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 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:
20 Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation.d in old time: or, at any time
21 For the prophecy came not in old timed by the will of man:
but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost.
But we, according to Scripture, only know in part:
11 When I was a child, I spake as a child, I understood as a child,
I thought as a child: but when I became a man, I put away childish things.
12 For now we see through a glass, darkly; but then face to face:
now I know in part; but then shall I know even as also I am known.
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.
Hi. Sorry if I was not very clear.I don't understand how that responds to the question in its contect.
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?
Possibly not.
Possibly.
What I tried to say, is that NO one can say that they haveI'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:
20 Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation.d in old time: or, at any time
21 For the prophecy came not in old timed by the will of man:
but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost.
But we, according to Scripture, only know in part:
11 When I was a child, I spake as a child, I understood as a child,
I thought as a child: but when I became a man, I put away childish things.
12 For now we see through a glass, darkly; but then face to face:
now I know in part; but then shall I know even as also I am known.
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.
Hi. Sorry if I was not very clear.
As I reread it, I can understand your
confusion and will try to revise..
Here's how the conversation went,
to refresh our memory.
What I tried to say, is that NO one can say that they have
it all correct, because it's written that we see in part.
(At this time)
But that, that's not how we know who's His anyhow.
The test isn't who's more knowledgable about Scripture,
but rather who's identifiable by their love for the brethren.
Which denomination has it all correct?
None. Theology (the study of God) is what
we do because we naturally want to know
as much about Him as we can, and as much
truth (for our daily living and decisio;ns) as
we can.
But none has it ALL correct. We see darkly right
now, but one day will understand completely.
I'd guess though, that those who understand God
and His Words the best would be those who spend
more time WITH Him, listening to the Spirit of God,
as He is the only one who can reveal things to our
hearts (in whichever mode of communication He
may happen to use, whether through other humans,
or just epiphanies etc.)
We would benefit if we'd study and meditate on
the Scripture ... hiding His Word in our hearts.
That would certainly help us a great deal.
Hope I clarified that post for you.
Getting used to all the changes here!
Not too shabby so far huh?
Is this as clear as the answer can get to the question among sola scripturists?
It's exactly as clear as if it were asked of the Tradition-ists instead of the Sola Scriptura-ists.
Each person has to act on his own conscience and judgment. It's only a question of where one looks for his answers. We place the Word of God above all other sources, being that it is the only "input" that we Bible Alone Christians know is certainly divine in origin. Other people in their churches follow church Tradition which, according to their churches, is believed to be another source of divine revelation.
And each of us does just this; no one has forced any of us to join one church rather than another (although this was an issue for the Reformers in a time when other people did indeed decide for the ordinary person what they had to believe and where they had to worship).
If you want to know which church I belong to and why, I'm more than happy to discuss that again -- as I have done so every time someone has asked me to.
Hi tlf. What exactly is the Gospel Message according to the RCC?So, in other words, a sola scripturist can never really know, this side of death, if their interpretation is right or not.
Then that would lead to the conclusion that a sola scripturist can never really know if they got the gospel message right or not.
Then that would lead to the conclusion that a sola scripturist can never really know if what he/she believes to be the gospel is really the gospel.
And then that would lead to the conclusion that a sola scripturist can never really know that what they believe leads to salvation really does lead to salvation. . . . . . . . .
Am I understanding you correctly?
Josiah said: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.
.
A few problems. To begin with, you mistakenly think that the Church has infallibly interpreted all the bible passages.
In fact it has only spoken infallibly and bound on the faithful 8 passages in the bible.
Sola ecclesia is not what the Catholic church teaches, it teaches scripture, and tradition.
The When the magisterium defines something officially(Infallibly) it is something that has been already present in scripture(implicitly or explicitly) and Oral apostolic tradition.
The Canon of the New Testament was formed and declared by the Catholic church way before Trent.
All protestants then are hypocrite's because the very church(Magisterium) and principle(Scripture and Tradition) that they deny is the principle they had to embrace to even know the NT to begin with.
Sola scriuptura? Its chaos.
So, in other words, a sola scripturist can never really know, this side of death, if their interpretation is right or not.
And then that would lead to the conclusion that a sola scripturist can never really know that what they believe leads to salvation really does lead to salvation. . . . . . . . .
Am I understanding you correctly?
So, in other words, a sola scripturist can never really know, this side of death, if their interpretation is right or not.
That is kind of akin to a commander leading his troops into a battle and his troops hoping his Strategy will work.The ONLY option for the Catholic is the HOPE the CC is right - INFALLIBLY - because the Catholic CANNOT know if such is or is not the case. The CC doesn't permit it, it only permits a docilic acceptance of whatever it iitself alone says.
