Sola Scriptura

[golfjack]

PS, Why don’t you enlighten me about being led by the Holy Spirit? Are you saying that the Pope and Majesterium are the only people that can be led by the Holy Spirit. I believe we as believers are all led by the Holy Spirit.
Peace, Golfjack

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

PS, Why don’t you enlighten me about being led by the Holy Spirit? Are you saying that the Pope and Majesterium are the only people that can be led by the Holy Spirit. I believe we as believers are all led by the Holy Spirit.

  Peace,   Golfjack

You know, I am beginning to question your motives in this, and other discussions. You don’t address points raised and when you do, it’s normally answering questions with questions. You don’t discuss scriptures provided and only offer your own writings or opinons as a refutation.

I have never said that ONLY the Magisterium can be led by the Holy Spirit. What I said, was that the authority of Christ’s Church has Holy Spirit protection, as promised by Christ.

All Christians have Holy Spirit influence. That does not grant all of us the right to assume authority, and teach different truths, according to a private interpretation.

Are the many denominations, with slight to great differences in doctrine, due to someone’s private interpretation, being of the same mind and judgment according to scriptures? It’s been asked several times and you have not addressed it. Instead, you have turned the discussion back to the Catholic Church and how that interpretation cannot be trusted, because it is the interpretation of men. Are not the many private interpretations, of Protestantism, also from men?

I know, you presented a list of objections, which are more misconceptions due to a lack of understanding, against the Catholic faith. I’ve told you, we can discuss any doctrine/teaching of the Catholic faith and show that teaching comes from an interpretation of scriptures, even if you don’t agree with the interpretation. The Catholic Church is a Bible based Church.

There was ONE Church throughout history, up until the 1500s. In my opinion, this was due to men who didn’t have faith that Christ could protect His truth and Church through the actions of corrupt men, which was much less than the gates of hell. Was the Church in need of reform then? Yes, most assuredly it was. You cannot reform, what you leave. That was Martin Luther’s mistake. He threw the baby out with the bathwater. If we worked under the assumption that it was acceptable to leave Christ’s Church because of the scandals of men, would it also be acceptable to leave Christ Himself because of all those disciples who left Him and walked with Him no more? (John 6:66, I cannot type that chapter and verse without seeing great irony). Would it be acceptable to leave Christ because He chose Judas Iscariot, who was one of the twelve?

Now, Catholics have admitted scandals within the Church, let me ask this, are all the Protestant denominations without scandal? The one without sin should cast the first stone…

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

Christ chose a Magisterium, through the Apostles. Not one Apostles appointed themself. Even Judas Iscariot’s replacement was chosen by the holy men Christ chose, demonstrating an apostolic succession. St. Paul wrote about appointment through the imposition of hands, and nowhere in scriptures does it tell us of anyone that imposed hands upon themself, or appointed themself.

Now, through private interpretation, there are many who have appointed themselves and become their own “magisterium”. They lead Churches and preach the Gospel according to their own private interpretation. There are many different denominations, as I’ve said, with many different doctrines and teachings based on someone’s private interpretation, all claiming guidance from the Holy Spirit. Aren’t these just “men” as some have said about the men of the Catholic Church?

Some continually say how wrong the Catholic Church is. Which denomination is the correct denomination? Which denomination has all His doctrines correct? Which denomination truly has apostolic authority? Who has the authority to say which denomination is correct? These are important questions for those who want to follow His truth, as He passed it down. You can’t just tell us the oldest Christian Church in the world is wrong and expect us to follow any denomination out there.

 

[golfjack]

PS, Just because you are old doesn’t mean you are right. By the way, I did have hands laid on me to be an Evangelist. But I won’t demand you call me Rev. Jack. Yes, there many different denominations with different opinions on Bible interpretation on certain scriptures, but Most Evangelicals will agree on how one gets saved and that is the most important thing. For example, I disagree with the Baptists about speaking in tongues and the laying on of hands for physical healing, but I would say they are excellent soul winners. Many times it comes down to Church governance, but I belong to a non-denominational Church, which is Pentacostal and has a Word of faith Pastor. I do not like liberal churches, which to me are luke-warm on most think. It all comes down to a choice. I am most comfortable in my church because it is a Word and Holy Spirit Church.
Peace, Golfjack

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

PS, Just because you are old doesn’t mean you are right.

