Scripture, Tradition, and Rome Part 2

GTY.org ^ | September 19, 2009 | John MacArthur

[redleghunter]

As we established yesterday, the official Catholic position on Scripture is that Scripture does not and cannot speak for itself. It must be interpreted by the Church's teaching authority, and in light of "living tradition." De facto this says that Scripture has no inherent authority, but like all spiritual truth, it derives its authority from the Church. Only what the Church says is deemed the true Word of God, the "Sacred Scripture . . . written principally in the Church's heart rather than in documents and records."

This position obviously emasculates Scripture. That is why the Catholic stance against sola Scriptura has always posed a major problem for Roman Catholic apologists. On one hand faced with the task of defending Catholic doctrine, and on the other hand desiring to affirm what Scripture says about itself, they find themselves on the horns of a dilemma. They cannot affirm the authority of Scripture apart from the caveat that tradition is necessary to explain the Bible's true meaning. Quite plainly, that makes tradition a superior authority. Moreover, in effect it renders Scripture superfluous, for if Catholic tr adition inerrantly encompasses and explains all the truth of Scripture, then the Bible is simply redundant. Understandably, sola Scriptura has therefore always been a highly effective argument for defenders of the Reformation.

[redleghunter]

You mean the Vatican has more than one self flagellating albino monk lurking about?:)

[redleghunter]

I guess contraception became a more interesting subject for most.

[redleghunter]

The other thread and your last post brings us back to this subject thread.

[editor-surveyor]

>> “ Scripture, interpreted by the individual, is the sole authority?” <<

.
Your personal relationship with Yeshua is the deciding condition WRT your eternal future, is it not?
.