• Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

What other denominations

Status
Not open for further replies.
C

Cathode

Well-Known Member
Reformed1689 said:
Is it a possibility? Sure.
Click to expand...

Aren’t you really worried about it? I mean not having the complete assurance of Truth. For me that’s seriously frightening stuff considering its your immortal soul is on the line if your wrong on things.
That takes bravery to a whole new level and beyond mate, way too risky for me.

It means any part of your interpretation could be wrong, perhaps an essential part.
I could only trust Infallible interpretation of scripture or at least a interpretive system that at least claims infallibility.
If there even a remote possibility, it’s way too frightening to contemplate.
 
Reformed1689

Reformed1689

Well-Known Member
Cathode said:
Aren’t you really worried about it? I mean not having the complete assurance of Truth. For me that’s seriously frightening stuff considering its your immortal soul is on the line if your wrong on things.
That takes bravery to a whole new level and beyond mate, way too risky for me.

It means any part of your interpretation could be wrong, perhaps an essential part.
I could only trust Infallible interpretation of scripture or at least a interpretive system that at least claims infallibility.
If there even a remote possibility, it’s way too frightening to contemplate.
Click to expand...
I said it is possible, but I don't think it would happen. Scripture has a plain meaning. That being said, I wouldn't trust my immortal soul to a Pope either. You are the one taking the bigger risk. Especially since Popes regularly go against Scripture.
 
C

Cathode

Well-Known Member
Reformed1689 said:
If you think your church teaches salvation is about nothing but love. That's also not what Scripture teaches. But quit trying to put forth Catholic Dogma as truth. Nobody here will stand for the heresy.
Click to expand...

No, Faith and Love together dude as I understand it. I don’t understand what you find wrong with it.
 
C

Cathode

Well-Known Member
Reformed1689 said:
I said it is possible, but I don't think it would happen. Scripture has a plain meaning. That being said, I wouldn't trust my immortal soul to a Pope either. You are the one taking the bigger risk. Especially since Popes regularly go against Scripture.
Click to expand...

Everyone keeps talking about the plain meaning of scripture, but they all come up with something different.
I haven’t got the time, knowledge or confidence to interpret the scripture for myself, I’m only a fallible garden contractor. I identify more with the sheep type of thing, trusting Infallible shepherds to guide me through.

I don’t reckon sheep were meant to shepherd themselves. And I could not follow my nose like a hegoat, there’s just too much ego in hegoats .

The other thing I would worry about is if I did interpret my own fallible teaching from scripture, it could be wrong and someone follows it to their destruction. I can’t handle that kind of responsibility.

Knowing my luck I could dive into a barrel of teats and come out sucking my own thumb. It’s all way too risky thinking about it, the land flowing with milk and honey, not by following my fallible nose.

Besides I could abandon Catholic interpretation of scripture, follow my own interpretation of scripture, and you could still call me a heretic.

Am I overthinking things.
 
C

Cathode

Well-Known Member
Reformed1689 said:
So you are lazy.
Click to expand...

Well I’d be up against hundreds of Popes and tens of thousands of bishops in interpretation for 2000 years, and they were all full timers.
What’s makes my fallible interpretation better than their combined single interpretation of scripture?
I’ve got a pretty solid work ethic, but I can’t reinvent Christianity from my fallible interpretations of written text, do you realise the man hours we are talking about, when would I get to sleep. Besides all I’d have at the end of all that is a fallible product that is no better or authoritive than anyone else’s.
Some dude could cast doubt on my interpretation of scripture with his interpretation , and because my interpretation would be fallible, I couldn’t be sure if it was the truth or not.

I don’t think Jesus would want to pressurise His sheep like that, sheep are really stupid, I’ve mustered them. The one thing sheep are fantastic at is following, mate I’d pit a sheep against any other animal when it comes to following. Dog comes close, but they get other ideas.
Jesus trusted His sheep to Peter to tend and feed, so all a sheep needs to know is Peters interpretation of the pasture. So we listen to Peters voice, not any other stranger. “ He who listens to you, listens to me “ , “ my sheep know my voice”, “ feed my lambs” , “ tend my sheep “, “ feed my sheep “.
So long as Peters in charge all we have to worry about is getting fat.
 
Last edited:
Lodic

Lodic

Well-Known Member
Cathode said:
The Apostles were Infallible. They only preached and taught the Inspired Truth from God.
Click to expand...
Hope you don't mind my jumping in here. I'm not here to argue Roman Catholic vs Protestant doctrine. However, I do want to point out that the Apostles were not infallible. In Galatians 2:11-15, Paul confronted Peter because Peter was guilty of hypocrisy. Peter accepted the correction, of course. The point here is this shows the Apostles were just as fallible as everyone else. Only Jesus was infallible. Even Mary needed a Savior (Luke 1:46-47).

Take care, and God Bless you.
 
Reformed1689

Reformed1689

Well-Known Member
Cathode said:
Well I’d be up against hundreds of Popes and tens of thousands of bishops in interpretation for 2000 years, and they were all full timers.
What’s makes my fallible interpretation better than their combined single interpretation of scripture?
I’ve got a pretty solid work ethic, but I can’t reinvent Christianity from my fallible interpretations of written text, do you realise the man hours we are talking about, when would I get to sleep. Besides all I’d have at the end of all that is a fallible product that is no better or authoritive than anyone else’s.
Some dude could cast doubt on my interpretation of scripture with his interpretation , and because my interpretation would be fallible, I couldn’t be sure if it was the truth or not.

I don’t think Jesus would want to pressurise His sheep like that, sheep are really stupid, I’ve mustered them. The one thing sheep are fantastic at is following, mate I’d pit a sheep against any other animal when it comes to following. Dog comes close, but they get other ideas.
Jesus trusted His sheep to Peter to tend and feed, so all a sheep needs to know is Peters interpretation of the pasture. So we listen to Peters voice, not any other stranger. “ He who listens to you, listens to me “ , “ my sheep know my voice”, “ feed my lambs” , “ tend my sheep “, “ feed my sheep “.
So long as Peters in charge all we have to worry about is getting fat.
Click to expand...
We are commanded to study. Look at the example of the Bereans.
 
C

Cathode

Well-Known Member
Reformed1689 said:
No such thing.
Click to expand...
Lodic said:
Hope you don't mind my jumping in here. I'm not here to argue Roman Catholic vs Protestant doctrine. However, I do want to point out that the Apostles were not infallible. In Galatians 2:11-15, Paul confronted Peter because Peter was guilty of hypocrisy. Peter accepted the correction, of course. The point here is this shows the Apostles were just as fallible as everyone else. Only Jesus was infallible. Even Mary needed a Savior (Luke 1:46-47).

Take care, and God Bless you.
Click to expand...

Paul rightly corrected Peters behaviour, he didn’t correct Peters teaching. Infallibility only involves teaching, not the behaviour of a dude.

Paul was only holding Peter to His Infallible teaching at the Council of Jerusalem. That God showed no partiality between Jew and Gentile believer.
So the teaching was correct, but Peters behaviour wasn’t.

Besides Jesus gave infallibility to all the Apostles.

Check this out. “ He who listens to you, listens to me “ . So when you listened to an Apostle, you were actually listening to Jesus. Jesus imparted His Infallible power to these dudes.
 
Reformed1689

Reformed1689

Well-Known Member
Cathode said:
Paul rightly corrected Peters behaviour, he didn’t correct Peters teaching. Infallibility only involves teaching, not the behaviour of a dude.

Paul was only holding Peter to His Infallible teaching at the Council of Jerusalem. That God showed no partiality between Jew and Gentile believer.
So the teaching was correct, but Peters behaviour wasn’t.

Besides Jesus gave infallibility to all the Apostles.

Check this out. “ He who listens to you, listens to me “ . So when you listened to an Apostle, you were actually listening to Jesus. Jesus imparted His Infallible power to these dudes.
Click to expand...
You really need to study more.
 
N

ntchristian

Active Member
Cathode said:
I can’t study more. Jesus words are in me, I can’t get away from them. It’s not me that remembers its Jesus that’s in me.
Click to expand...

Just to say that I'm glad you are here. I don't agree with your Catholicism, but I sense the Spirit of Christ in you.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top