Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Ten Things Every Catholic Should Know About Sola Scriptura
Standing on my head ^ | February 11, 2015 | Fr. Dwight Longenecker

Posted on 02/12/2015 2:17:57 PM PST by NYer

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 161-180181-200201-220 ... 481-484 next last
To: Iscool; NYer

Promoting the supposition that Matthew wrote the gospel in Hebrew but there is no documented proof is tantamount to a lack of faith in God’s ability to preserve His word “for all generations” as He promised.


181 posted on 02/13/2015 5:53:10 AM PST by CynicalBear (For I decided to know nothing among you except Jesus)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 178 | View Replies]

To: Joshua; rcofdayton
Catholics love to point out that the words “scripture alone” don’t specifically appear, but ignore the fact that most of their rituals also fail to appear in print. The majesterium has to tweaked them a bit to get them to work

The word *magisterium* doesn't appear in the Bible either, so by their reasoning, that ought to be disqualified as well.

182 posted on 02/13/2015 5:54:20 AM PST by metmom (...fixing our eyes on Jesus, the Author and Perfecter of our faith...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 148 | View Replies]

To: CynicalBear
Promoting the supposition that Matthew wrote the gospel in Hebrew but there is no documented proof is tantamount to a lack of faith in God’s ability to preserve His word “for all generations” as He promised.

But it has been preserved, after being translated into Greek and Latin, by Catholics.

183 posted on 02/13/2015 6:05:22 AM PST by NYer (Without justice - what else is the State but a great band of robbers? - St. Augustine)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 181 | View Replies]

To: CynicalBear
Prove that Matthew was first written in either Hebrew or Aramaic.

Prove that he didn't.

184 posted on 02/13/2015 6:06:04 AM PST by NYer (Without justice - what else is the State but a great band of robbers? - St. Augustine)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 180 | View Replies]

To: verga
The narrow minded bigots will say anything in desperation

Matthew 7:13-14 Enter ye in at the narrow gate: for wide is the gate, and broad is the way that leadeth to destruction, and many there are who go in thereat. How narrow is the gate, and strait is the way that leadeth to life: and few there are that find it!

185 posted on 02/13/2015 6:11:18 AM PST by metmom (...fixing our eyes on Jesus, the Author and Perfecter of our faith...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 166 | View Replies]

To: Jacob Kell
This is a common problem with English-speakers, who aren't comfortable with nouns having gender.

"Petra" is the word for rock, but it has a feminine ending. Addressing a male to give him a new name (a Biblical custom pointing to a major life-changing event), the word acquires a male ending. But there is no "masculine Greek word Petros" - other than the name, Peter.

The closest I can get to it in English is that if you named a male after a rock, you would name him Rocky, not Rockette.

186 posted on 02/13/2015 6:19:49 AM PST by AnAmericanMother (Ecce Crucem Domini, fugite partes adversae. Vicit Leo de Tribu Iuda, Radix David, Alleluia!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 54 | View Replies]

To: NYer
>>Prove that he didn't.<<

Say what? You're kidding right? We're not in kindergarten here NYer.

187 posted on 02/13/2015 6:21:42 AM PST by CynicalBear (For I decided to know nothing among you except Jesus)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 184 | View Replies]

To: metmom

“Matthew 7:13-14 Enter ye in at the narrow gate: for wide is the gate, and broad is the way that leadeth to destruction, and many there are who go in thereat. How narrow is the gate, and strait is the way that leadeth to life: and few there are that find it!”

You gave up the narrow gate when you gave up Jesus in the Eucharist.


188 posted on 02/13/2015 6:23:11 AM PST by Not gonna take it anymore (If Obama were twice as smart as he is, he would be a wit)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 185 | View Replies]

To: Salvation
Peter was not beheaded, he was crucified upside down. Bible reader?

Never said he was.....thread reader??

189 posted on 02/13/2015 6:25:29 AM PST by ealgeone
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 158 | View Replies]

To: NYer
>>But it has been preserved, after being translated into Greek and Latin, by Catholics.<<

Proof you can fool some of the people all the time.

190 posted on 02/13/2015 6:25:31 AM PST by CynicalBear (For I decided to know nothing among you except Jesus)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 183 | View Replies]

To: NYer; CynicalBear
CB:Promoting the supposition that Matthew wrote the gospel in Hebrew but there is no documented proof is tantamount to a lack of faith in God’s ability to preserve His word “for all generations” as He promised.

Sal: But it has been preserved, after being translated into Greek and Latin, by Catholics.

So that means that it was the CATHOLIC CHURCH which used the words *petra* and *Petros* in Matthew there.

Making the word for *rock* mean small stone in one case and bedrock in another.

And then it was the CATHOLIC CHURCH which penned this, too, right?

http://biblehub.com/text/1_corinthians/10-4.htm

1 Corinthians 10:1-4 For I do not want you to be unaware, brothers, that our fathers were all under the cloud, and all passed through the sea, and all were baptized into Moses in the cloud and in the sea, and all ate the same spiritual food, and all drank the same spiritual drink. For they drank from the spiritual Rock (petra) that followed them, and the Rock (petra) was Christ.

