Are we attacking the wrong sola scriptura?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Madaglan
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
40.png
Contarini:
However, the consistent witness of the pre-Reformation Church is that Scripture is the supreme authority in matters of faith and practice.
Click to expand...
Did Paul have the New Testament?

John, on the other hand, specifically says that by no means all is written down. 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.”.
40.png
Contarini:
Furthermore, Vatican II explicitly teaches that the Church is the servant of the Word and not its master. Of course that goes along with the view that the Word is preserved in Scripture and Tradition.
Click to expand...
40.png
Contarini:
But if we are speaking of the authority of the Church over against the authority of Scripture, .
Click to expand...
Where does THIS come from? Where does the Church say Tradition conflicts with Scripture?!?!
 
vern humphrey:
No, my point is scripture is a product of tradition (after all, the oldest scripture is redacted tradition – as is much of the New Testament.) Without tradition there can be no scripture.

As John says in 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.”

The early Christians had a rich tradition of oral teachings that cannot be ignored.

How do you get that? The Jews DID produce the Old Testament. Do you wish to reject it? That’s Marcionism!

Christians formed their Canon of the New Testament by listing those books they had traditionally used – which were those found in the LXX. Jesus Himself may have used the LXX – Paul and other early Christians certainly did.

Indeed – do you wish to drop Christianity and become a Jew?

With Christ, the old covenent was fulfilled. His Church had the authority that had formerly rested with the Prophets – and it used its own tradition to form the Canon.
Click to expand...
How do I get what? How do you conclude that I am rejecting the old testament?

Jeff
 
40.png
jphilapy:
How do I get what? How do you conclude that I am rejecting the old testament?

Jeff
Click to expand...
You said:
40.png
jphilapy:
If that is the case then shouldn’t we all convert to the traditions of the Jews considering they gave us the old testament? I mean if they gave us the old testament, then based on your logic their authority must be greater than or equal to that of the old testament.
Click to expand...
If you believe their authority is great, then why aren’t you a Jew? If you aren’t converting to Judaism, have you not rejected this “greater authority?”
In fact, the Jews also have both Scripture and Tradition, the latter being the Mishna.
 
vern humphrey:
You said:
Click to expand...
If you believe their authority is great, then why aren’t you a Jew? If you aren’t converting to Judaism, have you not rejected this “greater authority?”

In fact, the Jews also have both Scripture and Tradition, the latter being the Mishna.

I didn’t say their authority is great you said it is. You do so when you say that authority of the one cannonizing scripture is equal to the scripture. Now didn’t you say that.

And you still didn’t show me how I am rejecting the Old testament. If I am rejecting it then why would I appeal to the authority of those who gave it as you said? Would maricion convert to judaism? Is that what you are saying?

Jeff
 
40.png
jphilapy:
I didn’t say their authority is great you said it is. You do so when you say that authority of the one cannonizing scripture is equal to the scripture. Now didn’t you say that.
Click to expand...
Where? Quote me.
40.png
jphilapy:
And you still didn’t show me how I am rejecting the Old testament. If I am rejecting it then why would I appeal to the authority of those who gave it as you said? Would maricion convert to judaism? Is that what you are saying?

Jeff
Click to expand...
You’re lost here – Marcion was an early proto-Gnostic who rejected the Old Testament.

You should study the history of the early Church – it would save you from seizing on old heresies.
 
vern humphrey:
Where? Quote me.

You’re lost here – Marcion was an early proto-Gnostic who rejected the Old Testament.

You should study the history of the early Church – it would save you from seizing on old heresies.
Click to expand...
Why do I have to quote you? You know as well as I do your stance is that the catholic churches tradition is greater than or equal to scripture because tradition gave scripture. If the catholic churches tradition is greater than or equal to scripture because they gave it, then you have to apply that same principle to the old testament and to those who originally cannonized it.

I say greater than or equal to because I am unclear just how you see it. Is it greater than scripture or is it only equal to?

Now I know who is marcion, he taught that the God of the old testament was not the same God of Christians. However what I don’t understand is why on one hand you would accuse me of rejecting the old testament and being a marcionite who was against jews, and then accuse me of want to convert to judaism. You made a contradiction. See you can’t accuse me of being a marcionite and then accuse me of trying to convert to judaism.

And you still haven’t showed me how I rejected the old testament.

