Posted on 10/25/2009 9:52:48 AM PDT by narses
“It could be that the analogy of papacy to Aaronic line is not a common theme in patristic literature....”
Not a common theme? Its nonexistent, Alex and yet the theme of a functioning hierarchial system and the consequences of disobedience to that system is indeed a common one. But with no mention of the Bishop Rome being the top hierarch of the world.
So in point of fact, your argument is from silence.
How does that make you any more insightful than the braying asses of the Reformation? They forever pule anything not contained in Scripture is contrary to Scripture. You are engaging in the exact same vanity, except with the Patristic writings.
Actually, upon reflection I suppose that would make you even LESS noble, as at least there is no disagreement over the inspiration of Scripture.
So I ask again, what IS Jude referring to with the gainsaying of Korah? Keep in mind, by your own standard, any explaination you give that is not authenticated by the Patristic writings is no more or less conjecture than the one you disdain from me. ...And that is hypocrisy, by definition.
Again with the duplicity! So you people haven't studied koine greek at all: you ARE greek, but pass yourselves as scholars to everyone who isn't!
And for the record, I have studied koine greek on the university level, though not very successfully, and long ago.
That's why fundamental knowledge of Greek helps when discussing concepts developed in Greek, so as to avoid transliterational confusion.
What utter falsehood! There is nothing in greek that can't be explained in english provided the one doing the explaining has a thourough knowledge of both languages, and isn't a pedantic blowhard.
Speaking of the braying asses of the Reformation, pt, you posts condemn you as one who should be reported to your Ordinary and punished!
“Furthermore, in order to restrain petulant spirits, It decrees, that no one, relying on his own skill, shall,—in matters of faith, and of morals pertaining to the edification of Christian doctrine, —wresting the sacred Scripture to his own senses, presume to interpret the said sacred Scripture contrary to that sense which holy mother Church,—whose it is to judge of the true sense and interpretation of the holy Scriptures,—hath held and doth hold; or even contrary to the unanimous consent of the Fathers; even though such interpretations were never (intended) to be at any time published. Contraveners shall be made known by their Ordinaries, and be punished with the penalties by law established.”
Fourth Session of the Council of Trent; “DECREE CONCERNING THE EDITION, AND THE USE, OF THE SACRED BOOKS”
There’s more. You are subject to the Decrees of the Council of Trent, are you not?
There's something truly pathetic about that remark. Do you think that koine Greek was pronounced the way the Oxford dons pronounce it? In any event, word "presvyia" when used in an ecclesiological context, is Byzantine, not koine. And Byzantine Greek is pronounced exactly the same as modern Greek, regional dialects and accents aside. How β is written in Latin characters I suppose is a matter of convention. Since it is pronounced "Veeta" and not "Beta", Greeks usually will use a "v" in Latin letters. There is nothing at all wrong with B however. Kosta, btw, is a Serb, not a Greek, though his Greek is very good. Alex is a Russian, but his Greek is as good as mine.
"And for the record, I have studied koine greek on the university level, though not very successfully, and long ago."
Still embarrassed by your less than sterling performance in university "long ago"?
"What utter falsehood! There is nothing in greek that can't be explained in english provided the one doing the explaining has a thourough knowledge of both languages, and isn't a pedantic blowhard."
You know, pt, that's just silly. Translate Ο ΩΝ
I read the sentence.
The author of Judes makes no such claim. He seems to take all the credit for writing it.
Do I have to explain "inspiraion?" What do you think compelled him to write on contending for the faith when he says he wanted to write about salvation? Talk about gagging on gnats....
So, the Old Testament writers were not led by the Holy Spirit? Is that what you are saying?
Boy, you "deep thinkers" got it all over on me!
Here I thought there was an obvious difference between inferring from a chain of events, and explicit declaration! Guess I need to work on my evidence building skills.
Except for 250 PRINCES OF ISRAEL!
Maybe you *should* stay out of it....
“...what IS Jude referring to with the gainsaying of Korah?”
I told kosta50 I was going to stay out of the remainder of this thread, but we braying asses sometimes get the urge to help those finding interpretation of scripture difficult...
The error of Balaam, whom he also cites, was to teach what folks wanted to hear, rather than what they needed to hear, for sake of money.
Democrats, so to speak!
Korah’s problem was pride, and trying to place himself higher than God had allotted. It was St Augustine who said we should use scripture to interpret scripture, back in the age when Catholics were encourage to interpret scripture themselves...
In Numbers, we read the charge made by Moses against Korah:
“And Moses said to Korah, “Hear now, you sons of Levi: is it too small a thing for you that the God of Israel has separated you from the congregation of Israel, to bring you near to himself, to do service in the tabernacle of the LORD and to stand before the congregation to minister to them, and that he has brought you near him, and all your brothers the sons of Levi with you? And would you seek the priesthood also? Therefore it is against the LORD that you and all your company have gathered together. What is Aaron that you grumble against him?”
What did Moses mean by “seek the priesthood also”? Well, earlier, by divine revelation, Aaron and his sons were set apart for the Priesthood - see Exodus 28-29 for establishing Aaron as Priest. It seems worth noting that the divine revelation of Aaron’s priesthood greatly eclipses the specificity of Peter’s supposed ordainment above all in Matthew 16:16.
Also earlier, in Numbers 3, we find divine revelation setting the role for the Levites - also in greater detail and with explicit definition:
“And the LORD spoke to Moses, saying, “Bring the tribe of Levi near, and set them before Aaron the priest, that they may minister to him. They shall keep guard over him and over the whole congregation before the tent of meeting, as they minister at the tabernacle. They shall guard all the furnishings of the tent of meeting, and keep guard over the people of Israel as they minister at the tabernacle. And you shall give the Levites to Aaron and his sons; they are wholly given to him from among the people of Israel. And you shall appoint Aaron and his sons, and they shall guard their priesthood. But if any outsider comes near, he shall be put to death.
And the LORD spoke to Moses, saying, “Behold, I have taken the Levites from among the people of Israel instead of every firstborn who opens the womb among the people of Israel. The Levites shall be mine, for all the firstborn are mine. On the day that I struck down all the firstborn in the land of Egypt, I consecrated for my own all the firstborn in Israel, both of man and of beast. They shall be mine: I am the LORD.”
So we see that explicit and detailed divine revelation had set roles for the Priesthood and for Levitical service.
But Korah wasn’t content to be a Levite - he wanted the priesthood of Aaron as well.
THAT was the error of Korah - his pride, his desire to climb above the role God had given him and the Levites by divine revelation.
Please note again that there was nothing ambiguous about these roles. I suspect if Jesus had made Peter uber alles with such specificity, then much of this discussion would be meaningless.
As it is, it seems the sin of Koran could be best laid at the feet of the Bishop of Rome. Instead of being content with honorable office, he has tried to snatch a greater one, one not given him but given to Another - to replace the Holy Spirit as “Vicar of Christ”, and as the sole authoritative teaching authority.
One wonders how history would have been different, if the Bishop of Rome had encouraged other Bishops, and allowed Bishops in German, France and England to tend THEIR sheep, instead of assuming they were his own and needing fleecing!
Just an input from a little braying ass of the Reformation!
Oh, I could have phrased it differently, but that term does convey my opinion you've crossed over from simple vanity to wanton conceit.
But they, either of the East or the West, never said anything as profoundly ridiculous as that it refers to the Pope of Rome.
But neither did they deny it, did they? Otherwise, you would have produced it by now. Glass houses, indeed! :P
BTW, pt, do you read Jude 11 to mean that all who do not submit (I love to use that word with the Pope)to the Pope of Rome are cursed and will surely come to a bad end? Do you really believe that, pt? Please tell me yes so we can all have a good laugh at your expense. I'll even ping the orthodox list if you'd like! :)
Yes.
I case you haven't noticed, your scorn means little to me beyond the fascination of watching a small child breath threats of retribution.
Of course I should add the caveat that the genuinely ignorant can't be judged by the same standard as the willfully disbelieving, per the standard laid down in Romans 1.
Gee, a story about legitimate authorities opposing the one man God appointed to lead his people....no similarities there....and no alternative interpretations, either.
There is no one you can pose as the object of the type that limits the type from applying to the Pope.
Hmmmm....care for a steaming cup of "distinction without difference?"
Hmm...a story about someone given an honorable office by explicit divine revelation who isn’t content, but wants a higher office that was given to someone else by explicit divine revelation.
Sounds like a Bishop who wants to be ‘Bishop of Bishops” & “Vicar of Christ” to this braying ass...
***This passage in Jude does not now and never has been considered in any way primacy of the Bishop of Rome over other bishops.
Gee, a story about legitimate authorities opposing the one man God appointed to lead his people....no similarities there....and no alternative interpretations, either.
There is no one you can pose as the object of the type that limits the type from applying to the Pope.***
I don’t pose it. It is just that it never has been applied by the Fathers or anyone else, for that matter. And, who are the legitimate authorities opposing the primacy of the Pope? Would you contend that they are the secular governments of the world?
K:”BTW, pt, do you read Jude 11 to mean that all who do not submit (I love to use that word with the Pope)to the Pope of Rome are cursed and will surely come to a bad end? Do you really believe that, pt? Please tell me yes so we can all have a good laugh at your expense. I’ll even ping the orthodox list if you’d like! :)
P: Yes.”
Just so I get this straight, you’ve now added Feeneyism to your violation of a Decree of the Council of Trent? You’re not really a Catholic, are you; more a conservative CINO.
Oh, the irony.
Ehem, where do you see anything I've written "contrary to that sense which holy mother Church,...hath held and doth hold; or even contrary to the unanimous consent of the Fathers?"
Silence is not consent nor is it a finding, despite popular aphorisms.
“Ehem, where do you see anything I’ve written “contrary to that sense which holy mother Church,...hath held and doth hold; or even contrary to the unanimous consent of the Fathers?””
By promoting a strange and novel interpretation of Scripture. Since Trent, people who do that are called heretics! So are Feeneyites.
Still embarrassed by your less than sterling performance in university "long ago"?
No, just highlighting how easily you presume. (shhhh. don't tell anyone, but I've read some of the ante-nicene fathers, too)
You know, pt, that's just silly. Translate Ο ΩΝ
I said "explain," not "translate."
Perhaps you should give the greek a rest and brush up on your english skills?
Then wouldn't a reference to Lucifer in Isaiah have been more apropriate, my stubborn FRiend?
I said "explain," not "translate.""
OK, explain Ο ΩΝ.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.