Sola Scriptura - does this foundation make you a heretic

[KBCid]

Dear KBCid,
Looks like we are still in agreement: What was considered scripture and what was not considered scripture was debated by many people at many times. It was debated because they couldn't rely on "scripture alone" to decide what is scripture.

People can debate whatever makes them happy but, it still doesn't mean that you cannot rely on scripture alone. Now for you it may seem like you cannot rely on scripture alone and having traditions of man makes everything better for you but that is and will be your opinion.

You left out the debates at the Council of Hippo and Carthage. Today’s Bible owes a debt to many ancient debates.You do know that the Muratorian Canon is a fragment and scholars don't know what larger work it was a part of and that it starts in the middle of an unknown sentence. Some scholars have re-dated it to the fourth century.
If the there was a list of books that belong in the bible AND that list was in scripture, then there would not be a debate. Since we can't rely on your "scripture alone" theory then there will always be a debate.
BTW......Your Colossians 1:24-25 reference has NOTHING to do with what books belong in the bible.
IHS...Mary

I left out nothing of any consequence. I showed you right up front that there was no Holy Spirit in attendance during the attempt to canonize. The bible owes a debt to God who commissioned its texts to be written and canonized by his oracles. There was also the point you failed to see;
.....No church created the canon, but the churches and councils gradually accepted the list of books recognized by believers everywhere as inspired. How were the books of the Bible chosen?
The canon you believe was "determined" by men in the centuries after the apostles is not true. God's people, the small little group that has always kept going by God's providence has kept those canonized scriptures since the commissioned apostles (Jews / oracles of God who wrote them) in play throughout time since Christ. For someone to recognize and assert that they are the true canon does not in fact make them discerners of truth or directed by the Holy spirit it just means they are finally accepting what God has already put in motion.
The Colossians reference was a clue for you. I will not spell out everything for you because you are set in your belief that mans traditions are the equivalent of a true oracle of God. Thus, we are not one in our understanding.
Christ commissioned 11 to carry his message to the world so, the message as it has been written by those empowered with the Holy spirit by Christ are the only scriptures capable of being in the canon God made.

Matthew 28:16 Then the eleven disciples went away into Galilee, into a mountain where Jesus had appointed them. 17 And when they saw him, they worshipped him: but some doubted. 18 And Jesus came and spake unto them, saying, All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth. 19 Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in my Name: 20 Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you always, even unto the end of the world. Amen.

 

[mjrhealth]

ha, i don't read those Bibles, haven't for years, for that reason. Don't even pick them up. I reference them in discussions, but i read from a Lexicon now, or sometimes a literal translation.

I am not sure if you are trying to win the number of posts competition if there is one, surely you can add all you comments in one?? There are only 2 issues I see with the bible, one is that christians call it "Gods" word when we can all see not everything in there was out of Gods mouth, and 2, is the place it has in mens hearts, when men have idols in there hearts they seek to defend them and this book as you can see from the , "ire" it can manifest when spoken of, has become teh biggest Idol of all. Does if not say we must not make Idols of things on teh earth or from heaven????

 

[mjrhealth]

Man, with the guidance of the Holy Spirit, decided what is scripture. Scripture didn't decide what is scripture.

That is cow pooh, really a bunch of religious men who had a reason to keep the truth from men, and needed the book to reflect there beliefs and ideas, put that book together, even KJ had political reasons for having his version translated as He did. But I do agree with one thing as that without the Holy Spirit its just a book,

Isa 29:10 For the LORD hath poured out upon you the spirit of deep sleep, and hath closed your eyes: the prophets and your rulers, the seers hath he covered.
Isa 29:11 And the vision of all is become unto you as the words of a book that is sealed, which men deliver to one that is learned, saying, Read this, I pray thee: and he saith, I cannot; for it is sealed:
Isa 29:12 And the book is delivered to him that is not learned, saying, Read this, I pray thee: and he saith, I am not learned.
Isa 29:13 Wherefore the Lord said, Forasmuch as this people draw near me with their mouth, and with their lips do honour me, but have removed their heart far from me, and their fear toward me is taught by the precept of men:
Isa 29:14 Therefore, behold, I will proceed to do a marvellous work among this people, even a marvellous work and a wonder: for the wisdom of their wise men shall perish, and the understanding of their prudent men shall be hid.

 

[Angelina]

I think that when there is a spiritual, there is also a physical...JM2c

 

[Marymog]

People can debate whatever makes them happy but, it still doesn't mean that you cannot rely on scripture alone. Now for you it may seem like you cannot rely on scripture alone and having traditions of man makes everything better for you but that is and will be your opinion.

Dear KBCid,

Using scripture alone I can not find a list of books that are supposed to be in scripture.

Using scripture alone YOU can not find a list of books that are supposed to be in scripture.

YOU relied on MEN who debated the subject and came up with the bible. Therefor your "scripture alone" theory is self defeating.

IHS...Mary

 

[michaelvpardo]

You are right that we should be a "Living Sacrifice as an example" but you come up short when you say we should not make compelling argument as well. Christ was our example, he came with both words and actions to exemplify that a true reflection of the Father is one in thought and deed.

If you "love thy neighbour as thyself" wouldn't you think that helping your neighbor find the God of love the neighborly thing to do?

I believe that we are instructed to always be ready to have an answer for the hope within us (a reason for our faith.)

 

[bbyrd009]

I am not sure if you are trying to win the number of posts competition if there is one, surely you can add all you comments in one?

sorry, my scroll-up button is still mostly broken, making that a big pain, so i forget

 

[mjrhealth]

YOU relied on MEN who debated the subject and came up with the bible.

Where do you think yours came from???

 

[bbyrd009]

There are only 2 issues I see with the bible, one is that christians call it "Gods" word when we can all see not everything in there was out of Gods mouth, and 2, is the place it has in mens hearts, when men have idols in there hearts they seek to defend them and this book as you can see from the , "ire" it can manifest when spoken of, has become teh biggest Idol of all. Does if not say we must not make Idols of things on teh earth or from heaven?

ya, so don't. Meanwhile, beating other people up over the matter, pulling tares, is not going to encourage the shift in pov that you envision, at least i don't think. Don't expect people to joyfully acknowledge that Book is not Word if they are not ready, after a lifetime of believing otherwise, or anyway do so at your peril imo, "do not find love until you are ready."

 

[Marymog]

Where do you think yours came from???

Hi mrhealth,

Men who debated the subject and came up with (canonized) our current bible. That is what I have been saying all along.

 

[bbyrd009]

That is cow pooh, really a bunch of religious men who had a reason to keep the truth from men, and needed the book to reflect there beliefs and ideas, put that book together

wow if that is true, then these, what might you call them? Sanhedrin? or i guess the scribes were Sadducees, right? didn't do themselves much justice lol

 

[mjrhealth]

ya, so don't. Meanwhile, beating other people up over the matter, pulling tares, is not going to encourage the shift in pov that you envision, at least i don't think. Don't expect people to joyfully acknowledge that Book is not Word if they are not ready, after a lifetime of believing otherwise, or anyway do so at your peril imo, "do not find love until you are ready."

Dont quiet understand what you are getting at, but simply one can have a book or one can have Jesus, one gives us life the other on tells of the one who gives us life.. How much reading and studying does one need to come to teh conclusion, I am teh way teh truth and teh life says teh Lord, no man shall come into heaven except through me.

There are men who have never read teh bible who know about God, there are men who spend all teher lives studying, and in the end of it all only know "about" God, we are supposed top "know" God and that comes form being with Him not studying.

 

[mjrhealth]

Men who debated the subject and came up with (canonized) our current bible. That is what I have been saying all along

Nothing to do with any Holy Spirit,..

 

[KBCid]

If I may ask you a question with no tricks or tests in mind. You say the Holy Spirit is the "only" helper by the Father. My question is about the Holy Spirit also being called the Comforter in this verse:" And I will pray the Father, and he shall give you another Comforter, that he may abide with you for ever;" John 14:16
For me "another" Comforter is a second one, the first one being Jesus, himself. Would not Jesus also have been the first "helper" sent?

