The Rule of faith and practice is not scripture "alone"

[LoveofTruth]

Who then makes the determinination on who is or is not being led by the Holy Spirit, and by who's or what authority can they do so?

I believe I answered that in my first few introduction post .if you go over it again carefully you will see

 

[Fidelibus]

I believe I answered that in my first few introduction post .if you go over it again carefully you will see

I read through your introduction (carefully) and did not see where it says who can determine if someone is being led by the Holy Spirit in their interpretation of Scripture, or is not being led by the Holy Spirit? And how do they receive the authority to do so?

As from Fhansen post # 840, we see and now know what we, as members of the Catholic Church believe.

So, since I could not find it in your lengthy three part introduction, could you please enlighten us in your own words, from a Protestant perspective, say in two or three sentences, who has the authority to determine if someone is being led by the Holy Spirit in their interpretation of Scripture, or is not being led by the Holy Spirit?

And could you please follow-up your answer with, how does this person, persons, or entity receive the authority to do so?

Thank You!

 

[com7fy8]

I guess we could say that with God we discover how He has us living His word . . . better than how we could understand Him and try to get ourselves to do His word.

 

[LoveofTruth]

I read through your introduction (carefully) and did not see where it says who can determine if someone is being led by the Holy Spirit in their interpretation of Scripture, or is not being led by the Holy Spirit? And how do they receive the authority to do so?

As from Fhansen post # 840, we see and now know what we, as members of the Catholic Church believe.

So, since I could not find it in your lengthy three part introduction, could you please enlighten us in your own words, from a Protestant perspective, say in two or three sentences, who has the authority to determine if someone is being led by the Holy Spirit in their interpretation of Scripture, or is not being led by the Holy Spirit?

And could you please follow-up your answer with, how does this person, persons, or entity receive the authority to do so?

Thank You!

Just a part of it

- The primary rule of God is by His Spirit working in us to make us perfect.
- The work of God in the body of believers and the gifts in ministry to each other to perfect the saints
- The Holy scriptures which are able to make us perfect through faith which is in Christ Jesus.

All these work together to make us perfect.


ajso Gid gives prophets to judge as well

we have the personal witness of the Spirit, the witness of the church “everyone included not some special pastors alone or apostles) and we have the witness of the Spirit in the scriptures and confirmation by the brothers and sisters.
Yes there can still be while groups that are led away if they do not allow the freedom of every part in the body to discuss teach question etc

but this is God’s way.
There definitely is no apostolic succession or anything like that in scripture as I see.

 

[Fidelibus]

Just a part of it

- The primary rule of God is by His Spirit working in us to make us perfect.
- The work of God in the body of believers and the gifts in ministry to each other to perfect the saints
- The Holy scriptures which are able to make us perfect through faith which is in Christ Jesus.

All these work together to make us perfect.

Hmmm... with the exception of those whose interpretations "you" believe are not being led by the Holy Spirit like you stated in post # 838, right?

All false doctrine comes from those who are not led by the Spirit either in the original understanding or the interpretation.

ajso Gid gives prophets to judge as well
we have the personal witness of the Spirit, the witness of the church “everyone included not some special pastors alone or apostles) and we have the witness of the Spirit in the scriptures and confirmation by the brothers and sisters.

So far, I have yet to see you answer my two questions. So, again I will ask, Who or what entity among all the different Protestant denominations or sects in todays world has the authority to determine who's interpretation of Scripture is being led by the Holy Spirit and who's is not? The leaders of your church? The leaders of the Protestant church down the street? You? And how do they receive this authority to do so?

Yes there can still be while groups that are led away if they do not allow the freedom of every part in the body to discuss teach question etc.

Again, who or what entity within all of Protestantism has the authority to decide what groups are being "led away", and how do they receive the authority to do so?

but this is God’s way.

Are you absolutely and 100% sure of that? What if some other person or group disagrees with you, and claims you are not being led by the Holy Spirit, but being led away, how would you respond?

There definitely is no apostolic succession or anything like that in scripture as I see.

I disagree. I would be more than happy to post Scripture passages that show other wise if you'd like.

 

[Daniel Marsh]

Yet you quoted Scripture to provide evidence for you OP.

Sola Scriptura according to the Reformers meant Holy Scriptures are the only infallible rule to test truth claims.

