Bible-Only Christians, is this problematic

[MagicKirk]

There has been a great deal of discussion on CAF concerning sola scriptura (along with personal interpretation) versus the wisdom of interpreting scripture with the assistance of Tradition and the assistance of the early church fathers.

Job 8:8-10 states:
8 If you inquire of the former generations, and give heed to the experience of the fathers
9 (As we are but of yesterday and have no knowledge, because our days on earth are but a shadow),
10 Will they not teach you and tell you and utter their words of understanding?

Is this in any way problematic for you?

 

[HannahLisa]

Why would this be problematic? In context, the passage is speaking of learning about God’s goodness through the experiences of ancestors, which is a very desirable thing. It’s not talking specifically about the early church fathers.

Those who came before are not necessarily right about everything. The earth is not flat, nor is it the center of the universe, and sex is not something to be avoided at all costs. That being said, there’s a lot we can learn from our elders - whether they be the early church fathers or simply our grandparents.

 

[MagicKirk]

I agree that it isn’t talking about the ECF as Job pre-dates the ECF. Also, the passage comes as dialogue, though depicted as being correct. However, it does seem to suggest that truth is built-up through the generations. I may be wrong, (that is why I put this as a question), but it seems to suggest Tradition. It (and other passages of Job) seem to SUGGEST that personal interpretation is a step in the wrong direction.
Perhaps no Protestant will find it problematic, otherwise they probably wouldn’t be Protestants - but I thought I’d throw it against the wall and see what some folks thought.

 

[NDfan]

I agree that it isn’t talking about the ECF as Job pre-dates the ECF. Also, the passage comes as dialogue, though depicted as being correct. However, it does seem to suggest that truth is built-up through the generations. I may be wrong, (that is why I put this as a question), but it seems to suggest Tradition. It (and other passages of Job) seem to SUGGEST that personal interpretation is a step in the wrong direction.
Perhaps no Protestant will find it problematic, otherwise they probably wouldn’t be Protestants - but I thought I’d throw it against the wall and see what some folks thought.

Kirk if you understood reformation theology a little better you wouldn’t post this verse which is just proof texting the Bible.

Protestants don’t preach private interpretation. Where do RCs get this rubbish?

 

[cazayoux]

Those who came before are not necessarily right about everything. The earth is not flat, nor is it the center of the universe, and sex is not something to be avoided at all costs. That being said, there’s a lot we can learn from our elders - whether they be the early church fathers or simply our grandparents.

If this is a dig on the Catholic Church …

The Catholic Church does not claim to be infallible with regard to biology, chemistry, astronomy, or anything else other than faith and morals.

Catholics are not taught to avoid sex at all costs.
Check out the Theology of the Body to learn what the Catholic Church teaches in this regard.
Sex is what we are MADE for.
Now if you are talking about pre-marital sex, then the Catholic Church would tell you to respect God enough to abstain until you are married.
Conservative thinking, I know, but that’s Catholicism for ya!

michel

 

[ibkc]

Why would this be problematic? In context, the passage is speaking of learning about God’s goodness through the experiences of ancestors, which is a very desirable thing.

You’re right. It’s called “Tradition”.

 

[bpbasilphx]

Protestants don’t preach private interpretation.

**Where did you get the idea Protestants didn’t?

In my life as a Baptist I repeatedly heard about the right of the individual believer to interpret Scripture on his own–as long as it was just like everybody else’s.

Of course, woe betide you if your interpretation was different from that of those around you.**

 

[HannahLisa]

If this is a dig on the Catholic Church …

The Catholic Church does not claim to be infallible with regard to biology, chemistry, astronomy, or anything else other than faith and morals.

Catholics are not taught to avoid sex at all costs.
Check out the Theology of the Body to learn what the Catholic Church teaches in this regard.
Sex is what we are MADE for.
Now if you are talking about pre-marital sex, then the Catholic Church would tell you to respect God enough to abstain until you are married.
Conservative thinking, I know, but that’s Catholicism for ya!

michel

When I said that, I was referring to some of the Early Church Fathers who were extremely against sex, even between married couples.

 

[SIA]

Why would this be problematic? In context, the passage is speaking of learning about God’s goodness through the experiences of ancestors, which is a very desirable thing. It’s not talking specifically about the early church fathers.

Those who came before are not necessarily right about everything. The earth is not flat, nor is it the center of the universe, and sex is not something to be avoided at all costs. That being said, there’s a lot we can learn from our elders - whether they be the early church fathers or simply our grandparents.

Good points. The Catholic church’s teachings in some cases are contradicting to what the Early Church fathers said.