Conversation
Notices
-
If anyone can gainsay what I'm saying here, or dissuade me from this thinking, I'm open to it, but that is basically my take on this.
E Michael Jones goes along with all but that last sentence.
RT: https://poa.st/objects/f06aa905-7295-4634-b4a8-4038706eb752
-
@BowsacNoodle @thefinn @zeke @Dagnar Someone misunderstanding Sola Scriptura? In the year of our Lord 2025? Say it isn't so!
-
@Crux_Invictus @thefinn @zeke @Dagnar You might enjoy this video. I have tried to get my Protestant friends to watch it and they refuse.
-
@BowsacNoodle @thefinn @zeke @Dagnar I did watch it and it seemed to me his issue is with Solo Scriptura rather than Sola Scriptura.
Scripture is the Word of God which means it is the top authority for the Church. If something goes against the Word then it ought to be removed, if it is in line with the Word then it remains. That is the essence of Sola Scriptura. It's not that tradition is of no value or that we should abandon anything that isn't just the Bible. It is that Holy Scripture is the standard by which all doctrine is measured.
That many protestant Christians have abandoned tradition and made the absence of tradition a tradition in of itself is sad. But the blame for that doesn't fall on Sola Scriptura.
-
@thefinn @zeke @Dagnar >"I only need the bible" and they have no idea what they are reading or what it means.
This is a challenging belief for people to examine, because they assume you're trying to supplant the word of God with something created by man. Instead, the opposite is true.
-
I've always suspected that the KJV was some kind of subversion.
-
@zeke @Dagnar Bro don't even get me started.
E Michael Jones opened my eyes the most on it.
That John 1:1 passage was huge. When "Word" actually means "Logos" and Logos means "intellect, logic, reason" - that changes the whole thing.
The entire meaning is lost. And worse - you have all these protestants going "I only need the bible" and they have no idea what they are reading or what it means.
What a fucking farce.
-
@Dagnar I'd want to know what the actual translations are for that second one tbh. The word "Jews" didn't even exist back then.
I am wondering if they meant Israelites (but they'd say that if so) or "People of Judea" or what?!
-
@Dagnar This shit is why I hate the KJV so much and all the english translations. It's all bunk until you know the context and the real meaning.
-
They would have to give a ruling on passages like Galatians 3:28 and John 4:22 and demand it not be open to different interpretation.
-
@Crux_Invictus @BowsacNoodle @thefinn @zeke @Dagnar > It's not that tradition is of no value or that we should abandon anything that isn't just the Bible. It is that Holy Scripture is the standard by which all doctrine is measured.
I agree. Where problems arise, however, is when detailed historical specific Orthopraxes get simply written off as “unimportant” or “unBiblical”, simply because they aren’t specifically articulated enough in the Bible. Many, many such cases.
Baptism by Triple Immersion in the name of the Holy Trinity, for example (mentioned by Fr Josiah in the video). This practice is nearly universally abandoned within modern American Christianity (including, sadly, some who are “Orthodox” in name). The way this is removed is usually by asserting that it’s not specifically articulated in the Bible, and that it “cannot” be Salvationally Necessary - and may therefore be dispensed with.
This whole approach is entirely foreign to Orthodoxy - whether or not any specific Practice is “necessary for Salvation”. We see no valid basis for such reductionism, Scriptural or otherwise.
It might come across as a niggling detail; but on what basis is *this* judgment made? Churches split all the time over these details - it’s definitely not unimportant.
thefinn
Crux_Invictus
Santa Noodle ☦️
UnrepentantWhiteDevil
Dagnar
☦️KingOfWhiteAmerica☦️
All ０７６萌ＳＮＳ content and data are available under the