k2aggie07 said:

---

Can you clarify the intent of your question? Are you asking to understand the scriptural basis if theosis? Or if the practice of recognizing martyrs and the like as holy ones?

I think it's the latter. So, the honorific of saint, or blessed, is not some kind of theological distinction. A saint is not a super-duper Christian any more than an Apostle is. It's a title, and it is more or less a consensus confession that this person is worthy of emulation because of the witness of their life in Christ. As St. Paul says multiple times, imitate me. The people we recognize with the honorific of "saints" are worthy of imitation, because they imitate Christ. In the theological or categorical sense, all of those in Christ are saints, as you said.

---

I simply asked for the biblical authority for this designation. It is my understanding that they also have to have performed certain numbers of miracles. Maybe different denominations have different saint requirements. I'm simply asking for the book, chapter and verse where this religious designation/elevation is found?

Acts 14:8-18 would seem to indicate that Paul would have rejected man-made sainthood.

I'm out. Past my bedtime.

Good night.

Yeah, you're arguing about things Orthodoxy doesn't teach.

And Acts 14 is when St Paul and St Barnabus are being offered worship, sacrifices as if they're gods. That's not what anyone means when we recognize people as holy.

Also, I'll ask you the same thing I asked the other CoC fella - where is the book, chapter, and verse where the scriptures say that anything that isn't specifically prescribed is prohibited?

Such a strange hangup on an honorific. You know, if we wanted to be pedantic about the scriptures we should not anyone have the title of Mister, or Doctor, and we shouldn't call our fathers "father" or let our children call us the same. Mister is derived from master, which ultimately comes from a Latin word for teacher. Doctor is also a teacher's title coming from docer, "to teach". I doubt you choke on those words but in this case the scriptures are quite clear.

k2aggie07 said:

---

Also, I'll ask you the same thing I asked the other CoC fella - where is the book, chapter, and verse where the scriptures say that anything that isn't specifically prescribed is prohibited?

Such a strange hangup on an honorific. You know, if we wanted to be pedantic about the scriptures we should not anyone have the title of Mister, or Doctor, and we shouldn't call our fathers "father" or let our children call us the same. Mister is derived from master, which ultimately comes from a Latin word for teacher. Doctor is also a teacher's title coming from docer, "to teach". I doubt you choke on those words but in this case the scriptures are quite clear.

---

If Doctor or Mister came from the Catholic Church, I firmly believe it would cause the same reaction.

They did. The Latin church gives the honorific of "doctor" to certain people (Iike St Augustine or St John Chrysostom or Thomas Aquinas) and when the Roman church describes their authority they call it the magisterium, and mister/master comes from magister.

k2aggie07 said:

---

Such a strange hangup on an honorific. You know, if we wanted to be pedantic about the scriptures we should not anyone have the title of Mister, or Doctor, and we shouldn't call our fathers "father" or let our children call us the same. Mister is derived from master, which ultimately comes from a Latin word for teacher. Doctor is also a teacher's title coming from docer, "to teach". I doubt you choke on those words but in this case the scriptures are quite clear.

---

Some Christians go ultra-pedantic on anything "sacred" while simultaneously holding a completely lax attitude about anything "profane".

Example 1: Someone who enjoys all sorts of sexual humor and ribaldry online argues that Christmas trees are an offense against God.

Example 2: Someone who watches R-rated movies and shows on TV believes the veneration of icons is idol worship.

The cognitive dissonance is solved by judging one's sacred life as separate and unequal from one's profane life. The sacred is then shrunk to a minimal slice of life so as to keep it pure and clean while the profane expands.

k2aggie07 said:

---

They did. The Latin church gives the honorific of "doctor" to certain people (Iike St Augustine or St John Chrysostom or Thomas Aquinas) and when the Roman church describes their authority they call it the magisterium, and mister/master comes from magister.

---

The whole reformed theology came from the Catholic Church. The Reformation was about corruption, not theology.

