Protestant Theologian Karl Barth on Sola Scriptura

[Son_of_Niall]

I volunteered for them for a long time so I might know what I am talking about

calvinistcorner.com/about.htm

Run by Calvinists who try to stay “neutral”

And if you believe their ‘neutrality’ I have some ocean front property in AZ to sell you.

It’s a personal belief of Matt Slick.
Nevertheless, the 'Statement of Faith" is a typical fundamentalist statement.
CARM is a cesspool of deranged people. The fact that you ‘volunteered’ for them is something I would not brag about.
Lets return to the topic.

 

[Rohzek]

I am blaming our lack of unity.

Those are just two of the more egregious examples, and I’ve added the New Atheists to that list.

What a joke. I suppose ignorance of history is an excuse for ridiculous statements. Carson, if the Catholic Church was so great at protecting the physical security of empires and nations, why then did it severely weaken the Byzantine Empire post-First Crusade? Pope Paschal II commissioned a crusade against Byzantium and Pope Innocent III accidentally launched one against us. I mean, the list can go on and on and on.

This is something I notice about authoritarians: They claim everything would have been okay and good if everyone had just listened to them. It never even occurs to them that maybe they just aren’t relevant to the problems at all. But hey conceit is a funny thing.

 

[Lenten_ashes]

It’s a personal belief of Matt Slick.
Nevertheless, the 'Statement of Faith" is a typical fundamentalist statement.
CARM is a cesspool of deranged people. The fact that you ‘volunteered’ for them is something I would not brag about.
Lets return to the topic.

It’s not only a personal belief of Slick but also many of his cohort, volunteers.

So your statement that they are run by fundamentalists is unequivocally WRONG.

It’s not ‘bragging’ it’s the reality of maybe, just maybe I know those people better than you do.

 

[Son_of_Niall]

It’s not only a personal belief of Slick but also many of his cohort, volunteers.

So your statement that they are run by fundamentalists is unequivocally WRONG.

It’s not ‘bragging’ it’s the reality of maybe, just maybe I know those people better than you do.

You can actually be Calvinist and fundamentalist, you do know that, right?
They ARE fundamentalists, and deranged.

 

[Eric_Hilbert]

The topic please

 

[Lenten_ashes]

You can actually be Calvinist and fundamentalist, you do know that, right?
They ARE fundamentalists, and deranged.

You made a blanket statement. They even have Lutherans on the team there, just FYI.

\

 

[Lenten_ashes]

The topic please

Understood

 

[JonNC]

Carm is run by Calvinists. If you read their Statement of Faith I would dare say most protestants have zero objections to it.

carm.org/statement-faith

Lutherans would have quite a few.

Jon

 

[Randy_Carson]

ISIS is certainly not made up of atheists.

No, it is not.

Do you suppose that atheists and Muslims would be more inclined to respect Christianity if it were not broken up into thousands of competing factions preaching contradictory messages?

 

[JustaServant]

Carm is run by Calvinists. If you read their Statement of Faith I would dare say most protestants have zero objections to it.

carm.org/statement-faith

There’s a (agreeably rather insulting) joke about Reformed (Calvinist) Baptists I heard once from Reformed Baptists themselves:
“A Reformed Baptist is simply a Fundamentalist who has learned how to read”.

The “Statement of Faith” indeed looks very similar to the SOFs I became familiar with in IFB churches, without the section on Election. It does seem odd to include “eternal security” when Calvinists reject that terminology.
CARM is hardly an example of SS Christians. Their various sub-forums for different religions seems designed to TALK ABOUT that religion, not inter-religious dialogue we have here on CAF.

 

[Randy_Carson]

What a joke. I suppose ignorance of history is an excuse for ridiculous statements. Carson, if the Catholic Church was so great at protecting the physical security of empires and nations, why then did it severely weaken the Byzantine Empire post-First Crusade? Pope Paschal II commissioned a crusade against Byzantium and Pope Innocent III accidentally launched one against us. I mean, the list can go on and on and on.

This is something I notice about authoritarians: They claim everything would have been okay and good if everyone had just listened to them. It never even occurs to them that maybe they just aren’t relevant to the problems at all. But hey conceit is a funny thing.

If I were as ignorant of Church history as you think, then I might be guilty of making a ridiculous statement. However, I have done a wee bit of reading about the period in question, and I stand by my previous post.

