Need help answering a Baptist

  • Thread starter Thread starter alitaptap
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Bookcat said:
The question is what did Jesus intend? What did he do?

Jesus founded a Church which yes has authority from him. Nowhere does one find him teaching sola scriptura. But yes one does find him founding a Church.

Did people disagree with the Church? Sure it happens. Not good but it happens. Did differing groups found their own communities around doctrines of their own? yes the early centuries is full of various heretical groups …say denying the Divinity of Christ etc.

Did those differing groups use the Sacred Scriptures to claim that their doctrines where correct? Yes. Where they correct? No.

Was it the idea of Jesus that people just go the Bible and take that alone as their way? One does not find any such idea. Rather one finds that he founded a Church. A Church that loves the Sacred Scriptures.
Click to expand...
My church loves the sacred scripture; therefore, according to what you say, my church must be the church Jesus founded.
 
William_C said:
The discussion is about Sola Scriptura. The discussion is not about the point of the reformation.
Click to expand...
Without the reformation there is no sola scriptura. It is the child of the thinkers of the reformation.
 
MaryBernard said:
I’m even more confused now.
Click to expand...
What does your confusion have to do with this? Give me a break.
40.png
MaryBernard:
Most sola scripturists believe that this doctrine was embraced by the early church. Are you saying that it was not?
Click to expand...
Well there are certainly quotes to that effect, yes.

Do you want to engage in dueling ECF quotes? I prefer not to. 🙂

I believe that Sola Scriptura is a very logical doctrine reasoned from Scripture. You don’t.
 
Bookcat said:
I suggest a re-reading of the post. Such was not what was said.
Click to expand...
You said Christ founded a church, and I carefully read your post looking for the what it is that identified that church Jesus founded. In your post, the indentifying factor of the church Jesus founded is, it is “a church that loves the sacred scriptures.” 🤷
 
William_C said:
I believe that Sola Scriptura is a very logical doctrine reasoned from Scripture. You don’t.
Click to expand...
Such honestly would be claiming to reason a doctrine from Sacred Scripture that is not present in Sacred Scripture. And which is actually contrary to what is present in Sacred Scripture.

Where did you get the Scriptures your reasoning this doctrine from? Where did you get say the New Testament? How do you know it is the Scriptures?
 
Bookcat said:
Without the reformation there is no sola scriptura. It is the child of the thinkers of the reformation.
Click to expand...
Really? In your response to me you said:
Originally Posted by Bookcat
And nothing there (or in any verse in the Bible) is about Sola Scriptura.
Click to expand...
So what you’re telling me, you had to APPLY sola scriptura in order to prove that sola scriptura is not in the Bible. 👍
 
The problems with Sola Scriptura

  1. *]Not practical since not everyone can read
    *]Not practical since not everyone can understand it.
    *]Not even recorded as being practiced in the NT by Christ or the Apostles since both used oral traditions regarding OT events that were not recorded in the OT.
    *]Not historically acurrate since God’s Word was and still is communicated by the Church and the authority she was given to preach to all nations. A mission being done in the early Church before the NT books were even written and even after they were writen since Bibles weren’t common household books like they are now.
    *]A protestant in this very thread openly admitted that Sola Scriptura didn’t exist in the early Church but that it was an invention or “reformed doctrine” which of course didn’t exist until the reformation 1600.
    *]It leads to disunity since without the Church there is no real authority to settle matters of faith.
    *]The Bible cannot give authority to itself.
    *]The Bible without the authority of the Church can’t even be said to be complete.
    *]Not mentioned by ECF’s
    *]The Scriptures themselves praise the Church as being the pillar of Truth.
 
William_C said:
You said Christ founded a church, and I carefully read your post looking for the what it is that identified that church Jesus founded. In your post, the indentifying factor of the church Jesus founded is, it is “a church that loves the sacred scriptures.” 🤷
Click to expand...
Bookcat said:
The question is what did Jesus intend? What did he do?

Jesus founded a Church which yes has authority from him. Nowhere does one find him teaching sola scriptura. But yes one does find him founding a Church.

Did people disagree with the Church? Sure it happens. Not good but it happens. Did differing groups found their own communities around doctrines of their own? yes the early centuries is full of various heretical groups …say denying the Divinity of Christ etc.

Did those differing groups use the Sacred Scriptures to claim that their doctrines where correct? Yes. Where they correct? No.

Was it the idea of Jesus that people just go the Bible and take that alone as their way? One does not find any such idea. Rather one finds that he founded a Church. He formed a Church – a people and gave authority to certain men to teach and bind and loose within that Church. He gathered around him a Church. A Church that loves the Sacred Scriptures.
Click to expand...
Such would be a Church that was around in the first century one that goes all the way back to Jesus himself.

