Samson,
“I will establish my Church and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.” Jesus to his Apostles. And who are the successors of the Apostles? Not Luther nor Calvin nor any others who set up on their own with nothing but a Bible and a couple of folding chairs. Jesus didn’t leave all this to chance and just anyone’s interpretation of a book, he gave authority to certain men who ordained men to take their places until the present day. No other eccelsial body except the Orthodox can make the same claim.
Sonofthe,
If no one has any authority any higher than anyone else to interpret Scripture then no one has any at all.
Arguments do not doctrines make. Doctrines are revealed truths, not thelogical constructs that “seem” to make the most sense. God has revealed himself to us in Christ and Christ established his Church on the Apostles and their successors. The NT is nothing more than the written record of some of the Apostles. It nowhere claims to be self-interpreting, but rather just the opposite. Only those with God-given authority may interpret any part of Sacred Tradition, be it the OT, Early Church Fathers, or the Scriptures. Otherwise it’s not a Church, it’s every man for himself.
Is it your assertion that Catholicism is just another “denomination”?
Oh, just tell him that the Catholic Church is not a denomination and that all Protestant churches denominated from the OHCAC. Denomination is a Protestant thing.
Or - if it is just another Christian denomination, then by all means attend our church services this Sunday…Oh, just tell him that the Catholic Church is not a denomination and that all Protestant churches denominated from the OHCAC. Denomination is a Protestant thing.
If, as is often the case Luther gets the blame/credit for sola scriptura, ITSM how SS is practiced by the Lutheran confessions is the official representation.
Would you PLEASE suppy a few examples where Traditions contradict Scripture? OFF hand I can’t think of any?
On the contrary,it begs the question: Why do you cling to a false belief that Christ left denominations and founded them all?
Okay,then whose representation is consistent with SS and obviously who determines what constitutes “proper” representation? You still come back to the same issue: Who has the authority to determine SS as “proper” or “improper” whether official or not.
Sounds like there is more than one acceptable representation, by saying there is no “official” representation, then you say “Any representation” as if there are many?
I’m bias too, I think Catholics have a much easier time, being that they are defending truth, whereas Protestantism by and large, has a much harder undertaking in defending memes!
Marc Ayers is a good start on the Presuppositional side of Catholicism
Perhaps this will help: 1 Timothy 3:15:
Hey, me too, but then again that happens often with Lutherans
Yes and No. When doctrine becomes dogma, it is universal throughout the Church!
Well, when I say that there are different representations, I presupposing that there are different takes on Sola Scriptura that are mutually complmentary just as there are four Gospel accounts.
I’m not sure why you posted this, but I already know material like this exists and I’ve already read through a couple of very relevant and in-depth pages on calledtocommunion.com and have engaged with Catholics a number of times regarding Sola Scriptura. I can appreciate that you posted links if you did it to make sure that I’m aware that RC resources are out there, but I’m more likely to respond to the arguments or claims that are supposed to refute Sola Scriptura if you engage with me more personally with the content to which you are referring me. Even if you are accustomed to quoting others or paraphrasing or condensing what others have said, that’s fine. If I’m not important enough for you to do that, I totally respect that; but I really don’t have time to read every part of every single blog post someone tosses me, especially when I tend to have a hard time seeing how some of the questions or arguments that Catholics present are relevant or cogent -whether that’s my fault or there’s. Thank you.
Well, when I say that there are different representations, I mean that there are different takes on Sola Scriptura that are mutually complmentary just as there are four Gospel accounts.
I’m not sure why you posted this, but I already know material like this exists and I’ve already read through a couple of very relevant and in-depth pages on calledtocommunion.com and have engaged with Catholics a number of times regarding Sola Scriptura. (This is why I say that I haven’t seen a successful refutation). I can appreciate that you posted links if you did it to make sure that I’m aware that RC resources are out there, but I’m more likely to respond to the arguments or claims that are supposed to refute Sola Scriptura if you engage with me more personally with the content to which you are referring me. Even if you are accustomed to quoting others or paraphrasing or condensing what others have said, that’s fine. If I’m not important enough for you to do that, I totally respect that; but I really don’t have time to read every part of every single blog post someone tosses me, especially when I tend to have a hard time seeing how some of the questions or arguments that Catholics present are relevant or cogent -whether that’s my fault or there’s. Thank you.
Sola Scriptura is self-refuting because it is not found in scripture. It doesn’t get any simpler than that, does it?