Posted on 07/10/2014 8:05:46 PM PDT by NKP_Vet
“Does this question presume that the Church is outside of scripture?”
I don’t see how the church could be outside of something that specifically references it. Of course this opens another entire world of controversy.
You talk about a straw man! The scriptures say that you can’t have your own personal interpretation of scriptures.
Sola scriptura isn’t about individuals reading the scripture locked away from others’ thought processes. It is about putting primacy on scripture and not using the philosophical writings of venerated individuals as authoritative texts.
The premise of the article is wrong.
“If he actually studied his scriptures, he would know ALL believers are Saints”
And if you actually studied the history of Christianity you you wouls know that Christ STARTED THE CATHOLIC CHURCH, not the Good Will Assemblies of God Hickory Holler Church down on the corner.
The Catholic Church, started by Christ himself, has the teaching authority for the Bible, a document that would not exist if not for the Catholic Church.
“So your scared to death by some Protestant who is moved and taught by the Holy Spirit of the scriptures”
PROTESTism is a false religion. The “Holy Spirit” moves no one in a false religion.
It seem we are forgetting a few scriptures in this discussion. We don’t have the Scripture alone - we have a “helper” as well. How about John 14:26 But the Helper, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, he will teach you all things and bring to your remembrance all that I have said to you.” That just wasn’t for the disciples but for us today as well. How else could we understand the Word of God.
And II Peter 1:2-4, “Grace and peace be multiplied to you in the knowledge of God and of Jesus our Lord, as His divine power has given to us all things that pertain to life and godliness, through the knowledge of Him who called us by glory and virtue, by which have been given to us exceedingly great and precious promises, that through these you may be partakers of the divine nature, having escaped the corruption that is in the world through lust.”
I know there’s others that indicate the same thing but these are off the top of my head.
“Don’t be surprised that the anti-Christ sends so called “ Teachers “ out into the world as well taught teachers of all things in the bible who have “ Authority “
And they were all wrong for the first 1,500 years after Christ died. It took some heretic German monk to really figure out the way to salvation; one that even had the audacity to try and change the Word of God so the Bible would say what he wanted it to say, not the inspired Word of God, canonized for over a thousand years before the heretic Luther was born.
“take a look at what is happening in some of the middle east countries who are Muslim”
You mean all those CATHOLICS being killed because they are not Muslim?
You Replied:" It’s sad that you gleaned that from my post, because I said no such thing."
My apologies, I was presuming you were arguing from the RCC Tradition perspective.
I posted that response to you, assuming you were RCC, and as such would hold all "papal bulls" as authoritative, to wit:
Pope Eugene IV, 1441, the Bull Cantate Domino reads as follows: “The most Holy Roman Catholic Church firmly believes, professes, and preaches that none of those existing outside the Catholic Church, not only pagans, but also Jews, and heretics and schismatics, can have a share in life eternal; but that they will go into the eternal fire which was prepared for the devil and his angels, unless before death they are joined with Her..."
source
For more on RCC teaching regarding this: more
“You talk about a straw man! The scriptures say that you can’t have your own personal interpretation of scriptures.”
No. It says that Scripture is inspired by God and goes on to say no PROPHECY came from private interpretation.
“Above all, you do well if you recognize this: No prophecy of scripture ever comes about by the prophet’s own imagination,”
“And if you actually studied the history of Christianity you you wouls know that Christ STARTED THE CATHOLIC CHURCH, not the Good Will Assemblies of God Hickory Holler Church down on the corner.”
I notice that using all caps doesn’t make something true. Thanks for demonstrating!
EXACTLY! I hold that SCRIPTURE is the sole source of authority, you hold that it is "history" "Tradition" and "the teachings of the RCC" are.
QUOTE: "The Catholic Church, started by Christ himself, has the teaching authority for the Bible"
If you can come up with a good Biblical reference for that assertion, we could have a nice debate. For I would counter with this:
2 Timothy 2:15 "Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth."
and
2 Timothy 3:15-17 " 15 And that from a child thou hast known the holy scriptures, which are able to make thee wise unto salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus. 16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: 17 That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works."
And finally
John 20:31 "But these are written that you may believeb that Jesus is the Messiah, the Son of God, and that by believing you may have life in his name."
Translation: Genesis 1-11 is mythology.
Matthew 16:15 He saith unto them, But whom say ye that I am?
16And Simon Peter answered and said, Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God.
17 And Jesus answered and said unto him, Blessed art thou, Simon Barjona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven.
18 And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.
As Paul, the Apostle to the Gentiles clearly explained in
Romans 10:9 That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved.
10 For with the heart man believeth unto righteousness; and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation.
11 For the scripture saith, Whosoever believeth on him shall not be ashamed.
12 For there is no difference between the Jew and the Greek: for the same Lord over all is rich unto all that call upon him.
13 For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved.
But we don't know all that they said.
And neither do the "early church fathers". And as inconsistent as they were on things, I wouldn't hang my hat on their positions either.
St Paul references one of his letters as being authoritative in 1 Cor 5:9-11... but we don't have that letter.
