Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

To: Gamecock
Wow, that's just plain weak.

Consider this passage: "because our fathers have not harkened unto the words of this book, to do according unto all that which is written concerning us."

First, nothing in the passage actually states what it is claimed to state. ~((~A->~B)->(A->B))!

Besides "This book" refers to the Covenant of Moses, to which Christians added 88 books.

Again, 2nd Timothy 3:16-17 states that scripture is sufficient, which is the Catholic view. It hardly states that any doctrine not in scripture is false.

The use of the passage about the tempting in the desert (Matthew 4:4-11) is downright incredible. By chopping the passage into bits, the article recasts the story as if citing scripture were superior than using tradition. But what it shows is that the devil and Jesus both cite scripture. Where Jesus defeats the devil rhetorically is his refusal to act pridefully, even though he alone is glorious. Likewise the passage from Matthew 21 merely show that Jesus cites scripture.

Not one of the passage actually states that a doctrine not found in scripture is inherently incorrect.

Of course, the interesting thing about all this, is that the entire argument is based on a straw man against the Catholic Church, because while the Church recognizes the fact that sola scriptura is a self-contradicting argument, the Catholic church bases all but two doctrines solely on deduction from scripture. The church never concedes to the false accusations that it's doctrines are non-scriptural, but merely rejects the assertion that what it binds on Earth is not bound in Heaven, and what it looses on Earth is not loosed in Heaven. (Two doctrines are discerned through induction.)

Now, let's look at the passage from Augustine. Is he really establishing sola scriptura? If I argue strictly from the evidence presented in this article, what Augustine says is this:

"This Mediator (Jesus Christ), having spoken what He judged sufficient first by the prophets, then by His own lips, and afterwards by the apostles, has besides produced the Scripture which is called canonical, which has Paramount Authority, and to which we yield assent in all matters of which we ought not to be ignorant, and yet cannot know of ourselves."

What Augustine is proposing is not sola scriptura! Augustine presents scripture, herein, not as the sole source of truth, but that which should be defered to in all matters which are unknowable. (I believe, if I recall this passage correctly correctly, he is discussing creationism. H is argument is, essentially, that, lacking any other means to discern creation, we must default to what scripture says.)

I'll stick to this main point, and ignore the ad-straw-hominem of the passage entitled, "Can traditions contradict God's completed Word?"

22 posted on 08/14/2006 1:56:56 PM PDT by dangus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: dangus
John 21:25
There are also many other things that Jesus did, but if these were to be described individually, I do not think the whole world would contain the books that would be written.

26 posted on 08/14/2006 2:44:37 PM PDT by Salvation (†With God all things are possible.†)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies ]

To: dangus

You said, "Again, 2nd Timothy 3:16-17 states that scripture is sufficient, which is the Catholic view."

If that is true, where does the doctrine of praying to Mary come from? I can't find a single scripture that supports it.


42 posted on 08/14/2006 7:21:32 PM PDT by conservatative strategery
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson