"Sola Scriptura" Before There Was a New Testament "Scriptura"

[RedFan]

Well, let’s just say that the Church eventually settled on a consensus choice of which writings made the cut and which didn’t. Let’s not beg the question of whether apostolic succession was valldly established by those writings.

 

[Jared2914]

Even though St Paul was an apostle? I guess they’d deny apostolic succession?

Yes, some protestants deny that and believe only the original 12 apostles had any authority. With their passing, no one could conclude anything more than what the Old Testament says plus the writings of those apostles. These are the most extreme believers. Most protestants do believe St. Paul had authority but that at some unspecified time, the Church lost that authority.

But if protestants say that, shouldn’t we ask them: “if Jesus only gave authority to the 12 apostles, what does it really mean to say that Peter was the Rock on which He would build his church? Did He found a Church that would only live as long as the 12 apostles?”

What do you think?

I don’t think protestants are opposed to the Church itself, just the idea that they can interpret the teachings of the Bible to come to new logical conclusions. For example, our teaching against contraception is based on a logical conclusion combined with Bible teachings that leads to this truth: the marital act must be unitive and procreative. Thus, contraception is a sin. Protestants would say since the Bible doesn’t say anything about contraception, no one has the authority to say anything about it, so individuals are free to believe one way or another.

Protestants would probably see nothing wrong with the Church if it just quoted the Bible or reiterated what it says. Like most of the world they don’t believe logic and reason can lead to a greater understanding of the truth. Unless there was somehow scientific proof or the Second Coming, they won’t believe in the nuances of the faith the Church has revealed to us.

 

[Benadam]

I wonder if communities gathered around someone who was authorized to preach. or if preachers floated around at first

 

[ErraticFaith]

I find it surprising Protestants bother to believe in Christianity at all. Clearly the formation of a Church and the establishment of cannon, so that they actually even have their precious ‘scripture’, was all a hilarious waste of time.

Count yourself fortunate that Jesus selected people to continue his teaching at all. Or were you expecting the faith to be passed on and taught to people by imaginary fairies perhaps?

The whole idea that people have issues with succession, when every other institution on earth is based upon historical succession, from monarchy to presidency, is hilarious.

When I start a business you better believe I’ll hand it over to people who knew me and are best placed to continue it on.

That’s the entire purpose of a promotion system. Yawn.

 

[Curious11]

I like your blunt and confident style

 

[ErraticFaith]

I’d say that places you in a minority but alas, I am what I am. Never changes.

 

[Curious11]

At least you have the balls to be a Christian up front, which is more than you can say about me

 

[ErraticFaith]

Don’t give yourself such a hard time. It’s not easy to face down, what is technically the world at this stage, with just yourself.

I mean sure, there are plenty of people out there claiming the title ‘Christian’ but it’s a far cry from feeling as if any of them have your back.

I’m fortunate in that I don’t have any doubt. Therefore it’s easy for me to be stubborn that’s all

 

[rose321]

The Sermon on the Mount may not have been preserved in exactly the canonical form now found in Matthew, but it would not surprise me if some such collections were around quite early simply because of their utility as a manual for how to live while awaiting the Second Coming.

Interesting respectfully pondering on all one has stated. Examining, with questions also.
Sermon on the Mount can be found in the OT, long before they were written and put into a book, being commanded to teach their children children by memory? Today we individual have our own books to read from, Bible?

Note also James the Brother of the Lord >>>>dearly loved and known ( also mentioned in early church Father writtings) James was 1st Bishop who’s authority was over the Mother Jerusalem Church and did so for>>>> 30 years, for the Temple was not destroyed till 70 Ad.

Then because of great persecution Hebrew Israelites, Jews scattered into other Nations where Romans did not rule over?

example thousands fled into>> Pella, writtings recordings of such> where Judah Christians settled?
1 million as Historically recorded>> also settled and went into Alexander, Habor, where the Largest Library on earth at that time, know as Greek Jew Hellinics Christains?

