The Chain of Infallibility

[savagewind]

God has let us know. We know by how they treat the sheep. Do they take care of the sheep or try to devour them with theology that will benefit them. Do the point to themselves or to God? Does Ps 23 describe them?

That is you leaning on you own understanding. Proverbs 3:5 Trust in Yahweh with all your heart, and don't lean on your own understanding.

Also this: Jeremiah 17:9 The heart is deceitful above all things and beyond cure. Who can understand it? YOU CAN?

 

[savagewind]

. We know by how they treat the sheep.

All the sheep. Right? A person who takes the lead in telling us what God's Word means might treat every adult in his congregation appropriately but might use one young child the wrong way. You do not know about it. Is he still a sheep and might you forgive rape because he talks so very well?

 

[savagewind]

For followers of revealed, faith-based religions (on the world stage, this generally refers to the Abrahamic religions) how do you handle the issue of infallibility?

What I mean is this: if your god was indeed perfect, and intended for his followers to correctly understand his perfect message, then he must have preserved a chain of infallibility which extends from god himself to the follower.

E.g. A "perfect" god must ensure that his chosen prophet is infallible; the prophet's writings (the holy books) must also be infallible; those who preserve those books must also be infallible; those who translates those books must also be infallible; those who expound the content of those books must also be infallible; those who read the books or the translations (the disciple) must also be infallible.

If there is any failure in that chain, does it not inherently prove that the imagined originator (the deity) is imperfect and fallible?

(It seems the Roman Catholic Church understood this problem from early on, and determined that infallibility proceeds through the Church, the Popes and Councils, the Bishops and their Priests - the authorized preservers, translators, and expounders of the "Message", etc.)

It doesn't follow.

If there is any failure in the chain it proves the originator's intention is not perfect and infallible.

 

[Kemosloby]

It doesn't follow.

If there is any failure in the chain it proves the originator's intention is not perfect and infallible.

The opposite could be true. God may have made the bible difficult to understand intentionally. Jesus said "forgive them for they know not what they do" , So If any man was infallible and sinned he would surely be put to death.

 

[savagewind]

The opposite could be true. God may have made the bible difficult to understand intentionally. Jesus said "forgive them for they know not what they do" , So If any man was infallible and sinned he would surely be put to death.

I do not believe that God's intention is imperfect. HE said a break in the chain proves GOD is fallible. I was just correcting him. It is what I do.

I think mistakes are allowed to show us that it is wrong to put our trust in anyone but God.
It also teaches self control.
That the Bible has mistakes in it proves to me that God is above all that nonsense.
And finding the mistakes caused me to search for the truth. Zephaniah 2:3
World English Bible
Seek Yahweh, all you humble of the land, who have kept his ordinances. Seek righteousness. Seek humility. It may be that you will be hidden in the day of Yahweh's anger.

 

[loverofhumanity]

If the "great educators" teach something that rejects or contradicts what Jesus taught, are they really a great educator? If one of them contradicts what Jesus taught, which one do you believe?

In science we have been reading only the notes to a poem, in Christianity we find the poem itself. C;S. Lewis

None of Them contradict One another.

They only contradict the interpretations of the followers which are man made. The Jews crucified Christ because of their ignorance of their own Holy Books yet they claimed to be knowledgeable. But they were proven not to be.

Interpretations are just that. The Manifestations only teach truth not interpretations. But people judge the Manifestations by their own limited understanding and when they find it not in accordance with their own understanding they reject the truth and call it falsehood.

The Jews did this with Christ. The Christians did the same with Muhammad. All pride in human learning and no humility before God.

Everyone thinks He knows more about God than God's Manifestations but they don't.

By rejecting one Manifestation one is rejecting all of them and carrying oneself proud before God. To reject Christ was rejecting Moses also because He foretold Christ. And so on.

People tend to pick and choose what they feel makes them feel unique and superior to others which is really an ego trip.

If one is sincere and humble he will never reject any Manifestation of God. He will always try and see where he might be wrong and correct it but pride says 'I am right and all others wrong and false'. This is the ego talking or Satan take your pick.

 

[metis]

Irrelevant. The RCC has decided some things as coming from God that contradict the Bible. Both can't be right.

Point out one if you will. Mind you, there are numerous doctrines from the RCC that are not found in scripture, but that's different than saying they "contradict the Bible".

