True2Ourselves
Already a member? login
Divider
Divider
Divider
Divider
Divider
Divider
Divider
Divider
Divider
Divider
Divider
Divider
  
+
Register FAQ A-Z directory Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

True2Ourselves Forums   > Community Topics > Theology  > The Rule of Scripture ("Sola Scriptura")

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 03-12-2011, 10:11 AM
Josiah
 
Posts: n/a
Default The Rule of Scripture ("Sola Scriptura")

.



The Rule of Scripture in norming (What Luther and Calvin called "Sola Scriptura")



The Definition:


The Rule of Scripture is the practice of embracing Scripture as the rule ("straight edge") - canon ("measuring stick") norma normans (the norm that norms) as it is called in epistemology, as we examine and evaluate the positions (especially doctrines) among us.


Here is the official, historic definition: "The Scriptures are and should remain the sole rule in the norming of all doctrine among us" (Lutheran Formula of Concord, Solid Declaration, Rule and Norm, 9). "We pledge ourselves to the prophetic and apostolic writings of the Old and New Testaments as the pure and clear fountain of Israel, which is the only true norm according to which all teachers and teachings are to be judged" (ditto, 3).






What it IS:

1. An embrace of accountability for the doctrines among us (especially those in dispute).

2. An embrace of norming (the process of examining positions for truth, correctness, validity).

3. An embrace of Scripture as the best, most sound rule/canon/norma normans for this process.


What it is NOT:

1. A teaching that all revelation or truth is found in Scripture. It's not a teaching at all, it is the PRACTICE of using Scripture as the rule in the norming of doctrines. Scripture itself says that "the heavens declare the glory of God" but our visual reception of the stars is not used as the norma normans for the evaluation of doctrines among us in the practice of Sola Scriptura.

2. A teaching that Scripture is "finished." It's not a teaching at all. While probably all that practice Sola Scripture agree with all others that God seems to have inscribed His last book around 100 AD and doens't seem to be adding any more books, the Rule of Scripture was just as "valid" in 1400 BC when Scripture consisted of just two stone tablets as it is today - only the corpus of Scripture is larger, that has no impact on the practice of embracing it as the rule/canon/norma normans in our evaluation of doctrines among us. The Rule of Scripture embraces the Scripture that is.

3. Hermeneutics. The Rule of Scripture has to do with WHAT is the most sound rule/canon/norma normans for the evaluation of the doctrines among us, it is not a hermeneutical principle. Obviously that Scripture needs to be interpreted, but that's a different subject or another day and thread. The Rule of Scripture has to do with norming, not interpreting.

4. Arbitration. Obviously, some process of determining whether the doctrine under review "measures up" (arbitration) to the "measuring stick" (the canon). This is also beyond the scope here, the Rule of Scripture is the embrace of Scripture AS that canon, it does not address the issue of HOW it is best determined if a position "measures up" to that canon.




An illustration:


Let's say Dave and Fred are neighbors. They decided that they will hire a contractor to build a brick wall on their property line, six feet tall. Dave and Fred hire Bob the Builder. He agrees to build the wall on the property line - six feet tall.

Bob is now done. He claims the wall is six feet tall. Does it matter? If it doesn't, if his work and claim are entirely MOOT - then, nope - truth doesn't matter. And can just ignore what he said and did. OR we can consider that of the nearly 7 billion people in the world, there is ONE who is incapable of being wrong about measurements - and that ONE is Bob the Builder, claims ONE - Bob the Builder. IF Bob the Builder alone is right about what he alone claims about he alone here, it's pretty much a waste of time to wonder if what he said about this is true or not. But, IF truth matters and IF Bob the Builder will permit accountability (perhaps because he is confident the wall IS six feet tall), then we have the issue of accountability: Is the wall what we desire and what Bob the Builder claims it is?

If so, we just embraced norming. Norming is the process of determining correctness of the positions among us. For example, Bob claiming the wall is 6 feet tall. Is that correct? Addressing that question is norming.


