I answered this here http://www.christianityboard.com/topic/16167-does-the-bible-prohibit-a-woman-from-being-a-pastor/page__st__90#entry156966 in post 106.
What does the bible say about....
- Thread starter qwerty
- Start date
-
Welcome to Christian Forums, a Christian Forum that recognizes that all Christians are a work in progress.
You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
You are saying that Jesus never gave any authority to His apostles , you don't believe the Bible as it was intented, your interpretation differs from those that walked and talked with Jesus.
Any interpretation we arrive at must not contradict what has already been defined as CHristian truth. That is why God gave the Church the power of defining things-to keep us from going wrong. We must be willing to submit our interpretations to the final judgment of Christ's Apostolic Church i.e Built on Apostles 1Cor.3:10; Eph.2:20;Authority of the Church Matt.16:18-19; Matt. 18:15-18; Jn. 20:23; Church contains the truth of the Christian Faith 1 Tim. 3:15
Exegetes and believers must not pit their private interpretation against the mind of the Church or treat your method of interpretation as the ultimate arbiter of what Scripture can or cannot mean[ this is what is meant by "private interpretation ]
Any interpretation we arrive at must not contradict what has already been defined as CHristian truth. That is why God gave the Church the power of defining things-to keep us from going wrong. We must be willing to submit our interpretations to the final judgment of Christ's Apostolic Church i.e Built on Apostles 1Cor.3:10; Eph.2:20;Authority of the Church Matt.16:18-19; Matt. 18:15-18; Jn. 20:23; Church contains the truth of the Christian Faith 1 Tim. 3:15
Exegetes and believers must not pit their private interpretation against the mind of the Church or treat your method of interpretation as the ultimate arbiter of what Scripture can or cannot mean[ this is what is meant by "private interpretation ]
What I DID say was very clear to anyone who has an ear to hear. God's Word IS clear. The Holy Spirit in us makes it even clearer, as long as you are looking for the truth.
I think you may have asked the wrong question qwerty
There is no correct answer to the wrong question.
Where does it say we are kicked out of the family if we sin ?
We are not sin-free by our own actions.
God sees us as righteous because of what Christ did.
It is wonderful to strive to keep our errors at a minimum , but don't be consumed by guilt if you fall short some times. That is the beauty of Christianity , we are given endless opportunity to do better next time.
Every one of us is different , it is an internal action of The Holy Spirit trying to overcome our inherent sinful natures. One notch at a time , one day at a time. True perfection comes in the life after.
Relax and enjoy the ride ..... Therefore, there is now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus, [sup] [/sup]because through Christ Jesus the law of the Spirit who gives life has set you free from the law of sin and death (from Romans 8)
Best wishes.
.
God had sent Jesus to forgive sins, but after his resurrection Jesus told the apostles, "‘As the Father has sent me, even so I send you.’ And when he had said this, he breathed on them, and said to them, ‘Receive the Holy Spirit. If you forgive the sins of any, they are forgiven; if you retain the sins of any, they are retained’" (John 20:21–23). (This is one of only two times we are told that God breathed on man, the other being in Genesis 2:7, when he made man a living soul. It emphasizes how important the establishment of the sacrament of penance was.)
Since he would not always be with the Church visibly, Christ gave this power to other men so the Church, which is the continuation of his presence throughout time (Matt. 28:20), would be able to offer forgiveness to future generations. He gave his power to the apostles, and it was a power that could be passed on to their successors and agents, since the apostles wouldn’t always be on earth either, but people would still be sinning.
God had sent Jesus to forgive sins, but after his resurrection Jesus told the apostles, "‘As the Father has sent me, even so I send you.’ And when he had said this, he breathed on them, and said to them, ‘Receive the Holy Spirit. If you forgive the sins of any, they are forgiven; if you retain the sins of any, they are retained’" (John 20:21–23). (This is one of only two times we are told that God breathed on man, the other being in Genesis 2:7, when he made man a living soul. It emphasizes how important the establishment of the sacrament of penance was.)
Since he would not always be with the Church visibly, Christ gave this power to other men so the Church, which is the continuation of his presence throughout time (Matt. 28:20), would be able to offer forgiveness to future generations. He gave his power to the apostles, and it was a power that could be passed on to their successors and agents, since the apostles wouldn’t always be on earth either, but people would still be sinning.
Hi Kidron,
Please show me the Bible verses which state that our future sins are forgiven before we commit them, and, that we don't even need to acknowledge them to God, but just remind ourselves that He died for us? You have stated this more than once on CyB and I've challenged it everywhere I've noticed it, and you haven't yet provided biblical support for your theology. I'm quite open to learn something I didn't know before, but, it has to be both biblcial and verifiable by experience.
I don't know anyone who doesn't slowly lose their intimacy with God, when they neglect to refresh their fellowship with Him after sinning, by acknowledging it, and experiencing forgiveness in a specific and direct way.
Hi neophyte,
You are in a difficult place trying to defend Roman Catholic doctrine, when your predecessors went to such a lot of trouble to tinker with the original scriptures, to support doctrine they wanted to promote. How do you know that that sentence about authority to forgive was in the original?
Do you realise that it goes against everything else which Jesus Christ taught about forgiveness, and, against the Old Testament's testimonies, as well?
Jesus taught that if you have sinned against a person, you go to that person and ask their forgiveness, and, you make it right with them in a practical way. The law of Moses ensured that a person was given back more than they had lost. To some extent, this is where your church gets the idea of doing penance. But, this is definitely an inferior standard to the provisions of the New Covenant.
Jesus also taught that we should forgive a person who comes to us acknowledging they have sinned against us. He also gives permission to tell another person they are sinning. At no time is the making right between two people expected to involve a third party, when occurring between sane adults.
It's true there are situations when third parties become involved because of a person refusing to be corrected or refusing to admit their sin/fault, but these are always extremely serious, when the matter in hand is affecting more than just two people - such as when an elder sins, or a person in trust for the church with money or reputation.
It's also true that repentance is primarily toward God. Long before the Roman Catholic church existed, men were receiving forgiveness directly from God. This truth still stands, and there is no doctrine on earth which can prevent it. This is the gospel - now through Jesus Christ Himself.
Your insistence that only the twelve apostles had certain spiritual authority also contradicts the whole of Paul's testimony, from whom we have the majority of the New Testament, which Peter (we believe) acknowledged as 'scriptures'.
You can spend the rest of your life trying to make Roman Catholic doctrine fit the inadequate interpretation of scripture the Roman Catholic hierarchy has decreed, but it won't mean that the word of God is bound by Roman Catholic teaching. The word of God is not bound. And it's especially not bound in those who can hear from God for themselves through the gift of the Holy Spirt by whom they now converse with the Father in heaven.
Hebrews 12:9b ... shall we not much rather be in subjection to the Father of spirits, and live?
Please show me the Bible verses which state that our future sins are forgiven before we commit them, and, that we don't even need to acknowledge them to God, but just remind ourselves that He died for us? You have stated this more than once on CyB and I've challenged it everywhere I've noticed it, and you haven't yet provided biblical support for your theology. I'm quite open to learn something I didn't know before, but, it has to be both biblcial and verifiable by experience.
I don't know anyone who doesn't slowly lose their intimacy with God, when they neglect to refresh their fellowship with Him after sinning, by acknowledging it, and experiencing forgiveness in a specific and direct way.
Hi neophyte,
You are in a difficult place trying to defend Roman Catholic doctrine, when your predecessors went to such a lot of trouble to tinker with the original scriptures, to support doctrine they wanted to promote. How do you know that that sentence about authority to forgive was in the original?
Do you realise that it goes against everything else which Jesus Christ taught about forgiveness, and, against the Old Testament's testimonies, as well?
Jesus taught that if you have sinned against a person, you go to that person and ask their forgiveness, and, you make it right with them in a practical way. The law of Moses ensured that a person was given back more than they had lost. To some extent, this is where your church gets the idea of doing penance. But, this is definitely an inferior standard to the provisions of the New Covenant.
Jesus also taught that we should forgive a person who comes to us acknowledging they have sinned against us. He also gives permission to tell another person they are sinning. At no time is the making right between two people expected to involve a third party, when occurring between sane adults.
It's true there are situations when third parties become involved because of a person refusing to be corrected or refusing to admit their sin/fault, but these are always extremely serious, when the matter in hand is affecting more than just two people - such as when an elder sins, or a person in trust for the church with money or reputation.
It's also true that repentance is primarily toward God. Long before the Roman Catholic church existed, men were receiving forgiveness directly from God. This truth still stands, and there is no doctrine on earth which can prevent it. This is the gospel - now through Jesus Christ Himself.
Your insistence that only the twelve apostles had certain spiritual authority also contradicts the whole of Paul's testimony, from whom we have the majority of the New Testament, which Peter (we believe) acknowledged as 'scriptures'.
You can spend the rest of your life trying to make Roman Catholic doctrine fit the inadequate interpretation of scripture the Roman Catholic hierarchy has decreed, but it won't mean that the word of God is bound by Roman Catholic teaching. The word of God is not bound. And it's especially not bound in those who can hear from God for themselves through the gift of the Holy Spirt by whom they now converse with the Father in heaven.
Hebrews 12:9b ... shall we not much rather be in subjection to the Father of spirits, and live?
dragonfly, please consider this: How did the early Church evangelize and overthrow the Roman Empire, survive and prosper for almost 350- 400 years, without knowing "for sure" which books belong in the canon of Scripture?
You write of 'Authority" The Catholic Church regardless of what you may think of it, is most definitely based on Christ's chosen apostles and their successors [ Matt. 28: 18-20 ] and all of Jesus' "Authority" was given by Jesus to His Apostles/Successors [ Luke 10:16 ] and it is still today the very same unchangable doctrinal teachings from the Apostles that are found only in Christ's Catholic/Apostolic Church- [ Matt. 28:20 ]
Speaking only to His Apostles Jesus said:" As the Father sent me , I also send you " { John 20:21 ] along again with { Matt. 28: 18-20 ] and { Luke 10:16 ] .
Tell me dragonfly, who in what you call the ' church' had the authority back then to determine which books belonged in the NT canon and to make this decision binding on all Christians ? If nobody has this authority, then do you think that you or I can remove or add to the Canonical List on just our own authority ?
If Christianity is a" book religion", how did it flourish during the first 1500 years of Church history when the majority of people were illiterate ?
dragonfly, you can ask yourself or any other Protestant the question of who came up with the idea that all religious matters are to be settled by using the Bible Alone [ Sola Scriptura ] ? Before you try and answer that question ask yourself these questions ;
[ 1 ] Did the apostles write down absolutely everything that Jesus revealed to them ?
[ 2 ] Did not Jesus trust the apostles, who were eyewitnesses to His works and words, to pass on the truth?
[ 3] Did the apostles have to wait until the gospels were written before they started to preach?
dragonfly you wrote :'' The word of God is not bound. And it's especially not bound in those who can hear from God for themselves through the gift of the Holy Spirt by whom they now converse with the Father in heaven."
Then dragonfly tell me, why are there so many conflicting Holy Spirits in the Protestant religion?
If the unity of Christianity was meant to convince the world that Jesus was sent by the Father , what does the ever fragmentation of Protestantism say to the world?
