So because the Creator of all things adds to Scripture, we can too??? You do realize that we're talking about the Word here, right? The Canon of Scripture is done.
-
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
Is this blasphemous enough for you?
- Thread starter Amy.G
- Start date
- Status
So because the Creator of all things adds to Scripture, we can too??? You do realize that we're talking about the Word here, right? The Canon of Scripture is done.
Thinkingstuff
Active Member
You've jumped to an unwarrented conclusion here. Did you read post 293? I think I explain it in better detail and context than my response to RAdam. So you may want to review it. I don't deny the Canon of Scripture is done. However I am commenting on its use by Jesus, apostles and early Christians.
Yes, Scripture is authority. We cannot have tradition override Scripture or add to it. If it contradicts Scripture, Scripture wins.
Thinkingstuff
Active Member
The point in my post 293 was that Tradition is used by every denomination to understand scripture thus Tradition has of equal value in every Christian faith. BTW no one said anything about overriding or adding to it save my comments about Jesus with the OT. Are you sure you read that post? I mean I really want to discuss issues I pointed out in it.
You nailed it right here, Thinkingstuff. You are so right. Baptists read the Bible through a Baptist lens. Lutherans read the Bible through a Lutheran lens. Etc. We say we don't but we really do, whether we realize it or not.
He would have nailed it if he could prove that the baptists set up things outside the bible as being equally as authoritative as the bible. Look, both of you are trying to explain about problems the RCC has by attempting to cast their practices in a different light. A tradition isn't a problem except when that tradition is given equal or more authority as the word of God and contradicts the word.
Tradition is used by baptists to understand scripture? Really? I guess that's why there's such a consensus on here among baptists concerning things like the extent of the atonement, the efficacy of the death of Christ, the way a person is born again, the second coming of the Lord Jesus Christ, etc.
Among Baptists there is pretty much a consensus on these things because they learned from other Baptists. Their Baptist parents told them Bible stories when they were children (and never once was Mary mentioned outside the Christmas story), they sat in Baptist pews and listened to Baptist preaching from the time they were old enough to listen, their Baptist Sunday School teachers taught them the truths of scripture from a Baptist perspective, etc. etc.
But there are other perspectives from which to learn about Christianity. I will give you two verses, by way of example, just to point out how different traditions view the same words.
John 3:5. Baptists and other evengelicals view this as referring to and contrasting childbirth with a spiritual rebirth. Those of the Catholic tradition view it as a reference to baptism. Both sides are so sure of their position that they actually ridicule the other for its ignorance.
Hebrews 12:1. Baptists and other evangelicals consider these witnesses are witnesses to us. Those of the Catholic tradition consider that they are witnesses of us. Again, both sides are equally tenacious in their beliefs.
One more example is the perpetual virginity of Mary. You can't prove this either way by using scripture but you can sure make some strong arguments on either side. In all of these things, we read scripture with the lens of our tradition. If you deny it, you are either hopelessly ignorant or hopelessly dishonest.
Surely you realize I was being sarcastic when I talked about a consensus on those issues. Even a cursory reading of this message board would reveal nothing even close to a consensus among baptists on those issues.
You say a baptist believes something because he/she grew up listening to storied from parents. What an ignorant statement! Really, you didn't think that one through, did you?
First, you assume baptists never mention Mary outside the so-called Christmas story. What an assumption. I would be interested to hear how in the world you plan on proving such an assumption is true.
Secondly, you totally discount the possibility that people actually convert from one demonination to another. Some people even convert from not being Christians to being Christians. Gasp! I wonder how they learn anything, seeing their parents surely didn't raise them up telling them baptist-leaning bible stories and filling their heads with all sorts of anti-catholic propaganda.
Finally, you make another grave error in assuming that baptists interpret John 3:5 the same way. There are several different ideas. I take it to be speaking wholly of regeneration, but I know some take it as natural and spiritual childbirth. The point is, there isn't a consensus.
You assume the baptists work like the RCC does. They do not. The truth is, were you to talk into a different baptist church every week, you could find a preacher with widely different views on a variety of subjects. One might be a calvinist, while the next is free will salvation. One might believe in limited atonement while the next believes in universal atonement.
