Sola Scriptura is Absolutely biblical

[dawid]

I’m not here to debate if Mary is co-redeemer of not. Mary is either co-redeemer or she is not, regardless of what the magestrium officially states about that particular issue. It’s the same with the Bible being the Word of God. The Bible is the Word of God apart from a church council determing that it is the Word of God. God is because He is God. The denial of God being God doesn’t make Him not God. It is the same with the Word of God. The written Word of God is the Holy Scritpures, regardless of the opinions of men, or church councils.

I did not bring up the subject of Mary as co-redeemer, you did!

Papal authority was established by Jesus. The Magisterium support the Pope in doctrine. They are not some irrelevant church council , but divinely instituted.
The results of their work still speaks for itself after 2 000 years.

 

[Reformed]

I did not bring up the subject of Mary as co-redeemer, you did!

Papal authority was established by Jesus. The Magisterium support the Pope in doctrine. They are not some irrelevant church council , but divinely instituted.
The results of their work still speaks for itself after 2 000 years.

Papal authority is in contrast to the Scriptures as being final authority from God. That is the reason for the Protestant Reformation…Bible truth and revelation over papal authority. Please come join us in our Bible Study to help undestand the Protestant perspective over the Catholic perspective.

forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=273731&page=8

 

[dawid]

Papal authority is in contrast to the Scriptures as being final authority from God. That is the reason for the Protestant Reformation…Bible truth and revelation over papal authority. Please come join us in our Bible Study to help undestand the Protestant perspective over the Catholic perspective.

forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=273731&page=8

That is where the “reformists” lost their way.

The Protestants have no divinely-instituted authority for endorsing or interpreting Scripture.

Your Bible study uses books that were written by our priests and bishops then endorsed by the Divinely-instituted authority.

 

[Paul2274]

Hello Friends,

“It is written”…

(15) And that from a child thou hast known the holy Scriptures, which are able to make thee wise unto salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus.
(16) All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:
(17) That the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works.
2 Timothy 3:15-17

(18) And this voice which came from heaven we heard, when we were with him in the holy mount.
(19) We have also a more sure word of prophecy; whereunto ye do well that ye take heed, as unto a light that shineth in a dark place, until the day dawn, and the day star arise in your hearts:
(20) Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the Scripture is of any private interpretation.
(21) For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost. 2 Peter 1:18-21

Search the Scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me. John 5:39

Study to show thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth. 2 Timothy 2:15

You have the freedom of conscience.
“I receive not honor from men.” John 5:41

If, I repeat if you support freedom of conscience and that of choice, allow the following link to remain, and people to look for themselves. If Catholicism is truth then allow it to be compared.

amazingdiscoveries.org/AD-Media-RtR-Video.html

“Here I stand I can do no other.” Martin Luther

If you do not believe in Sola Scriptura, the following statement from New York Catechism is simple to swallow.

“The Pope takes the place of Jesus Christ on earth…by divine right the Pope has supreme and full power in faith, in morals over each and every pastor and his flock. He is the true vicar, the head of the entire church, the father and teacher of the Christians. He is the infallible ruler, the found of dogmas, the author of and the judge of councils; the universal ruler of truth, the arbiter of the world, the supreme judge of heaven and earth, the judge of all, being judged by no one, God himself on earth.” Quoted in the New York Catechism

God help us when a man places himself above the " Holy One of Israel," Jesus Christ alone is salvation found in.

Righteousness by faith

Galatians 5:5-6
(5) For we through the Spirit wait for the hope of righteousness by faith.
(6) For in Jesus Christ neither circumcision availeth any thing, nor uncircumcision; but faith which worketh by love.

(8) For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God:
(9) Not of works, lest any man should boast.
(10) For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus unto good works, which God hath before ordained that we should walk in them. Ephesians 2:8-10

[Emphasis of bold added, to make clear Jesus Christ alone is salvation in and no other]

amazingdiscoveries.org/AD-Media-RtR-Video.html

Search for yourselves, Jesus Christ wants so much to have a personal relationship with you.

