Sola Scriptura vs Sola Scriptura

Laws do not interpret the constitution, it is the other way around, the Constitution interprets and constricts the laws that can be made! That is why changes to the constitution require ratification by the states to come into force. The Supreme Court's role in Government is to determine if legislation passed by the Legislature, our elected representatives, are within the constraints of the Constitution. If not, then the Courts responsibility is to rule against the law, If yes, the Court makes no such ruling and the law stands.

The Bible works the same way, but with a higher authority backing it! And we do not get to vote on its authority!

 

Matthew 13:13 This is why I speak to them in parables: "Though seeing, they do not see; though hearing, they do not hear or understand.

Jesus states that he spoke in parables to confuse people. You may not believe what the Bible says, but I do.

 

You misread my post then, because my post is about how man interprets scripture.

Interpretation is a matter of perspective! Whose perspective do you have? Is it God's perspective or is it man's perspective?

If man fails to recognize the many examples in scripture relating to sins, specifically the sins of sexual immorality, then how is it possible for man to interpret the spiritual implications of scripture? IT IS NOT POSSIBLE to have God's perspective if one refuses to recognize the examples of what God calls sin.

Jesus told Nicodemus,

My point is just that! If the Scriptures tell us of earthly things, what is sin vs what is not, and we fail to accept that, how is it possible to accept the heavenly things the scriptures reveal to us?

My post is not off topic, your interpretation of my post is!

 

I see, you believe in the inerrancy of the human book known as the Bible. Go ahead and trust in man. Hmmm, now what?!

How is it that God can make a human book inerrant in matters of faith and morals (as we all believe) and yet cannot make a human institution inerrant in matters of faith and morals?

 

By this statement so seem to be implying that "Truth" is subjective and not objective. With this line of thinking you are saying that "I am correct because I believe I am correct and to prove it here are some Bible quoetes that if you interpret them this way back me up". I cannot agree with this line of thinking. God is constant. God is Truth. Therefore Truth is constant. My God is not a god of Confusion.

God bless

John </font>[/QUOTE]Actually your God (the Catholic God) is very much a god of confusion. He is not the authoritative God of the Bible, for the Bible is not the only authority of the Catholic Church. You do not have sola scriptura, and therefore condemn yourselves. What you do have is a manmade teaching authority that allows all kinds of unbiblical and even anti-biblical doctrines in the church--doctrines which in no way can be substnatiated by proper exegesis of Scripture: Mariolotry, purgatory, idolatry, praying to the deceased, the assumption of Mary, etc. Many, many doctrines that are contrarty to the Bible have been introduced by a man-made institution which has been established as a teaching authority outside of the authority of the Bible itself. That borders on blasphemy.

The Bible is our ONLY authority in all matters of faith and practice. What does that mean? It does not mean that it is the only source that we use. It means that it is the final authority. It is all sufficent for us. In whatever is said, the Bible is the final autority.

Now having said that, as a Baptist, every Baptist has Baptist distinctives that are followed. That is what makes him a Baptist. I won't go over them here as they have been discussed on other threads. Every Baptist church I know has a statement of faith, which spells out the fundamentals of the faith in which they believe. The stand against immorality of all kinds: adultery, fornication, homosexuality, may be included. Sometimes a statement of faith can be quite elaborate. Other times they are quite simple. It depends on the church. A person joining a church usually joins with the consent of adhering and believing the statement of faith, otherwise there would be no point in joining that church. Go join a church that you feel comfortable with the doctrine of the church in which you are joining whether Baptist or J.W. or Mormon, etc. We don't want J.W.'s joining our church. They hold to false doctrine.

Outside of our statement of faith, we have soul liberty to disagree. As we study the Bible we may see things differently. That is sola scriptura. But we never will disagree on the basics or fundamentals of the faith that are spelled out for us in our statement of faith or constitution. I hope that clears things up for you.
DHK

 

Let us then stick with morality then. If what you say is true then the Bible must be self evident with things pertaining to morality. And if this is the case who is right with regards to contraception? The Catholic Church's stance says no and very other Christain group says OK.

GoD Bless you and sorry about the misinterpretation.

John </font>[/QUOTE]Good Question! What about morality? Does sexual intercourse without contraception ever fit the definition of immorality? Of course it does, just look at the number of aborted, and abandoned human babies that result from no contraception. 99% of them conceived in sin, that is, within the description of sexual immorality!

Does that make sexual intercourse without contraception by males and females outside the bounds of marriage not a sin? Of course it does not!

There were far fewer "throw-away" humans when man was obeying God's plan and not his own! So what is the greater immorality, preventing conception or throwing away the results of conception?

Is the Catholic Church right about contraception? YES AND NO! If the CC follows through with the rest of God's plan then Yes! If the CC side steps any portion of God's plan, then NO!

 

You tell me John. I can ask you the same thing about the Catholic Church. I can list about a half a dozen sects of the Catholic Church all having different or varying beliefs. Who is right? Who is in union with God and who is not? How do you tell?
DHK

 

Who is to say that a doctrine is contrary to the Bible? Surely you will accept that Catholic Church theologians are completely satisfied that the doctrines you condemn are not contrary to the Bible. Why is your interpretation right, and theirs wrong?

A book cannot, in and of itself, be an authority. A book must be interpreted, and it is these interpretations which are taught and followed. History has shown time and again that people will interpret the identical words in the Bible as meaning different things. How, then, can the Bible alone be an authority? How can an authority produce two authoritative results which contradict one another?

"Do you understand what you are reading?"
"How can I, unless some one guides me?"

 

I don't believe the disciples tried to keep everything a secret so that they could have power over people.

Power over people is exactly what the Catholic church is all about. Submit or you will not be saved.

 

That is, at the very best, an ignorant statement

Do you deny that we must submit to the will of God over our own will in order to be saved? Can anyone be saved who does not submit? That's news to me!

 

God's people know God's voice and will follow it. Those who are not God's will follow another voice. It is that simple.

 

Submit to God yes, submit to man no.

 

The US Constitution and the Holy Bible have the same role in the governance of society. Neither carries any authority with those who will not submit to the authority behind the documents.

Rebellion and disobedience are the "original sin" of mankind, therefore it is only natural that many, if not all, will rebel against whatever authority may be represented by the said documents.

It is only by submission to the authority behind the documents that mankind is truly governed. The Documents simply spell out the constraints by which society will be governed. The documents allow the authority to mete out discipline to those who refuse to obey.

So who has authority to interpret the documents? Virtually anyone who will read them. Interpretation is not obedience, it is identification and understanding of content! Anyone who can read the written word can interpret the written word. It is the application of the word where we have our differences.

 

God's people know God's voice and will follow it. Those who are not God's will follow another voice. It is that simple. </font>[/QUOTE]33,000+ denominations argue with equal simplicity, and greater conviction, that God does not grant guidance into all truth directly to God's people. God's people are granted guidance into all truth, but through the organism of the Church, not through personal revelation. Christ has given us a clear creation, a city on a hill, through which we may know God's voice.

 

Who is to say that it is contrary to the Bible? That's an easy one Mike. The Bible itself says that man-made doctrines are not of the Bible, but of man. Isaiah warned of this:

Isa.8:20 To the law and to the testimony: if they speak not according to this word, it is because there is no light in them.
--When you cannot speak according to the Word of God, Mike, there is only one conclusion to draw. It matters not what your beloved church fathers say. The only thing that matters is "What saith the Lord?"
What saith the Lord about the assumption of Mary?
ZILCH!!
It is that easy about all of your man made doctrines. There is no interpretation of the Bible involved, because the doctrines are not even in the Bible.

Catholic Church theologians can (and were) corrupt in their theology, but you don't want to accept that possibility, do you?

The Bible claims inspiration.
The Bible claims to be truth--ultimate truth.
The Bible claims to be God's revelation--the very words of God.
Therefore, the Bible is its own authority. A reporter for CNN can take a news article and make it say anything he wants it too. He can put a spin on it. He can put the "wrong" interpretation on it deliberately. There is a lot of "misinformation."

There is no misinformation in the Bible. There are no untruths in the Bible. All that is written in the Bible is from God; he doesn't put deceitful spins on anything. It is the Bible that becomes its own authority. When man chooses by his own wilful self to deliberately misinterpret what the Bible says, he does what Peter says in 2Peter 3, and "wrests the Scripture to his own destruction." The Bible still maintains its own authority.
If it didn't Jesus would have never commanded to "Search the Scriptures, for in them ye think ye have eternal life."
Paul would never have said:
"Study (the Scriptures) to show thyself approved unto God, a workman that needs not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the Word of Truth.
The Bible is its own authority.
The Bible is its own authority by virtue of the fact that it interprets itself, for those who are willing to spend the time in the pursuit of its study.
When two interpretations arise: one is obviously wrong. However there are some passages that may allow for two interpretattions without either one being wrong.
Most people who have wrong doctrine, are wrong because their interpretation does not harmonize with the rest of Scripture. Scripture does not contradict itself. Scripture interprets Scripture.
DHK