Protestant Christians: Any problem with sola scriptura?

[PJM]

The problem is that there is no authority that can speak for ELCA and LCMS. They are moving farther apart. No “healing” is possible. Furthermore, no authority can speak for ELCA over time. It doesn’t have a permanent shape. It takes doctrinal and moral positions that, a few decades ago, it would have repudiated. Thus, an agreement made by RCC or LCMS, with the ELCA of 2016 wouldn’t be in effect in 2024, because ELCA would have shifted. The only way ELCA might, possibly, come to agreement, would be with other mainline denominations, because they are all more or less shifting in the same direction, following the secular culture.

In other words, the liberal Lutherans, might, possibly, bind with liberal Presbyterians, with TEC, and so on. But they might not all want to shift at the same pace as the UCC for instance. It’s not so much that they are “altering their doctrines” as they are all moving away from any fixed doctrine. The Coucil of the Protestant Left might come to an internal agreement, but would be totally incompatible with the RCC and EO. In fact, the internal agreement, or “healing” would need to be revised every few years. Or months.

The Protestant Right shows much more promise of compatibility with the RCC, but little chance of coming together themselves. They are committed to fixed doctrines, but different ones. I doubt they could agree who should be invited to a Council of the Protestant Right. Some groups would be labelled as doctrinally controversial, bordering on cults. Other groups would be accused of being compromised, a slip-slidin’ on social issues - have your heard the term “Evanjellycal”? They would never agree on the guest list. (But with God, and GKC, and JonNC, it is not impossible), so I may be wrong.

As much as I deeply admire those individuals who stand with us on prolife, marriage, and religious liberty, I also know similar denominations that once stood firm on those issues now stand on the other side of the street, protecting the “clinic”.

Another good and informed post. THANKS

God Bless,

PJM

 

[PJM]

From the Catholic Answers Tract, which is I am sure extremely well researched and fair:
**
"The Great Heresies**

Protestantism (16th Century)
**
Protestant groups display a wide variety of different doctrines. However, virtually all claim to believe in the teachings of sola scriptura (“by Scripture alone”—the idea that we must use only the Bible when forming our theology) and sola fide (“by faith alone”— the idea that we are justified by faith only). **
**
The great diversity of Protestant doctrines stems from the doctrine of private judgment, **which denies the infallible authority of the Church and claims that each individual is to interpret Scripture for himself. This idea is rejected in 2 Peter 1:20, where we are told the first rule of Bible interpretation: “First of all you must understand this, that no prophecy of Scripture is a matter of one’s own interpretation.” A significant feature of this heresy is the attempt to pit the Church “against” the Bible, denying that the magisterium has any infallible authority to teach and interpret Scripture.

The doctrine of private judgment has resulted in an enormous number of different denominations. According to The Christian Sourcebook, there are approximately 20-30,000 denominations, with 270 new ones being formed each year. Virtually all of these are Protestant".

Topper: According to my math, 270 denominations per year is roughly 5.19 per week. I said 5 per week so I actually understated the Official Catholic Answers figure. From now on I will use the higher figure.

Nicely done Topper

Thanks,

I’ve just been saying “Thousands” in recent years.

God Bless youm
PJM

 

[Lenten_ashes]

We know it’s in the thousands just by simple observation. No need to name all of them like some people ask us to do.

I’ve heard that there was almost 80 at the end of Luther’s life and from what I understand he was not happy about it.

 

[JonNC]

We know it’s in the thousands just by simple observation. No need to name all of them like some people ask us to do.

I’ve heard that there was almost 80 at the end of Luther’s life and from what I understand he was not happy about it.

If they are there, they can be named.

Jon

 

[benhur]

The biggest problem I see with it is the misinterpretation, misapplication, and occasional misrepresentation of it, not to mention what Catholics say about it

Hi Jon,
took the words right out of my mouth, you know , the supposed moving target complaint also as to just what SS is.

