Protestants do not really believe in Sola Scriptura

[justasking4]

PerryJ;4179034]
Originally Posted by justasking4
.
Has the catholic church officially interpreted this passages? If so, what do they say? The point is that you are going to need their official interpretation to determine if the ones I offer are right or wrong.

PerryJ;

I keep seeing your question “has the Catholic Church intepreted this passage?” It appears that you think this is a good point of refutation. It again shows how your define God one line at a time. We first do not defined God. God define himself to us. Second we take the Bible as a whole; which, is how any literate person reads any book.

My point is that the Catholic church alone has claimed to be the only one to be able to interpret Scripture correctly. We know that they have not done much offically in terms of specific verses and passages. Sexondly you have “defined” God by interpreting various passages of Scripture.
Thirdly, even if you do take the Bible as a whole (whatever that means) you must still on your own have your own private interpretations of the Scriptures. Line by line.

If you use this argument in order for us to not use scripture is an illogical argument. Your interpretations are man made as demonstrated by the various Protestant interpretation there are. Yet you would deny us to use scripture. The logic of your argument is very poor.

You also are doing what you accuse Prostestants of doing. Since there is no such thing as an infallible interpretation of the Scriptures in the Catholic church you must form your own “man made” interpretations. There is no way around this for you.
Just ask a number of catholics what a particular passage means and you will get different answers. They will not all be identical.

 

[PerryJ]

My point is that the Catholic church alone has claimed to be the only one to be able to interpret Scripture correctly. We know that they have not done much offically in terms of specific verses and passages. Sexondly you have “defined” God by interpreting various passages of Scripture.
Thirdly, even if you do take the Bible as a whole (whatever that means) you must still on your own have your own private interpretations of the Scriptures. Line by line.

You also are doing what you accuse Prostestants of doing. Since there is no such thing as an infallible interpretation of the Scriptures in the Catholic church you must form your own “man made” interpretations. There is no way around this for you.
Just ask a number of catholics what a particular passage means and you will get different answers. They will not all be identical.

We read and uderstand the Bible within the teachings of the Church.

 

[justasking4]

Kay Cee;4179152]
Originally Posted by justasking4
My belief comes from a lot of study and understanding the nature of the Scriptures.

Kay Cee
Let me get this straight, just so we’re clear. You’re basing the idea that scripture is the sole rule of faith on your own personal study?

Not just this but what others have also concluded.

Not on a revelation from God? You’re basing it on a fallible human being, not on God?

There is no “revelation” from God on this and a number of other things we believe. This would also apply to much of what you believe as a catholic.

You’re not even basing it on what you claim is your sole rule of faith (scripture) but on your own study?

See 1st reponse.

Quote:justasking4
Since you agree that the Scriptures are inspired-inerrant then compare them with what the Catholic church teaches on its various doctrines. Take the marian doctrines. Where we see anything about her immaculate conception in Scripture? Where do we see any claims by her or anyone else that she was without sin? Look up passages and verses in context and see if this is the case or is the church reading back into the passages something that is not there?

Kay Cee
I will not derail this thread with a discussion about other topics. You are always free to open a thread about anything you want and discuss it there.

What i presented with my examples how Sola Scriptura works. The Scriptures don’t claim such things for Mary and so a Sola Scripturaist would reject such claims since they are not grounded in Scripture.

But unless you can show me where scripture claims your idea that scripture is the sole rule of faith, I will have to say you are adding to scripture yourself.

No need to show in the Scriptures themselves that they alone are the sole rule of faith. All that is necessary is to show that the Scriptures themselves are indeed inspired-inerrant. If this is true then we have no higher authortity since they derive their authority from God.

So far what I’ve seen from you is:

1. a claim that if your statement cannot be disproven, it must be true, (which, BTW, is also asking me to prove a negative)

Not so. If there is another authority that is also inspired-inerrant then bring that to the table. I’m claiming there is no such other authority on earth that is inspired-inerrant. If you think there is, what is it?

1. many attempts to shift your burden of proof onto someone else,

True. This is required for those who claim there is another inspired-inerrant authority. I know of none.

