Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Religion and Spirituality > Christianity
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Closed Thread Start New Thread
 
Old 01-07-2009, 10:40 AM
 
8,989 posts, read 14,563,768 times
Reputation: 753

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by billb7581 View Post
Nowhere does it say ONLY scriputre is useful for teaching righteousness.
It is pretty much self explanatory, anything else is subjective. You say it's from the Holy Spirit? under what authority? How do you even know it's the right spirit and why should I believe you.

 
Old 01-07-2009, 10:45 AM
 
8,989 posts, read 14,563,768 times
Reputation: 753
Quote:
Originally Posted by billb7581 View Post
And Luther added the word "Alone" to Romans 3:28. It is nowhere to be found in the original Greek texts.

So basically you solo fide/ solo scriptura guys are worshiping Luther and not the original idea passed down from the Church fathers.
Nice twist but NO! Sola scriptura is a term to present an argument against unbiblical, extra-biblical and/or anti-biblical doctrines. The only way to know for sure what God expects of us is to stay true to what we know He has revealed – the Bible. We can know, beyond the shadow of any doubt, that Scripture is true, authoritative, and reliable. The same cannot be said of tradition.
 
Old 01-07-2009, 12:52 PM
 
1,000 posts, read 3,602,311 times
Reputation: 264
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fundamentalist View Post
Nice twist but NO! Sola scriptura is a term to present an argument against unbiblical, extra-biblical and/or anti-biblical doctrines. The only way to know for sure what God expects of us is to stay true to what we know He has revealed – the Bible. We can know, beyond the shadow of any doubt, that Scripture is true, authoritative, and reliable. The same cannot be said of tradition.
Prove that the Bible was intended to be the sole rule of faith. The Bible makes no such claim—in fact, it denies it (1 Cor. 11:2, 2 Thess. 2:15, 2 Tim. 2:2, 2 Pet. 1:20, 3:15-16)

It was the Church that formed the Bible, not the Bible that formed the Church. Note, too, that the New Testament wasn’t designed as a catechism. It was written to people who were already Christians, so it couldn’t have been intended as the sole source of religious teaching. In the early years, teaching was oral and was under the authority of the Church, which also decided which books belonged in the Bible and which did not.


Fundies think they take their beliefs straight from the Bible; in fact, the Bible is used to substantiate already-held beliefs. They begin with their own "tradition," which is generally their pastor’s interpretation of the Bible.
 
Old 01-07-2009, 12:54 PM
 
1,000 posts, read 3,602,311 times
Reputation: 264
It is highly unlikely that people who were writing when the Church was young and memories of Christ were vivid would erroneously report what beliefs the Church started with. If early Christian writers took it for granted that a sacrificial priesthood was set up by Christ (which they did), that fact is a powerful argument in support of the priesthood. If writers living a few years after Christ mentioned the Real Presence (which they did), that argues in favor of the Catholic interpretation of John 6. And so on.
 
Old 01-07-2009, 01:50 PM
 
8,989 posts, read 14,563,768 times
Reputation: 753
Quote:
Originally Posted by billb7581 View Post
Prove that the Bible was intended to be the sole rule of faith. The Bible makes no such claim—in fact, it denies it (1 Cor. 11:2, 2 Thess. 2:15, 2 Tim. 2:2, 2 Pet. 1:20, 3:15-16)
IT IS THE ONLY AUTHORITY THAN CAN NOT BE UNADULTERATED OR PERVERTED.
Quote:
It was the Church that formed the Bible, not the Bible that formed the Church. Note, too, that the New Testament wasn’t designed as a catechism. It was written to people who were already Christians, so it couldn’t have been intended as the sole source of religious teaching. In the early years, teaching was oral and was under the authority of the Church, which also decided which books belonged in the Bible and which did not.
You see I don't buy that historical. I hear the same from my Muslim father in law. I take (2 Timothy 3:16) "16 All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness...." very seriously. If God of the bible can design the universe, the planets and its creation in intricate form. I am sure that he can get all His words in a tiny little book.

Quote:
Fundies think they take their beliefs straight from the Bible; in fact, the Bible is used to substantiate already-held beliefs. They begin with their own "tradition," which is generally their pastor’s interpretation of the Bible.
As long as that pastor is doctrinally sound, then I am all for tradition!, we don't wait for a mere, fallible man who has the audacity to take on the name, "Holy Father" what he believes.

We have rejected many, many, many catholic traditions that we did not see in scripture and we accepted a few that we did.
Scripture’s authority is universal; because it is God’s Word, it is His authority. The fact that Scripture was not readily available, or that people could not read it, does not change the fact that Scripture is God’s Word.
 
Old 01-07-2009, 01:59 PM
 
Location: The Woods
18,356 posts, read 26,489,954 times
Reputation: 11350
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fundamentalist View Post
Nice twist but NO! Sola scriptura is a term to present an argument against unbiblical, extra-biblical and/or anti-biblical doctrines. The only way to know for sure what God expects of us is to stay true to what we know He has revealed – the Bible. We can know, beyond the shadow of any doubt, that Scripture is true, authoritative, and reliable. The same cannot be said of tradition.
Considering how many sects there are which claim their doctrines are based on the Bible, I'd say interpreting scripture is very subjective.

And what scripture? The original complete Bible? Or the Protestant Bible? Luther removed several books because they did not agree with his own views. He even at one point removed Revelations (but it was eventually included by Protestants).
 
Old 01-07-2009, 02:05 PM
 
8,989 posts, read 14,563,768 times
Reputation: 753
Quote:
Originally Posted by arctichomesteader View Post
Considering how many sects there are which claim their doctrines are based on the Bible, I'd say interpreting scripture is very subjective.

And what scripture? The original complete Bible? Or the Protestant Bible? Luther removed several books because they did not agree with his own views. He even at one point removed Revelations (but it was eventually included by Protestants).
If someone wants to raise their hands in worship, or speak in tongues. I may not see it or agree with it but I will not fight over it because it's a nonessential. I believe God intended that because He allows it but if a church preaches heresy like Jesus is not the only way then I can see a problem since it is not supported in scripture. Other than unbiblical salvation I see no subjective issues.
 
Old 01-07-2009, 02:45 PM
 
63,799 posts, read 40,068,856 times
Reputation: 7870
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fundamentalist View Post
Sola scriptura means that Scripture alone is authoritative for the faith and practice of the Christian. The Bible is complete, authoritative, and true. The Word of God is the ONLY authority for the Christian faith.

(2 Timothy 3:16) "16 All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness...."

Scripture is useful . . . but you always leave out certain aspects of how we are to use it and for what purpose. Using just your favorite Timothy chapter,

2 Timothy 3:10 (King James Version)

10But thou hast fully known my doctrine, manner of life, purpose, faith, longsuffering, charity, patience,

14But continue thou in the things which thou hast learned and hast been assured of, knowing of whom thou hast learned them;

16All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:

17That the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works.


You cannot just read the words without "knowing" what Jesus was like and making it fit his unconditional love and acceptance . . . despite the primitive concepts and context within which the "inspirations" were presented. (I notice you always drop off the "perfect" goal . . . concerned about that, are we? Not really consistent with mere believing . . . is it?)
 
Old 01-07-2009, 02:48 PM
 
8,989 posts, read 14,563,768 times
Reputation: 753
Quote:
Originally Posted by MysticPhD View Post
Scripture is useful . . . but you always leave out certain aspects of how we are to use it and for what purpose. Using just your favorite Timothy chapter,

2 Timothy 3:10 (King James Version)

10But thou hast fully known my doctrine, manner of life, purpose, faith, longsuffering, charity, patience,

14But continue thou in the things which thou hast learned and hast been assured of, knowing of whom thou hast learned them;

16All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:

17That the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works.


You cannot just read the words without "knowing" what Jesus was like and making it fit his unconditional love and acceptance . . . despite the primitive concepts and context within which the "inspirations" were presented. (I notice you always drop off the "perfect" goal . . . concerned about that, are we? Not really consistent with mere believing . . . is it?)

The ironic part about people who don't agree with solas scriptura is that they use scripture to prove it to be a fallacy
 
Old 01-08-2009, 03:33 PM
 
1,000 posts, read 3,602,311 times
Reputation: 264
I ask you, How did the early believers become Christians? How did they save their souls? It certainly was not by reading the Bible because there was no New Testament. It was not until 397 A.D., under the guidance of the Holy Spirit, at the Council of Carthage, that the Catholic Church finally agreed on which writings should be part of the New Testament.

The strange thing about Sola Scriptura, those who claim that every word in the Holy Bible is the infallible word of God, they fail to affirm that God commissioned the Catholic Church, no other Church, to compile the Holy Bible. It was the Catholic Church that produced the Bible. It was not the Bible that produced the Church.

Now if faith is only obtained by reading the Holy Bible (Sola Scriptura) in order to be saved, than salvation comes from the invention of the printing press. Before the middle of the 1400's, the Holy Bible was hand-written. Very few persons owned a copy of it. Every Christian family did not own a Holy Bible. Nor could many parishes afford to buy one.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Closed Thread


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Religion and Spirituality > Christianity
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top