a sola scriptura argument

[phatcatholic]

but, personally, i don't see Jesus giving the Holy Spirit to just anyone. i see him giving Him to the apostles, to the Church. THEY are the ones who will be guided into all truth. sure, scripture can inspire us all, but we have to work w/in the doctrine protected by the Holy Spirit, given first to the apostles by Jesus Christ. that's why private interpretation just doesn't work. THAT is the most illogical practice of them all......

[thessalonian]

[quote name='Honour' date='Jan 12 2005, 03:47 AM'] I'm sorry I just don't see how the logic follows. Ok, so you can read a sentance and get a different meaning than me. I could logically say that that is why I need to look to the Holy Spirtit for guidance in interpretating and appling the Bible as God's truth in [b]my[/b] life. Thats more direct.
Not saying I'm saying that...just that you made a HUGE jump there. [/quote]
Most Protestants I know view scripture as a set of logical statements (which in some sense it is) by which you apply a certain set of principles to come up with a conclusion as to what the verse says. It is called hermenutics. Actually it is not contrary to Catholic teaching on interprutation, but what they are lacking is sacred oral traditoin. That is why no amount of hermenutics will bring them all to the same conclusion and unify them. Thus thousands if not tens of thousands of denominatoins. Here is a quote from an email by a professor with a doctorate at a local univeristy that I am having a discussion on allegory with.

"There is a major problem with allegorical interpretation and that is that
the interpreter really becomes the final authority and not the scriptures
themselves. When the scriptures are not approached according to normal patterns
of grammar then there are almost no safeguards for what a person can teach
from them. I believe in normal interpretation (I like that better than
"literal"). Normal interpretation simply allows language to be language and if we
assume that God is trying to communicate to man then it would seem that He (the
creator of language) would not try and baffle us with hidden and totally
incomprehensible meanings"

Now I am discussing the pros and cons on Allegorical methods in that other thread. He sees them in opposition to eachother. He does not see the Catholic view that a verse can have a literal AND allegorical sense. Literal coming first. But hermenutics does not get him what he wants either.
I ask that you see my post above that presents another problem with hermenutics being the complete solution.

[Honour]

[quote]...it is called hermenutics. Actually it is not contrary to Catholic teaching on interprutation, but what they are lacking is sacred oral traditoin. That is why no amount of hermenutics will bring them all to the same conclusion and unify them. Thus thousands if not tens of thousands of denominatoins[/quote]
I agree hermenutics alone can be a problem...I took it my first year in Bible College, I hated it. There is no one answer type of thing, what you find is not what I find. Its partly what appeals to me about the Catholic Church... and it also seems so foriegn too..Oral tradition. I know the Holy Spirit guides me..it reaveals the truths I need, not all of them at once, but what I need when I need it, in the way I need it. At once I want you to tell me excatly what the scripture is saying, and I don't want you to tell me how I should interpret it....thats my problem.
All I was saying is that it is a big jump,,, I thought there might be more to the logic.

[thessalonian]

"At once I want you to tell me excatly what the scripture is saying, and I don't want you to tell me how I should interpret it....thats my problem."

There is a literal sense in which scripture must be understood. In Catholicism there are a set of doctrines (which is another problem with the way hermanutics is used in Protestantism) that form a framework and a guide for interprutation (like the commandments are to our morality). One may not go outside of this framework in great danger of heresy for to go outside of it is to come up with new doctrine. The faith was delivered "once for all" by the Apostles. These are the saving truths and anything contrary to them is not just nuetral, but puts our soul in jepordy.

Now the doctrines of the Catholic Church are a framework for interprutation. They can however be more deeply understood. The scriptures help us with that. Therein lies the second part of your question (the doctrines are the first) . The word of God is not only bound in a book. (oral tradition) nor can it not be applied today in our lives. Thus it is not a dead letter and when we read it we can discover an infinite amount of truths about God (all consistent with Catholic doctrine and dogma, adding nothing to it) but deepening our understanding of him, like one who knows that a ball is red and rubber and bounces as a child but then discovers it's chemical properties, color on the color spectrum, and elasticity in college. Our God is infinite. To think he is encapsulated in a finite set of statements in a book is ludicris. That I am afraid is one of the failings of the hermenitical only approach.

By the way, while the evangelical types go too much toward the hermenutical approach it is my experience that the Pentecostal types actually take your holy spirit arguement above to the extreme.

Blessings

Edited January 12, 2005 by thessalonian

[Honour]

Its beautifull... It now has a permanent place in my cut and past log of all things I find valuable on "My Catholic Journey".

[HomeTeamFamily]

what is?

[cathqat]

[quote name='thessalonian' date='Jan 12 2005, 08:22 AM'] In Catholicism there are a set of doctrines that form a framework and a guide for interprutation [/quote]
When an exegete shows how his interpretation of a passage is consistent with or similar to basic doctrines and practices of the faith, he is confirming the credibility of his interpretation by what is called "the analogy of faith."

[Mrvoll]

That is great