1. 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!

Soul liberty - Just a nice theory?

Discussion in 'Free-For-All Archives' started by trying2understand, May 30, 2003.

  1. trying2understand

    trying2understand New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2001
    Messages:
    3,316
    Likes Received:
    0
    Your church has a "personal interpretation" of Scripture then. You are not free to interpret differently than your statement of faith.

    Your church does not allow you to interpret Scripture in areas of your church's choosing.

    Isn't this sort of what you were complaining about in another thread in regards to the Catholic Church? You must remember all of your accusations about Catholics sitting in their pews mindlessly like a sponge while the priest tells them what they must believe? (Or some such dribble like that)

    After becomming a member of your church you must stop thinking?

    Why do you accept it in your church?

    You said that makes a church a cult.

    So now your little church is infallible?

    How can this be? Is your pastor God?

    Not once you joined your little church. You are not allowed to study your Bible and change your beliefs. You must either follow the infallible statement of faith or suffer the persecution of banishment.

    And you lost that when you joined your church.
     
  2. trying2understand

    trying2understand New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2001
    Messages:
    3,316
    Likes Received:
    0
    It should be obvious to all that churches that are not Catholic are no different than the Catholic Church where it comes to holding a body of beliefs that members of the Church are to hold personally if they are to remain a member in union with the Church.

    All the non-Catholics on this thread are defending the logic and sense of such a requirement.

    This would be a good time for the nonCatholics on the board to cease in the erroneous accusation that "Catholics are not allowed to interpret Scripture".

    Using the standard that many apply in judging the Catholic Church in this regard, none of the other churches are any different.

    Thank you for helping me make the point. [​IMG]

    Ron
     
  3. DHK

    DHK <b>Moderator</b>

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2000
    Messages:
    37,982
    Likes Received:
    137
    Your word games are quite silly Ron.
    God is a God of order and not of chaos. If there was no statement of faith, nothing for any member to adhere to than there would be nothing but chaos in the church. BTW, there are some churches like that. Ask them for a statement of faith; what do you believe? And they will avoid you, not answer you directly, giving you as an answer: "Our statement of faith is the Bible." I'm sorry, but that is not good enough to define what a church believes. That statement defined Jim Jones, Sun Myung Moon, David Koresh, etc. "We only believe the Bible." Yea, right! Is this the game that you also want to play Ron. Because it is true. We only believe the Bible. It is our only rule of faith and order. But there are other principles that define a Baptist as well.

    You have the right (the soul liberty) to believe what you want. If you don't want to believe in the bodlily resurrection of the Lord, but say it is just a spiritual resurrection then join the J.W.'s not us. I'll still respect your belief. That's soul liberty. But our church (like the church in th book of Acts) will be in one accord. If you want to believe in soul sleep and the annihilation of the wicked then join the S.D.A.'s. I'll respect you for your beliefs. You have the soul liberty to believe in the heresies that you choose to believe in. That is your right. But don't bring your heresies into our church. This church will act in one accord. It is unified. There are some essential things that must be agreed upon to be a member of this church.

    The fact remains that in the Catholic Church it is not some essential thing that must be agreed on, it is all essential and non-essential things that must be agreed on. Everything must be agreed on. The magesterium only has the right to interpret Scripture. You have no right. That has been aptly pointed out to you by Clint.

    Your examples serve nothing but to make a fool out of yourself. When others like Luther and Tyndale pointed out the pathetic heresies and errors of the Catholic Church they quickly condemned and put to death. They had no soul liberty. This would never be done in any Baptist church.
    DHK
     
  4. neal4christ

    neal4christ New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 1, 2002
    Messages:
    1,815
    Likes Received:
    0
    I just want to point out that I have not been espousing that statement (at least not anytime recently). At one time I may have held that, but quite a few months back I changed on it. I would like to just point that all so all nonCatholics are not lumped together. (Like many Protestants lump all Catholics together! ;) )

    Neal
     
  5. neal4christ

    neal4christ New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 1, 2002
    Messages:
    1,815
    Likes Received:
    0
    Actually, DHK, they did. They chose to hold onto their beliefs rather than change them.

    Neal
     
  6. DHK

    DHK <b>Moderator</b>

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2000
    Messages:
    37,982
    Likes Received:
    137
    Actually, DHK, they did. They chose to hold onto their beliefs rather than change them.