Moreover, I have done a bit of reading of scripture, also…particularly the part where Jesus specifically says,

John 17:22-23
I have given them the glory that you gave me, that they may be one as we are one— 23 I in them and you in me—so that they may be brought to complete unity. Then the world will know that you sent me and have loved them even as you have loved me.

So, tell me Rohzek: Do we Christians have COMPLETE UNITY? :nope:

And doesn’t Jesus say that this unity was to enable the world to know that Jesus was sent by the Father? :sad_yes:

Do the Muslim terrorists know that Jesus is one with the Father?

Do atheists know that Jesus was sent by God?

Would Christian unity have been a great sign to these unbelievers of the truth?

 

[Randy_Carson]

The topic please

:tiphat:

 

[Son_of_Niall]

If I were as ignorant of Church history as you think, then I might be guilty of making a ridiculous statement. However, I have done a wee bit of reading about the period in question, and I stand by my previous post.

Moreover, I have done a bit of reading of scripture, also…particularly the part where Jesus specifically says,

John 17:22-23
I have given them the glory that you gave me, that they may be one as we are one— 23 I in them and you in me—so that they may be brought to complete unity. Then the world will know that you sent me and have loved them even as you have loved me.

So, tell me Rohzek: Do we Christians have COMPLETE UNITY? :nope:

And doesn’t Jesus say that this unity was to enable the world to know that Jesus was sent by the Father? :sad_yes:

Do the Muslim terrorists know that Jesus is one with the Father?

Do atheists know that Jesus was sent by God?

Would Christian unity have been a great sign to these unbelievers of the truth?

From Society: A Brief Introduction by Ian Robertson:

“The fact that two variables are highly correlated does not prove that one caused the other, or even that they are related in any way at all. In North America for example, there is a high correlation between the sale of ice cream and the incidence of rape, but obviously eating ice cream does not cause rape, nor does rape cause people to eat ice cream. Rather the correlation is explained a third variable that influences the other: the heat of summer. People eat more ice cream when it is hot than in the winter. The rape-ice cream correlation exists, but is a spurious correlation, one that is merely coincidental and does not imply any casual relationship whatever. Spurious correlations which are often not as obvious as this one, present a constant trap for the careless researcher.”

 

[Randy_Carson]

From Society: A Brief Introduction by Ian Robertson:

“The fact that two variables are highly correlated does not prove that one caused the other, or even that they are related in any way at all. In North America for example, there is a high correlation between the sale of ice cream and the incidence of rape, but obviously eating ice cream does not cause rape, nor does rape cause people to eat ice cream. Rather the correlation is explained a third variable that influences the other: the heat of summer. People eat more ice cream when it is hot than in the winter. The rape-ice cream correlation exists, but is a spurious correlation, one that is merely coincidental and does not imply any casual relationship whatever. Spurious correlations which are often not as obvious as this one, present a constant trap for the careless researcher.”

The correlation was given by Jesus.

John 17:22-23
I have given them the glory that you gave me, that they may be one as we are one— 23 I in them and you in me—so that they may be brought to complete unity. Then the world will know that you sent me and have loved them even as you have loved me.

Hope this helps. :tiphat:

 

[JonNC]

No, it is not.

Do you suppose that atheists and Muslims would be more inclined to respect Christianity if it were not broken up into thousands of competing factions preaching contradictory messages?

Honesty? No. Christ told us the world would hate us.

Jon

 

[Lenten_ashes]

There’s a (agreeably rather insulting) joke about Reformed (Calvinist) Baptists I heard once from Reformed Baptists themselves:
“A Reformed Baptist is simply a Fundamentalist who has learned how to read”.

The “Statement of Faith” indeed looks very similar to the SOFs I became familiar with in IFB churches, without the section on Election. It does seem odd to include “eternal security” when Calvinists reject that terminology.
CARM is hardly an example of SS Christians. Their various sub-forums for different religions seems designed to TALK ABOUT that religion, not inter-religious dialogue we have here on CAF.

Slick considers many of those sub forumed churches to be heretical and they are under attack constantly by the Calvinists and others there. And Catholicism is at the top of their hit-list since a few of their team members are former Catholics who think they have seen the light.

The Fundamentalists I knew, real life, not internet people, maybe half of them did not buy into any eternal security. Yet on CARM the the arianism position is like anathema there. They don’t say that on the SOF but it’s reality as it is so far into Calvinism that they cant see past their own doctrine and their “essentials” which Slick seems to have just formulated out of his own mind.

And “where is that found in the bible” is the most common phrase you hear there so yeah, they are SS all day, everyday

 

[Son_of_Niall]

The correlation was given by Jesus.