Norming typically involves a norm: WHAT will serve as the rule (straight edge) or canon (measuring stick) - WHAT will be embraced by all parties involved in the normative process that is the reliable standard, the plumbline. Perhaps in the case of Fred and Dave, they embrace a standard Sears Measuring Tape. They both have one, Bob does too. Dave, Fred and Bob consider their carpenter's Sears Measuring Tape as reliable for this purpose, it's OBJECTIVE (all 3 men can read the numbers), it's UNALTERABLE (none of the 3 can change what the tape says) and it's OUTSIDE and ABOVE and BEYOND all 3 parties. Using that could be called "The Rule of the Measuring Tape." The Sears Measuring Tape would be the "canon" (the word means 'measuring stick') for this normative process.



Why Scripture?

In epistemology (regardless of discipline), the most sound norma normans is usually regarded as the most objective, most knowable by all and alterable by none, the most universally embraced by all parties as reliable for this purpose. My degree is in physics. Our norma normans is math and repeatable, objective, laborative evidence. Me saying, "what I think is the norm for what I think" will be instantly disregarded as evidential since it's both moot and circular. I would need to evidence and substantiate my view with a norm fully OUTSIDE and ABOVE and BEYOND me - something objective and knowable.

This is what The Handbook of the Catholic Faith proclaims (page136), "The Bible is the very words of God and no greater assurance of credence can be given. The Bible was inspired by God. Exactly what does that mean? It means that God Himself is the Author of the Bible. God inspired the penmen to write as He wished.... the authority of the Bible flows directly from the Author of the Bible who is God; it is authoritative because the Author is." Those that accept the Rule of Scripture tend to agree. It's embrace as the most sound Rule flows from our common embrace of Scripture as the inscriptured words of God for God is the ultimate authority.

The embrace of Scripture as the written words of God is among the most historic, ecumenical, universal embraces in all of Christianity. We see this as reliable, dependable, authoritative - it as a very, very, broad and deep embrace as such - typically among all parties involved in the evaluation. (See the illustration above).

It is knowable by all and alterable by none. We can all see the very words of Romans 3:25 for example, they are black letters on a white page - knowable! And they are unalterable. I can't change what is on the page in Romans 3:25, nor can any other; what is is.

It is regarded as authoritative and reliable. It is knowable by all and alterable by none. Those that reject the Rule of Scripture in norming ( the RCC and LDS, for example ) have no better alternative (something more inspired, more inerrant, more ecumenically/historically embraced by all parties, more objectively knowable, more unalterable), they have no alternative that is clearly more sound for this purpose among us.

To simply embrace the teachings of self (sometimes denominational "tradition" or "confession") as the rule/canon is simply self looking in the mirror at self - self almost always reveals self. In communist Cuba, Castro agrees with Castro - it has nothing whatsoever to do with whether Castro is correct. We need a Rule outside, beyond, above self.



Why do some so passionately reject it?


Those that reject the Rule of Scripture in norming tend to do so not because they reject Scripture or have an alternative that is MORE inerrant, MORE the inscripturated words of God, MORE reliable, MORE objectively knowable, MORE unalterable, MORE ecumenically embraced as authoriative. Rather the rejection tends to be because each rejects accountability (and thus norming and any norm in such) in the sole, singular, exclusive, particular, unique case of self alone. From The Handbook of the Catholic Faith (page 151), "When the Catholic is asked for the substantiation for his belief, the correct answer is: From the teaching authority. This authority consists of the bishops of The Catholic Church in connection with the Catholic Pope in Rome. The faithful are thus freed from the typically Protestant question of 'is it true' and instead rests in quiet confidence that whatever the Catholic Church teaches is the teaching of Jesus Himself since Jesus said, 'whoever hears you hears me'." The Catholic Church itself says in the Catechism of itself (#87): Mindful of Christ's words to his apostles: “He who hears you, hears me”, The faithful receive with docility the teachings and directives that their [Catholic] pastors give them in different forms." IF self declares that self is unaccountable and that self is exempt from the issue of truthfulness, then the entire issue of norming (and the embraced norma normans in such) becomes moot (for self). The issue has been changed from truth to power (claimed by self for self).



I hope that helps extend understanding of this praxis.



I humbly request that discussions of the praxis are in accord with the definition herein offered (it's useless to argue with what is not suggested). Thank you!



Pax



- Josiah







.

Last edited by Josiah : 03-12-2011 at 10:33 AM.
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 03-12-2011, 02:30 PM
Suspended for Review
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 6,856
Default Re: The Rule of Scripture ("Sola Scriptura")

Quote:
Originally Posted by Josiah View Post
.



The Rule of Scripture in norming (What Luther and Calvin called "Sola Scriptura")



The Definition:


The Rule of Scripture is the practice of embracing Scripture as the rule ("straight edge") - canon ("measuring stick") norma normans (the norm that norms) as it is called in epistemology, as we examine and evaluate the positions (especially doctrines) among us.


Here is the official, historic definition: "The Scriptures are and should remain the sole rule in the norming of all doctrine among us" (Lutheran Formula of Concord, Solid Declaration, Rule and Norm, 9). "We pledge ourselves to the prophetic and apostolic writings of the Old and New Testaments as the pure and clear fountain of Israel, which is the only true norm according to which all teachers and teachings are to be judged" (ditto, 3).






What it IS:

1. An embrace of accountability for the doctrines among us (especially those in dispute).

2. An embrace of norming (the process of examining positions for truth, correctness, validity).

3. An embrace of Scripture as the best, most sound rule/canon/norma normans for this process.


What it is NOT:

1. A teaching that all revelation or truth is found in Scripture. It's not a teaching at all, it is the PRACTICE of using Scripture as the rule in the norming of doctrines. Scripture itself says that "the heavens declare the glory of God" but our visual reception of the stars is not used as the norma normans for the evaluation of doctrines among us in the practice of Sola Scriptura.

2. A teaching that Scripture is "finished." It's not a teaching at all. While probably all that practice Sola Scripture agree with all others that God seems to have inscribed His last book around 100 AD and doens't seem to be adding any more books, the Rule of Scripture was just as "valid" in 1400 BC when Scripture consisted of just two stone tablets as it is today - only the corpus of Scripture is larger, that has no impact on the practice of embracing it as the rule/canon/norma normans in our evaluation of doctrines among us. The Rule of Scripture embraces the Scripture that is.

3. Hermeneutics. The Rule of Scripture has to do with WHAT is the most sound rule/canon/norma normans for the evaluation of the doctrines among us, it is not a hermeneutical principle. Obviously that Scripture needs to be interpreted, but that's a different subject or another day and thread. The Rule of Scripture has to do with norming, not interpreting.

4. Arbitration. Obviously, some process of determining whether the doctrine under review "measures up" (arbitration) to the "measuring stick" (the canon). This is also beyond the scope here, the Rule of Scripture is the embrace of Scripture AS that canon, it does not address the issue of HOW it is best determined if a position "measures up" to that canon.




An illustration:


Let's say Dave and Fred are neighbors. They decided that they will hire a contractor to build a brick wall on their property line, six feet tall. Dave and Fred hire Bob the Builder. He agrees to build the wall on the property line - six feet tall.

Bob is now done. He claims the wall is six feet tall. Does it matter? If it doesn't, if his work and claim are entirely MOOT - then, nope - truth doesn't matter. And can just ignore what he said and did. OR we can consider that of the nearly 7 billion people in the world, there is ONE who is incapable of being wrong about measurements - and that ONE is Bob the Builder, claims ONE - Bob the Builder. IF Bob the Builder alone is right about what he alone claims about he alone here, it's pretty much a waste of time to wonder if what he said about this is true or not. But, IF truth matters and IF Bob the Builder will permit accountability (perhaps because he is confident the wall IS six feet tall), then we have the issue of accountability: Is the wall what we desire and what Bob the Builder claims it is?

If so, we just embraced norming. Norming is the process of determining correctness of the positions among us. For example, Bob claiming the wall is 6 feet tall. Is that correct? Addressing that question is norming.


Norming typically involves a norm: WHAT will serve as the rule (straight edge) or canon (measuring stick) - WHAT will be embraced by all parties involved in the normative process that is the reliable standard, the plumbline. Perhaps in the case of Fred and Dave, they embrace a standard Sears Measuring Tape. They both have one, Bob does too. Dave, Fred and Bob consider their carpenter's Sears Measuring Tape as reliable for this purpose, it's OBJECTIVE (all 3 men can read the numbers), it's UNALTERABLE (none of the 3 can change what the tape says) and it's OUTSIDE and ABOVE and BEYOND all 3 parties. Using that could be called "The Rule of the Measuring Tape." The Sears Measuring Tape would be the "canon" (the word means 'measuring stick') for this normative process.



Why Scripture?

In epistemology (regardless of discipline), the most sound norma normans is usually regarded as the most objective, most knowable by all and alterable by none, the most universally embraced by all parties as reliable for this purpose. My degree is in physics. Our norma normans is math and repeatable, objective, laborative evidence. Me saying, "what I think is the norm for what I think" will be instantly disregarded as evidential since it's both moot and circular. I would need to evidence and substantiate my view with a norm fully OUTSIDE and ABOVE and BEYOND me - something objective and knowable.

This is what The Handbook of the Catholic Faith proclaims (page136), "The Bible is the very words of God and no greater assurance of credence can be given. The Bible was inspired by God. Exactly what does that mean? It means that God Himself is the Author of the Bible. God inspired the penmen to write as He wished.... the authority of the Bible flows directly from the Author of the Bible who is God; it is authoritative because the Author is." Those that accept the Rule of Scripture tend to agree. It's embrace as the most sound Rule flows from our common embrace of Scripture as the inscriptured words of God for God is the ultimate authority.

The embrace of Scripture as the written words of God is among the most historic, ecumenical, universal embraces in all of Christianity. We see this as reliable, dependable, authoritative - it as a very, very, broad and deep embrace as such - typically among all parties involved in the evaluation. (See the illustration above).

It is knowable by all and alterable by none. We can all see the very words of Romans 3:25 for example, they are black letters on a white page - knowable! And they are unalterable. I can't change what is on the page in Romans 3:25, nor can any other; what is is.

It is regarded as authoritative and reliable. It is knowable by all and alterable by none. Those that reject the Rule of Scripture in norming ( the RCC and LDS, for example ) have no better alternative (something more inspired, more inerrant, more ecumenically/historically embraced by all parties, more objectively knowable, more unalterable), they have no alternative that is clearly more sound for this purpose among us.

To simply embrace the teachings of self (sometimes denominational "tradition" or "confession") as the rule/canon is simply self looking in the mirror at self - self almost always reveals self. In communist Cuba, Castro agrees with Castro - it has nothing whatsoever to do with whether Castro is correct. We need a Rule outside, beyond, above self.



Why do some so passionately reject it?


Those that reject the Rule of Scripture in norming tend to do so not because they reject Scripture or have an alternative that is MORE inerrant, MORE the inscripturated words of God, MORE reliable, MORE objectively knowable, MORE unalterable, MORE ecumenically embraced as authoriative. Rather the rejection tends to be because each rejects accountability (and thus norming and any norm in such) in the sole, singular, exclusive, particular, unique case of self alone. From The Handbook of the Catholic Faith (page 151), "When the Catholic is asked for the substantiation for his belief, the correct answer is: From the teaching authority. This authority consists of the bishops of The Catholic Church in connection with the Catholic Pope in Rome. The faithful are thus freed from the typically Protestant question of 'is it true' and instead rests in quiet confidence that whatever the Catholic Church teaches is the teaching of Jesus Himself since Jesus said, 'whoever hears you hears me'." The Catholic Church itself says in the Catechism of itself (#87): Mindful of Christ's words to his apostles: He who hears you, hears me, The faithful receive with docility the teachings and directives that their [Catholic] pastors give them in different forms." IF self declares that self is unaccountable and that self is exempt from the issue of truthfulness, then the entire issue of norming (and the embraced norma normans in such) becomes moot (for self). The issue has been changed from truth to power (claimed by self for self).



I hope that helps extend understanding of this praxis.



I humbly request that discussions of the praxis are in accord with the definition herein offered (it's useless to argue with what is not suggested). Thank you!



Pax



- Josiah







.
I suspect from the Catholic perspective that the Bishops and Cardinals and priests or whoever got together, used the measuring stick to come to their conclusions in interpretation and the Pope places the seal of approval.
A true Catholic would adhere to these conclusions in interpretation.
If inspired by God then Amen.

If there is disagreement then form another body for interpretation. If that body is inspired by God then Amen to that.

Where that ends or begins or begins to end or ends to begin God only knows.
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 03-12-2011, 02:49 PM
Josiah
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: The Rule of Scripture ("Sola Scriptura")

Quote:
Originally Posted by CinderAsh View Post
I suspect from the Catholic perspective that the Bishops and Cardinals and priests or whoever got together, used the measuring stick to come to their conclusions in interpretation and the Pope places the seal of approval.
According to all my Catholic teachers, that would be VERY uncatholic and unacceptable... My Deacon would call that "Protestants hiding in the Church" and "the biggest threat to the Church ever."

From the Catholic perspective, The Catholic Church is not true because its teachings are true, the teachings are true because The Catholic Church is true. It's a matter of submitting to the power of The Catholic Church with quiet docility, not regarding its teachings as accountable and taking them to norming according to some norma normans outside itself.


But my purpose here is to understand the praxis....


Thank you very much!


Pax


- Josiah





.
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 03-13-2011, 04:36 PM
winsome's Avatar
Moderator
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 2,206
Default Re: The Rule of Scripture ("Sola Scriptura")

Quote:
Originally Posted by Josiah View Post
.

The Rule of Scripture in norming (What Luther and Calvin called "Sola Scriptura")
So you admit that Sola Scriptura was invented by men. It has no scriptural basis and is a tradition of men.

Thank you for confirming that


winsome.
__________________
It isn't learned talk that saves man or makes a saint of him; only a life well lived can claim God's friendship. (Thomas Kempis)
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 03-14-2011, 08:57 AM
Josiah
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: The Rule of Scripture ("Sola Scriptura")

Quote:
Originally Posted by winsome View Post
So you admit that Sola Scriptura was invented by men. It has no scriptural basis and is a tradition of men.

Thank you for confirming that
Evidently you didn't read the opening post. I invite you to do so!

No, I never said anyone "invented" anything. What I said is that Luther and Calvin CALLED this "Sola Scriptura." If I called my mother, "Mary" that doesn't mean I invented her.





.
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 03-14-2011, 09:30 AM
winsome's Avatar
Moderator
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 2,206
Default Re: The Rule of Scripture ("Sola Scriptura")

Quote:
Originally Posted by Josiah View Post
Evidently you didn't read the opening post. I invite you to do so!

No, I never said anyone "invented" anything. What I said is that Luther and Calvin CALLED this "Sola Scriptura." If I called my mother, "Mary" that doesn't mean I invented her.


.
Yes they invented it.

Sola Scriptura is NOT in the Bible. You showed in your post who invented it:


Quote:
Originally Posted by Josiah View Post
Here is the official, historic definition: "The Scriptures are and should remain the sole rule in the norming of all doctrine among us" (Lutheran Formula of Concord, Solid Declaration, Rule and Norm, 9). "We pledge ourselves to the prophetic and apostolic writings of the Old and New Testaments as the pure and clear fountain of Israel, which is the only true norm according to which all teachers and teachings are to be judged" (ditto, 3).
You see it was invented by the Lutherans and you admitted it.

You quoted from Lutheran documents to define it. NOWHERE in scripture is
Sola Scriptura defined, nor is the Lutheran Concorde in scripture - NOWHERE. Its an invention of man.

Thank you for proving my point.


winsome
__________________
It isn't learned talk that saves man or makes a saint of him; only a life well lived can claim God's friendship. (Thomas Kempis)
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 03-14-2011, 09:40 AM
Josiah
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: The Rule of Scripture ("Sola Scriptura")

Quote:
Originally Posted by winsome View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by Josiah

Evidently you didn't read the opening post. I invite you to do so!

No, I never said anyone "invented" anything. What I said is that Luther and Calvin CALLED this "Sola Scriptura." If I called my mother, "Mary" that doesn't mean I invented her.

Yes they invented it.
No, I did not say that Luther or Calvin "invented" anything.

I invite you to actually READ the opening post. Read the words. I think if you do, it will help you enormously and your misconceptions and misrepresentations will perhaps end.





Quote:
Sola Scriptura is NOT in the Bible.
It's exampled all over the place, from the moment Scripture first appeared. When Moses came down with the first Scripture, did he announce: "This is nothing, we should all look to the infallible, unaccountable, authoritative Voice of God - the Roman Catholic Church? No. Those Scriptures were normative for the issues therein addressed.


I think that the practice of Sola Scriptura is well illustrated by the Bible, especially vis-a-vis the Sola Ecclesia Roma of the RC denomination. We can list for you EVERY SINGLE ONE of the Scriptures that even mention the Catholic denomination or the Magisterium thereof, the Bishop of Rome or any particular sucessor thereto, or the Infallible Pope - for anything, as anything, in any regard whatsoever:

Here's the entire list, OT and NT:





Yup, nothing.




Now, let us compare that list with the the instances when Jesus and the Apostles used the Rule of Scripture: NOTE: THIS IS ONLY A PARTIAL LISTING AND JUST FROM THE NT - space will not permit a full listing.

Matt 21:42
Matt 22:29
Matt 26:54
Matt 26:56
Matt 2:5
Matt 4:4
Matt 4:6
Matt 4:7
Matt 4:10
Matt 11:10
Matt 21:13
Matt 26:24
Matt 27:37

Mark 12:10
Mark 12:24
Mark 14:49
Mark 15:28
Mark 1:2
Mark 7:6
Mark 9:12
Mark 9:13
Mark 11:17
Mark 14:21
Mark 14:27

Luke 4:21
Luke 24:27
Luke 24:32
Luke 24:45
Luke 2:23
Luke 3:4
Luke 4:4
Luke 4:8
Luke 4:10
Luke 4:17
Luke 7:27
Luke 10:26
Luke 18:31
Luke 19:46
Luke 20:17
Luke 21:22
Luke 22:37
Luke 23:38
Luke 24:44
Luke 24:46


John 2:22
John 5:39
John 7:38
John 7:42
John 10:35
John 13:18
John 17:12
John 19:24
John 19:36
John 19:37
John 20:9
John 2:17
John 6:31
John 6:45
John 8:17
John 10:34
John 12:14
John 12:16
John 15:25
John 19:20
John 20:30
John 20:31
John 21:25

Acts 1:16
Acts 8:32
Acts 8:35
Acts 17:2
Acts 17:11
Acts 8:24
Acts 18:28
Acts 1:29
Acts 7:42
Acts 13:29
Acts 13:33
Acts 15:15
Acts 23:5
Acts 24:14
Acts 13:46

Romans 1:2
Romans 4:3
Romans 10:11
Romans 11:2
Romans 15:4
Romans 26:26
Romans 1:17
Romans 2:24
Romans 3:4
Romans 3:10
Romans 4:17
Romans 4:23
Romans 8:36
Romans 9:13
Romans 10:15
Romans 11:8
Romans 11:26
Romans 12:19
Romans 14:11
Romans 15:3
Romans 15:9
Romans 15:21

1 Cor. 15:3
1 Cor. 15:4
1 Cor. 1:19
1 Cor 1:31
1 Cor. 2:9
1 Cor. 3:19
1 Cor. 4:6
1 Cor. 9:9
1 Cor. 9;10
1 Cor. 10:7
1 Cor. 10:10
1 Cor. 14:22
1 Cor. 15:45
1 Cor. 15: 54

2 Cor. 4:13
2 Cor. 8:15
2 Cor. 9:9

Gal. 3:8
Gal. 3:22
Gal. 4:30
Gal. 3:10
Gal. 3:13
Gal. 4:22
Gal. 4:27

1 Tim 5:18

2 Tim 3:16

James 2:8
James 2:23
James 4:5

1 Peter 2:6
1 Peter 1:16

2 Peter 1:20
2 Peter 3:16

There are many, many more, but I hope the point is made as to which Rule is illustrated in the Bible. It seems significant to me.






Quote:
You see it was invented by the Lutherans and you admitted it.
I invite you to READ the opening post. Read the words. I think if you do, it will help you enormously and your misconceptions and misrepresentations will perhaps end.



Quote:
You quoted from Lutheran documents to define it.
Yes. If I quoted a dictionary to define the word "God" would that mean that the dictionary invented God? I don't know if you are purposely being silly to make some point that I'm just missing or what....






.

Last edited by Josiah : 03-14-2011 at 09:49 AM.
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 03-14-2011, 09:53 AM
winsome's Avatar
Moderator
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 2,206
Default Re: The Rule of Scripture ("Sola Scriptura")

Quote:
Originally Posted by Josiah View Post
No, I did not say that Luther or Calvin "invented" anything.

I invite you to actually READ the opening post. Read the words. I think if you do, it will help you enormously and your misconceptions and misrepresentations will perhaps end.












I invite you to READ the opening post. Read the words. I think if you do, it will help you enormously and your misconceptions and misrepresentations will perhaps end.





Yes. If I quoted a dictionary to define the word "God" would that mean that the dictionary invented God? I don't know if you are purposely being silly to make some point that I'm just missing or what....






.

I did read the opening post. I quoted from it.

The point is that Sola Scriptura is not in the Bible. It is an invention of men. If it is in the Bible show me the chapter and verse.

You are avoiding the point I was making because you have no answer.


It clearly is not scriptural.
It's a tradition of men and the bible condemns such traditions.

winsome
__________________
It isn't learned talk that saves man or makes a saint of him; only a life well lived can claim God's friendship. (Thomas Kempis)
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 03-14-2011, 09:55 AM
winsome's Avatar
Moderator
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 2,206
Default Re: The Rule of Scripture ("Sola Scriptura")

Quote:
Originally Posted by Josiah View Post
No, I did not say that Luther or Calvin "invented" anything.

I invite you to actually READ the opening post. Read the words. I think if you do, it will help you enormously and your misconceptions and misrepresentations will perhaps end.







It's exampled all over the place, from the moment Scripture first appeared. When Moses came down with the first Scripture, did he announce: "This is nothing, we should all look to the infallible, unaccountable, authoritative Voice of God - the Roman Catholic Church? No. Those Scriptures were normative for the issues therein addressed.


I think that the practice of Sola Scriptura is well illustrated by the Bible, especially vis-a-vis the Sola Ecclesia Roma of the RC denomination. We can list for you EVERY SINGLE ONE of the Scriptures that even mention the Catholic denomination or the Magisterium thereof, the Bishop of Rome or any particular sucessor thereto, or the Infallible Pope - for anything, as anything, in any regard whatsoever:

Here's the entire list, OT and NT:





Yup, nothing.




Now, let us compare that list with the the instances when Jesus and the Apostles used the Rule of Scripture: NOTE: THIS IS ONLY A PARTIAL LISTING AND JUST FROM THE NT - space will not permit a full listing.

Matt 21:42
Matt 22:29
Matt 26:54
Matt 26:56
Matt 2:5
Matt 4:4
Matt 4:6
Matt 4:7
Matt 4:10
Matt 11:10
Matt 21:13
Matt 26:24
Matt 27:37

Mark 12:10
Mark 12:24
Mark 14:49
Mark 15:28
Mark 1:2
Mark 7:6
Mark 9:12
Mark 9:13
Mark 11:17
Mark 14:21
Mark 14:27

Luke 4:21
Luke 24:27
Luke 24:32
Luke 24:45
Luke 2:23
Luke 3:4
Luke 4:4
Luke 4:8
Luke 4:10
Luke 4:17
Luke 7:27
Luke 10:26
Luke 18:31
Luke 19:46
Luke 20:17
Luke 21:22
Luke 22:37
Luke 23:38
Luke 24:44
Luke 24:46


John 2:22
John 5:39
John 7:38
John 7:42
John 10:35
John 13:18
John 17:12
John 19:24
John 19:36
John 19:37
John 20:9
John 2:17
John 6:31
John 6:45
John 8:17
John 10:34
John 12:14
John 12:16
John 15:25
John 19:20
John 20:30
John 20:31
John 21:25

Acts 1:16
Acts 8:32
Acts 8:35
Acts 17:2
Acts 17:11
Acts 8:24
Acts 18:28
Acts 1:29
Acts 7:42
Acts 13:29
Acts 13:33
Acts 15:15
Acts 23:5
Acts 24:14
Acts 13:46

Romans 1:2
Romans 4:3
Romans 10:11
Romans 11:2
Romans 15:4
Romans 26:26
Romans 1:17
Romans 2:24
Romans 3:4
Romans 3:10
Romans 4:17
Romans 4:23
Romans 8:36
Romans 9:13
Romans 10:15
Romans 11:8
Romans 11:26
Romans 12:19
Romans 14:11
Romans 15:3
Romans 15:9
Romans 15:21

