News:


Main Menu

Sola Scriptura

Started by RogerMartim, May 10, 2012, 06:18:30 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

Weedon

Pr. Eckstein,

I have heard it said (but not read it myself in Luther) that Luther explained the Wortlein was Lügner - Liar.  What fells Satan is when we call out his falsification of God's threats, but especially the falsification of God's promises.  And we remember our Lord's words:  "A liar and the father of it."  John 8:44.  FWIW.

Pax!

Brian Stoffregen

Quote from: Weedon on May 15, 2012, 07:35:04 PM
To James, the truth is that there are not 10,000 confessions; there are still only about four or five.  Just as at the Reformation.  There's a Lutheran confession; a Roman Catholic; an Orthodox Confession; a Reformed Confession; and for lack of better term an "experiential" Confession (think Pentecostal et al.) sort of akin to the more radical Reformation.  All the many groups around today really still fit into these confessional categories.  There's just not a whole lot of other options you can come up with.  By the way, I put the Anglicans among the Reformed, which is where they classically belonged, but admit that at times they swing closer to the Lutheran than the Reformed take on things.


But look at the Lutherans -- while we all look to the scriptures and the Confessions and Luther's emphases; we have different denominational beliefs, e.g., ordination of women, open/close(d) communion.


Where would you put the numerous Baptists groups in your broad categories? They come out of the more radical reformation, but they certainly have a different confessions and polity than the Presbyterians, e.g., believer vs. infant baptisms.
I flunked retirement. Serving as a part-time interim in Ferndale, WA.

Brian Stoffregen

Quote from: George Erdner on May 15, 2012, 09:38:34 PM
Quote from: Weedon on May 15, 2012, 07:35:04 PM
Clyde's post to George was outstanding and good.  I recommend that method 100%.


Who is Clyde?


Ahab's camel http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pLB15kBvn_c


but Pr. Weedon might have been thinking of someone else.
I flunked retirement. Serving as a part-time interim in Ferndale, WA.

Brian Stoffregen

Quote from: peter_speckhard on May 15, 2012, 11:43:17 PM
Actually, sola scriptura holds up well, the recent complication being between those who think words mean things and those who don't. But what separates the five groups Will mentioned is precisely the ordering of authority. Catholics have popes and councils, the Orthodox have tradition, the Reformed have human reason, and the "emotional" group has human experience, all of which can sometimes contradict Scripture. Only Lutherans stick to Scripture against (when they are opposed) those other authorities, and only traditionalist Lutherans do so meaningfully and coherently.


Where does the LCMS's CTCR's authority fit into your scheme?
I flunked retirement. Serving as a part-time interim in Ferndale, WA.

Brian Stoffregen

Quote from: Weedon on May 16, 2012, 07:20:10 AM
Do note, though, cssml, I would never argue that the Fathers or the Scriptures do not teach the importance of holding to apostolic tradition.  What the tradition teaches us explicitly is that we can depend absolutely upon the Scriptures to convey the truth to us that we need to know for salvation.  They do this even when the magisterium totally messes up (as it has more than once in the past - as even the Catholic and Orthodox Churches confess).  Think what it meant in the years right before Luther when you had all those popes at the same time, mutually excommunicating each other and all who were in fellowship with them.  Who could be saved if salvation hung upon the fellowship with the right pope?  How could a common Christian know or arrive at any level of confidence that he had chosen the right one?  The same issue strikes me today when those who repose trust in the magisterium must choose between the East or Rome or (I suppose) Canterbury.


Why shouldn't Augsburg or St. Louis or Chicago be thrown into mix of whom should we trust/choose?
I flunked retirement. Serving as a part-time interim in Ferndale, WA.

Brian Stoffregen

Quote from: cssml on May 15, 2012, 11:51:42 PM
Satan attempted to use 'scripture alone' to tempt Christ:   "for it is written that..."  (scripture was correct, but not Satan's misuse of it)


We can also say that Jesus challenged "scripture alone" when he proclaimed, "You have heard that it was said ..." (a scripture alone position), "but I tell you ..." (something more than just scripture alone is necessary -- namely, Jesus).


Scripture is a cradle that holds Christ. By centering on the cradle, we can completely miss the purpose God has given us the cradle -- to direct us to Christ.


I believe that Luther much more often talked about "Word alone" than "scripture alone". The Word who is Jesus. The earliest Christians proclaimed Jesus without a New Testament, and without many copies of the Old Testament. They proclaimed Jesus to some people (Gentiles) who were completely ignorant of the Hebrew Scriptures -- and they came to believe. They had the faith alone that received grace alone -- without the scripture; but there was the Word.
I flunked retirement. Serving as a part-time interim in Ferndale, WA.

James_Gale

Quote from: Brian Stoffregen on May 16, 2012, 12:40:55 PM
Scripture is a cradle that holds Christ. By centering on the cradle, we can completely miss the purpose God has given us the cradle -- to direct us to Christ.

This is similar to the Chilstrom-Erdahl approach to Scripture, through which they argued that we are not bound by any Scriptural condemnations of same-sex sexual relations. 

