Sola Scriptura is Absolutely biblical

  • Thread starter Thread starter BibleOnly
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Sola scriptura is the end result of the canonisation of scripture.

It is the public witness that the scriptures are the PERFECT word of God written that declared God’s majesty and his will for humanity.
Although it existed in Tradition from the time of Jesus’ crucifiction, the NT was established in written form with the declaration by the Magisterium that the Scriptures were indeed the inspired Word of God. That was an example of infallibility in practice.

Sacred Tradition did not suddenly cease at that time.

SS is one of the more recent doctrines used in the reformed churches and not the result or outcome of the canonisation of Scripture.
 
Yes, all of this is good historical content and makes for absorbing reading. However, again the point must be pressed:

‘Are the Church Fathers infallible, unerring in their statements and judgments?’

By what objective standard can their credibility and entire truthfulness be measured? Who gets to decide?

I have nothing, whatsoever, against true Catholics who practise their faith; nevertheless these issues cannot be simply “swept under the carpet” or put in the “too hard basket”.
These are very good questions, and I commend you for asking them. 👍

It is the Teaching itself that is infallible. When Jesus promised to send the Spirit to guide them into all truth, He intended to protect the Church from teaching error. This charism of infallibility is not to the individuals, as we can clearly see from how many faithful members of the Church (starting with Peter) do fall short.

Whenever the fathers write about the infallible teaching of the Church, they are in unity with the gift of infallibility.

They are only preserved from error, just as are the successors of the Apostles today, when they are in unity with the inerrant teachings of Christ that were given to the Church.

We can all benefit by the gift of infallibility by clinging to the infallible teachings of Christ that were entrusted to the Church.👍
 
What proofs can you make against the Catholic Church being the True Christian Faith founded by Jesus;

"…Although the Church might be ancient, yet it would not be universal in time if it had failed at any period. The heresy of Nicolaites is ancient but not universal, for it only lasted a very little while. And as a whirlwind which seems ready to displace the sea then suddenly is lost in itself, or as a mushroom, which is born of some noxious vapor in a night, appears and in a day is gone, — so every heresy, ancient as it may be, has at last disappeared, but the Church endures perpetually. (7)

…I will say to you, as I have said above: show me a decade of years since Our Lord ascended into heaven in which decade our Church has not existed. The reason why you find yourselves unable to say when our Church began is that it has always existed. And if you would care to make yourselves honestly clear about this, Sanders in his Visible Monarchy, and Gilbert Genebrard in his Chronology would furnish you light enough, and particularly the learned Caesar Baronius in his Annals. But if you are not willing all at once to abandon the books of your masters, and have not your eyes blinded with too excessive a passion, you will, if you look closely into the Centuries of Magdebourg, see everywhere nothing but the actions of Catholics; for, says very well a learned man of our age, if they had not collected these there they would have left one thousand five hundred years without history. I will say something on this point afterwards…"

The Catholicity of the Church By St. Francis de Sales.
stas.org/apologetics/church/True_Religion/catholic.shtml
 
Limbo has been a church doctrine since the days of Augustine. It was passed down from the first council to the present and it remains in the catechism today.
No, actually, it is a pious theological speculation. I will agree that it has been taught to the faithful, but it has never been a doctrine of the faith.
The only difference is there was no hope of salvation in the past and now there is hope for the unbaptized. In the past everyone got the message: “Get your children baptized as soon as possible.” So how can you say it never was official?
The fact that some persons, earlier in history, may have failed in the hope of salvation does not implicate the teachings of Jesus committed to the Church.

The doctrines of the faith have come down to us from the Apostles. Limbo was not one of these, that is why it is called a pious theological speculation.

