Soul Liberty?

28Pay careful attention to yourselves and to all the flock, in which the Holy Spirit has made you overseers, to care for the church of God, which he obtained with his own blood. 29I know that after my departure fierce wolves will come in among you, not sparing the flock; 30and from among your own selves will arise men speaking twisted things, to draw away the disciples after them.

Again, just because a man says it, it does not mean that it is of God, even if that man is in the church. Paul warned the Ephesians for three years of this danger. He wept as he did so. </font>[/QUOTE]Just because Martin Luther said it or John Calvin said it or Joseph Smith said it. Yes I agree Clint. 100%. That is why I rely on the Church and not individiual men as you guys have.

Thousands of cotradictory denominations speak far more to this point then I could every put in a response Clint. Thank you for making my point.

Lucky for Paul he is in his glory or he would be weaping still.

 

No, I can be assured that I do know what the Gospel is:

2 Peter 1
3His divine power has granted to us all things that pertain to life and godliness, through the knowledge of him who called us to his own glory and excellence, 4by which he has granted to us his precious and very great promises, so that through them you may become partakers of the divine nature, having escaped from the corruption that is in the world because of sinful desire. </font>[/QUOTE]Yes Clint, I know you have your own definition and interprutation of this verse and are quite certain that you are 100% correct as to what you think that entails. So is every Mormon and JW I have come in to contact with.

Blessings

 

You can ask Briguy. I don't believe they do. Brian may have made the statement that in his own personal view it is possible for a ONENESS person to be saved, just as he may believe that in his own personal view it is possible for a Catholic to be saved. I don't believe you will find statements like that in his church's statement of faith. Ask him and see. I don't believe that is the official position of his church.

His church probably takes a stand against the Charismatic movement. Most Baptist churches do. But considering what Briguy has posted on the threads concerning tongues I know he takes a stand against tongues, and so should you. You are being a bit of hypocrite or else making false accusations if you don't agree with me that he takes a stand against the Charismatic movement. Read his posts.
DHK

 

I agree. Just because Calvin, Luther, or Smith say it, that does not make it true. Therefore test it and hold on to the good.

Just because Jerome, John-Paul II, or your local priest say it, That also does not make it true. It is up to you to test it and hold on to the good.

That is the basic nature of soul liberty. If YOU and YOU ALONE are RESPONSIBLE on the day of Judgment, then YOU and YOU ALONE are RESPONSIBLE in this life.

You have made a choice to follow blindly what your church says is good, a church made up of individual men. That is contrary to the nature of individual accountability and leaves you prone to false teachings. Wolves work in packs. The analogy used all through the Bible of sheep and wolves is quite accurate.

 

The more I ponder this statement, the more disturbing it is. When you say you rely on the church, the implication is that this is where your faith rests. This is contrary to the Epistles in which we are told to put our faith in Christ (Romans 3:22; 10:17; Galatians 3:22, 26; Phillipians 1:27; etc.)

If you think that the church is that reliable, a reading of the Letters to the seven churches in Revelation 2 & 3 may be quite eye opening to the shortcomings of man altered institutions.

 

Thessalonian,
Here is what Briguy said:

You will find the quote on the last page of the thread on "tongues."

From another quote from the same thread by Briguy:

[ May 22, 2003, 03:05 PM: Message edited by: DHK ]

 

"I agree. Just because Calvin, Luther, or Smith say it, that does not make it true. Therefore test it and hold on to the good."

I am glad you agree. But what you cannot see because of your blindness is that you violate it. They have said Sola Scriptura is the battle cry and given you some verses that sound kind of good and so you latch on to them and say by my own thinking Sola Scriptura is true. The idea itself has a certain amount of appeal because it is half way to the truth. Scripture is 100% true. Problem is there is an understanding that goes with scripture that you will never admit exists and can never grasp without accepting Sacred Tradition exists. Then from your errant premise of Sola Scriptura you are forced in to a host of errant premises and have left yourself vulnerable to the next guy who comes along with a couple of verses and an explanation as to what sounds good. I believe I heard it said that there are something like 5 new Churches starting up every day in this country. It is no wonder.


"Just because Jerome, John-Paul II, or your local priest say it, That also does not make it true. It is up to you to test it and hold on to the good. "

Absolutely. I don't go by individuals. So what is your point.

"That is the basic nature of soul liberty. If YOU and YOU ALONE are RESPONSIBLE on the day of Judgment, then YOU and YOU ALONE are RESPONSIBLE in this life."

What I find humorous in Protestantism though is that it becomes a case of what is really true is indeterminate. I am sure that I cannot fall from grace and will someday be in heaven. Once Saved Always Saved is the cry but not sure that I can interprut the Bible correctly with regard to the doctrines I believe. So you are lying to yourself about being sure you are saved. I agree about individual responsibility. But what you have does denies unity and makes truth impossilbe for the individual to discern because there are so many conflicting preachers out there. Your position ignores the responsibility of the preacher to preach truth. It ignores legitimate authority. As long as they are preaching from the Bible it's fine by you. It is a system by which men are being blown about by every wind of doctrine.



"You have made a choice to follow blindly what your church says is good, a church made up of individual men. That is contrary to the nature of individual accountability and leaves you prone to false teachings. Wolves work in packs. The analogy used all through the Bible of sheep and wolves is quite accurate. "

I have not ever said I don't check out what my church says. In your blindness you refuse to
Check it out honestly. Your every man and his bible system also ignores all the people throughout the ages who could not read. It becomes riduclous when you start taking all that in to account.

You are doing nothing but continuing to show me that the Catholic way of Scripture + sacred tradition is the correct way. But in your blindness you will never see it.

God bless

 

Amen to that.

DHK has used a phrase a couple of times...

"The truth hurts."

I have suspected that he is speaking from personal experience.

I would imagine that there would be a good deal of emotional hurt in having to tell yourself that what you thought was the "truth" before is no longer true as you set it aside for a new "truth" that goes along with some new interpretation of Scripture.

Only to have to do it all over again when a new "truth" is discovered in the same Scriptures.

It also appears to me that the invention of sola scriptura makes intellectualism and the ability to interpret Scriptures correctly the real "salvation by works".

Ron

 

"The more I ponder this statement, the more disturbing it is. When you say you rely on the church, the implication is that this is where your faith rests. This is contrary to the Epistles in which we are told to put our faith in Christ (Romans 3:22; 10:17; Galatians 3:22, 26; Phillipians 1:27; etc.)"


You guys and your dichotomies. No wonder you don't understand. Everything has to be in opposition of something. The glass cannot be half full because it is half empty. Prophets and Apostles can't be the foundation of the Church because Jesus is. Then Eph 2:20 and 1 Cor 3:11 are in conflict. How can men be the light of the world when Jesus is? Well check out Matt 5:14. Well by your dichotomic way of thinking this is contradictory to John 8:12. Peter can't be the Rock because Jesus is and so you twist and contort the plain words of scripture in to something totally unrecognizable to the english language and totally destroys what is said. My faith is 100% IN JESUS CHRIST. I have never said otherwise and would not. I trust that when he said "upon this rock I will build my church and the gates of hell shall not prevail" he meant it and thus will work through the office HE set up to ensure that it does not happen. I take him at his word that he guides his Church sometimes in spite of the men in it.

"If you think that the church is that reliable, a reading of the Letters to the seven churches in Revelation 2 & 3 may be quite eye opening to the shortcomings of man altered institutions. "

I have read it many time. Yes there have been many such institutions that have allowed errors of men to creep in. Arianism, Monophysitism, Pelgianism, Sabellianism. They have all died. Yet the Catholic Church has stood for 2000 years. Your 4th century historical fallacy above has been proven wrong time and time again. Yet you cling to it for it allows you to remain where you are comfortable. Where your personal errors don't really matter.

Blessings Clint,

Been nice talking.

