Cough me up ONE scripture passage . .

[1962Missal]

stollerusa:

How in the heaven are ya?!?!

Whatchathink about my prima, sola and solo?

I always welcome feedback from my fellow Christian brethern (and from sistern).

Roland
AmbassadorMan

Most inclusive and tolerant. But they exclude one viewpoint that is rather relevant here:

Therefore both sacred tradition and Sacred Scripture are to be accepted and venerated with the same sense of loyalty and reverence…

Dei Verbum

Justin

 

[RolandJS]

Quote from Dei Verbum:
“Therefore both sacred tradition and Sacred Scripture are to be accepted and venerated with the same sense of loyalty and reverence…”

You being a loyal dedicated Catholic must believe as Dei Verbum has spoken, for such comes from the Belief Set of Catholicism.

I, being a loyal dedicated nonCatholic, do not have the Belief Set of Catholicism - ergo, the Dei Verbum, presently is not part and parcel of the Belief Set coming from a nonCatholic source.

Naturally, as I do my readings, I shall learn more and more of your Faith as well as my own

Roland
AmbassadorMan

 

[jmm08]

SPOKENWORD:

Afterwards, I became like Jesus after I totally submitted myself to the Lord. I thought I was born again as a catholic but all I was, was a partial birth born again catholic. I continued living a non christian life. I smoked ,gambled ,used foul language. I definatly was not Christlike by the way I lived. Sure I went to church every week but that didnt make me a christian. Christianity is about a relationship with our Lord and Savior. Religeon is about man trying to reach God.

SPOKENWORD: So you wouldn’t have gotten very far if it weren’t for people and things in addition to the Bible. None of us would have. Even St. Peter needed to first have a talk with the Lord after the resurrection (because he had denied Christ). I thank God for the intercession of the Saints (both canonized and unrecognized)!

Homer and all those who tried to like my arguments (Jesus being tempted in the desert). Don’t take my Sola Scriptura argument and stick with it. I only tried my best to do what was asked “Cough me up ONE scripture passage…” and then to defeat the same idea.

 

[jmm08]

jimmy:

I must have missread your post. I am sorry, I thought you were supporting sola scriptura at first. I am not a sola scriptura enthusiast.

I’m kind of new still (haven’t started RCIA / RCIC yet). But I’m reading. Isn’t it St. Thomas Aquinas who would first set up and examine the best argument his opponents could possibly think up. And then knock them down with the truth?

I think I had somebody going for a little while (in favor of Sola Scriptura). They liked what I said at first and must have skipped over the rest of what I said.

That is why I was warning the Sola Scriptura crowd to be careful. Because us Catholics can be very very smart and sneaky. They should join us.

 

[RolandJS]

[no text]

 

[1962Missal]

stollerusa:

You being a loyal dedicated Catholic must believe as Dei Verbum has spoken, for such comes from the Belief Set of Catholicism.

I, being a loyal dedicated nonCatholic, do not have the Belief Set of Catholicism - ergo, the Dei Verbum, presently is not part and parcel of the Belief Set coming from a nonCatholic source.

Naturally, as I do my readings, I shall learn more and more of your Faith as well as my own

Roland
AmbassadorMan

Of course. I know you don’t want anyone left out.

Justin

 

[RolandJS]

…have one thing in common that I would like to see more of:

Rather than draw lines and exclude others,
draw a circle and invite all to see the Glory of the Lord.

Overly simplistic to be sure, I just wanted one point to shine thru.

Roland
AmbassadorMan

 

[drforjc]

Corpus Christi wrote:

Please note that there are many books that WEREN’T put into the canon that claimed ot be inspired by God. Take this into account and see that the VAST MAJORITY of the books in the Bible DON’T claim divine inspiration, much less EVEN AUTHORITY. So take that into account when answering questions, drfor

jc

Ummm, I was agreeing with you, and I was making the same point your are,although there are indeed several places which do claim inspiration, but of course do not give a list of which books are inspired. We rely on the Church to give us the Tradition of the Table of Contents (as Mark Shea so aptly puts it.)

