sola scriptura

[Traverse]

No, the inference is that those gifted with prophecy in the early church could recognize any inspired text.

You ask a question, what individuals… I don’t understand the question, honestly. Do you deny that the Holy Spirit has gifted some with the gift of prophecy?

 

[PRmerger]

No, the inference is that those gifted with prophecy in the early church could recognize any inspired text.

You ask a question, what individuals… I don’t understand the question, honestly. Do you deny that the Holy Spirit has gifted some with the gift of prophecy?

Well, Traverse, what you are describing is exactly what the Catholic Church defines as Sacred Tradition.

So you are acknowledging that it’s NOT by Scripture that these individuals came to know the Word of God, but through the transmission of the Word, via the Holy Spirit, orally.

Do you see how you can’t have a problem with the Catholic understanding of Sacred Tradition if you profess your comments above to be true?

 

[SteveVH]

No, the inference is that those gifted with prophecy in the early church could recognize any inspired text.

Makes one wonder why the Didache was in use when it was not chosen as an inspried text.

 

[Traverse]

I’ve already said before that this is how the bible came to be.

The real issue here is whether or not those gifts ceased. Because if they did then all we have currently is the bible, presented to us by the Holy Spirit through a lasting tradition. But the book itself would be our final authority on doctrine because there would not longer be additional revelations from those gifted with prophecy.

Your point makes a lot of sense if you can convince me those gifts still exist, but the catholic church today doesn’t represent the first century church where those gifts were handed out.

Consider the entirety of 1 Corinthians 14, particularly these verses…

1 Corinthians 14:27-33
If anyone speaks in a tongue, it should be by two or at the most three, and each in turn, and one must interpret; but if there is no interpreter, he must keep silent in the church; and let him speak to himself and to God.
Let two or three prophets speak, and let the others pass judgment.
But if a revelation is made to another who is seated, the first one must keep silent.
For you can all prophesy one by one, so that all may learn and all may be exhorted; and the spirits of prophets are subject to prophets; for God is not a God of confusion but of peace, as in all the churches of the saints.

If these gifts still persisted to this day then the modern catholic church service would be made up of several different people getting up to speak in turn as moved by the Holy Spirit. This does not happen. If these gifts remain… why doesn’t this happen?

I’ve been to a catholic service multiple times and it’s a very nice and respectful service, but it has nothing in common with the scene set in 1 Corinthians for how the early church functioned other than the presence of the memorial feast.

 

[Porknpie]

If these gifts still persisted to this day then the modern catholic church service would be made up of several different people getting up to speak in turn as moved by the Holy Spirit. This does not happen. If these gifts remain… why doesn’t this happen?

I’ve been to a catholic service multiple times and it’s a very nice and respectful service, but it has nothing in common with the scene set in 1 Corinthians for how the early church functioned other than the presence of the memorial feast.

Traverse,

The Catechism teaches that teaches that the gifts remain…Grace is “the first and foremost gift”

2003 **Grace is first and foremost the gift of the Spirit **who justifies and sanctifies us. But grace also includes the gifts that the Spirit grants us to associate us with his work, to enable us to collaborate in the salvation of others and in the growth of the Body of Christ, the Church. There are sacramental graces, gifts proper to the different sacraments. There are furthermore special graces, also called charisms after the Greek term used by St. Paul and meaning “favor,” “gratuitous gift,” "benefit."53 Whatever their character - sometimes it is extraordinary, such as the gift of miracles or of tongues - charisms are oriented toward sanctifying grace and are intended for the common good of the Church. They are at the service of charity which builds up the Church.54

1508 The Holy Spirit gives to some a special charism of healing119 so as to make manifest the power of the grace of the risen Lord. But even the most intense prayers do not always obtain the healing of all illnesses. Thus St. Paul must learn from the Lord that “my grace is sufficient for you, for my power is made perfect in weakness,” and that the sufferings to be endured can mean that "in my flesh I complete what is lacking in Christ’s afflictions for the sake of his Body, that is, the Church."120

 

[Traverse]

To clarify, is it the teaching of the catholic church that these gifts are just more rare than they used to be?