191 posted on 02/13/2015 6:32:35 AM PST by metmom (...fixing our eyes on Jesus, the Author and Perfecter of our faith...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 183 | View Replies]

To: CynicalBear; NYer
I noticed this thread yesterday afternoon when it had two posts. Two hours later, it had over 80. I take it topics like these move fast here.

Anyway, as to:

Promoting the supposition that Matthew wrote the gospel in Hebrew but there is no documented proof . .

As to Matt. 16, the point is simply that Aramaic was the common language of the day. (See, e.g., Mark 15:34-36) So when Jesus is speaking to the Apostles that day at Ceaserea Philippi, he's speaking in Aramaic. And clear evidence that Simon was called by the Aramaic "Kepha" is found in John 1:42;

42 And he brought him to Jesus.

Jesus looked at him and said, “You are Simon son of John. You will be called Cephas” (which, when translated, is Peter[a])(NIV).

The footnote to that edition states: "a. John 1:42 Cephas (Aramaic) and Peter (Greek) both mean rock."

"Cephas" is a transliteration into Greek of the Aramaic "Kepha" (rock).

So the point that in rendering the dialogue into Greek, Matthew had to contend with the noun gender in Greek (thus choosing "petros" (masculine)) doesn't depend on proof of some original Aramaic manuscript to Matthew's Gospel, just on recognition that the words spoken to Peter were originally spoken in Aramaic.

192 posted on 02/13/2015 6:37:35 AM PST by CpnHook (15)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 181 | View Replies]

To: metmom; BlueDragon; boatbums; Salvation; CynicalBear; FatherofFive; piusv
Interesting that you have not yet replied to this post: And who gave Jimmy the authority to define Sola Scriptura? Seriously I don’t recall the heavens opening up and God saying that Jimmy could make this decision. When and where did Jimmy’s authority come from? Be specific.

I thought prots answered EVERY question ever asked of them

193 posted on 02/13/2015 6:38:45 AM PST by verga (I might as well be playing Chess with a pigeon.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 185 | View Replies]

To: NYer

“On which doctrines do they disagree?”

How about papal infallibility, for a start.


194 posted on 02/13/2015 6:47:35 AM PST by Boogieman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 176 | View Replies]

To: verga

“Refresh my memory which Bible verse says:”

No, you made a claim that something was in the Bible. Thus, it is only sensible that you either produce the Scripture, or retract the claim.

I made no claims that the things you list were in Scripture, therefore your request is not sensible.


195 posted on 02/13/2015 6:53:09 AM PST by Boogieman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 167 | View Replies]

To: RnMomof7; NYer
That is not what it means.

The problem in these dialogues is that the word "sola" isn't employed with a consistent meaning by Protestants.

As to Scripture, the usual explanation is that Scripture is the first and highest source of truth; that other sources are not thereby precluded, just that ultimately Scripture is the measure. So here a more accurate shorthand expression would be prima Scriptura. "Sola" here doesn't strictly mean "only" or "exclusive," but more like "principal" or "primary."

But when the discussion turns to soteriology ("sola fide") Protestants are very clear that "sola" does mean "only" or "exclusive," assuring me that "works" have nothing whatsoever to do with our justification.

So if Protestants would use "sola" consistently (which they don't), there might be less confusion on the Catholic side.

196 posted on 02/13/2015 6:59:51 AM PST by CpnHook
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: metmom; NYer
>>So that means that it was the CATHOLIC CHURCH which used the words *petra* and *Petros* in Matthew there.<<

And then believe that the Catholic Church which they claim has unbroken lineage of the preservation of scripture lost the originals. And to top that all off believe they could consistently over millennium maintain an unchanging oral teaching. They can save dead bones but not God's original word.

197 posted on 02/13/2015 7:00:40 AM PST by CynicalBear (For I decided to know nothing among you except Jesus)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 191 | View Replies]

To: piusv

“It still sounds like you get to decide what does or doesn’t contradict Scripture.”

Everyone makes that decision one way or another, Catholics just choose to delegate matters to their church authorities. Still, they have all made the individual decision that the church authorities’ interpretations do not contradict Scripture.

Likewise, not all Protestants are Biblical scholars, so many choose to delegate those things to others, making a conscious decision to trust their judgement. So, I don’t think that the fact that a judgement was made about which interpretation is correct is really the important thing. What is important is that the correct interpretation is arrived at.


198 posted on 02/13/2015 7:05:18 AM PST by Boogieman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 164 | View Replies]

To: CpnHook; NYer
>>As to Matt. 16, the point is simply that Aramaic was the common language of the day.<<

Do you really want us to take your comments seriously? The common language beginning already in 300BC was Koine Greek, not Aramaic. What language Jesus was speaking is irrelevant in that the Holy Spirit inspired the New Testament to be written in Greek. Do you honestly think that the Holy Spirit didn't know what words to use to convey His meaning?

199 posted on 02/13/2015 7:15:37 AM PST by CynicalBear (For I decided to know nothing among you except Jesus)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 192 | View Replies]

To: verga; metmom; BlueDragon; boatbums; Salvation; CynicalBear; FatherofFive; piusv

Who is this Jimmy you speak of? And why should I care what this “Jimmy” says?


200 posted on 02/13/2015 7:17:24 AM PST by CynicalBear (For I decided to know nothing among you except Jesus)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 193 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 161-180181-200201-220 ... 481-484 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