The Highway Forums General Discussion Theology Discussion Forum Solo Scriptura

But, all those Catholic groups believe in the same doctrine, not the same practice. I know in Houston, there is a Charismatic Catholic center that is within the Diocese of the Houston Catholic Church but their practice is much different than other Roman Catholic churches. But, their doctrine is identical.

I think this may be the crux of the issue. What authority has the authority to teach? Mathison admits that Reformed traditions must appeal to tradition. But, how do you know what tradition to appeal to?

For me, that question is easily answered: I appeal to that "tradition" that submits to the authority of Scripture ALONE and not to some individual or group of individuals. Prof. John Murray wrote an excellent article on this very subject which you can read here: Tradition: Romish and Protestant

<font size="5"><script language="JavaScript" src="includes/ubbt_blink.js"></script><span id="blink"><blink>ENJOY!</blink></span><script language="JavaScript">blink();</script></font>

In His Grace,

Pilgrim,

Do you really think that any article with the pejoritive "Romish" in the title is objective? <img src="/forum/images/graemlins/scratch1.gif" alt="" />

Astralis

When I look at these various groups of Catholics, even from what is written in my last post shows that their doctrine is different.
Even if I was to accept what you said as true, what would it really matter? Someone can say they believe in something, but if their practice doesn't show it, in actuality their practice shows what they actually believe.

Tom

Tom,

I disagree. A church that uses more incense or uses it more often than another church doesn't mean their doctrine is different. It's a difference in practice. From what I have seen, none of these churches teach different doctrine. If you can point out something specific, that would help.

I only have a moment so I will only mention one.
Liberal Roman Catholics are generally pro-choice.

Tom

You might not like the term "Romish", but what really matters is whether or not the author represents the facts correctly.

Tom

John Murray answers your question in the article Pilgrim suggested you might like to read.


There you have it! You've always got to go to the source, the Bible.

Tom, No I am not Roman Catholic nor am I fooled by the Roman Catholics. That said I think it quite funny as to the numerous denominations yet the supposed unity of the Christian church. Sometimes churches and OFTENTIMES theologians spend more time refuting their counterparts in other sects than they do addressing the Christian faith.
If I hear another Dispensational vs. Preterist, 4 point vs. 5 point, etc. sermon I will scream! How is it that those in the pews sometimes understand an eschatological table (Dispy's) or can tell you that Arminians are clueless (Reformed folks), yet they do not know what the gospel is?

IiOscco,

Perhaps you might tell us what the Gospel is? Maybe also you might explain to me why learning about the cluelessness of Arminius and the ememies of the Gospel might be a waste of time?

Is it possible that you might be one of those that say: Give us the "spirit" and damn the doctrine. Or worse yet: For the sake of unity let us burn our bibles and "party". <img src="/forum/images/graemlins/cheers2.gif" alt="" /> <img src="/forum/images/graemlins/bananas.gif" alt="" />

Denny

Roms: 3 22-24

Hi there, thanks for ignoring the point of my post and going straight to the ad-hominem attacks! Well done! You will win many converts that way!

But you substantiated the point of my post. Instead of actually sharing the gospel, I find churches would rather engage in such attacks. And instead of seeing that sharing the gospel is important, I am very sad that you would rather go down a different path.

As to the gospel, in case you think I am the only one who thinks sharing the gospel is the most important, I will share a mission statement for Hope Protestant Reformed Church. Maybe you will label the PRC as one of those wacky "spirit led, give us the spirit and damn the doctrine"?

"The preaching of the gospel is the most important part of the worship of God. God's people are saved by its power and also constantly strengthened and encouraged in their faith. The preaching at our church is based on clear and careful exposition of the scripture. "

Having been to many a PRC church, they have it right. To be sure they spend a large amount of time with polemics, but they are ALWAYS sharing the gospel, they are ALWAYS Christ centered. They are NOT "ashamed of the gospel".
(Note: It should be noted I am NOT a member of the PRC.)

You have once again missed the point, who said anything about not proclaiming the Gospel. Of course we should and are obligated to proclaim the Gospel. As Paul said: "Wo is me, if I do not proclaim the Gospel."

The problem however, is much of what is proclaimed in many evangelical circles today, is not the Biblical Gospel. An example of this is the tract ‘Four Spiritual Laws’.

So please tell us, what is the Biblical Gospel?

Tom

Sir,

Maybe you did not notice but it was you that began the attack with "Reformed folks do not know what the Gospel is".

The fact is that we live and breath it so well, we are easily able to defend it from the growing number of its enemies.

To link "reformed folk" with "Dispys" is an uncomprehensible insult on this website.

Denny

Rom. 3:22-24

First, let me say that I am NOT happy the way this discussion is going and I do hope that ALL parties will consider abstaining from furthering the direction it has taken.

Secondly... you may have "attended" a number of PRC congregations, but so have I. Even more salient is the fact that I have studied at the PRC Seminary and therefore have a little different insight into what the PRC is and what they believe.

Thirdly, the statement you quoted from Hope PRC I find in error.

The preaching of the gospel is the most important part of the worship of God.

This topic has been discussed on the Board several times in the past, i.e., what should the focus be in a Christian worship service? Most of the Reformed persuasion, who do not embrace the "seeker friendly" model, are agreed that corporate worship is a time when professing believers come together to offer praise to God, confess their sins, hear the Word of God preached and then leave as changed individuals whose primary desire is to live holy lives before the Lord. This is not to say that the Gospel message isn't ever to be preached in a corporate worship setting. But again, it is clearly NOT to be the focus nor is it the "most important part" of the worship of God.

Lastly, from what I heard taught at the Seminary and what I heard at the various PRC congregations I visited (yes, there were exceptions and those churches were not well looked upon) the "gospel" was discernible different than that which Reformed churches historically preached. And this was due to their distorted doctrines concerning the "free offer" and how they viewed covenant children. According them, one must first come to know that he/she is one of the elect in order to have the right to believe upon Christ.

Now, if you would like to discuss any of this further, then I would suggest that a new thread be started so that the subject of this thread, "Solo Scripture" may continue on track.

In His Grace,