Subject: Sola Scriptura supported by bible? |
Bible Note: "The Bible apparently isn't sufficient to resolve this issue. So how should it be resolved?" I give up. How? Your previous suggestion was "the church." But as you said, "if you say that the church has resolved this you are just out of touch with anything real." So again, we have three options: 1. Scripture is sufficient, but at least one group is in error in its historical interpretation (i.e. in interpreting the original apostolic revelation). 2. Scripture is insufficient, and the church cannot agree on on the issue, meaning the church is insufficient. 3. Scripture and the church are insufficient, so we all go with our own understanding or "gut feeling" or whatever. So, citing your source of authority, tell us definitively whether infants should be baptized or not. You wrote: "But if someone who has studied the Bible disagrees with you, how can you say the scripture is sufficient?" We do it on this forum all the time. For example, Tim Moran is Arminian. I am Calvinist. We both agree on the sufficiency of Scripture and claim it as the only infallible authory available to us regarding the things of God. We both study the Scriptures, and we disagree with each other. Tim thinks the problem is not with Scripture but with me. I know, however, that my brother is mistaken. :) During our debating, which in the past has been quite extensive, we have not argued on which sounds more pleasing or which church teaches which thing. We have looked at the Scriptures together. That is what the church does. And while we remain divided on this important but secondary issue, we both stand together in affirming that the Bible is God's sole revelation to the post-apostolic church. The problem is that one of us is wrong about what it says. --Joe! |