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.
How do you know for sure that the "oral traditions" weren't subsequently included in the bible from the time of the writing of that scripure to the time the bible was finally made official. If such "oral traditions" were left as nothing more than mere "oral traditions", it's either because they weren't that important enough to be recorded in black and white, or that they were completely overlooked !!
What on earth do you mean - Sola Scriptura isn't taught in the Bible?
Sola Scriptura IS the Bible. Luther probably made the right decision that time to get away from pagan traditions that went against God's Word.
Fine, you believe whatever you want to believe .....
Hey am I the one here to asking you to defend your beliefs ? .....
It's inconsistent to attack the beliefs of that very Catholic Church that gave all of us the Bible -- I would argue of course that the Catholic Church of 400 AD is the same Church of 2009AD
SS also implies nobody is bound to any interpretation but their own since all "churches" and any "traditions" are fallible
[SIZE=3]If you believe that as truth, then the Bible pretty much confirms that the Devil is a world maker. He obviously can create physical and material things. . Christ didn’t tell the Devil you’re lying because only God the Jehovah is the only creator. Who knows then if this world might have been created by the Devil also? However, why the Jehovah is telling everyone “I am the maker the only maker and creator” someone must have gotten their facts wrong. [/SIZE]
Satan was not saying "I created all of this", he was saying, "I'm in charge of all this." (notice that he showed Jesus all the kingdoms of the world, which involves power, pride, pomp, lifting yourself above others, being in charge)
(This is from the account in Luke, Amplified Bible) - 5Then the devil took Him up to a high mountain and showed Him all the kingdoms of the habitable world in a moment of time [[c]in the twinkling of an eye]. 6And he said to Him, To You I will give all this power and authority and their glory (all their magnificence, excellence, preeminence, dignity, and grace), for it has been turned over to me, and I give it to whomever I will
So the reason Jesus didn't say, "You're lying" is because it was true....when man sinned and fell from perfect fellowship with God, who had given dominion over the earth to man, it was given into Satan's hands, until Christ comes and destroys him and takes it back.
You may not agree with all that, but at least you can see that what you thought it was saying is not what it was saying.....even without my explanation anyone can see that Satan was not saying "I created the world."
It's inconsistent to attack the beliefs of that very Catholic Church that gave all of us the Bible -- I would argue of course that the Catholic Church of 400 AD is the same Church of 2009AD
Of course …. It’s the same old “one true church” . Always ... what’s there to doubt? .. After all, in this forum alone, many of the threads and messages posted by your own disgruntled brethren confirm that ….. big time !!! ….
Quote:
Originally Posted by billb7581
SS also implies nobody is bound to any interpretation but their own since all "churches" and any "traditions" are fallible
You are partly right …. But you know what, it’s also through Christian forums like this that we clear up misunderstandings and misinterpretations of the Bible, which I’ve been guilty of myself !
But then again, being the fallible humans all of us are, not everyone can be pleased and corrected all the time.
In this forum, I don’t even know for sure who are the real Christians, catholics, cultists, atheists, agnostic, or even God-haters! Everyone is imposing their own views and interpretation of the bible and it get really pretty confusing at times !!! ....
Quote:
Originally Posted by DNick
We mean, that NO WHERE in the bible, does it say to use Only the bible. So there for, the bible does NOT teach Sola Scriptura.
The bible clearly says we are not to add to or subtract from God’s Word :-
Deuteronomy 4:2
"Do not add to what I command you and do not subtract from it, but keep the commands of the LORD your God that I give you."
Proverbs 30:6
"Do not add to his words, or he will rebuke you and prove you a liar."
Revelations 22:18,19
"I warn everyone who hears the words of the prophecy of this book: If anyone adds anything to them, God will add to him the plagues described in this book. And if anyone takes words away from this book of prophecy, God will take away from him his share in the tree of life and in the holy city, which are described in this book."
Quote:
Originally Posted by DNick
How can Sola Scriptura be the bible? Sola Scriptura is just a concept, not something tangible like the bible.
In case you haven’t noticed, the word “bible” isn’t found anywhere in the bible too, but you guys still believe in it and accept it, don’t you?
At least the word “scripture” is found in the bible no less than 53 times – from which “Sola Scriptura” is derived !!!
Quote:
Originally Posted by billb7581
Not only that, it was a concept made up 1500 years after the fact.
Of the 12 apostles, only Matthew, John and Peter wrote anything, did the rest of them not do their job LOL. ?
Even Peter has this to say about Paul’s writings :-
2 Peter 3:16
"He [Paul] writes the same way in all his letters, speaking in them of these matters. His letters contain some things that are hard to understand, which ignorant and unstable people distort, as they do the other Scriptures, to their own destruction."
Besides, this is what Jesus Himself said :-
Luke 24:44
Now He said to them, "These are My words which I spoke to you while I was still with you, that all things which are written about Me in the Law of Moses and the Prophets and the Psalms must be fulfilled."
Notice what is missing from this endorsement. Missing is the apocrypha -- those books known as the Deutero-canonicals. They were not considered to be a part of the Word of God. Jesus, who quoted from every section of Old Testament Scripture, never once quoted from the apocrypha. Neither did any of His disciples.
In order to use sola scriptura you have to first identify what the scriptures are, and since you are unable to do this from scripture alone, at some point you have to appeal to things outside of scripture to make the case for sola scriptura.
The very act of doing this he undermines this case. There is no way for you to escape the canon of tradition
Paul does not write scripture is the pillar and bulwark of truth. Paul writes : "If I am delayed, you may know how one ought to behave in the household of God, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and bulwark of the truth." 1 Timothy 3:15. If as Protestantism charges, Catholicism went into error on doctrinal matters, then Paul made a mistake in calling the church the pillar and bulwark of truth. Notice, it does not say pillar of truth only as long as it teaches scripture.
I doubt anybody on this forum, was given the bible, was told, all you need to know is in here, No one is allowed to tell you anything about the bible. You have to come with everything on your own. No people were taught. NO BODY uses Sola Scriptura, they all use the Bible & Tradition. They're tradition is just a lot more recent.
I am confused now. I was making a general point about why we have differences regarding biblical interpretation that's based on so many factors, especially if a person was raised up in a religious organization. Now if you are referrring to people who just study or read the bible on their own without any religous influence, then all I can say about them is that, they are influenced simply by their own interpretation simply from reading the bible without any relgious study aides or commentaries. In terms of traditon is just a lot more recent. My religion has been around at least since the reformation, as well as several other denominations.
I am confused now. I was making a general point about why we have differences regarding biblical interpretation that's based on so many factors, especially if a person was raised up in a religious organization. Now if you are referrring to people who just study or read the bible on their own without any religous influence, then all I can say about them is that, they are influenced simply by their own interpretation simply from reading the bible without any relgious study aides or commentaries. In terms of traditon is just a lot more recent. My religion has been around at least since the reformation, as well as several other denominations.
The point is this. No one on this forum came up with their beliefs by simply reading scripture. They all, had someone to help them, whether a parents, friend, or just a spiritual mentor. Their beliefs come from a tradition of that belief. Tradition, is what dictates HOW we interrupt the bible. Without it, who knows what people would believe. If we sent a bible to some alien planet who knew nothing of earth, other than how to read our language, it is VERY unlikely that they would come up some of the basic christian beliefs, such as the trinity. Would they believe Jesus was God? Who knows. But it is through tradition, we believe what they believe. So through this, it makes Sola Scriptura invalid, and nearly impossible to actually practice.
In order to use sola scriptura you have to first identify what the scriptures are, and since you are unable to do this from scripture alone, at some point you have to appeal to things outside of scripture to make the case for sola scriptura. The very act of doing this he undermines this case. There is no way for you to escape the canon of tradition
Hadn’t Luther already done that for us, like centuries ago? – retaining what conformed with scripture and rejecting others that did not – using canon of tradition I believe … which was how Sola Scriptura evolved!
Quote:
Originally Posted by billb7581
Paul does not write scripture is the pillar and bulwark of truth. Paul writes : "If I am delayed, you may know how one ought to behave in the household of God, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and bulwark of the truth." 1 Timothy 3:15. If as Protestantism charges, Catholicism went into error on doctrinal matters, then Paul made a mistake in calling the church the pillar and bulwark of truth. Notice, it does not say pillar of truth only as long as it teaches scripture.
It does not say pillar of truth as long as it teaches scripture AND Catholic traditions either. TRUTH is found in scripture, not in traditions.
What makes you think that “the church of the living God” referred to here is about the Roman Catholic Church? Just look at the state it has gotten into today …. As much as I hate to have to say this, and as much as you hate to have to see the truth, the “one true church” is no longer the “one true church” it was supposed to be!!!
Church means “body of believers” , “family of believers” or “household of God”– it says right there in the scripture. It does NOT mean Roman Catholic Church. And the universal Catholic Church is NOT the same as the Roman Catholic Church.
Quote:
Originally Posted by DNick
The point is this. No one on this forum came up with their beliefs by simply reading scripture. They all, had someone to help them, whether a parents, friend, or just a spiritual mentor.
I beg to differ. Not only do I know of many other people who became believers in Christ simply by reading the bible themselves, but yours truly (me, myself and I) is a perfect living testimony of this !
Quote:
Originally Posted by DNick
If we sent a bible to some alien planet who knew nothing of earth, other than how to read our language, it is VERY unlikely that they would come up some of the basic christian beliefs, such as the trinity. Would they believe Jesus was God? Who knows.
I absolutely, completely and vehemently DISAGREE with you.
Not only am I a living testimony of someone that became a strong believer of the Word simply by reading and studying it on my own AND I even heard the AUDIBLE voice of God pointing me to exact scripture verses, but also I know of many other people too. This is what Hebrews 4:12 precisely talks about :-
Hebrews 4:12
For the word of God is living and active. Sharper than any double-edged sword, it penetrates even to dividing soul and spirit, joints and marrow; it judges the thoughts and attitudes of the heart.
Even if hypothetically speaking your above assumption is true, you are trying to say that tradition = teaching. So what’s wrong with that? Teaching of the scripture is perfectly biblical – nothing unbiblical or extra-biblical about that !! Perhaps this is the “oral traditions” Paul is talking about in 2 Thess 2:15.
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.
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.
