Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

According to Scripture (Sola Scriptura)
http://www.catholic.com ^ | Tim Staples

Posted on 01/28/2014 7:27:17 PM PST by NKP_Vet

"If a teaching isn’t explicit in the Bible, then we don’t accept it as doctrine!" That belief, commonly known as sola scriptura, was a central component of all I believed as a Protestant. This bedrock Protestant teaching claims that Scripture alone is the sole rule of faith and morals for Christians. Diving deeper into its meaning to defend my Protestant faith against Catholicism about twenty years ago, I found that there was no uniform understanding of this teaching among Protestant pastors and no book I could read to get a better understanding of it.

What role does tradition play? How explicit does something have to be in Scripture before it can be called doctrine? Does Scripture tell us what is absolutely essential for us to believe as Christians? How can we determine the canon using sola scriptura? All these questions and more pointed to the central question: Where is sola scriptura itself taught in the Bible?

(Excerpt) Read more at catholic.com ...


TOPICS: Apologetics; History; Theology; Worship
KEYWORDS: freneau; solascriptura
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 681-700701-720721-740 ... 921-938 next last
To: SZonian

I wonder if restornu will comment on THOSE chapters???


701 posted on 02/06/2014 12:50:02 PM PST by Elsie (Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 654 | View Replies]

To: SZonian

I really don’t have to show anything SZonian

I share the word of the Lord because I love his children in spite of the endless crushing blows I receive.


702 posted on 02/06/2014 12:51:02 PM PST by restornu (Love One Another)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 698 | View Replies]

To: Ruy Dias de Bivar
YOU also have THE ORIGINAL Book of Abraham!

She's already handwaved that away in reply #487

703 posted on 02/06/2014 12:55:21 PM PST by Elsie (Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 658 | View Replies]

To: Scoutmaster
My serious problem is with documents and history disappearing down the rabbit hole.

Our knowledge of the world would be a LOT different, I imagine, if the unknown were revealed!


(Right; NSA??)


 


 
Eerily familiar...
 
 

Party ownership of the print media
made it easy to manipulate public opinion,
and the film and radio carried the process further.


 



16. Ministry Of Truth

.......

The Ministry of Truth, Winston's place of work, contained, it was said, three thousand rooms above ground level, and corresponding ramifications below.

The Ministry of Truth concerned itself with Lies. Party ownership of the print media made it easy to manipulate public opinion, and the film and radio carried the process further.

The primary job of the Ministry of Truth was to supply the citizens of Oceania with newspapers, films, textbooks, telescreen programmes, plays, novels - with every conceivable kind of information, instruction, or entertainment, from a statue to a slogan, from a lyric poem to a biological treatise, and from a child's spelling-book to a Newspeak dictionary.

Winston worked in the RECORDS DEPARTMENT (a single branch of the Ministry of Truth) editing and writing for The Times. He dictated into a machine called a speakwrite. Winston would receive articles or news-items which for one reason or another it was thought necessary to alter, or, in Newspeak, rectify. If, for example, the Ministry of Plenty forecast a surplus, and in reality the result was grossly less, Winston's job was to change previous versions so the old version would agree with the new one. This process of continuous alteration was applied not only to newspapers, but to books, periodicals, pamphlets, posters, leaflets, films, sound-tracks, cartoons, photographs - to every kind of literature or documentation which might conceivably hold any political or ideological significance.

When his day's work started, Winston pulled the speakwrite towards him, blew the dust from its mouthpiece, and put on his spectacles. He dialed 'back numbers' on the telescreen and called for the appropriate issues of The Times, which slid out of the pneumatic tube after only a few minutes' delay. The messages he had received referred to articles or news-items which for one reason or another it was thought necessary to rectify.

In the walls of the cubicle there were three orifices. To the right of the speakwrite, a small pneumatic tube for written messages; to the left, a larger one for newspapers; and on the side wall, within easy reach of Winston's arm, a large oblong slit protected by a wire grating. This last was for the disposal of waste paper. Similar slits existed in thousands or tens of thousands throughout the building, not only in every room but at short intervals in every corridor. For some reason they were nicknamed memory holes. When one knew that any document was due for destruction, or even when one saw a scrap of waste paper lying about, it was an automatic action to lift the flap of the nearest memory hole and drop it in, whereupon it would be whirled away on a current of warm air to the enormous furnaces which were hidden somewhere in the recesses of the building.

As soon as Winston had dealt with each of the messages, he clipped his speakwritten corrections to the appropriate copy of The Times and pushed them into the pneumatic tube. Then, with a movement which was as nearly as possible unconscious, he crumpled up the original message and any notes that he himself had made, and dropped them into the memory hole to be devoured by the flames.

What happened in the unseen labyrinth to which the tubes led, he did not know in detail, but he did know in general terms. As soon as all the corrections which happened to be necessary in any particular number of The Times had been assembled and collated, that number would be reprinted, the original copy destroyed, and the corrected copy placed on the files in its stead.

In the cubicle next to him the little woman with sandy hair toiled day in day out, simply at tracking down and deleting from the Press the names of people who had been vaporized and were therefore considered never to have existed. And this hall, with its fifty workers or thereabouts, was only one-sub-section, a single cell, as it were, in the huge complexity of the Records Department. Beyond, above, below, were other swarms of workers engaged in an unimaginable multitude of jobs.

There were huge printing-shops and their sub editors, their typography experts, and their elaborately equipped studios for the faking of photographs. There was the tele-programmes section with its engineers, its producers and its teams of actors specially chosen for their skill in imitating voices; clerks whose job was simply to draw up lists of books and periodicals which were due for recall; vast repositories where the corrected documents were stored; and the hidden furnaces where the original copies were destroyed.

And somewhere or other, quite anonymous, there were the directing brains who co-ordinated the whole effort and laid down the lines of policy which made it necessary that this fragment of the past should be preserved, that one falsified, and the other rubbed out of existence.

 
 


704 posted on 02/06/2014 12:57:07 PM PST by Elsie (Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 659 | View Replies]

To: metmom; Scoutmaster

I’m merely an echo of the HARD work put into compiling this list!


705 posted on 02/06/2014 12:58:28 PM PST by Elsie (Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 661 | View Replies]

To: restornu
I would not call spiritual things imaginations of men.

Oh?

You seem to have no problem with calling imaginations of men spiritual things!

706 posted on 02/06/2014 12:59:58 PM PST by Elsie (Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 663 | View Replies]

To: CynicalBear
Are you telling us that our calling isn’t legitimate?

Oh, no!

It's just that which ever of you is right (if either) the truth of the matter won't mean too much to a persons final destiny.

MormonISM, however, is a fish of a different color.

707 posted on 02/06/2014 1:02:10 PM PST by Elsie (Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 667 | View Replies]

To: restornu
Too bad many more did due diligence in their studies instead of acting like the class clown.

Honey, I am the posting MORMON data: YOU are the one refusing to deal with it.

708 posted on 02/06/2014 1:03:36 PM PST by Elsie (Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 670 | View Replies]

To: PhilipFreneau

>>>Did Jesus eat meat or not?<<<

If HE really had the Restored Gospel® as the MORMONs claim; HE definitely would NOT eat it in warm weather!

709 posted on 02/06/2014 1:05:02 PM PST by Elsie (Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 672 | View Replies]

To: Elsie

Multiple fronts I say. It’s going to get worse as time goes on. Gird up with the armor or it could get rough.


710 posted on 02/06/2014 1:05:27 PM PST by CynicalBear (For I decided to know nothing among you except Jesus Christ)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 707 | View Replies]

To: restornu
Impressions of a Prophet

HMMMmmm...



Read this at your leisure



“I Will Be a Second Mohammed”

In the heat of the Missouri “Mormon War” of 1838, Joseph Smith made the following claim, “I will be to this generation a second Mohammed, whose motto in treating for peace was ‘the Alcoran [Koran] or the Sword.’ So shall it eventually be with us—‘Joseph Smith or the Sword!’ ”[1]

It is most interesting that a self-proclaimed Christian prophet would liken himself to Mohammed, the founder of Islam. His own comparison invites us to take a closer look as well. And when we do, we find some striking—and troubling—parallels. Consider the following.

  • Mohammed and Joseph Smith both had humble beginnings. Neither had formal religious connections or upbringing, and both were relatively uneducated. Both founded new religions by creating their own scriptures. In fact, followers of both prophets claim these scriptures are miracles since their authors were the most simple and uneducated of men.[2]

  • Both prophets claim of having angel visitations, and of receiving divine revelation to restore pure religion to the earth again. Mohammed was told that both Jews and Christians had long since corrupted their scriptures and religion. In like manner, Joseph Smith was told that all of Christianity had become corrupt, and that consequently the Bible itself was no longer reliable. In both cases, this corruption required a complete restoration of both scripture and religion. Nothing which preceded either prophet could be relied upon any longer. Both prophets claim they were used of God to restore eternal truths which once existed on earth, but had been lost due to human corruption.

  • Both prophets created new scripture which borrowed heavily from the Bible, but with a substantially new “spin.” In his Koran, Mohammed appropriates a number of Biblical themes and characters—but he changes the complete sense of many passages, claiming to “correct” the Bible. In so doing he changes many doctrines, introducing his own in their place. In like manner, Joseph Smith created the Book of Mormon, much of which is plagiarized directly from the King James Bible. Interestingly, the Book of Mormon claims that this same Bible has been substantially corrupted and is therefore unreliable. In addition, Joseph Smith went so far as to actually create his own version of the Bible itself, the “Inspired Version,” in which he both adds and deletes significant portions of text, claiming he is “correcting” it. In so doing he also changes many doctrines, introducing his own in their place.

  • As a part of their new scriptural “spin,” both prophets saw themselves as prophesied in scripture, and both saw themselves as a continuation of a long line of Biblical prophets. Mohammed saw himself as a continuation of the ministry of Moses and Jesus. Joseph Smith saw himself as a successor to Enoch, Melchizedek, Joseph and Moses. Joseph Smith actually wrote himself into his own version of the Bible—by name.

  • Both prophets held up their own scripture as superior to the Bible. Mohammed claimed that the Koran was a perfect copy of the original which was in heaven. The Koran is therefore held to be absolutely perfect, far superior to the Bible and superceding it. In like manner, Joseph Smith also made the following claim. “I told the Brethren that the Book of Mormon was the most correct of any book on earth, and the keystone of our religion, and a man would get nearer to God by abiding its precepts, than by any other book.”[3]

  • Despite their claim that the Bible was corrupt, both prophets admonished their followers to adhere to its teachings. An obvious contradiction, this led to selective acceptance of some portions and wholesale rejection of others. As a result, the Bible is accepted by both groups of followers only to the extent that it agrees with their prophet’s own superior revelation.

  • Both Mohammed and Joseph Smith taught that true salvation was to be found only in their respective religions. Those who would not accept their message were considered “infidels,” pagans or Gentiles. In so doing, both prophets became the enemy of genuine Christianity, and have led many people away from the Christ of the Bible.

  • Both prophets encountered fierce opposition to their new religions and had to flee from town to town because of threats on their lives. Both retaliated to this opposition by forming their own militias. Both ultimately set up their own towns as model societies.

  • Both Mohammed and Joseph Smith left unclear instructions about their successors. The majority of Mohammed’s followers, Sunni Muslims, believe they were to elect their new leader, whereas the minority, Shiite Muslims, look to Alī ibn Abī Ṭālib, whom they consider Divinely appointed, as the rightful successor to Muhammad, and the first imam. (Ali was the cousin and son-in-law of the Islamic prophet Muhammad). Similarly, the majority of Joseph Smith's followers, Mormons, believed their next prophet should have been the existing leader of their quorum of twelve apostles, whereas the minority, RLDS, believed Joseph Smith's own son should have been their next prophet. Differences on this issue, and many others, have created substantial tension between these rival groups of each prophet.

  • Mohammed taught that Jesus was just another of a long line of human prophets, of which he was the last. He taught that he was superior to Christ and superceded Him. In comparison, Joseph Smith also made the following claim.

“I have more to boast of than ever any man had. I am the only man that has ever been able to keep a whole church together since the days of Adam. A large majority of the whole have stood by me. Neither Paul, John, Peter, nor Jesus ever did it. I boast that no man ever did such a work as I. The followers of Jesus ran away from Him, but the Latter-day Saints never ran away from me yet.”[4] In light of these parallels, perhaps Joseph Smith's claim to be a second Mohammed unwittingly became his most genuine prophecy of all.


[1] Joseph Smith made this statement at the conclusion of a speech in the public square at Far West, Missouri on October 14, 1838. This particular quote is documented in Fawn M. Brodie, No Man Knows My History, second edition, (New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1971), p. 230–231. Fawn Brodie’s footnote regarding this speech contains valuable information, and follows. “Except where noted, all the details of this chapter [16] are taken from the History of the [Mormon] Church. This speech, however, was not recorded there, and the report given here is based upon the accounts of seven men. See the affidavits of T.B. Marsh, Orson Hyde, George M. Hinkle, John Corrill, W.W. Phelps, Samson Avard, and Reed Peck in Correspondence, Orders, etc., pp. 57–9, 97–129. The Marsh and Hyde account, which was made on October 24, is particularly important. Part of it was reproduced in History of the [Mormon] Church, Vol. III, p. 167. See also the Peck manuscript, p. 80. Joseph himself barely mentioned the speech in his history; see Vol. III, p. 162.”

[2] John Ankerberg & John Weldon, The Facts on Islam, (Eugene, OR: Harvest House Publishers, 1998), pp.8–9. Eric Johnson, Joseph Smith & Muhammed, (El Cajon, CA: Mormonism Research Ministry, 1998), pp. 6–7.

[3] Documentary History of the [Mormon] Church, vol.4, pp.461.

[4] Documentary History of the [Mormon] Church, vol.6, pp.408–409.




711 posted on 02/06/2014 1:07:55 PM PST by Elsie (Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 673 | View Replies]

To: CynicalBear
Me: >>Did he send his son in vain? Did he send him to save the world, only to turn around and destroy it?<<

You: >>>> Your getting more obtuse by the post. We heritage gardeners understand that a seed has to be planted and “destroyed” for more and better seed to come.<<<<

You certainly got all huffy about that one. LOL! It would be nice if you try to respond in a somewhat professional manner.

Me: >> You reply is hard to follow.<<

You: >>>>I don’t doubt that for a minute. The spiritual things are hidden to those who don’t have the Spirit.<<<<

LOL! How ironic? I have never met a spiritually-minded dispensationalist. The entire foundation of dispensationalism is based on avoidance of the spiritual realm of the scriptures. Everything to a dispensational is carnal, earthly, and of the flesh: even the Church was somehow not the vision of the old testament prophets, even though it is mentioned many times as being on a great and high mountain in the O.T., similar to the great and high mountain in Revelation 21; and it is written, plain-as-day, that Christ loved the Church and gave himself for it. I guess Christ was not a dispensationalist.

Everything to dispensationalists seems centered around some mythical Palestinian Covenant, which exists nowhere but in the minds of dispensationalists. In fact, to be a bona-fide dispensationalist, you have to believe these myths:

1) The Throne of David is not the throne Jesus ascended to after his resurrection (Peter said it "was" on the Day of Pentecost.)

2) The House of Jacob is not the Church composed of both Jew and Gentile (I guess David's and Judah's houses do not qualify to be included in the House of Jacob, since they include Gentiles.)

3) Mount Zion in the O.T. prophecy is always the hill in Israel, and NEVER the heavenly mount Sion in the New Testament.

