S
Stephen_C
Guest
Well that is not quite true. I would say the Catholic Church which guided by the Holy Spirit compliled the bible is the sole “interpreter” of our bible. After all it is a Catholic book.
- Status
A
AAC08
Guest
Maybe we should first get rid of our confusion regarding the first transmission of the scriptures.Well that is not quite true. I would say the Catholic Church which guided by the Holy Spirit compliled the bible is the sole “interpreter” of our bible. After all it is a Catholic book.
We agree that the scriptures were transmitted progressively over a period of 1400 years and God inspired 40 different men to write His Word. While it was being transmitted to men, there were lots of intstances of DIRECT REVELATION, appeal to traditions, dreams, visions, angels, etc.
We should agree that when all of these revelations, oral traditions, dreams, and visions were put into written form, the work of INSPIRATION STOPPED.
THUS, all present appeals to revelations, oral traditions, dreams and visions should STOP, and only appeals to SCRIPTURE should be given weight when referring to the REVEALED WILL OF GOD.
P
Pixie_Dust
Guest
Chapter and verse where I can find this in Scripture, please.
A
AAC08
Guest
1Co 2:14 But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.
1Co 2:15 But he that is spiritual judgeth all things, yet he himself is judged of no man.
1Co 2:16 For who hath known the mind of the Lord, that he may instruct him? But we have the mind of Christ
P
Pixie_Dust
Guest
Amen!
Love those passages of Scripture, and I agree with them 100%! However, that’s not what I asked for. I am looking for the verse that says, “when all of these revelations, oral traditions, dreams, and visions were put into written form, the work of INSPIRATION STOPPED.” please.
A
AAC08
Guest
1Co 13:8 Charity never faileth: but whether there be prophecies, they shall fail; whether there be tongues, they shall cease; whether there be knowledge, it shall vanish away.Amen!
1Co 13:9 For we know in part, and we prophesy in part.
1Co 13:10 But when that which is perfect is come, then that which is in part shall be done away.
WHAT IS THE PERFECT (INFALLIBLE) that has already come that used to be incomplete before it was perfected (completed) at the time of the Apostles?
THE BIBLE
What shall cease as an everyday occurence to the churches as gifts of the Spirit?
**PROPHECIES (direct infallible revelations)
TONGUES (direct preaching using an unlearned language)
KNOWLEDGE (direct judgment if something revealed is really from GOD)**
T
Teflon93
Guest
And what evidence do you have that this stopped? It is a curious thing, given how many Protestants claim to be receiving direct revelations from the Holy Spirit any given Sunday. Why, I have a number of friends who swear that God’s revelation even extends to what job they take or what charities they give to.
Evidence, please.
(And please note that the second quote may be misattributed to me—the first is mine).
T
Teflon93
Guest
These seem random to me. Please provide the verses which say that revelation and inspiration stopped. Something along the lines of “This is the final book of the Bible” would suffice.
T
teachccd
Guest
the Book of Mormon claims inspiration. Should I go there??
T
Teflon93
Guest
Why not?the Book of Mormon claims inspiration. Should I go there??
Anyone can claim inspiration, of course, which is why Magisterium and Tradition are so important in discernment of dogma and why these are two pillars of Christ’s Church, Scripture being significantly the product of these.
Mormons, lacking these, have an uphill battle.
For Protestants, it’s even worse—they have to simultaneously maintain that Scripture is all that matters, while claiming the Holy Spirit guides everbody in its interpretation and that that very notion is not a Tradition.
Add to that the fact that Scripture neither interprets nor defines Scripture, but requires external editing and interpretation (not to mention translation, which anyone who knows more than one language realizes IS interpretation), and you’ve got one great big Gordian Knot of cognitive dissonance, the only sword able to cut through it all being the Truth of the Church.
It is simply folly to bar the door on God. He reveals what He will, when He will, and until He says He’s done, I presume He’s not. Given that we never seem to get any evidence from our brothers and sisters that God’s through revealing truths to us, I can only deem the Church’s position to be more reasonable and prudent—keep manning the wireless and wait for transmissions.
P
Pixie_Dust
Guest
So now that we have a Bible, we have no way of knowing if it is really from God? Interesting eisegesis.
T
Teflon93
Guest
Did I miss something there? Paul couldn’t have been referencing the Bible in Corinthians since the New Testament hadn’t been written by then, correct? Obviously, the New Testament includes Corinthians, creating a paradox.
The perfect refers to Christ here, doesn’t it?
I may be mistaken, but I’ve never heard of the notion that Paul was referencing the Bible.
P
Pixie_Dust
Guest
Yes, I believe it refers to Christ. I’ve only heard the interpretation of “that which is perfect” being the Bible one other time and it really doesn’t fit the context at all and is a classic example of eisegesis - forcing one’s interpretation into the text to make it say something it doesn’t say at all.
T
Teflon93
Guest
Agreed. Do you happen to recall the pedigree of this interpretation? It sounds fundamentalist or maybe Calvinist to me.
P
Pixie_Dust
Guest
Good call! The first time I heard it was from an I/F Baptist.
T
Thing
Guest
Still confused here. Many individual things were written [scripture] but not all that was written has been transmitted to us as Sacred Scripture.
You have already said that you don’t trust the Christians who wrote and selected the Sacred Scriptures.
-So, I’m wondering how Scripture interprets Scripture if you cast doubt on the validity of the Sacred Scriptures.
-Also how does the Holy Spirit guide you personally in an infallible way, but He could not guide the first Christians reliably.
M
mozart-250
Guest
Just to comment that all Pentecostal churches as well as a large number of non-Pentecostal evangelical churches disagree with this statement here.
Somehow the reader of Scripture reading 1 Cor. 13:10 must make a leap from “But when that which is perfect is come, then that which is in part shall be done away.” to “Gifts of the Holy Spirit ceased when the Bible was canonized”. This really seems like forcing the Bible to fit with your preconceived notions (I really think that Paul was referring to Christ here).
Since I have criticized Catholics for making the leap “Hail Mary Full of Grace” to “Mary was conceived without original sin and never committed one sin in her entire lifetime”, in the interest of fairness, I should criticize non-Catholics when they engage in similar creative interpretations of Scripture.
C
Church_Militant
Guest
This may be your opinion, but the fact is that as I have shown so far you have failed to offer a conclusive and convincing case. Personally I am always open to the truth and will follow it regardless of where it leads. That is one reason that I am Catholic to begin with.
Here again…you make a rhetorical statement as if it is fact when in fact you have failed to present evidence in support of your position.
I might point out that it appears to be you that has entered this discussion and debate with your mind made up and (as I pointed out above) offered not scripture in support of your beliefs but scriptural interpretations of men that contradict or exceed what is written. Isn’t that something that scripture itself condemns in 1st Corinthians 4:6?
I have seen no such abuse as you infer.
Then perhaps you need to obey the scriptures and “Carefully study to present thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly handling the word of truth.” (2nd Timothy 2:15)
In all faith sharing we are faced with a commitment of time, talents and treasure. If one is unwilling to commit then perhaps should reconsider the effort and their knowledge of the Christian faith.
So then this is your personal definition of SS? Again, I point out that even by your own definition the very doctrine of Sola Scriptura is error, since the Bible nowhere teaches it. Men teach it as their interpretation of some scriptures, but it is not supported by a simple objective reading of the New Testament and did not exist in Christian teaching prior to the so called reformation. I urge you to study Christian historical teachings and the New Testament and see for yourself and make your own decision.
I have yet to find any of that therefore there is no reason to drop anything but Sola Scriptura and all the other errant teachings that have cascaded down from it since it’s invention.
Here you condemn the reformers and all their modern doctrinal step children, because they do precisely this.
with the guidance of the HOLY SPIRIT and no group of human beings may deem themselves as having this sole authority today.Can you show me where this is stated in the Word of God, because I have looked diligently and have yet to find it.
This fallacy becomes more glaringly obvious when one notes that even the proponents of it confound themselves because they are far from universal as to their doctrines and practices, (again) because so many either contradict the Word of God, or simply contradict the teachings of other preachers, teachers, and the myriad of denominations (and “non-denominations”) that have sprung up within the last 500 years or so. If they were all led by the Holy Spirit as your doctrine specifies, then wouldn’t they all be in uniform agreement not only with each other, but with the historically verifiable writings of the early church as well?
And yet they are not…
T
Teflon93
Guest
As for Scripture interpreting Scripture, we had a thread awhile back attempting to do just that with John 6:53. I could get precisely one Protestant—SyCarl—to even make an attempt at interpreting this passage via Scripture alone (no additional words were allowed, only passages of Scripture).
You would not believe the brouhaha this caused or the unwillingness of many folks who claim that Scripture is the sole interpreter of Scripture to even try to put that claim to the test in convincing fashion.
Needless to say, the experiment didn’t turn out so well. It was illuminating on the one hand because I as a Catholic uncovered so many more passages in support of the Catholic teaching on the Eucharist and especially emerged with additional understanding of why the apostles who left were so angry with Jesus; on the other hand the technique exposed the danger that people simply ignore relevant passages and cherrypick the Bible for only those which support their preconceived position, itself inherited from men.
I encourage anyone to try to recreate the experiment, which was fascinating if frustrating in the end.
You would not believe the brouhaha this caused or the unwillingness of many folks who claim that Scripture is the sole interpreter of Scripture to even try to put that claim to the test in convincing fashion.
Needless to say, the experiment didn’t turn out so well. It was illuminating on the one hand because I as a Catholic uncovered so many more passages in support of the Catholic teaching on the Eucharist and especially emerged with additional understanding of why the apostles who left were so angry with Jesus; on the other hand the technique exposed the danger that people simply ignore relevant passages and cherrypick the Bible for only those which support their preconceived position, itself inherited from men.
I encourage anyone to try to recreate the experiment, which was fascinating if frustrating in the end.
- Status