 

[PRmerger]

To clarify, is it the teaching of the catholic church that these gifts are just more rare than they used to be?

The gift of Sacred Tradition, which is the Word of God, transmitted through the Holy Spirit, is alive and well in the Catholic Church, Traverse.

There is no verse in Scripture which states that “certain people” received this gift during the first 100 years of Christianity, but that this charism suddenly disappeared.

That would be a man-made tradition that has been proliferated by some folks who never read that in a single page of the Bible.

 

[Traverse]

Did I not show you a verse that the gift of prophecy went to certain individuals and that the gifts would be temporary? If you disagree with the conclusions I draw that’s one thing, but you can’t suggest that the bible doesn’t in fact say that SOME are gifted with prophecy and that the gifts are TEMPORARY. How temporary is certainly a worthwhile discussion.

 

[PRmerger]

Did I not show you a verse that the gift of prophecy went to certain individuals and that the gifts would be temporary? If you disagree with the conclusions I draw that’s one thing, but you can’t suggest that the bible doesn’t in fact say that SOME are gifted with prophecy and that the gifts are TEMPORARY. How temporary is certainly a worthwhile discussion.

Temporary? Where?

 

[Traverse]

I’ve posted the verse already, I’m not posting it again.

The question is of how temporary, but we know its temporary.

Your argument is that it’s temporary in so far as it’s until Christ comes again, while I argued it was until the bible was complete and we have the complete revelation of God.

It would be a worth while discussion to really discuss the merits of each position, but we’re getting really off track here. I was just trying to point out that the assertion that I believe in ongoing sacred tradition because of how we got the bible was false because I believed that how we got the bible and knew what it was was due to a temporary gift of prophecy and now that we have the complete word there is no ongoing sacred tradition.

And then I kind of went back and forth with porky about how the normal catholic service doesn’t represent the service of the church in the first century if both eras claim to have the same spiritual gifts. But it really is another discussion altogether at this point.

 

[CopticChristian]

I’ve already said before that this is how the bible came to be.

The real issue here is whether or not those gifts ceased. Because if they did then all we have currently is the bible, presented to us by the Holy Spirit through a lasting tradition. But the book itself would be our final authority on doctrine because there would not longer be additional revelations from those gifted with prophecy.

Your point makes a lot of sense if you can convince me those gifts still exist, but the catholic church today doesn’t represent the first century church where those gifts were handed out.

Consider the entirety of 1 Corinthians 14, particularly these verses…

1 Corinthians 14:27-33
If anyone speaks in a tongue, it should be by two or at the most three, and each in turn, and one must interpret; but if there is no interpreter, he must keep silent in the church; and let him speak to himself and to God.
Let two or three prophets speak, and let the others pass judgment.
But if a revelation is made to another who is seated, the first one must keep silent.
For you can all prophesy one by one, so that all may learn and all may be exhorted; and the spirits of prophets are subject to prophets; for God is not a God of confusion but of peace, as in all the churches of the saints.

If these gifts still persisted to this day then the modern catholic church service would be made up of several different people getting up to speak in turn as moved by the Holy Spirit. This does not happen. If these gifts remain… why doesn’t this happen?

I’ve been to a catholic service multiple times and it’s a very nice and respectful service, but it has nothing in common with the scene set in 1 Corinthians for how the early church functioned other than the presence of the memorial feast.

