If Protestantism Is True

[ChrissyB364]

I think it contradicts it in that it’s an assumption. There’s nothing in the Bible that says “Everything contained here is all there is and public revelation is closed” but they believe it anyway (without Scriptural evidence).

 

[JonNC]

I think it contradicts it in that it’s an assumption. There’s nothing in the Bible that says “Everything contained here is all there is and public revelation is closed” but they believe it anyway (without Scriptural evidence).

Assumptions are not in violation of sola scriptura, unless one speaking of doctrine.
Does scripture say anywhere that public revelation*** is ***closed?

Jon

 

[ChrissyB364]

Don’t know how to put it any plainer, The Bible doesn’t specifically say that public Revelation is closed. Protestants believe public Revelation is closed, despite the fact that it isn’t specifically said in the Bible.

Found this article on cybercatholics.com that explains it in better words than I ever could:

How do we know that public Revelation has ended?
Similarly, Holy Scripture never unequivocally states that public Revelation from God,
binding on the consciences of all His children, has ever ended. How do we know that
Revelation, that is, God’s self-disclosure in Jesus Christ through the Holy Spirit, came to
an end with the death of the last Apostle? We know because the Church tells us so,
because our ancestors in the faith believe it and the successors to the Apostles so declared
it.
Based on Sola Scriptura, Protestants cannot close the canon. Oh, they can accept
precedent or the words of the Reformers to that effect, but the Reformers were sticking to
the classical Catholic canon with little explanation as to when and how exactly public
revelation ended.
The fact that Sola Scriptura allows for open-ended revelation has not been ignored by
myriads of sects, from Montanism way back in Tertullian’s time to the ecstatic sects of
the Middle Ages to Seventh-day Adventism and Mormonism—this last one even has
three more books of “sacred scriptures” besides the Bible! But this glaring contradiction
has been passed over in silence by Protestant apologists.
A Protestant, if he or she is to be consistent, can’t criticize others who add their
revelations to the Bible simply because the Bible is silent on the subject. The answer to
this dilemma comes from outside the Bible, from the all-encompassing Tradition
maintained, treasured, and explained within the One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic
Church.

 

[submariner2]

You may want to see the books of Peter Kreeft. peterkreeft.com/books.htm

pablope,

You might want to read a real history book, Paul Johnson’s (Catholic) A History of Christianity. A real eye-opener.

Rob

 

[Abrigham]

Rob,

I truly suggest you read that book. I’m not sure how you can be comfortable without questioning the validity of your own beliefs, which originated with the questioning of the Catholic Church’s beliefs. I currently go to a sola Scriptural church and the thing that has really been bugging me is my church’s disbelief of the need to do sacraments. Even though I felt it was odd and didn’t interpret the Bible the way they did regarding baptism, I played along and got baptized anyway because it was expected. Now I feel like a fool and regret it.

I’m really not that interested in reading history books at this point in my journey. While I do believe in knowing your history so you don’t repeat it, it’s not going to affect my belief system. I know people of the Church have done bad things, as have many people in all belief systems. Jesus said there will be weeds among the wheat. I want to be sure I’m a nice strong piece of wheat ripe for harvest when He returns. I pray the same for you.

 

[JonNC]

Don’t know how to put it any plainer, The Bible doesn’t specifically say that public Revelation is closed. Protestants believe public Revelation is closed, despite the fact that it isn’t specifically said in the Bible.

Found this article on cybercatholics.com that explains it in better words than I ever could:

