Sola Scriptura is True

[Religio71]

16 All Scripture is breathed out by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, 17 that the man of God may be competent, equipped for every good work.

Again, the word every means sufficient for EVERY good work. Only God is good, all good works you can do are included in scripture, thus if something isn’t in scripture it isn;t a good work.

This passage is definitive and irrefutable.

Again, they can’t show us where the word of God is only found in the Bible. Those verses do not say that.

 

[Religio71]

and yes, we agree that it is definitive and irrefutable. What is refutable is your erroneous understanding of it. My eyes equip me for every situation, but they aren’t all that I need to deal with every situation.

 

[adstrinity]

2 Thess 2:15

15Therefore, brethren, stand fast, and hold the traditions which ye have been taught, whether by word, or our epistle.

Whoa, so we should not only hold to what is written down, but what is given by word of mouth? But what about scripture being sufficient?

NO NO NO! You’re not reading it right!

Alright, fine, all 73 books of the Bible are sufficient, happy now DD2007?

 

[Religio71]

Actually, yes it does. Think about it for a minute.

Your eyes serve a different purpose than scripture. This passage gives the purpose of scripture.

2 Timothy 3: 16-17 ESV
16 All Scripture is breathed out by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, 17 that the man of God may be competent, equipped for every good work.

Your eyes equip you to view the world around you.

They are totally different things and both are sufficient for their purposes.

Yes, your eyes equip you to view the world. They are not all that you need. You may also need your hands or your feet.

And also, your eyes take in the information. You also need the brain to interpret that information. This is all simple it’s sad you don’t get it. :banghead:

 

[josie_L]

You do understand that I am using the same hermeneutic you are supposed to be using when you exeget John chapter 6, right?

You guys have fought that the word is means is for centuries. We believe the word every means every. You discount the hermeneutic you lose the doctrine of transubstantiation.

Alright let’s follow your train of thought shall we (concerning SS), do you believe in the Trinity? Do you believe that Jesus has one or two natures? If indeed he has two natures are they distinct, i.e., 100% divine and 100% man but united? Or do you believe that one is absorbed into the other? Did Jesus have one or two wills? Where would you find the answer to these questions in the Bible?

 

[Religio71]

NO NO NO! You’re not reading it right!

Alright, fine, all 73 books of the Bible are sufficient, happy now?

 

[DD2007]

Again, they can’t show us where the word of God is only found in the Bible. Those verses do not say that.

Yes they do. The word of God only teaches good. If this passage is true, the word of God can only be found in the bible as it equips us for every good work.

No good works left out. All works left out aren’t good. It is solid teaching.

 

[adstrinity]

One statement was for you, one was for DD.

The one for you was what will be told to you. Even though it’s clear as crystal in the Bible, and, we should take the Bible literally, that doesn’t apply to the things that are in favour of Catholocism.

 

[nsper7]

Every good work means every good work. If something makes you equiped for everything then it is sufficient for anything. This scripture is sufficient. If there is anything else you need then it does not equip you for everything you need.

The scriputre is clear that it equips you for every good work. This it teaches it is sufficient and nothing else is needed.

Also since it does equip you for every GOOD work then if you are taught a work from some other source that isn;t in scriputre that work CANNOT be good. So, scripture nowhere says we are to pray to saints. Thus praying to saints isn’t a good work.

It does guarantee you will be equipped for every good work, it says you MAY be equipped for every good work. And even by SS, Communion of Saints can be defended:

Mk 9:4 (we see Elijah interacting with the living)
Luke 16:24 (we see someone asking Abraham for intercession)
Romans 12:5/1 Corinthians 10:17/Ephesians 4:4 (all Catholics are united)
Galations 6:2 (we are commanded to help each other)
1 Timothy 2:1-4 (we are told to pray for each other and to make intercessions for each other)
James 5:16-18 (the prayers of a righteous man availeth much–the Saints in Heaven are completely no righteous, no nothing)
1 Thessalonians 5:10 (whether one is asleep or awake [physically alive or dead], we are connected to Christ and to each other)
Hebrews 12:1 (cloud of witnesses…means they can hear and see us, part of the definition of a witness)

Where does it say that the dead, actually more alive than we are since they are with Christ, would stop praying for us (we can assume they have been perfected in charity) or that they could not hear us? Where is it forbidden to ask the physically dead, but alive in Christ, to pray for us? Do you ever ask others to pray for you?

