Matthew 2:23 Oral Prophecy? Thoughts/Questions

Ok, let's assume your view of the Catholic church for the sake of argument instead of mine. Why are you preaching the gospel to the church? It's the lost who need to here the gospel! And then there's the question of just what gospel the Catholic church is teaching?

 

In regards to the Catholic church preaching the Gospel, as Uncle Ray says we so this with great reverence. As for preaching to the lost, the Catholic Church has the largest ministry around the world, preaching the word in the most remote parts of the world.

As for scipture being the final authority, I will not argue that the Bible holds the truth, again the issue comes when we look at interpretation of scripture. Does it seem strange at all to many of you that there is such a wide range of interpretations, this has lead to so many different protestant sects. Can all be interpreting scripture correctly, that is impossible since they all believe differently. For example, I believe that in the Baptist belief you have those who believe in free will and those who believe in eternal security. Do you really feel that Jesus would have set up such a mess!!!

Jesus saw this problem and the disciples preached about avoiding schism. Jesus gave Peter the Keys to the Kingdom and the power of Loosing and binding. We as Catholics believe that this means whatever Peter decides and makes final will be true in Heaven. This included interpretation of scripture. We believe that the church Jesus founded and also the ONLY church for the first 1500 years (with the exception of the eastern rite) was the Catholic Church and was comprised of the teaching majesterium which was responisble for interpreting the scriptures using the deposit of faith which is scripture and apostalic tradition. In Titus 1:5-7 says there should be priests and bishops. This authority was passed on through an unbroken chain to the present day.

Yours in Christ
Daniel

 

Dualhunter said
Ok, let's assume your view of the Catholic church for the sake of argument instead of mine. Why are you preaching the gospel to the church? It's the lost who need to here the gospel! And then there's the question of just what gospel the Catholic church is teaching?

First I believe that there are a few of the "lost" actually in church. They are there seeking Christ.

Also the Catholic Church probably has the largest missionary system of any Christian Church.

As for what gospel is being taught, how about the gospel as recorded in Matthew, Mark, Luke and John? That's what I hear at every Mass.

Grace and peace,
Uncle Ray

 

That is your interpretation Daniel (and BTW, it is wrong), it is the Catholic interpretation, their own private interpretation. It is the Catholic church that has the "private interpretation" contrary to what the Word of God teaches.

2Pet1:20 Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation.
21 For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost.

The Catholic Church claims to have their own private interpretation--the interpretation of the magesterium. No other interpretation will be acceptable. This is contrary to God's Word which encourages each one of us to study it and search it, for we all will be accountable to God for our knowledge and obedience to it.
DHK

 

I'm not talking about the first 4 books of the New Testament, I'm talking about the Gospel which Paul and the other Apostles would preach to the crowds to bring them to Christ, the core of the Christian message.

 

The Catholic church also does readings every Sunday on scriptures from the NT other than Matthew, Mark, Luke and John.

To DHK, by what authority can you claim my interpretation of scripture is wrong?

Yours in Christ
Daniel

 

You've missed the point again, I'm not talking about 2 short readings from various books of the Bible, I'm talking about the Gospel that the Apostles were preaching to bring people to Christ. I don't think Paul was going to the crowds and opening up a Sunday Missal (if I spelled it wrong you ought to know what I'm talking about anyway) and reading them 2 passages.

 

The Catholic church is telling us that its interpretation is right because its interpretation says so, its authority is dependant upon itself. DHK is telling you that you interpretation is wrong because it is not consistent with scripture.

 

I am not quite sure what you are trying to get at. The Catholic church at the Mass has readings from the OT and NT and from the Gospel in addition the priest preaches on the Gospel. I agree that the Mass is probly more solumn and rigid than your worship service, but this is because the Mass includes the sacrifice of our Lord Jesus Christ in Holy Communion. Because it is our Lord we take the sacrifice of the Mass very seriously and it follows very specific guidelines. I think it is wonderful that you folks have such joy at your services. I guess us Catholics are a little less open, but thats probly part in due to the fact that the Mass is a very reverent occasion. We believe the Mass is a perfect prayer. At as one saint said (I dont remember his name) "If we had a true grasp of the gift of the Mass we would die of overwhelming joy".

The peace of Christ be with you.

Daniel

 

By the way, Christ died once and for all, not over and over again.

What I mean by Gospel is not a book of the Bible but the message that the Apostles preached, do you know what that message is? It is the core of the Christian message, it is what the Apostles preached to bring people to Christ and it is disturbing that you don't seem to know what I'm talking about.

 

The Jehovah's Witnesses's have their own private interpretation of Scripture. Everyone else is wrong but them. The Mormons have their own private interpretation of Scripture; everyone else is wrong but them. The Seventh Dav Adventists have their own private interpretation of Scripture; every one else is wrong (and according to them you have the mark of the beast). The Catholics have their own private interpretation of Scripture (the Magesterium); everyone else is wrong.

