Best defense for sola scriptura?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Thom18
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
However, the Church does not have the same level of inerrancy the Scripture does. Men are still fallible in their interpretation of Scripture. In the end, we appeal to the Holy Spirit to make it clear, Who will in His time.
To me, this is the best defense for Sola Scriptura. Even as Christians guided by the Holy Spirit we are still at war with our carnal natures.

Like Paul said in Romans 7: 15-20 “For I do not understand my own actions. For I do not do what I want, but I do the very thing I hate. 16 Now if I do what I do not want, I agree with the law, that it is good. 17 So now it is no longer I who do it, but sin that dwells within me. 18 For I know that nothing good dwells in me, that is, in my flesh. For I have the desire to do what is right, but not the ability to carry it out. 19 For I do not do the good I want, but the evil I do not want is what I keep on doing. 20 Now if I do what I do not want, it is no longer I who do it, but sin that dwells within me.”

All of us, including the early church fathers, the doctors of the church, Bishops, Popes and Priest fight with the Carnal (Fleshly) nature that will not be overcome until we are in Christ presence. We are all subject to our own prejudices that come from our experiences, what we have been taught, how we have been influenced by others, difference in understandings about definitions of words, our own carnal nature and who knows what else. Many things shape our worldview and understandings of doctrine and religious practices.

When we add Sacred Tradition and canon law (rulings of the Magisterium) to be equal with Scripture then we are just adding additional things for us to try to sort out between the spiritual (truth) and carnal (false). And because those things are more nebulous they are more prone to the influence of social/religious syncretism and leaders with powerful/strong personalities who sway others to follow their teachings. The body of Christ is always in danger of being influenced by society norms and practices and strong charismatic leaders who claim to speak the truth. It also puts the church in a dangerous position if the Magisterium or Pope becomes influenced by society or a person or group of people who teach things contrary to the Gospel. I understand Roman Catholics think the Magisterium and Pope (when speaking from the chair) can’t be wrong but I don’t hold that view. Any man or group of men can be deceived. As a matter of fact, I would say that one of the primary warnings in scripture is for the church and especially church leadership to not be deceived.

However, we can be like the Bereans mentioned in Acts 17 and “examining the Scriptures daily to see if these things were so.” If you believe the New Testament to be Scripture, regardless of if it was given to the Church by God or the Church created the Scripture by it’s authority, then the Scripture is the final authority to us just as it was to the Bereans. It is the scriptures that tell us if we are being deceived. The fact that we have some differences in what we believe the Scriptures tell us is a result of our carnal nature but it doesn’t mean the the Scriptures aren’t the final authority.

I personally don’t think the church will be perfected until all the elect have either tasted physical death and entered into His Glory or Christ returns to Earth. The church is made of people and will not be perfected until all the people are perfected. At that point we will all have perfect knowledge and we will finally have the full unity that we, in our imperfection, strive to achieve and that Christ prayed we would have.
 
Last edited:
Yeah.

It’s as if the Catholics have thrown out the idea of walking by faith for a purported absolute certainty. God calls us to walk by faith, but that is not good enough for them.

Our knowledge is analogical. We understand what God has chosen to reveal. They seem, with their insistence on absolute knowledge and infallible statements, to have rejected the way God has chosen to reveal Himself. We see through a glass darkly. They reject that by their insistence on a Tradition apart from Scripture. And look where it has gotten them.
 
40.png
SojournerOnEarth:
However, the Church does not have the same level of inerrancy the Scripture does. Men are still fallible in their interpretation of Scripture. In the end, we appeal to the Holy Spirit to make it clear, Who will in His time.
To me, this is the best defense for Sola Scriptura. Even as Christians guided by the Holy Spirit we are still at war with our carnal natures.
How do we know that Scripture is inerrant? How do we know what Scripture is? If Scripture is inerrant isn’t it only so in the original copy? Do we have original sources? If not then we’ve failed already. How do we know if we have original sources? When it comes time to interpret who can actually interpret? It seems to me it is a small group of people, like the Magisterium. It is only people proficient in ancient languages. And this is important. So many of the arguments hang on single words, verb tenses, and other issues of grammar.

I see lots of problems with Sola Scripture. It may be hard to believe that a group of men could be guided by the Holy Spirit to interpret Scripture. But if that really is the position then it makes Sola Scripture just as impossible as it was written by a small group of men guided by the Holy Spirit.
 
[=“exnihilo, post:60, topic:448514, full:true”]
I can only say that as I pondered the question I decided that the Catholic view of where to find the Church was the only one that held up if I wasn’t going to end up just siding with the interpretation I agree with. The Church divided from the earliest days. Folks were always disagreeing.
And you know I honor and respect that decision.
The Catholic understanding of the Church seems to me the only one that could ever bring the Church back together. The Orthodox can’t. They can’t even get an intra orthodox synod going. Protestants can’t. I think you’d agree with me that the unification/ecumenism in Protestantism has only been among those groups who have views seriously contrary to Scriptures and Tradition. In my opinion the Protestants ethos has been one of division. The Orthodox are able to maintain decent order precisely because they see the Church as having a hierarchy, even if their view is imperfect.
Oddly, I tend to agree, that unity will only come through Rome, but it won’t come unless and until there is agreement, not with western non-Catholics, but between Rome and the EO on exactly what the role of the Bishop of Rome is, in relation to councils.
 
Last edited:
How do we know that Scripture is inerrant? How do we know what Scripture is? If Scripture is inerrant isn’t it only so in the original copy? Do we have original sources?
We have faith and rely on the sovereignty of God. He revealed what he wanted to be scripture and that is what we have as scripture. Therefore, it is the source of God’s truth.
 
40.png
JonNC:
40.png
SojournerOnEarth:
40.png
JonNC:
40.png
SojournerOnEarth:
40.png
exnihilo:
40.png
JonNC:
They’ve found the CC to be in error from scripture and from the position of the historical Church. Much of what is criticized is from "development of doctrine ". And some of those criticisms are connected to methods of hermeneutics
Then we have question begging. The authentic interpretation of Holy Scripture is the role of the Church, and Lutherans rejected the established Church because it violated Holy Scripture. At the time of this initial rejection it is quite clear where the Church was and what it taught about Holy Scripture, which was at odds with Lutheran teaching.
I disagree. Christ instituted the Church to teach, preach, and administer the sacraments. On this I think Catholics would agree. Where we disagree is in where Church authority resides.
I agree that “Christ instituted the Church teach, preach, and administer the sacraments.” Hope that helps.
Sure, but you said,"The authentic interpretation belongs to the Holy Spirit. ". I think the Church is the tool of the Holy Spirit to do just that.
I’ll stand by both my statements and maintain they are not contradictory. I am not sure how to go further with respect to your last statement because anything I say could be subject to misinterpretation, especially if I get it wrong. God does use the Church. However, the Church does not have the same level of inerrancy the Scripture does. Men are still fallible in their interpretation of Scripture. In the end, we appeal to the Holy Spirit to make it clear, Who will in His time.
Hi guys, i was wondering if your discussion was going to go any farther before i interjected but it seemed to have stalled.

So JonNC i know where SojournerOnEarth lies on this point as we had this discussuon previously but i do not know your position in the full context of this thread. SojournerOnEarth posts “However, the Church does not have same level of inerrancy the Scripture does”. Do you also not see how this statment is seperating Christ and his body, the church or seperating the Holy Spirit from God? Can the Body of Christ be less than His Word? Can Christ be the Head without a Body? Can the Holy Spirit be greater than the Body of Christ? Dont you guys see how these statements are continually pulling the one true God apart and giving fuel to the non-Trinitarian sects alive today?

Peace be with both of you!!!
 
Hi guys, i was wondering if your discussion was going to go any farther before i interjected but it seemed to have stalled.

So JonNC i know where SojournerOnEarth lies on this point as we had this discussuon previously but i do not know your position in the full context of this thread. SojournerOnEarth posts “However, the Church does not have same level of inerrancy the Scripture does”. Do you also not see how this statment is seperating Christ and his body, the church or seperating the Holy Spirit from God? Can the Body of Christ be less than His Word? Can Christ be the Head without a Body? Can the Holy Spirit be greater than the Body of Christ? Dont you guys see how these statements are continually pulling the one true God apart and giving fuel to the non-Trinitarian sects alive today?

Peace be with both of you!!!
My tendency is to agree with you about the Church. That said, I’ve come to see the Great Schism as a deep wound to the Church, and its deepest effect is in this particular area. The early councils are an example of how the Church fulfilled its role as the body of Christ, so to speak, on Earth.
That division of the Church, in my view, makes the Reformation era divisions and those that followed in the west, trivial by comparison.
 
40.png
adf417:
Hi guys, i was wondering if your discussion was going to go any farther before i interjected but it seemed to have stalled.

So JonNC i know where SojournerOnEarth lies on this point as we had this discussuon previously but i do not know your position in the full context of this thread. SojournerOnEarth posts “However, the Church does not have same level of inerrancy the Scripture does”. Do you also not see how this statment is seperating Christ and his body, the church or seperating the Holy Spirit from God? Can the Body of Christ be less than His Word? Can Christ be the Head without a Body? Can the Holy Spirit be greater than the Body of Christ? Dont you guys see how these statements are continually pulling the one true God apart and giving fuel to the non-Trinitarian sects alive today?

Peace be with both of you!!!
My tendency is to agree with you about the Church. That said, I’ve come to see the Great Schism as a deep wound to the Church, and its deepest effect is in this particular area. The early councils are an example of how the Church fulfilled its role as the body of Christ, so to speak, on Earth.
That division of the Church, in my view, makes the Reformation era divisions and those that followed in the west, trivial by comparison.
Thanks for your responce Jon,
And my tendency is to agree with you about the trivial comparison which i was not doing. My concern was the language by Christians being used to tear apart the Body of Christ without correction. If the deep wound is in this area of concern, shouldn’t we Christians refrain from this type of language and stand corrected when we do? We have quite enough non-Christians doing this damage for us.

Peace!!!
 
40.png
JonNC:
40.png
adf417:
Hi guys, i was wondering if your discussion was going to go any farther before i interjected but it seemed to have stalled.

So JonNC i know where SojournerOnEarth lies on this point as we had this discussuon previously but i do not know your position in the full context of this thread. SojournerOnEarth posts “However, the Church does not have same level of inerrancy the Scripture does”. Do you also not see how this statment is seperating Christ and his body, the church or seperating the Holy Spirit from God? Can the Body of Christ be less than His Word? Can Christ be the Head without a Body? Can the Holy Spirit be greater than the Body of Christ? Dont you guys see how these statements are continually pulling the one true God apart and giving fuel to the non-Trinitarian sects alive today?

Peace be with both of you!!!
My tendency is to agree with you about the Church. That said, I’ve come to see the Great Schism as a deep wound to the Church, and its deepest effect is in this particular area. The early councils are an example of how the Church fulfilled its role as the body of Christ, so to speak, on Earth.
That division of the Church, in my view, makes the Reformation era divisions and those that followed in the west, trivial by comparison.
Thanks for your responce Jon,
And my tendency is to agree with you about the trivial comparison which i was not doing. My concern was the language by Christians being used to tear apart the Body of Christ without correction. If the deep wound is in this area of concern, shouldn’t we Christians refrain from this type of language and stand corrected when we do? We have quite enough non-Christians doing this damage for us.

Peace!!!
I wasn’t trying to imply that you were. Sorry, I could have phrased that more clearly.
It is of great concern to me that the language we use as Christians is often not clearly thought out. All of us have views about what the Church is and what it’s role is. None of us should doubt that the Church is of Christ’s making
 
40.png
adf417:
40.png
JonNC:
40.png
adf417:
Hi guys, i was wondering if your discussion was going to go any farther before i interjected but it seemed to have stalled.

So JonNC i know where SojournerOnEarth lies on this point as we had this discussuon previously but i do not know your position in the full context of this thread. SojournerOnEarth posts “However, the Church does not have same level of inerrancy the Scripture does”. Do you also not see how this statment is seperating Christ and his body, the church or seperating the Holy Spirit from God? Can the Body of Christ be less than His Word? Can Christ be the Head without a Body? Can the Holy Spirit be greater than the Body of Christ? Dont you guys see how these statements are continually pulling the one true God apart and giving fuel to the non-Trinitarian sects alive today?

Peace be with both of you!!!
My tendency is to agree with you about the Church. That said, I’ve come to see the Great Schism as a deep wound to the Church, and its deepest effect is in this particular area. The early councils are an example of how the Church fulfilled its role as the body of Christ, so to speak, on Earth.
That division of the Church, in my view, makes the Reformation era divisions and those that followed in the west, trivial by comparison.
Thanks for your responce Jon,
And my tendency is to agree with you about the trivial comparison which i was not doing. My concern was the language by Christians being used to tear apart the Body of Christ without correction. If the deep wound is in this area of concern, shouldn’t we Christians refrain from this type of language and stand corrected when we do? We have quite enough non-Christians doing this damage for us.

Peace!!!
I wasn’t trying to imply that you were. Sorry, I could have phrased that more clearly.
It is of great concern to me that the language we use as Christians is often not clearly thought out. All of us have views about what the Church is and what it’s role is. None of us should doubt that the Church is of Christ’s making
👍 I tries to just give a thumbsup but it won’t let me do only that anymore so im typing this long explanation just to get words on a page. 🤣
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top