Why All the Divisions Within Christ's Church?

[Mr E]

So you don't believe the scriptures? You think Paul only dream encountered Jesus? Can you prove that with scripture?

Where did Paul say otherwise?

Paul says he saw a bright light from Heaven and was blinded by it, seeing nothing else for three days. He heard a voice and the voice had to tell him who it was speaking.

 

[God's Truth]

Where did Paul say otherwise?

Is that the way you defend saying Paul saw Jesus in a dream?

Paul says he saw a bright light from Heaven and was blinded by it, seeing nothing else for three days. He heard a voice and the voice had to tell him who it was speaking.

That wasn't the only time Jesus spoke to Paul.

 

[Mr E]

Is that the way you defend saying Paul saw Jesus in a dream?

That wasn't the only time Jesus spoke to Paul.

Is that the way you answer a question? -with a question?

Where did Paul say he met Jesus?

 

[God's Truth]

Is that the way you answer a question? -with a question?

You are the one who didn't answer the question.

Where did Paul say he met Jesus?

So you don't want to tell me what scriptures verify your statement?

 

[Mr E]

You are the one who didn't answer the question.

So you don't want to tell me what scriptures verify your statement?

I referenced Paul's own testimony from the book of Acts.

 

[glorydaz]

Yes. Through Christ. And we can win that battle between or spirit and our flesh, but we don't always. I believe Paul is making it clear that even he goes through this too. Though I realize there are a number of ways of viewing it. I arrive where I do because it is a common experience and because after getting to the place where he sees himself as wretched (also a common experience for the Christian) he says, "Praise God through Jesus ." And what he is delivered from is his body of death. We are saved from that penalty for sin in Christ, pointed out by vere 1 of the next chapter, "There is now no condemnation for those who are in Christ."

That doesn't wash with what he'd just written in chapter six, which is a very important prelude to his teaching on the law he gives us here in Romans 7. Paul says, (v 14) "I'm carnal, sold under sin." How can that be true when he tells us in Chapter 6:17-18 But, God be thanked, that ye were the servants of sin, but ye have OBEYED FROM THE HEART that form of doctrine that was delivered you. Being made free from sin, ye became the servants of righteousness.

No sold under sin there. Also, Paul explains that it's when we are IN CHRIST (law of the Spirit of Life in Christ Jesus)

Romans 8:2 For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus hath made me free from the law of sin and death.

Everything is what it is, but it has a nature, Thus the expression "human nature." The inherent features of something. Characteristic of. The psychological characteristics, feelings, and behavioral traits of humankind that are regarded as shared by all humans. Paul describes that as sin in us when it comes to sin. Same when scriptures speak of all falling short of the glory of God. Or being born in sin. The probability of all people sinning (falling short of the glory of God) is 100%.

David: It may be that he was blaming his mother for sinning to conceive him but there is no evidence to support that. He was speaking of original sin.
The conditions described in Eph apply to all people. Paul was speaking to believers and reminding them of the wretched state they were in before union with Christ. We all come out of that same place.
We are all wicked and can only be redeemed by Christ.

IMO

I understand where you're coming from, but in the same way Adam and Eve were created innocent, we are as well. Suffer the little children.... Luke 18:15-16
And they brought unto him also infants, that he would touch them: but when his disciples saw it, they rebuked them.
But Jesus called them unto him, and said, Suffer little children to come unto me, and forbid them not: for of such is the kingdom of God.

 

[God's Truth]

No it isn't, not at all.

Yes it is.

This could easily be a compilation of compilations of eyewitness accounts from 100 years ago.

What? From a hundred years ago?

The gospels borrowed word for word from each other, is that something eyewitnesses is do, or someone copying someone else?

The Bible says eye witnesses. Why wouldn't eye witness accounts seem very similar?

People did, but you know that is not the issue. It's whether these writers saw him face to face, sine that is what you claimed and still cannot prove with scripture.

They were eye witnesses. An eye witness to the Lord. The eye witnesses saw Jesus face to face.

Okay, but that isn't what you claimed. And it's been proven that you do need to go outside of scripture to prove what you claim.

Never ever.

It is bizarre that you would use that qoute from luke, the author is saying these accounts are handed down to him, suggesting strongly he did not walk with Christ and see him face to face while he was on earth.

Just because they shared each others writings you are going to say that? Paul even commanded that the people he wrote to share it with the other churches,and the other churches share theirs.

I think that finishes this little back and fourth.

I do believe the gospels GT, I just wanted to show you that you are fallible and cannot back up nearly as much of what you claim as certainly true by scripture alone.

We can know the scriptures and understand them, but not all do. They could if they wanted, but they don't do what Jesus says to do to find out.

This is why it is important to have humility and acknowledge the importance of the Fathers and the opinions of others as our guides and not just trust in your own mortal intellect alone.

No way are we to go to people outside the Bible for God's Truth.
We are not even supposed to call them fathers.
Why you call those people fathers?

You don't know God revealed to little children? Do you know what the Bible says about scholars?

 

[God's Truth]

I referenced Paul's own testimony from the book of Acts.

Where does Paul say his testimony was in a dream?

 

[Phedup]

That is just someone's opinions that tickled your ears.

Nope, that is demonstratably true. Find any early church father before Ireneous' introduction of those four gospels that mentions and quotes them by name. Nobody is aware that they exist prior to this. They are fighting against the gnositcs and heretics for "supreme heretic" when they magically appear. These gospels would have been vital in their defence, but, crickets.

I know they taught you that the bible is "The very Word of God" and you believed them unquestioningly. If you continue in that belief, it is your own fault. The gospels come from an oral tradition, and when the "end is near" wasn't near, it was time to write them down. The books of your bible are different than the early church's bible, and that is different from the later church's bible, and all these different "Christians" have different books in their bible. But everyone believes that their particual selection of scripture is the correct "word of God."

 

[The_drake_]

Ignoring the other fluff where you pretend to not know what we're talking about...

They were eye witnesses. An eye witness to the Lord. The eye witnesses saw Jesus face to face.

This is your opinion. No where in Matthew does it say this is one account by an eyewitness who saw Jesus face to face and walked with him, like you claimed. It does not say it in Luke. It does not say it in Mark.

In fact using the quote you took from Luke, it says clearly it is a compilation of handed down accounts, not even necessarily first hand. That is not an eyewitness. If it is, then every account ever written is an eyewitness account. This is not so, and what you say is not true.

If you are admitting you were wrong and are changing your position to "they are accounts written by others later on who were in possession of accounts by people who walked with Jesus and saw him face to face" then that is fine. That can be proved in Luke through scripture. It still cannot be proved of Matt and Mark because we have no comments made on them inside of scripture. You must go outside to the Fathers for that.

But you cannot keep putting your head in the sand and plugging your ears here.

I am happy to narrow it down. If you can prove to me Matthew was written by one eyewitness who walked with Jesus and saw him face to face, without going outside of scripture, then I will concede. But you can't. There is nothing in scripture which says this.

 

[Mr G Lee]

Have you heard of the "three legged stool"? Three elements are needed for stability. Without one of them the stool falls over.
Regarding doctrine the three are:
1. Sacred Scripture
2. Sacred Tradition - the oral teaching from God
3. A Magisterium to correctly interpret the above.

The reformers jettisoned the second and made individuals their own magisterium interpreting scripture themselves. That is why Protestantism is splintering into more and more pieces.


I can't follow you thoughts here.

Soory try reading slower and ask quaetions .-+-Z+x


I have heard most common excuses like the three legged stool coning from a hierarchy of men form of government serving another written authority (Law of the legion fathers) That the non-venerable (no understanding of their own) must call patron saints written in their book of law (CCC) A false authority as commandments (I heard it through the fathers grapevine ) This other other than all things written in the law and the prophets (sola scriptura) therefore making God's traditon without efect .No man can sever tow god teaching master as one unseen Lord

Those who belong to a hierarchy of venerable men

 

[God's Truth]

Nope, that is demonstratably true. Find any early church father before Ireneous' introduction of those four gospels that mentions and quotes them by name. Nobody is aware that they exist prior to this. They are fighting against the gnositcs and heretics for "supreme heretic" when they magically appear. These gospels would have been vital in their defence, but, crickets.

I know they taught you that the bible is "The very Word of God" and you believed them unquestioningly. If you continue in that belief, it is your own fault. The gospels come from an oral tradition, and when the "end is near" wasn't near, it was time to write them down. The books of your bible are different than the early church's bible, and that is different from the later church's bible, and all these different "Christians" have different books in their bible. But everyone believes that their particual selection of scripture is the correct "word of God."

The New Testament teachings were by letters and books from the beginning. We can see in 2 Peter 3:15-16 Peter recognizes what Paul writes as scripture.

2 Peter 3:15 Bear in mind that our Lord’s patience means salvation, just as our dear brother Paul also wrote you with the wisdom that God gave him. He writes the same way in all his letters, speaking in them of these matters. His letters contain some things that are hard to understand, which ignorant and unstable people distort, as they do the other Scriptures, to their own destruction.

Much of the New Testament is letters from the apostles to the churches, and the apostles commanded the churches to share the letters.


Colossians 4:16 After this letter has been read to you, see that it is also read in the church of the Laodiceans and that you in turn read the letter from Laodicea.

1 Thessalonians 5:27 I charge you before the Lord to have this letter read to all the brothers and sisters.


Again, the believers from the beginning used these books and letters from the start. That is what determined these books as scripture.

Luke 1:1-4 Many have undertaken to draw up an account of the things that have been fulfilled among us, just as they were handed down to us by those who from the first were eyewitnesses and servants of the word. Therefore, since I myself have carefully investigated everything from the beginning, it seemed good also to me to write an orderly account for you, most excellent Theophilus, so that you may know the certainty of the things you have been taught.

John 20:30 Jesus performed many other signs in the presence of his disciples, which are not recorded in this book. 31 But these are written that you may believe that Jesus is the Messiah, the Son of God, and that by believing you may have life in his name.

I know the Bible is true because I did what Jesus says to do to find out.