Yeah, but Paul was one of the main guys who MADE the Gospels clear IN SCRIPTURE. :) His prayer was answered favorably. Pettegrew also said that the scriptures were clear, but not all of them were necessarily simple.
Larry D. Pettegrew says "One of the qualifications of a pastor, in fact, is that he be 'able to teach' the Scriptures (1 Tim 3:2)," [never mind the fact that Timothy does not advertise sola scriptura, so this quote is a non sequitur] and I ask Mr. Pettegrew who determines that? Other pastors? How is that different from clergy that all Protestants despise? So, now we need pastors in addition to sola scriptura?
Perspicuity and Sola Scriptura are related but different concepts. Perspicuity goes to God's desire for man to be able to understand His actual word, and Sola Scriptura goes to the authority of that word.
I'm afraid I don't understand your line of questions here. I think Pettegrew was trying to say that perspicuity does not exclude the goodness and necessity of teachers. From the part I quoted, I don't even see him getting into Sola Scriptura.
Perspicuity comes from Latin, meaning to 'see through,' in other words transparent. To say that the Bible is perspicuous is to say that what's in the Bible is transparent, in other words, lucid, easily understandable.
For basic Christian principles, this definition is fitting. To any child of the age of reason, the Gospel truths concerning salvation, that we are all sinners, that we need Jesus to forgive us, that Jesus loves us and died for our sins, that we need to repent of our sins, and that we want Jesus to be our Lord and Savior ARE understandable, i.e. perspicuous. To say that the whole Bible is perspicuous would mean through the Holy Spirit's leading. In many cases that leading would be through human teachers.
The term is misleading as great minds clashed over its "perspicuity" with each seeing something different, even opposite in it. Thus, the Jews read the same Tanakh as the Protestants, yet they read different things in it.
The term is not misleading if taken in the light that those who believe in it take it. Believers are led by the Holy Spirit and the "Lord, Lord" crowd are not. To the latter, the Bible is in no way perspicuous, rather, it is nonsense. It is only perspicuous to believers.
It's good to be able to teach, but why would one need to teach that which is obvious and clear as long as others can read?
Pettegrew acknowledged this point in the part I quoted you. On non-core issues, he distinguishes between clear and simple. Clear means it IS there, and simple is how easy it is to find.
No, a 5-year old does not know right from wrong and therefore cannot understand the basics of God and salvation.
I have seen a couple of 5-year-olds express what I thought to be a saving faith, but clearly not all can. The issue is not to decide the age of reason, but to decide if the basics of salvation are understandable as portrayed in the Bible to any such person who has in God's eyes reached that age. I would say "Yes", absolutely.
I don’t understand the claim that the Scripture are clear but not simple. If they are clear and simple, then obviously no teaching is required and the grasp of them is fairly quick. If they are clear but not simple, then their understanding is not in question, but it will take time to understand them, and probably with teaching aid.
Which obviously leads to the conclusion that any teachers need to be correct, or nearly correct. How do we know that they are? The diversity of Scriptural understanding present right now indicates the error of the clear Scripture position.
FK: Yeah, but Paul was one of the main guys who MADE the Gospels clear IN SCRIPTURE. :) His prayer was answered favorably. Pettegrew also said that the scriptures were clear, but not all of them were necessarily simple.
FK, please leave lawyering behind when you write these things. It's good for your soul. :)
From Eph 6:19 it is clear that +Paul thinks the gospel in question was a mystery.
Perspicuity goes to God's desire for man to be able to understand His actual word, and Sola Scriptura goes to the authority of that word
Where does it say that?
perspicuity does not exclude the goodness and necessity of teachers
Then don't call it "perspicuity" because that which is clear is intelligible.
To any child of the age of reason
That is an oxymoron actually. If for one moment we believed that 7-year-olds are capable of knowing right from wrong we should issue them driving licenses and let them purchase beer.
Science tells us that even teens don't have fully developed frontal lobes and cannot think abstractly enough to comprehend danger. Yet, you will tell me that a 5-year-old can grasp the meaning of faith and salvation?
In many cases that leading would be through human teachers
Wrong. The leading is never through human authority but through the authority given in Christ's promise that whatever they bind on earth shall be bound in heaven.
You know of course all those sects that think they can stand between the believer and JESUS are going to disagree. Of course for them Faith and the Scriptures are too complex for regular folks to understand.
Mark 10:15 Assuredly, I say to you, whoever does not receive the kingdom of God as a little child will by no means enter it.
I will stick with what Scripture tells me.