Is Perspecuity Necessary for Sola Scriptura?

[Totton Linnet]

So what do you call your father? Do you really interpret that so literally? What about Paul calling himself father to many of his churches? You just ignore that?

Father "in the gospel" Paul says, his appeal is simple, for other apostles had followed up his mission preaching against him, claiming to be superior to him and preaching a truer gospel which was a false gospel.

But they had received salvation through Paul's gospel...the Holy Spirit was working in their midst through his gospel. ...Paul didn't even begrudge that some favoured Cephas or Apollos, he said "ye may have many teachers but I was the one who first brought you the gospel"

That was his point, in the sense that he first brought them the gospel he was their father in the gospel. But Paul did not seek to lord it over them...they stood in their own faith.

 

[brewmama]

Show us the Bible verse

For though you have countless guides in Christ, you do not have many fathers. For I became your father in Christ Jesus through the gospel. (1 Corinthians 4:15 ESV)

But you know Timothy's proven worth, how as a son with a father he has served with me in the gospel. (Philippians 2:22 ESV)

Also, Acts 7:2, where Stephen refers to "our father Abraham," or in Romans 9:10, where Paul speaks of "our father Isaac."

 

[Totton Linnet]

He said "you have many teachers but not many fathers"

That is something Catholics could not say...they have MILLIONS of fathers...and not very good teaching.

 

[Totton Linnet]

For though you have countless guides in Christ, you do not have many fathers. For I became your father in Christ Jesus through the gospel. (1 Corinthians 4:15 ESV)

But you know Timothy's proven worth, how as a son with a father he has served with me in the gospel. (Philippians 2:22 ESV)

Also, Acts 7:2, where Stephen refers to "our father Abraham," or in Romans 9:10, where Paul speaks of "our father Isaac."

Come, come, you are stretching.

It is quite clear what Jesus meant...no one must come in the place of God as Father or Christ as Teacher.

This Paul did not do but the Catholic fathers do...for they teach different doctrines.

Ignatias declared that the bishop must be obeyed as though he were Christ...THAT is anathema, it is a clear usurpation.

 

[glassjester]

You are not arguing for scripture are you? you are arguing for the traditions of men

I'm not arguing for anything. I'm asking a lot about those 3 topics I listed, back when you asked me what I was having trouble understanding.

Put it this way, if Christ were to appear to you and say "see to it that you call no man on earth father" would you still do it? but He did say it, for me it is enough that He said it.

I'd ask Him to explain it further, to me.

I think you and I would agree that He didn't mean it literally. I am sure you have no problem making an exception to Christ's prohibition of the word "father," when it comes to one's male parent.

Sure, I make exceptions to the rule that you don't agree with. But neither one of us takes it literally.

None of this matters for the purpose of this thread.

 

[glassjester]

Come, come, you are stretching.

It is quite clear what Jesus meant...no one must come in the place of God as Father or Christ as Teacher.

This Paul did not do but the Catholic fathers do...for they teach different doctrines.

Ignatias declared that the bishop must be obeyed as though he were Christ...THAT is anathema, it is a clear usurpation.

No one can teach in place of Christ? What if Christ Himself gives them the authority to do so?

Luke 10:16 - Whoever listens to you listens to me; whoever rejects you rejects me; but whoever rejects me rejects him who sent me.

If Ignatius had said to obey an apostle as though he were Christ, would he be anathema?

 

[Totton Linnet]

No one can teach as Christ teaches? What if Christ Himself gives them the authority to do so?

Luke 10:16 - Whoever listens to you listens to me; whoever rejects you rejects me; but whoever rejects me rejects him who sent me.

If Ignatius had said to obey an apostle as though he were Christ, would he be anathema?

We fully accept the apostle's teachings as Christ's own teaching....but we do not accept RCC teachings as Christ's teachings.

In 2,000 years no pope has ever come up with a written work which even comes close to scripture.

 

[glassjester]

We fully accept the apostle's teachings as Christ's own teaching....

So He didn't literally mean for no one to teach in His place?

 

[glassjester]

In 2,000 years no pope has ever come up with a written work which even comes close to scripture.

This is about a million miles away from the discussion at hand.

As for the topic of this thread: I think we agree that Scripture is not perspicuous. In fact, most readers misunderstand and come to false conclusions pertaining to doctrine and practice.

Is that true?

 

[Bright Raven]

Is it clear;

2 Timothy 3:16 King James Version (KJV)

16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:

 

[Totton Linnet]

So He didn't literally mean for no one to teach in His place?

Christ taught [literally] through Paul, he spoke by the same inspiration that the prophets spake in olden times.

 

[glassjester]

Christ taught [literally] through Paul, he spoke by the same inspiration that the prophets spake in olden times.

