Refuting Sola Scriptura - Why the Bible Alone is Not Sufficient

[Root of Jesse]

I did 10 times. You'll have to look deeper or drop it

Your proof has no authority. Luther et al dropped books that the Church authoritatively said are Canonical. End of story.

 

[tulipbee]

Your proof has no authority. Luther et al dropped books that the Church authoritatively said are Canonical. End of story.

You'll see it straight out of the Bible. The proofs are God's own Words. Anyone who wants to know how to see them can do so. It's there. The end of the story ended with God's Word. It's a closed book to the RCC

 

[Goatee]

I did 10 times. You'll have to look deeper or drop it

Up to you to prove it buddy. Seems to me that you just type and run!

 

[Root of Jesse]

You'll see it straight out of the Bible. The proofs are God's own Words. Anyone who wants to know how to see them can do so. It's there. The end of the story ended with God's Word. It's a closed book to the RCC

Show me the verse that says "Esther does not belong in the Bible, nor 1 and 2 Maccabees". Please.

FWIW, God does not write. He inspires men to write. He also inspires men to speak His Truth. That's where our Sacred Tradition comes from. God inspiring men to speak His Truth.

 

[tulipbee]

Up to you to prove it buddy. Seems to me that you just type and run!

That's right. I proved it and ran and you guys want me to prove what I already proved, agian. The phenomena are there and there is no human way of explaining them. Eight men cannot each write last, 27 books, some 500 pages, cannot each be written last. But lets assume that one Mind directed the whole, and the problem is solved simply enough: by this Verbal Inspiration - of every jot and tittle of the New Testament.

 

[tulipbee]

Show me the verse that says "Esther does not belong in the Bible, nor 1 and 2 Maccabees". Please.

FWIW, God does not write. He inspires men to write. He also inspires men to speak His Truth. That's where our Sacred Tradition comes from. God inspiring men to speak His Truth.

But the truth isn't spoken in the extra books cause it wasn't inspired by God.
The authenticity of the Holy Bible has been attacked at regular intervals by
athiests and theologians alike but none have explained away the mathematical seal beneath its surface.

It would seem the divine hand has moved to prevent counterfeiting in the
pages of the Bible in a similar manner to the line that runs through paper money. Bible numerics appears to be God's watermark of authenticity.

 

[Albion]

Show me the verse that says "Esther does not belong in the Bible, nor 1 and 2 Maccabees". Please.

Show me the verse that says "Esther belongs in the Bible."

Oh, that's right. That kind of silly challenge is only supposed to be used when the objective is to diminish the importance of the Bible.

 

[tulipbee]

Show me the verse that says "Esther belongs in the Bible."

Oh, that's right. That kind of silly challenge is only supposed to be used when the objective is to diminish the importance of the Bible.

Bunch of fringe Catholics that tries to defend thier denomination rather than
defending the universal Catholic church. Those extra books don't even
come close to having the same numerical patterns the 66 books have.
If anybody out there wants to take on theomatics, they had better prepare
themselves for a major challenge. They will find themselves burried under
an avalange of hundreds of pages of data and computer print outs (see
Theomatics & the Scientific Method). There are a lot of young, cocky, and
cynical dudes out there in cyberspace (particularly in the CF),
who love to challenge all sorts of egregious claims. They actually enjoy
discrediting things and trying to debunk them. That is how they get their
kicks and jollies. Sort of a predator instinct. We will be more than
happy to welcome them to the challenge. What is our advice? Be prepared
to jump over the grand canyon in your bare feet.

At this point, we would like to make a bold and assertive statement that
will forever stand.

It is absolutely, completely, and totally impossible to mathematically
disprove theomatics. The overall validity of this discovery ~ the fact
that God did it ~ is unimpeachable. Theomatics will never be disproven.
In fact, no one will even come close to it. The evidence is so thoroughly
convincing and so absolutely conclusive, that those who examine it
carefully, their knees will buckle and they will quite literally fall to
the ground ~ they will not be able to stand up against it.

nuff said

 

[tulipbee]

If I may add my two cents?

2 Tim 3:16 Young's Literal Translation has it:
every Writing is God-breathed, and profitable for teaching, for
conviction, for setting aright, for instruction that is in
righteousness,

 

[Root of Jesse]

But the truth isn't spoken in the extra books cause it wasn't inspired by God.
The authenticity of the Holy Bible has been attacked at regular intervals by
athiests and theologians alike but none have explained away the mathematical seal beneath its surface.

The question is "How do you know it's not inspired by God?" What, about the book, tells you?

It would seem the divine hand has moved to prevent counterfeiting in the
pages of the Bible in a similar manner to the line that runs through paper money. Bible numerics appears to be God's watermark of authenticity.

Numerics is Biblical...how?

 

[Root of Jesse]

Show me the verse that says "Esther belongs in the Bible."

It's not there. There's nothing in the Bible that says that any book we hold as Canonical belongs there. The Canon of Scripture is a "tradition of men". Which is why man-made traditions are not a bad thing.

Oh, that's right. That kind of silly challenge is only supposed to be used when the objective is to diminish the importance of the Bible.

Not diminishing the importance of the Bible AT ALL. Not in any way, shape or form. smh.

 

[Root of Jesse]

Bunch of fringe Catholics that tries to defend thier denomination rather than
defending the universal Catholic church.

You, using numerics to justify the books of the Bible, calling Catholics "fringe"? That's the pot calling the kettle black...

Those extra books don't even
come close to having the same numerical patterns the 66 books have.

