GCM Home | Your Posts | Rules | DONATE | Bookstore | RSS | Facebook | Twitter | FAQs


Author Topic: Sola Scriptura is contrary to Scripture  (Read 27361 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Angelos

  • Guest
Sola Scriptura is contrary to Scripture
« on: Mon Aug 24, 2009 - 22:03:07 »
In Greek: Paradosis = Tradition

2 Thess 2:15 "Therefore, brothers, stand firm and hold fast to the traditions (paradoseis) that you were taught, either by an ORAL statement or by a letter of ours".

2 Tim 2:2
And what you heard from me through many witnesses entrust (paradou) to faithful people who will have the ability to teach others as well.

Lk 1:1-2
Since many have undertaken to compile a narrative of the events that have been fulfilled among us, just as those who were eyewitnesses from the beginning and ministers of the word have handed them down (paredosan) to us.
 
1 Cor 11:23
For I received from the Lord what I also handed on (paredoka) to you, that the Lord Jesus, on the night he was handed over, took bread ...

1 Cor 15:3-4
For I handed on (paredoka) to you as of first importance what I also received ...

John 20:30
Now Jesus did many other signs in the presence of (his) disciples that are not written in this book.
 
John 21:25
There are also many other things that Jesus did, but if these were to be described individually, I do not think the whole world would contain the books that would be written

Christian Forums and Message Board

Sola Scriptura is contrary to Scripture
« on: Mon Aug 24, 2009 - 22:03:07 »

Offline stevehut

  • Hero
  • *****
  • Posts: 3768
  • Manna: 70
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: Sola Scriptura is contrary to Scripture
« Reply #1 on: Mon Aug 24, 2009 - 22:13:28 »
Funny how some "Christians" love nothing more than to diminish the authority of the Scriptures...

Christian Forums and Message Board

Re: Sola Scriptura is contrary to Scripture
« Reply #1 on: Mon Aug 24, 2009 - 22:13:28 »

Angelos

  • Guest
Re: Sola Scriptura is contrary to Scripture
« Reply #2 on: Mon Aug 24, 2009 - 22:15:36 »
Who are these "Christians" you're referring to?

Offline stevehut

  • Hero
  • *****
  • Posts: 3768
  • Manna: 70
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: Sola Scriptura is contrary to Scripture
« Reply #3 on: Mon Aug 24, 2009 - 22:16:40 »
Anyone who works so hard to diminish the authority of Scripture...

Sorry, I thought I made that clear the first time.   ::pondering::

Christian Forums and Message Board

Re: Sola Scriptura is contrary to Scripture
« Reply #3 on: Mon Aug 24, 2009 - 22:16:40 »

Offline stevehut

  • Hero
  • *****
  • Posts: 3768
  • Manna: 70
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: Sola Scriptura is contrary to Scripture
« Reply #4 on: Mon Aug 24, 2009 - 22:37:00 »
Matthew 15

Thus you nullify the word of God for the sake of your tradition. 7You hypocrites! Isaiah was right when he prophesied about you:
    8" 'These people honor me with their lips,
      but their hearts are far from me.
    9They worship me in vain;
      their teachings are but rules taught by men.'

Christian Forums and Message Board

Re: Sola Scriptura is contrary to Scripture
« Reply #4 on: Mon Aug 24, 2009 - 22:37:00 »



Angelos

  • Guest
Re: Sola Scriptura is contrary to Scripture
« Reply #5 on: Tue Aug 25, 2009 - 09:28:15 »
For me Scripture and Tradition are the two sides of the same coin. After all the early Fathers decided WHICH BOOKS made it into Scripture

"Sacred Tradition and Sacred Scripture, then, are bound closely together, and communicate one with the other. For both of them, flowing out from the same divine well-spring, come together in some fashion to form one thing, and move towards the same goal." Each of them makes present and fruitful in the Church the mystery of Christ, who promised to remain with his own "always, to the close of the age".


"Sacred Scripture is the speech of God as it is put down in writing under the breath of the Holy Spirit."

"And [Holy] Tradition transmits in its entirety the Word of God which has been entrusted to the apostles by Christ the Lord and the Holy Spirit. It transmits it to the successors of the apostles so that, enlightened by the Spirit of truth, they may faithfully preserve, expound and spread it abroad by their preaching."

 As a result the Church, to whom the transmission and interpretation of Revelation is entrusted, "does not derive her certainty about all revealed truths from the holy Scriptures alone. Both Scripture and Tradition must be accepted and honored with equal sentiments of devotion and reverence."

Offline DCR

  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 11300
  • Manna: 432
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: Sola Scriptura is contrary to Scripture
« Reply #6 on: Tue Aug 25, 2009 - 09:49:11 »
Can we trust 2000 years of fallable men to keep the Tradition passed down from the apostles accurately though?

It's a judgment call to even decide who kept tradition the best on either side of every schism anyway.

