Why do you believe in Sola Scriptura?

[marywarfield]

God knows everyone. And God says that all have sinned.

If the Blessed Virgin were without sin, then we know that because of revelation. Which would mean that God has informed us that she is sinless. She would be an exception. God has indicted the rest of humanity, however.

Then we’re at an impasse, and you contradict the Scriptures. All have sinned. All means all.

That may be so. But my conscience says I can’t convict
everyone of sin as I don’t know everyone. And my conscience
says God is the only one who knows this.
I am not contradicting scripture. I’m just saying
I can’t know what God knows. I know we are born
with Original Sin which causes us to have a
tendency toward sin. But the catechism says tendency
and tendency does not mean actualization.
Like gays who believe they were born gay but have
never given into the tendency and committed the
act. Would you say they had sinned because they
were born with the tendency? I wouldn’t.

And it seems I’m not the only one who foresees exceptions.
Some Protestants do as well. Here is a good examination
taylormarshall.com/2012/01/did-st-paul-say-all-have-sinnedexcept.html

 

[Nicea325]

God knows everyone. And God says that all have sinned.

If the Blessed Virgin were without sin, then we know that because of revelation. Which would mean that God has informed us that she is sinless. She would be an exception. God has indicted the rest of humanity, however.

Then we’re at an impasse, and you contradict the Scriptures. All have sinned. All means all.

So all means…all-right? So that also includes Jesus-right? All means all…right?

So I if I were to say:

All from the town were here at the Fesitval. (A town of 500 people)

Does it really mean all 500 folks were present without a shred of doubt?

 

[marywarfield]

God knows everyone. And God says that all have sinned.

If the Blessed Virgin were without sin, then we know that because of revelation. Which would mean that God has informed us that she is sinless. She would be an exception. God has indicted the rest of humanity, however.

Then we’re at an impasse, and you contradict the Scriptures. All have sinned. All means all.

And besides the link I just gave you what do you
make of Protestant Bible linguistics and lexicons
who disagree with your rather fundamental literal interpretation?

Basically when does “all” really mean “all”.

For instance the Bible says ALL of Israel will be
saved. Yet some say no.
And the Bible says call no one good except God.
yet it also says “good people bring forth good fruits”.

And again exceptions. I have a six month old granddaughter
who does not walk or talk. I am having trouble conceiving
what sin you believe she may have committed?
socrates58.blogspot.com/2007/03/all-have-sinned-mary.html?m=1

 

[Per_Crucem]

So all means…all-right? So that also includes Jesus-right? All means all…right?

So I if I were to say:

All from the town were here at the Fesitval. (A town of 500 people)

Does it really mean all 500 folks were present without a shred of doubt?

Negatron. All means all unless there is qualification. Since Scripture also says that Christ was without sin, we know Him to be an exception (and Mary, if you hold that belief).

 

[Per_Crucem]

And besides the link I just gave you what do you
make of Protestant Bible linguistics and lexicons
who disagree with your rather fundamental literal interpretation?

Basically when does “all” really mean “all”.

For instance the Bible says ALL of Israel will be
saved. Yet some say no.
And the Bible says call no one good except God.
yet it also says “good people bring forth good fruits”.

And again exceptions. I have a six month old granddaughter
who does not walk or talk. I am having trouble conceiving
what sin you believe she may have committed?
socrates58.blogspot.com/2007/03/all-have-sinned-mary.html?m=1

Because the “all” is confirmed by numerous other Scripture passages which state that no flesh will be justified in the sight of God because all mankind has transgressed the law.

 

[Nicea325]

The church is a secondary cause in the sense that she receives the text. She doesn’t authorize it, or canonize it herself. It became canon when it was inspired. The revelation is the text itself.

Ah no! The church first received the Word via oral communication which via the Holy Spirit guided men to write through the inspiration. Wrong! The church did authorize it and God used his bishops to take care of the matter, a fact of church and canon history.

It became canon when it was inspired? When and where do the authors of Scripture explicitly state what they are writing is inspired;hence automatically canon? Chapter and verse please…

 

[Per_Crucem]

Ah no! The church first received the Word via oral communication which via the Holy Spirit guided men to write through the inspiration. Wrong! The church did authorize it and God used his bishops to take care of the matter, a fact of church and canon history.

It became canon when it was inspired? When and where do the authors of Scripture explicitly state what they are writing is inspired;hence automatically canon? Chapter and verse please…

You’re missing my meaning, Nicea. God is the only being to infallibly know the canon, because He is its ultimate author. It became Scripture by virtue of His inspiration of it. The Roman Catholic Church confesses this. See the canons on revelation from Vatican I.

 

[Nicea325]

Negatron. All means all unless there is qualification. Since Scripture also says that Christ was without sin, we know Him to be an exception (and Mary, if you hold that belief).

That is not what you said. You said…all…means all. So Mary cannot be an exception? So a sinner conceived the Son of God?

 

[marywarfield]

Because the “all” is confirmed by numerous other Scripture passages which state that no flesh will be justified in the sight of God because all mankind has transgressed the law.

But you call me a universalist because I point to
the possibility of exceptions.

For instance the Bible tells us “all will live in Christ”
but we “all” know, especially you more than me know that
some definitely will not as they will deliberately choose
evil over good. So frankly I can’t make a case for your
fundamental literal interpretation of “all” have sinned.
While I generally agree that all as in most, or just
about everybody has, I will allow God His own exceptions.

And see since your all is a literal all- you said all means just that all- how can
I now allow you to make exceptions for Mary and Jesus? All means all.

 

[Per_Crucem]

Ah no! The church first received the Word via oral communication which via the Holy Spirit guided men to write through the inspiration. Wrong! The church did authorize it and God used his bishops to take care of the matter, a fact of church and canon history.

It became canon when it was inspired? When and where do the authors of Scripture explicitly state what they are writing is inspired;hence automatically canon? Chapter and verse please…

These books the church holds to be sacred and canonical

not because she subsequently approved them by her authority after they had been composed by unaided human skill,
nor simply because they contain revelation without error,
but because,
    being written under the inspiration of the holy Spirit,
    they have God as their author,
    and were as such committed to the church.

chapter 2 from the canons of Vatican I

 

[Per_Crucem]

That is not what you said. You said…all…means all. So Mary cannot be an exception? So a sinner conceived the Son of God?

Mary can be an exception. You will not find me accusing her of sin any time soon.

 

[Per_Crucem]

But you call me a universalist because I point to
the possibility of exceptions.

I call you a universalist because you state that a man may be saved apart from Christ.
Christ is without sin because He is God. If Mary was without sin, she was a Christian, so it would hardly prove your point.

For instance the Bible tells us “all will live in Christ”
but we “all” know, especially you more than me know that
some definitely will not as they will deliberately choose
evil over good. So frankly I can’t make a case for your
fundamental literal interpretation of “all” have sinned.
While I generally agree that all as in most, or just
about everybody has, I will allow God His own exceptions.

The all of all will live in Christ is given qualifications elsewhere in Scripture. Passages must be interpreted in context, of course. The all of all have sinned in Romans 3, is given that qualification earlier in chapter 3, where Paul says that all are guilty before God and none will be justified by their works.

 

[Nicea325]

You’re missing my meaning, Nicea. God is the only being to infallibly know the canon, because He is its ultimate author. It became Scripture by virtue of His inspiration of it. The Roman Catholic Church confesses this. See the canons on revelation from Vatican I.

Really? So if the church and its bishops are fallible,then explain why God used His fallible church to determine which books would and would not make the cut?

On the contrary, you’re making a claim based on pure “inspiration” as the only means of determing the canon. Sorry, the process for the canon was much more complex than you wish to convey.

 

[Per_Crucem]

Really? So if the church and its bishops are fallible,then explain why God used His fallible church to determine which boks would and would not make the cut?

On the contrary, you’re making a claim based on pure “inspiration” as the only means of determing the canon. Sorry, the process for the canon was much more complex than you wish to convey.

No, I am saying that they are canon in virtue of their inspiration. Yes, they had to be discerned, but they are canonical because the Holy Spirit inspired them. Again, see Vatican I.

 

[marywarfield]

Mary can be an exception. You will not find me accusing her of sin any time soon.

And again that is a problem with your literalness.

If all means all than all means all. It doesn’t mean
all except for…
Please make up your mind.
Does all mean all or does it mean all except for?

 

[Per_Crucem]

And again that is a problem with your literalness.

If all means all than all means all. It doesn’t mean
all except for…
Please make up your mind.
Does all mean all or does it mean all except for?

If all says all, it refers to all of mankind who are not conceived by the Holy Spirit and are the 2nd person of the Trinity. Scripture is a unit and must be interpreted as such. Since Christ did not need to be justified and he committed no transgression of the law, then He is an exception. Since Scripture gives no other exceptions, I have no reason to believe there are any.

 

[Nicea325]

No, I am saying that they are canon in virtue of their inspiration. Yes, they had to be discerned, but they are canonical because the Holy Spirit inspired them. Again, see Vatican I.

I know Vatican I and I understand your point. However, you make it appear as though the church is only a second player in its canonization. Sorry,but that is it not how history explains it. I also know it happened long before Vatican I. And the question begging to be asked is: WHO decided and determined certain books were inspired?

Do you have a name of one scripture author saying:

What I am writing for you is inspired (Hence by virtue of inspiration it is canon)

That is not how it worked out. Not one verse mentions a word about the canon…not one!

 

[marywarfield]

Because the “all” is confirmed by numerous other Scripture passages which state that no flesh will be justified in the sight of God because all mankind has transgressed the law.

John the Baptist? Elizabeth? Comatose three month olds?
Really? They have sinned? What are their sins?
Those born with Downs Syndrome and cannot discern
right from wrong. The severely autistic with Downs?
Kids born brain dead and on life support?

Really? They all sinned?

Is there any possibility that “All have sinned”
Is from the Greek pas meaning most, or just about everyone?
For that was an original translation…

 

[Per_Crucem]

I know Vatican I and I understand your point. However, you make it appear as though the church is only a second player in its canonization. Sorry,but that is it not how history explains it. I also know it happened long before Vatican I. And the question begging to be asked is: WHO decided and determined certain books were inspired?

Do you have a name of one scripture author saying:

What I am writing for you is inspired (Hence by virtue of inspiration it is canon)

That is not how it worked out. Not one verse mentions a word about the canon…not one!

Well, various parts of the NT do refer to other parts of the NT as Scripture. But no, I don’t write the church out of the equation of how we know that Scripture is Scripture. God works through means and He used the church as one of the means in the canonization process. The same way He used the prophets and the apostles to communicate revelation to man.

 

[Per_Crucem]

John the Baptist? Elizabeth? Comatose three month olds?
Really? They have sinned? What are their sins?
Those born with Downs Syndrome and cannot discern
right from wrong. The severely autistic with Downs?
Kids born brain dead and on life support?

Really? They all sinned?

Is there any possibility that “All have sinned”
Is from the Greek pas meaning most, or just about everyone?
For that was an original translation…

The disabled may not commit actual sins due to their inability. They are, however, still conceived and born in sin.