16 All Scripture is breathed out by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, 17 that the man of God may be competent, equipped for every good work.

Again, the word every means sufficient for EVERY good work. Only God is good, all good works you can do are included in scripture, thus if something isn’t in scripture it isn;t a good work.

This passage is definitive and irrefutable.

Are you even listening to us or are you just that dense upstairs? It has already been pointed out:

A) All =/= only
B) Profitable =/= sufficient
C) May =/= is

With Scripture, one MAY be equipped for every good work. With good food, one MAY be healthy. MAY is not a definitive word like ‘is’ or ‘will’. ‘May’ denotes a possibility.

 

[adstrinity]

Yes they do. The word of God only teaches good. If this passage is true, the word of God can only be found in the bible as it equips us for every good work.

No good works left out. All works left out aren’t good. It is solid teaching.

Okay, so, what have we learned? One person says one thing, one person says the opposite. Even if one is wrong, this disproves Sola Scriptura. By starting this thread and allowing debate you show how it fails.

 

[Religio71]

Yes they do. The word of God only teaches good. If this passage is true, the word of God can only be found in the bible as it equips us for every good work.

No good works left out. All works left out aren’t good. It is solid teaching.

What were the first Christians using before the Bible was compiled?

And it is completely illogical to go from the Bible equipping us for every good work to the word of God only being found in it. My voice may come from my mouth, but I also have it recorded on audio. It’s the same voice, different sources.

 

[Religio71]

One statement was for you, one was for DD.

The one for you was what will be told to you. Even though it’s clear as crystal in the Bible, and, we should take the Bible literally, that doesn’t apply to the things that are in favour of Catholocism.

 

[Des]

16 All Scripture is breathed out by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, 17 that the man of God may be competent, equipped for every good work.

Again, the word every means sufficient for EVERY good work. Only God is good, all good works you can do are included in scripture, thus if something isn’t in scripture it isn;t a good work.

This passage is definitive and irrefutable.

I hear the word ‘sufficient’ thrown around alot by you yet it somehow isn’t existent in the verse itself.

Here’s how it should read if like you say is correct.

All Scripture is breathed out by God and SUFFICIENT for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, 17 that the man of God will be competent, equipped for every good work.

Notice the word Profitable is here instead. Two totally different words with totally different meanings.
And again, the NT wasn’t under one cover at that time so the Scripture He was talking about was incomplete. There is no way around it no matter how badly you want to inject your heresy into that verse.

 

[DD2007]

Alright let’s follow your train of thought shall we (concerning SS), do you believe in the Trinity? Do you believe that Jesus has one or two natures? If indeed he has two natures are they distinct, i.e., 100% divine and 100% man but united? Or do you believe that one is absorbed into the other? Did Jesus have one or two wills? Where would you find the answer to these questions in the Bible?

The Theology of the Trinity is implicit all over the bible. The name Trinity isn’t in the bible however the meaning is. I personally am one who holds that the Johanine comma 1 John 5:7 is indeed inspired scripture that was in Jerome’s original Vulgate. He even claimed it was taken out by Arians…so. The DOuay Rheims is actually your most accuirate RCC version of the bible. Ours is the KJV, NKJV, and Amplified. I use the ESv on-line because it is the most respected among modern scholars and I see no reason to argue everyday for the comma.

Jesus was both fully human and fuly God. This is implicit in scripture as well especially in the first chapter of John.

His will is one. Jesus has one will. We see that throughout scripture as well. Especia;lly when he prayed to the Father that the Father’s will be done in the garden on holy Thursday night.

