Does Judging Work?

[Rach1370]

The Catholic Church wasn't considered a denomination until Luther - in fact, it was considered the universal church for 1500 years prior - nor was it referred to as "the mother of harlots"

The first Church began in Acts, and we see it grow all through the New Testament. I do not believe it was 'Catholic', whether named or not.
I don't believe Catholic Church is the 'mother of harlots' just so you know!
But I believe that in Bible times all Churches were centered around Christ (as are we all in our ways), but denominations grew out of certain doctrinal differences. And while yes, the Catholic Church was very dominant throughout the dark ages, I do not believe that they were only perspective on the Bible, even before the reformation. I tend to think that one of the reasons the Catholic Church was so dominant in its teachings is that only your Priests were encouraged to actually read scripture. It didn't leave a lot of room for others coming to their own conclusions from scripture itself.

 

[Rach1370]

Hey Robbie! I'm tending to think we agree more than it might seem!
Lets see...I totally agree with Love being sooooo important, that forgiveness is essential, to them and to ourselves as well. I agree that encouraging someone morally, rather than announcing them 'sinner' would work better. And I agree that judging can not only be a symptom of our own fallen nature, but something that could fracture our relationships with others. And like we've both said, calling a brother out when they've done wrong, and having them do the same to us, within a loving Christian environment can really help us walk the path.

I think the two main issues I'm trying to raise is this:
* In regards to the whole 'homosexual disscuission', that just because in the progression of sharing the gospel with someone (anyone, not just the gay), one must bring up the topic of sin. Not finger pointing, just the general world state...and how sin is an offense to God. Not judging, just educating.

* And in the regard of discerning, you must admit there are times when a Christian must. As sad as it is, there are people out there who call Satan their master. Wolves in sheep's clothing the Bible calls them. As Christians if we cannot call upon Biblical discernment in these areas we invite the danger of these people within our Churches. Once there these wolves will do their very best to poison the flock and turn as many Christians away from Jesus as they can. As important as love and forgiveness is, we must be able to stand up for the truth of Jesus...if we don't the Church will be more and more watered down until there is not Church. Paul himself speaks out on these people, and he uses harsh language.

[sup]2[/sup]Look out for the dogs, look out for[sup][/sup] the evildoers, look out for those who mutilate the flesh. (Philippians 3:2 ESV)

Paul is speaking of those who try to undermine, this time through religion. He calls them dogs, evildoers, mutilators of flesh.

My point is that sometimes to be a true Jesus following Christian, we can be called to protect the faith, and this calls for discernment.

 

[aspen]

The first Church began in Acts, and we see it grow all through the New Testament. I do not believe it was 'Catholic', whether named or not.
I don't believe Catholic Church is the 'mother of harlots' just so you know!
But I believe that in Bible times all Churches were centered around Christ (as are we all in our ways), but denominations grew out of certain doctrinal differences. And while yes, the Catholic Church was very dominant throughout the dark ages, I do not believe that they were only perspective on the Bible, even before the reformation. I tend to think that one of the reasons the Catholic Church was so dominant in its teachings is that only your Priests were encouraged to actually read scripture. It didn't leave a lot of room for others coming to their own conclusions from scripture itself.

I am going to resist going too far down this road because if we are not careful it is going to turn into the anticatholic thread II. Not saying you are anticatholic, but many who post here are.

The Early Church did not believe in:

Sola Scriptura
Sola fide
Sola Gratia

The Early Church did believe in:

Prayers for the dead
The Eucharist
Apostolic Succession

Priests were the only people who were literate during the early church and middle ages - well except for leaders of heretical groups that wanted to change scripture and the nature of God like the Cathars. In any case, all literate people knew Latin.

 

[Rach1370]

I am going to resist going too far down this road because if we are not careful it is going to turn into the anticatholic thread II. Not saying you are anticatholic, but many who post here are.

The Early Church did not believe in:

Sola Scriptura
Sola fide
Sola Gratia

The Early Church did believe in:

Prayers for the dead
The Eucharist
Apostolic Succession

Priests were the only people who were literate during the early church and middle ages - well except for leaders of heretical groups that wanted to change scripture and the nature of God like the Cathars. In any case, all literate people knew Latin.

Um, I looked up those terms in my theological dictionary, and this is what I found:

Sola fide - Latin for "faith only", the Lutheran, Reformation doctrine that the only way to be justified and receive God's grace, that is, by accepting Christ's merits on one's own behalf.

Sola Gratia - Latin for "grace only", the Lutheran, Reformation doctrine that salvation is God's free gift rather than by human action. Righteousness or justification comes by God's free gift of grace alone through faith. Roman Catholic doctrine, in contrast, insisted that God requires free human cooperation, although it is God alone who makes such cooperation possible.

