[a / b / c / d / e / f / g / gif / h / hr / k / m / o / p / r / s / t / u / v / vg / vm / vmg / vr / vrpg / vst / w / wg] [i / ic] [r9k / s4s / vip] [cm / hm / lgbt / y] [3 / aco / adv / an / bant / biz / cgl / ck / co / diy / fa / fit / gd / hc / his / int / jp / lit / mlp / mu / n / news / out / po / pol / pw / qst / sci / soc / sp / tg / toy / trv / tv / vp / vt / wsg / wsr / x / xs] [Settings] [Search] [Mobile] [Home]
Board
Settings Mobile Home
/his/ - History & Humanities

Name
Options
Comment
Verification
4chan Pass users can bypass this verification. [Learn More] [Login]
File
  • Please read the Rules and FAQ before posting.

08/21/20New boards added: /vrpg/, /vmg/, /vst/ and /vm/
05/04/17New trial board added: /bant/ - International/Random
10/04/16New board for 4chan Pass users: /vip/ - Very Important Posts
[Hide] [Show All]


[Advertise on 4chan]


File: IMG_5670.jpg (145 KB, 689x900)
145 KB
145 KB JPG
Homily on Eutropius 6, Homilies on Matthew 13.1, 49 (paraphrased)
>You dare to seize the scripture while you stand outside the church. You are no different from the devil who quoted them to tempt the lord. You tear the words of God from the body of Christ and twist them to your own ruin. You make the gospel a sword against the gospel and set Christ’s house in flames with your private opinions. Such men are worse than unbelievers for they speak in Christ’s name while they war against his bride. Flee from your own inventions, abandon your lawless interpretations and bow before the judgment of the church.
Protestants BTFO.
>>
>>18066408
That's not a debunking that's just him seething about people not following his commands. He lived in a time where there were other groups of bishops which could and did reject the imperial church for various reasons and he is against that. He doesn't make some logical standpoint or argument against either Protestants,Sola Scriptura or even the people he was actually trying to criticise.
>>
>>18066418
Interpretive Circularity
>Without an infallible interpretive authority, all interpretations of Scripture are fallible.
>Fallible interpretations cannot result in certainty about the meaning of an infallible text.
>Therefore, Sola Scriptura cannot provide certainty regarding the correct interpretation of Scripture.

>Determining which books belong in Scripture requires an authority external to those books.
>Appealing to Scripture itself to justify the canon is circular because the canon is what is being established.
>Therefore, Sola Scriptura cannot provide a non-circular basis for identifying the canon of Scripture.
>Too avoid circularity and find certainty, there must be an infallible authority to identify the canon and interpret Scripture.

Besides that, the Bible itself teaches that it is not the sole rule of faith.
1 Timothy 3:15
Ephesians 3:10
2 Peter 1:20
Matthew 18:17
Deuteronomy 17:12
>>
>>18066408
Do you realize/comprehend that protestants don't see Roman Catholicism as the church, rather a mutation of it pretending to be the original host?
So whatever you guys think 'church' means here it's factually, objectively not roman catholism.
>>
>>18066941
Where is the church then in the first millennia according to Protestantism?
>>
>>18066408
>imagine worshipping a zionist dead rabbi nailed to a stick
Islam is the truth
>>
>>18066945
From my understanding Protestants hold that churches are founded on Apostolic beliefs rather than post-apostolic traditions or developed concepts of certain offices-
>Where is the church then in the first millennia according to Protestantism?
-in the hearts & souls of Christians, I guess.
>>
>>18066941
>that wasn't real christianity
you are a bolshevik
>>
>>18067015
>in the hearts and souls of Christians
How many groups from the first millennia held to sola scriptura? The Bible wasn’t canonized until Nicea, which authority did Christians appeal to it before that? Did God leave them without an authority on faith?
>>
>>18066408
But so is catholics.
You are truly souless if idea of "vicar of christ" doesn't give you antichrist vibes.
>>
>>18067008
>shitskinned nonsense is the truth
No, enjoy burning in hell.
>>
>>18067312
your deity has the same skin color
>>
>>18067309
The idea of Christ having a representative is anti-Christ?
>>18067008
How was he a zionist?
The Hadiths believe that the Torah was authentic. In Sunnan Abu Dawood 4449 your leader uses the Torah to solve a dispute.
The Quran confirms the scriptures at its time:
Surah 5:43
Surah 3:3
Surah 7:157
Surah 2:85
Surah 4:47
Besides that, you accuse us of corrupting scripture despite you being okay with the replacement of verses:
Surah 2:106
Surah 16:101
>>
File: 1730942783478189.png (54 KB, 754x466)
54 KB
54 KB PNG
>>18067361
Not him, and I don't agree with what he said about biblical Jesus. However we never claimed the Torah is not authentic. We claim you don't have it at all. There are many concurrent competing versions that claim that tile and you have no theological way to explain their existence while we do with our material. And since you are appealing to the final prophet, can you please show me where this exists in the bible?
>the replacement of verses
Abrogation is not corruption. Jesus does it himself when he changes the law of divorce and in the OT God changes the name his people can use to call upon him. We know btw that they were explicitly given stricter laws as punishment
>We forbade the Jews certain foods that had been lawful to them for their wrongdoing, and for hindering many from the Way of Allah- Quran 4:160
>>
>>18066408
History has debunked any debunking of Sola Scriptura.
>>
>>18067402
>we claim you don’t have it at all
>you are appealing to the final prophet
The reason I am appealing to him is because I am analyzing his message. You believe the Torah is authentic, he believes the Torah is at his time is the authentic one. But not a single manuscript of the Torah teaches Islam. Had it been truly as Islam taught, you would find manuscripts of the Torah that agree with Islam, specially at the time of Sayed Muhammad. You find none which contradicts the message.
>abrogation
There is a difference between a new law replacing a temporary commandment, and literally replacing verses. Surah 16:101 explicitly states that verses are replaced, not only abrogated.
>>
>>18067413
How so?
>>
File: 1735828178808977.png (51 KB, 1019x524)
51 KB
51 KB PNG
>>18067423
>he believes the Torah is at his time is the authentic one
If he does then why does he warn his companions about reading "your" scriptures? No what's most likely true is that there is a general confirmation of what they had. The same way Jesus generally confirms the teachings and authority of the Pharisees
>verses are replaced, not only abrogated
Yeah and? They were meant for a specific time and place much like the previous scriptures. The point I am making is that this is authorized by God, not that text can't be lost to time or made to be forgotten I mean you believe the same about what Jesus wrote down in the sand.
>>
>>18067473
Pricel doesn’t mention which book he acquired. Either way the Hadiths affirm that there was an authentic Torah at the time of early Islam, but we do not have a single manuscript to confirm that.
Jesus only affirmed the authority of the Pharisees when it came to following the Mosaic Law as it had not been fulfilled yet.
>yeah and?
The verse is replaced. It is not something added to it. It is replaced, it is not like initiating a new covenant, you are taking the same verse and replacing it.
>>
>>18066408
This is an airtight argument in the mind of a rat. Interesting! Enjoy burning.
>>
>>18067581
Hey hellfag, will you address this argument? >>18066930
>>
>>18067611
I think that guy is just a troll.
>>
>>18067678
Independent fundamental baptists unironically act this way.
>>
>>18067741
So that isn't just a media stereotype?
>>
>>18066408
This is an interesting quote, but the reason why that isn't a strong argument is twofold. Firstly, there are no actual Scripture quotations here. Yes, there are a couple of allusions I can see, but no actual in-context and direct quotations.

This also leads to the second problem. Anyone who thinks like this guy could disagree with him and repeat the exact same argument back to him word for word.

As a third party, I would have no reason to side with either this person or the person saying the exact same thing on the other side, since neither side is even appealing directly to Scripture. I am not just going to side with whoever is stronger. That's not how truth works.

>>18066930
You have failed to notice, or mention in any way, that the true infallible interpretive authority is the Holy Spirit, according to the Bible.
>>
File: 32128c92a.png (435 KB, 698x648)
435 KB
435 KB PNG
>>18066945
I don't know what Protestantism claims since it's a spinoff of catholicism.

But I can answer the first part of your question. The church in the first millennium was doing exactly what we as the church do today, practicing believer's baptism and congregational church polity.
>>
>>18067273
>The Bible wasn’t canonized until Nicea, which authority did Christians appeal to it before that?
In 1 Timothy 5:18, Paul the apostle appeals to Luke 10:7 as Scripture, quoting Deuteronomy 25:4 right beside it. Peter also calls the epistles of Paul as Scripture in 2 Peter 3:16.
>>
>>18066408
That's just him seething over people point out he's wrong by quoting scripture at him. Total NPD behavior.
>>
>>18067361
>The idea of Christ having a representative is anti-Christ?
Having him be called "Alter Christi" or "another Christ on earth" is extremely Anti-christ.
>>
>>18066930
Sure, but that ain't what OP says.
>>
File: kjvonlyism.jpg (38 KB, 437x342)
38 KB
38 KB JPG
>>18067611
>will you address this argument?
It would be my pleasure, rodent.

>Without an infallible interpretive authority, all interpretations of Scripture are fallible.
All human interpretations of Scripture are fallible because humans are fallible. The Bible is clear: While we are yet in this flesh we can not be without sin. Thus, even if we had the infallible interpretive authority (I do, more on that below), we are still prone to making mistakes in interpretation.
>Fallible interpretations cannot result in certainty about the meaning of an infallible text.
Incorrect. For example, you are a committed enemy of the gospel. You are certain about your interpretation, even though you are objectively wrong.
>Therefore,
You began. with a false premise, so your conclusion is not sound.
Your score: 0/1

>Determining which books belong in Scripture requires an authority external to those books.
This is wrong because, as it happens, the infallible interpretive authority you mentioned in the first argument does in fact exist in the person of the Holy Spirit. (1 Cor 2, KJV) Now observe:
The Holy Ghost is the author and interpreter of the King James Bible.
Furthermore, Jesus is the King James Bible.
Jesus and the Holy Ghost are two persons of the same God.
Jesus and the Holy Ghost are always in agreement, the latter taking orders from the former.
In this sense, Jesus and the Holy Ghost are not external to each other.
Therefore, the King James Bible and the Holy Ghost are not external to each other.
Therefore, the canonicity of the text of the King James Bible does not require an authority external to itself.
QED

(Continued)
>>
File: burning in hell.jpg (32 KB, 515x388)
32 KB
32 KB JPG
>>18068250
>Appealing to Scripture itself to justify the canon is circular because the canon is what is being established.
>Therefore, Sola Scriptura cannot provide a non-circular basis for identifying the canon of Scripture.
Correct, and irrelevant.
>Too avoid circularity and find certainty, there must be an infallible authority to identify the canon and interpret Scripture.
This is not an argument but a restatement of prior premises which I have successfully demonstrated to be false.
Your score: 0/2

>Gish Gallop in the form of a Laundry list of Bible Verses
I'm not going to address each one of these. Instead, I will grade all of them on the basis of the one you led with.
>1 Timothy 3:15
It is already telling that you failed to include the text of the verse. I'll pull it from umich.edu:
>But if I tarry long, that thou mayest know how thou oughtest to behave thyself in the house of God, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and ground of the truth.
This verse does not teach that churches are an authority on questions of faith. Rather, it quite rightly reminds the young preacher of the sanctity of his position, and that he should respect the truth for which the congregation is meeting in the first place. Consider how absurd, too, your interpretation is in like of the fact that in other epistles Paul condemns the doctrine of various churches. Perhaps your rodent brain thinks "the church" refers to a universal church, but that is not a Biblical teaching. It's a fantasy of perverted Catholic minds.
Your score: 0/7
Let's face it, you decided long ago that you hate God and that you won't believe the truth no matter what. The purpose of my response is not to educate you. Your rodent brain is way too far gone for that. Rather, I wrote all of this mainly because after you have read it you'll have even less excuse for your hatred of the Gospel. As such, the flames of Hell which receive you will be MUCH hotter. I can't wait to hear your screams. Enjoy!
>>
>>18068271
not very convincing
nta

muting you byeee :)
>>
>>18066408
Is there any proof that this saint existed?
>>
File: 1742801333317207.png (159 KB, 844x422)
159 KB
159 KB PNG
>>18067554
I mean personally it seems pretty clear since Moses was invoked and https://sunnah.com/bukhari:2685 shows us that this is also with regards to God's direct revelation and not just something like the Mishanh. However beside the fact that we have recorded information of what is supposed to exist in your Torah but doesn't, what they read from their version is also explicitly identified as only partially trustworthy. As for your point on manuscripts, before 1945 we also didn't have that for the gospel of Thomas but it was attested to have existed way before discovery in a manner similar to what I am proposing is the case here. In addition we have many now lost works that the bible itself uses https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-canonical_books_referenced_in_the_Bible I would not be surprised in the slightest if one of them shows up in the future. It is certainly not outside the realm of possibility.
>Jesus only affirmed the authority of the Pharisees when it came to following the Mosaic Law as it had not been fulfilled yet
Jesus gave a condition of when that is supposed to happen and since Heaven and Earth are still here it couldn't have possibly been met. btw while it's true they were in the seat of Moses his disciples were taught to listen to everything they say! He wasn't being specific at all there beside warning against their hypocrisy. You could obviously find a way to harmonize this with the fact that he was constantly proving them wrong and that's by affirming he meant a general confirmation of their teaching only.
>it is not like initiating a new covenant
With both you have rules that exist at one point and then they are no longer to be followed or are lost for X reason. If you have a problem with this then why not with Hebrews 8:7? which goes one step further by saying there was something wrong with the previous covenant. Or even John 21:25 which implies that a lot of Jesus' teachings are lost. At least with the Quran you have something in their place
>>
>>18066408
why can't priests be dripped out like this anymore?
>>
>>18067015
>Apostolic beliefs
apostolic revelations anon
>>
>>18067273
>>18068073