Gator03 said:

---

k2aggie07 said:

---

Such a strange hangup on an honorific. You know, if we wanted to be pedantic about the scriptures we should not anyone have the title of Mister, or Doctor, and we shouldn't call our fathers "father" or let our children call us the same. Mister is derived from master, which ultimately comes from a Latin word for teacher. Doctor is also a teacher's title coming from docer, "to teach". I doubt you choke on those words but in this case the scriptures are quite clear.

---

Some Christians go ultra-pedantic on anything "sacred" while simultaneously holding a completely lax attitude about anything "profane".

Example 1: Someone who enjoys all sorts of sexual humor and ribaldry online argues that Christmas trees are an offense against God.

Example 2: Someone who watches R-rated movies and shows on TV believes the veneration of icons is idol worship.

The cognitive dissonance is solved by judging one's sacred life as separate and unequal from one's profane life. The sacred is then shrunk to a minimal slice of life so as to keep it pure and clean while the profane expands.

---

It is a fascinating behavior. We had an annual trip to Vegas for a Fantasy Football draft. I was the only one who took my wife. Interesting how some of the Holy Rollers acted away from home. We always act the same.

Yeah, some of that behavior can be very damaging to spreading Christ's message to the world.

We do not think Vegas or anyplace or anything is sinful unless you make it that way. Kind of like food, alcohol, sex, etc. All gifts from God and joyful not sinful behavior unless made that way by us.

Yep, it is possible to follow Christ and rejoice in the Lord in any circumstance.

And also possible to completely turn away from God even in the most beautiful cathedral or picturesque setting.

k2aggie07 said:

---

Also, I'll ask you the same thing I asked the other CoC fella - where is the book, chapter, and verse where the scriptures say that anything that isn't specifically prescribed is prohibited?

---

Col. 3:17

VetSurg said:

---

k2aggie07 said:

---

Also, I'll ask you the same thing I asked the other CoC fella - where is the book, chapter, and verse where the scriptures say that anything that isn't specifically prescribed is prohibited?

---

Col. 3:17

---

If that verse was saying that, wouldn't it say "whatever you do, make sure that the word of the lord said you could"?

k2aggie07 said:

---

Such a strange hangup on an honorific. You know, if we wanted to be pedantic about the scriptures we should not anyone have the title of Mister, or Doctor, and we shouldn't call our fathers "father" or let our children call us the same. Mister is derived from master, which ultimately comes from a Latin word for teacher. Doctor is also a teacher's title coming from docer, "to teach". I doubt you choke on those words but in this case the scriptures are quite clear.

---

Matt. 23:9-"Father" refers to the title in a spiritual sense, i.e., spiritual father. As the verse says, there is only one Spiritual father.

Matt. 23:8-"Master"- see above, refers to the spiritual sense.

Neither "mister" or "doctor" are used in a spiritual sense. You're far too bright to act like you don't know/see the difference.

I would also point out that I have tried to support my points with scriptural references in each case. I would encourage the same from you.

Texaggie7nine said:

---

VetSurg said:

---

k2aggie07 said:

---

Also, I'll ask you the same thing I asked the other CoC fella - where is the book, chapter, and verse where the scriptures say that anything that isn't specifically prescribed is prohibited?

---

Col. 3:17

---

If that verse was saying that, wouldn't it say "whatever you do, make sure that the word of the lord said you could"?

---

I'm not trying to embarrass anyone but I feel compelled to answer.

"...in the name of the Lord" means "by the authority of." Like when a police officer says, "Stop in the name of the law!" That is his authority to stop someone.

In the same way, Christians must have Christ's authority for everything they do (spiritually) "in word or deed."

That is the incorrect context. The wording, when it adds on "giving thanks" is solidifying the statement as acting as a "representative". Meaning, act for His purpose, for his will to be done. But it is not addressing the biblical legality of your actions. As if you must make sure that what you do was exactly prescribed in scripture.

Otherwise, what the heck are you doing on the internet you heathen sinner?

I just read that verse in the NIV Bible.

And whatever you do, whether in word or deed, do it all in the name of the Lord Jesus, giving thanks to God the Father through Him.

I do not interpret that as being restrictive at all. Sounds like to me we should always do our best and strive for excellence in all we do, including how we treat people, act Christlike, and give thanks to God for everything.

