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.
Paul, for example, was able to distinguish between 'thus sayeth the LORD' and 'this is my recommendation'.
Some folks seem to think they can "improve upon the apostles".
Nope, we just want to make sure that all they taught is faithfully preserved and handed down.
19Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them ina the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit,</SPAN> 20and teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you. And surely I am with you always, to the very end of the age.</SPAN>
But ALL that they taught is not faithfully preserved since all tradition plus scripture churches "preserve" different teachings.
This is a logical fallacy. It's like saying "No religion has the truth since all religions teach different 'truths.'"But ALL that they taught is not faithfully preserved since all "tradition plus scripture churches" "preserve" different teachings.
This is a logical fallacy. It's like saying "No religion has the truth since all religions teach different 'truths.'"
Yes, this is true, but certainly one can be more faithful than another. I think what it comes down to is comparing side-by-side all the teachings from all the churches which claim to be apostolic, comparing them with the predominant teachings of the ECF's, history, and scripture, and find which of the traditions most closely align with all of these.
Which one 'seems" to align "better" with predominant teachings of the ECFs, history, and scripture is subjective when the bar is continually moving. The scriptures don't move. "T"raditions do.
It is the same "fallacy" that you guys accuse SS proponents of so what is good for the geese is good for the gander. lol
However, you can not refute it so the statement that any one denomination has preserved all apostolic truth is not accurate.
Well history certainly hasn't moved, but it is debatable whether scripture (i.e. what we Christians consider scripture) has shifted over time. For example, 1 Clement was considered scriptural by some, and the deutero's were considered (and still are considered) scriptural by many (and likewise rejected as scripture by many). So I think this concept of scripture is dynamic, even though all the writings are there. Also, this says nothing about potential discrepancies between the original manuscripts (which we don't have) and the manuscript copies that we do have.
Please use an example to support your claim.It is the same "fallacy" that you guys accuse SS proponents of
I did refute it by pointing out how it is a fallacious statement. "A =! B therefore both A and B = false" is fallacious because when A = Jesus is God and B = Zeus is God, A is still true.However, you can not refute it
. However, we don't have any of the "T"raditions in any form that could be remotely considered as a standard. Absolute truth can not be dynamic or it would not be absolute. The scriptures are absolute truth. They are not dynamic. God is fully aware of His special revelation.
Please use an example to support your claim.
(I would not say that "no one church has an infallible interpretation of scripture because all of the churches have conflicting interpretations." Just like I would not say "no one religion has the infallible truth about God because all of the religions have conflicting teachings about God."
I did refute it by pointing out how it is a fallacious statement. "A =! B therefore both A and B = false" is fallacious because when A = Jesus is God and B = Zeus is God, A is still true.
Originally Posted by Hentenza
I would say that tradition in the form of the ecumenical councils (which contains the creed), the writings of the fathers, and church history are quite static. These writings, events, happened and were recorded and preserved, just as scripture was. We can use these static sources to compare tradition against and see which traditions align most faithfully with them. Also, I could argue that the ecumenical councils are a form of special revelation as well (with a scriptural precedent).
So I will posit ro you that the ONLY common denomination accepted by ALL mainstream Christian churches is the 66 books of scripture, therefore, since God is perfectly capable of maintaining His special revelation, then this must be the standard. The rest is just fallible man's interpretation and irrelevant to God's absolute truth.
What do you mean by "dynamic" like hmmm... they do not allow for futhrer exploration? Not sure what you say here...
I understand and we as EO would not call the Councils "inffalable" either that is not how we place them as authority. Proof to that is that the iconoclastic Contraversy had to denouce a council as falseThe councils, ECFs, etc. are not infallible since they contradict themselves quite often. The scriptures, on the other hand, are indeed infallible and do not contradict themselves. The authority standard seems quite obvious to me.
So I will posit ro you that the ONLY common denomination accepted by ALL mainstream Christian churches is the 66 books of scripture, therefore, since God is perfectly capable of maintaining His special revelation, then this must be the standard. The rest is just fallible man's interpretation and irrelevant to God's absolute truth.
Ah...I see thus what is static in the Bible is what is ..the revealed reality. I think that would be indeed one fo the problems with interpretation then... How to stay true to the revealed message if one does not use a guide and takes it out of its historical context. Of couse the time you need to take to do all this ...is immense considering our full schedules todayDynamic refers to something that continually changes. Not static. Scriptures are static and are not dynamic since there can only be one meaning and that is the one given by the author. The text does not itself change. What is dynamic is our interpretations of it simply because of hermeunetic additions such as preconceived bias, etc. We have a tendency of ignoring the revealed reality in favor of our perceived realities.
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?