Why are the Gospels written mostly in Greek??>>> needing to be translated?
Were there not also Greek Jews, know as Hellinics Christains?

James the brother of the Lord, lead the Mother Jerusalem Church for 30 years, was he not dealing with theses 2 groups of Jewish Christians at that time?

Noting also in Rome >Christianity was a crime, not a safe place to live at that time being a Christian?

Why the oldest Christian churches of the Apostles etc are found in Iraq? Syria? Turkey? Constantinople> Constantine era? St Marks the oldest Christian Church just got destroyed a yr or 2 ago?

NT writtings first in Greek, some Aramac, then translated into Latin, English etc?

NT tells the Life of Jesus, records his quotes, who he was, what he did, what he taught, where he travelled, how he lived, who his family was, etc etc, ’

Jesus reads from OT and repeats from memory also, asking his own audience questions, preaches on, Jesus continually referrs back to OT and mentions those from the OT in all his teaching
Jesus asking, >>What did Isaiah say?
What did King David mean, when he said, My Lord said to My Lord?
As Jonah was 3 days and 3 nights etc

Jesus, St Paul both >>>>heavily quote from and referr to the OT through out their whole teaching, do they not?
Jesus continually referrs back to the 5 Books of Moses, Sermon on the Mount, Ten Commandments, Priestly laws, etc
Jesus speaks and quotes from> Books of the Prophets, Psalms, King David, Amos, Samuel, Enoch, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Job, Jonah, Abraham, Noah, list goes on.
Did Jesus not read from the Book of Isaiah.quotes from during a weekly gathering?

Was Jerome the one who editied the first Book, Bible? Called the Jerome Vulgate Bible?
Peace

 

[rose321]

Well, let’s just say that the Church eventually settled on a consensus choice of which writings made the cut and which didn’t. Let’s not beg the question of whether apostolic succession was valldly established by those writings.

Respectfully toward opinion only >> Search the Scriptures as commanded by Jesus to his listening audience

Test all Spirits
John 5:39> Search the Scriptures and>>
2 Timothy 2:25 > Study to shew thyself approved >
John 4:1-5
1 Corinthians 12:10
Acts 17:11:>
1 Thesselonians 5:24
Matthew 7:15-20 will know them by their fruits

Jesus gives his listening audience the freedom and authority to search the Scriptures>>> makes us all accountable and responsible as believers in the Faith, to search the Scriptures to study>>>> to shew thyself approved, to test all spirits etc.

James the Brother of the Lord known as James the Just, Righteous, was a very Holy Man and was dearly Loved by the Community of the Faithful and after 3o yrs well known also by the Romans who ruled over them??

James ruling as Head authority over the >>>Mother Church of Jerusalem for 30 years, immed after Jesus death.

This James the Brother of the Lord, was well known by many of the early Church Fathers also>>30 years is a long time and is mentioned by?>>>>>, Clement
in the Memorande of Hegesippus
Eusebius,
Jerome,
Emperor Adrein 117_138,
Justification of True Faith by Ariston from Pella (135-175 Ad) first Greek author after the Apostles and Saint James>>>for thousands of Hebrew Israelites, fled to and were known as >>Judah Christians>>> fled into Pella>>because of Roman persecution, Temple was destroyed in 70 AD

In searching in other sources, James the Brother of the Lord was 1st Bishop of the Mother Jerusalem Church immed after Jesus death, was he not?.

Apostles were commanded by Jesus>>given their task mission, to go out into All Nations and gather spread the WORD?.

After James the Brother of the Lord> who served for 30 years, after his death there ascended>>Bishop Symeon of Klopa or Simon 70 Ad of Jerusalem where successions of
12 more Bishops of Pella asscended>Bishops who were>>
Justus 1( 107-111)
Zaccheus
Tobias
Bejamen 1st
John 1st
Matthias 1st
Phillip
Senesa
Justus 2nd
Leuis
Ephraim
Joseph 1
Judas>>All Bishops of Pella, Jews in the thousands fled for safety from Roman persecution, during James the Brother of the Lord time>> Judah Christians…

1 Million Jews also fled into Alexandra, Habor, known as Greek Jews>hellinic Christians>James dealing with issues and concerns of both groups?