We did receive the instruction of infant baptism from the Apostles. The reasons this is encouraged are many, but we believe as a matter of doctrine that one cannot be born again without water and the spirit (baptism), yet we are certain that when one is born again will see the kingdom. We want to pass this gift to our infants, so we baptize them.
Vatican II was a very confusing council.
Actually, I think it was the people reading it that were confused, and not the council itself.
The sixties were a very confusing time in general. It does seem that the Church gives itself wiggle room when it wants to change its position.
Depends upon the position. If it is a doctrine of the faith, we cannot change it. We have no authority to change the Teachings of Jesus.
The problem with claiming to be infallible means that if an error was made you have to stay with it or find a clever explanation for it or do both at the same time.
No. Since the gift of infallibility originates in God, and finds it’s expression in God, there will be no error.

However, I agree that it is necessary for the church to develop her understanding of the infallible teaching of Jesus. It is we who grow and change, not God.
 
How did you happen to get so hostile toward Catholicism?
Usually I’m not. I don’t know what “set me off” in your post but perhaps I was a little too harsh when I shouldn’t have been.

Sorry about that I’ll try to do better.
 
Usually I’m not. I don’t know what “set me off” in your post but perhaps I was a little too harsh when I shouldn’t have been.

Sorry about that I’ll try to do better.
We all tend to be passionate about the things that matter most. If our faith were not important to us, we would not be here!

Let us do that which makes for peace. :byzsoc:
 
IWere the Church Fathers infallible in their utterances and inerrant in their doctrinal propositions?
anyone can be infallible, if one is educated in Scriptures… truly "in Christ"and under the influence of the Holy Spirit… and trying to be infallibe concering some belief or another… However, if one is not really attempting to arrive at absolute truth… and is not attempting to be utterly exact in the wording of his statement of belief… he probably won’t be.

I know one thing, if i had a choice of whether to listen to someone preach who is not well-versed in Scrpture… but who is a priest or deacon in the Original Church founded by Christ… and someone who “knows the scriptures” but is a member of a man-made church… I’m going with the Original Church every time… The Church came before Scirpture… (jesus never wrote anything and didn’t - that we know of - ask his followers to write down anything… he said to preach and baptize…)
 
guanophore;4313586]
Originally Posted by Craig Kennedy
Sola scriptura is the end result of the canonisation of scripture.
It is the public witness that the scriptures are the PERFECT word of God written that declared God’s majesty and his will for humanity.

guanophore
If SS were true, then there would not have been another authority for four centuries.
Not sure what you mean here. Can you clarify?
Also, they would not need an authoritative Source from outside themselves to validate them.
How does this follow?
 
guanophore;4314612]These are very good questions, and I commend you for asking them. 👍
It is the Teaching itself that is infallible. When Jesus promised to send the Spirit to guide them into all truth, He intended to protect the Church from teaching error. This charism of infallibility is not to the individuals, as we can clearly see from how many faithful members of the Church (starting with Peter) do fall short.
This has already been shown to be false. Christ did not promise the church that it would be protected from error. In fact He and His apostles warned that false teachers would come into the church itself and decieve many. If the church was protected from error then false teachers would never be a problem. We already see error creeping into the church in Paul’s writings where he warns churches about some of these errors. and in Revelation.
Whenever the fathers write about the infallible teaching of the Church, they are in unity with the gift of infallibility.
Did any early father teach that the pope would be infallible?
They are only preserved from error, just as are the successors of the Apostles today, when they are in unity with the inerrant teachings of Christ that were given to the Church.
Its amazing how far a person can get by just assuming things from Scripture instead of investigating what they mean.
We can all benefit by the gift of infallibility by clinging to the infallible teachings of Christ that were entrusted to the Church.👍
How i wish there was infallibility. 🤷
 
Its amazing how far a person can get by just assuming things from Scripture instead of investigating what they mean.
Exactly.

Look where Luther and Calvin ended up, not to mention Jim Jones!
 
Luther and Calvin were right on. Jones was not.
How do you know?

Luther and Calvin substituted their own understanding for that of the Church founded by Jesus.

Luther even went so far as to eliminate books of the bible and to change words of the Holy Scriptures.
 