Stop repeating this lie that the Bible was officiated at the Council of Nicea. This is a myth that was started by Voltaire and is repeated by ever Protestant because they're retarded and know nothing about the history of Christianity.
>>
>>18066408
>another orthocuck larp thread
yawn
>>
>>18066408
>multiple citations for a single quote
>"paraphrased"
What precisely are you quoting?
>>
>>18068068
The Donatists were not credobaptists, they rebaptized because they disputed the validity of baptisms performed by bishops whose authority they disputed, not because they disputed the validity of infant baptism (which they also practiced).
>>18066945
It is true, the work of reform was new, since if reform was not new it would also be unnecessary. But the faith which was reformed was not new, being the faith once for all delivered to the saints by our Lord Jesus Christ in the New Testament. Therefore, if it is objected where our Church was before Luther and Zwingli, we say that it was principally found in the Lollards, Hussites and Waldensians. And before them it was found in the old Latin churches of the west (if not also the Greek churches in the east) especially as represented by the medieval Augustinians, as Ratramnus and Gottschalk, who resisted the creeping innovations of transubstantiation and free will which have long since taken Rome captive, and the venerable Bede, and Fulgentius of Ruspe, and Prosper of Aquitane. And before them it was in the Greek and Latin fathers; and before them it was in the apostles and the Lord. So the Lord has preserved for Himself a remnant in every age, if not always with the same splendor and visibility. But the modern Roman church, seeing as she has nothing at all in common whatsoever with the ancient fathers whether in faith or practice or structure, we deny to have any part in the one, holy, catholic and apostolic Church, but name her the whore of Babylon, the counterfeit church which the dragon created upon seven hills with the beast at its head, inside of which there is ordinarily no possibility of salvation.
>>
>>18067911
No, you can frequent their telegram channels if you care. They believe in OSAS and Sola Fide unless you are Catholic, than in this case it is not by faith alone.
>>18068061
>is the Holy Spirit
Didn’t Jesus tell his apostles that the Holy Spirit will be with them when they are together? That’s the point of Ecumenical Councils. Also, how do you know the interpretation of the Holy Spirit? Can each believe know individually?>>18068073
Not all Christians had access to scripture, where did they get the information from? Why did St. Peter prohibit private interpretation?
>>18068077
This is for the priest consecrating the eucharist or else he wouldn’t be able to do it. But he is not considered to be Christ himself.
>>
>>18068250
>we are still prone to making mistakes
Does not answer my question regarding epistemic certainty.
>you are certain of your interpretation
False, or else I would be a baptist or other protestant heretic like you.
Your estimated iq: 45
>KJV
The KJV literally came centuries after Christ, how did Christians receive any theological information for all of these centuries?
>Holy Spirit
Yes, but how do we know what the Holy Spirit declares as true without an objective united authority?
Jesus also told his anointed apostles in Matthew 18:20 that when they are together the holy spirit is with them, this is reflected in our Ecumenical councils where the bishops being the successors of the apostles meet together with the leadership of the successor of St. Peter.
>>18068271
>irrelevant
You admit that your doctrine uses circular logic and you don’t realize the problem?
>successfully demonstrated to be false
Good one.
Your estimated iq: 40
>1 Timothy 3:15
>St. Paul condemns the teachings of several churches
These are individual parishes which heretics like you were trying to mislead.
>respect the truth for which the congregation is meeting
So you believe the congregations are an authority on matters of faith?
Nice self-refutation.
Your estimated iq? 0.45
Get baptized into the One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church outside of which there is no salvation.
You are a manifest heretic whose church disappeared for 1500 years. Repent.
You also hypocritically believe in salvation through faith alone but refuse to apply it to Catholics. If one believed in Christ and then converted to Catholicism it should not matter to you.
>>
>>18069631
>Sola Fide unless you are Catholic, than in this case it is not by faith alone.
The sinner is justified by faith alone, so that all the believer must to do be saved is believe in the Lord Jesus, but Romanists do not believe in Him. What is meant by believe is not pay lipservice, but trust in alone and rely upon Him only for salvation, so that, those who rely also upon their own merits and satisfactions, and on those of Mary, and the saints, cannot properly said to have saving faith. It is all or nothing. Hence, the apostle Paul curses the judaizers and calls them false brothers, agents of Satan sent to spy out our freedom in Christ Jesus.
>Didn’t Jesus tell his apostles that the Holy Spirit will be with them when they are together? That’s the point of Ecumenical Councils
Ecumenical councils are not the only time when the Church is together, nor is the meaning of Christ's word that His ministers would be incapable of error.
>Also, how do you know the interpretation of the Holy Spirit? Can each believe know individually?
Each believer can know the intent of the Holy Spirit in the scripture by applying proper methods of exegesis. That every believer can, in no way implies every believer does.
>Not all Christians had access to scripture, where did they get the information from?
What this has to do with sola scriptura I cannot apprehend, the doctrine is that scripture alone is the source of orthodox doctrine, not that the only way to know orthodox doctrine is by reading scripture. Thus it is proper for Christian people to learn from the elders (which in ancient custom preached expositorily through scripture itself), but not proper for the elders to teach them other than what is biblical.