That's another possible motivation to look to Scripture for all guidance... not merely an "anti-tradition" stance.  But, rather, it's an attempt look to Scripture for apostolic tradition.  And, it is the most trustworthy thing we have for that purpose.
« Last Edit: Tue Aug 25, 2009 - 10:38:58 by DCR »

blituri

  • Guest
Re: Sola Scriptura is contrary to Scripture
« Reply #7 on: Tue Aug 25, 2009 - 10:02:56 »
THE PROPHETS AND APOSTLES WERE CHOSEN TO RECEIVE AND PASS ON REVELATIO.

John 20:28 And Thomas answered and said unto him,
        My Lord and my God.
John 20:29 Jesus saith unto him,
        Thomas, because thou hast seen me, thou hast believed:
        blessed are they that have not seen, and yet have believed.

FOR THOSE TO WHOM THE SCRIPTURES WERE WRITTEN WHO CAN NEVER SEEN JESUS

John 20:30 And many other signs truly did Jesus in the presence of his disciples,
        which are not written in this book:
John 20:31 But these are written,
        that ye might believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God;
        and that believing ye might have life through his name


Only a person who has never become a DISCIPLE of "that which is written" or that "which has been taught" will run out of the SEVEN SPIRITS of Divine Knowledge and need something more. However, most of what we call "worship service" is based on denying that the Bible gives us all that pertains to life and godliness by its sermons and song.

larry2

  • Guest
Re: Sola Scriptura is contrary to Scripture
« Reply #8 on: Tue Aug 25, 2009 - 10:53:24 »

To answer this thread, I would add 2 Peter 1:20  Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation.
 
God is not going to give us His word, and then have tradition given that adds to, or contradicts it.

Galatians 1:8  But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed.

In Jesus' name - larry2


Offline trifecta

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 791
  • Manna: 24
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: Sola Scriptura is contrary to Scripture
« Reply #9 on: Tue Aug 25, 2009 - 11:00:39 »
Can we trust 2000 years of fallable men to keep the Tradition passed down from the apostles accurately though?

What's the alternative?  Trusting our own interpretation of Scripture.   Given that those church leaders before me studied the Scriptures far more extensively than I have.  Given that God works through history, including through his church.  Given that Holy Spirit guides that church.  Given that monks and nuns constantly uphold the world in prayer.  I go with the church that Jesus established, instead of leaning in my own understanding

Quote
It's a judgment call to even decide who kept tradition the best on either side of every schism anyway.

And Paul warned of this happening.   Once you look at the facts and forget about our personal sentimentalities, the answer isn't too hard  (The Orthodox Church).  God is not the author of confusion.

Quote
That's another possible motivation to Scripture for all guidance... not merely an "anti-tradition" stance.

In other words, our own interpretation of Scripture, regardless of what tradition says.   Or if you will, dump tradition if it doesn't agree with me, keep it only if it does.    This is not Scriptural, and certainly not found in Semitic culture. (Individuals didn't claim so much power then).

Quote
 But, rather, it's an attempt look to Scripture for apostolic tradition.  

If this is so, why not read the apostolic fathers like Ireaneous, Ignatius, Justin Marytr?  They don't count for much in Protestant circles  (although you DCR probably have.)   Rather Prots read Western 16th century "interpretations" of the apostolic tradition.    Why not, instead, turn to the real tradtion, rather than lean on a 16th or 19th century reinterpretation of things?  

Quote
And its the most trustworthy thing were have for that purpose.

But the church is the "pillar and foundation of the truth."  Paul says so himself.  If you can't just replace the word "church" with "scripture."

Offline DCR

  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 11300
  • Manna: 432
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: Sola Scriptura is contrary to Scripture
« Reply #10 on: Tue Aug 25, 2009 - 11:06:55 »
Once you look at the facts and forget about our personal sentimentalities, the answer isn't too hard  (The Orthodox Church).  

Well, of course.  And, any good Roman Catholic will disagree and say that "the answer isn't too hard (The Catholic Church)."  ::wink::

So, instead of trusting our own interpretation of scripture, we now trust our own interpretation of who has it right... and then trust them.  I'm not sure that's much better.

Angelos

  • Guest
Re: Sola Scriptura is contrary to Scripture
« Reply #11 on: Tue Aug 25, 2009 - 11:15:19 »
I don't think Protestants realise how much they rely for their OWN faith on the early Church's Tradition. To begin with the early Fathers are the ones that picked the Books that today comprise the Bible, it was THEIR decision that defined what Scripture IS.

Second, most Protestants believe the Nicene Creed, another masterpiece of the one Church.

Third, the core dogmas of Trinity and Christ as fully God AND fully Human were fully developed 600-700 AD, thanks to the Church's Tradition. Multiple Heresies were denying these core beliefs for hundreds of years.

So dear Protestants, whether you like to admit it or not, implicitly you DO trust the one Holy Catholic/Orthodox and Apostolic Church Tradition. Finally, for those who do not know, the core dogmas of the Catholic and Eastern Orthodox churches (with 1.3 billion adherents) are IDENTICAL, their differences are  poltical

Offline skala

  • Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 201
  • Manna: 13
    • View Profile
Re: Sola Scriptura is contrary to Scripture
« Reply #12 on: Tue Aug 25, 2009 - 12:12:21 »
Quote
I don't think Protestants realise how much they rely for their OWN faith on the early Church's Tradition. To begin with the early Fathers are the ones that picked the Books that today comprise the Bible, it was THEIR decision that defined what Scripture IS.

And to do that, they most likely compared scripture with scripture to decide what was inspired or not, right? Further, shouldn't God get the credit for working in and through the Church Fathers and led them to make this decision? So ultimately, it is scripture and God that decided what books would be in the Bible, not man.

Quote
Second, most Protestants believe the Nicene Creed, another masterpiece of the one Church.

No argument there.  I've always believed that Christianity is a living organism, that has been around since the time of Christ.  We have encountered controversies and we held counsels to respond to controversy, and issue written statements, for the benefit of future Christians.  but yet again, Who is behind these? Who is guiding the church the way He wants it to go? God of course! And where can we learn what God wants us to know? The Scriptures!

But, when you say the "One Church", you must not confuse the church from Rome the same today as it was "back then".  It has drastically changes in flavor and doctrine and emphasis.  Hence, the entire reason for the Protestant Reformation.  Today's so-called "one church", the RCC, is not the same as it was "back then".  Today, she is a harlot.
Quote
Third, the core dogmas of Trinity and Christ as fully God AND fully Human were fully developed 600-700 AD, thanks to the Church's Tradition. Multiple Heresies were denying these core beliefs for hundreds of years.

And where did the Christians at the time of these controversies go to prove the doctrine of the Trinity and Christ's divinity? The scriptures of course.  Who is behind the formulation of these dogmas? God of course.  Ate very turn, where you, Angelos, seek to give men credit, we should instead seek to give God and scriptures the credit.

Quote
So dear Protestants, whether you like to admit it or not, implicitly you DO trust the one Holy Catholic/Orthodox and Apostolic Church Tradition.

Oh, we like it and admit it! The problem is, what you're calling the "Holy catholic church" is not what we are calling the "Holy catholic church".  The word catholic means "universal", and there is no reason to capitalize it.   The Holy catholic church is the entire worldwide congregation of all of God's elect, not the papacy of Rome and his minions.


Angelos

  • Guest
Re: Sola Scriptura is contrary to Scripture
« Reply #13 on: Tue Aug 25, 2009 - 12:30:32 »
You posted "So ultimately, it is scripture and God that decided what books would be in the Bible, not man".

I completely agree that the early Fathers were inspired by the Holy Spirit, they were not acting alone. The Sacred Tradition of the Church is not man's work, it is the work of the Holy Spirit. So we agree there.  On the other half of you sentence, I hope you realise that it is a circular argument to say that scripture (i.e., the Bible) decided what books would be in the Bible!!

You also posted "when you say the "One Church", you must not confuse the church from Rome the same today as it was "back then".  I'm refering to the Church up to 1054, not to the modern Roman Catholic Church. Having said that, it doesn't matter because 99% of the RCC dogma and 100% of the Eastern Orthodox dogma has NOT changed since 1054.

Finally, using the world "harlot" to insult 1.4 bil. or 70% of all Christians (Catholics/Eastern Orthodox), shows your bias....

blituri

  • Guest
Re: Sola Scriptura is contrary to Scripture
« Reply #14 on: Tue Aug 25, 2009 - 13:04:21 »
Second, most Protestants believe the Nicene Creed, another masterpiece of the one Church.

Third, the core dogmas of Trinity and Christ as fully God AND fully Human were fully developed 600-700 AD,


No one ever taught a TRIAD of God, Jesus and the Holy Spirit.
No one ever even hallucinated the Father and Son as separated "people." Jesus said that the Father and Spirit were within.
No one ever thought of the Spirit OF God as a member of the Godhead.

Everyone defined God as ONE

FATHER was the thought
SON was the WordS when the "father" first SPOKE words.
SPIRIT was the breath that passes as invisible power between THOUGH and audible WORDS.

In the Nicean creed note that both GOD and LORD designate the same Deity which dwelled fully in Jesus of Nazareth for our salvation.
God speaks of the invisible Deity. Lord identifies the same GOD working in the World. God annointed the Rock, Manna, Water and every instance where He reaches into our world in an audible or visible way. This does not define two PEOPLE.

     "We believe in
    one God, the Father Almighty, Maker of all things visible and invisible:-and in.
    one Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God, the only-begotten of the Father, that is of the substance of the Father;
          God of God and Light of light;
          true God of true God;

    begotten, not made, consubstantial with the Father: by whom all things were made, both which are in heaven and on earth: who for the sake of us men, and on account of our salvation, descended became incarnate, and was made man; suffered, arose again the third day, and ascended into the heavens and will come again to judge the living and the dead.