1. attempts to change the subject.

False again. I have used examples of how Sola Scriptura works in practice and some take that as changing the subject instead of dealing with it.

What do you think it says to others reading this thread that when I ask you for evidence to back up your statement, all you provide is this? None of these prove your point. I have asked you over and over again for proof. If you cannot provide proof, please have the honesty and integrity to say so.

Are the Scriptures inspired-inerrant? If they are and we agree then we can go on to discuss what this means in terms of authority over other claims.
For example, when Jesus claimed to be speaking for God in John 12:49-50 did His teachings carry more authority than those who were leading at the time?

 

[Kay_Cee]

Not just this but what others have also concluded.

So it’s based on fallible human beings?

There is no “revelation” from God on this and a number of other things we believe. This would also apply to much of what you believe as a catholic.

Thank you for finally conceding the point that there is no revelation from God concerning this.

As for your statement about Catholicism, you would have to prove it, But that is a subject for another thread.

See 1st reponse.

Why should I base my beliefs on your conclusions when you provide no proof whatsoever that those conclusions are true?

What i presented with my examples how Sola Scriptura works. The Scriptures don’t claim such things for Mary and so a Sola Scripturaist would reject such claims since they are not grounded in Scripture.

I take it from this that I should reject your statement about scripture being the sole rule of faith since it is not grounded in scripture.

And, once again, if you want to discuss Mary, open another thread.

No need to show in the Scriptures themselves that they alone are the sole rule of faith. All that is necessary is to show that the Scriptures themselves are indeed inspired-inerrant. If this is true then we have no higher authortity since they derive their authority from God.

:banghead: :banghead: :banghead:

I thought you agreed that inspiration and inerrancy does not = exclusivity.

Not so. If there is another authority that is also inspired-inerrant then bring that to the table. I’m claiming there is no such other authority on earth that is inspired-inerrant. If you think there is, what is it?

I told you to cut it out. I am not going to fall for your attempts to shift your burden of proof onto me.

If you think scripture is the sole inspired, inerrant authority, what is your proof?

True. This is required for those who claim there is another inspired-inerrant authority. I know of none.

Well, at least you admit you’re shifting your burden of proof.

And, just so we’re straight: I’m supposed to accept your conclusions because you, a fallible human being, know of no other authority? In other words, I’m supposed to base my acceptance on your say so?

False again. I have used examples of how Sola Scriptura works in practice and some take that as changing the subject instead of dealing with it.

You are attempting to discuss Catholicism. I would think it is obvious this thread is not about Catholicism at all. It is about Protestants and sola scriptura and your statement that scripture is the sole rule of faith.

Are the Scriptures inspired-inerrant? If they are and we agree then we can go on to discuss what this means in terms of authority over other claims.
For example, when Jesus claimed to be speaking for God in John 12:49-50 did His teachings carry more authority than those who were leading at the time?

I am not going to change the subject. Where is your proof that scripture is the sole rule of faith? This is now the **fifth **time I have asked for it. ***Either provide the proof or be honest enough to admit you can’t. ***

 

[Church_Militant]

My point is that the Catholic church alone has claimed to be the only one to be able to interpret Scripture correctly. We know that they have not done much offically in terms of specific verses and passages. Sexondly you have “defined” God by interpreting various passages of Scripture.
Thirdly, even if you do take the Bible as a whole (whatever that means) you must still on your own have your own private interpretations of the Scriptures. Line by line.

The Catholic Church only defines and defends that which attacked, so, (and rightly) there is no need to do so for every last verse and passage of scripture.

I don’t see why we should be held to an higher standard than Protestants and other n-Cs are when they have not done the same and in fact those that appear to have attempted anything nearly like it have proved grossly wrong so many times.

It’s not a matter of “interpreting” the scriptures for ourselves, since, just as the Church teaches the scriptures most times don’t need very much.

You also are doing what you accuse Prostestants of doing. Since there is no such thing as an infallible interpretation of the Scriptures in the Catholic church you must form your own “man made” interpretations. There is no way around this for you.
Just ask a number of catholics what a particular passage means and you will get different answers. They will not all be identical.

