|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
EvC Forum active members: 65 (9164 total) |
| |
ChatGPT | |
Total: 916,908 Year: 4,165/9,624 Month: 1,036/974 Week: 363/286 Day: 6/13 Hour: 1/2 |
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Sola Scriptura? Is it actually in the Scriptures? | |||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 441 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: |
quote: But "everything that was written in the past" isn't specifically restricted to the Bible either. Taken in the broadest sense, that verse seems to negate Sola Scriptura rather than supporting it. People who think they have all the answers usually don't understand the questions.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 441 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: |
Mr. Ex Nihilo writes: Don't misunderstand me Ringo. I'm not arguing in favor of Sola Scriptura. Yes, I understand. I was just pointing out that what one person might say is evidence for Sola Scriptura, another person might say was evidence against it. Happens a lot when discussing the Bible. People who think they have all the answers usually don't understand the questions.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 441 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: |
iano writes: ... I looked and looked and I couldn't find this quote. Since I have the old e-Sword out:
quote: And also:
quote: Took me less time to find it than to read your post. People who think they have all the answers usually don't understand the questions.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 441 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: |
iano writes: Ascribing something to scripture that isn't there occurs frequently.... Ah, but you were suggesting that it wasn't there - claiming that you "looked and looked". I simply pointed out - for the benefit of lurkers mostly - that the passage not only exists (twice) but it's very easy to find. I would advise you to actually look at the Bible before you make assertions about it - and don't forget the gospels. People who think they have all the answers usually don't understand the questions.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 441 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: |
iano writes: The problem here is that Jar and Ringo and others frequently quote parts of the bible in making their point. Notice how quoting something out of context can twist the meaning? My quote-mine above suggests that you think quoting the Bible is a bad thing - which of course you don't. Similarly, quoting only Paul, for example, and ignoring what Jesus said is twisting the overall message of the Bible.
Either you stay within scripture to make a biblical case.... So... where's the scriptural case for sola scriptura? People who think they have all the answers usually don't understand the questions.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 441 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: |
iano writes: That we haven't got common ground means we can't discuss the issue. We have plenty of common ground, but you choose to concentrate on the barriers.
Your talking imperial and I'm talking metric. That's a really bad analogy. When I was in school, the metric system was taught as a curiosity. Now it's the law of the land. I'm equally fluent in both - to the point of sometimes switching back and forth in the same sentence. So, if there's an apples v. oranges problem here, it isn't on my side.
Your agreement that the bible was as if dictated by God - with which I concurred. Now you're getting confused again. That's a different thread. No such agreement exists in this thread.
Unless we agree to go outside sola scripture.... But sola scriptura is the topic here. And the question is: Does the Bible say that the Bible is the only source? People who think they have all the answers usually don't understand the questions.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 441 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: |
iano writes: ... just in case Ringo-the-cameleon trips across it Unfounded insults do not strengthen your case. People who think they have all the answers usually don't understand the questions.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 441 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: |
iano writes: To be Christs brother one would have to the fathers (adopted) son. And only certain people are given the right to be called sons of God. But Jesus said:
quote: And what is the will of God? "Love thy neighbour as thyself." Jesus was not talking about "adopted" brothers. He was talking about everybody who does the will of God. And who does the will of God? Well, that isn't for us to judge, is it? Therefore, it seems pretty clear that Jesus was talking about everybody being His brother - i.e. He was talking about general good works. The point of the passage is that those who claim to be "sons of God" will not be recognized. Only those who act like sons of God will be recognized. As I have said before, external works are a symptom of internal salvation. If the externals aren't there, neither are the internals. People who think they have all the answers usually don't understand the questions.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 441 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: |
iano writes: Given that none of us can follow this COMMAND under our own steam the future don't look too bright. And if you are going to say (as I strongly suspect you will) "it means doing your best" then it would help if you could produce biblical backup for this position Only an idiot or a sadist would demand 100% success from his children. Is God an idiot or a sadist? "The best you can do" is the only reasonable demand that a reasonable father would make. Why don't you produce Biblical evidence that God demands 100% success from us? Edit: Didn't see your edit at first.
AbE: John 1:12 "some however did receive Him and believed in Him; so he gave them the right to be called children of God." seems to blow the "universal sonship" idea out of the water How so? This message has been edited by Ringo316, 2005-10-27 12:31 PM People who think they have all the answers usually don't understand the questions.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 441 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: |
iano writes: I don't see the problem - unless you are suggesting that we're all children of God but some get the right to be called it - like a special privilege or something. Bingo. Some get to be called "brother" by God. We are not allowed to judge. Remember? Since we can not judge who is a son of God, or a brother of Jesus, we have to treat everybody as if they were. An analogy: suppose you are in a restaurant and the waitress makes a mistake in your order. You cuss her out, threaten to have her fired, etc. The next day, your brother introduces you to his fiance - the waitress. Moral of the story: Watch how you treat people because you never know who they are. You quoted:
quote: That does not in any way imply that God required 100% success in obeying the law. It says exactly what I've been saying - that we can't be 100% successful and a "righteous and holy God" would not expect us to be. But what has all this got to do with sola scriptura? People who think they have all the answers usually don't understand the questions.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024