Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

To: dartuser; Petrosius; Salvation
The scriptures are sufficient for salvation, you do not seem to believe that.

Believe it? I'm not even sure I understand it!

This exemplifies one problem with the FR religious donnybrooks: Terms and language are unclear and meanings are by no means "perspicuous."

I would say that the Scriptures without IHS are not "sufficient for salvation," while, if HE will it, IHS with or without the Scriptures is sufficient. The phrase is subject to interpretation and some clarifications needs to happen before one can go into a reasoned or fruitful examination of the questions.

Dartuser says as to the one faith
God has defined it ... in the scriptures.

Is there no disagreement about WHAT the one faith IS, even among those who agree that "God has defined it in the Scriptures"?

How are disagreements to be resolved? What is to be done when disagreements persist?

What, in practical terms, in terms of who is in and who is not, in terms of who is a teacher upon whom one can rely and who is not, ... what is the difference between, "That does (or does not) comport with Scripture," and "I think that does (or does not) comport with scripture"?


In related news, it seems that it two places Paul presents various ministries, gifts, and calls. Not every gift is given to every person. It would SEEM that not all are teachers.

What then are those who are not teachers? Mustn't they be students, disciples,'those who are taught?'

How is the neophyte, the newly converted, to know to whom to go for reliable teaching -- since there is such great disagreement about teaching that there are many bodies all teaching differently at least somewhat?

We disagree about HOW to read Scripture, about what books are comprised in the term, about the ways to interpret, say, the Letter of James. One group makes a system which struggles to account for everything THIS way, and another, with the same intention and claims, comes up with a different account. BOTH groups say that the members of the other group haven't read Scripture correctly.

I don't see how the Scriptures are sufficient to resolve this.

55 posted on 06/10/2014 9:53:00 AM PDT by Mad Dawg (In te, Domine, speravi: non confundar in aeternum.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies ]


To: Mad Dawg
We disagree about HOW to read Scripture, about what books are comprised in the term, about the ways to interpret, say, the Letter of James. One group makes a system which struggles to account for everything THIS way, and another, with the same intention and claims, comes up with a different account. BOTH groups say that the members of the other group haven't read Scripture correctly.

I don't see how the Scriptures are sufficient to resolve this.

It's not that difficult...You don't add 'Mary is the mother of God' and you don't take scripture like 'and upon this Rock I will build my church' and claim the Rock is Peter when the scripture is not clear on the statement...

Most problems come from people adding to or removing words from the scripture, or, just not believing what they read...

66 posted on 06/10/2014 12:14:04 PM PDT by Iscool
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 55 | View Replies ]

To: Mad Dawg

teachers are not perfect.

the bereans searched the scritpures daily looking for answers to questions.they were not told to stop or condemned for doing so.

the average christian is told to test all things by scripture. you say they may get things wrong, or ignore a truth they don’t like. i say anyone can, including teachers and church leaders.


73 posted on 06/10/2014 2:07:55 PM PDT by Secret Agent Man (Gone Galt; Not averse to Going Bronson.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 55 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson