Let's try this, a Sola Scriptura experiment

  • Thread starter Thread starter ralphinal
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
R

ralphinal

Guest
Let’s list all the Christian doctrine that can be defended using only sola scriptura. Some have proof on both sides, for and against. Let’s see how many we can get that are one sided.

I’ll start.

Jesus was born of a virgin.
 
ralphinal said:
Let’s list all the Christian doctrine that can be defended using only sola scriptura. Some have proof on both sides, for and against. Let’s see how many we can get that are one sided.

I’ll start.

Jesus was born of a virgin.
Click to expand...
There is therefore now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus. 👍
 
ralphinal said:
Let’s list all the Christian doctrine that can be defended using only sola scriptura. Some have proof on both sides, for and against. Let’s see how many we can get that are one sided.

I’ll start.

Jesus was born of a virgin.
Click to expand...
Jesus said to them, “Is this not the reason you are wrong, because you know neither the Scriptures nor the power of God?

Mark 12

This is a circular proof text for sola scriptura, maybe? 🤷

Here’s additional insight to the above text:

The natural person does not accept the things of the Spirit of God, for they are folly to him, and he is not able to understand them because they are spiritually discerned. The spiritual person judges all things, but is himself to be judged by no one. “For who has understood the mind of the Lord so as to instruct him?” But we have the mind of Christ. 1 Cor 2

John 3:3

Jesus answered him, “Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born again he cannot see the kingdom of God.”
 
AlanF said:
The Papacy

The Eucharist

Excorcism

Unction
Click to expand...
True, all of those can be defended using scripture. However, those who dispute these positions also use scripture.

I will allow exorcism and unction to make the list.

Don’t get me wrong, I fully beleive in the Real Presence and the Primacy and need of the Pope, but they have scriptures they claim (incorrectly) to show otherwise.
 
Reformed said:
Jesus said to them, “Is this not the reason you are wrong, because you know neither the Scriptures nor the power of God?

Mark 12

This is a circular proof text for sola scriptura, maybe? 🤷
Click to expand...
I did not want this to be a debate on the doctrine itself. THat verse may be used for it, but it would be a bad one to use. The context is about the woman who marries 7 brothers and who she is married to in the after-life. Jesus is showing them that the afterlife does not include the things of the earth.

Besides, I could say that the Power of God can prevent error in the Church and can allow for tradition, can’t I.
 
ralphinal said:
I did not want this to be a debate on the doctrine itself. THat verse may be used for it, but it would be a bad one to use. The context is about the woman who marries 7 brothers and who she is married to in the after-life. Jesus is showing them that the afterlife does not include the things of the earth.

Besides, I could say that the Power of God can prevent error in the Church and can allow for tradition, can’t I.
Click to expand...
I added two more in conjuction with that concept. I am saying that the Bible is a closed book to those who do not have the Spirit of God, and are not born from above. The Bible is concealed to those in the flesh. To understand the Scriptures in an effectual way, the Spirit of God must dwell in the believer. Concealment and revealment is intentional by God.

Luke 10:21

Jesus Rejoices in the Father’s Will

In that same hour he rejoiced in the Holy Spirit and said, “I thank you, Father, Lord of heaven and earth, that you have hidden these things from the wise and understanding and revealed them to little children; yes, Father, for such was your gracious will.

The Purpose of the Parables - Mat 13

10 Then the disciples came and said to him, “Why do you speak to them in parables?” 11 And he answered them, “To you it has been given to know the secrets of the kingdom of heaven, but to them it has not been given. 12 For to the one who has, more will be given, and he will have an abundance, but from the one who has not, even what he has will be taken away. 13 This is why I speak to them in parables, because seeing they do not see, and hearing they do not hear, nor do they understand.
 
Reformed said:
Jesus said to them, “Is this not the reason you are wrong, because you know neither the Scriptures nor the power of God?

Mark 12

This is a circular proof text for sola scriptura, maybe? 🤷

Here’s additional insight to the above text:

The natural person does not accept the things of the Spirit of God, for they are folly to him, and he is not able to understand them because they are spiritually discerned. The spiritual person judges all things, but is himself to be judged by no one. “For who has understood the mind of the Lord so as to instruct him?” But we have the mind of Christ. 1 Cor 2

John 3:3

Jesus answered him, “Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born again he cannot see the kingdom of God.”
Click to expand...
I wish you would quit adding to the post. I reply and then I look like an idiot.

Besides, what you just added may be used against sola scriptura, as it implies that an istructor can have the mind of Christ as to explain things.

