Another sola scriptura thread

  • Thread starter Thread starter tbuley
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
T

tbuley

Guest
I’m reading Chemnitz’s Examination of the Council of Trent. I am looking for an Apologists site who deals with a “confessional” view of sola scriptura. Most of what I come across seams to be a refutation of a generic nuda scriptura that is rehashed over and over, not much seems to be out there that deals with the historic understanding of this “doctrine” Lutheran or reformed.
 
Or maybe just a modern apologist (website) that deals with a confessional sola scriptura, rather than the generic non-denom strawman sola scriptura.
 
John M. Frame, in the Westminster Theological Journal (found at reformed.org) puts it like this:

That having been said, it is nevertheless important for the theologian to account for the normative force of his teachings. It certainly cannot be assumed, for example, that a description of various historic events or views will yield normative conclusions. We cannot decide our theology by counting noses among the Puritans, or the Reformers, or the nineteenth-century American Presbyterians, or among some other favored group. Nor can we assume that because some view has been endorsed by a church council or has otherwise gained a following among Christians we have an obligation to agree with it. Sola scriptura means that the only ultimate norm for theology is the teaching of Scripture. Other norms must justify themselves by their faithfulness to the inspired Word.
 
Thanks, but what I meant was a “refutation of sola scriptura”
 
tbuley said:
I’m reading Chemnitz’s Examination of the Council of Trent. I am looking for an Apologists site who deals with a “confessional” view of sola scriptura. Most of what I come across seams to be a refutation of a generic nuda scriptura that is rehashed over and over, not much seems to be out there that deals with the historic understanding of this “doctrine” Lutheran or reformed.
Click to expand...
I generally find James Akin to be sensible in his treatment of confessional Protestantism, at least more so than most online apologists.

However, I think you are probably looking in the wrong place when you look at websites. A much better source would be Louis Bouyer’s The Spirit and Forms of Protestantism and other books by serious Catholic theoogians.

How about you post some of the arguments you find convincing in Chemnitz and we can discuss them? I remember Chemnitz having a very detailed division of the various senses in which the Fathers speak of “tradition” which I think would be helpful in clarifying our discussions of “sola scriptura.”

Edwin
 
Contarini said:
I generally find James Akin to be sensible in his treatment of confessional Protestantism, at least more so than most online apologists.

However, I think you are probably looking in the wrong place when you look at websites. A much better source would be Louis Bouyer’s The Spirit and Forms of Protestantism and other books by serious Catholic theoogians.

How about you post some of the arguments you find convincing in Chemnitz and we can discuss them? I remember Chemnitz having a very detailed division of the various senses in which the Fathers speak of “tradition” which I think would be helpful in clarifying our discussions of “sola scriptura.”

Edwin
Click to expand...
Yes sounds good, sorry for not responding sooner. My shifts on at work our 13hr days and I got 3 young ones and a wife after, but when my week ends all get back to this thread.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top