Please help refute this....Sola scripture vs Roman Catholicism

[stevekehl]

I did read your post. What I’m doing is getting to the heart of the matter and staying on topic. The thread isn’t about OSAS, it’s about SS. You said,

There are LOTS of Christians who believe as you do…that Scripture is the final authority. Of those Christians who believe this, there are 2 opposing views on OSAS (among other doctrines). If Scripture is the final authority, then show me where Scriptures tells us **how to reconcile the opposing views **of OSAS that various Christians believe…those very Christians reliying on SS as the final test for those doctrines.

Let me break this down

1. You brought up OSAS as proof that Scripture can be improperly interpreted. I agree that can happen.
2. I use Scripture to show that OSAS is incorrect (post #715) There are not 2 opposing views.
3. The point I was making was that errors come from a lack of Scriptural study and knowledge. People can teach things out of context and people will follow them because they lack knowledge, Scripture is not to blame.

 

[Porknpie]

Let me break this down

1. You brought up OSAS as proof that Scripture can be improperly interpreted. I agree that can happen.
2. I use Scripture to show that OSAS is incorrect (post #715) There are not 2 opposing views.
3. The point I was making was that errors come from a lack of Scriptural study and knowledge. People can teach things out of context and people will follow them because they lack knowledge, Scripture is not to blame.

Hi Steve,

Catholics (as well as Orthodox) believe in Christ’s real presence in the Eucharist, that we receive his real body and blood at Mass. We believe because scripture is clear in this teaching and the early church believed in it as well. So in reference to your point #3, I agree with you, scripture and tradition are not to blame. People in some cases ignore or dismiss one and/or the other.

 

[ahs]

Let me break this down

1. You brought up OSAS as proof that Scripture can be improperly interpreted. I agree that can happen.

Yes.

1. I use Scripture to show that OSAS is incorrect (post #715) There are not 2 opposing views.

But other Christians will use Scripture (alone) to prove OSAS is correct. They’ll point you to an array of verses that “prove” their point and give you the “proper” context of the conflicting verses so that those no longer conflict. How would you use SS to show then that they are mis-understanding Scripture and that you are correctly understanding it?

1. The point I was making was that errors come from a lack of Scriptural study and knowledge. People can teach things out of context and people will follow them because they lack knowledge, Scripture is not to blame.

I don’t think the errors are from a lack of study and knowledge because the Christians I’ve argued with re: OSAS are very well educated and knowledgable (Doctors in theology, older men who have been studying Scripture since I was in diapers, etc…). What objective criteria do you use to determine whether a person’s knowledge or Scriptural study is lacking? Just that it disagrees with your understanding?

I agree that people will teach out of context. Where does Scripture spell out the proper context? I have not read many verses in Scripture that spell out the proper context under which the respective Scripture is to be understood. Have you?

People will follow erronous teaching for many reasons, lack of knowledge included. But many of these people don’t have a lack of knowledge, they have a faulty sense that the Scriptures can somehow interpret themselves without any (name removed by moderator)ut from the reader. They have a belief that their particular understanding of Scripture is correct and God Inspired and they have no other authority other than their own understanding to guide them.

So, in light of this, how does SS resolve the issue that 2 devout and God-loving Christians can come up with 2 opopsing views of what Scripture is saying…both based on SS…both fully convinced that God is leading them to their respective conclusions, both knowledgable and well-studied in the Scriptures?

 

[CopticChristian]

Let me break this down

1. You brought up OSAS as proof that Scripture can be improperly interpreted. I agree that can happen.
2. I use Scripture to show that OSAS is incorrect (post #715) There are not 2 opposing views.
3. The point I was making was that errors come from a lack of Scriptural study and knowledge. People can teach things out of context and people will follow them because they lack knowledge, Scripture is not to blame.

Steve,

The problem is simple for me. Calvinists/Presbyterians have an opposing view with the Armenians, ie Methodists concerning salvation…Both study Scripture…both believe by the Holy Spirit…are they both correct?

Calvinists/Presbyterian have an opposing view of Soteriology, Postmillineal view vs Dispensationalism…both study Scripture…both believe by the Holy Spirit…are they both correct?

PedoBaptists and CredoBaptists study Scripture…Church of Christ have differing views about Baptism than some Baptists…both study Scripture…both believe by the Holy Spirit…are both correct?

Can you understand why it is a difficult pill to swallow that Scripture is the sole rule for all you need to know…who decides which view is correct?

 

[JonNC]

Steve,

The problem is simple for me. Calvinists/Presbyterians have an opposing view with the Armenians, ie Methodists concerning salvation…Both study Scripture…both believe by the Holy Spirit…are they both correct?

Calvinists/Presbyterian have an opposing view of Soteriology, Postmillineal view vs Dispensationalism…both study Scripture…both believe by the Holy Spirit…are they both correct?

PedoBaptists and CredoBaptists study Scripture…Church of Christ have differing views about Baptism than some Baptists…both study Scripture…both believe by the Holy Spirit…are both correct?

Can you understand why it is a difficult pill to swallow that Scripture is the sole rule for all you need to know…who decides which view is correct?

I suspect it is about as difficult as it is for me determining which view is correct regarding universal jurisdiction between Rome and Orthodoxy. Who decides? The Filioque?
Indulgences? The IC?

It isn’t just SS that plays a part disagreements. Tradition has the same problem.

Jon

 

[CopticChristian]

I suspect it is about as difficult as it is for me determining which view is correct regarding universal jurisdiction between Rome and Orthodoxy. Who decides? The Filioque?
Indulgences? The IC?

It isn’t just SS that plays a part disagreements. Tradition has the same problem.

Jon

JohnNC…I can always count on you…I looked at this earlier…

OHCAC/Oriental Orthodox/Eastern Orthodox accept 7 sacraments…

This is based on Scripture and Tradition…

Neither Oriental Orthodox/Eastern Orhthodox or OHCAC base beliefs on Tradition alone or Scripture alone…

The filioque is a matter for discussion by the leaders of the Orthodox and the OHCAC…not the individual

So in the balance we have Sola Scriptura with a myriad of difficulties defining the Lords Supper, Baptism…2 ordinances…some sacraments…some confessional…not all confessional…with the individual more often than not deciding what is and is not acceptable…with Sola Scriptura

On the other side…no individual decides any of these issues and is subject either to the magesterium or the Patriarchs using Scripture and Tradition.

The balance for clarity weighs on the side of Scripture and Tradition and is out of balance using Scripture alone.

 

[JonNC]

=CopticChristian;9520074]JohnNC…I can always count on you

…I looked at this earlier…

OHCAC/Oriental Orthodox/Eastern Orthodox accept 7 sacraments…

This is based on Scripture and Tradition…

Neither Oriental Orthodox/Eastern Orhthodox or OHCAC base beliefs on Tradition alone or Scripture alone…

The filioque is a matter for discussion by the leaders of the Orthodox and the OHCAC…not the individual

So in the balance we have Sola Scriptura with a myriad of difficulties defining the Lords Supper, Baptism…2 ordinances…some sacraments…some confessional…not all confessional…with the individual more often than not deciding what is and is not acceptable…with Sola Scriptura

On the other side…no individual decides any of these issues and is subject either to the magesterium or the Patriarchs using Scripture and Tradition.

The balance for clarity weighs on the side of Scripture and Tradition and is out of balance using Scripture alone.

The issue is division. Regardless of the amount or types of division. Division is division.
Rest assured, this is a matter for all of us, and I am not singling out the CC.

Jon

 

[CopticChristian]

The issue is division. Regardless of the amount or types of division. Division is division.
Rest assured, this is a matter for all of us, and I am not singling out the CC.

Jon

Jon,

We said our piece and division is division…union is union…unity is unity…and in the broad stroke of the pen…it is a matter for all of us…

 

[Patavium]

Yes, the issue is division, but by division we mean Separation from the Roman Catholic Church, the “mother” of all the other churches (protestantism), and the Orthodox church (schism).

 

[stewstew03]

The issue is division. Regardless of the amount or types of division. Division is division.
Rest assured, this is a matter for all of us, and I am not singling out the CC.

Jon

Jon - if Luther were alive today, do you think he would he re-join the Catholic Church? Perhaps this question is fodder for another thread but since we are discussing division, just thought I’d gather your opinion…

 

[stewstew03]

Let me break this down

1. You brought up OSAS as proof that Scripture can be improperly interpreted. I agree that can happen.
2. I use Scripture to show that OSAS is incorrect (post #715) There are not 2 opposing views.
3. The point I was making was that errors come from a lack of Scriptural study and knowledge. People can teach things out of context and people will follow them because they lack knowledge, Scripture is not to blame.

The issue being drawn out is, Who decides what is “improperly interpreted?” Who decides what qualifies as error vis-a-via truth?

 

[JonNC]

Jon - if Luther were alive today, do you think he would he re-join the Catholic Church? Perhaps this question is fodder for another thread but since we are discussing division, just thought I’d gather your opinion…

I think he’d either find the most traditional Lutheran community, or turn to Orthodoxy. An opinion based on nothing but opinion.

Jon

 

[Porknpie]

I think he’d either find the most traditional Lutheran community, or turn to Orthodoxy. An opinion based on nothing but opinion.

Jon

Jon, did Luther say before his death that the issues he raised would have to be decided at a future church council?

 

[JonNC]

Jon, did Luther say before his death that the issues he raised would have to be decided at a future church council?

I’m not aware of it, but it is entirely possible.

Jon

 

[stevekehl]

But other Christians will use Scripture (alone) to prove OSAS is correct. They’ll point you to an array of verses that “prove” their point and give you the “proper” context of the conflicting verses so that those no longer conflict. How would you use SS to show then that they are mis-understanding Scripture and that you are correctly understanding it?

 

[stevekehl]

The issue being drawn out is, Who decides what is “improperly interpreted?” Who decides what qualifies as error vis-a-via truth?

That is a good question, but there are big errors and small errors. A big error is that Jehovah’s Witnesses teach that Jesus was the physical manifestation of the archangel Michael. Since Michael is the only archangel he is the only begotten son of God, therefor not divine. If you have been a Christian for any length of time the Holy Spirit says in the back of your head something is wrong. If you are well versed in Scripture you can point to Daniel 10:13 where Michael is called one of the chief princes of heaven, so one of many and not the only begotten.
A small errors aren’t really what I would consider errors, like when to take communion. Some say weekly, some monthly, some whenever the Spirit moves them, some only on Passover weekend. Jesus said whenever you do this remember me, in Acts the early church met and broke bread on the first day of the week.
My rule of thumb would be if your church demands its members do something or or believe something that’s not found in Scripture it doesn’t matter if you do it or not.

 

[CopticChristian]

ahs;9518468:

Quite simply they can’t prove it. The Church of Christ has saying Scripture interprets Scripture, I think the CC has a similar teaching, There is a happy agreement in all of Scripture (something like that). Pulling a verse out of Scripture is useful for a Bible study group or a devotion, but it is a poor way develop doctrine. Using OSAS again, Scripture tells us disciples abandoned Jesus(John 6), an apostle betrayed Him (Luke 22, Matt. 26) those who received the gift of the Holy Spirit can lose it (Heb 6). The NT books weren’t written verse by verse, but as letters and documents. We can’t interpret one verse on its own. Take this verse for example
1John 2:27 But Christ has blessed you with the Holy Spirit. Now the Spirit stays in you, and you don’t need any teachers. The Spirit is truthful and teaches you everything. So stay one in your heart with Christ, just as the Spirit has taught you to do.
Ask a priest what that means and get back to me. I’ll do some study and formulate my answer, I think this will be fun.