        [We] also [believe] in the Holy Spirit.

    But the holy Catholic and Apostolic church anathematizes those who say

    "There was a time when he was not," and
    "He was not before he was begotten" and
    "He was made from that which did not exist,"
    and those who assert that he is of other substance or essence than the Father, or that he was created, or is susceptible of change.' 62


    Substantia I. that of which a thing consists, the being, essence, contents, material, substance
    Ousi-a that which is one's own, one's substance, property, 5. in the concrete, the primary real,
     the substratum underlying all change and process in nature,

God always had His WORD and His WISDOM or Spirit with Him.  Jehovah is ONE GOD.

The NAME (singular) of Father, Son and Spirit is Jesus Christ.

The Catholic "trinity" contradicts all church scholars by making a three headed idol or defining the trinity as a FAMILY as in all pagan trinities consiste NECESSARILY of Father, Mother and eternally-infant child where the MOTHER OF THE GODS or Mary is the true Mediatrix.

The Historic Church for several centuries before there was a POPE called itself The Church of Christ.  If you read the recorded history of England for a thousand years you will discover that only the BISHOP in Rome thought that he was the HEAD of both religious and civil government.  Just about everyone in the world did NOT think so.  The BISHOP at Rome as a kinda backward town became the CLEARING HOUSE to send out preachers BECAUSE he was a wing of the Roman Government.

Offline canuck

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 959
  • Manna: 72
    • View Profile
Re: Sola Scriptura is contrary to Scripture
« Reply #15 on: Tue Aug 25, 2009 - 14:36:03 »
The Roman Catholic Church epitomizes tradition. But its " traditions " have been in a state of flux since at least the 3rd Century, evidenced by the incorporation of new dogmas and practices e.g. prayer beads, indulgences, scapulars, the immaculate conception, the assumption of Mary-- none of which have any solid scriptural foundation, regardless of which particular Canon of Scripture one may choose to follow.

As was pointed out in a previous post, the Reformation's focus was to undo the non-biblical traditions that had worked to enslave the Church. That Protestants by-and-large, follow the Canon of Scripture as tabled by Bishop Athanasius in the early 4TH Century, gives witness that they remain intent on preserving the books that were deemed inspirational at that time.

There can be honest debate over which books are inspirational and thus canonical, but to hold to certain traditions that have no support in any of the early Church writings allows us to dismiss the idea of a " two-sided coin " of truth i.e. the complementary nature of Scripture and invented traditions.

canuck

Angelos

  • Guest
Re: Sola Scriptura is contrary to Scripture
« Reply #16 on: Tue Aug 25, 2009 - 15:36:59 »
I think you seriously confuse core dogmas (Tradition) with practices. No Catholic is obligated to count prayer beads. It is a technique that some Catholics find useful ( I don't). Obviously, not every Catholic wears scapulars either.

Maybe your confusion, partly drives your hostility. If you're interested in learning about the core dogmas you can look here: http://www.vatican.va/archive/ccc_css/archive/catechism/ccc_toc.htm

The Catholic Church has more than 1 billion adherents in 5 Continents. It's a big tent. Practices come and go. Btw, the celibate priesthood is a practice not a dogma.

The Immaculate conception is logically supported by the Scriptures. It is definitely not contradicted by the Scriptures. Same thing with the, once controversial, dogma about Christ being fully God and fully human.

Offline trifecta

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 791
  • Manna: 24
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: Sola Scriptura is contrary to Scripture
« Reply #17 on: Tue Aug 25, 2009 - 15:38:11 »
DCR,

Once you look at the facts and forget about our personal sentimentalities, the answer isn't too hard  (The Orthodox Church).  

Well, of course.  And, any good Roman Catholic will disagree and say that "the answer isn't too hard (The Catholic Church)."  ::wink::


True, but they are letting sentimentality get in the way.  I didn't want to emphasize this point on this thread.  


Quote
So, instead of trusting our own interpretation of scripture, we now trust our own interpretation of who has it right... and then trust them.  I'm not sure that's much better.

The short answer is it is much better to trust others.
Firstly, you probably do this anyway.  Few people who have any background in Christianity pick up a Bible without someone else's framework around it.    

Secondly, we do this in many other areas in life.  As I said on another thread,  I believe in the general theory of relativity not because I understand it, but because of Einstein's reputation.  Rarely in history has the average person ever had the ability to figure out the scriptures (and Einstein for that matter) by himself.

Also, turn to the Scriptures and we are warned, as larry noted, that "no scripture is of private interpretation."  We are warned NOT to lean on our own understanding.    See the problem here:
If we think we can interpret Scripture without anyone else's help, this can really go to our heads.

