Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
Oh but I didn't see any mention of the written Word in those verses. I did see a clear reference to the Inward Witness. I think you're adding something to the text that just isn't there. Recall that the printing press wasn't available until 1500 years later, so it is highly unlikely that God would condition His revelations on the availability of the written text.Your welcome. We know the truth because God can speak to us according to His Word (i.e. the Bible). We can confirm the truth of God's Word by looking at the context, and by using real world examples, as well. But yes, God is the One who ultimately shows us the truth of what He wants us to know within His Word.
Prophecy is sometimes misunderstood to predominate in foretelling. My understanding that the prophetic ministry predominantly articulates government, guidance, encouragement, and so on. Consider Moses, Joshua, David, and the Judges.
But I am not sure there are any real prophets today. I think we've strayed a bit from the beaten path and, as a result, prophetic ministry hasn't flourished historically.
Our main mistake, in my view, is a historic failure to consistently champion prophecy over exegesis. The average Christian rests content with his own fallibility and doesn't see infallibility as a realistically pursuable goal.
You can't convincingly 'defend' a concept that is logically inconsistent/incoherent to begin with. You should resolve the contradictions alleged on this thread.For me, 2 Timothy 3:16-17, and Revelation 22:18 are pretty rock solid in defending Sola Scriptura. But if you need something more I did a defense of it (a while back using God's Word).
A Biblical Defense of Sola Scriptura!
Oh but I didn't see any mention of the written Word in those verses. I did see a clear reference to the Inward Witness. I think you're adding something to the text that just isn't there. Recall that the printing press wasn't available until 1500 years later, so it is highly unlikely that God would condition His revelations on the availability of the written text.
Sure one example here, "The one who prophesies speaks to people for their strengthening, encouraging and comfort" (1Cor 14).Prophecy means to foretell the future. So if there is prophetic utterances, there needs to be some kind of accurate fulfillment of the future in some way by those prophetic utterances. If this is not happening, then there is no prophetic utterances. What are prophetic utterances mean to you? Is your belief on prophetic utterances based on God's Word? Can you share those verses with us?
Jesus said the Father's word was truth (John 17:17).
Jesus spoke everything by what the Father told him to do (John 12:49).
The words of Jesus were immortalized in Scripture.
Paul wrote that what he has written should be regarded as the Lord's commandments (1 Corinthians 14:37).
Also, you cannot use Scripture to make a case against Scripture as being the Word of God. So why trust 1 John 2:27 and John 16:13? They are Scripture.
In all Jesus' teachings He referred to the divine authority of the Old Testament (Matthew 5:17-18; Matthew 8:17;Matthew 12:40-42; Luke 4:18-21; Luke 10:25-28; Luke 15:29-31; Luke 17:32; Luke 24:25-45; John 5:39-47). He quoted the Old Testament 78 times, the Pentateuch alone 26 times. He quoted from Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Deuteronomy, Psalms, Proverbs, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, Daniel, Hosea, Amos, Jonah, Micah, and Malachi. He referred to the Old Testament as “The Scriptures,” “the word of God,” and “the wisdom of God.” Jesus defeated the devil by using Scripture. For three words, "It is written" was said 3 times by Jesus inMatthew 4:1-11. This is confirmed by Ephesians 6 with how the Sword of the Spirit is the Word of God which is a part of putting on the amor of God so that one can stand against the wiles of the devil (Ephesians 6:11, 16). For the Living Word (Jesus) is like a two edged sword that divides asunder the soul and the spirit because He always speaks the words of God because He is God (Hebrews 4:12).
You can't convincingly 'defend' a concept that is logically inconsistent/incoherent to begin with. You should resolve the contradictions alleged on this thread.
For example Sola Scriptura contradicts authoritative conscience and therefore contradicts justice, for reasons I've already stated. Only an unjust God would dishonor conscience.
Also I must object to your arbitrary conflating of the written Word with the divine Word. They are not the same thing. The one is the Author of the other.Jesus said the Father's word was truth (John 17:17).
Jesus spoke everything by what the Father told him to do (John 12:49).
The words of Jesus were immortalized in Scripture.
Paul wrote that what he has written should be regarded as the Lord's commandments (1 Corinthians 14:37).
Also, you cannot use Scripture to make a case against Scripture as being the Word of God. So why trust 1 John 2:27 and John 16:13? They are Scripture.
In all Jesus' teachings He referred to the divine authority of the Old Testament (Matthew 5:17-18; Matthew 8:17;Matthew 12:40-42; Luke 4:18-21; Luke 10:25-28; Luke 15:29-31; Luke 17:32; Luke 24:25-45; John 5:39-47). He quoted the Old Testament 78 times, the Pentateuch alone 26 times. He quoted from Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Deuteronomy, Psalms, Proverbs, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, Daniel, Hosea, Amos, Jonah, Micah, and Malachi. He referred to the Old Testament as “The Scriptures,” “the word of God,” and “the wisdom of God.” Jesus defeated the devil by using Scripture. For three words, "It is written" was said 3 times by Jesus inMatthew 4:1-11. This is confirmed by Ephesians 6 with how the Sword of the Spirit is the Word of God which is a part of putting on the amor of God so that one can stand against the wiles of the devil (Ephesians 6:11, 16). For the Living Word (Jesus) is like a two edged sword that divides asunder the soul and the spirit because He always speaks the words of God because He is God (Hebrews 4:12).
Also I must object to your arbitrary conflating of the written Word with the divine Word. They are not the same thing. The one is the Author of the other.
Also I must object to your arbitrary conflating of the written Word with the divine Word. They are not the same thing. The one is the Author of the other.
But I was speaking about that verse in particular. Did those posts expound on that verse? Did they show where the verse does not allow for my reading it as 'further testimony about Jesus'? But that is precisely what the verse stated!See my posts 33, 24, 10, and 7 if you missed them or forgot what was in them.
Where did I say the Bible was wrong or incomplete? The Bible accomplishes the purposes for which it is intended, which does not including being 'my only final authority' as such contradicts conversion vis a vis the Inward Witness.You know what I meant when I said it several different ways. The word of God must be true and intelligible or else he isn't God. So if any of it is misunderstood by some mortal, that does not make the Bible wrong or incomplete. And the person who is in doubt doesn't have to remain in doubt anyway. Just like the study of any of the courses we took in school, it didn't make sense immediately but we learned.
But saying there is no merit to the argument is not an acceptable way to refute an argument. Don't just assert your position. Argue it.No, I didn't. There simply isn't any merit to them. I asked you -- if you are convinced of those objections -- to tell us what is that infallible, universally understood, source of authority we could turn to instead of the Bible. Well..........???????
What is our final authority for both faith and practice? The two most popular theories on this have been:
(1) Tradition (the church), for example the Magisterium of Catholic tradition.
(2) Sola Scriptura - the claim that Scripture is the only final authority on all major religious doctrines.
However, both views overlook the primacy of conscience, with conscience defined as a feeling of certainty as to what is morally right or wrong. If I feel certain that choice A is evil, and choice B is good, I shall opt for choice B. As I can find no exceptions to this rule, I cannot controvert it, hence it needs no proof (although I will provide some), it is thus self-evidently/tautologically true at all times, and therefore conscience is my only final authority. This refutes Sola Scriptura.
This is not to suggest that Scripture is untrue. I accept the inerrancy of Scripture. But exegesis provides me no direct access to Scripture, only to my fallible interpretations of it. Whereas conscience, as we shall see, affords God a method of speaking to us in an infallible manner definitive of the prophetic experience.
the issue seems to be if we know we are unsure about some things we have to also know others also can be unsure also that’s the issue with going to another for their understanding. We all are uncertain about most things whether we want to admit it or not.Look, we are fallible creatures, but the word of God is his revelation to us and, by definition, it must be intelligible. If some people don't understand parts of it, others do. But what other authority can you turn us to which is universally comprehended by all people in the exact same way? Well, the answer is 'there is none.'
I have to say that I am unsure of some things. However, that isn't to say that NOBODY understands those things...and that is what your line of thinking is asserting.
You are unsure of at least some parts of Scripture (I know it's not all of Scripture), so you want to dismiss it as inadequate, not that YOU are inadequate but that the Bible has failed! As I recall you mentioned logic awhile back, so apply it here.
And all you have to do is provide one exception to the rule. Show me one occasion where, feeling certain that action A is evil and B is good, that A is the morally proper choice.Man’s conscience as authority (which is the direction you are leading) is the very definition of Laodocea.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?