They certainly do and it was reinforced soon after the current pope took office. He met with the Lutherans in the hope of convincing them they need to come back to the RCC.

The pope on numerous occasions, including several before him, have made it abundantly clear that the RCC does not teach that they are the only Christian church, nor have they ever taught that one has to be a member of their church for the purpose of "salvation".

Here's from an official source:

The "Dogmatic Constitution on the Church - Lumen Gentium" (1964) is one of many documents to come out of the Second Vatican Ecumenical Council (often referred to as "Vatican II"). The Council was held in Rome between 1962 and 1965. Lumen Gentium" contains in its Chapter 1 an essay on "The Mystery of the church." Sections 14 to 16 describe the potential for salvation of:

Followers of the Catholic Church,

Members of other Christian denominations, and

Believers of non-Christian religions. -- http://www.religioustolerance.org/rcc_salv.htm


However, the RCC does teach that all churches that do not recognize and are not a part of the line of "apostolic succession" have a theological defect, however such a defect does not jeopardize one's salvation.

 

[buddhist]

What can you verify for yourself that Buddhist taught?

I've verified suffering for myself, I've verified the validity of the Four Noble Truths, I've verified the efficacy of the Eightfold Path, I've verified the process of rebirth, etc.

 

[buddhist]

Is loving your enemies an essence of Buddhism?

Compassion for our enemies is part of Buddhism.

How do you know that? How do you know Buddha is not the presumption?

I don't know that the Buddha is a presumption. The Buddha himself as an alleged "person" matter far less to us than the Dhamma (the Buddhist teachings). As I've written previously in this thread: in Buddhism, the Teachings (Dhamma) are far more important than the Person (Buddha). The truths of Buddhism are verifiable in the here (space) and now (time). The person of Jesus (or Buddha, or Krishna, or any other historical figure) is NOT verifiable in the here and now.

It doesn't matter who or where the Dhamma came from. They're called the Dhamma/"Buddhist teachings" because they originated from the "Buddha", a title for the Awakened, Enlightened One, whomever that might be.

Whether these enlightened Buddhist teachings originated 1 million, 2500, or 100 years ago, whether from Gotama, or Jesus, or Zeus, or Thor, or Epicurus, or Lao Tze, a monkey, an ant, or even an alien from another planet - that person or animal is "The Enlightened One", and he, she, or it deserves the title "Buddha"; the corresponding teachings are thus the "Buddhist teachings".

 

[buddhist]

The chain breaks at me. It doesn't matter how fallible or infallible all previous events might have been up to the point at which I believe something is true. We believe by faith.

Indeed ... then what differs between your faith, and the faith of disciples of any other faith-based religion?

 

[buddhist]

It doesn't follow.

If there is any failure in the chain it proves the originator's intention is not perfect and infallible.

I agree, and this to me, is evidence to me that no faith-based religion could have originated from an infallible Deity.

 

[Sonofason]

Indeed ... then what differs between your faith, and the faith of disciples of any other faith-based religion?

I have no idea what binds other people to their faith. I can only speak for myself.

 

[omega2xx]

That is you leaning on you own understanding. Proverbs 3:5 Trust in Yahweh with all your heart, and don't lean on your own understanding.

Also this: Jeremiah 17:9 The heart is deceitful above all things and beyond cure. Who can understand it? YOU CAN?

When I believed the gospel of my salvation I was sealed with the Holy Spirit of promise(Eph 1:13). Now I no longer lean on my understanding, I athe Holy Spirit to enlighten the eyes of my heart so I can KNOW the this of God(Eph 1:18)

“I am not apt to follow blindly the lead of other men”
― Charles Darwin

 

[omega2xx]

All the sheep. Right? A person who takes the lead in telling us what God's Word means might treat every adult in his congregation appropriately but might use one young child the wrong way. You do not know about it. Is he still a sheep and might you forgive rape because he talks so very well?

All Christians are sheep, but we are not without spot or blemish. God has promised to forgive any since we sincerely confess(I Jn 1:9). If God is willing m to forgive the sin, I should be willing to forgive also. If he raped my granddaughter, I not sure if I could, but I would know I should, and until I could forgive, I would confess that sin to God until I could.

“I am not apt to follow blindly the lead of other men”
― Charles Darwin

 

[omega2xx]

None of Them contradict One another.

