Did Jews follow "Sola Scriptura"?

  • Thread starter Thread starter LuciusMaximus
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
40.png
JonNC:
Sola scriptura is not a theology. It is a hermeneutical principle.
I think that’s an easy out for not wanting to explain why it hasn’t worked
Hadn’t worked how?
 
AYKM?
Rampant division!
That “principle” destroys the credibility of Christianity as it can no longer be defined.
 
AYKM?
Rampant division!
That “principle” destroys the credibility of Christianity as it can no longer be defined.
Rampant division?
Lutherans rather universally believe, teach and confess the confessions. Some of the issues parallel issues in the Catholic Church.
What about the Great Schism?
 
No, they frequently taught oral Torah traditions that ended up conflicting with the law as written, violating both the spirit and letter of the law. The Pharisaic schools frequently innovated from what the law taught. This is why Jesus frequently corrected the use of such oral tradition by pointing them back to scripture.
 
Last edited:
Look outside the window. There are indisoutably - indisputably - hundreds** if not multiple thousands of other ‘bible alone’ denominations out there. Calvinism. Zwingliites. Mennonites. Wesleyans. A new one every week in the US.

** 224 minimum per the (Protestant) “Handbook of Christian Denominations.”

How many did our Lord found again???
 
Look outside the window. There are indisoutably - indisputably - hundreds** if not multiple thousands of other ‘bible alone’ denominations out there. Calvinism. Zwingliites. Mennonites. Wesleyans. A new one every week in the US.
Everyone of them an offshoot of Rome, far more so than Lutheranism.
224 minimum per the (Protestant) “Handbook of Christian Denominations.”

How many did our Lord found again???
One, by which we believe one becomes a member via baptism.
But in subsequent centuries much more serious dissensions appeared and large communities became separated from full communion with the Catholic Church - for which, often enough, men of both sides were to blame."
Are you familiar with that quote?
 
Last edited:
He didn’t disprove of all oral tradition and extra-scriptural teaching authority, though, right? He rebuked the abuse of korban, and said that they did “many other such things” but I think he was just rebuking man-made doctrines being taught that nullified the Word of God. He seemed to tolerate the teaching authority of the Pharisees, when He said that they sat on the “chair of Moses” and for the people to do what they taught (but not as they do).
 
Last edited:
What does any of this have to do with the manner in which Christ founded His Church and directed that it should be perpetuated?
 
He didn’t disprove of all oral tradition and extra-scriptural teaching authority, though, right? He rebuked the abuse of korban, and said that they did “many other such things” but I think he was just rebuking man-made doctrines being taught that nullified the Word of God. He seemed to tolerate the teaching authority of the Pharisees, when He said that they sat on the “chair of Moses” and for the people to do what they taught (but not as they do).
No, of course he didn’t. Sola Scriptura doesn’t say that all oral tradition or whatever other term you want to use is not to be used. It says that the scriptures are the norm by which these are judged because it is the word of God preserved and handed down. What we do see however, is this is the normative means by which Jesus judged these other sources of authority. Delegated authority is always provided with inherent limits. When Joseph managed his master’s house, he knew that didn’t mean he gets to sleep with his master’s wife. He was to run the household in accord with his master’s will. The same goes for the teaching authority of the Church. The Church has the authority and responsibility to proclaim and teach what God handed down. It doesn’t have the authority to change that teaching or add to it in a way that contradicts what God had handed down. And as Christ showed us, the fact that one is given the authority to teach, doesn’t mean that the authority to teach means it is impervious to reproof and correction through the proclamation of God’s word.
I know this has been hashed out plenty but can you guys tell me what scripture explicitly teaches the Trinity? I know of many that teach it implicitly but im asking for explicit teaching.

Peace!!!

There are entire books on this subject. Not sure why this is a mystery since the Trinity has been a doctrine that has been defended using Scripture for millenia.
 
Last edited:
Whatever you want to call it, my church teaches that anything not explicitly found in Scripture cannot form the basis of any teachings. Like praying for the dead, praying to saints, purgatory, Assumption of Mary, or her sinlessness and perpetual virginity, etc. These aren’t explicitly explained or elaborated on, so it rules them out. I don’t know if that’s How Christ intended Christianity, though, so that’s why I wanted to see if there was a basis rooted in Judaism.
 
Last edited:
Whatever you want to call it, my church teaches that anything not explicitly found in Scripture cannot form the basis of any teachings.
By teachings do you mean doctrine? If so, I see the point. Scripture is the final norm for doctrine.
Whatever you want to call it, my church teaches that anything not explicitly found in Scripture cannot form the basis of any teachings. Like
Like praying for the dead, praying to saints, purgatory, Assumption of Mary, or her sinlessness and perpetual virginity, etc. These aren’t explicitly explained or elaborated on, so it rules them out.
Scripture also doesn’t exclude or deny these. Properly understood, none of these distract the from the Gospel, in my view, and can be reasonable pious beliefs, though the conscience of the believer is not bound to them.
 
I would agree with this, thanks. I didn’t mean doctrine, per se, just “praying to the saints isn’t found in the Bible, so you shouldn’t do it.” Or relating the practice to the forbidding of necromancy and such, like in Isaiah 8:19 or Deuteronomy 18:10-12. But as I’ve researched it more, I’ve found that praying to/with the saints isn’t necromancy or consulting the spirits, it’s just asking other members of the Body of Christ, whether alive or in Heaven, to intercede for you. So as you mentioned, these things don’t contradict Scripture, and just because they’re not spelled out obviously in Scripture, may not mean that they’re not valid and pious practices that do not take away from the Gospel (like the rosary).
 
Whatever you want to call it, my church teaches that anything not explicitly found in Scripture cannot form the basis of any teachings.
By teachings do you mean doctrine? If so, I see the point. Scripture is the final norm for doctrine.
I know this has been hashed out plenty but can you guys tell me what scripture explicitly teaches the Trinity? I know of many that teach it implicitly but im asking for explicit teaching.

Peace!!!
 
I don’t want to speak for JonNC, but I never really pondered “the Trinity” until researching Catholicism. I don’t think it’s a term that’s even used in my Pentecostal church. It’s kind of like, it’s enough to know that Jesus is God, God the Father is God, and the Holy Spirit was the Advocate that Jesus promised. It’s not like “hey, let’s worship ‘The Trinity’ today”. There’s not an urge to explicitly define everything or get into much theology.
 
Last edited:
I know this has been hashed out plenty but can you guys tell me what scripture explicitly teaches the Trinity? I know of many that teach it implicitly but im asking for explicit teaching.
There is no single scripture since the Trinity is a compilation of observations about the nature of God that we see in Scripture. Honestly, a great resource (you will hate the source) that does what are you asking in a pretty concise book is The Forgotten Trinity. It breaks down the doctrine into its component parts and provides scriptural support for those parts. The doctrine of the Trinity has been defended for millenia using scripture, so there are volumes and volumes of books on the subject.
 
Last edited:
There are entire books on this subject. Not sure why this is a mystery since the Trinity has been a doctrine that has been defended using Scripture for millenia.
No not really. If it had there would be no need for the early councils.

Peace!!!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top