Blessings

 

[JonNC]

ILC - Catholic dialogue

[ILC Catholic dialogue](ILC Catholic dialogue)

 

[alwayswill]

GREAT post! THANKS,

The PROBLEM with S S is that its advocates DON"T!

They only believe what they choose to accept {without altering their comfort levels I assume?}, or what they are able to personally translate in a manner acceptable to their own comfort zones.

Mt 16:15-19
John 17: 17–20
John 6:47-57
John 20:1-23
Mt 28:19-20

Is a short list of evidence of this.

God Bless you; and WELCOME HOME!

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.

 

[benhur]

Because sinners misunderstanding the Word of God does NOT diminish the authority of the Word of God.

Hi aw,

Agree. As it was in the beginning, when God first spoke in the garden, and shortly thereafter we had the biggest division ever. God did not change His methodology and continued to speak .

Blessings

 

[JonNC]

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.

You are correct. SS is in fact a practice of the Church, to hold doctrine accountable to the norm of scripture. Properly understood, laity do not use SS.

Jon

 

[Topper17]

Hi Lent,

Thanks for your response.

Thanks, Topper.

Complete agreement.

This is something that would be monumental and I think many of us would like to see happen.

But probably less than 1% chance of occurring, though It would take a lot of humility and patience on behalf of a lot of different people.

The barriers to such a Council are HUGE. We have to remember that Sola Scriptura, which of course leads to Interpretation by either ME or by MY ecclesiastical community, meaning the community of MY choice, is a EXTREMELY seductive thing. Many of these various communions have been calling the doctrinal (and now moral) shots for centuries. Given man’s Fallen Nature, giving that up would be an act of humility that is almost beyond comprehension.

Key point right there.

Each particular denomination needs to first come to agreements from within it before they start communicating with anybody else.

And I do think we have a decent shot at reuniting with the eastern churches.

I think that that would also be a huge barrier also. Let’s look at the Lutheran communities. The Confessional Lutherans are not in communion with the LWF and in fact, in this country, the WELS are not even in communion with theLCMS even though they are both Confessional.

Can you imagine the ELCA and the American Confessional Lutheran communities getting together and deciding on the adoption of the Formula of Concord? What about female ordination, abortion, or same sex marriage? On the other hand, as I said before, with the Holy Sprit, ALL THINGS are possible, which gives me tremendous hope. However, it seems it would be helpful IF we act like we actually CARE about Unity, meaning that the ELCA and the American Confessional Lutherans should at least consider an American Lutheran Council. In such a council, they would, with tremendous faith in the Holy Spirit, agree that the Spirit would lead them to reach the ‘correct’ consensus.

Maybe the place to start would be WELS/LCMS. I don’t know anywhere near as much about these differences as do the Confessional Lutherans here, but it seems to me that THIS particular reunification is doable. Could some of the Lutherans here chime in?

What do you think Lent?

God Bless You, Topper

 

[Lenten_ashes]

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.

From the New Advent link you posted:

---

and asserts the right of private interpretation of the same***

Nobody disputes the power of the Word of God, even with a faulty interpretation of it

Those who object to this are objecting because all these different interpretations seem to imply that doctrine does not matter. And neither does unity, both seem to contradict the same scripture you are appealing to. Furthermore, there is nothing in the bible instructing us to rely solely upon the bible.

 

[alwayswill]

From the New Advent link you posted:

---

and asserts the right of private interpretation of the same***

Nobody disputes the power of the Word of God, even with a faulty interpretation of it

Those who object to this are objecting because all these different interpretations seem to imply that doctrine does not matter. And neither does unity, both seem to contradict the same scripture you are appealing to. Furthermore, there is nothing in the bible instructing us to rely solely upon the bible.

Consider the Ten Commandants an example;
Inerrant, infallible , authored by God,
Carries the same authority as God speaking from His throne. (do you agree?)

Consider the commandment “Thou shall not kill”
One group interprets that to mean all killing: another group interprets it to mean murder; some may say it applies to hating in your heart: or calling someone a fool: some interpret to include the death penalty; others say it does not include “just wars”

Do the disagreements in interpretations diminish the authority of the Ten Commandments?
IOW: do the Ten Commandants carry the same authority as God speaking from His throne regardless of differing interpretations?

 

[alwayswill]

From the New Advent link you posted:

---

and asserts the right of private interpretation of the same***

Nobody disputes the power of the Word of God, even with a faulty interpretation of it

Those who object to this are objecting because all these different interpretations seem to imply that doctrine does not matter. And neither does unity, both seem to contradict the same scripture you are appealing to. Furthermore, there is nothing in the bible instructing us to rely solely upon the bible.

When you say “unity”: do you mean unity in teaching (non- contradicting doctrines) or to you mean unity in beliefs (every one interprets doctrines the same way)?

When you say “rely solely upon the bible” do you mean for what is required or that no other authority can be used?

 

[Topper17]

Hi Comm,

Thanks for your response.

I wish I had seen it before I wrote my last post because you were going the exact same place I was.

The problem is that there is no authority that can speak for ELCA and LCMS. They are moving farther apart. No “healing” is possible. Furthermore, no authority can speak for ELCA over time. It doesn’t have a permanent shape. It takes doctrinal and moral positions that, a few decades ago, it would have repudiated. Thus, an agreement made by RCC or LCMS, with the ELCA of 2016 wouldn’t be in effect in 2024, because ELCA would have shifted. The only way ELCA might, possibly, come to agreement, would be with other mainline denominations, because they are all more or less shifting in the same direction, following the secular culture.

I think that’s an excellent point. It goes right to the issue of stability. There are these overarching Lutheran organizations which serve as umbrella organizations for groups of Lutheran ecclesiastical communities. The problem is that membership keeps shifting and the various communities keep morphing and splitting and reuniting in new forms.

As an example, the ILC, which Jon would like to see in a leadership role for a worldwide Ecumenical Council. The ILC was formed in 1993, and is made up primarily of the LCMS in the US. As per your point, what will the ILC look like in 2024 in terms of member communities and number of total members? Who knows?

In other words, the liberal Lutherans, might, possibly, bind with liberal Presbyterians, with TEC, and so on. But they might not all want to shift at the same pace as the UCC for instance. It’s not so much that they are “altering their doctrines” as they are all moving away from any fixed doctrine. The Council of the Protestant Left might come to an internal agreement, but would be totally incompatible with the RCC and EO. In fact, the internal agreement, or “healing” would need to be revised every few years. Or months.

It seems that this is a noticeable trend. Unlike the Confessionals, who admirably hold the line on matters of doctrine and morals, the theological liberals are trending at a much faster pace towards a greatly reduced doctrinal Faith – a watering down of Christianity.

The Protestant Right shows much more promise of compatibility with the RCC, but little chance of coming together themselves. They are committed to fixed doctrines, but different ones. I doubt they could agree who should be invited to a Council of the Protestant Right. Some groups would be labelled as doctrinally controversial, bordering on cults. Other groups would be accused of being compromised, a slip-slidin’ on social issues - have your heard the term “Evanjellycal”? They would never agree on the guest list. (But with God, and GKC, and JonNC, it is not impossible), so I may be wrong.

Agreed. All things are possible with the Holy Spirit, but then the Spirit might be pretty impressed if we all began the process of working towards a Council. In addition to all of the problems with the people attending the Council, there would also be all of those who would flat out refuse to attend.

As much as I deeply admire those individuals who stand with us on prolife, marriage, and religious liberty, I also know similar denominations that once stood firm on those issues now stand on the other side of the street, protecting the “clinic”.

We need more people like them to stand with us on those moral issues.

God Bless You Comm, Topper

 

[Topper17]

Hi Mary,

Well said, and I would love to see us united with the Eastern Churches. Thumbs up back at ya,
and
:tiphat:

Very much agreed. I think that this one is in fact likely. How long it will take is anybody’s guess, but we have far too much in common to remain separated. With the emphasis that the Church puts on ecumenism and healing our divisions, this one can be accomplished.

God Bless You Mary, Topper

 

[Lenten_ashes]

Consider the Ten Commandants an example;
Inerrant, infallible , authored by God,
Carries the same authority as God speaking from His throne. (do you agree?)

Consider the commandment “Thou shall not kill”
One group interprets that to mean all killing: another group interprets it to mean murder; some may say it applies to hating in your heart: or calling someone a fool: some interpret to include the death penalty; others say it does not include “just wars”

Do the disagreements in interpretations diminish the authority of the Ten Commandments?
IOW: do the Ten Commandants carry the same authority as God speaking from His throne regardless of differing interpretations?

In regards to the commandments I actually think those are quite clear and nearly impossible to mangle. In fact I think they are written on our hearts before we become believers.

But what about other things such as the nature, purpose and formula for baptism? The Eucharist…especially the passage about in John 6. Things that are not that clear but could have serious ramifications for those misinterpreting it? If catholics are right about it then not only are you missing out on the source and summit of our faith, but the fate of your soul could be in jeopardy. If we are wrong about this then we are guilty of serious idolatry and our souls may be in jeopardy. That’s why I continually ask this question. …does doctrine matter?

God’s word does not diminish because it is misinterpreted. …but failure to properly interpret it could have eternal consequences .

I’ll address your other post later when I can get to a PC. Cramped phone not working so well lol.

Have a great day in the Lord.

 

[JonNC]

Hi Comm,

Thanks for your response.

I wish I had seen it before I wrote my last post because you were going the exact same place I was.

I think that’s an excellent point. It goes right to the issue of stability. There are these overarching Lutheran organizations which serve as umbrella organizations for groups of Lutheran ecclesiastical communities. The problem is that membership keeps shifting and the various communities keep morphing and splitting and reuniting in new forms.

As an example, the ILC, which Jon would like to see in a leadership role for a worldwide Ecumenical Council. The ILC was formed in 1993, and is made up primarily of the LCMS in the US. As per your point, what will the ILC look like in 2024 in terms of member communities and number of total members? Who knows?

It seems that this is a noticeable trend. Unlike the Confessionals, who admirably hold the line on matters of doctrine and morals, the theological liberals are trending at a much faster pace towards a greatly reduced doctrinal Faith – a watering down of Christianity.

Agreed. All things are possible with the Holy Spirit, but then the Spirit might be pretty impressed if we all began the process of working towards a Council. In addition to all of the problems with the people attending the Council, there would also be all of those who would flat out refuse to attend.

We need more people like them to stand with us on those moral issues.

God Bless You Comm, Topper

I never said I wanted the ILC in leadership of a dialogue.

Jon

 

[commenter]

ILC - Catholic dialogue

[ILC Catholic dialogue](ILC Catholic dialogue)

Thanks for the link. I was unaware of this. A little relevant documentation like this is worth more than dozens of opinion posts.

(My own opinion posts, of course, have special value).

 

[Lenten_ashes]

When you say “unity”: do you mean unity in teaching (non- contradicting doctrines) or to you mean unity in beliefs (every one interprets doctrines the same way)?

When you say “rely solely upon the bible” do you mean for what is required or that no other authority can be used?

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

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 a 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.

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.

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.

So yes, you need doctrinal harmony and overall harmony as a unit.

And in regards to “bible alone” faith, Catholics are always hearing that their beliefs about Mary or Purgatory or whatever, is not spelled out for them in the bible, therefore, they aren’t true. But no where in the bible does it say that all Christian truths are found only in the bible. This is a mindset, a assumption. I understand why they do it, but the bible has not instructed them to do it. The bible also points them to a visible and authoritative the church, if they care enough to look.

 

[Peter_J]

Thanks for the link. I was unaware of this. A little relevant documentation like this is worth more than dozens of opinion posts.

Careful there, people will start to think you like the official dialogues or something.