calluna said:
So, it sounds like answering the OP's question should be fairly easy for you - who has the correct interprtetion of scripture among those who hold to sola scriptura?
Anyone?
No-one?
Upvote
0
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.
calluna said:Quote:
That could, of course, be interpreted to mean a question that reads: 'Does Protestantism teach that all that Jesus taught is in the Bible?' Now that either looks like a somewhat daft question, or it reveals that the questioner thinks that Protestantism is like Catholicism, and has not yet got proper, synchronised answers worked out. And many Catholics do think like that. They are utterly unaware of the vast quantity of scholarship of the highest calibre that has been produced by Protestantism. So Prots so often have to give them basic education on the 'net. Though some, of course, are feigning ignorance, or feigning some of it. Some of them are rather nastily surprised to learn the truth!
That appears to be a correct premise:
You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to calluna again.
Originally Posted by JacktheCatholic
The RCC and EOC and OOC do not see ourselves as 'denominations.
However, many have decided to use this term for Catholicism too. So they have these denominations: Roman Catholicism, Eastern Catholicism, Anglicanism, and Protestantism.
But it should be pointed out that if we were to adopt this language, which is theologically against our teachings, then we would have RCC and EOC as untied within their 'denomination. We would have Anglicans divinding into three pirces or what we call "denominations". AND Protestants which are divided into THOUSANDS of pieces or denominations.
But for the Catholic Church to accept that it is a 'Denomination' it wpuld have to accept that Protestantism and Anglicanism are indeed Christian. It does not. It sees all those in these denominations of protesting churches as part of the body of Christ if baptised correctly otherwise they are not Christian in the Catholic Churche's teaching. No more Christian than Gnostics.
I do. Next question?So, it sounds like answering the OP's question should be fairly easy for you - who has the correct interprtetion of scripture among those who hold to sola scriptura?
Anyone?
No-one?
That would also helpIndeed, but you've had the answer. Or rather, two answers.
One answer is that the persons with the most hermeneutic interpretation are those telling the truth- and almost invariably there is a vast gap between the best answer and the next best, and there is no real choice to make.
The other answer is that no interpretation is necessary, once one is in full command of the facts. Even a child can tell what is right from wrong. Maybe only a child can do so, as Jesus himself indicated.
It's all so easy (provided you use Greek and Hebrew, of course!).
Possibly not.So, it sounds like answering the OP's question should be fairly easy for you - who has the correct interprtetion of scripture among those who hold to sola scriptura?
Anyone?
Possibly.No-one?
The term "Sola Ecclesia Roma" does refer more to the arbitration. It comes from the Catholic Catechism # 85 among several others.
But the Rule/Canon for the RCC is as follows:
1) The Tradition of the CC as chosen, defined and interpreted by the CC to agree with the CC. This is usually listed first.
2) The Scripture not on any page or document or tome but "in the heart of the CC" (# 113) as interpreted by the CC alone (# 85) so as to agree with # 1 and that so as to agree with the CC. This the CC itself declares to be infallible if done by self.
3) The Leadership of the CC as chosen by the CC; the decisions, rulings, interpretations and arbrations of the CC itself - infallable/exclusively
These 3 are "inseparable, equal and supplimental." If something is taught in #3, it MUST be taught in # 2 and #1 even if "implied" in ways only the CC can "see" since all 3 are True and Revelatory and Divine and thus all equal. They form one UNITED, INSEPARBABLE "source" or "stream."
The LDS (the only other denomination known to use to use this rubric) uses this excellent illustration to refer to what they call "The Three Legged Stool." They mention to think of a color TV tube. It has 3 "guns" - yellow, red, green. Each produces little "dots" on the screen. Each separate shows only a tiny part of the picture and would actually be misleading, but all 3 TOGETHER - each supplying their "part" creates a picture that is clear.
1. No one is saying the Catholic Denomination MUST be wrong about everything it has ever said or done. I agree with it 95% of the time.....
2. Protestants do NOT rely on the Council of Trent - the official embrace of the Canon in the CC (it happened after Luther was died!). We rely on the consensus of God's people - the church. This existed vis-a-vis the NT canon before there's any evidence that the Catholic Denomination existed at all.
.
calluna said:Originally Posted by thereselittleflower
Well, if you find it difficult to answer the question, we understand.
You do? I'd be most interested to know the reason.
And who is 'we'?
Here, I'll interpret the scriptures for you... and I'll leave all that other garbage out.It seems to be a very difficult question for sola scripturists to answer as we have hundreds of responses without a clear answer unless the answer is 'we don't know'
Those who are asking.
That's very odd, because we have had an apology for the question, and confirmation of the apology, moreover. It only needs the question to be asked in a manner that reflects the spirit of the apology for it to be acceptable as a valid one.It seems to be a very difficult question for sola scripturists to answer as we have hundreds of responses without a clear answer unless the answer is 'we don't know'
Just one, then. Not 'we', but 'I'.Those who are asking.
In other words, you can't answer the question because it reveals the fatal flaw of your dogma.That's very odd, because we have had an apology for the question, and confirmation of the apology, moreover. It only needs the question to be asked in a manner that reflects the spirit of the apology for it to be acceptable as a valid one.
Just one, then. Not 'we', but 'I'.
Possibly. Of the question is asked in a civil manner, then you can came to that conclusion. But Jack's offensive manner is not going to be tolerated by me, anyway.In other words, you can't answer the question because it reveals the fatal flaw of your dogma.
More likely it's Catholics doing that. All it needs is a simple question, but it seems you go to all this trouble to smear, instead.Therefore, you attack the messenger and avoid the issue.
Knock it off. Jack has been very polite in this thread, but I only see you determined to take it off topic. If you're offended, suck it up. Please stop derailing this thread.Possibly. Of the question is asked in a civil manner, then you can came to that conclusion. But Jack's offensive manner is not going to be tolerated by me, anyway.
More likely it's Catholics doing that. All it needs is a simple question, but it seems you go to all this trouble to smear, instead.
What exactly is his "dogma"?In other words, you can't answer the question because it reveals the fatal flaw of your dogma.
Therefore, you attack the messenger and avoid the issue.
That's very odd, because we have had an apology for the question, and confirmation of the apology, moreover. It only needs the question to be asked in a manner that reflects the spirit of the apology for it to be acceptable as a valid one.
Just one, then. Not 'we', but 'I'.
The gospel is pretty simple. It is men that make it complicated, and cause confusion by adding to it.
I'd say that's the correct answer.Is this as clear as the answer can get to the question among sola scripturists?
I'd say that's the correct answer.
How can it be any different?
Scripture is truth, must be truth,
since it came from God Himself,
not by any private interpretation
of the men who spoke or penned it:
So there is no denomination that sees more than God reveals.
But the emphasis in the Bible is on the love, not on who's
got more figured out, our goal is Jesus Christ (Love)
Jesus is the PERFECT theology:
13 And now abideth faith, hope, charity, these three;
but the greatest of these is charity.
That's how we can recognize who is of God:
They'll know we are Christians by our love,
one for another.
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?