N
Nazianzen
Guest
What you are saying is that the teachings of the church do not match your particular theology. Please *demonstrate *that it has ended.
- Status
J
jemfinch
Guest
What this amounts to is a claim that there is only one internally logically consistent interpretation of Scripture, and the Catholic Chuch contradicts this interpretation. What what little I know about the ambiguity inherent in natural languages, especially Greek, I’d say the claim that there is only one logically consistent interpretation of Scripture is prima facie false.
If there are multiple internally logically consistent interpretations of Scripture, then the question is not “Does the Catholic Church teach faith and practice that contradict my current interpretation of Scripture?” but “Does the Catholic Church possess an internally logically consistent interpretation of Scripture?” From everything I can see, the answer to the second question is “Yes, it does,” in which case I must choose between my internally logically consistent interpretation of Scripture and the Catholic Church’s internally logically consistent interpretation of Scripture. Whatever evidence I use to make that decision, it must be evidence that exists outside of Scripture (since, by definition, no Scriptural evidence could contradict an internally logically consistent interpretation of Scripture), so whether I choose to continue to hold my internally logically consistent interpretation of Scripture or to change my beliefs and hold to the Catholic internally logically consistent interpretation of Scripture, I must integrate some non-Scriptural evidence in making my decision, thus contradicting Sola Scriptura in the process.
The weakest point in this argument is the claim that the Catholic Church possesses an internally consistent interpretation of Scripture, but I’ve not yet found someone who has been able to argue that it does not. Many will try to argue that the Church’s interpretation of Scripture contradicts their interpretation of Scripture, but none have yet been successful arguing that it contradicts its own interpretation of Scripture.
Jeremy
K
kleary
Guest
All of this “doesn’t matter” because if “Sola Scriptura” were true then the Canon of Scripture would be somewhere in Scripture. Sola Scriptura must give Tradition equal weight in order to be true- because the Canon is “Sacred Tradition” indeed.
#1 is true indeed, yet without Sacred Tradition to tell us which books are “Scripture”, that “belief” is futile and based solely on personal feelings.
#2 cannot be true therefore unless you are interpreting Scripture in another way than which it was intended. This is proven true by numerous Catholic apologists. “Reformed Christianity” interprets Scripture differently in many passages than has always been interpreted by the Church.
#3 is the logical solution if the truth’s of God are to be denied. To use “Scripture Alone” is to show a need to interpret religious truth differently than it has always been or how it “officially” is interpretated.
Ken
P
PraRFLEsEkHm
Guest
Hiya
There is one God therefore there is One Truth.
There is one Truth therefore there is one Faith which teaches that Truth.
Walk into any Catholic Church in the world and you will hear that same Truth.
You can’t say the same thing about even one of the thousands of denominations in the Protestant world - each preacher will have his own interpretation of scripture, apart from the issue which prompted them to split from whomever they split from in the first place. IE - Baptists and immersion.
Therefore SS has been demonstrated by its fruits to be false. Christ said plain - by their fruits you shall know them.
Peace
John
There is one God therefore there is One Truth.
There is one Truth therefore there is one Faith which teaches that Truth.
Walk into any Catholic Church in the world and you will hear that same Truth.
You can’t say the same thing about even one of the thousands of denominations in the Protestant world - each preacher will have his own interpretation of scripture, apart from the issue which prompted them to split from whomever they split from in the first place. IE - Baptists and immersion.
Therefore SS has been demonstrated by its fruits to be false. Christ said plain - by their fruits you shall know them.
Peace
John
L
love4mary
Guest
St. Paul himself proves AGAINST Solo Scriptura. There HAS to be Sacred Tradition and it came first. He wrote his letters to existing churches before (according to biblical scholars) the first Gospel was penned, that of the Book of Mark.
The many books of the New Testement were still being penned or had not even been written yet when many churches existed. Just read the letter of St. Paul, some where written to correct problems in the church and to strengthen their faith. The Church was well established by the time the first completed bible was in print.
The many books of the New Testement were still being penned or had not even been written yet when many churches existed. Just read the letter of St. Paul, some where written to correct problems in the church and to strengthen their faith. The Church was well established by the time the first completed bible was in print.
G
Genesis315
Guest
Jousting is condemned by Lateran II
- We entirely forbid, moreover, those abominable jousts and tournaments in which knights come together by agreement and rashly engage in showing off their physical prowess and daring, and which often result in human deaths and danger to souls. If any of them dies on these occasions, although penance and viaticum are not to be denied him when he requests them, he is to be deprived of a church burial.
N
NotWorthy
Guest
Jousting is condemned by Lateran II
- We entirely forbid, moreover, those abominable jousts and tournaments in which knights come together by agreement and rashly engage in showing off their physical prowess and daring, and which often result in human deaths and danger to souls. If any of them dies on these occasions, although penance and viaticum are not to be denied him when he requests them, he is to be deprived of a church burial.
Does this mean that Professional Wrestling is condemned also?
BTW, thanks for the laugh!
M
MountainBoy11
Guest
Would love to…a friend (catholic) and I (protestant) have been discussing this by email and believe this might be a better format for our discussion. Roughly scanned above posts and will pick up with last comment…
M
MountainBoy11
Guest
No way you can get away with this one without chapter and verse.
Sure, the letters were based on the written OT and direct revelation/inspiration from Jesus Christ, and carry equal authority alongside the gospels.
As the apostolic age, lead by the biblical preaching of the apostles, winded down, the church age, lead by the biblical writing of the apostles, started up. Those early churches were in the middle of the transition period. But by the time Peter pens his second epistle in AD 68, he is already quoting the Apostle Paul’s writings (2 Pet 3:15-16), signaling the apostolic age is ending and now the church age is starting with the written Scriptures as the sole authority.
Sure, the church was established by the time the first completed Bible was in print, but established on biblical preaching as its authority. Just as now the church is based on biblical writings as its sole authority.
N
NotWorthy
Guest
You’ll have to show me where the Apostles handed over the sole authority of their Church to the written Scriptures. In your own words, No way you can get away with this one without chapter and verse.
I see Paul in his writings telling Timothy to hold fast to the traditions handed down written and orally. I don’t see him telling Tim to wait til they are compiled.
If this is true, wouldn’t Paul, Peter, and the rest of the Apostles set to compiling the Holy Scriptures before their deaths? I mean, it’s like they would think, “We know we’re fixing to die, and since we no longer have authority, we’d better have the Scriptures fixed in place before we become Roman corpses”.
How come none of the early Church, I mean those that were under the teaching authority of the Bible never made this claim. Didn’t anyone tell Ignatius? Clement? Polycarp?
And last question (for now, of course), If the Apostles were handing over the sole authority to the Bible, wouldn’t they have designed the Bible to read more light Leviticus, where the rules would be more cut-and-dried, so to speak?
P.S. By the way, Welcome to the Forums!!!
N
Nazianzen
Guest
I think the main issue to be tackled is that of the formation of the canon. There is no way to prove beyond a shadow of a doubt what books should be included in the scriptures from scripture.
If what you are saying is true, then shouldn’t the apostles have been the ones to settle the canon? Why is it that it took the Councils of Carthage, Hippo, and Rome to settle things for everybody (at least, until Luther came along)?
M
MountainBoy11
Guest
Youch. Can’t do much with this one until you please clarify the part about “their church.” I believe that Jesus Christ is the Head of the Church. In no way was the church ever the Apostles’ church?1? That phraseology is new to me, seems to borderline heresy, and unless I’m reading into your statement, reaks of a misguided perspective of delegated human authority, such as that Catholics show toward the Pope and church hierarchy. If Catholics believe it was the Apostles’ church then, I guess that helps me understand how they mistakenly think it’s the Pope’s, or Peter’s, or Mary’s, church now.
The Scriptures were fixed in place before the writers became corpses. It’s authority was immediately recognized. Granted, a nicely bound NT Canon had not yet been compiled. They had no reason to rush a bound volume of 66 books. With Nero on the throne, any publication or broad distribution of a Canon would have meant instant death. It wasn’t until a milder Constantine was on the throne that the “parchment press” could be safely fired up. In understanding Sola Scriptura and canonization, it’s okay to allow our minds to distinguish Scriptures from Canon. Scripture was written and went into affect immediately, although perhaps not neatly bound as 66 books until later.