4) Jerusalem in the O.T. prophecy is always the old city in Israel, and NEVER the heavenly New Jerusalem in the New Testament.

5) The Church is only temporary, and will be whisked away someday to make way for a 1,000 year Jewish rule of the earth (even though Christ loves the Church and gave his live for it. Try to figure that one out.)

6) There are two covenants, called "dual-covenant" theology: one for Christians, and one for Israel (in Hebrews it is written the old covenant is history; and Jeremiah stated the reason for the new, was because Israel broke the old. It is also written that Christ himself fulfilled the old convenant promises.)

7) The seven churches in Asia are always spiritual, and never the actual and real seven churches in Asia that existed around 60 A.D. Notice the oddity in this one. Instead of always earthly, as all of the above, this one is always spiritual. Why? It hurts the dispensationalist case for dual-covenant theology. If the fulfilment of the Revelation was not in future, their whole house of cards crumbles.

>>>1 Corinthians 2:13 Which things also we speak, not in the words which man's wisdom teacheth, but which the Holy Ghost teacheth; comparing spiritual things with spiritual. 14 But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.<<<<

Cynical Bear, I would recommend you read that verse very carefully.

Philip

712 posted on 02/06/2014 1:09:30 PM PST by PhilipFreneau
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 686 | View Replies]

To: Elsie

Honey, I am the posting MORMON data: YOU are the one refusing to deal with it.

***

Some day my comedic friend will have to deal with it!:)


713 posted on 02/06/2014 1:09:38 PM PST by restornu (Love One Another)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 708 | View Replies]

To: restornu
neither you nor I know, some like to speculate, some like to beat others over the head for having an opinion.

My opinion is that you're AFRAID to speak out about the OBVIOUS problems found in MORMONism.


2 Timothy 1:7
For God hath not given us the spirit of fear; but of power, and of love, and of a sound mind.

714 posted on 02/06/2014 1:10:40 PM PST by Elsie (Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 682 | View Replies]

To: restornu
What we do know is that the only begotten Son of God enter the world naturally!

Duh!

We also KNOW that LDS, Inc. teaches the way Mary got pregnant is the 'natural way' as well.

715 posted on 02/06/2014 1:12:03 PM PST by Elsie (Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 682 | View Replies]

To: CynicalBear

ME: >>>>>Where does it say they are “representative” Churches. Where does it say anything except they are “THE seven churches in Asia?”<<<<<

YOU: >>>So scripture isn’t for our teaching today?<<<

I knew you would avoid that one. LOL.

Everything is literal, but the seven churches. I wonder why?

Philip


716 posted on 02/06/2014 1:12:59 PM PST by PhilipFreneau
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 688 | View Replies]

To: restornu
Elsie your reply has no relationship to my post!

Sure it does!

I'm HELPING you by giving you a LIST of OTHER 'mormon' sects you can go to; when Salt Lake City has finally tossed that last straw on your back.

717 posted on 02/06/2014 1:13:33 PM PST by Elsie (Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 685 | View Replies]

To: CynicalBear

>>>Yeah, and all the years since it’s been heaven on earth over there in the middle east.<<<

LOL! When will it be heaven on earth on earth under dispensationalism?


718 posted on 02/06/2014 1:14:13 PM PST by PhilipFreneau
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 690 | View Replies]

To: Elsie

well don’t you know no comment from PhilipFreneau on LDS stuff...
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/3116855/replies?c=654


719 posted on 02/06/2014 1:15:33 PM PST by restornu (Love One Another)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 701 | View Replies]

To: PhilipFreneau
>> Everything to a dispensational is carnal, earthly, and of the flesh<<

Wow! That is so 180 off that it’s not worth giving more time then wrong.

The rest of your post is assumptions on your part or speculation so not worth my time.

720 posted on 02/06/2014 1:16:01 PM PST by CynicalBear (For I decided to know nothing among you except Jesus Christ)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 712 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 681-700701-720721-740 ... 921-938 next last

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.

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