Just because you’re new, doesn’t mean you’re right. See how this works. It’s not a scriptural argument, in fact it appears you avoid the scriptural argument presented about apostolic succession, Holy Spirit protection, Christ’s promises to be with us until the consummation of the world, and not to leave us orphans, to say, “Just because you are old doen’st mean you are right.” What you have failed to do is explain why the “new” Protestant movement is right over the early Church fathers, some of whom received their instructions from the Apostles. You also failed to address any question or point I raised, again.

By the way, I did have hands laid on me to be an Evangelist. But I won’t demand you call me Rev. Jack.

That’s nice but, can you show the lineage of apostolic succession for he that laid hands upon you and where he received his authority?

Yes, there many different denominations with different opinions on Bible interpretation on certain scriptures, but Most Evangelicals will agree on how one gets saved and that is the most important thing. For example, I disagree with the Baptists about speaking in tongues and the laying on of hands for physical healing, but I would say they are excellent soul winners. Many times it comes down to Church governance, but I belong to a non-denominational Church, which is Pentacostal and has a Word of faith Pastor. I do not like liberal churches, which to me are luke-warm on most think. It all comes down to a choice. I am most comfortable in my church because it is a Word and Holy Spirit Church.

So agreeing on one thing makes all denominations in full accord and of one mind?

**Php 2:2 complete my joy by being of the same mind, having the same love, being in full accord and of one mind.

1Co 1:10 I appeal to you, brethren, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that all of you agree and that there be no dissensions among you, but that you be united in the same mind and the same judgment.**

So things like Christ’s teaching about the last supper, baptism, or any other doctrine doesn’t matter?

Rom 16:17 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.

Is it safe to assume our Lord’s prayer over the Apostles was not answered?

Joh 17:17 Sanctify them in the truth; thy word is truth.
Joh 17:18 As thou didst send me into the world, so I have sent them into the world.
Joh 17:19 And for their sake I consecrate myself, that they also may be consecrated in truth.
Joh 17:20 "I do not pray for these only, but also for those who believe in me through their word,
Joh 17:21 that they may all be one; even as thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee, that they also may be in us, so that the world may believe that thou hast sent me.
Joh 17:22 The glory which thou hast given me I have given to them, that they may be one even as we are one,
Joh 17:23 I in them and thou in me, that they may become perfectly one, so that the world may know that thou hast sent me and hast loved them even as thou hast loved me.

Please list those scriptures that is ok to ignore, or remove from the Bible?

 

[golfjack]

PS, It is your understanding of the meaning of Scripture that is flawed. To say that Jesus established a church where people are blinded by the interptretions of the Pope and Mag. to me is ridiculous. God did not make us robots nto follow a church that is flawed.
Peace,. Golfjack

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

PS, It is your understanding of the meaning of Scripture that is flawed. To say that Jesus established a church where people are blinded by the interptretions of the Pope and Mag. to me is ridiculous. God did not make us robots nto follow a church that is flawed.

       Peace,.   Golfjack

No, my understanding is to accept all the scriptures. You seem to say we don’t need to adhere to all of them, by saying we don’t have to be of the same accord and one mind. Remember, I am the one that said scriptures are inerrant, it’s the private interpretations of men that are flawed.

And again, you twist the conversation to insinuate only the Magisterium can make mistakes, but do not address the possibility of mistakes by those many denominations who make private interpretations.

To say men can start a new Church to improve what Christ built is beyond ridiculous to me.

Now, it seems you only want to make derogatory remarks against the Catholic faith and are not really interested in an honest discussion. Can you please tell me what you hope to accomplish on a Catholic forum?

