Sola Scriptura Silence

[Cachonga]

SHW – Peter Vindicated is an interesting article. I would like to see Clement’s fifth book of Hypotyposes. However, I still believe it was Peter, and here’s why – we first find the name Cephas mentioned in John 1:42. Here it is clearly shown to be the same as Peter (Rock). This is a common literary device that lets readers know that any time you see either name, it indicates the same person (Jacob/Israel, Cephas/Peter, Aniken Skywalker/Darth Vader). If another character is introduced with the same name, there is a distinction made between them (such as “the other Mary”). Now why would Paul use the Aramaic Cephas instead of Greek Petros (Peter)? Could it be that, since he (Cephas/Peter) was separating himself from the Gentile believers, Paul wanted to make it clear to the Jewish believers that this was wrong? I would think so! OK, but why would Paul list him after James? Keep in mind, Paul was in Jerusalem. James was the Bishop in Jerusalem, so it would seem appropriate to mention him first. But why would Peter, who had learned his lesson when he had denied Jesus three times, do such a thing? Hmmm. Let’s think about that question. Why would the “Apostle to the Jews” not want to be seen hanging out with Gentiles? I wonder why that would be? Oh, wait! Maybe it’s because Cephas (Peter) was the “Apostle to the Jews”, and when the Jews came down from Jerusalem (where they don’t have a lot of Gentile believers), he might have wanted to make them comfortable, and so, separated from the Gentile believers. I don’t believe for a minute that Peter intended to cause a problem (most certainly not a schism between Jewish and Gentile believers). However, it is clear that this was Peter (Cephas) that Paul rebuked in Gal 2:11.

As far as accusing Paul of being a hypocrite for circumcising Timothy, I find nothing in the scriptures to indicate that Paul feared what the Jews might think. What I do see is that the Jews knew Timothy, and that his father was a Greek. This was a stumbling block to the Gospel (Timothy was looked at as an “uncircumcised Philistine”). This circumcision was more an act of love for the Jews than one of fear. Finally, since scripture is inspired by God, it would seem very strange to me that Paul would be hypocritical on this point and not have it pointed out within scripture itself. Since Paul is not rebuked for this anywhere in scripture, I would conclude that your accusation of hypocrisy is wrong.

 

[ralphy]

Hi Ralphy,

I think you do not understand that the Church speaks for Jesus. The Church is “living” and she is not contained in a Book. The Bible is a tool of the Church and the Church has Jesus’ authority to interpret its Scriptures. The Church is organized into a hierarchy which Jesus set up Himself.

Matthew 16:18-19 "And I also say to you that you are Peter, and on this rock I will build My church, and the gates of Hades shall not prevail against it. 19 And I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven.”

Jesus selects Peter for the top leadership position of His Church.

Matthew 28:19-20 “Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, 20 teaching them to observe all things that I have commanded you; and lo, I am with you always, even to the end of the age.” Amen.”

Jesus commissions the Apostles and commands them to go out and baptize persons so that they can be His disciples and He tells them to teach them all that they need to know in order to inherit eternal life. He did not tell them to go out and write a book. Jesus promises them that He will be with them in His Church until He returns.

Luke 10:16 “He who hears you hears Me, he who rejects you rejects Me, and he who rejects Me rejects Him who sent Me.”

Jesus tells His Church’s leaders that if people do not listen to them and if they do not do what the Church leaders say they should do, then they are rejecting Him and His Father.

Hebrews 13:17 “Obey those who rule over you, and be submissive, for** they watch out for your souls**, as those who must give account. Let them do so with joy and not with grief, for that would be unprofitable for you.”

Jesus gives His authority to the Apostles. This authority is passed down until He returns again. They rule over us spiritually. This is the way it is whether we like it or not.

John 14:26 “But the Helper, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in My name, He will teach you all things, and bring to your remembrance all things that I said to you.”

He sent the Holy Spirit to guide the Church and because the Holy Spirit is Truth, the Church cannot teach error regarding faith and morals.

