Sola Scriptura - unifier?

[MT1926]

No , but He had it written. Jesus is not a church either, but he is the head of it, chief cornerstone.

Were does it say Jesus commanded the Bible to be written?

From what I read it seems the Apostles decided to write and the Holy Spirit kept them from writing error. But I don’t see anywhere them saying Jesus commanded them to write the scriptures because that is the way Jesus intended for them to hand on the faith.

God Bless

 

[JonNC]

It is not a straw man at all. We continually see in many places what amounts to a denial of the Incarnate Christ, as if Christ is a figure in the bible, but did not walk the earth in human flesh, in human history, touch people, breathe on people, speak to people, give people work to do.

Source. Which Christian community/communion/tradition/ denomination teaches such? You won’t find one because, by definition, they wouldn’t be Christian.

It does not. It observes the truth that scripture is the word of God in human words, written by the community it lives in.

This is different from what you said above, and is an accurate statement.

Do you believe God floated the bible to earth already written, or was a community formed first, which wrote the bible?

This is polemical nonsense. No one believes this, but if you find someone who does, I will join you in condemnation of it.

The bible comes out of Tradition. Pleases explain how that marginalizes scripture, when in fact it merely observes how scripture came about.

Because in your initial post, which you corrected in this post, you seemed to dismiss God’s involvement in writing scripture.

Again:
Where was the bible when Jesus walked the earth in human flesh?

You never asked me that question, and it is a silly question since all through the Gospels we see Christ call Himself the Son of man, and God call Him “My Son” at His baptism.

 

[JonNC]

Were does it say Jesus commanded the Bible to be written?

It doesn’t, but that shouldn’t deny that fact that God (Jesus is God) inspired its writing, and Jesus references it often (“It is written”).

From what I read it seems the Apostles decided to write and the Holy Spirit kept them from writing error.

Are you of the opinion that they decided this themselves, or do you believe that the Spirit inspired them to do so?

But I don’t see anywhere them saying Jesus commanded them to write the scriptures because that is the way Jesus intended for them to hand on the faith.

Is it your opinion that God did not intend to hand on the faith through the written word, even though He handed the Decalogue directly to Moses?

 

[MT1926]

Do you believe God floated the bible to earth already written, or was a community formed first, which wrote the bible?

The bible comes out of Tradition. Pleases explain how that marginalizes scripture, when in fact it merely observes how scripture came about.

I don’t want to get in the middle of this conversation you guys are having but I just want to point out don’t you think that (for as long as you have been on this forum) that you actually believing @goout was dismissing God’s involvement could also be polemical nonsense?

God Bless

 

[JonNC]

I don’t want to get in the middle of this conversation you guys are having but I just want to point out don’t you think that (for as long as you have been on this forum) that you actually believing @goout was dismissing God’s involvement could also be polemical nonsense?

Of course I don’t, and I said as much:

This comes close to denying God’s authorship of scripture. I assume you do not mean it that way.

I just think sometimes Catholics go over the top in denying sola scriptura, just like some “protestants” go over the top in denying the importance of Church authority and Tradition in order to argue against Catholicism.

 

[goout]

I all boils down to Christ and Christ is incarnate, “in human flesh”.
And that either means something or it doesn’t.
Human beings form communities, ie “Church”. And that either means something or it doesn’t.
The Church has human things about it. It is instituted. It is composed of real people united to Christ, not free-lancing individuals.
People have authority. Authority is a charism, a gift for the good of the whole community.
If God did not intend this, then Christ can be just a figure in the bible for ethical guidance.

I think people who chafe at this should ask themselves “who is Christ”.

 

[MT1926]

It doesn’t, but that shouldn’t deny that fact that God (Jesus is God) inspired its writing, and Jesus references it often (“It is written”).

I never said Jesus was against it my only point is it sure seems like Jesus main concern was to start an authoritative Church. Personally if the Bible is as important as people believe it to be you would think he would have mentioned it.

Are you of the opinion that they decided this themselves, or do you believe that the Spirit inspired them to do so?

