To: MHGinTN
It’s odd to Sola Scriptura people, I guess. I think Sola Scriptura is an untenable position in its strict construction, so it’s not odd to me.
614 posted on
07/23/2015 7:31:14 AM PDT by
Mad Dawg
(Sta, si cum canibus magnis currere non potes, in portico.)
To: Mad Dawg
I think Sola Scriptura is an untenable position in its strict construction, so it’s not odd to me.While I find Scriptura Addendum is an untenable position in its non-biblical application.
648 posted on
07/23/2015 12:42:17 PM PDT by
Elsie
(Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going...)
To: Mad Dawg; MHGinTN
It’s odd to Sola Scriptura people, I guess. I think Sola Scriptura is an untenable position in its strict construction, so it’s not odd to me. I suppose that it depends on whose definition of sS you are using.
There's a world of difference between what born again believers actually believe it to be and what many Catholics claim that born again believers believe it to be.
Most of what I've seen Catholics claim it is, isn't at all what those of us who hold the Bible as authoritative believe.
655 posted on
07/23/2015 12:57:10 PM PDT by
metmom
(...fixing our eyes on Jesus, the Author and Perfecter of our faith...)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson