Originally posted by @ghost-of-a-dukeIn the Catholic view, the church ascendant is perfect and the church militant is going to be flawed due to the fact it's made up of humans.
It's taking its time...
(And heads up, something riddled with contradictions and contextual bias is unlikely to be infallible).
Also... St. Augustine actually argued that the greatest argument against Christianity would be if the church made people perfect.
The church preaches a perfect word, but it is done by flawed people.
In one sense it is perfect as the product is perfect, but in another, it is flawed.
Its a nuanced position.
31 Jan 18
Originally posted by @rajk999Faith in the redemptive work of Christ, does not give eternal life in the Kingdom of God.
Faith in the redemptive work of Christ, does not give eternal life in the Kingdom of God. That doctrine is a figment of the imagination of some Christians who believe that laziness and complacency is the route to Gods Kingdom.
It was Freaky I believe who mentioned this doctrine recently and when I challenged him to produce some passages he disappeared. ...[text shortened]... itings, those which match Christ's doctrine, about good works they find ways to explain it away.
Do you think that having "faith in the redemptive work of Christ" is part of the gospel preached by Jesus during His ministry? If so, where? If not, why do you think Jesus omitted it?.
- Joined
- 14 Mar 15
- Moves
- 29628
Originally posted by @jacob-vervilleI think it's yet to be proven sir that the product is perfect.
In the Catholic view, the church ascendant is perfect and the church militant is going to be flawed due to the fact it's made up of humans.
Also... St. Augustine actually argued that the greatest argument against Christianity would be if the church made people perfect.
The church preaches a perfect word, but it is done by flawed people.
In ...[text shortened]... t is perfect as the product is perfect, but in another, it is flawed.
Its a nuanced position.
Originally posted by @jacob-vervilleYou don't seem very adept at critical thinking. All of your questions are loaded. Based on your responses to me here and elsewhere, it seems you have a penchant for asking questions that don't logically follow.
This isn't going to work out well for you.
Do you believe that God founded the church? The Bible says that the gates of hell would not prevail against the Church (Matthew 16:18).
Suggesting that Paul takes away from Jesus implies that the basic structure of the whole church has been wrong, and that the Bible itself has been falsely constructe ...[text shortened]... l to begin with... It basically only serves to strip the Bible of context and of great epistles.
In the first quote box in the OP, an argument is made that the "redemptive work on the cross for salvation" is not part of the gospel preached by Jesus during His ministry. If you believe that the argument is incorrect, then show where it is, in fact, in the gospel preached by Jesus during His ministry. If you believe it is correct, then make a case that the gospel of Paul should be the foundation rather than the gospel preached by Jesus during His ministry.
31 Jan 18
Originally posted by @secondsonLet's say that new document is found. In it is a proclamation that it is the word of God. Is that enough for you to believe that it is, in fact, the word of God? Or do you judge it by a different standard?
2 Peter 3:15,16
And account that the longsuffering of our Lord is salvation; even as our beloved brother Paul also according to the wisdom given unto him hath written unto you;
As also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things; in which are some things hard to be understood, which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also t ...[text shortened]... aul "as they do also the other scriptures, unto their own destruction".
The OP clearly fails.
What you've provided here is similar. Just once removed.
Originally posted by @fmfWhatever Paul's motive, there is a wide gulf between the gospel preached by Jesus during His ministry and what Christianity, by and large, has made of what Paul had to say. Conceptually they are light years apart.
This is a wee bit off-topic but I think the way corporate Christianity latched the carefully calculated and repellant gobbledygook of Revelation onto the end of the Jesus story is worthy of scrutiny in addition to the spin applied by Paul who may well have been working in the interests of Rome. Just a footnote by me. Not an attempt to derail the thread.
Yeah, the Book of Revelation IS a completely different topic.
Originally posted by @ghost-of-a-dukeRIght, it just isn't going to have universal appeal. Some people just don't get it. And that's OK. I hope you will one day see it as a perfect product.
I think it's yet to be proven sir that the product is perfect.
But this has always been the case.
Some people see and hear, but do not understand, as is hinted at in Mark 4.
If you ask for understanding and what the nature of the gospels are, and seek with a true heart, you will receive understanding.
One of the keys to this is abandoning all pride.
31 Jan 18
Originally posted by @jacob-vervilleSome people see and hear, but do not understand, as is hinted at in Mark 4.
RIght, it just isn't going to have universal appeal. Some people just don't get it. And that's OK. I hope you will one day see it as a perfect product.
But this has always been the case.
Some people see and hear, but do not understand, as is hinted at in Mark 4.
If you ask for understanding and what the nature of the gospels are, and seek ...[text shortened]... true heart, you will receive understanding.
One of the keys to this is abandoning all pride.
In Mark 4, clearly Jesus was speaking of the gospel that He preached during His ministry.
From what I can tell, the vast majority of Christians do not have the gospel that Jesus preached during His ministry as their foundation. They neither hear nor understand.
Originally posted by @jacob-vervilleOk, I have no issue with your answers with which I concur. Except for the definition of 'church'. I interpret that to mean a body of people drawn from all walks of life, nations and peoples. The church are the brothers and sisters of Christ and defined as those who follow Christs commandments. The 'church' as far as Christ is concerned, is not a body of people who share a common doctrine. That is mans definition of 'church'.
I apologize. I wish that I had some kind of notifications on when someone directly replied to me. I also end up sucked into some other specific kind of discussion elsewhere.
(1) The Church that God founded is representative of the churches in general, because they would inevitably have issues with geography and splitting. But I do believe that ev ...[text shortened]... the traditions and the teachings are upheld well enough.
We cannot expect it to be perfect.
01 Feb 18
Originally posted by @thinkofone1. No. Not even the disciples were aware that Christ would be crudified.
[b]Faith in the redemptive work of Christ, does not give eternal life in the Kingdom of God.
Do you think that having "faith in the redemptive work of Christ" is part of the gospel preached by Jesus during His ministry? If so, where? If not, why do you think Jesus omitted it?.[/b]
2. Its not relevant to ones eternal life.
01 Feb 18
Originally posted by @rajk999Yeah, you know what, I agree with this, though I would not frontload this as a lesson for life.
Ok, I have no issue with your answers with which I concur. Except for the definition of 'church'. I interpret that to mean a body of people drawn from all walks of life, nations and peoples. The church are the brothers and sisters of Christ and defined as those who follow Christs commandments. The 'church' as far as Christ is concerned, is not a body of people who share a common doctrine. That is mans definition of 'church'.
I believe in a 'freedom in the non-essential,' and I fully endorse brotherhood and sisterhood with Christians of other denominations and recognizing them as my great allies.
But, if we over-emphasize ecumenism, we actually become a bit weaker collectively. In a weird way, our passionate disagreements are maybe part of the design of how we ought to be.It's hard to expand on that further and I do not think I can be eloquent right now so I will leave it at that. Perhaps you have ahd the same thought before.
Originally posted by @thinkofoneI try to not be overly judgmental about that kind of thing. I think it's really difficult to be a good Christian, and there is an active, gravitational pull that can begin to keep us down. So I think I see your point... definitely, there are issues with how we execute the Gospel, but at the same time...
[b]Some people see and hear, but do not understand, as is hinted at in Mark 4.
In Mark 4, clearly Jesus was speaking of the gospel that He preached during His ministry.
From what I can tell, the vast majority of Christians do not have the gospel that Jesus preached during His ministry as their foundation. They neither hear nor understand.[/b]
Who am I to judge?
Everyone is really obsessive about how the Christians should not be judgmental of others but few people are that charitable towards the Christians. Such has been my experience.
01 Feb 18
Originally posted by @ghost-of-a-dukeBecause, you know, "man" and stuff.
I never said man was infallible. I'm asking why an infallible book fails to deliver a perfect church.
😛
Originally posted by @ghost-of-a-dukeShow the man who has lived his life in accord with the infallible truth and then explain how the truth failed.
I never said man was infallible. I'm asking why an infallible book fails to deliver a perfect church.