Sola Scriptura--now I get

  • Thread starter Thread starter aurora77
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
40.png
Angainor:
It is *the *Church, the Church that contains everyone that is a foundation of truth. Anything else and you are building on the wrong foundation.
Two questions for you then.

First, point me to “the Church” today and throughout history that is referred to in Scripture as the “foundation of truth”. The One Body, One Faith, One True Church today. Not a smorgasbord of truths or collection of semi-truths but the One Truth.

Secondly, since you will not be able to provide us with a visable, locatable, identifiable and historical Church that matches your definition…what happened to that visable, locatable, identifiable Church we see in scripture?
 
40.png
JezCat:
Secondly, since you will not be able to provide us with a visable, locatable, identifiable and historical Church that matches your definition…what happened to that visable, locatable, identifiable Church we see in scripture?
Furthermore, if our brother sins against us we are to go where? To the Church. How do we do this if it’s an “invisible body of ‘true believers’ known to God only”?
 
40.png
Giver:
Pax, you should know I am not walking alone; Jesus is at my side all the time. Also you should know by now that Jesus is having me call people to a much closer walk with him than your church calls people.
Oh boy. Here we go! Another “I’m a better Christian than you” poster. :rolleyes:
 
40.png
Angainor:
Add Benedict and you are close to speaking the truth, except I make no claim to be guided by the Holy Spirit. The Church as a whole is guided by the Holy Spirit.

I don’t want you to take my word on it for anything I say. Test everything. Beware of false prophets.
So the Holy Spirit is guiding all these random, invisible, unknown Christians of differents denominations and beliefs? ONE Truth. And there’s that “test” word again. :confused: Test what? By what standard? Which truth do we use to test it with? How can we know a false prophet if every truth is relative to each individual? 😉 There must be ONE SET TRUTH. period…

Once we realize this fact then we can begin our journey. 👍
 
40.png
JezCat:
And there’s that “test” word again. :confused: Test what? By what standard?
If you have to ask “what standard?”, then it is you who are truely anchorless and adrift.

I can’t answer your questions for you. What standard did Paul what the Thessalonians to test everything against?
 
40.png
Milliardo:
I have the position to test, thank you, but not your words nor your interpretations. Since you have no authority to make any interpretation, then I am not obliged in any way to test what you say. It’s as simple as that.
OK. You are not hurting my feelings. I do, however, think you would be making a mistake if you make a habbit of dismissing other’s “words” out of hand. You might miss something.

Do not put out the Spirit’s fire; do not treat prophecies with contempt. Test everything. Hold on to the good. Avoid every kind of evil. 1 Thessalonians 5:19-21
 
40.png
JezCat:
40.png
Angainor:
40.png
mmortal03:
Even though the Church contains everyone, the word is also used to refer to the Magisterium.
Why?

You just summarized my point for me in a way I didn’t dare say outright. It is *the *Church, the Church that contains everyone that is a foundation of truth. Anything else and you are building on the wrong foundation.First, point me to “the Church” today and throughout history that is referred to in Scripture as the “foundation of truth”. The One Body, One Faith, One True Church today. Not a smorgasbord of truths or collection of semi-truths but the One Truth.
Actually for the sake of this argument, I was content to point to the same Church mmortal03 pointed to, or, that is, one of the Churches mmortal03 pointed to, the Church that contains everyone [all Catholics]. It should be this Church that is the foundation of truth.

Mmortal03 also points to “the Magisterium” as being called the Church, and it is this Church that is the foundation.
 
40.png
maryj:
I asked this question in #10 post, I’ll ask again… Or incorrect??
Yes, Protestants don’t acknowledge a “who” which says which interpretations are correct or incorrect. Thank you.
40.png
maryj:
I have read all of the posts in this thread, you have not addressed this except to tell us that we must “test”. How will you know if you are wrong with an interpretation…?
Testing. If you want to know how I will have certain knowledge that I am not wrong in an interpretation then I can only say that I don’t expect to have certian knowledge in this world. Did somebody promise you certian knowledge?
 
40.png
Angainor:
If you have to ask “what standard?”, then it is you who are truely anchorless and adrift.

I can’t answer your questions for you. What standard did Paul what the Thessalonians to test everything against?
Can’t answer or won’t? 😉

Let me put it into perspective for you. What you are asking people to do by “testing” others is to refer to scripture using their own individual interpretations to determine or “test” the Christianity of another whose individual interpretations are most likely varied in some way. The point is that everyone is “testing” everyone else by their own different standard, which makes your “test” and the revealed “truth” all relative.

You can avoid answering this obvious problem by lobbing adjectives at the faith of others in an attempt to cast the spotlight on them but the problem remains yours until answered. 🙂
 
Angainor said:
Do not put out the Spirit’s fire; do not treat prophecies with contempt. Test everything. Hold on to the good. Avoid every kind of evil. 1 Thessalonians 5:19-21

Does not apply to your interpretation or your views, since clearly you have no authority to speak. In short, since there’s no basis in what you say other than your own opinion, then I am not bound as well in testing what you say.
 
40.png
Angainor:
Actually for the sake of this argument, I was content to point to the same Church mmortal03 pointed to, or, that is, one of the Churches mmortal03 pointed to, the Church that contains everyone [all Catholics]. It should be this Church that is the foundation of truth.

Mmortal03 also points to “the Magisterium” as being called the Church, and it is this Church that is the foundation.
You are making something out of nothing. Did you read that link I posted that defines what “the Church” is in Catholic terms? There are not two “separate” churches, one that is the foundation and one that is not. Just because I said that people refer to the Magisterium as “the Church” (the Catholic Church, in this case) does not mean anything as far as an authoritative definition of what the words “the Church” refer to.

Where is it in the Bible that there is this “Church” of all Christians that you refer to that can interpret scripture and together be infallible in their interpretations? I do not see ANY evidence on Earth of this being the case, nor do I see ANY examples in the Bible describing ALL Christians being a part of some invisibly connected process that you describe. And, by the fact that different Protestants have different views on things, tell me which are the Protestants that YOU follow? How could you even make that choice, because you said that you personally cannot infallibly judge whether or not it is truth or not. So, how can you personally even make the choice of picking a denomination? None of those denominations have the infallible authority to teach you anything, unless they are part of this mysterious invisibly connected Church that you describe. But, since there is no way to empirically know the members of this Church, then there is no way to know who is right. And, as such, you have dug yourself the hole of relativism: know one can know who is right.

The Catholic Church, however, has concrete evidence of where it came from and what it abilities it was given.
 
40.png
Angainor:
Yes, Protestants don’t acknowledge a “who” which says which interpretations are correct or incorrect. Thank you.Testing. If you want to know how I will have certain knowledge that I am not wrong in an interpretation then I can only say that I don’t expect to have certian knowledge in this world. Did somebody promise you certian knowledge?
Angainor,

Please understand that I have a lot of respect for you. You post well and are considerate in your responses. That having been said, I think that this thread does demonstrate that your position defines the reasons for disunity among Christians.

Scripture is clear on the issue of unity. Jesus words in John Chapter 17 are particularly instructive in this regard. The entire chapter is devoted to the issue. Beyond this we have the following words of Paul:

Eph 4:1-5
I therefore, the prisoner in the Lord, beg you to lead a life worthy of the calling to which you have been called, with all humility and gentleness, with patience, bearing with one another in love, making every effort to maintain the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace. There is one body and one Spirit, just as you were called to the one hope of your calling, one Lord, one faith, one baptism,

Phi 1:27
Only, live your life in a manner worthy of the gospel of Christ, so that, whether I come and see you or am absent and hear about you, I will know that you are standing firm **in one spirit, striving side by side with one mind ** for the faith of the gospel,

Phi 2:1-2
If then there is any encouragement in Christ, any consolation from love, any sharing in the Spirit, any compassion and sympathy, make my joy complete: be of the same mind, having the same love, being in full accord and of one mind.

Sola Scriptura and personal interpretation of scripture does not create unity and single mindedness among Christians. Clearly, unity requires a definitive leadership to settle disputes and misunderstandings of scripture and doctrine. Paul speaks of problems in these areas with the following:

Romans 6: 17-18
But thanks be to God, that you who were once slaves of sin have become obedient from the heart to the standard of teaching to which you were committed, and, having been set free from sin, have become slaves of righteousness.

Romans 16: 17-18
I appeal to you, brethren, to take note of those who create dissensions and difficulties, in opposition to the doctrine which you have been taught; avoid them. For such persons do not serve our Lord Christ, but their own appetites, and by fair and flattering words they deceive the hearts of the simple-minded.

Ephesians 4: 13-14
…until we all attain to the unity of the faith and of the knowledge of the Son of God, to mature manhood, to the measure of the stature of the fullness of Christ; so that we may no longer be children, tossed to and fro and carried about with every wind of doctrine, by the cunning of men, by their craftiness in deceitful wiles.

1 Timothy 1: 3
As I urged you when I was going to Macedonia, remain at Ephesus that you may charge certain persons not to teach any different doctrine,

1Timothy 4: 1
Now the Spirit expressly says that in later times some will depart from the faith by giving heed to deceitful spirits and doctrines of demons,

Paul tells both Timothy and Titus to exercise authority in teaching. See 1Tim 4:12-13 and Titus 2:15. Paul himself exercises considerable authority in all his letters and even excommunicates fellow Christians and even names Hymenaeus and Alexander in the process[1 Tim 1:20]. We either acknowledge authority and follow the tradition of teaching and doctrine handed on by the apostles or we allow ourselves to believe as we will according to our own understandings. Scripture does not leave room for diverse doctrines and “factions” The unity called for by Jesus in John 17 can only be achieved through leadership and discipline in teaching.
 
40.png
Angainor:
Yes, Protestants don’t acknowledge a “who” which says which interpretations are correct or incorrect. Thank you.Testing. If you want to know how I will have certain knowledge that I am not wrong in an interpretation then I can only say that I don’t expect to have certian knowledge in this world. Did somebody promise you certian knowledge?
Yes as a matter of fact, the Catholic church. True knowledge is the doctrine of the Apostles, and the teaching authority of the church. So yes if we follow the interpretations of scripture put forth to us by the “Teaching Authority” I have %100 certainty of knowledge. Simple as that.
 
40.png
maryj:
Yes as a matter of fact, the Catholic church. True knowledge is the doctrine of the Apostles, and the teaching authority of the church. So yes if we follow the interpretations of scripture put forth to us by the “Teaching Authority” I have %100 certainty of knowledge. Simple as that.
Strange. Why do both Paul and John advise Christians to test the spirits?

Someone with 100% certain knowledge has no need of tests.Dear friends, do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits to see whether they are from God, because many false prophets have gone out into the world. This is how you can recognize the Spirit of God: Every spirit that acknowledges that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is from God, but every spirit that does not acknowledge Jesus is not from God. 1 John 4:1-3
 
40.png
Angainor:
Strange. Why do both Paul and John advise Christians to test the spirits?

Someone with 100% certain knowledge has no need of tests.Dear friends, do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits to see whether they are from God, because many false prophets have gone out into the world. This is how you can recognize the Spirit of God: Every spirit that acknowledges that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is from God, but every spirit that does not acknowledge Jesus is not from God. 1 John 4:1-3
You have hit the nail on the head. We have 100% certainty because we have tested the spirit and the spirit is true and the Catholic Church is proven to be the one true church because the spirit has been tested and the Catholic Church passes the test.
 
40.png
aurora77:
#1-OK, I’ve always thought that the idea of Sola Scripture didn’t make much sense.

#2-I can sit and wait for the Holy Spirit to guide me (not that I don’t think He will, but how do I know if it’s Him or just my imagination), or I can trust the guy sitting next to me, or I can turn to official Church teaching.

#3-How lucky we as Catholics are to have someone (or a group of someones 🙂 ) who can help guide us to better understand God’s word and teaching.

#4-I’d be out there floundering for sure!

This may have been totally obvious to everyone, but it was an “a-ha” moment for me and I just had to share!
Talk about a “A-HA” moment right from the get-go! And whats sad about this, really, catholic apologetics approve of this kind of attitude from fellow catholics.

#1-Thats your carnal mind at work doing triple time. You ask yourself-“Why accept Gods Word through those who he spoke to and through when I can be safe and accept a religion that claims it is the one founded by Christ, even though their teachings contain some major differences by what the bible teaches?” Your carnal mind cannot trade all those recorded historical years of man serving God with their own hands(CC) for the truth of yielding to the sovereign God through Jesus Christ and accept his 1st hand living word that is contained in the Holy Bible.

**#2.Imagine if the Apostle Peter in Matthew16:16 asked the same question you did. His carnal mind would of told him the statement-“You are the Christ, the son of God” was coming from his own mind, not from God. But instead, he yielded to God, and the voice he heard in his head sounded like his, but through faith, he knew it came from God. Peter said what was in his head, and Jesus confirmed he was right.

But to your credit and according to the catholic teachings, he didnt yield to God by faith and that is why you have a pope.**

#3.Being Catholic is “LUCKY”?! Good job correcting that one CC apologetics! 😃

#4.Yeah, why step out in faith when you can be “a good little ewe in the pew.”
 
40.png
aurora77:
I can sit and wait for the Holy Spirit to guide me (not that I don’t think He will, but how do I know if it’s Him or just my imagination), or I can trust the guy sitting next to me, or I can turn to official Church teaching.
Again all you keen-eyed, sharp witted, well schooled CC apologetics, I took what this person stated, in which no one here corrected him on, and applied it to Matthew 16:16. So was Peter “lucky” he decided to utter what he heard from his mind or did he yield to God and from his carnal mind? Did he take a chance or was it faith? Did Peter think, is this a question the Sanhedrin needs to answer? Or by faith did Peter let God answer?

In the true church of Jesus, faith in God through Jesus and the power of the Holy Spirit is not the magical mystery tour, it is for real.
 
40.png
geno75:
Again all you keen-eyed, sharp witted, well schooled CC apologetics, I took what this person stated, in which no one here corrected him on, and applied it to Matthew 16:16. So was Peter “lucky” he decided to utter what he heard from his mind or did he yield to God and from his carnal mind? Did he take a chance or was it faith? Did Peter think, is this a question the Sanhedrin needs to answer or by faith he let God answer?
What exactly are you talking about? Flesh and blood did not reveal this to Peter, but our heavenly Father did. Do you think that this somehow undermines the papacy you keen-eyed, sharp witted, well schooled anti-Catholic apologist? Sorry to tell you this, bud, but it doesn’t. 😉 We, as Catholics, recognize that “flesh and blood” is a Semitic expression for human beings, especially in their weakness. We also concede that Peter’s faith is spoken of as coming not through human means but through a revelation from God which is similar to Paul’s description of his recognition of who Jesus was. (see Gal 1:15-16, “. . . when he [God] . . . was pleased to reveal his Son to me. . . .”) There is no contradiction here with the Catholic Faith, so…what’s your point?
 
40.png
geno75:
In the true church of Jesus, faith in God through Jesus and the power of the Holy Spirit is not the magical mystery tour, it is for real.
I know. That’s why I’m so glad that I’m Catholic! 👍 😉 😛
 
40.png
JSmitty2005:
What exactly are you talking about? Flesh and blood did not reveal this to Peter, but our heavenly Father did. Do you think that this somehow undermines the papacy you keen-eyed, sharp witted, well schooled anti-Catholic apologist? Sorry to tell you this, bud, but it doesn’t. 😉 We, as Catholics, recognize that “flesh and blood” is a Semitic expression for human beings, especially in their weakness. We also concede that Peter’s faith is spoken of as coming not through human means but through a revelation from God which is similar to Paul’s description of his recognition of who Jesus was. (see Gal 1:15-16, “. . . when he [God] . . . was pleased to reveal his Son to me. . . .”) There is no contradiction here with the Catholic Faith, so…what’s your point?
Peter had his faith in Jesus shown up by others before he yielded to God and who he said Jesus is in Matt16:16.

Paul nearly destroyed all of Jesus’ Church, Jesus had to be revealed to Paul.

2 different people, 2 different situations.

Try again.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top