So, who are you obeying? I obey the Church because Jesus said that if I do not listen to her and obey her, then I am rejecting Him and His Father. The Church is the bride of Christ and He is with her and will be with her until He returns at His Second Coming. This is His promise. So, if you are not part of her, then you are not really obeying the gospel of Jesus.

2 Thessalonians 1:7-9 “when the Lord Jesus is revealed from heaven with His mighty angels, 8 in flaming fire taking vengeance on those who do not know God, and on those who do not obey the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ. 9 These shall be punished with everlasting destruction”

Pax,
SHW

That authority that has been passed down from the disciples (as the Roman catholics claims) must be running out of steam.I don’t see or hear about healings, raising the dead,etc.Then again maybe it just the pope who can do this. Do you have an answer for this please. Ralph

 

[SteveGC]

Read 2 Tim 3:16-17 and you will see about scripture, (not tradition,which is the teaching of man).I follow the Bible because of John 12:44-50. My judgement will come from the written word of God,not by tradition. Ralph

Hi again, ralphy. Couple questions…

You do realize that hundreds (if not thousands) of Christians like you (that hold to the Bible-alone) interpret it differently, right?

Do you realize that many of the things they interpret differently are salvific in nature? (i.e. some believe baptism is necessary, some believe obedience is based on free will and not automatic based on faith, some believe in OSAS, some believe confession of future sins is necessary - not just a ‘good idea’). And do you realize that all these different salvific beliefs are claimed to have come from the Bible alone?

So, when you say that you will be judged by the written word of God, the Bible alone, do you realize that what you’re saying is that you’ll be judged by what YOU have determined to be the judgment criteria? Do you believe that the hundreds of others will be judged on different criteria? perhaps we’re all just judged on whatever truths are accepted by us individually? Is truth subjective like that for you?

God Bless

 

[SHW]

SHW – Peter Vindicated is an interesting article. I would like to see Clement’s fifth book of Hypotyposes. However, I still believe it was Peter, and here’s why – we first find the name Cephas mentioned in John 1:42. Here it is clearly shown to be the same as Peter (Rock). This is a common literary device that lets readers know that any time you see either name, it indicates the same person (Jacob/Israel, Cephas/Peter, Aniken Skywalker/Darth Vader). If another character is introduced with the same name, there is a distinction made between them (such as “the other Mary”). Now why would Paul use the Aramaic Cephas instead of Greek Petros (Peter)? Could it be that, since he (Cephas/Peter) was separating himself from the Gentile believers, Paul wanted to make it clear to the Jewish believers that this was wrong? I would think so! OK, but why would Paul list him after James? Keep in mind, Paul was in Jerusalem. James was the Bishop in Jerusalem, so it would seem appropriate to mention him first. But why would Peter, who had learned his lesson when he had denied Jesus three times, do such a thing? Hmmm. Let’s think about that question. Why would the “Apostle to the Jews” not want to be seen hanging out with Gentiles? I wonder why that would be? Oh, wait! Maybe it’s because Cephas (Peter) was the “Apostle to the Jews”, and when the Jews came down from Jerusalem (where they don’t have a lot of Gentile believers), he might have wanted to make them comfortable, and so, separated from the Gentile believers. I don’t believe for a minute that Peter intended to cause a problem (most certainly not a schism between Jewish and Gentile believers). However, it is clear that this was Peter (Cephas) that Paul rebuked in Gal 2:11.

As far as accusing Paul of being a hypocrite for circumcising Timothy, I find nothing in the scriptures to indicate that Paul feared what the Jews might think. What I do see is that the Jews knew Timothy, and that his father was a Greek. This was a stumbling block to the Gospel (Timothy was looked at as an “uncircumcised Philistine”). This circumcision was more an act of love for the Jews than one of fear. Finally, since scripture is inspired by God, it would seem very strange to me that Paul would be hypocritical on this point and not have it pointed out within scripture itself. Since Paul is not rebuked for this anywhere in scripture, I would conclude that your accusation of hypocrisy is wrong.