The rule of faith is based on scripture.

 

[Fidelibus]

The rule of faith is based on scripture.

Could you please show us the book, chapter, and verse were the bible states this?

And please, before you post that 2 Tim. 16-17 claiming Scripture is sufficient as a rule of faith, under close examination of these verses in context shows that they don't claim that at all; they only claims Scripture is “profitable” (Greek: ophelimos), that is, helpful. Notice that the passage nowhere even hints that Scripture is “sufficient”—which is, unfortunately, exactly what Protestants think the passage means.

 

[Danthemailman]

2 Timothy 3:16 - All scripture (plus what? plus nothing) is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness.

The rule of faith and practice is scripture (God's Word) alone.

 

[rturner76]

2 Timothy 3:16 - All scripture (plus what? plus nothing) is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness.

The rule of faith and practice is scripture (God's Word) alone.

So what did they follow the 400 years before there was a Bible? Scripture and Apostolic tradition.

 

[Fidelibus]

2 Timothy 3:16 - All scripture (plus what? plus nothing) is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness.

The rule of faith and practice is scripture (God's Word) alone.

No where in that passage does it say "Scripture alone."

So I would suggest not altering God's written word to fit your beliefs.

 

[rturner76]

No where in that passage does it say "Scripture alone."

So I would suggest not altering God's written word to fit your beliefs.

Why not... as a protestant, if you don't like a doctrine, just change it.

 

[concretecamper]

2 Timothy 3:16 - All scripture (plus what? plus nothing) is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness.

This

DOES NOT MEAN

this

The rule of faith and practice is scripture (God's Word) alone.

 

[Fervent]

So what did they follow the 400 years before there was a Bible? Scripture and Apostolic tradition.

Apostolic tradition is what we call the New Testament. Those writings are the whole of it, there is no apostolic tradition besides what is in those pages.

 

[rturner76]

Apostolic tradition is what we call the New Testament. Those writings are the whole of it, there is no apostolic tradition besides what is in those pages.

Apostolic tradition preceded the Bible so it's still valid and reinforced by scripture. I believe in scripture and tradition, which does not contradict the Bible but is reinforced by it.

 

[Fervent]

Apostolic tradition preceded the Bible so it's still valid and reinforced by scripture. I believe in scripture and tradition, which does not contradict the Bible but is reinforced by it.

I repeat, apostolic tradition is what has been codified as the New Testament. Catholic Tradition is more akin to the Jewish Halakah that the Pharisees pushed that Jesus routinely criticized.

 

[Eloy Craft]

The rule of faith is based on scripture.

Wouldn't Scripture be contingent on the rule of Faith?

 

[rturner76]

I repeat, apostolic tradition is what has been codified as the New Testament. Catholic Tradition is more akin to the Jewish Halakah that the Pharisees pushed that Jesus routinely criticized.

If that's what you think who is the 2000-year-old church to argue? Tradition is valid according to my religion. If it's not in yours that's your business. I go with the Apostles in what is called "Apostolic Succession" Passed down from the Apostles to the Catholic Church in an unbroken line of succession from bishop to bishop to today. I don't know which one of the thousands of Protestant churches you belong to but that's the new "improved" way. I stick with the ancients.

 

[Fervent]

If that's what you think who is the 2000-year-old church to argue? Tradition is valid according to my religion. If it's not in yours that's your business. I go with the Apostles in what is called "Apostolic Succession" Passed down from the Apostles to the Catholic Church in an unbroken line of succession from bishop to bishop to today. I don't know which one of the thousands of Protestant churches you belong to but that's the new "improved" way. I stick with the ancients.

As I'm sure the leaders in Jesus day would have told him of their Rabbinic tradition, and as Jews today say of the "oral torah." Same old story from "religious" men.

 

[rturner76]

As I'm sure the leaders in Jesus day would have told him of their Rabbinic tradition, and as Jews today say of the "oral torah." Same old story from "religious" men.

Good, then go with God in one of the thousands of denominations available. I'll stick with the Apostolic Succession. It's been in place for over 2000 years so.....

 

[Fervent]

Good, then go with God in one of the thousands of denominations available. I'll stick with the Apostolic Succession. It's been in place for over 2000 years so.....

Best historical evidence says otherwise, but you go on believing myths perpetrated by men grasping at power.