I really don't get "Sola Scriptura"?

[Hilario]

Tradition is so very important in preserving deposits of faith in a Church. Actually Protestant do have their own tradition as well of course, this tradition is to protect their own teaching consequently mould with their interpretation on the scripture and hand it over to next generation infallible as they could. Just like with some other denomination, that from the doctrinal divergences throughout history. The reason what Protestant didn’t include their traditional spirit to be one of the basis of their divine rule of faith is that, they cannot connect their tradition to the apostles feet but instead from what Luther’s sandals lays their final assert on the matter obviously something like a rebellious history, right up to now, against the papacy. So to say ‘Scripture Alone’ was left alone.

As the Protestant insists that full persuasion of the infallible truth and divine authority thereof is from the inward work of the Holy Spirit, bearing witness by and with the word in their hearts. This is a clear enunciation of the principle that the judgment of each individual, moved by the assistance of the Holy Spirit, is the proximate living rule of faith. But apart from its solvent effect upon any true view of the Church, it is easy to see that such a rule could never serve as an infallible interpreter of the inanimate rule, namely, the Bible. For where does the Bible ever testify to the inspiration of certain books? And what limits does it assign to the canon?

 

[Aris]

Wil Peregrin:

Aris,
I was trying to explain more clearly the Protestant position, so that you, and even more so, the apologists, might understand it.

The Protestant position does not want to accept the Authority of Tradition, of the Teaching Authority of the Church.

That basically sums up the difference of between any definition of Sola Scriptura that Catholics and non-Catholics have.

Saying this, it should be mentioned Christ passed on down the things to be taught. For forty days he gave the Apostles the things necessary to teach the Good News. There is no exact description of this in Scripture except a passage in the beginning of Acts.

Even Peter says that what Paul is preaching would be difficult ti understand for many and could be twisted to something not of Christ.

The only guarantee is to heed Paul’s advice to Timothy. To stand by the Apostle’s teaching because “you know from whom it came.” That is Tradition.

Even during the Apostles time when Scriptures was composed of just the Old Testament, even when the passage of Isiah, Moses and all the prophets were read to the people, they could not understand that they all pointed to Christ unless the Church showed them.

The Catholic Church has shown that it has kept faith with the Apostles in keeping alive their teachings.

 

[rovimax]

I think you misunderstood. I’m not rejecting any traditions. I grew up in the Episcopal Church and still respect and honor the traditions. I just think that some people define their faith by these actions, and not by their relationship with God. At least this has been my experience. Some people like their religion handed to them on a platter. “Do X,Y and Z and you’ll get into Heaven.” I guess I just don’t buy into that. Actions alone don’t equal a relationship with God.

My pastor/minister is NOT my Pope. I don’t believe in hierarchy in the church, that is too political and causes too many problems. In fact, I believe just the opposite. I believe it’s the PEOPLE that make up the Church, not the institution of doctrine and laws.

I always admire the zeal of evangelical christians but most of them have the tendency to overlook some things. Your pastor is not your pope. You misunderstood the role of a pope in a church. I believe you know the pope means Father. Most evangelicals tend to view the pope as a dictator. The pope is not. By rejecting the pastors/ministers on what they are telling you then you are simply declaring yourself as pope. The pope is what unites the catholic church. while as you claim you are non denominational, do you have any ideas how many groups are non denominational? Yet you are seperate from one another and when some in your group don’t agree with your pastor anymore another group will establish another non denominational group. Many times I read the meaning of denomination and I can’t believe a group can claim they are non denominational while being biased and will only accept people with the same kind/set of beliefs. Jesus was questioned on what authority He does those things. Meaning There should be authority, otherwise there will be anarchy in the church. Same as the government, there is congress for legislation, the president as executive and the supreme court as the arbiter and final authority of the laws. Take out one of these and there will be power struggle. Mat 16:19, 18:18; gives authority to the church, Acts 14:23, 15: … is a good example that there is need for authority. The problem is if the people does not like the doctrine because it is not convenient for them then they say the pastor is wrong. Most wants a religion that will fit their lifestyle rather than accept the terms of God and will use a passage in the Bible to justify their actions neglecting that the Bible should be read as a whole.

You speak of relationship to God, your very relationship with God defines your actions. How can you say you love God but not love your neighbor? Did you feed your neighbor when they were hungry?

 

[rovimax]

The Bible nowhere taught “Sola scriptura” / “Bible Alone” Scripture Alone". :yup: