Sola Scriptura is True

[DD2007]

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

When the apostles were alive they heard the gospel from them and it was proved by the Old Testament and whatever apostolic writings were completed at the time. When the last apostle died the church simply had to sift through and copy and compile the apostolic writings so everyone had a copy. However they always had the Old Testament.

The scriptures were put together by God over thousands of years. The New Testament was compiled amazingly quick actually.

All books of the bible were received from the authoritative hand of either an apostle or a prophet.

 

[DD2007]

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.

Respectfully, when it says you MAY be it means IF YOU READ IT.

 

[Religio71]

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.

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.

If you’re quoting Irenaeus, you may as well quote him fully. Yes, much that was given orally was subsequently written down (thus pointing to the word of God not being limited to the Bible). Also, Irenaeus clearly supported Tradition, which is also profitable:

"It is possible, then, for everyone in every church, who may wish to know the truth, to contemplate the tradition of the apostles which has been made known throughout the whole world. And we are in a position to enumerate those who were instituted bishops by the apostles and their successors to our own times—men who neither knew nor taught anything like these heretics rave about.

"But since it would be too long to enumerate in such a volume as this the successions of all the churches, we shall confound all those who, in whatever manner, whether through self-satisfaction or vainglory, or through blindness and wicked opinion, assemble other than where it is proper, by pointing out here the successions of the bishops of the greatest and most ancient church known to all, founded and organized at Rome by the two most glorious apostles, Peter and Paul, that church which has the tradition and the faith which comes down to us after having been announced to men by the apostles.

“With this church, because of its superior origin, all churches must agree—that is, all the faithful in the whole world—and it is in her that the faithful everywhere have maintained the apostolic tradition” (ibid., 3:3:1–2).

“The true knowledge is the doctrine of the apostles, and the ancient organization of the Church throughout the whole world, and the manifestation of the body of Christ according to the succession of bishops, by which succession the bishops have handed down the Church which is found everywhere” (ibid., 4:33:8).

 

[Religio71]

When the apostles were alive they heard the gospel from them and it was proved by the Old Testament and whatever apostolic writings were completed at the time. When the last apostle died the church simply had to sift through and copy and compile the apostolic writings so everyone had a copy. However they always had the Old Testament.

The scriptures were put together by God over thousands of years. The New Testament was compiled amazingly quick actually.

All books of the bible were received from the authoritative hand of either an apostle or a prophet.

Yes, they always had the Old Testament, which is not the New Testament. While they were “sifting” (and also, while they were writing, where was the full word of God, if it’s only in the Bible? And everyone had a copy? Are you serious?

 

[nsper7]

Respectfully, when it says you MAY be it means IF YOU READ IT.

Now, you are throwing in your personal interpretation. I believe, when it says MAY, it is saying that certain other factors are required (i.e. the Church and Tradition), just as a doctor might say if eat healthy food, you MAY be healthy (but you also need water, medicine, etc.). You cannot disprove my argument from the text, thus disproving SS: the text is vague enough to allow multiple interpretations.

 

[SyCarl]

If you’re quoting Irenaeus, you may as well quote him fully. Yes, much that was given orally was subsequently written down (thus pointing to the word of God not being limited to the Bible). Also, Irenaeus clearly supported Tradition, which is also profitable:

However to Irenaeus Scripture and tradition had the same content. Tradition simply means teachings. You cannot read back into Irenaeus the present concept of Tradition as containing things not in Scripture.

 

[DD2007]

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

Interesting point of view.

I can assure you that I can point you to a scripture that teaches absolutley EVERY doctrine I believe.

Roman Catholicism has a deposit of “sacred tradition” yet No One can tell you the extent of what is included in it or where it came from. It is a big grey area that no one can define. It teaches doctrines that aren’t in scripture which is taught by the passage we have gone over to be other than good because every good work is taught in scripture.

 

[Religio71]

However to Irenaeus Scripture and tradition had the same content. Tradition simply means teachings. You cannot read back into Irenaeus the present concept of Tradition as containing things not in Scripture.

Actually, the present concept of Tradition is not that it contains things not in Scripture.

Please read the Catechism.

 

[DD2007]

Yes, they always had the Old Testament, which is not the New Testament. While they were “sifting” (and also, while they were writing, where was the full word of God, if it’s only in the Bible? And everyone had a copy? Are you serious?

The full written word of God was completed when John punctuated the last sentence in Revelation.

