Posted on 08/02/2017 2:07:44 PM PDT by detective
In that case you are not arguing with me. You are arguing with God.
I also believe if you think God selected Koine Greek you should also admit that he selected the Catholic Church to print the scriptures into the Bible.
As far as the Catholic and Protestant Churches are concerned i am neutral so i do not let any bias get in the way.
This is not as complicated as you’re making it. No human is sinless. But the Scriptures had to be error free. Therefore believing men who were willing to be used of God recorded Scripture, but it was the inspiration of the Holy Spirit that guided their thoughts and words. That experience didn’t create a single sinless, perfect man. It only produced inerrant Scripture because at the time of the writing the authors submitted themselves to the divine guidance of the Holy Spirit.
I’ve never met anyone who struggled so mightily with this concept. Has no one ever spoken to you about the Holy Spirit before?
There are no Biblical passages that claim Mary had an only begotten Son. God had such a Son. Mary had a ‘firstborn,’—and if you believe God’s Word, four additional sons.
I am not the one rejecting the plainest, most natural reading of the Scriptural texts. I am not trying to set aside divinely inspired passages by claiming God couldn’t express Himself clearly via the Greek language. I accept every word of Scripture as divinely inspired, and don’t seek to evade any of it by citing a language God rejected for His New Testament revelation.
You ere profoundly when you cite Roman Catholicism as a special institution of God. Jesus was given a golden opportunity to reveal Rome as the locus of future worship. He did the opposite.
John 4:
19 The woman *said to Him, “Sir, I perceive that You are a prophet.
20 Our fathers worshiped in this mountain, and you [people] say that in Jerusalem is the place where men ought to worship.”
21 Jesus *said to her, “Woman, believe Me, an hour is coming when neither in this mountain nor in Jerusalem will you worship the Father.
22 You worship what you do not know; we worship what we know, for salvation is from the Jews.
23 But an hour is coming, and now is, when the true worshipers will worship the Father in spirit and truth; for such people the Father seeks to be His worshipers.
24 God is spirit, and those who worship Him must worship in spirit and truth.”
It’s not about Rome. It’s about worshipping God in spirit and truth. You have it straight from Jesus’ own mouth.
Here’s a link that may add to your current understanding of the matter you seem to dwell upon — if you can accept it:
And i usually take that with a grain of salt.
Do you also believe God chose the Catholic Church to put the scriptures together to provide the Bible.
That is exactly what happened.
http://www.biblestudy.org/question/did-jesus-have-brothers-and-sisters.html
I did read it and do not except it..
I do not base my belief on my bias for or against any particular religion.
The scriptures for or against Mary having other children pretty much balances out until i read john 19:26
When Jesus therefore saw his mother, and the disciple standing by, whom he loved, he saith unto his mother, Woman, behold thy son!
27 Then saith he to the disciple, Behold thy mother! And from that hour that disciple took her unto his own home.
Jesus would have no authority to do any such thing if he was not her only child and his siblings would not have excepted it if he had any..
Jesus was Mary`s only child.
You and your Friend should try it sometime. You’d be surprised.
ere = err
This is not as complicated as you’re making it.
Do you believe that the holy spirit deliberately told Peter to go eat with the Jews just to give Paul some leverage over Peter?
Or do you admit that the holy spirit had nothing to do with the misunderstanding, and it could easily be a misunderstanding because Paul was also just as human an just as apt to make a mistake as Peter.
But i have a feeling that is only limited to Paul, Paul contradicts what Jesus said so it must be Jesus`s mistake.
The Catholic`s say the very same thing, they deny that Jesus said any such thing even though nothing any one ever said could be plainer.
The Catholic`s and protestants should love each other on this one
We’re getting nowhere. No matter how many times I separate the Holy Spirit inspiration for the Scruptures, you tangle it up with individual decisions/actions that have nothing to do with the Scriptures themselves. It’s a futile discussion.
David wrote many Psalms. He also sinned with Bathsheba. The Holy Spirit inspired the Psalms. The Holy Spirit did not direct David to sin with Bathsheba.
Scruptures = Scriptures
There are no Biblical passages that claim Mary had an only begotten Son
Both arguments are just assumptions.
I cited a text that clearly listed Mary’s four sons, and alluded to daughters. You set it aside with an unrelated comment re Hebrew.
There is nothing special about Rome. Jesus said true worship would be in spirit and truth. Any beliver/assembly of believers anywhere, under any affiliation, who worship in spirit and truth is/are part of the true ‘assembly.’
When Catholics worship in spirit and truth they are part of the true assembly/church. When they don’t, they aren’t.
Same for everyone else. It’s not about location or expensive trappings. It’s about the heart.
