Pope: Who Am I To Judge Gays

Discussion in 'Too Hot for Swamp Gas' started by 108, Jul 29, 2013.

  1. gator34654
    Offline

    gator34654 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2007
    Messages:
    4,754
    Likes Received:
    226
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Ratings Received:
    +1,086
    I don't know how anyone can put their faith 'all in' to the Bible, by simultaneously rejecting the very authority which assembled and preserved it. If one distrusts the Church enough to reject her authority--it begs the question as to why they trusted that same Church enought to preserve scripture in the first 400 years of the Church.[/I][/I][/I][/I]

    Read more: http://www.gatorcountry.com/swampgas/showthread.php?t=267077&page=2#ixzz2adPkH9ag

    Who decided what went into the Bible? The short answer to that question is no one. Or maybe a better answer is God did. When scholars talk about how a book qualified to be called Scripture, they list five characteristics called the laws of canonicity.

    How do we know that the 66 books in our Bible are the only inspired books? Who decided which books were truly inspired by God? The Roman Catholic Bible includes books that are not found in other Bibles (called the Apocrypha). How do we know that we as Protestants have the right books? These questions are addressed by a study of canonicity.

    “Canon” is a word that comes from Greek and Hebrew words that literally means a measuring rod. So canonicity describes the standard that books had to meet to be recognized as scripture.

    On the one hand, deciding which books were inspired seems like a human process. Christians gathered together at church councils in the first several centuries A.D. for the purpose of officially recognizing which books are inspired. But it’s important to remember that these councils did not determine which books were inspired. They simply recognized what God had already determined.

    This study discusses the tests of canonicity that were used, the history of canonization and a brief explanation of why certain disputed books are not scripture.

    The early church councils applied several basic standards in recognizing whether a book was inspired.

    A. Is it authoritative (“Thus saith the Lord”)?

    B. Is it prophetic (“a man of God” 2 Peter 1:20)?

    - A book in the Bible must have the authority of a spiritual leader of Israel (O.T. – prophet, king, judge, scribe) or and apostle of the church (N.T. – It must be based on the testimony of an original apostle.).

    C. Is it authentic (consistent with other revelation of truth)?

    D. Is it dynamic – demonstrating God’s life-changing power (Hebrew 4:12)?

    E. Is it received (accepted and used by believers – 1 Thessalonians 2:13)?

    Bottom line, God who gave man the Bible is more than capable to provide what we need to know and preserve it. The Bible is the only authority and final authority for how we are to live. Any laws, habits, actions that contradict God's word the Bible is not of God.

    There are many differences between what Catholics believe and what non-denominational Christians believe and it is an ongoing debate that really is not suited for post on GC. Having said that there are many similarities as well. Just wanted to give a very brief view of how the 66 books of the Bible came together and that I am all in when it comes to the authority of God's word alone. I would also add that there are many things in the Bible that are hard to understand, and lend itself to lots of views such as the book of Revelation. But, the vast majority of the Bible is very plain especially what one must do to be saved.

    Back to the main topic, there is no question whatsoever that homosexuality is a sin. One can debate why and we may not understand it all but the Bible is clear on this subject. I don't understand a lot of things, how a microwave works or how I can call someone in another country and they can hear me instantly, all I know is microwaves and cell phones work.
  2. 92gator
    Online

    92gator Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 14, 2007
    Messages:
    6,025
    Likes Received:
    321
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Ratings Received:
    +1,035
    ^^^and yet, for all you claim, Yeshua never mentioned a thing called 'the Bible'; never prophesizes any such thing; never prophesizes anything remotely resembling 'sola scriptura'; never even writes anything down at all, other than in the sand, with a stick or his finger. This is simply staggering when you consider that Yeshua was a child prodigy, found lectruing the Church elders in the Temple, at the tender age of 12.

    From this we somehow get to a point where ALL of the Faith that Yeshua handed down to his Apostles, was reduced to a writing????

    Yeshua left us a Church. He chose Apostles. The Bible distinguisshes between Apostles, and his disciples--as the foundational beginings of His Church. His Church was further prophesized as enduring to the end times, and never succombing to the 'gates of Hades'. The paraclete was also prophsized, to to guide His Church.

    But still the Bible wasn't prophesized.

    Hence sola scriptura is 'traditions of men'. It's not even scriptural itself.

    IOW, it fails the very test it pretends to measure everything else by.
  3. gator34654
    Offline

    gator34654 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2007
    Messages:
    4,754
    Likes Received:
    226
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Ratings Received:
    +1,086
    You must know the "Bible" is a term we use. Back then it was known primarily as the Word of God, or scriptures. You must know that Jesus often referred to the Old Testament or quoted parts of the OT throughout his ministry. If you need some examples I can supply.

    15and that from childhood you have known the sacred writings which are able to give you the wisdom that leads to salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus. 16All Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness; 17so that the man of God may be adequate, equipped for every good work. 2 Timothy 3:15-18.

    During Jesus ministry all was available were the OT scrolls. By the way Jesus being the Son of God knew the scriptures backwards and forwards. He believed every word of Scripture. All the prophecies concerning Himself were fulfilled, and He believed beforehand they would be concerning his death and resurrection.

    Just as the writers of the OT were Holy Spirit inspired to write down what God wanted us to know, so it was with the NT as the Holy Spirit inspired the writers as well. All scripture is God breathed. The very fact that the Word of God does not specifically say "only follow the scriptures" means God believed we were smart enough to figure it out. The OT people, (Israel) were commanded to follow the scriptures, and in the NT the church is to obey the word of God. The early church followed the God inspired instructions (or tried to) given by biblical writers such as Luke (who wrote the gospel of Luke and Acts, or Paul, or Peter, or John.

    I doubt your mind will be changed but if you care to discuss further PM me.
  4. 92gator
    Online

    92gator Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 14, 2007
    Messages:
    6,025
    Likes Received:
    321
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Ratings Received:
    +1,035
    Still, Yeshua never makes so much as a glancing reference to FUTURE 'scripture'--the very concept of such comes to us through the Church that Christ founded--the Catholic Church. And still not so much as a glancing reference to anything resembling 'sola scriptura'. Not even in the Bible itself (sorry, but 'profitable' doesn't even come close to fitting the bill, especially when, as you (perhaps inadvertantly) pointed out--it was in reference to THEN existing 'scripture'--not 'scripture' which was yet to come into bieng--or rather, yet to be declared as such BY the very Church that Yeshua founded).
  5. oragator1
    Online

    oragator1 Premium Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2007
    Messages:
    12,735
    Likes Received:
    430
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Ratings Received:
    +1,615
    Belief and truth are not equivalent. You can no more prove God exists or your pov on morality is correct than an atheist can prove the opposite. It's why arguing with either is often so maddening, it's not a rational debate. People are of course free to believe what they want and I respect people who have faith, my problem is when that belief is used to tell others they are wrong in theirs. And almost by definition, if you are telling someone they are wrong for their belief system (because you know the "truth") that is what you are doing.
    Also, all of the other sins you listed harm others, this one doesn't. I say if we are truly to live by the golden rule and they aren't hurting anyone, I hope they have fun happy lives together. Doesn't matter whether I like it or thinks it is right - It's not my place to tell people what they can and can't do.
  6. g8orbill
    Offline

    g8orbill Gators VIP Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2007
    Messages:
    71,212
    Likes Received:
    4,591
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Clermont, Fl
    Ratings Received:
    +9,673
    I wil never understand men screwing other men in the azz- and while I do take moral issue with homosexual marriage as long as it does not affect me then let them have at it

Share This Page