    Neal
    </font>[/QUOTE]Soul liberty is the right to believe what you believe to be right without fear of persecution. They died for their faith. Some of them were burned at the stake just for believing the gospel. The Catholic Church did not give them the right to believe the Bible or the gospel message of the Bible
    They did not tolerate it at all. There was no freedom. They could either recant or die. That is not a choice. That is not soul liberty.
    DHK
     
  7. Clint Kritzer

    Clint Kritzer Active Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2001
    Messages:
    8,877
    Likes Received:
    4
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Actually, DHK, in the game of semantics, I have to go with Neal on that one. "Religious freedom" can be squelched by force. "Soul Liberty" can be exercised right up to the point of death. As Christ told his Disciples, "I tell you, my friends, do not fear those who kill the body, and after that have nothing more that they can do. But I will warn you whom to fear: fear him who, after he has killed, has authority to cast into hell." Luke 12:4-5 (ESV)

    If that ability did not exist in man, we would have no martyrs.

    Edited to add Paul's words to Timothy:

    2 Timothy 2

    8Remember Jesus Christ, risen from the dead, the offspring of David, as preached in my gospel, 9for which I am suffering, bound with chains as a criminal. But the word of God is not bound! 10Therefore I endure everything for the sake of the elect, that they also may obtain the salvation that is in Christ Jesus with eternal glory.
     
  8. DHK

    DHK <b>Moderator</b>

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2000
    Messages:
    37,982
    Likes Received:
    137
    Soul liberty is what our Baptist forefathers fought for, particularly men like John Bunyan. Bunyan went to prison because he refused to be licenced by the state church. Who gives man permission to believe the gospel? to believe that purgatory is right or wrong? to believe to be a Baptist or a Catholic. Is it the right of a government? Is it the right of a government controlled church? Is it the right of any church?

    God never condones persecution, terrorism, torture, etc. Did God condone the destruction of the WTC towers? He allowed it to happen, but did he condone it? Of course not.
    God did not condone any of the horrible acts of Saddam Hussein, Hitler, Stalin, and many others.

    He brings or allows persecution to come on believers for different reasons. That doesn't mean he condones what the persecutor is doing. Though Christians may have suffered under Hussein's rule or Hitler's rule, or in the Inquistion, it was never God's will for those men to choose to be so evil. God is not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance. That would include Hussein and Hitler. It is not His will that they torture Christians. The soul liberty card can hardly be used in these circumstances when Hitler, Hussein, and the Catholic Inquisition took away the right for their people to believe as they wanted. If there is no liberty, there is obviously no soul liberty.

    John Bunyan never had it. The Church denied it to him. He had suffering, yes. That is a consequence of living a godly life, not a consequence of soul liberty, but rather a consequence of the denial of soul liberty.
    DHK
     
  9. BobRyan

    BobRyan Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2002
    Messages:
    32,913
    Likes Received:
    71
    Faith:
    Non Baptist Christian
    Burning fellow Catholics at the stake is not "soul liberty". I am guessing that all agree on that point.

    Paul states that each one must stand before God - and Christ states in Matt 7 that we are not to judge the salvation of another brother in Christ.

    God says in 1John 2 "you have no need for anyone to teach you ... His annointing teaches you" - this is the ultimate of "soul lilberty" as promised in the New Covenant of Hebrews 8 "They shall NOT say each one to his brother 'know the Lord' for ALL shall know me" In the New Covenant God promises that HE HIMSELF will be our teacher.

    The ADDED BLESSING of brothers and sisters in Christ that are also being Guided by the Holy Spirit "of Truth" and "led into all truth" John 16 - by God's Spirit - is certainly a great blessing. But it does not detract from soul liberty because "each one" must given an account for himself.

    There is no "My priest told me to do this and all would be well". Each one must give their own account before God "2Cor 5:6-9".

    In Christ

    Bob
     
  10. neal4christ

    neal4christ New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 1, 2002
    Messages:
    1,815
    Likes Received:
    0
    See, I would not include "without fear of persecution" in the definition. To me soul liberty simply means the first half of your definition. There are ramifications for beliefs, fair or unfair. But one has the liberty to believe whatever they want.

    Neal
     
  11. SolaScriptura in 2003

    Joined:
    Dec 20, 2002
    Messages:
    398
    Likes Received:
    0
    "Soul liberty is the right to believe what you believe to be right without fear of persecution." (DHK)

    "See, I would not include 'without fear of persecution' in the definition." (neal4christ)

    Perhaps then, Neal, you and DHK are looking at two different aspects of the subject. You are looking at the individual and he the church. DHK seems to be saying that the church should recognize the individual's soul liberty by not persecuting them for their belief but rather allowing them to leave with their head on their shoulders and their bodies unburned and you seem to be saying that the individual should stay true to his belief no matter what the church does.