Not true. There is a world o difference between liberal theology and conservative theology, between Mormonism and Christianity(I am not saying Mormons are not Christians, I don't know, so I won't judge), between Baptist and Presbyterians. The list goes on and on.

They only contradict the interpretations of the followers which are man made. The Jews crucified Christ because of their ignorance of their own Holy Books yet they claimed to be knowledgeable. But they were proven not to be.[/QUOTE]

I agree, but Scripture must be interpreted. That is how we learn the truth. God has given us His "Word so we can check the theology of the preachers.

]Interpretations are just that. The Manifestations only teach truth not interpretations. But people judge the Manifestations by their own limited understanding and when they find it not in accordance with their own understanding they reject the truth and call it falsehood.

How do you determine what is the truth if not by interpreting the Scriptue. How do you know we are saved by Grace?

The Jews did this with Christ. The Christians did the same with Muhammad. All pride in human learning and no humility before God.

Your brush is way to wide, and you don't know the hearts of anyone. When I study the Bible, I ask God to teach me, because I KNOW I cant lern without His guidance.

Everyone thinks He knows more about God than God's Manifestations but they don't.

WE can only know abut God through His manifestations

By rejecting one Manifestation one is rejecting all of them and carrying oneself proud before God. To reject Christ was rejecting Moses also because He foretold Christ. And so on.

Not understanding what you are calling a manifestation, is not a cause for rejecting them all. Many good Christians reject "predestination, other accept it.

People tend to pick and choose what they feel makes them feel unique and superior to others which is really an ego trip.

Speak for yourself. Conservative Christians accept what the Bible says,, whether we like it or not. I don't like that I have to love my enemy, but I accept I have to.

If one is sincere and humble he will never reject any Manifestation of God. He will always try and see where he might be wrong and correct it but pride says 'I am right and all others wrong and false'. This is the ego talking or Satan take your pick.

Anyone who thinks they or their denomination has perfect theology is a prideful fool, but one who does not think some of their theology is right, dishonors the guidance of the Holy Spirit.

How do you determine if what you believe is right?

 

[loverofhumanity]

Not true. There is a world o difference between liberal theology and conservative theology, between Mormonism and Christianity(I am not saying Mormons are not Christians, I don't know, so I won't judge), between Baptist and Presbyterians. The list goes on and on.

They only contradict the interpretations of the followers which are man made. The Jews crucified Christ because of their ignorance of their own Holy Books yet they claimed to be knowledgeable. But they were proven not to be.

I agree, but Scripture must be interpreted. That is how we learn the truth. God has given us His "Word so we can check the theology of the preachers.



Anyone who thinks they or their denomination has perfect theology is a prideful fool, but one who does not think some of their theology is right, dishonors the guidance of the Holy Spirit.

How do you determine if what you believe is right?[/QUOTE]

By One Who is All Knowing.

Verily, He Who is the Spirit of Truth is come to guide you unto all truth. He speaketh not as prompted by His own self, but as bidden by Him Who is the All-Knowing, the All-Wise. - Baha'u'llah

“In the Gospel of John, in speaking of the Promised One Who was to come after Christ, it is said in chapter 16, verses 12, 13: "I have yet many things to say unto you, but ye cannot bear them now. 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."

Now consider carefully that from these words, "for He shall not speak of Himself; but whatsoever He shall hear, that shall He speak," it is clear that the Spirit of truth is embodied in a Man Who has individuality, Who has ears to hear and a tongue to speak. In the same way the name "Spirit of God" is used in relation to Christ, as you speak of a light, meaning both the light and the lamp.
(`Abdu'l-Baha: Some Answered Questions, Pages: 108-109)”

Excerpt From: “In The Light Of Prophecies.”

 

[savagewind]

When I believed the gospel of my salvation I was sealed with the Holy Spirit of promise(Eph 1:13). Now I no longer lean on my understanding, I athe Holy Spirit to enlighten the eyes of my heart so I can KNOW the this of God(Eph 1:18)

“I am not apt to follow blindly the lead of other men”
― Charles Darwin

I think the biggest mistake some people keep on doing is to assume that once they know the way of salvation there isn't any way to leave it or be removed from it. It isn't what the Bible teaches. I think the second worse problem people make for themselves is they assume that whenever Jesus said anything it was at face value he meant it. For instance, people left off following him for real and YOU are not able to understand that it is an illustration of the fact that people leave off following him in the spirit.