If you dismantle the cradle, finding that its parts don't really matter, you are left with a "Christ" whose relationship to His creatures is undefined; or perhaps more to the point, is susceptible to whatever definition that a person might want to project on to Him.  And people who set up that kind of "Christ" generally end up with a "god" created in their own image (perhaps ever so slightly idealized).  We are all tempted to do this, by the way.  You seem to think that this is a good thing.  The Law, which if you will but hear it, will tell you otherwise, prying open your heart for reception of the saving Word of the Gospel. 

Dave Likeness

If Sola Scriptura becomes only the Gospel and eliminates
the Law, then we become antinomians.  Liberal theology
has been working hard to remove moral absolutes from the
Bible.  Moral relativism welcomes gay marriage as a way to
civil rights rather than a sin against the 6th commandment.

Romans 1:26,27.....makes it clear that when women exchange
natural relations for those that are contrary to nature,  and men
are consumed with passion for relations with other men, then
it is dishonorable and shameful to God.

Steven Tibbetts

Quote from: Brian Stoffregen on May 16, 2012, 11:54:53 AM
Quote from: The Rev. Steven P. Tibbetts, STS on May 15, 2012, 03:23:56 PM
Quote from: Brian Stoffregen on May 15, 2012, 02:03:13 PM
What I'm arguing against is the theory that because they had eyewitnesses it must all be historically true and factual in every detail.


So, once again, you create a Straw Man, then argue against it....

I did not start the eyewitnesses argument. I am arguing against what TV wrote. I don't think he's made of straw.

Nonsense, Brian.  You created the "that because they had eyewitnesses it must all be historically true and factual in every detail" Straw Man (or, if you prefer, red herring) in this conversation.  Not Pastor Awtrey, or me, or anybody else speaking of what is true, but you, all by yourself, constantly pointing us to something else. 

Christe eleison, Steven+
The Rev. Steven Paul Tibbetts, STS
Pastor Zip's Blog

Steven Tibbetts

Quote from: George Erdner on May 14, 2012, 12:47:32 AM
That is the kind of information that you guys who went to seminary know, and that we lay people ask about. That's the kind of informative answer I was looking for, rather than, "because I say so".

Alas, George, apart from the words "Muratorian fragment," I didn't learn any of that in seminary :( though I did learn there how, if I was interested, to learn such things.

Pax, Steven+
The Rev. Steven Paul Tibbetts, STS
Pastor Zip's Blog

Brian Stoffregen

Quote from: James_Gale on May 16, 2012, 01:37:31 PM
Quote from: Brian Stoffregen on May 16, 2012, 12:40:55 PM
Scripture is a cradle that holds Christ. By centering on the cradle, we can completely miss the purpose God has given us the cradle -- to direct us to Christ.

This is similar to the Chilstrom-Erdahl approach to Scripture, through which they argued that we are not bound by any Scriptural condemnations of same-sex sexual relations.


Regardless of what they did with it, it is Luther's and the Lutheran approach. How does that image affect your approach to scriptures?
I flunked retirement. Serving as a part-time interim in Ferndale, WA.

Weedon

Brian,

I would love for you to show me in Luther's own writings and words what he says that St. Paul's words in Romans 1 don't apply to Christians.  You have a reference for me?

Brian Stoffregen

Quote from: Dave Likeness on May 16, 2012, 01:57:33 PM
If Sola Scriptura becomes only the Gospel and eliminates
the Law, then we become antinomians.  Liberal theology
has been working hard to remove moral absolutes from the
Bible.  Moral relativism welcomes gay marriage as a way to
civil rights rather than a sin against the 6th commandment.


1. Moral relativism is already in play when you relate gay marriage to the 6th commandment. "Adultery" in scriptures only occurred between a man and a married woman -- it was essentially a sin against the woman's husband. A man having sex with a woman who was not married nor engaged to be married, was not adultery.


2. When the Law is preached as morality, we are misusing the law, at least according to Luther's two uses.
I flunked retirement. Serving as a part-time interim in Ferndale, WA.

Brian Stoffregen

Quote from: Weedon on May 16, 2012, 05:42:44 PM
Brian,

I would love for you to show me in Luther's own writings and words what he says that St. Paul's words in Romans 1 don't apply to Christians.  You have a reference for me?


Where I have I suggested that they didn't?
I flunked retirement. Serving as a part-time interim in Ferndale, WA.

James_Gale

Quote from: Brian Stoffregen on May 16, 2012, 05:54:36 PM
Quote from: Weedon on May 16, 2012, 05:42:44 PM
Brian,

I would love for you to show me in Luther's own writings and words what he says that St. Paul's words in Romans 1 don't apply to Christians.  You have a reference for me?


Where I have I suggested that they didn't?

That's the conclusion reached by PB Chilstrom and Bp. Erdahl.  You say that they used "Luther's approach" to Scripture in reaching this conclusion.  If you're right, then Luther's own writings and words would have to support the notion that Romans 1 does not apply to Christians.  Pr. Weedon therefore invites you to identify any such words.  Can you? 

SMF spam blocked by CleanTalk