Maybe it is me but I do not see the word spiritual in there and nothing about restriction of how the Church's hierarchy is set up.

VetSurg said:

---

Texaggie7nine said:

---

VetSurg said:

---

k2aggie07 said:

---

Also, I'll ask you the same thing I asked the other CoC fella - where is the book, chapter, and verse where the scriptures say that anything that isn't specifically prescribed is prohibited?

---

Col. 3:17

---

If that verse was saying that, wouldn't it say "whatever you do, make sure that the word of the lord said you could"?

---

I'm not trying to embarrass anyone but I feel compelled to answer.

"...in the name of the Lord" means "by the authority of." Like when a police officer says, "Stop in the name of the law!" That is his authority to stop someone.

In the same way, Christians must have Christ's authority for everything they do (spiritually) "in word or deed."

---

Is Christ's authority his entire earthly ministry or are you limiting it to what is written the four gospels?

Hm, what do you make of the verses on Christian freedom? (Roman's 14 and others from Paul)

Also, I made the baptism thread, but its getting derailed.

dermdoc said:

---

I just read that verse in the NIV Bible.

And whatever you do, whether in word or deed, do it all in the name of the Lord Jesus, giving thanks to God the Father through Him.

I do not interpret that as being restrictive at all. Sounds like to me we should always do our best and strive for excellence in all we do, including how we treat people, act Christlike, and give thanks to God for everything.

Maybe it is me but I do not see the word spiritual in there and nothing about restriction of how the Church's hierarchy is set up.

---

That is my reading as well. Whatever we do we need to do in/for the Lord Jesus.

Amen.

And Paul said that exact same exhortation throughout his letters. Always do your best as if you were doing it for the Lord.

In fact, Romans 14 as mentioned by swimmerbabe, continues this same theme. Even if your faith is strong and you realize all dood/drink are okay, remember that Christ is your master, not you. So deny yourself rather than upsetting your brother.

Quote:

---

Whatever you do in word or deed, do all in the name of the Lord Jesus, giving thanks through Him to God the Father.

---

That doesn't say that "if it isn't in the bible it's prohibited". That's a witness to the spiritual freedom that comes with slavery to Christ.

Quote:

---

"...in the name of the Lord" means "by the authority of." Like when a police officer says, "Stop in the name of the law!" That is his authority to stop someone.

In the same way, Christians must have Christ's authority for everything they do (spiritually) "in word or deed."

---

We are slaves to Christ, yes - but free slaves, and in that slavery we actually become friends and brothers. This is what the scriptures say.

Either way, doing everything by and for and through Christ by no means supports that if it isn't prescribed in the scripture it is forbidden. Christ's authority is above that of scripture or any created thing, don't you think?

Quote:

---

Matt. 23:9-"Father" refers to the title in a spiritual sense, i.e., spiritual father. As the verse says, there is only one Spiritual father.

Matt. 23:8-"Master"- see above, refers to the spiritual sense.

Neither "mister" or "doctor" are used in a spiritual sense. You're far too bright to act like you don't know/see the difference.

---

It doesn't say that though, that's your interpretation. The words in Matthew 23 say:

Quote:

---

...They love the chief place at the banquets, and the first seats in the synagogues, and the greetings in the marketplaces, and to be called 'Rabbi' by men.
But you shall not be called 'Rabbi,' for your Teacher is One, and you are all brothers.
And call no one your father on the earth; for One is your Father, who is in heaven.
Neither be called instructors; since One is your instructor, the Christ.

---

That's not spiritual at all, it is quite earthly. The entire passage is about hypocrisy and pride, not "spiritual" teaching. These are honorifics, Christ is saying to be humble, be lowly (like He is).

Regardless, the point is here you are interpreting scripture based on a word that isn't there. You can't even follow what is black and white without an excuse or an explanation, but you want to restrict others based on opinions which aren't even there? I mean, if a person wanted to make a big deal out of not being called a teacher I would perhaps disagree but at least they have something to back it up. You want to restrict people from things and you don't even have a scriptural basis for doing so.

