As I said before, Catholics arent Christians

Now I know why you have the name Doubting Thomas--you must still be doubting God's Word and having the "magesterium" interpret" the Bible for you!! The Word of God is "spiritual" and can only be "discerned" spiritually. The "natural" mind cannot discern "spiritual" things. You cannot "discern" things, like God's Word with the "natural" mind. God's Word is "spiritual"-- that's why there are so many "interpretations".</font>[/QUOTE]Once again, you've yet to give me an objective way to determine which interpretation is spirit led--ie interpretations in which proponents of each conflicting interpretation both claim to have the "spiritual" mind as opposed to the "natural" one. So if my buddy and I are listening to these proponents of these contradictory yet both allegedly "spiritually" minded interpretations, and I believe (discern) interpretation A is "spiritual" while my buddy believes interpretation B is the "spiritual" one, how do I know who if I'm right or my friend is right? WE'RE NOWHERE CLOSER TO AN ANSWER.

I'm not Catholic, but thanks for the presumptive lecture. I can just as easily return the ad hominem attack and say that it is you who is spiritually blind and hardhearted, unable to discern God's Word, since it is your interpretation of Scripture that is the incorrect one. You've yet to give me any valid way of determining objectively what is the true Spiritual interpretation of Scripture without collapsing into circular reasoning. WOW. Just throwing out Scripture passages doesn't help your case, because I'm asking how one determines who is right if two (or more) proponents of conflicting interpretations each claim to have "the annointing" and "the spiritual mind" and are "guided by the Holy Spirit". So far, it appears the best you seem to come up with is that those who have "spiritually minded" interpretations are the ones who happen to agree with your interpretation since you presume that you're "spiritually minded" as well. If that's the case, how are you objectively any different from the Mormon who claims he knows he's correct in his interpretation of Scripture by the "burning in the bosom"?

 

Linda, you have yet to answer the question, which has been posed by both me and DT (hint: neither of us are Catholic so you can put that straw man to one side): how are we to determine whose discernment in interpreting the Bible is correct?

It's a pretty straightforward question, and I'm waiting for a straightforward answer from you.

 

Says who? You? With what authority?

 

Then what do you make of the above Scripture? How would you interpret it, and with what authority?

 

And you know this how, exactly? </font>[/QUOTE]Can you not know why? I already mentioned that so many things are different each other, and they never accepted the other party each other before.

Look at the followings which I already mentioned in the beginning: My church disagree to those absolutely.

Catholics have : Immaculate Conception, Theotokos(Mother of God), Assumption, Mother of Church, Celibacy, Papacy, Papal Infallibility, No Salvation Outside Holy Roman Catholic Church, Idol making, Idol worshipping, Mass of ever-asking sin-forgiveness, Magic Show by Transubstantiation, Clergy system, Holy Father and Monsignor (Blasphemy to God), Extreme Unction, Purgatory, Limbo, Inquisition, Infant Baptism, and more products with the brand mark of Holy Roman Catholic. </font>[/QUOTE]I understand that your church disagrees with all of these. That is its interpretation of Scripture and doctrine. Catholics have a different interpretation. On what basis do you and your church claim that their interpretation is wrong and yours in correct?

 

In the Church of England (Anglican) we call ourselves the holy catholic church, our ministers are called priests, vicars, father, Reverends, and the like. We have holy confessions on Friday evenings, infant baptisms, confirmations and holy communion. We even have holy orders of grey nuns (sisters). Will we be the next target to be unsaved?

Check back in history and see how many sound theoogical books were contributed to Christendom by the Anglican Church. You might be amazed!

Cheers,

Jim

 

Linda, whilst I'm waiting for a reply from you, permit me to expand on my reasoning by way of an analogy with the legal situation in the US.