It took a long time.

There was also a Thursday before the Friday that the Lord was crucified. Everything works out in God’s ordered time.

 

[DD2007]

Actually, the present concept of Tradition is not that it contains things not in Scripture.

Please read the Catechism.

The assumption of Mary is not in scripture. Neither is the immaculate conception. Nethier is indulgences…the list is long.

 

[DD2007]

the text is vague enough to allow multiple interpretations.

Actualy no it isn’t. It is one of the clearest texts in the entire bible.

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.

It means exactly what it says.

 

[Religio71]

The full written word of God was completed when John punctuated the last sentence in Revelation.

It took a long time.

There was also a Thursday before the Friday that the Lord was crucified. Everything works out in God’s ordered time.

Now where was the full word of God before John punctuated the last sentence in Revelation? Was God’s word not available until it was written down? Even your Protestant friend above says that the message was transmitted orally until it was written down. Clearly, the word of God is not only found in the written form.

 

[adstrinity]

Now where was the full word of God before John punctuated the last sentence in Revelation? Was God’s word not available until it was written down? Even your Protestant friend above says that the message was transmitted orally until it was written down. Clearly, the word of God is not only found in the written form.

I thought Jesus was the Word of God. Does the Bible list itself as the Word of God?

 

[Religio71]

The assumption of Mary is not in scripture. Neither is the immaculate conception. Nethier is indulgences…the list is long.

That’s like saying the Trinity isn’t in the Bible. It isn’t explicitly stated, however Catholics believe there is scriptural support for all of our beliefs. Try making another thread if you so desire to discuss that. Or just read this book:

amazon.com/Biblical-Defense-Catholicism-Dave-Armstrong/dp/1928832954/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1250571886&sr=8-1

 

[Religio71]

I thought Jesus was the Word of God. Does the Bible list itself as the Word of God?

Yup. clearly the word of God is not just in the Bible.

 

[nsper7]

Actualy no it isn’t. It is one of the clearest texts in the entire bible.

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.

It means exactly what it says.

EXPLAIN THEN! DON’T JUST QUOTE THE VERSE AT ME! The verse is vague enough with that MAY such that there could be multiple explanations as to why the person with Scripture MAY NOT be equipped for every good work and one reason is because something else is needed (i.e. Tradition and the Church).

 

[DD2007]

Now where was the full word of God before John punctuated the last sentence in Revelation? Was God’s word not available until it was written down? Even your Protestant friend above says that the message was transmitted orally until it was written down. Clearly, the word of God is not only found in the written form.

I said the full written word of God. John was an apostle of God. When he spoke orally it was like listening to the prophet Isaiah. Prophets and apostles are from God that is why their writings which are God breathed are the foundation that the Church is built upon and equip us for every good work. The spoke the word of God. “Verbum Dei”.

 

[Religio71]

I said the full written word of God. John was an apostle of God. When he spoke orally it was like listening to the prophet Isaiah. Prophets and apostles are from God that is why their writings which are God breathed are the foundation that the Church is built upon and equip us for every good work. The spoke the word of God. “Verbum Dei”.

Ok, so now it’s the full written word of God. Thank you. We agree.

 

[Religio71]

EXPLAIN THEN! DON’T JUST QUOTE THE VERSE AT ME! The verse is vague enough with that MAY such that there could be multiple explanations as to why the person with Scripture MAY NOT be equipped for every good work and one reason is because something else is needed (i.e. Tradition and the Church).

But no, the Bible is all you need! That’s why we have all the various versions of sola scriptura churches floating around, that can’t even agree. They say they agree on the essentials, yet they all don’t even agree on what is “essential”, and the Bible never makes a distinction between essential and non-essential doctrines. So much for the Bible being all you need.

 

[DD2007]

EXPLAIN THEN! DON’T JUST QUOTE THE VERSE AT ME! The verse is vague enough with that MAY such that there could be multiple explanations as to why the person with Scripture MAY NOT be equipped for every good work and one reason is because something else is needed (i.e. Tradition and the Church).

2 Timothy 3:14-17
14 But as for you, continue in what you have learned and have firmly believed, knowing from whom you learned it 15 and how from childhood you have been acquainted with the sacred writings, which are able to make you wise for salvation through faith in Christ Jesus. 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.

Here is more to the passage. It is an exhortation to consult scripture and in the context that the apostle paul communicated it to Timothy it means IF YOU READ IT.