Sola Scriptura Revisited

  • Thread starter Thread starter shawn38
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
The intent is not to insult the priesthood you believe in, but rather show from Scripture that it doesn’t exist in a Biblical sense and in fact Hebrews eliminates it in the way your church practices it. I could have said it differently and not come acorss as hostile toward your priesthood; after all it is your belief that it is legitimate according to your religion and my belief that it is not from a Biblical perspective. It is a difference in our religious beliefs more than anything else; so I apologize for insulting you and accept your apology as well.
And that is the problem with non-Catholic churches,free to interpret scripture as it suits your private judgments. What makes your interpretation infallible? Why should anyone accept your interpretation over the other 39,000 different churches out there? Hebrew elimnates it in the way the RCC practices it? Show us where scripture eliminated the bishophric,priesthood and diaconate offices?
 
Beth,

I was directed to this thread…

Who verifies the veracity of the message? How do you know? What sources do you have that insures the true intent of Christ?

The Gospels and Acts prove that Christ was no stranger to misunderstandings with people who even spoke the same language and grew up in the same town as Him…that alone is pretty bad…and then when the Lord had his apostles with Him, people were still misunderstanding and accusing Him…very bad…and then the Acts speak of people coming out with different doctrines and contradicting the Apostles…so bad…

Just wondering…I may not be staying very long either.

So with all the troubles of communicating the Message from Christ Himself, and the problems He had, to the apostles and the problems they had, how do you know and what safeguards you against misunderstandings of the Word of God?
Read your Bible and you will find the answers. I suggest Romans and Galatians, then the Psalms and this should answer your questions if you truly care to know the answer to them. It should be a joy to read and it should take but 3-4 hours of your time to read them and hopefully you will look forward to reading about your Lord and your Savior and the words He has written to all who have true faith that saves.

I will leave you with one tid-bit to answer your question in part.

***10 For to us God revealed {them} through the Spirit; for the Spirit searches all things, even the depths of God. 11 For who among men knows the {thoughts} of a man except the spirit of the man which is in him? Even so the {thoughts} of God no one knows except the Spirit of God. 12 Now we have received, not the spirit of the world, but the Spirit who is from God, so that we may know the things freely given to us by God, 13 which things we also speak, not in words taught by human wisdom, but in those taught by the Spirit, combining spiritual {thoughts} with spiritual {words.} 14 But a natural man does not accept the things of the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him; and he cannot understand them, because they are spiritually appraised. 15 But he who is spiritual appraises all things, yet he himself is appraised by no one. 16 For WHO HAS KNOWN THE MIND OF THE LORD, THAT HE WILL INSTRUCT HIM? But we have the mind of Christ. ---- 1 Corinthians 2 ***

Do you realize the implications of this passage? The Christian has two spirits within him/her, the natural spirit of the man/woman, which is your concsience and the Holy Spirit. The natural man cannot understand the things of God because they are missing the Spirit from God given by Christ through true belief; whereas the Christian does understand and “has the mind of Christ”. So the question is; do you have the mind of Christ? For each will give an account one on one with God. Food for thought.
 
And that is the problem with non-Catholic churches,free to interpret scripture as it suits your private judgments. What makes your interpretation infallible? Why should anyone accept your interpretation over the other 39,000 different churches out there? Hebrew elimnates it in the way the RCC practices it? Show us where scripture eliminated the bishophric,priesthood and diaconate offices?
It is not hard to read Hebrews and it is not hard to see from the Greek that the way you use the term priest is the same as the Levitical priest, offering up daily sacrafices and there is a specific word for that used in Scripture. Whereas your priesthood has used the term for “overseer” and called them a priest, but the overseers do not offer sacrafices as your priests do; therefore your priests are of the Levitical definition according to Scripture, but not according to your church teaching; so be it that is your right to believe as you wish as it is mine as well. I am only pointing out the differences using Scripture as the gold standard by which all truth is measured in my opinion.

But unless one has the mind of Christ because the spirit searches the mind of God and Christ by His salvation has given to each believer the Holy Spirit and it is why 1 Cor. 2 says that Christians have the “mind of Christ”. Nonetheless there will be few Catholics and few non-Catholics in heaven as both sides will have those who come with a true heart of repentance and enter into God’s rest because of His grace by faith in Christ.
 
Hi Texas,

I admit to getting “warmed up” in sections of my “Blue Reply” but that was a build up from previous posts by Beth where she came in here being obstinate about the Catholic Tradition and finally insulting our priesthood and Jesus with a thinly veiled part of scripture. Basically at that time I was replying in the same spirit as Beth had been posting.

It seems that VetA has already replied to your post, so I’m not going to repeat reply (I think I’ve posted enough, don’t you? lol) Thank you for reminding me about losing my “niceness”. I realized that I was pretty impassioned when I re-read my post but by then I was wallowing in it and didn’t care. Funny how the “morning after” is always different 😊 As for writting posts that include scripture, that is what I do when I need to explain things to people who only believe in scripture. You must realize that Beth ignores anything by the ECF or declarations from our Church, which I completely understand on her part. Why should she? That’s not part of her belief system.
No worries. You were probably as nice as you could be at the time. I was just worried that you might be taking this a little too seriously. Don’t let us get you down. The unfortunate fact of communicating in this medium is that we can’t read people’s emotions very well. I could sit hear and type with all kinds of bravado, but you would miss the mischievous smirk on my face. The smilies just don’t do it for me. At one time in my life I had to vow to myself to finish writing at night and the re-read it in the morning to make sure I wasn’t too wound up. Then I would send it.

You are correct about fighting fire with fire, or scripture with scripture as it were. It is an inevitable necessity to bring it down to the level of the person you are debating. Sorry for implying you might not be consistent in your beliefs.

I appreciate your and VetA’s answers about the priesthood of all believers. I did not know all that about the RCC. I am especially intrigued about the fact that the laity can perform baptism and distribute communion. I always thought those functions could only be performed by the priests.

There are two parts that I am still not clear on though. If anyone can answer these I would appreciate it in a true spirit of academics. They are as follows:

If both a priest and a lay person can both perform priestly functions, is the difference between priest and laity merely vocational and academic, or does the Church make a spiritual distinction between the two classes? I understand that a priest would hold a position of authority within the government (for lack of a better term) of the Church and would also have received a certain amount of confidence from the brotherhood of the priests by demonstrating his understanding of spiritual matters in previous settings. My question is more about substance. Does the Church hold that the office of the priesthood imparts a spiritual quality to the priest that he could not obtain outside that office with an equal amount of dedication and study?

The second is, when there is a dispute within the Church, is the word of God used in the resolution, or only the opinions of the the priests. If it is used which holds more authority, the opinion of the priests, or the word of God? And what happens if that imaginary dispute rises all the way up to the Holy Father himself? Would he bother to back up his decision in the matter with the word of God, or would he just issue a decree and that would be the end of the matter? I hope I haven’t spoken offensively on this one, but I am truly curious about this. I could probably find the answer to this one elsewhere, but being an outsider I wouldn’t know where to start. I also think this point gets more to the heart of the issue of sola scripura.

Thanks.
 
Hebrews 4:12
**12 For the word of God is living and powerful, and sharper than any two-edged sword, piercing even to the division of soul and spirit, and of joints and marrow, and is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart. **

Mark 8:35-38
**35 "For whoever desires to save his life will lose it, but whoever loses his life for My sake and the gospel’s will save it.
36 "For what will it profit a man if he gains the whole world, and loses his own soul?
37 "Or what will a man give in exchange for his soul?
38 “For whoever is ashamed of Me and My words in this adulterous and sinful generation, of him the Son of Man also will be ashamed when He comes in the glory of His Father with the holy angels.” **

Luke 24:27
**Then beginning with Moses and with all the prophets, He explained to them the things concerning Himself in all the Scriptures. **

Luke 24:44-47
**44 Now He said to them, “These are My words which I spoke to you while I was still with you, that all things which are written about Me in the Law of Moses and the Prophets and the Psalms must be fulfilled.” 45 Then He opened their minds to understand the Scriptures, 46 and He said to them, "Thus it is written, that the Christ would suffer and rise again from the dead the third day, 47 and that repentance for forgiveness of sins would be proclaimed in His name to all the nations, beginning from Jerusalem.