“After James the Just had suffered martyrdom for the same reasons as the Lord, Simeon his cousin the son of Clopas was appointed Bishop whom they all proposed, because he was another Cousin of the Lord”>>>>> unquote Eusebius Church History 4.22 Trans. LCL 1.375

Stand to be corrected, just seeking and studying to shew thyself approved.

Peace

 

[guanophore]

I actually consider this a serious challenge. Nothing in Matt 16:18-19 or John 20:23 MUST be interpreted to mean that Jesus intended apostolic authority to be transferable to their successors. Rather, transferrability is something we INFER from the fact that the church outlasted that generation, i.e., that Jesus did not return within their lifespans as, arguably, He predicted He would (see Matt. 16:28, Mark 9:1, Luke 9:27).

It is more than an inference, as we witness the first apostolic succession in Acts. We also See Paul instructing Timothy:

"things which you have heard from me in the presence of many witnesses, entrust these to faithful men who will be able to teach others also. " 2 Tim 2;2

This is speaking of the paradosis, which is handed down through the Apostolic succession. Paul has entrusted the paradosis to Timothy, who is instructed to entrust it to “faithful men”, who will be able to teach others. That is four generations of apostolic succession right there! Paul appoints bishops, then instructs them to fulfill their duties with “all authority”. How did they get this, if it did not come from Christ, through the Apostles?

we cannot infer anything definitive about His view of apostolic successorship merely from the age of the Church.

No, but we can see what He taught reflected in the writings of the Apostles and their disciples.

Then when these first hand people who had authority had written divinely inspired accounts it is these scriptures then becomes the authority. Because from then on no one had first hand experience.

That would seem to exclude Paul. Or if it does include Paul, then it excludes all those who had “first hand experience” of the Risen Christ after He ascended. And if that is true, then all Christians since then, to the present day, who claim to have encountered the risen Christ spiritually do not really have any first hand experience, so we have no basis upon which to evangelize anyone!

 

[guanophore]

Well, let’s just say that the Church eventually settled on a consensus choice of which writings made the cut and which didn’t. Let’s not beg the question of whether apostolic succession was valldly established by those writings.

That is certainly a convenient way to avoid the facts of history. But the fact is, the Church does not do these things “by consensus”. If so, then we would all be Arian rather than Trinitarian!

But I agree with you, valid apostolic succession was established by Christ, and followed by the Apostles and their disciples. it was already working for decades before a word of the NT was ever written. So no, Apostolic succession is not established by the writings, or the canon. On the contrary, the canon was established by the successors of the Apostles.

I don’t think protestants are opposed to the Church itself, just the idea that they can interpret the teachings of the Bible to come to new logical conclusions.

This seems fair. Since the Teachings of the Apostles preceded the New Testament, it would not be fair to expect that, once they were written down, new conclusions could be made. In fact, this sounds more like a Reformation activity!

Thus, contraception is a sin. Protestants would say since the Bible doesn’t say anything about contraception, no one has the authority to say anything about it, so individuals are free to believe one way or another.

Not all Protestants say thins, but I get what you mean. It is true, if one is extracting their faith from the pages there are many limits. It is harder to situate a divine principle like no abortion if one is not falling within a faith that includes sacred tradition.

 

[ratio1]

That would seem to exclude Paul. Or if it does include Paul, then it excludes all those who had “first hand experience” of the Risen Christ after He ascended. And if that is true, then all Christians since then, to the present day, who claim to have encountered the risen Christ spiritually do not really have any first hand experience, so we have no basis upon which to evangelize anyone!

I made the same objection to my Protestant friend.
The answer I got was that the Scriptures were in effect the first hand experiences of Jesus. Hence subsequent Christians only need to rely on the Scriptures. Whereas the church tradition is more than second hand. Paul is included because he had a first hand spiritual wxperience that’s was recorded in Scriptures.

 

[guanophore]

Respectfully toward opinion only >> Search the Scriptures as commanded by Jesus to his listening audience

I think you have misunderstood this passage rose123. Jesus was criticizing his audience, because they were searching the Scriptures, thinking that in them, they would find life, and refused to come to Him to obtain life.

When He said “you search the scriptures” he was describing what they were doing not commanding them.

Jesus gives his listening audience the freedom and authority to search the Scriptures>>> makes us all accountable and responsible as believers in the Faith, to search the Scriptures to study>>>> to shew thyself approved, to test all spirits etc.

Of course Jesus quoted the Scriptures, read them and encouraged his disciples to read them. Of course we are all accountable a believers to study our faith. Of course we are all to test the spirits. None of this supports Sola Scriptura.

 

[rose321]

Of course Jesus quoted the Scriptures, read them and encouraged his disciples to read them. Of course we are all accountable a believers to study our faith. Of course we are all to test the spirits. None of this supports Sola Scriptura.

Jesus does not just encourage only his disciples to read them, but all who believe in Him are to seek out His Word Spoken, study to show they approved. If we do not know His Spoken Word how do we know who is not of Him?

I think you have misunderstood this passage rose123. Jesus was criticizing his audience, because they were searching the Scriptures, thinking that in them, they would find life, and refused to come to Him to obtain life.

When He said “you search the scriptures” he was describing what they were doing not commanding them.

Agree fully >>with your explaination>>to this specfic group that gathered around Jesus, knowing their thoughts or how they were communicating with Jesus in conversation, Jesus is trying to teach this group:I am the one the Scriptures are pointing to> I am right here!

Keepin in mine other groups who gather around Jesus>>in teaching, Biblical verses through out his travel, attracted different audiences> But to those who gather around HIM. He makes them aware of false prophets, imposters, those who set out to be decievers, 1 Timothy 10-14 then continue reading>>

1 Timothy 14-17 " And how from childhood you have known the sacred writings that are able to instruct you for salvation through faith in Christ Jesus. All Scripture is inspired by God and is useful for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, so that everyone who belongs to God many be proficient, equipped for every good works" Not speaking to pagans or gentles here but those also born in the faith and knew His Spoken Word is important >be equipped. This group Jesus is speaking to were Hebrew Israelites>>>from childhood you have known the Sacred writings>>theses were not new converts were they?

St Paul followers or audience he sought to convert into the Faith, were gentles, pagans who never knew or read or heard of the Hebrew Israelite Scripture or knew of the >>One God or His Spoken Word ??.>

Other audiences who were Jews knowing Scriptures who would gather around St Paul through out his travels, listening to him, would test St Paul and knew what questions to ask him, in what was written and in what St Paul was teaching?. They question HIM?
Peace

 

[guanophore]

Jesus does not just encourage only his disciples to read them, but all who believe in Him are to seek out His Word Spoken, study to show they approved. If we do not know His Spoken Word how do we know who is not of Him?

I agree that we must incorporate His Word into ourselves so that we know what is of Him. Ignorance of the Scripture is ignorance of Christ!

Not speaking to pagans or gentles here but those also born in the faith and knew His Spoken Word is important >be equipped.

You seem to believe that “His spoken Word” is contained fully in the Scripture. Scripture itself denies this.

 

[rose321]

You seem to believe that “His spoken Word” is contained fully in the Scripture. Scripture itself denies this.

Hello No>> do not believe His Spoken Word is contained>>> FULLY<<< in the Scriptures, nor do I take>>>> literally>> all that is written in the Bible whether from front to back. Does Man not have their hands all over it?

Could be why as written in OT>>>>>> God repeats 4 times, Oh those lying Scribes with theri pens<<>> for a reason?

He Speaks, Spoke, is He not able to Place His Spoken Word within>>> our Heart? Soul? Mind? That is where HE commands us to fully glorify, worship, Love HIM?
Opinion only, pondering not to offend either.>>In OT it is written many many times to those HE has choosen, to those HE freely chooses, his Prophets, Moses King David, etc , I WILL place>> MY Spirit within HIM to know me?

Like when Jesus states to >>St Peter, You did NOT learn that from Me, but from My Father?

HE Spoke, Spoken>>let your ears hear. Jesus states this for a reason? Let your eyes see for a reason? Test all Spirits for a reason? you will know them by their fruits for a reason?

Written?>>> But you do not ask me, seek me, or knock at my Door!!>>
He is a living Eternal Father, he does not die Infinite?
Why pray if he does not hear?
Why ask if he cannot answer?
Why knock, if He does not have the power to Open?
Main Source by a Wise one, teaching>>Silence is GOLDEN would that be true?

Also important to seek to attain a greater >>Knowledge and Understanding of His Spoken Word is it not?>>one needs to search other ancient sources >>Historically, Politically, Ancient Early Church Fathers>>>Jesus was a Hebrew Israelite Aramaic>out side sources>etc etc

Trust in Him, he does not disappoint. peace he leaves within! His Word as we are taught is not so much to be argued over, but to live by>> Hospitality>> Love Thy Neighbor as you Love yourself as taught also>by our Church, is it not? . Peace

 

[guanophore]

Does Man not have their hands all over it?

Not sure what you mean? Do you think humans have tampered with the Bible?

God repeats 4 times, Oh those lying Scribes with theri pens<<>> for a reason?

So you think some of the Scriptures are really lies inserted by corrupt scribes?

is He not able to Place His Spoken Word within

Of course, but it then becomes an argument over subjectivity.

In OT it is written many many times to those HE has choosen, to those HE freely chooses

let your ears hear. Jesus states this for a reason? Let your eyes see for a reason?

Are you such a person, and if so, how can you tell?

Is the Holy Spirit within you more reliable than the Bible.

 

[rose321]

Of course, but it then becomes an argument over subjectivity.

Hello First want to say thank you for your respectful kind replies admire one for that!! Who would the argument be with?

Are you such a person, and if so, how can you tell?

Is the Holy Spirit within you more reliable than the Bibl

Our Heavenly Father is more reliable simply trust in Him!! Peace

 

[FloridaAngler]

I wonder how you sola scriptura denizens out there view the interstitial period between Pentecost and the publication of the various books of the NT between roughly 40 and 100 C.E. Does it weaken your thesis at all?

First, that you use “C.E”, rather than the correct, “A.D.” shows where you stand.

Second, if I believed the Catholic lies about the Biblical doctrine of sola scriptura, then I suppose I would find this a huge blow to my belief in that Biblical praxis.

But, since I don’t, it doesn’t really bother me one way or the other.

For its first 20+ years Christianity spread through Paul’s missions and through the preaching of the original apostles and others – but with no NT writings to point to.

First, the words of the Apostles are considered inspired, just as scripture, and are even referred to as scripture.

Second, why do Catholics always ignore the Old Testament when they make this argument?

We don’t have any evidence that [Paul’s] letters were circulated widely until decades after they were penned.

Except that they’re referenced elsewhere.

My point is simply that for more than a generation…

You assume.

The gospel of salvation through Christ was a matter of oral transmission alone

Actually, they had the Old Testament books. The Gospel is very plainly presented in Isaiah.

Question: why should the writing of the NT end that authority? Whether you challenge the RCC as the repository of that authority today is a separate matter and not of any particular interest to me – but I am curious to understand your thinking regarding the replacement of apostolic authority with the NT canon.

First, and most obviously, there are no more apostles.

Second, because revelation ended with the closing of the canon.