We'd have to look at the passage and context. He was speaking to thoseI understand, and agree - and this Paul spoke in regards to not knowing as we are known by God now. This extends past matters of faith and morals.
Do you believe this refers to what is doctrine regarding faith and morals as well?
Is it possible to truly love if you don't have the Holy Spirit?Then, does this mean that all people's of the world, who love their brethern, belong to Christ?
He's given us all we need for life and godliness.Yes, but does that mean we have not been given all the truth we need in matters of faith and morals?
Just as Jesus Himself led them into all truth, (but they sometimesWhat does Jesus' promise to the Apostles mean, that the Holy Spirit would lead them personally into ALL truth?
I can think of no way we can outside of God giving usHow can we tell who those are?
Me too. It seems to load faster, and it's easier to navigate.I am kinda liking it so far - there are some things missing that I would like to see back; perhaps they will be after the tweeking is all done.
Then, does this mean that all people's of the world, who love their brethern, belong to Christ?
It does appear Jesus mentioned something like that in the Gospels. As a matter a fact, it was also mentioned to the OC Hebrew Israelites in Deut 28.Is it possible to truly love if you don't have the Holy Spirit?
There's a difference between the love of God that's been
shed abroad in our hearts by the Holy Spirit, and the world's idea of love.
"Just the facts and only the facts"
Hi JtC!!! Does my new avatar look familiar?I am glad to see this thread still going after the site's modifications.
But I am not sure I like the modifications.
Hi JtC!!! Does my new avatar look familiar?
Ooops. Just noticed your post LOL..........
When I came on I noticed the GA and NCR boards gone, [you know, the ones the heathen "non-Christians" post on?] I found them by going to links to threads I had saved and found out they were moved. LOL.I think we may see less people using this site unless they get it looking better and find a way to bring back the Characters and pets and some of the other stuff as well.
It may drop from 1200 to 2000 users on at anytime to less than 1000 at any time.
Actually this may be a great opportunity for someone to start a site with all the toys the other one had.
Moot. The RCC appoints it and it itself alone as the SOLE interpreter of Scripture (technically, the Scripture not in any book or document but "in its own heart) and predeclares that self and self alone, soly, does this infallibly. Read the Catholic Catechism # 85, 87 and 113 for starters.
Yet somehow it's come up with 2,865 points of doctrine in its Catechism....
...as arbitrated by the church alone. Yup, you just defined Sola Ecclesia. It's all outlined in the Catechism, especially # 80-100 plus 113. The term comes from # 85.
The Rule for the RCC is "The Three-Legged-Stool" as Mormons call it. It consists of:
1. The CC's Tradition as the CC chooses, defines and interprets - essentially the corpus of its own teachings. This is usually listed first and given promenence.
2. The Scriptures not in any tome but in the "heart of the Catholic Church" as interpreted by the Catholic Church alone - exclusively and infallibly - so as to agree with #1 above.
3. The Leadership of the CC alone, as chosen and defined by the CC. The CC's own rulings, decisions, interpretations and arbitrations.
These form ONE UNITED SOURCE, one 'stream'; united, supplimental, equal in devotion, reverence, authority and normative function. No "leg" is above or below the other - as if some accountability is involved - all is equally revelatory and true. Thus, the Scripture "in the heart of the CC" MUST agree with the Magisterium of the CC even if only in invisible words that only the CC can "see" and thus is "implied" but in reality just not there.
Not officially, not universally. In fact, it STILL hasn't been. But there is a universal consensus around it - official or not.
1. ALL denominations (officially or by consensus) have embraced the NT canon that God's people did. God's people did this largely in the first century when 18-21 of the 27 books were regarded as Scripture. The rest was formed by the mid 300's at the VERY latest (although the Revelation of John remained in SOME controversay well into the middle ages). When the regional meeting at Hippo (a non ecumenical meeting) declared the lectionary for Sunday readings (not the canon), it simply embraced what had already been determined. This history (and my priest) affirm. NO denomination decided anything about this, they's all pretty much affirmed what God's people decided.
2. No one is saying that the CC has been or is wrong about EVERYTHING or that it MUST be wrong about everything if it's wrong about ANYTHING. You are making an absurd and unfounded assumption. I probably agree with the CC 95% of the time, it doesn't mean that it MUST be correct the other 5% of the time. I agree with Islam on some points, that does NOT mean I MUST agree with it on ALL points.
I'll bet ya that drstevej (a strong Calvinist) and I agree on MUCH more both using Sola Scriptura than you and a Mormon agree on both using Sola Ecclesia. I think that Sola Ecclesia leads to FAR more chaos - as any examination between Catholicism and Mormonism reveals.
Thank you.
Pax
- Josiah
(I MAY be back, GT'ers. SORRY!!!)
.
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?