John 17:22-23
I have given them the glory that you gave me, that they may be one as we are one— 23 I in them and you in me—so that they may be brought to complete unity. Then the world will know that you sent me and have loved them even as you have loved me.

Hope this helps. :tiphat:

No it wasn’t. You’re taking Christ’s words and making it fit your theory.
And we accuse Protestants of ‘private interpretation’?

 

[Lenten_ashes]

Slick considers many of those sub forumed churches to be heretical and they are under attack constantly by the Calvinists and others there. And Catholicism is at the top of their hit-list since a few of their team members are former Catholics who think they have seen the light.

The Fundamentalists I knew, real life, not internet people, maybe half of them did not buy into any eternal security. Yet on CARM the the arianism position is like anathema there. They don’t say that on the SOF but it’s reality as it is so far into Calvinism that they cant see past their own doctrine and their “essentials” which Slick seems to have just formulated out of his own mind.

And “where is that found in the bible” is the most common phrase you hear there so yeah, they are SS all day, everyday

Meant to type arminianism

 

[Topper17]

Hi Pick,

I’ve no wager in this argument )) but it seems to me your logical advance can be halted at the first step. If Jesus, as True God, wanted to be sure that His teachings are recognised as those of the True God He would not have chosen any of the methods you describe, since the world is “in massive confusion” about the very existence of God, or, if He does exist, who He is, or what His teachings are. In short He clearly did not intend to provide us with certainty.

You say that Christ did not intend to provide us with certainty? I disagree. As we know, Christ, the Apostles, the Scriptures and also the Early Church Fathers ALL call us to Unity, including Unity of belief. That Unity means that it is important that we ALL believe the same thing. It is important that NOBODY believe something different. That means that it was extremely important to Christ that we believe His Absolute Truth accurately, that we know and believe exactly what He intends for us to know.

Clearly Sola Scriptura is not at all capable of producing that Unity and rather than certainty, it is only capable of fostering doctrinal confusion. With that doctrinal confusion comes doctrinal apathy. Under the SS paradigm, if we all believe something different, then it must be because Christ either wants it that way or doesn’t really care. An alternate theory of course would be that SS is a heretical belief that Christ never sanctioned.

Given that Christ and the Apostles and Scripture and the Fathers ALL called us to unity of belief, then they ALL must have had some type of ‘system’ in mind that would allow for that unity. Sola Scriptura is clearly not that kind of system.

If the Scriptures and the Fathers had indicated that Christ wasn’t all that ‘concerned’ with what we believe, well – then you might have a point, but the it seems to me that all of them refute your theory.

If there is some other way to see it, I am all ears.

God Bless You Picky, Topper

 

[Picky_Picky]

Hi Pick,

You say that Christ did not intend to provide us with certainty? I disagree. As we know, Christ, the Apostles, the Scriptures and also the Early Church Fathers ALL call us to Unity, including Unity of belief. That Unity means that it is important that we ALL believe the same thing. It is important that NOBODY believe something different. That means that it was extremely important to Christ that we believe His Absolute Truth accurately, that we know and believe exactly what He intends for us to know.

Clearly Sola Scriptura is not at all capable of producing that Unity and rather than certainty, it is only capable of fostering doctrinal confusion. With that doctrinal confusion comes doctrinal apathy. Under the SS paradigm, if we all believe something different, then it must be because Christ either wants it that way or doesn’t really care. An alternate theory of course would be that SS is a heretical belief that Christ never sanctioned.

Given that Christ and the Apostles and Scripture and the Fathers ALL called us to unity of belief, then they ALL must have had some type of ‘system’ in mind that would allow for that unity. Sola Scriptura is clearly not that kind of system.

If the Scriptures and the Fathers had indicated that Christ wasn’t all that ‘concerned’ with what we believe, well – then you might have a point, but the it seems to me that all of them refute your theory.

If there is some other way to see it, I am all ears.

God Bless You Picky, Topper

Hi Topper,

I certainly wasn’t trying to suggest that SS is a proper practice — that’s way outside my area of knowledge. Merely pointing out what I think is a flaw in an argument you were presenting as a logical progression. My point is simply that it is not possible to base an argument on the suggestion that Christ provided us with certainty when in fact uncertainty abounds. No doubt had he, being True God, wanted to make our knowledge certain he could have done so (the usual argument, I think, is that his concern not to counter free will is the reason he didn’t) .