Against "Sola Scriptura"

[whatistruth]

Protestant bretheren read carefully II John 9-12

"Any one who goes ahead and does not abide in the doctrines of Christ does not have God; he who abides in the doctrine has both the Father and the Son. If anyone comes to you and does not bring this doctrine, do not recieve him into the house or give him any greeting; for he who greets him shares his wicked work.

Though I have much to write to you, I would rather not use paper and ink, but I hope to come to see you and talk face to face, so that our joy may be complete"

If you notice a few things here:

1. Doctrine is not the bible, it is Apostolic Church teachings(Apostolic Tradition)
2. Doctrine outside the Apostolic teaching(Apostolic Tradition) is not permitted
3. John is stating face to face Apostolic teaching (Apostolic Tradition) is more important than things written down.

This scripture alone(No pun intended) blows protestant doctrine of “Sola Scriptura” completely out of spiritual waters.

We as Christians need an authoritative Apostolic Church when it comes to Scripture and Doctrine.I hope we can read this and realize how we need to become unified as One, Holy ,Catholic,and Apostolic Church. This is what Jesus demands and requires!

Peace be with you

 

[AgnosTheist]

If anyone comes to you and does not bring this doctrine, do not recieve him into the house or give him any greeting; for he who greets him shares his wicked work.

Wow thats too extreme. What ever happened to ‘love your neighbor as yourself’? I think its the JWs who has the guts to follow this insane advise.

 

[bengal_fan]

Protestant bretheren read carefully II John 9-12

"Any one who goes ahead and does not abide in the doctrines of Christ does not have God; he who abides in the doctrine has both the Father and the Son. If anyone comes to you and does not bring this doctrine, do not recieve him into the house or give him any greeting; for he who greets him shares his wicked work.

Though I have much to write to you, I would rather not use paper and ink, but I hope to come to see you and talk face to face, so that our joy may be complete"

i love scripture. i love it also where it says that it is living and active, and useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting, and training. and where it says to meditate on scripture day and night so that we may be careful to do everything written in it.

If you notice a few things here:

1. Doctrine is not the bible, it is Apostolic Church teachings(Apostolic Tradition)

that is not at all what this passage is saying. nowhere does it say that doctrine is not in the Bible. you are correct though that doctrine comes from Apostolic teachings, just like the Bible does, so doctrine can be found in the Bible.

1. Doctrine outside the Apostolic teaching(Apostolic Tradition) is not permitted

agreed. every protestant i know would agree with this. they would also say that there are some catholic doctrines outside of Apostolic teaching.

1. John is stating face to face Apostolic teaching (Apostolic Tradition) is more important than things written down.

no he isn’t. he is saying he would much rather see them then just write a letter. man, and i thought protestants were bad at proof-texting!

This scripture alone(No pun intended) blows protestant doctrine of “Sola Scriptura” completely out of spiritual waters.

We as Christians need an authoritative Apostolic Church when it comes to Scripture and Doctrine.I hope we can read this and realize how we need to become unified as One, Holy ,Catholic,and Apostolic Church. This is what Jesus demands and requires!

Peace be with you

i would say Jesus desires unity very strongly. so much so that He asks the Father for us to be unified. i would also say that you don’t understand sola scriptura. i do not hold to the extreme views of it, in fact i would say i am prima scriptura instead of sola scriptura in that the highest authority we have on earth is scripture. everything is subject to it. therefore (not that the church has done this), the church can never contradict scripture. ever. the writings of the apostles can and does continue to shape the church. hence, scripture first (not alone).

i would say you need to think before you post a little better.

 

[O.S.Luke]

This scripture alone(No pun intended) blows protestant doctrine of “Sola Scriptura” completely out of spiritual waters.

We as Christians need an authoritative Apostolic Church when it comes to Scripture and Doctrine.I hope we can read this and realize how we need to become unified as One, Holy ,Catholic,and Apostolic Church. This is what Jesus demands and requires!

Peace be with you

Not all Protestants adhere to sola scriptura.

Having said that, you have just been guilty of the Protestant-like behavior of quoting scripture out of context. You’re not even close. That is not exegesis, that is eisegesis! Goodness!

And before you accuse me of Protestant bias, know that my source for interpreting the Johannine epistles is Catholic biblical scholar Father Ray Brown, who wrote extensively on the subject. God rest his soul.

O+

 

[whatistruth]

Perhaps I didn’t state what I actually mean to say so sorry for the misunderstanding. John states he would rather orally discuss face to face rather than write it in letter(Scripture) so the point being scripture alone is not the only authority in delivering Jesus’ doctrine. This is where Oral Tradition is being practiced by an apostle. When an apostle speaks he speaks on behalf of the Church “The Pillar and foundation of Truth” and not the bible alone. I truly hope this makes a little more clarity.

 

[whatistruth]

i love scripture. i love it also where it says that it is living and active, and useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting, and training. and where it says to meditate on scripture day and night so that we may be careful to do everything written in it.

that is not at all what this passage is saying. nowhere does it say that doctrine is not in the Bible. you are correct though that doctrine comes from Apostolic teachings, just like the Bible does, so doctrine can be found in the Bible.

agreed. every protestant i know would agree with this. they would also say that there are some catholic doctrines outside of Apostolic teaching.

no he isn’t. he is saying he would much rather see them then just write a letter. man, and i thought protestants were bad at proof-texting!

i would say Jesus desires unity very strongly. so much so that He asks the Father for us to be unified. i would also say that you don’t understand sola scriptura. i do not hold to the extreme views of it, in fact i would say i am prima scriptura instead of sola scriptura in that the highest authority we have on earth is scripture. everything is subject to it. therefore (not that the church has done this), the church can never contradict scripture. ever. the writings of the apostles can and does continue to shape the church. hence, scripture first (not alone).

i would say you need to think before you post a little better.

Did Christ give himself up for the scriptures or for the Church? He came to fulfill the scriptures but not die for her. He came to die for the Church as stated by St.Paul. The Apostolic Church, (Magestarium),Oral Tradition, and Sacred Scripture carry equal weight and not scripture alone or scripture first. This is the point to make. This is not an attack but loving conversation so I hope you do not take offense.

 

[Marc1152]

Here is an excellent article concerning sola scriptura:

orthodoxinfo.com/inquirers/tca_solascriptura.aspx

 

[pa226p]

I believe there is a big rift between Roman Catholics and Protestants’…. The idea of sola scriptura being a bad idea…? Not to mention the idea of only church tradition being the only idea…? I do not buy into the fact of sola scriptura as taught by the Calvinist and other Protestants. I also have a hard time believing the written word does not mean that much when put side by side with oral tradition. If you notice the words for our Lord Jesus every time he is speaking to the Sanhedrin, he always states, “It is written.” So apparently Jesus thought of the written word as being important and not just oral tradition.

I personally get so confused with the different words and traditions in the Church it is frustrating. I personally have to fall back on scripture especially the book of Romans too keep my sanity at times. It does not matter who is write or wrong but your relationship with Christ. I also hear so many of my fellow Catholic throw the idea of the Church having the right to bind or not too bind when it comes to granting salvation or the forgiveness of sins… Look two-thousand years ago before the Christ departed, we were talking about non believers, not believers in Christ who did not agree about sola scriptura… How can we say non Catholic Christians are not saved…?

I personally do not judge and I do not know a priest who takes the stance that a man who confesses the Lord Jesus Christ is God, the Holy Trinity, The virgin birth and the rest of that stuff is going to hell because he is not Roman Catholic.

I am a Catholic due to the fact they seem to not have changed “fundamentally” over the past two millennium. I do believe oral tradition has a lot to do with my faith and it is important, but not the only thing when it comes to faith.

 

[whatistruth]

I love your response because we all get confused with Romans along with other scriptures and I believe you have just answered the response that we need the Church to interpret the scriptures and doctrines and how much we need her to guide us in regards to faith and morals. We need One,Holy,Catholic, and Apostolic Church to guide us in doctrine wether it be written or Oral Tradition. The Church has final authority! Amen?

 

[whatistruth]

I believe there is a big rift between Roman Catholics and Protestants’…. The idea of sola scriptura being a bad idea…? Not to mention the idea of only church tradition being the only idea…? I do not buy into the fact of sola scriptura as taught by the Calvinist and other Protestants. I also have a hard time believing the written word does not mean that much when put side by side with oral tradition. If you notice the words for our Lord Jesus every time he is speaking to the Sanhedrin, he always states, “It is written.” So apparently Jesus thought of the written word as being important and not just oral tradition.
Remember when Jesus stated"it is written" he was refering to the Old Testament.
I personally get so confused with the different words and traditions in the Church it is frustrating. I personally have to fall back on scripture especially the book of Romans too keep my sanity at times. It does not matter who is write or wrong but your relationship with Christ. I also hear so many of my fellow Catholic throw the idea of the Church having the right to bind or not too bind when it comes to granting salvation or the forgiveness of sins… Look two-thousand years ago before the Christ departed, we were talking about non believers, not believers in Christ who did not agree about sola scriptura… How can we say non Catholic Christians are not saved…?

I personally do not judge and I do not know a priest who takes the stance that a man who confesses the Lord Jesus Christ is God, the Holy Trinity, The virgin birth and the rest of that stuff is going to hell because he is not Roman Catholic.

I am a Catholic due to the fact they seem to not have changed “fundamentally” over the past two millennium. I do believe oral tradition has a lot to do with my faith and it is important, but not the only thing when it comes to faith.

 

[Harpazo]

Not all Protestants adhere to sola scriptura.

Having said that, you have just been guilty of the Protestant-like behavior of quoting scripture out of context. You’re not even close. That is not exegesis, that is eisegesis! Goodness!

And before you accuse me of Protestant bias, know that my source for interpreting the Johannine epistles is Catholic biblical scholar Father Ray Brown, who wrote extensively on the subject. God rest his soul.

O+

Don’t you adhere to Sola Scriptura? If not, why?

Also why would you choose a Catholic source for your interpretation and how does this line up with Wesleyan/Current Methodist doctrine and practice?

Pace e Bene
Andrew

 

[O.S.Luke]

Don’t you adhere to Sola Scriptura? If not, why?

I don’t adhere to Sola Scriptura for the simple reason that it was never a Wesleyan/Anglican principle, since the Anglican Church did not evolve from the Lutheran thread of Protestantism. If there is a term that would fit the Wesleyan/Anglican line, it would be Prima Scriptura. This best fits under the Anglican “Three-Legged Stool” or Wesleyan Quadrilateral:

The phrase [Quadrilateral] which has relatively recently come into use to describe the principal factors that John Wesley believed illuminate the core of the Christian faith for the believer. Wesley did not formulate the succinct statement now commonly referred to as the Wesley Quadrilateral. Building on the Anglican theological tradition, Wesley added a fourth emphasis, experience. The resulting four components or “sides” of the quadrilateral are (1) Scripture, (2) tradition, (3) reason, and (4) experience. For United Methodists, Scripture is considered the primary source and standard for Christian doctrine. Tradition is experience and the witness of development and growth of the faith through the past centuries and in many nations and cultures. Experience is the individual’s understanding and appropriating of the faith in the light of his or her own life. Through reason the individual Christian brings to bear on the Christian faith discerning and cogent thought. These four elements taken together bring the individual Christian to a mature and fulfilling understanding of the Christian faith and the required response of worship and service. - from A Dictionary for United Methodists, Alan K. Waltz, © 1991, Abingdon Press.

Also why would you choose a Catholic source for your interpretation and how does this line up with Wesleyan/Current Methodist doctrine and practice?

Raymond Brown is the foremost preeminent scholar on the Gospel of John and the Johannine Community - both in Catholic and Protestant circles. His two-volume commentary on The Gospel According to John in the Anchor Bible Commentary Series as well as his An Introduction to the New Testament are required texts at most major Protestant seminaries, and have the imprimitur and nihil obstat stamps on them.

O+

 

[O.S.Luke]

…

 

[Ginger2]

Protestant bretheren read carefully …
If you notice a few things here:…
3. John is stating face to face Apostolic teaching (Apostolic Tradition) is more important than things written down.

Pardon me if someone has already pointed this out, but…

The Catechism states that Tradition and Scripture are equal

 

[Ginger2]

This scripture alone(No pun intended) blows protestant doctrine of “Sola Scriptura” completely out of spiritual waters.

You can’t take one or two verses and state absolute proof of your point. You need to consider the whole thing. Otherwise it appears as tho the Scriptures contradict one another.

 

[Ginger2]

I do not adhere to the Catholic definition of Sola Scripture, but I do believe in Sola Scripture as defined in Scripture.

Isa 8:20 To the law and to the testimony: if they speak not according to this word, [it is] because [there is] no light in them.

Dictionary Aids
Act 17:11 These were more noble than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness of mind, and searched the scriptures daily, whether those things were so.

If what you teach contradicts Scripture, it is false.

Jhn 5:46 For had ye believed Moses, ye would have believed me: for he wrote of me. 47 But if ye believe not his writings, how shall ye believe my words?

II Timothy 3:16 All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness, 17 so that the man of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work.

Through Scriptures God is equiping us to be thoroughly equipped for every good work.

Mat 4:4 But he answered and said, It is written, Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God.

Mat 4:7 Jesus said unto him, It is written again, Thou shalt not tempt the Lord thy God.

Mat 4:10 Then saith Jesus unto him, Get thee hence, Satan: for it is written, Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God, and him only shalt thou serve.

If it’s good enough for Jesus, it’s good enough for me!

 

[bengal_fan]

Did Christ give himself up for the scriptures or for the Church? He came to fulfill the scriptures but not die for her. He came to die for the Church as stated by St.Paul. The Apostolic Church, (Magestarium),Oral Tradition, and Sacred Scripture carry equal weight and not scripture alone or scripture first. This is the point to make. This is not an attack but loving conversation so I hope you do not take offense.

has the catholic church ever contradicted scripture?

i’ll give you time to think.



the answer… no (according their interpretation of the scriptures which is not in debate here).

are there doctrines of the church that are not explicitly found in scripture?

yes (BUT, there’s always a but…)

catholic apologists are constantly showing us where these doctrines are implicit within the scriptures and that the ECF’s held to these doctrines and these interpretations of scripture. but they always go back to the scriptures to prove their points. not just apologists but priests, bishops, and popes use scripture to uphold the traditions and the magisterium. nothing in the church can contradict scripture. tradition is based on the Apostle’s teaching and much of that teaching is in scripture and the ones that aren’t are acceptable to the church because they do not contradict scripture. scripture is obviously the supreme authority. it is obviously prima scriptura. tradition and the magisterium help (and are the final authority) interpret scripture and to hand down those things not explicitly found in scripture, but they are not equal with scripture, they work in harmony with it. but scripture is the basis. the OT was the primary way of God communicating with His people in Jesus’ day (yes, before it was written down it was oral tradition). and it is the primary way He communicates with us today.

 

[Ginger2]

has the catholic church ever contradicted scripture?

I think, “yes”

Matthew14:9 “Jesus entered the house of Peter, and saw his mother-in-law lying in bed with a fever.” shows Peter was married, but the RC forbids Priests to marry.

Canonization of dead saints. All God’s children are referred to as Saints in the Bible. To place one over another is unbiblical. Only God knows a person’s heart. It is wrong for us to claim one who’s works we have seen will be greater in heaven that one who’s work’s were not seen by humans.

 

[bengal_fan]

I think, “yes”

Matthew14:9 “Jesus entered the house of Peter, and saw his mother-in-law lying in bed with a fever.” shows Peter was married, but the RC forbids Priests to marry.

Canonization of dead saints. All God’s children are referred to as Saints in the Bible. To place one over another is unbiblical. Only God knows a person’s heart. It is wrong for us to claim one who’s works we have seen will be greater in heaven that one who’s work’s were not seen by humans.

wow, and you are sola scriptura?? you should read the whole bible first. yes, Peter was married, but the RC discipline of unmarried priests is just that… a discipline. it is not doctrine, and (in fact) there are a number of married priests within the RC.

“dead saints”?? who is a dead saint?? Jesus says that if we believe in Him we will not die but have eternal life. so, followers of Christ whose physical bodies have died are even more alive than us in eternity. you place one person over another i’m sure. i’m positive that you view some people as “holier” than others (meaning closer to God, opening themselves up for more of God, etc.). your pastor, missionaries, Billy Graham and the like. are these not men and women held in higher regard within protestant circles?? the answer is yes. you really should read the whole bible and understand it before saying things that aren’t true.

 

[bengal_fan]

oh, and by the way… i say this as a protestant minister.