Holy Bible Scriptures: Hard to understand or easy to understand?

Now this I can work with. To many who are not willing to accept that they are not greater than God; yes it can be.

And we know that all things work together for good to them that love God, to them who are the called according to his purpose.

 

Delete case of mistaken ID, no pun intended.

reva

 

Can you elaborate?

 

Paul and Peter did not clash over doctrine. Peter was afraid to be seen eating with the Gentiles for fear of what the Jewish people might think. However he knew well rightly that it was now permitted as he himself was in a Gentiles house, and baptised Gentiles. It was just that he was afraid to eat with Gentiles in the presence of the Jews, and Paul rebuked him for it. And Peter realised he was in the wrong.

 

I am not infallible. I take it this is sarcasm, I thought as Christians we could discuss matters reasonably, and put forward our points. Each of us should be allowed to explain what they believe and why without being offensive to each other. I know this is hard to do sometimes but we must try and control our frustations, and listen to each other. I also find it extremely difficult when discussing such matters that are of importance.

 

We can and do; the issue is the setting. We should not be discussing this on an open forum where we may confuse others.

 

A reasonable and respectful response.
It is just as important that you understand that when a faith declares it is infallible and is in possession of the only true faith and path to the Father, others are not going to be passive about such a dismissal of them. Just human nature. It is an adversarial position, an "us vs. them" proposition, a line drawn in the sand, and that will always and only lead to one thing.
Conflict.

 

So if you are dedicated to the purpose enough to study the bible earnestly, and through that study discover problems that you seek to reconcile, you have proved yourself unworthy as you haven't simply given yourself over to a lack of serious inquiry? Only those who choose not to examine too closely are rewarded? Critical study is tantamount to declaring yourself greater than god?
Wow! Who knew?

 

Or where you might have to confront those that don't agree with you, and can make a cogent argument as to why.

 

No and no. If I thought I could have a rational discussion with you about this I would.

I am done here.

 

Well I find this sort of ironic. For one many evangalist and fundamentalists say their faith is the only way to heaven. They say we have to be "saved" to enter the kingdom of God. Apparently once saved always saved. The Catholic Church makes no such restrictions. We do not say a Christian from another faith will not make it into heaven, we simply do not know who gets in and who does not. Catholics do not beleive being saved is a one time event but that we are continually being saved. I also see sometimes when Protestants and Catholics debate, Protestants seem to team up on the Catholic, even though their fellow Protestants' view is just as every bit conflicting to their theology as the Catholic's. Also Catholicism does believe other Christian faiths are permitted grace from God, the closer they are to the Church the more grace they have. All Christian faiths believe they are true and infallible. If not then they are saying their faith is fallible and what they believe could well be wrong. So why would anyone want to learn error.

 

On that we can agree.
You can't have a rational discussion,
and you are done here.

 

The acceptance of other Christians is a fairly recent doctrine of the church. In the past they were considered headed to hell. That is a tacit admission that infallibility is not possible.
No one wants to learn error, but I am much more readily influenced by a person that has the humility to admit that when dealing with god we are in an area that the declaration of infallibility is silly, as it can in no way be certified as true. God remains beyond us, if he/she/it is out there at all, and the idea of infallibility is simply the attempt to keep people from questioning vigorously, scaring them into submission. For your church it has worked for centuries, but it is why they have to expand the church in undeveloped countries as the church contracts the more developed the country is. The people outgrow the idea that they can not seek god themselves without their hand being held by an arbitrary amalgamation of papal authority.

 

This clearly shows your ignorance of the Churches definition of her infallibility. I have already explained on this site the Catholic Churches position on her infallibilty. If you want I can explain it again to you. The Catholic Church is only infallible in ex-cathedra, anything that is regarding that which is essential to the faith, doctrine.
No it stands to reason God would give us a Church to follow one that would not lead us a stray rather than everyone being left ot come up with their own conclusions. Ever since the reformatino in the 1500s there is more and more schism yet it is quite clearly stated Jesus wanted unity with His followers.
Tell me why would you listen to some person who has no more authority on the matter than yourself?.
God does reveal Himself to us, and yes we can get to know God better all the time.
The Church has always been in many countries it was evangalising long before there was such a thing as Protestantism.
Tell me how are you going to seek God out for yourself?, if there was no Church then you would have no Bible. Were Protestants get their authority from came from the Catholic Church.