I really don't want to meet the person who claims they have figured out scripture without anyone else's help.  So, the question becomes "To  whom do we turn?" If we say no one, then we are our own interpretor.   So, then who?  I have to come back to "the pillar and foundation of the truth" is the church.
 
« Last Edit: Tue Aug 25, 2009 - 16:18:56 by trifecta »

Offline stevehut

  • Hero
  • *****
  • Posts: 3768
  • Manna: 70
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: Sola Scriptura is contrary to Scripture
« Reply #18 on: Tue Aug 25, 2009 - 15:44:05 »
The Roman Catholic Church epitomizes tradition. But its " traditions " have been in a state of flux since at least the 3rd Century,

Bravo, Canuck.

Offline stevehut

  • Hero
  • *****
  • Posts: 3768
  • Manna: 70
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: Sola Scriptura is contrary to Scripture
« Reply #19 on: Tue Aug 25, 2009 - 15:51:02 »
1- Obviously, not every Catholic wears scapulars either.

2- Maybe your confusion, partly drives your hostility.

3- The Catholic Church has more than 1 billion adherents in 5 Continents.

4- the celibate priesthood is a practice not a dogma.


1- I have a scapular from my youth, which says "anyone who dies wearing this scapular, will ne saved."  Saving power is attributed to a piece of flannel.  Any Catholics here who want to renounce this belief?

2- I don't see any hostility in here.  Just sincere responses to unsupported claims.

3- Are you sure?  Every survey for the last 20 years has found that only a small percentage of all people on the membership rolls, actually attend Mass.  The percentage decreases steadily, and has never gone up.  I recently found out that My whole family is still on the rolls of our local parish, even though none of us has shown up for Mass for almost 40 years.  

I'm not impressed by a billion names on a list.  Show me a billion fannies in pres, then yes, maybe you'll be on to something.

4- So I can join a seminary today as a married man?  That's news to me.

Offline trifecta

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 791
  • Manna: 24
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: Sola Scriptura is contrary to Scripture
« Reply #20 on: Tue Aug 25, 2009 - 15:59:06 »
canuck,

The Roman Catholic Church epitomizes tradition. But its " traditions " have been in a state of flux since at least the 3rd Century,

Actually, if they did epitomize tradition they wouldn't be in a state of flux.  One of the problems with the RCC is they moved away from Holy Tradition,  but Protestants have probably done more so.

Quote
evidenced by the incorporation of new dogmas and practices e.g. prayer beads,
There is nothing wrong with things that help you to worship.  Protestants use amplifiers and overheads.  They are worship aides too.  They just more modern.

Quote
indulgences, the immaculate conception, the assumption of Mary-- none of which have any solid scriptural foundation, regardless of which particular Canon of Scripture one may choose to follow.

We Orthodox don't do these things either (except the assumption of Mary) but history shows the NT was not only source that people looked to.  Paul says this himself when he says to follow the oral tradition as well as the written letters he had taught them.   Also, Paul says the "pillar and foundation of truth" is the church.

Quote
As was pointed out in a previous post, the Reformation's focus was to undo the non-biblical traditions that had worked to enslave the Church.

I am not sure that the Reformation had a single focus.  Sola Scriptura was just a compromise since no one took authority.   Think about it:  How come no one before Luther challenged the authority of the church?  Now, they fought to determine church doctrine (especially in the era
of the ecumenical councils) and who should lead the church but they never denied the church.    

Quote
That Protestants by-and-large, follow the Canon of Scripture as tabled by Bishop Athanasius in the early 4TH Century, gives witness that they remain intent on preserving the books that were deemed inspirational at that time.

If you read St. Athanansius, you'll find the canon of Scripture is not the biggest of deals in the early church.  In fact, we don't have any official list of the 27-books until Anthanasius letter (367 AD) and no ecumenical council clearly listed what they were.  

Quote
There can be honest debate over which books are inspirational and thus canonical, but to hold to certain traditions that have no support in any of the early Church writings allows us to dismiss the idea of a " two-sided coin " of truth i.e. the complementary nature of Scripture and invented traditions.

True, there are good traditions and bad traditions.  I think is was St. Basil who said if you have doubt, believe the tradition.  Why?  Because it is from God's own church.


Thanks for reading, especially if you disagree.

larry2

  • Guest
Re: Sola Scriptura is contrary to Scripture
« Reply #21 on: Tue Aug 25, 2009 - 16:06:54 »

Angelos -The Immaculate conception is logically supported by the Scriptures. It is definitely not contradicted by the Scriptures.

larry2 - Dear Brother Angelos, and yes I do consider those of the Catholic Church that have believed on the Lord Jesus my brethren, even though I came out of the Catholic Church and I no longer believe all their doctrine.

Romans 3:23  For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God;

Romans 5:12  Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned:

Tradition, custom, and scripture must align to be true; scripture is always correct. The Immaculate Conception does not meet that standard.

