M
mario_p
Guest
Is it Idolitry if someone believes in bible alone as sole authority?? Thanks!
- Status
R
Reuben_J
Guest
I don’t think so but it is certainly insufficient.
B
Brassring
Guest
Even though sola scriptura (Bible alone) is professed as sole authority, it never is in practice. What people mean when they say “Bible alone” is “my interpretation of the Bible Alone”.
It might not be idolatry, but it certainly is pride and that’s morally problematic by itself.
It might not be idolatry, but it certainly is pride and that’s morally problematic by itself.
D
Della
Guest
I agree with the other posters comments. I’d just like to add that for many, it comes pretty close to idolatry because they pick and choose which verses they like to follow instead of taking it as a whole. Many refer to it as if it were the 3rd Person of the Trinity by calling it the Word of God instead of the inspired word of God (something most are unaware they’re doing). Many say, “If it’s not in the Bible I won’t believe it.” Isn’t it God alone we are supposed to be saying that about? Isn’t that equating the Bible with God and even substituting it for him? It can be for some, that’s for sure. I saw people who believed these things when I was involved in the Evangelical side of Christianity. That’s not to say liturgical Christians don’t have their idols–they certainly may, but the Bible isn’t generally one of them. 
B
Brassring
Guest
Protestants put a lot of stock in the idea that the Bible is THE Word of God. I think that’s an incomplete understanding. I think a better description is that the Bible is SOME words FROM God. Jesus is THE Word of God. If you’re reading the Bible looking for anything other than Jesus, you’re reading it wrong.
The mind of God is infinite, and therefore far too vast to be contained in a few pages of text. That concept alone blows sola scriptura out of the water IMHO.
The mind of God is infinite, and therefore far too vast to be contained in a few pages of text. That concept alone blows sola scriptura out of the water IMHO.
R
rcwitness
Guest
We should try to be fair to anyone who places a holy respect for the Scriptures. There are degrees of how Christian benefit or cause harm by professing a Bible Alone doctrine.
Some might claim that doctrine must be explicitly derived from the Bible. And if there are extra Biblical practices, then they may be beneficial and constuctive, but must not be demanded of the believer for salvation.
That view doesn’t seem to be negative or even greatly opposed to the Catholic faith.
Reality is, is that interpretation is inevitable. Scripture is a message that needs to be understood and applied. There is a singular core message, and also many messages that relate to the core message. In a single word, the message is Jesus. From Him, comes the whole Revelation of God to man, which is life everlasting.
So all denominations eventually rely on some tradition to apply Scripture to practice. The Catholic Faith distinguishes between traditions (such as certain practices and customs) and Traditions (such as Sacred Traditions which came from Jesus and His Apostles). She also acknowledges the necessity of an authoritative interpreter within the Church. She calls this the Magisterium. The magisterium is able to declare with the “Keys” given to Peter, what is Sacred Tradition and what is not.
Scripture itself relied on the Church to ultimately declare which writings were Scripture and which were not. So Scripture cannot be truly alone as the rule of man. Yet, there certainly is a special place for Scripture as our rule, because it is the written word of God. Scripture was written in the age of the Apostles, it has no error in faith and moral Truth, it is Divinely inspired through chosen men.
Scripture itself recognizes that the Church is given authority from God. So we don’t believe the doctrines declared by the Church, or how they are to be understood, to be opposed to Scripture. So, in a sense, the Catholic faith is more Scripture Alone than even the reformers. Because Scripture assigns the Church and her leadership a role in ruling the faithful. It is not men, but Christmas and His Spirit who rule through leadership.
Some might claim that doctrine must be explicitly derived from the Bible. And if there are extra Biblical practices, then they may be beneficial and constuctive, but must not be demanded of the believer for salvation.
That view doesn’t seem to be negative or even greatly opposed to the Catholic faith.
Reality is, is that interpretation is inevitable. Scripture is a message that needs to be understood and applied. There is a singular core message, and also many messages that relate to the core message. In a single word, the message is Jesus. From Him, comes the whole Revelation of God to man, which is life everlasting.
