Yes there is an official interpreter.

The entire book of Acts all 28 chapters is a small picture of the actual history of the early Church. Here St.Philip, a deacon in the Chruch, was the official interpreter. Why was he an official interpreter in the Church? Becasue Christ founded His Church and built it upon St.Peter and the other Apostles. Christ personally gave them His authority and sent them to baptize and teach all nations. St.Philip is the official interpreter in the Chruch becasue the Apostles in turn gave their preaching, teaching and baptizing authority to St.Philip by the imposition of hands. Acts. 6:5-6. In time and develolpment of the Church, this official authority would be known as the Magisterium of the CC.

The official guide to understanding the true meaning of Scripture is the teaching authority given by Christ to St.Peter and the other Apostles and from them to others through the imposition of hands (Holy Orders). God Who inspired the Sacred Books, has entrusted their interpretation to His Church. Scripture itself states "The Church is the pillar and ground of truth".

......................................

1St.John 2:27 is one verse. You could arrive at this conclusion if there weren't 26 verses in front of it teaching a completely different conclusion than yours.

When you take the entire chapter in it's proper context, it cements my point about the Chruch being under the "unction" guidance of the Holy Spirit her authorities have all necessary knowledge and instruction so that we have no need to seek it elsewhere.  

Re: the highlighted...

This is a commonly held belief within Protestantism....that when individuals read their Bibles prayerfully, the Holy Spirit would guide each individual to a knowledge of the truth.  

However, Protestantism with all the different sects shows it doesn't work. For if it did, they would have come to the same conclusions, would all have exactly the same faith.  

Let's start with 10 people reading the same version of Scripture.

Ask them to give their respective interpretations of a given passage and you are going to get as many as 10 different answers.  Now, these 10 think themselves capable of interpreting it correctlly...but which one is correct? If they are different, they can't all be correct. Individual readers are liable to mistakes. Image the results if you multiply that 10 by 100s. Which one is led by the Holy Spirit?  

I don't have this problem. I believe that God confided the inspired writings to the guardianship of a living and infallible Church. The written pages cannot explain themselves and we need an official guide to interpret its pages. The living voice of an authentic interpeter is necessary and God provided that in the CC.   

lula posts:

kfc posts:

The Bible teaches the Holy Spirit acting through and within the Chruch which Christ personally founded and built upon St.Peter and the other Apostles is the official expounder of God's Law and Word.

The Bible teaches that the rulers of Christ's Church have authority which must be obeyed in matters of faith and morals.

Hebrews 13:17, "Obey your prelates, and be subject to them. For they watch as being to render an account of your souls; that they may do this with joy, and not with grief for that is unprofitable for you."

St.Matt. 18:17 "And if he will not hear them: tell the Church. ANd if he will not hear the Church, let him be to thee as a heathen and a publican."

St.Luke 10:16, "He that heareth you, heareth Me. And he that despitheth you, despitheth Me. And he that despitheth Me despitheth him Who sent Me."

St.Matt. 16:19 "And I will give unto thee (Peter) the keys to the kingdom of heaven; and whatever thou (Peter) shall bind on earth, shall be bound in Heaven, and whatever thou (Peter) shalt loose on earth will be loosed in Heaven."

The Apostles repeatedly claimed this authority Gal. 1:8; St.John 1:10; Acts 15, 23 and 28. These all show the Chruch of Christ has authority to act in His name.

We know the Bible teaches the Chruch was necessarily infallible 1Tim. 3:15, "the pillar and ground of truth."

That the Holy Spirit would guide her until the end of the world unto all truth...St.John 14:26; 16:13, and Acts 1:8.

The Bible teaches that the Chruch always has Christ with her and the HOly Ghost always to guide her...St.Matt. 28:20, St.John 14:16.

.................................................

lula posts:

kfc posts 87

I agree it's not true, but that seems to be what you are thinking when you posted:

post 60

You included the word "rapture". What then is the "rapture" here to you? Is this not a 3rd or "extra" coming of Christ?

I didn't appoint one.

 

I thought the Bible has all the answers.

I don't believe in hell. I don't believe that a loving G-d would send any of His children to such a place.

In my religion we do not do good things because we fear hell, we do good things because we fear disappointing our good Creator; just like children ultimately stop doing bad things not because, at 32 years old, they fear punishment from their parents but because they don't want to disappoint them.

The punishment for the wicked will never be a hell, it will be, in the next world, the realisation that they haven't contributed and have instead relied solely on their Creator's good will for their share.

 

 

THE CHURCH IS NEVER INFALLIBLE.   NEVER.  The church is made up of human sinful believers.  It's not infallible.  That is NOT what that scripture says. 

actually Lula, that was v20 and v27.  So if you're wrong here...tells me you didn't even look at it.  Gotcha!    There is no other conclusion.  What are you referring to?  Why not just answer the charge instead of bringing me to other scriptures?   You do this alot.  What did John mean then?  Answer that without going anywhere.  Answer it in context. 

Remember you can ALWAYS make scripture say what you want it to say when you go from one scripture to another without staying in context which is almost always what you do to prove your point.  I'll say it again...a scripture taken out of context is nothing but a pretext.  False preachers are usually topical.  It's much harder to twist scripture when you're expositional. 

How?   You gave me nothing here.  you have to twist the scriptures to make it say what you want it to say.  didn't I put in he wrote to the individual Chrisitians?  He called them "little children."  It's a letter to them telling them that they have the Holy Spirit in them as Philip did.  Now this Eunuch could go back to his own country and do the same.  He could read, meditate on the scriptures and teach.  We should all be doing that.  That's how the gospel spread so far and wide. 

The rapture is scriptural.  Very scriptural.  It's not that it isn't.  It's that some have made a whole lot out of it that it isn't.  In other words I don't agree with the "Left Behind Series" view of the Rapture although I do believe in the Rapture because it's in scripture. 

rapture is simply the gathering together of the Saints in the air when he returns.  It's at His second coming that this will happen.  No third coming. 

it has all the answers about life and our purpose in this life that we need to know.

and that's a very good reason to do good things.  We do good things because we love God and we want to give back to Him as He's been so generous and good to us. 

where are you getting this from? 

be careful Leauki with the "I don't believes" or "I believes"  Remember it doesn't really matter what we believe.  It matters more what God says.  Obviously the Jews in the OT had their own way of worship that didn't include God because they "believed" they were in the right then too only to find out they were really very radically wrong. 

He doesn't send HIS children to hell.  Remember His children and His creation are NOT the same.  Right from the get go we have Cain's line and we had Seth's line.  One line followed God, one did not and it went on from there.  If we find ourselves in Hell we have only ourselves to blame.   It's not God's fault.  He gave us so many opportunities thru the Prophets, His Word, other People and lastly His Son to give us the message but yet we, remain  as stubborn and rebellious as ever. 

 

 

 

Are you saying that those who sin are not his children?

lula posts:

Infidel posts:

Well, it doesn't. The Holy Bible is only part of God's revealed Truth in which He manifested and communicated both Himself and the eternal decrees of His Will concering His salvation plan for all mankind. Even the Bible itself states there is always something more to be known , infinitely more. It's found in St.John 21:25, "But there are also many other things which Jesus did, were every one of them to be written, I suppose that the world itself could not contain the books that would be written."

LEAUKI POSTS :

Remember, God who is Infinite Love and Mercy, is also Infinite Justice. Becasue of God's justice, as well as His total respect for human freedom, Hell is a real possibility as a person's eternal destiny. This side of God's mystery is difficult to grasp, but CHrist Himself taught it and so does His Church.  

leauki posts:

The teaching that Hell exists is clearly in Scripture. In St.Matthew 25:34, 41 Christ says to the just: "Come, you who are blessed by My Father. Inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world. But to the unjust He says, " Depart from Me, you accursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels." In St.Mark 9:43, Christ said, "It is better for you to enter into life maimed then with two hands to go into Gehenna."

There is something absolutely basic about every one of us...right from the get go--we are all seekers having questioning intellects. Whether we know it or not, the Ultimate Reality that we all seek is God.

We also have something else that's very basic...we go through life making constant decisions...yes to this and no to that. That is our free will..the power to want and the power to choose.

One point that emerges from the doctrine of those 2 passages quoted above is the reality of human freedom. We are free to seek God and serve Him and we are free to do the opposite. In either case, we are responsible for the consequences. Our short time of life on this earth is indeed a serious matter. The way we live it make a serious difference. We are free to seek God to choose the inexpressible pain of His absense.

  

   

 

 

 

Lula if you're going to use scripture to try and convince a Jewish person, you'd best not use the NT.  Since they don't recognize it it means little.   

No.  Everyone sins.  I'm saying I agree with you that God would NOT send HIS children to Hell anymore than any of us would send our children to hell.

The only diff between a believer who sins and an unbeliever who sins is the Saviour.   We are either in the family of God or we're not. 

There is a diff between His children and His creation. 

 

 

That was Leauki.

I respect the Christian Bible for its teachings about morality but whether or not there is a hell is really pure faith.

Gehenna is a physical location near Jerusalem.

 

Leauki posts:

And we've heard the other side of this too. It goes something like this: How can the world that's so wretched and filled with misery be the creation of a wise and Good God?

If one of His children sins greviously and remains that way at the time of his death, then he is condemned to Hell and he certaInly has deserved it. If one of His children dies with his will rebellious to God he puts himself in Hell. Why blame God when the person alone is responsible? 

In God all is one..His Mercy, Justice, Power and Love. It is our limited intellect that makes us set one attribute of God against the other.  God cannot defeat His mercy against His Justice and vice versa. God cannot deviate from right without ceasing to be God.

lula posts:

Thanks for the advice. But you know what? It's good to quote the NT to Jews becasue it's good for them.

 St.Matthew wrote the Gospel around the year 50. It's 2010, it's time they recognize it...actually it's pass time. Way pass time! 

