Things to clarify..
-
Firstly, isnt justification by faith so obviously proven in the books of Romans? Then why the controversy?
Secondly, isnt predestination clearly illustrated by Jesus's Salvation plan?
God knew that judha(sry for the spelling) would betray Jesus. Not only that, Jesus openly prognosticated his betrayal EVEN before Judda did it. -
Please discuss "justification by faith" here. http://www.sgforums.com/?action=thread_display&thread_id=225836
Please do not start a topic and try to talk about two subjects.
So let this topic be on predestination.
FYI, this was discussed before http://www.sgforums.com/?action=thread_display&thread_id=179897. It has expired though.
BTW, it's Judas. -
Its salvation by faith (some protestants) vs salvation by faith AND works. (catholic and orthodox)
I got a protestant friend who holds the catholic doctrine,
Aniwaes, i think this issue has been resolved by the CC and the Lutherans. -
People just don't think it's so simple. We all look at the outside behaviours of people and judge them. But God looks at the heart.Originally posted by davidche:Firstly, isnt justification by faith so obviously proven in the books of Romans? Then why the controversy?
Secondly, isnt predestination clearly illustrated by Jesus's Salvation plan?
God knew that judha(sry for the spelling) would betray Jesus. Not only that, Jesus openly prognosticated his betrayal EVEN before Judda did it.
Of course He is God and He knows all things before it happens. Perhaps Father God told Him beforehand who will betray Him? -
Many people don't read the bible literally. Also many people are blinded spiritually by the devil. Many also are not interested in reading for themselves and would rather people interpret for them or depend on hearsay. Many also lack faith and the spiritual IQ to read the bible. Some don't even want to hear about the bible and prefer to depend on traditions. Some are atheists who doesn't believe in God or even want to hear about the bible. So many possibilities...Originally posted by davidche:Firstly, isnt justification by faith so obviously proven in the books of Romans? Then why the controversy?
Secondly, isnt predestination clearly illustrated by Jesus's Salvation plan?
God knew that judha(sry for the spelling) would betray Jesus. Not only that, Jesus openly prognosticated his betrayal EVEN before Judda did it. -
ya right .. imagine now already have 36000 denominations liao.Originally posted by Devils_advocate:Many people don't read the bible literally. Also many people are blinded spiritually by the devil. Many also are not interested in reading for themselves and would rather people interpret for them or depend on hearsay. Many also lack faith and the spiritual IQ to read the bible. Some don't even want to hear about the bible and prefer to depend on traditions. Some are atheists who doesn't believe in God or even want to hear about the bible. So many possibilities...
If everyone reads the bible themselves, we might have 100 times as more denominations. -
and your solution is everyone stop reading the Bible?Originally posted by Icemoon:ya right .. imagine now already have 36000 denominations liao.
If everyone reads the bible themselves, we might have 100 times as more denominations. -
Actually last time they don't read the bible one. Faith comes from *hearing* the Word of God.Originally posted by vince69:and your solution is everyone stop reading the Bible?
-
Originally posted by Icemoon:ya right .. imagine now already have 36000 denominations liao.
If everyone reads the bible themselves, we might have 100 times as more denominations.
the issue is not whether one reads or doesn't read the Bible where denominations are concerned, it's about the ego trip of some professing Christians to want to be recognised as the "ONE".Originally posted by Icemoon:Actually last time they don't read the bible one. Faith comes from *hearing* the Word of God.
too many denominations wrong, ecumenical movement also wrong, so how? -
last time, is not Faith comes from *hearing* the Word of God. Its close two eyes and just do whatever the preacher/priest tell you to do. don't ask, don't question, don't doubt, just do.Originally posted by Icemoon:Actually last time they don't read the bible one. Faith comes from *hearing* the Word of God.
reading the Bible is to make sure what these preacher/priest is saying is really the Word of God.
Faith comes from hearing the Word of God, make you what you are hearing is really the Word of God.
-
Which is why reformation happened.Originally posted by Icemoon:Actually last time they don't read the bible one. Faith comes from *hearing* the Word of God.
-
Nothing was reformed.....more like deformation LOL....Body of Christ being split to 36 000 pieces isnt reallie a reformation.Originally posted by M©+square:Which is why reformation happened. -
Ironically when u read the Bible, u are doing exactly what u warned us against. When u read the Bible, u give explicit trust (without any reasoning nor proof), that the Catholic Church selected the right books. Whenever u read Scripture, u are blindly following the doctrines of the Catholic Church of the 4th century...ironic huh.Originally posted by vince69:last time, is not Faith comes from *hearing* the Word of God. Its close two eyes and just do whatever the preacher/priest tell you to do. don't ask, don't question, don't doubt, just do.
reading the Bible is to make sure what these preacher/priest is saying is really the Word of God.
