I have literally and physically done that.

curtpenn said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

Coke Bear said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

If the Jews didn't have an infallible authority to decide what is Scripture, then how did they get it right, according to Jesus himself? Therefore, you've defeated your own argument that an infallible authority is necessary to decide Scripture. Read that again and again, if you have to. Because I'm sure you're logic will fail you in understanding this as it has all others.

---

Which Jews got it right? Pharisees, Sadducees, Essenes, or the Zealots? They all had different canons and VERY different interpretations of those canons.

This tells us nothing of the NT. Jesus wasn't around to affirm any of the books of the NT.

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

This shows you really don't understand Scripture. Jesus was talking to the disciples in John 16:13, not the whole church. It's plainly obvious from Scripture that the church was NOT without significant error, as Paul's letters and Jesus' letters to the seven churches clearly reveal. And from whom did those churches receive their correction? The pope? No. From Paul, and from Jesus themselves.

"Whoever listens to you, listens to me...." - yes, HIS APOSTLES. And the only thing we have that today that we know is from the apostles, is in Scripture and nowhere else. Thank you, you've made the argument for sola scriptura.

---

Actually, you just made the case for apostolic succession. The apostles appointed successors as they passed away. We see the in Acts as Matthias replaced Judas.

Do you really think that Jesus just gave authority to the 12 and didn't intend for it to pass to others? That would negate what he said in Matt 16:18. Acts confirm that His Church did continue.

---

You're just arguing in circles, repeating arguments already answered and defeated. Your arguments always are filled with terrible logic, complete non sequiturs and bad eisegesis. And sadly, you're not capable of basic logic and reasoning, or intellectually honesty, to even realize or acknowledge it. So obviously, there's nothing that can be said that will have an effect. I gave you a chance, but I just can't keep correcting your continual errors in thinking.

---

This describes you perfectly.

---

Clanging empty vessel, for you in turn.

Folks, when this evil, vulgar, clanging empty vessel shows up to attack me and defend your beliefs, what does that tell you?

BUDOS said:

---

"People who constantly argue seek control and power over others. You cannot reason with them, so it's better to withdraw from an argument than try to prove them wrong." ~Nicola Davies

---

Translation: "I can't argue against the substance of what the person is saying, so I'll try to save face due to pride by attacking the person instead".

BUDOS said:

---

"People who constantly argue seek control and power over others. You cannot reason with them, so it's better to withdraw from an argument than try to prove them wrong." ~Nicola Davies

---

The Discussion should be about seeking the real truth no matter where it leads you. Be a genuine truth seeker and God will lead you to the truth.

xfrodobagginsx said:

---

BUDOS said:

---

"People who constantly argue seek control and power over others. You cannot reason with them, so it's better to withdraw from an argument than try to prove them wrong." ~Nicola Davies

---

The Discussion should be about seeking the real truth no matter where it leads you. Be a genuine truth seeker and God will lead you to the truth.

---

Amen..

Pray for revelation of the truth, wisdom, and knowledge to come upon you.


"If any of you lacks wisdom, you should ask God, who gives generously to all without finding fault, and it will be given to you." James 1:5

Very well said!

xfrodobagginsx said:

---

BUDOS said:

---

"People who constantly argue seek control and power over others. You cannot reason with them, so it's better to withdraw from an argument than try to prove them wrong." ~Nicola Davies

---

The Discussion should be about seeking the real truth no matter where it leads you. Be a genuine truth seeker and God will lead you to the truth.

---

To quote Pilate, "What is truth?"

Judging Truth requires a standard.

That standard is found in the Word of God, rightly divided.

That is to say, the Bible of the First millenium (OSB or Greek NT Translation + the Septuagint) interpreted in light of the Church Fathers and the Eight Ecumenical Councils.

Otherwise you end up with John Hagee promising salvation to the Jews without Christ and saying they shouldn't be evangelized. Or Paula White comparing Trump to Jesus. Or multiple other dispensationalists saying he is Cyrus. You end up with mainline evangelical pastorettes drop kicking a Bible into the pews on Super Bowl Sunday. Or Disney themed worshiptainment.

Yes, all these things are increasingly commonplace. Check out Protestia's website sometime to see where disorderly DIY worship ends up.

Sola scriptura inevitable becomes solo scriptura which becoms solo my opinion.

Realitybites said:

---

xfrodobagginsx said:

---

BUDOS said:

---

"People who constantly argue seek control and power over others. You cannot reason with them, so it's better to withdraw from an argument than try to prove them wrong." ~Nicola Davies

---

The Discussion should be about seeking the real truth no matter where it leads you. Be a genuine truth seeker and God will lead you to the truth.

---

To quote Pilate, "What is truth?"

Judging Truth requires a standard.

That standard is found in the Word of God, rightly divided.

That is to say, the Bible of the First millenium (OSB or Greek NT Translation + the Septuagint) interpreted in light of the Church Fathers and the Eight Ecumenical Councils.

Otherwise you end up with John Hagee promising salvation to the Jews without Christ and saying they shouldn't be evangelized. Or Paula White comparing Trump to Jesus. Or multiple other dispensationalists saying he is Cyrus. You end up with mainline evangelical pastorettes drop kicking a Bible into the pews on Super Bowl Sunday. Or Disney themed worshiptainment.

Yes, all these things are increasingly commonplace. Check out Protestia's website sometime to see where disorderly DIY worship ends up.

Sola scriptura inevitable becomes solo scriptura which becoms solo my opinion.

---

You're contradicting yourself. You're (correctly) claiming that the Word of God is the standard of truth (meaning it is the only infallible authority) which is sola scriptura defined. Then, you're saying sola scriptura inevitably becomes "solo", or someone's own opinion, thus suggesting that sola scriptura is false. So you're saying that the idea that the standard of truth is the Word of God, is ultimately false.