Selene
New Member
Actually, the only ones who can say that they are truely saved are those who are already in Heaven. As long as we are on Earth, it is possible to lose our salvation just as Scripture say; therefore, it is important to recognize when we sin and to repent from it:
Hebrews 10:26-27 For if we sin willfully after we have received the knowledge of the truth, there no longer remains a sacrifice for sins, but a certain fearful expectation of judgment, and fiery indignation which will devour the adversaries.
Those who received the knowledge of Truth are Christians.
Christ gave the authority to His Apostles to forgive or retain sins (See John 20:22-23). That is in the Bible. It is true that if a person commits a sin against another, they are to ask forgiveness from that person. However, a sin is not only a sin against that person, it is also an offense against God.
All sins are an offense against God; therefore, the person must ALSO ask God for forgiveness. One asks forgiveness from the person they hurt so they can be reconcile with that person. But the sin is also an offense against God, and the person must also ask forgiveness from God in order to be reconcile back to God.
In the Old Testament, God allowed the sins of the people to be forgiven through animal sacrifice. These Old Testament priests were acting as representatives of God to forgive the sins that were committed against God as they conducted the animal sacrifice. In the New Testament, Christ gave that authority to the Apostles (See John 20:22-23). The Apostles were given the authority to act as God's representative in forgiving sins. So, God hasn't changed. Today, He still use people as His instruments.
Hebrews 13:8 Jesus Christ the same yesterday, and to day, and for ever.
Does no-one ever do any, even simple, research before making statements like this?
Sorry it's off topic but this sort of rubbish really annoys me.
Hi Mungo,
Winnetou's reply post was in the wrong thread, and she apologised for it.
Please do share with me your better understanding of the first 'church wedding' ?
Winnetou's reply post was in the wrong thread, and she apologised for it.
Please do share with me your better understanding of the first 'church wedding' ?
The issue I raised is not about the first 'church wedding' but the claim that a church wedding was invented by the Council of Trent. That is easily refuted by just looking at what the Council of Trent said.
The first sentence of Chapter 1 under the ‘Decree on The Reformation of Marriage’ reads:
The form prescribed in the Council of Lateran for solemnly contracting marriage is renewed.
I agree to what Selene wrote ----
Jon-Marc, on 15 July 2012 - 05:07 PM, said:
Once we are saved, we are never OUT of His family. We just lose fellowship with Him when we sin--until we confess and forsake that sin. It's the same as with our earthly father. We do something to warrant punishment, but we remain his child. When I was saved, I was given ETERNAL life--not temporary life until my next sin, which probably happened the same day I was saved on May 18, 1963.
Actually, the only ones who can say that they are truely saved are those who are already in Heaven. As long as we are on Earth, it is possible to lose our salvation just as Scripture say; therefore, it is important to recognize when we sin and to repent from it:
Hebrews 10:26-27 For if we sin willfully after we have received the knowledge of the truth, there no longer remains a sacrifice for sins, but a certain fearful expectation of judgment, and fiery indignation which will devour the adversaries.
Those who received the knowledge of Truth are Christians.
dragonfly, on 22 July 2012 - 12:51 PM, said:
Hi neophyte,
You are in a difficult place trying to defend Roman Catholic doctrine, when your predecessors went to such a lot of trouble to tinker with the original scriptures, to support doctrine they wanted to promote. How do you know that that sentence about authority to forgive was in the original?
Do you realise that it goes against everything else which Jesus Christ taught about forgiveness, and, against the Old Testament's testimonies, as well?
Jesus taught that if you have sinned against a person, you go to that person and ask their forgiveness, and, you make it right with them in a practical way. The law of Moses ensured that a person was given back more than they had lost. To some extent, this is where your church gets the idea of doing penance. But, this is definitely an inferior standard to the provisions of the New Covenant.
Christ gave the authority to His Apostles to forgive or retain sins (See John 20:22-23). That is in the Bible. It is true that if a person commits a sin against another, they are to ask forgiveness from that person. However, a sin is not only a sin against that person, it is also an offense against God.