And again, there is room for discussion and in many cases the best answer is that almost all of them have some facet of the truth that can be gleaned from the Word of God.

Still, your allegation is specious since the rank and file faithful Catholic does not set dogma or doctrine. And well they should not…The myriad of errors that have cascaded down from the fundamental error of Sola Scriptura is witness enough of that folly.

 

[justasking4]

Church Militant;4179421]
Originally Posted by justasking4
My point is that the Catholic church alone has claimed to be the only one to be able to interpret Scripture correctly. We know that they have not done much offically in terms of specific verses and passages. Sexondly you have “defined” God by interpreting various passages of Scripture.
Thirdly, even if you do take the Bible as a whole (whatever that means) you must still on your own have your own private interpretations of the Scriptures. Line by line.

Church Militant
The Catholic Church only defines and defends that which attacked, so, (and rightly) there is no need to do so for every last verse and passage of scripture.
Why would you think there is no need to interpret all the Scriptures? Think how it would help so many to have a better understanding of what the Scriptures mean and would also help catholics to avoid errors in interpretations.

I don’t see why we should be held to an higher standard than Protestants and other n-Cs are when they have not done the same and in fact those that appear to have attempted anything nearly like it have proved grossly wrong so many times.

The Catholic church claims to be the only one to be able to interpret the Scriptures correctly. Since they believe they have this God given right it only follows they should be held to a higher standard.

It’s not a matter of “interpreting” the scriptures for ourselves, since, just as the Church teaches the scriptures most times don’t need very much.

Am i to believe that when a priest teaches the Scriptures he is exergeting the passage in terms of what it means in context? Since the mass is where most catholics hear the Scriptures do you think that is enough for catholics to know about the Scriptures?

Quote: justasking4
You also are doing what you accuse Prostestants of doing. Since there is no such thing as an infallible interpretation of the Scriptures in the Catholic church you must form your own “man made” interpretations. There is no way around this for you.
Just ask a number of catholics what a particular passage means and you will get different answers. They will not all be identical.
Church Militant
And again, there is room for discussion and in many cases the best answer is that almost all of them have some facet of the truth that can be gleaned from the Word of God.

Do you include protestants in this discussion?

Still, your allegation is specious since the rank and file faithful Catholic does not set dogma or doctrine. And well they should not…The myriad of errors that have cascaded down from the fundamental error of Sola Scriptura is witness enough of that folly.

i agree the rank and file don’t set dogmas. However, would you not agree that the rank file don’t have a good grasp not only of the Scriptures but of church doctrines and their implications?

 

[Church_Militant]

Why would you think there is no need to interpret all the Scriptures? Think how it would help so many to have a better understanding of what the Scriptures mean and would also help catholics to avoid errors in interpretations.

That’s carnal rationalization. That has not been that much of a problem historically…unlike in Protestantism and it’s modern step children.

The Catholic church claims to be the only one to be able to interpret the Scriptures correctly. Since they believe they have this God given right it only follows they should be held to a higher standard.

In your errant opinion perhaps, but if your modern religion is so highly efficient and we Catholics are so wrong then, by all means, show us the abundance of the truth of your doctrines. Oh wait…it hasn’t worked in 500 years, which is all the history that those errant doctrines have, and no authority has emerged to speak for all of you…so that won’t work either.

Am i to believe that when a priest teaches the Scriptures he is exergeting the passage in terms of what it means in context? Since the mass is where most catholics hear the Scriptures do you think that is enough for catholics to know about the Scriptures?

Irrelevant, but I suggest that we Catholics hear more scripture at Mass than most n-Cs do and (at least in my own experience as late as yesterday’s Mass), I found the exegesis better than any I have experienced in n-C services.

Do you include protestants in this discussion?

Sometimes, but not as something that I seek out. In their case it is more like the adage that “even a stopped clock is right twice a day”.

i agree the rank and file don’t set dogmas. However, would you not agree that the rank file don’t have a good grasp not only of the Scriptures but of church doctrines and their implications?