In the USA, your governing legal document, your Basic Law as it were (at least as this Limey understands it) is the Constitution (as subsequently amended). Now, in this analogy, the US Constitution is equivalent to the Bible. Not all US citizens are qualified or empowered to interpret the Constitution, however. If they were, you would have anarchy and lawlessness on your streets. On the contrary, interpretation and application of the document is reserved to the judiciary - the courts - and ultimately if necessary SCOTUS as the final court of appeal. In this picture, the courts and judicial system are analogous to the Church.

The fundamental trouble I have with both sola Scriptura and soul liberty in interpretation of the same is that it places the interpretation of the Constitution - in the analogy - into the hands of ordinary unqualified citizens and, just as that would result in lawlessness and anarchy, so SS and SL result in theological lawlessness and anarchy. Just as allowing all US citizens to put their own spin on the Constitution would result in "each man doing what he thought right in his own eyes"*, so SS and SL have the same result.

*Hmmm...where have I heard that before? Oh yes, Judges 21:25...

 

I was raised IFB and we never had a Bible study, except Sunday school, which was nothing more than another preached sermon. Since I have left the IFB, my walk with Christ has flourished as my relationship is developing through Bible study.

Curiously, I asked my parents (IFB) why they don’t have Bible studies and my mother told me that they tried, but everyone couldn’t agree on anything. Funny a bunch of little infallible popes in a room that all believe their interpretation is right….what’s even worse, or sad, is that their Church has split over these discussions…I’m sure this saddens our Lord.

 

Matt--

Since when is the US Constitution comparable to the Holy Scriptures? The Holy Scriptures are "spritual" and must be discerned and interpreted "spiritually". The US Constitution was written by MEN--those MEN never claimed to be inspired by God. You are comparing apples to oranges.

The governing factor in the life of the Christian is the BIBLE/GOD'S WORD.

 

originally posted by Matt Black...

Hmmmm, we have lawlessness and anarchy in our streets, as well as any country in the world does. By your reasoning, everyone must be qualified and empowered to interpret the Constitution.

 

Bible teaches us who can interpret the Bible.

1 John 2: 27
27 But the anointing which ye have received of him abideth in you, and ye need not that any man teach you: but as the same anointing teacheth you of all things, and is truth, and is no lie, and even as it hath taught you, ye shall abide in him.


I told you that these murderers are not the true believers:

http://www.cuttingedge.org/news/n1676.cfm

http://www.exposingchristianity.com/Inquisition.html

 

Inquisitors, Papists, Dogs at the Human Body Slaughter House are not qualified to interpret the Bible.

Beware of Dogs, beware of evil workers ! ( Phil 3:3)

 

So what happens if two or more individuals (or denominations), and who are neither Papists nor inquisitors, each claim to have the "anointing" yet come up with mutually contradictory interpretations of the Bible? How do we know who is right without collapsing into pure subjectivism?

 

For me, I just read the word, whatever version it happens to be, and take it at face value. When there questionable passages, I look for concurring verses for explanation. It is that simple to me. Sometimes I think people make it more complicated than it needs to be.....something like the mythical debate about the Jesuits debating how many devils (or angels,,forget now) could dance on the head of a pin. It results in the sum of nothing and changes not one iota of faith.

I think of the so-called "faith" interpreters and then see that they come up with some mythical doctrine as dispensationalism. That sure takes a lot of faith to imagine that doctrine from scripture.

Cheers,

Jim

 

The hint is in the word 'analogy'. And now would you answer my question.

 

Hmmmm, we have lawlessness and anarchy in our streets, as well as any country in the world does. By your reasoning, everyone must be qualified and empowered to interpret the Constitution. </font>[/QUOTE]Er...I think there's a world of difference between having crime and having anarchy and lawlessness - try living in Iraq if you don't believe me.

And I'm not sure I understand your last sentence - I was arguing that just as individuals should not have the right to interpret the US Constitution, so neither are individuals empowered and qualified to interpret Scripture on their own.

 

When Popes raised rival armies of "faithful devoted Catholics" to kill fellow Catholics in the opposing army - how could they know "if they were killing the right catholics"?


Give me the Holy Spirit and His Word in the FULL 66 over that man-made-error any day!!