Thinkingstuff
Active Member
Just to note RAdam, that where baptist disagree it seems that the tradition of the prevalent culture of the locality of the baptist church is how scripture is viewed. Therefore a reformed baptist will read scriptures in light of Tulip which is not in scriptures btw. Free will baptist will view scriptures in light of an armenian point of view and so it goes for the real minor stuff baptist tend to read their culture into the bible which is why during the civil war Southern Baptist could not bat an eye at slavery and the mistreatment of slaves while in our modern generation it would be abhorent to that same baptist group. To suggest that a "lens" of tradition is not inplace for any denominational group is just misleading. No one is really sola scriptura an even scripture doesn't claim that distinction. But there are further greater issues than even this which I questions as noted in post 293.
So you say (and I would have too, being deceived). But now I look at things from the Bible's perspective, not the RCC's perspective, and that is how things must be.
You pray to Mary. All prayer (worship) must be directed to God and God alone, otherwise it is idolatry. The RCC is an idolatrous institution.
You pray to idols. You stand in front of statues made with hands and pray toward that statue, though you pray to the God that the statue represents--just like the Hindus and Buddhists do. That is idolatry. It is no different than praying before a crucifix, and believing it represents Jesus as many used to genuflect while looking at the cross before entering the pew. They paid due reverence to Christ while bowing down to the wooden statue made of him. That is idolatry. Deny it if you will. But the Bible calls it idolatry. It is by the Bible's definitions that we stand, and define our terms: not yours, not the Catechism, not the magesterium, not the RCC, but the Bible, and the Bible alone.
Last edited by a moderator:
Again, a total bunch of hogwash. According to your theory, no baptists would ever change their views on scripture, or if they did it certainly wouldn't constitute a major change. Looking at the history of the baptists, including the recent history of the baptists, shows a very different story.
Again, you guys are trying to pigeonhole the baptists. One person says it is because of what the parents taught, even going so far as to allege they never mentioned Mary outside of the birth story. Another says it is because of culture. Both are wrong. Both fail to address reality. The reality is there is a wide difference of opinion because baptists read the scriptures and try to understand what they mean. There is no set in stone baptist interpretation of a text, and even within a single local church there can be a wide variety of opinion on many things.
Again, you guys try in vain to justify the practices of the RCC and equate those with the baptists.
Thinkingstuff
Active Member
Then you don't understand baptist. There are certain distinctiveness to Baptist by which all baptist hold to more or less. It is you who've proclaimed a hogwash. I'm just saying what is. For instance all baptist would claim this view which is a tradition unto itself.
1) biblical authority
2)Autonomy of Local churches
3)Priesthood of all believers
4)Jesus provided only two ordinances (not sacraments)
5)Individual soul liberty
6)People who are saved need to be part of a local church
7) there are primarily two offices by which administration of spiritual and temporal things are taken care of
8)Baptism is emphasized but not a requirement of salvation.
I think all baptist can agree with that. To suggest that this isn't the case is disingenuous. I'm begining to think you didn't like my comment about SDA loving to work out their rapture escatology.
Hogwash, DHK! You don't even know why Catholics genuflect before entering a pew! Genuflecting is an awknowledgement of the Real Presence of Christ in the Blessed Sacrament. I know you deny Christs Real Presence but that (and not the crucifix) is the purpose of genuflection. On Good Friday, when the Blessed Sacrament is not in the Church, there is no genuflecting before entering the pew. You were not well cathechized as a Catholic. You make so many false statements about Catholicism and then claim you know these things because of your Catholic up-bringing. Reality is that you are just plain wrong!
All worship must be directed to God and God alone. Not all prayer is worship.
Last edited by a moderator:
Here is the thing. At the start of this thread Amy posts that there is a 'statue' in the front of the Church of Mary. She doesn't know what a monstrance is so she calls it a statue. She doesn't recognize what any Catholic would recognize and that is the Blessed Sacrament being the focal point. She makes the assumption that Mary worship is alive and well in the Catholic Church and says this is blasphemas. She and others of you make big assumptions without investigating.
- Status