Who really cares what the ECF's had to say?

[MamaZ]

This shows you can not formulate an argument based on a reasonable stance. All you do is continually repeat your just-so statements. Because it is, because it is, because it is.

And God said let there be light and there it was. Gods word is truth. I can stand on this word for I know that it is truth and that truth is what I seek..I seek to please God and not men. For I cry abba Father when I come to His table and eat of His word..For He is my father and I can put my sole trust in Him and His written word and never find myself ashamed..Jesus is my sole savior and forever High Priest.. I can go to the throne room any time I please because of the shed blood of My savior. I need not go to any man..

 

[MamaZ]

Psa 9:9 The LORD also will be a stronghold for the oppressed, A stronghold in times of trouble;
Psa 9:10 And those who know Your name will put their trust in You, For You, O LORD, have not forsaken those who seek You.
Psa 9:11 Sing praises to the LORD, who dwells in Zion; Declare among the peoples His deeds.
Psa 9:12 For He who requires blood remembers them; He does not forget the cry of the afflicted.

 

[MamaZ]

Psa 119:10 With all my heart I have sought You; Do not let me wander from Your commandments.
Psa 119:11 Your word I have treasured in my heart, That I may not sin against You.
Psa 119:12 Blessed are You, O LORD; Teach me Your statutes.
Psa 119:13 With my lips I have told of All the ordinances of Your mouth.
Psa 119:14 I have rejoiced in the way of Your testimonies, As much as in all riches.
Psa 119:15 I will meditate on Your precepts And regard Your ways.
Psa 119:16 I shall delight in Your statutes; I shall not forget Your word.

 

[Anglian]

Dear MamaZ,

No one is suggesting you go to any other man. It is the Sola Scriptura idea which is of man.

Where, in Scripture does it define itself? Where, in Scripture does it say that the Holy Spirit is of one essence with the Father and the Son? These things were understood by the ECFs with the inspiration of the Spirit.

It may be that the Spirit inspires you with all the wisdom He gave to the ECFs, but for those of us less blessed, the ECFs provide not only a guide to what is Scriptural, but one about how best to understand the word of God.

Peace,

Anglian

 

[MamaZ]

Psa 118:8 It is better to take refuge in the LORD Than to trust in man.
Psa 118:9 It is better to take refuge in the LORD Than to trust in princes.

 

[MamaZ]

where can I find the words of the Lord? In His written scriptures..

 

[Ramon96]

And God said let there be light and there it was. Gods word is truth. I can stand on this word for I know that it is truth and that truth is what I seek..I seek to please God and not men. For I cry abba Father when I come to His table and eat of His word..For He is my father and I can put my sole trust in Him and His written word and never find myself ashamed..Jesus is my sole savior and forever High Priest.. I can go to the throne room any time I please because of the shed blood of My savior. I need not go to any man..

That still doesn't explain why every Protestant Christian teach differently, all based on what the Holy Spirit tells them. Seems you cannot answer the questions at hand. Why is it that a Born Again Christian teach X which is not believe by Born Again Christian B, and both claim to follow what the Holy Spirit teach them?

Where is the Holy Spirit teaching now, since every Christian is teaching differently? Where is His True Sheep that is teaching 100% truth and not falsehood?

"And Philip ran thither to him, and heard him read the prophet Esaias, and said, Understandest thou what thou readest?And he said, How can I, except some man should guide me? And he desired Philip that he would come up and sit with him.......Then Philip opened his mouth, and began at the same scripture, and preached unto him Jesus." (Acts 8:30-31; 35).


You see? This gives us an example. He went to Saint Philip (a Deacon) to teach him the truth. Likewise, we go to the Church (the Priests, the Bishops, etc), guided by the Holy Spirit, to learn the truth based upon what the Church has taught for the past 2,000 years. Understand?

Your logic that "The Holy Spirit leads every Christian with no need of men" ("Every man for himself") does not explain anything, and it just makes matters more confusing! Your logic is fallacy. Perhaps you have not read Eph 4:11.

where can I find the words of the Lord? In His written scriptures..

I am not even sure what those Scriptures have to do with Solo-Scriptura. Does any of those Scriptures have the phrase "Only Scriptures is the pure word of God"? In order words, while Scriptures are the inspired word of God, is not the only place we can learn from the Lord, since Christ left a authoritative Church! The Church was the final and ultimate authority in giving you a Bible so that you can be "Solo-Scriptura" with!

