Your above post is very ironic. You take millennialism for an example, and state that due to conflicting views on it one has to have an authority. It is obvious that sola scriptura (in your mind) does not work.
And yet you accept sola scriptura from all the church fathers who exercised it for you. They certainly did not all agree on millennialism (though I am certain that you will dispute this point). They had the soul liberty to disagree with one another, and exercised their obligation in sola scriptura to find the truth of the Scripture as is evidenced in Acts 17:11.
The church fathers disagreed with each other on many fronts. Yet you appeal to them in your "Oral Tradition," which is sacred to the RCC. The Catholic Church dizzies itself in enless circles of illogical semantics.
DHK
Re the ECFs' view on millenialism: yes, there were disagreements, which is why the Church in Council had to step in to adjudicate; the divergence of views proves the necessity of a single teaching authority.
Who is qualified to adjudicate the millenialist disputes on BaptistBoard?
If only the Pharisees had thought of that response to Christ!!
Jesus shows how the tradition of the ONE TRUE CHURCH started by God at Sinai (undisputed between RC and non-RC Christians today) with successors officially chosen (undisputed fact as well) -- were in error.
Notice that the "by definition tradition CAN NOT be in error" idea "never comes up".
#1 This is a message board where people from all over the world with different backgrounds and different faiths are posting. Of course there are going to be differences. It is the internet--a concept Paul never thought of.
#2."Who is qualified to adjudicate the millenialist disputes on BaptistBoard?"
Since this is private Baptist Board--Try the Webmaster.
#3. You perhaps fail to understand Baptists (especially IFB). We do not belong to a denomination. Our church is independent. We are accountable to no one but Christ. The Bible is our foundation. It doesn't matter one iota to us what you or any other church believes. We are accoutable to Christ and Him alone. In that our church has unity. We don't have the "millennial squabbles" that you see on the board; neither the versions debates, neither any of the other heated arguments (Calvinism/Arminianism) etc. We are one in doctrine as a church should be. Paul was speaking about local churches when he taught that. He was never addressing an internet audience.
DHK
It is the "ploy of the RCC" to spawn off all the major schisms in history and then demand that non-Catholic churches all adhere to a single pope (a kind of non-RC Pope) "AS IF" the non-RC Christians own BOTH sides of a schism any more than the RCC owns BOTH sides of ITS schisms!!
What is amazing to me - is how many RC members think that argument makes sense!