Personal Revelation of God's Goodness Over Sola Scriptura.

[GoldenKingGaze]

I encountered God's goodness in His discipline and forgiveness as a youth. I never saw that goodness and even if I did, it is not like it taking place in my heart itself. This in turn changes me to read and interpret sacred scripture differently to some other Christians who only have Sola Scriptura, the example of Martin Luther and the difficult passages in the OT. Like Lamentations. Jesus cross shows love but there is violence and much hidden meaning.

Also Jesus blessed the little children, but also lamented and said He wished He could hold them under His wings, but that Jerusalem would be destroyed. And Luther endorsed the soldiers to stop a revolution in Germany.

I say that a personal taste of God's goodness is vital to know God and understand scripture and perhaps write a theodicy. It takes the Spirit and His touch or fill.

 

[Beth77]

Is knowledge of any scripture necessary for salvation

 

[GoldenKingGaze]

Is knowledge of any scripture necessary for salvation

Christian scripture. When I feared for my life, I had heard of the lost son parable. The Apostles Creed, the Our Father, I prayed knowing about Heaven and Hell. I had once been a confessor to priests. I could pray off my thoughts as well as set prayers. I knew to renounce sexual sin and discipline my body, and clear my thoughts of sins, but could not have done this if I knew every command in the Bible and tried to uphold them. I acted on conscience and priest teachings. I appreciated the clergy's kindness. I took my dad's discipline and used positive thinking, hoped for good things. I was prepared to go on with a better life. People were praying for me.

Immediately after I repented from all known sin and was given a new conscience, some church teachings were exactly to lay up God's commands on my heart to keep my way pure. That's an over burden. I would have gone to Heaven if I died then, but gradually heard of being born again and that I needed that, but could have done that then except I did not think myself worthy from lack of scriptural knowledge. Alas it was ten years and I was born again at last.

 

[linux.poet]

Is knowledge of any scripture necessary for salvation

Not really. The principles behind Romans 10:9-11, Romans 5:8, John 3:16, and Acts 16:31 can be explained without having to quote them, though quoting them helps. It also helps to understand some basic apologetics, the stories of Genesis 1-3, and Christ’s life, death, burial, and resurrection.

Sola scriptura is a function of widespread literacy and most people being able to read and study it in obedience to Philippians 2:12. The idea in non-denominational churches is that we are to read, memorize, and act in accordance with the Scripture to achieve more Christlikeness and further the sanctification process. The more we act in accordance with the Scriptures, the more we will avoid sin and the better our lives will be. It’s not about salvation as much as what we do after we are saved to honor Our Lord by obeying His commandments.

Meanwhile, during the time of Christ and afterward, people could not read and books were scarce.

So faith comes from hearing, and hearing by the word of Christ.

People heard the Word of God read and preached, not read it. That was reality for thousands of years.

As side note, I’ve seen people overthink sola scriptura. The point of that doctrine is to reject what is not consistent with the Scripture, not anything else. If you have a spiritual experience or whatever that is consistent with the Scripture, fantastic! But if your knowledge, word, interpretation, vision, whatever, isn’t consistent with the Scripture, it is to be rejected as coming from the flesh or from the Enemy, etc. It’s safety check, not a dry polemic. The context of sola scriptura was doctrine that went against the Scriptures being proclaimed by the Catholic Church, or at least it appeared that way to Martin the Crabby Friar. I agree with Luther that the sale of indulgences goes against the story in Acts 8:9-23, but it’s best not to rub it in. As far as I know Team Catholic has learned their lesson on that, so no need to beat a historical dead horse.

 

[Beth77]

Not really. The principles behind Romans 10:9-11, Romans 5:8, John 3:16, and Acts 16:31 can be explained without having to quote them, though quoting them helps. It also helps to understand some basic apologetics, the stories of Genesis 1-3, and Christ’s life, death, burial, and resurrection.

Sola scriptura is a function of widespread literacy and most people being able to read and study it in obedience to Philippians 2:12. The idea in non-denominational churches is that we are to read, memorize, and act in accordance with the Scripture to achieve more Christlikeness and further the sanctification process. The more we act in accordance with the Scriptures, the more we will avoid sin and the better our lives will be. It’s not about salvation as much as what we do after we are saved to honor Our Lord by obeying His commandments.

Meanwhile, during the time of Christ and afterward, people could not read and books were scarce.



People heard the Word of God read and preached, not read it. That was reality for thousands of years.

As side note, I’ve seen people overthink sola scriptura. The point of that doctrine is to reject what is not consistent with the Scripture, not anything else. If you have a spiritual experience or whatever that is consistent with the Scripture, fantastic! But if your knowledge, word, interpretation, vision, whatever, isn’t consistent with the Scripture, it is to be rejected as coming from the flesh or from the Enemy, etc. It’s safety check, not a dry polemic. The context of sola scriptura was doctrine that went against the Scriptures being proclaimed by the Catholic Church, or at least it appeared that way to Martin the Crabby Friar. I agree with Luther that the sale of indulgences goes against the story in Acts 8:9-23, but it’s best not to rub it in. As far as I know Team Catholic has learned their lesson on that, so no need to beat a historical dead horse.

Good points.

 

[boughtwithaprice]

Not really. The principles behind Romans 10:9-11, Romans 5:8, John 3:16, and Acts 16:31 can be explained without having to quote them, though quoting them helps. It also helps to understand some basic apologetics, the stories of Genesis 1-3, and Christ’s life, death, burial, and resurrection.

Sola scriptura is a function of widespread literacy and most people being able to read and study it in obedience to Philippians 2:12. The idea in non-denominational churches is that we are to read, memorize, and act in accordance with the Scripture to achieve more Christlikeness and further the sanctification process. The more we act in accordance with the Scriptures, the more we will avoid sin and the better our lives will be. It’s not about salvation as much as what we do after we are saved to honor Our Lord by obeying His commandments.

Meanwhile, during the time of Christ and afterward, people could not read and books were scarce.



People heard the Word of God read and preached, not read it. That was reality for thousands of years.

As side note, I’ve seen people overthink sola scriptura. The point of that doctrine is to reject what is not consistent with the Scripture, not anything else. If you have a spiritual experience or whatever that is consistent with the Scripture, fantastic! But if your knowledge, word, interpretation, vision, whatever, isn’t consistent with the Scripture, it is to be rejected as coming from the flesh or from the Enemy, etc. It’s safety check, not a dry polemic. The context of sola scriptura was doctrine that went against the Scriptures being proclaimed by the Catholic Church, or at least it appeared that way to Martin the Crabby Friar. I agree with Luther that the sale of indulgences goes against the story in Acts 8:9-23, but it’s best not to rub it in. As far as I know Team Catholic has learned their lesson on that, so no need to beat a historical dead horse.

The primary Christian virtue is humility, the demonstration of which is obedience. Jesus commissioned His Apostles to go and preach the Gospel and teach all that I have commanded you
Sharing the scriptures is good, but we know Jesus didn’t give the Apostles a cache of books and say here, hand these out.
If we limit the Bible to self interpretation then by definition we obey no one. Each of us becomes our own interpretation of God, which would then make God subject to us rather than we being subject to God.
The Christian road is not easy. To start walking we must deny ourselves and take up our cross.
Enter by the straight gate. Narrow is the way straight is the gate that leads to life, few there be that find it. If today you hear His voice harden not your hearts

Also, if you knew what an indulgence was, you would know that one cannot be sold. Money in exchange for spiritual gifts is the sin of Simony and is therefore invalid. Any blessed object or act loses the blessing once money changes hands. That was true before, during Luther’s time and today.

What is termed the sale of indulgences was taking advantage of the poor, which is problematic, but Jesus did not condemn the poor from donating. The widow with two pennies gave all she had and was commended above the rich by Our Lord. The indulgenced act is the voluntary giving from the heart, not the price that it paid

 

[linux.poet]

The primary Christian virtue is humility, the demonstration of which is obedience.

I disagree with this. I'm wondering if Christianity as a whole and specifically Catholic are getting confused here.

The primary Christian virtue is love, namely Christ's love for us that sent Him to the cross on our behalf. Without that, we are nothing but sounding brass and clanging symbols and might as well go home (1 Corinthians 13:2), for our faith is meaningless.

We love, because He first loved us.

But now faith, hope, and love remain, these three; but the greatest of these is love.

But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, 23 gentleness, self-control; against such things there is no law.

Now, I must give the caveat that universalist or seeker-friendly churches that preach God's love for everyone aren't preaching real love, but rather a shallow form of acceptance. Love is a hard virtue for humans struggling against the sin nature to achieve, and making it happen requires the humility and obedience that you just mentioned. With no humility, nobody would give up their efforts to appease (and thus control) God through good works, and without obedience to Christ's authority, the sin nature cannot be overcome.

If you love Me, you will keep My commandments.

The one who has My commandments and keeps them is the one who loves Me; and the one who loves Me will be loved by My Father, and I will love him and will reveal Myself to him.

One needs to accept the Gospel and then, in the power of the Holy Spirit, understand and obey our Lord's commands. Note that love is first in the fruits of the Spirit, and so it is produced by God's work in us.

I am giving you a new commandment, that you love one another; just as I have loved you, that you also love one another. 35 By this all people will know that you are My disciples: if you have love for one another.”

36 “Teacher, which is the great commandment in the Law?” 37 And He said to him, “‘You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your mind.’ 38 This is the great and foremost commandment. 39 The second is like it, ‘You shall love your neighbor as yourself.’ 40 Upon these two commandments hang the whole Law and the Prophets.”

Even in the Law love is important, and Christ did not come to abolish the Law but to fulfill it. The consensus of John and Paul would be enough for me to state that love is central to the faith, not to mention the statements by Christ himself, but even the Law places love at the front.

God's love for us is why we are humble; it is why we obey Him, because He has our best interest at heart; and it is why we do our best to love each other, because Christ's sacrifice declares all other Christians worthy of love, because God loves them too. But without Truth, there is no love. It is the Holy Spirit's transforming power that enables us to love and keep Christ's commands.

So humility and obedience are important to work toward love with the Holy Spirit's assistance, but it is important to realize what we are trying to achieve with our obedience and submission to the Spirit, lest we lose heart and view our obedience as drudgery.

11 Beloved, if God so loved us, we also ought to love one another. 12 No one has ever seen God; if we love one another, God remains in us, and His love is perfected in us. 13 By this we know that we remain in Him and He in us, because He has given to us of His Spirit. 14 We have seen and testify that the Father has sent the Son to be the Savior of the world.

If we limit the Bible to self interpretation then by definition we obey no one. Each of us becomes our own interpretation of God, which would then make God subject to us rather than we being subject to God.

If I build a web site according to my self-interpretation of what web design is and what I think it should be, then it will be nothing but an insecure mess of HTML and CSS in a revolting color scheme of purple and red and black that will be hacked to pieces within minutes of it going online. If it manages to survive the hackers, the EU will come after it for violating GDPR and hit me with an enormous fine. In order to do web design properly, one must submit to general human knowledge and expertise about how to program it, comply with applicable laws, and demonstrate a reasonable knowledge of actual design principles, including color theory.

Likewise, in order to interpret the Bible correctly, you need to have proper knowledge and expertise, including a knowledge of the ancient Hebrew and Greek, hermeneutical principles, church history, and a consensus of scholarship informed by multiple people so the sin nature of any one person does not carry the day. Now we can sit and shuffle around which consensus of scholars to go with, the Dallas Theological Seminary, the Roman Catholic Church, the Early Church Fathers, the sons of Zadok, John Macarthur and the Master's Seminary (or even "All of the above!"), the point is that there needs to be a consensus so you don't end up with some wild rogue idea that the Holy Spirit never intended.

Where there is no guidance the people fall, But in an abundance of counselors there is victory.

There's a reason why we equip and train pastors and missionaries with theology degrees and don't just let them get up in the pulpit with whatever random ideas they got from reading the NIV on a Tuesday. It's not "self-interpretation", it's interpretation in context of the Body of Christ with others to help guide and correct. This is why bible studies exist, as well.

It is possible that we agree more than the quote above reflects. The OP wants to argue for personal revelation over sola scriptura, which is even more unstable than self-interpretation. If you do self-interpretation, you might get something that is at least vaguely biblical; personal revelation is even more unstable and can be controlled by demons.

Also, if you knew what an indulgence was, you would know that one cannot be sold.

I would like to know what a Catholic perspective on indulgences is. From your perspective, what is an indulgence?

 

[boughtwithaprice]

I disagree with this. I'm wondering if Christianity as a whole and specifically Catholic are getting confused here.

The primary Christian virtue is love, namely Christ's love for us that sent Him to the cross on our behalf. Without that, we are nothing but sounding brass and clanging symbols and might as well go home (1 Corinthians 13:2), for our faith is meaningless.