Can you spot your error? What you're really arguing against is NOT sola scriptura, but rather the lack of an interpretive authority of Scripture, which is an entirely different concept that has nothing to do with sola scriptura. This has been explained to you many times, but there's just no remedy for stubborn, willfull ignorance, apparently.

It amazes me how so many people just can't grasp sola scriptura correctly, and understand its truth. Or rather, they don't want to, because it goes against the authority of their church's tradition. You can see why people put others on "ignore" or they attack them personally instead of the merits of their argument - people want to grab hold of their comfort zone, and they just don't want to hear from people who by making sense, threaten it. Very sad to witness.

xfrodobagginsx said:

---

BUDOS said:

---

"People who constantly argue seek control and power over others. You cannot reason with them, so it's better to withdraw from an argument than try to prove them wrong." ~Nicola Davies

---

The Discussion should be about seeking the real truth no matter where it leads you. Be a genuine truth seeker and God will lead you to the truth.

---

Unfortunately, there are some here who just can't/won't seek and evaluate the truth of what's said, but who'd rather attack those who are saying it.

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

BUDOS said:

---

"People who constantly argue seek control and power over others. You cannot reason with them, so it's better to withdraw from an argument than try to prove them wrong." ~Nicola Davies

---

Translation: "I can't argue against the substance of what the person is saying, so I'll try to save face due to pride by attacking the person instead".

---

Here is something we might all consider before we respond to what we consider as personal attacks:
"Stop explaining yourself to people who are committed to misunderstanding you."

BUDOS said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

BUDOS said:

---

"People who constantly argue seek control and power over others. You cannot reason with them, so it's better to withdraw from an argument than try to prove them wrong." ~Nicola Davies

---

Translation: "I can't argue against the substance of what the person is saying, so I'll try to save face due to pride by attacking the person instead".

---

Here is something we might all consider before we respond to what we consider as personal attacks:
"Stop explaining yourself to people who are committed to misunderstanding you."

---

You don't seem to understand the difference between "explaining yourself" and rightful criticism of you and others.

Now instead of spending forum space on your passive aggressiveness, why not share your beliefs on sola scriptura? What's your view on Reality's post above and my response?

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

Realitybites said:

---

xfrodobagginsx said:

---

BUDOS said:

---

"People who constantly argue seek control and power over others. You cannot reason with them, so it's better to withdraw from an argument than try to prove them wrong." ~Nicola Davies

---

The Discussion should be about seeking the real truth no matter where it leads you. Be a genuine truth seeker and God will lead you to the truth.

---

To quote Pilate, "What is truth?"

Judging Truth requires a standard.

That standard is found in the Word of God, rightly divided.

That is to say, the Bible of the First millenium (OSB or Greek NT Translation + the Septuagint) interpreted in light of the Church Fathers and the Eight Ecumenical Councils.

Otherwise you end up with John Hagee promising salvation to the Jews without Christ and saying they shouldn't be evangelized. Or Paula White comparing Trump to Jesus. Or multiple other dispensationalists saying he is Cyrus. You end up with mainline evangelical pastorettes drop kicking a Bible into the pews on Super Bowl Sunday. Or Disney themed worshiptainment.

Yes, all these things are increasingly commonplace. Check out Protestia's website sometime to see where disorderly DIY worship ends up.

Sola scriptura inevitable becomes solo scriptura which becoms solo my opinion.

---

You're contradicting yourself. You're (correctly) claiming that the Word of God is the standard of truth (meaning it is the only infallible authority) which is sola scriptura defined. Then, you're saying sola scriptura inevitably becomes "solo", or someone's own opinion, thus suggesting that sola scriptura is false. So you're saying that the idea that the standard of truth is the Word of God, is ultimately false.

Can you spot your error? What you're really arguing against is NOT sola scriptura, but rather the lack of an interpretive authority of Scripture, which is an entirely different concept that has nothing to do with sola scriptura. This has been explained to you many times, but there's just no remedy for stubborn, willfull ignorance, apparently.

It amazes me how so many people just can't grasp sola scriptura correctly, and understand its truth. Or rather, they don't want to, because it goes against the authority of their church's tradition. You can see why people put others on "ignore" or they attack them personally instead of the merits of their argument - people want to grab hold of their comfort zone, and they just don't want to hear from people who by making sense, threaten it. Very sad to witness.

---

honest question, who is the divine authority to interpret scripture?

The modern western church is a community gathering point but is the head of those churches, a divine authority to interpret scripture just because they went to bible college?

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

BUDOS said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

BUDOS said:

---

"People who constantly argue seek control and power over others. You cannot reason with them, so it's better to withdraw from an argument than try to prove them wrong." ~Nicola Davies

---

Translation: "I can't argue against the substance of what the person is saying, so I'll try to save face due to pride by attacking the person instead".

---

Here is something we might all consider before we respond to what we consider as personal attacks:
"Stop explaining yourself to people who are committed to misunderstanding you."

---

You don't seem to understand the difference between "explaining yourself" and rightful criticism of you and others.

Now instead of spending forum space on your passive aggressiveness, why not share your beliefs on sola scriptura? What's your view on Reality's post above and my response?

---

Thank you for toning down your response and assuming that you are more intelligent in that you understand that I I don't. Where is a response you gave to someone who did not agree with you and where you did not respond in the tone and attitude of one who disagreed but objectively attempted to correct the individual in a manner focused on pointing out where the individual may have been in error in your opinion, why and where they might go to find that information without your trademark "tone"?

4th and Inches said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

Realitybites said:

---

xfrodobagginsx said:

---

BUDOS said:

---

"People who constantly argue seek control and power over others. You cannot reason with them, so it's better to withdraw from an argument than try to prove them wrong." ~Nicola Davies

---

The Discussion should be about seeking the real truth no matter where it leads you. Be a genuine truth seeker and God will lead you to the truth.

