Posted on 12/26/2011 6:08:22 PM PST by rzman21
‘Sola scrptura’ is a misnomer. Those who claim to subscribe to it also claim a voice in their head tells them the accurate interpretation.
Sola Scriptura is not correct. You cannot be saved by scripture, no matter how much of it you read.
Sola Fides.
Feed anyone today?
/johnny
Actually, I’m against “anti- Scriptura,” which describes much of Catholicism teaching.
So you reject the Holy Spirit?
I sincerely thank you for sharing all this excellent information. My prayers are that you read it all with an open mind and pray for your inner guidance to guide you to the truth within it. However, also read the opposing viewpoints with the same open , critical mind. We do not need to convince others of a truth in order to accept it ourselves. If we feel that need, it most likely is a very weak truth and should be examined more thoroughly.
Actually, I’m against “anti- Scriptura,” which describes much of Catholicism teaching.
>>Funny ad hominem attack.
I’m a convert, so I started from the other POV. My family still is Protestant. I’ve gotten used to having to defend my faith to them.
Maybe you should look up the definition of “ad hominem” before you try to use it.
Faith through grace is the beginning of justification and not the end.
As Luther said we are saved by faith alone, but faith that is alone is not faith.
If “sola scriptura” were actually words in the Bible, then I would be more open to the idea of it being credible.
Salvation is closer from the Word, than from the Church.
I accept that the Holy Spirit operates over time and collectively to those who best understand.
Yes because a book written by a man inspired by God, needs to be interpreted by a man so he can write another book because another man is too ignorant to understand it himself.
Never mind that the Word tells us we are each responsible for knowing the book.
Looks like the comment was directed at the schola, not the hominem.
But I'm sure you knew that... You did study latin in grade school, right?
/johnny
His point is that, rather than attack what you percieve to be Catholic teachings, you should defend sola scriptura, if you believe in it.
best article i have ever read explaining the illogic that is sola scriptura.
Which part? The part written in Hebrew? Or the part written in Aramaic?
Wait... it wasn't written in latin...
/johnny
"What [we] perceive to be Catholic teaching" isn't the issue; Catholic teaching is plainly stated in the Catechism. Does this need further translation and clarification?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.