tom55 said:
I have never said the guy in Rome or I have that authority. If you are suggesting I have then please quote me.
Perhaps I have misunderstood you.
Does the Pope in Rome have the authority to interpret scripture for me, or doesn't he?
Your quoting of John 12:48 makes my point. Someone has to have authority to decide if I, Tom55, has rejected His words or if I rejected Him. I do accept Jesus words when he said, "Very truly I tell you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you have no life in you." I believe communion is his flesh and blood, just like He said. Some churches teach that it is only a symbol of his flesh and blood. So who gets to decide if I am right or they are right?? Who has that authority?
So, when Jesus gave His disciples the bread and wine the night that He was arrested, He gave them His actual flesh and blood? Just how do you get that? Did He slice off pieces of Himself, or did the bread and wine turn into His flesh and blood as He stood there?
Again, if the host does become actual flesh and blood during the celebration of the Communion...just how much flesh and blood do you think Jesus has/had?
Come on, Tom. Cannibalism? Really?
What I have been saying to you is that, in my opinion, you have articulated in your writings that you have your own authority to decide what the truth is in scripture is to YOU. You are your own authority. You read the bible and you decide what it means to you. But now in your above statement, "There is One Who has that authority. It isn't me. It isn't you." It seems to me you are now saying you don't have authority to interpret scripture and decide what the truth is. So now I am confused.
Act 17:11 These were more noble than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness of mind, and searched the scriptures daily, whether those things were so
Where did those noble Bereans get the authority to decide whether those things were so from the scriptures?
God has given man the truth in scripture but man needs to interpret that truth. Man has interpreted that (singular) truth into 30,000 different truths.
Darling, do you know how a false doctrine is created? It is done by taking scriptures that agree with your premise...say you wanted to prove that God loves whores above all other people. Ridiculous...but possible. You take a few scriptures...Rahab, Tamar, Ruth, Esther, the woman who washed Jesus' feet with her tears and dried them with her hair, the woman taken in adultery, possibly a few others...and you put your own little "spin" on those verses, carefully avoiding verses like Proverbs 31, where it talks about The Virtuous Woman...and you depend heavily on your target audience not to read or study for themselves. Of course, you must be seen as an "authority"...that's very important. People have to believe that you are the one they should look to to interpret scripture for them.
And, before you can say "I baptize thee", you have 30,000 "bodies of Christ".
Catholics have Rome (not ONE guy in Rome) as their authority. Other Churches have their hierarchal structure as their authority.
No matter how you try to sugar coat it, the Pope does have the final authority. He is more than just a spokesman...he is the Big Kahuna. They actually kneel before him and kiss his ring.
Now, I'm not saying the Pope is not a nice guy...the current one seems to be pretty cool, anyway. But it is a sad fact that when one man has that much power, it is bound to go to his head.
You have you as your own authority because you read the bible and decide what it means to YOU. You have decided what you are going to believe and practice and interpret from the bible on your own. That is NOT what scripture says to do; that is not what the early church practiced.
Tom, if I didn't know better, I'd think that you agreed with those Catholics who once thought that the Bible should not be read by laymen. It was a tremendous battle, you know, for us to have our Bible in our own language...and I am grateful to the men who fought for me to have the privilege of having my own Bible to read for myself. Now I can also be like those noble Bereans, and search the scriptures to see what things be so...
Catholics and other churches have a hierarchal structure and the decision on what they believe is decided within this structure. Like what happened at the Council of Jerusalem.
You do know that the council in Jerusalem decided a dispute between Paul and Peter? Or...did they? It's rather confusing, actually...
Gal 2:11 But when Peter was come to Antioch, I withstood him to the face, because he was to be blamed.
Gal 2:12 For before that certain came from James, he did eat with the Gentiles: but when they were come, he withdrew and separated himself, fearing them which were of the circumcision.
Gal 2:13 And the other Jews dissembled likewise with him; insomuch that Barnabas also was carried away with their dissimulation.
Gal 2:14 But when I saw that they walked not uprightly according to the truth of the gospel, I said unto Peter before them all, If thou, being a Jew, livest after the manner of Gentiles, and not as do the Jews, why compellest thou the Gentiles to live as do the Jews?
Here, it looks an awful lot like Peter was at fault.
Act 15:7 And when there had been much disputing, Peter rose up, and said unto them, Men and brethren, ye know how that a good while ago God made choice among us, that the Gentiles by my mouth should hear the word of the gospel, and believe.
Act 15:8 And God, which knoweth the hearts, bare them witness, giving them the Holy Ghost, even as he did unto us;
Act 15:9 And put no difference between us and them, purifying their hearts by faith.
Act 15:10 Now therefore why tempt ye God, to put a yoke upon the neck of the disciples, which neither our fathers nor we were able to bear?
Act 15:11 But we believe that through the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ we shall be saved, even as they.
And here, it looks as if Peter had changed his tune.
So, who was at fault, really?
Act 15:1 And certain men which came down from Judaea taught the brethren, and said, Except ye be circumcised after the manner of Moses, ye cannot be saved.
Act 15:2 When therefore Paul and Barnabas had no small dissension and disputation with them, they determined that Paul and Barnabas, and certain other of them, should go up to Jerusalem unto the apostles and elders about this question.
I had always been taught that this was a dispute between Paul and Peter...and it seems that they did clash a bit. But in the end, it was James et al who were in the circumcision camp.