Sola Scriptura is True

  • Thread starter Thread starter DD2007
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
DD2007 I have to admire your grit. You have stood steadfast in the midst of all comers who have peppered you with mindless opposition.
You are correct scripture is true not like mens traditions which have changed over time. Scripture is true not like mens traditions which are vain and give men glory due God. Scripture is true not like mens traditions which are fallible.
 
josie_L said:
By the way Jesus had two wills one of which was divine and the other human only that both were in accord with each other. You have committed the heresy of Monothelitism in decreeing he had one will. That is what happens when you don’t have a Church guiding you. Furthermore you do realize you owe the Church credit for developing our understanding of the Trinity especially amidst all the heresies. Apparently scripture is not explicit enough on these matters to have prevented these groups from breaking away from the Church (due to their take on the Trinity and Christ’s makeup): Arians, Nestorians, Monophysitism, Monothelitism, Sabellianism, Docetism, Gnosticism. All these groups have one thing in common: THEY WERE SOLA SCRIPTURA FOLLOWERS, when they decided to break away from the Sacred Traditions of the Church.
Click to expand...
Where do you get that each of these groups held to sola scriptura? The Gnostics certainly did not. They claimed to have secret oral teachings that had only been passed on to a select few, hardly sola scriptura.

What did Tertullian have to say in his orthodox days?
He, therefore, will not be a Christian who shall deny this doctrine which is confessed by Christians; denying it, moreover, on grounds which are adopted by a man who is not a Christian. Take away, indeed, from the heretics the wisdom which they share with the heathen, and let them support their inquiries from the Scriptures alone: they will then be unable to keep their ground.
Click to expand...
(On the Resurrection of the Flesh, Chapter 3
ccel.org/ccel/schaff/anf03.v.viii.iii.html

He was of the view that the heresies couldn’t stand up to the scrutiny of Scripture alone.

John Chrysostom says that it is Scripture that protects against heresies.
Observe the marks of a robber; first, that he doth not enter openly; secondly, not according to the Scriptures, for this is the, “not by the door.” Here also He referreth to those who had been before, and to those who should be after Him, Antichrist and the false Christs, Judas and Theudas, and whatever others there have been of the same kind. And with good cause He calleth the Scriptures “a door,” for they bring us to God, and open to us the knowledge of God, they make the sheep, they guard them, and suffer not the wolves to come in after them. For Scripture, like some sure door, barreth the passage against the heretics, placing us in a state of safety as to all that we desire, and not allowing us to wander; and if we undo it not, we shall not easily be conquered by our foes. By it we can know all, both those who are, and those who are not, shepherds.
Click to expand...
(Homilies on the Gospel of St. John, Homily 59)
ccel.org/ccel/schaff/npnf114.iv.lxi.html
 
Hisalone said:
DD2007 I have to admire your grit. You have stood steadfast in the midst of all comers who have peppered you with mindless opposition.
You are correct scripture is true not like mens traditions which have changed over time. Scripture is true not like mens traditions which are vain and give men glory due God. Scripture is true not like mens traditions which are fallible.
Click to expand...
Man’s interpretation of Scripture is fallible in many cases, as is evident from a simple look at CARM. So much for all you need is the Bible. 🤷
 
Hisalone said:
DD2007 I have to admire your grit. You have stood steadfast in the midst of all comers who have peppered you with mindless opposition.
You are correct scripture is true not like mens traditions which have changed over time. Scripture is true not like mens traditions which are vain and give men glory due God. Scripture is true not like mens traditions which are fallible.
Click to expand...
Thank you so much. God bless. 🙂
 
DD2007 said:
So are we Reformed. We are Reformed Cathoilcs. We hold fast to the traditions handed to us and abide by the doctrine of Sola Scriptura in all matters of faith and practice as the binding authority on our conscience.

The Reformers NEVER denied holding fast to traditions from those who came before us, provided they were biblical.

Those who are anti creedal are against us as well. We uphold the Apostles Creed, Nicene Creed, and the Reformed Confessions and Catechisms and Canons. ALL of whome are based on scripture alone as their authority to be taught.

Most Roman Catholics have a fundamental misunderstanding of what sola scriptra is. As demonstrated above it is not what you were taught it was.
Click to expand...
No they are not based on scripture alone (but by this I don’t mean that they disregarded it either), what you’re forgetting is that the Apostle’s Creed and the Nicene Creed was put together by a Church (sacred traditions/ecumenical councils) you reject.
 
SyCarl said:
Where do you get that each of these groups held to sola scriptura? The Gnostics certainly did not. They claimed to have secret oral teachings that had only been passed on to a select few, hardly sola scriptura.

What did Tertullian have to say in his orthodox days?

(On the Resurrection of the Flesh, Chapter 3
ccel.org/ccel/schaff/anf03.v.viii.iii.html

He was of the view that the heresies couldn’t stand up to the scrutiny of Scripture alone.

