Sola Scriptura Is Not God's Plan - An Argument

[mikeledes]

I think that is what it would mean. Of course, many Catholics aposticized, but if no Church was maintained in purity, then that means Jesus is a liar, and the HS is a weakling.

I found that an interesting question/comment. Considering that truth precedes apostasy, and that Catholicism precedes Protestantism, one would think that Protestantism would fit that description better. Though I’m not saying Protestantism is an apostasy. But if the Roman Catholic “apostasy” prevailed for 1500 years, then that does mean that Satan prevailed. But since Christ promised that the gates of hell would never prevail against His church, and Jesus keeps His promise, then the only church that can be the Church He founded is the Catholic Church. The Catholic Church has historical, institutional, and theological continuity with the apostolic age, something that no Protestant church can claim. The Bible and history backs the claims of the Catholic Church.

God Bless,
Michael

 

[Nick_Jones]

1 Timothy 3:15

15but in case I am delayed, I write so that you will know how one ought to conduct himself in the household of God, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and support of the truth.

'Cuz the Bible tells me so.

God Bless,
Michael

For the sake of context and continuity, here is what I was originally asking as it pertains to which is more authoritative, the church, or Scripture.

I said:

There are a few fatal flaws in this view of yours:

1. Without the Scriptures, how on earth can you, or anyone else, determine which religion and/or which religious teachings are from God?

1. How is it possible to hold the view that “the church has more authority than the bible,” without viciously insulting God? Without God’s word, “the church” is just a bunch of prideful lost souls inventing whatever doctrines seem useful to maintain control over the masses.

Then loscampos referred me to 1 Tim. 3:15 to prove that the church is higher in authority than Scripture!

1. This one is rather simple.
   A. The pillar of Truth is the Church 1 Tim 3: 15

Without realizing it, you people have been helping me prove that without Scripture, you are not even capable of presenting your arguments for the supposedly HIGHER authority of the church!

If the church is equal to, or higher in authority than Scripture, why do you always rely on SCRIPTURE to make your case? If you really believed what you say you believe about the supremacy of Holy Mother Church, then why is SCRIPTURE your final authority in all of your arguments, and not the CHURCH?

 

[loscampos]

For the sake of context and continuity, here is what I was originally asking as it pertains to which is more authoritative, the church, or Scripture.

I said:

Then loscampos referred me to 1 Tim. 3:15 to prove that the church is higher in authority than Scripture!

Without realizing it, you people have been helping me prove that without Scripture, you are not even capable of presenting your arguments for the supposedly HIGHER authority of the church!

If the church is equal to, or higher in authority than Scripture, why do you always rely on SCRIPTURE to make your case? If you really believed what you say you believe about the supremacy of Holy Mother Church, then why is SCRIPTURE your final authority in all of your arguments, and not the CHURCH?

I never said we didnt need it or that it wasnt important, I just said that it had more authority than scripture. One can have more authority and still work together. In your view scripture has more authority than the church, yet they can still coexist.

We can prove without scripture that the world was created, and that there are planets and the sun and so forth. If there was no NT the Catholic church would still exist. And we can prove without scripture through the writings of those times that there was a church and community created. So even if we never put the NT together the church can be seen outside the church.

 

[Nick_Jones]

Yes, I think it is both. And Jesus is the Rock. Jesus grafted Peter into His own rockyness. But, that is another thread!

This also belongs on another thread! Why are you derailing this thread? I thought you wnated to talk about Sola Scriptura? Was I wrong? Do you just want to find fault with the Catholic faith wherever you can?

I’m NOT derailing this thread. This thread is dealing with the topic of AUTHORITY, and it is my view that the RCC is utterly powerless to support its own claims of supreme authority without totally relying on what is really authoritative–the Scriptures. If Peter was the first pope, how on earth can you prove this without (mis)using the Scriptures?

 

[davidv]

Without realizing it, you people have been helping me prove that without Scripture, you are not even capable of presenting your arguments for the supposedly HIGHER authority of the church!

If the church is equal to, or higher in authority than Scripture, why do you always rely on SCRIPTURE to make your case? If you really believed what you say you believe about the supremacy of Holy Mother Church, then why is SCRIPTURE your final authority in all of your arguments, and not the CHURCH?

“supposedly HIGHER authority” is purely and simply your personally contructed caricature of the Church. It in not true. How did you miss all of the posts declaring the correct Church teaching that the Scripture, Tradition and the Magisterium are inseparable. Nice strawman.

 

[mikeledes]

For the sake of context and continuity, here is what I was originally asking as it pertains to which is more authoritative, the church, or Scripture.

I said:

Then loscampos referred me to 1 Tim. 3:15 to prove that the church is higher in authority than Scripture!

Without realizing it, you people have been helping me prove that without Scripture, you are not even capable of presenting your arguments for the supposedly HIGHER authority of the church!

If the church is equal to, or higher in authority than Scripture, why do you always rely on SCRIPTURE to make your case? If you really believed what you say you believe about the supremacy of Holy Mother Church, then why is SCRIPTURE your final authority in all of your arguments, and not the CHURCH?

Hi Nick! The role of the Church is to safeguard and interpret Divine Revelation, just as the role of the Supreme Court is to interpret the Constitution. When the Church has its first controversy regarding salvation, they turned to a church council and the teaching authoirty of the Church to definitively decide who was right (Acts 15). And the decrees of that council were binding on all Christians. Divine Revelation is the source of our teachings. The Church is not above Scripture.

It was also this teaching authority that discerned that the books you now accept as canonical were inspired.

Moreover, we have to cite Scripture because that is the only authority you accept.

God Bless,
Michael

 

[mikeledes]

Nick, I will most likely not be online this weekend. I pray that God richly bless you and your family in Christ and that you have a very blessed weekend! I wish the same to all.

God Bless,
Michael

 

[Nick_Jones]

“supposedly HIGHER authority” is purely and simply your personally contructed caricature of the Church. It in not true. How did you miss all of the posts declaring the correct Church teaching that the Scripture, Tradition and the Magisterium are inseparable. Nice strawman.

Hi David,

It seems that you completely missed my point. You are assuming rather than proving that the RCC is the church that Christ established. How did you come to know that the RCC really is the true church?

 

[Nick_Jones]

On what basis would one assume that, if one did not find something in the NT, then it did not exist? Even the Bible itself states that it does not contain everything! Scripture is very clear that the Teachings, whether given by word of mouth or by letter, are to be held in equal authority.

Hi guanophore,

Exactly what are “the Teachings” you are referring to?

What you must establish, in order to throw out Sacred Tradition, is that the Church went off the rails at some point, and abandoned the Teachings delivered to her by the Apostles. This is also on another thread!

It seems to me that what YOU must establish is:

1. Some practical method for defining what is and what isn’t “Sacred Tradition.”
2. That all of these “Sacred Traditions” were actually taught by the apostles.

Good luck!

 

[guanophore]

For the sake of context and continuity, here is what I was originally asking as it pertains to which is more authoritative, the church, or Scripture.

This was where we got off on the wrong foot, since they are equal for Catholics.

1 Tim. 3:15 to prove that the church is higher in authority than Scripture!

James 3:1-2
2 For we all make many mistakes, and any one makes no mistakes in what he says he is a perfect man, able to bridle the whole body also.

Without realizing it, you people have been helping me prove that without Scripture, you are not even capable of presenting your arguments for the supposedly HIGHER authority of the church!

Both represent the one complete Divine Deposit of faith, delivered once and for all to the Saints.

If the church is equal to, or higher in authority than Scripture, why do you always rely on SCRIPTURE to make your case?  If you really believed what you say you believe about the supremacy of Holy Mother Church, then why is SCRIPTURE your final authority in all of your arguments, and not the CHURCH?

It is very difficult to have a discussion with a SS using anything but scripture. There are plenty of documents available other than scripture, but most who bring these sort of questions do not accept those sources. It is usually more effective to make an arguement from a source that is accepted by both sides.

 

[anthony022071]

I must respectfully disagree. Most RC’s will say that God wants all people to be saved. Scripture says that we are saved by grace. So the question is, if we can’t know or even agree on what the definition of “grace” is, how should the RC attempt to obtain this “grace” for salvation? If you don’t really know what you’re looking for, how should you begin your search?

Grace doesn’t depend upon our ability to define it for it to be effectual. We only obtain grace as a free gift,and through prayer. God’s grace finds us even when we aren’t looking for it. I would define grace as the gift of the Holy Spirit,which draws men to Jesus Christ,who in turn draws men to obedience to the Father’s will,which is for us to follow the commandments.

A very good point! Salvation does entail a covenant with God. And it isn’t a momentary feeling or a one-time expression; faith needs to be enduring and abiding. But who, or what, is it that causes the elect to obtain this kind of faith? It is all given freely by God to those who He intends to save. Jesus is the Good Shepherd who will lose none of those whom the Father has given to Him. Our “free” will was lost in the fall through Adam. Hence the complete dependence upon the grace of God for our salvation.

I don’t agree that our free will was lost. If we had no free will,then faith and love would be worthless. God’s gift of grace would be neither a gift nor grace;it would be coersion. Free will is simply the ability to choose.

Deuteronomy 30,19-20:
< I call heaven and earth today to witness against you: I have set before you life and death, the blessing and the curse. Choose life, then, that you and your descendants may live,
by loving the LORD, your God, heeding his voice, and holding fast to him. >

Paul does not see faith and works as opposed to each other.
We must be righteous by faith. How are we righteous by faith? By following the commandments,by works. Grace ought to lead us back to following the commandments. That is the proof of faith,and it is how grace can save us.

Galatians 3,11-12:
< And that no one is justified before God by the law is clear, for “the one who is righteous by faith will live.”
But the law does not depend on faith; rather, “the one who does these things will live by them.” >

 

[Namesake]

The jews(sic) before the time of the Church utilized scripture(OT canons) and the jews(sic) were taught by their priests and leaders just as the Christian lay people are led by the Bishops and priests and deacons of the Church.

Maybe refresh your understanding of Torah. Even after what you call “the time of the Church” Jewish thought is both written and oral.

The jews did not have one set canon, their were 5 canons, but the Word of God revealed through the commandments was what each followed for his/her guidance to do the will of God through the Law of God.

Not just the commandments…as I assume you understand.

 

[Nick_Jones]

This was where we got off on the wrong foot, since they are equal for Catholics.

Apparently not for ALL Catholics.

 

[Nick_Jones]

It is very difficult to have a discussion with a SS using anything but scripture. There are plenty of documents available other than scripture, but most who bring these sort of questions do not accept those sources. It is usually more effective to make an arguement from a source that is accepted by both sides.

I find this argument to be not at all persuasive. Atheists don’t believe the gospel; should we avoid proclaiming the gospel to atheists just because they find it offensive? I sure hope not. If I were a RC, and I truly thought the RCC was a necessary and essential authority over mankind, I would make every effort to argue in favor of RC authority in a manner that is consistent with my beliefs and I would not hesitate to declare what I believe is true just because some people are set against it. I really can’t tell you how to do apologetics, but as for me, the truth should NEVER be compromised just because lots of people won’t like it.

 

[Nick_Jones]

Grace doesn’t depend upon our ability to define it for it to be effectual.

Well I could say pretty much the same thing about sola Scriptura, couldn’t I?

 

[Nick_Jones]

I don’t agree that our free will was lost. If we had no free will,then faith and love would be worthless. God’s gift of grace would be neither a gift nor grace;it would be coersion. Free will is simply the ability to choose.