The dificulty is getting people to look at Scripture objectively and not trying to defend a doctrine they have grown comfortable with. Just because someone has a PhD. or is old doesn’t make them right (who was that guy last year predicting Jesus return, Camping or something). Fear of God is the beginning of knowledge, part of that fear is admitting we may be wrong and are willing to study more and more to either solidify or refute our beliefs.

The context is the entire book which is being studied. Jesus said in John that the Father is greater than the Son and the Son can’t do anything the Father has not told him to do. Jehovah’s Witnesses point to this to deny Christ’s deity, yet the entire book of John point’s to Christ as our God and personal Savior. By reading more than cherry picked verses we see Jesus is talking about His human mission and how it was orchestrated by the Father. Jesus, in His human form is under the Father’s authority.

My first question would be, is the issue critical to salvation? Are they arguing about how often to take communion, should I observe Lent, was Mary sinless, should men have long hair, should women have short hair, did Adam have a belly button, can I watch an R-rated movie? If it’s not critical to salvation it is an opinion and doesn’t matter. If it is critical to salvation then the answer is in Scripture.

Steve,

Scripture tells us that Salvation is through the Church…the mystery hidden for all ages by which Gentiles are made fellow heirs with Christ…and that the Church is the pillar and foundation of Truth and through which the manifold wisdom of God is known…so I guess it would be pretty important to know all about that Church and why you should take communion, why you would want to daily, observing lent, honoring the mother of the head of the Church, and what you should and should not watch…now the hair thing and the belly button may be a Church of Christ thing…but they have only existed a few hundred years…I believe knowing where the way to become a fellow heir with Christ would be pretty important…

 

[stewstew03]

That is a good question, but there are big errors and small errors. A big error is that Jehovah’s Witnesses teach that Jesus was the physical manifestation of the archangel Michael. Since Michael is the only archangel he is the only begotten son of God, therefor not divine. If you have been a Christian for any length of time the Holy Spirit says in the back of your head something is wrong. If you are well versed in Scripture you can point to Daniel 10:13 where Michael is called one of the chief princes of heaven, so one of many and not the only begotten.
A small errors aren’t really what I would consider errors, like when to take communion. Some say weekly, some monthly, some whenever the Spirit moves them, some only on Passover weekend. Jesus said whenever you do this remember me, in Acts the early church met and broke bread on the first day of the week.
My rule of thumb would be if your church demands its members do something or or believe something that’s not found in Scripture it doesn’t matter if you do it or not.

JWs do not believe in a Triune God, and can rely on Scripture to “prove” there is no such doctrine as the Trinity. Aren’t they right?

If not, are they making a “small” error or a “big” error? And does Scripture give us a list of small errors and big errors?

(Post Script: no need to cite verses related to your belief in the Trinity. Let’s stick to the epistemological issue - i.e., how do we know who’s right?)

 

[stewstew03]

I think he’d either find the most traditional Lutheran community, or turn to Orthodoxy. An opinion based on nothing but opinion.

Jon

You don’t think he’d find any room in the Catholic Church?

 

[stewstew03]

Ask a priest what that means and get back to me. I’ll do some study and formulate my answer, I think this will be fun.

Why would he need to ask a priest?

The dificulty is getting people to look at Scripture objectively and not trying to defend a doctrine they have grown comfortable with. Just because someone has a PhD. or is old doesn’t make them right (who was that guy last year predicting Jesus return, Camping or something). Fear of God is the beginning of knowledge, part of that fear is admitting we may be wrong and are willing to study more and more to either solidify or refute our beliefs.

At what point do you stop and say, “okay, I’ve got it all figured out and now I can share my knowledge with others.” Or do you continue to challenge yourself and seek knowledge? Could it be that this discussion about Sola Scriptura is the beginning of your journey toward admitting Sola Scriptura is false…?

My first question would be, is the issue critical to salvation?

I would think the first question would be: Where is this found in Scripture? What does the text say about this issue?