    [ June 01, 2003, 03:35 AM: Message edited by: SolaScriptura in 2003 ]
     
  12. trying2understand

    trying2understand New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2001
    Messages:
    3,316
    Likes Received:
    0
    You persist in your error, DHK.

    As I a Catholic I may interpret Scripture as long as it is not in contrarty to the teachings of the Church.

    This is no different than your church.

    You try to play word games by saying "essentials" but of course it is your church that tells you what those essentials are.
     
  13. DHK

    DHK <b>Moderator</b>

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2000
    Messages:
    37,982
    Likes Received:
    137
     
  14. trying2understand

    trying2understand New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2001
    Messages:
    3,316
    Likes Received:
    0
    As I previously pointed out to you, it is necessary to read all of the words in a sentence in order to comprehend the meaning.

    Have you so soon forgotten the word which you choose to overlook? "Authenticly"

    I accept your previous words as evidence of your attitude where it comes to Catholics.


    Perhaps this was a judgement call on his part due to his personal knowledge of your skills with the written word. [​IMG]

    Even I have had to point out to you that it is necessary to consider "every" word in a sentence in order to find the writer's intent.

    Oh, but there is the rub DHK, either you have to consider the possibiblty that your interpretation could be in error or you are making the claim of infallibility.

    Like I have said before, anything you want to say about Scripture is merely your interpretation. [​IMG]
     
  15. DHK

    DHK <b>Moderator</b>

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2000
    Messages:
    37,982
    Likes Received:
    137
    Oh, but there's the rub Ron, either you have to consider the possibility that magesterium's interpretation could be in error or you are making the claim of their infallibility.

    Like I have said before, anything you want to say about Scripture is merely the magesterium's interpretation. Who and what are the magesterium? A bunch of sinful ment who try to interpret the Scripture, but more than that they add to the Scriture things that ought not to be.
    DHK
     
  16. trying2understand

    trying2understand New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2001
    Messages:
    3,316
    Likes Received:
    0
    No problem.

    In regards to matters of faith, the Magesterium is infallible. [​IMG]
     
  17. DHK

    DHK <b>Moderator</b>

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2000
    Messages:
    37,982
    Likes Received:
    137
    This is the height of arrogance, and that which leads to a denial of soul liberty. "I am right and you are wrong because I am infallible." (So says the Catholic Church).

    No Baptist admits to infallibilty.
    DHK
     
  18. DHK

    DHK <b>Moderator</b>

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2000
    Messages:
    37,982
    Likes Received:
    137
    Here really is the crux of the matter that you fail to address. The Catholic Church claims to be a universal church having one doctrine (the Catechism), and yet it varies widely in its beliefs all over the world. At one extreme in third world countries such as Mexico and Pakistan you have Catholics offering sacrifices like chickens to idols of Mary. There are people making money selling statues of Mary, and selling candles to light before this idol of Mary
    Some of the Catholic churches are liberal in their doctrine and some are conservative. Chech out your "popes-in-waiting." Even some of them are classified as liberal and some as conservative. Must be as a result of doctrinal differences and the interpretation thereof. I know for a fact that individual Catholics have variuous views on beliefs such as contraception, (don't believe in it), purgatory, and even Hell. Even your early church fathers disagreed on many things. To this day many theologians cannot agree on whether purgatory is a state or a place. Try Augustine. See what he says. The Catholic Church all over the world is in disarray. They know not what they believe. And many know what they believe and believe it dogmatically. However what they believe so dogmatically is contrary to the Catechism. 90% or more have never heard of terms such as dulia.

    Yet you must admit there is one Catholic Church, one Catechism, one doctrine.

    Contrary, we have one church, independent of all others, not belonging to any denomination, completely independent. It is not denominational. It is Baptistic in doctrine. It is an Independent Baptist Church. There is no denomination as Independent Baptist Church denomination. You will not find a common creed that defines us. We each have our own statement of faith. All of our members adhere to that. Unlike the Catholic Church, where you cannot give account for the one billion members that you have, I can account for the 40 or so members that we do have. Like the Bible, we are all of one accord, one doctrine, in unity in all things. There is a vast difference.
    The major difference: Our church is a Biblical church; yours is not. Our church has accountablity; yours does not. Our church has soul liberty; your does not. Our church has the Bible as its final authority in all things of faith and practice; yours does not. In our church every member is a priest before God; in yours they are not. In our church there has always been a separation between church and state; in yours there has not. In our church every member is saved and baptized; in your church they are not.

    If the truth be told the Catholic Church is largely composed of millions and millions of unregenerate pagans that need to be saved. The Catholic Church is a mission field in itself.
    DHK
     
  19. trying2understand

    trying2understand New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2001
    Messages:
    3,316
    Likes Received:
    0
    In regards to what you have said about what some Catholics or theologians may or may not believe:

    All that does not change the teachings of the Church.

    That some one does not follow the teachings of the Church does not make the Church less valid or inconsistent. It merely shows that some Catholics for whatever reasons are not in union with the Church.


    Concerning all that you said about your church, since it is merely your intrpretation of Scripture, if everyone in your church does in fact agree with you, you all get an equal opportunity to be wrong in your interpretation.

    Unless you want to claim some sort of infallibity. Oh wait, you did make the claim previously didn't you. [​IMG]

    Too bad you can't know if it's your little called out assembly that is right or the little called out assembly just down the road. You can't both be right if you disagree now can you?

    The world according to DHK. [​IMG]

    Aint it grand when you think that you the next thing to God yourself?
     
  20. DHK

    DHK <b>Moderator</b>

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2000
    Messages:
    37,982
    Likes Received:
    137
    In regards to what you have said about what some Catholics or theologians may or may not believe:

    All that does not change the teachings of the Church.

    That some one does not follow the teachings of the Church does not make the Church less valid or inconsistent. It merely shows that some Catholics for whatever reasons are not in union with the Church.
    </font>[/QUOTE]1Pet3:15 But sanctify the Lord God in your hearts: and be ready always to give an answer to every man that asketh you a reason of the hope that is in you with meekness and fear:
    --Be ready always to give an answer
    Ron's answer: "Blah, blah blah..." Very good defence Ron.

    That some one does not follow the teachings of the Church does not make the Church less valid or inconsistent.
    Of course it make the Catholic Church inconsistent. What else could it do. One church is practicing one thing; and another church practicing and believing another thing. It is very inconsistent. Ignorance of the law (or catechism in this case) is no excuse. It doesn't matter what your catechism says anymore. The Catholics practice otherwise and are still Catholics, making your Catechism totally irrelevant to their faith. So now your faith becomes believe what you want and still be a Catholic?? It always was that in morals and practice anyway, wasn't it. Be as wicked as you want; be the pervert that you want; do as much evil as you care to--as long as you confess your sins to the priest at the end of the week your ok. Right? That's really how it works in practice.


    No, not just my interpretation of Scripture, Ron. That is where you are wrong. It is my interpretation when I preach or teach, but I rely on the Holy Spirit to guide me and teach me. He has promised to illuminate me and give me understanding. Perhaps that is why there is so little disagreement. We rely on the guidance of the Holy Spirit. If the Catholic Church is full of unregenerate people that's an impossiblity.

    Nope never did. I said the Holy Spirit guides me. I am not infallible, never was, never will be. Slander is not good Ron. It was you that said that the magesterium was infallible.

    You need to open up your Bible and study it.

    Acts 17:11 These were more noble than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness of mind, and searched the scriptures daily, whether those things were so.
    --The Bereans had complete freedom (soul liberty) to open up their Bibles, interpret what they found, study it, compare it to what Paul had said to see if what he had said was the truth. Paul did not force them to believe what he had said. They had the choice and freedom to believe or not to believe. They took the Scriptures. They studied them on their own. They interpreted them on their own. There was no magesterium, no council, no synod--nothing. Only the Bereans giving account of themselves to God as they interpreted the Scriptures themselves without any fear from Paul or anyone else. That is soul liberty.

    The church at Ephesus were one in doctrine. We can see this very clearly not only from the epistle written to them but from the Book of Acts, I and II Timothy, for Timothy was the pastor of the church at Ephesus. The church at Philippi were one in doctrine. But the one church did not know what the other believed. If they had it all written down their statements of faith may have varied. They were independent churches, having nothing to do with each other. Yet each one was united in doctrine within themselves. They (the local individual assemblies) acted in one accord, just as the church at Jerusalem did.

    The Catholic Church does not act in one accord; it acts all in disaccord, with much dissension.

    Yes our assembly acts according to the Word of God, as does the assembly down the road that is also an IFB church.

    Don't speak blasphemy Ron. I am not the one that claims infallibility. Both the pope does and the magesterium do. The number one Baptistic Distinctive is that our church is based on the Bible as the final authority in all matters of faith and practice. It is a church, (not according to DHK), but according to the Bible, as we have always asserted. The Catholic Church defines itself by a Catechism; we define ourself by the Word of God.
    DHK
     
Loading...