M
moondweller
Guest
Thank you for the clarification. I didn’t think so. So then “excaliber” doesn’t speak for all Catholics here. Right?
His rationale is that since Satan used Scripture to to tempt Jesus, Satan then invented “sola Scriptura.” Do you also believe that’s a correct conclusion? Do you believe, then, that all Protestants who adhere to the idea of “sola Scriptura” are Satanic or Satanically deceived? Are you concluding that Protestants are Satanic?
Are you referring to 2 Pet. 1:20-21? Peter isn’t prohibiting individuals from interpreting the Scriptures in those verses, but rather stating a fact about the prophetic Scriptures. That they did not originate with the prophets themselves, not by an act of their own will (no Scripture was), “but men moved by the Holy Spirit spoke from God.”
Certainly you’re not contending that the Scriptures didn’t officially exist until the council of Carthage, are you?
In my post I referenced Lk. 24:27 where it says Jesus began with Moses and with all the prophets explained the things concerning Himself in all the Scriptures. Now we know that the Jews never had a council to determined which writings were Scripture. Yet at the time of Christ, they knew which writing were. In the same vain, we see that Irenaeus who lived in the second century quoted most of the N.T. books, as Scripture, in his writings. They were known in his day as “The Gospel and the Apostles,” as the O.T. books were called “The Law and the Prophets.” Tertullian in his writings spoke of the Christian Scriptures as the “New Testament.” And in his extant writings we find around 1800 quotations from the N.T. books. Even Origin quoted from them extensively and accepted the 27 books of the N.T. as Scripture And when Eusebius was commissioned by Constantine to put together fifty “Bibles” for his kingdom, he traveled extensively to the various churches and found out what books they, corporately, accepted as Scripture. In the end, the books that constituted his N.T. were exactly the same 27 that are in our Bibles today. All of this occurred before the Council of Carthage. So, in respect to the N.T., Carthage only ratified what was already accepted amongst the churches.
As the Jews recognized their Scriptures, so did the early Christians. But it’s not men who, traditionally, made them “Scripture.” They are inherently. They stand alone by their own divine Authority.
Not even having a high position in the church guarantees one’s understanding of the Scriptures. Remember, Jesus even had to explain the prophetic Scriptures concerning His suffering, death and resurrection to His own Apostles. And for several centuries the biggest controversy amongst the high ranking Bishops within the empire, east and west, was Arianism. Even after the Council of Nicea. Ultimately, the deity of Christ wasn’t settled by “tradition,” but by what was revealed of Him in the Scriptures. Blind reliance on Bishops proved to be dangerous. Can Scripture be misinterpreted and abused? Certainly! But that’s a testimony against men. So today, even as in Christ’s day, it’s the teachings and traditions of men that must be tested by the Scriptures.
Regards,
MD