 

 

KFC posts:

KFC posts 80

 KFC,

This is not what Jesus meant. Daniel does not prophesy about an endtime Jerusalem Temple built for the purpose of reinstituting OT sacrifices as you state here. You're interpretating St.Matt. 24:15 according to Christian Zionist ideology. Rebuilding the Jerusalem Temple and reinstituting OT animal sacrifices might be a dream, prayer, wish and desire of some people, but it is not Biblical prophecy.

 Just as your interpretation of Daniel 9:26-27 is truth mixed with error, the same with this. I've highlighted the part that is error.    

First, Concerning the "abomination of desolations"......St.Matthew's 24:15  "abomination of desolation" refers to a sacrilege on the altar or desecration of the sanctuary of the holy place by a "man of sin" 2Thess. 2:3-4 or "Antichrist" 1St. John 2:18 who must come prior to the end of the world.

By saying "Whoso reads, let him understand" Jesus is directing the reader to Daniel and the command to "understand" implies the reader to search for fulfillments of Daniel's prophecy either in Scripture or in events in his own day.

Daniel's "abomination of desolation" was close to the time in which the book of Daniel was written. You have already cited Antiochus IV which is recounted in 1 and 2 Machabees and we can learn something from it. 1Mach 1:57; 6-7 refers to an "abomination of desolation" set up by Antiochus Epiphanes who caused all sorts of afflictions to the Jews and the Holy Land. Antiochus was aided and abetted by 4 Jewish high priests: Jason 2Mach 4:7-13; Menelaus 2Mach 4:23-25; 13:5-7; Lysimachus 2Mach 4:39-42; and Lacimus 2Mach. 14:3-4.

But what our Lord does in St. Matt. 24: verses 15 through 22 is apply this episode in the history of Israel to the future destruction of the Jerusalem within their generation. That abomination occurred in 70AD when the Roman armies destroyed and profaned the Temple and later under Hadrian who ordered the erection of a statue of Jupiter on the ruins. Verse 17-22 is Jesus telling the early Christians what to do when they see "the abomination of desolation" of which the prophet Daniel spoke.

Keep in mind that Jesus predicted "the desolation of Jerusalem" St.Matt. 23:37-38; St.Luke 21:20-24; 23:28. There would be a spiritual and a physical judgment of Jerusalem. The prophetic fulfillment would be a time span from 33AD to 70AD (Daniel's last week).

Immediately at Christ's death, God rent the Temple Veil from top to bottom. What was He telling everyone by this? That the Temple era from Solomon in 931 BC was done. No longer would the Temple serve as God's dwelling. This was the spiritual judgment. God rejected the Jewish nation as his chosen people, although a remnant would continue to be saved due to the promises to Abraham Rom. 11:5-27.

 

The "Abomination of Desolation" would be fulfilled more completely by the events leading up to the physical destruction of the Temple in 70AD and again in 146AD by the Roman armies. The Jewish historian Joesphus writes about this. 

According to Daniel's 3 references to the "abomination of desolation", it is a time when the "sacrifice and offering" cease 9:27, or when the "continual sacrifice" is replaced. 11:31; 12:11; 8:11-13.

FOR THE JEWS, THE CESSATION OF SACRIFICE AND OFFERING OCCURRED AT THE DEATH OF CHRIST, SINCE HE REPLACED THEIR SACRIFICE WITH HIS ONE AND ULTIMATE SACRIFICE. Heb. 9:12-28.    

 

kfc posts:

 

KFC,

 

Antichrist isn't going to give a hoot about animal sacrifices or putting a stop to them. It's the sacrifice associated with the New Covenant worship that will cease or be replaced by a pseudo sacrifice when Satan is loosed and the man of sin is revealed. Read Malachias 1:11...that's the New Covenant "continual sacrifice" that is offered in every place all over the world that Antichrist will be after.  

 

"standing in the holy place"....even if a future Jerusalem Temple will be built...it cannot be "the holy place" as God will not dwell there....the holy place is the Church of the New Covenant .....her Altars...in the Tabernacle. 

 

 

It depends.

If it really says what you claim it says, it's certainly not "good" for us, and neither were forced conversions, the inquisition, and the crusades.

If you want to do something for Jews and Christianity, stop advertising your version of Christianity to anyone. Trust me, you are not convincing anybody. Just ask the Jews, Protestants and atheists who read you here.




It's very simple.

Rebuilding the Temple is part of what a messiah does.

If Jesus doesn't do it, he is not a messiah.

You are telling me that Jesus won't rebuild the Temple.

Therefor, if I believe you, I know he is not a messiah (let alone the Messiah).

You still think you teaching Jews about Christianity is a good thing?

I doubt that any Christian or Jew wants to hear that somone isn't the Messiah.

 

"Past", not "pass."

Another problem with quoting the Christian Bible (or the Quran) to Jews is that if the quote says something that isn't in the Hebrew Bible, the Jew will take that as an indication that the Christian Bible (or the Quran) is wrong.

Hell is not a concept of Judaism, but it exists in Islam and Christianity.

I think both Christianity and Islam got their concept of hell from Zoroastrianism. Maybe hell is a place where G-d sends wicked non-Jews, I don't know. But that would explain why He chose to reveal information about it not in Aramaic or Hebrew but in Greek, Arabic, and Persian.