Quote:

---

I would also point out that I have tried to support my points with scriptural references in each case. I would encourage the same from you.

---

??

"Whatever you do, whether in word or deed, do all in the name of the Lord."

"In the name of" is by His authority (authorization). We have to have God/Christ's authority for EVERYTHING we do spiritually.

It has nothing to do with "being a representative" of Christ. How can we know that is the case?

John 16:23, 26 (why we close prayers "in Jesus name")

Acts 2:38 ("....in the name of". by His authority)

Acts 3:6 (by His authority)

Acts 4:7,10 (by His authority)

Acts 16:18 (by His authority)

Acts 19:13 (by His authority)

I Cor. 1:10 ("...by the name (authority) of our Lord...")

II Thess. 3:6 ("...we command you, brethren in the name (by the authority) of our Lord...")

James 5:10, 14 (by His authority)

Colossians 3:17 commands us to have Christ's authority (re; from New Testament scripture) for everything we do spiritually (worship, how we live spiritually, etc.).

The commandments of Christ are not limited to the Gospel accounts but the entire New Testament;

I Cor. 14:37 If any man think himself to be a prophet, or spiritual, let him acknowledge that the things that I write unto you are the commandments of the Lord.

k2aggie07 said:

---

Quote:

---

Matt. 23:9-"Father" refers to the title in a spiritual sense, i.e., spiritual father. As the verse says, there is only one Spiritual father.

Matt. 23:8-"Master"- see above, refers to the spiritual sense.

Neither "mister" or "doctor" are used in a spiritual sense. You're far too bright to act like you don't know/see the difference.

---

It doesn't say that though, that's your interpretation. The words in Matthew 23 say:

Quote:

---

...They love the chief place at the banquets, and the first seats in the synagogues, and the greetings in the marketplaces, and to be called 'Rabbi' by men.
But you shall not be called 'Rabbi,' for your Teacher is One, and you are all brothers.
And call no one your father on the earth; for One is your Father, who is in heaven.
Neither be called instructors; since One is your instructor, the Christ.

---

That's not spiritual at all, it is quite earthly. The entire passage is about hypocrisy and pride, not "spiritual" teaching. These are honorifics, Christ is saying to be humble, be lowly (like He is).

Regardless, the point is here you are interpreting scripture based on a word that isn't there. You can't even follow what is black and white without an excuse or an explanation, but you want to restrict others based on opinions which aren't even there? I mean, if a person wanted to make a big deal out of not being called a teacher I would perhaps disagree but at least they have something to back it up. You want to restrict people from things and you don't even have a scriptural basis for doing so.

Quote:

---

I would also point out that I have tried to support my points with scriptural references in each case. I would encourage the same from you.

---

??

---

Are you being serious or just messing with me?

They were using those as spiritual titles. When Catholics call priests "Father" are you saying they consider him their literal, earthly, fleshly dad? Of course not. They are acknowledging him as a spiritual father. In the same way that Rabbi was used as a title of spiritual master. And it is clearly condemned in scripture.

There is one spiritual Father and one spiritual Master.

If you read further in the context (Matt. 23:11-12), it is abundantly clear that these were attempts to spiritually elevate themselves with their titles, garments, chief seats......spiritual honorifics....:

This is an argument of semantics.

You are partly correct, but also wrong.

When you say "by His authority". This is correct.

According to the scriptures, those that are followers of Christ are given permission by Jesus' authority to be His representatives in this world.

Where you are wrong is that it in any way is stipulating to follow the exact prescriptions of every scripture and never stray to anything outside if not expressly addressed by scripture. Such as the internet for example.

It is similar to signing over power of attorney. You are giving your authorization for someone to act in your name. So yes, according to scripture, you are given authority by Jesus to act in his name if you are his follower and acting towards his will.

Is it Jesus' will that your child to go A&M or tu? The bible does not provide an answer for that, however, whatever your child chooses, according to the bible, they should go to whatever they choose and act "in His name".

John 12:48

And going to A&M is not a spiritual thing. Colossians 3:17 is talking about how we live spiritually.

Quote:

---

Are you being serious or just messing with me?

---

I am dead serious that the passage does not say spiritual title.

Quote:

---

They were using those as spiritual titles.

---

It doesn't say that at all. Show me where it says that, please? You won't find it. They were not saying "I am your spiritual father" they were puffing themselves up with earthly position, earthly power. Being seen in the market, being invited to banquets, sitting in prominent positions.. .this isn't about spiritual advice, it's about pride and vanity. Hence the "you are all brothers".

Quote:

---

When Catholics call priests "Father" are you saying they consider him their literal, earthly, fleshly dad? Of course not. They are acknowledging him as a spiritual father. In the same way that Rabbi was used as a title of spiritual master. And it is clearly condemned in scripture.

---

No, what I'm saying is this is not a forbidding spiritual fatherhood, because St Paul himself uses the title. "For if you should have ten thousand guardians in Christ, yet not many fathers; for in Christ Jesus I have begotten you through the gospel." 1 Corinthians 4:15. Or again, "I appeal to you for my child Onesimus, whose father I became while I was in chains.: Philemon 1:10. Or any of the numerous times scriptural writers refer to their followers as their "children" like 3 John 1:4.

What it is forbidden here is the arrogation of earthly titles like Rabbi, Instructor, using a position of religious authority as one of power. Same as Matthew 20:25.

Quote:

---

If you read further in the context (Matt. 23:11-12), it is abundantly clear that these were attempts to spiritually elevate themselves with their titles, garments, chief seats......spiritual honorifics....:

---

Not spiritual honorifics, temporal ones.

This is the point. Your own view is expressly contradicted by scripture - St Paul says to imitate him, he says he has spiritual children and that he is a spiritual father. And, when you cannot explain what is actually in scripture correctly, how can you presume to say that others must follow things that are not written in scripture?

The scripture does not say "everything that is not stated as permissible is disallowed." Period.

Hopeless

VetSurg said:

---

John 12:48

And going to A&M is not a spiritual thing. Colossians 3:17 is talking about how we live spiritually.

---

You realize that there are way better interpretations of whatever it is you pull out of these scriptures. So simply posting them as if they speak for themselves does nothing but hurt your case.

At least try to make an argument that they remotely say what you think they are saying.

John 12:48 in no way speaks to doing nothing except what is expressly in scripture.

If you tell me to not get you pineapple on your pizza and I get you sausage, am I "rejecting" your words?

How is using an musical instrument in church worship "rejecting" God's word when no scripture expressly says not to, or even hints in a direction that it would be frowned upon?


Also Col 3:17 stipulates in NO fashion that "whatever you do in deed or word" means "only spiritually".

Quote:

---

"In the name of" is by His authority (authorization). We have to have God/Christ's authority for EVERYTHING we do spiritually.

---

The scriptures don't say that. We are charged that whatever we do, we do in the name of Jesus. Scripturally speaking the name is the presence, and power, and somehow the reality of the thing being named. We are saved by His name, baptized in the name of the Father, Son, and Spirit, we believe in His name, we call upon His name, if we believe we have life in His name. Jesus manifests the name of the Father to us, and prays that the Father keeps us in His name.

Constraining this wonderful scriptural reality to ONLY a kind of authority and a kind of mark of our servanthood is a paucity of belief.

All who call upon the name of the Lord will be saved, much as the blind man calls out - have mercy on me, Son of David! This is an invocation, yes, but not of the (mere) authority of God but of God Himself, His very power, His very presence, His love and mercy and grace.

So now, we return to Colossians 3:17: whatever we do, do it with and through and in and by the power and person of Jesus Christ. This is no different whetever than St Paul's baptized the words of Epimenides, "for in Him we live and move and have our being."

This is in no way saying - you can do nothing without finding a license for it in the scripture. It is saying, do nothing apart from the person, power, grace, love, and yes - authority! of Jesus Christ.

VetSurg said:

---

Hopeless

---

How so? If I read the same Scripture as you and have a different interpretation, it is "hopeless"?

You been living under a rock?