What is the foundation of the church?

God, Christ, & The Holy Spirit
User avatar
21centpilgrim
Posts: 183
Joined: Fri Aug 22, 2008 11:17 pm

Re: What is the foundation of the church?

Post by 21centpilgrim » Sun Aug 09, 2015 10:32 pm

Dizerner,

could I ask again the following?
I am glad that you do not espouse that the doctrine of the Trinity must be understood to be saved, do you think one does not need to affirm the Trinity to be saved either?

How central is the doctrine of the Trinity if it is not explicitly taught but at best implied? The concept of three coequal partners in the Godhead, is this clearly detected with the confines of the canon ?
Then those who feared the LORD spoke with each other, and the LORD listened to what they said. In his presence, a scroll of remembrance was written to record the names of those who feared him and loved to think about him.

dizerner

Re: What is the foundation of the church?

Post by dizerner » Mon Aug 10, 2015 12:02 am

could I ask again the following?
Of course, glad to answer.
How central is the doctrine of the Trinity if it is not explicitly taught but at best implied? The concept of three coequal partners in the Godhead, is this clearly detected with the confines of the canon ?
I don't think a doctrine is necessarily more or less central by how clearly it seems stated in Scripture. I think all essential doctrines are stated clearly enough, so that with the help and affirmation of the Spirit, the text can be seen to teach them. I'm not into saying people that disagree with my particular doctrines are necessarily heretics, but I do believe there are an essential set of doctrines, although for me they are very broad. I think even that Scriptures clearly teach us some doctrines are hidden in Scripture for the sole purpose of seeking them out by revelation. I don't personally equate that with any Gnostic mysticism and secret knowledge, but rather a true and proper mysticism open to all who seek God.

I believe the Trinity is clearly set out within the confines of the canon alone; in fact, I think a man taking his Bible into the woods for a year and devoutly praying, would come out with this doctrine, had no one taught him a thing about it. In fact, myself not really coming from any strong church traditions, I don't feel particularly influenced or biased to believe a previous or established doctrine, but appreciate it when I come to the same conclusion that many othodox Christians have over the years.

The Trinity not being essential for salvation, I still find essential to deeply know God and very beneficial to relating to God, interpreting his Word and strengthening my personal faith in Scriptural truths. At one point I severely questioned my own belief in the Trinity due to it being something I was taught but had not been solidly founded in Scriptures. At that point, I held it in limbo, until I felt I could feel certain I had a solid Scriptural foundation for myself, and that it appropriately fit all the Scriptural data. At this point in time, I feel it overwhelmingly fits the data, and have incorporated it back into my beliefs with a deeper appreciation for the exegesis of those who went before me.

The most persuasive criticisms to me are not logical contradictions, but rather certain Biblical emphases, most notably the singular references to God saturated in Scripture. Secondly, that Christ often seemed to indicate himself on some level lower than God, expressing limitations, prayer, avowals of devotion towards God, an admission of true humanity and a separate identity. No other argument but these two really carries much weight with me. And despite the strength of these two arguments, the overwhelming support of the complete Biblical testimony and the constant affirmation in my own personal experiential walk, has completely solidified my faith in a Triune God, each of which participated in my salvation in a different, but essential and Divine role.

Bless.

User avatar
TheEditor
Posts: 814
Joined: Thu Sep 16, 2010 9:09 pm

Re: What is the foundation of the church?

Post by TheEditor » Mon Aug 10, 2015 9:39 pm


Hi Dizerner,

I appreciate your passion to know God more fully. I do not share trinitarian sentiments, but I do understand what it feels like to have your take on God appear to be attacked, or perhaps misunderstood. Having said that, I wonder if you can clear something up for me. You stated something that I believe JR has also said, namely:

I think a man taking his Bible into the woods for a year and devoutly praying, would come out with this doctrine, had no one taught him a thing about it. In fact, myself not really coming from any strong church traditions, I don't feel particularly influenced or biased to believe a previous or established doctrine

I believe that you feel this way, but you then said something that I believe contradicts this statement:

At one point I severely questioned my own belief in the Trinity due to it being something I was taught but had not been solidly founded in Scriptures


I think it would be fair to say, that virtually no one on the planet that has been touched by Western Christianity, could make a claim to not have been exposed in some way to the trinity doctrine. They may not be able to articulate it, but it is permeating and I really doubt whether someone can approach the Scriptures without wearing some kind of creedal spectacles in this respect.

Regards, Brenden.
[color=#0000FF][b]"It was for freedom that Christ set us free; therefore keep standing firm and do not be subject again to a yoke of slavery."[/b][/color]

dizerner

Re: What is the foundation of the church?

