P
No, not a thing as far as I know.White is the best I’ve heard on the protestant side.
So my take on last night was that he was doing what all if protestantism does - apply their own standards to the scriptures. This prescriptive vs descriptive theory he came up with…is that even a thing?
I’m not familiar with this. What is his assertion or proof? I’m guessing he says descriptive is the only way to go since prescriptive means “accepted by long usage or the passage of time”. Which we all know would be the writings of the Church Fathers.This prescriptive vs descriptive theory he came up with…is that even a thing?
Also, the Bible doesn’t state that we should read it with the eye of description vs prescription, so that’s a thing we are under no obligation to endorse.No, not a thing as far as I know.
And there is no guidance from the Bible as to how we are to discern whether a passage is prescriptive or descriptive.
So that makes it a man-made tradition, no?![]()
Since the debate is over it can’t be watched on that website. It was only a live stream.Do I need to register to view? Where is it on the site?
I’m gonna actively look for a upload because I would like to hear it again. Maybe I just missed his rational as to why he applies this method.I’m not familiar with this. What is his assertion or proof? I’m guessing he says descriptive is the only way to go since prescriptive means “accepted by long usage or the passage of time”. Which we all know would be the writings of the Church Fathers.Personally I have a hard time listening to White, he comes across as nothing more than a cyber bully to me. That’s one of the reasons I kept working last night. I can usually only handle White about 20 minutes at a time.
Exactly what I was thinking when listening to him carry on.No, not a thing as far as I know.
And there is no guidance from the Bible as to how we are to discern whether a passage is prescriptive or descriptive.
So that makes it a man-made tradition, no?![]()
So basically the definition of descriptive is “how James White chooses to describe it”?I’m gonna actively look for a upload because I would like to hear it again. Maybe I just missed his rational as to why he applies this method.
Basically, those passages like John 15 where Jesus describes pruning, he is saying that is describing what happens to the unregenerate, not saved people. And these are just warning type passages for people to understand what happens to the fake Christians.
But Horn rightfully maintained that in order to be cut off or severed you must first be adjoined.
To me he is just practicing typical Sola Scriptura. Which means I place certain scriptures above others based on my own theological presuppositions.
Exactly.So basically the definition of descriptive is “how James White chooses to describe it”?![]()
Indeed.Exactly.
He also danced around the not so friendly passages in Hebrews by saying if you aren’t scholarly on the book of Leviticus then you wont really get the true meaning of Hebrews.
Love to hear more on his rational on this as well.
Now, this, I didn’t see. I didn’t see him being snide.But yeah, he can be tough to listen to in his bully pulpit of condescension. He made a snide remark to protestants who aren’t OSAS believers…said you are basically already
Catholic. Horn fired right back at him on that. Really unfair generalizations made. Surprising since much of Protestantism is about allowing diversity.
I hope I am not going to far off topic, this might actually be a good thread to start some day.Exactly.
He also danced around the not so friendly passages in Hebrews by saying if you aren’t scholarly on the book of Leviticus then you wont really get the true meaning of Hebrews.
Love to hear more on his rational on this as well.
But yeah, he can be tough to listen to in his bully pulpit of condescension. He made a snide remark to protestants who aren’t OSAS believers…said you are basically already
Catholic. Horn fired right back at him on that. Really unfair generalizations made. Surprising since much of Protestantism is about allowing diversity.
Right.I hope I am not going to far off topic, this might actually be a good thread to start some day.
But my question goes with your remark above “if you aren’t scholarly on the book of Leviticus.”
I thought one of the big premises of Sola Scriptura was anyone could pick up the Bible, read it for themselves and teach themselves God’s revelation?
If that weren’t true wouldn’t your only course of action be to either go to a Church which was 2000 years old or read the writings of the Church fathers to aid you in your interpretation?
That is the biggest hang up I have when I dialogue with someone of another faith. I can fully accept someone saying they don’t agree with the Catholic Church’s interpretation. Hey God gave us all an unlimited supply of free will. But it just sends needles up my spine when someone says she is wrong. That just makes absolutely no sense.Right.
“The Catholic Church can’t tell me that I can’t interpret the Bible in this particular manner!”–James White (rhetorical)
Also,
“Your interpretation of Scripture is incorrect”–James White (rhetorical)