What You Protestants Don't Seem to Get

[ QUOTE ]
Not at all. But you do have to be able to see the logical implications that certain beliefs have in regards to being successful in persuading non-believers to accept the gospel.

[/ QUOTE ]

God's things, spiritual things, are transmitted from spirit to spirit. Man is a three-fold being: body, soul, and spirit. When God imparts something to us, He imparts it into our spirits. When we receive that and impart it to others we impart it to their spirits.

The logical mind is part of a man's soul. The unregenerate man has only his soul to guide him. His carnal, selfish, fleshly soul has had years and years to pull him away from the things of God and set him on paths of folly. You don't try to convince someone from mind to mind. The gospel is not to be accepted and received logically.

The currency of every cult from the JW's to the Moonies to the RCC is a twisting of logic to enprison its adherents, a system of thought that builds upon itself brick by brick so that the high walls no longer let Light in, leaving man in a cave of darkness.

[NotReady]

[ QUOTE ]

The currency of every cult from the JW's to the Moonies to the RCC is a twisting of logic to enprison its adherents, a system of thought that builds upon itself brick by brick so that the high walls no longer let Light in, leaving man in a cave of darkness.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is an excellent point. Many if not all heresies are the result of applying "logic" to some doctrine of Scripture.

I don't know why it's so hard for people to understand that the logic of a finite, imperfect creature is likely to be finite and imperfect. It's only logical to believe that. Our sight isn't perfect. Our hearing isn't perfect. Our emotions aren't perfect. Our strength isn't perfect. Our will isn't perfect. But our logic is?

To deny the perfection of humanity's ability to reason isn't to deny the ultimate validty of perfect reason (which belongs to God) or the usefulness of reason so far as we are able any more than to deny we can see perfectly is to deny the sight we do have is useful and accurate as far as it goes.

Because we can't reason it all out perfectly God communicates to us. So we naturally then take His communication and subject it to the test of human reason. Why does He put up with us?

[baggins]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
do you have to be a bible scholar or a master theologian to feed the hungry, take care of the sick and poor, or comfort the hurting people in this world?

[/ QUOTE ]

Not at all. But you do have to be able to see the logical implications that certain beliefs have in regards to being successful in persuading non-believers to accept the gospel. You really need to reread my original and following posts. Since I know you believe that God expects you to share the faith, then you should also believe that He expects you to try to do it in a way that has the greatest chances for getting non-believers to accept it. Same as maximizing your EV in poker.

[/ QUOTE ]

I still pretty much disagree with you. I mean, I'm sure He wants me to share my faith in a way that is not ostracizing or insulting or hurting to other people. beyond that, I believe that the Holy Spirit intervenes at some point and takes hold of a person's heart and transforms it. now, I don't have a problem discussing theology. nor do i think that it doesn't matter how we present the gospel of Christ to people. but, at the same time, it's not MY job to convince anyone. my job is to "feed the hungry, take care of the sick and poor, and comfort the hurting people in this world." the Spirit that God gave us to guide us will do the rest.

[BluffTHIS!]

[ QUOTE ]
but, at the same time, it's not MY job to convince anyone.

[/ QUOTE ]

"Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you; and lo, I am with you always, to the close of the age." Matt. 28:19-20

So it is YOUR job after all. And if you try to convince them to take the gospel on faith, but also that the beliefs of the particular denomination you belong to are not 100% correct, then your chances for success are lessened, which is the point of my original post in this thread.

[BluffTHIS!]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

The currency of every cult from the JW's to the Moonies to the RCC is a twisting of logic to enprison its adherents, a system of thought that builds upon itself brick by brick so that the high walls no longer let Light in, leaving man in a cave of darkness.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is an excellent point. Many if not all heresies are the result of applying "logic" to some doctrine of Scripture.

I don't know why it's so hard for people to understand that the logic of a finite, imperfect creature is likely to be finite and imperfect. It's only logical to believe that. Our sight isn't perfect. Our hearing isn't perfect. Our emotions aren't perfect. Our strength isn't perfect. Our will isn't perfect. But our logic is?

To deny the perfection of humanity's ability to reason isn't to deny the ultimate validty of perfect reason (which belongs to God) or the usefulness of reason so far as we are able any more than to deny we can see perfectly is to deny the sight we do have is useful and accurate as far as it goes.

Because we can't reason it all out perfectly God communicates to us. So we naturally then take His communication and subject it to the test of human reason. Why does He put up with us?

[/ QUOTE ]

He was talking in his post about "twisted" logic, which isn't true logic. And as I said before, logic is a branch of mathematics and knowledge. And it isn't just human logic, but LOGIC. Just like mathematics in general. God made mathematics and logic, and if you hold a set of beliefs that is logically contradictory to itself in some ways, then that indicates those beliefs to be less than 100% true, and thus not fully reflective of God's truth. And heresies have not sprung from misapplied logic, but from a literalist out-of-context interpretation of various passages in scripture, which shows not only the fallacy of such methods of interpretation, but the consequences of not having an authoritative interpreter.

The height of such illogic is what I said in another post about maintaining that the reformation changed catholic doctrine which was in error, but that the new doctrines aren't 100% correct either, and that you expect non-believers to buy that new set of doctrines.

[NotReady]

[ QUOTE ]

And it isn't just human logic


[/ QUOTE ]

1 Cor 3:20

"(A)THE LORD KNOWS THE REASONINGS of the wise, THAT THEY ARE USELESS."

[BluffTHIS!]

I can't begin to say how pathetic it is if you maintain that you can hold a set of beliefs in which some are logically contradictory of each other, but still maintain that you are correct in holding those beliefs. How hard is it for you to understand that this doesn't most likely mean that true doctrine is only "apparently" illogical because human reasoning is incapable of undertanding it fully, but rather that many of your particular interpretations of scripture are just wrong?

[NotReady]

[ QUOTE ]

I can't begin to say how pathetic it is if you maintain that you can hold a set of beliefs in which some are logically contradictory of each other, but still maintain that you are correct in holding those beliefs


[/ QUOTE ]

I never said this.

[ QUOTE ]

but rather that many of your particular interpretations of scripture are just wrong


[/ QUOTE ]

What you meant to say is you don't understand them according to your logic.

[BluffTHIS!]

[ QUOTE ]
What you meant to say is you don't understand them according to your logic.

[/ QUOTE ]

How can you claim to be able to though? You have already stated that you don't expect to find perfection in any denomination's doctrine, with the logical implication that you feel comfortable only having an X% grasp of true doctrine. If all you mean is that no denomination matches your own interpretations, then you should start yet another protestant denomination. At least then you could claim its doctrines were 100% correct and be more likely to convince non-believers of same.

And as far as my not understanding your protestant interpretations according to my logic, you have also stated that you can find no logical contradictions in my views, so I see no reason to doubt the understanding of my particular denomination, the catholic church.

If you think that true doctrine and true logical implications of those doctrines can be in conflict, or that true doctrine and true science can conflict, then how can you claim to be intellectually honest? God asks faith of us, which means trusting in Him even if there is not complete evidence. He doesn't ask us to check our brain at the door to the church and accept logically contradictory doctrines as a part of a set of beliefs. If you think otherwise, then you really don't believe that God = truth, because He doesn't contradict Himself.

[NotReady]

[ QUOTE ]

If all you mean is that no denomination matches your own interpretations, then you should start yet another protestant denomination.


[/ QUOTE ]

Which denomination has complete doctrinal perfection? If you say RC, please state the year and day this occurred.

[ QUOTE ]

you have also stated that you can find no logical contradictions in my views,


[/ QUOTE ]

When?

[ QUOTE ]

If you think that true doctrine and true logical implications of those doctrines can be in conflict


[/ QUOTE ]

I never said this.

[ QUOTE ]

He doesn't ask us to check our brain at the door to the church


[/ QUOTE ]

I did say this.

[ QUOTE ]

and accept logically contradictory doctrines as a part of a set of beliefs.


[/ QUOTE ]

I never said this.

[ QUOTE ]

He doesn't contradict Himself.


[/ QUOTE ]

I did say this.