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.
I'd be pleased to compare the "unity" of WELS with RCUS (both embracing the practice of Sola Scriptura) with the "unity" of the RCC and LDS
iREAD what I said. It has been ENTIRELY, COMPLETELY twisted to "imply" what was never stated OR implied.
Indeed...although I would say Josiah doesn't just try to discredit the Apostolic Churches by association
he tries to discredit any church that claims to have the truth on the basis that other claimants even exist.
His argument at it's core is against the Apostles. For they claim to have truth.
And I'd be please to point out that WELS and RCUS nowhere remotely constitute the totality of sola scripturists.
Jesus was not 'adding to the corpus of Scripture' by speaking. His words were not added to the corpus until they were written.Addressed SEVERAL times already.... Jesus (who is God) was ADDING to the corpus. God may do that. If you are God, so can you. In ADDING to the corpus, God is not violating a rule FOR US today.
Even the Judean Pharisees had a hard time with the parables of Jesus
(NKJV) Matthew 13:10 And the disciples came and said to Him, "Why do You speak to them in parables?"
13 "Therefore I speak to them in parables, because seeing they do not see, and hearing they do not hear, nor do they understand.
Matthew 13:35 that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the prophet, saying "I will open My mouth in parables, I will utter things kept secret from the foundation of the world."
I agree.....
When I signed my lease for the apartment here, it is a WRITTEN DOCUMENT. In objective words, knowable to all and alterable by none. In it is a very interesting clause that reads, "This contract supersedes any other agreements - oral or otherwise - by either party." Written trumps oral.
God "wrote" morality in the 'hearts' of all people. Why, shortly after literacy come to the Hebrews, did God write the Ten Commandments - literally in stone? Why did the Hebrews point to THAT as the norma normans rather than the "hearts" of each individual? Just questions, I don't pretend to have a definitive answer to them....
But I do know this: When each individual (such as the RCC or LDS or Mary Baker Eddy or me) insists that what I "feel" or "think" supersedes (or is even equal) to what God wrote - Houston, we've got a problem! My study of the cults, of the early LDS (and yes - as a Catholic of my Church), I saw the consequence of this. But that's just MY perspective- nothing more.
.
There seems to be a number of armchair lawyers here.
Written accounts are of course accepted. But eye witnesses are also accepted.
As I noted above, a person can 'witness' (as giving expert testimony) even if they weren't present at the time of the incident.
Written accounts are of course accepted. But eye witnesses are also accepted.
Isn't that exactly the same argument which is being used against SS?
From what I hear, it was the RCC that put together the Canon we all use today*snip*
I'm still waiting for any SS to show when their canon was developed, and by whom (although one said it was just done by God).
Their WORDS are accepted - if they are alive to give them.
Even dead people can provide evidence. There are (non-written) signs that may be used to determine when they died and how they died.Rarely can a dead man give oral testimony.
That depends.In any case, I think generally a written document would be accepted above oral testimony of one dead and cannot speak.
But unfortunately those supporting SS keep bringing up over and over again this attack on tradition.
Each SS, being their own authority on interpretation means that there are in fact 100,000's of different truths
From what I hear, it was the RCC that put together the Canon we all use today
Perhaps 'attack' has harsher meaning in your eyes.The question is WHAT is the more RELIABLE method of preserving something. I hardly see giving an opinion on this as an "attack" on anything.
1. I fail to see the connection to the issue of this thread....
2. Ask 50,000 people that regard self as unaccountable/infallible and the Voice of God and you're going to get a lot of different views, too. It is a natural consequence of your rubric: self pointing to self as the authority rather than to some objective, knowable, unalterable rule outside and above and beyond self.
3. As you know, embracing Scripture as the Rule (rather than self) has nothing to do with hermeneutics, thus your issue of "interpretation" is diversionary. And of course, self has to "interpret" the views of self, too - you have same situation
Not just the 'words', but the witness themselves. The witness can be cross-examined and their testimony tested.
And here an eyewitness subject to cross-examination is important.
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?