The Baptists alone believe in the right to soul liberty--the right to study the Bible out and come to your own conclusions based on how the Holy Spirit guides you in your study of the Scriptures. The Bible is of no private interpretation.
DHK

 

It looks to me like you are saying the Baptists are the only ones who believe in private interpretation and then you show scripture which shows that it is wrong. We believe that private interpretation is Ok, but within the limits and guidelines of the Catholic church.

Since the scriptures warn against private interpretation, and since we believe that God wants us to know the truth, then how are we to understand scripture. We believe the church is given the authority of infallible interpretation which Jesus first gave to Peter alone. This authority was then passed on to each successive Pope. Paul says in Timothy that the CHURCH is the pillar and bullwark of the truth.

Yours in Christ
Daniel

 

What DHK means when he says that the Catholic church has it's own private interpretation, is that they have their interpretation which they claim is the only valid and perfect one. It is private because it is exclusive to the Catholic church. Out of the groups named only the Baptists believe in soul liberty though there are other groups who were not named that would agree. You claim that the Catholic church's private interpretation is the only one that is perfect and true but I remind you that the Catholic church has declared that the Jews should not be evangelized which clearly goes against what is written in the Bible and what was done in the early Church. By this, the Catholic church is found to be clearly wrong and yet they still claim the truth though they do not know the Truth.

 

Well I am not sure what is the characteristics of a cult?

We believe we possess the fulness of truth, we also believe our fellow protestants hold most of the truth as well.

We believe that our fellow protestants can achieve salvation, just as we can. In fact we also believe we will be judged harder because we have the fulness of truth.

We do not say other religions are condemed however I have heard a number of people on here come close to condeming Catholics, like calling the church a cult.

Yes we rely on the apostalic tradition and Scripture as the deposit of faith. All this tradition is is the passing on by word of mouth what Jesus taught the apostles. THis was all there was for the first 400 years and is what is taugh, now you condem this teaching that came directly from Jesus. Jesus said, he who rejects my teachings rejects me.

Yes its true we believe in works because only a true believer does as Jesus commands, these are manifested as works.

I am curious where soul-liberty is in the bible?
Since you have no fear in your interpretation, tell me what would happen in a baptist church if you interpreted scripture and believed in infant baptism, would you be allowed to profess your belief in your church or would you be asked to find another church with those beliefs?

You look at the authority of the church as a burden but so many look at it as a freeing influence since we do not have to worry about correct scripture interpretation and can spend more of our time worshiping the lord.

I know you have trouble with the authority of the church, but what are we told to do when we have a dispute with someone else and we are unable to work it out, we are told to bring it to the church.

Peace be with you all.

Yours in Christ
Daniel

 

Daniel,
"I am curious where soul-liberty is in the bible?"
2Pet.1:20 Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation.

This verse alone proves soul liberty. The Bible is of no private interpretation, and consequently there is soul liberty. That is the obvious conclusion. When you don't have "private interpretation," you do have "soul liberty." That is the plain teaching of this verse, and it is what you fail to see and understand. The Catholic Church has its own private interpretation, that of the Magesterium; you cannot disagree with it. The Bible condemns this. In fact it gives us an example of this in 1Timothy:

4:1 Now the Spirit speaketh expressly, that in the latter times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils;
2 Speaking lies in hypocrisy; having their conscience seared with a hot iron;
3 Forbidding to marry, and commanding to abstain from meats, which God hath created to be received with thanksgiving of them which believe and know the truth.
---When the "church" or a religious organization teaches certain doctrines, not in the Bible as truth, such as: 1) forbidding their people to marry (Roman Catholic priests), 2) commanding to abstain from meats or food (such as forbidding to eat meat on Friday), this Church is teaching doctrines of demons. It has a private interpretation of the Bible, does not give its people soul liberty to decide for themselves on the basis of their own study, and what they teach is obviously from Satan, according to this passage. The Roman Catholic Church fits this bill.

"Since you have no fear in your interpretation, tell me what would happen in a baptist church if you interpreted scripture and believed in infant baptism, would you be allowed to profess your belief in your church or would you be asked to find another church with those beliefs?"
--A person has the right to believe what he wants to believe. If he believes that is what the Bible teaches (infant baptism), instead of burning him at the stake (as the Catholics did to those who disagreed with them), we ask such a person to keep their beliefs to themselves (i.e., not to propagate them, or find a church where he would be more comfortable. If a person believes in infant baptism, and holds that doctrine dearly, he would obviously be more welcome in a Presbyterian church, than in a Baptist Church. But he still has the right to believe as he wants to believe, and he is still welcome at our church.

"You look at the authority of the church as a burden but so many look at it as a freeing influence since we do not have to worry about correct scripture interpretation and can spend more of our time worshiping the lord."
---Authority in a Catholic Church is a burden, a yoke to bear, something that keeps one in bondage.
But it is not so in a Baptist Church. In a Baptist Church every member has an equal vote. It is not a hierarchy that rules things. We all, as one assembly, sit and make decisions, democratically as they pertain to the church. Everyone that is a member has their say, their vote.
---You say: "We do not have to worry about correct scripture interpretation." That is just another way of saying, "We don't have to worry about having to think; the church does it for us." What a shame! "Study to show yourselves approved unto God," the Bible says. You say: "No thank you, the Church does it for me. We have our private interpretation. Soul liberty is not allowed here."

