Guest Legion Posted October 8, 2003 Share Posted October 8, 2003 Blaze, I hate to tell you but "faith alone" is in the Bible... James 2:24 You must perceive that a person is justified by his works and not by FAITH ALONE. GOD BLESS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
foundsheep Posted October 8, 2003 Share Posted October 8, 2003 Blaze, I hate to tell you but "faith alone" is in the Bible... James 2:24 You must perceive that a person is justified by his works and not by FAITH ALONE. GOD BLESS ??????????????where did that Come From??????????? Faith alone is in there but the verse is saying you must have works, whats that got to do with sola scriptura-bible alone? :huh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trooper4DaHolyG Posted October 8, 2003 Share Posted October 8, 2003 John 8:31-32 31 ..."If you abide in My word, you are My disciples inDouche... 32 And you shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free. Hebrews 4:12 12 ... the word of God is living and powerful, and sharper than any two-edged sword, piercing even to the division of soul and spirit, and of joints and marrow, and is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart. Col 3:16-17 16 Let the word of Christ dwell in you richly in all wisdom, teaching and admonishing one another in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, singing with grace in your hearts to the Lord. 17 And whatever you do in word or deed, do all in the name of the Lord Jesus, giving thanks to God the Father through Him. Also if Jesus is the Word, and Jesus is your role moded, your God and your saviour. How can Sola Scriptura be proven wrong? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ICTHUS Posted October 8, 2003 Share Posted October 8, 2003 Those verses do nothing for Sola Scriptura. They simply prove that the Word of God is, in fact, the Word of God, and powerful. Catholics agree. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trooper4DaHolyG Posted October 8, 2003 Share Posted October 8, 2003 Sola Scriptura and Sola Fidelity to do not clash against biblical teaching as they form a Kingdom Culture... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trooper4DaHolyG Posted October 8, 2003 Share Posted October 8, 2003 Wasn't Augustine a firm believer in Sola Fidelity (100% Faith) and also a teacher of Sola Scriptura? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trooper4DaHolyG Posted October 8, 2003 Share Posted October 8, 2003 (edited) oops! double posted! :lol: Edited October 8, 2003 by Trooper4DaHolyG Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Katholikos Posted October 8, 2003 Share Posted October 8, 2003 Wasn't Augustine a firm believer in Sola Fidelity (100% Faith) and also a teacher of Sola Scriptura? No. Definitely, emphatically no. Sola Scriptura (Scripture Alone) is one of several myths that sprang full blown from the mind and pen of Martin Luther in the 16th century. (Sola Fide and OSAS are among the others, but those are separate subjects.) History puts the lie to Sola Scriptura. The Catholic Church was nearly 400 years old when she canonized and formed the Bible. The Bible as we know it did not exist before then. The early Christians did not learn their Faith from a book, but from the dynamic teaching Church founded by Christ which, at the close of the fourth century and beginning of the fifth, collected and canonized 73 writings (out of about 200) and put them together in a single volume and called it "ta Biblia" (the books). But most Protestants are disconnected from the history of the Bible and the history of the Catholic Church and early Christianity. I know. I used to be one. I thought the Bible fell out of heaven in the leather bound, red-letter edition :^). When a Catholic and a Protestant say "Bible," they're talking about different books. A Protestant's Bible consists of only 66 writings ('books') -- the ones which Martin Luther accepted. A Catholic's Bible has 73 books -- the ones canonized by the Catholic bishops when they originally formed the Bible (St. Augustine was among them!). Martin Luther threw part of the OT on the trash heap because those writings conflicted with the novel doctrines of his so-called Reformation. He taught a new Gospel -- contrary to the admonitions of Scripture. "But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach [to you] a gospel other than the one that we preached to you, let that one be accursed!" Galatians 1:8 RSV. Well it wasn't an angel, but the opposite that preached a different gospel -- and his name was Martin Luther. Protestants have Luther to thank for their incomplete Bible. Pray for his poor soul. He's probably going to be in Purgatory until the end of time, with a millstone hung around his neck (Mt 18:6, Mk 9:42, Lk 17:2). The Catholic Church didn't say this, I did! Likos Ex-Southern Baptist, ex-agnostic, ex-atheist, ecstatic to be Catholic! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trooper4DaHolyG Posted October 8, 2003 Share Posted October 8, 2003 Protestants have Luther to thank for their incomplete Bible. Pray for his poor soul. He's probably going to be in Purgatory until the end of time, with a millstone hung around his neck (Mt 18:6, Mk 9:42, Lk 17:2). The Catholic Church didn't say this, I did! that sux man, you had good post going there till you said that. Totally unnecessary! Your prayer attempt was more of a joke then anything, how can you wish that one someone. It's dam straight ludicrous. I found this: CHAP. 3.--OF THE AUTHORITY OF THE CANONICAL SCRIPTURES COMPOSED BY THE DIVINE SPIRIT. This Mediator, having spoken what He judged sufficient first by the prophets, then by His own lips, and afterwards by the apostles, has besides produced the Scripture which is called canonical, which has paramount authority, and to which we yield assent in all matters of which we ought not to be ignorant, and yet cannot know of ourselves. For if we attain the knowledge of present objects by the testimony of our own senses,(3) whether internal or external, then, regarding objects remote from our own senses, we need others to bring their testimony, since we cannot know them by our own, and we credit the persons to whom the objects have been or are sensibly present. Accordingly, as in the case of visible objects which we have not seen, we trust those who have, (and likewise with all sensible objects,) so in the case of things which are perceived 4 by the mind and spirit, i.e., which are remote from our own interior sense, it behoves us to trust those who have seen them set in that incorporeal light, or abidingly contemplate them. hope you understand it I got the general drift its writings from St Augustine.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cmotherofpirl Posted October 8, 2003 Share Posted October 8, 2003 Augustine also accepted all the writings of the Church FAthers as Sacred Tradition with equal authority to the Bible. Do you? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Legion Posted October 8, 2003 Share Posted October 8, 2003 :huh: :ph34r: I need an icon that shows I want to bury my head in the sand. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cmotherofpirl Posted October 8, 2003 Share Posted October 8, 2003 Sola Scriptura and Sola Fidelity to do not clash against biblical teaching as they form a Kingdom Culture... sola scriptura is not biblical Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anna Posted October 8, 2003 Share Posted October 8, 2003 (edited) that sux man, you had good post going there till you said that. Totally unnecessary! No post that begins with "sux" has much to offer. I've said it before, and will repeat that "sux" is a vulgarity which doesn't belong on this phorum, much less coming out of the mouth and heart of any Christian. ok? Your prayer attempt was more of a joke then anything, how can you wish that one someone. It's dam straight ludicrous.The best any charitable, intelligent Catholic can hope for Luther is Purgatory; the place where he is assured entry into heaven once his sins are purged. The alternative would be hell. Doubtful that he received direct entry into heaven, but one never knows! I found this: CHAP. 3.--OF THE AUTHORITY OF THE CANONICAL SCRIPTURES COMPOSED BY THE DIVINE SPIRIT. This Mediator, having spoken what He judged sufficient first by the prophets, then by His own lips, and afterwards by the apostles, has besides produced the Scripture which is called canonical, which has paramount authority, and to which we yield assent in all matters of which we ought not to be ignorant, and yet cannot know of ourselves. For if we attain the knowledge of present objects by the testimony of our own senses,(3) whether internal or external, then, regarding objects remote from our own senses, we need others to bring their testimony, since we cannot know them by our own, and we credit the persons to whom the objects have been or are sensibly present. Accordingly, as in the case of visible objects which we have not seen, we trust those who have, (and likewise with all sensible objects,) so in the case of things which are perceived 4 by the mind and spirit, i.e., which are remote from our own interior sense, it behoves us to trust those who have seen them set in that incorporeal light, or abidingly contemplate them. Trooper, Here is a little history lesson for you: Augustine was the Catholic Bishop of Hippo. He was ordained a priest in 391 and consecrated bishop of Hippo in 396. The canons of Scripture to which he was referring were the 73 books known as the Catholic Bible. The Canon of Scripture was settled by a local Council in Rome (382), then reaffirmed at councils in Hippo (393) and Carthage (397 and 419). The Canon was also reaffirmed by Pope Innocent I in 405 in a correspondence with the Bishop of Toulouse. This same canon was again (implicitly) affirmed at the Second Council of Nicaea (787)which approved the decrees of the second Council of Carthage (419). Luther declared several of these books "apocrypha" or "uninspired" some 1200 years later, after 1500 years of Christians believed the Truths they contain. hope you understand it I got the general drift its writings from St Augustine.... I doubt that you need to worry about Likos misunderstanding history, or Augustine. And I doubt that you got Augustine's drift. Seems you missed his message entirely. Edited October 8, 2003 by Anna Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BLAZEr Posted October 8, 2003 Author Share Posted October 8, 2003 I found this: CHAP. 3.--OF THE AUTHORITY OF THE CANONICAL SCRIPTURES COMPOSED BY THE DIVINE SPIRIT. This Mediator, having spoken what He judged sufficient first by the prophets, then by His own lips, and afterwards by the apostles, has besides produced the Scripture which is called canonical, which has paramount authority, and to which we yield assent in all matters of which we ought not to be ignorant, and yet cannot know of ourselves. For if we attain the knowledge of present objects by the testimony of our own senses,(3) whether internal or external, then, regarding objects remote from our own senses, we need others to bring their testimony, since we cannot know them by our own, and we credit the persons to whom the objects have been or are sensibly present. Accordingly, as in the case of visible objects which we have not seen, we trust those who have, (and likewise with all sensible objects,) so in the case of things which are perceived 4 by the mind and spirit, i.e., which are remote from our own interior sense, it behoves us to trust those who have seen them set in that incorporeal light, or abidingly contemplate them. hope you understand it I got the general drift its writings from St Augustine.... I think the thing to take Note of here Trooper is that Augustine is pointing out that IN ADDITION to the Apostolic teaching that was being done by himself and the other Bishops and priests, that the Church had the Scriptures as an authoritative way to understand Christ's teachings. The Bible is the Word of God, as you say in your other posts. We believe this. However, we also Believe that the Tradition is the Word of God as well. That the WORD being Christ, is authoritatively revealed by the Tradition and the Scriptures. That's where the skinny's at. The intention of this post was to get to the heart of a logical inconsistency: Protestants believe that the Scriptures ALONE (Sola Scriptura) are the way to understand what Christ taught. If you believe this, then you have to show how this is a Scriptural Teaching . . . otherwise you are basing your understanding on a human tradition, not a Tradition handed down by the Apostles in their Teaching or Writings (Apostolic Tradition and Scripture) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nippy316 Posted October 8, 2003 Share Posted October 8, 2003 Blaze, I hate to tell you but "faith alone" is in the Bible... James 2:24 You must perceive that a person is justified by his works and not by FAITH ALONE. GOD BLESS If that wasn't sarcastic that made no sense. I'll assume it was sarcastic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now