Where is this taught in the bible?

[freerf]

Based on my last thread regarding the non-Catholic consensus of what sola scriptura is, and is not, I have concluded that the bible, as per sola scriptura advocates, is the Christians only source of divine authority, and that all Christians, as per the practice of sola scriptura, must defer to the authority of the bible alone, (with the exception of one SS advocate) - as opposed to deferring to the authority of the Catholic Church or any other Protestant Church for that matter. I am told that All have the right to read the bible (with which I agree, to a point…) - as it has been written, and discern truth for themselves: no church Bishop or Pastor (regardless of church affiliation) - is needed to further expound that which has been expounded by the Spirit of Christ in the Prophets and the Apostles.

Where is this taught in the bible??? 2 Timothy 3 does not teach this…

I know I am late on this thread, but this is simply not an accurate reflection of what Protestants believe (at least any that i know), or what Sola Scriptura entails.

I would say that all beliefs must be bounced off the bible for accuracy. That the bible is sufficient. We can learn from other sources, defer to other sources, and learn from other people, but must learn these things in the light of scripture. We can also enjoy traditions -such as a christmas tree at Christmas, or holding hands during prayer - so long as these traditions arn’t forbidden by scripture.

Elders are always needed for further guidance and clarification. We would be fools to believe otherwise.

 

[joe370]

Freef, what was your answer to the OP? You said that all beliefs must be bounced off the bible for accuracy. Regarding said bouncing, in the end is it the elders of each respective church that are needed for further guidance and clarification, which means that you must not embrace private judgment or private interpretation of the bible - correct?

I know I am late on this thread, but this is simply not an accurate reflection of what Protestants believe (at least any that i know), or what Sola Scriptura entails.

I would say that all beliefs must be bounced off the bible for accuracy. That the bible is sufficient. We can learn from other sources, defer to other sources, and learn from other people, but must learn these things in the light of scripture. We can also enjoy traditions -such as a christmas tree at Christmas, or holding hands during prayer - so long as these traditions arn’t forbidden by scripture.

Elders are always needed for further guidance and clarification. We would be fools to believe otherwise.

 

[freerf]

Freef, what was your answer to the OP? You said that all beliefs must be bounced off the bible for accuracy. Regarding said bouncing, in the end is it the elders of each respective church that are needed for further guidance and clarification, which means that you must not embrace private judgment or private interpretation of the bible - correct?

I think i answered the op but maybe the thread split. . .i don’t recall the question you’re asking above.

But my answer wound be, no. It does not mean that “you must not embrace private judgement or private interpretation. . .” I know of no society, profession or religion that does not honor the wisdom of it’s elders and trust them for guidance. Does that mean they are always right? No. So how do we know? We hold all knowledge to the light of scripture.

I know very few protestants who are so foolish as to believe they have nothing to learn from Mother Teresa, St. Thomas Aquinas, or a St. Therese of Lisieux (one of my personal favorites). Am I bound to learn only from my own Church? Thank God, no!

 

[Cinette]

Are you saying that those children of God who are protestants are not part of the church Jesus was speaking about?

Is the CC the ONLY Christian church?

The people that were the church are in there grave waiting to be raised to be with Jesus for eternity or they are already in Heaven. I’m sure they don’t care as long as the spend eternity with Him.

There’s always been Christians since Act 1. Some ended up in the CC and many in other churches as it is now.

I have no clue what kind of timeline you are asking for.

*I think you need to study Church history. Then your questions would be automatically answered.

Cinette*

 

[Cinette]

Was Luther partly correct if the CC changed some practices he protested against?

You must be speaking about Luther’s understanding of justification by faith that is heretical. Have you ever looked at the ‘works’ that Luther was against for justification? I’m sure Luther understood that faith in Jesus results in correct living and obedience to Him. I’m also sure that Luther saw correct living and obedience to Jesus as works. Maybe Luther disagrees with the CC as to what those resulting works are? I would tend to agree with Luther.

*Did Luther practice “correct living” in his personal life?

Cinette*

 

[oneGODoneCHURCH]

We can also enjoy traditions -such as a christmas tree at Christmas, or holding hands during prayer - so long as these traditions arn’t forbidden by scripture.

When Catholic speck of Holy Tradition these are not the type of tradidtion we speck of.
We are specking of Tradition such as those that determined what books would be in the Bible. The Trinity. The Sacrements. The Creeds. The communion of the Saints. the Apostolic authority of the bishops and the Church.

 

[freerf]

When Catholic speck of Holy Tradition these are not the type of tradidtion we speck of.
We are specking of Tradition such as those that determined what books would be in the Bible. The Trinity. The Sacrements. The Creeds. The communion of the Saints. the Apostolic authority of the bishops and the Church.

I know. I was addressing a common misconception: that a Protestant can have no traditions if they believe sola scriptura.

 

[Cinette]

I know. I was addressing a common misconception: that a Protestant can have no traditions if they believe sola scriptura.

*Any tradition that developed 1500 years after Jesus is a “tradition of man”. The bible warns us about traditions of man.

Tradition with a capital T is not the same thing.

God bless
Cinette*

 

[joe370]

Hey Freef…

So private judgment regarding the truths found in the bible is the correct approach to accessing said truths? In other words, my private judgment and your private judgment regarding the holy bible is all that is required if we don’t agree with what our Pastors teach? If yes then doctrinal truth is unknowable; if you and I “hold all knowledge to the light of scripture” we come away from scripture with polar opposite beliefs when it comes to certain truths found in the bible. .

I think i answered the op but maybe the thread split. . .i don’t recall the question you’re asking above.

But my answer wound be, no. It does not mean that “you must not embrace private judgement or private interpretation. . .” I know of no society, profession or religion that does not honor the wisdom of it’s elders and trust them for guidance. Does that mean they are always right? No. So how do we know? We hold all knowledge to the light of scripture.

I know very few protestants who are so foolish as to believe they have nothing to learn from Mother Teresa, St. Thomas Aquinas, or a St. Therese of Lisieux (one of my personal favorites). Am I bound to learn only from my own Church? Thank God, no!

 

[oneGODoneCHURCH]

I know. I was addressing a common misconception: that a Protestant can have no traditions if they believe sola scriptura.

But those things that you stated are not even in the same frame for thought as the ones I listed. They would be what is commomly known as a small (t) tradition. They have really no bareing on the faith. No one that I know of has ever said that one must have a christmas tree or hold hands when they pray together. So unlike a large (T) Tradition if they were to go away it really do not alter the faith.

 

[roveau]

The simpilest answer is offtne the Best. Now I do not presume to spkeak for all Catholics, but to the best of my ability I will give it a shot. For Catholics the Church is the Pillar and Bulwork of Truth. This truth comes to the church through the teaching Magisterium, Tradition, and Scripture. The 3 are not seperable. Chirst first gave us the Teachers (apostles) they gave us the Traditions, and ( inspired by God) the Scritpure. The 3 are coneected and can not be seperated nor can they contradict one another. therefore if a Bishop were to teach something other that what we are given in scriopture or from Tradition he would be in error. Arias is an example.

The above seems to be pretty sound, despite the typing.

I would say, Christ is the Pillar and Bulwork of Truth, He is head of the Church.

I don’t think anyone here seriously denies that the Scriptures are the Word of God. Tradition is also rooted in the Scriptures as guided by the Holy Spirit. The Magisterium is guided by the Scriptures and Tradition.

There is no one Scripture verse that is going to satisfy every CAF member on either the Sola Scriptura or the Partim Partim view. Those holding the Sola Scriptura view hold a view that is not more than 500 years old. The Catholic Partim Partim view has a 2000 year history during which Christ was/is head of the Church.

To put it in perspective though, the Partim Partim view doesn’t make it a 50/50 proposition (that is 50% Scriptures and 50% Tradition), the vast bulk of Catholic belief is based on the Scriptures alone.

 

[oneGODoneCHURCH]

The above seems to be pretty sound, despite the typing.

I would say, Christ is the Pillar and Bulwork of Truth, He is head of the Church.

I don’t think anyone here seriously denies that the Scriptures are the Word of God. Tradition is also rooted in the Scriptures as guided by the Holy Spirit. The Magisterium is guided by the Scriptures and Tradition.

There is no one Scripture verse that is going to satisfy every CAF member on either the Sola Scriptura or the Partim Partim view. Those holding the Sola Scriptura view hold a view that is not more than 500 years old. The Catholic Partim Partim view has a 2000 year history during which Christ was/is head of the Church.

To put it in perspective though, the Partim Partim view doesn’t make it a 50/50 proposition (that is 50% Scriptures and 50% Tradition), the vast bulk of Catholic belief is based on the Scriptures alone.

Thank you for the indorsment as well as the typing critique. I would disagree that that vast bulk of catholic belief is based in scripture. I would say that all catholic based is based on scripture. That Tradition and magistral teaching is found either directly or indirectly in scripture. The Tradition arises out of Church teaching on Scripture. That teaching arise out of studies of scripture and tradition. All three working in union with one another so that it becomes hard to tell one from the other.

Aslo to clearify acording to scripture the church is the Pillar and Bulwork of Truth.