Prove your assertion.

If anybody out there wants to take on theomatics, they had better prepare
themselves for a major challenge. They will find themselves burried under
an avalange of hundreds of pages of data and computer print outs (see
Theomatics & the Scientific Method). There are a lot of young, cocky, and
cynical dudes out there in cyberspace (particularly in the CF),
who love to challenge all sorts of egregious claims. They actually enjoy
discrediting things and trying to debunk them. That is how they get their
kicks and jollies. Sort of a predator instinct. We will be more than
happy to welcome them to the challenge. What is our advice? Be prepared
to jump over the grand canyon in your bare feet.

I'm sure the Early Church Fathers used numerics, theomatics, etc to conjure up what should and what should not be Canonical.

At this point, we would like to make a bold and assertive statement that
will forever stand.

Who's "we"?

It is absolutely, completely, and totally impossible to mathematically
disprove theomatics. The overall validity of this discovery ~ the fact
that God did it ~ is unimpeachable. Theomatics will never be disproven.
In fact, no one will even come close to it. The evidence is so thoroughly
convincing and so absolutely conclusive, that those who examine it
carefully, their knees will buckle and they will quite literally fall to
the ground ~ they will not be able to stand up against it.

nuff said

Who cares about proving our faith mathematically, other than being able to show that God exists using physics? Theomatics can never be proven. It's not up to me to disprove something that doesn't exist.

 

[Albion]

It's not there. There's nothing in the Bible that says that any book we hold as Canonical belongs there. The Canon of Scripture is a "tradition of men". Which is why man-made traditions are not a bad thing.

That's a logical fallacy. If you were the one to discover that eating grass cures cancer, you would not have been the inventor of grass, nor would it make every other vegetable cure cancer.

 

[Root of Jesse]

That's a logical fallacy. If you were the one to discover that eating grass cures cancer, you would not have been the inventor of grass, nor would it make every other vegetable cure cancer.

Show me how, or where, anything in the Bible says that any book that we hold canonical should (or shouldn't) be there?

 

[Albion]

Show me how, or where, anything in the Bible says that any book that we hold canonical should (or shouldn't) be there?

I know that you're trying to say that men decided what's scripture, but even if we accept that as so, it doesn't make them equal to scripture. Get it? If men decide to follow Christ, it doesn't follow that every other opinion they hold is of equal importance or even necessarily true. Christ is what He is. You just figured it out. You didn't make him the Son of God and redeemer of the world. So also with Scripture.

 

[Root of Jesse]

I know that you're trying to say that men decided what's scripture, but even if we accept that as so, it doesn't make them equal to scripture. Get it? If men decide to follow Christ, it doesn't follow that every other opinion they hold is of equal importance or even necessarily true. Christ is what He is. You just figured it out. You didn't make him the Son of God and redeemer of the world. So also with Scripture.

It wasn't just "men" that "decided" what's Scripture. We believe that the Holy Spirit guided them to their decision, as surely as the Holy Spirit guided the Apostles in replacing Judas. Who says men = scripture? I never said or implied it.
All our Tradition is inspired. It's not simply men making decisions.

 

[Albion]

It wasn't just "men" that "decided" what's Scripture. We believe that the Holy Spirit guided them to their decision

If that is your point of contention, you have NO argument for traditions, not even the familiar one that says that if the church decided what to consider Scripture, it follows (illogically) that whatever else the church wants to make into a doctrine is correct.

All our Tradition is inspired. It's not simply men making decisions.

If you really believe that, you'll be interested in these golden plates that were dug up in New York and are a lost volume of divine revelation.

 

[Root of Jesse]

If that is your point of contention, you have NO argument for traditions, not even the familiar one that says that if the church decided what to consider Scripture, it follows (illogically) that whatever else the church wants to make into a doctrine is correct.

That's wrong. You're right about it being illogical. Nothing in Tradition can contradict Scripture. The Holy Spirit prevents it from ever happening. I'm not talking about traditions such as priestly celibacy or fasting on Friday. I'm talking about Sacred Tradition, such as our belief in what the Eucharist is, what constitutes the Bible, the Marian dogmas, and the like. Have you not gotten the difference to this day? I understand that you disagree with it, but if you're going to talk about it to Catholics you should know what they mean by it. (or should mean by it-I know that "all Catholics" aren't on the same page)

 

[Albion]

That's wrong. You're right about it being illogical. Nothing in Tradition can contradict Scripture.

Except that it often does.

I'm not talking about traditions such as priestly celibacy or fasting on Friday. I'm talking about Sacred Tradition, such as our belief in what the Eucharist is, what constitutes the Bible, the Marian dogmas, and the like.

Sure--and the Catholic church over there has a totally different "take" on those traditions from yours. Some divine guidance that is, huh? Every Catholic/Orthodox denomination has its own version of what tradition is believed to be saying.

 

[Root of Jesse]

Except that it often does.

In your opinion, maybe. But not in the Catholic Church, and we can prove it, even if you disagree with that proof.

Sure--and the Catholic church over there has a totally different "take" on those traditions from yours. Some divine guidance that is, huh? Every Catholic/Orthodox denomination has its own version of what tradition is believed to be saying.

Christ told people that they must eat his flesh and drink his blood to have eternal life, and many walked away...

It's not a popularity contest, dude. People often don't do or believe something because it's too hard for them. Then again, you're again talking of tradition, not Sacred Tradition. tradition = practices, Tradition = Truths. Truths cannot change, practices can and often do.