True we don't. That tells us God did not intend for us to have it. We also don't have the very first sermons/lessons Paul taught a lot of the churches he founded either...but we know he founded them due to the written record we have.
We do have however,
Jn 20:30-31 "Jesus performed many other signs in the presence of his disciples, which are not recorded in this book. 31But these are written that you may believe that Jesus is the Messiah, the Son of God, and that by believing you may have life in his name."
Jn 21:24-25, "24This is the disciple who testifies to these things and who wrote them down. We know that his testimony is true. 25Jesus did many other things as well. If every one of them were written down, I suppose that even the whole world would not have room for the books that would be written."
In 1 Thess 3:10, St Paul says that he wants to be with them face to face because his letter is not enough for their instruction.
And he wrote them another letter as well.
Rarely did St Paul appeal to Scripture in his writings...
Recommend you re-read Romans.
he primarily told the reader to be true to the traditions he brought with him (Phil 4:9).
Actually in Phil 4:9 he said, "the things you have learned and received and heard and seen in me, practice these things; and the God of peace shall be with you."
What were those things? Read the letters Paul has written.
The Bible is the story of our fall and redemption. It isn't a Catechism of all things and a complete instruction manual for life.
It doesn't tell you to brush your teeth or when to go to bed, but it does tell us how to conduct our lives according to Christ. It does tell us how to have a relationship with Christ and how to go to Heaven.
In Acts 15, we see that the Apostles had to define doctrine based on their understanding of Scripture... not based on established Scripture but in accordance with their commission to the world and authority given by Christ.
Yes...they were correcting a false "tradition" that was being taught by some. And it was the judgment of James, with an appeal to Scripture, that was followed. Also interesting that the Council did note in Acts 15:11 that we are saved through the grace of the Lord Jesus...
>Not all was written, only that which was necessary for understanding salvation. <
The very fact that the Bible Itself tells you It isn't all-inclusive should punch a deciding blow in Sola Scriptura (John 20:30 & John 21:25).
Interestinlgy when Jesus was being tested by the Devil He appealed to Scripture (sola scriptura) three times by saying, "it is written."
If Jesus referred to the Scripture in this ordeal, I think that's a pretty good role model we should copy.
You will also note as you read the Gospels that Jesus trashed man-made tradition.
Let's be clear on something as we end.
Was the Word spread by preaching? Yes.
Did the apostles write letters for instruction and teaching? Yes.
Do we spread the Word through preaching and the written Word today? Yes. But we do not go beyond the written text as given to us in the Bible.
Do we have a record of each and every sermon/lesson that was taught by Christ or the disciples or from other believers as well? No. The Bible is clear on that.
Do we have in the Bible what we need to know about how to get to Heaven and conduct our lives? Yes.
1 Jn 5:13 "These things I have written to you who believe in the name of the Son of God, so that you may know that you have eternal life."
That I would agree with. Let's just don't add anything to what the Bible has said about Him and we'll be fine.
“Can a non-believer, stranded alone, with only a Bible to go on, or even just part of one, be saved?”
Yes, in fact, they wouldn’t even necessarily need a Bible. God can save them all by Himself. He did it for the thief on the cross.
“In like manner, I’d be content to add as a second infallible and inerrant authority the statements of the Pope when He speaks ex cathedra.
First, however, let him raise men from the dead.”
^This
I’ve always felt that you cannot presume to claim the authority of an apostle if you cannot demonstrate the gifts of an apostle.
Lets also agree not to misrepresent another’s faith based on misunderstanding and agenda.
The pope is not the center of the RCC the Eucharist is.
“Did it ever occur to you that the Church has studied It for nearly 2000 years and has discovered many of the answers you admit you don’t have?”
Yup. It probably will surprise you that I have read more than my share of official Catholic doctrine on various subjects. I often find much wisdom there. But then I read Pope Francis on how governments should act . . . there’s not a whole lot of that wisdom stuff going on there. I’m sure he thought about it and studied it a lot. He just got it obviously wrong.
Fact is, we are all sinners and fallible people. We are so blessed to have intact and accurate scripture to go back to. It keeps knocking the whole church back on course despite our many deviations over the centuries.
That wise folks have been studying the Bible for 2,000 years and have devised answers doesn’t change my answer you quoted above at all. The gospel itself is simple and clear. I would love to go to Seminary and understand, say, some of the more opaque passages in Daniel better. But do I need that to be a follower of Jesus?
In the end, human answers are answers devised by humans. In many branches of the mainstream churches, 2,000 years of study has resulted in oddities such as liberation theology, denial of the divinity of Christ, indulgences, a metaphorical (instead of real) resurrection, social justice theory, and many other heresies. And it has also resulted in brilliant work like N.T.Wright’s, which combines history and theology and interprets the New Testament through the lens of Second Temple Judaism.
Ultimately, there is no choice but for each person to sort through the variety of answers within every denomination and answer them for himself. Would I like to get ‘em all right? Sure. But fortunately for me, if I get some of ‘em wrong, it doesn’t matter so long as I get the Gospel right.
Or to put it in Paul’s words, there are ‘disputable’ matters and then there are clear matters. I’m not going to lose much sleep over or spend much time arguing about the disputable matters.
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.