Hello,

Thank you for writing.

The names, Cephas and Peter, are both used for the same man in Scripture; however, when two men by the same name are mentioned, a distinction is made in order to be able to tell which man is being referred to. Galatians in the original Greek translations uses two different names in order to distinguish between two different men with the same name.

Would you use two different names for the same man in one letter? I wouldn’t and neither did Paul. He would have said “Cephas for the apostleship to the circumcised” instead of “Peter for the apostleship to the circumcised” if they both meant the same man because he used the name “Cephas” just a few words later.

Every time the Jews questioned Peter about Gentile Christian fellowship, he told them about his vision. After he did this, their objections disappeared and that was the end of it. Peter, who denied Jesus three times, certainly learned his lesson and would not have done such a cowardly thing as to refuse to eat with the Gentiles after he explicitly said that they were to be baptized into Christian fellowship. This would not ring true to zealous Peter’s character, he who cut off the ear of the servant with a sword in the Garden of Gethsemane defending the Lord. (John 18:10)

Scripture records events, it doesn’t always make judgments. If you are male and are told to be circumcised in order to please others who did not believe as you do in order to make them feel more friendly towards you; how would you react? Peter is the one who declared that circumcision was unnecessary in the new Church.

“This is the account of Clement in the fifth book of his Hypotyposes , in which he also says that Cephas was one of the seventy disciples, a man who bore the same name as the apostle Peter, and the one concerning whom Paul says, “When Cephas came to Antioch I withstood him to his face” [Galatians 2:11]. Matthias, also, who was numbered with the apostles in the place of Judas, and the one who was honored by being made a candidate with him [Joseph (Barsabas) Justus, see Acts 1:23-26], are likewise said to have been deemed worthy of the same calling with the seventy.” Eusebius’ History of the Church Book 1.12

His 5th book no longer exists. Books were written on materials that deteriorated and few remain. But it did exist when it was referenced by Eusebius.

Peter is always listed first in every list of apostles/disciples in the Bible. It is only in this one instance that he is not. Why not? Because it is not Peter, but Cephas the disciple, who is being reprimanded. These other two, James and John, are of the 70-72 disciples or else they would both have been listed before Cephas. Apostles are always listed first. The Church is a hierarchy.

The Apostles; Peter, James, and John are pillars. The disciples; James, Cephas, and John are only reputed to be pillars.

We will have to agree to disagree.

Pax,
SHW

 

[Sharp11]

Read 2 Tim 3:16-17 and you will see about scripture, (not tradition,which is the teaching of man).

Hi Ralphy,

What do you think of what I said about 2 Tim 3:16-17 in post #92?

Sharp 11

 

[Nousername]

Ask yourself what was authoritative for the N.T. Church. I believe you can find it in the N.T.
One verse which tells us is:
2 Thess. 2:15- So then, brethren, stand firm and hold to the traditions which you were taught by us, either by word of mouth or by letter.
Now, who holds to this verse, Protestants or Catholics?

Sorry I can’t give you chapter and verse. Maybe somebody else can fill that in…but, somwhere in the Bible it also says something like…'There is not enough room to write ALL that could be written…" I know it is more profound than that…but apparently, EVERYTHING was not covered (in the witten word) because PRACTICALLY, there was just too much that could have been covered. It is satisfying enough to me that what IS written is of great importance to the Christian life…and that what has not been WRITTEN has been passed along in the TEACHING tradition of the Apostles, since they were given the mandate…“Go TEACH all nations.” I don’t believe they were EVER told to actually WRITE anything. Not even sure they had any feasible means to WRITE for the MASSES and therefore no possibility to hand out flyers or ‘tracks.’ Teaching was, of necessity, by world of mouth…and by ACTION of the followers of Jesus…“SEE how the love one another.” WORD and ACTION.