 

[golfjack]

PS, My only hope and prayer is to lead people to Christ here. I hope is to teach people here faith, which is lacking in all denominations. God has told me to come here for awhile, and has told me to tell Catholics the truth of the Word. If you don’t wish me to be here, then why don’t you kick me out of here?
Peace, Golfjack

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

PS, My only hope and prayer is to lead people to Christ here. I hope is to teach people here faith, which is lacking in all denominations. God has told me to come here for awhile, and has told me to tell Catholics the truth of the Word. If you don’t wish me to be here, then why don’t you kick me out of here?

       Peace,   Golfjack

So, you’re saying Catholics don’t know Christ? You come here to convert us to “Protestant” truth?

 

[golfjack]

My friend, it is just about knowing about Christ, which is intellectual reception of Christ. My wish is that people know that they know, as I do. My wish is for people to trust the great sacrifice Jesus made on the cross. I don;'t care if people are Catholic or not ( not my intention here), but just tell them the truth of the Word that will set people free.You see, people like Denwilles are Catholic, but have an understanding how important salvation is in their lives.
Peace, Golfjack:thumbsup:

 

[golfjack]

I must be getting tired, as I goofed up the last post. One thing I meant to say is that it is not enough to know about Christ ( your words), but to know that we know, and completely trust In His Sacrifice on the cross.

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

golfjack,

I don’t see how questioning the faith of Catholics, in general, applies to the topic of sola scriptura?

I’ve told you (my words) Christ is the center of faith for Catholics and the Catholic Church, and the Catholic Church is (again, my words) a Bible based Church. We trust in His sacrifice on the cross and know we must work out our salvation with fear and trembling, to use the words of St. Paul.

Php 2:12 Wherefore, my dearly beloved, (as you have always obeyed, not as in my presence only but much more now in my absence) with fear and trembling work out your salvation.

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

Back to the topic of sola scriptura. So far no one has produced scriptural support for that teaching, or private interpretation of scriptures. That only leaves some of us to assume, we are correct in thinking that sola scriptura and private interpretation is a man made tradition, or doctrine.

Checking in with another forum, I was reading a thread and found one of the posters had posted a very good example of how interpretations were arrived at, and shared, in the Old Testament.

Neh 8:1 And the seventh month came: and the children of Israel were in their cities. And all the people were gathered together as one man to the street which is before the water gate, and they spoke to Esdras the scribe, to bring the book of the law of Moses, which the Lord had commanded to Israel.
Neh 8:2 Then Esdras the priest brought the law before the multitude of men and women, and all those that could understand, in the first day of the seventh month.
Neh 8:3 And he read it plainly in the street that was before the water gate, from the morning until midday, before the men, and the women, and all those that could understand: and the ears of all the people were attentive to the book.
Neh 8:4 And Esdras the scribe stood upon a step of wood, which he had made to speak upon, and there stood by him Mathathias, and Semeia, and Ania, and Uria, and Helcia, and Maasia, on his right hand: and on the left, Phadaia, Misael, and Melchia, and Hasum, and Hasbadana, Zacharia and Mosollam.
Neh 8:5 And Esdras opened the book before all the people: for he was above all the people: and when he had opened it, all the people stood.
Neh 8:6 And Esdras blessed the Lord the great God: and all the people answered, Amen, amen: lifting up their hands: and they bowed down, and adored God with their faces to the ground.
Neh 8:7 Now Josue, and Bani, and Serebia, Jamin, Accub, Sephtai, Odia, Maasia, Celtia, Azarias, Jozabed, Hanan, Phalaia, the Levites, made silence among the people to hear the law: and the people stood in their place.
Neh 8:8 And they read in the book of the law of God distinctly and plainly to be understood: and they understood when it was read.
Neh 8:9 And Nehemias (he is Athersatha) and Esdras the priest and scribe, and the Levites who interpreted to all the people, said: This is a holy day to the Lord our God: do not mourn, nor weep: for all the people wept, when they heard the words of the law.

That appears to be more a “Magisterium” interpreting, as opposed to private interpretations.