(cont)
>>
>>18069631
>Why did St. Peter prohibit private interpretation?
This is of great value, since it exposes two things: 1. that we may infer the correct meaning of scripture through proper exegesis, since it is manifest your stated interpretation is in error 2. that you do not nor can consistently believe and apply your own arguments, since you are right now arguing from your "private interpretation" of a verse of scripture
>This is for the priest consecrating the eucharist or else he wouldn’t be able to do it
And that is precisely why he is to be considered an Antichrist not merely because he claims to be another Christ but because he claims it properly, namely, by claiming to do what Christ does in offering Christ as sacrifice for the sins of the living and the dead.
>>
File: But I was BASED.jpg (34 KB, 465x406)
34 KB
34 KB JPG
>>18069636
>Yes, but how do we know what the Holy Spirit declares as true without an objective united authority?
Your solution places the antichrist "church" above God. You're done. :)
>You admit that your doctrine uses circular logic and you don’t realize the problem?
Yes. There is no problem.
>So you believe the congregations are an authority on matters of faith?
No, you just can't read. Typical of a Catholic.
>If one believed in Christ and then converted to Catholicism it should not matter to you.
This is an impossible scenario because
1. Catholics don't believe in Christ for their salvation.
2. It's impossible to lose your salvation, so no saved person could believe in Catholic "salvific" doctrine.
Thanks for doubling down, you just made the flames MUCH hotter for yourself. I can't wait to hear your tormented screams. Tick tock.
>>
>>18068250
>1 Cor 2
Nothing in this says anything about the King James Bible, you are illiterate.
>>
>>18069693
>I can't read!
Noted. Enjoy Hell.
>>
>>18069701
What makes you think this 1st century Greek text is talking about a 17th century English book?
>>
>>18069722
You don't understand what I wrote.
>Oh yeah? Then answer this question based on my misunderstanding.
No. Your brain is worthless.
>>
I win.
>>
>>18069688
>your solution
The apostles have the holy spirit between them according to Christ when they are together.
What is your solution?
>there is no problem
No problem with circular logic? Good job, you buried yourself.
>you just can’t read
You literally said that they must respect the truth the congregation is holding, what does this mean then?
>Catholics don’t believe in Christ for salvation
Read the 1st chapter of the sixth session of the Council of Trent.
>so no saved person could
According to your own wicked anti-apostle “pastor” Steven Anderson, one can be a believer and become an idolator, drunkard, fornicator, adulterer and still be saved, so simply believing in Catholic doctrine after being saved shouldn’t be impossible.
You are extremely misinformed, I hope you repent soon.
>>18069668
Pope Pius IV, Council of Trent, Sess. 25, On Invocation, Veneration and Relics of Saints, and on Sacred Images, ex cathedra:
>“… the saints, who reign with Christ, offer up their prayers to God for men; and that it is good and useful to invoke them suppliantly and, in order to obtain favors from God through His Son JESUS CHRIST OUR LORD, WHO ALONE IS OUR REDEEMER and Savior… And they must also teach that images of Christ, the virgin mother of God and the other saints should be set up and kept… But if anyone should teach or maintain anything contrary to these decrees, let him be anathema.”
We believe Jesus alone redeems us and that he saved us. The first chapter of the sixth session of the council of Trent is clear on the inability of nature and the law to justify us.
>>
>>18069668
>>18070067
>not the only time
It is the only time where the bishops, the successors of the apostles are all together.
Christ’s ministers wrote the Bible itself, if they do not have any infallibility when teaching dogma than we cannot even correctly believe.
>every believer can
How to do so? Where did you learn this exegesis from?
>sola scriptura
Sola scriptura is that the Bible is the sole authoritative is the sole infallible authority of faith, if the Bible wasn’t canonized and available it would imply Christians had an infallible authority outside of the Bible to appeal to, or else they lived for centuries without epistemic certainty on many issues.
>we may infer the correct meaning of scripture
If you and I used the same exegesis and reached different conclusions, how do we determine which is true? How do you also determine which exegesis is the proper one?
>offering Christ
Christ himself does it, the priest wouldn’t be able to do any of that without Christ.
>>
>>18070067
Just stop, heretic. You lost. You have egg all over your face, a total embarrassment. Discerning Christians see how much you hate God, it is written over every post of yours. You're just making Hell worse for yourself. Idiot. :)
>>
>>18070126
>please stop I can’t answer you
I accept your concession.
Heretical blasphemer and schismatic, I pray you realize how dumb you are that people thought you were a troll. The entire board can see how you are an intellectual lightweight who believes circular arguments are logical.
>>
>>18070203
>I accept your concession.
Strong delusion is a sign that God hates you. Tick tock.
>>
Btw by tick tock I mean I'm waiting for you to f*ck my mom
>>
>>18070208
Well you basically begged me to stop after you admitted your doctrine is built on circular logic.
Are you also a flat earther like the rest of your sect?
>>
>>18070223
On second thought, keep going. I would love you to max out your punishment in Hell. You're such a vile little rat. This is fun.
>>
>>18070227
NTA but do you actually believe people disagreeing with you on an image board will make a big difference to how God judges them? Or is this just some mantra you use to validate yourself? Tell me, honestly, I'm very interested to know if you're actually pulling this off.
>>
>>18070238
>NTA but do you actually believe people disagreeing with you on an image board will make a big difference to how God judges them?
No, I believe the following are sins which make a difference in how God judges them:
1. Lying
2. Thinking stupid thoughts
3. Blasphemy
4. Spreading false religion
>Or is this just some mantra you use to validate yourself?
Not really. I've already said, I'm happy that it's increasing its torment in the lake of fire.
>Tell me, honestly, I'm very interested to know if you're actually pulling this off.
Pulling what off?
>>
>>18069631
>Didn’t Jesus tell his apostles that the Holy Spirit will be with them when they are together?
In the Gospel of John it says:

"And I will pray the Father, and he shall give you another Comforter, that he may abide with you for ever;
Even the Spirit of truth; whom the world cannot receive, because it seeth him not, neither knoweth him: but ye know him; for he dwelleth with you, and shall be in you."
(John 14:16-17)

This is referred to as the indwelling of the Holy Spirit. See the following:

"Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth: for he shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak: and he will shew you things to come.
He shall glorify me: for he shall receive of mine, and shall shew it unto you."
(John 16:13-14)

"Now we have received, not the spirit of the world, but the spirit which is of God; that we might know the things that are freely given to us of God.
Which things also we speak, not in the words which man's wisdom teacheth, but which the Holy Ghost teacheth; comparing spiritual things with spiritual."
(1 Corinthians 2:12-13)

"But the anointing which ye have received of him abideth in you, and ye need not that any man teach you: but as the same anointing teacheth you of all things, and is truth, and is no lie, and even as it hath taught you, ye shall abide in him."
(1 John 2:27)

>Why did St. Peter prohibit private interpretation?
Private interpretations is referring to those who do not receive guidance from the Holy Ghost. If they do not receive that guidance, they will only have private interpretations. This includes all unsaved people. See 1 Corinthians 2:14 for example.

>Can each believe know individually?
Believers are taught the truth of Scripture by God, according to 1 Corinthians 2:13. We, as saved people, are taught the truth of Scripture directly by the Holy Ghost according to Paul. Thus, a believer needs not that any man teach him, as it says in 1 John 2:27.
>>
File: 14c5271000.png (216 KB, 561x747)
216 KB
216 KB PNG
>>18069424
>The Donatists were not credobaptists,
There were many churches that dissented from Rome under Constantine. They were not a single monolithic group. The dissent got even worse after he and his immediate heirs explicitly started supporting Arianism and Arius. The reality is that the history of dissent from Constantine's reforms is not as simple as you've made it out to be. Augustine's letter to Vincentius is sufficient to clear that misconception.
>>
>>18070243
So right off the bat I see that "thinking stupid thoughts" and blasphemous thoughts or opinions aren't really going to be much different regardless if he engages with you or not. So the other two things are "lying" and "spreading false religion"... this is going to MAX OUT his punishment? Lying on an image board about religion? You genuinely convinced yourself your interaction with him makes such a difference?
>>
>>18070073
>if the Bible wasn’t canonized and available it would imply Christians had an infallible authority outside of the Bible to appeal to, or else they lived for centuries without epistemic certainty on many issues.
Yes, the same authority that assures believers today that the Bible is divinely inspired truth. The Holy Spirit is the infallible authority that confirms God's word. He was back then, He still is now.

