38 hard questions for Bible Christians

[ConfusedTim]

The following questions for “Bible Christians” was taken from Catholic Convert.com (most were written by David Palm). I dont expect answers to all of them but i am sure on reading them you will agree the sola scrpture is completly alien to Christianity

1. Where did Jesus give instructions that the Christian faith should be based exclusively on a book?
2. Other than the specific command to John to pen the Revelation, where did Jesus tell His
   apostles to write anything down and compile it into an authoritative book?
3. Where in the New Testament do the apostles tell future generations that the Christian faith will be based solely on a book?
4. some Protestants claim that Jesus condemned all oral tradition (e.g., Matt 15:3, 6;
   Mark 7:813). If so, why does He bind Hislisteners to oral tradition by telling them to
   obey the scribes and Pharisees when they “sit on Moses’ seat” (Matt 23:2)?
5. Some Protestants claim that St. Paul condemned all oral tradition (Col 2:8). If so,
   why does he tell the Thessalonians to “stand firm and hold to the traditions which you were
   taught, whether by word of mouth or by letter” (2 Thes 2:15) and praises the Corinthians because they “hold firmly to the traditions” (1 Cor 11:2)? (And why does the Protestant NIV change the word “tradition” to “teaching”?)
6. If the authors of the New Testament believed in sola Scriptura, why did they sometimes
   draw on oral Tradition as authoritative and as God’s Word (Matt 2:23; 23:2; 1 Cor 10:4; 1 Pet 3:19; Jude 9, 14 15)?
7. Where in the Bible is God’s Word restricted only to what is written down?
8. How do we know who wrote the books that we call Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, Acts,
   Hebrews, and 1, 2, and 3 John?
9. On what authority, or on what principle, would we accept as Scripture books that we know were not written by one of the twelve apostles?
10. Where in the Bible do we find an inspired and infallible list of books that should belong
    in the Bible? (e.g., Is the Bible’s Table of Contents inspired?)
11. How do we know, from the Bible alone, that the individual books of the New Testament are inspired, even when they make no claim to be inspired?
12. How do we know, from the Bible alone, that the letters of St. Paul, who wrote to first century congregations and individuals, are meant to be read by us as Scripture 2000 years
    later?
13. Where does the Bible claim to be the sole authority for Christians in matters of faith and morals?
14. Most of the books of the New Testament were written to address very specific problems in the early Church, and none of them are a systematic presentation of Christian faith and theology. On what biblical basis do Protestants think that everything that the apostles taught is captured in the New Testament writings?
15. If the books of the New Testament are “self-authenticating” through the ministry of
    the Holy Spirit to each individual, then why was there confusion in the early Church over
    which books were inspired, with some books being rejected by the majority?
16. If the meaning of the Bible is so clear—so easily interpreted—and if the Holy Spirit leads every Christian to interpret it for themselves, then why are there over 33,000 Protestant denominations, and millions of individual Protestants, all interpreting the Bible
    differently?
17. Who may authoritatively arbitrate between Christians who claim to be led by the Holy
    Spirit into mutually contradictory interpretations of the Bible?
18. Since each Protestant must admit that his or her interpretation is fallible, how can any
    Protestant in good conscience call anything heresy or bind another Christian to a particular belief?
19. Protestants usually claim that they all agree on the important things.” Who is able to
    decide authoritatively what is important in the Christian faith and what is not?
20. How did the early Church evangelize and overthrow the Roman Empire, survive and
    prosper almost 350 years, without knowing for sure which books belong in the canon of
    Scripture?
21. Who in the Church had the authority to determine which books belonged in the New
    Testament canon and to make this decision binding on all Christians? If nobody has this
    authority, then can I remove or add books to the canon on my own authority?
22. Why do Protestant scholars recognize the early Church councils at Hippo and Carthage as the first instances in which the New Testament canon was officially ratified, but ignore the fact that those same councils ratified the Old Testament canon used by the Catholic hurch today but abandoned by Protestants at the Reformation?
23. Why do Protestants follow post-apostolic Jewish decisions on the boundaries of the Old Testament canon, rather than the decision of the Church founded by Jesus Christ?
24. How were the bishops at Hippo and Carthage able to determine the correct canon
    of Scripture, in spite of the fact that they believed all the distinctively Catholic doctrines
    such as the apostolic succession of bishops, the sacrifice of the Mass, Christ’s Real Presence in the Eucharist, baptismal regeneration, etc?
25. If Christianity is a “book religion,” how did it flourish during the first 1500 years of
    Church history when the vast majority of people were illiterate?
26. How could the Apostle Thomas establish the church in India that survives to this day
    (and is now in communion with the Catholic Church) without leaving them with one word
    of New Testament Scripture?
27. If sola Scriptura is so solid and biblically based, why has there never been a full treatise written in its defense since the phrase was coined in the Reformation?
28. If Jesus intended for Christianity to be exclusively a “religion of the book,” why did
    He wait 1400 years before showing somebody how to build a printing press?

