Oh sorry, it was me.
| This thread has been locked, it will not receive new replies. |
|
Locked on 02/23/2011 7:04:03 PM PST by Religion Moderator, reason:
Poster’s request |
Posted on 02/23/2011 3:05:37 PM PST by Natural Law
Who owns the concept of Sola Scriptura and what does it take to be an adherent? What active Christian; be they Catholic Protestant, or Evangelical would argue with the definition put forth by Dr. W. Robert Godfrey, a leading Protestant theologian and President of Westminster Theological Seminary in Escondido, California, in his article “What Do We Mean by Sola Scriptura?”:
“The Protestant position, and my position, is that all things necessary for salvation and concerning faith and life are taught in the Bible clearly enough for the ordinary believer to find it there and understand.”
Yet a more literalist definition of Sola Scriptura is contradictory in itself because it is to be found nowhere in the Bible. Even the often referenced Timothy 3:16, which states; "All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness", was a reference to the Septuagint. The New Testament did not yet exist and would not exist for several hundred more years. It was not even possible to adhere to Sola Scriptura if you were a pre-4th century Christian because there was no Christian canon, and there were many Christian writings circulating, many of which never made it into the New Testament. Nowhere does not define Scripture, include or exclude any specific works, or say anything about Scripture being the only source of doctrine, only that it is profitable for doctrine.
Surprisingly, Scripture explicitly acknowledges and supports Tradition. 2 Thessalonians 2:15 states “ So then, brothers and sisters, stand firm and hold fast to the teachings we passed on to you, whether by word of mouth (LOGOS) or by letter (EPISTLE)”. If you are a Christian Sola Scriptura is your heritage.
I smell an obsession.
This is an Ecumenical Thread. It is not permitted to ntagonize or to incur or to provoke hostility in others.
Oh sorry, it was me.
Narrator: She was like the air. Brittle and easily broken.
[shows title: COMPULSION, as dramatic music starts ]
Narrator: How could one so perfect, be so flawed?
Man: Dearest...
Woman: Not now. I'm busy.
[ is seen scrubbing the stairs ]
Narrator: She was an incondescant angel, dancing on the edge of a ritual that was both innocent and jejune.
Man: Yes. She was.
Narrator: [ annoyed at man ] Her translucent figure, glowing in the light and fire of her overwhelming passion.
[ Woman picks up a chess piece and wipes under it, then looks at the sponge and sees the dirt it picked up ]
Woman: Save me....
[ Man pulls her toward him ]
Man: Why?
Narrator: I wonder what was the greater transgression. Loving her, or abiding her immaculate madness.
[ a wine glass is knocked over, as Woman tries to clean up the mess ]
Model: A little club soda will get that out.
Woman: Liar!
Narrator: She was consumed. Obsessed. Never able to enjoy her own party.
Man: I alone felt her torment. Her deepest secrets known only to me.
[ Narrator slaps Man in the face ]
Woman: If keeping a clean house is a crime, then let me be guilty!
Model: Guilty!
[ another model gasps ]
Narrator: A horrifying creature. What was it we could not give her, or she understand?
[ everyone is dancing, while woman tries to vacuum after them ]
[ setting is now black and white and shows Woman behind bottle of Compulsion ]
Woman: Somewhere between cleanliness and godliness lies Compulsion, the world's most indulgent disinfectant. From Calvin Kleen.
Announcer: Ah, the price of it.
No, not the Obsession! It rates the same -40 on the obnoxious smell scale along with Youth Dew, and that ever present stink Juicy Couture and anything else that smells like a slightly mildewed fruit salad.
In fairness you did leave out one very important part of Dr. Godfrey’s statement
““The people do not need any additional institution to interpret the Word.”
That to me contradicts official Church teaching on Scripture which declares that the Church is the final authority on intrepretation of Scripture. Not that such interpretation is always or even often needed. Most of the time the plain sense of Scripture is just that.
We are a Church of the Word. This Word is actually 3 fold. The written Word of Scripture. The oral Word of Apostolic Tradition and the Living Word, which is Christ Jesus. In all of these we find revealation from God which is to be held binding on all faithful.
We are not a Sola Scriptura faith. We do not think the Scripture can be separated from the Church.
“The people do not need any additional institution to interpret the Word.”
And yet, many of the adherents are interpretating not based upon an individual thought, but upon the institutionalized version of Calvin, Luther, and Wesley.
That is exactly what I was taught as a Catholic. I don't understand why a Catholic would want to be considered Sola Scriptura. It was a term of derision (or at least pity) as far as I could tell.
The worst is Jovan Musk. ewwwwwwww
You rock.
Anything Avon
” It was a term of derision (or at least pity) as far as I could tell.”
In all my years, I never heard mention of it at any time. Must be something with the young ‘uns.
If you intend to post an ecumenical thread, I suggest you label it - anything else is inviting a flame-war.
Actually, I think it was labled ecumenical orginally.
Or else I need glasses changed.
“Actually, I think it was labled ecumenical orginally.
Or else I need glasses changed.”
I don’t think you’re glasses need changed.
But none of those gentleman are considered by the Reformed faithful to be infallible when it comes to matters of faith and morals. It is the charisma of infallibility held by the Pope and the Magesterium that lay the authority to interpret Scripture on them.
It is also important to distinguish the Ecclesiology(sp) of most Protestant denominations from that of the Catholic and Orthodox Church. Some good articles on Reformed teaching on the Church can be found here:
http://www.reformed.org/ecclesiology/index.html
For the Catholic there are 4 marks of the Church. It is One. It is Holy. It is Apostolic. It is Catholic. This Church is visible.
For Reformed the primary mark of the Church is that the Word is rightly preached there. I don’t know what other marks they hold.
This statement seems to be an abt summation of Reformed belief on the visibility of the Church “The universal Church, which is invisible, consists of the whole number of the elect, which were purchased for God with Christ’s blood from [Dan 3:4; 5:19; Rev 7:9; 10:11; 11:9; 13:7; 14:6; 17:15] every tribe and tongue and people and nation.”
The institutional version of Calvin, Luther and Wesley is not in the mind of our Protestant brethern the same as what we call the One, Holy, Apostolic Catholic Church.
It is a joke and a charade to pretend that Catholics believe in the scriptures as the word of God and then true around and argue against sola scriptura. You certainly can't make the case that you believe in the infallibility of the word of God. The early father obviously believed in it otherwise they would never have declared infallible writings.
The real reason Catholics must bash the holy word of God time and again is because declaring the word of God infallible makes every other writing fallible. That means every doctrine or decree that comes from the Church can be subject to error. This puts the Catholics in a difficult position. It is also one of the reasons the Church 1900 years later has declared the Pope as infallible. Catholics essentially have put the Pope up to the same level as the word of God and have discarded the holy scriptures.
Tsk, tsk. This is something the early fathers never considered. They, you see, were the earliest supporters of sola scriptura.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.