Pretty Bold for a First Time Posteropcorn:

Paul

 

[cfrancis]

Okay, please share the different councils in church history that defined the cannon of Scripture. It is my understanding that church councils, creeds, and confessions are driven be heresy and false teaching in the church. If that’s true, there is long period of time when Christians received the Word of God as the Word of God before the first council on the issue of the cannon of Scripture.

OK, and you please provide your Biblical evidence for the canon you believe and accept. Deal?

In addition to the Protestant and Roman Catholic cannons, you now have greater problems in regards to defining tradition with Sacred Tradition. This is an on-going issue for Roman Catholic truth.

Actually, no, no it is not an on-going issue. Not sure how you come to that conclusion.

In regards to receivng the Bible as my truth, God did not place me in this world in the 1st century, but in the 21st century with the universal testimony of the Universal Church believing the Bible is God-breathed. God gave us the Scriptures.

Amen! God gave us the Scriptures! Amen! We believe the Scriptures to be God-breathed and inerrant! Can’t think of any Christians who do not believe this.
But such is not the issue at hand, is it.

For all Christians, we believe the Bible is the Word of God through the work of the Holy Spirit as our conviction which is based on faith alone. You nor I can prove to others that the Bible is the Word of God; we accept that truth by Faith Alone through the conviction the Spirit give us as a testimony to other men.

Again, you have, knowingly (in my opinion) avoided the issue at hand with this truth we share: The Bible is the Word of God.
The issue at hand is: as the Bible doesn’t tell us what books are actually Scripture, we needed an extra-Biblical authority to tell us.
Now, you can reply that you accept the canon through faith alone; that’s fine.
Yet such a reply grants to us Catholics the sme reply: by faith, we accept the Church’s decision on the canon.

 

[cfrancis]

Papal authority is in contrast to the Scriptures as being final authority from God. That is the reason for the Protestant Reformation…Bible truth and revelation over papal authority. ]

Except with regards to the canon of the Bible, as the Bible is silent on this issue. You cannot forget this important proviso!

 

[Reformed]

Except with regards to the canon of the Bible, as the Bible is silent on this issue. You cannot forget this important proviso!

I don’t understand what you are trying to share?

 

[cfrancis]

I don’t understand what you are trying to share?

You stated:

Papal authority is in contrast to the Scriptures as being final authority from God. That is the reason for the Protestant Reformation…Bible truth and revelation over papal authority.

I merely pointed out that when it comes to your very Christian belief in the canon of Scripture, your belief in that is not rooted in Scripture.
If Scripture truly is the final authority, then to settle any issues on the canon of Scripture - a very Christian belief - one need only look to Scripture for the canon. Yet Scripture is silent on the issue - there is no inspired table of contents.

 

[Reformed]

You stated:
I merely pointed out that when it comes to your very Christian belief in the canon of Scripture, your belief in that is not rooted in Scripture.
If Scripture truly is the final authority, then to settle any issues on the canon of Scripture - a very Christian belief - one need only look to Scripture for the canon. Yet Scripture is silent on the issue - there is no inspired table of contents.

You lost me again. Do we both agree that the Roman Catholic Faith teaches that the Holy Scriptures are insufficient revelation from God?

 

[josephdavid]

You lost me again. Do we both agree that the Roman Catholic Faith teaches that the Holy Scriptures are insufficient revelation from God?

NO but Scripture shows that not all that was taught was written and that not all has been revealed to us by God.

 

[cfrancis]

You lost me again. Do we both agree that the Roman Catholic Faith teaches that the Holy Scriptures are insufficient revelation from God?

I harldy think you miss my point.
To make it more palatable for you: do you have Scriptural evidence for the canon of Scripture you accept and believe?

 

[Reformed]

NO but Scripture shows that not all that was taught was written and that not all has been revealed to us by God.

