Sola Scriptura is Absolutely biblical

[twb1621]

post #3 of 3

In Scripture, as today, both written and unwritten Tradition are from Christ and made by him to stand inseparably united like hydrogen and oxygen that fuse to form living water or like the words and tune of a single song. In Scripture, as today, the unwritten aspect of Sacred Tradition is not some separate, secret and parallel revelation, but the common teaching, common life, and common worship of the whole Church. In Scripture, as today, this Tradition grows like the mustard seed and, as a result, gets more mustardy, not less. In Scripture, as today, the Church in council sits on the judge’s bench and listens to the testimony of Scripture in light of its Tradition in order to discern how best to define that Tradition more precisely.
And all this is because, in Scripture, as today, the Tradition, both written and unwritten, comes to us through the Body of Him Who is Truth: the one, holy, catholic and apostolic Church Paul calls “the fullness of him who fills everything in every way” and the “pillar and foundation of the truth” (Eph 1:22; 1 Tm 3:15). For in Scripture, as today, Sacred Tradition-the common apostolic teaching, life and worship handed down to us in written and unwritten form-and the magisterial authority of the one, holy, catholic and apostolic Church are as inseparably united as the Father, Son and Holy Spirit.”

author, Mark P. Shea
mark-shea.com/tradition_f.html

 

[Gabriel_of_12]

Scripture is not necessarily an EXHAUSTIVE REVELATION. All that is meant by this is that God has decided not to reveal everything to us. However, what God has revealed to us in His word is inerrant truth.

**Gabriel of 12
Now this makes sense to me although it falls short of what Jesus accomplished in his earthly ministry. Now reread your statement and add “Sola Scriptura” to it, and you will find it does not connect or agree with our Omnipotent God. So would you agree then “Sola Scriptura” is not absolutely biblical? and that God through his begotten Son Jesus revealed things to his apostles and not everything got written down? **
**John 21:24
It is this disciple who testifies to these things and has written them, 14 and we know that his testimony is true.
25
There are also many other things that Jesus did, but if these were to be described individually, I do not think the whole world would contain the books that would be written. **

Scripture is also the supreme benchmark by which all other sources of truth are judged by.

Gabriel of 12
Again I find myself in agreement with you, when you dont attach “Sola” to those things that are divine. Sacred Scripture and Sacred Tradition go together you cannot have one without the other. So when you say Scripture without the “Sola”, every Catholilc doctrine is supported by Sacred Scripture and Sacred Tradition to which you just acknowledged indicating “by which all other sources of TRUTH are judged by”, this my brother is stating Scripture = supports the body of Jesus Christ on earth the Catholic church, her Magesterium, and apostolic Traditional teachings unchanged, for God does not change, Jesus is the same yesterday, today, and forever more.

A person can be saved outside of sola scriptura - this has been my consistent plea throughout.

Gabriel of 12
Question? if a person can be saved outside of “Sola Scriptura” to which I agree with you, then why do we need the doctrine of “Sola Scriptura”? The “Sola” attached to Scripture then; is never needed, it lends to a deception and mischaracterization of Salvation through Jesus Christ.

Peace be with you

 

[twb1621]

**Originally Posted by Craig Kennedy **
Scripture is not necessarily an EXHAUSTIVE REVELATION. All that is meant by this is that God has decided not to reveal everything to us. However, what God has revealed to us in His word is inerrant truth.

Hey Craig, in order for you to stand by this, you must accept the following as the word of Our Lord;
15
"…I do not ask that you take them out of the world but that you keep them from the evil one.
16
They do not belong to the world any more than I belong to the world.
17
Consecrate them in the truth. Your word is truth.
18
As you sent me into the world, so I sent them into the world.
19
And I consecrate myself for them, so that they also may be consecrated in truth.
20
“I pray not only for them, but also for those who will believe in me through their word, 21
so that they may all be one, as you, Father, are in me and I in you, that they also may be in us, that the world may believe that you sent me.
22
And I have given them the glory you gave me, so that they may be one, as we are one,
23
I in them and you in me, that they may be brought to perfection as one, that the world may know that you sent me, and that you loved them even as you loved me.” John 17: 15-23

 

[justasking4]

Part 1

twb1621;4335572]continued post #2 of 3 from previous post;

"…After all, no verse in Scripture says revelation ends with the death of the apostles. Rather, a few verses (such as Paul’s command to Timothy to guard what has been entrusted to him) can be seen to bear an extremely oblique witness to this teaching in light of Sacred Tradition preserved in the ChurchThis pattern of seeing Scripture in light of Sacred Tradition is absolutely crucial to understand, because failure to grasp it accounts for an enormous amount of misunderstanding. Evangelicals who have received (usually without realizing it) a pair of contact lenses colored by the Tradition of the Closure of Public Revelation can “see” that Tradition implied in Paul’s commands to Timothy. Yet we do not derive the doctrine from Scripture. Rather, we see it reflected there.

How can you have true Christian doctrine without deriving those doctrines from the Scriptures themselves?

But since Evangelicals have not received the contact lenses with the Tradition of the Perpetual Virginity of Mary, they are unable to see it reflect there. Instead, they imagine that doctrine is arrived at by Catholics sitting down with a Bible and saying, “Let’s see. What is the most tortured and extreme reading I can get out of Matthew 1:25 today? Hey! Let’s say Mary remained a virgin perpetually!”
In reality, however, Catholics see the Perpetual Virginity of Mary reflected in Scripture in just the same way the Council of Jerusalem saw the Circumcision Exemption reflected in Amos and Evangelicals see the Closure of Public Revelation reflected in Paul’s command to Timothy. The Church does not sit down and derive the dogma from the tortured reading of a few isolated texts of Scripture. Rather, it places the Scripture in the context of the Tradition handed down by the apostles and the interpretive office of the bishops they appointed.
In this context, we discover not explicit, but implicit testimony to the doctrine, while those verses which appear to speak of Jesus’ siblings or Mary’s relations with Joseph after the birth of Christ can easily be understood in a way compatible with her perpetual virginity. We find, for instance, that mention of Jesus “brothers” can mean “cousins” in the first century Jewish milieu.

I disagree with the idea that the church has not “tortured” the Scriptures to derive the Perpetual Virginity of Mary doctrine. To support this doctrine the church has to reject the plain meaning of those texts of Scriptrue the clearly show that Mary did have children of her own. Even the idea of a perpetual virgin in a marriage would go against God’s plan to go forth and multiply.
There are Greek words for cousin—anepsios as in Colossians 4:10 or kinsman = sungenis which is used in Luke 1:36. If the gospel writer meant cousin or kinsmen then these would have been the words used.

We find that Matthew 1:25 need not necessarily imply anything about Mary’s subsequent sexual relations with Joseph any more than “Michal had no children till the day of her death” implies that Michal had children after her death.

It absolutely implies that there will be and must sexual relations after the birth of Jesus. There is no hint in the angel’ message or in Mary’s statements that she would not have normal sexual relations.

 

[justasking4]

Part 2

We also find Mary-a woman betrothed-is astonished at Gabriel’s proclamation that “You will bear a son.” This is an odd thing for a betrothed woman to be astonished about. After all, a betrothed woman could expect and hope to bear many sons… unless she had already decided to remain a virgin even after marriage. Then she would be astonished at the prophecy.

 

[justasking4]

Gabriel of 12
Question? if a person can be saved outside of “Sola Scriptura” to which I agree with you, then why do we need the doctrine of “Sola Scriptura”? The “Sola” attached to Scripture then; is never needed, it lends to a deception and mischaracterization of Salvation through Jesus Christ.

Peace be with you

It is only in the Scriptures that we learn of Christ and salvation. In fact it is by the Scriptures that we grow in respect to salvation. I Peter 2:2

 

[twb1621]

Part 1

How can you have true Christian doctrine without deriving those doctrines from the Scriptures themselves?

I disagree with the idea that the church has not “tortured” the Scriptures to derive the Perpetual Virginity of Mary doctrine. To support this doctrine the church has to reject the plain meaning of those texts of Scriptrue the clearly show that Mary did have children of her own. Even the idea of a perpetual virgin in a marriage would go against God’s plan to go forth and multiply.
There are Greek words for cousin—anepsios as in Colossians 4:10 or kinsman = sungenis which is used in Luke 1:36. If the gospel writer meant cousin or kinsmen then these would have been the words used.

It absolutely implies that there will be and must sexual relations after the birth of Jesus. There is no hint in the angel’ message or in Mary’s statements that she would not have normal sexual relations.

