The argument is that "testing doctrine" is done by reading scripture "alone" as we see in Acts 17:11
It does not say "they could not read scripture so they asked their Jewish magesterium if the magisterium's condemnation of Paul's doctrine, was what the Bible was really saying or not".
I don't think this part is the least bit confusing to readers on either side of this topic.
just as we see in the case of the Bereans in Acts 17:10-11 -- (a verse some are very reluctant to quote)
And they sought scripture to "SEE IF" those things spoken to them by the Apostles Paul "were so" -- EVEN though their own magisterium in both tradition and teaching had already condemned that teaching.
Details so often skimmed past
These are non-Christian students of the Bible in Acts 17:11. They had NO Christian magisterium to tell them what to say or think.
They had to test against scripture (as the text actually says) and could not rely on the guidance of the very magisterium that was on record as condemning Paul's teaching -- to get to the right answer.
I don't see how this is even a little bit confusing to unbiased objective readers.
what part of that text -- the details in it -- tell you that the non-Christian Bereans were relying on the guidance of their non-Christian magisterium to judge the teaching of Paul ?? Especially since their magisterium had already condemned Paul's teaching?
This is a straightforward question. I look forward to how it is addressed here on this thread.
=======================================================================
Did not have long to wait...
Ok - well as you see from my post above - I did respond to several segments of it.
Is this where you consider answering the one Question above??
Paul is speaking the doctrine of the Christian church in that Acts 17:11 Jewish Synagogue.
The text you are still not quoting is stating that they consult scriptures to "see IF those things spoken by Paul - WERE SO" even though they were not Christians at all. And the writer of Acts 17 -- says they are approved for doing it. sola scriptura.
The text does not say "somewhere somehow" ... the text you are not quoting says 'they searched the scriptures daily to SEE IF" those things were so.
Are you trying to argue they ran straight to their magisterium to see IF their traditions were affirming Paul -- and if SO then Paul is approved?? Is that how you would change the text.
Ok so what does the text say that they did that does NOT look like "sola scriptura testing" of Paul's doctrine in your POV?
(speaking of the text you are not quoting)
I am trying to understand your argument, Bob
It looks like it is, since the Bereans used scripture to judge Paul, the scripture is superior to Paul.
You then make the claim that since the Jewish magisterium had failed to properly teach scripture, we should never listen to another magisterium, but rely on scripture alone?
Is that right?
The point that you miss is that the Jewish magisterium was not refuted by scripture alone but by Christ Himself. Jesus did not come to abolish the law and the prophets, but to fulfill.
What was incomplete in the Old Covenant was brought to fulfillment by the New Covenant, which was only made evident by the death and resurrection of Our Lord. The New Covenant also had a new magisterium which was sealed by the out pouring of the Holy Spirit on Pentecost. It was the Apostles whom were given the great commission, not any and all scripture readers.
There were plenty of people at the time that read scripture and interpreted it for themselves, yet fell into error. The gnostics were the heresy that comes to mind as an early error, but there were others. We can have a discussion on heresies in the early church if you wish to examine them and why they are heresies.
An Apostle is one who is sent. Sent by direct commission of Jesus Christ, not someone that just reads scripture and decides to teach. The Apostles shared their authority by the laying on of hands and passed their authority through succession as explained by Iraneus in the second century. The Church did not consist of indecent scripture readers. She commissioned priest and bishops. Even these were subject to the magisterium of the Church, as we know there have been priests and bishops that have been deceived by heresy. The authority to teach never resided in the individual scripture reader but the magisterium of the Church that was commissioned by Christ and given the promise that the gates of hell would not prevail.
Unless one is an Apostle, they do not have that promise and are subject to error as any of us are, if we rely on our human weakness alone to interpret scripture and challenge the authority of the Church
Galatians 1:8-12 explains the Christian Magisterium. He says if anyone preaches another gospel than the one He preached, he even implies that if he himself goes crazy and recants his gospel and preaches another one, let him be anathema or accursed. It is not the man, but the Church that has the authority.
He gives a very very strong implication that the Gospel cannot be learned from reading scripture on one’s own. He says the he did not receive it from men, nor was he taught it. It came from Jesus Himself.
The Bereans did not receive the Gospel by reading the Scriptures alone. The received the Gospel by the magisterial teaching of Paul, and they judged that magisterium by the scriptures.
But for the preaching of Paul and his magisterial authority as an Apostle commissioned by Jesus Himself, the Bereans never would have received the Gospel, through they had the scriptures their whole lives.
Want to be a Berean? We have the Apostolic teaching intact. It’s called the Catechism of the Catholic Church. Read it and tell me where it contradicts scripture. That is where the discussion should focus.
Don’t feel like doing that? Abraham told the rich man in flames, they have the law and the prophets. If they don’t believe them, they won’t even believe one that comes back from the dead.
You have the catechism. Won’t read it and discuss it? Think about why.
