Hey!, all kidding aside, I hope you make it.Kiran wrote:Yeah it's what the church has decided, as said in one of my posts.
Bettina
Moderators: Tunnelcat, Jeff250
Hey!, all kidding aside, I hope you make it.Kiran wrote:Yeah it's what the church has decided, as said in one of my posts.
Where in the Bible does it say that "sola Scriptura" is the only way to go? Wasn't that made up by a certain person as well?Admiral Thrawn wrote:Where in the bible does it say that people must observe Lent? Or is this something that the church made up?
That includes to yourself, too. (Oh, yes, you are the authority on what's best for yourself and everyone else, I forgot.)Lothar wrote:Why don't you try giving up lying for lent?Bet51987 wrote:I have to keep up my image for my dad and the church
Maybe you just traded them in for different ones.Beowulf wrote:I gave up my morals for lent. So far so good.
Where in the Bible does it say that \"sola Scriptura\" is the only way to go? Wasn't that made up by a certain person as well?
[grenade](Mark 7:6-7) 6 He said to them: “Isaiah aptly prophesied about YOU hypocrites, as it is written, ‘This people honor me with [their] lips, but their hearts are far removed from me. 7 It is in vain that they keep worshiping me, because they teach as doctrines commands of men.. . .
Matthew 16: 18-19 wrote:"And so I say to you, you are Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of the netherworld shall not prevail against it. I will give you the keys to the kingdom of heaven. Whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven; and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven."
Man was given authority over the Church on earth by Christ himself. And you still haven't answered my other point; before Luther, the whole concept of "sola Scriptura" was completely nonexistent.Matthew 28: 19-20 wrote:"Go, therefore, and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you. And behold, I am with you always, until the end of the age."
Perhaps I'm blind, but I don't see exactly where it said for man to introduce teachings and doctrines that weren't outlined in the bible as things to practice.Man was given authority over the Church on earth by Christ himself
If there were a pop quiz, many religions would have a big fat Red \"F\" on their answer paper for that subject. That's why so many people are apathetic towards religion.teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you
I admit, I wasn't familiar with the term \"Sola Scriptura\" before you mentioned it, but I did a little reading up on it. Pretty Interesting. How about this part\"And you still haven't answered my other point; before Luther, the whole concept of \"sola Scriptura\" was completely nonexistent.
In other words, double check everything that your church teaches you with biblical references. Many people listen and allow themselves to be influenced by churches who are doing nothing but pouring honey in their ears. Everyone who actively participates in something should solidy their conviction in what they do and why they do it.(1 John 4:1-3) . . .Beloved ones, do not believe every inspired expression, but test the inspired expressions to see whether they originate with God, because many false prophets have gone forth into the world. 2 YOU gain the knowledge of the inspired expression from God by this: Every inspired expression that confesses Jesus Christ as having come in the flesh originates with God, 3 but every inspired expression that does not confess Jesus does not originate with God. Furthermore, this is the antichrist’s [inspired expression] which YOU have heard was coming, and now it is already in the world. . .
Note that in the Greek, it comes out as a pun:Top Gun wrote:Matthew 16: 18-19 "And so I say to you, you are Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church"
Mt 15:7-9 Ye hypocrites, well did Esaias prophesy of you, saying, This people draweth nigh unto me with their mouth, and honoureth me with their lips; but their heart is far from me. But in vain they do worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men.Top Gun wrote:before Luther, the whole concept of "sola Scriptura" was completely nonexistent.
Totally agreed.Kilarin wrote:The source of Doctrine is to be God, not man. We can have lengthy discussions on exactly what constitutes "coming from God", but when a new doctrine contradicts or deliberatly changes something clearly laid down by God, we can have little doubt it falls into the area Christ was attacking in Matt. 15.
Actually the odds are fairly high that they could have been speaking greek. At that time greek was the universal language, spoken by both Romans and others in that part of the world (contrary to the "Passion of Christ," Romans in the provences did not usually speak latin - Mel Gibson was shown the evidence for this and he rejected it for theatrical reasons). The ability to write it may have been limited, but most people could speak greek at that time.Kilarin wrote:Of course, the problem here is that Christ was almost certainly speaking Aramaic, not greek, so the joke may not have been intended quite this way in the original, we can't be certain. But Matthew translated it that way, and I assume he did so in an attempt to capture the flavor of the original statement.
On Peter and the Rock.Kilarin wrote:Note that in the Greek, it comes out as a pun:Top Gun wrote:Matthew 16: 18-19 "And so I say to you, you are Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church"
Peter is a small rock, Christ is the large stone. To paraphrase (badly) the joke: ...
... Oh, and just to clarify, this is NOT a "I hate Catholics and all Catholics are going to hell!" post. I can disagree with you and still get along just fine.
Would he have been speaking Hebrew? or at that time jewish?Kilarin wrote:Of course, the problem here is that Christ was almost certainly speaking Aramaic,..
I believe that Hebrew was at that time a more formal language, reserved for religious ceremonies; the common people spoke Aramaic in their day-to-day lives.Duper wrote:Would he have been speaking Hebrew? or at that time jewish?Kilarin wrote:Of course, the problem here is that Christ was almost certainly speaking Aramaic,..
You never said whether you were giving up all chocolates or just bon bons. Either way, I really hope you make it. No joking around.Kiran wrote:...
I assume he didn't want to give Peter a girlie name, so he used the masculine form of rock instead of the feminine form. It just happens that the masculine form refers to a smaller rock than the feminine form. In Aramaic, there would be no difference.Kilarin wrote:Of course, the problem here is that Christ was almost certainly speaking Aramaic, not greek, so the joke may not have been intended quite this way in the original, we can't be certain. But Matthew translated it that way, and I assume he did so in an attempt to capture the flavor of the original statement.
Oh, absolutely agreed that they all were likely to know greek. But would they have been likely to speak it among themselves? A large percentage of Europeans can speek English, and may use it when in a mixed crowd, but are they likely to use it when speaking to others who share the same native tounge as themselves? The several times that Christ's statements are preserved in Aramaic seem to indicate to me that among the Jewish disciples he was likely to be speaking in that tounge.Shoku wrote:Actually the odds are fairly high that they could have been speaking greek
dissent wrote:On Peter and the Rock.
A very nice link, thank you! I'll have to look into his point about the change in "Petros" between Attic and Koine Greek. It doesn't change any fundamental points for me since I already acknowledged the translation issue and find the other points of the argument to be more convincing than the "Petros - Petra" issue, but still, interesting and needs research, thank you!Mercury wrote:I assume he didn't want to give Peter a girlie name
Ha! Very true. But for me it's not a *sigh* issue. I LIKE religious debates, and find that I almost always walk away from them with more knowledge than I had going in. Your "Attic vs Koine" issue being a good example. My Greek is limited to understanding how to use Strong's Exhaustive Concordance.dissent wrote:Yes, we'll disagree (and still get along!); and doubt we'll solve this here. *sigh*
Tis ok Kir, I've got a workout planned out for you, and I promise you'll love it.Kiran wrote:Heck no, Test. I'll get fat!