To be honest I don’t know what was going through St. Paul’s mind when he wrote. Take for instance Romans 1

It seems that Paul longed to preach to the Romans but he could not get there so he wrote to them instead. He doesn’t say I couldn’t get their so the Holy Spirit inspired me to write to you. Any conclusion we make is reading that into this text. But to me it sure seems like writing to the Romans was Paul’s intention until he would get the chance to get there.

Is it your opinion that God did not intend to hand on the faith through the written word

No never said that, not sure how you are getting to that from my post.

even though He handed the Decalogue directly to Moses?

Is it your opinion that the God did not need Moses and the people could have taken the Decalogue from Moses at the foot of the mountain and interpret it, within their separate tribes, for themselves?

God Bless

 

[MT1926]

I just think sometimes Catholics go over the top in denying sola scriptura, just like some “protestants” go over the top in denying the importance of Church authority and Tradition in order to argue against Catholicism.

I don’t really “deny” sola scriptura i tend to ignore it. The reason being just like private interpretation of scripture people tend to have private interpretation of what sola scriptura actually means.

Personally for me when I see the teachings of Jesus’ mode of passing on the faith his primary mode doesn’t seem to be the Bible nor does it seem to be Tradition it sure seems pretty clear that his primary mode is Authority to Teach. If you can’t come to an understanding on who has the Authority to Teach then scripture and tradition are meaningless.

God Bless

PS please don’t think I am saying the Bible is worthless. All I am getting at rules, regulations, doctrines, traditions, interpretations, etc…are all meaningless without someone who has the authority to bind it or loose it.

 

[Bon_Croix]

Would they say that the Jews of the OT times were Sola Scriptura?

 

[goout]

goout:

It is not a straw man at all. We continually see in many places what amounts to a denial of the Incarnate Christ, as if Christ is a figure in the bible, but did not walk the earth in human flesh, in human history, touch people, breathe on people, speak to people, give people work to do.

Source. Which Christian community/communion/tradition/ denomination teaches such? You won’t find one because, by definition, they wouldn’t be Christian.

I find this a little disingenuous. Look at the posts here. Read the large volume of protestant objections to Tradition and the charism of authority.
It’s all around you, and yet you ask this question.

Really and truly, what are you objecting to here? Why are we here? One the one hand you claim concordance with just about all we believe, all the while objecting.
What are doing here…

 

[guanophore]

That is like saying the OT community of God , the Jews , created the Messiah.

To an extent, this is true. When Paul writes about the Jews being the foundation of Christianity, he points out all that God did through the Jews to prepare for the coming of the Messiah.

Before Paul came to Christ, he had much reason to boast as coming from the Jews

3 Then what advantage has the Jew? Or what is the value of circumcision? 2 Much, in every way. For in the first place the Jews were entrusted with the oracles of God. (Rom. 3)

If anyone else has reason to be confident in the flesh, I have more: 5 circumcised on the eighth day, a member of the people of Israel, of the tribe of Benjamin, a Hebrew born of Hebrews; as to the law, a Pharisee; 6 as to zeal, a persecutor of the church; as to righteousness under the law, blameless. Phil. 3

One interpretation of the woman in Revelation who gives birth to the Messiah is the nation of Israel.

 

[JonNC]

I never said Jesus was against it my only point is it sure seems like Jesus main concern was to start an authoritative Church. Personally if the Bible is as important as people believe it to be you would think he would have mentioned it.

He often mentions scripture. His main purpose was atonement. He then established the Church in order to preach the word and administer the sacraments (Baptize and teach). He says so in the Great Commission. He says so when He tells the disciples to “bind and loose”.
The Bible is important because this is the way human beings transmit knowledge. It was important to the Jews, and it is important to Christians. The Catholic Church teaches its importance.

To be honest I don’t know what was going through St. Paul’s mind when he wrote. Take for instance Romans 1

It seems that Paul longed to preach to the Romans but he could not get there so he wrote to them instead. He doesn’t say I couldn’t get their so the Holy Spirit inspired me to write to you. Any conclusion we make is reading that into this text. But to me it sure seems like writing to the Romans was Paul’s intention until he would get the chance to get there.

Then how do we know Paul’s writings are truth? The same way we know the truth of the Decalogue.

No never said that, not sure how you are getting to that from my post.

Were does it say Jesus commanded the Bible to be written?

This is what you said that prompted my question.

Is it your opinion that the God did not need Moses and the people could have taken the Decalogue from Moses at the foot of the mountain and interpret it, within their separate tribes, for themselves?

I think I’m the one who stated that God gave them to Moses. God summoned Moses to the top of Mount Sinai. He writes the Decalogue and hands it to Moses to take down the mountain. God uses human hands to provide His word to His people.

 

[Bon_Croix]

Jesus was born by a special grace from God. Jesus race could not have conceived Jesus with their laws and prophets b/c the Holy Spirit conceived Jesus. Abraham’s DNA did not conceive Jesus.

But, we love Abraham too.

 

[JonNC]

PS please don’t think I am saying the Bible is worthless. All I am getting at rules, regulations, doctrines, traditions, interpretations, etc…are all meaningless without someone who has the authority to bind it or loose it.

I don’t disagree.

 

[JonNC]

Would they say that the Jews of the OT times were Sola Scriptura?

Were there not the teachers in the Temple?

 

[Bon_Croix]

Temple TEachers?

 

[JonNC]

JonNC:

goout:

It is not a straw man at all. We continually see in many places what amounts to a denial of the Incarnate Christ, as if Christ is a figure in the bible, but did not walk the earth in human flesh, in human history, touch people, breathe on people, speak to people, give people work to do.

Source. Which Christian community/communion/tradition/ denomination teaches such? You won’t find one because, by definition, they wouldn’t be Christian.

I find this a little disingenuous. Look at the posts here. Read the large volume of protestant objections to Tradition and the charism of authority.
It’s all around you, and yet you ask this question.

Really and truly, what are you objecting to here? Why are we here? One the one hand you claim concordance with just about all we believe, all the while objecting.
What are doing here…

I object to the characterizations here. @goout stated this:

We continually see in many places what amounts to a denial of the Incarnate Christ, as if Christ is a figure in the bible, but did not walk the earth in human flesh, in human history, touch people, breathe on people, speak to people, give people work to do.

I see no true Christian communion reject the Incarnation. I see no where where Christians reject the fact that He was a living, breathing human being.
All I did was ask for a source of a communion that does this, and I would join in a condemnation of it.

The fact is that among Christians, there is a significant concordance. It seems there is no need to create differences where they do not exist, such as in the nature and person of Christ.

 

[JonNC]

Temple TEachers?

Do not modern Jewish rabbis teach?
As for Christians, is that not what Christ says to do in the Great Commission.

Going therefore, teach ye all nations; baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and behold I am with you all days, even to the consummation of the world.

 

[commenter]

He often mentions scripture

He (Jesus) often mentions a body of writings that Christians have, starting long after His time on Earth, referred to as the Old Testament. The earliest Christians, and the Jews then or now, would not have referred to an Old Testament.

 

[MT1926]

He often mentions scripture.

Yes and did you notice He often mentions scripture because the people didn’t believe He had the authority to teach. Kind of makes you wonder doesn’t it? Nothing has changed no one is willing to follow and authority so we gotta run around mentioning scripture.

The Bible is important because this is the way human beings transmit knowledge. It was important to the Jews, and it is important to Christians. The Catholic Church teaches its importance.

And I never claimed it wasn’t important.

Then how do we know Paul’s writings are truth?

For me it’s the authority of the Catholic Church, not sure your reasoning?

The same way we know the truth of the Decalogue.

And that would be?

I think I’m the one who stated that God gave them to Moses. God summoned Moses to the top of Mount Sinai. He writes the Decalogue and hands it to Moses to take down the mountain. God uses human hands to provide His word to His people.

I have no objections to this. I was speaking about authority. My point is sure God wrote it but what good would it have been with out the authority He gave to Moses.

It’s all about authority

God Bless