 

[SHW]

That authority that has been passed down from the disciples (as the Roman catholics claims) must be running out of steam.I don’t see or hear about healings, raising the dead,etc.Then again maybe it just the pope who can do this. Do you have an answer for this please. Ralph

Hi Ralph,

Scripture states that we are to obey the leaders of the Church. If you look at Acts 1:15-26, you will see the first record of Apostolic Succession in action. Also, if you look at 2 Timothy 2:2, you will find Paul instructing the new bishop, Timothy “And the things that you have heard from me among many witnesses, commit these to faithful men who will be able to teach others also.”

Hebrews 13:17 “Obey those who rule over you, and be submissive, for they watch out for your souls, as those who must give account. Let them do so with joy and not with grief, for that would be unprofitable for you.”

2 Thessalonians 3:14 “And if anyone does not obey our word in this epistle, note that person and do not keep company with him, that he may be ashamed.”

1 Corinthians 14:37 “If anyone thinks himself to be a prophet or spiritual, let him acknowledge that the things which I write to you are the commandments of the Lord.”

Acts 5:32 "And we are His witnesses to these things, and so also is the Holy Spirit whom God has given to those who obey Him.”

The Holy Spirit is given to those who obey Him. A person obeys the Holy Spirit by doing what the Church commands. (Luke 10:16)

Galatians 1:6-8 “I marvel that you are turning away so soon from Him who called you in the grace of Christ, to a different gospel, 7 which is not another; but there are some who trouble you and want to pervert the gospel of Christ. 8 But even if we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel to you than what we have preached to you, let him be accursed.”

Paul warns that those who do not obey him are perverting the gospel and he says, “let him be accursed.”

2 Peter 3:15-17 “Paul, according to the wisdom given to him, has written to you, 16 as also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things, in which are some things hard to understand, which untaught and unstable people twist to their own destruction, as they do also the rest of the Scriptures. 17 You therefore, beloved, since you know this beforehand, beware lest you also fall from your own steadfastness, being led away with the error of the wicked;”

2 Peter 1:20 “knowing this first, that no prophecy of Scripture is of any private interpretation”

The Church is a hierarchy set up by Jesus. He commands that we obey His hierarchy. But, if a person sets himself up as “pope” of his own “religion” which consists of his own beliefs determined by his own personal interpretation of Scripture, then he is not obeying Jesus’ gospel because He said to obey His Church which He promises to be with until He returns and to which He promises the Holy Spirit’s guidance. (Luke 10:16, Matthew 28:19-20, John 14:25-26)

2 Thessalonians 1:7-9 “when the Lord Jesus is revealed from heaven with His mighty angels, 8 in flaming fire taking vengeance on those who do not know God, and on those who do not obey the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ. 9 These shall be punished with everlasting destruction”

The gospel of Jesus Christ is entrusted to His Church, His representative on earth.

1 Timothy 3:15 "but if I am delayed, I write so that you may know how you ought to conduct yourself in the house of God, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and ground of the truth."

We are instructed to obey the “traditions” of the apostles, both oral traditions and those traditions recorded in letters.

2 Thessalonians 2:15 “Therefore, brethren, stand fast and hold the traditions which you were taught, whether by word or our epistle.”

1 Corinthians 11:2 “Now I praise you, brethren, that you remember me in all things and keep the traditions just as I delivered them to you.”

As for miracles, etc., there is so much sin in the world and unbelief, we do not hear of miracles on a major scale, such as feeding 5000 people on five loaves and two fish, but miracles do happen for individual persons. Some things can only be accomplished by prayer and fasting and not enough people are doing this these days. (Mark 9:18-29, Matthew 13:58)

Pax,
SHW

 

[Sharp11]

Hi Nousername,

Are you thinking of John 21:25?
*
But there are also many other things which Jesus did; were every one of them to be written, I suppose that the world itself could not contain the books that would be written.*

Or maybe 3John 13-14?

*I had much to write to you, but I would rather not write with pen and ink; I hope to see you soon, and we will talk together face to face. *

Sharp 11

 

[SHW]

Nousername[COLOR="Navy:
[QUOTE]
, post:166, topic:147956"]
Sorry I can’t give you chapter and verse. Maybe somebody else can fill that in…but, somwhere in the Bible it also says something like…'There is not enough room to write ALL that could be written…" I know it is more profound than that…but apparently, EVERYTHING was not covered (in the witten word) because PRACTICALLY, there was just too much that could have been covered. It is satisfying enough to me that what IS written is of great importance to the Christian life…and that what has not been WRITTEN has been passed along in the TEACHING tradition of the Apostles, since they were given the mandate…“Go TEACH all nations.” I don’t believe they were EVER told to actually WRITE anything. Not even sure they had any feasible means to WRITE for the MASSES and therefore no possibility to hand out flyers or ‘tracks.’ Teaching was, of necessity, by world of mouth…and by ACTION of the followers of Jesus…“SEE how the love one another.” WORD and ACTION.
[/QUOTE]
Hi,

I agree with you. Jesus commanded them to go out and make disciples through baptism and teaching them to observe all that He commanded them. (Matthew 28:18-20)

John 21:25 “And there are also many other things that Jesus did, which if they were written one by one, I suppose that even the world itself could not contain the books that would be written. Amen.”

John 20:30 “And truly Jesus did many other signs in the presence of His disciples, which are not written in this book;”

1 Timothy 3:14-15 “These things I write to you, though I hope to come to you shortly; 15 but if I am delayed, I write so that you may know how you ought to conduct yourself in the house of God, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and ground of the truth.”

2 John 1:12 “Having many things to write to you, I did not wish to do so with paper and ink; but I hope to come to you and speak face to face, that our joy may be full.”

3 John 1:13-14 “I had many things to write, but I do not wish to write to you with pen and ink; 14 but I hope to see you shortly, and we shall speak face to face.”

Pax,
SHW

 

[rocketrob]

Read 2 Tim 3:16-17 and you will see about scripture, (not tradition,which is the teaching of man).I follow the Bible because of John 12:44-50. My judgement will come from the written word of God,not by tradition. Ralph

2 Tim 3:16-17 has been covered numerous times…even just in this thread.

John 12:48, which you referenced, actually supports the Catholic perspective regarding Sacred Tradition:

“He that despiseth me, and receiveth not my words, hath one that judgeth him; the word that I have spoken, the same shall judge him in the last day.” (John 12:48)

Sacred Tradition, as has been mentioned numerous times above, refers to the Words of Christ that have been passed on orally to His Apostles. This Tradition is not the teaching of just any man, or man in general, but rather the teaching of a Man…the ultimate Man…Christ Himself. This is the same teaching that Paul refers to in 2 Tim 3:14, just two verses before your 2 Tim reference:

“But continue thou in those things which thou hast learned, and which have been committed to thee: knowing of whom thou hast learned them;” (2 Tim 3:14)

But I’ve mentioned this above, also.

rocketrob

 

[Cachonga]

SHW – I will agree to disagree. You have presented some good arguments, and I will certainly do some research into it. I would offer a suggestion though. You said “Every time the Jews questioned Peter about Gentile Christian fellowship…” There is only one such account in scripture (or have I missed something?). I would suggest (unless you can find other times this happened) that instead of saying “Every time” you might say “When”. I’m not sure you understood what I was saying about Paul’s circumcision of Timothy. I believe that Paul and Timothy loved the Jews so much that Timothy was willing to be circumcised by Paul in order to remove that stumbling block (once circumcised, how could the Jews complain about him?). While it’s not entirely clear why Paul did it, I doubt it was fear of the Jews, and since (as I already pointed out) he wasn’t rebuked within scripture, I do not accept the charge of hypocrisy against him for doing it.

To all – this topic has strayed far and wide, like a metal ball in a pin ball game (did I just date myself?). I was willing to stay for the sake of JJ59, but he has made it clear that he has decided to “Swim the Tiber” (just hasn’t set the date). And so, this will be my last entry here. It’s been interesting!

Pax!

 

[thechristian]

Yes the church does speak for jesus thru the influence holy spirit…as member in faith can this only be done. Yes the church is living in the hearts of all members of the church.
The bible is the book of standards In which the church is to conduct itshelf. The authority
to interpet scripture is given to all members in faith thru the power of holy spirit so it is not a personal interpentation.

peace and blessings

david

Hi Ralphy,

I think you do not understand that the Church speaks for Jesus. The Church is “living” and she is not contained in a Book. The Bible is a tool of the Church and the Church has Jesus’ authority to interpret its Scriptures. The Church is organized into a hierarchy which Jesus set up Himself.

Matthew 16:18-19 "And I also say to you that you are Peter, and on this rock I will build My church, and the gates of Hades shall not prevail against it. 19 And I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven.”

Jesus selects Peter for the top leadership position of His Church.

Matthew 28:19-20 “Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, 20 teaching them to observe all things that I have commanded you; and lo, I am with you always, even to the end of the age.” Amen.”

Jesus commissions the Apostles and commands them to go out and baptize persons so that they can be His disciples and He tells them to teach them all that they need to know in order to inherit eternal life. He did not tell them to go out and write a book. Jesus promises them that He will be with them in His Church until He returns.

Luke 10:16 “He who hears you hears Me, he who rejects you rejects Me, and he who rejects Me rejects Him who sent Me.”

Jesus tells His Church’s leaders that if people do not listen to them and if they do not do what the Church leaders say they should do, then they are rejecting Him and His Father.

Hebrews 13:17 “Obey those who rule over you, and be submissive, for** they watch out for your souls**, as those who must give account. Let them do so with joy and not with grief, for that would be unprofitable for you.”

Jesus gives His authority to the Apostles. This authority is passed down until He returns again. They rule over us spiritually. This is the way it is whether we like it or not.

John 14:26 “But the Helper, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in My name, He will teach you all things, and bring to your remembrance all things that I said to you.”

He sent the Holy Spirit to guide the Church and because the Holy Spirit is Truth, the Church cannot teach error regarding faith and morals.

So, who are you obeying? I obey the Church because Jesus said that if I do not listen to her and obey her, then I am rejecting Him and His Father. The Church is the bride of Christ and He is with her and will be with her until He returns at His Second Coming. This is His promise. So, if you are not part of her, then you are not really obeying the gospel of Jesus.

2 Thessalonians 1:7-9 “when the Lord Jesus is revealed from heaven with His mighty angels, 8 in flaming fire taking vengeance on those who do not know God, and on those who do not obey the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ. 9 These shall be punished with everlasting destruction”

Pax,
SHW

 

[ralphy]

Hi again, ralphy. Couple questions…

You do realize that hundreds (if not thousands) of Christians like you (that hold to the Bible-alone) interpret it differently, right?

Do you realize that many of the things they interpret differently are salvific in nature? (i.e. some believe baptism is necessary, some believe obedience is based on free will and not automatic based on faith, some believe in OSAS, some believe confession of future sins is necessary - not just a ‘good idea’). And do you realize that all these different salvific beliefs are claimed to have come from the Bible alone?

So, when you say that you will be judged by the written word of God, the Bible alone, do you realize that what you’re saying is that you’ll be judged by what YOU have determined to be the judgment criteria? Do you believe that the hundreds of others will be judged on different criteria? perhaps we’re all just judged on whatever truths are accepted by us individually? Is truth subjective like that for you?

God Bless

The choice is up to you. You can believe what God said in His word (not what I said) or believe what the church teaches you, which is obviously different. You will answer for yourself. Ralph

 

[Ferde_Rombola]

The authority to interpet scripture is given to all members in faith thru the power of holy spirit so it is not a personal interpentation.