All sins are an offense against God; therefore, the person must ALSO ask God for forgiveness. One asks forgiveness from the person they hurt so they can be reconcile with that person. But the sin is also an offense against God, and the person must also ask forgiveness from God in order to be reconcile back to God.
In the Old Testament, God allowed the sins of the people to be forgiven through animal sacrifice. These Old Testament priests were acting as representatives of God to forgive the sins that were committed against God as they conducted the animal sacrifice. In the New Testament, Christ gave that authority to the Apostles (See John 20:22-23). The Apostles were given the authority to act as God's representative in forgiving sins. So, God hasn't changed. Today, He still use people as His instruments.
Hebrews 13:8 Jesus Christ the same yesterday, and to day, and for ever.
Edited by Selene, Yesterday, 02:59 PM.
Jon-Marc, on 15 July 2012 - 05:07 PM, said:Once we are saved, we are never OUT of His family. We just lose fellowship with Him when we sin--until we confess and forsake that sin. It's the same as with our earthly father. We do something to warrant punishment, but we remain his child. When I was saved, I was given ETERNAL life--not temporary life until my next sin, which probably happened the same day I was saved on May 18, 1963.
Actually, the only ones who can say that they are truely saved are those who are already in Heaven. As long as we are on Earth, it is possible to lose our salvation just as Scripture say; therefore, it is important to recognize when we sin and to repent from it:
Hebrews 10:26-27 For if we sin willfully after we have received the knowledge of the truth, there no longer remains a sacrifice for sins, but a certain fearful expectation of judgment, and fiery indignation which will devour the adversaries.
Those who received the knowledge of Truth are Christians.
dragonfly, on 22 July 2012 - 12:51 PM, said:Hi neophyte,
You are in a difficult place trying to defend Roman Catholic doctrine, when your predecessors went to such a lot of trouble to tinker with the original scriptures, to support doctrine they wanted to promote. How do you know that that sentence about authority to forgive was in the original?
Do you realise that it goes against everything else which Jesus Christ taught about forgiveness, and, against the Old Testament's testimonies, as well?
Jesus taught that if you have sinned against a person, you go to that person and ask their forgiveness, and, you make it right with them in a practical way. The law of Moses ensured that a person was given back more than they had lost. To some extent, this is where your church gets the idea of doing penance. But, this is definitely an inferior standard to the provisions of the New Covenant.
Christ gave the authority to His Apostles to forgive or retain sins (See John 20:22-23). That is in the Bible. It is true that if a person commits a sin against another, they are to ask forgiveness from that person. However, a sin is not only a sin against that person, it is also an offense against God.
All sins are an offense against God; therefore, the person must ALSO ask God for forgiveness. One asks forgiveness from the person they hurt so they can be reconcile with that person. But the sin is also an offense against God, and the person must also ask forgiveness from God in order to be reconcile back to God.
In the Old Testament, God allowed the sins of the people to be forgiven through animal sacrifice. These Old Testament priests were acting as representatives of God to forgive the sins that were committed against God as they conducted the animal sacrifice. In the New Testament, Christ gave that authority to the Apostles (See John 20:22-23). The Apostles were given the authority to act as God's representative in forgiving sins. So, God hasn't changed. Today, He still use people as His instruments.
Hebrews 13:8 Jesus Christ the same yesterday, and to day, and for ever.
Edited by Selene, Yesterday, 02:59 PM.
Hi Mungo,
You might like to do further research, as all that I could find in the Lateran Councils were to do with priests not having concubines any more, and a slackening of the rules for marriage between people who were already related through first and second marriages. The priest, at that stage, was a witness to marriage. He was not performing them. His duties were to do with discovering any impediment to a marriage proposed between two people.
Even the note I found in the Council of Trent does not actually state a priest must conduct the marriage.