 

[savagewind]

All Christians are sheep, but we are not without spot or blemish. God has promised to forgive any since we sincerely confess(I Jn 1:9). If God is willing m to forgive the sin, I should be willing to forgive also. If he raped my granddaughter, I not sure if I could, but I would know I should, and until I could forgive, I would confess that sin to God until I could.

“I am not apt to follow blindly the lead of other men”
― Charles Darwin

I think you are taking the point in another direction. YOU say the men taking the lead are to be trusted. I have said nothing about that they should be forgiven or not. I agree with you.

Though, according to my understanding of scripture a person must confess that he had sinned before any forgiveness takes place for him.

Now, what I am talking about is sinning against the spirit of the truth. If a person won't realize it so that he can ask God's forgiveness, does God forgive him anyway?

 

[omega2xx]

Point out one if you will. Mind you, there are numerous doctrines from the RCC that are not found in scripture, but that's different than saying they "contradict the Bible".

--A priest, a sinful human being can determine penance for out sins. In I Jn 1:9 there is only forgiveness and cleansing from God, no penance.
--Taking the Lord's supper is closed to all non-Catholics.
---Mt 26:26--...Jesus took some bread and after a blessing He broke it and gave it to the
disciples... All Christisn are Jesus' disciples.
--Mary remained a virgin---Mt 13:55-56, Jn 7:3-5, Gal 1:18-19.

There is nothing wrong with having non-Biblical traditions as long as their is no penalty for noncompliance.

The pope on numerous occasions, including several before him, have made it abundantly clear that the RCC does not teach that they are the only Christian church, nor have they ever taught that one has to be a member of their church for the purpose of "salvation".

That simply is not true and your current pope reinforced it soon after taking office. I don't have time to find it this morning but if you google "pope says Protestant churches are not ral churches," you will find the article.

Here's from an official source:

The "Dogmatic Constitution on the Church - Lumen Gentium" (1964) is one of many documents to come out of the Second Vatican Ecumenical Council (often referred to as "Vatican II"). The Council was held in Rome between 1962 and 1965. Lumen Gentium" contains in its Chapter 1 an essay on "The Mystery of the church." Sections 14 to 16 describe the potential for salvation of:

Followers of the Catholic Church,

Members of other Christian denominations, and

Believers of non-Christian religions. -- http://www.religioustolerance.org/rcc_salv.htm

However, the RCC does teach that all churches that do not recognize and are not a part of the line of "apostolic succession" have a theological defect, however such a defect does not jeopardize one's salvation.

The is no Biblical evidence for "apostolic succession." This is plainly evidenced by the fact that even some called apostles in the Bible are not included in the Catholic list. Barnabus was an apostle(Acts 14:14). Is he on the list?

Those who reject the authority if the pope and Catholic theology are called heretics. Will they be saved?

 

[omega2xx]

I think you are taking the point in another direction. YOU say the men taking the lead are to be trusted.

Just the opposite. Pastors need to be evaluated to see if they are teaching God's word. In my church you can't teach until you have been an active member for one year. During that time the elders and pastor will have some idea if you agree with church doctrines

I have said nothing about that they should be forgiven or not. I agree with you.

Good. Great minds tend to think alike.

Though, according to my understanding of scripture a person must confess that he had sinned before any forgiveness takes place for him.

Now, what I am talking about is sinning against the spirit of the truth. If a person won't realize it so that he can ask God's forgiveness, does God forgive him anyway?

Maybe not forgive , but not count it against them---God know what He has to work with---we are but dust(Ps 103:1:14).

I think the biggest mistake some people keep on doing is to assume that once they know the way of salvation there isn't any way to leave it or be removed from it. It isn't what the Bible teaches.

Actually it doe. Twice Gods tell us what He starts in us He will perfect until Jesus returns---Phil 1:6 and Heb 12:2

I think the second worse problem people make for themselves is they assume that whenever Jesus said anything it was at face value he meant it. For instance, people left off following him for real and YOU are not able to understand that it is an illustration of the fact that people leave off following him in the spirit.

While much of Jesus's best teaching was in figurative language, some of it needs to be taken at face value or it is meaningless. I think some did literally leave Him but IMO, they had not been converted. Some, like the Prodigal son, left, but since he was a son, he finally saw the truth and returned. We are all prodigals at some time.