Sir you may ask anything you like. You have been honorable in all our interactions.
Christ indeed was a comforter to them as well as a counselor and a guide or helper. If you look at the context of the verse you quoted it is where Christ is telling the disciples that he will have to leave so, Christ is letting them know that they will not be left alone but that he will ask the Father to send them a helper.

To clarify what I am saying;
John 14:26 But the Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, he shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you.

The helper Christ is signifying can only be the one sent after his ascension since it will be the one who would have knowledge of what was already said by Him. Thus, though Christ was a helper in many ways (as you are thinking) and was sent by the Father both He and I are pointing to the Helper that would have the historic knowledge of what He has already said during his life in the physical world.

If this subject about the Holy spirit is of interest to you then I would ask of you to find the 2 places in the old testament where God tells about his people being given this spirit. This is also not a trick or a test. I am stating plainly that the references are there.

 

[Marymog]

Nothing to do with any Holy Spirit,..

Dear mrhealth,

The men who canonized the bible were inspired by the Holy Spirit just like the men who were inspired by the Holy Spirit in Acts 15:28. The decision in Act 15 was binding on all Christians.

Whatever the Church leaders bind on earth it is bound in heaven (Matthew 16). After a long debate the canon was bound by the men of the Church.

IHS....Mary

 

[KBCid]

Dear KBCid, Using scripture alone I can not find a list of books that are supposed to be in scripture. Using scripture alone YOU can not find a list of books that are supposed to be in scripture.YOU relied on MEN who debated the subject and came up with the bible. Therefor your "scripture alone" theory is self defeating.IHS...Mary

You have stated correctly that you cannot find a list of books in scripture and no one could find a list of books since they were not books to begin with. What you have formed is a straw man argument which is typically seen in the scientific circles.

A straw man is a common form of argument and is an informal fallacy based on giving the impression of refuting an opponent's argument, while refuting an argument that was not presented by that opponent.One who engages in this fallacy is said to be "attacking a straw man".
The typical straw man argument creates the illusion of having completely refuted or defeated an opponent's proposition through the covert replacement of it with a different proposition (i.e., "stand up a straw man") and the subsequent refutation of that false argument ("knock down a straw man") instead of the opponent's proposition.
This technique has been used throughout history in polemical debate, particularly in arguments about highly charged emotional issues where a fiery "battle" and the defeat of an "enemy" may be more valued than critical thinking or an understanding of both sides of the issue.
Straw man - Wikipedia

 

[mjrhealth]

The men who canonized the bible were inspired by the Holy Spirit just like the men who were inspired by the Holy Spirit in Acts 15:28. The decision in Act 15 was binding on all Christians.

No they where not, they had motive behind there translation, stop blaming God for mens evil desires.Just like pharaoh, making slaves of men, that is what religion is all about. Teh mistranslated bible was there justification.

 

[mjrhealth]

After a long debate the canon was bound by the men of the Church.

Yes teh RC Church who had motive, just as KJ did.

 

[Marymog]

You have stated correctly that you cannot find a list of books in scripture and no one could find a list of books since they were not books to begin with. What you have formed is a straw man argument which is typically seen in the scientific circles.

A straw man is a common form of argument and is an informal fallacy based on giving the impression of refuting an opponent's argument, while refuting an argument that was not presented by that opponent.One who engages in this fallacy is said to be "attacking a straw man".
The typical straw man argument creates the illusion of having completely refuted or defeated an opponent's proposition through the covert replacement of it with a different proposition (i.e., "stand up a straw man") and the subsequent refutation of that false argument ("knock down a straw man") instead of the opponent's proposition.
This technique has been used throughout history in polemical debate, particularly in arguments about highly charged emotional issues where a fiery "battle" and the defeat of an "enemy" may be more valued than critical thinking or an understanding of both sides of the issue.
Straw man - Wikipedia

YOU are the one who said we can rely on scripture alone, not me.

Can you back up that statement?

IHS....Mary

 

[Marymog]

Yes teh RC Church who had motive, just as KJ did.

I know you won't answer but I will ask anyway.....how many books are in the bible you read?

IHS...Mary