How do you know?

Luther and Calvin substituted their own understanding for that of the Church founded by Jesus.

Luther even went so far as to eliminate books of the bible and to change words of the Holy Scriptures.
Interesting quotes from Martin Luther:

Although Martin Luther stated that he looked upon the Bible “as if God Himself spoke therein” he also stated,

My word is the word of Christ; my mouth is the mouth of Christ" (O’Hare PF. The Facts About Luther, 1916–1987 reprint ed., pp. 203-204).

The Bible, in Romans 3:28, states,

Therefore we conclude that a man is justified by faith apart from the deeds of the law.

Martin Luther, in his German translation of the Bible, specifically added the word “allein” (English ‘alone’) to Romans 3:28-a word that is not in the original Greek. Notice what Protestant scholars have admitted:

…Martin Luther would once again emphasize…that we are “justified by faith alone”, apart from the works of the Law" (Rom. 3:28), adding the German word allein (“alone”) in his translation of the Greek text. There is certainly a trace of Marcion in Luther’s move (Brown HOJ. Heresies: Heresy and Orthodoxy in the History of the Church. Hendrickson Publishers, Peabody (MA), 1988, pp. 64-65).

Furthermore, Martin Luther himself reportedly said,

You tell me what a great fuss the Papists are making because the word alone in not in the text of Paul…say right out to him: ‘Dr. Martin Luther will have it so,’…I will have it so, and I order it to be so, and my will is reason enough. I know very well that the word ‘alone’ is not in the Latin or the Greek text (Stoddard J. Rebuilding a Lost Faith. 1922, pp. 101-102; see also Luther M. Amic. Discussion, 1, 127).

cogwriter.com/luther.htm
 
CHESTERTONRULES;4315333]How do you know?
Luther and Calvin substituted their own understanding for that of the Church founded by Jesus.
Luther and Calvin knew the Scriptures and what it taught and compared it to some of the doctrines of the church and found the church in error since it deviated from the inspired-inerrant Word of God.
Luther even went so far as to eliminate books of the bible and to change words of the Holy Scriptures.
I’m not that familar with Luther. Are you referring to the book of James? If so, did he not later accept it?

In reference to adding a word to the scriptures are you referrring to “alone” in the justification by faith issue?

Finally, Luther was not infallible as no man or council is. He can and did err at times.
 
Quote:
This has already been shown to be false. Christ did not promise the church that it would be protected from error. In fact He and His apostles warned that false teachers would come into the church itself and decieve many. If the church was protected from error then false teachers would never be a problem. We already see error creeping into the church in Paul’s writings where he warns churches about some of these errors. and in Revelation

Matt 16:18-19 is more than clear. Because of the warnings in scripture of false teachings and heresies trying to creap in it is common sense that God would want to protect His Church with an infallible authoritative magisterium. Just read St Augustine
(5th century) and you will see how the Church had to battle against Montanism, Arianism and all the other herasies The Church under the Pope (the supreme authority designated by Christ)had to call tog the bishops from all over the world in General Council. One of these was Nicaea where the Church was so divided. But when the Pope, inspired by the Spirit, discerned the truth the Council Fathers acclaimed “Peter has spoken thru Leo”. Surely this proves the necessity of a teaching authority

🙂
.
 
Question;
stepping aside for a minute from the recitation of specific verses, as an example, Jesus teaches His apostles to go out and spread the word of the kingdom of God and repentance giving them the authority to choose to forgive the sins or not with the power of the Holy Spirit until His return. This done with the authority to assign successors to their seat when necessary. We will call this the Universal Church or the Catholic Church.

