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.
Obviously lack of evidence of scriptural proof does decide for us that soul sleeps and annihilationism is false doctrine. Seems plain enough to me.If Scripture alone cannot decide if the soul sleeps or not and if annihilationism is true or not then it is not sufficient to decide all matters of doctrine and practise is it? And why does SDA opinion trump Methodist opinion? Is it by vote? Majority wins?
Not to BobRyan. He says the opposite. The scriptures can decide the case between you can they. You'll argue till the end of time because the final authority to which you appeal is not sufficient to settle the case. It can't settle baptism issues either or issues about the Lord's supper or purgatory or prayer for the dead. It is not sufficient.Obviously lack of evidence of scriptural proof does decide for us that soul sleeps and annihilationism is false doctrine. Seems plain enough to me.
Aww shucks, so much less to have to deal with KISSNot to BobRyan. He says the opposite. The scriptures can decide the case between you can they. You'll argue till the end of time because the final authority to which you appeal is not sufficient to settle the case. It can't settle baptism issues either or issues about the Lord's supper or purgatory or prayer for the dead. It is not sufficient.
What scripture do you use as doctrine for either?
Not to BobRyan. He says the opposite. The scriptures can decide the case between you can they. You'll argue till the end of time because the final authority to which you appeal is not sufficient to settle the case. It can't settle baptism issues either or issues about the Lord's supper or purgatory or prayer for the dead. It is not sufficient.
I guess there`s many other threads on this topic that argue the legitimacy of this contraversial doctrine. It just strikes me as funny that you two are argueing past each other about things that most SS followers have no part in. You are trying to prove SS with questionable doctrine that most who adhere to SS don`t subscribe to.As for the continued existence of the saints after death (but in a dormant state these texts call "sleep') - and before the resurrection.
John 11:11-14
1 Thess 4:13-18
As for the ultimate fate of the wicked after being tormented in real fire and real brimstone in the real lake of fire of course.
Matt 10:28
Your two straw men. 1) canon 2) interpreter have nothing to do with the definition of SS.Can you respond to my post or not?
Canon has a great deal to do with holy scripture and SS presumably has a canon of some sort in mind so what is and what is not canonical is important to a discussion of SS. Interpretation is also important in a discussion of SS since you interpret matters one way and BobRyan in a different way and both claim holy scripture as your final authority in matters of doctrine yet arrive at opposite doctrines on soul-sleep and annihilationism and who is to decide if BobRyan or you is right? If you appeal to the Holy Spirit then so will BobRyan. If you appeal to the church then so will BobRyan (you will be appealing to different denominations). And since SS is defined according to the cut & paste from Wikipedia that you gave I am working with that definition of SS in this thread. Do you still stand by it? The definition that you gave is "Sola scriptura (Latinablative, "by Scripture alone") is the Christian doctrine that the Bible is the supreme authority in all matters of doctrine and practice." If Scripture alone cannot decide if the soul sleeps or not and if annihilationism is true or not then it is not sufficient to decide all matters of doctrine and practise is it?
No. The Catholic faith is this, we believe in holy scripture, in holy tradition, and in the magisterium. take one away and the whole structure collapses.Your two straw men. 1) canon 2) interpreter have nothing to do with the definition of SS.
"Sola scriptura (Latin ablative, "by Scripture alone") is the Christian doctrine that the Bible is the supreme authority in all matters of doctrine and practice."
BUT, let's agree for the sake of moving the roundabout. Let's use RC canon as the norm. Here's the definition.
"Sola scriptura (Latin ablative, "by Scripture alone") is the Christian doctrine that the Bible is the supreme authority in all matters of doctrine and practice."
AND, let's agree for the sake of moving the roundabout a bit further. Let's let RC Magisterium be the interpreter. Here's the definition.
"Sola scriptura (Latin ablative, "by Scripture alone") is the Christian doctrine that the Bible is the supreme authority in all matters of doctrine and practice."
Can you agree? If not, why not?
I guess there`s many other threads on this topic that argue the legitimacy of this contraversial doctrine. It just strikes me as funny that you two are argueing past each other about things that most SS followers have no part in. You are trying to prove SS with questionable doctrine that most who adhere to SS don`t subscribe to.
No. The Catholic faith is this, we believe in holy scripture, in holy tradition, and in the magisterium. take one away and the whole structure collapses.
I doubt that your claim is accurate.We know what RC believes.
He won't because he can't. it would turn his world upside down.Your two straw men. 1) canon 2) interpreter have nothing to do with the definition of SS.
"Sola scriptura (Latin ablative, "by Scripture alone") is the Christian doctrine that the Bible is the supreme authority in all matters of doctrine and practice."
BUT, let's agree for the sake of moving the roundabout. Let's use RC canon as the norm. Here's the definition.
"Sola scriptura (Latin ablative, "by Scripture alone") is the Christian doctrine that the Bible is the supreme authority in all matters of doctrine and practice."
AND, let's agree for the sake of moving the roundabout a bit further. Let's let RC Magisterium be the interpreter. Here's the definition.
"Sola scriptura (Latin ablative, "by Scripture alone") is the Christian doctrine that the Bible is the supreme authority in all matters of doctrine and practice."
Can you agree? If not, why not?
I doubt that your claim is accurate.
The part that I quoted.MC: "The Catholic faith is this, we believe in holy scripture, in holy tradition, and in the magisterium. take one away and the whole structure collapses."
Which part of your quote is inaccurate?
Nobody ought to make time to type rubbish like your post.Insipid. Petulant.
Scripture decides. Men argue over what the decision means.If Scripture alone cannot decide if the soul sleeps or not and if annihilationism is true or not then it is not sufficient to decide all matters of doctrine and practise is it? And why does SDA opinion trump Methodist opinion? Is it by vote? Majority wins?
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?