 

If you haven't done it, you should read up on the rank and diplorable history of how popes have been chosen and some of the dispicable political intrigue that has gone on in the Holy City. If these are the people that I have to give over my guidance in all things spiritual to, I think I'm better off on my own.
You don't seem to understand that the church is a human concoction, not a god one. And when humans enter in, things go to hell pretty quickly, and the Catholic Church has not been spared that fate. It isn't unique to them, but they aren't immune either.

 

I know there has been much evil committed in the name of the Church. However this was done by individuals. The doctrines of the Church are perfect in every way. you cannot blame the teachings of the Church for the actions of certain people who claim to belong to it. Also the weeds and the wheat should grow together unitl harvest time. Then the weeds will be throwing into the fire. Protestants that point out all the sinners in the Catholic Church are only proving more that the Church is the one established by Jesus. It was Him that said if there was no sinners then there would be no need for the Church. What use is a hospital if there is no sick people.
Every Protestant church as matter of fact every Christian owes their belief to the Catholic Church. It provided them with the Bible. Many of the doctrines Protestants go by were established in the Catholic Church. Where did the doctrine of the Holy Trinity come from?, nowhere in the bible does it speak of the Holy Trinity. Yet this is widely accepted by the vast Protestant majority. That also goes for the divinity of Christ, nowhere in the Bible does Jesus say I am God made man. Yet it is accepted by all Christianity, that is what makes us Christians. Otherwise we would be the same as the Muslims just believing He was a prophet. The Church obtained these doctrines of faith through Tradition and reading of the Scriptures and discerning the truth, the Church is also guided by the Holy Spirit in these matters.

 

Jesus spends almost the entirety of the gospel of John proclaiming his divinity.
All faiths think their unique vision of the deity is without error. This does not set Catholicism apart. It makes it another itteration of the norm.

 

No i can have a rational discussion and I have had quite a few in this thread. Just because I disagree with somebody does not mean there can be no fruit from a discussion. You on the other hand have no interest in discussion. If your maturity level were such that you could comprehend the subject matter it would be different - but as it is talking with you on this subject is a waste of my time.

 

Actually, John 1:1-14 implies Jesus being God.

 

Having a rational discussion is your choice. You stated you couldn't do it with that poster. You can't control them, but you can control you, and you have stated that you can't. I accepted your admission.
As for being done, be done. Be what you say you are.

 

You see what i mean. Pointless.

 

Here is the flow or our discussion. Where is the irrationality, other than your abrupt decision to pull out of the discussion? Sean Michael and I can disagree and pursue our discussion with respect. He even befriended me since starting our talks, and I readily accepted.
The response to posts is always our own responsibility. I have failed to keep myself in check often on these boards, and have suffered the consequences. That didn't make it anyone else's responsibility.
I am being perfectly rational in my discussion with you. Perhaps that's the problem.

 

I don't know that anyone sees what you mean, but we certainly can see what you are doing.

 

Circular discussion. I tell you that it is not hard to understand and I explain some things like setting, timeframe, speaker, audience, context and other scripture relating to the subject and all of the sudden others say complicated. I say if you have a true heartfelt desire to comprehend scripture it is not hard at all.

So it is easy if you want to understand it and impossible if you do not.

 

And I believe the opposite is true.
If you truly want to understand it, it's hard, because you have to weed through the contradictions and discrepancies and inconsistencies that it displays, and figure out how you are going to reconcile them to yourself. If you don't want to understand it, but simply want to believe it, that's easy, because it is simply a choice.