Protestants: Did Sola Scriptura exist at the time of the Apostles?

[Palladio]

Yes only they had the old testament at that time. And the new covenant. Then came Paul .

God gave us the Bible to teach us, to guide us, to correct us, and to enable us to lead Godly lives. Through the Bible, God reveals Himself and His ways to us. Scripture says:

“All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness; That the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works.” (2 Timothy 3:16-17)

“Thy word is a lamp unto my feet, and a light unto my path.” (Psalm 119:105)

“The law of the LORD is perfect, converting the soul: the testimony of the LORD is sure, making wise the simple. The statutes of the LORD are right, rejoicing the heart: the commandment of the LORD is pure, enlightening the eyes.” (Psalm 19:7-8)

“For the word of God is quick, and powerful, and sharper than any two-edged sword, piercing even to the dividing asunder of soul and spirit, and of the joints and marrow, and is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart.” (Hebrews 4:12)

“Sanctify them through thy truth: thy word is truth.” (John 17:17)

“…receive with meekness the engrafted word, which is able to save your souls.” (James 1:21)

“The entrance of thy words giveth light; it giveth understanding unto the simple.” (Psalm 119:131)

“…If ye continue in my word, then are ye my disciples indeed: And ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free.” (John 8:31-32)

“For whatsoever things were written aforetime were written for our learning, that we through patience and comfort of the scriptures might have hope.” (Romans 15:4)

“Heaven and earth shall pass away, but my words shall not pass away.” (Matthew 24:35)

“The grass withereth, the flower fadeth: but the word of our God shall stand for ever.” (Isaiah 40:8)

“Forever, O LORD, thy word is settled in heaven.” (Psalm 119:89)

For Jesus’ evaluation of the religious traditions of his time, read Mark 7:1-13 and Matthew 15:1-9. Jesus rebuked the scribes and Pharisees because their traditions nullified the Word of God. He used Scripture to measure the validity of their religious traditions. He was distressed because the religious leaders of his time considered their traditions to be equal in authority to Scripture. He rebuked them saying, “This people draweth nigh unto me with their mouth, and honoureth me with their lips; but their heart is far from me. But in vain they do worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men.” (Matthew 15:8-9) In Mark 7:8, Jesus says, “For laying aside the commandment of God, ye hold the traditions of men”. (See Mark 7:6-8.)

The Bible clearly tells us that we are not to add to Scripture or take away from it. We need to stay with what has been written.

Deuteronomy 4:2 says, “Ye shall not add unto the word which I command you, neither shall ye diminish ought from it, that ye may keep the commandments of the LORD your God which I command you.” In other words, adding to Scripture results in disobeying God. If we say that Tradition is equal in authority to Scripture, then we can no longer use Scripture to test Tradition, like Jesus did. Instead, we are allowing Tradition to determine how we interpret Scripture. Either this is “adding to Scripture” or else it is perilously close to it.

Deuteronomy 12:32 says, “What thing soever I command you, observe to do it; thou shalt not add thereto, nor diminish from it.” Proverbs 30:5-6 says, “Every word of God is pure: he is a shield unto them that put their trust in him. Add thou not unto his words, lest he reprove thee, and thou be found a liar.” Revelation 22:18-19 warns that adding to God’s words can cause a person to have their name be removed from the “book of life”.

This is no proof of anything: passages piles upon passages.

How can one deduce anything from these?

Besides, if sola scriptura could work, it would have to work on the Hebrew and Greek texts.

Protestants would never have study Bibles or footnotes either (both of which are meta-Biblical, therefore constituting tradition), if the Bible were open to all.

Translations–especially the King James Bible–also constitute tradition.

Most of all, nobody has bothered to define and use evidence from the reformers to say what they said about sola scriptura, which does not come into existence until the sixteenth century. This is fatal to any argument attempting ‘to prove’ anything of the sort. But it also reminds us that sola scriptura waited upon its birth so long after the Apostles it cannot be true.

 

[Montalban]

This is no proof of anything: passages piles upon passages.

Spam is popular!

 

[Palladio]

Spam is popular!

Yes, it give new life to steamrolling.

Fides et ratio.

God bless.

 

[colliric]

This is no proof of anything: passages piles upon passages.

How can one deduce anything from these?

Besides, if sola scriptura could work, it would have to work on the Hebrew and Greek texts.

Protestants would never have study Bibles or footnotes either (both of which are meta-Biblical, therefore constituting tradition), if the Bible were open to all.

Translations–especially the King James Bible–also constitute tradition.

Most of all, nobody has bothered to define and use evidence from the reformers to say what they said about sola scriptura, which does not come into existence until the sixteenth century. This is fatal to any argument attempting ‘to prove’ anything of the sort. But it also reminds us that sola scriptura waited upon its birth so long after the Apostles it cannot be true.

yep…“word” can mean both Written Word and Spoken Word. Thats where most passages that supposedly support Sola Scripture fall down… They fail to indicate only “written Word of God” but instead really infer “Written AND Spoken word of God”!

 

[Isa_Almisry]

Acts 8:30
Then Philip ran up to the chariot and heard the man reading Isaiah the prophet. “Do you understand what you are reading?” Philip asked.
31
**“How can I,” he said, “unless someone explains it to me?” **So he invited Philip to come up and sit with him.

The Bible doesn’t teach. People teach/learn. Why didn’t Philip say to the Ethiopian “Go away and be guided by the Holy Spirit”? The Ethiopian was obviously eager to learn. Wasn’t that enough for God?

There’s *learning *and there’s right learning.

If Jesus had have wanted us to rely solely on the ‘word’ he’d have dictated to the Apostles and instructed them to write everything down AT THAT TIME.

That’s the problem. The only time Christ writes, it is the sins of those who brought to him the woman caught in adultery.

The Gospels show him preparing the Apostles for their ministry in the Church quite a bit.

 

[Isa_Almisry]

Yes only they had the old testament at that time. And the new covenant. Then came Paul .

God gave us the Bible to teach us, to guide us, to correct us, and to enable us to lead Godly lives. Through the Bible, God reveals Himself and His ways to us. Scripture says:

“All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness; That the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works.” (2 Timothy 3:16-17)

“Thy word is a lamp unto my feet, and a light unto my path.” (Psalm 119:105)

“The law of the LORD is perfect, converting the soul: the testimony of the LORD is sure, making wise the simple. The statutes of the LORD are right, rejoicing the heart: the commandment of the LORD is pure, enlightening the eyes.” (Psalm 19:7-8)

“For the word of God is quick, and powerful, and sharper than any two-edged sword, piercing even to the dividing asunder of soul and spirit, and of the joints and marrow, and is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart.” (Hebrews 4:12)

“Sanctify them through thy truth: thy word is truth.” (John 17:17)

“…receive with meekness the engrafted word, which is able to save your souls.” (James 1:21)

“The entrance of thy words giveth light; it giveth understanding unto the simple.” (Psalm 119:131)

“…If ye continue in my word, then are ye my disciples indeed: And ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free.” (John 8:31-32)

“For whatsoever things were written aforetime were written for our learning, that we through patience and comfort of the scriptures might have hope.” (Romans 15:4)

“Heaven and earth shall pass away, but my words shall not pass away.” (Matthew 24:35)

“The grass withereth, the flower fadeth: but the word of our God shall stand for ever.” (Isaiah 40:8)

“Forever, O LORD, thy word is settled in heaven.” (Psalm 119:89)

For Jesus’ evaluation of the religious traditions of his time, read Mark 7:1-13 and Matthew 15:1-9. Jesus rebuked the scribes and Pharisees because their traditions nullified the Word of God. He used Scripture to measure the validity of their religious traditions. He was distressed because the religious leaders of his time considered their traditions to be equal in authority to Scripture. He rebuked them saying, “This people draweth nigh unto me with their mouth, and honoureth me with their lips; but their heart is far from me. But in vain they do worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men.” (Matthew 15:8-9) In Mark 7:8, Jesus says, “For laying aside the commandment of God, ye hold the traditions of men”. (See Mark 7:6-8.)

The Bible clearly tells us that we are not to add to Scripture or take away from it. We need to stay with what has been written.

Deuteronomy 4:2 says, “Ye shall not add unto the word which I command you, neither shall ye diminish ought from it, that ye may keep the commandments of the LORD your God which I command you.” In other words, adding to Scripture results in disobeying God. If we say that Tradition is equal in authority to Scripture, then we can no longer use Scripture to test Tradition, like Jesus did. Instead, we are allowing Tradition to determine how we interpret Scripture. Either this is “adding to Scripture” or else it is perilously close to it.

Deuteronomy 12:32 says, “What thing soever I command you, observe to do it; thou shalt not add thereto, nor diminish from it.” Proverbs 30:5-6 says, “Every word of God is pure: he is a shield unto them that put their trust in him. Add thou not unto his words, lest he reprove thee, and thou be found a liar.” Revelation 22:18-19 warns that adding to God’s words can cause a person to have their name be removed from the “book of life”.

So then brethren, stand fast and hold to the traditions which you were taught by us, whether by word of mouth or our epsitle. II Thessalonians 3:14.

 

[Montalban]

That’s the problem. The only time Christ writes, it is the sins of those who brought to him the woman caught in adultery.

The Gospels show him preparing the Apostles for their ministry in the Church quite a bit.

Exactly! If the “Gospel” was important - only in written form, it’d have been set down as revealed, as Moslems claim for their Koran.

 

[Nella]

Did Sola Scriptura exist at the time of the Apostles, and if not why should we accept it today?

Convince me Sola Scriptura existed in the early Church and I will become a Protestant. That is the challenge…

Did the Roman church exist at the time of the Apostles?? I’ll even give you the answer. No…

 

[Montalban]

Did the Roman church exist at the time of the Apostles?? I’ll even give you the answer. No…

They would answer that their church *did *exist then

Certainly we Orthodox date our church to Pentecost.

Heard of Apostolic Succession? I’ll give you the answer. No…

 

[St_Violet]

Did the Roman church exist at the time of the Apostles?? I’ll even give you the answer. No…

.Peter and Paul were trying to centralize the Catholic Church in Rome, why? because Rome was the center of the Empire of that Time

“Matthew also issued among the Hebrews a written Gospel in their own language, while Peter and Paul were evangelizing in Rome and laying the foundation of the Church” (Against Heresies, 3, 1:1 [A.D. 180]). -Irenaeus

 

[Fisher]

Matthew 4:1-11. Three times Jesus was tempted by the Devil and each time Jesus replied exactly the same three dangerous words that defeated the Devil: “IT IS WRITTEN” Read it for yourself! If any one could have used oral tradition, it was Jesus, yet he chose the only safe and sure way to defeat Satan: Scripture.

Jesus expected the scriptures to be understood by the average man, even his enemies:

“What is written in the Law? How does it read to you?” (Luke 10:26)
Jesus said to them, "Is this not the reason you are mistaken, that you do not understand the Scriptures or the power of God? (Mark 12:24)
But Jesus answered and said to them, "You are mistaken, not understanding the Scriptures nor the power of God. (Matthew 22:29)
“The Son of Man is to go, just as it is written of Him” There were any oral traditions as to who the messiah was. All were wrong! Some thought he was merely a king, some merely a prophet, some merely a priest! (Matthew 26:24)
"What then is this that is written: ‘The stone which the builders rejected, This became the chief corner stone’? (Luke 20:17)
"You search the Scriptures because you think that in them you have eternal life; it is these that testify about Me (John 5:39)
“How then will the Scriptures be fulfilled, which say that it must happen this way?” (Matthew 26:54)

The example of the apostles using Sola Scriptura:
Even though the apostles were inspired with genuine oral revelation, they always directed people to the scriptures for the final determination of truth. Oral tradition is worthless without the witness of scripture!

And according to Paul’s custom, he went to them, and for three Sabbaths reasoned with them from the Scriptures (Acts 17:2)
Now these were more noble-minded than those in Thessalonica, for they received the word with great eagerness, examining the Scriptures daily to see whether these things were so. Therefore many of them believed, along with a number of prominent Greek women and men. (Acts 17:11-12)
“Apollos powerfully refuted the Jews in public, demonstrating by the Scriptures that Jesus was the Christ.” (Acts 18:28)

Scriptures were read in the churches every Lord’s Day:

Until I come, give attention to the public reading of Scripture, to exhortation and teaching. (1 Timothy 4:13)

Never did Jesus refer to oral tradition to prove or defend truth.

Never does Jesus refer to oral traditions in a positive way.
Every time he defends truth he refers to the scriptures.
The only times Jesus referred to Oral traditions, was condemning them: ‘But in vain do they worship Me, Teaching as doctrines the precepts of men.’ “Neglecting the commandment of God, you hold to the tradition of men.” He was also saying to them, "You are experts at setting aside the commandment of God in order to keep your tradition. “For Moses said, ‘Honor your father and your mother’; and, ‘He who speaks evil of father or mother, is to be put to death’; but you say, ‘If a man says to his father or his mother, whatever I have that would help you is Corban (that is to say, given to God),’ you no longer permit him to do anything for his father or his mother; thus invalidating the word of God by your tradition which you have handed down; and you do many things such as that.” (Mark 7:7-13)

 

[Nella]

They would answer that their church *did *exist then

Certainly we Orthodox date our church to Pentecost.

Heard of Apostolic Succession? I’ll give you the answer. No…

thanks for your answer except that it is wrong. Apostolic succession exists in the Anglican church as well and has been proven.

 

[St_Violet]

thanks for your answer except that it is wrong. Apostolic succession exists in the Anglican church as well and has been proven.

can you please enlighten us?

 

[Isa_Almisry]

Matthew 4:1-11. Three times Jesus was tempted by the Devil and each time Jesus replied exactly the same three dangerous words that defeated the Devil: “IT IS WRITTEN” Read it for yourself! If any one could have used oral tradition, it was Jesus, yet he chose the only safe and sure way to defeat Satan: Scripture.

Then why did He say this kind does not go out except by prayer and fasting? Matthew 17:21.

What Scripture told Him to get baptized in the first place? To go into the desert? To fast?

Jesus expected the scriptures to be understood by the average man, even his enemies:

The problem is that a lot of the sermon of the mount He says “you have hear it said” when refering to a scripture, and then makes a statement on his own authoity “But I tell you…” so He taught not like the scribes (sola scriptura) but like one with authority." Matthew 8:29. Note v. 24-28 “my SAYINGS.”

Yes, a lot of these debates took place in reading Scripture in the synagogue.

Only problem, what scripture mandates the synagogue? The OT only speaks of the temple, not the synagogue service that He did attend. Luke 4:16-27 (note: v.16 …according to His custom. In v. 23 He quotes a proverb not in Scripture). And in the great commission He tells to teach the nations to observe all things He had taught them, none of which were at the time scripture but Tradition.

The example of the apostles using Sola Scriptura:
Even though the apostles were inspired with genuine oral revelation, they always directed people to the scriptures for the final determination of truth. Oral tradition is worthless without the witness of scripture!

The Church instituted the office of deacon without any reference to scripture. Acts 6:1-6, I Timothy 3:8-13. And the holding of things in common Acts 4:32-7 had no scriptural basis. Nor did the sending of the Apostles to chrismate/confirm the Samaritans Acts 8:14-7, have any mandate from scripture. The beginning of the Gentile Church in Acts 10 has no witness of scripture, except that they were contradicted it (eg. v. 28) (also the praying in the nineth hour, what OT scripture mandated that? And the apostles met and celebated the eucharist on sunday, without any mandate from scripture Acts 20:7.

Scriptures were read in the churches every Lord’s Day:

Until I come, give attention to the public reading of Scripture, to exhortation and teaching. (1 Timothy 4:13)

II Theassalonians 2:15 "stand fast and hold the traditions which you were taught, wheterh by word of mouth or our epists.

Never did Jesus refer to oral tradition to prove or defend truth.

Never does Jesus refer to oral traditions in a positive way.
Every time he defends truth he refers to the scriptures.
The only times Jesus referred to Oral traditions, was condemning them: )

As we seen above He went to synagogue, fasted and baptized and was baptized, none of which had a reference to scripture, but were traditions.

 

[Montalban]

thanks for your answer except that it is wrong. Apostolic succession exists in the Anglican church as well and has been proven.

That deosn’t deny Apostolic Succession then, so you’re in fact wrong!

All it means is that the Anglican church continues to recognise what most Protestants reject - which also further evidences the massive divisions *within *Protestantism

 

[Montalban]

can you please enlighten us?

Nella had said…

Nella:

Did the Roman church exist at the time of the Apostles?? I’ll even give you the answer. No…

I pointed out that there’s Apostloic Succession.

Nella seems to think that because the Anglicans believe in this AS WELL it means it doesn’t exist!

 

[SFLCatholic]

“For our Gospel did not come to you in word alone” 1 Thes 1:5

Sounds like St Paul didn’t believe in Sola Scriptura either

 

[Gabriel_of_12]

Nella had said…

I pointed out that there’s Apostloic Succession.

Nella seems to think that because the Anglicans believe in this AS WELL it means it doesn’t exist!

Montalban, interesting thread, Nella took me for a spin, I think she needs to give us her Anglican Apostolic succession lesson.To disprove a 2000 year recorded succession from the Apostles to our Pope today, Nella has my attention, Nella stands to prove Anglican succession, The Holy Apostolic Catholic Church has already spoken in history, check your local secular books in any library, besides the Jewish religon recognizes the Catholic Church as the one true church from Jesus Christ. Check your library.

awaiting to be enlightened.

waiting to be enlightened.

 

[Montalban]

“For our Gospel did not come to you in word alone” 1 Thes 1:5

Sounds like St Paul didn’t believe in Sola Scriptura either

The fact he wrote to them to maintain the faith he’d already taught them (by spoken word) means that he too didn’t believe in it.

Can you imagine the Apostles preaching by sola scriptura? Then enter a new city carrying placards with the faith written down. Silently, they raise these placards and ‘preach’ by getting people to read the message boards.

People might ask them questions. They write the answers down and hold the boards up for all to read.

One Protestant on another thread tried to convince himself that they did also preach by word of mouth which totally negates the “SOLA” in sola scriptura (meaning “ONLY”)

 

[ChadS]

Acts 17:10-12 And the brethren immediately sent away Paul and Silas by night unto Berea: who coming thither went into the synagogue of the Jews. These were more noble than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness of mind, and searched the Scriptures daily, whether those things were so. Therefore many of them believed; also of honorable women which were Greeks, and of men, not a few.

No “scriptura” yet??? What was the Bereans reading? The daily Berean Bugle? We are clearly shown here that they were searching the “SCRIPTURES” so yes there was indeed “scriptura”.

As for whether sola scriptura existed at the time of the apostles or not? For the Bereans it existed. Note that they did not consult priest, or tradition to see if what the apostle Paul was teaching was true, they searched the Scriptures daily to see if what he said was true.

Also note how the apostle Paul commends the Bereans for consulting the Scriptures. He didn’t condemn them, and say how they should have trusted him, and the traditions. So if sola scriptura wasn’t condemned by the apostle Paul, why is it condemned by the Catholic church?

In the name of Jesus,

Ken

This passage in no way supports the false teaching of Sola Scriptura. If you would read a few verses before the ones you cite you’d see that Paul reasoned with the Thessalonicans concerning Jesus Christ from the Scriptures. He sat with them for three days in the Synagogue and showed and explained to them how Christ had to suffer and rose from the dead (Acts 17: 1-4).

How did the Thessalonicans treat Paul? Some of them joined him but many of them remained unpersuaded and formed a mob and attacked him.

Actually the portion of Scripture you cited supports Catholic beliefs concerning Scripture. At that time the scriptures available to them was what we know as the Old Testament. Paul used what he knew about Jesus, his life and teachings (things not literally recorded in the OT) and persuaded the Bereans. So they used the oral teachings of the Christians and their interpretations of the OT to come and believe Jesus as Lord and Savior.

On the other hand the Thessalonicans stuck with their OT and old covenant interpretations and refused to believe in Jesus. If any group should be held up as an exemplar of Sola Scriptura it should be the Thessalonicans since they refused to follow the oral teachings of the Apostles and Paul and formed a mob to go after them. They only looked for their answers in Scripture and didn’t apply what Paul told them.

The Bereans are Catholic despite the claims of Protestants.

ChadS