Is Scripture MISSING Dogmas? (2)

[mluiesp]

Who said that it did??

The guy I was replying to.

 

[tadoflamb]

No that's the confidence we have in Christ, not our denomination. Or perhaps there's the rub?

According to the bible, the Church and Christ are one and the same.

But, I admit, when you have an infallible church backed by an inerrant book, it's hard not to be confident.

 

[tadoflamb]

...so being Catholic does not preclude being frustrated.

I wouldn't say that. It's just that I'm not frustrated by theology since I'm Catholic and have easy and complete access to the fullness of God's revealed Truth. In other words, I accept the dogmas the Church has defined.

So, what dogmas which are unique to the sola scripturist tradition which are held in common by all sola scripturists?

Have sola scripturists even defined dogma? I've noticed the word doesn't appear in the bible.

 

[SpyderByte]

According to the bible, the Church and Christ are one and the same.

But, I admit, when you have an infallible church backed by an inerrant book, it's hard not to be confident.

You don't have an infallible church, but we do have an inerrant bible, and Jesus Christ as our saviour! If He is for us who can be against us! Oh, and no the church and Christ aren't the same. The church (believers) are the body, He is our head.

 

[Rick Otto]

Show me that, in the Bible, please.

Ah! The familiar appeal to Sola Scriptura.

Unfortunately, you might have to rely on judicial tradition wherein facts speak for themselves.

 

[Rick Otto]

I wouldn't say that. It's just that I'm not frustrated by theology since I'm Catholic and have easy and complete access to the fullness of God's revealed Truth. In other words, I accept the dogmas the Church has defined.

So, what dogmas which are unique to the sola scripturist tradition which are held in common by all sola scripturists?

Have sola scripturists even defined dogma? I've noticed the word doesn't appear in the bible.

Typicaly, your criticism is of solo scriptura, not sola scriptura.
Solo is using the bible as sole source for info, whereas sola, uses the bible only for verification, not just a source.

But you have already "privately interpreted" The RCC as your "safe room".
No need to make fine distinctions about the "exo Romana".

 

[SpyderByte]

Typicaly, your criticism is of solo scriptura, not sola scriptura.
Solo is using the bible as sole source for info, whereas sola, uses the bible only for verification, not just a source.

But you have already "privately interpreted" The RCC as your "safe room".
No need to make fine distinctions about the "exo Romana".

That's something I've never understood. Those who belong to the rcc made a fallible choice in joining the rcc, right? How do they know they made the right choice?

 

[Souldier]

Typicaly, your criticism is of solo scriptura, not sola scriptura.
Solo is using the bible as sole source for info, whereas sola, uses the bible only for verification, not just a source.

But you have already "privately interpreted" The RCC as your "safe room".
No need to make fine distinctions about the "exo Romana".

I think Sola is to seek answers from the bible alone, i.e. its the only infallible scource of truth. Perthaps other men can speak truth but we will not know truth unless we seek it from Christ first. (John 14) It also means to find verification of truth from scripture alone. IF thats not Sola then im not Sola.

 

[concretecamper]

Oh, and no the church and Christ aren't the same.

Saul, Saul, why do you persecute the Church? Is that what scripture says?

 

[Rick Otto]

I think Sola is to seek answers from the bible alone, i.e. its the only infallible scource of truth. Perthaps other men can speak truth but we will not know truth unless we seek it from Christ first. (John 14) It also means to find verification of truth from scripture alone. IF thats not Sola then im not Sola.

Anything and anyone can be a source. The bible is for verifying that information.
The best example I know of is where Paul uses OT scripture to help the Bereans verify that Jesus is the messiah.

 

[concretecamper]

I think Sola is to seek answers from the bible alone, i.e. its the only infallible scource of truth. Perthaps other men can speak truth but we will not know truth unless we seek it from Christ first. (John 14) It also means to find verification of truth from scripture alone. IF thats not Sola then im not Sola.

Solo and Sola crowds end up at the same place.....I often wonder why some make believe there is a difference.

 

[Rick Otto]

Angel Gabriel.

He did not say she was without sin. That is wishful thinking born of logical extremes.

 

[Souldier]

Solo and Sola crowds end up at the same place.....I often wonder why some make believe there is a difference.

Yes it leads us to the spirit teacher within. Thats the place to be.

 

[Rick Otto]

This does nothing to put it to bed. Sorry. I will not accept non-Catholic viewpoints on the subject.
So the issue here is how much adoration some people give to Mary, and it's a judgment of people's hearts on your part that they're wrong.

...As if that isn't itself a "judgement of people's hearts".

And "non-Catholic" in this case, means even the viewpoint of a college history professor who has authored about 30 books, one of which is titled "Why I Am Catholic".
In other words, if it doesn't agree with the magesterium, you won't accept it.

I just rolled my eyes so hard I saw my brain.

 

[Rick Otto]

Solo and Sola crowds end up at the same place.....I often wonder why some make believe there is a difference.

Because they are not in deep denial of reality in order to cling to myths created by their private interpretation of whom to believe.

 

[SpyderByte]

...As if that isn't itself a "judgement of people's hearts".

And "non-Catholic" in this case, means even the viewpoint of a college history professor who has authored about 30 books, one of which is titled "Why I Am Catholic".
In other words, if it doesn't agree with the magesterium, you won't accept it.

I just rolled my eyes so hard I saw my brain.

Sola Ecclesia. Period. It's why many refuse to listen.

 

[Rick Otto]

Sola Ecclesia. Period. It's why many refuse to listen.

Totally.

 

[bbbbbbb]

I'm not contradicting at all. The Canon of Scripture is certainly dogma. Is it "part of the Bible"? Is the commentary at the bottom of every page in our Bibles "part of the Bible"? No, it's not. In fact, commentaries are fallible. The Canon of Scripture is infallible. It's dogma.

Yes, for you it was dogmatized by the Council of Trent. Thus, MoreCoffee's contention that the ToC is an unbiblical Protestant dogma is rather curious. We Protestants, as you know, have never held an ecumenical council to proclaim dogma.

 

[bbbbbbb]

Not Biblically based, is it?

Of course it is. The Bible tells us a lot about John the Baptist. We know that he spoke and thus, had a head. The Bible does not tell us how many heads he had, does it?

 

[bbbbbbb]

My personal views have no bearing on whether or not my faith is true or not. When it comes to Truth, my views do not matter. I must accept the Truth and struggle with it, if necessary, just as Jerome did with the canon of Scripture.

That seems rather schizophrenic to me - holding personal beliefs which conflict with your peronsal faith. I do not have the problem. It helps that I do not have to conform to a denomination with dogmas quite outside my own personal views.