Worldliness

[Silentreader]

All kidding aside, you cannot possibly think the early church advocated Sola Scriptura?

In the sense that the things they believed are found in the scriptures, yes. If someone had introduced the Mariam doctrines or a dedicated class of unmarried priests, I think they wouldn't have accepted it.

Here's a quote I ran across today...thoughts?

While the Spirit-filled events of Pentecost and the resulting ministry were extraordinary, the apostles and their followers did not begin saying afterward, Well, now the Spirit of God teaches me; therefore, I don’t need to listen to anybody else. Instead, when filled with the Holy Spirit, they were all ears for the authoritative preaching and teaching of God’s word. This teaches us an important lesson: the Spirit of God always leads the people of God to devote themselves to the word of God.

[ohio jones]

All kidding aside, you cannot possibly think the early church advocated Sola Scriptura?

Acts 17:10-11

[Valerie]

All kidding aside, you cannot possibly think the early church advocated Sola Scriptura?

Acts 17:10-11

That is not justification for Sola Scriptura which the Church never was (2 Thessalonians 2:15)
That passage was about verifying Christ as fulfillment of OT prophecies which can be done by OT Scriptures.
The NT Church read OT as they did not have the New Testament but they certainly depended on oral teachings for a long time - they had no New Testament and obviously were not just hearing/reading Old Testament passages, but as the Bertrand searched Scriptures to see Christ as fulfilling Old Testament prophecy regarding the coming Messiah so they would believe.

[JayP]

Glad someone got it. Thinking is tricky

[Ernie]

they had no New Testament and obviously were not just hearing/reading Old Testament passages, but as the Bertrand searched Scriptures to see Christ as fulfilling Old Testament prophecy regarding the coming Messiah so they would believe.

Lots of new people groups being introduced on MN.
First we were introduced to a new Anabaptist group called the Smish. Then a group called the Holdemam's. Now we learn about a NT group called the Bertrand. Anybody want to guess the next group?

[Ernie]

All kidding aside, you cannot possibly think the early church advocated Sola Scriptura?

In the sense that the things they believed are found in the scriptures, yes. If someone had introduced the Mariam doctrines or a dedicated class of unmarried priests, I think they wouldn't have accepted it.

You have a point. However, I think that how the Reformers used the scriptures is quite different from the early Christians. The early Christians had a high view of scripture, but different than the high view of the Reformers.

Catholics and Orthodox are clear that they view scripture as part of Christian tradition. This is in contrast to viewing scripture as something that has authority to critique Christian tradition.

[ohio jones]

they had no New Testament and obviously were not just hearing/reading Old Testament passages, but as the Bertrand searched Scriptures to see Christ as fulfilling Old Testament prophecy regarding the coming Messiah so they would believe.

Lots of new people groups being introduced on MN.
First we were introduced to a new Anabaptist group called the Smish. Then a group called the Holdemam's. Now we learn about a NT group called the Bertrand. Anybody want to guess the next group?

There have also been a few references to the feminist Mennonites, the Anna Baptists.

[Valerie]

they had no New Testament and obviously were not just hearing/reading Old Testament passages, but as the Bertrand searched Scriptures to see Christ as fulfilling Old Testament prophecy regarding the coming Messiah so they would believe.

Lots of new people groups being introduced on MN.
First we were introduced to a new Anabaptist group called the Smish. Then a group called the Holdemam's. Now we learn about a NT group called the Bertrand. Anybody want to guess the next group?

I’ll work on S’more
Gotta love it when focus is on errors instead of content

[temporal1]

i often understand “early Christians” as those first believers, before the written Word.
As happens, the phrase has different meanings according to context and author. ??

Nowadays, I look for little mistakes like this since it means I can be reasonably confident the document wasn't AI generated
(it score 100% in Pangram, which is somewhat reassuring?), although I suppose a sophisticated person will eventually prompt the AI tools to insert deliberate misspellings in an attempt to seem more human.

i heavily rely on CLOSED CAPTIONING. i appreciate it.

However, CC’s gotta be THE WORST for spelling! i hope there’s no worse.
As i read it, i grieve for young people, those new to English, i’m not sure how they can manage.

Content produced for public display, for profit, should be held to a higher standard than “any ordinary individual” sharing personal thoughts, making honest mistakes, esp due to awkward tech devices and limited time.

Is CC AI-generated? i don’t think it’s any longer “human” or even edited!

[JohnH]

Most closed captions are machine generated now. Some high budget films, TV shows etc will still have a real transcriptionist.