The “A Church that loves the Sacred Scriptures” was not some single identifying mark. The heretical groups that denied the Divinity of Christ can be said to have loved Scripture.

Like if I said – I married my wife and we had a son. That son is the one who will inherit all that we have. A son who loves playing with toy airplanes.

The another child is “a son” of someone and the fact that that child is “a son that loves to play with toy airplanes” does not mean that that son will inherit all that I have.

A son who loves playing with toy airplanes is a further waxing on the loves of my son not on how to identify him.
 
Bookcat said:
Such honestly would be claiming to reason a doctrine from Sacred Scripture that is not present in Sacred Scripture. And which is actually contrary to what is present in Sacred Scripture.
Click to expand...
Stop it, will you. Protestants aren’t stupid.

SS is a logical, reasoned-from-scripture position.
40.png
Bookcat:
Where did you get the Scriptures your reasoning this doctrine from? Where did you get say the New Testament? How do you know it is the Scriptures?
Click to expand...
I don’t have the ambition to go into a long explanation for you.

Catholics seem to enjoy providing links that appeal to the writings of others to explain their doctrines.

Hopefully, you also enjoy reading the links of others. Let me give one: Sola Scriptura.
 
Bookcat said:
Such would be a Church that was around in the first century one that goes all the way back to Jesus himself.

The “A Church that loves the Sacred Scriptures” was not some single identifying mark. The heretical groups that denied the Divinity of Christ can be said to have loved Scripture.

Like if I said – I married my wife and we had a son. That son is the one who will inherit all that we have. A son who loves playing with toy airplanes.

The another child is “a son” of someone and the fact that that child is “a son that loves to play with toy airplanes” does not mean that that son will inherit all that I have.

A son who loves playing with toy airplanes is a further waxing on the loves of my son not on how to identify him.
Click to expand...
You’re reasoning in a circle AFAIC.
 
William_C said:
Stop it, will you. Protestants aren’t stupid.

]
Click to expand...
I did not say they where stupid.

A person can be “not stupid” and still be quite wrong. So can whole groups. There are some intelligent atheists out there who certainly are not stupid but certainly are quite wrong.

Still waiting for answers to my above posted questions.
 
William_C said:
You’re reasoning in a circle AFAIC.
Click to expand...
Actually no. I was seeking to show that your reading of what I noted in my post was not correct. I was not saying that the Church is the Church that Jesus founded because she loves Sacred Scripture. Anymore than someone who is a “son” who loves toy planes will inherit all my stuff due to his love of air planes.
 
I was thinking about the phrase the other day “I believe what the Bible says”

The Bible says…Thou shalt not kill.

Where does abortion fit in with this? This question will be answered differently by CHRISTIANS let alone by people in general. I remember reading that Bill Clinton asked his pastor about the issue of abortion and the pastor told him that Adam was not alive until God breathed life into him, so a baby is not alive until he takes his first breath.

Who has the authority to distinguish in this case? If there is no authority then there is no right answer (or at least not one that we can figure out).
 
Micah11 said:
Really? In your response to me you said:

So what you’re telling me, you had to APPLY sola scriptura in order to prove that sola scriptura is not in the Bible. 👍
Click to expand...
The point actually is that since “Sola Scriptura” is not found anywhere in the Scriptura --according to the idea of “Sola Scriptura” then it has to be rejected.

I do not believe Sola Scriptura. But one who does is faced with the difficulty that it refutes itself.

Similar to those moral relativists who say “there is no absolute truth” have to face difficulty that such is said “as an absolute truth” thus it is self -refuting.
 
William_C said:
You’re reasoning in a circle AFAIC.
Click to expand...
Huh? The point in the second post was that you misread my first one-- that I was not saying that the Church is the Church that Jesus founded “because” she loves the Bible. As you correctly noted such can be said of many. Just like a “son” who loves airplanes is not my heir “because” he love airplanes.
 
Micah11 said:
Really? In your response to me you said:

So what you’re telling me, you had to APPLY sola scriptura in order to prove that sola scriptura is not in the Bible. 👍
Click to expand...
The point actually is that since “Sola Scriptura” is not found anywhere in the Scriptura --according to the idea of “Sola Scriptura” then it has to be rejected.

I do not believe Sola Scriptura. But one who does is faced with the difficulty that it refutes itself.

Similar to those moral relativists who say “there is no absolute truth” have to face difficulty that such is said “as an absolute truth” thus it is self -refuting.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top