Now, someone From the Catholic Church because of his objections decides after years of following the doctrine of that church breaks away and forms his own faith claiming his is the correct faith, which he determined on his own. This is basic for the principle of brevity but fact. Now this new faith teaches you don’t need this and you don’t need that and eliminates various articles and sacraments that have for 1500 years been a recognized part of salvation, yet remember the words of Jesus in His gospel, to beware of such exact happenings, and yet others still follow. The question is, when the gospel of Jesus warns in many ways of such a thing and it would stand to reason that satan would want to stop us from partaking in sacraments and believing in the gospel as we do, why doesn’t a light bulb go off and people realize that the person saying to do less could be the wrong one to follow especially considering Jesus said this would come about?
Yes, we have been warned from the beginning as the Church Jesus shed His blood over that false shepherds and those claiming to be of Him would come and DECEIVE many. But not that His Church would deceive many, like maybe those like Luther as an example? He spoke individuals.
 
Re: Sola Scriptura is Absolutely biblical

OK, I’'ll bite. Please prove it to me.

By the way, to start with a common understanding, please read

2 Tim. 3:16, and please use your KJV, but the Catholic bible is the true, complete and more accurate one.

Gods continued blessings,
PJM m.c.
 
The beginning and progress of the Lutheran Heresy.
  1. Erasmus of Rotterdam, called by some the Precursor of Luther; his Literature. 2. His Doctrine was not sound, nor could it be called heretical. 3. Principles of Luther; his familiarity with the Devil, who persuades him to abolish Private Masses. 4. He joins the Order of the Hermits of St. Augustine. 5 Doctrines and vices of Luther. 6. Publication of Indulgences, and his Theses on that subject. 7. He is called to Rome, and clears himself; the Pope sends Cardinal Cajetan as his Legate to Germany. 8. Meeting between the Legate and Luther. 9. Luther perseveres and appeals to the Pope. 10, 11. Conference of Ecchius with the Heretics. 12 Bull of Leo X., condemning forty-one errors of Luther, who burns the Bull and the Decretals.
§ II. – The Diets and principal Congresses held concerning the Heresy of Luther
  1. Diet of Worms, where Luther appeared before Charles V., and remains obstinate. 14. Edict of the Emperor against Luther, who is concealed by the Elector in one of his castles. 15. Diet of Spire, where the Emperor publishes a Decree, against which the Heretics protest. 16. Conference with the Zuinglians; Marriage of Luther with an Abbess. 17. Diet of Augsburg, and Melancthon’s profession of Faith; Melancthon’s Treatise, in favour of the authority of the Pope, rejected by Luther. 18. Another Edict of the Emperor in favour of religion. 19. League of Smalkald broken up by the Emperor. 20. Dispensation given by the Lutherans to the Landgrave to have two wives. 21. Council of Trent, to which Luther refuses to come; he dies, cursing the Council. 22. The Lutherans divided into fifty-six Sects. 23. The Second Diet of Augsburg, in which Charles V. published the injurious Formula of the Interim. 24, 25. The heresy of Luther takes possession of Sweden, Denmark, Norway, and other Kingdoms.
§ III. – Errors of Luther
  1. Forty-one errors of Luther condemned by Leo X. 27. Other errors taken from his Books. 28. Luther’s remorse of conscience. 29. His abuse of Henry VIII.; his erroneous translation of the New Testament – the Books he rejected. 30. His method of celebrating Mass. 31. His Book against the Sacramentarians, who denied the Real Presence of Christ in the Eucharist.
§ IV. – The Disciples of Luther
  1. Melancthon, and his character. 33. His Faith, and the Augsburg Confession composed by him. 34. Matthias Flaccus, author of the Centuries. 35. John Agricola, chief of the Antinomians; Atheists. 36. Andrew Osiander, Francis Stancar, and Andrew Musculus. 37. John Brenzius, Chief of the Ubiquists. 38. Gaspar Sneckenfield abhorred even by Luther for his impiety. 39. Martin Chemnitz, the Prince of Protestant theologians, and opponent of the Council of Trent.
    THE HISTORY OF HERESIES and THEIR REFUTATION;
Translated from the Italian of
St. Alphonsus M. Liguori

stas.org/apologetics/church/True_Religion/hrefute.shtml
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top