 

[ConfusedTim]

1. If the early Church believed in sola Scriptura, why do the creeds of the early
   Church always say “we believe in the Holy Catholic Church,” and not “we believe in Holy
   Scripture”?
2. If the Bible is as clear as Martin Luther claimed, why was he the first one to interpret it
   the way he did and why was he frustrated at the end of his life that “there are now as many
   doctrines as there are heads”?
3. The time interval between the Resurrection and the establishment of the New Testament canon in AD 382 is roughly the same as the interval between the arrival of the Mayflower in America and the present day. Therefore, since the early Christians had no defined New Testament for almost four hundred years, how did they practice sola Scriptura?
4. If the Bible is the only foundation and basis of Christian truth, why does the Bible itself say that the Church is the pillar and foundation of truth (1 Tim. 3:15)?
5. Jesus said that the unity of Christians would be objective evidence to the world that
   He had been sent by God (John 17:20-23). How can the world see an invisible “unity” that
   exists only in the hearts of believers?
6. If the unity of Christians was meant to convince the world that Jesus was sent by God,
   what does the ever-increasing fragmentation of Protestantism say to the world?
7. Hebrews 13:17 says, “Obey your leaders and submit to their authority. They keep watch over you as men who must give an account. Obey them so that their work will be a joy, not a burden, for that would be of no advantage to you.” What is the expiration date of this verse? When did it become okay not only to disobey the Church’s leaders, but to rebel against them and set up rival churches?
8. The Koran explicitly claims divine inspiration, but the New Testament books do
   not. How do you know that the New Testament books are nevertheless inspired, but the Koran is not?
9. How does a Protestant know for sure what God thinks about moral issues such as
   abortion, masturbation, contraceptives,eugenics, euthanasia, etc.?
10. What is one to believe when one Protestant says infants should be baptized (e.g., Luther and Calvin) and another says it is wrong and unbiblical (e.g., Baptists and Evangelicals)?

 

[Wesley7]

Some of the questions could be answered ~ but I don’t have the intellectual fortitude to properly tackle and answer quite a list of difficult questions. Better yet, why don’t you answer them yourself?

On other hand why don’t you ask a team of Bible scholars? Judging from the extensive list that’s alot of work bro.

 

[Wesley7]

1. Where did Jesus give instructions that the Christian faith should be based exclusively on a book?

Nowhere. In the time of Jesus’ ministry on earth he taught in spoken dialect ~ it was not until some time later scribes and authors wrote the Gospels on papyrus to copied and translated into a lengthy process which can be known as the New Testament.

 

[carneyc]

Very good work…

 

[Jon_Hus]

Jesus said something like this: “The Scriptures cannot be broken”.

 

[NewCatholic1207]

Nowhere. In the time of Jesus’ ministry on earth he taught in spoken dialect ~ it was not until some time later scribes and authors wrote the Gospels on papyrus to copied and translated into a lengthy process which can be known as the New Testament.

Wesley, are you as an Orthodox Christian seriously suggesting that sola scriptura is a true and proper Christian teaching?

 

[NewCatholic1207]

Jesus said something like this: “The Scriptures cannot be broken”.

The text is: John 10:34-38

*34 Jesus answered them, “Is it not written in your law, ‘I said, you are gods’? 35 If he called them gods to whom the word of God came (and scripture cannot be broken), 36 do you say of him whom the Father consecrated and sent into the world, ‘You are blaspheming,’ because I said, ‘I am the Son of God’? 37 If I am not doing the works of my Father, then do not believe me; 38 but if I do them, even though you do not believe me, believe the works, that you may know and understand that the Father is in me and I am in the Father.” *

Jon, what does this prove? How are the scriptures being broken?

 

[Bob_Crowley]

Jesus said something like this: “The Scriptures cannot be broken”.

The context of the above quote can be found in John 10:31-38, when the Jews were going to stone Him for claiming to be the Son of God.

However nobody is arguing the “Scripture cannot be annulled” (as it is in my Bible), but the Scripture itself states that Christ would found His Church on Peter. Christ said so.

Christ called Peter the Rock on which He would found His Church, and the Scriptures confirm it. The Church Fathers confirmed the Petrine Office as the main authority for the chuch, and until Luther, 1500 years later, it remained that way. Suddenly he brought the Scriptures in as the ultimate authority (meanwhile saying how strongly he despised some of it, calling James a watery epistle as it mentioned “works”), despite the fact they didn’t even exist in Christ’s time.

Christ did not found His church on the Scriptures.

 

[BrianH]

While I am not Sola Scriptura, I wonder if you realize how many of these arguments are really similiar to atheist’s arguments against Christianity and the Bible?

 

[Jon_Hus]

Ephesians 1:22 & 5:23

 

[myfavoritmartin]

1) Where did Jesus give instructions that the Christian faith should be based exclusively on a book?
**“what is asserted without the Scriptures or proven revelation may be held as an opinion, but need not be believed.”
Sola Scriptura was established in principle with the giving of the law. No tradition passed down by word of mouth, no rabbinical opinion, and no priestly innovation was to be accorded authority equal to the revealed Word of God as recorded in Scripture.
Read Josh. 1:7-8
… Be strong and very courageous; be careful to do according to all the law which Moses My servant commanded you; do not turn from it to the right or to the left, so that you may have success wherever you go. This book of the law shall not depart from your mouth, but you shall meditate on it day and night, so that you may be careful to do according to all that is written in it **

2) Other than the specific command to John to pen the Revelation, where did Jesus tell His
apostles to write anything down and compile it into an authoritative book?
**Incarnate in flesh God? Maybe not but as Peter explains “But know this first of all that no prophecy of Scripture is a matter of one’s own interpretation, for no prophecy was ever made by an act of human will, but men moved by the Holy Spirit spoke from God.”
So I wonder are you questioning whether scripture is the inspired word of God, because the apostles didn’t. James was writing his own book and called it scripture. He says, “Do you think the scripture speak to no purpose” in James 4:5. He calls his own books, book James, scripture. Paul reading the law of God, the Old Testament, said the law is holy, just and good. He affirms the holiness, the perfection of God’s law, the Old Testament. Jude quotes Peter as scripture. Peter quotes Paul as scripture. And John quotes himself as scripture. John just finished writing the letters to the churches, he says let the churches hear what the Spirit says. John knew he was writing what the Spirit was saying, not what he was saying.
**
3) Where in the New Testament do the apostles tell future generations that the Christian faith will be based solely on a book?
According to 1 Peter chapter 1, the Apostle Peter reminds us that we have a living and abiding Word of God that is an imperishable truth upon which God builds a foundation of eternal life and glory.
According to 1 John 1:4 John said, “These things I write unto you that your joy may be full.” Psalm 138:2 says, “God has exalted the Word to the very level of His own name.” It is impossible to separate the glory of the Word from God Himself because this is indeed His own Word.

4) some Protestants claim that Jesus condemned all oral tradition (e.g., Matt 15:3, 6;
Mark 7:8-13). If so, why does He bind His listeners to oral tradition by telling them to
obey the scribes and Pharisees when they “sit on Moses’ seat” (Matt 23:2)?
You miss the point the LORD was making, His point was for him that is taught in the word to give respect to him that teaches, that is commendable; but for him that teaches, to demand it, to be puffed up with it, is sinful.

 

[Wesley7]

Wesley, are you as an Orthodox Christian seriously suggesting that sola scriptura is a true and proper Christian teaching?

No, sola scriptura is a Protestant invention.

In the Orthodox Church the Scriptures and the Bible are placed within Tradition.

. .

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

1) Where did Jesus give instructions that the Christian faith should be based exclusively on a book?
**“what is asserted without the Scriptures or proven revelation may be held as an opinion, but need not be believed.”
Sola Scriptura was established in principle with the giving of the law. No tradition passed down by word of mouth, no rabbinical opinion, and no priestly innovation was to be accorded authority equal to the revealed Word of God as recorded in Scripture.
Read Josh. 1:7-8
… Be strong and very courageous; be careful to do according to all the law which Moses My servant commanded you; do not turn from it to the right or to the left, so that you may have success wherever you go. This book of the law shall not depart from your mouth, but you shall meditate on it day and night, so that you may be careful to do according to all that is written in it **

Interesting you refer to the Old Testament to support ‘sola scriptura’. Now let’s look at the example of Old Testament interpretation of scriptures. It was not by private interpretation, it was the men of God who explained scriptures to the people and caused them to understand.

Neh 8:1 And the seventh month came: and the children of Israel were in their cities. And all the people were gathered together as one man to the street which is before the water gate, and they spoke to Esdras the scribe, to bring the book of the law of Moses, which the Lord had commanded to Israel.
Neh 8:2 Then Esdras the priest brought the law before the multitude of men and women, and all those that could understand, in the first day of the seventh month.
Neh 8:3 And he read it plainly in the street that was before the water gate, from the morning until midday, before the men, and the women, and all those that could understand: and the ears of all the people were attentive to the book.
Neh 8:4 And Esdras the scribe stood upon a step of wood, which he had made to speak upon, and there stood by him Mathathias, and Semeia, and Ania, and Uria, and Helcia, and Maasia, on his right hand: and on the left, Phadaia, Misael, and Melchia, and Hasum, and Hasbadana, Zacharia and Mosollam.
Neh 8:5 And Esdras opened the book before all the people: for he was above all the people: and when he had opened it, all the people stood.
Neh 8:6 And Esdras blessed the Lord the great God: and all the people answered, Amen, amen: lifting up their hands: and they bowed down, and adored God with their faces to the ground.
Neh 8:7 Now Josue, and Bani, and Serebia, Jamin, Accub, Sephtai, Odia, Maasia, Celtia, Azarias, Jozabed, Hanan, Phalaia, the Levites, made silence among the people to hear the law: and the people stood in their place.
Neh 8:8 And they read in the book of the law of God distinctly and plainly to be understood: and they understood when it was read.
Neh 8:9 And Nehemias (he is Athersatha) and Esdras the priest and scribe, and the Levites who interpreted to all the people, said: This is a holy day to the Lord our God: do not mourn, nor weep: for all the people wept, when they heard the words of the law.

Also, what did Christ teach about the men of God, in the Temple?

**Mat 23:1 Then Jesus spoke to the multitudes and to his disciples,
Mat 23:2 Saying: The scribes and the Pharisees have sitten on the chair of Moses.
Mat 23:3 All things therefore whatsoever they shall say to you, observe and do: but according to their works do ye not. For they say, and do not. **

FYI.

According to Rabbinic Judaism, the oral Torah, oral Law, or oral tradition (Hebrew: תורה שבעל פה, Torah she-be-`al peh) is the oral tradition received in conjunction with the written Torah (and the rest of the Hebrew Bible), which is known in this context as the “written Torah” (Hebrew: תורה שבכתב, Torah she-bi-khtav). The Mishnah is the record of the oral Torah.

According to Rabbinic Judaism, Moses and the Israelites received an oral as well as the written Torah (“teaching”) from God at Mount Sinai. The books of the Tanakh (Hebrew Bible) were relayed with an oral tradition passed on by the scholarly and other religious leaders of each generation, and according to classical Rabbinic interpretation, the teachings of the oral law are a guide to that interpretation of the written law which is considered the authoritative reading. Jewish law and tradition thus is not based on a strictly literal reading of the Tanakh, but on combined oral and written traditions. Further, the basis of halakha (Jewish law) is the premise that the written law is inherently bound together with an oral law.

