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.
Since you won't and can't prove that you have another source of incontrovertible truth;So the concept of Sola Scriptura, which I shall reference as SS from now on, has been in debate here for the past few days it seems. After reading and watching and debating on a few threads myself, I decided to make a new thread in regards to the issues with this concept.
Nobody said the traditions of man. We said Holy Traditions, which are different.
I'm aware of the debate and the councils, but I couldn't disagree more with you regarding your interpretation of the circumstances. The Catholic Church didn't "choose" anything.
Wrong in your use of the term Scripture. Scripture means :the sacred writings of Christianity contained in the Bible.Your argument didn't work before and doesn't work now. Scripture is God's word. Scripture existed the moment the words were spoken/written. You can not usurp any authority because you collated scripture into the Bible.
Not true. Can you tell me what criteria was used by your church to determine what books belong in the New Testament?
Scripture gave us a guide to test all teachings against scripture.
Hi. I'm having computer trouble so I'm going to see if I can limp through a few answers. Don't make too much of their brevity.I enjoy how you come across in your response, thank you. Let me answer in kind.
As I noted, it does.It does not state that scripture is the highest authority.
But since the Church that all of us descend from decided that the NT was also Holy Scripture, you can't take that view unless you disavow the Church.Most verses in the Bible in reference to scripture are referring to the OT, which the apostles used to show the world that Jesus was the Messiah foretold in the OT.
That's debatable, but it's impossible to add to Scripture without Scriptural justification, and that's lacking.Scripture does not support the concept of SS.
The verse that's always cited says to hold to unidentified traditions. So that means we don't know what they are in any case. But the word there means customs. The term Holy Tradition (spelled differently) is a concept devised by later churchman, was arbitrarily named, and has a totally different meaning.Scripture supports both scripture and tradition.
That's not so. If a doctrine is created on the basis of Holy Tradition it is one that isn't otherwise established by Scripture.Tradition does not compete with Scripture. They work together
But this is probably the most unpersuasive argument of all against SS. For one, SS doesn't evaluate interpretions and certainly doesn't deem any possible interpretation to be as good as the next one. It's all about what to look to when seeking to know the answer to any necessary doctrine.It is the logical conclusion in terms of authority. Because there are so many different denominations, all claiming to be true, all following SS, obviously this means they are all right. But ask a Baptist how the Lutherans interpret scripture and they will say wrongly, and visa-versa.
Not true. Can you tell me what criteria was used by your church to determine what books belong in the New Testament?
Scripture gave us a guide to test all teachings against scripture.
The teachings and traditions of Jesus Christ, preserved by His Church for 2000 years. This INCLUDES SCRIPTURE.Since you won't and can't prove that you have another source of incontrovertible truth;
How about you just provide one doctrine necessary for salvation that is not in scripture.
That's not Catholic tradition. It's simply an administrative task of determining which books were authentic and which were not. It wasn't even the decision of an Ecumenical Council with the presumed authority that is believed to attach to them. The reason we all have 66 agreed-upon books is because we think the purely human decision was correct in their case.You can't even tell us which books are scripture without Catholic tradition.
That's not Catholic tradition. It's simply an administrative task of determining which books were authentic and which were not.
That might make it 'Catholic' but it doesn't make it tradition and definitely not Holy Tradition.It was Catholic tradition because all Christians were Catholic at the time.
NP, I only am on the computer at work, so if I don't respond for hours it tends to be because I am at home.Hi. I'm having computer trouble so I'm going to see if I can limp through a few answers. Don't make too much of their brevity.
But since the Church that all of us descend from decided that the NT was also Holy Scripture, you can't take that view unless you disavow the Church.
Customs is Tradition, definition of Tradition: the transmission of customs or beliefs from generation to generation, or the fact of being passed on in this way.The verse that's always cited says to hold to unidentified traditions. So that means we don't know what they are in any case. But the word there means customs. The term Holy Tradition (spelled differently) is a concept devised by later churchman, was arbitrarily named, and has a totally different meaning.
There are a number of different churches that utilize Holy Tradition instead of SS and, guess what? ...no two of them agree on doctrine although they all say they followed Tradition. If the Bible isn't good enough, the suggested remedy is even less so!
That's not Catholic tradition. It's simply an administrative task of determining which books were authentic and which were not. It wasn't even the decision of an Ecumenical Council with the presumed authority that is believed to attach to them. The reason we all have 66 agreed-upon books is because we think the purely human decision was correct in their case.
IOW, you don't consider the NT to be Holy Scripture. You don't intend to say that, of course, but this is the meaning of what you wrote.NP, I only am on the computer at work, so if I don't respond for hours it tends to be because I am at home.
This still does not change the historical context of the passage. They were talking about OT, the only scripture at the time. This doesn't mean anything in regards to the Church deciding the NT part of Holy Scripture. So that last part is not true.
That would be traditions. "Holy Tradition" OTOH is something different, and it's HT that we are dealing with if we ditch SS.Customs is Tradition, definition of Tradition: the transmission of customs or beliefs from generation to generation, or the fact of being passed on in this way.
Oh, Please! Are you going to throw out all the careful reasoning and necessary linkages, etc. we've been striving for just like that? I might as well say that Joseph Smith vouched for the Book of Mormon, so I have to go with it.what were the traditions taught that are not shown? Well that is where we have to turn to the Church that Jesus started
I said we all agree on the 66. Yes, there are dozens of church bodies that have a different number--additional ones--but the agreement on the 66 is about as much unanimity as exists with anything in Christendom.Sorry, it is 73 books.
Oh, Please! Are you going to throw out all the careful reasoning and necessary linkages, etc. we've been striving for just like that?
Already did though. Holy Traditions cannot stand on its own, and neither can Holy Scripture. You need all 3 legs for that stool to stand. That 3rd is the authority of the Church, that was started by Jesus. Jesus also only started 1 Church, that I laid out in the OP.So what was your answer to the fact that the Holy Tradition churches are in even more disagreement than the SS ones???
As I said, that's the import of what you wrote. I know you don't intend to agree with the statement, but that's the conclusion if we were to go strictly by what you wrote. It's worth considering.Of course I believe the NT to be Holy Scripture.
There is no particular reason TO find them. And there is no WAY to find them. This was a comment spoken to certain people and appears to be rather ordinary advice--keep on keeping on, attending synagogue, keeping the fasts, and etc. There is no reason to make it into a prime doctrinal directive akin to "This is my body. Do this...."I did not throw anything out. As I stated, if the Bible does not contain the Traditions that paul is talking about, where then can we find them?
So you've reduced your side of the discussion to "Take my own denomination's word for all this stuff." You might as well have said that in the beginning if that is all that this was going to devolve down to.Already did though. Holy Traditions cannot stand on its own, and neither can Holy Scripture. You need all 3 legs for that stool to stand. That 3rd is the authority of the Church, that was started by Jesus. Jesus also only started 1 Church, that I laid out in the OP.
Well, Wolf Says, you really opened up a can of worms.Nobody said the traditions of man. We said Holy Traditions, which are different.
That is not the import of what I wrote at all. You made a jump when you said that they were referring to OT but since the Church made NT a part of Holy Scripture, we include that too. I claimed that this is wrong, I did not said I do not believe that NT is not Scripture.As I said, that's the import of what you wrote. I know you don't intend to agree with the statement, but that's the conclusion if we were to go strictly by what you wrote. It's worth considering.
It is not devolving, you asked a question which I answered. Your question was about why churches who place HT above Scripture also differ.So you've reduced your side of the discussion to "Take my own denomination's word for all this stuff." You might as well have said that in the beginning if that is all that this was going to devolve down to.
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?