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

Back to the topic of sola scriptura. So far no one has produced scriptural support for that teaching, or private interpretation of scriptures. That only leaves some of us to assume, we are correct in thinking that sola scriptura and private interpretation is a man made tradition, or doctrine.

Checking in with another forum, I was reading a thread and found one of the posters had posted a very good example of how interpretations were arrived at, and shared, in the Old Testament.

Neh 8:1 And the seventh month came: and the children of Israel were in their cities. And all the people were gathered together as one man to the street which is before the water gate, and they spoke to Esdras the scribe, to bring the book of the law of Moses, which the Lord had commanded to Israel.
Neh 8:2 Then Esdras the priest brought the law before the multitude of men and women, and all those that could understand, in the first day of the seventh month.
Neh 8:3 And he read it plainly in the street that was before the water gate, from the morning until midday, before the men, and the women, and all those that could understand: and the ears of all the people were attentive to the book.
Neh 8:4 And Esdras the scribe stood upon a step of wood, which he had made to speak upon, and there stood by him Mathathias, and Semeia, and Ania, and Uria, and Helcia, and Maasia, on his right hand: and on the left, Phadaia, Misael, and Melchia, and Hasum, and Hasbadana, Zacharia and Mosollam.
Neh 8:5 And Esdras opened the book before all the people: for he was above all the people: and when he had opened it, all the people stood.
Neh 8:6 And Esdras blessed the Lord the great God: and all the people answered, Amen, amen: lifting up their hands: and they bowed down, and adored God with their faces to the ground.
Neh 8:7 Now Josue, and Bani, and Serebia, Jamin, Accub, Sephtai, Odia, Maasia, Celtia, Azarias, Jozabed, Hanan, Phalaia, the Levites, made silence among the people to hear the law: and the people stood in their place.
Neh 8:8 And they read in the book of the law of God distinctly and plainly to be understood: and they understood when it was read.
Neh 8:9 And Nehemias (he is Athersatha) and Esdras the priest and scribe, and the Levites who interpreted to all the people, said: This is a holy day to the Lord our God: do not mourn, nor weep: for all the people wept, when they heard the words of the law.

That appears to be more a “Magisterium” interpreting, as opposed to private interpretations.

I underlined a couple of additional verses, for emphasis, in the passage above. It seems to say there were only “some” who could understand the passages, just as there were only some who could interpret the scriptures to the mulitude of men and women…

 

[golfjack]

PS, You would make a good political spin doctor.:juggle:
Peace, Golfjack

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

PS, You would make a good political spin doctor.:juggle:

    Peace,  Golfjack

I feel my interpretation of scriptures is Holy Spirit guided. What gives you the authority to question my interpretation?

As usual, no explanation as to why you would disagree.

The truth doesn’t have to be spun.

I found that in a thread that wasn’t even discussing sola scriptura. It was on a forum I rarely visit anymore. I wonder what led me to go there and click on that particular thread? God works in mysterious ways…

 

[golfjack]

My authority is Jesus, the mighty name of Jesus.
Peace, Golfjack

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

My authority is Jesus, the mighty name of Jesus.

   Peace,   Golfjack

:tsktsk:

I find that an unacceptable way to avoid the discussion. I provide scriptures and an explanation of the interpretation, you reject the interpretation with no explanation. When I ask for the authority you have to say my interpretation is wrong, according to the precepts of sola scriptura, you make a joke using the name of Jesus? That’s really sad, in my opinion.

You’re in my prayers.

 

[CWBetts]

My authority is Jesus, the mighty name of Jesus.

   Peace,   Golfjack

that is a cop-out. What happens when tow people, who claim that same authority are in disagreement? What you mena to say is that your authority is YOU. You mean to say that YOUR interpretation is infallible, and everyones else is wrong. What arrogance. Even when confronted with Scriptures and the Early Church Fathers, it is still YOUR interpretation that you find to be correct, and no one can tell you otherwise. Why dob;t you just be honest and say that you are your own authority.

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

Isn’t it ironic that someone who espouses sola scriptura, fails to explain their interpretation of scriptures, in an apologetic discussion?