Protestant Christians: Any problem with sola scriptura?

[PJM]

Sola Scriptura has nothing to do with anyone’s interpretation of Scripture:
please use this description of SS from Catholic.com
“Even the principle of sola scriptura (“Scripture alone”), according to the sharpest Protestant scholars, means that the Bible is the ultimate authority—above councils and popes and any tradition—but not that no commentary or tradition may be cited or utilized.”
archived here:
web.archive.org/web/20100330002353/http://www.catholic.com/thisrock/2004/0402fea3.asp

or this one from New Advent newadvent.org/cathen/12495a.htm
“” Protestantism, however, by no means despises or rejects church authority as such, but only subordinates it to, and measures its value by, the Bible,"

**Sola Scriptura is about authority: not interpretation.
**

If EVERY single person misunderstood Jesus speaking from the Sermon on the Mount that would NOT diminish His authority in the slightest manner.
Do you agree?

And back to the question OP:* “Protestant Christians: Any problem with sola scriptura?”*

As it relates to SS: Sola Sciptura practicing Christians do NOT have any problems with differing interpretations of Scripture.
Why?
Because sinners misunderstanding the Word of God does NOT diminish the authority of the Word of God.

]QUOTE]Sola Scriptura has nothing to do with anyone’s interpretation of Scripture:
please use this description of SS from Catholic.com
“Even the principle of sola scriptura (“Scripture alone”), according to the sharpest Protestant scholars, means that the Bible is the ultimate authority—above councils and popes and any tradition—but not that no commentary or tradition may be cited or utilized.”

Sorry to disagree with you; but it seems quite logical to me at least that if the Bible is your only source for religious truths; either the bible is wrong, or those self-interpreting it are wrong.

HOW ELSE can one explain the multiplicity of Protestant faiths and churches?

God Bless you,

Patrick

 

[PJM]

If they are there, they can be named.

Jon

OK, BUT to what purposes; besides SPACE is limited on the CAF

God Bless you Jon,

PJM

 

[JonNC]

To support my view about Lutherans and Anglicans being closer to Catholicism in some area, this about creeds.

youtube.com/watch?v=GPg0wBP5k6M

 

[alwayswill]

]

Sorry to disagree with you; but it seems quite logical to me at least that if the Bible is your only source for religious truths; either the bible is wrong, or those self-interpreting it are wrong.

HOW ELSE can one explain the multiplicity of Protestant faiths and churches?

God Bless you,

Patrick

" the Bible is your only source for religious truths"
the Bible is our only source for infallible and inerrant religious truths

"either the bible is wrong, "
Impossible: the Bible is infallible and inerrant

“or those self-interpreting it are wrong.”
Obviously: we are not infallible and inerrant

 

[JonNC]

OK, BUT to what purposes; besides SPACE is limited on the CAF

God Bless you Jon,

PJM

Only to show that the claim is, at best, speculative, particularly when a specific number or small range is placed on the claim.

Jon

 

[Topper17]

Hi Lent,

We see this running narrative in the NT about unity. John 17:21
Ephesians 4:5 one Lord, one faith, one baptism;

John 10:16 Jesus mentions ONE flock, not 20-30,000 flocks

As do the Scriptures and the Fathers. There is nothing in the early Church which would indicate that all of these independent communities would have been acceptable in early Christendom.

Here is what I saw in protestant churches - too many cooks in the kitchen and everybody is essentially the same rank.

Everybody has a bible and an infallible interpretation of that bible (or so they believe) and so many of them think they are appointed to tell others how to live their lives. And so the inevitable occurs, people get hurt and either leave the church, or worse, start another church. And since this is not apostolic faith founded by the Lord, the pastors sometimes do not know how to properly handle these disputes. And i think that is because 1.) They don’t know how much, if any, REAL authority they actually have and 2.) Everyone’s interpretation of the bible seems to carry the same weight. And there is nothing else to appeal to if we both pray about it and come up with different ideas.

In some of these ecclesiastical communities, (the less ‘Confessional’ and more independent ones), the ministers report directly to some kind of board of elders. The ministers are hired on the basis of an interview in which they are quizzed about what they will teach. If they believe and plan to teach something different than what the interview committee believes to be true, they will not be hired. In other words, the beliefs of the laypeople will govern doctrine rather than the Seminary trained Minister. I also know of situations where the Minister, Theologically trained, would be ‘corrected’ and forced to teach what the board wants taught, or be fired. All of this simply MUST lead to doctrinal confusion over time, and in fact, overall, a decrease in the importance of doctrine, which is EXACTLY what we see in modern culture.

This is not a knock on protestant pastors. I respect them a great deal and personally I think they have a very tough job, maybe even tougher than priests because they usually have families to attend to and more disputes to deal with. It IS, however, a knock on the environment created by sola scriptura, though.

I agree, and have a great deal of respect for anyone who chooses to serve God in a Ministerial function. That is not to say that I approve of what they might teach of course, but definitely the intent.

Apostolic churches have their issues but this usually isn’t one of them. A group of 100 million Sergeants combined is still outranked by 1 General. They know that when the church speaks, that’s it. You can bite your tongue or go be a protestant, but you cant overrun the pillar and foundation of truth.

EXACTLY! If there is going to be unity on earth, meaning a single Church, then that Church MUST have a single earthly leader. Unity simply CANNOT be maintained through any kind of “Committee of Equals”. Unity is impossible if the structure allows multiple individuals to believe that there is NO authority above them personally. If they think that, eventually there will be organizational division.

God Bless You Lent, Topper

 

[Lenten_ashes]

Hi Lent,

As do the Scriptures and the Fathers. There is nothing in the early Church which would indicate that all of these independent communities would have been acceptable in early Christendom.

In some of these ecclesiastical communities, (the less ‘Confessional’ and more independent ones), the ministers report directly to some kind of board of elders. The ministers are hired on the basis of an interview in which they are quizzed about what they will teach. If they believe and plan to teach something different than what the interview committee believes to be true, they will not be hired. In other words, the beliefs of the laypeople will govern doctrine rather than the Seminary trained Minister. I also know of situations where the Minister, Theologically trained, would be ‘corrected’ and forced to teach what the board wants taught, or be fired. All of this simply MUST lead to doctrinal confusion over time, and in fact, overall, a decrease in the importance of doctrine, which is EXACTLY what we see in modern culture.

I agree, and have a great deal of respect for anyone who chooses to serve God in a Ministerial function. That is not to say that I approve of what they might teach of course, but definitely the intent.

EXACTLY! If there is going to be unity on earth, meaning a single Church, then that Church MUST have a single earthly leader. Unity simply CANNOT be maintained through any kind of “Committee of Equals”. Unity is impossible if the structure allows multiple individuals to believe that there is NO authority above them personally. If they think that, eventually there will be organizational division.

God Bless You Lent, Topper

See I figured that and I think it is just flat out wrong!! Not trying to bash protestant churches, but I am so in love with the Mass because I know 100% of the time that Jesus is the focus. But on the other side I have literally sat through 45 minute sermons where all the pastor did was complain about not receiving enough tithes…and how we were “robbing God” according to the OT. I love how some of them cherry pick the OT, by the way. Sometimes it’s hard to believe they are receiving a message from the Holy Spirit, but other times it felt warm and genuine. It was always hit or miss in the non denom church for me.

I remember talking to the Anglican priest from one of my old churches and he told me how so many of his parishoners were impossible to please and complain about everything. And you know Anglicans tend to have money so they expect like full service lol.

People just need to realize life is about serving causes greater than ourselves.

Thanks for the talk, Topper. The Lord be with you.

 

[benhur]

Looks like we are all repeating ourselves now.

When I started this thread, I wanted to know if any protestants saw any problems with sola scriptura…And I honestly didn’t expect anyone to say they did, but to my surprise a few protestants acknowledged that it is problematic. And to those people I want to thank you for your honesty and integrity. Most people who are born and raised to believe something never stop to seriously examine why it is they believe it, or ask themselves if it is logically consistent to believe it.

Hi La’

Which is why one must be born again, born of the Spirit, regenerated etc., etc. Must.

Jesus asked the apostles whom they thought Jesus was. He did not ask them what their parents thought. or their rabbis, of their version of “magisterium” (though they all have their say also). In order to answer personally , you must know personally, and that from the Father.

By the way, all methodologies, hermeneutics etc. are “problematic”. All. Yes, even “ss”. Otherwise, I would say why strive and yearn for heaven, if perfection and infallibility are already here ? SS does not call itself infallible, and is in a totally different paradigm than another alternative…

Blessings

 

[Lenten_ashes]

Hi La’

Which is why one must be born again, born of the Spirit, regenerated etc., etc. Must.

Jesus asked the apostles whom they thought Jesus was. He did not ask them what their parents thought. or their rabbis, of their version of “magisterium” (though they all have their say also). In order to answer personally , you must know personally, and that from the Father.

By the way, all methodologies, hermeneutics etc. are “problematic”. All. Yes, even “ss”. Otherwise, I would say why strive and yearn for heaven, if perfection and infallibility are already here ? SS does not call itself infallible, and is in a totally different paradigm than another alternative…

Blessings

Hi Benhur.

I think Jesus was establishing a Church so wouldn’t make much sense to ask those questions. Just like I think it doesn’t make much sense to try and bypass the Church once it was established.

So you hold to baptism as being only symbolic type ordinance?

 

[benhur]

See I figured that and I think it is just flat out wrong!!

Hi La,’

What, that churches appoint themselves elders ? Ignatius certainly admonished churches to do this .Certainly the bishop of Rome did not appoint presbyters/bishops consistently and exclusively for other churches til when, 1000 years later ?

Not trying to bash protestant churches,

But you are brother. I shake my head and say we are all in glass houses, and it is in the eyes of the beholder, let all men be liars (imperfect) only God is true (and perfect) ,and when you point a finger, three point back at you (I am plum run out of …whatever, the word escapes me) .Nevertheless, La,carry on, for certainly there is a time for everything, and I do not mind discussing our errors and shortcomings. They are there .Sin is ugly.May we repent cause for sure wood, hay, and stubble will be burned, away.

Blessings

 

[Lenten_ashes]

Hi La,’

What, that churches appoint themselves elders ? Ignatius certainly admonished churches to do this .Certainly the bishop of Rome did not appoint presbyters/bishops consistently and exclusively for other churches til when, 1000 years later ?But you are brother. I shake my head and say we are all in glass houses, and it is in the eyes of the beholder, let all men be liars (imperfect) only God is true (and perfect) ,and when you point a finger, three point back at you (I am plum run out of …whatever, the word escapes me) .Nevertheless, La,carry on, for certainly there is a time for everything, and I do not mind discussing our errors and shortcomings. They are there .Sin is ugly.May we repent cause for sure wood, hay, and stubble will be burned, away.

Blessings

Not sure what you mean but what I was objecting to was elders turning their pastor into some sort of puppet.

 

[benhur]

Hi Benhur.

I think Jesus was establishing a Church so wouldn’t make much sense to ask those questions. Just like I think it doesn’t make much sense to try and bypass the Church once it was established.

So you hold to baptism as being only symbolic type ordinance?

The questions must always be personally asked. “What hath God really said.” For example, you certainly , along with myself , asked that question and made your/our decision as to where/ what God hath said, and where Truth lies. One can not get the right answer unless one is born of God. For that matter to even ask the right question.

As far as baptism, I view it as somewhat like circumcision of the OT.Thereis a sanctification perhaps, a blessing ,a covering, but one must still be justified personally.One must still be born of the Spirit. Nicodemus would be like a high ranking bishop today, yet though religious, and holy, and card carrying in all things(rites/sacraments/traditions), he was blind as a bat, not born again.

So, what does that say about religious initiation rites, that we are/were commanded to do ?

Blessings

 

[benhur]

Not sure what you mean but what I was objecting to was elders turning their pastor into some sort of puppet.

Ok , but the original post said "laypeople’’ also , as in the congregation. I was trying to point out that at some point elders and congregations anointed, chose. It was not (like today) top down after the original apostles and their immediate disciples. Remember, presbyterslders/bishops were often martyred , and I would think the congregation would be led enough by the Spirit to choose amongst themselves who was suited to lead. Ignatius alludes to this.

Blessings

 

[Lenten_ashes]

The questions must always be personally asked. “What hath God really said.” For example, you certainly , along with myself , asked that question and made your/our decision as to where/ what God hath said, and where Truth lies. One can not get the right answer unless one is born of God. For that matter to even ask the right question.

As far as baptism, I view it as somewhat like circumcision of the OT.Thereis a sanctification perhaps, a blessing ,a covering, but one must still be justified personally.One must still be born of the Spirit. Nicodemus would be like a high ranking bishop today, yet though religious, and holy, and card carrying in all things(rites/sacraments/traditions), he was blind as a bat, not born again.

So, what does that say about religious initiation rites, that we are/were commanded to do ?

Blessings

We obviously view baptism differently. If you are correct and I’m wrong I wonder how the early church could go so wrong so early in the process. It’s mind boggling.

You know I’ve seen people who are “saved” accepted Jesus into their hearts yet still seem to look a lot like this world and live in sin. Unregenerates are everywhere.

 

[benhur]

We obviously view baptism differently. If you are correct and I’m wrong I wonder how the early church could go so wrong so early in the process. It’s mind boggling.

You know I’ve seen people who are “saved” accepted Jesus into their hearts yet still seem to look a lot like this world and live in sin. Unregenerates are everywhere.

Well most baptisms in scripture, and I would say the early church, only baptized "believers’.You can not believe unless you are born again already. Nicodemus was not told to be born again just so he could go to heaven, but so that he could see and believe, and therefore go to heaven. Infant baptism was not widespread and prevalent a tradition til centuries later. My view is coherent with early church. Nothing mind boggling.

Agree that any initiation rite, including the alluded to sinners prayer, is problematic. Baptism and the prayer are a "should do’’ but rebirth is still rebirth.

Blessings

 

[Lenten_ashes]

The Nicene creed is still considered early church and that seems to state otherwise.

 

[Son_of_Niall]

Hi Lent,

As do the Scriptures and the Fathers. There is nothing in the early Church which would indicate that all of these independent communities would have been acceptable in early Christendom.

**In some of these ecclesiastical communities, (the less ‘Confessional’ and more independent ones), the ministers report directly to some kind of board of elders. The ministers are hired on the basis of an interview in which they are quizzed about what they will teach. If they believe and plan to teach something different than what the interview committee believes to be true, they will not be hired. In other words, the beliefs of the laypeople will govern doctrine rather than the Seminary trained Minister. I also know of situations where the Minister, Theologically trained, would be ‘corrected’ and forced to teach what the board wants taught, or be fired. All of this simply MUST lead to doctrinal confusion over time, and in fact, overall, a decrease in the importance of doctrine, which is EXACTLY what we see in modern culture. **

I agree, and have a great deal of respect for anyone who chooses to serve God in a Ministerial function. That is not to say that I approve of what they might teach of course, but definitely the intent.

EXACTLY! If there is going to be unity on earth, meaning a single Church, then that Church MUST have a single earthly leader. Unity simply CANNOT be maintained through any kind of “Committee of Equals”. Unity is impossible if the structure allows multiple individuals to believe that there is NO authority above them personally. If they think that, eventually there will be organizational division.

God Bless You Lent, Topper

Perhaps what you describe happens in ‘independent’ churches, but you are painting with a very broad brush and comes off as rather condescending.

 

[Wannano]

The Nicene creed is still considered early church and that seems to state otherwise.

Could you elaborate what this statement is saying…I mean, what does the Nicene creed contradict?

 

[Topper17]

Hi always,

Thanks for your post.

This has been around the web for a few years: linked on various PRO-Catholic sites
Unsound Sticks, or, Arguments Catholics Shouldn’t Use
freerepublic.com/focus/religion/2243954/posts

The very first point that they make is
(quoted in its entirety)​

1. Do not allege that there are 33,000 Protestant denominations. This tally comes from the 2001 World Christian Encyclopedia, and it includes all denominations and paradenominations which self-identify as Christian, including Catholics, Orthodox, Protestants, Old Catholics, Mormons, Jehovah’s Witnesses, Seventh Day Adventists, Gnostics, Bogomils, etc. And even so, the number is too high. The World Christian Encyclopedia artificially inflates the number of Catholic “denominations” by counting Eastern Churches in communion with Rome as separate denominations. It likewise inflates the number of Eastern Orthodox “denominations” by counting Churches in communion with each other as distinct.

This reference lists 8,973 denominations under the heading “Protestant,” and 22,146 more under the heading “Independent.” Some, but not all, of the “independent” denominations may justly be described as Protestant. Still, these numbers may be inflated similarly to the numbers for Catholics and Orthodox. Suffice it to say that there are thousands of Protestant denominations.

Moreover, even if we could arrive at an accurate tally for Protestant denominations (20,000?), we still could not blame the whole of that number on Sola Scriptura. Some of these churches share substantial unity in faith, even if they are juridically independent (perhaps due to geography). And much of the disunity of faith within Protestantism, at least in the developed world, stems from efforts to subordinate the authority of Scripture (e.g., to various sexual perversions). In reality, if every Protestant denomination were serious and consistent in affirming and applying the rule of Sola Scriptura, the spectrum of Protestant belief would be significantly narrower. It bears emphasizing: the only thing for which we can directly blame Sola Scriptura is the extent to which it fails to provide unity in true faith and morals to those who sincerely adhere to it, e.g., “orthodox” Lutherans, Presbyterians, Baptists, Anglicans, Methodists, Pentecostals, Campbellites, etc.​

And if you go to the linked url:

note #8

I took a look at the article you linked. One of the things that I noticed is that it seems as if it was written by, possibly, someone who was writing only as an individual. In other words, it was not the position of a larger group. It especially was not written and officially sanctioned by an organization with the standing of Catholic Answers. In addition, it does not have the NIHIL OBSTAT and IMPRIMATUR of the Church. All this being said, I would suggest that the numbers reported by Catholic Answers, and the numbers I updated to account for the increases between 1999 and 2016 have a greater credibility.

It seems that possibly you should contact Catholic Answers and request that they rewrite that tract “The Great Heresies”. If you can get them to change the numbers I will use the corrected numbers whatever they end up being. Is that reasonable?

God Bless You always, Topper

PS, I love that phrase. “God Bless You always”. It has a Great Ring to it.

 

[Wannano]

Hi La,’

What, that churches appoint themselves elders ? Ignatius certainly admonished churches to do this .Certainly the bishop of Rome did not appoint presbyters/bishops consistently and exclusively for other churches til when, 1000 years later ?But you are brother. I shake my head and say we are all in glass houses, and it is in the eyes of the beholder, let all men be liars (imperfect) only God is true (and perfect) ,and when you point a finger, three point back at you (I am plum run out of …whatever, the word escapes me) .Nevertheless, La,carry on, for certainly there is a time for everything, and I do not mind discussing our errors and shortcomings. They are there .Sin is ugly.May we repent cause for sure wood, hay, and stubble will be burned, away.

Blessings

I want you to know Benhur that I am often encouraged by your contributions. That you have vibrant relationship with Jesus evident.