Posted on 10/22/2011 1:21:35 PM PDT by NYer
Anyone weho had actually READ thr post would have seen that the 700,000 hits were for “paragolic interpretation” and the 7300,000 were for “parable interpretation.
Srs;, go back and read the post.
Can’t take them seriously is right.
Please point out to me where I said anything contrary to that.
Exactly -- they deny the Apostolic interpretation handed down by Christ and replace it with each and every one of the myriad ones of their own.
Sounds like someone doesn't like being treated like a Catholic.
I did not recall getting judgmental or distraught on that thread, so I went back and reread my posts in the sidebar to see if I had (2694, 2697, 2708, 2714, 2780, 2784, 2923, 2926, 2941, 3032, 3046, 3090, 3092, 3157, 3160 and 3264.)
I see no indication that I was either judgmental or distraught in those posts. If you'd care to link me to the ones you had in mind I'll be glad to address them over on that thread.
When they get what they give, when they reap what they sow, they do seem to be outraged. That’s actually very funny, when you think about it.
For I demand, whence it is that we learn that the church cannot err in consigning the canon of scripture? They answer, that it is governed by the Holy Spirit (for so the council of Trent assumes of itself), and therefore cannot err in its judgments and decrees. I confess indeed that, if it be always governed by the Holy Spirit so as that, in every question, the Spirit affords it the light of truth, it cannot err. But whence do we know that it is always so governed? They answer that Christ hath promised this. Be it so. But where, I pray, hath he promised it? Readily, and without delay, they produce many sentences of scripture which they are always wont to have in their mouths, such as these: "I will be with you always, even to the end of the world." Matth. xxviii. 20. "Where two or three are gathered together in my name, there I will be in the midst of you." Matth. xviii. 20." I will send to you the Comforter from the Father." John xv. 26. "Who, when he is come, will lead you into all truth." Johnxvi. 13. I recognise here the most lucid and certain testimonies of scripture. But now from hence it follows not that the authority of scripture depends upon the church; but, contrariwise, that the authority of the church depends on scripture. Surely it is a notable circle in which this argument revolves! They say that they give authority to the scripture and canonical books in respect of us; and yet they confess that all their authority is derived from scripture. For if they rely upon the testimonies and sentences of these books, when they require us to believe in them; then it is plain that these books, which lend them credit, had greater authority in themselves, and were of themselves authentic. (William Whitaker, Disputations on Holy Scripture (Cambridge: Parker Society, 1894; reprint, Orlando: Soli Deo Gloria Publications, 2005), 334-335.)
Oh, good, you’re awake. Will you now apologize to me for mistating my post of Natural Law’s and the false accusation of being “sneaky”?
Looks like you just proved cronos’ point.
Looks like you didn’t read it very well.
Well, why don’t you “rightly divide” it for us all?
St. Thomas Aquinas, in his logical proof for the existence of God, established that everything in creation is contingent upon something that precedes it with the one exception of God. Scripture is no exception. When one traces Scripture backward toward its ultimate source they will find the Episcopacy of the Catholic Church as one of the fundamental contingencies in the chain.
The irony is that to be a Protestant one must simultaneously both accept AND reject the authority of the Catholic Episcopacy that compiled the Canon of the Scripture.
That right there shows the insanity, the self-contradictory, self-serving twisted logic of the Sola crowd.
Not really — your post is sneaky. Why don’t you explain your buddy’s belief in Limited Atonement, Double Predestination and Covenant Theology first?
True and Bb's faction also has to justify it's buddy's belief in double-predestination and limited atonement.
Then on what basis does your group believe in Covenant Theology and limited atonement? Perhaps your little cult got it wrong and the Arminians are actually the elect elite?
Whine, whine -- need some cheese with that?
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.