Acts 12:5 & 12:12
**5 Peter was therefore kept in prison, but constant prayer was offered to God for him by the church. **

12 So, when he had considered this, he came to the house of Mary, the mother of John whose surname was Mark, where many were gathered together praying.- i.e. the true church

John 5:39
**"You search the Scriptures because you think that in them you have eternal life; it is these that testify about Me;

Acts 17:2-3
**2 And according to Paul’s custom, he went to them, and for three Sabbaths reasoned with them from the Scriptures, 3 explaining and giving evidence that the Christ had to suffer and rise again from the dead, and {saying,} “This Jesus whom I am proclaiming to you is the Christ.” **

Acts 18:24
**Now a Jew named Apollos, an Alexandrian by birth, an eloquent man, came to Ephesus; and he was mighty in the Scriptures25 This man had been instructed in the way of the Lord; and being fervent in spirit, he was speaking and teaching accurately the things concerning Jesus, being acquainted only with the baptism of John; 26 and he began to speak out boldly in the synagogue. But when Priscilla and Aquila heard him, they took him aside and explained to him the way of God more accurately. 27 And when he wanted to go across to Achaia, the brethren encouraged him and wrote to the disciples to welcome him; and when he had arrived, he greatly helped those who had believed through grace, 28 for he powerfully refuted the Jews in public, demonstrating by the Scriptures that Jesus was the Christ…/I]

Romans 1:1-4
1 Paul, a bond-servant of Christ Jesus, called {as} an apostle, set apart for the gospel of God, 2 which He promised beforehand through His prophets in the holy Scriptures, 3 concerning His Son, who was born of a descendant of David according to the flesh, 4 who was declared the Son of God with power by the resurrection from the dead, according to the Spirit of holiness, Jesus Christ our Lord,

Romans 16:25-27
25 Now to Him who is able to establish you according to my gospel and the preaching of Jesus Christ, according to the revelation of the mystery which has been kept secret for long ages past, 26 but now is manifested, and by the Scriptures of the prophets, according to the commandment of the eternal God, has been made known to all the nations, leading to obedience of faith; 27 to the only wise God, through Jesus Christ,

1 Corinthians 15:3-4
3 For I delivered to you as of first importance what I also received, that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, 4 and that He was buried, and that He was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures,

2 Peter 3:16b
which the untaught and unstable distort, as {they do} also the rest of the Scriptures, to their own destruction.

Luke 4:21
And He began to say to them, "Today this Scripture has been fulfilled in your hearing."

Joh 7:38
"He who believes in Me, as the Scripture said, ‘From his innermost being will flow rivers of living water.’ "

John 13:18
"I do not speak of all of you. I know the ones I have chosen; but {it is} that the Scripture may be fulfilled, ‘HE WHO EATS MY BREAD HAS LIFTED UP HIS HEEL AGAINST ME.’

Galatians 3:8
The Scripture, foreseeing that God would justify the Gentiles by faith, preached the gospel beforehand to Abraham, {saying,} “ALL THE NATIONS WILL BE BLESSED IN YOU.” **
 
It is not hard to read Hebrews and it is not hard to see from the Greek that the way you use the term priest is the same as the Levitical priest, offering up daily sacrafices and there is a specific word for that used in Scripture. Whereas your priesthood has used the term for “overseer” and called them a priest, but the overseers do not offer sacrafices as your priests do; therefore your priests are of the Levitical definition according to Scripture, but not according to your church teaching; so be it that is your right to believe as you wish as it is mine as well. I am only pointing out the differences using Scripture as the gold standard by which all truth is measured in my opinion.

But unless one has the mind of Christ because the spirit searches the mind of God and Christ by His salvation has given to each believer the Holy Spirit and it is why 1 Cor. 2 says that Christians have the “mind of Christ”. Nonetheless there will be few Catholics and few non-Catholics in heaven as both sides will have those who come with a true heart of repentance and enter into God’s rest because of His grace by faith in Christ.
Interersting,but I do not accept your interpretation.

You said:

I am only pointing out the differences using Scripture as the gold standard by which all truth is measured in my opinion.

Which begs the question: What makes your interpretation infallible? Why is your interpretation correct over the other 39,000 different churches?
 
Beth,

As a Catholic, I have studied the Bible at Mass throughout my entire life. That is 54 years.

I think the great fallacy and bias is that fundamentalists think we oppose the sacred Word of God, do not make use of it, and some are even shocked we have our Bible readings at Mass, and have been doing so for 2,000 years.

You can’t study the Bible alone because if you do, you will never the history of faith. You are using the bible without people, divorced from those who laid down the foundation of the church, to the believers, and to their descendents to whom they dutifully and with great courage in the face of persecution and death passed on the true faith in Jesus Christ through the sacraments of His blood and nurtured by the Word of God.

Excuse me!!!

So if you are using the Word of God as the standard, then what standard are you in heaven using??? It missed out on ours that we have had since the time of the Apostles.
 
Beth,

As a Catholic, I have studied the Bible at Mass throughout my entire life. That is 54 years.

I think the great fallacy and bias is that fundamentalists think we oppose the sacred Word of God, do not make use of it, and some are even shocked we have our Bible readings at Mass, and have been doing so for 2,000 years.

You can’t study the Bible alone because if you do, you will never the history of faith. You are using the bible without people, divorced from those who laid down the foundation of the church, to the believers, and to their descendents to whom they dutifully and with great courage in the face of persecution and death passed on the true faith in Jesus Christ through the sacraments of His blood and nurtured by the Word of God.

Excuse me!!!

So if you are using the Word of God as the standard, then what standard are you in heaven using??? It missed out on ours that we have had since the time of the Apostles.
I also would also add,when cannot have the Bible-Alone minus the church. Sorry,but that is heresy. Christ did not leave a book faith,but a church of the person: Christ. Yes Scripture is vital as all of our doctrines derive from scripture (explicitly/implicitly) but to say all one needs is Scripture is a bogus premise.
 
Interesting,but I do not accept your interpretation.

You said:

I am only pointing out the differences using Scripture as the gold standard by which all truth is measured in my opinion.

Which begs the question: What makes your interpretation infallible? Why is your interpretation correct over the other 39,000 different churches?
According to the Gold Standard; interpretation of Scripture comes not from man, but from the Holy Spirit indwelling each Christian. Since there are only a few true Christians compared to the number of false Christians according to the Golden Standard Bearer, the Lord Jesus; it certainly explains why there are many interpretations, many that defy even basic human logic.

I allow Scripture to interpret itself; and I am in no way infallible as many of you have already accused me of being in a sarcastic manner. I would be fooling myself to think I could ever correctly receive the correct interpretation of all of Scripture since the mind of God is far superior. The Scripture does say that the Christian has the mind of Christ, but because of the Christian sin stains; they still will get things incorrect, but not on the basics and even some of the more complex things.

Most peoples problem in my opinion between themselves and God is they don’t fully understand sin, it nature, character and what it has done to all creation. The few that do find the narrow way but are still unable to enter as Luke tells us via the Holy Spirit is that one never drops their baggage of self righteousness to “squeeze” through the gate. That self righteous person is the person knowing all the right stuff, but never letting grace be grace by adding some external work to their salvation, thus never fully letting go of self for the promises of the free gift of God.

That is my opinion and I believe we can see this in Scripture by looking at the Sermon of the mount , the parables and the many examples of people encountered, especially by Jesus, who asked about eternal life, but were never ready to deal with their sin issues and their complete dependency on God alone for Grace by faith to the entrance.
 
Beth,

As a Catholic, I have studied the Bible at Mass throughout my entire life. That is 54 years.

I think the great fallacy and bias is that fundamentalists think we oppose the sacred Word of God, do not make use of it, and some are even shocked we have our Bible readings at Mass, and have been doing so for 2,000 years.

You can’t study the Bible alone because if you do, you will never the history of faith. You are using the bible without people, divorced from those who laid down the foundation of the church, to the believers, and to their descendents to whom they dutifully and with great courage in the face of persecution and death passed on the true faith in Jesus Christ through the sacraments of His blood and nurtured by the Word of God.

Excuse me!!!
So if you are using the Word of God as the standard, then what standard are you in heaven using??? It missed out on ours that we have had since the time of the Apostles.
Anyone can hear the reading of Scripture for 200 years and never enter the Kingdom, so reading the Scripture does not equal salvation. It is only the repentant heart coming to God with nothing to offer and begging for His forgiveness for one’s sins against Him and turning from thoses sins and asking Him to have mercy on your soul and to teach you His ways so one can live by His truth.

The history you receive is a revisionist history in my opinion, for example, their is no succession or Catholic priest mentioned in the earliest of church history, which is described in the Acts of the apostles. Many of the church fathers during the first 3-4 generation believed in a faith alone by grace in Christ, taught predestination and other doctrines dispised by your church.

The First Epistle of Clement to the Corinthians

This is but one example of many that could be shown; yet over time many traditions have evolved that were never part of Scripture or the earliest church.

Chapter I.-The Salutation. Praise of the Corinthians Before the Breaking Forth of Schism Among Them.

The Church of God which sojourns at Rome, to the Church of God sojourning at Corinth, to them that are called and sanctified by the will of God, through our Lord Jesus Christ: Grace unto you, and peace, from Almighty God through Jesus Christ, be multiplied.

Owing, dear brethren, to the sudden and successive calamitous events which have happened to ourselves, we feel that we have been somewhat tardy in turning our attention to the points respecting which you consulted us;(2) and especially to that shameful and detestable sedition, utterly abhorrent to the elect of God, which a few rash and self-confident persons have kindled to such a pitch of frenzy, that your venerable and illustrious name, worthy to be universally loved, has suffered grievous injury.(3) For who ever dwelt even for a short time among you, and did not find your faith to be as fruitful of virtue as it was firmly established?(4) Who did not admire the sobriety and moderation of your godliness in Christ? Who did not proclaim the magnificence of your habitual hospitality? And who did not rejoice over your perfect and well-grounded knowledge? For ye did all things without respect of persons, and walked in the commandments of God, being obedient to those who had the rule over you, and giving all fitting honour to the presbyters among you. Ye enjoined young men to be of a sober and serious mind; ye instructed your wives to do all things with a blameless, becoming, and pure conscience, loving their husbands as in duty bound; and ye taught them that, living in the rule of obedience, they should manage their household affairs becomingly, and be in every respect marked by discretion.

Chapter II.-Praise of the Corinthians Continued.

Moreover, ye were all distinguished by humility, and were in no respect puffed up with pride, but yielded obedience rather than extorted it,(5) and were more willing to give than to receive.(6) Content with the provision which God had made for you, and carefully attending to His words, ye were inwardly filled(7) with His doctrine, and His sufferings were before your eyes. Thus a profound and abundant peace was given to you all, and ye had an insatiable desire for doing good, while a full outpouring of the Holy Spirit was upon you all. Full of holy designs, ye did, with true earnestness of mind and a godly confidence, stretch forth your hands to God Almighty, beseeching Him to be merciful unto you, if ye had been guilty of any involuntary transgression. Day and night ye were anxious for the whole brotherhood,(8) that the number of God’s elect might be saved with mercy and a good conscience.(9) Ye were sincere and uncorrupted, and forgetful of injuries between one another. Every kind of faction and schism was abominable in your sight. Ye mourned over the transgressions of your neighbours: their deficiencies you deemed your own. Ye never grudged any act of kindness, being “ready to every good work.”(10) Adorned by a thoroughly virtuous and religious life, ye did all things in the fear of God. The commandments and ordinances of the Lord were written upon the tablets of your hearts.(11)
 
I also would also add,when cannot have the Bible-Alone minus the church. Sorry,but that is heresy. Christ did not leave a book faith,but a church of the person: Christ. Yes Scripture is vital as all of our doctrines derive from scripture (explicitly/implicitly) but to say all one needs is Scripture is a bogus premise.
Unfortunately that is not what anyone is saying; that is your understanding of what Sola Scritura is as opposed to what it is not.

