tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2109883109617013273.post6990049291914426213..comments2023-05-24T07:02:16.492-07:00Comments on By Whose Authority?: Sola Scriptura as an Epistemological Principle?Catz206http://www.blogger.com/profile/02414685937358420034noreply@blogger.comBlogger59125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2109883109617013273.post-61098781005432234112016-11-12T15:37:00.388-08:002016-11-12T15:37:00.388-08:00Is the scripture that is written, without a verses...Is the scripture that is written, without a verses to say Sola Scriptura is sufficient, enough to provide salvation? Absolutely. <br /><br />In Matthew 28 Christ said all authority is given to me. If Christ is the authority then that which he taught his Apostles to spread throughout the nations would have his authority backing their teachings. Hence Acts 2 has the ability to begin the process. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2109883109617013273.post-6080835838077635882011-05-03T08:50:36.256-07:002011-05-03T08:50:36.256-07:00Michael,
Please stop posting spam. If you are no...Michael,<br /><br />Please stop posting spam. If you are not going to interact directly with the post that you are commenting on, or any of the previous comments, then please stop wasting our time. <br /><br />No one on this blog holds to a "fundamentalist" view of Sola Scriptura. We would agree with you that many evangelicals have an essentially docetist view of Scripture. None of David N.https://www.blogger.com/profile/00774829757737151477noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2109883109617013273.post-48463934261486792102011-05-02T23:50:26.981-07:002011-05-02T23:50:26.981-07:00This comment has been removed by the author.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07940745178193985942noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2109883109617013273.post-26058746771125840162011-05-02T13:37:07.433-07:002011-05-02T13:37:07.433-07:00I understand you are busy. I too am graduating, un...I understand you are busy. I too am graduating, undergraduate at UCLA. I study philosophy. <br /><br />However, let me just point out that you seem to have commitments to doctrines that aren't clearly stated in Scripture, though I understand that it's your belief that Scripture implies them. And this is the belief which you are in the process of trying to provide an argument for. <br /><Marknoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2109883109617013273.post-65224016707610802602011-04-28T00:11:29.769-07:002011-04-28T00:11:29.769-07:00This comment has been removed by the author.Nathanael P. Taylorhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13545397078211884885noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2109883109617013273.post-78005776364168612962011-04-27T23:00:36.818-07:002011-04-27T23:00:36.818-07:00Nate, did you see my last post?
Can you give me a...Nate, did you see my last post?<br /><br />Can you give me a proof/argument?<br /><br />Best,<br />MarkMarkhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16296781762669562413noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2109883109617013273.post-56873278688816202392011-04-20T05:02:55.312-07:002011-04-20T05:02:55.312-07:00This comment has been removed by the author.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07940745178193985942noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2109883109617013273.post-89638024292586754712011-04-20T04:58:52.546-07:002011-04-20T04:58:52.546-07:00This comment has been removed by the author.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07940745178193985942noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2109883109617013273.post-51286982654033249432011-04-20T04:55:08.394-07:002011-04-20T04:55:08.394-07:00This comment has been removed by the author.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07940745178193985942noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2109883109617013273.post-55490398491002985292011-04-20T00:27:15.884-07:002011-04-20T00:27:15.884-07:00Nate,
You're claiming that I do not really be...Nate,<br /><br />You're claiming that I do not really believe that these certain books in the Catholic canon (which are not in the protestant Canon)are divinely inspired. <br /><br />Now, I would like to see a step-by-step argument proving this. <br /><br />Best,<br />MarkMarknoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2109883109617013273.post-57305722282471907692011-04-18T11:23:38.206-07:002011-04-18T11:23:38.206-07:00Tell The Truth Or Suffer The Consequences!
Holy ...<b>Tell The Truth Or Suffer The Consequences!</b> <br /><br />Holy Scripture is very clear that each one of us is obligated to search for the truth and to abide by it. I am appalled at the number of people who completely ignore these dire warnings from the Bible, or are ignorant of the fact that they are there. <br /><br />Many non-Catholics repeat outright lies about the Catholic Church and takeAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2109883109617013273.post-87313696334372170702011-04-18T11:15:49.180-07:002011-04-18T11:15:49.180-07:00Your Personal Opinion May Have No Bearing Whatsoe...<b>Your Personal Opinion May Have No Bearing Whatsoever On Doctrinal Truth...</b><br /><br />Let us first look at some basic definitions using the Greek roots of words from which they came.<br />1. Philosophy: 'Philo' from the Greek root, 'Philos' means "the love of". 'Sophy' from the Greek means 'wisdom'. <br /><br />So philosophy simply means the love Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07940745178193985942noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2109883109617013273.post-30295414049957405202011-04-17T16:13:14.805-07:002011-04-17T16:13:14.805-07:00This comment has been removed by the author.Nathanael P. Taylorhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13545397078211884885noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2109883109617013273.post-69955329037440707682011-04-17T01:27:03.374-07:002011-04-17T01:27:03.374-07:00So, do you think that when any Christian disagrees...So, do you think that when any Christian disagrees with you about whether any given book is divinely inspired, when they tell you that they disagree, they are lying? I'll admit that even if this were true, it wouldn't prove my point. But this is really an odd consequence.<br /><br />The only positive proof for your picture is one that depends on empirical claims. These empirical claims, IMarknoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2109883109617013273.post-42609767347154035282011-04-16T21:21:16.791-07:002011-04-16T21:21:16.791-07:00Greetings Mark, my response it below:
