Is Sola Scriptura Biblical? You Betcha!

[justtryin]

EricFilmer said:

I likewise commend Miguel for sticking with this discussion, especially since the OP has apparently left him “holding the bag.”

I agree. Despite Miguel not being convinced of the Catholic Church’s Apostolic Authority, at least he is willing to remain in the discussion. Although I disagree with Miguel I can sincerely say WELL DONE FOR STICKING AROUND!!!

 

[CompSciGuy]

This does not deny a place for tradition but it is subordinate to Scripture and it is not necessary for salvation. Neither does it say that all Scripture is clear, but that what is necessary is clear. It is not necessary for everyone to read the Scripture. People can hear Scripture and be taught orally from it.

I’ve always had a problem with this. You say that scripture is the sole rule of faith but that only the “important stuff” is clear enough and should be agreed upon, and the rest of the faith is pretty much up for grabs. How do you determine what stuff is important/necessary? Why would the apostles bother writing about it unless it were important/necessary? That makes no sense. And why would they write about it and then leave it up to everyone to figure out for themselves what they were actually trying to say? There are a lot of things that are disagreed upon in the Protestant denominations that, from my reading of scripture, appear very important. For example, Holy Communion. St. Paul said whoever eats of this bread and drinks this cup without recognizing the body of the Lord eats and drinks his own judgement (1 Corinthians). I’d say that’s pretty serious.

What is the new Testament? It is: 1. the four gospels, containing the accounts of the life death and resurrection of Christ, 2. The Acts of the apostles, 3. Letters of St. Paul to the Churches, and 4. St. John’s apocalypse. There are many teachings, admonitions, etc. that the Church has always held as infallible that were laid out in scripture. But look at scripture, it’s not written as a sort of compendium that details all of the articles of faith. It isn’t written in that way. The Catechism is written in that way, the scripture is not.

 

[CatholicFireman]

I agree, Eric. I still hope as I stated in my follow up post:

I’m with you.

I was kind of praying it would enlighten him to further look into our faith.

Maybe, he is.

 

[paul_c]

I’d like to make a simple point to Miguel concerning his argument that St. Paul’s statement to go beyond what is written can NOT be a statement supporting sola scriptura

.
We all know and agree that the scripture that Paul is referencing is the Old Testament since the New Testament didn’t exist at the time he wrote 1Corinthians.

We also know that Jesus went well beyond what was written in the Old Testament in his ministry. Note, he never contradicted the Old Testament, but he expanded and clarified it.

Lets look at the Sermon on the Mount (Matthew 5) for evidence of this:

17 "Do not think that I have come to abolish the law or the prophets. I have come not to abolish but to fulfill.
18 Amen, I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not the smallest letter or the smallest part of a letter will pass from the law, until all things have taken place.
19 Therefore, whoever breaks one of the least of these commandments and teaches others to do so will be called least in the kingdom of heaven. But whoever obeys and teaches these commandments will be called greatest in the kingdom of heaven.
20 I tell you, unless your righteousness surpasses that of the scribes and Pharisees, you will not enter into the kingdom of heaven.
21 "You have heard that it was said to your ancestors, ‘You shall not kill; and whoever kills will be liable to judgment.’
22 But I say to you, whoever is angry with his brother will be liable to judgment, and whoever says to his brother, ‘Raqa,’ will be answerable to the Sanhedrin, and whoever says, ‘You fool,’ will be liable to fiery Gehenna.
23 Therefore, if you bring your gift to the altar, and there recall that your brother has anything against you,
24 leave your gift there at the altar, go first and be reconciled with your brother, and then come and offer your gift.
25 Settle with your opponent quickly while on the way to court with him. Otherwise your opponent will hand you over to the judge, and the judge will hand you over to the guard, and you will be thrown into prison.
26 Amen, I say to you, you will not be released until you have paid the last penny.
27 "You have heard that it was said, ‘You shall not commit adultery.’
28 But I say to you, everyone who looks at a woman with lust has already committed adultery with her in his heart.
29 If your right eye causes you to sin, tear it out and throw it away. It is better for you to lose one of your members than to have your whole body thrown into Gehenna.
30 And if your right hand causes you to sin, cut it off and throw it away. It is better for you to lose one of your members than to have your whole body go into Gehenna.
31 "It was also said, ‘Whoever divorces his wife must give her a bill of divorce.’
32 But I say to you, whoever divorces his wife (unless the marriage is unlawful) causes her to commit adultery, and whoever marries a divorced woman commits adultery.
33 "Again you have heard that it was said to your ancestors, ‘Do not take a false oath, but make good to the Lord all that you vow.’
34 But I say to you, do not swear at all; not by heaven, for it is God’s throne;
35 nor by the earth, for it is his footstool; nor by Jerusalem, for it is the city of the great King.
36 Do not swear by your head, for you cannot make a single hair white or black.
37 Let your ‘Yes’ mean ‘Yes,’ and your ‘No’ mean ‘No.’ Anything more is from the evil one.
38 "You have heard that it was said, ‘An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth.’
39 But I say to you, offer no resistance to one who is evil. When someone strikes you on (your) right cheek, turn the other one to him as well.
40 If anyone wants to go to law with you over your tunic, hand him your cloak as well.
41 Should anyone press you into service for one mile, go with him for two miles.
42 Give to the one who asks of you, and do not turn your back on one who wants to borrow.
43 "You have heard that it was said, ‘You shall love your neighbor and hate your enemy.’
44 But I say to you, love your enemies, and pray for those who persecute you,
45 that you may be children of your heavenly Father, for he makes his sun rise on the bad and the good, and causes rain to fall on the just and the unjust.
.