I lost you in your post. Sufficient means complete and all that is necessary pertaining to the Christian Faith and life. Consider the testimony of the Scriptures as being sufficient. The Mormon Church teaches that the Scriptures is not sufficient and additional extra-biblical revelation is necessary. Doesn’t the Roman Catholic Church teach the same thing in regards to Sacred Tradition?

3 His divine power has granted to us all things that pertain to life and godliness, through the knowledge of him who called us to [3] his own glory and excellence, [4] 4 by which he has granted to us his precious and very great promises, so that through them you may become partakers of the divine nature, having escaped from the corruption that is in the world because of sinful desire. 5 For this very reason, make every effort to supplement your faith with virtue, [5] and virtue with knowledge, 6 and knowledge with self-control, and self-control with steadfastness, and steadfastness with godliness, 7 and godliness with brotherly affection, and brotherly affection with love. 2 Peter 1

 

[cfrancis]

Do we both agree that the Roman Catholic Faith teaches that the Holy Scriptures are insufficient revelation from God?

You yourself stated the Bible cannot convince someone the Bible is the Word of God.
Can you, using only your Bible, present the canon of Scripture from the words of Scripture?

 

[dawid]

You lost me again. Do we both agree that the Roman Catholic Faith teaches that the Holy Scriptures are insufficient revelation from God?

That is incorrect!

There are many other things that Jesus did, but if these we to be described individually, I do not think the whole world would contain the books that would be written Jn 21: 25

The Scriptures are an adequate, definitive part of God’s word.

 

[Reformed]

NO but Scripture shows that not all that was taught was written and that not all has been revealed to us by God.

John 21:25

Now there are also many other things that Jesus did. Were every one of them to be written, I suppose that the world itself could not contain the books that would be written.

Scripture reveals that not all the was written is all that Christ did in His incarnation. God is infinite and the Biblie is finite in contents. God gaves us the Scritpures, His written Word to base our Faith on in this life. We will know more when we see Him face to face, and not before. To go beyond what is written leads to false gospels and false Christ.

 

[Reformed]

You yourself stated the Bible cannot convince someone the Bible is the Word of God.
Can you, using only your Bible, present the canon of Scripture from the words of Scripture?

I don’t think converted sinners who are born from above stuggle with the cannon of Scripture. The Bible is a closed book for those without the Spirit. It is an open book of progessive understanding and knowledge for those who are born from above. How do you think God the Holy Spirit grows us in knowledge and transformation but through the Scriptures (written Word of God).

 

[Reformed]

That is incorrect!

There are many other things that Jesus did, but if these we to be described individually, I do not think the whole world would contain the books that would be written Jn 21: 25

The Scriptures are an adequate, definitive part of God’s word.

Please please join us in our bibile study together as Christians.

forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=273731&page=9

 

[Lief_Erikson]

I lost you in your post. Sufficient means complete and all that is necessary pertaining to the Christian Faith and life. Consider the testimony of the Scriptures as being sufficient.

The Early Church belief about this was that while Sacred Scripture includes essentially all revelation Christians need, people are notoriously bad at interpreting it. The Early Church found that heretics they were arguing with could use Sacred Scripture persuasively in debate and could find all kinds of disagreements and quibbles over word meanings. While the meaning was plain enough to the Church, people who were willing to deviate from their Tradition presented a vast variety of contradictory meanings leading in all kinds of directions.

The Church has affirmed from the beginning that the Scriptures contain essentially all important public revelation, whether implicitly or explicitly. However, history has proven, and it proved in the very early days of the Church, that the Scripture could also be misinterpreted in some terrible ways.

Thus Tradition, from which Scripture sprang, serves as a kind of interpretive moral compass, showing people what the original meaning was, and thus what was meant by the apostles and by Jesus in the Scripture.

Finally, the Church gives the final word on matters of faith and morals, in unity with Tradition and Scripture (not in opposition to either), and keeps the Church from being reduced to subjectivist confusion.

The Mormon Church teaches that the Scriptures is not sufficient and additional extra-biblical revelation is necessary.