Faith comes from hearing the Word of God, make you what you are hearing is really the Word of God.
Show me where in Scripture does it say read Scripture by yourself and that ur own intepretation is always true? -
so you don't read the Bible? so whatever the priest said, you just accept without questioning?Originally posted by Pope Nicholas:Ironically when u read the Bible, u are doing exactly what u warned us against. When u read the Bible, u give explicit trust (without any reasoning nor proof), that the Catholic Church selected the right books. Whenever u read Scripture, u are blindly following the doctrines of the Catholic Church of the 4th century...ironic huh.
Show me where in Scripture does it say read Scripture by yourself and that ur own intepretation is always true?
I hope you are not doing this, as in accept everything blindly. actually I had always the impression that even the Catholic Church now a days encourage their followers to read the bible for themselves (at least this is what my friends told me). -
I still wish to point out, historically most people are illiterate.
How do illiterate Christians read their bible?
-
I remember something.Originally posted by vince69:I hope you are not doing this, as in accept everything blindly. actually I had always the impression that even the Catholic Church now a days encourage their followers to read the bible for themselves (at least this is what my friends told me).
Catholics don't seem to believe the Holy Spirit will guide every believer to the Truth. So they read bible also no use. Still need to refer to authority for the correct interpretation.
Hence Tradition is still the foundation? -
If you remember, the reformation happened for a cause.Originally posted by Pope Nicholas:Nothing was reformed.....more like deformation LOL....Body of Christ being split to 36 000 pieces isnt reallie a reformation.
It happened to John Knox and John Huss as well. It was for a cause, not a purpose to deform the church. -
Next time name your boy John.Originally posted by M©+square:It happened to John Knox and John Huss as well. It was for a cause, not a purpose to deform the church.
Won't be wrong one!
1. John Knox
2. John Huss
3. John Newton
4. John Owen
5. John Calvin
6. John Wesley -
you may be correct here, in many places, yes, that tradition holds the key to the interpretation of Scriptures, which effectively put traditions above Scriptures. This is something I find demeaning to both traditions and Scripture. In that these are not about blind followings.Originally posted by Icemoon:I remember something.
Catholics don't seem to believe the Holy Spirit will guide every believer to the Truth. So they read bible also no use. Still need to refer to authority for the correct interpretation.
Hence Tradition is still the foundation?
How do you honor the traditions and the teachings of the Church Fathers, if not by striving to understanding how these come about? How do you figure this out, if not by questionings? by studying?
Further more, if one is to talk about the unity of the three pillars of the Catholic Church, how can one say this is above the other?
Finally, by failing to study the Scripture on our own, we are simply telling the church teachers that they had failed their job, cause their students cannot and don't know how formulate their own opinion.
**** flame bait ****
Throughout human history, whenever someone write something, a commentary, a teaching, an arguement, its human nature to be biased, namely, there is a tendency to be influenced by own opinion, own expreience, own beliefs, its likea message to bring across his own ideals (of course, those he disagree ones, will get much lesser mention if not even down played).
why am I saying this, If you look at the writtings of the Church Fathers, this is one of the things you can see. Now, fallible and biased they may be, I am not saying throw them out of the window, all I am saying is this, read them with a pinch of salt, understand where and why they are saying what they said, and maybe underneath these layers of 'soils' we can find some 'gold' -
Historically, Christianity is not a "studying" religion like Judaism. The latter places huge emphasis on Torah and the Oral Tradition, but the bible is not emphasized by the Church.Originally posted by vince69:you may be correct here, in many places, yes, that tradition holds the key to the interpretation of Scriptures, which effectively put traditions above Scriptures. This is something I find demeaning to both traditions and Scripture. In that these are not about blind followings.
How do you honor the traditions and the teachings of the Church Fathers, if not by striving to understanding how these come about? How do you figure this out, if not by questionings? by studying?
Further more, if one is to talk about the unity of the three pillars of the Catholic Church, how can one say this is above the other?
Finally, by failing to study the Scripture on our own, we are simply telling the church teachers that they had failed their job, cause their students cannot and don't know how formulate their own opinion.
In fact, studying is in a sense antithical to the essence of Christianity - everything is a mystery.
So the most important sacrament - the eucharist - is a mystery. The nature of God is a mystery. As a Christian, you are expected to suspend your belief.
The more you think, the more chance of you falling into heresy. Look at history - Nestorius, Pelagius, Calvin, Luther etc. These are all pretty intelligent people, if not in IQ at least in theology. Look what happened to them!
Historically Christianity is an experiencing religion. Stuffs like bible study only comes with the advent of the Protestant Reformation. Before that, the clergy sucks. The laity sucks even worse.
So cannot read bible how? Never mind! That's why you have the liturgy! You have sight, sense and smell. You have "idols". You have incense. You have paintings on windows. You consume the host and feel one with Christ. -
The unity guarantees that the three pillars do not contradict each another.Originally posted by vince69:Further more, if one is to talk about the unity of the three pillars of the Catholic Church, how can one say this is above the other?
Finally, by failing to study the Scripture on our own, we are simply telling the church teachers that they had failed their job, cause their students cannot and don't know how formulate their own opinion.
And your comparison is unfair. The three pillars - Scripture, Tradition and Magistrium - not ALL of them are static.
Scripture is "dead". Tradition is alive. In fact after 33AD, it is constantly evolving. (I'm not too sure about Magistrium, so I won't comment on it)
As Catholics, you can formulate your own opinion. But always draw a line between your own opinion and the Church position (i.e. Catechism of the Catholic Church). There is always a danger of priests giving their own opinion and misleading people to think this is the Church position. -
1 static target and 2 moving target, which one is not changing? can you be sure of something that keeps changing or on the one that do not change?Originally posted by Icemoon:The unity guarantees that the three pillars do not contradict each another.
And your comparison is unfair. The three pillars - Scripture, Tradition and Magistrium - not ALL of them are static.
Scripture is "dead". Tradition is alive. In fact after 33AD, it is constantly evolving. (I'm not too sure about Magistrium, so I won't comment on it)
As Catholics, you can formulate your own opinion. But always draw a line between your own opinion and the Church position (i.e. Catechism of the Catholic Church). There is always a danger of priests giving their own opinion and misleading people to think this is the Church position.
as for your second paragraph, thats not how I interpret our Pope here is saying, he is saying own opinion is always wrong and in error -
'Change' is a poor choice of words. It has the connotation the old is no good and the new is better. A better word will be to 'evolve'.Originally posted by vince69:1 static target and 2 moving target, which one is not changing? can you be sure of something that keeps changing or on the one that do not change?
as for your second paragraph, thats not how I interpret our Pope here is saying, he is saying own opinion is always wrong and in error
So Scripture is static. Tradition and Magistrium are evolving. -
actually, change is not a bad thing, it change or evolve to suits the situation, the needs of people. The only thing about it is, it is not firm, meaning, it can be this today, but may not be this tomorrow.Originally posted by Icemoon:'Change' is a poor choice of words. It has the connotation the old is no good and the new is better. A better word will be to 'evolve'.
So Scripture is static. Tradition and Magistrium are evolving.
so is being Static, just that its unchanging, means one can be sure that what it say today, is also what it says tomorrow.
personally, where faith is concerns, it need to be anchor on something that is firm and not shifting, policy and tradition may change/evolve, but truth should be firm, if not, how can we be sure if its true today, will it still be true tomorrow?
maybe something you can relate to, Jewish customs and traditions may have evolved throughout the ages, but the Torah have not. Hence we have here, the Torah (firm) guilding the customs/traditions/practices (evolving). How this happen is that these customs/traditions/practices though still guide by the principles in the Torah evolved to adapt to the needs of the people practicing it making it practical for them. But the guilding principle have to be firmed. -
*Readies flamer*Originally posted by vince69:you may be correct here, in many places, yes, that tradition holds the key to the interpretation of Scriptures, which effectively put traditions above Scriptures. This is something I find demeaning to both traditions and Scripture. In that these are not about blind followings.
How do you honor the traditions and the teachings of the Church Fathers, if not by striving to understanding how these come about? How do you figure this out, if not by questionings? by studying?
Further more, if one is to talk about the unity of the three pillars of the Catholic Church, how can one say this is above the other?
Finally, by failing to study the Scripture on our own, we are simply telling the church teachers that they had failed their job, cause their students cannot and don't know how formulate their own opinion.
**** flame bait ****
Throughout human history, whenever someone write something, a commentary, a teaching, an arguement, its human nature to be biased, namely, there is a tendency to be influenced by own opinion, own expreience, own beliefs, its likea message to bring across his own ideals (of course, those he disagree ones, will get much lesser mention if not even down played).
why am I saying this, If you look at the writtings of the Church Fathers, this is one of the things you can see. Now, fallible and biased they may be, I am not saying throw them out of the window, all I am saying is this, read them with a pinch of salt, understand where and why they are saying what they said, and maybe underneath these layers of 'soils' we can find some 'gold'
If so, any translation of the bible is still considered invalid even though the translators are blessed by your God in their works.