Travis,

St. John Chrysostom, Doctor says this…in the 4th century says this…

What now can be more awful than these things? For in truth the Church was a heaven then, the Spirit governing all things, and moving each one of the rulers and making him inspired. But now we retain only the symbols of those gifts. For now also we speak two or three, and in turn, and when one is silent, another begins. But these are only signs and memorials of those things. Wherefore when we begin to speak, the people respond, with your Spirit , indicating that of old they thus used to speak, not of their own wisdom, but moved by the Spirit. But not so now: (I speak of my own case so far.) But the present Church is like a woman who has fallen from her former prosperous days, and in many respects retains the symbols only of that ancient prosperity; displaying indeed the repositories and caskets of her golden ornaments, but bereft of her wealth: such an one does the present Church resemble. And I say not this in respect of gifts: for it were nothing marvelous if it were this only: but in respect also of life and virtue. Thus the list of her widows, and the choir of her virgins, then gave great ornament to the churches: but now she is made desolate and void, and the tokens only remain. There are indeed widows now, there are also virgins; but they retain not that adornment which women should have who prepare themselves for such wrestlings. For the special distinction of the virgin is the caring for the things of God alone, and the waiting on Him without distraction: and the widow’s mark too should be not so much the not engaging in a second marriage, as the other things, charity to the poor, hospitality, continuing instant in prayers, all those other things, which Paul writing to Timothy requires with great exactness. One may see also the married women exhibiting among us great seemliness. But this is not the only thing required, but rather that sedulous attention to the needy, through which those women of old shone out most brightly. Not as the generality now-a-days. For then instead of gold they were clothed with the fair array of almsgiving: but now, having left off this, they are decked out on every side with cords of gold woven of the chain of their sins.

Shall I speak of another repository too emptied of its hereditary splendor? They all met together in old time and sang psalms in common. This we do also now: but then among all was there one soul and one heart: but now not in one single soul can one see that unanimity, rather great is the warfare every where.

Peace, even now, to all, he that presides in the Church prays for, entering as it were into his Father’s house: but of this peace the name is frequent, but the reality no where.

1. Then the very houses were churches: but now the church itself is a house,

The Church matured and grew up and continues in that proces…that was then, this is now.

 

[PRmerger]

I’ve posted the verse already, I’m not posting it again.

The question is of how temporary, but we know its temporary.

It says nothing about “temporary” gifts, Traverse. That is adding to Scripture.

 

[Traverse]

Maybe you just missed the post I made about it. I’m not talking about any scripture from 1 Corinthians 14.

Back in post 847…

1 Corinthians 13:8-10
Love never fails; but if there are gifts of prophecy, they will be done away; if there are tongues, they will cease; if there is knowledge, it will be done away. For we know in part and we prophesy in part; but when the perfect comes, the partial will be done away.

Emphasis mine of course.

 

[PRmerger]

Maybe you just missed the post I made about it. I’m not talking about any scripture from 1 Corinthians 14.

Back in post 847…

1 Corinthians 13:8-10
Love never fails; but if there are gifts of prophecy, they will be done away; if there are tongues, they will cease; if there is knowledge, it will be done away. For we know in part and we prophesy in part; but when the perfect comes, the partial will be done away.

Emphasis mine of course.

Ah–amen to the above!

But nothing in there, of course, talks about the Holy Spirit’s assistance to the Church being temporary.

That’s how the early Christians discerned which of the over 400 Christian texts were inspired–through the assistance of the HS.

And you have acknowledged that this is indeed how the Scriptures were discerned–through “certain individuals” (here, read “bishops”).

But there is NOTHING in the Scriptures that say that this assistance left the Church after 100 or 400 years.

Rather, the Scriptures attest to the opposite. Jesus will be with the Church to the end of time.

 

[Traverse]

Oh, I didn’t say the Holy Spirit has abandoned the church, I merely suggested that those particular gifts, described as temporary, have currently ceased.

 

[Porknpie]

Oh, I didn’t say the Holy Spirit has abandoned the church, I merely suggested that those particular gifts, described as temporary, have currently ceased.

Traverse,

I responded with the commentary saying that what is temporary is our living on earth with the Holy Spirit guiding us. You are taking the verse out of context and not reading the whole thing…read the whole passage including verses at the end.

You can disagree …

This is an example of the problem with Sola Scriptura.