---

To quote Pilate, "What is truth?"

Judging Truth requires a standard.

That standard is found in the Word of God, rightly divided.

That is to say, the Bible of the First millenium (OSB or Greek NT Translation + the Septuagint) interpreted in light of the Church Fathers and the Eight Ecumenical Councils.

Otherwise you end up with John Hagee promising salvation to the Jews without Christ and saying they shouldn't be evangelized. Or Paula White comparing Trump to Jesus. Or multiple other dispensationalists saying he is Cyrus. You end up with mainline evangelical pastorettes drop kicking a Bible into the pews on Super Bowl Sunday. Or Disney themed worshiptainment.

Yes, all these things are increasingly commonplace. Check out Protestia's website sometime to see where disorderly DIY worship ends up.

Sola scriptura inevitable becomes solo scriptura which becoms solo my opinion.

---

You're contradicting yourself. You're (correctly) claiming that the Word of God is the standard of truth (meaning it is the only infallible authority) which is sola scriptura defined. Then, you're saying sola scriptura inevitably becomes "solo", or someone's own opinion, thus suggesting that sola scriptura is false. So you're saying that the idea that the standard of truth is the Word of God, is ultimately false.

Can you spot your error? What you're really arguing against is NOT sola scriptura, but rather the lack of an interpretive authority of Scripture, which is an entirely different concept that has nothing to do with sola scriptura. This has been explained to you many times, but there's just no remedy for stubborn, willfull ignorance, apparently.

It amazes me how so many people just can't grasp sola scriptura correctly, and understand its truth. Or rather, they don't want to, because it goes against the authority of their church's tradition. You can see why people put others on "ignore" or they attack them personally instead of the merits of their argument - people want to grab hold of their comfort zone, and they just don't want to hear from people who by making sense, threaten it. Very sad to witness.

---

honest question, who is the divine authority to interpret scripture?

The modern western church is a community gathering point but is the head of those churches, a divine authority to interpret scripture just because they went to bible college?

---

The divine authority to intepret Scripture is and always has been the divine - the Holy Spirit, whom Jesus sent to us, who leads all who seek God to the truth.

While learned, accepted authority figures should be taken seriously and are a good source to learn from, still, they must never be considered infallible. I'm sure you know all this.

4th and inches: " who is the divine authority to interpret scripture?"

One thing that bothers me in this debate, is how often people make arguments not to gain wisdom and understanding, but to score some kind of points.

I am not saying 4th and inches means to do so in this question, but this kind of question is too often used to advance an argument rather than explore truth.

Scripture can be difficult to understand in some places, but there is a great deal there, and we know Scripture does not contradict itself, and most of Scripture is plain in its meaning. So what I have seen people do whom I consider wise, is to look at the whole of Scripture so context and the theme is understood, before obsessing on one passage which is unclear.

It also seems plain to me, that God alone has full and complete knowledge, so it's okay for a person to admit the parts he or she does not understand.

I just wish believers would not use arguments over Scripture as weapons to use against other believers, or cling to opinion rather than discuss it in a Christian spirit.

Oldbear83 said:

---

4th and inches: " who is the divine authority to interpret scripture?"

One thing that bothers me in this debate, is how often people make arguments not to gain wisdom and understanding, but to score some kind of points.

I am not saying 4th and inches means to do so in this question, but this kind of question is too often used to advance an argument rather than explore truth.

Scripture can be difficult to understand in some places, but there is a great deal there, and we know Scripture does not contradict itself, and most of Scripture is plain in its meaning. So what I have seen people do whom I consider wise, is to look at the whole of Scripture so context and the theme is understood, before obsessing on one passage which is unclear.

It also seems plain to me, that God alone has full and complete knowledge, so it's okay for a person to admit the parts he or she does not understand.

I just wish believers would not use arguments over Scripture as weapons to use against other believers, or cling to opinion rather than discuss it in a Christian spirit.

---

no gotchas from me, just self reflection.

I am personally on a personal deep dive into scripture. The Holy Spirit keeps giving me words and phrases to cross reference to bible verses.

This year, I have been in my prayer room more and have specific supplications for knowledge and wisdom. The spirit of truth provides in amazing ways.

What are your thoughts on the Holy Spirit being the divine authority which guides us towards the intent, truth and appropriate context of the Scriptures?

BUDOS said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

BUDOS said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

BUDOS said:

---

"People who constantly argue seek control and power over others. You cannot reason with them, so it's better to withdraw from an argument than try to prove them wrong." ~Nicola Davies

---

Translation: "I can't argue against the substance of what the person is saying, so I'll try to save face due to pride by attacking the person instead".

---

Here is something we might all consider before we respond to what we consider as personal attacks:
"Stop explaining yourself to people who are committed to misunderstanding you."

---

You don't seem to understand the difference between "explaining yourself" and rightful criticism of you and others.

Now instead of spending forum space on your passive aggressiveness, why not share your beliefs on sola scriptura? What's your view on Reality's post above and my response?

---

Thank you for toning down your response and assuming that you are more intelligent in that you understand that I I don't. Where is a response you gave to someone who did not agree with you and where you did not respond in the tone and attitude of one who disagreed but objectively attempted to correct the individual in a manner focused on pointing out where the individual may have been in error in your opinion, why and where they might go to find that information without your trademark "tone"?

---

Where is your response where you actually deal with what's being said, rather than trying to personally attack me for how you perceive I say it?

You obviously are reading all my posts through your thick lens. I seem to bother you a great deal, when I'm just saying what is true. That's pretty revealing.

BUDOS said:

---

What are your thoughts on the Holy Spirit being the divine authority which guides us towards the intent, truth and appropriate context of the Scriptures?

---

i generally agree with it but it has to be from a level of discernment aided by the Holy Spirit and strengthened by knowledge of God's word. A community of Christ helps steer the boat so to speak

John10: 27 My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me; 28 And I give unto them eternal life; and they shall never perish, neither shall any man pluck them out of my hand.

My day includes What some would consider long daily prayers for wisdom, knowledge, and clarity that have been written and expanded upon based on scripture.

Proverbs 1:7, "The fear of the Lord is the beginning of knowledge; fools despise wisdom and instruction."

Proverbs 2:6 "For the Lord gives wisdom; from his mouth come knowledge and understanding."

COLOSSIANS 2:3
"In whom are hidden all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge."

PROVERBS 18:15
"The heart of the discerning acquires knowledge, for the ears of the wise seek it out."

James 1:5
"If any of you lacks wisdom, let him ask of God, who gives to all liberally and without reproach, and it will be given to him."

PSALM 119:66
"Teach me knowledge and good judgment, for I trust your commands."

PHILIPPIANS 1:9
"And this is my prayer: that your love may abound more and more in knowledge and depth of insight."

COLOSSIANS 3:16
"Let the message of Christ dwell among you richly, as you teach and admonish one another with all wisdom through psalms, hymns, and songs from the Spirit, singing to God with gratitude in your hearts."

Where to start: read John, then the other 3 gospels.

To learn how to pray: read psalms
To learn how to live: read romans

Read it all from cover to cover. It is all one continous story of Jesus Christ.

Jesus is the second Adam and the church is his Eve. The bridegroom pays a price for the bride and goes ahead and makes room in his fathers house.(as was custom in the time of the gospel). We await the wedding feast(written in revelation)

4th and Inches said:

---

BUDOS said:

---

What are your thoughts on the Holy Spirit being the divine authority which guides us towards the intent, truth and appropriate context of the Scriptures?

---

i generally agree with it but it has to be from a level of discernment aided by the Holy Spirit and strengthened by knowledge of God's word. A community of Christ helps steer the boat so to speak

John10: 27 My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me; 28 And I give unto them eternal life; and they shall never perish, neither shall any man pluck them out of my hand.

My day includes What some would consider long daily prayers for wisdom, knowledge, and clarity that have been written and expanded upon based on scripture.

Proverbs 1:7, "The fear of the Lord is the beginning of knowledge; fools despise wisdom and instruction."

Proverbs 2:6 "For the Lord gives wisdom; from his mouth come knowledge and understanding."

COLOSSIANS 2:3
"In whom are hidden all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge."

PROVERBS 18:15
"The heart of the discerning acquires knowledge, for the ears of the wise seek it out."

James 1:5
"If any of you lacks wisdom, let him ask of God, who gives to all liberally and without reproach, and it will be given to him."

PSALM 119:66
"Teach me knowledge and good judgment, for I trust your commands."

PHILIPPIANS 1:9
"And this is my prayer: that your love may abound more and more in knowledge and depth of insight."

COLOSSIANS 3:16
"Let the message of Christ dwell among you richly, as you teach and admonish one another with all wisdom through psalms, hymns, and songs from the Spirit, singing to God with gratitude in your hearts."

Where to start: read John, then the other 3 gospels.

To learn how to pray: read psalms
To learn how to live: read romans

Read it all from cover to cover. It is all one continous story of Jesus Christ.

Jesus is the second Adam and the church is his Eve. The bridegroom pays a price for the bride and goes ahead and makes room in his fathers house.(as was custom in the time of the gospel). We await the wedding feast(written in revelation)

---

So it sounds like you don't just "generally" agree with it, you agree with it fully. It's okay to state things with conviction. Don't let these people who get scared when someone boldly speaks truth inhibit you from just saying what you believe.

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

BUDOS said:

---

What are your thoughts on the Holy Spirit being the divine authority which guides us towards the intent, truth and appropriate context of the Scriptures?

---

i generally agree with it but it has to be from a level of discernment aided by the Holy Spirit and strengthened by knowledge of God's word. A community of Christ helps steer the boat so to speak

John10: 27 My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me; 28 And I give unto them eternal life; and they shall never perish, neither shall any man pluck them out of my hand.

My day includes What some would consider long daily prayers for wisdom, knowledge, and clarity that have been written and expanded upon based on scripture.

Proverbs 1:7, "The fear of the Lord is the beginning of knowledge; fools despise wisdom and instruction."

Proverbs 2:6 "For the Lord gives wisdom; from his mouth come knowledge and understanding."

COLOSSIANS 2:3
"In whom are hidden all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge."

PROVERBS 18:15
"The heart of the discerning acquires knowledge, for the ears of the wise seek it out."

James 1:5
"If any of you lacks wisdom, let him ask of God, who gives to all liberally and without reproach, and it will be given to him."

PSALM 119:66
"Teach me knowledge and good judgment, for I trust your commands."

PHILIPPIANS 1:9
"And this is my prayer: that your love may abound more and more in knowledge and depth of insight."

COLOSSIANS 3:16
"Let the message of Christ dwell among you richly, as you teach and admonish one another with all wisdom through psalms, hymns, and songs from the Spirit, singing to God with gratitude in your hearts."

Where to start: read John, then the other 3 gospels.

To learn how to pray: read psalms
To learn how to live: read romans

Read it all from cover to cover. It is all one continous story of Jesus Christ.

Jesus is the second Adam and the church is his Eve. The bridegroom pays a price for the bride and goes ahead and makes room in his fathers house.(as was custom in the time of the gospel). We await the wedding feast(written in revelation)

---

So it sounds like you don't just "generally" agree with it, you agree with it fully. It's okay to state things with conviction. Don't let these people who get scared when someone boldly speaks truth inhibit you from just saying what you believe.

---

JOHN 16:13
"But when he, the Spirit of truth, comes, he will guide you into all the truth. He will not speak on his own; he will speak only what he hears, and he will tell you what is yet to come."

JOHN 14:26
"But the Advocate, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, will teach you all things and will remind you of everything I have said to you."