Jeff
 
Ani Ibi:
**4. Do not view the discussion area as a vehicle for single-mindedly promoting an agenda.
5. Non-Catholics are welcome to participate but must be respectful of the faith of the Catholics participating on the board. **
Click to expand...
Ani I agree that folks should respect these rules. I am not going to investigate anyone as its not my job, and maybe my saying something on this forum went to far. However I do think that the issue became way to personal. Maybe the best way to handle anyone you or I think is violating forum rules and conduct is to report them to moderators.

Jeff
 
40.png
jphilapy:
Why do I have to quote you?
Click to expand...
You made an accusation. I call you.

Show me where I said "
I didn’t say their authority is great you said it is. You do so when you say that authority of the one cannonizing scripture is equal to the scripture. Now didn’t you say that."

I call for a quote, showing I actually said any such thing. In other forums, this would be called the “put up or shut up” rule.
40.png
jphilapy:
You know as well as I do your stance is that the catholic churches tradition is greater than or equal to scripture because tradition gave scripture.
Click to expand...
You are totally wrong in your interpretation of the Catholic Church’s position on Scripture and Tradition.

This is, however, a typical ploy – to falsely pretend the Church holds a position, then to attack that position.

In other venues, it’s called a “strawman argument.” It was the favorerite tactic of Crescens – and you know what Justin Martyer said about Crescens.
40.png
jphilapy:
If the catholic churches tradition is greater than or equal to scripture because they gave it, then you have to apply that same principle to the old testament and to those who originally cannonized it…
Click to expand...
Since your strawman is false, we don’t have to accept your conclusions.
40.png
jphilapy:
I say greater than or equal to because I am unclear just how you see it. Is it greater than scripture or is it only equal to?
Click to expand...
After making all those false claims about the Catholic position on Scripture and Tradition, you finally admit you don’t know the Catholic position.
40.png
jphilapy:
Now I know who is marcion, he taught that the God of the old testament was not the same God of Christians. However what I don’t understand is why on one hand you would accuse me of rejecting the old testament and being a marcionite who was against jews, and then accuse me of want to convert to judaism.
Click to expand...
Because YOUR position demands one or the other. YOUR false characterizartion of tradition and authority has put you in a box.
 
vern humphrey:
You made an accusation. I call you.

Show me where I said "
I didn’t say their authority is great you said it is. You do so when you say that authority of the one cannonizing scripture is equal to the scripture. Now didn’t you say that."

I call for a quote, showing I actually said any such thing. In other forums, this would be called the “put up or shut up” rule.
Click to expand...
In the following post you established that tradition and scripture are at least equal.
forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=493155&postcount=111

Are you saying you don’t believe that scripture is equal to tradition?
vern humphrey:
You are totally wrong in your interpretation of the Catholic Church’s position on Scripture and Tradition.
Click to expand...
How am I wrong? I know that the catholic churches position is that scripture and tradition is at least equal to each other. However when you make the argument that tradition gave scripture you seem to me to establish that tradition is greater than scripture. see you are making the point unclear.

Now if tradition is equal to scripture according to the catholic churches view, then I am not falsely accusing you, and am not falsely representing the catholic churches view. And thus not making a strawman argument.

But if I am in error on my understanding then you would do well to explain how.

Jeff
 
40.png
jphilapy:
In the following post you established that tradition and scripture are at least equal.
forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=493155&postcount=111

Are you saying you don’t believe that scripture is equal to tradition?
Click to expand...
Quoting the entire passage so others can see it"

**Then where did Scripture come from?

Did Jesus personally write the New Testament?

No, He did not. Christians began to write about His message some years after the Resurection. And voluminously – you can find more “scripture” outside the New Testament than inside. Some appears perfectly sound, some not so sound, some is forged or edited.

Who chose the documents that make up the New Testament? Based on what criterria?

Clearly the choices were based on TRADITION. The Church fathers chose those documents that were in accord with tradition and rejected (or simply did not include) those which were not.

Who rejects tradition must willy-nilly reject scripture as well.**

Nowhere do I support your false argument that Scripture and Tradition are somehow juxtaposed in tension.