 

[SPOKENWORD]

Catholic4aReasn:

I’m interested in the source of your deinitions of “christianity” and “religion”. Could you pass those along? Thanks!

Catholics ARE born again in baptism (Romans 6:3-4). However, as one matures one must respond to the grace that God has given him. Sounds like yours wasn’t a deficiency in being born again, but rather a deficiency in your cooperation with God’s grace. Wherever you may be, praise God that you are more fully cooperating with His grace now. It’s what we all must do.

It’s interesting how many people feel it necessary to leave the Catholic Church in order to cooperate with God’s grace and conversely, how many people know that it was a response to God’s grace that brought them into the Church.

In Christ,
Nancy

I believe anytime the word religion is used in the new testament it refered to the nonchristians. Being a christian is one who follows and takes on Jesus Christs nature. Is it possible that Christ calls out some of his chosen people for His purpose? I know where I was and I know where I am. I am doing the will of my heavenly Father. Change is one of the hardest things for us to do,but that is what Christ calls us to do.I know who I am in Christ and I am here to do His will.

 

[Reformed_Rob]

This is not meant to be an all inclusive argument for Sola Scriptura. But, since the challenge has been presented, I hope that the Catholics in the discussion can see that Sola Scriptura is not a completely arbitrary and nonsense way of going about discovering how God would have us live and think in the world.

So, the one passage I’ll contribute, with a short explanation, is:

II Peter 3:15 - 16

In which St. Peter says " and regard the patience of our Lord to be salvation; just as also our beloved brother Paul, according to the wisdom given him, wrote to you, as also in all his letters, speaking in them of these things, in which are some things hard to understand, which the untaught and unstable distort, as they do** also the rest of the Scriptures**, to their own destruction."

I realize this exact passage is used by Catholics to argue against Sola Scriptura (because the letters of Paul are hard to understand, hence you need an infallible magesterium), and also against Sola Fide (because Protestants typically draw heavily from Paul’s letters to prove JBFA), but I’ll now point out what I’m getting at. We can know, by this Epistle of Peter, that he himself considers, (and he is led by the Holy Spirit in writing this) that Paul’s letters are “Scriptures.” So we don’t need to be told by the Catholic Church what books should be included in the New Testament Canon, because Peter tells us!

Now, seeing right through that argument, I’m expecting to get slammed, but please do it gently and with a spirit of ecumenicism:tsktsk:

And JMM08 - your (name removed by moderator)ut on this topic is intriguing!

 

[Andreas_Hofer]

Reformed Rob:

So, the one passage I’ll contribute, with a short explanation, is:

II Peter 3:15 - 16

In which St. Peter says " and regard the patience of our Lord to be salvation; just as also our beloved brother Paul, according to the wisdom given him, wrote to you, as also in all his letters, speaking in them of these things, in which are some things hard to understand, which the untaught and unstable distort, as they do** also the rest of the Scriptures**, to their own destruction."

I realize this exact passage is used by Catholics to argue against Sola Scriptura (because the letters of Paul are hard to understand, hence you need an infallible magesterium), and also against Sola Fide (because Protestants typically draw heavily from Paul’s letters to prove JBFA), but I’ll now point out what I’m getting at. We can know, by this Epistle of Peter, that he himself considers, (and he is led by the Holy Spirit in writing this) that Paul’s letters are “Scriptures.” So we don’t need to be told by the Catholic Church what books should be included in the New Testament Canon, because Peter tells us!

Now, seeing right through that argument, I’m expecting to get slammed, but please do it gently and with a spirit of ecumenicism:tsktsk:

And JMM08 - your (name removed by moderator)ut on this topic is intriguing!

Without really thinking about it, I’m guessing two weak spots you might have in mind:

1. Nothing tells us that Peter’s letters are inspired Scripture, thus they can’t attest inerrantly to the scriptural character of other works
2. Not all of the New Testament was written by Paul.

