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.
Am I supposed to follow the "T"raditions of one church above the "T"raditions of others and find them credible? Are they subject to error?
Sister, there is only one scripture. All Christians agree with the 27 books of the NT and all of the books of the OT (some with variations). There is little discrepancy. However, there is a very large discrepancy between the "T"radition of the churches that use "T"radition plus scripture.
The same argument that you are attempting to make against the sole authority of the scripture is even worse when we apply the same premises of your syllogism to "T"raditions. There is no record of comparison. No bar. No source of objective proof to compare.
Jesus Christ is the norm.
The sole norm.
He is the Head of the Church.
Two problems I see:
1. SS uses a text about and not the actual revelation as its supreme authority.
Jesus Christ is the Revelation of God, our supreme authority. Christ gave us His own true, real, living, eternal Body, the Church. Christ wrote no words, except what he wrote in the dust with the adulterous woman.
2. SS is not authorized as sole rule in the Church for such. SS does not satisfy that which has been believed everywhere, always, and by all.
So what's the ultimate rule or measure of a doctrine? The Church that claims authority? Or the commands of God?
This entire paragraph is based on a strawman representation of what the Catholic and the Orthodox churches believe.To say that a church is 100% divine with no errors is unparalleled simply because it is composed of errant men. The scriptures, as originally rendered, are 100% inerrant. The origin is divine. The mechanism of writing is divine (even if men wrote the words). One can not say the same thing of any church since all churches have erred. Also, one can not say the same thing about councils since councils have erred. But this is probably a discussion for another thread. lol
So what's the ultimate rule or measure of a doctrine? The Church that claims authority? Or the commands of God?
So you are saying that no existing text is the divine text ?
I am saying that we have copies of the divine text which is falsifiable using in comparisons with the extant manuscripts.
So only the writers of the divine Scripture, that no longer exists in any form (as God was not able to preserve this special thing), are capable of agreeing with God.
You have scripture because God was able to preserve it. One only has to look at the historical peril of the scriptures to understand that we have them because He wills it.
We're back in the same boat.
Not really.
The divine Scripture does not exist, God was not able to preserve it, or one of the existing texts is a copy of the divine Scripture, but we don't know which one.
We have them sister. We always have. What we do not have is a set of "T"raditions that agree with each other. We can not even quantify or qualify existing "T"raditions. I hear arguments from many here that justify their "T"raditions with scripture but do not consider scripture to be the authority by which their "T"raditions can be justified by. In practice individual "T"raditions have become the authority by which to judge scripture. Just because "my" church believes so is not an argument for their "T"radition's authority.
I am saying that we have copies of the divine text which is falsifiable using in comparisons with the extant manuscripts.
Which extant manuscripts (which is the issue here).
Which of extant manuscript variationsYou have scripture because God was able to preserve it. One only has to look at the historical peril of the scriptures to understand that we have them because He wills it.
is the one that God preserved ?
We have them sister. We always have. What we do not have is a set of "T"raditions that agree with each other. We can not even quantify or qualify existing "T"raditions. I hear arguments from many here that justify their "T"raditions with scripture but do not consider scripture to be the authority by which their "T"raditions can be justified by. In practice individual "T"raditions have become the authority by which to judge scripture. Just because "my" church believes so is not an argument for their "T"radition's authority.
With apologies to CaliforniaJosiah - back to the subject of the thread, which is not which "T"raditions, but Sola Scriptura.
Which of the extant variants is the divine text preserved by God ?
This entire paragraph is based on a strawman representation of what the Catholic and the Orthodox churches believe.
We do not believe the Church is inherently 'free of error' in all regards -- we believe it is free of error but only in the regards of proclaiming doctrine concerning faith and morals.
The difference between these two churches is that the Catholic Church believes that infallible teachings are proclaimed through ecumenical councils by all of the bishops in communion with each other (Matthew 18) as well as from the seat of Peter by the successor of his office in certain circumstances (Matthew 16), while the Orthodox church believes this infallible capacity was only given in the former case and not the latter.
Members of the Church are capable of erring.
You are familiar with the term "straw man," right?
Of course we refer to Scripture, and of course Scripture is extraordinarily important.
In fact, in my experience discussing Sola Scriptura here, it is often the conclusion of Sola Scriptura adherents that to deny SS as defined means that one does not value Scripture.
It is an either/or dichotimizing - it seems to be a way of thinking among SS adherents that refutes any sense of moderation (its Scripture is the thing or nothing) and the reality that Christianity is a way of living.
What of Christ, what of worship, what of faith, what of the spiritual struggle, the spiritual life, what of prayer, what of what was received, and more ?
All these need to be ignored in order to posit the "Scripture only or nothing"; imo, this is symptomatic of "textism".
"And we impart this in words not taught by human wisdom but taught by the Spirit, interpreting spiritual truths to those who are spiritual.
Even in the verse you cite from Paul, it is clear that it is in the "power energized" that is the core. And indeed, here he undermines the role of human wisdom to refocus them on what is received from God. Is what is received from God only a text which we intellectually analyze, without the living ? Can we understand this text through intellect alone ? Perhaps, but then we risk by full resort to the intellect that the heart of the Scripture is not known (and recall that 'rightly divide' indicates to cut through to the heart as it were).
Is this a sort of mysticism, to say that there are 5 "alones" ?
This is a very thoughtful contribution here! I just want to point out that in my very non-RC non-EO little Church, just last week the Pastor preached very simply that to ask God what to do when you haven't been doing what He's already clearly shown you to do is ... frustrating the Grace of God, the Holy Spirit, and Pastoral efforts. So this aspect of rightly dividing is very much alive and well among those who embrace Scripture rather than Tradition!
And while some may not agree, I think think Jesus speaks very succinctly to this point here:
John 7:17 If any man will do his will, he shall know of the doctrine,"
Which extant manuscripts (which is the issue here).
Which of extant manuscript variations
is the one that God preserved ?
With apologies to CaliforniaJosiah - back to the subject of the thread, which is not which "T"raditions, but Sola Scriptura.
And the ecumenical councils have erred in the past so the argument is moot.
From "On Not Three Goods; To Ablabius",
I don't know that for sure. Which councils erred, and in which ways?And the ecumenical councils have erred in the past so the argument is moot.
I don't believe that it is right because it agrees with itself. I believe it is right because the Church Jesus founded must have existed since the time of the Apostles, and churches such as the Lutheran and Anglican churches cannot effectively make this claim.Secondly, your church believes to be right so you believe that it is right because it agrees with itself.
Each church has its own tradition, yes. But only one Church can have Holy Tradition, as handed down by the Apostles themselves. Such Tradition can only be found in the Church that Christ established on the day of Pentecost. Remember, the Church is the pillar and support of the truth. If the church you belong to was not founded in Pentecost (such as the Lutheran or Anglican churches, or any other churches that have appeared only since after the second millenium) then you better look for the Church that was.Your church's "T"raditions do not agree with the EO's "T"raditions nor do they agree with the Anglican "T"raditions or with the OO "T"raditions, etc, etc, ad infinitum. There are no set of "T"raditions that agree with each other nor is there even a mechanism by which to compare each. One has to simply rely on the statement that their individual "T"raditions are the correct ones.
You based that entire paragraph I previously cited on the notion of a church that is 100% free of error. The Catholic Church and the Orthodox church do not teach that the Church Christ founded would be 100% free of error. Read the very sentence you posted:To make a strawman argument one must misrepresent the argument posed by the opponent. I have done no such thing.
We do not say that the Church is "100% divine with no errors."To say that a church is 100% divine with no errors is unparalleled
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?