So clearly Jesus didn’t believe in Sola Scriptura.

and as for Paul, Do you not understand that Galatians is a condemnation of those who have not moved beyond what was written in the Old Testament to the realities of the salvation though Christ that the Church was teaching verbally? Let’s look at Galatian’s 3 for evidence:

1 O stupid Galatians! Who has bewitched you, before whose eyes Jesus Christ was publicly portrayed as crucified?
2 I want to learn only this from you: did you receive the Spirit from works of the law, or from faith in what you heard?
3 Are you so stupid? After beginning with the Spirit, are you now ending with the flesh?
4 Did you experience so many things in vain?–if indeed it was in vain.
5 Does, then, the one who supplies the Spirit to you and works mighty deeds among you do so from works of the law or from faith in what you heard?

I know you use this as a proof text for faith vs works discussions so you are familiar with it (although you misinterpret it for those purposes as well). Can’t you see that Paul was going “beyond what was written” in making these statements. So clearly, he can’t be a sola scripturist…

 

[guanophore]

I’ve always had a problem with this. You say that scripture is the sole rule of faith but that only the “important stuff” is clear enough and should be agreed upon, and the rest of the faith is pretty much up for grabs. How do you determine what stuff is important/necessary? Why would the apostles bother writing about it unless it were important/necessary? That makes no sense. And why would they write about it and then leave it up to everyone to figure out for themselves what they were actually trying to say?

Didn’t they go over that in RCIA? The list of “essential” and “non-essential” is right there next to the table of contents. It is in all the early manuscripts.

 

[guanophore]

I’d like to make a simple point to Miguel concerning his argument that St. Paul’s statement to go beyond what is written can NOT be a statement supporting sola scriptura

.
We all know and agree that the scripture that Paul is referencing is the Old Testament since the New Testament didn’t exist at the time he wrote 1Corinthians.

We also know that Jesus went well beyond what was written in the Old Testament in his ministry. Note, he never contradicted the Old Testament, but he expanded and clarified it.

Lets look at the Sermon on the Mount (Matthew 5) for evidence of this:

17 "Do not think that I have come to abolish the law or the prophets. I have come not to abolish but to fulfill.
18 Amen, I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not the smallest letter or the smallest part of a letter will pass from the law, until all things have taken place.
19 Therefore, whoever breaks one of the least of these commandments and teaches others to do so will be called least in the kingdom of heaven. But whoever obeys and teaches these commandments will be called greatest in the kingdom of heaven.
20 I tell you, unless your righteousness surpasses that of the scribes and Pharisees, you will not enter into the kingdom of heaven.
21 "You have heard that it was said to your ancestors, ‘You shall not kill; and whoever kills will be liable to judgment.’
22 But I say to you, whoever is angry with his brother will be liable to judgment, and whoever says to his brother, ‘Raqa,’ will be answerable to the Sanhedrin, and whoever says, ‘You fool,’ will be liable to fiery Gehenna.
23 Therefore, if you bring your gift to the altar, and there recall that your brother has anything against you,
24 leave your gift there at the altar, go first and be reconciled with your brother, and then come and offer your gift.
25 Settle with your opponent quickly while on the way to court with him. Otherwise your opponent will hand you over to the judge, and the judge will hand you over to the guard, and you will be thrown into prison.
26 Amen, I say to you, you will not be released until you have paid the last penny.
27 "You have heard that it was said, ‘You shall not commit adultery.’
28 But I say to you, everyone who looks at a woman with lust has already committed adultery with her in his heart.
29 If your right eye causes you to sin, tear it out and throw it away. It is better for you to lose one of your members than to have your whole body thrown into Gehenna.
30 And if your right hand causes you to sin, cut it off and throw it away. It is better for you to lose one of your members than to have your whole body go into Gehenna.
31 "It was also said, ‘Whoever divorces his wife must give her a bill of divorce.’
32 But I say to you, whoever divorces his wife (unless the marriage is unlawful) causes her to commit adultery, and whoever marries a divorced woman commits adultery.
33 "Again you have heard that it was said to your ancestors, ‘Do not take a false oath, but make good to the Lord all that you vow.’
34 But I say to you, do not swear at all; not by heaven, for it is God’s throne;
35 nor by the earth, for it is his footstool; nor by Jerusalem, for it is the city of the great King.
36 Do not swear by your head, for you cannot make a single hair white or black.
37 Let your ‘Yes’ mean ‘Yes,’ and your ‘No’ mean ‘No.’ Anything more is from the evil one.
38 "You have heard that it was said, ‘An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth.’
39 But I say to you, offer no resistance to one who is evil. When someone strikes you on (your) right cheek, turn the other one to him as well.
40 If anyone wants to go to law with you over your tunic, hand him your cloak as well.
41 Should anyone press you into service for one mile, go with him for two miles.
42 Give to the one who asks of you, and do not turn your back on one who wants to borrow.
43 "You have heard that it was said, ‘You shall love your neighbor and hate your enemy.’
44 But I say to you, love your enemies, and pray for those who persecute you,
45 that you may be children of your heavenly Father, for he makes his sun rise on the bad and the good, and causes rain to fall on the just and the unjust.
.

So clearly Jesus didn’t believe in Sola Scriptura.

and as for Paul, Do you not understand that Galatians is a condemnation of those who have not moved beyond what was written in the Old Testament to the realities of the salvation though Christ that the Church was teaching verbally? Let’s look at Galatian’s 3 for evidence:

1 O stupid Galatians! Who has bewitched you, before whose eyes Jesus Christ was publicly portrayed as crucified?
2 I want to learn only this from you: did you receive the Spirit from works of the law, or from faith in what you heard?
3 Are you so stupid? After beginning with the Spirit, are you now ending with the flesh?
4 Did you experience so many things in vain?–if indeed it was in vain.
5 Does, then, the one who supplies the Spirit to you and works mighty deeds among you do so from works of the law or from faith in what you heard?

I know you use this as a proof text for faith vs works discussions so you are familiar with it (although you misinterpret it for those purposes as well). Can’t you see that Paul was going “beyond what was written” in making these statements. So clearly, he can’t be a sola scripturist…

Thanks for doing that, Paul. I thought it was necessary, but did not have the time.

 

[pablope]

I’d like to make a simple point to Miguel concerning his argument that St. Paul’s statement to go beyond what is written can NOT be a statement supporting sola scriptura

.

I know you use this as a proof text for faith vs works discussions so you are familiar with it (although you misinterpret it for those purposes as well). Can’t you see that Paul was going “beyond what was written” in making these statements. So clearly, he can’t be a sola scripturist…

Hi, paulc and others…just some thoughts…

If someone is to practice or do SS, as Miguel says…doesn’t that person need to know how to read for himself, and have his own scripture (whatever existed at the time of St Paul) to study?

Duh…it just came to me…those first Christians did own their own Scriptures, most did not know how to read (only a few) and relied on oral teachings and instructions…so could they practice SS? Or know something about SS?

pablope

 

[Algo1]

Hi, paulc and others…just some thoughts…

If someone is to practice or do SS, as Miguel says…doesn’t that person need to know how to read for himself, and have his own scripture (whatever existed at the time of St Paul) to study?

Chrysostom (349-407):
Tarry not, I entreat, for another to teach thee; thou hast the oracles of God. No man teacheth thee as they; for he indeed oft grudgeth much for vainglory’s sake and envy. Hearken, I entreat you, all ye that are careful for this life, and procure books that will be medicines for the soul. If ye will not any other, yet get you at least the New Testament, the Apostolic Epistles, the Acts, the Gospels, for your constant teachers. If grief befall thee, dive into them as into a chest of medicines; take thence comfort of thy trouble, be it loss, or death, or bereavement of relations; or rather dive not into them merely, but take them wholly to thee; keep them in thy mind.
** This is the cause of all evils, the not knowing the Scriptures.** We go into battle without arms, and how ought we to come off safe? Well contented should we be if we can be safe with them, let alone without them.
NPNF1: Vol. XIII, Homilies on the Epistle of St. Paul to the Colossians, Homily 9.

Apparently Chrysostom believed that those he preached to could read. He encouraged them to purchase at least the New Testament.