So all denominations eventually rely on some tradition to apply Scripture to practice. The Catholic Faith distinguishes between traditions (such as certain practices and customs) and Traditions (such as Sacred Traditions which came from Jesus and His Apostles). She also acknowledges the necessity of an authoritative interpreter within the Church. She calls this the Magisterium. The magisterium is able to declare with the “Keys” given to Peter, what is Sacred Tradition and what is not.
Scripture itself relied on the Church to ultimately declare which writings were Scripture and which were not. So Scripture cannot be truly alone as the rule of man. Yet, there certainly is a special place for Scripture as our rule, because it is the written word of God. Scripture was written in the age of the Apostles, it has no error in faith and moral Truth, it is Divinely inspired through chosen men.
Scripture itself recognizes that the Church is given authority from God. So we don’t believe the doctrines declared by the Church, or how they are to be understood, to be opposed to Scripture. So, in a sense, the Catholic faith is more Scripture Alone than even the reformers. Because Scripture assigns the Church and her leadership a role in ruling the faithful. It is not men, but Christmas and His Spirit who rule through leadership.
S
spina1953
Guest
When the Protestant reformation came about with Luther, The Catholic Church was no loner recognized as an authority. So Protestants needed a new authority and the Bible became that sole authority. Luther himself said anyone even a child can read Scripture and understand it without need for someone to tell them what it means. This of course led to people reading Scripture which is a good thing in and of itself, but the real problem lies in the fact that it has become private interpretations by picking and choosing whatever verses a preconceived notion the reading had before reading to make the verse fit thereby making the meaning far different from what the author intended it to mean.
Anyone can just pick and choose a verse and take it out of context and make it mean whatever one wants it to mean. This does not in any way make it true, instead it makes it distorted leading to misunderstanding of what the author had intended it to mean in the context in which he wrote it. Bible alone really means that the individual becomes the real authority not the Bible…
Anyone can just pick and choose a verse and take it out of context and make it mean whatever one wants it to mean. This does not in any way make it true, instead it makes it distorted leading to misunderstanding of what the author had intended it to mean in the context in which he wrote it. Bible alone really means that the individual becomes the real authority not the Bible…
P
PluniaZ
Guest
The Protestant Reformers didn’t really believe the Bible was the sole authority - they believed the secular monarch should be the sole authority over Christians in his land. So once the German peasants revolt was crushed by Luther’s prince benefactors, he earnestly championed their authority to decide religious matters, which led to the Peace of Augsburg principle Cuius regio, eius religio in 1555. The same principle was adopted by all the Protestant Reformers in England, Scotland, Denmark, Norway and Sweden.
In France, the Protestant Huguenots tried to impose their own king, Henry IV, on the throne, but at the end of the French wars of religion they settled for limited religious freedom in the Edict of Nantes.
In France, the Protestant Huguenots tried to impose their own king, Henry IV, on the throne, but at the end of the French wars of religion they settled for limited religious freedom in the Edict of Nantes.
D
DanielStDominic
Guest
Obviously, I don’t know every Protestant you’ve ever spoken to on the subject. But I don’t think that this is a proper conclusion to draw from Sola Scriptura, or from the various common approaches to Scripture that Protestants undertake. Rather, as I’m sure you know, many treat the Bible as if, by the Holy Spirit, God is speaking directly to them through Holy Writ and by various mental promptings. That’s not at all bad, even if much of their exegesis might be poor, or even if much of what they think they hear is merely the result of their own thoughts. But that’s also not treating the words as if they themselves were God.
I think a closer analogy would be in seeing much of the Protestant view of the reading of Scripture as being something of a Sacrament, wherein special graces or gifts of the Holy Spirit are transmitted through the vehicle of that which is God-breathed.
R
rcwitness
Guest
I wouldn’t demonize the reformers to that degree. The Church had many members abusing Teaching and straying from Scripture. Scripture and it’s authority wasn’t so much a problem during the reformation. Men from both sides were guilty of causing division. And the Catholic clergy were not just high and dry, exemplifying Scripture.
