Prior Book | Prior Chapter | Prior Verse | Next Verse | Next Chapter | Next Book | Viewing NASB and Amplified 2015 | |
NASB | Matthew 22:32 'I AM THE GOD OF ABRAHAM, AND THE GOD OF ISAAC, AND THE GOD OF JACOB'? He is not the God of the dead but of the living." |
AMPLIFIED 2015 | Matthew 22:32 'I AM THE GOD OF ABRAHAM, AND THE GOD OF ISAAC, AND THE GOD OF JACOB'? He is not the God of the dead, but of the living." [Ex 3:6] |
Subject: purgatory is it true? |
Bible Note: Emmaus: You wrote: 'This is circular logic. If the traditions are all "inscripturated" then the only tradition is the bible and the bible is the only tradition.' No, it is not circular. What the Reformation view of sola Scriptura holds is that the traditions of the early church (and by early I mean until the Middle Ages) are consistent with the traditions of the apostles that were subsequently written down in the Bible. As an example, look at Nicaea or Chalcedon and look at Trent. Protestants and Catholics agree on the first two. Why? Because it is clear from them that the bishops involved were seeking to INTERPRET Scripture correctly. to come together as an ecclesiastical body and rightly discern what the Scriptures (and vis-a-vis the apostles) teach on important theological matters. I stand right beside you in defending the Nicene Creed against groups like the Jehovah's Witnesses who insist that the council simply made it up. However, when we look at later edicts, such as those which pronounced that the pope is infallible when speaking ex cathedra (a notion that arose in the 12th century as a debate between Fransiscans and other orders), the immaculate conception of Mary (19th century), and the assumption of Mary (20th century), we see absolutely no mention whatsoever in Scripture of these doctrines, nor can we find a shred of evidence that they were held by anyone in the first several centuries of the church. So where did they come from? From the "infallible" church, which is not nearly as monolithic in its theology as you want to assert. You seem to hold that heresy and schism and sectarianism began with Luther. Read your New Testament and you will see that false teaching has always been with us, held by large numbers of cults and sects. In your own church, we had the split of the Eastern and Western Church in the 11th century, which exists today as Roman Catholicism and Eastern Orthodoxy. Lest we forget the Great Schism also, there were several decades when the church itself had two, then THREE competing popes, all with their own followers and supporters, claiming that they held the chair of Peter. So it is somewhat of a red herring to say that because people distorted (and continue to distort) the very biblical notion of sola Scriptura that the doctrine itself is wrong. And notice that Luther viewed these groups that rejected the apostolic tradition in favor of personal authority with just as much disdain as he viewed the Roman church with their elevation of human tradition above that of the apostles as seen in Scripture. Lastly, you have not commented yet on Romans 4 in view of sola fide, so I will just say that reapeating your assertion over and over again that it is unbiblical does not make it so. --Joe! P.S. No altar in my church. Christ already made the last sacrifice of atonement. |