An Argument against Sola Scriptura?

[preyoflove]

In my meditation on the Mystery of the Descent of the Holy Spirit of the Glorious Mysteries of the Most Holy Rosary, it occurred to me that our Lord The Holy Spirit gave the infant Church the gift to speak languages other than their own, obviously to be able to preach and to be understood by the Gentile nations–not the gift to write in languages other than their own. I realized that inorder to preach in writing and be understood by their own nation and the Gentiles, they had to either learn to write in their language and in languages other than their own, or perhaps rely on converts who can do any or both tasks.

Anyhow, we can see that God really intended His Church to first preach the Gospel, and not to write it down “immediately”, show it to the world and then cockily sit back waiting for the reader to understand all of it correctly without any explanation (“If God speaks to you, you do not ask Him for His business card”) needed.

Your thoughts?

Shalom, amen.

 

[RobedWithLight]

This is especially clear when thinking of the life of Christ. He Himself never wrote anything down, except for some unrecorded words in the sand, nor did He command any of the twelve to write anything down which would serve as the sole and final source of doctrinal authority and teaching. All that He ever commanded before the Ascension was for His disciples to preach the Gospel before all nations and baptize them in the name of the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit…

This is likewise significant because in the early centuries of the Christian era, only around 10 percent of the Roman Empire’s populace can be regarded as literate, that is able to read and write. Hence, Sola Scriptura would be a strange teaching in those early days.

Gerry