R
rcwitness
Guest
Yes, I think you are right that politics had a very strong influence. And abuses happened by the hands of the reformers also. But their stance was that Scripture should be the sole rule for doctrine, not necessarily civil law, right?
S
spina1953
Guest
Hi rcwitness, I was not trying to demonize the reformers only that if they were not going to recognize the authority of the catholic Church what authority then were they going to recognize if not the Bible? true that both sides were guilty of abuses either in teaching or in bashing the other about what was believed. I do understand that there were plenty of issues going on both religious as well as secular that led to the reformation… its also true that some like the Church of England the King or Queen it the authority for their Church ands during Luther’s time the princes of the regions also were the authority of the Churches in their domaine. but over time the individual has really become the sole authority but claiming the Bible is the sole authority alone. At least that’s what i have so far understood from reading the history of Bible alone.
C
Cor_ad_Cor
Guest
Years ago, I was a member of the (Campbellite) Church of Christ. They were about as close as you could get. In fact, they’ve been called “Bible worshippers” by people before - they do tend to place an extreme and almost idolatrous level of importance on scripture, including the physical book itself at times.
R
rcwitness
Guest
The Church has always venerated the divine scriptures as she venerated the Body of the Lord, in so far as she never ceases, particularly in the sacred liturgy, to partake of the bread of life and to offer it to the faithful from the one table of the Word of God and the Body of Christ.
1)***** The deacon carries the Book of the Gospels into the Church, leading the procession, and lifting it high above his head for all to see.
2)***** He places the Book of the Gospels upon the altar table for the introductory rites of the Mass.
3)***** In the Liturgy of the Word, the book of the Gospels is carried in procession by the Deacon from its place on the altar to the ambo. In solemn liturgies he is led by two altar servers carrying lighted candles signifying the Word as Light
4)***** In solemn liturgies incense is offered to the book of the Gospels—indicating the presence of Christ in the Word.
5)***** After reading the Gospel the Deacon kisses the page of the Gospel reading
6)***** Then he carries it to the presiding celebrant who kisses it also.
7)***** If a Bishop is presiding, he takes the book of the Gospels and blesses the Congregation with it—again indicating the presence of Christ in his Word.
D
Della
Guest
Please don’t take my comments to encompass “every Protestant * ever spoken to” because that’s not what I wrote.
I was talking about the extremes to which some people take their devotion for the Bible, in answer to the OP’s question: Does the way some people believe in SS constitute idolatry? And the answer I gave is: Yes, some do. With the counterpoint to that being: But certainly not the majority–and especially not liturgical Christians, which I also cited.
I agree most Protestants do not treat the Bible as an idol to be worshiped, but there are those who do, sad to say.*
L
lanman87
Guest
As a protestant I can agree that many who say they believe in sola scriptura actually believe solo scriptura.
sola scriptura believes to properly interpret the Bible that you should take into account not only what is written, but the intent of the passage, who the audience is, the culture of the audience and if any literary devices are being used to illustrate the point being made.
solo scriptura means it is me, the Bible and the Holy Spirit and whatever conclusion I come up with is correct.
F
ffg
Guest
Amen!
For those playing at home too - Don’t put the Bible on the floor!
I don’t think it should be covered by anything either, as it tops all other things wherever it sits.
Bugs me when the kids put the video games or dvd cases on the Bible that’s in the living room.
I suppose they make opportunities to serve, through cleaning the area.
H
hasantas
Guest
I think Bible must come first but that would not be enough. Worships just like sacraments should be learnt from holy tradition.
Is that not wrong to establish faith(doctrines of Church) just on tradition which were not described in scripture? On the other hand faith and main and ultimate issues were declared very clearly in scripture!
Is that not wrong to establish faith(doctrines of Church) just on tradition which were not described in scripture? On the other hand faith and main and ultimate issues were declared very clearly in scripture!
P
pablope
Guest
- Status