 

[Porknpie]

Oh, I didn’t say the Holy Spirit has abandoned the church, I merely suggested that those particular gifts, described as temporary, have currently ceased.

Traverse -

Fruits and gifts of the Holy Spirit

III. THE GIFTS AND FRUITS OF THE HOLY SPIRIT

1830 The moral life of Christians is sustained by the gifts of the Holy Spirit. These are permanent dispositions which make man docile in following the promptings of the Holy Spirit.

1831 The seven gifts of the Holy Spirit are wisdom, understanding, counsel, fortitude, knowledge, piety, and fear of the Lord. They belong in their fullness to Christ, Son of David.109 They complete and perfect the virtues of those who receive them. They make the faithful docile in readily obeying divine inspirations.

Let your good spirit lead me on a level path.110
For all who are led by the Spirit of God are sons of God . . . If children, then heirs, heirs of God and fellow heirs with Christ.111

1832 The fruits of the Spirit are perfections that the Holy Spirit forms in us as the first fruits of eternal glory. The tradition of the Church lists twelve of them: "charity, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, generosity, gentleness, faithfulness, modesty, self-control, chastity."112

You can read more here: scborromeo.org/ccc/p3s1c1a7.htm

 

[PRmerger]

Oh, I didn’t say the Holy Spirit has abandoned the church, I merely suggested that those particular gifts, described as temporary, have currently ceased.

Excellent.

You are well on your way!

What say you, now, to the charism of infallibility? Are you willing to acknowledge that this charism exists in a church, at least as it applies to discerning the canon of Scripture?

Or, if you are not acknowledging this charism, do you believe the Church erred somewhere in the canon? Perhaps you believe that Hebrews is incorrectly assigned the title of being inspired, and, say, the letter of Clement to the Corinthians should be inspired?

 

[joe370]

Because that’s not what sola scriptura means. The “sola” in sola scriptura indicates that scripture is - alone - the final norm. Councils, creeds and confessions are not equal to scripture but secondary to it. It does not mean other things are not useful, important, even critical.

Sola scriptura is the practice of the Church (Lutheran, in my case) of using scripture as the final norm, holding all teachers and teachings, doctrines and dogma accountable.
It does not, therefore, exclude teachers and teachings, doctrine and dogma. It does not exclude the pulpit or the mass, be it Lutheran or Catholic.
Further, scripture gives the Church the authority to teach, and teaching comes from the pulpit (and other places).

Jon

Hey Jon. Logically speaking isn’t the following true, in this order:

Jesus established His church. Jesus sent to His church the Paraclete to guide His church forever (which is why we can trust the church in terms of defining doctrine as well as codifying sacred scripture). Jesus’ church, in terms of leadership, did as He requested and taught orally i.e. tradition, both oral and written, as per Saint Paul. Eventually, certain books of sacred scripture were called into question by some, in certain parts, necessitating the need for Jesus’ church leaders (using tradition as the touchstone) to determine what should be included and excluded?

If so, then even though sacred scripture + sacred tradition comprise the word of God, as per sacred scripture, and is therefore the absolute norm by which everyone is held accountable, Jesus’ church leadership, forever guided by God, is still the key to doctrinal unity?

 

[joe370]

Hey Jon. Logically speaking isn’t the following true, in this order:

Jesus established His church. Jesus sent to His church the Paraclete to guide His church forever (which is why we can trust the church in terms of defining doctrine as well as codifying sacred scripture). Jesus’ church, in terms of leadership, did as He requested and taught orally i.e. tradition, both oral and written, as per Saint Paul. Eventually, certain books of sacred scripture were called into question by some, in certain parts, necessitating the need for Jesus’ church leaders (using tradition as the touchstone) to determine what should be included and excluded?

If so, then even though sacred scripture + sacred tradition comprise the word of God, as per sacred scripture, and is therefore the absolute norm by which everyone is held accountable, Jesus’ church leadership, forever guided by God, is still the key to doctrinal unity?