 

[Andreas_Hofer]

stollerusa:

Whatchathink about my prima, sola and solo?

Roland
AmbassadorMan

It may be a real distinction made by some Protestants, but I would suggest that this is a different topic because sola scriptura in that sense presents a different argument. If discussing it using your classification system, a Protestant who subscribes to it would be challenged to explain why his tradition (essentially, that common-sense magisterium of learned friends, etc.) should be regarded as a reliable guide when it came into being, at the earliest, 1500 years after the life of Christ and conflicts overwhelmingly with the tradition of so many other learned people, some of whom were disciples of the Apostles (St. Polycarp) or just one more step removed (the disciples of those original followers, writing in the 2nd century).

 

[Andreas_Hofer]

Originally Posted by SPOKENWORD
*The Written Word was enough for Jesus to fight off satan. If its good enough for Him its good enough for me. *

But sometimes the Written Word was apparently not good enough for Jesus to fight off demons, because he doesn’t seem to have used it. In the healing of the Gerasene demoniac (I’m reading in Lk 8 right now) Jesus simply ordered the demon out of the possessed man. I guess I could give you a while to search the Old Testament for a verse that is a direct order to a demon to leave a possessed person, or we could just agree that in this case Jesus fought demons without quoting Scripture.

 

[Andreas_Hofer]

Shibboleth:

The Latin expression “sola scriptura” refers to the authority of the Holy Scriptures to serve as the sole norm for all that is taught and confessed in the church. In numerous passages the Scriptures claim this authority for themselves as the inspired Word of God. For example, St. Paul writes in 2 Tim. 3:16, “All scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness…” (RSV).

Your citation from second Timothy fails to take into consideration that Paul was referring to the Old Testament only; a look at the previous verse or two shows that Timothy has known these scriptures since his childhood. Also, the verse calls the Old Testament “profitable,” not sufficient. “…so that…fully equipped…” also does not equal sufficiency. If you have lumber and a hammer, I can give you nails so that you may be fully equipped to build a fence. But the nails are by no means sufficient.

Shibboleth:

Likewise, the apostle Peter declares that “no prophecy of scripture is a matter of one’s own interpretation, because no prophecy ever came by the impulse of man, but men moved by the Holy Spirit spoke from God” (2 Pet. 1:20-21; RSV). It should be remembered that acceptance of the Bible as the sole authority for teaching comes not from rational arguments or human traditions, but is a conviction produced by the Holy Spirit in the human heart. In other words, it is a matter of faith worked by the Holy Spirit through the Scriptures themselves (see 1 Thess. 2:13)!

There is, of course, no contradiction between 2 Pet. 1:20 and what Peter says later in 3:15-16. That the Scriptures may be difficult for human beings to understand in certain places does not take away from their divine authority. In fact, St. Peter’s words underline the necessity and importance of praying for the Holy Spirit’s guidance to properly interpret Scripture as we “grow in the grace and knowledge of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ” (2 Pet. 3:18; emphasis added).

Hope this helps…

Although we would agree that the only way to properly interpret Scripture is under the guidance of the Holy Spirit (I would say the Holy Spirit is protecting the Magisterium from error) the passage from 2 Peter does not end with, “which is why prophecy of scripture is actually a matter of individual interpretation under the guidance of the Holy Spirit.”

The argument that the sola scriptura can work because the Holy Spirit guides individuals who read the Bible can be refuted by the reality of Protestantism. There are over 25,000 Protestant denominations divided by doctrinal issues. Within those denominations there is sometimes leeway for differing opinions. By the time we get down to a set of people that holds every single doctrinal interpretation in common, we have pretty much found out that about 1 Protestant is guided by the Holy Spirit, and about 1 billion other Protestants are not so guided (because their incorrect interpretations cannot have come from the Holy Spirit). So even if one clings to the principle that an individual can interpret Scripture with divine guidance, there is still no way to tell which one of the myriad interpretations was guided by the Holy Spirit - the claim has no practical application.