In Jesus' name - larry2


Offline skala

  • Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 201
  • Manna: 13
    • View Profile
Re: Sola Scriptura is contrary to Scripture
« Reply #22 on: Tue Aug 25, 2009 - 16:19:33 »
Quote
1- I have a scapular from my youth, which says "anyone who dies wearing this scapular, will ne saved."  Saving power is attributed to a piece of flannel.  Any Catholics here who want to renounce this belief?

As I said, a harlot.  By harlot I mean, a spiritual adulterer.    Do you care to respond to this salvific scapular, Angelos?  Or do you find it embarassing?

Offline Wycliffes_Shillelagh

  • Down with pants! Up with kilts!
  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 11878
  • Manna: 346
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: Sola Scriptura is contrary to Scripture
« Reply #23 on: Tue Aug 25, 2009 - 16:39:25 »
And to do that, they most likely compared scripture with scripture to decide what was inspired or not, right?
Not really.  For the most part, they took a vote.

Offline Wycliffes_Shillelagh

  • Down with pants! Up with kilts!
  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 11878
  • Manna: 346
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: Sola Scriptura is contrary to Scripture
« Reply #24 on: Tue Aug 25, 2009 - 16:48:33 »
Think about it:  How come no one before Luther challenged the authority of the church?  Now, they fought to determine church doctrine (especially in the era
of the ecumenical councils) and who should lead the church but they never denied the church.
My friend, many many people have challenged the authority of the church throughout its history, from its very inception.  You simply don't hear much about them because by and large they have been re-labeled in such a way as to exclude them from the ranks of those who were actually brothers in Christ.

Offline zoonance

  • Legendary Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 8518
  • Manna: 233
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: Sola Scriptura is contrary to Scripture
« Reply #25 on: Tue Aug 25, 2009 - 16:56:27 »
Think about it:  How come no one before Luther challenged the authority of the church?  Now, they fought to determine church doctrine (especially in the era
of the ecumenical councils) and who should lead the church but they never denied the church.
My friend, many many people have challenged the authority of the church throughout its history, from its very inception.  You simply don't hear much about them because by and large they have been re-labeled in such a way as to exclude them from the ranks of those who were actually brothers in Christ.



dead guys tell no tales

Offline stevehut

  • Hero
  • *****
  • Posts: 3768
  • Manna: 70
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: Sola Scriptura is contrary to Scripture
« Reply #26 on: Tue Aug 25, 2009 - 16:58:21 »
1- How come no one before Luther challenged the authority of the church?  

2- Now, they fought to determine church doctrine (especially in the era of the ecumenical councils)

3- but they never denied the church.    

Trif, I believe you need to brush up on your history.

1- Hundreds of people rebelled long before Luther.  He was far from the first.

2- Has the era of ecumenical councils ended?  Vatican 2 met in the 1960s, have they now been abolished?

3- Nor did Luther, for that matter.  Even in the 95 Theses, he defended the church and the pope in many significant ways.
« Last Edit: Tue Aug 25, 2009 - 17:10:11 by stevehut »

Angelos

  • Guest
Re: Sola Scriptura is contrary to Scripture
« Reply #27 on: Tue Aug 25, 2009 - 17:06:46 »
larry2:

You argument falls apart on many levels:

1) All would also mean Jesus. Yet, Jesus, also fully human, is clearly an exception because Heb 4:15 says that Jesus was like us in all ways except sin. Therefore, Jesus is an exception and defeats the universality of the word all.

2) A case could be made for Adam and Eve since they were created without sin. However, one could then say that they did in fact commit personal sin when they ate of the fruit.
However, since Adam and Eve were created without sin, there is nothing to say that others could also be created without sin, for with God nothing is impossible(Lk 1:37)

3) If all refers universally to all, then what sin has the unborn child committed? Paul speaks of Jacob and Esau were unborn and had done nothing either good or bad (Rom 9:11) What of the infant who died in child birth? What personal sin did they commit? Please answer me that.

Clearly, the assumption of the universaslity of the word "all" in Rom 3:23 and Rom 11:32 does not hold up to logical criticism. Therefore, those verses cannot mean "all" in a universal sense. Paul means them in another sense.
In addition, these verses do not contradict the I.C. because the dogma specifically states that it was an act of grace that preserved Mary in a way in which she was preserved before any sin touched her. She was not kept sinless of her own merit, but of a singular act of grace in view of Christ's merits.

Why did God do this for Mary?
He did it because no sin ever touched Jesus. The sin of Adam is passed through generation through the mother (Ps 51:5). Mary was kept immaculately as a fitting vessel to carry the Christ child (ark of the new covenant) in her womb to show God�s redemptive work in action.

The dogma of the I.C. is Christ- centered because Mary was made fir to carry the King and it also shows the fruits of the cross, salvation

Furthermore, let's look at some Scriptures and compare them to Romans 3:23

Rom. 3:23 "all have sinned," The greek word used here is pantes, for "all".
Jesus must be an exception to this rule. Therfore, others may be an exception as well.

1 Cor. 15:22 - in Adam all ("pantes") have died, and in Christ all ("pantes") shall live.

This proves that "all" does not mean "every single one." This is because not all have died (such as Enoch and Elijah who were taken up to heaven), and not "all" will go to heaven (because Jesus said so).

Rom. 5:12 - Paul says that death spread to all ("pantes") men.

Again, this proves that "all" does not mean "every single one" because death did not spread to all men (as we have seen with Enoch and Elijah).

Rom. 5:19 Paul says "many (not all) were made sinners." Paul uses "polloi," not "pantes." Is Paul contradicting what he said in Rom. 3:23?
Of course not. Paul means that all are subject to original sin, but not all reject God. Mary was also subject to original sin, but was preserved from it by a singular act of grace by God

Offline stevehut

  • Hero
  • *****
  • Posts: 3768
  • Manna: 70
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: Sola Scriptura is contrary to Scripture
« Reply #28 on: Tue Aug 25, 2009 - 17:13:04 »
there is nothing to say that others could also be created without sin, for with God nothing is impossible(Lk 1:37)


False argument here.  As far as I know, no one here has argued about what God can or cannot do.  The question before us is, did he?

Angelos

  • Guest
Re: Sola Scriptura is contrary to Scripture
« Reply #29 on: Tue Aug 25, 2009 - 17:16:33 »
Btw, your guy Luther supported the concept of Immaculate conception:

Three hundred years before it was declared Dogma, the Protestant reformer Martin Luther said:

"... so that while the soul was being infused, she would at the same time be cleansed from original sin ... And thus, in the very moment in which she began to live, she was without all sin." (Martin Luther's Works, vol 4, pg 694)

"God has formed the soul and body of the Virgin Mary full of the Holy Spirit, so that she is without all sins, " (ibid. vol 52, pg 39)

". . . she is full of grace, proclaimed to be entirely without sin. . . . God's grace fills her with everything good and makes her devoid of all evil. . . . God is with her, meaning that all she did or left undone is divine and the action of God in her. Moreover, God guarded and protected her from all that might be hurtful to her." (Ref: Luther's Works, American edition, vol. 43, p. 40, ed. H. Lehmann, Fortress, 1968).

So If Luther supports it, not just some "corrupt" Pope it must be good... :-)

Offline stevehut

  • Hero
  • *****
  • Posts: 3768
  • Manna: 70
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: Sola Scriptura is contrary to Scripture
« Reply #30 on: Tue Aug 25, 2009 - 17:31:40 »
Yup.   ::disco::

Luther wasn't the divider that he is often assumed to be.  He identified problems and tried to fix them.

He also upheld papal authority, penance, and canon law, just within the 95 theses.

Angelos

  • Guest
Re: Sola Scriptura is contrary to Scripture
« Reply #31 on: Tue Aug 25, 2009 - 17:42:48 »
1- I have a scapular from my youth, which says "anyone who dies wearing this scapular, will be saved."  Saving power is attributed to a piece of flannel.  Any Catholics here who want to renounce this belief?

From Wikipedia: "The earliest form of the Scapular promise states simply that wearers of the brown scapular, the Carmelite habit, will be saved. In the first place this meant Carmelite religious who remained faithful to their vocation."

So all it means is that if you remain faithful to your vocation you will be saved...the scapular is a symbol of the vocation, the same way the American Flag is a symbol of our country not just a piece of cloth...which is why Americans are pissed when someone burns the flag. They see an attack on the symbol of their country, not a piece of cloth.

Protestants seem to have a hard time comprehending symbols..for them an American patriot who salutes the flag is an idolater

Offline zoonance

  • Legendary Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 8518
  • Manna: 233
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: Sola Scriptura is contrary to Scripture
« Reply #32 on: Tue Aug 25, 2009 - 17:54:48 »
dang protestants.  Proof we're right.

Offline canuck

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 959
  • Manna: 72
    • View Profile
Re: Sola Scriptura is contrary to Scripture
« Reply #33 on: Tue Aug 25, 2009 - 18:34:50 »
larry2:

Clearly, the assumption of the universaslity of the word "all" in Rom 3:23 and Rom 11:32 does not hold up to logical criticism. Therefore, those verses cannot mean "all" in a universal sense. Paul means them in another sense.
In addition, these verses do not contradict the I.C. because the dogma specifically states that it was an act of grace that preserved Mary in a way in which she was preserved before any sin touched her. She was not kept sinless of her own merit, but of a singular act of grace in view of Christ's merits.

Why did God do this for Mary?
He did it because no sin ever touched Jesus. The sin of Adam is passed through generation through the mother (Ps 51:5). Mary was kept immaculately as a fitting vessel to carry the Christ child (ark of the new covenant) in her womb to show God�s redemptive work in action.


Modern medicine and genetics contradicts any notion that the blood line of humanity is passed on to the unborn through the mother. In fact, it is the other way around! The blood of the infant is determined by the genetics of the father. This has been known for a few generations.