The “oral law” was ultimately recorded in the Mishnah, the Talmud and Midrash.

The laws transmitted to Moses were contained in the Torah written down on scrolls. The explanation however, was not allowed to be written down. Jews were obligated to speak the explanation and pass it on orally to students, children, and fellow adults. It was thus initially forbidden to write and publish the Oral Law: written material would be incomplete and subject to misinterpretation (and abuse).

After great debate, however, this restriction was lifted. Following the destruction of the Second Temple and the fall of Jerusalem, it became apparent that the Palestine community and its learning were threatened, and that publication was the only way to ensure that the law could be preserved

 

[adstrinity]

1) Where did Jesus give instructions that the Christian faith should be based exclusively on a book?
“what is asserted without the Scriptures or proven revelation may be held as an opinion, but need not be believed.”
Sola Scriptura was established in principle with the giving of the law. No tradition passed down by word of mouth, no rabbinical opinion, and no priestly innovation was to be accorded authority equal to the revealed Word of God as recorded in Scripture.
Read Josh. 1:7-8
**… Be strong and very courageous; be careful to do according to all the law which Moses My servant commanded you; do not turn from it to the right or to the left, so that you may have success wherever you go. This book of the law shall not depart from your mouth, but you shall meditate on it day and night, so that you may be careful to do according to all that is written in it **

2) Other than the specific command to John to pen the Revelation, where did Jesus tell His
apostles to write anything down and compile it into an authoritative book?
Incarnate in flesh God? Maybe not but as Peter explains "But know this first of all that no prophecy of Scripture is a matter of one’s own interpretation, for no prophecy was ever made by an act of human will, but men moved by the Holy Spirit spoke from God."
So I wonder are you questioning whether scripture is the inspired word of God, because the apostles didn’t. James was writing his own book and called it scripture. He says, “Do you think the scripture speak to no purpose” in James 4:5. He calls his own books, book James, scripture. Paul reading the law of God, the Old Testament, said the law is holy, just and good. He affirms the holiness, the perfection of God’s law, the Old Testament. Jude quotes Peter as scripture. Peter quotes Paul as scripture. And John quotes himself as scripture. John just finished writing the letters to the churches, he says let the churches hear what the Spirit says. John knew he was writing what the Spirit was saying, not what he was saying.

3) Where in the New Testament do the apostles tell future generations that the Christian faith will be based solely on a book?
**According to 1 Peter chapter 1, the Apostle Peter reminds us that we have a living and abiding Word of God that is an imperishable truth upon which God builds a foundation of eternal life and glory. **
According to 1 John 1:4 John said, “These things I write unto you that your joy may be full.” Psalm 138:2 says, “God has exalted the Word to the very level of His own name.” It is impossible to separate the glory of the Word from God Himself because this is indeed His own Word.

4) some Protestants claim that Jesus condemned all oral tradition (e.g., Matt 15:3, 6;
Mark 7:8-13). If so, why does He bind His listeners to oral tradition by telling them to
obey the scribes and Pharisees when they “sit on Moses’ seat” (Matt 23:2)?
You miss the point the LORD was making, His point was for him that is taught in the word to give respect to him that teaches, that is commendable; but for him that teaches, to demand it, to be puffed up with it, is sinful.

1. Christian Faith. That’s answering with the OT, which was regarded as canon.
2. The Word of God is Jesus, His Son, not the Bible.

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

3) Where in the New Testament do the apostles tell future generations that the Christian faith will be based solely on a book?
According to 1 Peter chapter 1, the Apostle Peter reminds us that we have a living and abiding Word of God that is an imperishable truth upon which God builds a foundation of eternal life and glory.
According to 1 John 1:4 John said, “These things I write unto you that your joy may be full.” Psalm 138:2 says, “God has exalted the Word to the very level of His own name.” It is impossible to separate the glory of the Word from God Himself because this is indeed His own Word.