Agreed.

 

[Totton Linnet]

This is about a million miles away from the discussion at hand.

As for the topic of this thread: I think we agree that Scripture is not perspicuous. In fact, most readers misunderstand and come to false conclusions pertaining to doctrine and practice.

Is that true?

In all my time on TOL I have never found a case where scripture clearly stated can be misunderstood...except folk wilfully misunderstand it, preferring their doctrines.

 

[Totton Linnet]

It's 3.00 am jester, I gotta sleep.

I've enjoyed our debate...God bless you, good night

 

[glassjester]

It's 3.00 am jester, I gotta sleep.

I've enjoyed our debate...God bless you, good night

Likewise!


So long

 

[iouae]

In all my time on TOL I have never found a case where scripture clearly stated can be misunderstood...except folk wilfully misunderstand it, preferring their doctrines.

My experience is quite the opposite.

I have virtually never found a clear scripture that someone does not have an alternate explanation for.

Be that as it may...

I have less faith in my cult leader getting things right than I have in myself with the help of the Holy Spirit and my online Hebrew-Greek translation getting it right.

And I will add this...

Even with the Holy Spirit filling someone, even they are full of misinterpretations of scripture.

We are all somewhere along the learning curve, all perfectly sincere, but not one has full understanding. And thats OK with God. For now we see darkly as through a glass.

 

[brewmama]

Come, come, you are stretching.

It is quite clear what Jesus meant...no one must come in the place of God as Father or Christ as Teacher.

This Paul did not do but the Catholic fathers do...for they teach different doctrines.

Ignatias declared that the bishop must be obeyed as though he were Christ...THAT is anathema, it is a clear usurpation.

I'm stretching? That's rich! And I find it stunning that you scorn the noble St. Ignatius, who was the third bishop of Antioch and a disciple of the Apostle John. You would do well to study what the Church Fathers said rather than slander them. They knew Apostles!

"See that you all follow the bishop, even as Jesus Christ does the Father, and the presbytery as you would the apostles; and reverence the deacons, as being the institution of God. Let no man do anything connected with the Church without the bishop. Let that be deemed a proper Eucharist, which is [administered] either by the bishop, or by one to whom he has entrusted it. Wherever the bishop shall appear, there let the multitude [of the people] also be; even as, wherever Jesus Christ is, there is the Catholic Church. It is not lawful without the bishop either to baptize or to celebrate a love-feast; but whatsoever he shall approve of, that is also pleasing to God, so that everything that is done may be secure and valid."

I understand fully what Jesus meant, you were the one who said we can call no one father.

 

[brewmama]

My experience is quite the opposite.

I have virtually never found a clear scripture that someone does not have an alternate explanation for.

Very true, and this thread proves it. e.g.,

Is it clear;

2 Timothy 3:16 King James Version (KJV)

16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:

Folks keep quoting this over and over and somehow believe it validates sola scriptura when it absolutely does not. It is referring to the OT, and it never ever says use "scripture only". Yet they keep saying it over and over and over...

(Not to mention how they imply that not accepting sola scriptura means not accepting scripture!)

 

[iouae]

I'm stretching? That's rich! And I find it stunning that you scorn the noble St. Ignatius, who was the third bishop of Antioch and a disciple of the Apostle John. You would do well to study what the Church Fathers said rather than slander them. They knew Apostles!

"See that you all follow the bishop, even as Jesus Christ does the Father, and the presbytery as you would the apostles; and reverence the deacons, as being the institution of God. Let no man do anything connected with the Church without the bishop. Let that be deemed a proper Eucharist, which is [administered] either by the bishop, or by one to whom he has entrusted it. Wherever the bishop shall appear, there let the multitude [of the people] also be; even as, wherever Jesus Christ is, there is the Catholic Church. It is not lawful without the bishop either to baptize or to celebrate a love-feast; but whatsoever he shall approve of, that is also pleasing to God, so that everything that is done may be secure and valid."

I understand fully what Jesus meant, you were the one who said we can call no one father.

Whoever said the above highlighted, had no clue.

There are NO sacraments among true believers.

EVERY SINGLE Christian can baptise, administer communion, marry, pray for the sick etc.

Show me a scripture saying only a select few can administer sacraments?

Show me a scripture that there ARE sacraments.

 

[Bright Raven]

Whoever said the above highlighted, had no clue.

There are NO sacraments among true believers.

EVERY SINGLE Christian can baptise, administer communion, marry, pray for the sick etc.

Show me a scripture saying only a select few can administer sacraments?

Show me a scripture that there ARE sacraments.

No need for ordination eh? Is there chaos within the church? All should be done in an orderly manner. :duh: