Find fields & stores near you!
Find fields and stores
Zipcode
PbNation News
PbNation News
Community Focus
Community Focus

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 12-27-2012, 01:54 AM #253
F1VENOM
 
 
F1VENOM's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
 has been a member for 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by RLN View Post
That's exactly the point. Many of the employer's of the hosptial, schools, universities are the churches that founded and run them. If you have a problem with working for a religious runned organization or even a religious employer such as Dominoes, who has by the way filed a lawsuit against the Obama Administration for the HHS mandate, you are "free" to work else where.

I think it's safe to say that the fact that Christians have been killed and/or jailed in various countries in South America isn't overemphasis. If it is, tell that to the victims and their families.

I need you clarify your comment on abortion. Are you saying a baby has to be born to be counted as an abortion?
By your argument isn't Dominoes free to move outside of the US? You're ignoring the fact that not allowing that choice is religious discrimination and when the entity is a business and not a church you can't assume homogeneous adherence to one religion. The HHS isn't forcing anyone to stick condoms in the lobby, it's forcing employers to provide the option in healthcare. Why aren't you up in arms about JW's opposing blood transfusions but being forced to give people the option?

You framing the conversation as if it's only a Christian problem and not a "you oppose the regime" problem is over-emphasis. They don't descriminate on the religion, just dissent.

No, I'm saying a fetus exists inside the womb and a baby outside. You abort a fetus, not a baby.
__________________
"Originally posted by visualx: hey everyone, look at me. i call people poor though i make absolutely nothing; brag about my job as an intern or some ****; hate on people for not being fat like me; and absolutely never have any idea what i'm talking about, though i always have a ****ing righteous indignation with everything i say! aren't i ****ing amazing?! do you all like me yet?! oh, you know that hate is just a guise! good thing i have a ****ing amazing life! now let me go **** my fat girlfriend and cry myself to sleep"
F1VENOM is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sponsored Links Remove Advertisement
Advertisement
Old 12-27-2012, 01:58 AM #254
RLN
 
 
RLN's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Guam
RLN donated to help Peyton Trent
RLN owns a Planet Eclipse Ego
RLN has achieved Level 1 in PbNation Pursuit
RLN has achieved Level 2 in PbNation Pursuit
Man just found out that our only paintball field on Guam is slated to close in April 2013 because the government does not want to renew the lease of the business operating it. They want to turn the field into a public park and the field owner has advised us that he doesn't have the financial resources necessary to start all over again in setting up a new field. So frustrated at this.
__________________
Christ Krew#291Feedback: http://www.pbnation.com/feedback.php?u=383004
RLN is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-27-2012, 02:38 AM #255
RLN
 
 
RLN's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Guam
RLN donated to help Peyton Trent
RLN owns a Planet Eclipse Ego
RLN has achieved Level 1 in PbNation Pursuit
RLN has achieved Level 2 in PbNation Pursuit
Quote:
Originally Posted by F1VENOM View Post
By your argument isn't Dominoes free to move outside of the US? You're ignoring the fact that not allowing that choice is religious discrimination and when the entity is a business and not a church you can't assume homogeneous adherence to one religion. The HHS isn't forcing anyone to stick condoms in the lobby, it's forcing employers to provide the option in healthcare. Why aren't you up in arms about JW's opposing blood transfusions but being forced to give people the option?.
The Obama administration defines "churches" as basically the 4 wall building or house of worships. So that mean the "church exemption" in the HHS Mandate does not apply to religious institutions that feed the homeless, minister to the poor, care for the sick, look after orphans, or train up future generations from a biblically based worldview.

Taken from here: http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/...161d_blog.html
"Religiously affiliated hospitals, adoption agencies, homeless shelters, schools, and many other ministries will now be forced to violate their deeply held religious beliefs – that they should not fund, support, or promote abortion-related drugs.

The fact alone that the Obama administration has issued its definition of what counts as a church, a “religious employer,” in the most limited way is an outrage. Religious liberty that is confined to the narrowly defined terms of the government is not liberty at all.

When the government starts dictating what our values and religious beliefs must be, religious liberty is violated, and it is critical that the American people continue to stand up. While religious liberty is being violated for many today, whoever is president, and in turn HHS secretary, a year from now will determine whether this violation continues"


Quote:
Originally Posted by F1VENOM View Post
You framing the conversation as if it's only a Christian problem and not a "you oppose the regime" problem is over-emphasis. They don't descriminate on the religion, just dissent.
This is a Christian thread isn't it? Of course I'm talking about Christians first and foremost. Your over analyzing and looking for anything to nit pick. Regimes that trample on human rights will always be against Christians. That's the reality. Furthermore, when these governments persecute non-Christians it is usually the Christians that are the first to decry these persecutions. Viva Cristo Rey!

Quote:
Originally Posted by F1VENOM View Post
No, I'm saying a fetus exists inside the womb and a baby outside. You abort a fetus, not a baby.
Again, just like the above your just nit picking. The reality is when we say abortion we know what's happening...a human baby is killed. A person with rights is slaughtered. When someone says I'm pregnant they don't say I have a fetus inside me. They say "I'm having a boy" or I'm having a girl" or "I'm having twins!" When we notice that someone is pregnant we don't go up to them and say "oh have you thought of a name for the fetus inside you?"

Some states even have unborn victims of violence laws recognizing that if a pregnant woman is assaulted and the assault results in the death of the baby she is carrying in her womb that that person can be charged for the murder of the baby. Why would these states even consider such a law if it were just some scientific term like fetus? Afterall according to you it's not a baby it's just a fetus.

It's also interesting to note that abortion clinics never advise women considering abortion that they are having a child or a baby. Instead they say fetus just as you do. Why because it deemphasizes the human being that's inside them. It's less emotional if we were to say we are terminating the pregnancy or terminating the fetus. It just doesn't sound right to say "we are terminating a baby or a child" does it? An abortion clinic will not say we are terminating this child to an inquiring woman because the more they show the reality of what abortion is the more likely the woman will change her mind. There's a reason why some states have informed-consent laws that require a woman to actually understand what she is doing including seeing an ultrasound of the baby before going through with abortion. Majority of the time when a woman sees the baby on the ultrasound monitor and come to terms with the life that is inside them they change their minds on having an abortion.

I, along with the rest of the Pro-Life movement supporters will continue to call the fetus in the womb a child or baby regardless of what you or anyone else says because the truth is abortion is the killing of a person...a human being.
__________________
Christ Krew#291Feedback: http://www.pbnation.com/feedback.php?u=383004

Last edited by RLN : 12-27-2012 at 02:44 AM.
RLN is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-27-2012, 04:15 AM #256
vijil
Giant Paintball Robot
 
vijil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: New Zealand
This thread is starting to get out of hand. F1venom, take it to PMs if you want to continue.
vijil is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-27-2012, 04:39 AM #257
F1VENOM
 
 
F1VENOM's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
 has been a member for 10 years
All I'm seeing is more dodging, appealing to emotion and mischaracterization and I can't say I'm surprised. I'll see myself out.
__________________
"Originally posted by visualx: hey everyone, look at me. i call people poor though i make absolutely nothing; brag about my job as an intern or some ****; hate on people for not being fat like me; and absolutely never have any idea what i'm talking about, though i always have a ****ing righteous indignation with everything i say! aren't i ****ing amazing?! do you all like me yet?! oh, you know that hate is just a guise! good thing i have a ****ing amazing life! now let me go **** my fat girlfriend and cry myself to sleep"
F1VENOM is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-27-2012, 07:43 AM #258
RLN
 
 
RLN's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Guam
RLN donated to help Peyton Trent
RLN owns a Planet Eclipse Ego
RLN has achieved Level 1 in PbNation Pursuit
RLN has achieved Level 2 in PbNation Pursuit
@vijil - thanks

Quote:
Originally Posted by F1VENOM View Post
All I'm seeing is more dodging, appealing to emotion and mischaracterization and I can't say I'm surprised. I'll see myself out.
All I see is someone trying to argue points that are either irrelevant or just simply untrue.

It's good that you see yourself out as there was nothing left to discuss anyways.
__________________
Christ Krew#291Feedback: http://www.pbnation.com/feedback.php?u=383004
RLN is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-27-2012, 09:48 AM #259
xDarkk
Cool enough
 
xDarkk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Rock Hill, SC
xDarkk plays in the APPA D5 division
xDarkk has perfected Level 1 in PbNation Pursuit
xDarkk has perfected Level 2 in PbNation Pursuit
xDarkk has achieved Level 3 in PbNation Pursuit
well...I've missed a good bit of debate it seems.

Hello everyone lol
xDarkk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-27-2012, 10:53 AM #260
chodeyg
sprezzatura
 
chodeyg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: via lactea
Quote:
Originally Posted by RLN View Post
Do us a favor and take such comments outside of our Christian thread. If you want to comment you are more than welcome but we ask that you do so with respectful and intelligent responses. Now since you probably think my comment was not intelligent let's get some things straight. I am well aware of the persecutions that Christians have suffered since the very first Martyr, St. Stephen which coincidentally the Roman Catholic Church celebrated his feast day yesterday. If you missed it the discussion was about this: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000... od=hp_opinion

The fact is people can be persecuted without being killed. Not being able to practice your religion in public is persecution and we see this even in America which is supposed to be the Land of the Free.

Or perhaps in your mind someone needs to actually die in order to be persecuted. I guess the Christians that are being killed today in parts of Africa, the Middle East, Southeast Asia, Central and South America, and other parts of the world only qualify as being persecuted and yet the media rarely reports on these events that are occurring.

I would further say that Christians are being killed right here in America too. In fact thousands of Christians die every year at abortion clinics across America. A silent holocaust that is "justified" and based on "reason." The most innocent of human society killed by indifference. History will show that abortion clinics, abortion doctors and staff and pro-death...I mean pro-choice politicians will be more successful than Hitler, Mao, Pol Pot, or Stalin ever was in eradicating the "unwanted" persons of society.

"What is taking place in America, is a war against the child. And if we accept that the mother can kill her own child, how can we tell other people not to kill one another." - Mother Teresa of Calcutta in 1997 to the US President and First Lady.
I don't think anyone has to die to be persecuted. But by your broad definition, all members of religions have been persecuted, and will continue to be persecuted forever. I think claiming you have been persecuted is unfair to those who have practiced their religion uncertain of their safety and future. Not trying to be a jerk, I just think its an unnecessary poor me attitude. No one lives their life without discrimination.

With that, I leave you, have a good day.
__________________
Resurrect dead on planet Jupiter
chodeyg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-27-2012, 04:45 PM #261
RLN
 
 
RLN's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Guam
RLN donated to help Peyton Trent
RLN owns a Planet Eclipse Ego
RLN has achieved Level 1 in PbNation Pursuit
RLN has achieved Level 2 in PbNation Pursuit
Quote:
Originally Posted by chodeyg View Post
I don't think anyone has to die to be persecuted. But by your broad definition, all members of religions have been persecuted, and will continue to be persecuted forever. I think claiming you have been persecuted is unfair to those who have practiced their religion uncertain of their safety and future. Not trying to be a jerk, I just think its an unnecessary poor me attitude. No one lives their life without discrimination.

With that, I leave you, have a good day.
So your whole problem is I said Christians are persecuted in the media and you feel that I have no right to say such a thing. Why? And that my comments that we Christians are persecuted in the media is insulting because we are not physically in danger? Are you serious? I mean why do you even care? Poor me attitude?

Okay let's get real. I see racism for certain groups of people because of their ethnicity so I get angry and want to do something about it. But is that a wrong attitude because they are not "physically" in danger?

I've worked amongst the poor in the slums of the Philippines where their government fails to address their needs and many times these people are shunned from society. So is that a wrong attitude since no one is "threatening" these people's lives?

I've been to a Muslim country where yes it was uncomfortable being the minority Christian and having to be "careful" with what I can and cannot do for fear of being charged with trying to spread another religion. But that doesn't count as persecution because my life isn't technically threaten yet?

So is abiding by the "laws" of that country no matter how "limiting" it is to your religious beliefs is not persecution by your definition?

It just so happened that four churches were fire bombed a week after I left that country. One of them I had attended while I was there. So if I had stayed another week I would've been "persecuted" by your definition? Or is the fact that no Christian was killed makes it technically not a so bad of a persecution?

The fire bomb was due to a Catholic Priest who is in jail for using the word 'Allah' in his materials because 'Allah' was the only word for God in that particular region and since God was an unfamiliar term to the people he was evangelizing he used 'Allah." The Muslims felt it was blasphemy for him to use 'Allah' in his materials and have arrested him and put him on trial for blasphemy. So is that considered persecution for the Christians who are close to this priest and/or ministered by this priest or no since their lives are not "in danger" only the priest?

I have friends who live in the Middle East who have advised me to not say God bless or mention Jesus in my emails or text messages to them for fear that the "Military or Secret Police" will catch these messages and do something to them. Is that persecution?

As far as religions being persecuted forever. I no where said that. However, the reality is is that people will be persecuted because they are different. So long as you have others imposing their will on others you will have persecution.

Persecution comes in different forms. Regardless of the gravity or "degree" whether its physically life threatening or it's persecution on an emotional level. Whether it's because of a country's laws or the media not caring or just telling one side of a story or someone holding a gun to your head it's still persecution. I have a right to call it what it is. That's not a "poor me" attitude. That's facing reality and that's a first step towards trying to do something about it.

With the "issues" you and F1VENOM have brought up I wonder if you were ever interested in my answers or you just wanted a reason to just stir things up in the Christian thread.

I wish you both a good day.
__________________
Christ Krew#291Feedback: http://www.pbnation.com/feedback.php?u=383004

Last edited by RLN : 12-27-2012 at 05:21 PM.
RLN is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-27-2012, 05:30 PM #262
markcheb
surrender...don't move
 
markcheb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: across the Jordan river
Anywhos...

Richard - Did your shocker arrive? I'm a sucker for a nice sft (but haven't owned a nxt). If it did call pics or shens.


Question - If I were to believe I had an experience/revelation/insight into or about God, but didn't have biblical support, would your encourage me to pursue it?
__________________
Which thief ~»††«~ are you?
ChristKrew #185
Anointing foreheads with the paintball for a while now.
Where's God? - Read Luke 15:11-32
markcheb is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-27-2012, 06:16 PM #263
RLN
 
 
RLN's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Guam
RLN donated to help Peyton Trent
RLN owns a Planet Eclipse Ego
RLN has achieved Level 1 in PbNation Pursuit
RLN has achieved Level 2 in PbNation Pursuit
No not yet...I hope it arrives today and hopefully my Eigenbolt as well...I also have a TiPX being mailed to me as well. It does kinda suck that the only local field out here is likely to close.

I say pursue it and see where it leads. Just remember to pray to the Holy Spirit for guidance. Remember not everything is explicitly expressed in the Bible but it can be implicit and as long as it doesn't contradict Scripture you should be fine.
__________________
Christ Krew#291Feedback: http://www.pbnation.com/feedback.php?u=383004
RLN is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-27-2012, 09:26 PM #264
markcheb
surrender...don't move
 
markcheb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: across the Jordan river
Quote:
Originally Posted by RLN View Post
No not yet...I hope it arrives today and hopefully my Eigenbolt as well...I also have a TiPX being mailed to me as well. It does kinda suck that the only local field out here is likely to close.
That would suck but let's hope that it doesn't. PBIF! And everyone should agree... or else.

Quote:
Originally Posted by RLN View Post
I say pursue it and see where it leads. Just remember to pray to the Holy Spirit for guidance. Remember not everything is explicitly expressed in the Bible but it can be implicit and as long as it doesn't contradict Scripture you should be fine.
Quote:
Originally Posted by from a quick google search
"The primary Catholic argument against sola scriptura is that the Bible does not explicitly teach sola scriptura. Catholics argue that the Bible nowhere states that it is the only authoritative guide for faith and practice. While this is true, they fail to recognize a crucially important issue. We know that the Bible is the Word of God. The Bible declares itself to be God-breathed, inerrant, and authoritative. We also know that God does not change His mind or contradict Himself. So, while the Bible itself may not explicitly argue for sola scriptura, it most definitely does not allow for traditions that contradict its message. Sola scriptura is not as much of an argument against tradition as it is an argument against unbiblical, extra-biblical and/or anti-biblical doctrines. The only way to know for sure what God expects of us is to stay true to what we know He has revealed—the Bible. We can know, beyond the shadow of any doubt, that Scripture is true, authoritative, and reliable. The same cannot be said of tradition."
Bold and underlined, read pretty much the same as your response.

I would believe that SS would be considered implicit and to be honest a reasonable conclusion to arrive at.
__________________
Which thief ~»††«~ are you?
ChristKrew #185
Anointing foreheads with the paintball for a while now.
Where's God? - Read Luke 15:11-32
markcheb is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-27-2012, 10:42 PM #265
vijil
Giant Paintball Robot
 
vijil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: New Zealand
I've often wondered about SS myself, but the fact that tradition and revelation = subjective or created by man while scripture = God's word certainly leans me towards erring on the side of caution - ie. SS. That said I understand the argument against.

If you feel you've had a revelation from God and it is not in scripture (ie. maybe a prophecy or somesuch) I'd personally talk it through with some elders. I honestly think many people are deceived by their emotions and expectations regarding such things. Right now my uncle (a Vineyard pastor) is talking about a vision/dream/prophecy he had of major revival in this town within two years. I've heard it all before, but still I'm interested to see what actually happens if anything.

Last edited by vijil : 12-27-2012 at 10:45 PM.
vijil is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-28-2012, 12:03 AM #266
RLN
 
 
RLN's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Guam
RLN donated to help Peyton Trent
RLN owns a Planet Eclipse Ego
RLN has achieved Level 1 in PbNation Pursuit
RLN has achieved Level 2 in PbNation Pursuit
Quote:
Originally Posted by markcheb View Post
That would suck but let's hope that it doesn't. PBIF! And everyone should agree... or else.


from a quick google search
"The primary Catholic argument against sola scriptura is that the Bible does not explicitly teach sola scriptura. Catholics argue that the Bible nowhere states that it is the only authoritative guide for faith and practice. While this is true, they fail to recognize a crucially important issue. We know that the Bible is the Word of God. The Bible declares itself to be God-breathed, inerrant, and authoritative. We also know that God does not change His mind or contradict Himself. So, while the Bible itself may not explicitly argue for sola scriptura, it most definitely does not allow for traditions that contradict its message. Sola scriptura is not as much of an argument against tradition as it is an argument against unbiblical, extra-biblical and/or anti-biblical doctrines. The only way to know for sure what God expects of us is to stay true to what we know He has revealed—the Bible. We can know, beyond the shadow of any doubt, that Scripture is true, authoritative, and reliable. The same cannot be said of tradition."

Bold and underlined, read pretty much the same as your response.

I would believe that SS would be considered implicit and to be honest a reasonable conclusion to arrive at.
But the Bible explicitly says otherwise. That's the point I made many posts ago. The Bible does state what the sole authority of faith is.

"But if I should be delayed, you should know how to behave in the household of God, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and foundation of truth" - 1 Timothy 3:15

So the "pillar and foundation of truth" is the Church. Not Scripture. It is the Church that provides the source of truth and is the authority on matters of faith for Christians. This makes perfect sense since the Church was present before the Bible and not the other way around. Otherwise what about the early-Christians who did not have the New Testament scriptures(and certainly not the Bible as we have it today) at least within the first 60 years after Christ had died?

Now what does the Bible say about Scripture:
"and that from infancy you have known [the] sacred scriptures, which are capable of giving you wisdom for salvation through faith in Christ Jesus."
- 2 Timothy 3:15

Scripture gives us wisdom for salvation. Scripture gives us wisdom. Note how it is not the authority on faith. Scripture cannot contradict itself. Yet the doctrine of Sola Scriptura does just that. Scripture clearly shows that Scripture is not the sole authority of truth and faith for Christians but that the Church is.

Furthermore the Bible tells us:
"Now Jesus did many other signs in the presence of [his] disciples that are not written in this book."-John 20:30

Not everything was written down. So how did we learn these things if not everything was written down? Think about that.

The quote says that Sola Scriptura is not an argument against tradition but against anti-biblical, extra-biblical/unbiblical doctrines. That Scripture is authoratative and reliable which can't be said the same about tradition. The reality is Sola Scriptura is a tradition created by men because it is not explicitly nor is it implictly spoken of in Scripture. And based on the passages I quoted above Sola Scriptura also contradicts Scripture!

Now not all tradition is bad and unbiblical. There is what we call sacred Tradition with a capital "T" which is much different from "traditions" of men with a lower case "t."

Let's take a look at:

2 Thessalonians 2:15 - "Therefore, brothers, stand firm and hold fast to the traditions that you were taught, either by an oral statement or by a letter of ours."

Wait, I thought Scripture taught against "traditions" but here Paul is saying to hold fast to "traditions?" Why? Is Paul wrong? Is Scripture contradicting itself?

2 Timothy 2:2 - "And what you heard from me through many witnesses entrust to faithful people who will have the ability to teach others as well"

So here we have Paul again telling Timothy to take what he has "heard" from him and share it with others. That's Oral Tradition.

1 Corinthians 11:2 - "I praise you because you remember me in everything and hold fast to the traditions, just as I handed them on to you."

Again we have Paul telling the early church to "hold fast to the traditions."

1 Thessalonians 2:13 - "And for this reason we too give thanks to God unceasingly, that, in receiving the word of God from hearing us, you received not a human word but, as it truly is, the word of God, which is now at work in you who believe."

Another example of "Oral Tradition" being passed on to the early Christians.

Acts 2:42 - "They devoted themselves to the teaching of the apostles and to the communal life, to the breaking of the bread and to the prayers."

The early Christians devoted themselves to the "teachings" of the apostles. If it was simply Scripture the Bible would say so but no it was the "teachings" of the apostles that the early Christians devoted themselves to. It was the Church that the early Christians learned from. Not the Bible.

So although I understand where your coming from and I love the Bible and read it daily and truly believe it is the Word of God. The reality is Sola Scriptura is not in the Bible even "implicitly." The Bible clearly states that it is the Church as the sole authority of faith and not Scripture. Furthermore we see that there are "Traditions" that are handed down by the apostles and early Christians that are not contradictory nor anti-biblical that we are to follow.

Sola Scriptura is a tradition created by men and did not appear on the scene of Christianity until the 1500s. It was never taught via the written Word of God (the Bible) nor the Oral Traditions of the apostles, early church fathers, and leaders of the Christian Church down the centuries.

Rather we should use both the written and the oral word of God. Both Scripture and the Oral Traditions and teachings of the Church guide us closer to God.

God bless brother.
__________________
Christ Krew#291Feedback: http://www.pbnation.com/feedback.php?u=383004
RLN is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-28-2012, 06:42 AM #267
vijil
Giant Paintball Robot
 
vijil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: New Zealand
The idea that sola scriptura is self defeating via support for tradition doesn't work, given that the traditions it speaks of are now included in the canon. There may be good arguments against SS, but this is not one.

1tim3:15 is a misinterpretation. A "pillar and ground" is a foundation, ie. it is not the truth in itself. This passage is saying that the church upholds the truth, but is not the source thereof.

2tim3:15 says that scripture is for wisdom to salvation. Why then has the RCC such a huge role for tradition in understanding salvation? Confessing to priests, doing sacraments, etc. - Bigger than the role of scripture if that chart is even a teensy bit correct.

John 20:30 does not say nor imply that we are supposed to know the other things Jesus did via tradition or revelation.

2 Thes 2:15 - at the time there was no NT. As such, the NT existed in the form of oral tradition. We now call that oral tradition scripture. Since everything important in the oral tradition was written down, there is no longer a need for tradition as a separate means to truth. Everything was written down by the time the canon was established so more writings would be in the Bible if more were needed. The protestant position is therefore that all Spirit inspired tradition *became* scripture. The various councils ensured this so the RCC idea of tradition is therefore redundant.

2 Tim 2:2 - see above.
1 Cor 11:2 - " "
1 Thes 2:13 - " "
Acts 2:42 - " "

Even if one can successfully argue that not all tradition made it into the canon, this is still enough to show that sola scriptura cannot be invalidated by scriptural support for oral tradition. A better argument would be that some nonbiblical tradition is inspired and necessary. Hard to prove though. This is the ground which many heresies claim.

A different (and equally flawed) argument against SS is that scripture itself doesn't teach it, and therefore fails to satisfy its own rules. I don't buy this - the Bible does not have to preach SS in order for SS to be valid, the Bible simply has to be the only infallible word of God. The issue therefore is not whether SS teaches itself, but whether the Bible is in fact the only infallible Word. Given that all the important traditions are included therein, and given that outside of original tradition and scripture nothing is considered infallible, SS is therefore a natural logical endpoint. The only logical way to disprove SS is to prove extrabiblical inerrancy and necessity. Scripture doesn't clearly teach either way besides considering itself inspired.

Last edited by vijil : 12-28-2012 at 07:21 AM.
vijil is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-28-2012, 01:01 PM #268
RLN
 
 
RLN's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Guam
RLN donated to help Peyton Trent
RLN owns a Planet Eclipse Ego
RLN has achieved Level 1 in PbNation Pursuit
RLN has achieved Level 2 in PbNation Pursuit
Okay let's re-clarify what I mean by the source of truth. The source of truth is first and foremost from God. When I say the source of truth is from the Church what I am alluding to is that it is the Church that Scripture tells that has the authority to determine matters of faith and not the Scripture itself. Sola Scripture teaches that it is the Bible Alone is the only source that we need to turn to when dealing with matters of faith. Hope that clarifies what I mean by source and I apologize for the confusion. Sometimes what I am trying to convey does not come out exactly especially when I'm distracted from work while responding to a question.

So let's take a look at 1 Timothy 3:15. It says the Church is the "pillar" of truth. What is a "pillar." Merriam-Webster dictionary says a pillar is a "a firm upright support for a superstructure ." So the Church is the support behind the truth. So I agree with you the Church upholds the truth.

1 Timothy 3:15 also says that the Church is the ground of truth. Other translations say "foundation of truth." And some translations say "bulwark of truth."

According to the Merriam-Webster dictionary ground can be defined as "a basis for belief, action, or argument." Another definition is "an area to be won or defended in or as if in battle."

Now foundation can be defined as "a basis (as a tenet, principle, or axiom) upon which something stands or is supported." It can also be defined as " a body or ground upon which something is built up or overlaid" or defined as "an underlying base or support; especially : the whole masonry substructure of a building."

Bulwark is defined as "a solid wall-like structure raised for defense" or defined as "a strong support or protection."

So by these definitions the Church is the basis of truth, the area where truth is defended, the place where truth is built upon, the underlying base of truth, the solid wall structure raised to defend the truth, the strong support of truth, and the protection of truth.

Just based on these definitions of the words "Pillar" and "Ground"(or foundation or bulwark) it clearly shows that scripture is saying that the Church is the source that Christians go to on matters of faith because the Church is the foundation, authority, and protector of that truth.

Again no where in the Bible does it explicitly nor implicitly say that the Bible Alone is the source and sole authority on matters of faith. It just doesn't say that and it just isn't in the Bible. For those who adhere to Sola Scriptura I ask, "How can you believe in Sola Scriptura or the Bible Alone doctrine and it isn't even in the Bible?" To me that's contradictory.

2 Timothy 3:15 - "and how from childhood you have known in sacred writings that are able to instruct you for salvation through faith in Christ Jesus."

First of all, the Roman Catholic Church does not de-emphasize Scripture. It doesn't. I'm a Catholic and not once was I discouraged nor told not to read Scripture. Scripture plays a very important role in my daily walk as a Catholic Christian and in the worship life of my Church. Second, the basis of all the Sacraments and Sacred Tradition is found in Scripture and does not contradict Scripture. Now rather than get into detail about the Sacraments and Sacred Tradition lets focus on this 2 Timothy 3:15.

We see that Paul is writing to Timothy and he says that "from childhood you have known the sacred writings" to Timothy. Timothy was a young adult at this time and I'm pretty sure there was no New Testament during his childhood. So what sacred writings is Paul referring to? The Old Testament. So therefore one could conclude that Sola Scriptura only applies to the Old Testament and not the New Testament which was not completed during nor available at this time in history. The OT was the only sacred writing available at the time. There was no NT so we don't need the NT for salvation, theology, and matters of faith. Of course no one would agree to that statement. Because both the OT and NT are important for our faith.

Let's look at the verse before it, verse 14 - " But as for you, continue in what you have learned and firmly believed, knowing from whom you learned it," - Here we see that Paul is telling Timothy to use what he has learned and trust in whom he has learned from (Paul). Paul is talking about Oral teachings and traditions. Paul used Oral Tradition to verbally instruct Timothy. So what we see is Paul telling Timothy to use both "Tradition"(teachings he received orally) and "Scripture"(OT since NT was not available at the time). Doesn't sound like Paul is advocating "Scripture Alone" but both Scripture and Tradition.

John 20:30 - "Now Jesus did many other signs in the presence of his disciples, which are not written in this book."

Okay, I'll give you that, it doesn't necessarily imply that we are supposed to know the other things that Jesus did. After reading this verse including the few verses before it I realized that this verse if anything does not support Sola Scriptura either. Rather it tells us only that the Bible was composed so we can be helped to believe Jesus is the Messiah. It does not say the Bible is all we need for salvation, much less that the Bible is all we need for theology; nor does it say the Bible is even necessary to believe in Christ.

2 Thessalonians 2:15, 2 Tim 2:2, 1 Cor 11:2, 1 Thessalonians 2:13, Acts 2:42 -

I'd like to know where it says in Scripture that everything that is needed is recorded in Scripture since that's basically your response to those Scripture verses above? Show me where does it state in Scripture that all the "needed Oral Tradition" is now written in the Bible? Or are you appealing to documents outside of Scripture to prove this? But doesn't that go against Sola Scriptura or the Bible Alone doctrine since these documents would be considered not only outside of scripture but "traditions" of men since it's not in the Bible based on your statement that the "important traditions" are now in the Bible. If what you say is true, that the "important" traditions are written down then why is it that when Paul says to hold on to the traditions in the various verses above no where in Scripture are we told what exactly these traditions are? You'd think we'd at least know what traditions to hold onto.

Now back to the discussions earlier about how Catholics choose Scripture over tradition such as the Sacraments. Using the Sola Scriptura approach show me in the Bible where the word "Trinity" is. After all, one of the basic tenets of the Christian faith is the doctrine of the Trinity. Yet the word Trinity is not in the Bible. But we both know that Scripture supports the doctrine of the Trinity and both you and I can quote Scripture to support it even if we don't see the word "Trinity" in the Bible. The same can be said about the Sacraments and other doctrines of the Catholic Church. As I said in previous posts in the past, there is nothing in the Catholic Church that contradicts Scripture. If there is show me. So far no one has been able to do so.

Many Protestants also have traditions that are not found in the Bible. Sunday worship is not in the Bible. "Altar calls" are not in the Bible. Wednesday night worship is not in the Bible. Forming Bible study groups is not in the Bible. And I'm sure many more other "traditions" are done by Protestants or non-Catholic Christians that are not found in the Bible. Since ware in the season...the Christmas Tree is not in the Bible. The use of Christmas Trees is a tradition that is not found in the Bible yet it is specifically linked to a Christian celebration. If the Bible is against traditions then we should stop doing the things I mentioned above since they are traditions and not found in Scripture.

Now how can we determine what is Apostolic Scripture or Inspired Scripture versus man-made writing that is not inspired by God?

Since you say the important traditions are in the Bible now for the sake of discussion how was it determined which traditions were Apostolic or Inspired and what was simply "traditions of men?"

I would say to you that it was the Church who determined what was Apostolic or Inspired Scripture and which was Sacred Tradition and what was not. It was the Church that compiled, safe guarded, and eventually determined the Canon of Scripture. The only Church around that far back in history the Catholic Church. The Bible we have is because of the Catholic Church and like or not every non-Catholic Christian must admit this truth that without the Catholic Church we would not have the Bible today.
__________________
Christ Krew#291Feedback: http://www.pbnation.com/feedback.php?u=383004
RLN is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-28-2012, 04:27 PM #269
gracefool
buccaneer scholar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
How wrong sola scriptura is depends on how far it is taken.



At one end you have "all other authorities are subordinate to, and are to be corrected by, the written word of God." This is meaningless beyond the general sentiment of caring about what Scripture says. The word is *always* subject to interpretation by some authority, whether it is you as the reader, the person explaining it to you, or a position taken by a church group (doctrine). There is no possible way that writing by itself can be an ultimate authority on anything, because it has a limited ability to explain itself, no ability to apply itself to new situations, and everyone reads it in a slightly different way.

In any practical sense, Scripture is always a collaboration between the writing (prophecy and historical community) and the interpretation and application of the Church (modern community). The formation of the canon is an obvious example. Another is the writing of translations. Another is preaching.



At the other end you have bibliolatry, common in evangelical churches. There is a very common and ridiculous view that the Bible is easy to read, and that its meaning is always obvious - that you can simply read it by itself, by yourself, and naturally arrive at the correct conclusions. There is always a need for proper exegesis, reading within both the context of the entire Scriptures, and the wider historical context without which it can't make sense. Without good interpretation you will *definitely* get things wrong.

There are a great many clinically insane people whose craziness is caused by their strongly-held beliefs that they found in the bible.

*God* is the only infallible source of doctrine. The Bible is just a bunch of books. Very important books to be sure, but it isn't the Word in the same sense that Jesus is.

Scripture doesn't claim itself to be infallible or sufficient. In fact the scriptural position is that truth cannot be found or practised outside of community.



Sola scriptura is the attempt of Protestants to prove themselves right tautologically, without having to actually engage with the Catholic churches (or whatever other church group they disagree with). They have their own doctrines that don't come from Scripture - it's necessary to have some. Protestants should address the theological and doctrinal issues rather than trying to win with a fundamental statement about how their approach is better than everyone else's.

Last edited by gracefool : 12-28-2012 at 04:29 PM. Reason: minor copyedit
gracefool is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-28-2012, 05:08 PM #270
markcheb
surrender...don't move
 
markcheb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: across the Jordan river
I'm guessing Harry, but maybe Brent (though I'm not sure it's in his character to be *shy*). Could be wrong on all accounts, either way good input.
__________________
Which thief ~»††«~ are you?
ChristKrew #185
Anointing foreheads with the paintball for a while now.
Where's God? - Read Luke 15:11-32
markcheb is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-28-2012, 05:42 PM #271
RLN
 
 
RLN's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Guam
RLN donated to help Peyton Trent
RLN owns a Planet Eclipse Ego
RLN has achieved Level 1 in PbNation Pursuit
RLN has achieved Level 2 in PbNation Pursuit
Quote:
Originally Posted by gracefool View Post
How wrong sola scriptura is depends on how far it is taken.



At one end you have "all other authorities are subordinate to, and are to be corrected by, the written word of God." This is meaningless beyond the general sentiment of caring about what Scripture says. The word is *always* subject to interpretation by some authority, whether it is you as the reader, the person explaining it to you, or a position taken by a church group (doctrine). There is no possible way that writing by itself can be an ultimate authority on anything, because it has a limited ability to explain itself, no ability to apply itself to new situations, and everyone reads it in a slightly different way.

In any practical sense, Scripture is always a collaboration between the writing (prophecy and historical community) and the interpretation and application of the Church (modern community). The formation of the canon is an obvious example. Another is the writing of translations. Another is preaching.



At the other end you have bibliolatry, common in evangelical churches. There is a very common and ridiculous view that the Bible is easy to read, and that its meaning is always obvious - that you can simply read it by itself, by yourself, and naturally arrive at the correct conclusions. There is always a need for proper exegesis, reading within both the context of the entire Scriptures, and the wider historical context without which it can't make sense. Without good interpretation you will *definitely* get things wrong.

There are a great many clinically insane people whose craziness is caused by their strongly-held beliefs that they found in the bible.

*God* is the only infallible source of doctrine. The Bible is just a bunch of books. Very important books to be sure, but it isn't the Word in the same sense that Jesus is.

Scripture doesn't claim itself to be infallible or sufficient. In fact the scriptural position is that truth cannot be found or practised outside of community.



Sola scriptura is the attempt of Protestants to prove themselves right tautologically, without having to actually engage with the Catholic churches (or whatever other church group they disagree with). They have their own doctrines that don't come from Scripture - it's necessary to have some. Protestants should address the theological and doctrinal issues rather than trying to win with a fundamental statement about how their approach is better than everyone else's.


Such a simple explanation of why Sola Scriptura is unbiblical....it comes down to interpretation of Scripture and who has the authority to interpret Scripture. Although I admit, I am not ready to head down that path of explanation/reasoning. It is nonetheless an option which I need to read-up on myself. The only thing I'd add to the above is Sola Scriptura is the reason why we have literally tens and thousands of different Christian denominations with no two denomination having the same exact doctrine or Scripture interpretations.

Matthew 12:25
"Jesus knew their thoughts and said to them, “Every kingdom divided against itself will be ruined, and every city or household divided against itself will not stand."

Mark 3:24-26
"If a house is divided against itself, that house cannot stand."

Luke 11:17
"Jesus knew their thoughts and said to them: “Any kingdom divided against itself will be ruined, and a house divided against itself will fall"
__________________
Christ Krew#291Feedback: http://www.pbnation.com/feedback.php?u=383004

Last edited by RLN : 12-28-2012 at 05:49 PM.
RLN is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-28-2012, 08:42 PM #272
RLN
 
 
RLN's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Guam
RLN donated to help Peyton Trent
RLN owns a Planet Eclipse Ego
RLN has achieved Level 1 in PbNation Pursuit
RLN has achieved Level 2 in PbNation Pursuit
Received my shocker yesterday However the seller forgot to include the bolt. He warned me that he had an extra bolt lying around and suspected he forgot to put the bolt back into the marker after lubing it. So he'll be mailing it to me Luckily I took the bolt from my SFT and I was good to go. But then I noticed the eyes were malfunctioning After trouble shooting the issue from checking the battery, verifying that the correct eye logic is selected (Virtue redefined), verifying the ribbons, and switching boards with my SFT which has the older Virtue board it looks like the Redefined board is the culprit. Thank God that Virtue has a lifetime warranty and I can send it in for repairs or software update with no questions ask. Hopefully my Eigen bolt arrives today and I can just play at the field with the eyes turned off and lowering the ROF to reduce the chances of chopping.
__________________
Christ Krew#291Feedback: http://www.pbnation.com/feedback.php?u=383004
RLN is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-29-2012, 05:20 PM #273
RLN
 
 
RLN's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Guam
RLN donated to help Peyton Trent
RLN owns a Planet Eclipse Ego
RLN has achieved Level 1 in PbNation Pursuit
RLN has achieved Level 2 in PbNation Pursuit
For those of us who live in the USA or are US citizens. Here's a great article on why the HHS Mandate tramples on our 1st Amendment.

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/badcath...s-mandate.html
__________________
Christ Krew#291Feedback: http://www.pbnation.com/feedback.php?u=383004
RLN is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools

Posting Rules
Forum Jump