And supposedly you and similar n-Cs posting here at CAF do? Just based on your posts that I have responded to JA4 I’d say that statement applies more to you than most Catholics.

However, since all Christianity is a learning process, it is specious of you to even bring such up.

Here again…you seek to hold Catholics to a higher standard that not only can you not live up to but no other authority can be appealed to.

Face it JA4, you n-Cs have no authority in your religion. Most of you give lip service to Sola Scriptura, but most of you bandy the term around without a clear definition of what you mean by it and even when one defines it the rest cannot agree upon it.

The New Testament clearly teaches that the scriptures come from the church and that the church is the pillar and foundation of the truth. There is nothing in the Bible that claims sole authority and the sermons and lectures used by various n-C proponents of it are an exercise in mental and doctrinal apologetic gymnastics on a truly Olympic scale, which is why they fail.

All one has to do is wander around this forum here and note the myriad of interpretations that are posted by n-Cs to get a clear picture of why SS is such a fundamental error and epic failure.

 

[KathleenElsie]

Why would you think there is no need to interpret all the Scriptures? Think how it would help so many to have a better understanding of what the Scriptures mean and would also help catholics to avoid errors in interpretations. Interpretation IMHO usually tends to need even more interpretation and clarification as time goes by for those that have no solid tradition to base their faith upon. God’s laws do not change over time with the times. So interpretation of the interpretations of the interpretations just are not necessary in the Catholic Church.

The Catholic church claims to be the only one to be able to interpret the Scriptures correctly. Since they believe they have this God given right it only follows they should be held to a higher standard. The Catholic Church was the means of placing the bible in written form as one book.

Am i to believe that when a priest teaches the Scriptures he is exergeting the passage in terms of what it means in context? Since the mass is where most catholics hear the Scriptures do you think that is enough for catholics to know about the Scriptures? As I personally do not know of one practicing Catholic that does not own a bible, your assumption that Catholics don’t read the bible is probably no more accurate then my opinion that that Catholics do read the Bible.

Do you include protestants in this discussion? We have the original Church to look to for guidance in our studies.

i agree the rank and file don’t set dogmas. However, would you not agree that the rank file don’t have a good grasp not only of the Scriptures but of church doctrines and their implications? Some Catholics do and some don’t, just the same as many who accept the altar call and say the sinners prayer don’t follow through on their public profession of faith. Human beings tend to get lazy in their pursuit of truth.

PAX

 

[larry_m]

To Justasking4. You might want to follow the head banging against the wall & leave it in the hands of the Spirit to convince & convict. Don’t take His job. I gave alot of SS principles in Scripture to My brothers & sisters in here. One by one the Scriptures were thrown out by their interpretation, not what the Scriptures said. In Deut.4:2, Prov.30:6,Rev.22:18, it states to not add or take words from the word given. Protestants & Catholics alike are into the system, what the church says. Read 1Cor.7:19, Gal.2:11-21. Get out of the system & into the Spirit Who leads us into all truth. Does that mean get out of church. NO!! Quit relying on the “church” & stick with what you know is truth, the Scriptures lead us, through the guidance of the Spirit, to all truth as it is in our Savior, which the Scriptures speak. I am sure I will hear from my brothers & sisters from the Catholic faith on what is directed to you. So be it. I will not reply. Already have done what I can do. Now it is up to the Spirit. All I have done is try to lead by Scripture, not the “churches” ideas or mine. There is a great divide in the ideas of how to receive truth. SS only or Scripture, church & tradition, which by the way no one has been able to show what that tradition is spoken about in Scripture. May the Spirit guide us into the Truth as it is in our Savior.

 

[PerryJ]

To Justasking4. You might want to follow the head banging against the wall & leave it in the hands of the Spirit to convince & convict. Don’t take His job. I gave alot of SS principles in Scripture to My brothers & sisters in here. One by one the Scriptures were thrown out by their interpretation, not what the Scriptures said. In Deut.4:2, Prov.30:6,Rev.22:18, it states to not add or take words from the word given. Protestants & Catholics alike are into the system, what the church says. Read 1Cor.7:19, Gal.2:11-21. Get out of the system & into the Spirit Who leads us into all truth. Does that mean get out of church. NO!! Quit relying on the “church” & stick with what you know is truth, the Scriptures lead us, through the guidance of the Spirit, to all truth as it is in our Savior, which the Scriptures speak. I am sure I will hear from my brothers & sisters from the Catholic faith on what is directed to you. So be it. I will not reply. Already have done what I can do. Now it is up to the Spirit. All I have done is try to lead by Scripture, not the “churches” ideas or mine. There is a great divide in the ideas of how to receive truth. SS only or Scripture, church & tradition, which by the way no one has been able to show what that tradition is spoken about in Scripture. May the Spirit guide us into the Truth as it is in our Savior.

I will point out one of the many misunderstandings that Protestants have concerning the Bible. Protestants read the Bible as if it fell to earth, with the pages open, ready for them to read and understand it. I will now show if one reads it without proper context one does not understand the Bible.

Revelation 22 18 - 20 was not part of the original Bible. It was not written by John. It was written in the early 1st or 2nd century and was an addition to the Bible. It was added by an uninspired copyist that was making a copy of John. Why was it added? Because it was common for copyist of books to add, subtract or paraphrase books when rewritting them. This addition is written to the copyist of the Bible not to change the words in John. It has nothing to do with the Bible in total and nothing to do with our faith. These types of statements were in fact common for the age and were written in many books of the time.

Now let us look at your post. Because you did not understand the Bible you added your personal interpetation to it. Something you accuse Catholics of doing. In fact you did it right there in Revelation because you did not understand the Bible.

For one to use the Bible and understand it one has to read it in context! Stop having the Bible follow your personal interpretation.

 

[justasking4]

Church Militant;4179634]
Originally Posted by justasking4
Why would you think there is no need to interpret all the Scriptures? Think how it would help so many to have a better understanding of what the Scriptures mean and would also help catholics to avoid errors in interpretations.

Church Militant
That’s carnal rationalization.
Huh??? The same could be said for you also…

That has not been that much of a problem historically…unlike in Protestantism and it’s modern step children

.
Its a major problem today as more and more catholics interact with others especially Protestants who know the Scriptures and Catholic teachings. Catholics who look for support for their doctrines and practices have nothing to depend on but their “own private interpretations”. Even though you are a priest you have your own private interpretations since your church has never infallibly interpreted the Scriptures.

Quote: justasking4
The Catholic church claims to be the only one to be able to interpret the Scriptures correctly. Since they believe they have this God given right it only follows they should be held to a higher standard.
Church Militant
In your errant opinion perhaps,

Am i wrong in say this?

but if your modern religion is so highly efficient and we Catholics are so wrong then, by all means, show us the abundance of the truth of your doctrines.

There are many places to go for this. Sola Scriptura is one.

Oh wait…it hasn’t worked in 500 years, which is all the history that those errant doctrines have, and no authority has emerged to speak for all of you…so that won’t work either.

Don’t you find it amazing that we believe in the inspiration and inerrancy of Scripture, Christ died for our sins and rose again, and salvation is found in Christ alone to name a few?

Quote: justasking4
Am i to believe that when a priest teaches the Scriptures he is exergeting the passage in terms of what it means in context? Since the mass is where most catholics hear the Scriptures do you think that is enough for catholics to know about the Scriptures?

Church Militant
Irrelevant,

Not so. This is where most catholics learn about the Scriptures and yet are they?

but I suggest that we Catholics hear more scripture at Mass than most n-Cs do and (at least in my own experience as late as yesterday’s Mass), I found the exegesis better than any I have experienced in n-C services.

I suspect you haven’t heard some excellent Protestant pastors exergete the Scriptures. If you are i can direct you to a few podcast if you are interested.

Quote:justasking4
Do you include protestants in this discussion?
Church Militant
Sometimes, but not as something that I seek out. In their case it is more like the adage that “even a stopped clock is right twice a day”.

If you have consulted any who might they be?

Quote:justasking4
i agree the rank and file don’t set dogmas. However, would you not agree that the rank file don’t have a good grasp not only of the Scriptures but of church doctrines and their implications?
Church Militant
And supposedly you and similar n-Cs posting here at CAF do? Just based on your posts that I have responded to JA4 I’d say that statement applies more to you than most Catholics.

What do you think though? Do you think catholics have a good grasp of the Scriptures and church doctrines?

However, since all Christianity is a learning process, it is specious of you to even bring such up.

How is this specious of me if i’m stating something that i observe?

Here again…you seek to hold Catholics to a higher standard that not only can you not live up to but no other authority can be appealed to.

i do hold the Catholic church up to a higher standard because of the claims it makes and attacks it makes on Protestant believers.

Face it JA4, you n-Cs have no authority in your religion. Most of you give lip service to Sola Scriptura, but most of you bandy the term around without a clear definition of what you mean by it and even when one defines it the rest cannot agree upon it.

That may be true of some but not me. I know what Sola Scriptura is and how it works.

The New Testament clearly teaches that the scriptures come from the church and that the church is the pillar and foundation of the truth.

This is not true. Take the OT. That predates the church. Secondly, God is the author of Scripture not the church. You have erred on these 2 points.

There is nothing in the Bible that claims sole authority and the sermons and lectures used by various n-C proponents of it are an exercise in mental and doctrinal apologetic gymnastics on a truly Olympic scale, which is why they fail.

They are not the sole authority perse but they are the sole ultimate authority because they alone are inspired-inerrant. There is no other authority on earth that can make that claim and support it.

All one has to do is wander around this forum here and note the myriad of interpretations that are posted by n-Cs to get a clear picture of why SS is such a fundamental error and epic failure

View attachment 4081

 

[larry_m]

To PerryJ. I said I wouldn’t reply, but with such an unbelievable argument as that I have to say something. First. I keep reading from my Catholic friends that it was the CC that wrote the NT & that it was the CC that decided what was canon. So, if that is the case, which is error, then Rev.22:18-22 was written by the CC & deemed to be canon. Also, those verses agree with what those other verses say. Either agree with what you guys are saying about the CC writing the NT & that the CC decided what was canon, or not. I don’t think that is too much to ask.

 

[mackbrislawn]

Don’t you think catholics are guilty of the same thing?

.

I suppose so, but the point is, Catholics don’t claim to believe in sola scriptura. Hence, they don’t contradict themselves when they follow their pastors and bishops.

 

[guanophore]

Belief in Sola Scriptura is not required to enter heaven.

Whew! I guess there is hope for us poor Catholics after all!

No, I don’t think that is a good example. The Marian doctrines were not derived from the scriptures, so adding or subtracting does not apply. The Marian doctrines were derived from the Sacred Tradition that produced the NT.

.
Has the catholic church officially interpreted this passages? If so, what do they say? The point is that you are going to need their official interpretation to determine if the ones I offer are right or wrong.

No, this is not the case. The Teaching of Jesus preserved and taught by the Apostles is not dependent upon any artificial requirements that you invent. Church Teaching, in fact, by itself clarifies how the scripture is to be understood.

Anyway, since you reject the charism of infallibility, why would matter even if they were made “official”?

You also are doing what you accuse Prostestants of doing. Since there is no such thing as an infallible interpretation of the Scriptures in the Catholic church you must form your own “man made” interpretations. There is no way around this for you.
Just ask a number of catholics what a particular passage means and you will get different answers. They will not all be identical.

This is true. Everyone is free to read and interpret. Catholics have the standard of the infallible Teaching of Jesus, so that if we get out of bounds, it is clear that we have done so.

Not just this but what others have also concluded.

We are in agreement, then, that it is a man-made doctrine.

There is no “revelation” from God on this and a number of other things we believe. This would also apply to much of what you believe as a catholic.

But the Teachings of the Church are clearly revelations from God. There are a number of private deviotionals that are not, yet are believed by Catholics.

No need to show in the Scriptures themselves that they alone are the sole rule of faith. All that is necessary is to show that the Scriptures themselves are indeed inspired-inerrant. If this is true then we have no higher authortity since they derive their authority from God.

Well, the point has been made, and since you keep ignoring it I will make it again, that you have not proven that the scriptures are inspired-inerrant. All you have been able to say is that Catholics and SS agree that they are, which is true, but you have never shown why it is true. You could just as easily pick up a copy of Moby ****, and claim that it is inspired, inerrant.

Not so. If there is another authority that is also inspired-inerrant then bring that to the table. I’m claiming there is no such other authority on earth that is inspired-inerrant. If you think there is, what is it?

off topic. Why are you trying to derail the thread?

True. This is required for those who claim there is another inspired-inerrant authority. I know of none.

The fact that you are unaware of something is not equivalent to that thing not existing.

False again. I have used examples of how Sola Scriptura works in practice and some take that as changing the subject instead of dealing with it.

How you practice the use of this man-made doctrine is not the topic here. The topic is pointing out that SS use doctrine from outside the bible itself.

Are the Scriptures inspired-inerrant? If they are and we agree then we can go on to discuss what this means in terms of authority over other claims.

For the sake of the discussion I will say “no”. Prove to me that they are. I have a Book of Mormon. They are not better.

For example, when Jesus claimed to be speaking for God in John 12:49-50 did His teachings carry more authority than those who were leading at the time?

Indeed, and He passed this authority on to the Apostles, saying “He who hears you, hears me”. " He who rejects you, rejects Me, and He who sent Me." Where does that leave you and SS?

[/QUOTE]

 

[mackbrislawn]

Quote from justasking4:
This is not true. Take the OT. That predates the church. Secondly, God is the author of Scripture not the church. You have erred on these 2 points. Unquote

Response:
Yes, it is true, the OT predates the church. That is, it predates the Christian church. But the OT does not predate the people of God, the congregation of God. The Hebrew people existed for generations without scripture, and it was God’s people that finally produced scripture, beginning with Moses.

So, for both the OT and the NT, God’s people predated scripture. And it was God’s people, His congregation, church if you will, that produced scripture, both for the OT and the NT. Members of God’s congregation authored scripture, under inspiration of the Holy Spirit. It is the church that recognizes scripture as inspired, and recognizes which writings those are.

It must be remembered that there were Christians who lived and died before any Christian scripture was written.

 

[PerryJ]

To PerryJ. I said I wouldn’t reply, but with such an unbelievable argument as that I have to say something. First. I keep reading from my Catholic friends that it was the CC that wrote the NT & that it was the CC that decided what was canon. So, if that is the case, which is error, then Rev.22:18-22 was written by the CC & deemed to be canon. Also, those verses agree with what those other verses say. Either agree with what you guys are saying about the CC writing the NT & that the CC decided what was canon, or not. I don’t think that is too much to ask.

I can agree with the Bible and the Churches interpretation of scripture. My Church defined the Bible and defined its teaching. They are not in conflict. Protestants tend to read the Bible as if it were written to them. They interpret what they want and anyway they want. That is not how the Bible is to be read or interpreted. One has to know who wrote it and in what context. I agree with the teachings of the Church who defined the Bible. Don’t make the Bible fit your own interpretation of scripture. You think this statement is absurd because you read into scripture what you want it to say.

How does Sola Scriptura work with verses that were not in the original Bible. I love the answer that God willed it. As if God forgot something in the first version and had a copyist add it a couple of hundred years later.

Note my post is supported by both an Episcopalian and Baptist scriptural exegesis. This verse was not in the original Bible and was not written by John.

Did you check on your other two verses? Are you trying to learn about Christ or win the discussion? I can point out more scripture verses that are used out of context.