If you’re right about that, then the Holy Spirit is leading millions astray. How do you account for 34,000 protestant sects and millions of their members coming to widly differing conclusions about what Scripture means?

 

[Ferde_Rombola]

The choice is up to you. You can believe what God said in His word (not what I said) or believe what the church teaches you, which is obviously different. You will answer for yourself. Ralph

You beg the question there, Ralph. You’re right to imply that what God said is not the same as what you said (whether you meant to say that or not) but you’re wrong when you say there’s a difference between what the Catholic Church teaches and the word of God. When you make allegations like that, you ought to include some proof if you want to be taken seriously.

And you changed the subject. Steve asked how you account for personal interpretation of Scripture when there are, literally, millions of different opinions about the meaning of Scripture. They can’t all be right. Can you answer that?

 

[thechristian]

No offsense ralphy…but I don’t know why catholics use scripture to prove there theology
if they think its “only a book”. How do they know that if what they are interpenting is correct or not if its “Only a book”?

Peace and blessing

david

 

[JJ59]

No offsense ralphy…but I don’t know why catholics use scripture to prove there theology
if they think its “only a book”. How do they know that if what they are interpenting is correct or not if its “Only a book”?

Peace and blessing

david

Did I miss something? (It’s possible.) Since when do Catholics consider the Bible to be “only a book”? Nope, The Church has taught for 2000 years that Sacred Scripture is inspired by God. It just isn’t our sole authority.

Now then, can we please focus on one aspect of Sola Scriptura, instead of just everything at once?

God Bless.

 

[thechristian]

When you are spirit filled there is no such thing as personel intepentation of scripture…the spirit leads you into all truth. If you get the wrong interpentation then you not spirit filled
and you are in error. Scripture is either Simbolic, Metaforic, Literal…for example a birthday
party is a symbolic tradition for a literal happening "Celabration of your literal birth. An example is christ saying he is the vine, the truth, the way, the life…theses are metafors
for literaly saying he is the only way to salvation. When Jesus whent to the cross and some of his last words were “It is finished” this is literal "What he came to accomplish here on earth was finished…and that’s what meant FINISHED.

peace and blessings

david

You beg the question there, Ralph. You’re right to imply that what God said is not the same as what you said (whether you meant to say that or not) but you’re wrong when you say there’s a difference between what the Catholic Church teaches and the word of God. When you make allegations like that, you ought to include some proof if you want to be taken seriously.

And you changed the subject. Steve asked how you account for personal interpretation of Scripture when there are, literally, millions of different opinions about the meaning of Scripture. They can’t all be right. Can you answer that?

 

[inkaneer]

That authority that has been passed down from the disciples (as the Roman catholics claims) must be running out of steam.I don’t see or hear about healings, raising the dead,etc.Then again maybe it just the pope who can do this. Do you have an answer for this please. Ralph

Why do you say that? Healings still occur. Miracles are not dead. God is still involved with His Creation. As for the authority running out of steam, what does authority to bind or loose have to do with healings? It may seem that the Apostolic church was blessed with more miracles than we see today but miracles are still occurring. With advances in the medical sciences we are much more conservative in what we classify as a miracle but there are still those cases of cures which doctors say they have no medical explanation. Could it be that maybe you don’t hear about them is because there are none occurring in your denomination?

 

[JJ59]

When you are spirit filled there is no such thing as personel intepentation of scripture…the spirit leads you into all truth. If you get the wrong interpentation then you not spirit filled
and you are in error. Scripture is either Simbolic, Metaforic, Literal…for example a birthday
party is a symbolic tradition for a literal happening "Celabration of your literal birth. An example is christ saying he is the vine, the truth, the way, the life…theses are metafors
for literaly saying he is the only way to salvation. When Jesus whent to the cross and some of his last words were “It is finished” this is literal "What he came to accomplish here on earth was finished…and that’s what meant FINISHED.

peace and blessings

david

So how does one become “spirit-filled”? How do you tell that you are spirit-filled, and that everyone else is wrong?