John Chrysostom says that it is Scripture that protects against heresies.

(Homilies on the Gospel of St. John, Homily 59)
ccel.org/ccel/schaff/npnf114.iv.lxi.html
Click to expand...
They used Sacred Scripture as their authority and broke away from the Church’s teachings and Sacred Traditions.
 
josie_L said:
Only people who are Calvinists (or are byproducts of Calvinism) go to Heaven, didn’t you know?
Click to expand...
I went to a Reformed high school (graduated from a Catholic one), so, as it happens, I DID know that.
nsper7 said:
So was the New Testament.
Click to expand...
AHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!! This is a true statement.

Also, about the Trent/Timothy connection – the reason you are so wrong, DD2007 is because you are telling Catholics what we believe. Stop that. Just because something is said in the Book of Timothy does not mean that we reject the Council of Trent.

Also, you said that God approves of a Bible to get us to the end, then you said the Douay Rheims. Since you said ~A~ Bible, it would follow that no other Bible does God endorse…according to you.
 
josie_L said:
No they are not based on scripture alone (but by this I don’t mean that they disregarded it either), what you’re forgetting is that the Apostle’s Creed and the Nicene Creed was put together by a Church (sacred traditions/ecumenical councils) you reject.
Click to expand...
We never rejected the church. God forbid! We reformed it and made sure that it didn’t teach anything unbiblical because scriputure is our written authority from God and the sole rule of faith and practice.

Believers are the Church. There have been believers in every age.
 
DD2007 said:
We never rejected the church. God forbid! We reformed it and made sure that it didn’t teach anything unbiblical because scriputure is our written authority from God and the sole rule of faith and practice.

Believers are the Church. There have been believers in every age.
Click to expand...
which church did you reform?
 
adstrinity said:
Also, about the Trent/Timothy connection – the reason you are so wrong, DD2007 is because you are telling Catholics what we believe. Stop that. Just because something is said in the Book of Timothy does not mean that we reject the Council of Trent.
Click to expand...
What I said was that if you disagree that the scriptures are inspired by God which is what you are saying when you do not include the New Testement writings as ALL scriputure then you are anathema according to trent.
Also, you said that God approves of a Bible to get us to the end, then you said the Douay Rheims. Since you said ~A~ Bible, it would follow that no other Bible does God endorse…according to you.
Click to expand...
I simply gave you my opinion of what is your most accurate english translation. I would hope you would use an even more accurate protestant one. 😉 God inspired the bible it is translated into all languages to be used by all God’s people around the world.
 
DD2007 said:
We never rejected the church. God forbid! We reformed it and made sure that it didn’t teach anything unbiblical because scriputure is our written authority from God and the sole rule of faith and practice.

Believers are the Church. There have been believers in every age.
Click to expand...
You reformed the Catholic Church (we’re the ones who put together the Apostle’s Creed and the Nicene Creed)? :confused:
 
DD2007 said:
What I said was that if you disagree that the scriptures are inspired by God which is what you are saying when you do not include the New Testement writings as ALL scriputure then you are anathema according to trent.
Click to expand...
What he meant was that, in the context of the passage, there is no possible way “all scripture” can include the New Testament. Paul would have been referring to the Old Testament.
 
DD2007 said:
What I said was that if you disagree that the scriptures are inspired by God which is what you are saying when you do not include the New Testement writings as ALL scriputure then you are anathema according to trent.

I simply gave you my opinion of what is your most accurate english translation. I would hope you would use an even more accurate protestant one. 😉 God inspired the bible it is translated into all languages to be used by all God’s people around the world.
Click to expand...
  1. Doesn’t apply. “All scripture” at the time was the Old Testament. The New Testament and Trent’s statement doesn’t come into play. It takes great faith and no logic and not the Bible to believe that.
  2. So, God inspired more that one Bible, then.
 
Tim_Kirchoff said:
What he meant was that, in the context of the passage, there is no possible way “all scripture” can include the New Testament. Paul would have been referring to the Old Testament.
Click to expand...
You forget that God is the author of scripture. There is a human writer and a divine author. One must read scripture from the divine authors point of view and not shackle his mind with the human writers limitations.
 
Tim_Kirchoff said:
What he meant was that, in the context of the passage, there is no possible way “all scripture” can include the New Testament. Paul would have been referring to the Old Testament.
Click to expand...
This is indeed what I meant. Also, I’m female.

Divine/Human author comment – we’re supposed to read things from the Divine Autho’s voice and interpret them literally. It’s all very clear in the Bible. Sparticus 9:17. It’s in there.
 
DD2007 said:
There is only one church universal. We reformed and all members who would like to reform are welcome to join us.
Click to expand...
So what was reformed? And where can we find the reformed Church? Is there a website?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top