"What you have heard from me before many witnesses entrust to faithful men who will be able to teach others also" (2 Tim. 2:2). In this passage he refers to the first three generations of apostolic succession—his own generation, Timothy’s generation, and the generation Timothy will teach. So the Church teach us what she learn from the Holy Spirit. The Holy Apostles passed along there teachings to the Early Church Fathers!

Thus, The Holy Spirit was sent down on the Apostles on Pentecost, and they were given the charisma to serve and lead the Church. This charisma they passed on to their successors, the Bishops, who in turn passed it on to their own successors, even to this present day. Understand?

That is why I follow the Church. She has the ultimate authority not a book. I believe the NT has 27 books because of the Church, for Scriptures themselves does not have a "Canon List" so I have to accept and trust the Church, guided by the Holy Spirit.

Blessings,
Ramon

 

[Anglian]

Dear MamaZ,

Perhaps a concrete example of how the ECFs help deepen our understanding of the word of God might help here.

In reading St. Matthew this morning I read, for the xth time the parable of the wheat and the tares. I know what is being said, my priest has preached on it numerous times, and I have read it more times than I can remember. But this morning I decided to see what the ECFs have to say. Going to St. Augustine's commentary on St. Matthew I found this:

Between wheat and weeds is something called darnel, when the plant is in its early growth and there is no stalk yet. It looks like an ear of corn, and the difference between them is hardly noticeable

The Greek word translated in English as either tares (a bit uncommonly old-fashioned now) or weeds is ζιζάνια (zizania), plural of ζιζάνιον (zizanion), and that is usually assumed to mean darnel. So, a specific species of plant. But can that possibly matter?

Indeed it does. Darnel is Lolium temulentum, a species of rye-grass, the seeds of which are a strong soporific poison. It is an annual plant that can grow up to the same height as wheat. It is commonly found in Syria and Israel in those areas in which wheat is grown. More importantly, it resembles wheat so strongly in appearance that it is widely known as “false wheat”. Until both wheat and tares have grown to the point at which the ears appear they look the same. The ears of darnel are light and do not bend with the heaviness of the seed within them as do the ears of wheat. This explains the instruction given by the householder when his servants suggest that they dig up the weeds (tares):

28…The servants said to him, “Do you want us then to go and gather them up?”
29 But he said, “No, lest while you gather up the tares you also uproot the wheat with them.
30 Let both grow together until the harvest, and at the time of harvest I will say to the reapers, "First gather together the tares and bind them in bundles to burn them, but gather the wheat into my barn.””

It also explains the comment in the version of the parable found in the apocryphal “Gospel of Thomas”: “For on the day of the harvest the weeds will be conspicuous, and will be pulled up and burned.”

But, still, why all this focus on darnel? All the parables of The Lord appear to be simple tales with easy-to-understand meanings. But they are all, in fact, very sophisticated stories, with many layers of meaning, in which sometimes minor details, properly understood, bring out the most important teaching.

This parable is often read as a simple story of good (wheat) and evil (weeds) which must be separated. But life relatively rarely offers such easy choices and, when it does, it requires no great insight to understand what should be done. If the wheat was contaminated, say, with a plant bearing no resemblance to wheat, and which quickly produced scarlet flowers, it would be easy to distinguish the good wheat from the bad weeds.

But darnel looks like wheat, grows like wheat, is all but indistinguishable (except to the very knowing eye) from wheat until both plants have reached the stage of ripeness immediately prior to the harvest. One produces a heavy head of life-giving grain and is bent over with the weight; the other produces many poisonous seeds and remains upright.

One can readily say: life’s like that! That which has the appearance of good may, eventually, reveal itself to be evil. That which seems to have the potential for fruitfulness may grow into that which is deadly or delusory. What appears to be a life of spiritual devotion may be a life of pretence and deception. Within our own lives we may be deceived by the appearance of “wheat” (all too often because “wheat” is what we want to see) only to find out, eventually, that it was darnel.

Maybe these comments, deriving from what St. Augustine had to say, add nothing to your understanding of what the Lord meant; but they helped me, as I hope they will others.

Peace,

Anglian

 

[Montalban]

Personally, I think you're wasting your time.

Like LittleLambofJesus, MamaZ is set with repitition of 'just-so' statements. The biblical quotes with no context also doesn't help

 

[Anglian]

Dear Montablan,

You may well be right.

Those whose tradition teaches Sola Scriptura will, ironically, stick to their made made tradition despite the lack of support for it in Scripture. Since Scripture nowhere defines itself, any position which relies on what is in Scripture alone is inherently flawed.

There is a delicious irony emerging here.

Those who decry reliance on' made made tradition' the loudest, rely on it the most (unless they can show where in Scripture it defines what is in it).

Those who decry most the Pope's claims to infallibility, make that claim for themselves.

I guess we can't argue against their infallible man made tradition

Peace,

Anglian

 

[Montalban]

Matthew 7:22
Many will say to me on that day, 'Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name, and in your name drive out demons and perform many miracles?'
23 Then I will tell them plainly, 'I never knew you. Away from me, you evildoers!'

I'm still having a really difficult time understanding how we can trust the things we feel convicted of when we are reading & interpreting Scripture personally. A really nice lady I know goes to a different church than I do, where they believe different things on Salvation - like, they believe in saying the sinner's prayer, and accepting Christ and that's all you need ever. You're saved for good and it can't be taken away. But I don't think so - I think that Salvation is something we have to aim for throughout our entire lives. Like if I accept Christ but then fall and have premarital sex, I have to repent, right? WHy should I repent if I can't lose my Salvation? I think you can lose it.

Anyway, the point is, we're both convicted in this matter, and it is a pretty critical issue. She feels that the Spirit is leading her one way based on how she has read Scripture, and I feel the Spirit is leading me another. I don't understand how we can both be right... there has to be some other way to understand this issue rather than saying "you just know" if the Spirit is leading you...

Anyway it's just an issue that's been bothering me.

That is the very problem of a sola scriptura approach. Paul called for unity of faith but sola scriptura leads to disunity. 100,000's of different churches all making the same claim that the Holy Spirit guides them.

Some handle snakes, some speak in tongues, some believe in many baptisms, some Protestant churches have gay 'clergy'.

However Jesus set up a system to avoid this.

The offices of deacon, priest and bishop are in the NT.
Deacons
1 Timothy 3:10
And let these also first be proved; then let them use the office of a deacon, being found blameless.
1 Timothy 3:13
For they that have used the office of a deacon well purchase to themselves a good degree, and great boldness in the faith which is in Christ Jesus.

Priests
1 Timothy 4:14
Neglect not the gift that is in thee, which was given thee by prophecy, with the laying on of the hands of the presbytery.
Presbytery
4244 presbuterion pres-boo-ter'-ee-on neuter of a presumed derivative of 4245; the order of elders, i.e. (specially), Israelite Sanhedrin or Christian "presbytery":--(estate of) elder(-s), presbytery.
Strongs Lexicon
http://www.eliyah.com/cgi-bin/strongs.cgi?file=greeklexicon&isindex=presbytery

Bishops
1 Timothy 3:2
A bishop then must be blameless, the husband of one wife, vigilant, sober, of good behaviour, given to hospitality, apt to teach;
Titus 1:7
For a bishop must be blameless, as the steward of God; not selfwilled, not soon angry, not given to wine, no striker, not given to filthy lucre;
1 Peter 2:25
For ye were as sheep going astray; but are now returned unto the Shepherd and Bishop of your souls.

Paul mentioned that our church elders were worthy men (1 Timothy 5:17). Protestants ignore all of this. They have to.

However MamaZ and others here simply offer repitition of 'just-so' statements without reference to these facts. What leads them to do this? Not all who cry "Lord! Lord" will be saved (Matthew 7:21).
As Augustine said, even the demons know that Jesus is God.
"For "the devils also believe and tremble," as the Scripture tells us."Augustine - Homily X

Simply knowing He is God is not enough. Jesus said "I am the Way", so that there is a right way to believe in God. Else you must believe that Moslems are a type of Christian by virtue of the fact that they refer to Jesus as Christ.

There is a right way...
The Ethiopian gives a clue to being 'taught' the Word... (the Holy Spirit didn't just waltz down and inspire him)
Acts 8:30 Then Philip ran up to the chariot and heard the man reading Isaiah the prophet. “Do you understand what you are reading?” Philip asked.
31 “How can I,” he said, “unless someone explains it to me?” So he invited Philip to come up and sit with him. That is, Philip didn't just let him read it for himself to be inspired by the Holy Spirit.
The Bible itself calls on us to keep to the 'traditions' as handed down, and in scripture
Now I praise you, brethren, that you remember me in all things and keep the traditions as I delivered them to you (1 Corinthians 11:2)

“Therefore, brethren, stand fast and hold the traditions which you were taught, whether by word or by our epistle” (2 Thessalonians 2:15)

We are to follow the teachers Jesus Himself chose. Why do you think out of all the hundreds that followed Him about He called 12 aside and taught them?

