N
NPS
Guest
The idea of Sola Scriptura is either God’s idea or man’s idea.
If it was God’s idea, why wouldn’t He make it plain in the bible what He was aiming for? Why is the idea of reliance strictly on the bible so frustratingly oblique in the passages cited by its proponents?
If it was God’s plan that Christians use this method, why did He have them wait so long to put together a bible in the first place?
Why would He not make it clear and plain to anyone reading the bible that this is His plan?
I would ask for more of a logical or even philosophical (if that’s the right word) debate about S.S. I am not looking for this verse or that passage for defense of Sola Scriptura, so please don’t just throw verses at this thread. No matter which verse is cited in which the “obvious meaning” is Sola Scriptura, the person ALWAYS has to explain it to people, and inevitably starts off by saying *“What he is saying here is…” * or *“What this passage really means is…” *
If Sola Scriptura was God’s idea, why did He make it so hard for Christians to figure out—even hard enough to figure out that it took Christians over 1500 years for the lightbulb to go on?
Isn’t it logical that if this is what God wanted, then the very earliest Christians would have practiced it? Rather, isn’t it obvious that in reality, it took over 1500 years for man to get far enough away time-wise from the origins of Christianity to have such a foreign concept not be universally found strange, even abhorent to orthodox Chistians? Historians will tell us that it indeed was found completely foreign and really only developed as a strict doctrine over time.
Wasn’t the idea of Sola Scriptura more of a human reaction to circumstances rather than a lightbulb going on that said “This is God’s will” ???
Can Sola Scriptura not be more accurately described as a “concept”? A concept of men? A well-meaning concept, but only a concept nonetheless?
Concept:
*1-A general idea derived or inferred from specific instances or occurrences.
2-Something formed in the mind; a thought or notion. *
If it was God’s idea, why wouldn’t He make it plain in the bible what He was aiming for? Why is the idea of reliance strictly on the bible so frustratingly oblique in the passages cited by its proponents?
If it was God’s plan that Christians use this method, why did He have them wait so long to put together a bible in the first place?
Why would He not make it clear and plain to anyone reading the bible that this is His plan?
I would ask for more of a logical or even philosophical (if that’s the right word) debate about S.S. I am not looking for this verse or that passage for defense of Sola Scriptura, so please don’t just throw verses at this thread. No matter which verse is cited in which the “obvious meaning” is Sola Scriptura, the person ALWAYS has to explain it to people, and inevitably starts off by saying *“What he is saying here is…” * or *“What this passage really means is…” *
If Sola Scriptura was God’s idea, why did He make it so hard for Christians to figure out—even hard enough to figure out that it took Christians over 1500 years for the lightbulb to go on?
Isn’t it logical that if this is what God wanted, then the very earliest Christians would have practiced it? Rather, isn’t it obvious that in reality, it took over 1500 years for man to get far enough away time-wise from the origins of Christianity to have such a foreign concept not be universally found strange, even abhorent to orthodox Chistians? Historians will tell us that it indeed was found completely foreign and really only developed as a strict doctrine over time.
Wasn’t the idea of Sola Scriptura more of a human reaction to circumstances rather than a lightbulb going on that said “This is God’s will” ???
Can Sola Scriptura not be more accurately described as a “concept”? A concept of men? A well-meaning concept, but only a concept nonetheless?
Concept:
*1-A general idea derived or inferred from specific instances or occurrences.
2-Something formed in the mind; a thought or notion. *