Exactly. There was no such thing. Jamnia was a school of “Halakha”, or Jewish law and had no authority to decide anything. The whole thing was nothing more than a theory which has since been put to rest.
Don’t you mean that it has to cohere with someone’s interpretation of Genesis, Isaiah, Mark and 1 Peter? And to whom would you direct us for the correct interpretation?
Because the Bible simply cannot be an “authority”. It is a collection of books. The book cannot interpret itself. If it could, as I have said, there could be no disagreement.
That is not what SS is. SS does not do away with foundation we are put upon. It merely says foundation is is judged by His word, especially after it is written. SS does not do away with apostles, the writers, the receivers and preservers of His written word. SS is a term coined after scripture was written and preserved. It does not mean because the church and tradition came first they are authoratative over scripture. For most of CC history she says she is restrained by scripture also.
.No, a fallible church (maybe in an fallible way) gave us an infallible book. Something like that.That way God gets all the glory, and utter dependence on Him is essential for any kind of perfection.
Yes, divinely written, divinely received, divinely understood and preserved, within the Body, the Church, first known as “Christian”, then people of the Way, and then known as “catholic”, then Catholic, branching to Othodoxy, and finally Protestantism, all the Body of Christ
That is right. We weren’t there. Faith has a role, yet with good logic and reason and evidences. Faith was there at all stages of development and reception of sacred writings. The same Spirit that bore witness to them bears witness to us also on this matter.
… which means it probably shouldn’t be called Sola Scriptura.
Yes! I only wish everyone else saw that too.
Agree to some. In my post above I deleted a phrase " to those who diligently seek, dig like for gold’ in my last sentence about the spirit bearing witness to truth. Understanding is also subject to “giftings”, that is some are gifted in understanding, enough to teach others. Yet, in St. Augustine’s words, "seek you, your Word, since we are to weak to find truth by pure reason and for that cause we needed the authority of Holy Writ, you have given such surpassing authority so that thru it you be believed in and sought,…and is “easy for everyone to read,…and accessible to all men”. He acknowledges the Church, even his teacher (Ambrose) and the Scripture yet thru it all he says, “I hear your voice”, “He teaches us”…From *Christ our Teacher-*Confessions and former "Years of Struggle"book 6 Confessions. …Anyone can not understand scripture. One must be Christian first, and must be divinely understood. It is His interpretation, His teaching. You’d be surprised at how much much is understood universally this way.( as you acknowledge). Of course the apostles taught and proclaimed. Not sure they needed to interpret. But they indeed had authority and one should not wander from their shepherd/elder/presbyter, even a gifted teacher…I would agree that the Body is needed and used on more difficult issues, yet the individual should be fully persuaded by the Lord on a matter, not just on any authority say so. A good teacher/ authority says that, don’t take my word for it, be ye convinced for yourself in the matter. As far as division and variances, you will have that with or without the authority you proclaim. Christ did not overcome differences by “authority”(not yet) nor should we.
My paradigm starts right in Genesis .You basically have two kinds of people, children of the Promise,of Eve,and children of Satan,non-believers,against the Promise. Later Revelations, two kinds , those written in the book of life and those that aren’t. So in the beginning you looked forward in faith to the Promise of Christ the Redeemer at Calvary.In Revelations we look backward to Calvary and Redemption. And all saints look forward to seeing Him again ,on the other side or at His second coming.
I’d say the theater is the same, just different faces. It is like USSR was the greatest threat /evil . When that went away a new threat , from Islamic terrorists. Like you said ,someone always stirring up trouble, Satan shuffling his princesFrom my perspective, there has been more than one theater. The same divine drama has occurred, at least in part, when Buddha entered the stage in the backdrop of the Hindu set, or the White Buffalo Calf Woman among the Lakota people. Its almost as though God is the One Great Puppeteer Spirit directing the Show, and there’s always another Show!
Yes, the command part is bad. Jesus did not, does not force himself,not yet the second coming.
Interesting .I know nothing here but vaguely.
Assuming the advocates role here:
;[MEANS One Church] as you are called in one hope of your calling. One Lord, one faith,[ONLY One set of Faith beliefs] one baptism. One God and Father of all, who is above all, and through all, and in us all. But to every one of us is given grace, according to the measure of the giving of Christ:.
With a few exceptions, like the SSPX, Catholics don’t see it that way.
I don’t really get this way of thinking. I realize it is common nowadays, but it wasn’t in the early church. If you look at a dispute, e.g. the Chalcedonian dispute in 451, neither side (in this case, Alexandria on one side and Rome and Constantinople on the other) said “The Church’s position is wrong.” Rather, the two sides disagreed about what the Church’s position is.
But how do you know that the Church got it right? What measure do you use to make that determination? The Church used Sacred Tradition as the measure. What do you use to determine that Titus should be included and the Didache should be excluded?
yes, and it goes one step further. As you say, there is first what the text is actually saying, then comes the meaning and finally the application to our lives.On all three levels it is Jesus that reveals them to our revived spirits.
Well those are two problems. One is to be “uneducated”, but there are also maturity levels, even newborns.The other is to think you know it all.That is always a problem. But to be “uneducated” (newborn) can be addressed with time, in the Word, with teachers and experiences in the Lord etc.
I don’t think anyone says all the bible is simple. However, enough of it is, but only for this one reason, it is primarily a heart matter, something we all have, and is not subject to IQ or education. AND we have a perfect heart teacher, Christ himself, as Augustine attests. As far as the more complex biblical issues, it is a heart matter again, and the level of desire to know such things that we allow God to give us.Seek hard as for Gold and He is a rewarder. .
Agreed but be careful for I think there is only one church that claims infalibility.
“Personal interpretation” can mean two things. One is that the interpretation is arrived at by "oneself’. The other is that indeed is an interpretation, and indeed it is personal, but given of God.It is personal just like it is for every one else. God is the only correct interpreter of scripture, and He is willing to share with any desiring soul. Hence John in his epistle says we know all things, we have an unction from the Holy one, and he wasn’t speaking to elders or leaders, but to every “christian” brother and sister. Of course on who holds to the proper view of “personal interpretation” will not force his view but respects the freedom of the other and his ability to "get it’ personally also. Like I am convinced of the Lord so you take it to Him and see if He won’t convince you also. That is dignity that hits right in the heart.
. No one is against elders, presbyters, teachers, prophets, the “Body” and a need to properly “study”. Thanks again
Not “all” truly accept the bible either
Only their version and understanding of it with some
It seems to me that we are mistaking the subject of this as a thread on the Bible. When the thread is really about the question did Christ give authority and power to the apostles to teach fully and correctly and also to transfer that power to successors.