The Complexities of Biblical Interpretation

Anselm01

Active member
You start out with a false assumption that serious proponents of sola scriptura often overlook the subjects in Beaumont's list. They don't overlook any of them. I don't know who you are talking about and calling them proponents of sola scriptura.
Then please feel free to address them.
 

Anselm01

Active member
nope:
Why should type out the same response of something you claimed to have read:
is summary
the layers are an issue for Solo Scriptura
not Sola Scriptura
Why are they not an issue for sola scriptura? If you turn to subordinate authorities that then subordinate themselves to Scripture, you have NOT addressed the issue.
 

1Thess521

Well-known member
Then please feel free to address them.
you copied and pasted1300 + words with nearly zero effort:
and you expect a hand typed response to 10 separate "issues"
read Chapter 10and 11 from the Mathison book which you have.
It answers nearly everyone of those objections in detail

in summary
the layers are an issue for Solo Scriptura
not Sola Scriptura
 

Anselm01

Active member
you copied and pasted1300 + words with nearly zero effort:
and you expect a hand typed response to 10 separate "issues"
read Chapter 10and 11 from the Mathison book which you have.
It answers nearly everyone of those objections in detail

in summary
the layers are an issue for Solo Scriptura
not Sola Scriptura
I've made it clear that I reject the distinction. I have explained why I reject it multiple times.
 

1Thess521

Well-known member
I've made it clear that I reject the distinction. I have explained why I reject it multiple times.
you sure have:
and that you don't acknowledge the difference is YOUR problem
Not mine

I will not be responding to your strawman arguments.
This isn't CAF.
We won't be banned for pointing out your errors
-redbert, Tester, reGifter
 

Anselm01

Active member
you sure have:
and that you don't acknowledge the difference is YOUR problem
Not mine
There is an issue when it is left to individuals to properly discern what the Bible teaches. The history of Church Councils demonstrates as much. Saying it does not matter, does NOT address the issue in front of you.
I will not be responding to your strawman arguments.
Correction: you will not response to arguments you know you have no response to and will therefore declare them "strawman." I see what you are doing and I believe others do, too.
This isn't CAF.
Were you banned from that forum?
We won't be banned for pointing out your errors
Here's the thing... As a Catholic who accepts the teaching authority of the Church, you "pointing" out "errors" is no big deal. You are one person on a forum against the Catholic Church. Let me see, should I listen to St. Aquinas or a guy on the internet... That is a toughy.... St. Augustine or you? Again, I got to give the edge to St. Augustine. Your authority only extends of your individual person. You have no means to implement any of your opinions beyond yourself. Even whatever church you currently attend has no real authority over you. If you decided tomorrow that this church was in "error," and you did all you could be "point it out," the end result would be you leaving and trying to find another church you agree with. Is this the way it was in the early Church? Did Christians go around evaluating various local churches seeing which were the most "biblical?" No. For one, there was no "Bible" containing 66 books one could just carry around. Books were handwritten, expensive, and therefore rare. It is time you stop living in an anachronistic fantasy.
-redbert, Tester, reGifter
Cool! I remember some of those names. Question: if you had more than one, were you going back on after you were banned in violation of the rules?
 

Anselm01

Active member
Here's the thing... As a Catholic who accepts the teaching authority of the Church, you "pointing" out "errors" is no big deal. You are one person on a forum against the Catholic Church. Let me see, should I listen to St. Aquinas or a guy on the internet... That is a toughy.... St. Augustine or you? Again, I got to give the edge to St. Augustine. Your authority only extends of your individual person. You have no means to implement any of your opinions beyond yourself. Even whatever church you currently attend has no real authority over you. If you decided tomorrow that this church was in "error," and you did all you could be "point it out," the end result would be you leaving and trying to find another church you agree with. Is this the way it was in the early Church? Did Christians go around evaluating various local churches seeing which were the most "biblical?" No. For one, there was no "Bible" containing 66 books one could just carry around. Books were handwritten, expensive, and therefore rare. It is time you stop living in an anachronistic fantasy.

Sorry, I wrote this in a hurry and need to clean it up a little.

Here's the thing... As a Catholic who accepts the teaching authority of the Church, you "pointing" out "errors" is no big deal. You are one person on a forum against the Catholic Church. Let me see, should I listen to St. Aquinas or a guy on the internet?... That is a toughy.... St. Augustine or you? Again, I got to give the edge to St. Augustine. Your authority only extends to your individual person. You have no means to implement any of your opinions beyond yourself. Even whatever church you currently attend has no real authority over you. If you decided tomorrow that this church was in "error," and you did all you could to "point it out," the end result would be you leaving and trying to find another church you agree with. Is this the way it was in the early Church? Did Christians go around evaluating various local churches seeing which were the most "biblical?" No. For one, there was no "Bible" containing 66 books one could just carry around. Books were handwritten, expensive, and therefore rare. It is time you stop living in an anachronistic fantasy.
 
Top