Results 1 - 4 of 4
|
|
|||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Ordered by Verse | ||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
1 | Church Fathers? Part V | Mark 7:9 | EdB | 243666 | ||
“ The orthodox (although they hold the fathers in great estimation and think them very useful to a knowledge of the history of the ancient church, and our opinion on cardinal doctrines may agree with them) yet deny that their authority, whether as individuals or taken together, can be called authoritative in matters of faith and the interpretation of the Scriptures,†Again does this not depend on which side you stand? If early church fathers interpretation of scripture agrees with yours most will say see even the early church fathers agree with me so on that authority it is correct. But it their interpretation disagree with yours most will day they are only men and not infallible. Scripture provided a boundary for us. If an interpretation falls within that boundary without modification of words, modification of sentence structure, without abandoning context or without violating a clear explanation else where in scripture, which of us was given the authority to call it false teaching. |
||||||
2 | Church Fathers? Part V | Mark 7:9 | DocTrinsograce | 243669 | ||
Dear Ed, Turretin cites what the East and West churches actually confess. Those confessions are publicly available then as now. Thus, he lays out their positions as they express them, then contrasting and comparing those positions to the Reformed position. He refutes the opposing arguments by following through to their conclusion. That is what is meant by the word "elenctic." These were the practices used from the earliest times of the church; e.g., Augustine vs Pelagius; Athanasius vs Arius; Luther vs Erasmus; etc. etc. This pattern was originally used by the Apostles -- as in Paul vs Peter (as described in Galatians 2, for example.) This is an academic method that has served the church very well. It requires everyone involved to clarify exactly what they mean. An ideal example of this was with the Canons of the Council of Trent. Although it took a couple of decades, the magisterium was able to very explicitly define the Protestant position. This is commendable for both "sides" as you call them -- for the Protestants to so clearly express their doctrines and for the Romanists to carefully use just those expressions. It might be a helpful exercise for you to read what Trent had to say. In Him, Doc |
||||||
3 | Church Fathers? Part V | Mark 7:9 | EdB | 243670 | ||
Doc The word infallible conveys the idea of being not open to discussion as in, this is the doctrine of the denomination. Do you consider the Canon of scripture infallible? At first blush you would probably I certainly do not. Yet I think is it safe to say you think it is so accurate you do not question it. No Pentecostals do not hold to infallibly but yet we do believe that our doctrinal truths are certain as stated by church leadership. To doubt those statements of beliefs would put us outside the beliefs of Pentecostalism and therefore no longer Pentecostal. I believe the same holds true for you. You hold the tenets of faith of Calvinism as truths therefore defining you as a Calvinist. If however you if denied Calvin’s tulips you could no longer be considered a Calvinist. So you have to believe those concepts are true. Are they infallible? No but in effect that is how you treat them do you not? Here is a quote from http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/07790a.htm which makes the point perhaps better. “Without infallibility there could be no finality regarding any one of the great truths which have been identified historically with the very essence of Christianity; and it is only with those who believe in historical Christianity that the question need be discussed. Take, for instance, the mysteries of the Trinity and Incarnation. If the early Church was not infallible in her definitions regarding these truths, what compelling reason can be alleged today against the right to revive the Sabellian, or the Arian, or the Macedonian, or the Apollinarian, or the Nestorian, or the Eutychian controversies, and to defend some interpretation of these mysteries which the Church has condemned as heretical?†|
||||||
4 | Church Fathers? Part V | Mark 7:9 | EdB | 243672 | ||
Sorry posted to wrong thread | ||||||