Is sola Scriptura Infallible? Protestant says yes!

  • Thread starter Thread starter Randy_Carson
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
We all can learn a lesson from St. Augustine when we think that the bible can teach error.

**St. Augustine: **
“On my own part I confess to your charity that it is only to those books of Scripture which are now called canonical that I have learned to pay such honor and reverence as to believe most firmly that none of their writers has fallen into any error. And if in these books I meet anything which seems contrary to truth, I shall not hesitate to conclude either that the text is faulty, or that the translator has not expressed the meaning of the passage, or that I myself do not understand.”
 
Reformed1-

Another ecumenical breakthrough!

I’m with you on this one! 👍
On a forum such as this one the differences are going to be what is focused on.

Regardless, our theology has an awful lot in common, we just don’t discuss it very often and for some reason choose to argue over the differences.
 
On a forum such as this one the differences are going to be what is focused on.

Regardless, our theology has an awful lot in common, we just don’t discuss it very often and for some reason choose to argue over the differences.
I believe it was the current Pope who said that the divisions in Christianity are a scandal to the world.

This is why we discuss them so much. They must be dealt with so that the Church can be reunited and we can be a proper witness to the world.

Christ Himself alluded to the idea that our best and surest witness is when we are one. He said that the world would know us by our love for one another.

It is impossible for this love to properly manifest to the world when the Body is shattered into so many pieces.
 
Reformed1 quoted
Read the footnotes in DV and you will see that it refers to several other texts where it is clear that the scriptures are totally and completely inerrant. Also, the section of the catechism you quoted comes from DV does it not?
Also, the phrase "Since therefore all that the inspired authors or sacred writers affirm should be regarded as affirmed by the Holy Spirit, we must acknowledge that the books of Scripture firmly, faithfully, and without error teach that truth which God, for the sake of our salvation, wished** to see confided to the Sacred Scriptures."** is some what ambiguous is it not?
and CM quoted
I don’t see how…when you take it for what it’s meaning and not what someone might wish to portray it as saying.
If one says that the Bible is inerrant even when it conflicts with scientific fact you make the whole inspiration of the Bible untenable. That’s why I say that it needs literal and not literalist interpretation.
To me it’s simply God-given common sense.
I would like to just hightlight a couple of things that Reformed1 quoted from DV.
**, and without error teach **that truth which God, for the sake of our salvation…
CM you are correct when you state “…when you take it for what it’s meaning and **not **what someone might wish to portray it as saying.” and that it “…needs literal not literalist interpretation”

I think this states it pretty well about the hierarchy of truths.
 
In another thread in this forum, a Protestant made the following assertion:
Sola Scriptura:
Here is the point. For the Protestant, sola Scriptura is in essence equal to the word of God as the only infallible rule of faith for the church.
Equal to the Word of God?

Infallible?


Well, folks, what do you think of this claim? Any Protestants want to comment?
The statement means the word of God, in whatever form is always infallible and the highest authority. During the times of Jesus, the Prophets, and the Apostles we had the word of God being spoken and written. However, it was always the same principle that the word of God alone is infallible and the highest authority. For today’s church the only verifiable word of God we have are the Scriptures. Therefore, it is sola Scriptura, the sole infallible and highest authority.

I’ve been asking this simple question for weeks now and I have never received a adequate answer. Do Catholics have any evidence from Scripture or early patristics of any teaching outside of Scripture that was considered equal with God’s word?
 
2tim3:16-17
As has been argued elsewhere ad infinitum and conceded by the person that I quoted above in the OP, this passage does not teach that the Bible Alone is the sole infallible rule of faith.
 
The statement means the word of God, in whatever form is always infallible and the highest authority. During the times of Jesus, the Prophets, and the Apostles we had the word of God being spoken and written. However, it was always the same principle that the word of God alone is infallible and the highest authority. For today’s church the only verifiable word of God we have are the Scriptures. Therefore, it is sola Scriptura, the sole infallible and highest authority.

I’ve been asking this simple question for weeks now and I have never received a adequate answer. Do Catholics have any evidence from Scripture or early patristics of any teaching outside of Scripture that was considered equal with God’s word?
Perhaps the answers have been adequate but not to your liking? And you want evidence from Scripture of a teaching outside of Scripture???

Let’s take a different approach.

At the time that Jesus walked the earth, the scriptures of the OT would have been the written Word of God while Jesus Himself was the Word Made Flesh. The OT did not cease being the WoG during the time of the Incarnation. Jesus refers to the “authority” of the OT when He stated, “It is written”, yet, he also refers to the authority of His Father in heaven who has given “all authority in heaven and on earth” to the Son. Thus, there were multiple and equal “authorities” in existence simultaneously

Today, we have the written Word of God and the Magisterium of the Catholic Church. This will be unacceptable to you under any circumstances. However, I will provide a few basic ideas and you may do with them what you will.

The Church’s authority is unique in that it is derived from the authority of the Apostles themselves. Apostolic Authority flows from the Authority of Jesus and the Father.

“All authority” comes from God. This authority was given by God the Father to Jesus who, in turn, gave it to His disciples. He gave them “all authority” to “make disciples of all nations”. We also see another example of the authority given to the Apostles in the Gospel of John:

“Again Jesus said, ‘Peace be with you! As the Father has sent me, I am sending you.’ And with that he breathed on them and said, ‘Receive the Holy Spirit. If you forgive anyone his sins, they are forgiven; if you do not forgive them, they are not forgiven.’ " (John 20:21-23)

From this passage, we see again that Jesus said, “as the Father has sent me (with all authority in heaven and on earth), so “I am sending you” with all of that exact same authority. Note further that Jesus has given the Apostles the authority to forgive men’s sins. Yet, as the Jews asked on another occasion:

“Who can forgive sins but God alone?” (Mark 5:5)

But Jesus knew their thoughts and asked:

“Why do you entertain evil thoughts in your hearts? Which is easier: to say, ‘Your sins are forgiven,’ or to say, ‘Get up and walk’? But so that you may know that the Son of Man has authority on earth to forgive sins…” Then he said to the paralytic, “Get up, take your mat and go home.” And the man got up and went home. When the crowd saw this, they were filled with awe; and they praised God, who had given such authority to men.” (Matthew 9:4-8)

Notice that the Jews did not praise God who had “given such authority to a man” – a single man named Jesus. Instead, they praised God because the authority to forgive sins has now been passed into the hands of mankind. Moreover, with this kind of authority firmly conveyed to them, the Apostles spoke with the authority of Jesus Christ Himself.

(cont.)
 
“Then Jesus came to them and said, ‘All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me. Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, and teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you. And surely I am with you always, to the very end of the age.’ " (Matthew 28:18-19)

“Again Jesus said, ‘Peace be with you! As the Father has sent me, I am sending you.’ ” (John 20:21)

From this, we can see that God the Father has given all authority to God the Son who in turn bestows this authority upon His own disciples and sends them out to preach the truth to all the world. Thus, we can see that the Apostolic Authority of the Church is God-given. But how closely should the Church be identified with Christ? Jesus Himself specified how we should receive those sent by Christ:

“He who listens to you listens to me; he who rejects you rejects me; but he who rejects me rejects him who sent me.” (Lk 10:16)

Echoing the words of Jesus, the Apostle John wrote:

“We are from God, and whoever knows God listens to us; but whoever is not from God does not listen to us. This is how we recognize the Spirit of truth and the spirit of falsehood.” 1 John 4:6

When you listen to the “God-breathed” Church, you are hearing the voice of Jesus Himself.
 
Perhaps the answers have been adequate but not to your liking? And you want evidence from Scripture of a teaching outside of Scripture???
Well of course any answer will not do, it has to be a rational and cogent answer. It does not have to be evidence from Scripture, but it has to be evidence of teaching that is not contained in Scripture(otherwise it is still sola Scriptura) that is God’s word or something somehow that is equal to God’s word.
Let’s take a different approach.
I’m sure, but I wonder if this different approach will answer the question.
At the time that Jesus walked the earth, the scriptures of the OT would have been the written Word of God while Jesus Himself was the Word Made Flesh. The OT did not cease being the WoG during the time of the Incarnation. Jesus refers to the “authority” of the OT when He stated, “It is written”, yet, he also refers to the authority of His Father in heaven who has given “all authority in heaven and on earth” to the Son.
Yes, very true. It is the word of God in all those cases.
Today, we have the written Word of God and the Magisterium of the Catholic Church. This will be unacceptable to you under any circumstances. However, I will provide a few basic ideas and you may do with them what you will.
But the Magisterium itself confesses to not being the word of God and it does not claim inspiration. So already you are facing an uphill battle, because what you are claiming is and theological novum.
The Church’s authority is unique in that it is derived from the authority of the Apostles themselves. Apostolic Authority flows from the Authority of Jesus and the Father.
The church has authority, but having authority does not equal infallibility. The Apostles authority was unique, because they were operating under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit. Your church does not claim the same which demonstrates everything the Apostles had does not therefore pass on to the church. Furthermore, you take passages that were uniquely applied to the Apostles and just assume they now apply to the YOUR church without an argument to prove they do.
From this, we can see that God the Father has given all authority to God the Son who in turn bestows this authority upon His own disciples and sends them out to preach the truth to all the world. Thus, we can see that the Apostolic Authority of the Church is God-given. But how closely should the Church be identified with Christ? Jesus Himself specified how we should receive those sent by Christ:

"He who listens to you listens to me; he who rejects you rejects me; but he who rejects me rejects him who sent me(Lk 10:16)

Echoing the words of Jesus, the Apostle John wrote:

“We are from God, and whoever knows God listens to us; but whoever is not from God does not listen to us. This is how we recognize the Spirit of truth and the spirit of falsehood.” (1 John 4:6)

All you have done is made a case for the Apostles being infallible and the highest authority equal to God speaking, but we don’t deny this. Sola Scriptura is an affirmation of this, and it is so because they were speaking under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit.

Now this is what I meant by every answer not being a good answer. You have not brought any evidence to the table for an Oral Tradition outside of Scripture being infallible and equal in authority to the word of God. Also you haven’t brought any cogent evidence to the table that a Bishop in Rome would be granted infallibility. You have given us nothing, but rambling about the Apostles authority and in your final sentence you make an incredible leap of logic to magically apply all of this to the church.
Randy Carson;1860660:
When you listen to the “God-breathed” Church, you are hearing the voice of Jesus Himself.
There goes the great big leap of logic that doesn’t even make sense. Your church doesn’t even claim the church is “God-breathed”. Furthermore, you are supposed to be giving evidence for the Bishop of Rome and Oral Tradition outside of Scripture. So once again for all the Catholics constant attacks on sola Scriptura their own rule of faith is even worse if you ask them to provide evidence from Scripture or the early church. It is a theological novum that never existed.
 
SolaScriptura…Hope you are doing well. Why do you believe the Bible is the sole rule of faith for Christians?
 
Can I see the list of big T tradition?
Is there a list? Is there a list that says which books are supposed to be in the Bible? Please don’t say the table of contents or something like that. Four Traditions passed orally:
  1. Doctrine
  2. Prayers
  3. Breaking of bread
  4. changing the Lord’s day from Saturday to Sunday
 
Is there a list? Is there a list that says which books are supposed to be in the Bible? Please don’t say the table of contents or something like that. Four Traditions passed orally:
  1. Doctrine
  2. Prayers
  3. Breaking of bread
  4. changing the Lord’s day from Saturday to Sunday
Sorry, I meant a list of big T tradition, not already found in the Bible.
 
Hi,

I see your point. I am a born again Christian who puts Christ first in my life. (1) The only way I can do that is by studying the Scripture. So where as I do not worship the bible I do have to read it, believe it is the (2) Word of God 100% so I can put what is in it to practice in my daily living. IMHO I think that is what most Christians (catholic and non-catholic alike) believe to be true. Although I have met a few catholics and protestants who dont believe the bible to be 100% the inerrant Word of God.:eek: (3) I wouldnt consider them Christians in the sense of a true follower of Christ.😦
(1) So the person you are is not a way to put Christ First in you life. It is only by reading? Is it not understanding the meaning and doing what it commands of us that scripture
how we honor Christ?

(2) Are you limiting God to the Bible only? Do you believe God has left us to our own interpretations for the last 2000 years? Also in my study of the many translation of translation of the Holy Bible there are many inconsistencies from one translation to another. Which is right?

(3) It is not my or your decision to judge who is a Christian. That is left up to God at the day of judgment. IMHO there will be many surprises on that day.
 
SS is not in the Bible, is a tradition of men, which negates the word of God.
 
My favorite thing on this thread right now is SolaScriptura’s signature line.

Can anyone say oxymoron?
 
Kaycee and/or SS…I’m interested in your answers to these questions:
  1. If everything we need to know as Christians is in the Bible, where in the Bible does it give us the list of books that are supposed to be in the Bible?
  2. What is the pillar and foundation of truth?
  3. Why do Protestants go to Seminary? Do they think Seminary can teach them something about Holy Scripture the Holy Spirit cannot?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top