Name one doctrine that is not supported by Scripture.

[Thatgirloncfforums]

Interesting. Thank you.

Some would say that the doctrine that Public Revelation closed [for this age] with the last Apostle St. John is a doctrine not in Scripture, I personally think that it is implied in the last verses of Revelation though (anything explicit, implied, or in Church able to accurately read as = in Scripture to me).

 

[concretecamper]

You seem to affirm the Lutheran definition of Sola Scriptura here.

you must not understand what Luther's definition of SS is.

 

[Thatgirloncfforums]

Well, I've read Luther on and off since I was 14. I am now 41, but it's possible. Can you quote him please?
Thanks

you must not understand what Luther's definition of SS is.

you must not understand what Luther's definition of SS is.

 

[concretecamper]

Well, I've read Luther on and off since I was 14. I am now 41, but it's possible. Can you quote him please?
Thanks

you are the one that brought up Luther. If you have anything to show where what I said affirms Luther's definition of SS, now is the time.

 

[Thatgirloncfforums]

Did I? I know that I made reference to Lutheranism. Here is what I posted in the other thread:
Comprehension Summary, Foundation, Rule, and Norm | Book of Concord
It's the most clear articulation of how SS operates except for a reference to ecclesiastical traditions. I'll get you that one too.

you are the one that brought up Luther. If you have anything to show where what I said affirms Luther's definition of SS, now is the time.

 

[Thatgirloncfforums]

Here ya go:
Art. XV (VIII): Of Human Traditions in the Church | Book of Concord

Did I? I know that I made reference to Lutheranism. Here is what I posted in the other thread:
Comprehension Summary, Foundation, Rule, and Norm | Book of Concord
It's the most clear articulation of how SS operates except for a reference to ecclesiastical traditions. I'll get you that one too.

 

[concretecamper]

Did I? I know that I made reference to Lutheranism. Here is what I posted in the other thread:
Comprehension Summary, Foundation, Rule, and Norm | Book of Concord
It's the most clear articulation of how SS operates except for a reference to ecclesiastical traditions. I'll get you that one too.

save me the trouble of reading all through this and IN YOUR OWN WORDS, how did what I say affirm the Lutheran definition of SS.

 

[Thatgirloncfforums]

Well, I really think you ought to read, but ok...
There is no doctrine that the Church adheres to that is not attested to in Scripture. The Fathers are in conformity with Scripture. (They wouldn't be Fathers if they weren't) This means that oral Tradition is not a separate source (contains no additional info) of doctrine. Scripture alone, as interpreted by the Fathers is the sole source of what we ought to believe to be saved.

save me the trouble of reading all through this and IN YOUR OWN WORDS, how did what I say affirm the Lutheran definition of SS.

 

[concretecamper]

There is no doctrine that the Church adheres to that is not attested to in Scripture.

really? So what is your belief about the aged old argument of the filioque? Please back up your belief using scripture alone.

 

[Abaxvahl]

Well, I really think you ought to read, but ok...
There is no doctrine that the Church adheres to that is not attested to in Scripture. The Fathers are in conformity with Scripture. (They wouldn't be Fathers if they weren't) This means that oral Tradition is not a separate source (contains no additional info) of doctrine. Scripture alone, as interpreted by the Fathers is the sole source of what we ought to believe to be saved.

What does Sacred Tradition mean or do in this context to Lutherans? To me at this point in my understanding it is basically just the way of life in the Church, the way we read Scripture, and so on. This makes the difference between an orthodox and a heretical interpretation of Scripture. If someone based on Scripture departs from what the Church has confirmed they departed from the Tradition and are most likely a heretic (for instance those who innovated the soul sleep doctrine or denied the divinity of the Son, even though it is possible to read Scripture in this way, it is not to be done and simply by being novel and against what was confirmed can be rejected out of hand without further argument). And these confirmations happen in divinely inspired Councils primarily. Is it the same for Lutherans?

 

[Thatgirloncfforums]

As Western Christians, we follow the Athanasian Creed, but Lutherans in Russia are allowed to omit the Filioque.

really? So what is your belief about the aged old argument of the filioque? Please back up your belief using scripture alone.

 

[concretecamper]

As Western Christians, we follow the Athanasian Creed, but Lutherans in Russia are allowed to omit the Filioque.

so where is the entirety of this doctrine in scripture?

 

[Thatgirloncfforums]

Yes exactly. Lutherans are also liturgical, so our understanding of Scripture is formed primarily (immediately) by the liturgy.

What does Sacred Tradition mean or do in this context to Lutherans? To me at this point in my understanding it is basically just the way of life in the Church, the way we read Scripture, and so on. This makes the difference between an orthodox and a heretical interpretation of Scripture. If someone based on Scripture departs from what the Church has confirmed they departed from the Tradition and are most likely a heretic (for instance those who innovated the soul sleep doctrine or denied the divinity of the Son, even though it is possible to read Scripture in this way, it is not to be done and simply by being novel and against what was confirmed can be rejected out of hand without further argument). And these confirmations happen in divinely inspired Councils primarily. Is it the same for Lutherans?

 

[GodsGrace101]

Yes. We mean Jesus. Jesus is a Divine person with two natures, human and Divine. Therefore, God was born, walked, ate, wept, suffered and died.

Which God was born?
God Father
or
God Son?

I hope you know that there's a difference between the 3 Persons of the Trinity - even though they are all God.

They each have particular personalities and duties.

God the Father is not God the Son.
Even though they are both God.

The following is accepted by all Christian denominations.

 

[Thatgirloncfforums]

The second person of the Trinity is eternally born of God the Father who is the source of Divinity, and in time, born of the virgin Mary, who is the source of his humanity.

Which God was born?
God Father
or
God Son?

I hope you know that there's a difference between the 3 Persons of the Trinity - even though they are all God.

They each have particular personalities and duties.

God the Father is not God the Son.
Even though they are both God.

The following is accepted by all Christian denominations.




View attachment 307041

 

[Thatgirloncfforums]

so where is the entirety of this doctrine in scripture?

Ask Athanasius. My personal opinion doesn't matter.

 

[GodsGrace101]

The second person of the Trinity is eternally born of God the Father who is the source of Divinity, and in time, born of the virgin Mary, who is the source of his humanity.

The second person of the Trinity was never born.
He always existed or He wouldn't be God.

 

[concretecamper]

Name one doctrine that was held by the Chalcedon affirming Church that is not supported in Scripture.

I contend that one doesn't exist.

Ask Athanasius. My personal opinion doesn't matter.

That didnt take long. Seems like the doctrine concerning the Fillioque isnt supported by scripture. You keep referencing Athanasius. Can you please tell me where the doctrine of the Fillioque is supported by scripture.

 

[Abaxvahl]

The second person of the Trinity was never born.
He always existed or He wouldn't be God.

Nicene-Constantinopolitan Creed: "And in one Lord, Jesus Christ, the only-begotten Son of God. Born of the Father before all ages. God of God, Light of Light, true God of true God. Begotten, not made: consubstantial with the Father; by Whom all things were made."

 

[Thatgirloncfforums]

He was born (begotten) of the Father from all eternity: Light from Light, true God from true God; Begotten not made.

The second person of the Trinity was never born.
He always existed or He wouldn't be God.