This should give you an oversimplified explanation so you can put things into the correct perspective for the purpose of the dialogue. GotQuestions-Sola Scriptura

Hope this helps with any further dialogue.
Beth
 
Unfortunately that is not what anyone is saying; that is your understanding of what Sola Scritura is as opposed to what it is not.

This should give you an oversimplified explanation so you can put things into the correct perspective for the purpose of the dialogue. GotQuestions-Sola Scriptura

Hope this helps with any further dialogue.
Beth
And that is the whole problem with Sola Scriptura. I have plenty of sources on the topic and over the years SS has taken on different meanings to different Chrisitans.

Either way,the whole notion of SS (regardless in what perspective you look at it) it is NOT biblical or historically accurate.
 
Fourth Council of Constantinople : 869-870

Canon 3 First paragraph

We decree that the sacred image of our lord Jesus Christ, the redeemer and saviour of all people, should be venerated with honour equal to that given to the book of the holy gospels. For, just as through the written words which are contained in the book (book of the holy gospels), we all shall obtain salvation, so through the influence that colours in painting exercise on the imagination, all, both wise and simple, obtain benefit from what is before them; for as speech teaches and portrays through syllables, so too does painting by means of colours. It is only right then, in accordance with true reason and very ancient tradition, that icons should be honoured and venerated in a derivative way because of the honour which is given to their archetypes, and it should be equal to that given to the sacred book of the holy gospels and the representation of the precious cross.

Again. Wow!
For, just as through the written words which are contained in the book (book of the holy gospels), we all shall obtain salvation,

Does this imply that the book of the holy gospels is sufficient for salvation?

And that we obtain benefit from other things?
The text of the third canon as quoted at fordham.edu/halsall/basis/const4.html says,
*The holy images of our Lord Jesus Christ shall be honored in like manner as the Gospel-book. For, as the words of the Gospel lead us to salvation, so also do the pictures through their colors produce the same effect, and all, learned and unlearned, can derive benefit therefrom. The message that comes to us through the written word, the same is brought home to us through the color of the Picture. Since the honor directed toward the picture reverts in intention to the prototype, it follows, in accordance with right reason and ancient tradition, that pictures must be honored in the same manner as the Gospel-book and the picture of the precious cross. If, therefore, anyone does not now honor the picture of Christ, he shall not see His form when He comes to glorify His saints. Likewise do we design pictures and images of His Blessed Mother and of the angels, as also the Sacred Scriptures picture them for us in words; also of the Apostles, prophets, martyrs, and all the saints . *
The text that you’ve presented appears to have been manipulated. Exactly where did you get it from?

Cheers
 
And that is the whole problem with Sola Scriptura. I have plenty of sources on the topic and over the years SS has taken on different meanings to different Christan’s.

Either way,the whole notion of SS (regardless in what perspective you look at it) it is NOT biblical or historically accurate.
That is your opinion, but Scripture works against that opinion especially in view of evolving religious traditions that fail to pass the Gold Standard of Scripture, which the nation and leadership of Israel gives the clearest example of what I am speaking of.
 
One of the last places I would go to get a definition of any faith questions would be to Gotquestions.org. Clearly anti-Catholic bias.

MJ
How do you define “anti-Catholic”? I see that term thrown around often and often used as red herring to avoid looking at other opinions or ignoring how somethng is actually defined rather than mere speculation and sound bites like OSAS.

In this case it was to clarify what Sola Scriptura is and what it is not, although much more could be said than what is on that sight, but for simplicity and for further dialogue on the subject it does give a better understanding than most seem to have here.

What is interesting to me is that most seem to believe that Sola Scriptura negates all traditions by any church. Traditions can be a really good thing and gives uniquness in the way each body worships the Lord, but the tradition must be Biblical in its practice, which means it must not contradict what the bible or God has said.
 
That is your opinion, but Scripture works against that opinion especially in view of evolving religious traditions that fail to pass the Gold Standard of Scripture, which the nation and leadership of Israel gives the clearest example of what I am speaking of.
No it is not my opinion, it is a FACT! Sola Scriptura is not biblical and not even taught in Scripture. It is your opinion to believe otherwise. I recommend you get out of your comfort zone and read early church history.
 
Lobotme
I wonder what Jesus means by binding and loosing?
The way I see it many think that Jesus meant to bind up all those loose writings going around into a book and call it the KJV and use it and only that. Thus we have SS.
 
That is your opinion, but Scripture works against that opinion especially in view of evolving religious traditions that fail to pass the Gold Standard of Scripture, which the nation and leadership of Israel gives the clearest example of what I am speaking of.
MRI is the gold standard for diagnosis of many medical conditions. The image we get using an MRI has to be interpreted correctly. Interpretation is critically important.
 
According to the Gold Standard; interpretation of Scripture comes not from man, but from the Holy Spirit indwelling each Christian. Since there are only a few true Christians compared to the number of false Christians according to the Golden Standard Bearer, the Lord Jesus; it certainly explains why there are many interpretations, many that defy even basic human logic.

I allow Scripture to interpret itself; and I am in no way infallible as many of you have already accused me of being in a sarcastic manner. I would be fooling myself to think I could ever correctly receive the correct interpretation of all of Scripture since the mind of God is far superior. The Scripture does say that the Christian has the mind of Christ, but because of the Christian sin stains; they still will get things incorrect, but not on the basics and even some of the more complex things.
This to me seems to be contradictory.
“According to the Gold Standard” Who set this standard and it is found in the Bible?
…interpretation of scriptures comes not from man, but from the Holy Spirit indwelling each Christian"
Are you saying that the Holy Spirit was indwelling in men who in the 4th century compiled the bible, however, those same men were not able to interpret what they claimed as being inspired by the Holy Spirit? AMOF those men aka the early Church, aka the CC, has had the same interpretation of the scriptures to the present day.

You allow Scripture to interpret itself? Where is that in scripture? I have heard this used time and time again by many non-Catholics, but when asked where is this in scripture they remain silent.
How can scripture interpret itself? There has to be somebody to interpret it.
I once asked in another forum many years ago that if two persons claimed they had the Holy Spirit in them, but came to a different interpretation of a certain verse, who determined which person was correct. The guy said, they would then search the scriptures again. I asked what if they still came up with different interpretations. I was told they would continue searching. I asked what if after exhausting their searches they still disagreed. I was told then that they would just have to agree to disagree. Now is the Holy Spirit going to give two different truths?

If you are not infallible and you are telling the Catholics here, that they have it wrong and your interpretation is correct, but you then admit that you don’t think you could ever correct receive the correct interpretation of ALL of scripture, then how do you know that the explanations you have given of scripture are correct.

And please don’t answer with the first sentence above that it is the Holy Spirit that is giving you that interpretation because you really don’t have any assurance that you are correct.
…but not on the basics.
This is funny because doing a search regarding the basics, and asking many non- Catholics what are the basics, they cant even agree as to what they are.

So the contradiction here is: The Holy Spirit indwells each Christian but then that Christian is not foolish enough to think they could ever correctly received the correct interpretation.
However, since they have the Holy Spirit indwelling in them, they have the correct interpretation, but they are not fallible so they dont claim to have all correct interpretations, but only the ones that are basic, and round and round it goes ad infinitum.

The thing is that there are hundreds if not thousands of Christians all claiming the Holy Spirit, all following the “Gold Standard” yet all coming with different interpretations.

It this what Jesus left behind? He must have been out of his mind?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top