Sola Scripturists guide on the authority of the Bible

[laconicstudent]

You know, just because the Christian religion isn't entirely logical doesn't mean we should feel free to glory in it.

 

[OpenDoor]

which points?

If I am understanding you guys correctly it sounds like what we believe doesn't matter (as you have a right to say) and its written off as illogical and circular reasoning.
I am surprised that you don't understand that the same scrutiny could be applied to any part of Christianity.
Including Churches, Councils, Apostles, even our Lord...

 

[OpenDoor]

You know, just because the Christian religion isn't entirely logical doesn't mean we should feel free to glory in it.

It looks like you are all suggesting that the EO could hold up to this level of scrutiny. I would be very interested in seeing that.

 

[laconicstudent]

It looks like you are all suggesting that the EO could hold up to this level of scrutiny. I would be very interested in seeing that.

Levels of scrutiny? You mean,

I don't know what you are talking about, so I assumed.

 

[OpenDoor]

Levels of scrutiny? You mean,

I don't know what you are talking about, so I assumed.

Sure.
How does that guide on authority?

 

[laconicstudent]

Sure.
How does that guide on authority?

I don't know, you are the one who brought up martyrdom, I was assuming you had some reason for it.

 

[OpenDoor]

I don't know, you are the one who brought up martyrdom, I was assuming you had some reason for it.

 

[laconicstudent]

YouTube - Troparion to the New Martyrs of Russia

 

[OpenDoor]

and boom goes the dynamite.
Goodnight everyone.

 

[Ortho_Cat]

It looks like you are all suggesting that the EO could hold up to this level of scrutiny. I would be very interested in seeing that.

I would suggest starting a thread on this topic in TaW if you want sufficient feedback and attention drawn to your question WRT to the EOC. Perhaps something like "is orthodox christianity logical?" or something along those lines. If you just want general feedback, you can post it in the main forums, if you want to discuss/debate the issue, you should post it in the sub-forum "St. Justin Martyr's Corner". Alternatively, you can start a new thread in GT which addresses both Orthodox and Catholic and say something like, "Is tradition more logical than sola scriptura?" Just an idea.

 

[Montalban]

If I am understanding you guys correctly it sounds like what we believe doesn't matter (as you have a right to say) and its written off as illogical and circular reasoning.

What points?

I am surprised that you don't understand that the same scrutiny could be applied to any part of Christianity.

So you're saying you've no evidence to back your point (whatever that is) and you don't understand why you should offer any because no other part of Christianity is subject to evidence too?

Including Churches, Councils, Apostles, even our Lord...

You mean based on a web-link?

 

[Montalban]

It looks like you are all suggesting that the EO could hold up to this level of scrutiny. I would be very interested in seeing that.

So your argument is you're admitting your opinion can't be put under scrutiny and it's unfair unless we subject Orthodoxy to the same level over something else?

 

[Montalban]

I would suggest starting a thread on this topic in TaW if you want sufficient feedback and attention drawn to your question WRT to the EOC. Perhaps something like "is orthodox christianity logical?" or something along those lines. If you just want general feedback, you can post it in the main forums, if you want to discuss/debate the issue, you should post it in the sub-forum "St. Justin Martyr's Corner". Alternatively, you can start a new thread in GT which addresses both Orthodox and Catholic and say something like, "Is tradition more logical than sola scriptura?" Just an idea.

"X" is my opinion. It's right. I'll say it again. You want evidence - here's a general web-site that you need to trawl through to find what it is I'm not sure I believe in. That's not good enough for you? You can't demand evidence because you don't have evidence for some unnamed position somewhere else held at some other time!

 

[Ortho_Cat]

If I am understanding you guys correctly it sounds like what we believe doesn't matter (as you have a right to say) and its written off as illogical and circular reasoning.
I am surprised that you don't understand that the same scrutiny could be applied to any part of Christianity.
Including Churches, Councils, Apostles, even our Lord...

Actually, I think what we believe matters very much. That is why I am here. However, I do believe that SS is inherently illogical, and leads a person back to tradition either way you cut it, or in an endless search for an authority that only exists in Christ's Church. I have applied scrutiny to all aspects and branches of Christianity, and I have found, IMO, Orthodox Christianity to be the most logical and internally consistent, as well at the most authentic expression of Christian faith. As I mentioned in a previous thread, I strongly believe it is the only thing that could have brought me out of a downward spiral towards atheism that I was in, and I also strongly feel that this was Christ's way of getting my attention was through the EOC.

 

[Ortho_Cat]

"X" is my opinion. It's right. I'll say it again. You want evidence - here's a general web-site that you need to trawl through to find what it is I'm not sure I believe in. That's not good enough for you? You can't demand evidence because you don't have evidence for some unnamed position somewhere else held at some other time!

FWIW, I think that Open Door has a valid question here. If we claim what we claim, then we should be able to back it up against questions pertaining to logical inconsistencies. I look forward to his thread and I will contribute to the best of my abilities. Questions of this type can often be the most difficult and most revealing.

In the meantime, we can continue to point out the logical inconsistencies in the Sola Scriptura approach in this thread...

 

[Philothei]

This is why I said (as it appears to me anyway) is hypocritical.

If we apply these standards to any faith it will be shown as illogical.
Not to be taken as name calling, but these are honestly atheist points (or at least agnostic).

What is hypocritical? How are they atheists points? The Scripture did come to be because people wrote it. Either the people who wrote it made mistakes in it or not. God cannot be inspiring for part of his revelation and not inspiring for the other...That is oral tradition is not inspired but written is.. The Bible was at one point oral tradition and then it became written. The dichotomy between the two is kind of illogical to me

A council that radifies the canon of the NT is "God inspired" but the rest of the counsils are NOT...

*BTW we know that the gospels is attributed to certain Apostles (except John) is the community of believers that wrote it and not the Apostles themselves. Scholars do agree to that but some of course would still not believe them *

 

[Ortho_Cat]

A council that radifies the canon of the NT is "God inspired" but the rest of the counsils are NOT...

An excellent example which further illustrates my point about Protestants 'picking and choosing' from Tradition...

 

[Montalban]

FWIW, I think that Open Door has a valid question here. If we claim what we claim, then we should be able to back it up against questions pertaining to logical inconsistencies. I look forward to his thread and I will contribute to the best of my abilities. Questions of this type can often be the most difficult and most revealing.

In the meantime, we can continue to point out the logical inconsistencies in the Sola Scriptura approach in this thread...

I already met one challenge - that our church didn't make a mistake, by choosing the books in the Bible

 

[OpenDoor]

The Bible was at one point oral tradition and then it became written. The dichotomy between the two is kind of illogical to me

I think this is were the SS and the EO have been talking past each other. The bible is not just oral tradition written down.
If that was the case we should probably include the Gospel of Thomas.

 

[OpenDoor]

I already met one challenge - that our church didn't make a mistake, by choosing the books in the Bible

Which I agree with! (one of my first posts)

However, I would change "choosing" to recognized.