It's NOT in the Bible, okay?

[DerekD]

Did God tell you personally which books should be included in Sacred Scripture?

yes

But I *know *the Holy Spirit is guiding me. Do you *know *the Holy Spirit is guiding you? You and I have read the same Scriptures guided by the Holy Spirit, but have different interpretations. How do we resolve that?

We don’t; God will. Fear God.

The Bible doesn’t mention the word Trinity either, but the Trinity existed then.

It is very explicit throughout Scripture. Just as justification by faith alone is explicit, but not stated.

Just exactly what do you think 1 Tim. 3:15 means?

It means what it says; not what people add to it.

 

[DerekD]

Where did Christ teach what books should be included in the Bible? Where did Christ ever tell anyone to write down what He did or taught?

What’s a matter you cannot answer a simple question? Assuming Christ said a lot more and even taught more, which I do not believe He taught more, where do we look with certainty of divine revelation outside of the Bible and how do you know it is of God and not the devil?

Do you believe the Bible is 100% divine? If so, then why do you ask where Christ asked anyone to write something down; that makes no sense if you believe the Word. I don’t think you do believe it 100%.

 

[DerekD]

Great question! Now we’re getting somewhere!

catholic.com/library/pillar.asp
CCC

I’m not clicking some canned link; tell me in your own words.

 

[DerekD]

Also why does the bible say?

The true rule of faith is scripture PLUS apostolic TRADITION as manifestedin the living teachng authority of the CC to which were entrusted the oral teachings of Jesus and the apostles to interpret Scritpure correctly.

It is in the bible you know!

Your church must have told you that; it is not in the Bible what you said above…you might try reading and discerning for yourself you you don’t mishandle the Word of God, which is very offensive to God. Fear God.

 

[DerekD]

Presumption does not work. It comes to a conclusion even before it has looked at the facts. Would anyone want to be the subject of any case where presumption was the basis for conclusion? Very risky.

Where does 1st Timothy 3:15 even infer such a belief as you assert? I’ll have to disagree with your interpretation and go with what the Word of God actually says right there. You express a gross fallacy because that may be your own opinion, but even if one accepts the authority ascribed to the Bible by Sola Scriptura, one would have to reject that.

As to your last question…you already answered that when you touched on 1st Timothy 3:15 above. What does that verse literally tell us is the pillar and bulwark of the truth?

You have a very low view of Scripture in light of your churchs doctrines as far as I can tell based on this dialogue; a Christian would never try to argue over the validity of Scripture, nor say presuming it is the truth is “very risky”; that is why we walk by faith and not by the wisdom of men.
You seem to like philosphy of men better than the supernatural and illogical truth of Scripture. It is the Living Word, sharper than a two -edged sword able to penatrate both the spirit and the soul, it is the very voice of God and it is Living because in the beginning was the Word and the Word was with God and the WORD was GOD. The Bible is the very nature and attributes of God expressed in writing for the benefit of HIs elect. Does it benefit you? In what way? To put down true Bible believers; God’s very own children? Fear God. I suppose you can penalize me; oh well I speak the truth in love.

 

[DerekD]

Which is the only option supported by the New Testament.Not so t all. I examined the evidence in the New Testament and wrote the following article on my blog based upon what I found.Take a look. **Infallibility & How The Apostles Taught the Study of Sacred Tradition.**So then teachings that the apostles offer in their New Testament writings, (and there are a great many) that Our Lord never spoke about are invalid? Surely you didn’t mean that! Yet that is the only logical conclusion to arrive at based upon what you have just said.

I admire you honest concerning putting your church above the Scripture. Real nice talking with you and I wish you the very best in this life and I hope you enjoy this life to its upmost fullest; for it is but a vapor.

God bless and happy trails

 

[DerekD]

[SIGN][/SIGN]

Where does it say in the bible that the bible is all we need for salvation. Actually where does it even say in the bible that we NEED the bible for theology?

WHere does it say in the bible that theBible is necessary to believe in Christ?

Your questions are real amazing

The Bible is the very voice of God, Living Word, very attributes and character of God are revealed; you too should enjoy this life to its fullest and I pray you live to 120 years of age.

God bless and may you learn to fear Him who can condemn the body and the soul.

 

[DerekD]

If I did not answer your question or post; I apologize, I am very limited on time. I can’t hang in this thread; it has only gotten me in trouble and has only proven to me that your Church is superior to the Living Word, as Chruch Militant said the NT teaches; something I can not handle and disagree with and find quite offensive to my Lord and God and Savior.

I wish you all the best.

 

[nuntym]

You seem to like philosphy of men better than the supernatural and illogical truth of Scripture. It is the Living Word, sharper than a two -edged sword able to penatrate both the spirit and the soul, it is the very voice of God and it is Living because in the beginning was the Word and the Word was with God and the WORD was GOD. The Bible is the very nature and attributes of God expressed in writing for the benefit of HIs elect. Does it benefit you? In what way? To put down true Bible believers; God’s very own children? Fear God. I suppose you can penalize me; oh well I speak the truth in love.

Hi DerekD.

Hmm, I would disagree with your comment on the truth of Scripture being illogical. The Gospel is actually alogical, meaning that the truths cannot be grasped by logic alone, for they are outside of logic, but can only be revealed by God to man.

However, once the said truths are revealed, they can be used logically to reveal even more truths. If the truths of the Scriptures are illogical, then this cannot be done and cannot be illustrated in the Bible.

In fact, the use of logic on the revealed truths of Judaism and Christianity was shown numerous times by Jesus during his ministry, and subsequently by the apostles. An illuminating example is Jesus’ talk with the Sadducees about the resurrection.

[23] The same day Sad’ducees came to him, who say that there is no resurrection; and they asked him a question,
[24] saying, “Teacher, Moses said, If a man dies, having no children, his brother must marry the widow, and raise up children for his brother.' [25] Now there were seven brothers among us; the first married, and died, and having no children left his wife to his brother. [26] So too the second and third, down to the seventh. [27] After them all, the woman died. [28] In the resurrection, therefore, to which of the seven will she be wife? For they all had her." [29] But Jesus answered them, "You are wrong, because you know neither the scriptures nor the power of God. [30] For in the resurrection they neither marry nor are given in marriage, but are like angels in heaven. [31] And as for the resurrection of the dead, have you not read what was said to you by God, [32] I am the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob’? He is not God of the dead, but of the living.”
Matthew 22:23-32

Now let us analyze this DerekD. Jesus clearly used logic here. He used an existing truth, a truth that we know cannot be false because it is in the Scriptures, to show that the resurrection of the dead is true: since it was clearly recorded that God in the burning bush said to Moses in the book of Exodus that He is the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob, and it cannot be true that God can rule over something that does not exist (for if there is no resurrection, then death means the end of existence), and yet by this time Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob had also died, THEN that means Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob must still exist until at least by the time of Moses. But that means that since they still exist by then but not in the physical plane, then they must not be in the subject of time, which means that until Jesus’ time, and until our time, and until the end of time, Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob exist. And if they, then others who have died must exist too. Until the end of time. Which means that the resurrection of the dead must, at least, be possible.

See Jesus’ use of logic?

But DerekD, it does not end there. I will point to you what Jesus said:

[29] But Jesus answered them, "You are wrong, because you know neither the scriptures nor the power of God.

If you say DerekD that the Scriptures are the only source of God’s truth, then why is Jesus pointing not also to the Scriptures but also to the power of God?

 

[Church_Militant]

I’ll be sure to tell God, when I see Him, that He was wrong that the church was not built on Christ

, the foundation- and the laying of such by the prophets and the apostles. I will also tell Him that He needed to add to those whom the Holy spirit leads, for you were wrong about that as well God. Boy, I hope I’m nearby when you do that so I can hear the Almighty’s chuckle before He corrects that one.

I have no doubt that Our Lord will have a chuckle too at that point as He reminds you that His Church was always built on Him, but also built by Him just as He tells us in Matthew’s Gospel.

Yeah…that’s gonna be an enlightening moment in your Bible study life right there my friend.

 

[Church_Militant]

yes

Please by all means open a new thread and tell us how He did that. I’d love to see where the Bible tells what books belong in its canon.

We don’t;

Yet you are already definitively telling us that our interpretations are in error and yours are correct, even in the face of scriptural and historical evidence to the contrary. That seems contradictory to your stated belief.

God will.

And promised to do so through His Church, promising that He will be with us always even to the end of the world and that His Spirit would guide us into all truth. We say that has been consistently the case for 2,000 years, and yet you assert that your interpretations are correct when they have no root farther back than a mere 500 years. It seems that makes them a “new wind of doctrines of men”. Not good…

Fear God.

No problem there at least.

It is very explicit throughout Scripture. -]Just as justification by faith alone is explicit, but not stated./-]

If it’s so explicit, it should have been easily provided to me by now…and yet this explicit teaching of yours hasn’t been shown to be scriptural at all.

I lined out the rest, as that is irrelevant to this topic.

It means what it says; not what people add to it.

Precisely my own thinking in opening this discussion!

I’m still waiting for those scriptures that explicitly teach that all we believe and practice must be found in the Bible’s pages.

 

[Church_Militant]

What’s a matter you cannot answer a simple question? Assuming Christ said a lot more and even taught more, which I do not believe He taught more,

where do we look with certainty of divine revelation outside of the Bible and how do you know it is of God and not the devil?

Do you believe the Bible is 100% divine? If so, then why do you ask where Christ asked anyone to write something down; that makes no sense if you believe the Word. I don’t think you do believe it 100%.Irrelevant and off topic!

Look…it’s really pretty simple.

If there is scripture that tells us that all we believe and practice must be found in the scriptures then you should be able to provide it. ***Where is it?

***You’re scripturally in error in the bolded part above because St. John plainly tells us in his Gospel. (Chapter 20) “30 Many other signs also did Jesus in the sight of his disciples, which are not written in this book.”

 

[Church_Militant]

You have a very low view of Scripture in light of your churchs doctrines as far as I can tell based on this dialogue; a Christian would never try to argue over the validity of Scripture, nor say presuming it is the truth is “very risky”; that is why we walk by faith and not by the wisdom of men.

I wouldn’t make assumptions about me my friend. You do not know me.

I have an extremely high regard for the Word of God.

The presumption that I call risky is in regard to your interpretations of scripture so far, which have proved to go beyond what is written in nearly all of your citations.

Also, personal shots like this are irrelevant to his topic, so please don’t waste time and space with them. All I need is for you to show me what I have asked for. Why haven’t you done that yet?

If, as you assert, everything that we believe and practice has to be found in the Bible, then there has to be a scripture that states that. Where is that found?

You seem to like philosphy of men better than the supernatural and illogical truth of Scripture.

More irrelevance…and diversion to make allegations about me personally instead of addressing the topic. It’s simple Derek…if what you believe is taught by the Bible then where is that found.

I won’t address that any further because it will derail the thread. (PM me if you just have to discuss me.)

It is the Living Word, sharper than a two -edged sword able to penatrate both the spirit and the soul,

I’m well familiar with Hebrews 4:12 and agree completely with it, as does the Catholic Church.

it is the very voice of God and it is Living because in the beginning was the Word and the Word was with God and the WORD was GOD.

The first part is fine and we faithful Catholics have no problem with it, however your tying in John 1:1 goes far beyond what is written in the actual context of that verse, as shown here.

1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2 The same was in the beginning with God. 3 All things were made by him: and without him was made nothing that was made. 4 In him was life, and the life was the light of men. 5 And the light shineth in darkness, and the darkness did not comprehend it.

The context clearly shows that this refers to Our Lord Jesus Christ and in no way to the scriptures of either the Old or New Testament. Your statement is one that , confuses a lot of people because it seems that you have deified the Bible and that would be a violation of the 1st commandment.

The Bible is the very nature and attributes of God expressed in writing for the benefit of HIs elect. Does it benefit you? In what way? To put down true Bible believers; God’s very own children? Fear God. I suppose you can penalize me; oh well I speak the truth in love.

I see neither truth nor love in that remark Derek. It is also grossly off topic.

If you have texts that prove that the Bible says that everything we believe and practice has to be found in its pages then please provide it for me otherwise you might step aside and let someone more knowledgeable in the Word offer an answer.

I have put no one down, and certainly the Bible benefits me and will benefit me even more when someone shows me where this belief can be found within its holy pages.

So far…I’ve seen more rhetoric and interpretations of modern men than scriptural documentation, so I’m thinking that my inability to locate this teaching in scripture is not unique, and I don’t understand that.

 

[Church_Militant]

I admire you honest concerning putting your church above the Scripture. Real nice talking with you and I wish you the very best in this life and I hope you enjoy this life to its upmost fullest; for it is but a vapor.

God bless and happy trails

I don’t guess you bothered to even read what I wrote. That’s the way it goes though…

I didn’t put my church above the scriptures Derek. Our Lord Jesus Christ put His Church above the scriptures with a promise to insure that He would never let the enemy overcome it and allow it to teach error.

Yeah… I know about life Derek… .“9 What hath man more of his labour? 10 I have seen the trouble, which God hath given the sons of men to be exercised in it. 11 He hath made all things good in their time, and hath delivered the world to their consideration, so that man cannot find out the work which God hath made from the beginning to the end. 12 And I have known that there was no better thing than to rejoice, and to do well in this life. 13 For every man that eateth and drinketh, and seeth good of his labour, this is the gift of God. 14 I have learned that all the works which God hath made, continue for ever: we cannot add any thing, nor take away from those things which God hath made that he may be feared. 15 That which hath been made, the same continueth: the things that shall be, have already been: and God restoreth that which is past” (Ecclesiastes 3)

 

[JustaServant]

The foundation of Protestantism is denial that God gave HIS CHURCH authority. Without this authority anybody can make anything the foundation they most feel comfortable with. The problem with making the Bible itself that authority is simply proven wrong by a quick glance at one’s local yellow pages. Page after page of ‘authority’. Sometimes studying the scriptures can take you in circles. Many who study the scriptures in their proper historical context find their way back to the Catholic Church.
The problem is CM, you have dared to ask a question Protestants CANNOT answer. You’ve given them a choice between authority.
The Church or their own authority.

