You can't have it both ways.

  • Thread starter Thread starter Jimmy_B
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
LutheranDK said:
Wrong. Sola Scriptura does not mean “No other authority AT ALL”, but "No authority ABOVE OR EQUAL TO Scripture. Scripture’s the supreme authority given to man by God, from which all other authority is derived.
Click to expand...
Hi LutheranDK,

You used all those super large, font letters in your first sentence to try to prove a point, just to undermine that point in the following sentence, where you wrote - " Scripture’s the supreme authority…". Now, let’s include the Protestant doctrine, which allows for “personal interpretation” of Holy Scripture… and now what do we have? Confusion and division, right? I read what you wrote and I’m just not seeing it. Also, do you think that it’s possible that you might also be making an argument based on semantics? Thank you for your post.

Your thoughts?
 
Dokimas said:
Sorry that you misunderstood me.
Click to expand...
Ok.

Catholicism has never said that we are to blindly follow any teaching. Oh, the irony of being on a Catholic Apologetics forum and proclaiming that!
f I believe the Bible is inspired by God, and you know I believe this, then it goes without saying that anything in the Bible is inspired by the Holy Spirit.
Click to expand...
Indeed.

And if we believe that the CC is guided by the Holy Spirit, and you know we believe this, then it goes without saying that anytime we talk about the CC proclaiming a teaching it is inspired by the HS.

Just like we say we have authority over our children, it goes without saying, if we’re Christians, that we know this authority comes from God.
My mentioning Paul and Moses isn’t because I hold them perfect in any way. You hold the CC perfect in it’s teaching, don’t you?
Click to expand...
You don’t hold Paul and Moses perfect in their teachings?
Do you think I have a bad memory to have to keep telling me what you believe?
Click to expand...
Based on your posting history I think we (Catholics) all have to keep telling you what we believe, Doki. Not because your memory is bad, but because you’re a stubborn fella. 😃
 
Dokimas said:
Why didn’t you say that when I first asked?

Thanks for your candor.
Click to expand...
This is not to say that there is no Scriptural basis for the ministerial priesthood, but rather ministries of the Church were set up under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit in such a way as to be able to develop and meet the needs of the faithful beyond the 1st century.
 
PRmerger said:
You got it, Doki! We are all part of the Royal Priesthood.
Click to expand...
Yes, we are.
Now, the ministerial priesthood was established by Jesus
Click to expand...
Yes, it was.
(and it gave you your Bible, BTW
Click to expand...
Well, the undivided Church certainly received it, and we should be thankful to both East and West for preserving it.
, so you ought to have some respect for the Catholic priesthood!
Click to expand...
Yes, we should.

Jon
 
JonNC said:
Human sin, of course, not only regarding the different interpretations amongst Christian groups generally referred to as Portestant, but also amongst those who claim scripture and tradition.
Click to expand...
Then the Bible as a sole authority is ineffective and useless, is it not?
Because it is a -]post-apostolic/-] post-post-post (as in 1500 years post :D) apostolic era practice.
Click to expand...
:eek:
No doubt, some who claim to be sola scripturists do. I don’t, and Lutherans are not supposed to.
Click to expand...
Jon
Click to expand...
👍
 
JonNC said:
Yes, Carl, it does. It also implies that scripture is sufficient. And Christ often mentioned, “it is written”.

Jon
Click to expand...
Actually, the Scriptures do no such thing. The Scriptures identify the Holy Writ as useful, but nowhere is sufficiency implied. Furthermore, the pillar and bulwark of Truth is identified as the Church.
 
If we are discussing, whether or not the Bible is the supreme authority in Christianity, then why aren’t my Protestant brothers here, using Bible verses to prove their point? Just wondering, because it appears that the Catholic posters here are making better and more often use of the Bible. :rolleyes:
 
Jimmy_B said:
If we are discussing, whether or not the Bible is the supreme authority in Christianity, then why aren’t my Protestant brothers here, using Bible verses to prove their point? Just wondering, because it appears that the Catholic posters here are making better and more often use of the Bible. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...
Too be fair, I credit my own knowledge of the Scriptures to two things:

  1. *]Amazing Scripture professers here at Franciscan University
    *]My background as an IFB and the strong emphasis on Bible study
 
=PRmerger;7090830]Then the Bible as a sole authority is ineffective and useless, is it not?
Click to expand...
Then, so is scripture and tradition.
Because it is a -]post-apostolic /-]post-post-post (as in 1500 years post ) apostolic era practice.
:eek:
Click to expand...
:rotfl: post-post-post. Are you trying to sell Raisin Brand? 😃

Jon
 
StTommyMore said:
Actually, the Scriptures do no such thing. The Scriptures identify the Holy Writ as useful, but nowhere is sufficiency implied. Furthermore, the pillar and bulwark of Truth is identified as the Church.
Click to expand...
Ok. We were using the word “implied”.

Which Church? Until the schism, there was indeed one institutional Church. Our communions, along with the Orthodox, agree on the first 7 councils. Since then, where is that Church? Joe and I have discussed this often.

Jon
 
JonNC said:
Ok. We were using the word “implied”.

Which Church? Until the schism, there was indeed one institutional Church. Our communions, along with the Orthodox, agree on the first 7 councils. Since then, where is that Church? Joe and I have discussed this often.

Jon
Click to expand...
I would say the Catholic Church, but I may be biased 😉
 
Jimmy_B said:
If we are discussing, whether or not the Bible is the supreme authority in Christianity, then why aren’t my Protestant brothers here, using Bible verses to prove their point? Just wondering, because it appears that the Catholic posters here are making better and more often use of the Bible. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...
Jimmy,
Is this an unbiased opinion? 😃

Jon
 
JonNC said:
Ok. We were using the word “implied”.

Which Church? Until the schism, there was indeed one institutional Church. Our communions, along with the Orthodox, agree on the first 7 councils. Since then, where is that Church? Joe and I have discussed this often.

Jon
Click to expand...
Seriously, it was not a comparative analysis between Orthodoxy and Catholicism that drew me into the Catholic Church. To be honest, I am not all that well educated on the issues behind the Great Schism. Some are led to belief through intellectual study (such as Dr. Scott Hahn), but that was not part of my conversion. So I can honestly say that I accept that"the Church" of the Scriptures is the Catholic Church on faith. I can tell you no more than that.
 
JonNC said:
Then, so is scripture and tradition.
Click to expand...
It would be useless if Scripture and Tradition were posited as being subject to one’s personal interpretation (guided, of course, by the HS).

However, the Catholic Church’s position is, as you know, not as stated above.
 
JonNC said:
Jimmy,
Is this an unbiased opinion? 😃

Jon
Click to expand...
No Jon,

Lol… you already know how bias I am, so I’m not even going to try to hide it…😃

However, to answer your question here; I went back a ways and look through the posts here, because I haven’t posted very much on this thread lately and it didn’t seem like there were very many posts by non-Catholics, using, very many Bible references and when I did post Bible verses that support our position, I didn’t get a Protestant response. If I’m wrong, please feel free to point it out.

Thanks. 🙂
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top