Mark: Well...Greetings Mark, my response it below: <br /><br />Mark: Well, I don't know how to respond to this, except to reply that I am being serious when I say that I believe certain books to be divinely inspired which are not contained in the protestant canon. But, you must admit, there is something strange about your position in a really bad way. If you argued to the conclusion that nobody believes Nathanael P. Taylorhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13545397078211884885noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2109883109617013273.post-32232562567411419412011-04-16T20:48:20.441-07:002011-04-16T20:48:20.441-07:00In other words I am saying here what is true of th...In other words I am saying here what is true of the skeptic and the atheist is true of a Roman Catholic, namely, their professed belief is not there actual belief. So that is how the analogy is functioning.<br /><br />Well, I don't know how to respond to this, except to reply that I am being serious when I say that I believe certain books to be divinely inspired which are not contained in theMark Moralesnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2109883109617013273.post-67330672277582726282011-04-16T13:48:14.300-07:002011-04-16T13:48:14.300-07:00Greetings Mark,
Of course I can object to that fo...Greetings Mark,<br /><br />Of course I can object to that form of argumentation if you would like:<br /><br />You say that P.<br />P implies Q.<br />Q is false. <br />Therefore, not P.<br /><br />Your justification that Q was false was this:<br /><br />You're response was something like- all persons would know that book T is not inspired, where book T is a book not in the protestant canon. Nathanael P. Taylorhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13545397078211884885noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2109883109617013273.post-75570647297681978152011-04-16T13:35:39.785-07:002011-04-16T13:35:39.785-07:00"So just because you have a belief, again doe..."So just because you have a belief, again does not constitute a defeater against my view. So I do not really see this as a defeater."<br /><br />I tried to show why the example I brought up is a problem for your view. I provided a reductio argument. <br /><br />Can you please object to that form of the argument, rather than just letting me know that my case happens to not function as anMarknoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2109883109617013273.post-1840205095194008682011-04-16T10:25:35.713-07:002011-04-16T10:25:35.713-07:00No Error
No error is to be admitted in the Bible,...<b>No Error</b><br /><br />No error is to be admitted in the Bible, not even concerning things of but little importance. . . . If any statements should <i>seem</i> contrary to truth, we must not accuse the Author of the Book of falsehood: we should rather conclude, either that (a) the text is defective*; or (b) that the interpreter has mistaken the meaning; or (c) that we have misunderstood.<br /Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2109883109617013273.post-51009272358860437492011-04-16T10:08:10.686-07:002011-04-16T10:08:10.686-07:00The Danger of Privately Interpreting Scripture
A...<b>The Danger of Privately Interpreting Scripture</b> <br /><br /><b>Acts 8:30-35</b> - 30 Philip ran up and heard him reading Isaiah the prophet and said, "Do you understand what you are reading?" <br /><br />31 He replied, "How can I, unless someone instructs me?" So he invited Philip to get in and sit with him. <br /><br />32 This was the scripture passage he was reading: &Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07940745178193985942noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2109883109617013273.post-52488815445947009452011-04-15T23:44:25.216-07:002011-04-15T23:44:25.216-07:00Greetings Mark, My responses are below:
Mark: You...Greetings Mark, My responses are below:<br /><br />Mark: You're response was something like- all persons would know that book T is not inspired, where book T is a book not in the protestant canon. Then I brought up the case of myself, and asked: how can I know that book T is not inspired, if I don't even believe that book T is not inspired (I think it is inspired).<br /><br />Nathanael: Nathanael P. Taylorhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13545397078211884885noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2109883109617013273.post-46627930993990607662011-04-15T22:35:47.076-07:002011-04-15T22:35:47.076-07:00And that last comment makes no sense, because the ...And that last comment makes no sense, because the comment before it didn't go through. That's frustrating lol.<br /><br />Anyway, what I basically said was this.<br /><br />You say that P.<br />P implies Q.<br />Q is false. <br />Therefore, not P.<br /><br />P- any honest functioning Christian will know whether a book is divinely inspired by reading it. And this is true of every ChristianMarknoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2109883109617013273.post-56346626761309356352011-04-15T21:40:23.006-07:002011-04-15T21:40:23.006-07:00Ignore the three things part lol, I was going to s...Ignore the three things part lol, I was going to structure my response differently but changed my mind. I forgot to go back and edit that out.<br /><br />Best,<br />MarkMarknoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2109883109617013273.post-54299197647181324082011-04-15T20:29:07.816-07:002011-04-15T20:29:07.816-07:00Greetings Mark, my responses are below.
Mark: It ...Greetings Mark, my responses are below.<br /><br />Mark: It wasn't supposed to. It was a response to your claim that we all (myself included) somehow 'know' which books are inspired. However, I my exmaple was (I think) slightly different from your original one, because I am making sure to include 'knowing that a book is not inspired' under 'knowing that a book is inspired&Nathanael P. Taylorhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13545397078211884885noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2109883109617013273.post-26033410864875551652011-04-15T16:16:26.803-07:002011-04-15T16:16:26.803-07:00I can explain the fallible person, infallible magi...I can explain the fallible person, infallible magisterium picture a bit more, so that you can understand. BUT, i think we should postpone this for at least just a little bit. Here's why:<br /><br />1) whether or not an infallible magisterium actually exists doesn't is a separate question from whether an infallible magisterium would (in principle) solve the problem that I am raising. <br /Marknoreply@blogger.com