Mr Dave
God Save The Queen!
Let me throw Prima Scriptura out as another alternative, Prima scriptura - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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.
I have always been confused on that myself
http://www.christianforums.com/t5633743/
What is the true definition of Sola Scriptura?
sola scriptura allows for other sources, so it's not a problem.That's only a valid objection if you assume Sola Scriptura is true in the first place. If you accept Tradition then it makes perfect sense. The canon of the Bible is not mentioned in the Bible. You'd think something that important for Sola Scriptura would have been mentioned in the Bible.
...See where that's going?
That is what I fall under.*snip*
I have heard some people refer to Scripture alone and complete rejection of all other things as "Solo Scriptura." However, I don't know if that's accurate.
sola scriptura allows for other sources, so it's not a problem.
Such as the RCCs Papacy?Then you wind up with circular logic. It's a valid doctrine because Scripture says it is. What makes up Scripture? An external authority is required to determine what is and what is not Scripture. But then we deign to deny that external authority once Scripture was created.
It's not circular logic, because all Scripture comes from God. If you need proof, ask your church.Then you wind up with circular logic. It's a valid doctrine because Scripture says it is. What makes up Scripture? An external authority is required to determine what is and what is not Scripture. But then we deign to deny that external authority once Scripture was created.
Such as the RCCs Papacy?
It's not circular logic, because all Scripture comes from God. If you need proof, ask your church.
but we're not "a-religious". from a Christian point of view, God wrote the Bible. so saying the Bible is the ultimate authority because Scripture says so, isn't circular. unless, of course, you're not a Christian.Comes from God through humans. As far as we can tell, from a completely a-religious PoV, it was a bunch of humans that decided what went into the Bible.
but we're not "a-religious". from a Christian point of view, God wrote the Bible. so saying the Bible is the ultimate authority because Scripture says so, isn't circular. unless, of course, you're not a Christian.
but we're not "a-religious". from a Christian point of view, God wrote the Bible. so saying the Bible is the ultimate authority because Scripture says so, isn't circular. unless, of course, you're not a Christian.
Jesus used His finger in John 8To be fair, God didn't write the Bible. The closest scripture comes to anything of the sort is the 2 Tim verse which means God-breathed. This is still through the medium of man though. No-where does scripture or anything else suggest God picked up a pen or pencil and scribbled down some words, Not even through Jesus, but only through those who have only one nature, human.
You're wrong. God determines what goes into Scripture, not humans. Once people start taking credit for God's word (like Catholics do with the NT) then you open the door to say the Bible is less than what it is, thus needing outside sources or "tradition".Humans inspired by God wrote the Bible. An important difference. The problem is that even if Scripture says Scripture is the ultimate authority (which it doesn't), you are still left with determining what goes into Scripture. The objection was to show the general futility of "if it was so important, it would be in the Bible." It wasn't really directed at any other particular point.
Doesn't matter. God cannonized the Bible. So we're good.The canon is quite possibly the most important thing for Sola Scriptura, and it's definitely not in the Bible. There is no Sacred Table of Contents or Holy Index of Relevant Texts.
You're wrong. God determines what goes into Scripture, not humans. Once people start taking credit for God's word (like Catholics do with the NT) then you open the door to say the Bible is less than what it is, thus needing outside sources or "tradition".
Once you realize that God wrote the Bible, NOT the humans God USED to write it, then it becomes clear why the Bible is the ultimate authority.
Doesn't matter. God cannonized the Bible. So we're good.
One place is in Exodus, when God Himself wrote the Ten Commandments on stone tablets. God wrote those directly. The rest, God used men to write, the same way someone uses a secretary to take down dictation, like John did in Revelation 1:1.Please show me in Scripture where God wrote the Bible.
Don't go, although it seems the writing's on the wall with this thread
http://www.christianforums.com/t7496252/#post55651824
Daniel 5:24 In-then before-him being-sent the-fingertip, that of the-hand and-the-writing, the-this, being-signified
25 And this the writing that being signified: 'Mene', Mene', T@qal , P@rac'.
26 This interpretation of matter-the account/Mene' he-accounted 'Elahh-the kingdom of the, and he balanced her'.
27 T@qal/weighing thou were weighed in the scales and thou were found lacking'.
28 P@rac/Bisecting she is bisected kingdom of thee and she was granted to-Maday and-Parac'.
[John 8?]
Once you realize that God wrote the Bible, NOT the humans God USED to write it, then it becomes clear why the Bible is the ultimate authority.
We both seem to be of one "mind" here
:o You saw right through my attempt at being comicalhaha.
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?