- Where did Jesus give instructions that the Christian faith should be based exclusively on a book?
He didn’t, nor does Sola Scriptura embrace that.
Where did Jesus state the The Catholic Church is exempt from accountability, INCAPABLE of being wrong in matters of doctrine and morals, and whatever IT and IT itself alone says is just to be accepted “with docility?”
- 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?
We have no record that He did, but God did - since they were His penmen through whom He wrote His Scripture.
- Where in the New Testament do the apostles tell future generations that the Christian faith will be based solely on a book?
It doesn’t. Where in the New Testament do the apostles tell future generations that The Catholic Church is infallible, unaccountable, and that whatever it alone says is just to be accepted with docility (CCC 87, etc., etc.)?
And what is the only norma normans that the Apostle’s used? Yup, Scripture. And how often did ANY of them so much as even MENTION The Catholic Church for anything, about anything, concerning anything, in any regard about any matter at all? Where did they promise or authorize The Catholic Church - specifically, particularly, perpetually?
- 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)?
I thought this thread was about Sola Scriptura, not “some Protestants.” Some Catholics support abortion and believe in artificial birth control.
See above.
- 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)?
One cannot “believe in” a praxis, one employs a praxis.
Hum, you got those from where? Yup, Scripture. And you seem to not realize that the corpus of Scripture increased from 1400 BC to 90 AD. Kinda moot in 2010, wouldn’t you say?
- Where in the Bible is God’s Word restricted only to what is written down?
Doesn’t. Nor does Sola Scriptura say that. Sola Scriptura doesn’t say anything. Sola Scriptura is the PRAXIS of embracing Scripture as the norma normans as doctrines among us are normed.
- How do we know who wrote the books that we call Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, Acts,
Hebrews, and 1, 2, and 3 John?
Who cares? Why is that relevant to this discussion?
Actually, Protestants agree with The Catholic Church that GOD did, which is why they are called “Scripture.” From “The Handbook of the Catholic Faith” (page 136), “The Bible is the very Word of God and no greater assurance of reliability can be given. The Bible was inspired by God. Exactly what does this mean? It means that God is the Author of the Bible. God inspired the penmen to write as He wished.” God is the Author, who was the penmen is pretty moot.
- 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?
Actually,we don’t know who the penmen were. Who cares? Can we get to a discussion of Sola Scriptura?
Do you think that truth matters, especially doctrine concerning our very souls?
Do you think that teachers of doctrine are accountable for such?
IF so, then The Catholic Church is accountable for the doctrines it teaches - NO LESS than any and all other teachers; and just as The Catholic Church insists that all are fully and wholly accountable right here and right now, so what’s good for the goose is good for the gandar - Protestants ACCEPT this position of The Catholic Church, which means IT is fully accountable - right here, right now - for the doctrines it teaches. Make sense? Thus, now embracing norming (and departing from what The Catholic Church demands in it’s Catechism # 87), the question becomes: WHAT best serves as the norma normans for this norming of doctrines among us?
- 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?)
We don’t. Under the Rule of Law, where is there a list of all laws currently in place in all jurisdictions? IF such a list doesn’t exist, do you therefore reject the Rule of Law and insist that a defendant is correct if the defendant alone proclaims that the defendant alone is INCAPABLE of being wrong and thus is correct, and thus the defendant is exempt from norming and WHATEVER that individual does is just to be accepted as correct “with docility?”
- 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?
It’s not an issue of debate among us.
It’s not ME or YOU or any party involved in the normative process.
How do we know that The Catholic Church exclusively, particularly, perpetually is INFALLIBLE and UNACCOUNTABLE and EXEMPT from norming, and that WHATEVER it alone says is just to be accepted with docility? Didn’t God warn us over and over and over of false teachers - meaning that teachers CAN be wrong/false? Didn’t Jesus praise people for regarding their teachers as accountable, for testing/norming them and even for finding them to be false? WHERE did God state the there is but ONE and exclusively ONE teacher that is incapbable of error, infallible, unaccountable, exempt from accountability, and WHATEVER that ONE says is just to be accepted with docility?
- 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?
- Where does the Bible claim to be the sole authority for Christians in matters of faith and morals?
It doesn’t. Where does any but The Catholic Church say that The Catholic Church is the sole authority in matters of faith and morals? The LDS says that it is, so accepting your alternative rubric, self proclaiming self to be the sole authority being correct, then the LDS is the sole authority because it alone says that it alone is - EXACTLY the rubric you seem to be defending as correct.
- 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?
None ever said that it does.
I thought this thread was going to be about Sola Scriptura?
Where does The Catholic Church get the confirmation that IT - and it itself exclusively - knows what the Apostles taught but God kept out of His Scripture to us? Of course, the LDS claims this, too - they know what the Apostles (and Jesus) taught that there is no record of, and it insists that it knows cuz it insists that it knows, so it knows. Do you think the LDS is accountable for this secret, gnostic “teaching” it alone knows? If so, what’s good for the goose is good for the gandar, don’t you agree?
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?
Maybe we’re going to get to something about Sola Scriptura in one of these…
- 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?
See above…
- Who may authoritatively arbitrate between Christians who claim to be led by the Holy
Spirit into mutually contradictory interpretations of the Bible?
See above…
- 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?
See above…
Take this complant to The Catholic Church. It is the ONLY one on the planet and in all of Christian history that does what you are rebuking. Read your Catechism # 85. You will find NOTHING of the sort in ANY other Catechism of ANY other group.
Catholics usually don’t attend Mass.
I thought this thread was about Sola Scriptura?
- 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?
I’m waiting for something about Sola Scriptura…
- 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?
See above.
- 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?
See above.
Why do so many Catholics have hispanic last names here in California?
When are we going to get to the issue of ACCOUNTABILITY, NORMING, and the most sound norma normans for such?
- 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?
- 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?
- 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?
- 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?
- 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?
Nothing.
Oh, well…
.
