Response to FightingVatican (part 6) - On Sola Scriptura and the unity of the Church
Concerning Sola Scriptura, i ask you if you think Contraception is good or bad. In whatever you say, I hope all who believe in Sola Scriptoria believe the same as well. Should we be allowed or not? I pray you say no, not just because no where in the New Testament will you find a verse containing to it, just because of how murderous and selfish it is. But who is to have authority? Ourselves? Truly if I interpret something one way and you the other, we have just created two Gods. You said that we must find out how the original writers intended, so you are trying to create unity, and the only hope if for that the unity is to be one, the only Church that claim to be ONE, the same faith in America as the same faith in Africa, is the Catholic Church.
Let me begin by first noting your fallacious thinking about the doctrine of Sola Scriptura. Sola Scriptura is not a statement that says, “all believers will have the exact same views about the same things.” Your inference in your question is that Sola Scriptura is a statement about the PERSON who believes in it. This is completely missing the mark. Rather, Sola Scriptura is a statement about the nature and sufficiency of Scripture. It is a statement that basically says that God’s word, as the very word of God, is the ultimate authority in the Church (notice, I didn’t say the only authority, only the authority over all others, ultimate); It is a statement about God’s word sufficiently containing all that one needs to know to be saved. Hence, if it is not required in the Bible FOR SALVATION, it is not necessary FOR SALVATION.
I have to emphasize “for salvation” because there are things that are “not necessary for salvation.” For instance, nowhere in the Bible does it require that I have certainly beliefs about certain moral topics or political views in order to be considered a Christian or justified before God. The Bible does not require, for instance, a particular view of contraception in order to be saved. Rather, the Bible clearly says that “if we believe with our hearts, and confess Jesus Christ as Lord, you will be saved.” Acts 16:31 “Believe in the Lord Jesus Christ and you will be saved…”. This is why Protestant argue that “faith alone” is the sole instrument of justification apart from works. It is Faith alone that the Bible requires in order to be justified.
Now, in order to be sanctified, there are further requirements for sure. There we must seek to conform our wills to God’s. There we must certainly take our moral stands and align our thinking with God’s word. But our sanctification is a result of our justification. Our justification does not depend on our sanctification.
Let me bring Scripture back into this. Sanctification is a process. Not all Christians are at the same level of sanctification either morally or intellectually. Some Christians live out very moral lives, but cannot think like a consistent Christian for the life of them. These are usually very simple people who have not really sought out the implications of Christian doctrine in all of life. They keep their Christianity simple and that is perfectly fine for them. Then there are some Christians who are intellectually sanctified in that these have thought through in a very thorough manner the doctrines of the Gospel of Jesus Christ. These have diligently studied the Scriptures and can apply the Scriptures to their own circumstance. Many in these category are usually Christian professors and philosophers. Again, nothing wrong with this category. We know that the Church needs them. Now, there might be some Christians who are behind in their sanctification. Some Christians might not even think to see what the Scriptures teach about particular moral issues, such as contraception.
After all lets be honest. The Bible does not explicitly speak about contraceptions. Now, the one example that many Catholics refer to is when a certain fellow “emitted on the ground” and was struck down by God. I’ve heard this one several times. However, in the context, God was not angered by his “emitting on the ground.” Rather, God was angered that this fellow didn’t want to fulfill his brotherly duty and give an heir to his brother’s wife (see Genesis 38:1-10), hence this example is misapplied from the text. The other thing you have to consider is your reasoning. You say, that contraception is “murderous”. But, my friend, how can you kill something which is not living? I will say that abortion is certainly murderous, but how can it be murder when the games have not even joined to create life? If nothing has been conceived, how can one “kill” nothing? You also say it is “selfish”, but for who? What if both partners concur that they do not wish to conceive a child but still want to be joined together as a husband and wife are (this is in a marriage context, of course)? If you are going to be consistent, then you would have to say that the ONLY reason for sex is procreation. Sex at any other time that has willful knowledge of when conception is impossible would be murder. I don’t believe you are willing to go that far, but being consistent with your assertions you would have to be. What of nocturnal emissions in children? Are they now guilty of murder? Get the point? It just doesn’t hold water…
So, should a person who holds to Sola Scriptura necessarily have the same views on contraception? Not necessarily. Nor does Sola Scriptura require them to. Again, Sola Scriptura is a statement about the nature and sufficiency of Scripture, not about the competency of the one interpreting Scripture. I myself have some different views with other fellow Christians. Some Christians believe that drinking alcohol is a sin. I do not. Some say smoking is a sin. I do not (not that I smoke). Some say that “stupid” is a bad word; I do not. Does that mean that they or I do not believe in Sola Scriptura? Hardly! It just means that we are different people. But where the word of God speaks and to what it speaks, SCRIPTURE ALONE speaks with infallible authority because it is the very Word of God. It is God speaking.
Hence, to ask the question you ask about Scriptures authority, the believer and contraceptions. You would first have to produce the explicit or implicit statements in Scripture condemning contraceptives or contraception in any way. Now, maybe I have missed those statements. I don’t claim exhaustive knowledge. I may only know what I have read and understood from Scripture. So ,if there is evidence for your view which can make a case against contraceptives for all Christians, then I certainly welcome it.
As per the unity that you require, you should understand that Rome does not meet that same standard. If I understand correctly, you believe that the Catholic Church professes a common faith, both doctrinally and morally. To a certain extent, this is true. I think all of the Roman Catholic Church is united generally in the belief of the primacy of the Pope, the Marian dogmas, the Eucharist and how to be saved. All of Rome professes common doctrine in word. However, when you get to the nitty-gritty that is to the lay people where Catholicism is really carried out in practice, we often find another story. And don’t get me wrong, this is in all Churches, even Protestant Churches. Rome has her members who profess to be Roman Catholic but yet believe in abortion (this is common in the RCC of the United States). Of course, Rome doesn’t excommunicate these members like professed Catholic John Kerry. Rome has her members within her fold who actually use contraceptives. Etc…my point is that theory and practice, doctrine and morals, don’t always match. I can also tell you that the Catholicism of the United States is carried out differently than the Catholicism in Mexico and South American countries, versus the Catholicism in Ireland versus the Catholicism in Rome itself, and I’m not just talking liturgically either. Each “form” has its own cultural relevance. I’m sure Catholics in Africa don’t worship like those in Mexico.
Now, my point is simply that the unity that you require for Protestants is not present in Roman Catholicism either. Even with Roman Catholicism there have been identified “denominations” such as the “sedavacanist” who do not believe that Rome has a valid Pope. There are “charismatic” Catholics; “Liberal” Catholics; “Moderate” Catholics; “Conservative” Catholics; Catholics who are opposed to the documents of Vatican II; Catholics who believe Vatican II was infallible; Catholic who do not believe Vatican II was infallible, etc…the list could go on and on but I think I’ve made the point.
Let me begin by first noting your fallacious thinking about the doctrine of Sola Scriptura. Sola Scriptura is not a statement that says, “all believers will have the exact same views about the same things.” Your inference in your question is that Sola Scriptura is a statement about the PERSON who believes in it. This is completely missing the mark. Rather, Sola Scriptura is a statement about the nature and sufficiency of Scripture. It is a statement that basically says that God’s word, as the very word of God, is the ultimate authority in the Church (notice, I didn’t say the only authority, only the authority over all others, ultimate); It is a statement about God’s word sufficiently containing all that one needs to know to be saved. Hence, if it is not required in the Bible FOR SALVATION, it is not necessary FOR SALVATION.
I have to emphasize “for salvation” because there are things that are “not necessary for salvation.” For instance, nowhere in the Bible does it require that I have certainly beliefs about certain moral topics or political views in order to be considered a Christian or justified before God. The Bible does not require, for instance, a particular view of contraception in order to be saved. Rather, the Bible clearly says that “if we believe with our hearts, and confess Jesus Christ as Lord, you will be saved.” Acts 16:31 “Believe in the Lord Jesus Christ and you will be saved…”. This is why Protestant argue that “faith alone” is the sole instrument of justification apart from works. It is Faith alone that the Bible requires in order to be justified.
Now, in order to be sanctified, there are further requirements for sure. There we must seek to conform our wills to God’s. There we must certainly take our moral stands and align our thinking with God’s word. But our sanctification is a result of our justification. Our justification does not depend on our sanctification.
Let me bring Scripture back into this. Sanctification is a process. Not all Christians are at the same level of sanctification either morally or intellectually. Some Christians live out very moral lives, but cannot think like a consistent Christian for the life of them. These are usually very simple people who have not really sought out the implications of Christian doctrine in all of life. They keep their Christianity simple and that is perfectly fine for them. Then there are some Christians who are intellectually sanctified in that these have thought through in a very thorough manner the doctrines of the Gospel of Jesus Christ. These have diligently studied the Scriptures and can apply the Scriptures to their own circumstance. Many in these category are usually Christian professors and philosophers. Again, nothing wrong with this category. We know that the Church needs them. Now, there might be some Christians who are behind in their sanctification. Some Christians might not even think to see what the Scriptures teach about particular moral issues, such as contraception.
After all lets be honest. The Bible does not explicitly speak about contraceptions. Now, the one example that many Catholics refer to is when a certain fellow “emitted on the ground” and was struck down by God. I’ve heard this one several times. However, in the context, God was not angered by his “emitting on the ground.” Rather, God was angered that this fellow didn’t want to fulfill his brotherly duty and give an heir to his brother’s wife (see Genesis 38:1-10), hence this example is misapplied from the text. The other thing you have to consider is your reasoning. You say, that contraception is “murderous”. But, my friend, how can you kill something which is not living? I will say that abortion is certainly murderous, but how can it be murder when the games have not even joined to create life? If nothing has been conceived, how can one “kill” nothing? You also say it is “selfish”, but for who? What if both partners concur that they do not wish to conceive a child but still want to be joined together as a husband and wife are (this is in a marriage context, of course)? If you are going to be consistent, then you would have to say that the ONLY reason for sex is procreation. Sex at any other time that has willful knowledge of when conception is impossible would be murder. I don’t believe you are willing to go that far, but being consistent with your assertions you would have to be. What of nocturnal emissions in children? Are they now guilty of murder? Get the point? It just doesn’t hold water…
So, should a person who holds to Sola Scriptura necessarily have the same views on contraception? Not necessarily. Nor does Sola Scriptura require them to. Again, Sola Scriptura is a statement about the nature and sufficiency of Scripture, not about the competency of the one interpreting Scripture. I myself have some different views with other fellow Christians. Some Christians believe that drinking alcohol is a sin. I do not. Some say smoking is a sin. I do not (not that I smoke). Some say that “stupid” is a bad word; I do not. Does that mean that they or I do not believe in Sola Scriptura? Hardly! It just means that we are different people. But where the word of God speaks and to what it speaks, SCRIPTURE ALONE speaks with infallible authority because it is the very Word of God. It is God speaking.
Hence, to ask the question you ask about Scriptures authority, the believer and contraceptions. You would first have to produce the explicit or implicit statements in Scripture condemning contraceptives or contraception in any way. Now, maybe I have missed those statements. I don’t claim exhaustive knowledge. I may only know what I have read and understood from Scripture. So ,if there is evidence for your view which can make a case against contraceptives for all Christians, then I certainly welcome it.
As per the unity that you require, you should understand that Rome does not meet that same standard. If I understand correctly, you believe that the Catholic Church professes a common faith, both doctrinally and morally. To a certain extent, this is true. I think all of the Roman Catholic Church is united generally in the belief of the primacy of the Pope, the Marian dogmas, the Eucharist and how to be saved. All of Rome professes common doctrine in word. However, when you get to the nitty-gritty that is to the lay people where Catholicism is really carried out in practice, we often find another story. And don’t get me wrong, this is in all Churches, even Protestant Churches. Rome has her members who profess to be Roman Catholic but yet believe in abortion (this is common in the RCC of the United States). Of course, Rome doesn’t excommunicate these members like professed Catholic John Kerry. Rome has her members within her fold who actually use contraceptives. Etc…my point is that theory and practice, doctrine and morals, don’t always match. I can also tell you that the Catholicism of the United States is carried out differently than the Catholicism in Mexico and South American countries, versus the Catholicism in Ireland versus the Catholicism in Rome itself, and I’m not just talking liturgically either. Each “form” has its own cultural relevance. I’m sure Catholics in Africa don’t worship like those in Mexico.
Now, my point is simply that the unity that you require for Protestants is not present in Roman Catholicism either. Even with Roman Catholicism there have been identified “denominations” such as the “sedavacanist” who do not believe that Rome has a valid Pope. There are “charismatic” Catholics; “Liberal” Catholics; “Moderate” Catholics; “Conservative” Catholics; Catholics who are opposed to the documents of Vatican II; Catholics who believe Vatican II was infallible; Catholic who do not believe Vatican II was infallible, etc…the list could go on and on but I think I’ve made the point.
posted by prchdaword at 4:05 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home