FK I find that on this thread. Because so much of Tradition is not technically found in the scriptures, it is independent. On issues such as infant baptism, purgatory, and Mary's perpetual virginity, there really is no supporting scripture. These beliefs stand on their own and are taken as truth.
Where exactly have you found on this thread that anyone said that the Church is above the Word of God? Please give me an example, as you are again putting words into people's posts. Tradition is NOT something ove and above the Word of God - it IS PART of the Word of God! You need to get out of the Protestant concept that the Word of God is found only in the Scriptures - which is entirely a man-made concept. The Bible says NOWHERE that it is ALL of the Word of God, nor does it say to ignore any Word of God outside of itself. Making such a claim refutes Sola Scriptura!
These beliefs stand on their own and are taken as truth.
As is the idea that the Bible is the Word of God. Or that the bible is the Word of God alone. Or that all that God wants man to know is found ONLY in the Bible. Whew...It's one thing to make false accusations, but beware - from where we are standing, Protestants fare much worse in "bending" the Word of God found in Scriptures.
However, with the Bible, there are many verses in which the plain meaning "apparently" directly contradicts the plain meaning of Tradition.
Plainly, that is your opinion. Plainly, you yourself hold to the very ideas you accuse us of, for example, "God didn't give man the power to forgive sins", or "God didn't tell us we must REALLY eat His flesh to have eternal life". What holds you back from belief on these points is your own personal concepts of God, not the Scriptures. I would seriously consider this a case of the pot calling the kettle black here...
This is man over God's word. Tradition stands on its own, the Bible does not.
The Bible is subject to interpretation by God's people. We have spent an inordinate time discussing Scripture on free will. And the plain meaning? There isn't one. The same can be said on many issues. WE have different interpretations based on OUR traditions. YOU look at justification through the lense of Luther who said that man is totally corrupt - an innovation of the 1500's. Your interpretations of Scripture are NOT the same as were held 1000 years ago. Who exactly is changing the Bible's meaning to fit their own opinions? If you want to know what the Bible REALLY means, find out what the first Christians thought it meant. Ignore them at your own peril. If anyone is changing the Bible's meaning, it would by yourself, not the catholic/orthodox Church.
You believe that there is absolutely no way in the world anyone could correctly read the Bible without the interpretation of the Church. Again, this puts man over and above God's word.
Here we go again, God speaks through only Protestants...I forgot that Protestants have a pipeline to the mind of God and know exactly how to interpret every Word...
God never said they [OT stories] weren't true. Men put themselves over the word.
Exactly when did God vouch for the truth of every written word to be taken literally as historical or scientific truth? You are confused on what the definition of "inerrant" means. Or do you still think, along with the literal interpretation of the Bible, that the world is flat and sitting on pillars? God speaks through parables, but in the OT, He isn't allowed to? Even people like St. Augustine regarded parts of the Scriptures as allegory - 400 AD! YOU with all of our scientific knowledge at hand can't admit what is as plain as the fact that the earth is round?
Sorry for the sarcasm, but your reply to Kosta was something else...
Regards
I have found this idea throughout this thread from your side. Just a very quick scan of this 50-post string turns up this from Alex in post 5171:
"After all, theology is secondary to liturgy; it is through liturgical union with Christ that we know the Word, Who is Christ Himself. An attempt to discover Christ through scripture alone is about as fruitful as trying to impregnate one's wife through e-mail."
This, presumably, was met with agreement by Kosta in 5185. The message is that Christ is unknowable through the scripture alone, and that only through men can anyone know Christ. Men are thus above the scripture and only these elite men decide what the scripture means for the rest of mankind. This idea is rampant on this thread and the superiority of men over scripture is clear in that men decide what the Bible means, the Bible does not.
The Bible says NOWHERE that it is ALL of the Word of God, nor does it say to ignore any Word of God outside of itself. Making such a claim refutes Sola Scriptura!
That Tradition is now part of the word of God also seems to be a new claim. What word of God is outside of the Bible? What do you think Sola Scriptura means?
It's one thing to make false accusations, but beware - from where we are standing, Protestants fare much worse in "bending" the Word of God found in Scriptures.
LOL! I think I'll take my chances on this one. :)
YOU look at justification through the lense of Luther who said that man is totally corrupt - an innovation of the 1500's.
I suppose you can assign me a pope if you want to, but I don't claim Luther or anyone else as a pope figure. Before I knew any of Luther's or Calvin's beliefs, I was already more than 80% in agreement. This doesn't surprise me in that the scripture is the base. Neither they nor I ever felt a need to re-write the scripture to satisfy another group of men's opinions.
Who exactly is changing the Bible's meaning to fit their own opinions?
Well, that would be Catholics, as the Bible's meaning MUST be changed in order to match Tradition.
If you want to know what the Bible REALLY means, find out what the first Christians thought it meant.
When I want to know what the Bible really means I try to find out what God thought it meant.
Exactly when did God vouch for the truth of every written word to be taken literally as historical or scientific truth?
Not every written word is literal, but when they are not, it is pretty clear. If I can figure out the vast majority of them, anyone can. I did not realize you were on the train of denying the historical truth of the Bible. So let me ask you what I have asked Kosta, how do you know which stories are true and which are false? Does the science of 2006 tell you, or, do you even care at all which are true?
God speaks through parables, but in the OT, He isn't allowed to?
When God spoke in parables in the NT, it was fairly obvious. It's not so easy in the OT. There could very well be examples, I'm just not aware of them.
YOU with all of our scientific knowledge at hand can't admit what is as plain as the fact that the earth is round?
The earth is round? Oh yes, that is from scripture. Thanks for reminding me. :)
Is. 40:22 : He sits enthroned above the circle of the earth, and its people are like grasshoppers. He stretches out the heavens like a canopy, and spreads them out like a tent to live in.