What is Sola Scriptura

[joe370]

AP, you said:

But with the comment that Catholicism does this also.

This is nothing more than a red herring. Please show me where the CC teaches conflicting truths regarding any one defined doctrine?

Once I was reading a web site of a Catholic 7 day creationist, geocentrist.

Although I am sure geocentrism is a minority opinion within Catholicism it is certainly allowed. Most Catholics that I am aware are probably Theologically Evolutionists but not all.

Geocentrism is not a defined doctrine, nor is the 7 day model. The Catechism of the Catholic Church comments positively on the theory of evolution, which is neither precluded nor required by the sources of faith, stating that scientific studies “have splendidly enriched our knowledge of the age and dimensions of the cosmos, the development of life-forms and the appearance of man.”

But the net is that under your paradigm, the Holy Spirit is teaching one set of truths to one set of Catholics and another set of truths to another set of Catholics.

Please expound, and don’t use evolution as your example. If the Holy Spirit is teaching one set of truths to one set of Catholics and another set of truths to another set of Catholics, then I most definitely want to be aware of these conflicting truths.

Or
Quote:
Originally Posted by joe370 View Post
2) Look to some other methodology or source outside of sacred scripture, to resolve their conflict. What might that methodology or source be???

Well for example, with the NT canon the arbitrator would be the fact that Protestants, Orthodox, and Catholics all share a common canon. That is what prevents me from going out and adopting my personal NT canon.

Good to know that you don’t go out and adopt your own personal NT canon, however, you didn’t answer the question.

 

[joe370]

By let it stand, I meant I don’t have that many objections to argue about it.

Obviously the Holy Spirit does not contradict himself.

When two Christians disagree over an issue, the following are logical possibilities.

(1) God has revealed the answer in which case 1 or both of the parties in disagreement are wrong.

(2) God has not revealed the answer in which case both parties in the disagreement are wrong and hold merely speculative opinions.

However, my comment holds about the exact same scenario occuring within Catholicism (see the origins of the earth issue).

So, if I am a fledgling Christian on the fence and I ask you to provide me with the truth regarding the Eucharistic doctrine, you would tell me that either God has revealed the answer but only in an ambiguous way, or that God has not revealed the answer? That certainly wouldn’t help me much.

I agree; the Holy Spirit does not contradict himself. So, your answer to the following question is either:

(1) God has revealed the answer in which case 1 or both of the parties in disagreement are wrong. In other words, one person is right and one person is wrong, or they are both wrong. That doesn’t help much.

OR

(2) God has not revealed the answer in which case both parties in the disagreement are wrong, (which begs the question: how can they be wrong or right, if God has not revealed it?) - and hold merely speculative opinions. In other words, God has not revealed the truth regarding the Eucharistic doctrine, even though it is spelled out in the Word of God? If God has not revealed the answer, then why does every church claim to have the answer regarding the Eucharistic doctrine? Which brings me back to the original question, directed to any non-Catholic on this thread:

What happens when 2 people (as opposed to any one church leader, such as a bishop, pastor or minister, regardless of church denomination) - go to the scriptures to resolve the dispute regarding baptism by water being necessary or unecessary, or the true presence in the Eucharist vs the symbolical interpretation, and come away with opposing beliefs, believing beyond a shadow of a doubt that they are both right? How do they go about deciding who is right and who is wrong, regarding these 2 doctrines? Where do they go to definitively resolve these diametrical differences, after they have exhausted all efforts to resolve the matter via sola scriptura?

 

[AmateurPianist]

AP, you said:
This is nothing more than a red herring. Please show me where the CC teaches conflicting truths regarding any one defined doctrine?

That sounds like “pay no attention to that man behind the curtain”. The more one tells me to “pay no attention to that man behind the curtain”, the more the man behind the curtain interests me.

Your original proposition states simply “the Holy Spirit teaching one set of truths to one person while teaching another set of truths to another person”. It made no distinction between defined and undefined doctrines.

Geocentrism is not a defined doctrine, nor is the 7 day model. The Catechism of the Catholic Church comments positively on the theory of evolution, which is neither precluded nor required by the sources of faith, stating that scientific studies “have splendidly enriched our knowledge of the age and dimensions of the cosmos, the development of life-forms and the appearance of man.”

Catholics disagree in respect to origins.

Please expound, and don’t use evolution as your example. If the Holy Spirit is teaching one set of truths to one set of Catholics and another set of truths to another set of Catholics, then I most definitely want to be aware of these conflicting truths.

Pay no attention to that man behind the curtain.

Good to know that you don’t go out and adopt your own personal NT canon, however, you didn’t answer the question.

I think I did

Well for example, with the NT canon the arbitrator would be the fact that Protestants, Orthodox, and Catholics all share a common canon. That is what prevents me from going out and adopting my personal NT canon.

 

[AmateurPianist]

What happens when 2 people (as opposed to any one church leader, such as a bishop, pastor or minister, regardless of church denomination) - go to the scriptures to resolve the dispute regarding baptism by water being necessary or unecessary, or the true presence in the Eucharist vs the symbolical interpretation, and come away with opposing beliefs, believing beyond a shadow of a doubt that they are both right? How do they go about deciding who is right and who is wrong, regarding these 2 doctrines? Where do they go to definitively resolve these diametrical differences, after they have exhausted all efforts to resolve the matter via sola scriptura?

Maybe you lock them up in the same conference room and tell them not to come out until they agree.

That approach works in corporate America in my workplace.

It might require a lot of pizza, soda, and cookies to feed the crew in the conference room, but eventually it will work.

But seriously, I am not convinced that this question is applicable to all definitions of Sola Scriptura anyway. Some yes, but not sure on all of them. Some definitions do seem to allow for the possibility of a central authority arbitrating disputes concerning interpretation of Scripture.

 

[joe370]

Hey AP…

Originally Posted by joe370 View Post
AP, you said:
This is nothing more than a red herring. Please show me where the CC teaches conflicting truths regarding any one defined doctrine?

That sounds like “pay no attention to that man behind the curtain”. The more one tells me to “pay no attention to that man behind the curtain”, the more the man behind the curtain interests me.

OK…I am still wondering what these conflicting truths are?

Your original proposition states simply “the Holy Spirit teaching one set of truths to one person while teaching another set of truths to another person”. It made no distinction between defined and undefined doctrines.

I apologize…Defined or undefined.

Quote:
Originally Posted by joe370 View Post
Geocentrism is not a defined doctrine, nor is the 7 day model. The Catechism of the Catholic Church comments positively on the theory of evolution, which is neither precluded nor required by the sources of faith, stating that scientific studies “have splendidly enriched our knowledge of the age and dimensions of the cosmos, the development of life-forms and the appearance of man.”

Catholics disagree in respect to origins.

As do non-Catholics. No biggie…

Quote:
Originally Posted by joe370 View Post
Please expound. If the Holy Spirit is teaching one set of truths to one set of Catholics and another set of truths to another set of Catholics, then I most definitely want to be aware of these conflicting truths.
Pay no attention to that man behind the curtain.

OK…If you get the opportunity, could you please share with me these conflicting truths of the CC?

Quote:
Originally Posted by joe370 View Post
Good to know that you don’t go out and adopt your own personal NT canon, however, you didn’t answer the question.
I think I did

You said:

Well for example, with the NT canon the arbitrator would be the fact that Protestants, Orthodox, and Catholics all share a common canon. That is what prevents me from going out and adopting my personal NT canon.

I know that all Christians share a common canon (the holy bible) - however, you did say:

Look to some other methodology or source to resolve their conflict. That would have to be the answer if one believes adopting your own personal canon is not allowed, to which I said: What might that methodology or source be??? What do you mean when you say:

“…if one believes adopting your own personal canon is not allowed.”

 

[joe370]

Maybe you lock them up in the same conference room and tell them not to come out until they agree.

That approach works in corporate America in my workplace.

How about baptism and the Eucharist? Do they allow for the possibility of a central authority arbitrating disputes concerning the interpretation of these 2 doctrines?

---

King James Bible
Therefore, brethren, stand fast, and hold the traditions which ye have been taught, whether by word, or our epistle.

 

[AmateurPianist]

Hey AP…
OK…If you get the opportunity, could you please share with me these conflicting truths of the CC?

Actually I never claimed that the Catholic defined dogmas are conflicting. I was specifically responding to this statement that made no differentiation between defined and undefined doctrines:

What happens when 2 people (as opposed to any one church leader, such as a bishop, pastor or minister, regardless of church denomination) - go to the scriptures to resolve a dispute, (e.g. the true presence in the Eucharist) - and come away with opposing beliefs, believing beyond a shadow of a doubt that they are both right? Where do they go to definitively resolve these diametrical differences, after they have exhausted all efforts to resolve the matter via sola scriptura?

I know that all Christians share a common canon (the holy bible) - however, you did say:

Look to some other methodology or source to resolve their conflict. That would have to be the answer if one believes adopting your own personal canon is not allowed, to which I said: What might that methodology or source be??? What do you mean when you say:
“…if one believes adopting your own personal canon is not allowed.”

I thought I was saying that the common canon becomes the methodology. Some might call this tradition.

 

[AmateurPianist]

How about baptism and the Eucharist? Do they allow for the possibility of a central authority arbitrating disputes concerning the interpretation of these 2 doctrines?

Good grief, maybe I am reading comprehension challenged but when I look at some of the definitions on the broad end of this scale, I can’t see why this is precluded.