Sola Scripture - Latin for "scripture only", the Lutheran, Reformation principle that scripture, not scripture plus church tradition - is the source of Christian revelation. As a result, Scripture is to rule as God's word in the Church unencumbered by papal and ecclesiastical magisterium (dogma) and unrivaled by the supposed additional revelation that comes through Church tradition.

Sure the "Early Church" probably didn't have these named principals....a lot of the naming of things came in the early councils they held. But the Protestants get these doctrines from the Bible...which was being written in the very day the "Early Church" was growing. Quite obviously though not officially named, they still followed them.

I'm not a Catholic hater, not at all, but I do believe they have several doctrines wrong. And if you are claiming that the Catholic Church follows the above doctrines, perhaps you should read them again? It seems to me that you place a lot of others things in the same importance level as scripture (Church tradition, papal decree etc), faith and grace (your belief in Purgatory, works, etc) I'm not claiming to be an expert on Catholic matters, but those issues plainly battle against faith alone, grace alone, scripture alone.

I'm not trying to fight with you, not at all! But if I can encourage you to truly seek what scripture is saying, rather than relying so much on the teachings of your church (which really needs to be purely scriptural) then I hope you do so, and grow closer to Jesus!

 

[Robbie]

Right on Rach... that's a good Word... and that's what I try to do... I've already let to many people pressure me into submitting to their teachings when I knew very well they weren't in agreement with Jesus... but when you read the bible you see the same sort of stuff... like I think it was Peter that would act freely when cruising around the gentiles and then he would act like he was under the law when he was around the Pharisees and how Paul had to rebuke him... but then again that is second hand information coming from Paul so who knows what the story would sound like if we heard it from Peter... haha... but the principle is good either way... that when we follow Jesus we'll be put under the same pressures He was... and that we'll be rejected and hated by men the same way He was... this is us sharing in His sufferings... it must be so hard for Him to love us so much and have us reject Him in order to follow someone who hates us... all thanks and Glory to Him for the Love They have for us...

And yeah... let us keep our eyes on His eyes looking at us... so that we care what pleases Him and not what pleases men... I'm such a bad friend to Jesus... to many times I've warmed my hands by the enemies fire while denying Him because I didn't want to suffer with Him... and the awesome thing is He just keeps loving me and loving me and loving me... I think if Jesus asked me the way He asked Peter if I loved Him my response would just be, "All I know for sure is that you love me because you love me even when I'm at my worst"

 

[aspen]

Um, I looked up those terms in my theological dictionary, and this is what I found:

Sola fide - Latin for "faith only", the Lutheran, Reformation doctrine that the only way to be justified and receive God's grace, that is, by accepting Christ's merits on one's own behalf.

Sola Gratia - Latin for "grace only", the Lutheran, Reformation doctrine that salvation is God's free gift rather than by human action. Righteousness or justification comes by God's free gift of grace alone through faith. Roman Catholic doctrine, in contrast, insisted that God requires free human cooperation, although it is God alone who makes such cooperation possible.

Sola Scripture - Latin for "scripture only", the Lutheran, Reformation principle that scripture, not scripture plus church tradition - is the source of Christian revelation. As a result, Scripture is to rule as God's word in the Church unencumbered by papal and ecclesiastical magisterium (dogma) and unrivaled by the supposed additional revelation that comes through Church tradition.

Sure the "Early Church" probably didn't have these named principals....a lot of the naming of things came in the early councils they held. But the Protestants get these doctrines from the Bible...which was being written in the very day the "Early Church" was growing. Quite obviously though not officially named, they still followed them.

I'm not a Catholic hater, not at all, but I do believe they have several doctrines wrong. And if you are claiming that the Catholic Church follows the above doctrines, perhaps you should read them again? It seems to me that you place a lot of others things in the same importance level as scripture (Church tradition, papal decree etc), faith and grace (your belief in Purgatory, works, etc) I'm not claiming to be an expert on Catholic matters, but those issues plainly battle against faith alone, grace alone, scripture alone.

I'm not trying to fight with you, not at all! But if I can encourage you to truly seek what scripture is saying, rather than relying so much on the teachings of your church (which really needs to be purely scriptural) then I hope you do so, and grow closer to Jesus!

Rach - I never claimed that Catholicism teaches any of the solas I listed. I said, there is no historical record of the early church teaching any of them - regardless of the labels. The Catholic Church does not teach them because they are later doctrine, unknown to Christianity for 1500 years.

Sola Scriptura in particular was created as reasoning for breaking away from Catholicism. Unfortunately, it has lead to private interpretation of scripture, countless denominations, and radical individualism.

