Skip to comments.Beating Private Judgment’s Dead Horse
Posted on 05/06/2011 1:28:46 PM PDT by NYer
OK, I admit it. I’m into this topic right now (see, in the past week, this and that). I had another exchange with a Protestant who believes that the meaning of Scripture is fairly plain, and—since Christ promised he would send the Holy Spirit to lead us into all truth (Jn 16:13)—then with a little application and study, we can decide rightly what the Word of God means all by ourselves.
This is a common theory, and I haven’t been able to make any headway with my correspondent in raising the question of how we handle disagreements among those who are equally empowered by the Holy Spirit. Among other comments, he offers this clearly sincere paragraph:
If I cannot assert what scripture means then why study it and find its meaning? I have good warrant to prefer my understandings of Scripture because mine are based on my study of the Word and I took the time to learn the meanings. I did not get them from some institution that has bias built into its structures of teaching. God forbid that the RCC change a teaching since they can never be wrong by definition.
Well, I won’t keep you. But today I’m simply wondering which of the following is easier to believe:
I know, I know, it’s a tough one.
You guys have failed miserably when it comes to showing or telling us what that oral tradition is that was passed on down from the Apostles to your religion...
Not a single excerpt...Therefore, it doesn't exist...You have a two legged stool...And it keeps falling over...
It seems Roman epologists always talk in theories and hypotheticals. Self-declaring infalibilty, certainty, tradition, while ignoring any details. Offcourse, these grandiose claims are meant to impress, but "the devils in the details".
Romanists cannot deliver ANY apostolic tradition/doctrine, NOT found in scripture.
Infalibility, a self proclaimed attribute, mostly used to elevate Marian doctrine and a handful of biblical verses, the rest of scripture being open to interpretation by all (as long as it does not conflict with existing doctrine). All grand self-crowned titles, giving comfort to those who decide to trust Rome, instead of the Scriptures.
I wouldn't expect anyone with such obviously limited capabilities to understand.
So where is sola scriptura found in scripture?
When one does not have all the facts and/or resources can one really make a sound judgment?
John 21: (We'll be using the KJV today to keep things on even footing): "And there are also many other things which Jesus did, the which, if they should be written every one, I suppose that even the world itself could not contain the books that should be written. Amen."
The Bible Itself declares that it doesn't contain everything.
Protestatnts tend to look at this as just a confrontation, but it was actually the first Council (magisterium included--although is was not named as such) in the Bible.
It is the Decision of the Holy Spirit and Us
.On the Council of Jerusalem...(Catholic Caucus)
A Timeline of Catholic Church history, 1-500 A.D. (includes Councils, Canon of the Bible)
MAJOR COUNCILS OF THE CHURCH - 1st Council of Nicaea - 325 A.D. (1st in a series)
MAJOR COUNCILS OF THE CHURCH - 1st Council of Constantinople - 381 A.D. (2nd in a series)
MAJOR CHURCH COUNCILS - The Council Of Chalcedon - 451 A.D.
But the Bible says it contains everything pertinent to our Salvation...It was written so that we can know we have eternal life, right now...
There apparently is a reason Jesus felt we had enough information with what He gave us...No where did Jesus suggest that some group later on would be able to add to what Jesus did and certainly not to any thing that He taught...
And the fact that you guys don't have any thing at all in the way of 'handed down tradition' pretty much proves nothing was left that Jesus intended we should know...
And it ended when the words of God were committed to writing...Those things were hashed out and we have the written record...
There is no room nor authority for more councils...A prayerful study of the scriptures on this side of the veil of the Catholic religion can reveal that to you...
That's all you got, eh???
So where does Jesus mention anything extra scriptural to determine doctrine binding upon the church?
Do you mean Act 15, council in JERUSALEM, presided over by JAMES?
This table is adapted from White, From Jesus to Christianity. Note that the matching of Paul's travels in the Acts and the travels in his Epistles is done for the reader's convenience and is not approved of by all scholars.