PHILIPPIANS 4:6-7
"Do not be anxious about anything, but in every situation, by prayer and petition, with thanksgiving, present your requests to God. And the peace of God, which transcends all understanding, will guard your hearts and your minds in Christ Jesus."

" Where is your response where you actually deal with what's being said, rather than trying to personally attack me for how you perceive I say it?

You obviously are reading all my posts through your thick lens. I seem to bother you a great deal, when I'm just saying what is true. That's pretty revealing."

Obviously I am neither a Bible scholar nor a psychiatrist or psychologist, so I just did some searches based on a collection of your responses to a variety of posts and the below site popped up. I don't think every characteristic fits and like I said, I am not qualified to form any type of declarative judgement.
However, in my opinion, there are multiple items which describe how I believe you often come across, but not always. You know so much and would have so much more influence and educate us more effectively if you did not come across so negative, angry and bitter. So often it is that which causes the person to lose sight of the content and focus more on the tone of your message, often resulting in a give and take inferior to what otherwise would happen.

" A narcissistic Bible scholar often weaponizes extensive scriptural knowledge to establish superiority, demand admiration, and control others, rather than to serve or enlighten. They display grandiosity, lack empathy, twist doctrines to fit their agenda, and react to criticism with rage or victimhood.

Key Characteristics:
Weaponized Scripture:
Memorized knowledge is used as ammunition to prove others inferior and justify personal control.

.Grandiosity & Entitlement:
They believe they are uniquely enlightened, interpreting complex texts better than anyone else.

Lack of True Empathy:
They are often selfish and unholy, acting with a "False Self" that centers on their own reputation.

Manipulative Teaching:
They may twist biblical narratives to serve their own interests and, if challenged, play the victim to gain sympathy.

Performative Piety:
They emphasize the appearance of holiness (preaching, acting) but lack the humility or "fruit" required of a leader

.Revenge & Grudges:
They are often unforgiving and will seek vengeance if their authority is questioned, leading to alienation.

Fake Vulnerability ("Fauxnerability"): They may share fake weaknesses to appear relatable, while maintaining a facade of moral superiority.

BUDOS said:

---

" Where is your response where you actually deal with what's being said, rather than trying to personally attack me for how you perceive I say it?

You obviously are reading all my posts through your thick lens. I seem to bother you a great deal, when I'm just saying what is true. That's pretty revealing."

Obviously I am neither a Bible scholar nor a psychiatrist or psychologist, so I just did some searches based on a collection of your responses to a variety of posts and the below site popped up. I don't think every characteristic fits and like I said, I am not qualified to form any type of declarative judgement.
However, in my opinion, there are multiple items which describe how I believe you often come across, but not always. You know so much and would have so much more influence and educate us more effectively if you did not come across so negative, angry and bitter. So often it is that which causes the person to lose sight of the content and focus more on the tone of your message, often resulting in a give and take inferior to what otherwise would happen.

" A narcissistic Bible scholar often weaponizes extensive scriptural knowledge to establish superiority, demand admiration, and control others, rather than to serve or enlighten. They display grandiosity, lack empathy, twist doctrines to fit their agenda, and react to criticism with rage or victimhood.

Key Characteristics:
Weaponized Scripture:
Memorized knowledge is used as ammunition to prove others inferior and justify personal control.

.Grandiosity & Entitlement:
They believe they are uniquely enlightened, interpreting complex texts better than anyone else.

Lack of True Empathy:
They are often selfish and unholy, acting with a "False Self" that centers on their own reputation.

Manipulative Teaching:
They may twist biblical narratives to serve their own interests and, if challenged, play the victim to gain sympathy.

Performative Piety:
They emphasize the appearance of holiness (preaching, acting) but lack the humility or "fruit" required of a leader

.Revenge & Grudges:
They are often unforgiving and will seek vengeance if their authority is questioned, leading to alienation.

Fake Vulnerability ("Fauxnerability"): They may share fake weaknesses to appear relatable, while maintaining a facade of moral superiority.

---

I have absolutely no interest in justifying myself to you. You are strangely dedicating all your efforts here in attacking my character rather than what I'm saying. You seem to think that you are the position to judge hearts. You're post above is a complete mischaracterization, and amounts to false witness. That's just not speaking to the right kind of spirit within you. It's the same spirit that led people to do what they did to the prophets, apostles, and even Jesus himself. Maybe you should reflect on that.

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

You're just arguing in circles, repeating arguments already answered and defeated. Your arguments always are filled with terrible logic, complete non sequiturs and bad eisegesis. And sadly, you're not capable of basic logic and reasoning, or intellectually honesty, to even realize or acknowledge it. So obviously, there's nothing that can be said that will have an effect. I gave you a chance, but I just can't keep correcting your continual errors in thinking.

---

Maybe one day you will realize that sola scriptura in is FALSE.

• You will hopefully learn that scripture never claims that it is the ONLY infallible source.
• You will hopefully learn that that scripture affirms the authority of Tradition and the Church:

* 2 Thess 2:15 - "hold fast to the traditions that you were taught by oral statement or by letter." - Paul places oral tradition with equal footing with written letters.
* 1 Tim 3:15 - Paul calls the Church "pillar and foundation of truth" - not scripture.
* Luke 10:16 - Jesus tells the apostles, "Whoever listens to you listens to me. Whoever rejects you rejects me." - This is apostolic authority.

• You will hopefully learn that that scripture needed the Church to determine what the canon actually is, as scripture doesn't tell us nor does it give us criteria to determine what is scripture.
• You will hopefully learn that sola scriptura makes the bible meaningless because anyone can justify what they want from the bible AS is DONE today -

* Slavery was justified by the South and England.
* Divorce and remarriage is justified
* Female ordination, same-sex unions, and abortions are all justified
* Health and wealth gospel preachers build entire theologies from selective verses.