 

[Lampo]

I’ll be sure to tell God, when I see Him, that He was wrong that the church was not built on Christ, the foundation-

If you tell Him that, He will say, “No, you are wrong in your private interpretation of My Book. I *am *the foundation of My Church, which I built on Saint Peter.”

 

[SteveGC]

Militant,

Getting back to your OP…

Do you think it really is necessary for a Sola Scripturist to substantiate their belief in the Bible alone through a proof text found within that Bible alone? IOW, does it refute Sola Scriptura simply by revealing that Scripture itself does not even implicitly reveal it to be true?

I’m asking this not because I believe it one way or the other, but because I myself have been grappling with it since you started the thread. I’m certain you won’t find anyone who can successfully answer your OP here, and you probably know that too. And it certainly should be an eye opener for many Bible-only lurkers out there, as they recognize that their belief in Scripture alone is not scriptural. But does it have to say it in Scripture for one to actually believe it? Most SS’ers also believe in Spirit led revelation, and affirmations from the Spirit which somehow validate what other humans are teaching them. In this way, a person gets taught from their ecclesial community that Scripture alone is wholly sufficient, and the Spirit affirms it in their heart that that is true. This would seem to be the position someone like DerekD would take.

Of course, that sort of position raises the question of where did their teachers themselves discern that it was true? If they themselves learned it from another, and the Spirit convicted them in it, then keep working backward…someone, somewhere back in the chain had to have been taught it by either Christ Himself, or presumably from one of the apostles themselves. And since it is not revealed in Scripture, a SS’er must concede that this teaching was handed down traditionally. But should that concession then easily refute Sola Scriptura? I’m not so sure. A true SS’er is willing to concede that there are fully Christian traditions that contain truth…it’s just that none of them can contradict Scripture. And since Scripture also does not explicitly refute Sola Scriptura, then this extra-biblical, traditional teaching of SS can be believed, especially when one is personally convinced that the Spirit affirms it in their hearts. I know that “hold fast to the traditions” is a scriptural text we use to show them that SS is wrong, but this is not explicit enough for them.

Anyway, see where I’m going? One last note…going back to my underline above…to me, this is the biggest loophole that remains…SS’ers never seem to finish the definition of their own doctrine…they conveniently leave it truncated, ignoring the need for *an interpretation *of Scripture…they simply say Scripture, as if it speaks for itself, interprets itself. One even would think that they reject the whole concept of interpretation when it comes to reading and understanding a written text. How often have we all seen SS’ers come in here and say “Hey, this is not my private interpretation, this is just what it says, this is Scripture speaking for itself”…when it’s plain as day that they are not merely quoting Scripture verbatim, but rather offering the inferred teaching from said Scripture (hence, interpretting it). You know, as much as the whole notion of SS is errant, I find the obstinate refusal to articulate which interpretation of Scripture holds the supreme authority to be the most frustrating element of it.

 

[eagle_eye222001]

Even if the Bible taught “sola scriptura,” that would be insufficient as your just blindly believing some text. You still need to validate the books and actual compilation of the Bible which you get from…those Catholic councils in the 300/400s.

 

[Grace_Seeker]

I would much appreciate it if someone one, (especially you who are n-Cs) would display and clarify for me just precisely where it is in the Word of God that it specifically states that everything that Christians believe and practice must be found within its pages.

This also is for some of you Catholics that come in here and all but demand to know where some Catholic teaching or practice is found in the Bible.

The reason I am posting this is because I have read the Bible (all 73 books of it!) many times and have yet to find anything that supports this idea. I have concluded that the Catholic Church is correct in teaching that the Bible does not say this and therefore it is error.

I want all of us Catholics to understand that this is a fundamental doctrinal error of some communities of n-C Christianity and so there is no reason to get distressed when someone comes at you with this stuff, because the fact of the matter is …it’s NOT in the Bible itself.

Let me see if I understand what you are saying:

Premise: Non-Catholics often say that a teaching can only be a teaching if found in the Bible.
Premise: But, the Bible doesn’t adctually say that at teaching can only be a teaching if it is found in the Bible.
Conclusion: Therefore, based on the fact that it isn’t a teaching found in the Bible, it can’t be a teaching.

Observation: You yourself are accepting the condition of Premise #1 in order to arrive at your conclusion which denies it? I love the irony.

 

[hollypally]

The famous story from oral tradition about jesuses love for chocolate is not in the bible but the pope says it so it is absolute!

(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)
Jesus discovering chocolate