Your mistake appears to be that you take ‘Word of God’ to mean specifically scriptures. 1 Peter is not speaking about scriptures. 1 John 1:4 does not state a ‘sole authority’ in scriptures. Psalms 138:2 does not specify ‘scriptures’.

Peter warns about the unlearned, unstable and unwise wresting scriptures, even to their own destruction.

2Pe 3:15 And account the longsuffering of our Lord, salvation: as also our most dear brother Paul, according to the wisdom given him, hath written to you:
2Pe 3:16 As also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things; in which are certain things hard to be understood, which the unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, to their own destruction.
2Pe 3:17 You therefore, brethren, knowing these things before, take heed, lest being led aside by the error of the unwise, you fall from your own steadfastness.

Where is the pillar and ground of truth?

1Ti 3:15 But if I tarry long, that thou mayest know how thou oughtest to behave thyself in the house of God, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and ground of the truth.

Why does the inspired word of God tell us the Church is the pillar and ground of truth instead of scriptures?

Eph 3:10 That the manifold wisdom of God may be made known to the principalities and powers in heavenly places through the church

Why does the inspired word of God tell us that the manifold wisdom of God maybe made known through the Church, instead of scriptures?

Mat 18:17 And if he will not hear them: tell the church. And if he will not hear the church, let him be to thee as the heathen and publican.

Why did Christ tell us, and God inspire it be written, to take disputes to the Church, instead of scriptures, if scriptures were really the ‘sole authority’?

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

4) some Protestants claim that Jesus condemned all oral tradition (e.g., Matt 15:3, 6;
Mark 7:8-13). If so, why does He bind His listeners to oral tradition by telling them to
obey the scribes and Pharisees when they “sit on Moses’ seat” (Matt 23:2)?
You miss the point the LORD was making, His point was for him that is taught in the word to give respect to him that teaches, that is commendable; but for him that teaches, to demand it, to be puffed up with it, is sinful.

**1Co 11:2 Now I praise you, brethren, that in all things you are mindful of me and keep my ordinances as I have delivered them to you.

2Th 2:15 (2:14) Therefore, brethren, stand fast: and hold the traditions, which you have learned, whether by word or by our epistle.

2Th 3:6 And we charge you, brethren, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that you withdraw yourselves from every brother walking disorderly and not according to the tradition which they have received of us. **

Hold the traditions, whether by WORD or epistle.

**2Th 3:7 For yourselves know how you ought to imitate us. For we were not disorderly among you.
2Th 3:8 Neither did we eat any man’s bread for nothing: but in labour and in toil we worked night and day, lest we should be chargeable to any of you.
2Th 3:9 Not as if we had not power: but that we might give ourselves a pattern unto you, to imitate us. **

Paul tells us to imitate him, it’s not asking but telling them, or demanding if you will.

 

[myfavoritmartin]

Psalms 138:2 does not specify ‘scriptures’.

What on earth do you think David was speaking of if it were NOT God’s revealed scripture?

1 I will praise thee with my whole heart: before the gods will I sing praise unto thee.
2 I will worship toward thy holy temple, and praise thy name for thy lovingkindness and for thy truth: for thou hast magnified** thy word** above all thy name.

 

[myfavoritmartin]

Your mistake appears to be that you take ‘Word of God’ to mean specifically scriptures.

On what basis do you make anything beyond scripture to be God’s revealed word?

 

[myfavoritmartin]

2 kings 22:10
And Shaphan the scribe shewed the king, saying, Hilkiah the priest hath delivered me a book. And Shaphan read it before the king.
11 And it came to pass, when **the king had heard the words of the book of the law, that he rent his clothes. **
12 And the king commanded Hilkiah the priest, and Ahikam the son of Shaphan, and Achbor the son of Michaiah, and Shaphan the scribe, and Asahiah a servant of the king’s, saying,
13 Go ye, enquire of the LORD for me, and for the people, and for all Judah, concerning the words of this book that is found: for great is the wrath of the LORD that is kindled against us, because our fathers have not hearkened unto the words of this book, to do according unto all that which is written concerning us.