Sola and Replying to Fundamentalists

[NHInsider]

Jesus gave His authority to the Apostles. They and their successors exercised that authority in writing and compiling the Scriptures. When sola scriptura folks insist that the Bible is God’s Word, they are accepting, indeed relying upon, the authority of the Church.*

But, at the same time that the Apostles and their successors were writing, compiling and discerning the authenticity of the Scriptures, they were also implementing the other part of the Great Commission - not only “preaching the Gospel” but also baptizing and teaching the people “all that I have commanded.” So they were developing the rules and rituals of the Church, figuring out, under the guidance of the Holy Spirit, how Christians should live out those teachings - just as we see in Acts 15, where the Apostles sorted out what obligations would be placed on Gentile converts, a subject Jesus never addressed specifically. Various non-catholic Christian denominations accept various parts of these Apostolic Traditions - Sunday worship, for example, and the definitions of the Incarnation and the Trinity, the celebration of the sacraments, etc. At the same time, these various groups reject other parts of the same body of belief and practice. In so doing, they reject the very Authority that they rely upon when they claim the Unique status of Scripture as the Inspired Word of God.

Of course, most Protestants know little or nothing of early Church history and so cannot see this gaping hole in their logic. Some will insist that the Church became corrupted by pagan influence after the determination of the canon, for example, in part because they are completely unaware of the Didache, or the writings of Ireneus or Justin Martyr and the like. Once confronted with those documents, they will dismiss them as having no value because they are not in the Bible - again, hopelessly circular reasoning.

*There is a recurring line in Protestant apologetics about “an infallible book produced by fallible men” but it does not withstand even a cursory comparison with the historical development of Scripture.

 

[fhansen]

It doesn’t happen overnight. The way it worked for me was that I finally had to admit that scripture alone was insufficient to lead one to certain knowledge of God’s will regarding salvation. This came mainly through something that’s often done here on CAF: debating the meaning of scripture. After going around in circles with opponents who often have equally reasonable arguments for their position one thing can become apparent: the doctrine of Sola Scriptura- the teaching that the written word alone can authoritatively instruct us in the sure knowledge of faith- is a logical fallacy-it simply cannot work. I was left with the Churches whose authority was not solely scripture-based -the Orthodox and Catholic.

 

[UnityofTrinity]

I’ve been debating with the Fundamentalists for a while now, and after many times of presenting logic, history, and Biblical facts and yet they reject it, the only thing one could do is to pray for them that God may open their heart. To try to continue to fight this battle is like throwing stones to the river, pointless.

 

[Little_Mary]

I’ve been debating with the Fundamentalists for a while now, and after many times of presenting logic, history, and Biblical facts and yet they reject it, the only thing one could do is to pray for them that God may open their heart. To try to continue to fight this battle is like throwing stones to the river, pointless.

I am in the very same boat. What I can’t get over is that people really can be like this. How do you deliberately avoid the Truth? Deny it? It’s mind boggling…but it’s also heartbreaking.

 

[UnityofTrinity]

I am in the very same boat. What I can’t get over is that people really can be like this. How do you deliberately avoid the Truth? Deny it? It’s mind boggling…but it’s also heartbreaking.

“Ignorance is bliss”, it’s hard for people to break away from the traditions which they were taught for such a long time. Think of it like a Klansman who hate other races despite of how genetic has reveal us about man’s equality. At the end, I think it boils down to one word: pride.

 

[Little_Mary]

“Ignorance is bliss”, it’s hard for people to break away from the traditions which they were taught for such a long time. Think of it like a Klansman who hate other races despite of how genetic has reveal us about man’s equality. At the end, I think it boils down to one word: pride.

Yeah I think you’re right. And that is where prayer comes in.

 

[mackbrislawn]

This has already been tossed around a lot, but I’d like to phrase it this way and hope some pithy answers are forthcoming

Protestants but especially fundamentalists say that in the Bible, we have the unique Word of God, simple and unadorned.

Catholics say that in the Bible, we have the unique Word of God.

Fundamentalists say that, since we have God’s Word, there is nothing to add or subtract or to refer to vis a vis the categories of Revelation and Salvation.

Catholics say that, in addition to God’s biblical Word, we have living tradition.

My question is how to “get past” the huge Protestant-Catholic agreement that the Bible is God’s unique Word. If we have that, what possible need is there for Tradition or anything else? Wouldn’t that be like having the single, most unique, greatest treasure collection in the world, then having someone coming along and wanting to mix costume jewelry in with the treasure?

Don’t get me wrong, I take the Catholic side on this. But if the Bible is the Word of God, how can it be explained to Fundamentalists that there is “another treasure” just as valuable as the written Word? That this other treasure is just as divine as the Bible, that is not just spiritual costume jewelry?

Actually, Catholics don’t agree that the Bible is the unique word of God. Unique means “the only one, sole.” For Catholics, God’s word is not only found in Scripture, but also in Tradition. The complete Word of God is found in the Church, because Jesus is its head, and Jesus is the Word of God. Protestants have cut themselves off from the complete Word, and so have only part of God’s word. When they say that the Bible is the unique word, they are laying a false premise, a trap, hoping we will fall into it. But we won’t.

And that is how we get past the Protestant-Catholic agreement that the Bible is God’s unique word, because that is the very false premise we do NOT agree to. The Protestant’s way of argumentation is devious, because if we agree to his false premise, he’s got us.

 

[pablope]

This has already been tossed around a lot, but I’d like to phrase it this way and hope some pithy answers are forthcoming

Protestants but especially fundamentalists say that in the Bible, we have the unique Word of God, simple and unadorned.

Catholics say that in the Bible, we have the unique Word of God.

Fundamentalists say that, since we have God’s Word, there is nothing to add or subtract or to refer to vis a vis the categories of Revelation and Salvation.

Catholics say that, in addition to God’s biblical Word, we have living tradition.

My question is how to “get past” the huge Protestant-Catholic agreement that the Bible is God’s unique Word. If we have that, what possible need is there for Tradition or anything else? Wouldn’t that be like having the single, most unique, greatest treasure collection in the world, then having someone coming along and wanting to mix costume jewelry in with the treasure?

Don’t get me wrong, I take the Catholic side on this. But if the Bible is the Word of God, how can it be explained to Fundamentalists that there is “another treasure” just as valuable as the written Word? That this other treasure is just as divine as the Bible, that is not just spiritual costume jewelry?

In addition to the posts…I would put the onus on them and let them prove sola scriptura…and have them find something from Luther’s works or writing that prove sola scriptura.