Why Sola Scriptura isn't God's plan

[Ortho_Cat]

You could interpret it however you want, wouldn't keep you from being wrong. On the same hand, having X amount of years behind you as "evidence" doesn't mean you've been interpreting it correctly either. Spiritual things are spiritually discerned. The reason why folk don't get certain things right is simply because the Spirit hasn't finished His work with them yet.

Where did you get this idea from? Doesn't sound scriptural to me...

 

[Ortho_Cat]

I don't know squat about you, but I love you.

That's one commandment, yes. And thanks, btw.

 

[Ortho_Cat]

My point actually was that whether they READ it,
or HEAR it (God's words spoken by God directly
or recorded for them in the Bible) isn't the issue.
They will get it or they wont, doesn't matter which
format it's presented in...

Why does someone get confused on something from the bible?
Or something God said in person (as we have read about in the Bible)?

There are a few reasons.
One is that they are spiritually blind and deaf..
but that's because they have HARDENED their own
hearts! They're 'darkened in their understanding'
and "seperated from the life of God" out of
IGNORANCE due to hardening their hearts...

Then there are those who don't desire a diet of meats
but rather of milk..and so milk is all they get.
They are UNSKILLED in the word of righteousness,
meaning one can be SKILLED in handling the Word.
Solid food is for mature Christians , who by reason of
USE have excercised their spiritual senses so that they
can discern what's right and what isn't.

Another is due to not having the spiritual eyes to see.
Unless one is BORN AGAIN, they can't SEE the kingdom.

Another is lack of use of the word, being a hearer only,
and not a doer. What little you have could be taken.

How are we to discern between those who have been enlightened by the Holy Spirit to interpret the scripture properly and those who haven't?

 

[sunlover1]

That's one commandment, yes. And thanks, btw.

How are we to discern between those who have been enlightened by the Holy Spirit to interpret the scripture properly and those who haven't?

By their words ... (my guess)
Out of the abundance of the heart, the mouth speaks.

But can't you be "enlightened" and yet still "immature".

 

[Ortho_Cat]

By their words ... (my guess)
Out of the abundance of the heart, the mouth speaks.

But can't you be "enlightened" and yet still "immature".

There are many convincing words on the baptism thread though, all supported by scripture. How is someone new to Christianity to know which one of the different beliefs concerning baptism are correct?

 

[Philothei]

You could interpret it however you want, wouldn't keep you from being wrong. On the same hand, having X amount of years behind you as "evidence" doesn't mean you've been interpreting it correctly either. Spiritual things are spiritually discerned. The reason why folk don't get certain things right is simply because the Spirit hasn't finished His work with them yet.

So you are saying: if you get it right...(according to my interpretation of what is right) then you are "enlitlented" by the Spirit...Then where is that in the Bible? Does it say that the so and so individual has it right then follow him or if you do not ....eh...you do not have the spirit working in you...That is how this works? So each one of any church would have to say that for themselves... let's see ...how many churches we are seeing that "the spirit is "semi-done" with them?

You think that the billions of Christians that exist (the majority actually) of EO and RC...in this planet "we do not get things right simple because the spirit has not finished His work with them'?
Hmmmm....

On the other hand who from the rest of the Chruches does? that can get sticky...

 

[sunlover1]

There are many convincing words on the baptism thread though, all supported by scripture. How is someone new to Christianity to know which one of the different beliefs concerning baptism are correct?

For you I would like to say that they could go with tradition, but I can no
longer say that either so I'd have to tell them that God is faithful and that
they should seek His face and determine to listen to His voice.
He said that His sheep would KNOW His voice and that a strangers voice
we will NOT follow.. so imo, the only thing we "lack" is the faith to believe
that that voice we 'hear' IS God's.
Therefore I'd try to help such a one to exercise their faith in that way.
I would encourage them to study, which causes His voice to be more easily
discerned from others..
And I would pray with him/her.
God said that if we pray in faith that He will hear and answer.
So I would pray for Him to reveal His will to her/him.

I bet that baptism thread is interesting.
I don't remember seeing that one.

Be blessed "loved one "

 

[Philothei]

How are we to discern between those who have been enlightened by the Holy Spirit to interpret the scripture properly and those who haven't?

That is my question too in a nutshell

 

[Stryder06]

Where did you get this idea from? Doesn't sound scriptural to me...

Which part wasn't scriptural? Part of my response dealt with the copious amounts of arguments for tradition that all revolve around the "We've got the history so we're right" school of thought.

The latter part of my statement was a reference to John 3:8

 

[Stryder06]

How are we to discern between those who have been enlightened by the Holy Spirit to interpret the scripture properly and those who haven't?

That is my question too in a nutshell

By comparing what they say to what the scripture says. This should be done prayfully.

Example. I tell you that the world was not made in six days with a 7th day acting as a period to the creation of it.

You look in your bible at Gen and see that hey God created the world in six days and rested on the seventh. You can compare that to Ex 20:11

See, simple. Creation vs Evolution problem solved.

 

[Stryder06]

So you are saying: if you get it right...(according to my interpretation of what is right) then you are "enlitlented" by the Spirit...Then where is that in the Bible? Does it say that the so and so individual has it right then follow him or if you do not ....eh...you do not have the spirit working in you...That is how this works?

Isa 8:20 my sister.

So each one of any church would have to say that for themselves... let's see ...how many churches we are seeing that "the spirit is "semi-done" with them?

Sorry but you lost me here.

You think that the billions of Christians that exist (the majority actually) of EO and RC...in this planet "we do not get things right simple because the spirit has not finished His work with them'?
Hmmmm....

I don't make that assumption at all, but let's be fair, the RCC believes that it is the only true church with the correct way of interpreting scripture. It believes that millions of Protestants are out of line with God's "True church" and as such need reconciliation. So you won't get much sympathy out of me in regards to "billions" of people not having it right.

The fact is that Christ said the way to salvation is narrow and few find it. With that being said, the numbers game works in reverse here with the majority being in the wrong. It's been that way from the beginning and it'll be that way till the end.

On the other hand who from the rest of the Chruches does? that can get sticky...

Not at all. You're trying to play the role that only God can fill. No denomination membership guarantees salvation. The one who have it right are the ones who trust God and love Him with all their hearts, and are doing their best to live according to the light which they have.

 

[ivebeenshown]

By comparing what they say to what the scripture says. This should be done prayfully.

Example. I tell you that the world was not made in six days with a 7th day acting as a period to the creation of it.

You look in your bible at Gen and see that hey God created the world in six days and rested on the seventh. You can compare that to Ex 20:11

See, simple. Creation vs Evolution problem solved.

But it's not really that simple. For it to be that simple you would have to pretend that God didn't give humans language abilities that include metaphor, hyperbole, general poetry, etc.

 

[ivebeenshown]

I questioned trinity for several years and God never left me ...
And He continued to fill me with love for His people and all
else that I had prayed for.

We all have it 'wrong' to a point.
But it's not about who has more 'right'.
It's about life and love.

That's just it... it is possible to be deceived into believing God is with you. Not saying you are/were, just saying Satan himself can disguise as an angel of light. But I'm sure you knew that, it's in the scriptures, which we both greatly enjoy.

 

[StThomasMore]

You sure you understand what SS is?
Simply put: The view that scripture is our only infallible rule of faith.

Has NOTHING to do with interpretations.

It does not require some high level of genius to understand.

no, has more to do with your oral tradition regarding authority.

If the Church doesn't have the same authority given by Christ and the Holy Spirit, then..as they say.. a fallible collection of infallible books.

problem is, if the collection is fallible then you don't know how many genuine books and scriptures are floating out there that might not be in the bible, or how many books they included that might be corrupt.

Yes, you can defer to the authority of the Jews and the Maimonides in their canon and the Masoretic text. But then all your doing is appealing to the authority of the 9th century Jews rather than the Early Christians and doing the exact same thing the Catholics do. And even then it is slippery sloop due to the discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls and their differing Canon and the Greek Jews.

Catholics appeal to the Church as far as all of the Bible Canon. Whereas protestants appeal to the later 9th century Jews regarding the authority for the OT canon, and the Catholic Church regarding the NT canon.

 

[Philothei]

But it's not really that simple. For it to be that simple you would have to pretend that God didn't give humans language abilities that include metaphor, hyperbole, general poetry, etc.

No it is not I agree with you. The Bible needs much discernment and in depth study and "a guide" an elder to guide you with it. You go into your room like the Bible says and read it and learn in prayer what it says but you go and get counsel and instruction from your preacher. St. Paul, Timothy etc were the ones who did the instruction for the newly illumined they were not "left to read and figure it out" ...

The Fathers who studied the Bible their whole lives and wrote tons of things on different issues took into account and juxtaposed the Bible to come up with solutions...They did not ramdomely wondered through the Bible trying to figure out things..They had as guides other elders before them who had the Apostles... Thus each generation depended on that
"apostolic succesion" as they transmitted the thought of the Apostles into the Chrisitan History to what we have today. We know what a word "meant" in Greek in the Gospel because we have 'similar" writings that guide us to that meaning ... Some beleive that all translation if good... but not all translations are accurate to the language of the Gospel and that is obvious today as scholars finally realized that some are not accurate at all.. How do we know? Because grammar does not lie and also looking into the commentaries of different writers

 

[Ortho_Cat]

There is one verse in particular that I would really like to get the sola scripturians' opinion on.

14I am writing these things to you, hoping to come to you before long; 15but in case I am delayed, I write so that you will know how one ought to conduct himself in the household of God, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and support of the truth.

Many translations use foundation instead of support here. I'm curious, what does this mean to you? I mean, if this verse said "the scripture is the pillar and foundation of truth" sola scripturians would consider it a slam dunk! However, it doesn't. It says the Church is. This sounds to me as if Paul is placing authority in the Church, with Christ at it's head, not in scripture. He is saying that we should look to the Church for truth.

As a sola scripturian, what authority (if any) does the church have? If you find yourself scratching your head to come up with an answer, what does this mean? Is it possible that where you have placed your authority for which determines truth been misplaced?

 

[Ortho_Cat]

I bet that baptism thread is interesting.
I don't remember seeing that one.

Be blessed "loved one "

http://www.christianforums.com/t7542407-17/

 

[Stryder06]

But it's not really that simple. For it to be that simple you would have to pretend that God didn't give humans language abilities that include metaphor, hyperbole, general poetry, etc.

You totally missed the point. Obviously everything in the bible isn't simply understood. However nothing is impossible to understand through the guidance of the scripture.

Ex: If someone said to you that Jesus wasn't God incarnate you'd automatically know that was false. Why? Because scripture tells us clearly that He is. We don't have to figure out if it's metaphor, hyperbole, poetry, etc. Scripture is made more complicated then it should be that the traditional teachings of men may be accepted and their authority given place alongside God's.

 

[Stryder06]

There is one verse in particular that I would really like to get the sola scripturians' opinion on.

14I am writing these things to you, hoping to come to you before long; 15but in case I am delayed, I write so that you will know how one ought to conduct himself in the household of God, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and support of the truth.

Many translations use foundation instead of support here. I'm curious, what does this mean to you? I mean, if this verse said "the scripture is the pillar and foundation of truth" sola scripturians would consider it a slam dunk! However, it doesn't. It says the Church is. This sounds to me as if Paul is placing authority in the Church, with Christ at it's head, not in scripture. He is saying that we should look to the Church for truth.

As a sola scripturian, what authority (if any) does the church have? If you find yourself scratching your head to come up with an answer, what does this mean? Is it possible that where you have placed your authority for which determines truth been misplaced?

Problem is that you think Paul thought the way you do, while we think Paul thought the way we do. That scripture in no way shows that man has the authority to create doctrine. The church is the pillar and foundation of the truth because it contains the living word of God. But again, when you think church you probably think EO. When we think church we think the body of believers everywhere.

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

Problem is that you think Paul thought the way you do, while we think Paul thought the way we do. That scripture in no way shows that man has the authority to create doctrine. The church is the pillar and foundation of the truth because it contains the living word of God. But again, when you think church you probably think EO. When we think church we think the body of believers everywhere.

http://www.christianforums.com/t7542608/#post56946063
The Word Of God [poll]

Hebrew 4:12 For living the word of the God, and in-working/energhV <1756> and keener over every two-mouthed blade/knife, and penetrating to parting of soul and of spirit, joints besides and marrows, and judge of feelings and of in-minds/thoughts of heart

Textus Rec.) Hebrews 4:12 zwn gar o logoV tou qeou kai energhV kai tomwteroV uper pasan macairan distomon kai diiknoumenoV acri merismou yuchV te kai pneumatoV armwn te kai muelwn kai kritikoV enqumhsewn kai ennoiwn kardiaV