How do we know that public Revelation has ended?
Similarly, Holy Scripture never unequivocally states that public Revelation from God,
binding on the consciences of all His children, has ever ended. How do we know that
Revelation, that is, God’s self-disclosure in Jesus Christ through the Holy Spirit, came to
an end with the death of the last Apostle? We know because the Church tells us so,
because our ancestors in the faith believe it and the successors to the Apostles so declared
it.
**Based on Sola Scriptura, Protestants cannot close the canon. Oh, they can accept
precedent or the words of the Reformers to that effect, but the Reformers were sticking to
the classical Catholic canon with little explanation as to when and how exactly public
revelation ended.**The fact that Sola Scriptura allows for open-ended revelation has not been ignored by
myriads of sects, from Montanism way back in Tertullian’s time to the ecstatic sects of
the Middle Ages to Seventh-day Adventism and Mormonism—this last one even has
three more books of “sacred scriptures” besides the Bible! But this glaring contradiction
has been passed over in silence by Protestant apologists.
A Protestant, if he or she is to be consistent, can’t criticize others who add their
revelations to the Bible simply because the Bible is silent on the subject. The answer to
this dilemma comes from outside the Bible, from the all-encompassing Tradition
maintained, treasured, and explained within the One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic
Church.

Based on whose definition of sola scriptura? Sola scriptura is simply the practice of holding all doctrines and teachings accountable to scripture. It is about doctrine, about articles of faith. It certainly isn’t an exclusion of Tradition. That the Lutheran reformers stuck with the classical canon is to be expected. They also stuck to the creeds and early councils, as the properly reflect the true faith.

To say that we can’t criticize those who add their “revelations” to the canon is nonsense.
It is an attempt to create a caricature of sola scriptura, a strawman to easily knock down.

Jon

 

[Abrigham]

Based on whose definition of sola scriptura? Sola scriptura is simply the practice of holding all doctrines and teachings accountable to scripture. It is about doctrine, about articles of faith. It certainly isn’t an exclusion of Tradition. That the Lutheran reformers stuck with the classical canon is to be expected. They also stuck to the creeds and early councils, as the properly reflect the true faith.

To say that we can’t criticize those who add their “revelations” to the canon is nonsense.
It is an attempt to create a caricature of sola scriptura, a strawman to easily knock down.

Jon

I believe you are describing prima Scriptura, not sola Scriptura

Edit: aha never mind. I spoke before I finished reading. My apologies.

 

[benjohnson]

I believe you are describing prima Scriptura, not sola Scriptura

I think Jon is describing Lutheran Sola Scriptura accurately - Sola Scriptura only demands that doctrine be shown to be compatible with the Bible.

In my mind, there’s quite a difference between Lutheran Sola Scriptura and what our Catholic and Evangelicals friends think Sola Scriptura is.

 

[JonNC]

I think Jon is describing Lutheran Sola Scriptura accurately - Sola Scriptura only demands that doctrine be shown to be compatible with the Bible.

In my mind, there’s quite a difference between Lutheran Sola Scriptura and what our Catholic and Evangelicals friends think Sola Scriptura is.

Thanks, Ben.

When reading the quote our friend here posted, I took umbrage (with the writer of the quote from from cybercatholics.com ) with the charge that we are obliged somehow to say to the Mormons that it is ok from them to add the Book of Mormon to scripture, because our Church uses the practice of sola scriptura. It is the same apolegetic nonsense one sees when some protestants claim Catholics have to be worshipping the Blessed Virgin becasue they say they pray to her, and prayer only goes to God (ignoring, of course, that prayer has more than one meaning).

Jon

 

[Abrigham]

I think Jon is describing Lutheran Sola Scriptura accurately - Sola Scriptura only demands that doctrine be shown to be compatible with the Bible.

In my mind, there’s quite a difference between Lutheran Sola Scriptura and what our Catholic and Evangelicals friends think Sola Scriptura is.

Yeah, please note my edit.

At the church I currently attend, the previous point would cause big issues because they are a scripture only, faith only church. We do nothing that doesn’t come straight from the Bible. It set off alarms in my head, which I ignored as long as I could, but I can’t anymore, especially not after reading this book.

 

[JonNC]

Yeah, please note my edit.

At the church I currently attend, the previous point would cause big issues because they are a scripture only, faith only church. We do nothing that doesn’t come straight from the Bible. It set off alarms in my head, which I ignored as long as I could, but I can’t anymore, especially not after reading this book.

Abrigham,
I pray His guidance for you in your journey.

Jon

 

[Abrigham]

Thanks, Ben.

When reading the quote our friend here posted, I took umbrage (with the writer of the quote from from cybercatholics.com ) with the charge that we are obliged somehow to say to the Mormons that it is ok from them to add the Book of Mormon to scripture, because our Church uses the practice of sola scriptura. It is the same apolegetic nonsense one sees when some protestants claim Catholics have to be worshipping the Blessed Virgin becasue they say they pray to her, and prayer only goes to God (ignoring, of course, that prayer has more than one meaning).

Jon

The author wasn’t saying you should accept additions to the Bible, just that the Bible doesn’t say anything direct on the subject of it being closed and if your church goes ONLY from the Bible that having a solid belief on a topic that isn’t clear in the Bible is a contradiction.

I honestly don’t know anything about the Lutheran Church, or many others for that matter.

 

[ChrissyB364]

I am not familiar with the different believes of the different denominations. In doing a little looking around here and there (which led me to the lovely website gotquestions.org :nope: but that’s a different post for a different time…) I see there is truth to both points, Jon. I never realized there was a difference as I am surrounded by, and hear from frequently, Baptists and Fundamentalists who according to Wikipedia:

Beyond the Reformation, as in some Evangelical and Baptist denominations, sola scriptura is stated even more strongly: it is self-authenticating, clear (perspicuous) to the rational reader, its own interpreter (“Scripture interprets Scripture”), and sufficient of itself to be the final authority of Christian doctrine.

 

[benjohnson]

I never realized there was a difference as I am surrounded by, and hear from frequently, Baptists and Fundamentalists who according to Wikipedia:

Beyond the Reformation, as in some Evangelical and Baptist denominations, sola scriptura is stated even more strongly: it is self-authenticating, clear (perspicuous) to the rational reader, its own interpreter (“Scripture interprets Scripture”), and sufficient of itself to be the final authority of Christian doctrine.

If you are Catholic and you’re concerned with what some of our more distant Evangelical friends think “Sola Scriptura” is, know that we Lutherans can be almost as concerned as you are.

Speaking for myself, I do think the bible the final authority for Christian dogma. Not only because it’s God’s Law and Gospel, but because it was compiled by wise men full of reverence at a time of greater closeness to the resurrection.

Now that I’ve said that - just because the Bible doesn’t provide us a clear answer, doesn’t mean that I condone or condemn all novelties. Catholic dogma on Mary’s Assumption doesn’t bother me one bit, but prosperity preaching gives me the willies. This discernment comes from tradition, charity, and my attempts to understand the totality of what it means to be a follower in Christ.

 

[Nicea325]

Has anyone else read this book? (“If Protestantism Is True” by Devin Rose) I’m currently reading it and it has raised some very convincing points for me to really want to join the Catholic church. Granted, I started reading it because I was already interested and was looking for more information on the subject. Any suggestions of other books I should read while continuing my current plans of joining an RCIA class in September? I would also like to lead my husband this direction through use of good logic. He’s a math guy and less inclined to follow his heart and feelings over logical points. Any book suggestions that you think would be good for him would also be appreciated.

Buy and read “Suprised by the Truth.” It deals with 11 converts from Protestanism. One of them is Marcus Grodi the host of EWTN The Journey Home.

 

[JonNC]

=benjohnson;9396097]If you are Catholic and you’re concerned with what some of our more distant Evangelical friends think “Sola Scriptura” is, know that we Lutherans can be almost as concerned as you are.

Maybe even moreso, because we have to continually correct the misconception.

Speaking for myself, I do think the bible the final authority for Christian dogma. Not only because it’s God’s Law and Gospel, but because it was compiled by wise men full of reverence at a time of greater closeness to the resurrection.

This is very important, not only regarding the apostolic era, but also that time immediately following it. Hence, our acceptance as Lutherans of the early councils and creeds.

Now that I’ve said that - just because the Bible doesn’t provide us a clear answer, doesn’t mean that I condone or condemn all novelties. Catholic dogma on Mary’s Assumption doesn’t bother me one bit, but prosperity preaching gives me the willies. This discernment comes from tradition, charity, and my attempts to understand the totality of what it means to be a follower in Christ.

Well said here. I would add that regarding the Assumption, it isn’t at all the pious belief in it that bothers, but the dogmatic attachment to it, binding the conscience of the believer.

Jon

 

[peace2u2]

Has anyone else read this book? (“If Protestantism Is True” by Devin Rose) I’m currently reading it and it has raised some very convincing points for me to really want to join the Catholic church. Granted, I started reading it because I was already interested and was looking for more information on the subject. Any suggestions of other books I should read while continuing my current plans of joining an RCIA class in September? I would also like to lead my husband this direction through use of good logic. He’s a math guy and less inclined to follow his heart and feelings over logical points. Any book suggestions that you think would be good for him would also be appreciated.

No, I haven’t heard of “If Protestanism Is True” by Devin Rose. Thank you for the book suggesion.

Some good books for your husband and yourself:

Search and Rescue: How to Bring Your Family and Friends Into or Back Into the Catholic Church by Patrick Madrid

Where Is That In the Bible? by Patrick Madrid (I haven’t read yet, but is on my list to read)

All the books written by Scott Hahn. (I love to read books by converts to Catholicism - It makes my faith stronger knowing that a former anti-catholic (much like St. Paul) had the scales removed from their eyes!)

Catholic Christianity by Peter Kreeft

Rediscover Catholicism by Matthew Kelly

Do I Have to Go? 101 Questions About the Mass, the Eucharist, and Your Spiritual Life by Matthew Pinto

The GIft of Simplicity by Brother Victor-Antoine D’Avilia-Latourrette

Good luck.

 

[DevinSRose]

Hi Abrigham and friends,

I’m the author of this book. Firstly, thanks for your interest in it and for the great comments on the book, including constructive criticism.

I just wanted to let you know that I am in the process of doing a complete revision of the book with Catholic Answers, and a new book with a substantially similar title will be published sometime later this year. The original book will not longer be sold.

The book will have similar content, using the reductio ad absurdum format, but will be better in every way. I don’t say that lightly; my editor at Catholic Answers is excellent and is taking all the good aspects of the book and enhancing them, while improving or eliminating the parts that were weaker.

In any case, you can buy the original book now or wait until the new one comes out. Or buy both!

Thanks again for the feedback. God bless,
Devin

 

[JonNC]

Hi Abrigham and friends,

I’m the author of this book. Firstly, thanks for your interest in it and for the great comments on the book, including constructive criticism.

I just wanted to let you know that I am in the process of doing a complete revision of the book with Catholic Answers, and a new book with a substantially similar title will be published sometime later this year. The original book will not longer be sold.

The book will have similar content, using the reductio ad absurdum format, but will be better in every way. I don’t say that lightly; my editor at Catholic Answers is excellent and is taking all the good aspects of the book and enhancing them, while improving or eliminating the parts that were weaker.

In any case, you can buy the original book now or wait until the new one comes out. Or buy both!

Thanks again for the feedback. God bless,
Devin

Hi Devin,
First, best wishes in you new publication.

I am not familiar with the first offering, but is it your plan to be rather specific regarding various communions? As you can tell by my earlier comments, criticizing sola scriptura without specific communions in mind is kind of a useless activity.

Jon

 

[DevinSRose]

Hi Devin,
I am not familiar with the first offering, but is it your plan to be rather specific regarding various communions? As you can tell by my earlier comments, criticizing sola scriptura without specific communions in mind is kind of a useless activity.

Jon

Hi Jon,

While Protestantism is a diverse set of movements, the various Protestant denominations share much in common. The book sometimes focuses on specific denominations but mostly seeks to demonstrate why Protestantism itself is unworkable, undermining the basis for the entire idea.

For example, all Protestants use a 66-book Bible. So I argue for the 73-book Catholic Bible. All Protestants reject sacramental Confession, so I address that.

There are cases that differ. For example, I enlist Martin Luther himself to defend Catholic baptismal regeneration.

God bless,
Devin