 

[justasking4]

larry m;4179758]To Justasking4. You might want to follow the head banging against the wall & leave it in the hands of the Spirit to convince & convict. Don’t take His job

.
Catholics are worth banging the head against the wall for…
i don’t think that it is worth discussing these things at great lengths if needed. It is true as you say only the Spirit can convict and convince. Our job is to be patient and persistent…

I gave alot of SS principles in Scripture to My brothers & sisters in here. One by one the Scriptures were thrown out by their interpretation, not what the Scriptures said. In Deut.4:2, Prov.30:6,Rev.22:18, it states to not add or take words from the word given. Protestants & Catholics alike are into the system, what the church says. Read 1Cor.7:19, Gal.2:11-21. Get out of the system & into the Spirit Who leads us into all truth. Does that mean get out of church. NO!! Quit relying on the “church” & stick with what you know is truth, the Scriptures lead us, through the guidance of the Spirit, to all truth as it is in our Savior, which the Scriptures speak. I am sure I will hear from my brothers & sisters from the Catholic faith on what is directed to you. So be it. I will not reply. Already have done what I can do. Now it is up to the Spirit. All I have done is try to lead by Scripture, not the “churches” ideas or mine. There is a great divide in the ideas of how to receive truth. SS only or Scripture, church & tradition, which by the way no one has been able to show what that tradition is spoken about in Scripture. May the Spirit guide us into the Truth as it is in our Savior.

Good points. Don’t give up. Who knows how this may impact someone…

 

[guanophore]

Why would you think there is no need to interpret all the Scriptures?

They are 100% consistent with the Teaching of the Church.

Think how it would help so many to have a better understanding of what the Scriptures mean and would also help catholics to avoid errors in interpretations.

It is more important to teach people how to read them correctly. Anyway, the Church has made a number of official teachings on many matters that catholics reject anyway, such as abortion and birth control. What does either of these have to do with SS?

The Catholic church claims to be the only one to be able to interpret the Scriptures correctly. Since they believe they have this God given right it only follows they should be held to a higher standard.

I agree, but what does that have to do with the topic?

Am i to believe that when a priest teaches the Scriptures he is exergeting the passage in terms of what it means in context? Since the mass is where most catholics hear the Scriptures do you think that is enough for catholics to know about the Scriptures?

No. but what has this to do with the topic?

Do you include protestants in this discussion?

The discussion should be about the fact that SS is not in the Bible.

i agree the rank and file don’t set dogmas. However, would you not agree that the rank file don’t have a good grasp not only of the Scriptures but of church doctrines and their implications?

Many of them do not. What does that have to do with the topic?

I think you are dodging.

 

[guanophore]

Catholics who look for support for their doctrines and practices have nothing to depend on but their “own private interpretations”. Even though you are a priest you have your own private interpretations since your church has never infallibly interpreted the Scriptures.

This is more calumny and detraction by ja4. Catholics can depend entirely upon the Teaching of Jesus, found in scripture, and in the Teachings of the Church He founded, and of which he is the Head. This teaching is infallible, and completely reliable.

Am i wrong in say this?

Yes, because it is a lie, and bearing false witness is a sin.

Don’t you find it amazing that we believe in the inspiration and inerrancy of Scripture,

Still waiting for that proof of this claim that the Bible is inerrant and inspired…

Do you think catholics have a good grasp of the Scriptures and church doctrines?

Off topic ja4. You said you base your SS on the “nature” of the Scriptures. Prove their nature.

i do hold the Catholic church up to a higher standard because of the claims it makes and attacks it makes on Protestant believers.

I agree that the Catholic Church must be held to a higher standard. However, the Church does not attack protestants. The Church speaks out against heresies. That is her job.

That may be true of some but not me. I know what Sola Scriptura is and how it works.

Then you should have no trouble proving the infallible and inerrant nature of the scriptures.

 

[justasking4]

They are 100% consistent with the Teaching of the Church.

It is more important to teach people how to read them correctly. Anyway, the Church has made a number of official teachings on many matters that catholics reject anyway, such as abortion and birth control. What does either of these have to do with SS?

I agree, but what does that have to do with the topic?

No. but what has this to do with the topic?

The discussion should be about the fact that SS is not in the Bible.

Many of them do not. What does that have to do with the topic?

I think you are dodging.

I know you don’t like the word “context” but if you understood what it means you would see how it applies to the discussion. Keep in mind that these are some kind of professional debates where it is mandated to stay very specific on the topic. There is a lot of leeway on the threads that i’m on.

If you have any other questions feel free to ask–View attachment 4085