I’m going to have to start all over again from where I came into this thread, aren’t I? Craig, where are you?

 

[justasking4]

No. The order of importance according to the Catholic Church is Sacred Tradition, Sacred Scripture and Magisterium but not one can do without the other. Sacred Tradition comes first because it existed first and includes all.

What is this Sacred Tradition that is more important than the written Scriptures? Is this a reference to the oral teachings that we no longer have access to?

 

[twb1621]

Part 1

How can you have true Christian doctrine without deriving those doctrines from the Scriptures themselves?

Are you aware that the gospels are that part of Jesus life and teachings that eventually got written down? They were written from the Traditional teachings. But not all was written nor was it all written in direct language to be taken for its word in all cases.

I disagree with the idea that the church has not “tortured” the Scriptures to derive the Perpetual Virginity of Mary doctrine. To support this doctrine the church has to reject the plain meaning of those texts of Scriptrue the clearly show that Mary did have children of her own. Even the idea of a perpetual virgin in a marriage would go against God’s plan to go forth and multiply.
There are Greek words for cousin—anepsios as in Colossians 4:10 or kinsman = sungenis which is used in Luke 1:36. If the gospel writer meant cousin or kinsmen then these would have been the words used.

All these issues have been responded to and it would probably help you if you went over the thread posts for the last few days. If you have difficulty finding the responses to these questions please let me know and I will re-enter them

It absolutely implies that there will be and must sexual relations after the birth of Jesus. There is no hint in the angel’ message or in Mary’s statements that she would not have normal sexual relations.

nop

 

[twb1621]

What is this Sacred Tradition that is more important than the written Scriptures? Is this a reference to the oral teachings that we no longer have access to?

I refer you to my last answer on that. but really, go over the posts from the last few days, at least the ones that I already posted because these questions have been answered before and if you have questions from those responses I can help you with those also. Unless we start a new thread because this one has been going for quite a while. I do want to help you but it would be beneficial for you to read back a few days or so. I mean that respectfully.

 

[Pixie_Dust]

How can you have true Christian doctrine without deriving those doctrines from the Scriptures themselves?

The doctrine came before the Scriptures were written. Do you keep forgetting that. Our faith is not based on the Bible, it is based on the Word of God, Jesus Christ.

I disagree with the idea that the church has not “tortured” the Scriptures to derive the Perpetual Virginity of Mary doctrine. To support this doctrine the church has to reject the plain meaning of those texts of Scriptrue the clearly show that Mary did have children of her own.

Where does it say in Scripture that Mary brought forth any other children?

Even the idea of a perpetual virgin in a marriage would go against God’s plan to go forth and multiply.

Actually Jesus did add all of us who believe to His family.

There are Greek words for cousin—anepsios as in Colossians 4:10 or kinsman = sungenis which is used in Luke 1:36. If the gospel writer meant cousin or kinsmen then these would have been the words used.

Not if they were Joseph’s sons from his first marriage. Then they would be step-brothers.

It absolutely implies that there will be and must sexual relations after the birth of Jesus. There is no hint in the angel’ message or in Mary’s statements that she would not have normal sexual relations.

In your opinion. By what authority do you claim to infallibly teach us the Scriptures?

 

[JMJ_coder]

What is this Sacred Tradition that is more important than the written Scriptures? Is this a reference to the oral teachings that we no longer have access to?

First off, Sacred Tradition isn’t more important that Sacred Scripture. They are of the same importance.

Second, we do have access to the oral teachings. They have been faithfully preserved and handed down throughout the ages in the Church.

 

[justasking4]

First off, Sacred Tradition isn’t more important that Sacred Scripture. They are of the same importance.

Second, we do have access to the oral teachings. They have been faithfully preserved and handed down throughout the ages in the Church.

What specific oral teachings do you have?

 

[JMJ_coder]

What specific oral teachings do you have?

A short non-exhaustive list:

Canon of Scriptures
Inerrancy and Inspiration of Scriptures
Trinity
Hypostatic Union
Sunday Worship
Marian Dogmas
Seven Sacraments
Real Presence

Note: Most of these can be found in Scripture as well, even if it is just an implication.

 

[Rachel_Malloy]

This thread is now closed.

God bless-

Rachel