Hey Siggy! and everyone else!

Hope youse all here doing well!

As one who has never believed "Scriptures Alone," rather, as one for years having considered the Holy Scriptures as a plumb-line to weigh my [not my neighbors'] thoughts and actions against, I realize that my belief in "Plumb-Line Scriptures" comes from other Christians, several denominational experiences, and so on, I don't remember any writing by any spirit-hand upon any wall that indicated "Scriptures Alone."

And, reading and writing only English, and not even my former native German, not even near Latin, Greek, Aramaic [sp?], Chaldee Hebrew -- I definitely must depend up learned clergy, learned brothers & sisters, writings and consultations to help me understand the Holy Scriptures.

Definitely in the camp of "Scriptures Alone" is not I.

Roland
ps: my vision problems have not improved! however, I will do what I can
ps2: Siggy! how does subscribe topic and bookmark topic work? subscribe notifies me of replies, yes? bookmark flags topic upfront for me when I log in, yes?

I'm not sure about the bookmark thing, Roland. Try it out and see. Welcome back.

What would be your definition of infallible?

When satan tempted Christ,it would have been the perfect time,for Christ to say something other than what is in scripture,however He did'nt...He did'nt say,I say,He said scripture says...

With that said,are you saying that the books of the Bible are not inspired?You ask where does the Bible say,I ask where does it not say...

My faith in God allows me to believe that He was more than capable of keeping His words true...and for me to rely on nothing else but that word..

It's my belief that the only reason catholics don't rely on the Bible only is because if they were too,her doctrines could not stand...but then you turn around and say everything you teach can be backed by scripture,if that's the case,why do you need the extra?

"The fact is, every teaching that is not the true gospel, inevitably ends up rejecting God's word alone as the final authority over Church doctrine. In rejecting the Bible as the sole source of God's word today, man frees himself to add, take away from, or circumvent biblical truths by so-called oral traditions. For if the word of God is not the final authority, then they believe they can add other authorities with impunity. But when the "word of God alone" is not our rule of law, then God alone is not our authority. We have forsaken trust in the Lord and have made man to rule for God. Because when Church leaders decide to make up their own doctrines based upon their own understanding (rather than God's word), they are failing to acknowledge His supremacy. "

Tony Warren

Incapable of error.

He was speaking of the only Scripture He used, which was the Septuagint. There was no Canon of the New Testament, so we know that He was not speaking of the New Testament Canon.



No.



So, you admit you cannot meet the challenge.



That is not an answer to my challenge.

That is a false statement. We do rely on the Bible. It is our Book. It is part of Sacred Tradition. Now stop wasting our time and answer the challenge questions.

That does not answer the challenge. Tony Warren is not an infallible authority.

Apparently, he can't read either. The Bible does not say that the Bible is our final authority, ever, and you can't point to any verse from the Bible that says it is. The Bible, in fact, says that the Church is our final authority.

No man is infallble...period...or can you name me one that is...

So are you saying the catholic church can overrule scripture?



The Bible stands alone and does not belong to any group of people and it is not apart on any tradition,in fact it teaches against man's traditions...for the simple fact of what the catholic church does and that is to make void the Word of God...

"All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness, that the man of God may be complete, thoroughly equipped for every good work" (2 Timothy 3:16-17).

"Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation. For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost" (2 Peter 1:20-21).

What part of that don't you understand,does it say anything about traditions?..No it dos'nt...Christ did not have one good word to say about man's traditions...

It's funny how you claim catholic's gave us the Bible and yey you don't believe what's in it...go figure.

But if I tarry long, that thou mayest know how thou oughtest to behave thyself in the house of God, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and ground of the truth.

Therefore, brethren, stand fast; and hold the traditions which you have learned, whether by word, or by our epistle.



Oh, we believe.

No, I say to you: but unless you shall do penance, you shall all likewise perish.

Amen, amen I say unto you: Except you eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood, you shall not have life in you.

The chalice of benediction, which we bless, is it not the communion of the blood of Christ? And the bread, which we break, is it not the partaking of the body of the Lord?

But wilt thou know, O vain man, that faith without works is dead?

Confess therefore your sins one to another: and pray one for another, that you may be saved. For the continual prayer of a just man availeth much.

Just to name a few.

What we don't believe is your interpretation of Scripture. What we don't believe is that it is you and not the Church that has the authority to interpret that Scripture.

Head your own advice and stop interpreting scripture privately.

Then why do you rely on Tony Warren to prove the infallibility of the Bible, seeing as how he is not infallible? You have made him your infallible interpreter of Holy Scripture.



Don't know where you got that idea. Stop stonewalling.



If it stands alone, then you should be able to answer the challenge. More stonewalling.



Sacred Tradition is not man's traditions. Still stonewalling.



And you are a liar. And stonewalling again.



The Canon of the New Testament did not exist at that time, so it cannot be speaking of the New Testament. It also doesn't say that the Bible is our final authority. Are you admitting that there is a place for works in God's plan of salvation? More and more stonewalling.



And yet you rely upon your own private interpretation above that of the authority of the Church which Christ gave her to interpret Scripture.



Our Sacred Tradition is not "man's traditions".



Another lie. It is you who do not believe what's in it.

If you don't start answering the challenge, any further posts will not be approved in this thread.

Seems to me that you don't understand this verse,so let me help you out...It means that what the prophets wrote was not by their own thinking,rather they wrote by inspiration of the Holy Spirit...

Isaiah 1:2 - The Lord has spoken.
Jeremiah 10:1,2 - Hear the word which the Lord speaks. Thus says the Lord...
Ezekiel 1:3 - The word of the Lord came expressly.
Hosea 1:1,2 - The word of the Lord that came ... the Lord began to speak by Hosea, the Lord said...
Jonah 1:1 - The word of the Lord came to Jonah.
Micah 1:1 - The word of the Lord that came to Micah.
Zech. 1:1 - The word of the Lord came to Zechariah.

1 Corinthians 14:37 - The things I write are commands of Lord.

Ephesians 3:3-5 - The things Paul wrote were made known to him by revelation. Formerly these things were not known but have now been revealed by the Spirit to apostles & prophets.

1 Thessalonians 4:15 - We say by the word of the Lord.

1 Timothy 4:1 - The Spirit expressly says.

[2 Thessalonians 3:12; John 12:48-50; Acts 16:32; Romans 1:16; 1 Thessalonians 1:5]



traditions are not of God no matter what kind you say they are...

Quote:
....for the simple fact of what the catholic church does and that is to make void the Word of God...


And you are a liar. And stonewalling again.

Not my words

Mark 7:13
Making the word of God of none effect through your tradition, which ye have delivered: and many such like things do ye.

The Bible came from God...not man...that being the case it is infallible...

However if you say the Bible came from man...as you claim then I guess it's not,and you would be calling God a liar...

No one disagrees with that, but you are still interpreting the Bible your own way, for yourself. You are not one of the prophets.



Our point is that you can't prove that statement. How do you know that? Other books and other writers make the same claim.



You can't know that for certain and sure all by yourself. Other people have made the same claim. It took the Church to go through those writings and decide which ones were inspired and which were not.



The Bible says differently. Our Sacred Tradition is mentioned here:

2 Thess. 2:14 Therefore, brethren, stand fast; and hold the traditions which you have learned, whether by word, or by our epistle.



That isn't talking about Catholic Sacred Traditions.



We don't disagree with that. What we disagree with is the source of the knowledge that the Bible is infallible. The Bible doesn't even make that claim for itself, yet you use the Bible as your source, and then you interpret it privately to mean all sorts of things that are plainly error. We use the authority of the pillar and foundation of truth, which is the Church Christ established.



I'm calling you a liar. I never said the Bible came from man.

It seems you still don't understand the implications of private interpretation. The Prophets were moved by the Holy Spirit so the source of their prophecy was God Himself. Why do you think God did that? Well for one thing so scripture doesn't contradict itself (since it has only one source). Who is moving YOU when you interpret scripture? Who is moving the other thousands of protestant denominations that contradict one another on some very fundamental issues? And more importantly, who decides who is right? I would rethink your position if I were you.

n2, does the following sound like inspired Scripture to you?

Believe Him therefore, and fear Him, and in this fear be continent.

I've never been SolO or Bible Alone.
I've been SolA for years believing the Writings are a plumb line, a ruler, to keep oneself moderate and balanced in all things.
[Including less and less opening lower part of face and losing all of face in discussion boards.]

For the record, I believe readings of The Writings for me is greatly enhanced by resources and references, hopefully almost all of them of an orthodox nature. I'm very similar to the Ethiopian who asked who will guide me in my readings?

My corrective lens and hearing aids come from:
Worldwide Church of God pre-1995; and post-1995
resources & references being consulted
consultations with learned clergy & laypeople

If the above puts me outside of the group that says "Bible, God, me" [whatever order] -- so be it. Even though there is a difference in the distinction between SolO and SolA, I realize I must be careful to surround myself with learned helps to avoid falling into the ditches on either side of The Road.

Roland
ps: To me, Siggy's challenge remains intact.

Sorry my dear brother in Christ; We take Jesus on Faith, all others, including you my friend, will have to provide evidence for the claims you make!