Bible, sole authority?

[ntchristian]

That is a bit of a silly question. Since only Protestants believe in Sola Scriptura ("Scripture alone"), then only the Protestant Bible counts for Protestants. Roman Catholics and the Orthodox Churches all accept authority as "scripture plus". So there is no reason for a protestant to use a Catholic or Orthodox bible over their own as "Scripture alone". The Catholics and Orthodox reject "Scripture alone" so the question is a non-issue for them.

I kind of get your point, but I think you kind of missed mine.

 

[ntchristian]

NO earthly church is the true church of Christ, as that would be all of the redeemed out from various churches!

I agree with you on that!

 

[Salty]

Southern Baptist minister says he turns to Roman Catholic churches, when he wants to hear Scripture:

Pastor Mark Dever, Capitol Hill Baptist Church, Washington DC

Dever noted that he visits many evangelical services where corporate prayer is noticeably absent....The Baptist pastor...underscored the importance of publicly reading Scripture aloud, noting that many evangelical churches do not spend time doing that anymore. When he goes on vacation he says he has to go to a Roman Catholic church for a reliable place to find that"

Okay, I must have been absent that day- Where does Scripture say it MUST be read aloud? and if so? How many verses or chapters much be read. Must it be done in unison or only the pastor should read. Must a passage be read from both Testaments or just the Scripture you are preaching that day? Is it required that everyone stand when that Scripture is read - a) only when the text is read or b) every time the pastor reads out of his Bible.

 

[robycop3]

Do you think there can be secondary sources of authority as long as they agree with scripture in fact or principle?

Only if it agrees completely & absolutely with Scripture, free of any additions or subtractions.

Cults and spurious authorities function by adding or subtracting meanings to certain Scriptures. The standard of Scripture is the measuring rod & final earthly arbiter in all matters of faith/worship. Scripture is GOD'S Constitution, His written law. We have no higher authority on earth, & won't have, til Jesus physically returns. And when he does, I believe He will still govern by "It is WRITTEN...".

 

[ntchristian]

Only if it agrees completely & absolutely with Scripture, free of any additions or subtractions.

Cults and spurious authorities function by adding or subtracting meanings to certain Scriptures. The standard of Scripture is the measuring rod & final earthly arbiter in all matters of faith/worship. Scripture is GOD'S Constitution, His written law. We have no higher authority on earth, & won't have, til Jesus physically returns. And when he does, I believe He will still govern by "It is WRITTEN...".

I agree with you. But what about when there is disagreement on the meaning of particular scriptures? For a person searching for truth, how do they know which interpretation is the right one?

 

[robycop3]

I agree with you. But what about when there is disagreement on the meaning of particular scriptures? For a person searching for truth, how do they know which interpretation is the right one?

I believe the rule of "common sense" must apply.

Since almost everyone here uses Bible translations, we should use the meaning which is the closest to the sources that are translated. For example, the KJV, in Ex. 20:13 reads "Thou shalt not KILL", when the Hebrew source for that verse actually means, "You shall not MURDER." After all, everything we eat is something we've killed, plant or animal.

And, of course, different meanings can apply to various cultures. For example, on a Pacific island, a man might dress up for church by wearing a brightly-colored loincloth & a shiny necklace. which would be inappropriate to wear to church in the USA or Japan.

 

[Yeshua1]

I agree with you. But what about when there is disagreement on the meaning of particular scriptures? For a person searching for truth, how do they know which interpretation is the right one?

For example, we can discern form the scriptures that Baptismal regeneration is not valid, as to be saved by God one must receives Jesus thru faith in him and His finished work!

 

[Walpole]

For example, we can discern form the scriptures that Baptismal regeneration is not valid, as to be saved by God one must receives Jesus thru faith in him and His finished work!

Perhaps in your discernment you overlooked these passages of Scripture, which explicitly teach baptismal regeneration.

Here is St. Paul...

"Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ also loved the Church and gave Himself up for her; that He might sanctify her, having cleansed her by the washing of water with the word, that He might present to Himself the Church in all her glory, having no spot or wrinkle or any such thing; but that she should be holy and blameless.” (Eph 5:25-27)


“He saved us, not on the basis of deeds which we have done in righteousness, but according to His mercy, by the washing of regeneration and renewing by the Holy Spirit.” (Titus 3:5)


Here is Ananias instructing St. Paul about it...

“Now why do you delay? Get up and be baptized, and wash away your sins, calling on His name.” (Acts 22:16)

 

[Yeshua1]

Perhaps in your discernment you overlooked these passages of Scripture, which explicitly teach baptismal regeneration.

Here is St. Paul...

"Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ also loved the Church and gave Himself up for her; that He might sanctify her, having cleansed her by the washing of water with the word, that He might present to Himself the Church in all her glory, having no spot or wrinkle or any such thing; but that she should be holy and blameless.” (Eph 5:25-27)


“He saved us, not on the basis of deeds which we have done in righteousness, but according to His mercy, by the washing of regeneration and renewing by the Holy Spirit.” (Titus 3:5)


Here is Ananias instructing St. Paul about it...

“Now why do you delay? Get up and be baptized, and wash away your sins, calling on His name.” (Acts 22:16)

The first passage refers to the scriptures themselves are the cleansing agent, second one is done thru faith in Jesus, not by the water, and third one is in the greek stating to us that we are being water baptized now into Jesus, as HE is the source of the remission of our sins!

You are filtering the scriptures thru the lens of your Church theology!

 

[robycop3]

if you were led to Jesus by any of the following:
Mom &/or dad
Granny or gramps
Pastor
Friend/acquaintance
Teleminister or radio preacher
Traveling evangelist
Tracts
Their ultimate source of intel about God was SCRIPTURE!

 

[Walpole]

The first passage refers to the scriptures themselves are the cleansing agent, second one is done thru faith in Jesus, not by the water, and third one is in the greek stating to us that we are being water baptized now into Jesus, as HE is the source of the remission of our sins!

You are filtering the scriptures thru the lens of your Church theology!

How did you discern that...

"Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ also loved the Church and gave Himself up for her; that He might sanctify her, having cleansed her by the washing of water with the word, that He might present to Himself the Church in all her glory, having no spot or wrinkle or any such thing; but that she should be holy and blameless.” (Eph 5:25-27)

...Is referring to the Scriptures? If you take "the word" to be referring to the Scriptures, you still have to deal with the water in that passage, which St. Paul says sanctified and cleansed (i.e. regenerated).

 

[robycop3]

You forgot that Jesus saved the repentant thief on the cross who couldn't be baptized.

 

[Yeshua1]

How did you discern that...

"Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ also loved the Church and gave Himself up for her; that He might sanctify her, having cleansed her by the washing of water with the word, that He might present to Himself the Church in all her glory, having no spot or wrinkle or any such thing; but that she should be holy and blameless.” (Eph 5:25-27)

...Is referring to the Scriptures? If you take "the word" to be referring to the Scriptures, you still have to deal with the water in that passage, which St. Paul says sanctified and cleansed (i.e. regenerated).

No, rather its identifying the water that was washing was the word, scripture, itself!

 

[Yeshua1]

You forgot that Jesus saved the repentant thief on the cross who couldn't be baptized.

That one example proves saved by Grace alone, thru faith alone!

 

[Walpole]

No, rather its identifying the water that was washing was the word, scripture, itself!

Let's put your assertion to the logic test. If the water is the word, then the passage can be rendered as follows:

"...that He might sanctify her, having cleansed her by the washing of THE WORD WITH THE WORD...”

Do you think this is logical?

 

[Yeshua1]

Let's put your assertion to the logic test. If the water is the word, then the passage can be rendered as follows:

"...that He might sanctify her, having cleansed her by the washing of THE WORD WITH THE WORD...”

Do you think this is logical?

The entire scriptures teach to us that we are saved once received Jesus thru faith as our lord, so cannot be thru water baptism!

 

[Walpole]

The entire scriptures teach to us that we are saved once received Jesus thru faith as our lord, so cannot be thru water baptism!

Mark 16:16 ---> "Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved, but whoever does not believe will be condemned."

This is Christianity 101.

The anti-Sacramentalism so rampant in modern Protestantism is the result of a fallacious Christology. Try as modern Protestants may to rid Christianity of baptism, they cannot. For it is in baptism where man is born again, which gives him "newness of life." (cf. Romans 6:4)

In Christianity, matter...matters.

 

[Yeshua1]

Mark 16:16 ---> "Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved, but whoever does not believe will be condemned."

This is Christianity 101.

The anti-Sacramentalism so rampant in modern Protestantism is the result of a fallacious Christology. Try as modern Protestants may to rid Christianity of baptism, they cannot. For it is in baptism where man is born again, which gives him "newness of life." (cf. Romans 6:4)

In Christianity, matter...matters.

So what happened to the thief on the Cross when he died?

 

[Salty]

You forgot that Jesus saved the repentant thief on the cross who couldn't be baptized.

Well, here is the answer that BR's will give - "The Thief on the Cross was saved before the Death and Resurrection of Christ." Thus
they say, we were not yet under the New Covenant yet.

 

[Adonia]

You forgot that Jesus saved the repentant thief on the cross who couldn't be baptized.

Good grief. We have the Lord himself sending the thief to heaven, so it is no wonder that a water baptism was not needed for this particular individual to enter paradise. Not so for the rest of us as the scriptures are pretty clear that baptism is a requirement, not just a suggestion.