I expect an apology.
40.png
jphilapy:
How am I wrong? I know that the catholic churches position is that scripture and tradition is at least equal to each other. However when you make the argument that tradition gave scripture you seem to me to establish that tradition is greater than scripture. see you are making the point unclear.
Click to expand...
I challenge you to cite any Catholic position under the Magesterium that supports that statement.
40.png
jphilapy:
Now if tradition is equal to scripture according to the catholic churches view, then I am not falsely accusing you, and am not falsely representing the catholic churches view. And thus not making a strawman argument.

Jeff
Click to expand...
You are falsely stating the Catholic Church’s position, and you do so even after being told you are wrong.
 
vern humphrey:
Nowhere do I support your false argument that Scripture and Tradition are somehow juxtaposed in tension.

I expect an apology.

I challenge you to cite any Catholic position under the Magesterium that supports that statement.

You are falsely stating the Catholic Church’s position, and you do so even after being told you are wrong.
Click to expand...
I have no idea what you mean by “juxtaposed in tension”.

The catechism establishes that they are equal.

**One common source. . . **
80 “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.”[40] 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”.[41] **. . . **

**two distinct modes of transmission **

81 “Sacred Scripture is the speech of God as it is put down in writing under the breath of the Holy Spirit.”[42]

“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.”[43] 82 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 honoured with equal sentiments of devotion and reverence.”[44]
 
vern humphrey:
I expect an apology.

I challenge you to cite any Catholic position under the Magesterium that supports that statement.

You are falsely stating the Catholic Church’s position, and you do so even after being told you are wrong.
Click to expand...
Hey Vern–whaddaya say you and I start an “I await your apology or retraction” thread?

To all of you who may think I’m being bitter or facetious: Lighten-up–I have–I’m joking…😛
 
40.png
jphilapy:
I have no idea what you mean by “juxtaposed in tension”.

The catechism establishes that they are equal.

**One common source. . . **
80 “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.”[40] 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”.[41] **. . . **

**two distinct modes of transmission **

81 “Sacred Scripture is the speech of God as it is put down in writing under the breath of the Holy Spirit.”[42]

“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.”[43] 82 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 honoured with equal sentiments of devotion and reverence.”[44]
Click to expand...
The Catechism establishes – following Vatican II – that Revelation is from one source, with two modes of transmission – read it again.

There is no tension. There is no one superior to the other. There is no one equal to the other. There is simply revelation – with two modes of transmission.
 
I challenge you to cite any Catholic position under the Magesterium that supports that statement.
Click to expand...
Catholics do believe that Scripture and tradition are at least equal to each other. See here for discussion:

forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=37044&highlight=michaelp

And here:

catholic.com/library/Scripture_and_Tradition.asp
You are falsely stating the Catholic Church’s position, and you do so even after being told you are wrong.
Click to expand...
What Jeff is saying is that in all confessions, Scripture and Traditon are equal avenues to the one deposit. Some people believe that they are separate, some that they are the same. This is a debate that Catholics are “allowed” to have since the Magisterium have not spoken on the sufficiency of either with clarity (since it is often difficult to interpret magisterial statements). They all believe that they are at least equal.

However, practically speaking, Jeff is saying that Tradition has priority since it must define and interpret Scripture along with the Magisterium (who interprets both). Catholics therefore sometimes confess that Tradition has a certian priority over Scripture.

Therefore, Jeff has not created a straw man. Maybe you disagree with other Roman Catholics on this, but it is still represented by most. Once again, the magisterium is difficult to interpret about this particular issue.

Michael
 
40.png
st_felicity:
Hey Vern–whaddaya say you and I start an “I await your apology or retraction” thread?

To all of you who may think I’m being bitter or facetious: Lighten-up–I have–I’m joking…😛
Click to expand...
Don’t hold your breath.http://forums.catholic-questions.org/images/icons/icon10.gif

As Jusin said about Crescens: “that lover of bravado and boasting; for the man is not worthy of the name of philosopher who publicly bears witness against us in matters which he does not understand”
 
vern humphrey:
The Catechism establishes – following Vatican II – that Revelation is from one source, with two modes of transmission – read it again.

There is no tension. There is no one superior to the other. There is no one equal to the other. There is simply revelation – with two modes of transmission.
Click to expand...
The catechism says there are two modes. Not one mode but two. Are the modes equal? By their very definition they are. If they were not equal then one would be less than the other or they would be the same exactly in content with no reason to express them as two modes.

Jeff
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top