Sola Scriptora

[Fiosh]

Instead of defining sola scriptura as the only means for inspiration, let us define it to mean the Bible is the final authority on all theological matters.

That is the only way you can have a true debate.

Well, SJ, that's not exactly the same debate. While I do not hold to "sola Scriptura", I DO agree that in the case of a conflict the Bible IS the final authority.

The issue is... what about those things that are not made clear in the Bible.

If you adhere to that then you cannot believe in the sacred tradition that the Roman Catholic church presents

Sure I can. Tradition is not in conflict with Sacred Scripture.

[Guest shiloh357]

Instead of defining sola scriptura as the only means for inspiration, let us define it to mean the Bible is the final authority on all theological matters.

That is the only way you can have a true debate.

Well, SJ, that's not exactly the same debate. While I do not hold to "sola Scriptura", I DO agree that in the case of a conflict the Bible IS the final authority.

The issue is... what about those things that are not made clear in the Bible.

If you adhere to that then you cannot believe in the sacred tradition that the Roman Catholic church presents

Sure I can. Tradition is not in conflict with Sacred Scripture.

Bull Corn. I can site all kinds of things Catholic that fly in the face of Scripture.

[Fiosh]

Instead of defining sola scriptura as the only means for inspiration, let us define it to mean the Bible is the final authority on all theological matters.

That is the only way you can have a true debate.

Well, SJ, that's not exactly the same debate. While I do not hold to "sola Scriptura", I DO agree that in the case of a conflict the Bible IS the final authority.

The issue is... what about those things that are not made clear in the Bible.

If you adhere to that then you cannot believe in the sacred tradition that the Roman Catholic church presents

Sure I can. Tradition is not in conflict with Sacred Scripture.

Bull Corn. I can site all kinds of things Catholic that fly in the face of Scripture.

In your opinion.

[Guest shiloh357]

We can start with the way that the Catholic Church omits the second commandment against graven images in their acceptance of the Augustinian rendition of ten commandments.

[Fiosh]

We can start with the way that the Catholic Church omits the second commandment against graven images in their acceptance of the Augustinian rendition of ten commandments.

Uh, not sure where you got that idea.

from the CCC:

PART THREE

LIFE IN CHRIST

SECTION TWO

THE TEN COMMANDMENTS

CHAPTER ONE

"YOU SHALL LOVE THE LORD YOUR GOD WITH ALL YOUR HEART, AND WITH ALL YOUR SOUL, AND WITH ALL YOUR MIND"

ARTICLE 1

THE FIRST COMMANDMENT

I am the LORD your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage. You shall have no other gods before me. You shall not make for yourself a graven image, or any likeness of anything that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth; you shall not bow down to them or serve them.3

It is written: "You shall worship the Lord your God and him only shall you serve."4

I. "YOU SHALL WORSHIP THE LORD YOUR GOD AND HIM ONLY SHALL YOU SERVE"

[apothanein kerdos]

Perpetual virginity of Mary (heos sets a limit, meaning that something was done "until"...in essence, Joseph kept Mary a virgin UNTIL Jesus was born...this is the literal meaning of the Greek...also don't forget that Paul, as well as the Old Testament, states that sex is what consumates a marriage AND is the marrital duty of man and wife, thus if Mary witheld sex from Joseph [and she wasn't commanded to] then she sinned by violating the purpose of marriage)) as well as her being declared without sin (for ALL have sinned). Papl authority is not set in scriputre and, if anything, authority is within councils, not the Pope. Even if we buy that we need a Pope, in the New Testament it is James who Peter reports to at the councils, thus James would have been the first Pope. The Bible declares that all of us are saints to the Lord and thus having to be labeled a "saint' by the church takes that authority from the Lord and places it within men.

"Sacred" tradition slaps the fact of the Bible.

[Fiosh]

Shiloh,

You continue to misinterpret one solitary verse. We have given you numerous verses that demonstrate the command to hold fast to oral Tradition.

Again, I agree that the Bible is the inspired word of God. I agree it equips us for good works. But oral tradition guides us in how we should live out the teachings.

It still comes down to this. If you believe "sola Scriptura", especially combined with no church structure, you must rely on your own interpretation of Scripture. And, friend, that just don't work. That much is painfully obvious.

Peace,

Fiosh

[apothanein kerdos]

Nice try, but you failed Fiosh. Instead of responding to what was actually put forth, you gave a wrong interpretation of oral tradition and likewise created a straw man.

For one, oral tradition does not tell us how to live out scripture but actually dictates theology and is the only supportive element in its reasoning. It is circular because the only justification we have for oral tradition is oral tradition. It creates the theology that the Pope is the "father" of the church, that Mary is sinless, that there is purgatory, etc. Oral tradition is more than a "guideline to living", it is what establishes core theology in the Roman Catholic church.

Likewise, I am not uncomfortable trusting my interpretation of scripture...I speak Greek and will soon be learning Hebrew...why shouldn't I trust my own interpretation?

[Fiosh]

Perpetual virginity of Mary (heos sets a limit, meaning that something was done "until"...in essence, Joseph kept Mary a virgin UNTIL Jesus was born...this is the literal meaning of the Greek...also don't forget that Paul, as well as the Old Testament, states that sex is what consumates a marriage AND is the marrital duty of man and wife, thus if Mary witheld sex from Joseph [and she wasn't commanded to] then she sinned by violating the purpose of marriage)) as well as her being declared without sin (for ALL have sinned). Papl authority is not set in scriputre and, if anything, authority is within councils, not the Pope. Even if we buy that we need a Pope, in the New Testament it is James who Peter reports to at the councils, thus James would have been the first Pope. The Bible declares that all of us are saints to the Lord and thus having to be labeled a "saint' by the church takes that authority from the Lord and places it within men.

"Sacred" tradition slaps the fact of the Bible.

Sorry, wrong again.

The Church does not "make" saints. The Church merely recognizes saints. And gives the glory to God for giving us models of faith, by His Grace, that we may imitate. The RCC does recognize that we are all called "saints". However, it holds up those holy men and women who have lead a life of submission to God, often suffering and/or dying for their faith. We are fully aware that there are innumerable "unrecognized" saints.

Re: Mary

It is your interpretation of the word "until" that is limited. If you check all the usages in Scripture it does not necessarily mean an action or state ends at that point.

RE: Virgin Mary

That's another thread

Re: Peter & James & the Pope

Start another thread; I don't want to go off on a tangent. Not "side-stepping". It is a whole other debate.

[Guest shiloh357]

Shiloh,

You continue to misinterpret one solitary verse. We have given you numerous verses that demonstrate the command to hold fast to oral Tradition.

Again, I agree that the Bible is the inspired word of God. I agree it equips us for good works. But oral tradition guides us in how we should live out the teachings.

It still comes down to this. If you believe "sola Scriptura", especially combined with no church structure, you must rely on your own interpretation of Scripture. And, friend, that just don't work. That much is painfully obvious.

Peace,

Fiosh

You use those verses to create a false dichotomy between supposed "oral tradition" and Scripture.

The Bible completely equips us for good works according the Paul. If it completely equips us then there is no need for your traditions. Your traditions come centuries after the Scriptures. Because I believe in Sola Scriptura I don't have to depend on a Magesterium to tell me what to believe.

The problem here is that you are trying to equate Catholic "oral tradition" with Paul's use of the word "traditions" in2 Thessalonians. You are trying to read, not merely oral traditions, but specifically Catholic oral traditions into that verse.