"I know you have trouble with the authority of the church, but what are we told to do when we have a dispute with someone else and we are unable to work it out, we are told to bring it to the church."
---You have taken that verse out of context. That is not talking of soul liberty. It is talking primarily of ethical and moral issues. It is speaking of sin. "If you have ought against your brother go to him." It is not speaking of a difference in meaning in Scripture. Furthermore I don't have any trouble with the authority of my church at all. I have trouble with the authority of your church which by Biblical definitions is not a church. It is an organization; not a church. Check the meaning of the word "ekklesia."
DHK

[ August 18, 2002, 07:00 PM: Message edited by: DHK ]

 

Hi there,

 

Hi there,
I think you misunderstand the Protestant position on the church fathers. We do not reject them, we just dont view them as authoritative. That is, there is a lot of good and helpful stuff in them, but they are not to be used to establish doctrine. To turn the question around, do you take everything that every church father said as 100% authoritative? Is everything St Chrysostom (for example) said 100& the authoritative word of God? I like some stuff Luther said, other things he wrote are disgusting, I like some of Billy Grahams writings, but they are not scripture. How do you see it?
All the best, Colin

 

I do not understand this concept of soul liberty. The way we understand private interpretation is just as it reads, no one person has the right of private interpretation. The interpretation of the Catholic church is by the church and therefore public. Also we feel that Jesus gave this authority to Peter who in turned passed this on to the succession of popes.

The way I understand what you are saying is that you have the personal right to interpret scripture, is this soul liberty? If so then why is this not private interpretation, I do not see the difference. I know many protestants believe that the holy spirit will guide you in the interpretation but this is obviously not infalliable since there are thousands of different protestant religions, all beliving different interpretations about scripture.

I really do not think Jesus would want this, we are warned again and again about division.Jesus wants us united in one truth. Jesus promised the apostles that he would not let the gates if hell prevail against the church the he established and the only church that was formed and lasted for over 2000 years is the Catholic church. The Catholic faith is the largest of all religions in the world

This sounds like the protestant reformation, until that time their was only one church.

In regards to these goofy arguements over forbidding marriage and abstaining from meat, you need to look at history and what was happening at that time. They were warning against the pagan (gnostics) traditions of that time, but if you don't believe this then I offer the following.

The catholic church does not forbid marriage, sure priests are to remain celebate but they can marry, they just have to give up their priestly duties. They still are priests since they will always carry this spiritual title.

As for forbiding food, Catholics can eat any food they want, the church asks its people to obstain from meat on Fridays during lent to bring us closer to Jesus through personal sacrifice. Meat was considered to be an extragant food for years and by obstaining from it on Fridays one is giving ups something for our lord and it also helps us focus on Jesus' passion. If a person really likes fish over meat, then fish is what he should obstain from. We do not make any sweeping condemnation of food in general.

These doctrines as you call them are not dogma, they are not infalliable and do not necessarily come from the apostalic tradition. These are man made traditions of the church. We as Catholics do have to follow the rules set down by the church so it would be sinful if we do not obey these rules.

As being a doctrine of demons, I think you are getting a little carried away. Remember judge not, lest yea be judged. These rules of the church do not have any evil intent, tell me what is wrong with these doctrines. As for the priesthood, Saint Paul says that it is best not to be married. Jesus who is the high priest of the church never married. These are not evil things. We are warned that a married man cares for the things of his wife and not of the things of the lord (sorry I didnt look up the actual text).

Again if sole liberty is not private interpretation then what is it. It is interpretation by a person (private). And the remarks saying the Catholic church is of Satan. Be careful what you say, if I am correct and the Catholic church is the church founded by Jesus, you are commiting blasphemy to his church. Also it not very christian like to attack a fellow christian religion this way.

Who did we burn at the stake? I get a kick out of your churchs response to someone believing as they do "Keep your mouth shut". At least we admit that there is one teaching and if they do not believe this teaching they are in conflict with the teachings of the church. If one is a Catholic then one has to believe as a Catholic regarding the doctrin of the church.

This is true unless you beleive in a different doctrine like infant baptism then your voice is not to be heard. Its human pride and arrogance which keeps people from obeying authority set forth by Jesus.

You see we believe that the church has the authority to interpret scriptures, also since the Catholic Church has been around 1500 years longer than any other christian group, we have alot more experience with interpretation. Our interpreters go back to the time of Jesus. Soul liberty has resulted in schism and division into thousands of beliefs. There is only one truth in Heaven.

Well our definition of church is the body of believers with Jesus as its head, Jesus also designated people of authority, Peter as the earthly head of the church and the apostles and the bishops of the church. This is the heiarchy which Jesus designed into his church, which as endured for over 2000 years. Can you say that your church as stayed true to its intial beliefs. For instance the original protestants believed that birth control was wrong, as well as abortion. Luther and Calvin had a great devotion to Mary, the teachers of the church where to be men. Many of your beliefs differ greatly, the Catholic church has stayed true to its belief.

Peace be with you all.

Yours in Christ
Daniel