That is why there is no need for the idea of the " Immaculate Conception" of Mary, the mother of our Lord Jesus Christ. As the Holy Spirit came upon her, He shielded the zygote from the corruption of tainted blood -- giving blood not corrupted in Adam. This unscriptural dogma has its roots in tradition and not in modern science, not to mention anything that Scripture has to say.

canuck

larry2

  • Guest
Re: Sola Scriptura is contrary to Scripture
« Reply #34 on: Tue Aug 25, 2009 - 19:31:46 »

Angelos - larry2: Your argument falls apart on many levels:

1) All would also mean Jesus. Yet, Jesus, also fully human, is clearly an exception because Heb 4:15 says that Jesus was like us in all ways except sin. Therefore, Jesus is an exception and defeats the universality of the word all.

larry2 - Ah yes, but Jesus was God; Mary was not. Hebrews 4:15  For we have not an high priest which cannot be touched with the feeling of our infirmities; but was in all points tempted like as we are, yet without sin.
 
Angelos - 2) A case could be made for Adam and Eve since they were created without sin. However, one could then say that they did in fact commit personal sin when they ate of the fruit.
However, since Adam and Eve were created without sin, there is nothing to say that others could also be created without sin, for with God nothing is impossible (Lk 1:37)

larry2 - And scripture does not say others were born sinless. Adam and Eve were created; not born. Was Mary created?

Angelos - 3) If all refers universally to all, then what sin has the unborn child committed? Paul speaks of Jacob and Esau were unborn and had done nothing either good or bad (Rom 9:11) What of the infant who died in child birth? What personal sin did they commit? Please answer me that.

larry2 - Psalms 51:5  Behold, I was shapen in iniquity; and in sin did my mother conceive me. A child is not held accountable for their nature, but their actions. You don't have to teach a child to lie; it comes automatically.

Angelos - Clearly, the assumption of the universality of the word "all" in Rom 3:23 and Rom 11:32 does not hold up to logical criticism. Therefore, those verses cannot mean "all" in a universal sense. Paul means them in another sense.
In addition, these verses do not contradict the I.C. because the dogma specifically states that it was an act of grace that preserved Mary in a way in which she was preserved before any sin touched her. She was not kept sinless of her own merit, but of a singular act of grace in view of Christ's merits.

larry2 - Do you have scripture?

Angelos - Why did God do this for Mary?
He did it because no sin ever touched Jesus. The sin of Adam is passed through generation through the mother (Ps 51:5). Mary was kept immaculately as a fitting vessel to carry the Christ child (ark of the new covenant) in her womb to show God's redemptive work in action.

The dogma of the I.C. is Christ- centered because Mary was made fir to carry the King and it also shows the fruits of the cross, salvation

larry2 - Hebrews 4:15  For we have not an high priest which cannot be touched with the feeling of our infirmities; but was in all points tempted like as we are, yet without sin. How can God be tempted? If Jesus was not of sinful man as we are, He could not have been tempted. We read in James 1:13  God cannot be tempted with evil. 
 
Angelos - Furthermore, let's look at some Scriptures and compare them to Romans 3:23

Rom. 3:23 "all have sinned," The Greek word used here is pantes, for "all".
Jesus must be an exception to this rule. Therefore, others may be an exception as well.

larry2 - Assumptions such as this is how these strange doctrines are born. Mankind likes to worship the created more that the creator. Romans 1:25  Who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen.
 
Angelos - 1 Cor. 15:22 - in Adam all ("pantes") have died, and in Christ all ("pantes") shall live.

This proves that "all" does not mean "every single one." This is because not all have died (such as Enoch and Elijah who were taken up to heaven), and not "all" will go to heaven (because Jesus said so).

larry2 - All in Christ have died to the world. Colossians 2:20  Wherefore if ye be dead with Christ - -. Colossians 3:3  For ye are dead, and your life is hid with Christ in God. In context where did Jesus say all including non believers will go to heaven?

Angelos - Rom. 5:12 - Paul says that death spread to all ("pantes") men.

Again, this proves that "all" does not mean "every single one" because death did not spread to all men (as we have seen with Enoch and Elijah).

Rom. 5:19 Paul says "many (not all) were made sinners." Paul uses "polloi," not "pantes." Is Paul contradicting what he said in Rom. 3:23?
Of course not. Paul means that all are subject to original sin, but not all reject God. Mary was also subject to original sin, but was preserved from it by a singular act of grace by God

larry2 - Scripture does not support your theories, and if they were true it would. You have allowed the doctrines of men to lead you to believe a lie.

That's how you discount even the things Jesus would say as you stated: "not "all" will go to heaven (because Jesus said so)." Taken in context scripture does not contradict itself. The next thing you know, we will hear you proclaiming Mary to be a "Mediatrix of all Graces;" of course according to scripture also.

In Jesus' name - larry2


 

     
anything