The reason extra-biblical revelation is necessary is that people come to vast varieties of conflicting and flawed interpretations of it. It’s beastly the array of contradictory interpretations exist. The system of the Catholic Church (Church + Tradition + Scripture) which has existed from the earliest days of the Church and can be seen supported in the Scripture itself has been a sure guide for consistent and clear revelation of the original doctrinal meanings of Jesus for all Christians who submit to them.

For those who do not submit to these original and consistent teaching, division, confusion and subjectivism have been the results. The existence of 30,000+ Protestant denominations prove this.

Doesn’t the Roman Catholic Church teach the same thing in regards to Sacred Tradition?

They added books to the Bible. The Catholic Church never has (though the Protestant Reformers removed books from it). The Catholic Church, in fact, selected the Bible’s canon. Without the Church, you would not have the Bible.

Secondly, the Mormons have added in a new revelation that isn’t supposed to have been shown to men prior to Joseph Smith. This is different from the Catholic Church, as the Church does not profess to offer any “new” revelation. The Church instead clarifies the “old” revelation, describing in more clarity the original meanings passed on by the apostles to their successors and all the Church. The Catholic Church does not come up with new revelations like the Mormons did, but only illuminates the old.

The Catholic Church and the Sacred Tradition are also the sources of the original Bible canon. In that sense, I guess you could say that we “added” books to the Bible. We added the New Testament.

 

[Reformed]

The Early Church belief about this was that while Sacred Scripture includes essentially all revelation Christians need, people are notoriously bad at interpreting it. The Early Church found that heretics they were arguing with could use Sacred Scripture persuasively in debate and could find all kinds of disagreements and quibbles over word meanings. While the meaning was plain enough to the Church, people who were willing to deviate from their Tradition presented a vast variety of contradictory meanings leading in all kinds of directions.

The Church has affirmed from the beginning that the Scriptures contain essentially all important public revelation, whether implicitly or explicitly. However, history has proven, and it proved in the very early days of the Church, that the Scripture could also be misinterpreted in some terrible ways.

Thus Tradition, from which Scripture sprang, serves as a kind of interpretive moral compass, showing people what the original meaning was, and thus what was meant by the apostles and by Jesus in the Scripture.

Finally, the Church gives the final word on matters of faith and morals, in unity with Tradition and Scripture (not in opposition to either), and keeps the Church from being reduced to subjectivist confusion.

The reason extra-biblical revelation is necessary is that people come to vast varieties of conflicting and flawed interpretations of it. It’s beastly the array of contradictory interpretations exist. The system of the Catholic Church (Church + Tradition + Scripture) which has existed from the earliest days of the Church and can be seen supported in the Scripture itself has been a sure guide for consistent and clear revelation of the original doctrinal meanings of Jesus for all Christians who submit to them.

For those who do not submit to these original and consistent teaching, division, confusion and subjectivism have been the results. The existence of 30,000+ Protestant denominations prove this.

They added books to the Bible. The Catholic Church never has (though the Protestant Reformers removed books from it). The Catholic Church, in fact, selected the Bible’s canon. Without the Church, you would not have the Bible.

Secondly, the Mormons have added in a new revelation that isn’t supposed to have been shown to men prior to Joseph Smith. This is different from the Catholic Church, as the Church does not profess to offer any “new” revelation. The Church instead clarifies the “old” revelation, describing in more clarity and detail the original meanings passed on by the apostles to their successors and all the Church. The Catholic Church does not come up with new revelations like the Mormons did, but only illuminates the old.

The Catholic Church and the Sacred Tradition are also the sources of the original Bible canon. In that sense, I guess you could say that we “added” books to the Bible. We added the New Testament.

Please please join us in our bibile study together as Christians.

forums.catholic-questions.org/showthrea…=273731&page=9

 

[Lief_Erikson]

I can’t access the page- the url you’re using has an error in it. The URL has been abbreviated with this: “…”, which kills its functionality.

I don’t really have sufficient time or interest to join a Bible study, either . . . Maybe I’ll drop by from time to time.

I’d love to hear your reply to my post in this thread, though .