I don’t see how having the ability to choose what we want gives us anything other than bondage if everything we want is evil all of the time. We need to be regenerated by the Spirit to want what is good.

Gen. 6:5-7
The LORD saw how great man’s wickedness on the earth had become, and that every inclination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil all the time. The LORD was grieved that he had made man on the earth, and his heart was filled with pain. So the LORD said, “I will wipe mankind, whom I have created, from the face of the earth—men and animals, and creatures that move along the ground, and birds of the air—for I am grieved that I have made them.”

 

[Namesake]

why would Jesus preface His statement with

"you are cephas(rock) immediately before saying

“and upon this cephas I will build my church”?

if He did not mean Cephas(kephas, peter, rock)?

What was the use of saying "you are Peter(cephas)?

if it was not peter he was speaking of in the vry next set of words in the exact same sentence?

The church IS Christ’s Body, therefore Christ would not be speaking of His Body. The church is built on the foundation of the apostles with Christ as the chief cornerstone. Cornerstones are not under the foundation, they are on the same level as that foundation, just the corner of it. This is why the church is the pillar and foundation of the Truth, they uphold Christ to the world, as peter did as the church’s greatest servant. “the greatest servant among you, that is your leader” Christ stated to His apostles.
and he only gave one the keys and the job of tending and feeding his sheep and strengthening his brethren after being sifted by satan.

I think that’s crazy talk. How could anyone believe that the catholic church could have as it’s very foundation, a mere man?

Just think about the idea of a foundation. Peter wasn’t the foundation at all, Christ was and is the foundation of Christianity. Otherwise it might be called Peteranity, and it isn’t.

 

[guanophore]

Hi David,

It seems that you completely missed my point. You are assuming rather than proving that the RCC is the church that Christ established. How did you come to know that the RCC really is the true church?

This is just another strawman, NIck Jesus founded His church in Capernum, on His Apostle Peter, who He renamed Cephas. The Church was based in Jerusalem for at least 20 years before Peter or Paul ever went to Rome,and Rome did not develop a Latin Rite for centuries. The Church Christ founded is not Roman. It was in Antioch that the believers of the Way were first called Christians. This is just anti-Catholic rhetoric.

I don’t see how having the ability to choose what we want gives us anything other than bondage if everything we want is evil all of the time. We need to be regenerated by the Spirit to want what is good.

You are right, of course, but we don’t only want what is evil all the time. Even the unregerate want good things. As Jesus said “even you, being evil, will give good gifts to your children, if you child asks for a piece of bread…”

The unregenerate heart cannot effect what is of God, but still wants it.

 

[guanophore]

Apparently not for ALL Catholics.

Yes, this is Catholic teaching. If a person calls himself a Catholic and rejects this doctrine, then he is not Catholic. He may not realize it, but he is out of order.

 

[guanophore]

I find this argument to be not at all persuasive. Atheists don’t believe the gospel; should we avoid proclaiming the gospel to atheists just because they find it offensive? I sure hope not.

Oh, no! But the issue was not proclaiming the gospel, but defending the doctrines of the church. Personally, I don’t involve myself with non-Catholic apologetics. I have my hands full here (and enjoy this). I don’t even go on the atheist threads. I know there are others that like it. My interest is in issues of non-Catholic Christians.

If I were a RC, and I truly thought the RCC was a necessary and essential authority over mankind, I would make every effort to argue in favor of RC authority in a manner that is consistent with my beliefs and I would not hesitate to declare what I believe is true just because some people are set against it. I really can’t tell you how to do apologetics, but as for me, the truth should NEVER be compromised just because lots of people won’t like it.

It has nothing to do with what people like, or don’t like. I am not Roman, anyway, and Jesus gave authority to Peter to shepherd the Church, that does not include the whole world, but only the flock of God.