 

[bob]

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. (John 20: 31)

Good enough for me! I don’t need traditions and councils and magesterial teachings… I have the WORD OF GOD in my hands. The Word of God is above every single man-made teaching in the whole world and i’m proud to say that IT IS enough.

Sorry, Homer, you do not have ALL the WORD OF GOD in your hands, your have only PARTIAL WORD OF GOD - only what is written. Not good enough!
Anyway even if you have ALL, you still need teacher(s) to understand…

 

[Andreas_Hofer]

Like all these posts right in a row? One last thing and I’ll be silent for a bit.

As has been mentioned, on what basis does a sola scripturist accept the canon of Scripture? The canon was defined by the Catholic Church. Further, even if this canon is accepted by some other means, how does one know that the books have actually been preserved faithfully? After all, the only copies the Reformers had were those that had been transmitted by an institution they claimed was holding the Church in a Babylonian captivity (yes, I know this was just Luther, but it’s a metaphor for the point I’m sure you can see). Later discovery of older manuscripts does not rule out tampering because, as far as I know, even the oldest dates from the 2nd or 3rd century. No one claims to have an original copy of a canonical book. If this Church of Rome were really so error-prone and deceitful, isn’t it reasonable to think it would be malevolent enough to lie to the world about the content of Scripture as well?

 

[Peace-bwu]

SPOKENWORD:

Afterwards, I became like Jesus after I totally submitted myself to the Lord. I thought I was born again as a catholic but all I was, was a partial birth born again catholic. I continued living a non christian life. I smoked ,gambled ,used foul language. I definatly was not Christlike by the way I lived. Sure I went to church every week but that didnt make me a christian. Christianity is about a relationship with our Lord and Savior. Religeon is about man trying to reach God.

Do you blame the problems you had while you wore Catholic on the Catholic Church? Without religion there would be no Bible and we would have a difficult time trying to have a relationship with God without knowing Him… each person would have to start over and it would be much like the Gentiles before Christ… religion was necessary to pass on oral and written tradition. Jesus wants us to be one body in Christ… for you it seems to be just “you and Jesus” We are all connected in the Body of Christ and communion of saints. If you are anti-religion, then I guess you better get rid of the Bible since the Jewish religion passed on the old testament and the catholic Church passed on collected and wrote the New Testament… If you love the Bible is seems a little strange to be against religion.

 

[jimmy]

jmm08:

I’m kind of new still (haven’t started RCIA / RCIC yet). But I’m reading. Isn’t it St. Thomas Aquinas who would first set up and examine the best argument his opponents could possibly think up. And then knock them down with the truth?

I think I had somebody going for a little while (in favor of Sola Scriptura). They liked what I said at first and must have skipped over the rest of what I said.

That is why I was warning the Sola Scriptura crowd to be careful. Because us Catholics can be very very smart and sneaky. They should join us.

I agree, we have the truth to back us up.

 

[jimmy]

stollerusa:

Quote from Dei Verbum:
“Therefore both sacred tradition and Sacred Scripture are to be accepted and venerated with the same sense of loyalty and reverence…”

You being a loyal dedicated Catholic must believe as Dei Verbum has spoken, for such comes from the Belief Set of Catholicism.

I, being a loyal dedicated nonCatholic, do not have the Belief Set of Catholicism - ergo, the Dei Verbum, presently is not part and parcel of the Belief Set coming from a nonCatholic source.

Naturally, as I do my readings, I shall learn more and more of your Faith as well as my own

Roland
AmbassadorMan

Welcome to the board. If you stay on here you should learn alot about the Catholic faith. The people on this board represent some very dedicated and knowledgable Catholics.

 

[The_Dead_Bishop]

Jesus commissioned His Apostles to " teach all nations " whatsoever He had commanded them not to go write a bible for every one to read.