There is a right way
2 Peter 1:20 Above all, you must understand that no prophecy of Scripture came about by the prophet's own interpretation.

As I say Protestants ignore all of this. They have fallen for the very sin of Adam, that of pride. It is too much for them to believe that they should 'submit' themselves to the church. Instead they believe that what ever they do is 'submitting' to Jesus. How do they know? They just have faith that it is so, and so we get back to the many 100,000's of different Protestant churches. This division is not of God

 

[Montalban]

Dear Montablan,

You may well be right.

Those whose tradition teaches Sola Scriptura will, ironically, stick to their made made tradition despite the lack of support for it in Scripture. Since Scripture nowhere defines itself, any position which relies on what is in Scripture alone is inherently flawed.

There is a delicious irony emerging here.

Those who decry reliance on' made made tradition' the loudest, rely on it the most (unless they can show where in Scripture it defines what is in it).

Those who decry most the Pope's claims to infallibility, make that claim for themselves.

I guess we can't argue against their infallible man made tradition

Peace,

Anglian

I've yet to see one Protestant show how Scripture says Scripture alone is sufficient.

I've yet to see one Protestant show how Scripture authorised itself. For instance, we have the "Gospel of Mark". But, how do we know it's from Mark? Did it authorise itself and include itself in the Bible?

But the greatest tragedy is the ignoring of huge swathes of evidence from the Bible that argues against them

I've cited Paul quoting stuff he knew from 'oral tradition'. I've quoted him saying to keep to the traditions that were taught. And, to the fact that offices of the church were established; deacons, priests and bishops. All of this is for naught for sola scriptura Protestants

 

[Anglian]

Dear Montalban,

Thank you for an excellent statement of the position of the Orthodox Church.

Whether it is any proof against these infallible man-made traditions of Sola Scriptura we shall see.

I would be quite convinced by SS if someone could point out where, in Scripture, it defines what is Scriptural.

Peace, and thanks,

Anglian

 

[MamaZ]

That still doesn't explain why every Protestant Christian teach differently, all based on what the Holy Spirit tells them. Seems you cannot answer the questions at hand. Why is it that a Born Again Christian teach X which is not believe by Born Again Christian B, and both claim to follow what the Holy Spirit teach them?

Where is the Holy Spirit teaching now, since every Christian is teaching differently? Where is His True Sheep that is teaching 100% truth and not falsehood?

"And Philip ran thither to him, and heard him read the prophet Esaias, and said, Understandest thou what thou readest?And he said, How can I, except some man should guide me? And he desired Philip that he would come up and sit with him.......Then Philip opened his mouth, and began at the same scripture, and preached unto him Jesus." (Acts 8:30-31; 35).


You see? This gives us an example. He went to Saint Philip (a Deacon) to teach him the truth. Likewise, we go to the Church (the Priests, the Bishops, etc), guided by the Holy Spirit, to learn the truth based upon what the Church has taught for the past 2,000 years. Understand?

Your logic that "The Holy Spirit leads every Christian with no need of men" ("Every man for himself") does not explain anything, and it just makes matters more confusing! Your logic is fallacy. Perhaps you have not read Eph 4:11.



I am not even sure what those Scriptures have to do with Solo-Scriptura. Does any of those Scriptures have the phrase "Only Scriptures is the pure word of God"? In order words, while Scriptures are the inspired word of God, is not the only place we can learn from the Lord, since Christ left a authoritative Church! The Church was the final and ultimate authority in giving you a Bible so that you can be "Solo-Scriptura" with!

"What you have heard from me before many witnesses entrust to faithful men who will be able to teach others also" (2 Tim. 2:2). In this passage he refers to the first three generations of apostolic succession—his own generation, Timothy’s generation, and the generation Timothy will teach. So the Church teach us what she learn from the Holy Spirit. The Holy Apostles passed along there teachings to the Early Church Fathers!

Thus, The Holy Spirit was sent down on the Apostles on Pentecost, and they were given the charisma to serve and lead the Church. This charisma they passed on to their successors, the Bishops, who in turn passed it on to their own successors, even to this present day. Understand?

That is why I follow the Church. She has the ultimate authority not a book. I believe the NT has 27 books because of the Church, for Scriptures themselves does not have a "Canon List" so I have to accept and trust the Church, guided by the Holy Spirit.

Blessings,
Ramon

In this Scripture this man had not been born again yet..After this man received Jesus notice that Philip was taken away.. This man no longer needed Philip to teach him for now he was spiritually born.

 

[MamaZ]

That still doesn't explain why every Protestant Christian teach differently, all based on what the Holy Spirit tells them. Seems you cannot answer the questions at hand. Why is it that a Born Again Christian teach X which is not believe by Born Again Christian B, and both claim to follow what the Holy Spirit teach them?

As I said not every Prostestant teaches differenly. This is something you have heard and picked up and stated.I can gleam from the scriptures at any bible teaching assembly because it is the scripture that feeds and not mens belief system. I am not bound to what men teaches.. I have the scriptures to take all that is said to line up with the written word. My responsiblity is to know Jesus myself and to walk in His written scriptures not in what men may teach me.


Where is the Holy Spirit teaching now, since every Christian is teaching differently? Where is His True Sheep that is teaching 100% truth and not falsehood?


Only the scriptures are truth and not falsehood. The Holy Spirit is in each individual believer. Teaching them what the scripture is saying. Depending on the maturity of the man in their spiritual walk with the Lord.


"And Philip ran thither to him, and heard him read the prophet Esaias, and said, Understandest thou what thou readest?And he said, How can I, except some man should guide me? And he desired Philip that he would come up and sit with him.......Then Philip opened his mouth, and began at the same scripture, and preached unto him Jesus." (Acts 8:30-31; 35).


You see? This gives us an example. He went to Saint Philip (a Deacon) to teach him the truth. Likewise, we go to the Church (the Priests, the Bishops, etc), guided by the Holy Spirit, to learn the truth based upon what the Church has taught for the past 2,000 years. Understand?

I could care less how long some churchs have taught something. IF it does not line up with the written scriptures then error can be taught as long as that and still not be truth.

Your logic that "The Holy Spirit leads every Christian with no need of men" ("Every man for himself") does not explain anything, and it just makes matters more confusing! Your logic is fallacy. Perhaps you have not read Eph 4:11.

Eph 4:11 And He gave some as apostles, and some as prophets, and some as evangelists, and some as pastors and teachers,
Eph 4:12 for the equipping of the saints for the work of service, to the building up of the body of Christ;
Eph 4:13 until we all attain to the unity of the faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God, to a mature man, to the measure of the stature which belongs to the fullness of Christ.
Eph 4:14 As a result, we are no longer to be children, tossed here and there by waves and carried about by every wind of doctrine, by the trickery of men, by craftiness in deceitful scheming;
Eph 4:15 but speaking the truth in love, we are to grow up in all aspects into Him who is the head, even Christ,
Eph 4:16 from whom the whole body, being fitted and held together by what every joint supplies, according to the proper working of each individual part, causes the growth of the body for the building up of itself in love.

I am not even sure what those Scriptures have to do with Solo-Scriptura. Does any of those Scriptures have the phrase "Only Scriptures is the pure word of God"? In order words, while Scriptures are the inspired word of God, is not the only place we can learn from the Lord, since Christ left a authoritative Church! The Church was the final and ultimate authority in giving you a Bible so that you can be "Solo-Scriptura" with!

If a church errs from the teaching of the scripture how can it have any authority?

"What you have heard from me before many witnesses entrust to faithful men who will be able to teach others also" (2 Tim. 2:2). In this passage he refers to the first three generations of apostolic succession—his own generation, Timothy’s generation, and the generation Timothy will teach. So the Church teach us what she learn from the Holy Spirit. The Holy Apostles passed along there teachings to the Early Church Fathers!

Never does paul call any of these teachers successor of an Apostle.
The gifts and callings are from God not hand me down callings from men.


Thus, The Holy Spirit was sent down on the Apostles on Pentecost, and they were given the charisma to serve and lead the Church. This charisma they passed on to their successors, the Bishops, who in turn passed it on to their own successors, even to this present day. Understand?

The Holy Spirit is a gift from God not from man.. The Father sends the Holy Spirit .
That is why I follow the Church. She has the ultimate authority not a book. I believe the NT has 27 books because of the Church, for Scriptures themselves does not have a "Canon List" so I have to accept and trust the Church, guided by the Holy Spirit.

Blessings,
Ramon

No man is in lordship of any other man.. So therefore it is the God breathed scripture that has the teaching of God in them. You will be held accountable to God all by yourself for seeking out the truth. So if this assembly you follow after does not speak truth in all things you will be held accountable to God for following after an assembly that spoke not truth and you believing the error. That is why I take everything I hear to the whole counsel of the written accounts of the word of God.

 

[MamaZ]

Dear Montablan,

You may well be right.

Those whose tradition teaches Sola Scriptura will, ironically, stick to their made made tradition despite the lack of support for it in Scripture. Since Scripture nowhere defines itself, any position which relies on what is in Scripture alone is inherently flawed.

There is a delicious irony emerging here.

Those who decry reliance on' made made tradition' the loudest, rely on it the most (unless they can show where in Scripture it defines what is in it).

Those who decry most the Pope's claims to infallibility, make that claim for themselves.

I guess we can't argue against their infallible man made tradition

Peace,

Anglian

I am not responsible for what men have taught.. They are. I am responsible for what I have done with what I have been taught. Have I taken what I have been taught to the very pure word of God to see if indeed what they speak is truth? Have I believed man over the full councel of the written scriptures? Have I allowed men to tell me what scripture says and added a little of their own understanding of what they think it says? Or Have I as a faithful servant of Christ taken all that men have said and dug and studied the written scriptures myself so that the Holy Spirit in me can teach me what God is saying to His people? Rightly dividing the word of Truth.. Showing myself approved? Believing God instead of man?

 

[Anglian]

No man is in lordship of any other man.. So therefore it is the God breathed scripture that has the teaching of God in them. You will be held accountable to God all by yourself for seeking out the truth. So if this assembly you follow after does not speak truth in all things you will be held accountable to God for following after an assembly that spoke not truth and you believing the error. That is why I take everything I hear to the whole counsel of the written accounts of the word of God.

Dear MamaZ,

But where, in the 'God breathed Scriptures' does it say what is Scripture? Your Assembly knows Scripture only because His Church, guided by His Spirit, determined its boundaries.

No one is saying that any man has 'lordship' over any other man. Yes, we shall each be accountable for seeking out the truth, and the point being made here is that by cutting yourself off from a source of truth which enabled the Church to see what was and was not Scripture, you deprive yourself of much spiritual sustenance.

Nowhere in Scripture does it say that it interprets itself; nowhere does it say what is and is not Scripture. Sola Scriptura is a man made doctrine unknown before the sixteenth century, and like all things that are of man, is marred by man's sinfulness.

It may be that your Assembly divides the words of God aright with all the wisdom that is to be found in the Fathers of the Church, and they they add nothing to what you are taught. But until you have read some of them, how can you be sure?

Peace,

Anglian

 

[MamaZ]

I have yet to see where Jesus taught us to trust in men and hold everything they have said and taught as the gospel instead of the Gospel itself. This is why the Apostles were chosen so they could lay the foundation of what is from God and what is not from God so that Christ Body could have a sure foundation built upon the Foundation of Christ built upon by the foundation of the Apostles. Therfore being careful how we build on this foundation for every man is accountable to God for how they build. I have yet to see where Jesus told us to follow after tradtions of men. I have yet to see where any of what the EO or the RCC hold as sacred tradtion taught by Jesus.. Such as many a thing.. The Pope for one..A man claiming to be Christ here on earth.. Scripture warns us of such things as this.. Mary as being the queen of heaven for another.. No where in scripture do we see these things as truth but yet many a man holds on to these tradtions.

 

[MamaZ]

Dear MamaZ,

But where, in the 'God breathed Scriptures' does it say what is Scripture? Your Assembly knows Scripture only because His Church, guided by His Spirit, determined its boundaries.

No one is saying that any man has 'lordship' over any other man. Yes, we shall each be accountable for seeking out the truth, and the point being made here is that by cutting yourself off from a source of truth which enabled the Church to see what was and was not Scripture, you deprive yourself of much spiritual sustenance.

Nowhere in Scripture does it say that it interprets itself; nowhere does it say what is and is not Scripture. Sola Scriptura is a man made doctrine unknown before the sixteenth century, and like all things that are of man, is marred by man's sinfulness.

It may be that your Assembly divides the words of God aright with all the wisdom that is to be found in the Fathers of the Church, and they they add nothing to what you are taught. But until you have read some of them, how can you be sure?

Peace,

Anglian

You know not the power of God for it was not man who determined what Gods word was but God Himself since God breathed it.. God is faithful.. He is sovereign over any man.

 

[MamaZ]

I have yet to see where we are taught that the church is the authority over the scripture.