Now, I must give the caveat that universalist or seeker-friendly churches that preach God's love for everyone aren't preaching real love, but rather a shallow form of acceptance. Love is a hard virtue for humans struggling against the sin nature to achieve, and making it happen requires the humility and obedience that you just mentioned. With no humility, nobody would give up their efforts to appease (and thus control) God through good works, and without obedience to Christ's authority, the sin nature cannot be overcome.





One needs to accept the Gospel and then, in the power of the Holy Spirit, understand and obey our Lord's commands. Note that love is first in the fruits of the Spirit, and so it is produced by God's work in us.





Even in the Law love is important, and Christ did not come to abolish the Law but to fulfill it. The consensus of John and Paul would be enough for me to state that love is central to the faith, not to mention the statements by Christ himself, but even the Law places love at the front.

God's love for us is why we are humble; it is why we obey Him, because He has our best interest at heart; and it is why we do our best to love each other, because Christ's sacrifice declares all other Christians worthy of love, because God loves them too. But without Truth, there is no love. It is the Holy Spirit's transforming power that enables us to love and keep Christ's commands.

So humility and obedience are important to work toward love with the Holy Spirit's assistance, but it is important to realize what we are trying to achieve with our obedience and submission to the Spirit, lest we lose heart and view our obedience as drudgery.




If I build a web site according to my self-interpretation of what web design is and what I think it should be, then it will be nothing but an insecure mess of HTML and CSS in a revolting color scheme of purple and red and black that will be hacked to pieces within minutes of it going online. If it manages to survive the hackers, the EU will come after it for violating GDPR and hit me with an enormous fine. In order to do web design properly, one must submit to general human knowledge and expertise about how to program it, comply with applicable laws, and demonstrate a reasonable knowledge of actual design principles, including color theory.

Likewise, in order to interpret the Bible correctly, you need to have proper knowledge and expertise, including a knowledge of the ancient Hebrew and Greek, hermeneutical principles, church history, and a consensus of scholarship informed by multiple people so the sin nature of any one person does not carry the day. Now we can sit and shuffle around which consensus of scholars to go with, the Dallas Theological Seminary, the Roman Catholic Church, the Early Church Fathers, the sons of Zadok, John Macarthur and the Master's Seminary (or even "All of the above!"), the point is that there needs to be a consensus so you don't end up with some wild rogue idea that the Holy Spirit never intended.



There's a reason why we equip and train pastors and missionaries with theology degrees and don't just let them get up in the pulpit with whatever random ideas they got from reading the NIV on a Tuesday. It's not "self-interpretation", it's interpretation in context of the Body of Christ with others to help guide and correct. This is why bible studies exist, as well.

It is possible that we agree more than the quote above reflects. The OP wants to argue for personal revelation over sola scriptura, which is even more unstable than self-interpretation. If you do self-interpretation, you might get something that is at least vaguely biblical; personal revelation is even more unstable and can be controlled by demons.


I would like to know what a Catholic perspective on indulgences is. From your perspective, what is an indulgence?

An indulgence is the remission of the temporal punishment due to sin by the merits of the Church and the authority of Peter to bind and loose things on Earth, when he was given the keys to the kingdom of heaven.
It like paying restitution for sins that have already been forgiven. We are grateful for God’s mercy and His mercy endures forever, but God is also a just God. An indulgence is our way of performing a pious act toward the justice of God.
It does not buy our way to heaven, and to receive its benefit, we must be free of all attachments to sin.
For us to obtain them in this life, it really requires us to guard our behavior more closely. We need to ask more of the grace of God to keep us free from sin.
An indulgence can be applied to a soul in purgatory and is an act of love. The souls in purgatory cannot pray for themselves, yet there is still a temporal punishment due for their sins which we can help to pay for them.


The primary virtue of a Christian is humility because Christ says if any man come after me, let him deny his very self and begin to follow in my footsteps. Love grows from humility, but there is no love without humility, only affection
Affection can be an aspect of love, but true love calls for death of self, as demonstrated by Christ’s death on the cross

Peace be with you

 

[GoldenKingGaze]

I disagree with this. I'm wondering if Christianity as a whole and specifically Catholic are getting confused here.

The primary Christian virtue is love, namely Christ's love for us that sent Him to the cross on our behalf. Without that, we are nothing but sounding brass and clanging symbols and might as well go home (1 Corinthians 13:2), for our faith is meaningless.







Now, I must give the caveat that universalist or seeker-friendly churches that preach God's love for everyone aren't preaching real love, but rather a shallow form of acceptance. Love is a hard virtue for humans struggling against the sin nature to achieve, and making it happen requires the humility and obedience that you just mentioned. With no humility, nobody would give up their efforts to appease (and thus control) God through good works, and without obedience to Christ's authority, the sin nature cannot be overcome.





One needs to accept the Gospel and then, in the power of the Holy Spirit, understand and obey our Lord's commands. Note that love is first in the fruits of the Spirit, and so it is produced by God's work in us.





Even in the Law love is important, and Christ did not come to abolish the Law but to fulfill it. The consensus of John and Paul would be enough for me to state that love is central to the faith, not to mention the statements by Christ himself, but even the Law places love at the front.

God's love for us is why we are humble; it is why we obey Him, because He has our best interest at heart; and it is why we do our best to love each other, because Christ's sacrifice declares all other Christians worthy of love, because God loves them too. But without Truth, there is no love. It is the Holy Spirit's transforming power that enables us to love and keep Christ's commands.

So humility and obedience are important to work toward love with the Holy Spirit's assistance, but it is important to realize what we are trying to achieve with our obedience and submission to the Spirit, lest we lose heart and view our obedience as drudgery.




If I build a web site according to my self-interpretation of what web design is and what I think it should be, then it will be nothing but an insecure mess of HTML and CSS in a revolting color scheme of purple and red and black that will be hacked to pieces within minutes of it going online. If it manages to survive the hackers, the EU will come after it for violating GDPR and hit me with an enormous fine. In order to do web design properly, one must submit to general human knowledge and expertise about how to program it, comply with applicable laws, and demonstrate a reasonable knowledge of actual design principles, including color theory.

Likewise, in order to interpret the Bible correctly, you need to have proper knowledge and expertise, including a knowledge of the ancient Hebrew and Greek, hermeneutical principles, church history, and a consensus of scholarship informed by multiple people so the sin nature of any one person does not carry the day. Now we can sit and shuffle around which consensus of scholars to go with, the Dallas Theological Seminary, the Roman Catholic Church, the Early Church Fathers, the sons of Zadok, John Macarthur and the Master's Seminary (or even "All of the above!"), the point is that there needs to be a consensus so you don't end up with some wild rogue idea that the Holy Spirit never intended.



There's a reason why we equip and train pastors and missionaries with theology degrees and don't just let them get up in the pulpit with whatever random ideas they got from reading the NIV on a Tuesday. It's not "self-interpretation", it's interpretation in context of the Body of Christ with others to help guide and correct. This is why bible studies exist, as well.

It is possible that we agree more than the quote above reflects. The OP wants to argue for personal revelation over sola scriptura, which is even more unstable than self-interpretation. If you do self-interpretation, you might get something that is at least vaguely biblical; personal revelation is even more unstable and can be controlled by demons.


I would like to know what a Catholic perspective on indulgences is. From your perspective, what is an indulgence?

A person should have a revelation of God, that God gives, and His Spirit of Truth as author of the Bible best teaches the Bible, or one has private interpretations, sola scriptura and logic.

A revelation of God only exceeds the Bible after we die and are in the light of life and God's presence. Until then we check revelations by scripture, OT and NT. Other writings matter, like Polycarp...

We can seek God from scripture and receive gifts. God can give the believer knowledge in prayer or His voice when the believer is still. The Spirit is there, and works while one reads His word.

Knowing God is good determines exegesis. For example, reading Deuteronomy 28, blessings and curses, and a someone interested in Christ's Way asks for help. You notice a curse at work in them from the list in that chapter. Do you tell her God is cursing her? Best not, because actually God is good, curses come when God is not present or enthroned there. If we choose life, the curses should depart, and the blessing come from our good God. Goodness reveals the true meaning.

A person who has been healed well from something noticeable or serious, may read the Bible with new interest and insight. Scriptures liven on the page and become rhema words, alive, relevant, meaningful and powerful. The promises start to happen in them, and their children. Also they may have a congregation and their testimony becomes someone else's prophecy. And they still use sola scriptura. Catholics as well or Lecio Divina.