Posted on 02/28/2013 6:52:42 AM PST by Gamecock
you wrote:
“I would suggest it may be most prudent if you wouldn’t get your information from bias sources like the Catholic encyclopedia. At the very least it may be best not to refer to people as “morons” without understanding history.”
I have a PhD in medieval history. When you can tell the difference between 1309 and 1377 let me know. And, in light of the mistake you just posted, I will continue to call some people morons.
Scripture.
Give me an example.
Well, if interpretation is so unreliable, so is the Catholic church’s.
It is no more valid than any other interpretation. Might doesn’t make right and truth is not determined by consensus. Therefore, for all it’s claims to give itself authority, they are just as meaningless as you claim mine are.
The problem comes in which each individual claims on his own authority that he/she is using scripture to interpret scripture with the guidance of the Holy Spirit - and arrives at different meaning and doctrine.
You think they’re not; and they think you’re not. You can both claim to speak for the Holy Spirit, but this too is on your own authority.
It most certainly does excluding those who follow a different “lord”, “faith”, or “baptism”.
I’ve listed the variety of sola scriptura churches before. They include: Lutheran, Calvinists, Arminians, Oneness Pentecostals, some Unitarians, Dispensationalists... virtually all Protestant denominations.
Of which there are many. That's the point here.
Not until you can show from scripture the teaching of the assumption of Mary for sure. And they would have to stop using statues, idols, pagan symbols, and pagan holidays.
Not if backed up by scripture.
That would be an honest admission for a sola scriptura adherent.
They've only replaced the Church's authority with their own.
And *that's* not scriptural. :)
Then explain to me the point of Jesus and all the apostles continually appealing to Scripture to verify the claims of Christ and validate Him as THE fulfillment of Scripture.
If Scripture were not authoritative, then it wouldn't matter whether Jesus fulfilled it or not.
Nor would Jesus have been able to put Satan to flight by quoting it when He was tempted in the wilderness.
Scripture is GOD'S WORDS to us. What could possibly be more authoritative and what could possible cause anyone to believe that it is not authoritative?
How can anyone or anything have more authority than God?
And yet we see the Catholic church trying to claim that very thing by making Scripture subservient to tradition, creeds, their magisterium, and pope.
What chutzpah.
"Being CONFIDENT of this very thing, that HE which hath BEGUN A GOOD WORK IN YOU WILL PERFORM IT UNTIL THE DAY OF JESUS CHRIST" Philippians 1:6.
It is actually THAT simple.
Not if backed up by scripture.
Backed up according to whom?
Likewise, why should we take yours or the Catholic church's over someone else's?
That’s not the example I was asking for. I want a belief they have that is not from scripture or differs according to their understanding of scripture.
Because Christ established His Church, gave it authority led by the Holy Spirit and it is the pillar and foundation of the truth.
It's all there in Holy Scripture.
See how this works? :)
I told you multiple times now. Scripture. NOT whom. Reliance on “whom” will get you want “whom” gets.
True.
Or does each decide the other isn't really a true believer?
Who cares whether someone else passes judgment on who is or is not a true believer? That's merely opinion and has no relevance to the facts of the matter. My opinion as to whether someone else is a true believer does not make it so. They are not necessarily damned because I think they might not be a believer, nor are they saved because I might think they are.
My opinion does not make fact. Whether they are a true believer or not is GOD'S determination to make.
My responsibility is to point out the way of salvation to them and to encourage them to accept Christ. I pray for them, saved or not.
If I think that they are not saved, I pray for them to become saved. If I think that they are saved, I pray for them to grow in Christ.
So what difference does it make whether I think they are saved or not? Why is that even relevant to a discussion on whether Scripture is the final authority or not?
Study all the various heresies that existed in the past and keep coming back in different forms: Adoptionism, Apollinarism, Arianism, Docetism, Pneumatomachians, Macedonians or, Monarchianism, Eutychianism, Monophysitism or, Monothelitism, Nestorianism, Patripassianism, Psilanthropism, Sabellianism, Gnosticism..
The point is they argue from scripture just as you do.
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.