Duh…it just came to me…those first Christians did own their own Scriptures, most did not know how to read (only a few) and relied on oral teachings and instructions…so could they practice SS? Or know something about SS?

Sola Scriptura began after the Apostolic Age. The first Christians lived during what we call “the time of inscripturation”.

Inspiration is the direct result of inscripturation—the work of the Holy Spirit by which he so guided the minds of the human authors and writers that they chose the precise words necessary to accurately reflect the exact truth God intended, all the while reflecting their own personality, writing style, vocabulary, and cultural context thus guaranteeing that this truth is accurately, inerrantly, and infallibly inscripturated.
Inspiration and Translation Rodney J. Decker, Th.D.

Irenaeus (c. 130-200): We have learned from none others the plan of our salvation, than from those through whom the gospel has come down to us, which they did at one time proclaim in public, and, at a later period, by the will of God, handed down to us in the Scriptures, to be the ground and pillar of our faith.
Vol. 1, Irenaeus, “Against Heresies” 3.1.1, p. 414.

 

[guanophore]

Irenaeus (c. 130-200): We have learned from none others the plan of our salvation, than from those through whom the gospel has come down to us, which they did at one time proclaim in public, and, at a later period, by the will of God, handed down to us in the Scriptures, to be the ground and pillar of our faith.
Vol. 1, Irenaeus, “Against Heresies” 3.1.1, p. 414.

Anyone who reads Irenaeus can easily see that he gives equal value to the Sacred Tradition. Scripture and Tradition are two equal, entwined strands of the One Revelation of Christ of Himself to mankind.

1 Tim 3:15
15 if I am delayed, you may know how one ought to behave in the household of God, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and bulwark of the truth.

 

[Algo1]

Anyone who reads Irenaeus can easily see that he gives equal value to the Sacred Tradition. Scripture and Tradition are two equal, entwined strands of the One Revelation of Christ of Himself to mankind.

1 Tim 3:15
15 if I am delayed, you may know how one ought to behave in the household of God, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and bulwark of the truth.

Very well, can you provide us with the content of the “Sacred Tradition” that is not in Scripture that Irenaeus “gives equal value to”?

 

[thenobes]

Just a note:

Quote:

Irenaeus (c. 130-200): We have learned from none others the plan of our salvation, than from those through whom the gospel has come down to us, which they did at one time proclaim in public, and, at a later period, by the will of God, handed down to us in the Scriptures, to be the ground and pillar of our faith.
Vol. 1, Irenaeus, “Against Heresies” 3.1.1, p. 414.

I read the above this way:

We have learned from none others the plan of our salvation, than from those through whom the gospel has come down to us

(which they did at one time proclaim in public, and,
at a later period, by the will of God, handed down to us in the Scriptures)

to be the ground and pillar of our faith.

Just because Iranaeus interpolated the parenthesized statements, doesn’t mean he thinks the scriptures are the Ground and Pillar of our Faith, but the Gospel.

And by interpolating “handed down to us in the scriptures” he didn’t thereby discard the necessity of the magisterial authotity of the Church.

peace
steve

 

[Algo1]

Just a note:

And by interpolating “handed down to us in the scriptures” he didn’t thereby discard the necessity of the magisterial authotity of the Church.

peace
steve

Augustine (354-430): This Mediator, having spoken what He judged sufficient first by the prophets, then by His own lips, and afterwards by the apostles, has besides produced the Scripture which is called canonical, which has paramount authority, and to which we yield assent in all matters of which we ought not to be ignorant, and yet cannot know of ourselves. NPNF1: Vol. II, The City of God, Book XI, Chapter 3.

 

[guanophore]

Very well, can you provide us with the content of the “Sacred Tradition” that is not in Scripture that Irenaeus “gives equal value to”?

You are creating a false dichotomy, Algo. ST does not refer to what is “not in Scripture”. On the contrary, it is the lens through which we understand Scirpture. It is a perspective, a world view, In the NT, is is called “The Way”. This way of life and perspective on how to understand the Scriptures did not disappear when some of it was committed to writing. The “once for all” divine deposit of faith is the Word of God that is at work in the Church.

1 Thess 2:13-14

13 And we also thank God constantly for this, that when you received the word of God which you heard from us, you accepted it not as the word of men but as what it really is, the word of God, which is at work in you believers.

The Word of God accomplishes that for which it is sent.

Isa 55:10-11

10 "For as the rain and the snow come down from heaven,
and return not thither but water the earth,
making it bring forth and sprout,
giving seed to the sower and bread to the eater,
11 so shall my word be that goes forth from my mouth;
it shall not return to me empty,
but it shall accomplish that which I purpose,
and prosper in the thing for which I sent it.

It will be alive and well in the Church until we are taken up to Him.

 

[pablope]

Hi, paulc and others…just some thoughts…

If someone is to practice or do SS, as Miguel says…doesn’t that person need to know how to read for himself, and have his own scripture (whatever existed at the time of St Paul) to study?

Duh…it just came to me…those first Christians did own their own Scriptures, most did not know how to read (only a few) and relied on oral teachings and instructions…so could they practice SS? Or know something about SS?

pablope

OOppps…correction (did not catch it in time…)…should have read:

“those first Christians did not own their own Scriptures…”

 

[PRmerger]

Very well, can you provide us with the content of the “Sacred Tradition” that is not in Scripture that Irenaeus “gives equal value to”?

How about the canon of Scripture?

 

[pablope]

Apparently Chrysostom believed that those he preached to could read. He encouraged them to purchase at least the New Testament.

Sola Scriptura began after the Apostolic Age. The first Christians lived during what we call “the time of inscripturation”.

Procure does not necessarily mean to buy or purchase. …it means to get a hold of…

1.To get by special effort; obtain or acquire: managed to procure a pass.
2. To bring about; effect:

From the quote you cited, I think it is more in line with the 2nd definition…“to bring about”…a total christian life, not to purchase.

Well, it seems you and Miguel even cannot agree…Miguel even contends it began with St. Paul…so which is it?

 

[paul_c]

Very well, can you provide us with the content of the “Sacred Tradition” that is not in Scripture that Irenaeus “gives equal value to”?

I’ll give you three examples:

1. Tradition is the lens through which scriopture is viewed. We already know that Jesus set up the Church to spread the good news about Jesus and the salvation available through the sacraments so we understand what scripture says about this.
2. There are also areas of the Christian faith that are not directly transferred through scripture. The content of the mass, the actual form and words to use when administering the sacraments, the organization of the church, etc.
3. How people actually lived out the Christian faith - (i.e., the lives of the Saints)

 

[paul_c]

Apparently Chrysostom believed that those he preached to could read. He encouraged them to purchase at least the New Testament.

I personally don’t think this is an issue of literacy. And just because someone owns a bible doesn’t mean they are sola scripturists. I read 5 + chapters of the bible every day and while I believe that everything in the bible is true, I don’t believe that the bible contains ALL truth.

Sola Scriptura began after the Apostolic Age. The first Christians lived during what we call “the time of inscripturation”.

Wow, another innovation. Very good. So you clearly understand that the first Christians couldn’t have been Sola Scripturists since the New Testament didn’t exist. You seem to be calling the documentation of the new ideas of the New Testament as the time of inscripturation. That puts you one step up on Miguel. But what neither of you can explain is how it came to pass that only what was written in scripture is necessary for salvation. Where is that written. And where is it written that scripture was complete with the 27 books of the New Testament? And who has the authority to define the correct interpretation of scripture when two well meaning people come to different conclusions on the same passage?

You see Algo, by definition, none of the authors of scripture could have been sola scripturists or else they wouldn’t have added to scripture in the first place. And if none of the authors of scripture were sola scripturists, then clearly sola scriptura is not scriptural.
And now you have a logical inconsistency that is impossible to ignore.

I’m truly sorry for you. You have denied the authority of the church for an abstract authority of scripture, which you now see is untenable. But on the other hand, I am happy for you because now you can see more clearly that Jesus commissioned his Church to teach the truth and administer the sacraments and that if you follow what it teaches and partake of the sacraments with a loving heart, you too can be saved…

 

[Algo1]

Anyone who reads Irenaeus can easily see that he gives equal value to the Sacred Tradition. Scripture and Tradition are two equal, entwined strands of the One Revelation of Christ of Himself to mankind.

1 Tim 3:15
15 if I am delayed, you may know how one ought to behave in the household of God, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and bulwark of the truth.

Very well, can you provide us with the content of the “Sacred Tradition” that is not in Scripture that Irenaeus “gives equal value to”?

How about the canon of Scripture?

Can you provide us with Irenaeus’s canon of scripture then?
I thought that the common claim of this web-board was that the canon did not exist until about 200 yrs after Irenaeus’s time.

 

[Philthy]

Can you provide us with Irenaeus’s canon of scripture then?
I thought that the common claim of this web-board was that the canon did not exist until about 200 yrs after Irenaeus’s time.

Irrelevant. Any and all canon’s of Scripture are inconsistent with Sola Scriptura. The point remains that your canon is “extrabiblical” and so is every other one. Deal with the relevant facts and implications.