Thank You.
-
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!
The Difference Between Sola Scriptura And Biblicism (R. Scott Clark)
- Thread starter thatbrian
- Start date
- Status
@thatbrian, there is an art to know when to disengage with another poster. It is not a perfect art, but I am getting better at it. Sometimes there is nothing more you can say in a particular thread to an individual. You are just never going to see eye-to-eye.
Sent from my Pixel 2 XL using Tapatalk
Sent from my Pixel 2 XL using Tapatalk
Yes. You are right, and I'm a fool for expecting common sense to be common.
Thanks for your input in this thread. It is a serious subject which I think deserves serious thought and discussion, but, again, I'm a fool for thinking such is possible here.
Yes I would agree that there is both seriousness and foolishness to the subject of the o/p.
IMO As we depend more upon the written works of men we move away from the wisdom of the scripture.
James 3:17 But the wisdom that is from above is first pure, then peaceable, gentle, and easy to be intreated, full of mercy and good fruits, without partiality, and without hypocrisy.
IMO As we depend more upon the written works of men we move away from the wisdom of the scripture.
James 3:17 But the wisdom that is from above is first pure, then peaceable, gentle, and easy to be intreated, full of mercy and good fruits, without partiality, and without hypocrisy.
It is what "Biblicism" is unless you are relying on a revisionist re-interpretation of the word after the manner of Neo-Orthodoxy.
The idea that bible interpretation includes the church is an oxymoron. The church does not exist as a unified organic entity. The church is a collection of individuals, all of whom come to an understanding of the meaning of scripture individually, either from personal study or through interaction with other individual persons.
Exactly, individuals endued with gifts, infilled with the Spirit gathered into local churches for fellowship and worship.
Ignore function, right? Lol....
@thatbrian, you are not a fool. This thread is very useful and serves to expose the fundamental difference in the way certain Baptists approach scripture.
My previous comment was about engagement that goes nowhere. I like @HankD a lot. However, I know that we just are not going to agree and it will turn into a comedy routine of "you are wrong...No! You are wrong!" So, I know when it is time to cut bait. I had to do that with Hank in another recent thread because it just got to that point.
Certain BB members get annoyed with your threads and that is a good thing in my opinion, because it proves that you are stepping on the toes of theological sacred cows. Keep it up, mon ami.
Sent from my Pixel 2 XL using Tapatalk
I agree with everything except the "endued with gifts" part if you mean the spiritual gifts of Romans and 1 Corinthians, which died out from Christendom around 100 AD.
I also agree except perhaps for some of the following:
Ephesians 4
11 And he gave some, apostles; and some, prophets; and some, evangelists; and some, pastors and teachers;
12 For the perfecting of the saints, for the work of the ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ:
13 Till we all come in the unity of the faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God, unto a perfect man, unto the measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ:
What about - some, evangelists; and some, pastors and teachers - I know it says - until we all come in the unity of the faith, etc...
but what is your thinking here Dr Tom?
I believe a good sense of humor goes a long way in keeping a peaceful atmosphere here at the BB.
I appreciate your civility Reformed and value your friendship brother.
delizzle
Active Member
I just have a quick question. How is Sola Scriptura defined? Is it merely scripture alone (no sacred tradition or church authority) or is it scripture is the sole authority and standard for establishing doctrine or is it neither? Sincere question because I have heard various answers.
Thank you, Hank. I feel the same way towards you.
Sent from my Pixel 2 XL using Tapatalk
The Scriptures are the sole infallible rule of faith and practice and rejects any original infallible authority other than the Bible.
Those gifts are not the spiritual gifts bestowed on individuals prior to the maturity of the canon. Those gifts are men who are gifts given to the churches for the maturation of the church members to better enable them to keep the Great Commission and the Great Commandment for the building up of the church both spiritually and numerically.
Thanks.
Not locally but it does universally. There is one body of Christ (Heb. 12:23; Col. 1:18; Eph. 1:22-23) that spans all time.
I do not deny that individuals come to an understanding about a myriad of things, scripture being one. However, your statement (even if you did not mean it this way) gives the impression that knowing church history and the παράδοσις (paradosis) handed down to us by the Apostles is meaningless. Tradition always takes a back seat to scripture. Traiditon only has value to the extent that it clearly affirms (perspicuity) scripture. Modern commentaries and lexicons serve a similar purpose. They are never an excuse to neglect self-study, but they provide a framework in which to compare conclusions. This is what R.C. Sproul, Sr. meant by his statement, "Although tradition does not rule our interpretation, it does guide it. If, upon reading a particular passage, you have come up with an interpretation that has escaped the notice of every other Christian for two thousand years, or has been championed by universally recognized heretics, chances are pretty good that you had better abandon your interpretation."
delizzle
Active Member
Wrong song.[emoji6]
In the jungle, the mighty jungle (oops)...
- Status