I know you are not trying to fight with me - I do not see you as a hater of the Catholic Church at all. I do know that there are people out their who are though and I think this should be my last post on Catholicism. One last thing.....if you have read my posts (outside of the Catholic thread) I rarely talk about Catholic doctrine - I was raised Protestant and I believe Christians are inside and outside the Catholic Church. My focus is Christ not doctrine.

 

[Robbie]

Hey Aspen... just to encourage you I thought I'd share a lil story with you...

I went to a church back in the day where the pastor was extremely judgmental towards the catholic church... I was taught this view to such a point that if someone told me they were catholic I immediately thought they were lost...

Then one day I was going through this tough time in my life and this old dude sat next to me at the gym... he started sharing with me the revelation of God's love that is in Jesus and I felt so built up and encouraged by the end of our fellowship that it really helped me a lot... well when all was said and done I asked him where he went to church and he told me he was catholic... I couldn't believe it... how could this person who I was taught was supposed to be so wrong, have just shared with me so much loving truth... hahaha... thank God for that lesson...

If that guy would have told me at the beginning that he was catholic I wouldn't even have listened to him... thank God he didn't so that by the end I found out what my judgmental attitude towards him would have caused me to miss...

In that I learned that the amount of truth that's in people is entirely dependent on the revelation of God they receive through Jesus Christ and not which division of the body they associate themselves with... the divisions within christianity are unfortunate... but if there's on thing that's become clear... the Spirit is never divided... and that Spirit can be in anyone... even in the person we've been taught that it couldn't be...

I believe the Spirit's in you Aspen...

Hope this blesses = )

 

[aspen]

Hey Aspen... just to encourage you I thought I'd share a lil story with you...

I went to a church back in the day where the pastor was extremely judgmental towards the catholic church... I was taught this view to such a point that if someone told me they were catholic I immediately thought they were lost...

Then one day I was going through this tough time in my life and this old dude sat next to me at the gym... he started sharing with me the revelation of God's love that is in Jesus and I felt so built up and encouraged by the end of our fellowship that it really helped me a lot... well when all was said and done I asked him where he went to church and he told me he was catholic... I couldn't believe it... how could this person who I was taught was supposed to be so wrong, have just shared with me so much loving truth... hahaha... thank God for that lesson...

If that guy would have told me at the beginning that he was catholic I wouldn't even have listened to him... thank God he didn't so that by the end I found out what my judgmental attitude towards him would have caused me to miss...

In that I learned that the amount of truth that's in people is entirely dependent on the revelation of God they receive through Jesus Christ and not which division of the body they associate themselves with... the divisions within christianity are unfortunate... but if there's on thing that's become clear... the Spirit is never divided... and that Spirit can be in anyone... even in the person we've been taught that it couldn't be...

I believe the Spirit's in you Aspen...

Hope this blesses = )

Very encouraging! Thanks Robbie.
I had a similar experience when I confronted an educated catholic about her heresy - two years later I became Catholic.
If I was going to embrace a sola doctrine, it would be sola Christ :)

 

[Robbie]

Nice...

If I had to embrace one teaching it would be the Word's of Jesus... haha... because that is what I embrace = )

Much Love Family... till we all come to a perfect understanding and unity of the truth... grace can cover any darkness that might try to divide the body... if we're willing to walk in it...

ALL LOVE <3

 

[TexUs]

I am going to resist going too far down this road because if we are not careful it is going to turn into the anticatholic thread II. Not saying you are anticatholic, but many who post here are.

The Early Church did not believe in:

Sola Scriptura
Sola fide
Sola Gratia

The Early Church did believe in:

Prayers for the dead
The Eucharist
Apostolic Succession

Priests were the only people who were literate during the early church and middle ages - well except for leaders of heretical groups that wanted to change scripture and the nature of God like the Cathars. In any case, all literate people knew Latin.

Maybe when you stop trying to promote Catholicism at all costs and instead just read and partake in the Biblical discussion you might actually learn something.

As far as rebuking Jesus tells us to do it when our brother sins against us...

How do we know he sins against us? Doesn't that include some amount of judgement?

As far as correcting... here's an example... the other day my friend came over and told me he had been talking to a married woman at work and he felt there was starting to be a connection... so what I said was, "Whoa dude... that sounds kind of dangerous...

So you coming to the conclusion that it was bad, doesn't involve a matter of judgement?

I mean Jesus was perfect and had the right to judge but how many times do you see Him walking around judging? I mean He told the woman to, "Go and sin no more" after He protected her from judgment and condemnation.

But he judged the Pharisees did he not?
Him seeing her sin meant he evaluated (judged) that what she did was sin, yes?
What about Peter when Jesus calls him Satan? You don't think he judged the words said to arrive at that?

 

[Robbie]

Blessings Texus...

Just so you know man... I don't really like it when people chop up what I write and respond to individual half sentences and stuff... it makes me feel like the person's purposely removing the spirit of what I'm saying in order to argue with me or judge me (This is how it makes me feel... I'm not saying it's what you're doing)... so instead of feeling like someone is having a conversation with me, I feel like they're trying to interrogate me and that to me doesn't feel like fellowship...when people interact with me in that way I've learned to just turn the other cheek and stop talking to them because I've found that kind of communication doesn't go anywhere except to a place of bitterness and confusion... I've watched people do it over and over again especially on message boards... where two people are arguing with each other and neither person is even responding to the context of what the other person is saying... haha... pretty much worthless...

So I'm trying to take all your sentences and grasp the principle or context of what you're asking me...

It sounds like what you're asking me is whether we have to judge someone in order to recognize sin against us and whether I think Jesus was judging the woman caught in the act of adultery... I personally believe that if I have to judge my brother in order to find out whether they're sinning towards me that I'm kind of desperate to find fault with them... when someone sins against me I'll know it because it will hurt my feelings... and sometimes our feelings can be hurt without a person even doing anything wrong to us but our feelings have told us they have... so either way I think it's a important to let our brother know how we're feeling... whether they've actually wronged us or not.. because either way it gives them a chance to either apologize or explain the situation in order to comfort us and shed light... I also think the most important part of the sentence that you left out is that if they hurt us 7 times a day and 7 times a day they apologize we should forgive them. I believe this is most important because this protects the bonds of love between us all... and Jesus said the way men would know we were taught by Him is because we'd love each other.

As far as the judging part I don't believe Jesus had to judge the woman even though He's the only person Who had the right to... it's like if I saw my friends downtown and they were sitting on the curb handcuffed for drinking and driving... I wouldn't have to make any judgment to whether they were doing something wrong... the law already had judged them and were punishing them... so without having to make any kind of judgment towards them I could say, "Dude... stop drinking and driving because on your second offense a worst thing will come upon you"

Oh yeah... As far as whether he judged Peter... I would say no... he told satan to beat it... which Jesus has the right to do...

Hope this blesses...

 

[TexUs]

[font="tahoma][size="2"]"As far as correcting... here's an example... the other day my friend came over and told me he had been talking to a married woman at work and he felt there was starting to be a connection... so what I said was, "Whoa dude... that sounds kind of dangerous..."
So you coming to the conclusion that it was bad, doesn't involve a matter of judgement?[/size][/font]

 

[Robbie]

[font="tahoma][size="2"]doesn't involve a matter[/size][/font]

So you're saying it doesn't involve a matter?



I hope you don't take this the wrong way but if you don't respond to the whole context of what I write I don't really see any point in fellowshipping with you... I like interaction where me and the other person are trying to understand each other... not argue with each other... and unless we're responding to the complete context of what we're saying I don't think there's any chance we'll understand each other and us not understanding each other will eventually lead to an argument... I see this happen over and over again on message boards and have made mistakes in the past of interacting in this way... and I never want any part of that kind of interaction with people ever again.

Hope you understand...

 

[TexUs]

I'm responding to one of your stories. If you can't answer then I think it may serve as an answer for itself.

 

[Robbie]

haha... OK buddy....

I hope you're blessed...

 

[aspen]

TexUs - are you trying to pick a fight with me? Implying that I am pushing Catholicism, when I am clearly not doing so and even making an effort to put Christ over doctrine, is slanderous. Is this how you witness your faith to people?

As far as your comments to Robbie - do you really consider warning a person about impending danger is the same as judging their actions? If a person is driving towards a cliff, you can warn them without judging them on their driving skills - or maybe you can't.....

 

[Foreigner]

If a person is driving towards a cliff, you can warn them without judging them on their driving skills - or maybe you can't.....

-- Aspen, in your previous posts you have shown that you don't even feel the need to warn them about it because you feel they are already aware they are driving towards a cliff.

 

[TexUs]

If a person is driving towards a cliff

Thus you've just judged that they are, indeed, driving towards a cliff- didn't you?

 

[Duckybill]

Anybody think that Paul was charged with being judgmental?

1 Corinthians 6:9-10 (NKJV)
[sup]9 [/sup]Do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived. Neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor homosexuals, nor sodomites, [sup]10 [/sup]nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners will inherit the kingdom of God.

I suspect that is one reason he was/is so hated by religious folks, and finally murdered as were Jesus and the other Apostles.

 

[aspen]

Thus you've just judged that they are, indeed, driving towards a cliff- didn't you?

Is there anywhere on this thread that I claim homosexuality is not a sin?

There is no condemnation involved. Judging the situation is not judging the person.