 

Clint,

One more thing. You see God as something that can be extracted from some ink splashed on a page by our human minds. Your word is a dead word by which a God is created in the image that you want him to be created. Your trust in yourself ( a man) not to do this. The reality is that because of your corrupt nature you cannot help but do it. The depravity of man is the doctine that damns your system of soul freedom. Every man and his Bible is a system doomed to failure by your very own beliefs. The collective of the Catholic Church prevents this in Catholicism for those who recognize legitimate authority. Together with Sacred tradition it makes the Bible a living, breathing document. Far from blinding me and hamstringing me like you think, making me a zombie spouting out Catholic Apologetic arguements that I have memorized, having constaints on my Bible understanding ends up freeing me for God to actually speak to me far more than in your rigid protestant way of interpruting scripture. You will never understand until you experience it but let me say it again. Having a magesterium that puts constaints on scripture is to theological freedom as the ten commandments are to moral freedom. Once again I do not expect you to understand this any more than I really understood what it was like to be married and have kids when I was single. Nevertheless it is true.


Blessings

 

Thessalonian and T2U,
You both have created your own false dichotomy. You by your own choice and soul liberty have decided to believe that Peter is the first "pope," and that all revelation came down from him and the apostles through a vehicle which you believe is the Catholic Church. You put your trust in that organization because you choose to do so. It is of your own free will that you have made that choice. No one forced you to do so. You came to that decision on your own. That is the essence of soul liberty--to believe what you think is right. No matter which way you look at it you exercised your right of soul liberty at some point in your life. Now if you, at some point in your life, decided that you are going to be a zombie for the rest of your life, believing only what the catechism teaches you, and what priests and bishops will spoon feed you, and nothing else, then that decision was up to you. You have become like a robot or a pre-programmed computer. You will believe only the information that is put into you and nothing more. You have no will to interpret, to think indepently on your own. You have done away with soul liberty, the freedom to think on your own, what the Bible is really saying. Only the Catholic Church can decide this for you. You have no mind, no intellect of your own. Correct?
DHK

 

All Soul Liberty means is that if the Catholic Church wanted to change its name to Baptist, but change in no other way, it would be recognized as 'Baptist'.

The same could be said of the Mormon Church, a Buddist Temple, or any other organization.

 

That's not really what soul liberty is, but your entitled to your opinion. And it is soul liberty that grants you your opinion to believe so.
DHK

 

Soul Liberty means you are only responsible to God for what you believe. It means no one has the right to persecute you if you are holding other religious opinion. We have to leave the judgment to God at His appointed time.

1Cor. 4:5
Therefore judge nothing before the time, until the Lord come, who both will bring to light the hidden things of darkness, and will make manifest the counsels of the hearts: and then shall every man have praise of God.

Sad to say there are claiming to be Churches of Christ but their hands are filled with the blood of many people who are of other persuasion.

One example of this is the Catholic Church. In the "name of God" they persecute others who don't belong to their fold. This we could learn from history by the evil of iquisition.

Whereas the true churches of Christ rather suffer afflictions and persecutions. They are martyrs for Christ sake. There are times that they have had the power to persecute others but they leave them to God. They argue that christianity is a voluntary religion. And if they force their faith to others that would not be acceptable since it would not be according to heart.

 

Southeastbaptist,

Have you ever read a history book on an inquisition?

Also, have you ever read the Catholic Church's teaching on religious freedom?

If your answer to the second question is no, I suggest reading this document:

http://www.ewtn.com/library/COUNCILS/v2relfre.htm

"This Vatican Council declares that the human person has a right to religious freedom. This freedom means that all men are to be immune from coercion on the part of individuals or of social groups and of any human power, in such wise that no one is to be forced to act in a manner contrary to his own beliefs, whether privately or publicly, whether alone or in association with others, within due limits."

I would also have you know that there have been more Catholics martyred for their faith in the 20th century than in all previous centuries combined.

 

On "THE INQUISITION"? Yes, plenty.

The URL that you posted was one of the goals and aspirations of the Catholic Church in the realm of religious education. It said nothing of religious freedom, as far as I could see, though I admit I scanned through it rather quickly.

The Catholic's church position on religious freedom in the past--there is none.
Their position in the present: Believe as we teach or you are an outcast. There is no soul liberty as a Catholic--just Catholic zombies.