"He that is of God heareth God's words: ye therefore hear them not, because ye are not of God." - John 8:47

The above is always true in all ages. It has absolutely nothing to do with following political councils and letting them make decisions for you. That's just putting your trust in man rather than God.
>>
>>18070251
>I can't answer a basic question
This is boring. I have better things to work on.
>>
>>18070274
Like convincing yourself that your posts have the power to affect someone's judgement and eternity? Please leave this site.
>>
>>18070244
I was specifically referring to Matthew 18:20 in which Jesus tells his anointed apostles that when several of them meet the Spirit will be with them and that whatever they bind on earth will be so in heaven.
>if they do not receive that guidance
How does one receive such guidance? Because even among sola scriptura groups, you see vast disagreements on dogmatic issues.
>thus a believer need not that any man teach him
The church is taught by the Holy Spirit, or else Jesus would never tell his disciples that whoever refuses to listen to the church is like a heathen. Jesus also tells us to appeal to the church which St. Paul himself also did, this shows that the Bible is not the sole infallible authority on faith.
>>
>>18070227
How funny it will be when you realize you were in such deep error. You literally believe in circular logic. Are you a troll?
>>
>>18066930
But how are you infallibly certain that you aren't a brain in a vat?
>>
>>18070291
Matthew 18:15-20 says the following:

"Moreover if thy brother shall trespass against thee, go and tell him his fault between thee and him alone: if he shall hear thee, thou hast gained thy brother.
16 But if he will not hear thee, then take with thee one or two more, that in the mouth of two or three witnesses every word may be established.
17 And if he shall neglect to hear them, tell it unto the church: but if he neglect to hear the church, let him be unto thee as an heathen man and a publican.
18 Verily I say unto you, Whatsoever ye shall bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever ye shall loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.
19 Again I say unto you, That if two of you shall agree on earth as touching any thing that they shall ask, it shall be done for them of my Father which is in heaven.
20 For where two or three are gathered together in my name, there am I in the midst of them."
(Matthew 18:15-20)

The above is talking about church discipline. The leaders of the church are given the authority to decide for the church whether someone who commits an offense will be forgiven collectively by that church or not. There are examples of church discipline in other part of the New Testament where this is relevant, such as 1 Corinthians 5.

You can contrast the concept of church discipline with what follows in the next two verses:

"Then came Peter to him, and said, Lord, how oft shall my brother sin against me, and I forgive him? till seven times?
Jesus saith unto him, I say not unto thee, Until seven times: but, Until seventy times seven."
(Matthew 18:21-22)

According to Christ, we are expected to forgive those who do us wrong precisely as we would have the Heavenly Father forgive us.

From the above we see that there are sins, transgressions or offenses that pertain to you as an individual, which you are responsible to forgive accordingly. Likewise, the church leadership has been given the authority to handle church discipline. (1/2)
>>
File: 1724681057600501.jpg (1011 KB, 3840x1200)
1011 KB
1011 KB JPG
>>18070291
>How does one receive such guidance?
According to the Bible, the Holy Spirit is given to each believer individually and will guide them into all truth. All they have to do is study the word and pray. The Holy Spirit is the only way for anyone to receive the correct and true meaning of Scripture. Otherwise, they will stumble and fail with private interpretations, as Peter noted, that are not guided by God into the truth. Note the following:

"And I say unto you, Ask, and it shall be given you; seek, and ye shall find; knock, and it shall be opened unto you.
10 For every one that asketh receiveth; and he that seeketh findeth; and to him that knocketh it shall be opened.
11 If a son shall ask bread of any of you that is a father, will he give him a stone? or if he ask a fish, will he for a fish give him a serpent?
12 Or if he shall ask an egg, will he offer him a scorpion?
13 If ye then, being evil, know how to give good gifts unto your children: how much more shall your heavenly Father give the Holy Spirit to them that ask him?"
(Luke 11:9-13)

"Now he which stablisheth us with you in Christ, and hath anointed us, is God;
Who hath also sealed us, and given the earnest of the Spirit in our hearts."
(2 Corinthians 1:21-22)

"And grieve not the holy Spirit of God, whereby ye are sealed unto the day of redemption."
(Ephesians 4:30)

This accords with what Jesus said in John 14:16-17 and beyond.

>even among sola scriptura groups, you see vast disagreements on dogmatic issues.
You don't need to look to other people to find the truth, only study the word and pray. There are others who also do this and arrived at the truth because God is real. This process can only work with the Holy Spirit's intervention.

Those who do not believe that God can work in this way, effectively denying that the Holy Spirit guides individual believers as described in the Bible, then start looking for groups of men to follow after as a kind of substitute for God. This will never work.
>>
>>18070327
Correct. Of course, the vermin you are talking to decided to reject the Holy Ghost a long time ago, so you are talking at a wall of dung, I'm afraid.
>>
>>18070320
NTA but you're saying individuals have to forgive everything done to them but the church doesn't? Man that's really convenient, it's almost like the church made up these rules for their own benefit.
>>
>>18070465
>NTA but you're saying individuals have to forgive everything done to them
There's more than just forgiveness involved actually. It also says in another place that we have to rebuke.

"Take heed to yourselves: If thy brother trespass against thee, rebuke him; and if he repent, forgive him.
And if he trespass against thee seven times in a day, and seven times in a day turn again to thee, saying, I repent; thou shalt forgive him."
(Luke 17:3-4)

>but the church doesn't?
According to Matthew 18:17-18, it depends on the leadership of the church.

"I wrote unto you in an epistle not to company with fornicators:
10 Yet not altogether with the fornicators of this world, or with the covetous, or extortioners, or with idolaters; for then must ye needs go out of the world.
11 But now I have written unto you not to keep company, if any man that is called a brother be a fornicator, or covetous, or an idolater, or a railer, or a drunkard, or an extortioner; with such an one no not to eat.
12 For what have I to do to judge them also that are without? do not ye judge them that are within?
13 But them that are without God judgeth. Therefore put away from among yourselves that wicked person."
- 1 Corinthians 5:9-13

"Sufficient to such a man is this punishment, which was inflicted of many.
7 So that contrariwise ye ought rather to forgive him, and comfort him, lest perhaps such a one should be swallowed up with overmuch sorrow.
8 Wherefore I beseech you that ye would confirm your love toward him.
9 For to this end also did I write, that I might know the proof of you, whether ye be obedient in all things.
10 To whom ye forgive any thing, I forgive also: for if I forgave any thing, to whom I forgave it, for your sakes forgave I it in the person of Christ;
11 Lest Satan should get an advantage of us: for we are not ignorant of his devices."
- 2 Corinthians 2:6-11

So you see in this example that the Corinthian church did later forgive the man who was put under discipline.
>>
>>18070285
Like binge watching Sailor Moon.
>>
>mortal man debunked the immortal word of god
Just one more Vatican iii will fix it
>>
>>18066408
>hates rich people
>hates pagans
>hates Jews
>hates homosexuals

I fucking love Chrysostom. The most based of the Church Fathers.
>>
>>18070320
>the leaders of the church are given authority to decide whether someone will be forgiven
Is this authority infallible? If they decide one is to be forgiven, is this decision infallible?
>>18070327
>only study the word any pray
But there are times where I may not understand, which authority do I appeal to to understand the verse? If your system worked we would see unified teachings all protestant denominations agreed on, if you were all guided by the Holy Ghost. We can also see that the church is given authority in the Bible superior to that of man, what do you make of that?
>>18070355
You literally affirm circular logic, you are definitely not under the Holy Ghost’s guidance.
>>
>>18072468
>If they decide one is to be forgiven, is this decision infallible?
Whatever they decide on earth will be bound in heaven. As it says in Matthew 18.

>If your system worked we would see unified teachings
Yes, my church is a good example of this.
>We can also see that the church is given authority in the Bible superior to that of man, what do you make of that?
Whatever authority either has, it all comes from the superior authority of the Bible itself and God.
>>
File: a42520a01.jpg (31 KB, 600x541)
31 KB
31 KB JPG
>>18072468
>which authority do I appeal to to understand the verse?
If you've been praying to the Triune God of the Holy Bible, that's your authority as has been explained here: >>18070327

"Hitherto have ye asked nothing in my name: ask, and ye shall receive, that your joy may be full."
(John 16:24)

"If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness."
(1 John 1:9)
>>
>>18072468
>you are definitely not under the Holy Ghost’s guidance.
Hi Rodent. I found a Bible passage about you:
>Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened.
>Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools,
>And changed the glory of the uncorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible man, and to birds, and fourfooted beasts, and creeping things.
>Wherefore God also gave them up to uncleanness through the lusts of their own hearts, to dishonour their own bodies between themselves:
>Who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen.
>>
>>18072818
>whatever is decided on earth will be bound in heaven
So you affirm they do exercise an infallible authority to some extent?
>my church
Lutheran?
>comes from the Bible
Well their authority canonized the Bible. But yes their authority does come from God.
>>18072825
If this were the case than all believers would believe in the same dogmas.
>>18074088
Here is one about you:
>27 And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet.



[Advertise on 4chan]

Delete Post: [File Only] Style:
[Disable Mobile View / Use Desktop Site]

[Enable Mobile View / Use Mobile Site]

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.