Religious

[Show Me the Wire]

Originally Posted by boxcar

Since you lie much better than a rug, it was no attack -- just stating the truth.

Said the only proven liar in the thread. Are you basing the credibility, of this observation on the logic it takes one to know one?

Hint: disagreeing with you is not make a person a liar.

Another personal attack from desperation.

[Show Me the Wire]

2 Tim 2:1-2
You therefore, my son, be strong in the grace that is in Christ Jesus. 2 And the things which you have heard from me in the presence of many witnesses, these entrust to faithful men, who will be able to teach others also.
NASB

So...after the apostles died and went to be with the Lord, their message continued in through the scriptures in the manner described above?

Begs the question, how do you know if the person teaching you is a faithful man who Timothy appointed.

Actually Catholics love this and the chain of events. Ever hear of Apostolic succession?

[boxcar]

Originally Posted by Show Me the Wire

Begs the question, how do you know if the person teaching you is a faithful man who Timothy appointed.

Actually Catholics love this and the chain of events. Ever hear of Apostolic succession?

I believe the "faithful men" who Timothy taught have long, long, long, long, long, long been dead.

You truly must be desperate!

So Timothy was an apostle? And the faithful men he taught, they were apostles? And the "others" these "faithful men" taught are also apostles?
And they were all eyewitnesses to resurrected Christ? If so, give chapter and verse, please.

[Show Me the Wire]

Originally Posted by boxcar

So Timothy was an apostle? And the faithful men he taught, they were apostles? And the "others" these "faithful men" taught are also apostles?
And they were all eyewitnesses to resurrected Christ? If so, give chapter and verse, please.

Did I say Timothy was an apostle, nor did I say the faithful men were apostles?

I said Timothy was appointed by an apostle.

So if I get your gist, according to your interpretation, you need to be an apostle to teach the Gospel to people who never heard of Jesus, correct? Since all the original Apostles, including Matthias and Paul, have passed from this life, missionary work is no longer possible? The best a Christian can do is preach the Gospel to other Christians in a leaderless church?

Also, are you saying the remaining eleven Apostles acted incorrectly by adding an apostle to fill the role left by Judas' betrayal.

[Show Me the Wire]

Originally Posted by boxcar

I believe the "faithful men" who Timothy taught have long, long, long, long, long, long been dead.

So do I. What is your point, you don't understand what the term Apostolic succession means?

[Actor]

Originally Posted by Show Me the Wire

We theist. Is boxcar rubbing off on you?

So you are saying that "We theist" believe in the soul? So what else is new?

[Show Me the Wire]

hcap said:

I am always taken back by this attitude. Many here are so stuck in their own philosophies, discussing common principles versus the emphasis on differences is not easily doable. IMO it is a way to see past our own horizons, and gives a much better understanding of what religion is about.

Again the inner psychological-spiritual realm is a much better place to start than arguing philosophical and word definitions.

First I apologize for missing your reply, I was detracted by the accuser of men.

Yes, it is not easy, but the more we have in common more unity and harmony is possible.

As I stated to another poster in this thread, His Bible teaches that the war he is supposed to fight is not against other men, nor judge them, but the war his own flesh, the mystery of iniquity which is in him. Definitely, agree it is better to put your inner spiritual realm, than arguing over philosophy and terms.

[Show Me the Wire]

Originally Posted by Actor

So you are saying that "We theist" believe in the soul? So what else is new?

It goes to your comment about theists not believing in something unless they experience it with their own five senses. Remember, I told you I really din't understand what you meant. Mostly because, of the distraction, of boxcar's constant bombardment of false logic directed art me.

I think I understand now. You are talking about evolution and the age of the earth which certain theists do not believe, because they have not seen or experienced it with their senses. Is that right?

[Show Me the Wire]

dnlgfnk:

Thanks for enticing me back into the train-wreck that this thread is, because of your response to boxcar's baiting.

As always, may the peace of Christ be with your spirit.

[Actor]

Originally Posted by Show Me the Wire

I think I understand now. You are talking about evolution and the age of the earth which certain theists do not believe, because they have not seen or experienced it with their senses. Is that right?

Yes. That and the big bang.

[Show Me the Wire]

Originally Posted by Actor

Yes. That and the big bang.

Let me add this. Think about it. These same people did not experience with their five senses God creating the world, in seven days, either and yet they believe. Ergo, the criticism you proposed, theists do not believe without sensory experience is not true.

What they don't believe is the validity of the proof or the testimony of the interpretation of the proof science proposes.

To be clear this is only a criticism of the reasoning, that theists do not believe without sensory experience.

[boxcar]

Originally Posted by Show Me the Wire

Did I say Timothy was an apostle, nor did I say the faithful men were apostles?

I said Timothy was appointed by an apostle.

Actually, Timothy WASN'T appointed by an apostle! You are dead wrong! You are so earthly and fleshly-minded that God himself ever-so-rarely figures into the RCC's false, humanistic gospel!

2 Tim 1:8-10
8 Therefore do not be ashamed of the testimony of our Lord, or of me His prisoner; but join with me in suffering for the gospel according to the power of God, 9 who has saved US, and called US with a holy calling, not according to OUR works, but according to His own purpose and grace which was granted US in Christ Jesus from all eternity,
NASB

It's God who "appointed", i.e. called Timothy into his glorious kingdom.

Further, the gift which Timothy had, presumably pastor and teacher, was also a gift from God, which at that time was communicated or conveyed to Timothy through the laying on of hands by Paul. But it wasn't Paul's gift; it was God's gift! Paul was merely the medium through which God granted Timothy the gift.

Also, if Paul "appointed" Timothy (for what purpose, you don't say), then who appointed Paul? Scripture tells us, of course. Paul was no more appointed by any human agency or act of any human will anymore than Timothy was!

2 Tim 1:10-11
10 but now has been revealed by the appearing of our Savior Christ Jesus, who abolished death, and brought life and immortality to light through the gospel, 11 for which I was appointed a preacher and an apostle and a teacher.
NASB

Given this text, how could the thought even enter your mind that any believer's gift of salvation itself or gifts of the Holy Spirit given to the Church for purpose of ministry are "appointed" by anyone save the Sovereign Lord, who distributes his gifts according to his good pleasure and the counsel of his own will?

Finally, Paul commanded Timothy to entrust the teachings of Paul to "faithful men". So, where do you get "appointed" from a mandate!?

So if I get your gist, according to your interpretation, you need to be an apostle to teach the Gospel to people who never heard of Jesus, correct?

Nope, never said that! But you certainly appeared to be saying that!

So, since this isn't what the passage is teaching, then this fact supports my argument that Timothy (a pastor/teacher but not an apostle) was commanded to teach other "faithful men", so that these faithful men in turn would teach "others". So, there is a line of succession here that began with the apostle Paul but since then has been going on indefinitely. To this day, faithful God-fearing, God-loving men continue to pass the gospel baton on to the next generation of believers. And the whole reason for this is for the purpose of fruitful ministry -- so that each generation of believers would go out and preach the gospel to lost souls, raise up new believers so that these new believers can be taught how to minister and preach the gospel to the lost, etc, etc. All this without the need for any popes whose carcasses are parked on golden thrones behind Vatican walls.

What Paul did with Timothy is precisely what he taught to the Ephesians! Paul practiced what he preached!

Eph 4:11-12
11 And He gave some as apostles, and some as prophets, and some as evangelists, and some as pastors and teachers, 12 for the equipping of the saints for the work of service, to the building up of the body of Christ;
NASB

Timothy's gift was evidently pastor-teacher, which Paul was very instrumental in helping Timothy to develop, and it was this process by which Paul equipped Timothy for works of service to the Lord; and then instructed Timothy that he do the same to "faithful men" so that those "faithful men", in turn, would then teach "others". (Since you're so earthly minded, we could couch this entire process as one generation "paying it forward" to the next.) The 2Timothy passage is actually a practical example of how Paul implemented his own teaching to the Ephesian Church! What we have is a classic example with Timothy of the outworking of doctrine that Paul taught to the Ephesians.

Kinda neat the way scripture all harmonizes so nicely, isn't it?

By the way, have you found that ancient Aramaic manuscript yet for the Gospel of Matthew? I'm still looking for a petras-solid popery passage. (Forgive the good pun.)

[Actor]

Originally Posted by Show Me the Wire

Let me add this. Think about it. These same people did not experience with their five senses God creating the world, in seven days, either and yet they believe. Ergo, the criticism you proposed, theists do not believe without sensory experience is not true.

Get boxcar to explain that inconsistency.

[Show Me the Wire]

boxcar:

Ultimately God appoints everything, God gets want he wants and he works through men. When Paul says God appointed you he inspired Paul to teach him and appoint him the leader of that Church. Paul even had to instruct Timothy to appoint faithful men with specific qualifications, not solely because they were faithful.

Let me simplify. Look what happened to the Jewish brothers who performed exorcisms without authority. Authority is important. Let's say you need major specialized plumbing work performed at your very expensive house. You talk to a plumber and you ask him how he became a plumber. The plumber responds I was taught, great so far so good. You then ask the plumber who taught and certified you, the plumber responds my mother. Okay, you ask who taught your mother. The plumber responds, she read a book.

Would you use that plumber? The plumber may be authorized in mom's home to fix plumbing, because she allows it, but the plumber is not officially authorized perform plumbing for other people. You grant the unauthorized plumber authority, at your own risk. Would you do such a thing.

That is how I view your loony statements. You are the plumber and your pastor Billy Bob is the mother.

Now contrast that with a plumber who was taught by the person who invented the specialized plumbing system and authorized the plumber to do the work on his behalf. That plumber is sent in the name of the creator.

That is how I view the Catholic Church.

Actually, all the posts you wrote, have not addressed my Biblical point, which is the actual description of events described in the Bible. The Bible describes events showing each of the three Divine Persons of the Most Holy Trinity acting in forming my Church. I asked you to show me that the same thing for your little circle of Reformed friends.

Bottom line you have not. Why, because you cannot. Thus, your tortured personal interpretations are still meaningless.

[Show Me the Wire]

Originally Posted by Actor

Get boxcar to explain that inconsistency.

I would be happy to get boxcar to understand he is not the pillar and foundation of the truth.