Coke Bear said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

You're just arguing in circles, repeating arguments already answered and defeated. Your arguments always are filled with terrible logic, complete non sequiturs and bad eisegesis. And sadly, you're not capable of basic logic and reasoning, or intellectually honesty, to even realize or acknowledge it. So obviously, there's nothing that can be said that will have an effect. I gave you a chance, but I just can't keep correcting your continual errors in thinking.

---

Maybe one day you will realize that sola scriptura in is FALSE.

• You will hopefully learn that scripture never claims that it is the ONLY infallible source.
• You will hopefully learn that that scripture affirms the authority of Tradition and the Church:

* 2 Thess 2:15 - "hold fast to the traditions that you were taught by oral statement or by letter." - Paul places oral tradition with equal footing with written letters.
* 1 Tim 3:15 - Paul calls the Church "pillar and foundation of truth" - not scripture.
* Luke 10:16 - Jesus tells the apostles, "Whoever listens to you listens to me. Whoever rejects you rejects me." - This is apostolic authority.

• You will hopefully learn that that scripture needed the Church to determine what the canon actually is, as scripture doesn't tell us nor does it give us criteria to determine what is scripture.
• You will hopefully learn that sola scriptura makes the bible meaningless because anyone can justify what they want from the bible AS is DONE today -

* Slavery was justified by the South and England.
* Divorce and remarriage is justified
* Female ordination, same-sex unions, and abortions are all justified
* Health and wealth gospel preachers build entire theologies from selective verses.

---

Nothing you're saying establishes the church as an infallible authority. I've already proven to the forum that your church councils were in err. The "church" received what GOD decided was canon, it did not "determine" or decide it for itself.

Someday, YOU'LL see the mistake you made. And I truly hope it's not when you're standing before God, but before it's too late.

Perhaps you should reflect on the fact that your response helped to confirm the characteristics indicated in my post, as does many of your previous responses to others.

BUDOS said:

---

Well, well, here is at least something we seem to at least partially agree on.

Not having been in on the early stages of this thread, I recognize that I am open to being completely ignored, especially since a quick scan has already indicated much of what I say below. However, this is a subject that is been of some personal interest for some time so I wanted to at least state my take. I am not the "expert" some of you seem to be. However, your critiques of what I have said below could be an opportunity for me to gain a better understanding of this topic, especially the Catholic side, but hopefully both interpretations of this subject. Here we go:

Jesus never explicitly says that Peter will be "the head of His church."

Matthew 16:1819 Jesus tells Peter:
"You are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church… I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven…"This is the closest Jesus ever comes to giving Peter a unique role.

But Jesus does not say:

• Peter is the "head" of the church.
• Peter will have authority over the other apostles.
• Peter will be the leader after His ascension.

---

BUDOS you've been away for a bit, Welcome back.

I'll try my best to present to you a Catholic response to some of your claims here …

You are correct that the bible never uses the words or phrases that you state above; however, when we look at the context clues in the NT, we do see that Peter had a leadership role. We couple that with what early Church fathers said about Peter and the role of the bishop of Rome, it stands as strong evidence to support the Catholic claim.

BUDOS said:

---

Jesus Himself is the Head of the Church and the New Testament is very consistent:

• Christ is the head of the church (Ephesians 1:2223; 5:23; Colossians 1:18).
• No apostle is ever called the head.

---

Yes, Christ is the Head of the Body of Christ. We, the people, are the Body. But where is Christ, physically right now? He's in heaven. Someone has to lead the believers. This held true for ancient Jews. God set Aaron as the High Priest for the Hebrews. He was succeeded by his son, Eleazar. Phinehas succeeded him. And so on. They possessed a three

Jesus was the high priest. When He ascended into heaven, he had to have someone step in as the leader. That person was Peter. This is seen in Acts when Peter preaches the first homily on Pentecost, the birth of the Church.

BUDOS said:

---

But even in Acts:

• Leadership becomes shared (Acts 15 council)
• James (the Lord's brother) appears to lead the Jerusalem church
• Paul confronts Peter when he is wrong (Galatians 2)

So Peter's role appears to be more foundational, and not "head."

---

Leadership is shared with respect to all of the Apostles were bishops. You are correct, James is the Bishop of Jerusalem.

Paul calling out Peter's conduct actually confirms that Peter was the leader of the Apostles. His public rebuke was required because of Peter's leadership role. Paul sought out Peter specifically because he was the leader. Paul was telling those in Galatia that he was commissioned, like the apostles. To prove this he tells them that even he called out Peter, who was the leader.

BUDOS said:

---

According to the Bible, Jesus gives Peter a special role in the early church, but He never calls Peter the head of the church. Scripture consistently teaches that Christ alone is the head, while the apostlesincluding Peterserve as foundational witnesses.

---

Significant other evidence exists, as well.

At the Last Supper, Jesus tells Peter that he prays for him to strengthen his brothers. He doesn't tell the others that.

In John, after the resurrection, some of the apostles were fishing when Jesus calls out to them. At that point, they are able to net a catch of fish so large that they can't pull it in even with Peter's help. Peter jumps out of the boat, swims ashore, and greats Jesus. The apostles wrangle their haul closer to the shore and Peter, by himself, is able to pull the overloaded net to shore without any assistance. The passage states that the net was not "torn". The Greek used for "torn" is "schism". This wasn't just an crazy feat of strength, it demonstrates that thru Jesus, Peter was supernaturally able hold all the fish together.

This is a prophetic sign that the Church will not be torn apart by schism.

Ironically, this passage, John 21, was read in every (Latin or Western (Roman)-rite) Catholic mass around the world today.

Finally, at the end of the chapter, Jesus tells Peter, and Peter alone "Feed my lambs, Tend my sheep, and Feed my sheep."
Using the Greek, "feed" actually means "shepherd or nourish." "Arina," the "little lambs" - young, newly born, the vulnerable, the new converts, the newly baptized.
"Tend" is a different word "poimaine" meaning "to govern, to guide, to protect, to discipline, to rule."
The "Probata" or "Sheep" are the those who have grown in the life of grace who still need to be feed.

This is a leadership role that Christ gave Peter.

If you would like to question/challenge any of these, please feel free to ask.

I hope that you enjoy the rest of your Easter season.

Coke
Thank you for what appears to be an articulate yet fairly concise summary of the position of the Catholic Church. I have some questions and/or points to share.

My take is that when the apostles were establishing churches in the various regions, they selected/instructed elders to lead each one and gave them some general parameters to follow/enforce within their respective congregations.
Where does it say that they have to give part of their resources to some distant authority or that their elders/pastor had to be approved by that distant authority. To me each church/congregation is its own entity, and its elders/leaders lead and are responsible for that.
Christ is the head of every church not another layer of man imposed authority.

Whether or not one is a Baptist, Catholic, Nazarene or whatever is secondary to is that person a Christian and their actions reflect that belief. I see no need for a pope, cardinal or regional officer whose authority exceeds that of the elders of that church, provided the congregation has sufficient power in elder selection and a few key functions of that church.

Now you give me your take on that and let's see where we go as to areas we agree/disagree or declare neutral.

BUDOS said:

---

Perhaps you should reflect on the fact that your response helped to confirm the characteristics indicated in my post, as does many of your previous responses to others.

---

No, that's called confirmation bias, on top of a running defense mechanism.

I've done NONE of these things, which you posted:

" Memorized knowledge is used as ammunition to prove others inferior and justify personal control.

.Grandiosity & Entitlement:
They believe they are uniquely enlightened, interpreting complex texts better than anyone else.

Lack of True Empathy:
They are often selfish and unholy, acting with a "False Self" that centers on their own reputation.

Manipulative Teaching:
They may twist biblical narratives to serve their own interests and, if challenged, play the victim to gain sympathy.

Performative Piety:
They emphasize the appearance of holiness (preaching, acting) but lack the humility or "fruit" required of a leader

.Revenge & Grudges:
They are often unforgiving and will seek vengeance if their authority is questioned, leading to alienation.

Fake Vulnerability ("Fauxnerability"): They may share fake weaknesses to appear relatable, while maintaining a facade of moral superiority."

You're a despicable liar. Why don't you post my comments where you claim I'm demonstrating these? That's a challenge.

My responses to others, which may be sharply critical, I believe to be completely warranted. You don't. You're free to feel the way you want. But you'll excuse me if I discount your judgement of others, given that you're really not offering much here except to engage in ad hominem.

BUDOS said:

---

Coke
Thank you for what appears to be an articulate yet fairly concise summary of the position of the Catholic Church. I have some questions and/or points to share.

My take is that when the apostles were establishing churches in the various regions, they selected/instructed elders to lead each one and gave them some general parameters to follow/enforce within their respective congregations.
Where does it say that they have to give part of their resources to some distant authority or that their elders/pastor had to be approved by that distant authority. To me each church/congregation is its own entity, and its elders/leaders lead and are responsible for that.
Christ is the head of every church not another layer of man imposed authority.

Whether or not one is a Baptist, Catholic, Nazarene or whatever is secondary to is that person a Christian and their actions reflect that belief. I see no need for a pope, cardinal or regional officer whose authority exceeds that of the elders of that church, provided the congregation has sufficient power in elder selection and a few key functions of that church.

Now you give me your take on that and let's see where we go as to areas we agree/disagree or declare neutral.

---

^^^ Oh, the arrogance of some, thinking they're the only ones who've started off a discussions in this perfunctorily civil way, except here with nauseatingly obvious passive aggressive intentions. If only they went back to the beginning of this thread at page 5 when I first entered the thread, and see that my posts were no different than theirs, and perhaps they're even better. Oh, the arrogance of thinking one can insert themselves hundreds of pages later, not having witnessed the constant intellectual dishonesty, poor logic and thinking, extreme bias, and ad hominem attacks on me, and believe that sharply calling them out was completely unwarranted.

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

BUDOS said:

---

Perhaps you should reflect on the fact that your response helped to confirm the characteristics indicated in my post, as does many of your previous responses to others.

---

No, that's called confirmation bias, on top of a running defense mechanism.

I've done NONE of these things, which you posted:

" Memorized knowledge is used as ammunition to prove others inferior and justify personal control.

.Grandiosity & Entitlement:
They believe they are uniquely enlightened, interpreting complex texts better than anyone else.

Lack of True Empathy:
They are often selfish and unholy, acting with a "False Self" that centers on their own reputation.

Manipulative Teaching:
They may twist biblical narratives to serve their own interests and, if challenged, play the victim to gain sympathy.

Performative Piety:
They emphasize the appearance of holiness (preaching, acting) but lack the humility or "fruit" required of a leader

.Revenge & Grudges:
They are often unforgiving and will seek vengeance if their authority is questioned, leading to alienation.

Fake Vulnerability ("Fauxnerability"): They may share fake weaknesses to appear relatable, while maintaining a facade of moral superiority."

You're a despicable liar.

My responses to others, which may be sharply critical, I believe to be completely warranted. You don't. You're free to feel the way you want. But you'll excuse me if I discount your judgement of others, given that you're really not offering much here except to engage in ad hominem.

---

No. You are wrong, again, and again, because you hear but you refuse to listen.
As for your accusation about my lack of credibility, that BTD is primarily due to at least some of the characteristics listed and which you often mirror, but not always.

