Listen closely now and try to answer this. If no one can know what books are Scripture without an external authority made up of living men to give them infallible certainty of what books those were, then [pay attention now] ***why did Jesus hold men accountable during His own lifetime for knowing what books were in the Old Testament? There was no infallible authority to tell them what books were Scripture and yet, for some unknown reason, Jesus expected them to know not only what books were Scripture, but also the proper interpretation. *****If you, Mr. Boule Theou don’t even have an authority to decide which Books are to be in the Bible, who are you to make “a circular argument” that you know which books belong and which do not belong? If you cannot resolve that then you cannot get out of the starting blocks. **
Sorry I intended to say “harden his heart”. My prayer is still the same, however.RBushlow -
I wasn’t aware that one could harden their hard. But apparently, I’ve done so and didn’t know it
Peace be with you.J -
I have no desire to read the meanderings of Dave Armstrong or James Akin. Just give me a simple answer to my questions.
Thanks,
Listen closely now and try to answer this. If no one can know what books are Scripture without an external authority made up of living men to give them infallible certainty of what books those were, then [pay attention now] ***why did Jesus hold men accountable during His own lifetime for knowing what books were in the Old Testament? There was no infallible authority to tell them what books were Scripture and yet, for some unknown reason, Jesus expected them to know not only what books were Scripture, but also the proper interpretation. ***exporter -
I’ll ignore most of you post as it is not worthy of comment.
What you are asking is impossible to answer. The reasons the books of the Old Testament were determined to be inspired have been lost to the ages. We have to assume that the writings the Jewish faith have given to us are inspired, and we can take comfort from the fact that Jesus referred to them throughout his ministry.Listen closely now and try to answer this. If no one can know what books are Scripture without an external authority made up of living men to give them infallible certainty of what books those were, then [pay attention now] ***why did Jesus hold men accountable during His own lifetime for knowing what books were in the Old Testament? There was no infallible authority to tell them what books were Scripture and yet, for some unknown reason, Jesus expected them to know not only what books were Scripture, but also the proper interpretation. ***
Ahhh. I don’t recall you saying before that you did not determine for yourself what is to be included in the Bible (if you did, I missed it). All this while, I’ve been of the understanding that you are arguing we all, as individuals, have the ability and even the obligation to determine for ourselves what is and what is not Scripture.I did not determine for myself what books are Scripture. I acknowledge the same books that were received by God’s people in the past as Scripture. Just as this was done apart from the existence of or pronouncements of or determinations of some infallible institution in the Old Testament, the same was done in the New Testament.
The difference is big, Boule. First of all, the Catholic perspective doesn’t rule out the possibility that good Christians will disagree…as is verified by the facts you presented. This is why we need the Church to guide us. Whereas your theory, if it were true, **rules out the possibility of disagreement ** (which thereby proves your theory false).The same way you account for Catholics disagreeing over the proper interpretation of Vatican 2. People have their own sins and precommittments which color their reading of the texts. Read this debate and then tell me that the Magisterium clarifies things:
Where’s the agreement there? How do you account for Catholics disagreeing with you about the interpretation of Vatican 2’s pronouncements?
BouleTheou
He did not say all tradition. Only those tradition that were not of God.moira -
Indeed, they did, and Jesus rebuked them for it because it nullified the Word of God. Mark 7, Matthew 15.
BouleTheou
Exactly. For that matter, there is no way that one could have discerned the interpretation of the passages that Christ interpreted based on the “perspicuous meaning” of those passages, as would be required for them to provide a justification of sola scriptura. These issues have been raised to BouleTheou on several occasions, and he blithely ignores them and continues to build his case upon the unwarranted assertion that Jesus held men accountable to the perspicuous meaning of of Scripture in the manner of sola scriptura. It is telling that while the Catholics have offered a reasoned defense of our position, BouleTheou’s Protestantism appears to depend on saying something so many times that you start believing it’s true.He listed Matthew 12:3, 12:5, 21:16 and 21:42. In the first two, he is addressing the Pharisees. In the third, the chief priests and scribes. In the fourth, the chief priests and elders. He knows all have read the Scriptures. That is their job. All have challenged him. When Jesus asks them “Have you never read the Scriptures” or “Have you never read the texts?” it is a sharp rebuke. It is like asking a quarterback after four interceptions, “Have you never read the playbook?” These men have applied their learning incorrectly. In each case, Christ is correcting them and their interpretation.
Bible Private Interpretation, **Will you read St. Peter,Luke & Paul? **Will you IGNORE these Apostles?
There are many Bible verses which tell us that individual interpretation of the Bible simply cannot be done without divine assistance…
***Luke 24:45, “Then He opened their minds, that they might understand the Scriptures.” ***
******So it took Jesus Christ to open the minds of the Apostles so that they could teach others in the truth.
Do you believe likewise that Jesus Christ opened the minds of each of the leaders of all those 28,000 protestant churches? If so, why is there so much disagreement between them?
***Acts 8:27-40, the eunuch was trying to read Isaiah when Philip asked him, “Do you understand what you are reading?” But he said, “Why, how can I, unless someone shows me?” ***
******Since Philip had been filled by the Holy Spirit in Acts 2:4, he was able to explain the truth of Isaiah to the eunuch.
***2Pet 1:20, St. Peter said, ******“This then you must understand first of all, that NO PROPHECY OF SCRIPTURE IS MADE BY PRIVATE INTERPRETATION.” ***I do not see how Peter could have said it any plainer than he did here. Why do Protestants ignore verses such as this one?
***2Pet 3:16-17, St. Peter said, ***"…In these Epistles there are certain things difficult to understand, WHICH THE UNLEARNED AND UNSTABLE DISTORT, JUST AS THEY DO THE REST OF THE SCRIPTURES ALSO, TO THEIR OWN DESTRUCTION. YOU THEREFORE, BRETHREN, SINCE YOU KNOW THIS BEFOREHAND, BE ON YOUR GUARD LEST, CARRIED AWAY BY THE ERROR OF THE FOOLISH, YOU FALL AWAY FROM YOUR STEADFASTNESS."
******Here is a very clear warning that it is easy to fall into error by private interpretation of Scripture.
Boule Theole, read 2Pet 1:20. What dont you understand about that simple verse? Please show me how you can distort that.
**
Boule,Matthew -
What she teaches is a whole different story. The papacy, purgatory, the catholic priesthood, the mass, indulgences, all the Marian dogmas, the catholic concept of justification, scapulars, rosaries, magic medals, etc have absolutely, positively no basis in special revelation (i.e. Scripture) whatsoever.
BouleTheou