 

[Religio71]

Okay, so, what have we learned? One person says one thing, one person says the opposite. Even if one is wrong, this disproves Sola Scriptura. By starting this thread and allowing debate you show how it fails.

Correct. If Scripture was all that we needed, we wouldn’t have most churches disagreeing with what it says. Clearly there is a need for something else in addition to scripture. The protestants themselves can’t even agree on it. Then they say they agree on the “essentials”, yet the Bible itself never divides doctrines into essentials and non-essentials. So much for everything HAS TO BE in the Bible.

 

[DD2007]

I hear the word ‘sufficient’ thrown around alot by you yet it somehow isn’t existent in the verse itself.

Here’s how it should read if like you say is correct.

All Scripture is breathed out by God and SUFFICIENT for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, 17 that the man of God may be competent, equipped for every good work.

Notice the word Profitable is here instead. Two totally different words with totally different meanings.
And again, the NT wasn’t under one cover at that time so the Scripture He was talking about was incomplete. There is no way around it no matter how badly you want to inject your heresy into that verse.

Profitable for means simply “good for”

Sufficiency is clearly taught when it says it will train you in every good work. That makes it sufficient by necessity.

 

[SyCarl]

2 Thess 2:15

15Therefore, brethren, stand fast, and hold the traditions which ye have been taught, whether by word, or our epistle.

Whoa, so we should not only hold to what is written down, but what is given by word of mouth? But what about scripture being sufficient?

You are quoting from one letter to one church. Paul wrote only two short letters to the Thessalonians which obviously do not contain all his teaching. But the fact that part of what was taught to the Thessalonians was oral, does not mean that those oral teachings were not recorded elsewhere in Scripture. Looking at another Church Father, we are told that what once had been taught oral had now been recorded in Scripture.

We have learned from none others the plan of our salvation, than from those through whom the Gospel has come down to us, which they did at one time proclaim in public, and, at a later period, by the will of God, handed down to us in the Scriptures, to be the ground and pillar of our faith.

Irenaeus (Against Heresies Book 3, Chapter 1. Paragraph 1.)
newadvent.org/fathers/0103301.htm

Also remember that sola scriptura does not say everything we could know is recorded in scripture, but that the necessary things are.

 

[Religio71]

Profitable
* Main Entry: prof·it·able
* Pronunciation: \ˈprä-fə-tə-bəl, ˈpräf-tə-bəl
* Function: adjective
* Date: 14th century

: affording profits : yielding advantageous returns or results

Don’t see sufficiency in there.

 

[nsper7]

Profitable for means simply “good for”

Sufficiency is clearly taught when it says it will train you in every good work. That makes it sufficient by necessity.

NO! Can you use a little bit of logic here? I know that is inherently contradictory to Protestantism, but PLEASE TRY!

The verse NEVER says you WILL be equipped for every good work. It says you MAY be equipped for every good.

 

[Des]

The Theology of the Trinity is implicit all over the bible. The name Trinity isn’t in the bible however the meaning is. I personally am one who holds that the Johanine comma 1 John 5:7 is indeed inspired scripture that was in Jerome’s original Vulgate. He even claimed it was taken out by Arians…so. The DOuay Rheims is actually your most accuirate RCC version of the bible. Ours is the KJV, NKJV, and Amplified. I use the ESv on-line because it is the most respected among modern scholars and I see no reason to argue everyday for the comma.

Jesus was both fully human and fuly God. This is implicit in scripture as well especially in the first chapter of John.

There’s another mistake of yours. Anything implicit in any type of writing will bring about confusion and debates. And with no visibile authority to settle the matter seems the debating and confusion will continue. Last time I checked Jesus wanted us all to be one. He Prayed for this as a matter of fact. Don’t you think He would have made sure there is no room for error.

SS is the biggest joke when it comes to many sects of Christianity and you’ve fallen for it hook, line and sinker. .