Post by dizerner » Mon Aug 10, 2015 10:31 pm

TheEditor wrote:I think it would be fair to say, that virtually no one on the planet that has been touched by Western Christianity, could make a claim to not have been exposed in some way to the trinity doctrine. They may not be able to articulate it, but it is permeating and I really doubt whether someone can approach the Scriptures without wearing some kind of creedal spectacles in this respect.
Well, it would be nice to get a brain wipe somehow, or take a person absolutely separated from society from birth, and see what their eventual conclusions would be. But that's not very realistic, and even then you couldn't measure other factors such as the person's sincerity. It's like those secular studies on prayer that claim to prove prayer is ineffectual or less effective—because they are assuming a lot of things about how prayer works. But think about the conclusion of what you are implying: so maybe no one hasn't been "touched" by some preexisting unsubstantiated or man-made dogma somewhere. I could agree with that, in principle. But to take that fact and then argue that that means no one can ever get past that dogma, it just contaminates your viewpoint for life—I've seen dogma go deep in a person, and take a lifetime to get out. I still fellowship with people who were strongly influenced by the Word of Faith error that says we can believe our way to health and wealth in any situation, and it has been a long time coming out of their system, and honestly I don't think is completely out yet (but much, much better!). So let's say that everyone has some glasses that skew a pure perspective on Scripture and grant that point. Does it mean nothing you can do can ever get past that, you're just marked for life? That's what I can't agree with. I said elsewhere on here that I think a normal path of belief in the Bible should always start with a simple Monotheism, because we can honestly admit that's where the Bible starts. But Peter tells us as we "pay close attention" the "prophetic word" will become like a "lamp shining in a dark place" until gradually, through a process that obviously takes time, "the morning star arises in our hearts." To me that's telling me that the Word should take new focus and clarity and bring new revelation corresponding with time and earnestness I put into it. We could compare ungodly sinful "worldviews" or perspectives, to these false religious perspectives. The Scripture tells us we can renew our mind, we can change our thinking, we can adjust our paradigm no matter what we come from, if we have a willingness to do so. So it becomes I think going from a simple "You've been infected with a bad thinking" type of zombie suspicion, into a more deeper and subtle "even in your complete sincerity and willingness to rethink and relook your position endless times with a pure motive, you're just too blind to ever see." And that's the line I can't cross or the idea I can't accept, it takes a lot of running over grace to get to that point of blindness. Bless.

User avatar
TheEditor
Posts: 814
Joined: Thu Sep 16, 2010 9:09 pm

Re: What is the foundation of the church?

Post by TheEditor » Mon Aug 10, 2015 10:58 pm

Hi Dizerner,

I can't say I disagree. I liken it to having English as a second language; you will always have an accent, it just depends on how hard you try to get rid of it. But I think my point was more that even though you said you took an unvarnished view, at the same time you confessed that you had the view "taught" to you. Therefore, how unvarnished could it be? I never meant to imply we can't divest ourselves of out theological grid. Look at me, 25 years ago we wouldn't even be having this kind of dialogue. :D

Regards, Brenden.
[color=#0000FF][b]"It was for freedom that Christ set us free; therefore keep standing firm and do not be subject again to a yoke of slavery."[/b][/color]

BrotherAlan
Posts: 189
Joined: Fri Oct 22, 2010 10:42 am

Re: What is the foundation of the church?

Post by BrotherAlan » Sat Dec 26, 2015 2:21 am

The foundation of the Church is Christ, and Christ built His Church upon Peter, whose very name was given to him by Christ and means "Rock" ("Cephas" = Peter=Rock), giving Peter the "keys to the kingdom of heaven", as stated in Mt. 16:17-19. The successors of Peter, the Popes of Rome, carry on this Petrine Office and now possess those keys. Thus, where Peter, I.e., the Pope, is, there is the Church (as was stated in the early church), and the gates of hell will never prevail against that Church, Christ's Church, the Catholic Church....for Christ, the ultimate foundation of this Church, will sustain her, His Bride, throughout the ages, as He promised.

In Christ, the Newborn King,
BrotherAlan
"Glory be to the Father, and to the Son, and to the Holy Spirit,
as it was in the beginning, is now, and always, and unto the ages of ages. Amen."

dizerner

Re: What is the foundation of the church?

Post by dizerner » Sun Dec 27, 2015 11:21 am

BrotherAlan wrote:The foundation of the Church is Christ, and Christ built His Church upon Peter, whose very name was given to him by Christ and means "Rock" ("Cephas" = Peter=Rock), giving Peter the "keys to the kingdom of heaven", as stated in Mt. 16:17-19. The successors of Peter, the Popes of Rome, carry on this Petrine Office and now possess those keys. Thus, where Peter, I.e., the Pope, is, there is the Church (as was stated in the early church), and the gates of hell will never prevail against that Church, Christ's Church, the Catholic Church....for Christ, the ultimate foundation of this Church, will sustain her, His Bride, throughout the ages, as He promised.

In Christ, the Newborn King,
BrotherAlan
The Jews in Jesus' time thought they were successors of Abraham, and built their entire religion around that premise. How can you demonstrate that all the Popes directly come from Peter's succession? Even were we to accept the premise that Peter could somehow pass down a higher authority "office" to particular people, how do we know the Popes are the "right" ones? Maybe the real Popes Peter really chose have been some nobodies no one heard of because they don't seek fame and pomp or the limelight? It seems quite a stretch to me to say "Upon this rock I will build my church" means Peter directly authorized one particular institution over others. Also, I think it's a bit confusing to use Scripture to prove a point, when you don't believe it's even an ultimate authority in any way (which Muslims also try to do, and even many on this forum). What would happen if one of your Popes were to officially declare that the Catholic church got the interpretation of this Scripture wrong? Because he has the ultimate authority and not Scripture, he could dismantle the entire religion with a new interpretation. Yet the Scripture stands in what it says, all on it's own, without a Pope or an institution or anything. (Don't get me wrong I love Catholics, I have Catholic friends, I think Catholics can know Christ, but in love we challenge each other's positions.)

User avatar
morbo3000
Posts: 537
Joined: Tue May 29, 2012 9:05 pm
Location: Washington State
Contact:

Re: What is the foundation of the church?

Post by morbo3000 » Mon Dec 28, 2015 10:04 pm

I've been watching "Davinci's Demons." I can't recommend it. It's 100% fiction. And quite worldly.

But.

It's depiction of a Pope at the time is quite enlightening. [spoiler alert] Their Pope is a horrible human being, of no redeemable traits. Murderous. Treacherous. Vile sexuality. In the second season, we learn that he was the older brother of the actual Pope, and assumed the post by treachery. With no one the wiser, he imprisoned his brother, and because of their similar looks, no one knew different.

While a fiction, it demonstrates the faulty thinking of papal succession. An anti-christ can take the position through treachery, or political maneuvering. Have nothing in common with either Jesus, nor Peter. And live a vile life. This has nothing in common with New Testament Christianity.
When you are a Bear of Very Little Brain, and you Think of Things, you find sometimes that a Thing which seemed very Thingish inside you is quite different when it gets out into the open and has other people looking at it.
JeffreyLong.net
Jesusna.me
@30thirteen

User avatar
Paidion
Posts: 5452
Joined: Mon Aug 18, 2008 10:22 pm
Location: Back Woods of North-Western Ontario

Re: What is the foundation of the church?

Post by Paidion » Tue Dec 29, 2015 1:15 pm

So what's the answer to the original question, "What is the foundation of the Church?"

In 1 Corinthians 3:11, Paul says that the foundation is Christ:
For no one can lay a foundation other than that which is laid, which is Jesus Christ.
But in Ephesians 2: 19,20, he seems to say that the foundation is the apostles and prophets, with Christ being part of that foundation—the cornerstone.
So then you are no longer strangers and aliens, but you are fellow citizens with the saints and members of the household of God, built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Christ Jesus himself being the cornerstone.
Since both passages employ analogies, perhaps one should not make much of the difference between the two different figures of speech used to represent the basis of the Church.
Paidion

Man judges a person by his past deeds, and administers penalties for his wrongdoing. God judges a person by his present character, and disciplines him that he may become righteous.

Avatar shows me at 75 years old. I am now 83.

BrotherAlan
Posts: 189
Joined: Fri Oct 22, 2010 10:42 am

Re: What is the foundation of the church?

Post by BrotherAlan » Tue Apr 26, 2016 12:27 am

dizerner wrote:
Also, I think it's a bit confusing to use Scripture to prove a point, when you don't believe it's even an ultimate authority in any way (which Muslims also try to do, and even many on this forum).
Catholics believe the Scripture is the inspired Word of God, having the Holy Spirit (God) as its primary author. Therefore, we Catholics believe the Scripture is an ultimate authority in teaching us faith and morals, even as God Himself is the ultimate authority, for, like I just said, the Scripture is the Word of God ("All Scripture is inspired by God..." (1 Tim. 3:16)). The Magisterium of the Church (headed by the Popes) is simply the ultimate authority in interpreting the Bible, being granted this authority from Christ Himself, who founded the Church, which is the "pillar and foundation of truth" (1 Tim. 3:15) upon Peter, the first Pope. As a Protestant looks to a trusted Scripture scholar or pastor to aid him in understanding the Divine Scriptures, a Catholic looks to the greatest of pastors, the Pastors of the Universal Church, i.e., the Roman Pontiffs, the Popes, to help him understand the true meaning of the Holy Scriptures (for the Popes, being the successors of Peter, have the same role that Peter, the first Pastor of the Universal Church, received from Christ to "feed Christ's sheep and lambs").

In Christ, the Supreme Pastor of Souls,
BrotherAlan
"Glory be to the Father, and to the Son, and to the Holy Spirit,
as it was in the beginning, is now, and always, and unto the ages of ages. Amen."

Post Reply

Return to “Theology Proper, Christology, Pneumatology”