We’re getting nowhere. No matter how many times I separate the Holy Spirit inspiration for the Scruptures, you tangle it up with individual decisions/actions that have nothing to do with the Scriptures themselves. It’s a futile discussion.
I do not believe any writer was forced by the holy spirit to write anything i believe the writers used their own words.
I cited a text that clearly listed Mary’s four sons, and alluded to daughters. You set it aside with an unrelated comment re Hebrew.
Here’s a helpful commentary:
Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible
All Scripture is given by inspiration of God,.... That is, all holy Scripture; for of that only the apostle is speaking; and he means the whole of it; not only the books of the Old Testament, but of the New, the greatest part of which was now written; for this second epistle to Timothy is by some thought to be the last of Paul’s epistles; and this also will hold good of what was to be written; for all is inspired by God, or breathed by him: the Scriptures are the breath of God, the word of God and not men; they are “written by the Spirit”, as the Syriac version renders it; or “by the Spirit of God”, as the Ethiopic version.
http://biblehub.com/commentaries/2_timothy/3-16.htm
Strong's Concordance
theopneustos: God-breathed, i.e. inspired by God
Original Word: θεόπνευστος, ον
Part of Speech: Adjective
Transliteration: theopneustos
Phonetic Spelling: (theh-op'-nyoo-stos)
Short Definition: God-breathed, inspired by God
Definition: God-breathed, inspired by God, due to the inspiration of God.
HELPS Word-studies
2315 theópneustos (from 2316 /theós, "God" and 4154 /pnéō, "breathe out") – properly, God-breathed, referring to thedivine inspiration (inbreathing) of Scripture (used only in 2 Tim 3:16).
2315 /theópneustos ("God-breathed"), likely a term coined by Paul, "expresses the sacred nature of the Scriptures (their divine origin) and their power to sanctify believers" (C. Spicq, 2, 193).
[Inbreathing (2315 /theópneustos) relates directly to God's Spirit (Gkpneuma) which can also be translated "breath."]
2 Tim 3:16: "Each-and-every (3956 /pás, singular) Scripture (Gk, singular) is God-breathed (2315 /theópneustos) and profitable for teaching, for convincing, for correction, for training in righteousness."
The singular (anarthrous) use of 3956/pás ("all") underlines that each part of speech (every inflected word-form, "reflex") used in the Bible is God-breathed, i.e. inscripturated (written) under divine inspiration.
[G. Archer, "2315 (theópneustos) is better rendered 'breathed out by God' as the emphasis is upon the divine origin of the inscripturated revelation itself" (A Survey of OT Introduction, fn. 7, 29).]
Link follows.
This is a better link than the previous one. (I hadn’t read that one thoroughly enough before I posted it.)
‘If the Bible is a Catholic book, how can Catholics account for the passage, “A bishop then, must be blameless, married but once, reserved, prudent, of good conduct, hospitable, a teacher...He should rule well his own household, keeping his children under control and perfectly respectful. For if a man cannot rule his own household, how is he to take care of the church of God?” (1 Tim. 3:2, 4-5).
The Catholic Church does not allow a bishop to marry, while the Bible says “he must be married.” Furthermore, if the Bible is a Catholic book, why did they write the Bible as it is, and feel the necessity of putting footnotes at the bottom of the page in effort to keep their subject from believing what is in the text?
The following list give a summation of what we have been trying to emphasize. If the Bible is a Catholic book,
1. Why does it condemn clerical dress? (Matt. 23:5-6).
2. Why does it teach against the adoration of Mary? (Luke 11:27-28).
3. Why does it show that all Christians are priests? (1 Pet. 2:5,9).
4. Why does it condemn the observance of special days? (Gal. 4:9-11).
5. Why does it teach that all Christians are saints? (1 Cor. 1:2).
6. Why does it condemn the making and adoration of images? (Ex. 20:4-5).
7. Why does it teach that baptism is immersion instead of pouring? (Col. 2:12).
8. Why does it forbid us to address religious leaders as “father”? (Matt. 23:9).
9. Why does it teach that Christ is the only foundation and not the apostle Peter? (1 Cor. 3:11).
10. Why does it teach that there is one mediator instead of many? (1 Tim. 2:5).
11. Why does it teach that a bishop must be a married man? (1 Tim. 3:2, 4-5).
12. Why is it opposed to the primacy of Peter? (Luke 22:24-27).
13. Why does it oppose the idea of purgatory? (Luke 16:26).
14. Why is it completely silent about infant baptism, instrumental music in worship, indulgences, confession to priests, the rosary, the mass, and many other things in the Catholic Church?
http://www.bible.ca/cath-bible-origin.htm
anyone lived in a pretty how town
(with up so floating many bells down)
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.