as this discussion seems to be driving you around in tighter circles as you try to argue you point in trying to tease protestants of their stance in your own eyes. Grow up I might add because at end of the day you are only picking holes at protestants rather than a genuine enquiry
My point is not to try to tease or pick at them… my point is to focus their thoughts on what it is they believe and exactly why they believe it, and to show that there are a number of inconsistencies - logical and scriptural - in their beliefs.
To wit:
- Where in the Bible does it say that we should go by the Bible alone when it comes to all matters pertaining to faith and morals? Scripture verse?
The answer is: There is no such Scripture verse. Now, there are a few Scripture verses that people point to and say, “See, right there it says to go by Scripture alone,” but, the problem is, those passages don’t really say what they think they say if you actually read them and pay attention to what the actual words are saying. For example, 2 Tim 3:16-17 says, “All Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof…that the man of God may be complete, equipped for every good work.” “There!” the Protestant will say, “Right there it says Scripture alone is all that is necessary for the man of God to be complete.” Well, not so fast. Catholics agree with that passage 100%! But, nowhere does it say, “Scripture alone is the sole rule of faith for Christians,” nor does it say, “That Scripture is the
only thing that the man of God needs to be complete.” All the passage says is that Scripture is inspired by God and that Scripture is needed by the man of God to be complete. No argument from the Catholic on either of those points.
The purpose of this question is: 1) To point out that there is no verse that states the Bible is to be the sole rule of faith for Christians; and 2) to use their answer (if they had ever given one) to get them to carefully examine the meaning of any Scripture verse they may have given me and to eventually get to a discussion about authority - which is also the purpose of several of the other questions - since the question of authority is the ultimate question behind all doctrinal disputes with other Christians. Who has the authority to decide what is right and what is wrong?
- Where in the Bible does it list the books which should be part of the Bible? Scripture verse?
There is no such Scripture verse. If a person believes in the doctrine of Sola Scriptura - the belief that the Bible is the sole authority in all matters pertaining to faith and morals - and they refuse to accept many Catholic teachings because, as they say, they are based on “tradition” and not on the Bible, then I use this question to show them that they actually believe in tradition, too, whether they realize it or not. And, not only do they believe in tradition, but they believe in tradition in order to have their Bible - which is all they believe in - in the first place. In other words, the dogma of Sola Scriptura has an inherent flaw: Sola Scriptura is dependent upon a Scriptura that is dependent on tradition. Nowhere does the Bible give us a list of the books that should be in the Bible. So, there is some authority, some tradition, outside of the Bible, that everyone relies upon in order to have the Bible in the first place. Sola Scriptura is a logical inconsistency.
- Where in the Bible does it say that public revelation ended with the death of the last apostle? Scripture verse?
There is no such Scripture verse. I use this question to also show “Bible only” believers that they believe in non-biblical traditions. There is not a single Protestant that I have ever come across who does not believe that the canon of Scripture is closed, and that public revelation - God’s revelations relating to the deposit of faith - ended with the death of the last Apostle. This is why they believe, as do Catholics, that Scripture cannot be added to. The problem is, though, nowhere does the Bible say public revelation ended with the death of the last Apostle…that is a tradition. Which means they believe in non-biblical traditions, which is the very thing they accuse the Catholic Church of teaching and for which reason they reject those Catholic teachings that they consider to be non-biblical. That’s being a bit hypocritical I do believe.
- Do you believe the writer of the Gospel of Mark was inspired by the Holy Spirit? Yes or no?
This is a set up question. Every Christian believes the writer of Mark was inspired. The question is, why? Why does a Bible-only believer believe that the writer of the Gospel of Mark was inspired by the Holy Spirit? The Bible nowhere tells us such a thing, and since the Bible is the sole authority on matters of faith and morals, why do they believe it? This is yet another “tradition” that people who don’t think they believe in tradition, believe in.
- If yes, where in the Bible does it say that the writer of the Gospel of Mark was inspired by the Holy Spirit? Scripture verse?
This is the follow-up to the set up question #4 above. There is no such verse in the Bible. And, no matter what verse they may sling at me, I need only point out that nowhere does that verse even remotely say that the writer of the Gospel of Mark was inspired by the Holy Spirit.
- Do you believe the writer of the Letter to the Hebrews was inspired by the Holy Spirit?
Another set up question like #4 above…same reasoning.
- If yes, where in the Bible does it tell us that the writer of the Letter to the Hebrews was inspired by the Holy Spirit? Scripture verse?
Same reasoning as #5 above. No such verse exists in the Bible.
- Where in the Bible does it tell us who the writer of the Letter to the Hebrews was? Scripture verse?
No such Scripture verse. Again, this question points to the fact that the reason anyone believes Hebrews is inspired Scripture is because of tradition. If the Bible doesn’t even tell you who wrote the letter, then how can you know they were inspired when they wrote the letter if you rely on the Bible alone for everything related to faith and morals? You can’t. There is an underlying logical contradiction here that needs to be brought out into the light.
- Do you interpret the Bible? Yes or no?
Set up question. An honest answer has to be, “Yes.” Everyone interprets the Bible when they read it. Interpreting is inherent to communication - whether it be through the written or the spoken word. When you read, you interpret symbols that we call letters as certain sounds. When those symbols are combined they form words which are symbols that represent things, ideas, concepts. You have to interpret those word symbols. When words are combined into sentences, those sentences represent thoughts, ideas, expressions, etc. that all have to be interpreted in order to try and understand the meaning, the thoughts, the ideas the author was trying to convey. So, yes, we all interpret when we read the Bible.
- If the answer to #9 is yes, is your interpretation infallible? Yes or no?
Follow up question. Most Protestants will not answer this question. At least, most Protestants I have dealt with. They know that they cannot say, “Yes,” because they have been taught to tell Catholics that no man (i.e., the Pope) is infallible; yet, they realize they can’t say, “No,” because by saying no, they instinctively know they are opening the door to having to admit that their interpretation of this or that Bible passage could be wrong. And they just can’t admit that. So, most will not answer and will try to change the subject or will go on the offensive at this point. The honest ones will say, “No,” but they then start trying to talk their way around their admission rather than entering into what could be a productive conversation about how then do we know truth, if there is no authority that can infallibly decide what is true.
- If the answer to #9 is no, then will you admit that your interpretations of the Bible could be wrong in one or more places? Yes or no?
Follow up question as explained above.
- If the answer to #9 is yes, then does anyone have the authority to tell you that your interpretations of the Bible are wrong? Yes or no?
Again, trying to establish who, or what, has final authority when it comes to interpreting the Bible. Is it each individual on his own, which leads to chaos; or did God set up some authoritative guide that we could rely upon to help us understand His Word? Do folks confer upon themselves the ultimate authority to read and interpret Scripture, so as to decide for themselves what is true and what is false doctrine, without regard to any authority outside of themselves?
- If the answer to #12 is yes, then who? Just one name please.
This question points out that many Protestants – both pastors and laity – believe they have been given the sole authority to decide for themselves what is true and what is false when it comes to the Bible. A follow up question to this, if I ever receive an answer, would be to point out that nowhere does the Bible give each and every individual such authority. Rather, the Bible is pretty clear that the church has such authority. The question, ultimately, is whether or not Protestants submit to the church in matters of faith and morals, or if they can decide for themselves regardless of what the church teaches - if they are, in essence, a church unto themselves. So many Protestants give lip service to the authority of the church, but when it comes right down to it, their churches have no binding authority over any individual when it comes to teaching on faith and morals.
