S
Except for that it's entirely relevant. The person I describe is the rule, not the exception. The wealth and technological advances that are occurring in our time has no historical precedence. For the vast majority of the people for the vast majority of the history of the world, life has been a life or death struggle for survival. Any theory or explanation about about how God communicates to us has to account for that.
No, not quite. Sola Scriptura means Scripture alone. This means that we are to base our beliefs on God and our religious practice soley on scripture, or on scripture alone. Martin Luther's idea was that the plan of salvation, as laid out in the scriptures is easy and plain to understand and anyone that read the scriptures would come to the same ideas that he did about how to be saved and live as a Christian. Even in his own lifetime he saw this idea proven false as the protestants began dividing up over scriptural disagreements almost immediately after the reformation began.
Sola Scriptura is self refuting though because obviously, the people wrote the Bible to begin with didn't get their ideas about God from scripture because there was no scripture to read from. The oral tradition came first and was later written down. If the ones that wrote the Bible had believed in Sola Scriptura (I'm aware of how thoroughly absurd that is. Are you?) then the Bible would have never been written.
I NEVER once stated not using scripture. By arguing against "Scripture only," I am not arguing for "scripture not at all." I believe in a Triune word of God. That is I believe in Scripture plus sacred tradition plus church leadership.
Also, I'm honest. The average protestant did not read the entire Bible and then decide on their doctrine but instead went along with what there Church or parents taught. So most protestants, who claim to practice only sola scriptura are in actually relying on both scriptura and some kind of church leadership. Most protestant churches that have been around for more than one generation have also developed their own traditions and so most protestants observe that as well.
So the real difference between protestants and Catholics is that Catholics can trace the start of their Church leadership and sacred traditions to Jesus himself while protestants have church leadership ad tradition that is traced to mortal, fallible man.
Dear JeremyFromTexas, There really is no significant difference between most Protestants and Roman Catholics, because their doctrine of the Trinity is the same; in opposition to Jesus Christ in St. John 15:26, they say, "who proceedeth from the Father" AND THE SON (FILIOQUE). .... They have been following that Filioquist (semi-Sabellian) error [heresy] since at least 1014 AD. Much or most of Protestantism, and all of Roman Catholicism, in its basic, fundamental errors, comes from one person: Augustine of Hippo. Augustine taught some true things, and for these, may God bless him. But Augustine also taught a few basic, fundamental errors, such as original sin as original guilty, violence in the name of God, and the Filioque error.
Not all Roman traditions are from Christ. Since the middle Ages, the Roman church has been giving communion (holy Eucharist) in one kind only, the unleavened wafer, and forbidding the cup (the wine) for the catholic laity? Why? Christ said to drink His blood and eat His body, and Catholicism is denying the blood of Christ to the catholic laity, and letting only the catholic priests have the wine. This is heresy. So, roman catholicism is not totally infallible, and this is seen also in their doctrine of Filioque, and in their doctrine of papal infallibility and supreme jurisdiction, and they substitute the pope as the "vicar of Christ" for the Holy Spirit! Only the Holy Spirit is or can be the "vicar of Christ" on earth. No man, in any place, can ever be the "vicar of Christ". There is no human substitute for Christ Himself; only the Holy Spirit is infallible in the Church. Only most of the 7 or 8 ecumenical councils have weight and teaching authority in the Orthodox Catholic Church. The other local Orthodox Church councils also have authority, but only inasmuch as they agree with the ecumenical councils. Orthodox Christians are obligated to receive the unaltered Creed of 381 AD of First Constantinople without the Filioque, the teaching of Chalcedon of 451 AD, the teachings of the Orthodox catechisms, the Lord's prayer, the 10 commandments, the Beatitudes, the Orthodox canons of the holy book "THE RUDDER", and the canons and teachings of the 7 holy councils (synods) that are ecumenical, and all the teachings of the local councils of the Orthodox Church that have been received by all among the clergy and laity of the One Church. And all Orthodox Christians must accept and believe in and cherish all 7 sacraments of the Orthodox Church, and not just 2 as protestants falsely teach.
We must reject the sola fide and sola scriptura of Martin Luther, and the Vatican I and Vatican II councils of papism, and the dogma of purgatory and the immaculate conception of Mary in papism, and the indulgences of papism, which things (indulgences of roman popes, forgiveness of sins obtained by money) the Lutherans (the indulgences in Luther's 95 theses) also rightly reject; along with Martin Luther in his 95 theses, the Orthodox Church also rightly rejects papal indulgences. God save us in Christ Jesus. Amen. In Erie PA Scott R. Harrington
No, not quite. Sola Scriptura means Scripture alone. This means that we are to base our beliefs on God and our religious practice soley on scripture, or on scripture alone. Martin Luther's idea was that the plan of salvation, as laid out in the scriptures is easy and plain to understand and anyone that read the scriptures would come to the same ideas that he did about how to be saved and live as a Christian. Even in his own lifetime he saw this idea proven false as the protestants began dividing up over scriptural disagreements almost immediately after the reformation began.
Sola Scriptura is self refuting though because obviously, the people wrote the Bible to begin with didn't get their ideas about God from scripture because there was no scripture to read from. The oral tradition came first and was later written down. If the ones that wrote the Bible had believed in Sola Scriptura (I'm aware of how thoroughly absurd that is. Are you?) then the Bible would have never been written.
I NEVER once stated not using scripture. By arguing against "Scripture only," I am not arguing for "scripture not at all." I believe in a Triune word of God. That is I believe in Scripture plus sacred tradition plus church leadership.
Also, I'm honest. The average protestant did not read the entire Bible and then decide on their doctrine but instead went along with what there Church or parents taught. So most protestants, who claim to practice only sola scriptura are in actually relying on both scriptura and some kind of church leadership. Most protestant churches that have been around for more than one generation have also developed their own traditions and so most protestants observe that as well.
So the real difference between protestants and Catholics is that Catholics can trace the start of their Church leadership and sacred traditions to Jesus himself while protestants have church leadership ad tradition that is traced to mortal, fallible man.
Dear JeremyFromTexas, There really is no significant difference between most Protestants and Roman Catholics, because their doctrine of the Trinity is the same; in opposition to Jesus Christ in St. John 15:26, they say, "who proceedeth from the Father" AND THE SON (FILIOQUE). .... They have been following that Filioquist (semi-Sabellian) error [heresy] since at least 1014 AD. Much or most of Protestantism, and all of Roman Catholicism, in its basic, fundamental errors, comes from one person: Augustine of Hippo. Augustine taught some true things, and for these, may God bless him. But Augustine also taught a few basic, fundamental errors, such as original sin as original guilty, violence in the name of God, and the Filioque error.
Not all Roman traditions are from Christ. Since the middle Ages, the Roman church has been giving communion (holy Eucharist) in one kind only, the unleavened wafer, and forbidding the cup (the wine) for the catholic laity? Why? Christ said to drink His blood and eat His body, and Catholicism is denying the blood of Christ to the catholic laity, and letting only the catholic priests have the wine. This is heresy. So, roman catholicism is not totally infallible, and this is seen also in their doctrine of Filioque, and in their doctrine of papal infallibility and supreme jurisdiction, and they substitute the pope as the "vicar of Christ" for the Holy Spirit! Only the Holy Spirit is or can be the "vicar of Christ" on earth. No man, in any place, can ever be the "vicar of Christ". There is no human substitute for Christ Himself; only the Holy Spirit is infallible in the Church. Only most of the 7 or 8 ecumenical councils have weight and teaching authority in the Orthodox Catholic Church. The other local Orthodox Church councils also have authority, but only inasmuch as they agree with the ecumenical councils. Orthodox Christians are obligated to receive the unaltered Creed of 381 AD of First Constantinople without the Filioque, the teaching of Chalcedon of 451 AD, the teachings of the Orthodox catechisms, the Lord's prayer, the 10 commandments, the Beatitudes, the Orthodox canons of the holy book "THE RUDDER", and the canons and teachings of the 7 holy councils (synods) that are ecumenical, and all the teachings of the local councils of the Orthodox Church that have been received by all among the clergy and laity of the One Church. And all Orthodox Christians must accept and believe in and cherish all 7 sacraments of the Orthodox Church, and not just 2 as protestants falsely teach.
We must reject the sola fide and sola scriptura of Martin Luther, and the Vatican I and Vatican II councils of papism, and the dogma of purgatory and the immaculate conception of Mary in papism, and the indulgences of papism, which things (indulgences of roman popes, forgiveness of sins obtained by money) the Lutherans (the indulgences in Luther's 95 theses) also rightly reject; along with Martin Luther in his 95 theses, the Orthodox Church also rightly rejects papal indulgences. God save us in Christ Jesus. Amen. In Erie PA Scott R. Harrington