Back on track. What teachings are only supported by sola scriptura?
 
Reformed said:
I added two more in conjuction with that concept. I am saying that the Bible is a closed book to those who do not have the Spirit of God, and are not born from above. The Bible is concealed to those in the flesh. To understand the Scriptures in an effectual way, the Spirit of God must dwell in the believer. Concealment and revealment is intentional by God.
Click to expand...
I can accept that. Ignore the harshness of my last post.
 
ralphinal said:
I can accept that. Ignore the harshness of my last post.
Click to expand...
I added more scripture to support what I am saying. I guess I’m trying to say that Scripture teaches that spiritual truth is concealed to many and revealed to some.

You have to understand that I see your thread as an attempt to discredit the turth of sola scriptura, right?
 
Reformed said:
I added more scripture to support what I am saying. I guess I trying to say that Scripture teaches that spiritual truth is concealed to many and revealed to some.
Click to expand...
And that is fine. What it does not teach is that ONLY Scripture contains the truth of faith.
 
ralphinal said:
And that is fine. What it does not teach is that ONLY Scripture contains the truth of faith.
Click to expand...
We can battle for authority, but only the Spirit of God can open the hearts of sinners to receive the authority of Holy Scriptures over other sources of claimed extra-bibilcal authority. I can say that those who know Jesus hear His voice through the Scriptures alone. I can debate this same issue with LDS Christians. They too claim apostolic succession. So, what’s your purpose of this thread?

Mat 4

Then Jesus was led up by the Spirit into the wilderness to be tempted by the devil. And after fasting forty days and forty nights, he was hungry. And the tempter came and said to him, “If you are the Son of God, command these stones to become loaves of bread.” But he answered, “It is written,

“‘Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word (Holy Scriptures) that comes from the mouth of God.’”
 
Reformed said:
We can battle for authority, but only the Spirit of God can open the hearts of sinners to see the authority of Holy Scriptures over other sources of claimed extra-bibilcal authority. I can debate this same issue with LDS Christians. They two claim apostolic succession. So, what’s your purpose of this thread?
Click to expand...
I am trying to establish those Christian concepts about which there is no scriptural duplicity.
 
Baptism.

(It appears the sola scriptura point is turning into a debate. I sincerely do not want to be a part of derailing your thread, but if support for it continues, I’ll have to provide arguments against it.)
 
Prodigal_Son1 said:
Baptism.

(It appears the sola scriptura point is turning into a debate. I sincerely do not want to be a part of derailing your thread, but if support for it continues, I’ll have to provide arguments against it.)
Click to expand...
Fair enough.

Baptism is in there, as long as we don’t get too deep into the theology of it.

Is that five?
 
ralphinal said:
I am trying to establish those Christian concepts about which there is no scriptural duplicity.
Click to expand...
Be honest, you are asking Roman Catholic Christians to do a Sola Scriptura experiment. For what reason, to undermine the authority of Holy Scripture? The battle for the Truth lies within the authority of Holy Scripture over the Magestrium. Have you ever read the testimony of Scott Hahn? If you let go of the truth of Sola Scriptura, you are open to receive all kinds of teachings.
 
Reformed said:
Be honest, you are asking Roman Catholic Christians to do a Sola Scriptura experiment. For what reason, to undermine the authority of Holy Scripture? The battle for the Truth lies within the authority of Holy Scripture over the Magestrium. Have you ever read the testimony of Scott Hahn? If you let go of the truth of Sola Scriptura, you are open to receive all kinds of teachings.
Click to expand...
No. I am asking a poor cross-section of people of faith to help us establish what all of us, as Christians, will agree on. Once we know what we all accept, we can go from there.

Scientifically, this is a bad group because of a lot of reasons. It is the only group I have, so I will make it work.
 
Reformed said:
Mat 4

Then Jesus was led up by the Spirit into the wilderness to be tempted by the devil. And after fasting forty days and forty nights, he was hungry. And the tempter came and said to him, “If you are the Son of God, command these stones to become loaves of bread.” But he answered, “It is written,

“‘Man shall not live by bread alone, but by **every word **(Holy Scriptures) that comes from the mouth of God.’”
Click to expand...
You just proved that sola scriptura is a huge lie. Holy Scriptures do NOT contain every word that comes from the mouth of God.
We all thank you very much for proving the invalidity of Scripture alone.

Now, return to the OP…how 'bout some Doctrine that CAN be proven from scripture alone.

I’ll just throw the Trinity in the mix off the top of my head.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top