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.
But they do not.I'm not trying to knock these groups, just pointing out that Protestants and other non-Catholic / non-Orthodox do essentially the same thing that these Churches do, only they describe it differently.
in light of other's writings or their own ideas and interpretations. It's a constantly evolving series of cultures based on interpretation and there's not a whole lot of unity.
Yes, you have observed that happening.only they describe it differently. So it functionally comes down to the same thing. And it's not *technically* Sola Scriptura. Because everyone interprets through some lens. Even their own.
Yes, you have observed that happening.
Yet, is is written, and never, never, ever changed,
that's not right nor good for them to do that, in any century.
You have seen what happens when that is done.
Keep seeking, and YHWH says (HIS WORD) you will find (the TRUTH) (not tradition).
Otherwise, stop seeking, accept what men say, and lose the opportunity for TRUTH.
So as of right now, I'm coming to the conclusion that Sola Scriptura is basically impossible. Protestants, while claiming Scripture Alone, are informed theologically by a massive library of very diverse theologians, authors, TV personalities, radio personalities, and pastors as diverse as John Calvin and Joyce Meyer who basically tell their audience what the Bible says, what it means, and how to live it out.
What's the difference between this and Tradition interpreting Scripture? Because the points of Calvinism are no where spelled out point by point in Scripture, line by line, yet Christians adhering to Reformed Soteriology interpret the Bible through the thoughts and writings of Calvin and others. Likewise Protestants generally interpret the Scriptures through the lens of Sola Fide, in spite of numerous verses that seem to indicate that our works in Christ *do* determine where we go when we die.
So in light of all this, why get upset by Catholics and Orthodox who interpret Scripture through their Tradition, when Protestants do the exact same thing, essentially? Thoughts?
Then, you admit you don't hear me.I hear you. But at the same time, everyone reads and applies Scripture through a lens
I don't know if that implication is there - that some of the Bereans did not believe Paul's message.Bereans checked everything Paul said against Scripture to see if it was true, and Sola Scriptura is basically saying that we should follow this same practice whenever we are taught anything. It says that many of the Bereans believed Paul's message, which implies that there were at least some who do not, but regardless of whether or not they agreed with Paul, they were all in agreement that Scripture is what should be used to determine whether what he said was true.
I don't know if that implication is there - that some of the Bereans did not believe Paul's message.
If they all used SCRIPTURE as YHWH'S WORD SAYS,
then they all accepted Paul's message, as Y'SHUA taught Paul.
It is written that all those who accepted/ believed Paul's message (sent by YHWH)It seems clear to me that it is saying many of those who examined the Scriptures every day believed what Paul said was true, but it does not say that all of them accepted that. I think people can genuinely examine Scripture to see what the truth of the matter is and honestly come to different opinions.
It is written that all those who accepted/ believed Paul's message (sent by YHWH)
became believers.
Those who rejected Paul's message (sent by YHWH)
remained UNbelievers.
That did not seem to be your point earlier, sorry if I missed that.My point was that people are disagree about what Scripture says, but still be in agreement that we should believe whatever it is that Scripture says where there is a conflict between Scripture and man's opinion.
But it is not "Tradition" AKA Holy Tradition or Sacred Tradition, which some Christians think is a separate divine revelation in addition to the Bible.There is no escaping tradition. Even the idea that we are just going to follow what the Bible says is itself a tradition.
That's a question I keep asking myself, actually. And btw, the "answer" is usually a variation of I "don't understand what Sola Scriptura is!!"So as of right now, I'm coming to the conclusion that Sola Scriptura is basically impossible. Protestants, while claiming Scripture Alone, are informed theologically by a massive library of very diverse theologians, authors, TV personalities, radio personalities, and pastors as diverse as John Calvin and Joyce Meyer who basically tell their audience what the Bible says, what it means, and how to live it out.
What's the difference between this and Tradition interpreting Scripture? Because the points of Calvinism are no where spelled out point by point in Scripture, line by line, yet Christians adhering to Reformed Soteriology interpret the Bible through the thoughts and writings of Calvin and others. Likewise Protestants generally interpret the Scriptures through the lens of Sola Fide, in spite of numerous verses that seem to indicate that our works in Christ *do* determine where we go when we die.
So in light of all this, why get upset by Catholics and Orthodox who interpret Scripture through their Tradition, when Protestants do the exact same thing, essentially? Thoughts?
That same passage also argues against Sola Scriptura. The jews in Thessalonica abided by Sola Scriptura so they chased St. Paul out of town. The Berean jews were of more noble character as they compared Paul's teachings to the scriptures and found they agreed with one another so they believed in Our Lord.Acts 17:11-12 Now the Berean Jews were of more noble character than those in Thessalonica, for they received the message with great eagerness and examined the Scriptures every day to see if what Paul said was true. 12 As a result, many of them believed, as did also a number of prominent Greek women and many Greek men.
It seems clear to me that it is saying many of those who examined the Scriptures every day believed what Paul said was true, but it does not say that all of them accepted that. I think people can genuinely examine Scripture to see what the truth of the matter is and be sincerely wrong.
Well, let's come right to the point. What do you consider to be more reliable than the word of God? It's really that simple.Apparently my Church's high view of the Early Church is bad and I should trust nothing but Sacred Scripture.
That same passage also argues against Sola Scriptura. The jews in Thessalonica abided by Sola Scriptura so they chased St. Paul out of town. The Berean jews were of more noble character as they compared Paul's teachings to the scriptures and found they agreed with one another so they believed in Our Lord.
Thanks for this post. I agree. Whether the books through which you understand, interpret, and apply Scripture are homilies by Origen, John Chrysostom, Theodore of Mopsuestia, John Calvin, A.W. Tower, or Joel Osteen you're still using the thoughts and theologies and a heritage of others' theologies to understand what is written. .
It's reasonable to think of Protestants as Reformed Catholics, sure.Is it also entirely possible to describe Protestants, theologically, as rebellious Catholics? Because many Protestants feel completely comfortable and justified quoting theologians who are basically pillars of Catholic thought (like Tertullian, Justin Martyr, Aquinas) and even saints. So the foundation of thought is very similar, minus faith plus works and minus other doctrines viewed as excessive or incorrect, and minus submission to the Pontiff. But plenty of other stuff is arguably quite similar.
It's reasonable to think of Protestants as Reformed Catholics, sure.
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?