Your belief that your criticism is completely warranted, is oftentimes wrong. and it doesn't really matter if I excuse you or not. You and I both know who is, and you refuse to comply.
What I offered was another opportunity for you to stop and examine yourself and your methods.
It appears to me that you are currently a Saul, who could do so much for Christ if you would only reflect the conversion Paul experienced. Personally I think you would be even more effective if you would add a touch of Barnabas.
I am not the only one on this forum who prays for you.
You might try it sometime. (Praying for yourself to listen to Jesus, and the demeanor in which He taught others; not just hear His Word.)
In my opinion, you are a Pharisee and present a real danger to do exactly the opposite you think you might be doing.

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

BUDOS said:

---

Coke
Thank you for what appears to be an articulate yet fairly concise summary of the position of the Catholic Church. I have some questions and/or points to share.

My take is that when the apostles were establishing churches in the various regions, they selected/instructed elders to lead each one and gave them some general parameters to follow/enforce within their respective congregations.
Where does it say that they have to give part of their resources to some distant authority or that their elders/pastor had to be approved by that distant authority. To me each church/congregation is its own entity, and its elders/leaders lead and are responsible for that.
Christ is the head of every church not another layer of man imposed authority.

Whether or not one is a Baptist, Catholic, Nazarene or whatever is secondary to is that person a Christian and their actions reflect that belief. I see no need for a pope, cardinal or regional officer whose authority exceeds that of the elders of that church, provided the congregation has sufficient power in elder selection and a few key functions of that church.

Now you give me your take on that and let's see where we go as to areas we agree/disagree or declare neutral.

---

^^^ Oh, the arrogance of some, thinking they're the only ones who've started off a discussions in this perfunctorily civil way, except here with nauseatingly obvious passive aggressive intentions. If only they went back to the beginning of this thread at page 5 when I first entered the thread, and see that my posts were no different than theirs, and perhaps they're even better. Oh, the arrogance of thinking one can insert themselves hundreds of pages later, not having witnessed the constant intellectual dishonesty, poor logic and thinking, extreme bias, and ad hominem attacks on me, and believe that sharply calling them out was completely unwarranted.

---

Matthew 23:13-36

BUDOS said:

---

You know so much and would have so much more influence and educate us more effectively if you did not come across so negative, angry and bitter. So often it is that which causes the person to lose sight of the content and focus more on the tone of your message, often resulting in a give and take inferior to what otherwise would happen.

---

^^^^ Foks, this is just not the case. People are losing sight of the content and give an "inferior take" not because of my "tone", but because they're fully entrenched in their beliefs and are desperately defending what I was showing to be indefensible, leading them to throw things out there for their own psyche. They just don't want to face the truth. And on top of that, it's just true that some people here are just not very good logical thinkers. I don't apologize for saying it, because it's true, and it truly does significantly hamper the discussion. Oh the arrogance of some who think they can judge other people's hearts, and attribute that to me trying to use my "memorized knowledge for ammunition to prove others inferior".

Why are you saying "folks "?
Are you assuming everyone reads your posts?

You indicated that in your opinion that I was exhibiting arrogant behavior. Interesting. Tell you what, you carefully read the following then read your last few responses. Point out which ones where I exhibited arrogant behavior and how and I will do the same. Fair enough?

Arrogance is an offensive, overbearing display of superiority or self-importance, characterized by excessive pride and a, often, insulting attitude toward others. It involves a, [conceited belief that one is more important, knowledgeable, or capable than others, often manifesting as condescension, dismissal, or boastfulness.

Common Synonyms for Arrogance
* Haughtiness: Extreme pride and disdain for others.
* Insolence: Rude and disrespectful behavior.
* Disdain: Contempt or a feeling that others are unworthy.
* Hubris: Excessive pride or self-confidence (often used in literary/professional contexts).
* Presumption: Acting beyond one's proper authority or social standing.
* Egotism: The habit of talking and thinking too much of oneself.

Usage Examples & Signs of Arrogance
* Conversational Dominance: Always talking over others and only discussing oneself.
* Dismissive Behavior: Dismissing or ignoring input from others in meetings.
* Boasting: Constantly showing off achievements or intelligence.
* Condescension: Looking down on people deemed "beneath" them.
* Unwarranted Certainty: Refusing to listen or learn, believing one has all the answers.
* Lack of Empathy: Showing an arrogant disregard for the feelings or opinions of others.

BUDOS said:

---

Why are you saying "folks "?
Are you assuming everyone reads your posts?

You indicated that in your opinion that I was exhibiting arrogant behavior. Interesting. Tell you what, you carefully read the following then read your last few responses. Point out which ones where I exhibited arrogant behavior and how and I will do the same. Fair enough?

Arrogance is an offensive, overbearing display of superiority or self-importance, characterized by excessive pride and a, often, insulting attitude toward others. It involves a, [conceited belief that one is more important, knowledgeable, or capable than others, often manifesting as condescension, dismissal, or boastfulness.

Common Synonyms for Arrogance
* Haughtiness: Extreme pride and disdain for others.
* Insolence: Rude and disrespectful behavior.
* Disdain: Contempt or a feeling that others are unworthy.
* Hubris: Excessive pride or self-confidence (often used in literary/professional contexts).
* Presumption: Acting beyond one's proper authority or social standing.
* Egotism: The habit of talking and thinking too much of oneself.

Usage Examples & Signs of Arrogance
* Conversational Dominance: Always talking over others and only discussing oneself.
* Dismissive Behavior: Dismissing or ignoring input from others in meetings.
* Boasting: Constantly showing off achievements or intelligence.
* Condescension: Looking down on people deemed "beneath" them.
* Unwarranted Certainty: Refusing to listen or learn, believing one has all the answers.
* Lack of Empathy: Showing an arrogant disregard for the feelings or opinions of others.

---

You do realize you have spent the vast majority of your time on this thread personally attacking me instead of engaging the merits of my words, throwing stones with your apparent belief that you know people's hearts and are in the position to judge their motivations. You don't see the arrogance there? Anyway, I offered you a challenge. Let's see you answer it.