The Internal Evidence of the Fourth Gospel
CHAPTER II - THE INTERNAL EVIDENCE OF THE FOURTH GOSPEL
BY CANON G. OSBORNE TROOP, M. A., MONTREAL, CANADA
As iron sharpens iron,
one person sharpens another. (Proverbs 27:17)
CHAPTER II - THE INTERNAL EVIDENCE OF THE FOURTH GOSPEL
BY CANON G. OSBORNE TROOP, M. A., MONTREAL, CANADA
(Read the series so far.)
As far as I can tell the Roman Catholic Church now teaches that the most likely way to go to hell is to believe Roman Catholic doctrine. Allow me to support this from a series of quotes from the Catechism of the Catholic Church (CCC).
The CCC teaches that Protestants who disbelieve the doctrine of the Roman Catholic Church are likely saved:
CCC-818: However, one cannot charge with the sin of the separation those who at present are born into these communities [that resulted from such separation] and in them are brought up in the faith of Christ … . All who have been justified by faith in Baptism are incorporated into Christ. (Brackets in original.)
CCC-819: Christ’s Spirit uses these Churches and ecclesial communities as means of salvation, whose power derives from the fullness of grace and truth that Christ has entrusted to the Catholic Church.
(Read the series so far.)
Approaching the question of language and meaning can often seem like a chicken and egg scenario. If we had words and grammar first then how did we learn to communicate them so as to be correctly understood by others? But if we had a thought to communicate, how could we do it without the symbols of language (alphabet, grammar, syntax, etc.) to convey that thought?
The Creation account in Genesis represents God as the first Speaker. He employs words to convey His precise intentions. Something of immense importance occurred when God created Adam and Eve. What we witness there is God speaking to them of their dominion mandate, and they understand Him. In the second chapter God gives a specific prohibition to the man with a clearly worded warning appended.
A little examination of this transaction will be helpful.
“Nobody in the discussion was saying, ‘A person is justified by works of the law.’ Nor was anyone saying, ‘Christians have no moral obligations.’ So what was the disagreement really about? And how should we think about it today?”
(From Maranatha Baptist Seminary Journal; used by permission. Read the series so far.)
There are three words or phrases in Hebrews 6:6 that describe what it means to “fall away.” Each of these is discussed individually.
Fall away. The first word used to describe falling away is “fall away” (παραπεσόντας).1 There are two broad categories of understanding concerning the nature of falling away. Some suggest that falling away is absolute apostasy, a total rejection of Christ and his gospel, an alignment with those who crucified Christ.2 Others suggest that falling away is a serious sin that a believer can commit which is usually identified as a decisive refusal to trust Christ’s high priestly ministry for help in daily living.3 The word “fall away” itself does not help in choosing which view is correct, because it does not have an object in Hebrews 6:6.4 It is uncertain from what one falls away. Neither does its use in the LXX aid one’s decision.5 Gleason concludes,
“In Gen. 21 it is Abraham and Sarah who thus laugh wholly and holily in response to God’s goodness to them. Their laughter is prompted by God’s fulfillment (at last!) of his promise of a child to them.”
Many of us recognize Robert Cornuke as the man whom many believe discovered the real Mt. Sinai. He is also president of the Bible Archaeology Search and Exploration Institute, and has been featured on major television networks including ABC, FOX, CNN, National Geographic, and the History Channel; he received his PhD from Louisiana Baptist University.
What I especially appreciate about the author is that he begins with complete confidence in the Scripture. If accepted tradition contradicts Scripture, Cornuke’s game is afoot.
Dr. Cornuke, in a few pages, argues convincingly that the Temple was built in the old City of David—as he documents the Bible avows—rather than atop what has been wrongly dubbed the “Temple Mount.”
Cornuke quotes a number of passages that equate Zion with both the Temple and the City of David. Since the “Temple Mount” sits outside the old City of David, Zion and the Temple Mount cannot be one and the same.
(Read the series so far.)
Among Roman Catholics, Vatican II, and thus the Catechism of the Catholic Church (CCC), is interpreted across a spectrum from essential rejection to continuity with the past to rupture.
Essential rejection is the position of extremely traditional Catholics who remain in communion with the Pope but who continue to give or take the Mass in the wafer alone and who gravitate toward the Latin Mass. Their interpretation of CCC has the greatest continuity with pre-Vatican II statements and tends to minimize the discontinuity.
Continuity with the past is the mainstream interpretation of serious Catholics. “Serious” does not include politicos who claim Augustine supported abortion or who have purchased multiple annulments. Pope Benedict XVI, now emeritus, appears to me to be a very conservative proponent of the continuity view, and he is the mind behind the current universal Catechism. This view is represented by Catholic voices like the magazine First Things.
Discussion