You might like to do further research, as all that I could find in the Lateran Councils were to do with priests not having concubines any more, and a slackening of the rules for marriage between people who were already related through first and second marriages. The priest, at that stage, was a witness to marriage. He was not performing them. His duties were to do with discovering any impediment to a marriage proposed between two people.
Even the note I found in the Council of Trent does not actually state a priest must conduct the marriage.
aspen
“"The harvest is plentiful but the workers are few
The Ministers of the Sacrament:
How can a marriage between two non-Catholic but baptized Christians be a sacrament, if a Catholic priest does not perform the marriage? Most people, including most Roman Catholics, do not realize that the ministers of the sacrament are the spouses themselves. While the Church strongly encourages Catholics to marry in the presence of a priest (and to have a wedding Mass, if both prospective spouses are Catholic), strictly speaking, a priest is not needed.
How can a marriage between two non-Catholic but baptized Christians be a sacrament, if a Catholic priest does not perform the marriage? Most people, including most Roman Catholics, do not realize that the ministers of the sacrament are the spouses themselves. While the Church strongly encourages Catholics to marry in the presence of a priest (and to have a wedding Mass, if both prospective spouses are Catholic), strictly speaking, a priest is not needed.
Hi aspen,
Where did you find this? It's fascinating. What about two Catholics being married. Is the priest only a witness then, too?
Selene
New Member
The marriage rules of the Roman Catholic Church applies only to Roman Catholics. The Catholic Church recgonizes that non-Catholic Christians who marry in their own church, for example, are valid marriages. The Catholic Church also recognizes that non-Christians (such as the Jews) who are married in their own religion are also valid marriages.
Those who are Roman Catholics, however, must obey the teachings of the Roman Catholic Church. Her teachings are all found in the Catechism. So, if two Roman Catholics marry in a civil court, their marriage is invalid in the eyes of the Church. Although the spouses themselves are ministers of the sacrament of matrimony, they express their marriage before the Church, and the priest or clergy must be present to validate the marriage and give the blessings of the Church. According to the Catechism:
CCC 1623 According to Latin tradition, the spouses as ministers of Christ's grace mutually confer upon each other the sacrament of Matrimony by expressing their consent before the Church. In the tradition of the Eastern Churches, the priests (bishops or presbyters) are witnesses to the mutual consent given by the spouses,[sup]124[/sup] but for the validity of the sacrament their blessing is also necessary.
CCC 1630 The priest (or deacon) who assists at the celebration of a marriage receives the consent of the spouses in the name of the Church and gives the blessing of the Church. The presence of the Church's minister (and also of the witnesses) visibly expresses the fact that marriage is an ecclesial reality.
As others have said the priest is a witness to the marriage on behalf of the Church.
St. Igantius writes in his letter to Polycarp (about 110AD)
“…it becomes both men and women who marry, to form their union with the approval of the bishop, that their marriage may be according to God, and not after their own lust.”
The Catholic Encyclopedia says this:
“This eventually successful effort of the Church everywhere to bring the solemnization of matrimony more immediately under her influence, is well summed up in the following Anglo-Saxon ordinance: "At the nuptials there shall be a Mass-priest by law who shall with God's blessing bind their union to all prosperity" (Liebermann, "Gesetze der Angel-Sachsen", I, 422)”
The Catholic Encyclopedia refers to the marriage of Judith of France and the father of Alfred the great in 856 and continues:
“With this exception the oldest ordines of a marriage service conducted by ecclesiastical authority are several centuries later in date and those that bear a distinctly religious character almost always show the betrothal and the nuptial ceremony amalgamated into one. This is conspicuously the case in the "Ordinals" of Sarum and York and in the modern English Catholic service which is derived from them."
The “Ordinals” of Sarum and York date back to the 13[sup]th[/sup] century.
aspen
“"The harvest is plentiful but the workers are few
I think Selene and Mungo gave the references - I just wanted to add that I knew about this because my wife and I got married before we joined the Catholic Church.
Similar threads
