You see, I have just sent Lief responses to his post 376. I utterly respect Lief, as you know, and I’m not trying to lead him (or anyone) away from Catholicism. However, I know that what I have said will be “explained away quite easily” and dismissed “with a flick of the fingers” because it does not conform to what the Roman Catholic Bishops teach. Why should I keep responding to counter replies, when I know my position is not, at least, SERIOUSLY CONSIDERED?
I do carefully consider everything you say.
I’m afraid I, over the last couple days, have been having similar thoughts to those you have, in the discussion. You see, with you, the problem is: They believe the Catholic Magesterium, so could they ever accept anything I say? With me, the problem is: He believes in Sola Scriptura, so could he ever accept anything
I say? Because he can believe whatever he wants from the Bible; that’s the nature of Sola Scriptura. He tries to be honest, but in the end, what’s the point of my raising arguments since he always can (and does) come up with an alternate interpretation of any verse I bring up?
I feel similar to how you do. I feel a little . . . helpless . . . in the face of a belief system that can always interpret anything differently from how I interpret it on any issue. The Early Church Fathers encountered just this problem when trying to debate the divinity of Christ or the reality of the Trinity with heretics, from Scripture. The heretics endlessly came up with different, seemingly plausible interpretations of any passage, and were certainly honest in their views. So the Fathers to a large extent gave up on using the Scripture as a principle source of arguing material, and used the argument of apostolic succession instead. For it was not something heretics could “interpret differently,” and thus get around the Fathers’ claims about the nature of the true religion. In this way, they defeated the heresies of the Early Church and maintained unity.
You don’t believe . . . and maybe for some reason don’t want to believe . . . in an infallible Magesterium. So you can always interpret the Bible in ways that dispute it, and that’s what you do. If you chose, you could easily seek out and find many interpretations of the Bible’s verses that outright reject Sola Scriptura.
No matter what passage I bring up to you, there will always be an alternative interpretation you can bring up. And you are seeking those “alternative interpretations,” thus seeking to justify Sola Scriptura, rather than trying to find sensible interpretations of the verses that disagree with Sola Scriptura and confirm the Magesterium, to really see if this is possible. So since you act with the purpose of justifying Sola Scriptura, I hardly see the point anymore
. For you will always succeed. Anyone can always succeed. I just left a person on another website who was arguing sincerely from Scripture that God wants us to hate people and that every Gentile will perish in eternal fire, God saving only those “seeming” Gentiles who are actually genetic members of the lost 11 tribes of Israel.
It was pure, barbaric insanity I was reading, yet he was bringing up dozens of passages to justify his reading. He sincerely believed it, and was trying to do what he felt was right in God’s eyes.
I brought up clear passages confronting his position, and he reinterpreted them all. It’s mad. That’s why the Fathers abandoned this style of Scripture-based arguing, when confronting heretics over false beliefs. They saw it as pointless. And I feel that since you simply don’t believe in the Magesterium, verses I bring up aren’t likely to convince you. Even though I think they’re clear as daylight.
So you are concerned about the Magesterium on our end, but from my point of view, you have a perfectly impervious position on your end, too, for any verse I bring up to justify the Magesterium or Tradition, or challenge Sola Scriptura, you can and will (if the posts and emails you’ve given on this matter so far are a basis for forming an opinion) interpret differently. That’s been my experience all the way up to this time, discussing many verses with you so far on issues of spiritual authority.
It makes theological dispute feel pointless
. Since I know you are fully capable of finding a way out of anything I present, on any issue we disagree on.
I suppose that’s similar to your feeling that it’s pointless to dispute with our view, because of the Magesterium.
I do carefully think about what you say, though, Craig. I think everyone here does- the massive posts you’ve received from so many people show how much thought they put into it. And I know you think about what we say.
But the deeper barriers between us are spiritual or psychological, I think. What you are trying to see in the Bible, you’ll see. Therefore the verses themselves, tragically, are less important than the frame of mind we have when approaching them.
. I’d heard something like that before, about the direct translation of that verse, but had forgotten it.