Why do you believe in Sola Scriptura?

[Per_Crucem]

What I would like to know is why you, per crucem and Jon
are unable to answer direct questions on the SUBJECT?
It’s very easy to get into insults and hurt feelings with
you three but you all three have failed at directly answering
questions put to you on the subject?
Why?

Really? You throw ad hominems at Luther and you want us to defend him from them? Why?

 

[marywarfield]

Really? You throw ad hominems at Luther and you want us to defend him from them? Why?

No. I want you to explain your ism assertions made
without proofs. You can start with post 531.

 

[marywarfield]

I wasn’t talking about Luther. I was talking about you saying that to Jon.

530 and 531. Posts. On. The. Subject. In. Answer. To Assertions
Made by you and Jon. Care to explain your statements
on the TOPIC?

 

[Per_Crucem]

No. I want you to explain your ism assertions made
without proofs. You can start with post 531.

I’m not a Baptist, so why would I argue in favor of immersion only? Not that this is exclusively Baptist, since some eastern churches only baptize by immersion. Regardless, I’m not going to defend a position I don’t hold to.

 

[marywarfield]

I’m not a Baptist, so why would I argue in favor of immersion only? Not that this is exclusively Baptist, since some eastern churches only baptize by immersion. Regardless, I’m not going to defend a position I don’t hold to.

Do you have a position on sola Scriptura? That is the topic.
Have not yet heard your position.
For instance you don’t hold with baptism by immersion.
Ok since it’s not in Scripture to sprinkle or immerse,
how do you know you don’t hold with it? How did you
form that conclusion?

 

[steido01]

(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)

 

[Per_Crucem]

http://th895.photobucket.com/albums/ac159/GIFsforhire/Sigh/th_sigh.gif

Don, LOL

 

[JonNC]

You have a problem also with me calling Luther
arrogant but no problem with you coming to Catholic
forums to argue the wrongness of Catholic faith?
Really?

And if there is only ONE why do you call it Lutheran
rather than Catholic? Why not just drop the Lutheran
and go with OC, RC or EC? There must be something
different then between Lutheran and these OC, RC,
and EC?

Let’s be clear. This is the first time we’ve crossed paths. You don’t know me, and you don’t know what I do here. Usually it is more to clarify what Lutherans believe, such as my first post to you was. I don’t come here to argue against the Catholic Church.
You might want to consider that some of us seek dialogue toward better
Understanding and closer ties, and have an abiding respect for the Catholic Church

As for the name, Evangelical Catholic is fine by me.

Jon

 

[commenter]

Let’s be clear. This is the first time we’ve crossed paths. You don’t know me, and you don’t know what I do here. Usually it is more to clarify what Lutherans believe, such as my first post to you was. I don’t come here to argue against the Catholic Church.
You might want to consider that some of us seek dialogue toward better
Understanding and closer ties, and have an abiding respect for the Catholic Church
As for the name, Evangelical Catholic is fine by me.
Jon

JonNC, and a few other Christians of different denominations on CAF, have taught me a lot partly by their knowledge of their own faith tradition, partly by their (in some cases enormous) knowledge of Catholicism, and partly by the respect they show to Catholicism and other faith communities besides their own. CAF, especially this Forum, is a place where I learn, and occasionally rant when other people are obviously wrong and need to be set straight.

 

[marywarfield]

Ok. You don’t want to discuss the TOPIC or answer
any responses except with personal attacks.
So let me expand the range for you. In my own
opinion I find Sola Scriptura to be arrogant period.
For one thing trying to force people to adhere to
it is something Christ never did and secondly
Christ Himself was not Sola Scriptura. Evidenced
by his conversation with the woman at the well- He
was able to exercise more respect and more humility
with her than the three of you combined treatedme but then as I said
He was NOT Sola Scriptura was He? Case closed and later.

 

[JonNC]

What I would like to know is why you, per crucem and Jon
are unable to answer direct questions on the SUBJECT?
It’s very easy to get into insults and hurt feelings with
you three but you all three have failed at directly answering
questions put to you on the subject?
Why?
I’m still waiting for answers on the TOPIC in posts
530 and 531 after giving up asking YOU the same
questions two pages ago and not getting an answer.
I don’t understand why it is so easy for you to take
personal umbrage and so difficult to answer questions
on the TOPIC.

The thread is over 500 posts long. I am sure I posted this before, but from the Formula of Concord

. 1] 1. We believe, teach, and confess that the sole rule and standard according to which all dogmas together with [all] teachers should be estimated and judged are the prophetic and apostolic Scriptures of the Old and of the New Testament alone, as it is written Ps. 119:105: Thy Word is a lamp unto my feet and a light unto my path. And St. Paul: Though an angel from heaven preach any other gospel unto you, let him be accursed, Gal. 1:8.

2] Other writings, however, of ancient or modern teachers, whatever name they bear, must not be regarded as equal to the Holy Scriptures, but all of them together be subjected to them, and should not be received otherwise or further than as witnesses, [which are to show] in what manner after the time of the apostles, and at what places, this [pure] doctrine of the prophets and apostles was preserved.

3] 2. And because directly after the times of the apostles, and even while they were still living, false teachers and heretics arose, and symbols, i. e., brief, succinct [categorical] confessions, were composed against them in the early Church, which were regarded as the unanimous, universal Christian faith and confession of the orthodox and true Church, namely, the Apostles’ Creed, the Nicene Creed, and the Athanasian Creed, we pledge ourselves to them, and hereby reject all heresies and dogmas which, contrary to them, have been introduced into the Church of God.

SS is a practice of holding all teachings accountable to scripture

Jon

 

[marywarfield]

The thread is over 500 posts long. I am sure I posted this before, but from the Formula of Concord

SS is a practice of holding all teachings accountable to scripture

Jon

So this is different from RC actually HOW???
Why is it necessary to be Lutheran and reject
the RC to hold all teachings accountable to Scripture?
You have not yet demonstrated that RC dies not.
You have not yet described how the Lutheran
Church is different from RC.

 

[McCartney]

Even a cursory examination of 2nd century history from the early church fathers will show you these books were not first viewed as secondary by Luther.

What does this mean? where was Luther in the second century?

 

[McCartney]

Only speaking about ourselves, we would say the one Holy catholic and apostolic church where the gospel is proclaimed and the sacraments are administered.

Wow!! never thought I would hear this from a protestant. Keep up the good work.

 

[McCartney]

The more important question for Catholics and Lutherans is how to reconcile now that those abuses are long in the past - and even if we can’t worship around the same altar just yet - we should strive as individuals to at least understand each other and build each other up in Christ while gently defending our own viewpoint.

I have been reading that the reconciliation between Catholics and Lutherans is coming faster than one would think.

 

[CaliLobo]

As a former Protestant, for me, what else logically is there?

1. Sola Scriptura sounds so concisely beautiful, it has to be true.
2. There is nothing in the Bible that mandates that we HAVE to follow manmade tradition, or even Holy Tradition. Paul tells one of the churches to keep holding onto what they were taught, but what is that they were taught? The insistence on adhering to Holy Tradition is driving many away from the Catholic Church and into Evangelical churches, where many feel that they have experienced God for the first time. The faster growth of the Evangelical churches proves that maybe Evangelical churches got something right.
3. It is difficult to follow a Magisterium that has committed crimes against humanity and continues to adhere to archaic policies on abortion, gay rights, and contraception. Placing faith in the Magisterium leaves one vulnerable to institutional abuses. Protestants, because we are all priests, believe it is entirely appropriate to read, interpret, and discuss the Bible by and among themselves.
4. The fact that the Catholic Church has changed doctrines, disciplines, and traditions over the years undermines the idea that the Magisterium and Holy Tradition are the same things taught by Jesus. Are we really saying that today’s Mass is the same thing that the early Christians did in Acts? Example: Vatican II.

 

[benjohnson]

1. Sola Scriptura sounds so concisely beautiful, it has to be true.

Beauty isn’t always an indication of truth.

While I agree with Sola Scripture, this argument only makes me suspicious; Many ugly people have beautiful hearts and beauty is a mask worn often by the Deceiver.

1. There is nothing in the Bible that mandates that we HAVE to follow manmade tradition, or even Holy Tradition. … The faster growth of the Evangelical churches proves that maybe Evangelical churches got something right.

Popularity doesn’t equate to truth. The truth exists independently of how many people perceive it.

1. It is difficult to follow a Magisterium that has committed crimes against humanity and continues to adhere to archaic policies on abortion, gay rights, and contraception.

Difficulty in following truth is not an indication at all of it’s validity - and the contrast you made with modern temporarily pleasures of meaningless sex makes highlights this.

 

[JonNC]

So this is different from RC actually HOW???
Why is it necessary to be Lutheran and reject
the RC to hold all teachings accountable to Scripture?
You have not yet demonstrated that RC dies not.
You have not yet described how the Lutheran
Church is different from RC.

Catholics hold that scripture is not itself the final norm, but one of three, including sacred tradition and the pope and magisterium.
I do not “reject” the CC, but it is not hermeneutics that for me is church dividing.
Example: I do not believe that from scripture or even tradition of the early Church that the Bishop of Rome has universal jurisdiction.
The Augsburg Confession lays our differences out.

Jon

Edit: I am not here trying to explain Catholic practice.

 

[steido01]

Wow!! never thought I would hear this from a protestant. Keep up the good work.

Then you’ve been listening to the wrong Protestants. Lutherans have always believed it. Ben is paraphrasing from Article VII of the Augsburg Confession:

Article VII: Of the Church.

Also they (Lutherans) teach that one holy Church is to continue forever. The Church is the congregation of saints, in which the Gospel is rightly taught and the Sacraments are rightly administered.

And to the true unity of the Church it is enough to agree concerning the doctrine of the Gospel and the administration of the Sacraments. Nor is it necessary that human traditions, that is, rites or ceremonies, instituted by men, should be everywhere alike. As Paul says: One faith, one Baptism, one God and Father of all, etc. Eph. 4:5-6.

 

[commenter]

It is difficult to follow a Magisterium that has committed crimes against humanity and continues to adhere to archaic policies on abortion, gay rights, and contraception. Placing faith in the Magisterium leaves one vulnerable to institutional abuses. Christians did in Acts? .

The Magisterium refers only to teaching the truth. It upholds a standard, which to a large extent also forms the standard that Protestants, atheists, and others hold to today. It’s because that standard has been upheld, and currently is being upheld, that everyone condemns massacres, and child abuse today. It’s not the fault of the Magisterium that individual Catholics like me, and non Catholics, sometimes do bad things. We know that Truth is good, and Evil is bad, because of the Magisterium. The Magisterium doesn’t commit any crimes, nor any good deeds.

Is it “archaic” to oppose killing a child in the womb because of public opinion?
The Magisterium is not affected by what is popular or unpopular, that reflects the Media, not truth. In the United States, there is a culture war between those who follow the Media, and those who follow the Magisterium.

Protestants and many non Christians indirectly follow the Magisterium somewhat, because the Magisterium sets the standard for which books are inspired, which traditions are Tradition, why is evil wrong, especially when it is popular. If you argue “I don’t need the Magisterium because my denomination follows orthodox doctrine” you are like the guy who said “I don’t need the farm because all my food comes from the store”.