This one’s fun…we could go on and on here, but I think we must respect the rules re long quotations agreed to when sigining up for this forum. We need to understand that the Holy Spirit has no problem with truth being revealed/compiled gradually (Jn 16:12).
Not trackin with you here.
Thank you.
M
MountainBoy11
Guest
Canonization is tricky. Two thoughts…
- Catholic theologians seemed to understand Canonization at one point.
“These books the church holds to be sacred and canonical not b/c she subsequently approved them by her authority…but b/c, being written under the inspiration of the HS, they have God as their author, and were as such committed to the church.”
-First Vatican Council, Session 3, Chapter 2 (although it does sound like a good Protestant theology…oops). - How the canon came into being is one thing. The sufficiency of Scripture as the authority of the church today another. “My Sheep hear my voice” (Jn 10:27). God’s voice is clearly proclaimed in protestant churches that practice biblical exposition. True sheep are drawn to protestant churches.
M
MountainBoy11
Guest
Your idea of “settling things down” is misinformed. It’s not like there was a bunch of chaotic debate and controversy over what was inspired and what wasn’t. THat was pretty much settled in everyone’s mind right away. Like I said above, the church was just waiting for sick Nero to die or get the boot so they wouldn’t end up candles for his next dinner party. The delay of publishing the canon had little to do with ecclesiastical confusion, but more to do with the political situation and the sheer practicality of safely accomplishing such an endeavor. Same reason why today the average household in America might have several copies of the BIble, while in China, Sudan, or certain Middle Eastern countries, there might only be several copies of th Bible for a whole town. We’ve got “Constantine.” they’ve got “Nero.” Just b/c Christians in those places might not have or discuss complete copies of the Bible doesn’t mean they don’t recognize which books are inherently and plainly inspired.
N
NotWorthy
Guest
OK, we’re going to play semantics here, are we?
In your post you state “the apostolic age” is ending. Can you please show me where in the bible we are going from Apostolic Age to the Scriptures as the sole authority?
You might want to study your history again.
Was Hebrews immediately accepted? In the east, Yes. In the West, NO, not until around 350AD.
Was Revelations immediately accepted? No, not even close.
Was St. Clement’s letter to the Corinthians immediately accepted? Yes. Only later on did it lose face.
There are numerous other examples that show that you are not very accurate in the development of a 73 book Canon.
Where in the world did you get 66 books in the Canon from? That Tradition of Man didn’t start till the Middle Ages.
N
NotWorthy
Guest
OK, we’re going to play semantics here, are we?
In your post you state “the apostolic age” is ending. Can you please show me where in the bible we are going from Apostolic Age to the Scriptures as the sole authority?
You might want to study your history again.
Was Hebrews immediately accepted? In the east, Yes. In the West, NO, not until around 350AD.
Was Revelations immediately accepted? No, not even close.
Was St. Clement’s letter to the Corinthians immediately accepted? Yes. Only later on did it lose face.
There are numerous other examples that show that you are not very accurate in the development of a 73 book Canon.
Where in the world did you get 66 books in the Canon from? That Tradition of Man didn’t start till the Middle Ages.
C
Church_Militant
Guest
and **now the church age is starting with the written Scriptures as the sole authority.**As you said… no way you are getting away with that one without chapter and verse.
Where does the word of God say that the apostolic age would end? Among the ministries in the Church Ephesians 4 reads as follows. 11: And his gifts were that some should be apostles, some prophets, some evangelists, some pastors and teachers,
12: to equip the saints for the work of ministry, for building up the body of Christ,
13: until we all attain to the unity of the faith and of the knowledge of the Son of God, to mature manhood, to the measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ;
14: so that we may no longer be children, tossed to and fro and carried about with every wind of doctrine, by the cunning of men, by their craftiness in deceitful wiles.
15: Rather, speaking the truth in love, we are to grow up in every way into him who is the head, into Christ,
16: from whom the whole body, joined and knit together by every joint with which it is supplied, when each part is working properly, makes bodily growth and upbuilds itself in love. I don’t see anything in that passage that says there will be an end to apostles within the church. There has been an end to public revelation, but not the ministries listed there.
Support your assertion that scriptures were the sole authority. I don’t think you can.
Acts 20:35: In all things I have shown you that by so toiling one must help the weak, remembering the words of the Lord Jesus, how he said, `It is more blessed to give than to receive.’" Find that in the Gospels for me or anywhere else in the NT?
Also, please find for me the OT quotes in Jude 1:9 and 14,15 and if you cannot then please tell me what Jude is quoting there as prophetic?
Also, specifically what does the New Testament says is “the pillar and ground of the truth”?
According to you…yet neither the New Testament nor the historic writings of the early church will support you.
Pax tecum,
C
Church_Militant
Guest
and **now the church age is starting with the written Scriptures as the sole authority.**As you said… no way you are getting away with that one without chapter and verse.
Where does the word of God say that the apostolic age would end? Among the ministries in the Church Ephesians 4 reads as follows. 11: And his gifts were that some should be apostles, some prophets, some evangelists, some pastors and teachers,
12: to equip the saints for the work of ministry, for building up the body of Christ,
13: until we all attain to the unity of the faith and of the knowledge of the Son of God, to mature manhood, to the measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ;
14: so that we may no longer be children, tossed to and fro and carried about with every wind of doctrine, by the cunning of men, by their craftiness in deceitful wiles.
15: Rather, speaking the truth in love, we are to grow up in every way into him who is the head, into Christ,
16: from whom the whole body, joined and knit together by every joint with which it is supplied, when each part is working properly, makes bodily growth and upbuilds itself in love. I don’t see anything in that passage that says there will be an end to apostles within the church. There has been an end to public revelation, but not the ministries listed there.
Support your assertion that scriptures were the sole authority. I don’t think you can.
Acts 20:35: In all things I have shown you that by so toiling one must help the weak, remembering the words of the Lord Jesus, how he said, `It is more blessed to give than to receive.’" Find that in the Gospels for me or anywhere else in the NT?
Also, please find for me the OT quotes in Jude 1:9 and 14,15 and if you cannot then please tell me what Jude is quoting there as prophetic?
Also, specifically what does the New Testament says is “the pillar and ground of the truth”?
According to you…yet neither the New Testament nor the historic writings of the early church will support you.
Pax tecum,
C
Church_Militant
Guest
Forum glitch dupe
C
Church_Militant
Guest
and **now the church age is starting with the written Scriptures as the sole authority.**As you said… no way you are getting away with that one without chapter and verse.
Where does the word of God say that the apostolic age would end? Among the ministries in the Church Ephesians 4 reads as follows. 11: And his gifts were that some should be apostles, some prophets, some evangelists, some pastors and teachers,
12: to equip the saints for the work of ministry, for building up the body of Christ,
13: until we all attain to the unity of the faith and of the knowledge of the Son of God, to mature manhood, to the measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ;
14: so that we may no longer be children, tossed to and fro and carried about with every wind of doctrine, by the cunning of men, by their craftiness in deceitful wiles.
15: Rather, speaking the truth in love, we are to grow up in every way into him who is the head, into Christ,
16: from whom the whole body, joined and knit together by every joint with which it is supplied, when each part is working properly, makes bodily growth and upbuilds itself in love. I don’t see anything in that passage that says there will be an end to apostles within the church. There has been an end to public revelation, but not the ministries listed there.
Support your assertion that scriptures were the sole authority. I don’t think you can.
Acts 20:35: In all things I have shown you that by so toiling one must help the weak, remembering the words of the Lord Jesus, how he said, `It is more blessed to give than to receive.’" Find that in the Gospels for me or anywhere else in the NT?
Also, please find for me the OT quotes in Jude 1:9 and 14,15 and if you cannot then please tell me what Jude is quoting there as prophetic?
Also, specifically what does the New Testament says is “the pillar and ground of the truth”?
According to you…yet neither the New Testament nor the historic writings of the early church will support you.
Pax tecum,
- Status