Protestant Christians: Any problem with sola scriptura?

[guanophore]

This is such a great post.

Were they Lutherans? I know you know that there are differing usages, understandings.

No. The Church that sponsored me was Methodist, but the Seminary has Anabaptist roots and was formed by Brethren.

The current president in that video used to be one of my professors.

 

[alwayswill]

It seems that I have been corrected (multiple times) for stating the the Bible is infallible (incapable of error).

can you clarify:
Is it the Catholic view that there is no such thing as an infallible document, statement, or written declaration?

Yes, as far as I know.

Btw, the Bible is much more than “error free” material. It is the divine Revelation of God written down. Thanks be to God.

I’ll be following this thread
forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?p=13742051#post13742051
where multiple Catholics are saying the 1st and 2nd Peter are infallible writtings.

I’m hoping to see consistent responses from Catholics to anyone (Catholic or not) who makes the claim that Scriptures are infallible.

 

[guanophore]

I’ll be following this thread
forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?p=13742051#post13742051
where multiple Catholics are saying the 1st and 2nd Peter are infallible writtings.

I’m hoping to see consistent responses from Catholics to anyone (Catholic or not) who makes the claim that Scriptures are infallible.

Not all Catholics are as well educated as they might be.

The act of writing scripture is an infallible act. The primary author, the Holy Spirit is an infallible teacher.

 

[Michael68]

i b​

I’ll be following this thread
forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?p=13742051#post13742051
where multiple Catholics are saying the 1st and 2nd Peter are infallible writtings.

I’m hoping to see consistent responses from Catholics to anyone (Catholic or not) who makes the claim that Scriptures are infallible.

I believe the interpretation can be fallible

 

[alwayswill]

i b​

I believe the interpretation can be fallible

of course interpretations can be fallible;
And that includes interpretations of Catholic teachings; correct?

I’m hoping you (or other Catholics) can reply to the question I posed to you in post # 608.
Thanks

 

[guanophore]

i b​

I believe the interpretation can be fallible

Indeed yes - interpretation is an action of persons that involves perception and decision making.

And there are many examples in the NT of infallible interpretations.

 

[commenter]

I’ll be following this thread
forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?p=13742051#post13742051
where multiple Catholics are saying the 1st and 2nd Peter are infallible writtings.

I’m hoping to see consistent responses from Catholics to anyone (Catholic or not) who makes the claim that Scriptures are infallible.

Considering there are different meanings of “infallible”, I don’t know if you will find consistent responses to your questions.

It might help to point out Scriptural infallibility and inspiration in context.

1. Someone in the Bible is perhaps inspired to give a sermon, or do some action.
2. Another person may have been inspired to record it in a writing
3. Writing that was later edited; presumably guided by the Spirit.
4. And later still, identified as scripture by the Magisterium under the Spirit’s guidance
5. The meaning of that passage is prayerfully pondered by theologians, some of whom are under guidance of the Magisterium
6. Doctrine is formulated, influenced by the Spirit, based partly on that passage
7. Individuals today read that passage, or read that doctrine in the CCC. They respond to their understanding of that reading in their life, but seeking the Spirit’s guidance in prayer.

In your posts, you seem to be focusing heavily on step 2, and asking if that step is infallible or not, if it existed in and of itself (which it doesn’t).

 

[Gabriel_of_12]

alwayswill;13741134]The correct translation of 1 Timothy 3:15
is that the the pillar and foundation of the truth.
meaning it the the church itself is not “the truth” but the church is to support “the truth”

The correct translation is “Bulwark”. The Church is the Bulwark and foundation of Truth, not Sola Scriptura.

Meaning; The Church is the possessor and protector of All TRUTH revealed. Sola Scriptura can never be the bulwark of all Truth. Scripture (not Sola Scriptura) only reveals what is written. ALL TRUTH is Jesus personified who never writes and not all is written what Jesus revealed to His apostles. Jesus = All Truth is Living resurrected in True substantial presence.

The Church; who Jesus revealed to Saul of Tarsus, is the body of Christ. Saul/Paul from his divine revelation; reveals that the body of Christ is the Church personified through his Epistles.

So much so, that Paul records in 1Corinthians 10:16 The cup of blessing that we bless, is it not a participation in the blood of Christ? The bread that we break, is it not a participation in the body of Christ? and Paul continues in 1Corinthians 11;26
For as often as you eat this bread and drink the cup, you proclaim the death of the Lord until he comes.
27
Therefore whoever eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord unworthily will have to answer for the body and blood of the Lord.*
28
A person should examine himself,* and so eat the bread and drink the cup.
29
For anyone who eats and drinks without discerning the body, eats and drinks judgment* on himself.

If Jesus is the head (Truth) and the Church is His Body, the bulwark of Truth.
Does it not stand to reason, as St. Paul and Jesus teach? To eat and drink the body and blood of Jesus in order to be His TRUE body, The Bulwark and foundation of Truth in His Church?

We Catholic’s have never ceased to be the body of Christ according to Sacred Scripture and Sacred Tradition since Pentecost.

Jesus Christ and the Word of God are THE truth…
The church (ekklesia / all believers) are to uphold THE truth (Jesus Christ and the Word of God)

As I am part of the ekklesia: I am to uphold Jesus Christ and the Word of God; THE Truth

Catholics are not ones that only “uphold the TRUTH”. Catholics are the house hold of God the Church of the Living God (in every age), Who are the Bulwark and foundation of Truth. Truth Possesses those who are the bulwark of TRUTH, personified in TRUE presence, with Him, In Him and Through Him, are words professed each Sunday in our Liturgical Catholic Mass.

My main point to all of this, is not to debate you or argue Linguistically about words on a page. My point is to reveal a problem with Sola Scriptura by itself, that does not possess the Bulwark and foundation of TRUTH, when scripture reveals that it is the Church who is the Bulwark and foundation of TRUTH, When ALL Truth is personified in Jesus Christ presence.

Peace be with you

 

[JustaServant]

Hi guano,

I always find it interesting when people are advised to stay on topic. Sometimes, it seems perfectly acceptable to wander all over the place, and at other times, even an extremely closely connected topic seem to be off limits.

This particular thread is about “problems with Sola Scriptura”, and in fact, one of the biggest problems with Sola Scriptura, is that, ultimately, it leads to some form of Private Interpretation. In order to correctly understand the problems associated with these two extremely closely related issues, understanding their origin is crucial.

The problem Topper is whatever the topic is, you bring it back to Luther and Lutherans. And no amount of re-direction from fellow Catholics seem to have any effect.
I realize you are new to apologetics. Take it from me and other converts and reverts here, you are damaging your credibility with this obsession you have with Luther.
You can take the advice, or learn the hard way. Your choice.

 

[commenter]

The problem Topper is whatever the topic is, you bring it back to Luther and Lutherans. And no amount of re-direction from fellow Catholics seem to have any effect.
I realize you are new to apologetics. Take it from me and other converts and reverts here, you are damaging your credibility with this obsession you have with Luther.
You can take the advice, or learn the hard way. Your choice.

This post is true.
I’m not just a “fellow Catholic”, I am a Catholic active in my diocese for causes that are labelled “conservative”, and have been criticized by liberal pastors and extended family members for what they call rigidity (“doesn’t the Bible preach tolerance, not dogma”?), and often disagree with all liberals and Protestants who fail to understand the importance of the Magisterium, that for 500 years private interpretation has always, always led to spiritual pride, and resistance to conversion, among both Catholics and Protestants.

OK. So I have lots of empathy for his POV. Now, go back and read the post I quoted above. Lutherans and SS supporters, are far more influenced by the current secular and religious culture, and the Holy Spirit, than by Luther, and other people who lived in his century. But they still have emotional loyalty to Luther. When Topper criticizes Luther, that makes them a little more resistant to the Magisterium that they see associated with Catholics like Topper and me.

In fairness to Topper, he does thorough research, he obviously cares for the Truth and his fellow posters. I would rather have a few more Toppers, basically solid but badly in need of redirection, when I am surrounded by clueless Catholics unaware of the war going on for our minds and souls.

 

[guanophore]

This post is true.

When I read Topper’s post I could see the inevitable result of another anti-Luther rant.

Protestants who fail to understand the importance of the Magisterium, that for 500 years private interpretation has always, always led to spiritual pride, and resistance to conversion, among both Catholics and Protestants.

I agree, and I also agree that private interpretation is a destructive and dangerous close
corollary to SS that has rended Christendom, and continues to do so.

In fairness to Topper, he does thorough research, he obviously cares for the Truth and his fellow posters. I would rather have a few more Toppers, basically solid but badly in need of redirection, when I am surrounded by clueless Catholics unaware of the war going on for our minds and souls.

As I would also myself.

But one hammer in the toolbox is not always suitable for every task, and there may be other avenues to reach the goal in addition to dragging out the errors of Luther.

 

[JustaServant]

This post is true.
I’m not just a “fellow Catholic”, I am a Catholic active in my diocese for causes that are labelled “conservative”, and have been criticized by liberal pastors and extended family members for what they call rigidity (“doesn’t the Bible preach tolerance, not dogma”?), and often disagree with all liberals and Protestants who fail to understand the importance of the Magisterium, that for 500 years private interpretation has always, always led to spiritual pride, and resistance to conversion, among both Catholics and Protestants.

OK. So I have lots of empathy for his POV. Now, go back and read the post I quoted above. Lutherans and SS supporters, are far more influenced by the current secular and religious culture, and the Holy Spirit, than by Luther, and other people who lived in his century. But they still have emotional loyalty to Luther. When Topper criticizes Luther, that makes them a little more resistant to the Magisterium that they see associated with Catholics like Topper and me.

In fairness to Topper, he does thorough research, he obviously cares for the Truth and his fellow posters. I would rather have a few more Toppers, basically solid but badly in need of redirection, when I am surrounded by clueless Catholics unaware of the war going on for our minds and souls.

When I was a Baptist I never even heard the words “Sola Scriptura”. It was a reliance on the Bible as the final authority, but no reference to Luther (whom they regarded as never taking his other foot out of the Catholic Church).

 

[Son_of_Niall]

In fairness to Topper, he does thorough research, he obviously cares for the Truth and his fellow posters. I would rather have a few more Toppers, basically solid but badly in need of redirection, when I am surrounded by clueless Catholics unaware of the war going on for our minds and souls.

It was just couple weeks ago he raised a ruckus on this forum by bringing in an outsider who directly attacked CA management and moderators on his ‘blog’ and FB page. He destroyed any credibility in my eyes after that.

 

[Michael68]

Sola Scriptura, even though professed, does not exist. Magic does not exist yet pagans profess it

 

[Son_of_Niall]

Sola Scriptura, even though professed, does not exist. Magic does not exist yet pagans profess it

That’s illogical.
SS is a philosophy. A philosophy is a teaching that is put into practice. You can argue it’s a broken teaching, or inconsistent. I have no clue why you insist on whether it ‘exists’ or not. It obviously does.

 

[guanophore]

Sola Scriptura, even though professed, does not exist. Magic does not exist yet pagans profess it

As do practitioners of Magic, there are people who have a concept of what they are doing, and they do it with great commitment. Those who espouse this doctrine/practice engage in it with all sincerity. The fact that we believe it is not possible does not prevent them from professing and practicing it.

I think taking the position that it does not exist is a conversation stopper. Clearly it exist in the minds and hearts of those who practice it.

Catholics believe that authority must be exercised by persons. The exercise of it requires a will, an intellect, and the capacity to be responsible for one’s decisions. Scripture, not being a person, has none of these qualities. So while scripture can be authoritative, it is really the person who is practicing SS who becomes the authority.

 

[JustaServant]

Sola Scriptura, even though professed, does not exist. Magic does not exist yet pagans profess it

SS is a theory. A belief in a theory is a belief. It’s 'existence is immaterial. It’s existential.

 

[PJM]

The correct translation is “Bulwark”. The Church is the Bulwark and foundation of Truth, not Sola Scriptura.

Meaning; The Church is the possessor and protector of All TRUTH revealed. Sola Scriptura can never be the bulwark of all Truth. Scripture (not Sola Scriptura) only reveals what is written. ALL TRUTH is Jesus personified who never writes and not all is written what Jesus revealed to His apostles. Jesus = All Truth is Living resurrected in True substantial presence.

The Church; who Jesus revealed to Saul of Tarsus, is the body of Christ. Saul/Paul from his divine revelation; reveals that the body of Christ is the Church personified through his Epistles.

So much so, that Paul records in 1Corinthians 10:16 The cup of blessing that we bless, is it not a participation in the blood of Christ? The bread that we break, is it not a participation in the body of Christ? and Paul continues in 1Corinthians 11;26
For as often as you eat this bread and drink the cup, you proclaim the death of the Lord until he comes.
27
Therefore whoever eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord unworthily will have to answer for the body and blood of the Lord.*
28
A person should examine himself,* and so eat the bread and drink the cup.
29
For anyone who eats and drinks without discerning the body, eats and drinks judgment* on himself.

If Jesus is the head (Truth) and the Church is His Body, the bulwark of Truth.
Does it not stand to reason, as St. Paul and Jesus teach? To eat and drink the body and blood of Jesus in order to be His TRUE body, The Bulwark and foundation of Truth in His Church?

We Catholic’s have never ceased to be the body of Christ according to Sacred Scripture and Sacred Tradition since Pentecost.

Catholics are not ones that only “uphold the TRUTH”. Catholics are the house hold of God the Church of the Living God (in every age), Who are the Bulwark and foundation of Truth. Truth Possesses those who are the bulwark of TRUTH, personified in TRUE presence, with Him, In Him and Through Him, are words professed each Sunday in our Liturgical Catholic Mass.

My main point to all of this, is not to debate you or argue Linguistically about words on a page. My point is to reveal a problem with Sola Scriptura by itself, that does not possess the Bulwark and foundation of TRUTH, when scripture reveals that it is the Church who is the Bulwark and foundation of TRUTH, When ALL Truth is personified in Jesus Christ presence.

Peace be with you

Thanks,
Well done:

 

[Michael68]

SS is a theory. A belief in a theory is a belief. It’s 'existence is immaterial. It’s existential.

I used the wrong word but you get my point!

 

[PJM]

The problem Topper is whatever the topic is, you bring it back to Luther and Lutherans. And no amount of re-direction from fellow Catholics seem to have any effect.
I realize you are new to apologetics. Take it from me and other converts and reverts here, you are damaging your credibility with this obsession you have with Luther.
You can take the advice, or learn the hard way. Your choice.

Topper, this Prudent advice from a voice of wexperieced-reason. You’d do well to listen to it.

God Bless you,

Patrick