[Bro. Curtis]

On the contrary. I've noticed most of my Baptist breteren stay out of this cesspool forum, because they can't abide the stench. Apparrantly, they don't think it's worth talking to you, either.

 

[tragic_pizza]

Originally posted by Bro. Curtis:
On the contrary. I've noticed most of my Baptist breteren stay out of this cesspool forum, because they can't abide the stench. Apparrantly, they don't think it's worth talking to you, either.

 

[Bro. Curtis]

This Baptist Board has over 4000 members. But we see very few of them in here. My felings are that the fighting in this forum started way before I got here. And will continue after I am gone. The baptist/catholic thing will never be settled on this Board.

The garbage flies in both directions.

 

[GraceSaves]

Curtis,

I followed your suggestion and have taken things to the administrator.

Ask Brigguy, an adament and faithful Baptist, if he thinks these discussions are garbage. I certainly don't think listening to Baptists speak about their faith is garbage. I consume the knowedge and enjoy seeing people who are in love with Jesus Christ.

If you are so drenched in this stench and garbage, I ask that you please stop moderating this board. Others, who are just as non-Catholic as you are have been more temperate in their dealings with those of differing faith backgrounds.

God bless,

Grant

 

[tragic_pizza]

I've never met a truly temperate moderator, on any board...