SIN is the reason we have people lying about what the scriptures mean.
This could only be talking about the OT Scriptures since, when Timothy would have been a child, there would have been no New Testament.
Well, if you are so sure your interpretation is correct, then that makes you a prideful idiot.
How do we know who’s lying? Look on CARM, there are all types of Protestant over there arguing about various beliefs. They fervently believe that their interpretation is true. They all claim to be “born again”.
Here is where he fails to understand. A man of God in this context, like Timothy were taught since infancy regarding the Scriptures. He was a deacon, a student of Paul, so was still being taught. So a person who understands the scriptures after being taught the correct way, was a teacher of the Church, may be completed for the task using Scripture without twisting it when teaching the faithful. Any Priest I know does this. He would be fitted appropriately for the occasion of teaching, rebuking and correcting using His Bible. So if he can use His Bible to defend the Papacy, then great. DD2007 loves to insist he’s a man of God with perfect knowledge and understanding of Scripture to do this. And even he admitted to the implicitness of certain basic Doctrines in Scripture meaning that if one is taught properly, (eg Immaculate Conception), it may complete the teacher when teaching the faithful. But Scripture alone is useless without knowing what you’re teaching. And any Jon doe merely praying to the Holy Spirit, doesn’t have that ability as much as he’d loooove to think. The many doctrines of protestantism will attest to that.
If you’re none of those, then you just proclaimed yourself to be infallible. Keep dreaming.
He first said to consult the scriptures that Timothy had been aquainted with from his youth, then he went on to say tha ALL scripture is inspired by God. To say that the Holy Spirit didn’t mean ALL scripture but only the Old Testament is to deny that the New Testament is inspired. That would be against the teachings of teh RCC who gave an anathema at trent to all who didn;t include the 27 books of teh New Testament in the canon of sacred scripture.
He said from whome you learned it. Meaing himself. He was an apostle of God. We have already covered the status of prophets and apostles as the spokesmen for God. They wrote, dictated or blessed all of the books of the bible under inspiration of the Holy Spirit.
No, see, this is why we cannot believe you when you talk on behalf of God. You get Catholic things wrong, and therefore, you cannot be right when you are talking about God. This is not true; this is faulty logic on your part, but, this is what you want to believe so you make it fit your truth. Stop it.
No. The Pope is infallible. The Bible is inerrant. It contains no error. There’s a distinction.
Well, then who has the right interpretation? It comes down to authority. An infallible document poorly interpreted leads to a mess, as all of Protestantism shows.
No one can really understand the scriptures unless they are regenerated.
No institution on earth has a completely correct theology. The bible is completely correct, but as long as there are humans involved with it there will be interpretive questions.
So the Apostles at the time they wrote Scripture were not infallible? Interesting.
Well, apparently everyone but you is handling it wrongly? IS THAT IT YOU PRIDEFULLY IGNORANT PROTESTANT? EVERYONE ELSE ON EARTH HAS IT WRONG BUT YOU? WHO THE HELL ARE YOU? YOU HAVE AN OPINION AND THAT IS IT! EVEN BY SOLA SCRIPTURA, YOU ARE NOT SCRIPTURE, YOU ARE JUST A POORLY SCHOOLED DEBATER! YOU FAIL IN LOGIC AND IN HISTORY, YET CLAIM EVERYONE ELSE HAS IT WRONG!
So, it all comes down to what you ‘believe’?! Who cares what you believe? Calvin was not Scripture and he certainly disagreed with every other Reformer but himself.
Here is a quote from Trent to prove I’m not lying to you:
John 17:17 ESV
and apparently there are a many Protestants that disagree on the interpretation of that truth. Clearly the Bible isn’t all that you need, and again (we know you don’t agree), God’s word isn’t only in written form. The fact that Protestants believing in sola scriptura come to various conclusions from God’s word is all that we need to know.
Oh. Oh good. Well, we solved this then, as long as nobody reads the Bible, all will be well.
I accept the truth at Trent. What is wrong is you’re saying the Timothy passage has to do with the New Testament and this was implying Trent. You’re making logical leaps which do not have any connections.
These were all instructions to Timothy, brought into the priesthood by having hands laid on him. They weren’t letters written and meant for all the Christians everywhere and anywhere.
Only if they are taught by one of the Apostles or their successors.
Yes. What we must understand is that DD2007 is a Calvinist.
At the time Jesus uttered these words, there was no New Testament–St. Paul was still a Pharisaic Jew and the Gospels could not have been complete since more is recorded afterwards.