Do you think sola scriptura is practical?

  • Thread starter Thread starter WesleyF
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
2:14 To which - Faith and holiness. He hath called you by our gospel - That which we preached, accompanied with the power of his Spirit. Hold - Without adding to, or diminishing from, the traditions which ye have been taught - The truths which I have delivered to you. Whether by word or by our epistle - He preached before he wrote. And he had written concerning this in his former epistle.
Some important points here, the Gosple, and these teachings were Preached… They weren’t written down until Paul heard of erroneous teachings (or needed to advise a new Bishop) and it had to be addressed. These letters were not addressed to the whole church. More over, the whole church didn’t have access to these letters.

Second point:
Sola scriptura violates “without adding to, or diminishing from, the traditions which ye have been taught”. It diminishes from the traditions taught, by teaching that traditions passed on by word [of mouth] which Paul specifically instructs us to hold fast to are invalid. That deminishes the word of God, by denying half of it.
What traditions are not included in the epistles that Paul preached that are necessary for salvation? It’s that he preached them first, then wrote them shortly after.
No, he preached them and did not write them down shortly there after in the sense you’re thinking. He didn’t write them so they could be written and everyone could read them. He wrote corrections to specific churches addressing specific problems. Only these Churches would have access to the letter for a number of years (years). Even when the letters began to be distributed there was no way of knowing which ones were valid, there were a host of forgeries floating around. In the early church the oral teaching carried the most weight, it was the only thing you could be absoultly sure of. You might have a letter claiming to be written by Paul, but you know for a fact what Paul him self told you. If there is a conflict, then certainly what Paul told you orally would trump a letter as a letter coudl be written by anyone and attributed to Paul.
While in Thessalonica, Paul, Silvanus and Timothy transmitted a body of oral teaching to the Thessalonians, to which they later appeal in their two letters. 2 Thessalonians is usually dated to shortly after the composition of 1 Thessalonians, c. 51-52.
Again, for Sola Scriptura to hold water, then these letters had to be written with the intention that they would very quickly be distributed to every Christian everywhere. That’s not the case, the letters to the Thessalonians, were to the Thessalonians. They were distributed, of course, because they were verified as being a true Apostolic letter. You’re not going to just keep that kind of thing to your self. But the letters were addressed to the Thessalonians, addressing them and their concerns.
1 Thes 3:11 Night and day we pray most earnestly that we may see you again and supply what is lacking in your faith. Paul first came to Thessalonica in 50-51 AD during his second missionary journey. Paul made a another visit to Thessalonica in 56 AD.
 
Again, for Sola Scriptura to hold water, then these letters had to be written with the intention that they would very quickly be distributed to every Christian everywhere. That’s not the case, the letters to the Thessalonians, were to the Thessalonians. They were distributed, of course, because they were verified as being a true Apostolic letter. You’re not going to just keep that kind of thing to your self. But the letters were addressed to the Thessalonians, addressing them and their concerns.
The concept of Sola Scriptura did not come about until the reformation. However, the very point you made is at the heart of Sola Scriptura. Paul addresses the false teachings which had crept into the church by writing the epistles (scripture). The tradition has now been encorporated into scripture for that church.

Not all would have had access to the text of the letters. Many would have had to rely on tradition (word of mouth) for their teaching then. However the epistles could have been applicable to any and all of the early churches, not just the one written to specifically.
 
I think the scriptures are sufficient to show me how to become born anew and to mature me in the faith…I entrust my pastor/our bishops are able to equip me from it…We’ll each give account in the end how much the Holy Spirit taught us by the word we hide in our heart to do His will…We as believers will either have gold/silver or ash to stand before Him…Thy word is a lamp and light…it is written Jesus said many time…I know w all agree sacred scripture is God’s word breathed by the Holy Spirit to the OT and NT believers…It, hidden in our heart keeps us from sin…It works in ecclesia’s Jerusalem, Rome, churches in Asia, even here in the christian churchs in Palmyra Pa…peace to you…
One day each of us will stand alone before the Lord…We will see how we shared with souls around us the God’s plan for salvation…He even has a crown for those who are soul winners…Where do we learn all He desires us to do…What source do we hide in our hearts.
 
Yes with prayer and the Holy Spirit.

2 Tim 3:16 All scripture is inspired of God - The Spirit of God not only once inspired those who wrote it, but continually inspires, supernaturally assists, those that read it with earnest prayer. Hence it is so profitable for doctrine, for instruction of the ignorant, for the reproof or conviction of them that are in error or sin, for the correction or amendment of whatever is amiss, and for instructing or training up the children of God in all righteousness

John 5:38-39 Ye have not his word - All who believe have the word of the Father (the same with the word of the Son) abiding in them, that is, deeply ingrafted in their hearts. Search the Scriptures - A plain command to all men. In them ye are assured ye have eternal life - Ye know they show you the way to eternal life. And these very Scriptures testify of me. Yet ye will not come unto me - As they direct you

Rom 15:4 For everything that was written in the past was written to teach us, so that through endurance and the encouragement of the Scriptures we might have hope.
This doesn’t bolster the case for Sola Scriptura (Scripture alone is our final authority).
Nor does it make Sola Scriptura practical because, as I stated before – it is a self-refuting position.


Jesus gave the Church the Final Authority on matters concerning the Body of Christ:
Matt. 16:15-19, 18:15-18, John 16:12-15, 20:21-2****3.
 
The concept of Sola Scriptura did not come about until the reformation. However, the very point you made is at the heart of Sola Scriptura. Paul addresses the false teachings which had crept into the church by writing the epistles (scripture). The tradition has now been encorporated into scripture for that church.

Not all would have had access to the text of the letters. Many would have had to rely on tradition (word of mouth) for their teaching then. However the epistles could have been applicable to any and all of the early churches, not just the one written to specifically.
Only when it was impossible for him to come, but it was teaching by word which built the faith, and instructed the Christians. It was not letter, these teachings, by word still exist and are still jelously guarded by the Church though an unbroken Apostolic line. This line, and it’s teachings are safe guarded by Christ him self, who gave the Keys of the Kingdom to Peter and promised that “the gates of hell will never prevail against the Church”, and further promises to be with the Apostles until the end of time, which only makes sense in light of Apostolic Succession.

I think what you’re trying to do is come to a conclusion which on the surface seems to make sense, but once you actually study scripture is actually quite irrational. What you’re trying to say is “they wrote letters to preserve the teaching”, or similarly I have heard “well maybe word of mouth made sense in the Apostolic age, but time has moved on and now you should read the bible”. Well maybe on the surface this makes sense, but by taking this position you are doubting Christ. You are doubting his promise to protect the Church from erroneous teaching, you are doubting that he will be with the successors of the Apostles until the end of time, just like he said he would be. It also doubts Christ when he tells the Apostles “He that heareth you, heareth me; and he that despiseth you, despiseth me; and he that despiseth me, despiseth him that sent me”. This would be like Abraham doubting God when he said, all nations will be blessed through your loins.

This Spirit is here with us today, but not here with us all individually guiding us all individually to all truth through the bible. I’ve already proved that isn’t true. The Spirit is with us, in the Apostles, guiding thier successors to the full truth of the revelation of Christ.
 
I think the scriptures are sufficient to show me how to become born anew and to mature me in the faith…I entrust my pastor/our bishops are able to equip me from it…We’ll each give account in the end how much the Holy Spirit taught us by the word we hide in our heart to do His will…We as believers will either have gold/silver or ash to stand before Him…Thy word is a lamp and light…it is written Jesus said many time…I know w all agree sacred scripture is God’s word breathed by the Holy Spirit to the OT and NT believers…It, hidden in our heart keeps us from sin…It works in ecclesia’s Jerusalem, Rome, churches in Asia, even here in the christian churchs in Palmyra Pa…peace to you…
One day each of us will stand alone before the Lord…We will see how we shared with souls around us the God’s plan for salvation…He even has a crown for those who are soul winners…Where do we learn all He desires us to do…What source do we hide in our hearts.
Yes – we WILL stand alone before God and some of us will be asked why we deviated from his plan for salvation by rejecting the very vessel of truth he left us – the Church.
Jesus left the Church as his earthly Authority – not the Bible. It is the Church that canonized the Scriptures – not the other way around.
It is the Church that is called the pillar and foundation of truth (1 Tim. 3:15) - not the Bible.

The entirety of God’s truth is NOT contained in the written word (2 Thess 2:15, 2 Thess. 3:6, 2 Tim. 2:2, 1 Cor. 11:2, 2 Tim. 1:12-14).


I find it interesting that you would make the statement that Jesus said,It is written”.**
Not everything Jesus said was based on the written word:
Matt. 23:1-2
Then Jesus spoke to the crowds and to his disciples, saying, "The scribes and the Pharisees have taken their seat on the chair of Moses.

(Oral Mishna/Jewish Tradition)

Matt. 2:23
He went and dwelt in a town called Nazareth, so that what had been spoken through the prophets might be fulfilled, "He shall be called a Nazorean."**
(Jewish Rabbinic tradition)

Here are a few more places in the New Testament that rely on the spoken – not the written word:
1 Cor. 10:3-4

All ate the same spiritual food, and all drank the same spiritual drink, for they drank from a spiritual rock that followed them, and the rock was the Christ.
(Jewish Rabbinic tradition)


2 Timothy 3:8
Just as Jannes and Jambres opposed Moses, so they also oppose the truth–people of depraved mind, unqualified in the faith.
(Jewish Rabbinic tradition)
 
I have no intention on getting sucked into this thread.

But reading this thread has confirmed my long held observation that Catholics often have no interest. In discussing what Protestants actually believe. Instead they start with the title “sola scriptura”, define it how they like based on the title, and take it from their.

This observation from somebody who probably does not believe in sola scriptura and instead believes in prima scriptura.

But go knock yourselves out in tearing down your own definition of sola scriptura. Carry on.
 
I guess I’ll find out when my time is up elvisman, is your way is correct on not…For me I believe His church is comprised of His people, in christian churches all over the world…You think the church that is underground in China is all Roman Catholics…I’ll take my chances they way they are…
 
Hear, here! :hug1: I’m not allowed to vote in the poll, but I don’t find that possibly 3 out of 27 responders is quite what the OP had in mind?

bolding is mine:
My question is directed specifically towards those Protestants who may think it is true, but might not be sure whether it could work in practice. For eg. two protestants believe sola scriptura is true. Both are well versed in scripture. One protestant uses the Bible to argue that baptism is necessary for salvation. The other uses the Bible to argue that it isn’t. So does it work in practice???
 
I have no intention on getting sucked into this thread.

But reading this thread has confirmed my long held observation that Catholics often have no interest. In discussing what Protestants actually believe. Instead they start with the title “sola scriptura”, define it how they like based on the title, and take it from their.

This observation from somebody who probably does not believe in sola scriptura and instead believes in prima scriptura.

But go knock yourselves out in tearing down your own definition of sola scriptura. Carry on.
I’m Catholic, at what point am I not allowing Protestants to discuss their beliefs? At what point do I not respond to what they write? I think generalizations are something we should generally try to avoid.
 
Hear, here! :hug1: I’m not allowed to vote in the poll, but I don’t find that possibly 3 out of 27 responders is quite what the OP had in mind?

bolding is mine:
If you are looking for intellectual honesty, keep looking…
 
I think the scriptures are sufficient to show me how to become born anew and to mature me in the faith…I entrust my pastor/our bishops are able to equip me from it…We’ll each give account in the end how much the Holy Spirit taught us by the word we hide in our heart to do His will…We as believers will either have gold/silver or ash to stand before Him…Thy word is a lamp and light…it is written Jesus said many time…I know w all agree sacred scripture is God’s word breathed by the Holy Spirit to the OT and NT believers…It, hidden in our heart keeps us from sin…It works in ecclesia’s Jerusalem, Rome, churches in Asia, even here in the christian churchs in Palmyra Pa…peace to you…
One day each of us will stand alone before the Lord…We will see how we shared with souls around us the God’s plan for salvation…He even has a crown for those who are soul winners…Where do we learn all He desires us to do…What source do we hide in our hearts.
This is great.

Now can you tell me how what you call the Scriptures is defined?
 
This is great.

Now can you tell me how what you call the Scriptures is defined?
I sorta don’t know what your asking.I’m a little slow as I fell from a railcar and may brain got a little throttled…I can’t think real deep…
 
I sorta don’t know what your asking.I’m a little slow as I fell from a railcar and may brain got a little throttled…I can’t think real deep…
How do you know what books ought be in the bible. Bare in mind there were a host of forgeries floating around in Apostolic times, from both Christian and non-Christian sources. How did we get the biblical TOC. More over, how can you base your whole faith on a bible that is 7 books short of complete?
 
How do you know what books ought be in the bible. Bare in mind there were a host of forgeries floating around in Apostolic times, from both Christian and non-Christian sources. How did we get the biblical TOC. More over, how can you base your whole faith on a bible that is 7 books short of complete?
Thank you brother for making it easier for me to understand…I live by faith…I had a pretty radical conversion experience and my faith is real to me…I trust God that He spoke into fallible men’s minds to pen scripture…By faith I accept the words He sent…I know some became canon and others became sources of history…Not sure what TOC means though…My bile contains the gospel to change lives…I guess my simple answer is faith…I know He is able to complete the work He finished…I know the Holy Spirit uses that word to mature me…Gues I can’t get much deeper that that…Sorry I’m not much of the deep thinking scholar,I’m just a believer in Christ…
 
What we keep running into is a matter of WHY and WHEN and WHERE did we get the scriptures.

No part of the Bible tells us what should be in the Bible.

At the time the Bible was assembled, there were books that were left out for one reason or another.

How do we know that we got it right?
 
Thank you brother for making it easier for me to understand…I live by faith…I had a pretty radical conversion experience and my faith is real to me…I trust God that He spoke into fallible men’s minds to pen scripture…By faith I accept the words He sent…I know some became canon and others became sources of history…Not sure what TOC means though…My bile contains the gospel to change lives…I guess my simple answer is faith…I know He is able to complete the work He finished…I know the Holy Spirit uses that word to mature me…Gues I can’t get much deeper that that…Sorry I’m not much of the deep thinking scholar,I’m just a believer in Christ…
TOC = Table of Contents, how do you know which books belong in the bible. I’m not arguing any points you made, but there was a corperal process of making the bible, it did not appear miraculously. This does not detract from the inspired nature of the bible, this doesn’t detract from the guidance provided by the holy spirit. It does state, that there is a true historical process by which we got the bible. In summation, it comes from a series of counsoles held by the Catholic Church, which made the determination of which books ought be in the bible, 73 in total.

You might be interested in reading Where We Got the Bible: Our Debt to the Catholic Church

It is also available for sale on Amazon.com, but if you want you can just read it for free online. The information contained there in, is accurate and written by a former Anglican Bishop who converted to the Catholic Faith, no doubt in part due to his studies of biblical history.
 
TOC = Table of Contents, how do you know which books belong in the bible. I’m not arguing any points you made, but there was a corperal process of making the bible, it did not appear miraculously. This does not detract from the inspired nature of the bible, this doesn’t detract from the guidance provided by the holy spirit. It does state, that there is a true historical process by which we got the bible. In summation, it comes from a series of counsoles held by the Catholic Church, which made the determination of which books ought be in the bible, 73 in total.

You might be interested in reading Where We Got the Bible: Our Debt to the Catholic Church

It is also available for sale on Amazon.com, but if you want you can just read it for free online. The information contained there in, is accurate and written by a former Anglican Bishop who converted to the Catholic Faith, no doubt in part due to his studies of biblical history.
Thank you for your patience and info…I know I am in a Catholic forum and am not here just to agure…I know the scriptures have a history and I’ll learn much more fully in heaven…I know God spoke to the church catholic… I just believe there is more to the church tha just your Roman catholic side…May the Lord bless you and draw you closer in the last days.
 
Thank you for your patience and info…I know I am in a Catholic forum and am not here just to agure…I know the scriptures have a history and I’ll learn much more fully in heaven…I know God spoke to the church catholic… I just believe there is more to the church tha just your Roman catholic side…May the Lord bless you and draw you closer in the last days.
Christianity from the start has been Universal, or in otherwords Catholic. It still is, that’s why it’s Catholic Church, not -]Roman/-] Catholic Church. Just a small correction, I know you meant no offence but in actuality the term Roman Catholic is derogatory, invented hundreds of years ago by proestants determained to prove the church illegitimate.

Regarding the bible, I can only exhort you to learn as much as you can now. I admire your faith and sincirity, I hope though that you will take the time to learn as much as you can about Christ. Doing so requries learning as much as you can about this history of the bible, this history of the [Catholic] Church and the Fathers.
 
I guess I’ll find out when my time is up elvisman, is your way is correct on not…For me I believe His church is comprised of His people, in christian churches all over the world…You think the church that is underground in China is all Roman Catholics…I’ll take my chances they way they are…
I’m not taking any chances. I’m relying on the promises of Christ.

**Contrary to Protestant belief - the Church is not comprised of all believers in Christ. Where does the Bible *****EVER ***claim that?

Your statement is very telling:
“For me I believe His church is comprised of His people, in christian churches all over the world”
“For me
***” – “I believe*”**
This is nothing short of moral relativism – the belief that what is true for me may not be true for you. Truth is TRUTH, my friend and Jesus didn’t speak in half-truths.
**
The Church is made up of the united Body of Christ. Read John 17 where Jesus prayed for the Unity of His Church. He prayed that they remain ONE as He and the Father are ONE. Jesus’ intention was for ONE holy, Catholic Church – not tens of thousands of divorced, splintering factions.**
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top