Posted on 02/07/2006 5:02:07 AM PST by HarleyD
Introducing your own error by misinterpretation is precisely the problem. But you are entitled to your own personal interpretation.
Which establishes that Scripture is necessary for the man of God to be "perfect" and "thoroughly furnished unto all good works".
It does not say that it is sufficient, however.
And how you get from what the "man of God" needs to the governance of the Church is a completely different question.
In context, it refers to the scripture Timothy had known "since infancy," which cannot possibly be the New Testament. "Old Testament Only"?
All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and [is] profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: That the man of God may be *perfect*, *thoroughly* furnished unto *all* good works. (II Timothy 3:16-17)
Absolutely agree. But that doesn't say that scripture ALONE is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, etc.
BTW, that's just childish, and detracts from both your Christian witness and your argument. Keep it on the playground where it belongs.
Yes ... it does state that after Paul appeals to apostolic tradition in the previous verse.
But you, remain faithful to what you have learned and believed, because you know from whom you learned it, (II Timothy 3:14-15).
**Absolutely agree. But that doesn't say that scripture ALONE is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, etc.**
Agree!
But, according to their own doctrine, there should be no need for them to exist. If the Bible is perfectly sufficient, possesses final authority, and requires no authoritative human interpreter, then CRI's own doctrine precludes CRI's need to exist as much as it precludes the Pope's.
That's like saying that since the Roman Church is the only authoritative interpreter of Scripture and Tradition there should be no need for something like "Catholic Answers". CRI isn't any more a "magesterium" than "Catholic Answers" is.
In turn, I have a simple question for you. After the Church comes up with some purportedly infallible interpretation, who then interprets that infallible interpretation for you?
Cordially,
II Timothy 3:16-17 means necessary; but it does not mean sufficient. In other words, you have the scriptura, but not the sola.
See if you can figure out why, Jude. Then tell me.
I'm not baiting you. I'm honestly interested in your answer.
Best, OP
"Perfect" and "thoroughly"... both Synonyms, if not Superlatives, for "Sufficient" -- in any Lexicon in the world.
I guess that means that we have the Scriptura, and the Sola.
You were saying?
Best, OP
That's part of the second clause, not the first. It says scripture is necessary so that man might have all he needs. After all, without scripture, he would not have all he needs.
Your error in interpretation is precisely my point. Thanks for making it.
Your comparison doesn't hold water at all. Catholic Answers is obedient to the magisterium in Rome. To whom is CRI obedient, and why do they have any authority? To Scripture? To whose interpretation of Scripture? CRI's?
Moreover, CRI runs around criticizing people who are allegedly "in the Church" (by their definition). CA leaves that to the people who have the actual authority to do that sort of thing. The two organizations aren't equivalent.
After the Church comes up with some purportedly infallible interpretation, who then interprets that infallible interpretation for you?
This is the James White/William Webster "you gotta do private interpretation eventually" question.
It misses the point. The point is not to get everything perfect between my ears, the point is what interpretation governs the Church. So if there's serious disagreement about what an infallible pronouncement means, the bishops (or whoever is having the disagreement) go back to the infallible pronouncer and ask for a clarification.
In what language, on what planet?
Any Greek rhetorician can tell you that those adjectives modify "man of God," not "scripture". You're seriously misreading the text to support a position it doesn't teach.
It does not say that it is sufficient, however.
The Greek word artios means "complete", "sufficient", "whole", "qualified". Since the Scripture has the ability to make the man of God "complete", "sufficient", "whole", "qualified" for every good work, what else do you need to make the man of God " complete", "sufficient", "whole", "qualified" "for every good work"? You admit that Scripture is necessary, so what other good works are there other than what the Scripture necessitates? Can you provide me an authoritative list of such good works that are not necessitated in Scripture?
Cordially,
Hold on, now... you're prostrating yourselves before some guy who's walking around wearing a big white parking-garage on his head, and you're calling me "childish"?
Sorry, this is still the Land of Free Speech. If the Muslims don't like the portrayal of Muhammed in an Editorial Cartoon, they can go pound sand -- and yes, I am still allowed, by the First Amendment, to point out the fact that the Pope's get-up is silly-looking.
Because, after all... the Pope's get-up is silly-looking. Hey, it happens; The Hindu conception of Cosmology is pretty darn aesthetically-absurd, also. I mean, really -- four elephants on the back of a honkin' big turtle? Terry Pratchett would never have made a fortune off his DiscWorld Novels if it weren't absurd.
Likewise... the Pope's get-up is silly-looking. Sorry. It's true.
These things happen.
Best, OP
CRI is not a church, and neither is Catholic Answers. Since neither one has anything to do with what interpretation governs the Church, both are irrelevant to the question of final authority in the Church.
Cordially,
It's not just childish, it's a lie. The pope isn't worshipped.
Note ... drstevej has been banned from FR. 15 posted on 02/07/2006 8:56:03 AM MST by NYer
Do you take credit for drstevej being banned?
That is a false analogy. First, it is Protestantism that asserts that the Bible alone is sufficient, and that, as a consequence, the Spirit will guide all individuals to a knowledge of a single set of truths. Catholics do not say that, asserting that both Sacred Tradition and the magisterial authority are the other two legs, along with Scripture, upon which Truth stands. Second, the need for Catholic Answers DOES exist when we live in a world with a multiplicity of erroneous Biblical assertions due to the mistaken notion of Sola Scriptura. Catholics are not responsible for the non-Catholic surroundings they find themselves in, save only to attempt to correct them. Hence the need for CA.
I need to call it a day, and I can already see that you are *Perfectly* and *Thoroughly* Equal to the Task.
(By which I certainly mean that you are sufficiently equal to the task. No normal English-Speaking Person would doubt that such was my meaning; but, you know these Romanists.... it's necessary to their theology that Words not mean what they Say).
Best, OP
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.