Posted on 04/04/2008 11:29:53 AM PDT by big'ol_freeper
Ping
I really just need the one reason: the jaw-smashing paradox that “sola scriptura” does not appear in Scripture.
Yeah, but the rest of it is great.
Beautiful Scriptures.
Wonderful testimony.
1)Most Catholic/Orthodox opponents of "sola scriptura" reject Biblical inerrancy. Thus inerrancy and sufficiency get become blended in the minds of both parties to the argument, either accepted or rejected in tandem. And since Fundamentalist Protestants refuse to ascribe errancy to the Word of G-d, they feel compelled to reject Divine Tradition as well.
2)Catholicism and Orthodoxy condemn the observance of the Torah, insisting that J*sus put an end to all that. Protestants quite logically conclude that if J*sus put an end to Biblical law, he sure as shootin' didn't intend to institute a post-Biblical law in its place. Thus their reading of J*sus' and Paul's condemnation of Torah observance and tradition is interpreted in a more consistent way as a condemnation of chr*stian tradition as well. That Paul is condemning G-d's Torah but not "apostolic tradition" would be to make him a hypocrite . . . wouldn't it?
Teaching and so forth is very important. But we are always to test the spirits. The spirits are tested against what scripture says as interpreted by the Holy Spirit.
In a time when literally almost NOBODY had a bible old or new testament if they could read at all, including some apostles.... What did they depend on?.. The teachings of some other probably illiterate "authority"?.. The post above makes many assumptions not accepted many is at least an argument,..
Could make for some interesting observations.. Its amazing to me that the Holy Spirit is almost completely negelected on most of these discussions.. Like the Holy SPirit is not a personality with a ministry and message and active ministration of his work.. But his authority is usurped..
I Am looking forward to the discourse..
Burn everybody
AWESOME HOW THE TRUTH SHINES THRU!!!!
PING FOR LATER WITH A SLICE OR TWO OF PIZZA.
What a terrific dissertation. I would sell my soul to be able to author such a work (just kidding).
What possible reason would you have to place an asterisk in the name Jesus?
You are assuming that the church and its hierarchy were illiterate and that is simply not true.
history shows that these were the men doing the writing of the earliest documents and letters to the various churches.
The didache didnt drop out of the sky one day and give instructions for worship.
They were educated and could read and write.
You mentioned how you dont understand the lack of mention of the holy spirit, again, that is incorrect. The teaching position of the pope is based on infallible teaching guided by the holy spirit.
You cant assume the church leaders were some sort of stumbling boobs who couldnt lace their own sandals...
look at all the rich, scriptural filled writing of the folks like clement, and others...living at the time of the apostles and teaching in their name as their succesors...
Some may. Personally, I post about 9 to 1 criticizing my Church (in terms of its modernist errors), compared to blindly praising it. But it know the Truth is still there, as in the unbroken chain of The Papacy. Maybe I shouldn't be so hard on the contemporary Church, although protestantized accommodations by and through ecumenically obsessed bishops and popes (not the current one) makes it tough.
By this doctrine, which is one of the foundational beliefs of Protestantism, a Protestant denies that there is any other source of religious authority or divine Revelation to humanity.
This is totally analagous to the permanent debate on our Constitution: a living document or strict Originalism?
The latter allows the application of individual conscience which, done in good faith, is appropriate for a multitude of reasons, regardless of the individual Christian sect.
The alternative interposes imperfect men into the equation, and the abuse resulting is so historically demonstrable and universal as to be beyond debate.
Neither the Old Testament nor the New discusses infallibility explicitly. That, and the historical record argues persuasively for the individual choice, for better or for worse.
Joshua 1:7-8 completely supports sola scriptura.
The same reason for doing so with b*ddha, th*rsday, and any other use of the name of a false "gxd." May their names speedily disappear from the earth!
You mean the guys(apostles) that argued among themselves (in Jesus presence) who would be greatest in heaven?.. Those guys?..
Obviously they missed much of what Jesus taught.. Jesus must have been rolling his eyes over that event.. You know when he grabed a little child and said, UNLESS they become as one of THESE they would never even SEE heaven..
The whole debate is disingenuous. Luther did not really advocate 'Scriptures alone', he advocated that Scriptures were the highest authority and should be open to the masses to read.
The Papacy chain is not supported by everyone.. Job security is not supported by scripture.. i.e Mattias did more or less nothing.. Instead Jesus(Holy Spirit) selected Saul himself.. to replace Judas.. Selecting Mattias was a MISTAKE..
Well said. I can’t imagine anyone thinking any differently, Catholic or Protestant.
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.