You are skewing the statistic to your own benefit. The statistic is that there are more "Christians" martyred in the 20th century than in all previous centuries combined. That includes Christians from all denominations, not just Catholics.
DHK

 

On "THE INQUISITION"? Yes, plenty.

The URL that you posted was one of the goals and aspirations of the Catholic Church in the realm of religious education. It said nothing of religious freedom, as far as I could see, though I admit I scanned through it rather quickly.</font>[/QUOTE]You must be kidding! Took me about 5 seconds to find the religious freedom references.

Let's see -- I want the right to belong to the Catholic Church, which makes it quite clear that it understands itself to be teaching divinely revealed truth, but I want to believe something different. But I still want to be a Catholic. But I don't want to believe what the Catholic Church teaches. But I still want to be a Catholic....

And so I spiral down the rabbit hole, clinging all the while to my puny pride. I also be sure and surround myself with other pick-and-choosers and spend lots of time talking about what an ass is the Church. We call those people cafeteria Catholics, and it is not a term of endearment.

Is there liberty in the Church to believe non-Catholic teachings and have the Church condone your error? Nope. Is there liberty in the Church to sin and have the Church condone your sin? Nope. You want the Church's approval, you believe and follow the Church's teachings. Since they're divinely revealed, your submission will set you free -- that's the amazing part!

 

Another comment:

One has the freedom to believe whatever he or she wants in regards to the Scriptures, right? That means whatever Absolute Truth is present in the Scriptures is not absolutely known by the people, right? Then what right, exactly, does this church body have to reject certain members from their ranks? By doing so claims that they have found the Absolute Truth while others have not, even though everyone is allowed to interpret for himself or herself.

In other words, while DHK can call me a heretic, that, admittedly, is just his free interpretation of Scriptures. Because of Soul Liberty, it has no binding effect on me, and I could be just as right as him. Therefore, what reason in the world would I have to believe him? I have the right to interpret Scriptures! You say I have that right. Therefore, you cannot impose beliefs on me that in any way can be binding. So your lable of a heretic is nothing more than your personal interpretation/opinion. You could be 100% wrong, admittedly.

So, again, the question is, why should I trust your interpretation when I am free to make my own, and either one of us could have the REAL Truth?

God bless,

Grant

 

According to Soul Liberty, I can just as easily say the opposite, and it have the exact same chance of being true in God's eyes. According to Soul Liberty, you just gave me your opinion.

I hope you see the error in all of this. You take absolute truth, and claim that it is there for people to find (even though apparently only one group of people is the closest or completely correct), and all others apparently didn't pray hard enough for the Holy Spirit for guidance.

The freedom of Soul Liberty, in this man's humble opinion, is slavery to confusion.

God bless,

Grant

 

OK, Mike, You are a Catholic, and I don't expect you to understand soul liberty. Once you have chosen Catholicism I don't expect you to practice it, even though you must have for all practical purposes. You do have an intellect and a will that God created you with. You are competent to make your own decisions, even ones related to theology and the Bible, however great or small they may seem to be. The very fact that you are on this board without a priest or bishop standing behind your back telling you every word to type is evidence that you have soul liberty. You have the liberty to put down your thoughts on any given subject, and according to the number of your posts you have already said quite a bit. You have exercised you soul liberty without the priest's permission. Am I correct?

Secondly, it is you that has chosen to believe that the Catholic Church's teachings are divinely revealed, and you must submit to them, just like any other cult must submit to the "divinely" revealed authority of their sect. You have made that choice. That is where your soul liberty ended if you carried it out perfectly.

We believe that the Bible is our final authority in all matters of faith and practice. No man has the authority to force an interpretation upon us. We all are priests before God; each one of us will give account before God, not some earthly priest. And the knowledge that I have from the Bible, I gain primarily from my own study. I will give account not just for what I know, but also for what I have acted upon. You will not give accounnt in the day of judgement to the Catholic Church. You will give account to God. It is He who will be sitting on the Throne. And He will be the one to judge you, not the priest, bishop or Catholic Church.

If God has given us the Bible as our guide, I believe He expects us to know it. He was the One who said "Search the Scriptures." He wasn't speaking to the Catholics. He was speaking to all.
DHK