Ah, but then, we must discard Sola Scriptura in favour of our beliefs which come from not only Scripture, but extra Scriptural sources. The creation of the Day of the Lord (Sunday) as opposed to the Saturday Sabbath, for instance.
If someone takes verses from Matthew and interprets them to mean Jesus is telling people their works are necessary for salvation, we can know that they are incorrect because not only does Jesus say in other passages that it is by faith alone but additional scriptures - God-breathed scriptures - say it as well.
See what I mean? By additional Scriptures, you could be referring to snippets of Paul. Matthew 25: is most explicit. As well as numerous other statements of Jesus.
As fond of you as I am, I do not have time to present, yet again, that Paul was speaking for Christ in his epistles under the inspiration of the Holy Ghost only to have each example tossed aside because it doesn't meet some criteria of yours.
Not mine. The Sola crowd's. I fully and wholeheartedly believe that Paul was called, instructed and had full revelation by Christ. But the evidence of what was revealed to him is not spelled out in Scripture. Moses laid out directly what his revelation was. So did John. Paul never did. I believe the Church's authority in this matter; and for the record, so do you, because Scripture is lacking in this matter.
Sorry - still love you, though.
I'd better not tell my wife...
Mushing dispensations together in order to make them fit a preconceived belief. Taking the pieces of the dispensation of the Kingdom and trying to make them fit in the dispensation of the Grace of God. It will never work. That's one puzzle.
Add to that the puzzle of doctrines of men and traditions and extra biblical whatever. :You'll never find all the pieces from among all the other pieces in order to finish this puzzle. It's impossible, as doctrines and traditions change and the pieces change.
The next puzzle is separating the 2 dispensations and finding the right pieces of Paul's ministry and the revelations he received directly from the risen Christ. Because his ministry and message is different from the Kingdom ministry and message of Peter and the11, their pieces cannot be interchanged unless you start cutting the pieces to the shape you're in search of.
These three puzzles are not interchangeable. There is only one correct spot for each puzzle piece. And you're trying to do three at once when they've been mixed, shaken, and dumped on your table. :You have a big fat mess of this that and the other and you're trying to make sense of it all.
Well...I didn't mean it THAT way. :o)
I fully and wholeheartedly believe that Paul was called, instructed and had full revelation by Christ. But the evidence of what was revealed to him is not spelled out in Scripture. Moses laid out directly what his revelation was. So did John. Paul never did.
I'm not being obtuse here, I really do not know what you mean by the evidence not being spelled out in Scripture. How are you defining "evidence" here? Paul said many times that he was speaking truths, mysteries even, that he received from Jesus Christ. In a number of cases, he revealed truths that, up until that time, had not been revealed yet. Things like the Gentiles being grafted into the vine of the family of God. The mystery that "we shall not all sleep (die) but we will all be changed.". The "mystery of Godliness which is Christ in you, the hope of glory". These are a few I can think off the top of my head. Do these count as "evidence"?