"Sola Scriptura" - The Rule of Scripture in Norming

[popsthebuilder]

Three cheers for apparent unity between Josiah and Pedrito on saying that they both want their 66 book bibles to be the absolute arbiter of doctrine (and practise too?). Now let's see if they both agree on doctrine and practise.

Cute; mock and attack the unity you pretend to propagate.

For the longest time I was ignorant to your actual demeanor and didn't understand the seeming bombardment you receive. I donot stand actively against the RCC, but if you represent them as a unit, then they should be worried. I have caught glimpses of varied occasions of misdirection within the ancient and current rcc, but sincerely donot hold it against them and actually see it as a good thing that they hold such a strong faith in spite of, not because of, the knowing misdirection of the powers in high places.

I wish you the best but the reek of your dogma hindered illogic, and contentious, manipulative spirit do surely....

It is unfortunate that your true colors are so very bland... resembling death

 

[MoreCoffee]

.

 

[popsthebuilder]

Nothing mocking in my post just some scepticism about using the bible to arrive at one's doctrine and practise. I don't doubt that many doctrines can be derived from the holy scriptures but I haven't seen it happen outside a common faith tradition. Thus Baptists can be agreed on many doctrines between themselves but they agree less between themselves and Pentecostals and less still between themselves and Presbyterians. It isn't unfair to point out that in practise a 66 book bible hasn't served as unifying for the differing denominations.

You aren't helping matters with your sarcastic pessimistic stabs that's for sure.

 

[MoreCoffee]

.

 

[popsthebuilder]

Tell me why you have decided I am super-evil then?

PS: how does one have a tone in text? I read your previous post and decided not to answer the accusations in it directly because they seemed like something a chap might write when in a bad mood but now that you're reaffirming your accusations please explain why they ought to matter to me any more than accusations from Josiah or Psalms 91 when they make irrational and unwarranted accusations about Catholicism, myself, or the Catholic Church?

PPS: I am not "promoting unity" - though I do see unity as good and desirable - my threads on unity started off as threads about what people can do to move towards unity and then quickly became a pretext for Josiah and Psalms 91 to attack Catholicism. I don't hesitate to point out that Christians in good standing in their churches and denominations are divided and that they do not have unity of faith, sacraments, and practises nor do I hesitate to say why I think it is so. Can you fault me for stating the obvious? There is disunity, there are divisions, Christian people do not share the same pastors nor communion nor teach the same doctrines and nobody with eyes to see can say otherwise.

What you say is true about those of varied faith and religions. I do not deny that. You know I have not stood against you and may even recall times when I actively stood at you and your denominations defence.

My remarks towards you where not those stemming from mellow drama, but more so simply based on my observations of your posts within the last month perhaps.

I did not say nor intend to insinuate that you are extra evil, or damned or condemned or anything similar.
Your own words convict you, though not of me, as I am no judge.

The sarcasm with a touch of spite that you directed towards Josiah and Psalm 91 did put me over the edge.

I'm tired of defending people only to be proven to that they shouldn't have been defended in the first place.

Lastly; death happens to us all. There is no escape from that reality. What I'm trying to say is that though I described your dogma as smelling of death, you are not dead and can, by the will of GOD, still be a beacon of light and a reflection of the light and life given by GOD. Might the Father, son, and Holy Ghost all descend upon you and guide you....and us all, in all our ways, at every turn, along the narrow path that is the way set forth by the Christ of GOD.


Peace friend

 

[Josiah]

- He believes that unadulterated, in-context, Holy Scripture can be the only basis for determining doctrine and practice.
… - And therefore the concept of “Sola Scriptura” is both admirable and compulsory.

The practice of using Scripture as the rule, canon, norma normans in the evaluation of disputed doctrine ("Sola Scriptura") means using Scripture as the rule, canon, norma normans in the evaluation of disputed doctrine. You might benefit by reading the opening post.

I AGREE AGAIN with you that this is be best rule for this purpose. And I note with you that no one has even suggested a better, more-inspired, more-reliable, more objective, more universally accepted alternative: their objection is accountability, not Scripture.

Churches who tout the “Sola Scripturs” mantra are guilty of actually not using Holy Scripture as their only basis for doctrine and practice.

If you read the words of the opening post, there is no claim that ANY denomination is perfect, sinless, faultless about ANYTHING. In fact, the whole point is that all are accountable. But again, the practice of using Scripture as the rule/canon/norma normans in the evaluation of disputed dogmas among us is using Scripture as the rule/canon/norma normans in the evaluation of disputed dogmas among us - nothing else, nothing otherwise.

t Pedrito has clearly stated that unadulterated, in-context, Holy Scripture can be the only basis for determining doctrine and practice, but that the churches are not honestly employing it.)

And AGAIN - yet AGAIN - then you ESSENTIALLY agree with the opening post and I don't know why you are protesting it when you keep claiming you are agreeing with it. But again.... the practice of using Scripture as the rule/canon/norma normans in the evaluation of disputed dogmas among us is just that - and nothing else. And I don't think the word "honest" is found anywhere in the opening post (and certianly not in the official definition of Sola Scripture). Nor did I ever remotely indicate or imply that ANY denomination is perfect, faultless, sinless (indeed, Sola Scriptura would be irrelevant and useless in that case - thus the reason why the RCC and LDS so passionately reject it in the sole case of itself uniquely).



Thank you.


- Josiah