1 Cor. 15:3
1 Cor. 15:4
1 Cor. 1:19
1 Cor 1:31
1 Cor. 2:9
1 Cor. 3:19
1 Cor. 4:6
1 Cor. 9:9
1 Cor. 9;10
1 Cor. 10:7
1 Cor. 10:10
1 Cor. 14:22
1 Cor. 15:45
1 Cor. 15: 54

2 Cor. 4:13
2 Cor. 8:15
2 Cor. 9:9

Gal. 3:8
Gal. 3:22
Gal. 4:30
Gal. 3:10
Gal. 3:13
Gal. 4:22
Gal. 4:27

1 Tim 5:18

2 Tim 3:16

James 2:8
James 2:23
James 4:5

1 Peter 2:6
1 Peter 1:16

2 Peter 1:20
2 Peter 3:16

There are many, many more, but I hope the point is made as to which Rule is illustrated in the Bible. It seems significant to me.








I invite you to READ the opening post. Read the words. I think if you do, it will help you enormously and your misconceptions and misrepresentations will perhaps end.





Yes. If I quoted a dictionary to define the word "God" would that mean that the dictionary invented God? I don't know if you are purposely being silly to make some point that I'm just missing or what....






.
Those verses do not mention Sola Scripture
__________________
It isn't learned talk that saves man or makes a saint of him; only a life well lived can claim God's friendship. (Thomas Kempis)
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 03-14-2011, 10:04 AM
Josiah
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: The Rule of Scripture ("Sola Scriptura")

Quote:
Originally Posted by winsome View Post
Those verses do not mention Sola Scripture
1. I listed all the Scriptures that example the Rule of Sola Ecclesia Roma - or even so much as mentioned the RCC for or about or concerning anything whatsoever. It wasn't long....

2. I listed just a few of the examples from just the NT where Scripture is used normatively (The Rule of Scripture).

3. Yes, MANY of the examples I give mention Scripture (by that very word) and yes, they all reveal Scripture being used normatively, as the norma normans ("Sola Scriptura").

4. I'd invite you to compare the number of times (just in the NT) where the Roman Catholic denomination is used as the rule/norm with how many times Scripture is used as such. I think if you do, you will come to an unavoidable conclusion: Sola Scriptura is OFTEN exampled, Sola Ecclesia Roma is never exampled.

5. No, I never posted that Luther and Calvin invited this practice. I never said they invited anything. Luther and Calvin CALLED this practice "Sola Scriptura" - it's the title they gave to the practice. Yes, the Lutheran Confessions officially define the practice, but to define is not to invent - any more than the dictionary defining the word "God" means that the book invented God - your whole point seems silly to me.


I didn't raise this point of examples of practices in Scripture (since such seems fairly moot), but it's profoundly odd that YOU'D bring it up - since Sola Scriptura is ALL OVER Scripture - more examples of this practice than the program here permits to be posted, while YOUR position is never exampled once, in fact your denomination is never mentioned at all and your practice is never once exampled. Odd you'd want to "go there". The typical RCC and LDS objection is that accountability only applies to all others - and not to self exclusively, thus the issue is moot in the singular case of self alone.

But again, my purpose here is to define and describe the practice of embracing Scripture as the rule. I think if you read the opening post, your misconceptions and misunderstandings and misrepresentations will be discovered by you to be baseless - and perhaps understanding will be advanced. I realize you are not permitted to embrace accountability in the sole case of the RCC alone - and thus must reject any rule and any norming, but hopefully you CAN understand what the practice is even if you are mandated by your denomination to reject any accountability for itself.






.

Last edited by Josiah : 03-14-2011 at 10:15 AM.
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
"Religion! Who needs it?" or "Religious Tyranny:" RichardBurger General Discussions 32 05-12-2013 05:49 PM
Sola Scriptura. Beauty1 Theology 194 02-05-2010 11:59 AM
Sola Scriptura. diebamted21 Bible Chat 104 05-14-2009 09:36 AM
"Eye for Eye" or "Resist not Evil"-what do christians believe antonio General Discussions 38 05-07-2009 06:54 PM
What "Scripture" does 2Timothy3 refer to??? antonio Bible Chat 4 04-06-2009 03:19 PM


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:04 AM.


true2ourselves
 
 
 

Flashcoms

You need to upgrade your Flash Player.

Version 8 or higher is required.

download from http://www.adobe.com/go/getflashplayer

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29