Sola Scriptura Silence

[SHW]

It doesn’t matter what I say, but what the Scripture says:

2 Timothy 3:14-17

14 You, however, continue in the things you have learned and become convinced of, knowing from whom you have learned them,

15 and that from childhood you have known the sacred writings which are able to give you the wisdom that leads to salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus.

16 All Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness;

17 SO THAT the man of God may be adequate, equipped for every good work.

You’re looking for answers everywhere, other than where you should be looking.

Please show me where it states “Scripture Alone is more important than the Church” in the preceding Scripture passage. I see that it states that Scripture is profitable which means helpful but I do not see it proclaiming self-sufficiency as a doctrine for us to believe.

I do find that Scripture states that the Church is the pillar (support) and ground (foundation) of the Truth but I do not see Scripture making this same claim for itself.

1 Timothy 3:15 “but if I am delayed, I write so that you may know how you ought to conduct yourself in the house of God, which is** the church** of the living God, the pillar and ground of the truth.”

I do see that Scripture states that we are to “hold fast the traditions which were taught, both oral and written.” (2 Thessalonians 2:15)

Also, if there are any disputes that cannot be settled, Scripture states that we are to take them to the Church since she is the final authority and if the person refuses to listen to even the Church, then the person should be treated as a heathen or tax collector. (Matthew 18:17)

And, we are commanded to obey those who rule over us in the faith:

Hebrews 13:7-8 “Remember those who rule over you, who have spoken the word of God to you, whose faith follow, considering the outcome of their conduct. 8 Jesus Christ is the same yesterday, today, and forever.”

Hebrews 13:17 “Obey those who rule over you, and be submissive, for they watch out for your souls, as those who must give account. Let them do so with joy and not with grief, for that would be unprofitable for you.”

Scripture Alone is not scriptural. Jesus’ Church is a hierarchy put into place by Jesus and we are told to obey His Church’s hierarchy because the Church’s leaders speak for Him. (Luke 10:16)

Looks to me like the Church of the living God is the clear winner and not Scripture Alone.

Pax,
SHW

 

[baddog]

“I find my conclusions supported by Scripture. There’s the impasse.”

And other Protestants whose conclusions are different from yours are based on what? Who decides which is correct?

“That verse is not the standard of truth, Ferde, but a directive from the standard, that standard being the Scriptures. The church’s authority is not to determine these things, but to declare the judgment of heaven based on the principles of God’s Word. In making such judgments on the basis of God’s Word, the local church can be sure heaven is in accord. In other words, whatever they “bind” or “loose” on earth is already “bound” or “loosed” in heaven. When the church says the unrepentant person is bound in sin, the church is saying what God says about that person. When the church acknowledges that a repentant person has been loosed from that sin, God agrees.”

And when two different denominations base two different viewpoints based on the principles of God’s word? Who is correct?

“I’m not speaking for all of “Protestantism,” but for Reformed churches only in accord with the instructions of Mt 18:15-17.”

Matt. 18:15- "If your brother sins against you, go and tell him his fault, between you and him alone. If he listens to you, you have gained your brother. 16 But if he does not listen, take one or two others along with you, that every word may be confirmed by the evidence of two or three witnesses. 17 If he refuses to listen to them, tell it to the church; and if he refuses to listen even to the church, let him be to you as a Gentile and a tax collector.
So how does these verses refer to conflicting doctrines within Protestantism?

“That may be your perception, but I’m not separating myself from SS. I am separating myself from many of the errant teachings of those claiming to be adherents of SS, and I’m not responsible for what they teach; they are; that is the fact that escapes you.”

Who determines errant teachings?

“Here you’re separating yourself from those Catholics you consider to be heretics, but when I separate myself from protestants with errant doctrine, you accuse me of separating myself from SS.”

Once again, who makes that determination for Protestantism? Who determines, for example, which of the many Baptist sects is the correct one?

 

[Howie01]

Please show me where it states “Scripture Alone is more important than the Church” in the preceding Scripture passage. I see that it states that Scripture is profitable which means helpful but I do not see it proclaiming self-sufficiency as a doctrine for us to believe.

I do find that Scripture states that the Church is the pillar (support) and ground (foundation) of the Truth but I do not see Scripture making this same claim for itself.

That’s an important verse in Reformed churches as well. We recognize the Truth that pillar and the foundation uphold is the Truth found in Scripture (cf Jn 17:17). Furthermore, we recognize the necessity of teachers as illustrated in Acts 8:27ff (cf Eph 4:11), and the statements concerning the submission to elders in Heb 13.

 

[Ferde_Rombola]

It doesn’t matter what I say, but what the Scripture says:2 Timothy 3:14-17

14 You, however, continue in the things you have learned and become convinced of, knowing from whom you have learned them,

15 and that from childhood you have known the sacred writings which are able to give you the wisdom that leads to salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus.

16 All Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness;

17 SO THAT the man of God may be adequate, equipped for every good work.You’re looking for answers everywhere, other than where you should be looking.

Nowhere in the passages you quoted does the word “alone” appear. Your opinion of what they say is the esegesis you so expertly practice and is nothing more than an opinion. You are reading things into Scripture which are demonstrably not there. You are going outside of Scripture to try to prove the false *sola scriptura *doctrine. In order for Scripture to validate the doctrine of sola scriptura, you must show the word “alone.” It isn’t there.

The warnings against false prophets are given to the body of Christ, and not to some self-appointed “infallible” teaching body.

That’s true. The infallible teaching body of the Catholic Church is in no need of the warning against false prophets since, by definitioin, that body teaches the infallible truth.

Note the scripture nowhere follows up on those warnings by telling the body that they need not worry because an “infallible” teaching magisterium and pope have been appointed.

Of course it does and I have quoted the relevant passages to you. That you ignore them doesn’t mean they aren’t there. Matthew 16:13:17-19. Read it for content this time. It means what it says. Denying it and/or explaining it away doesn’t change a word of it. The passage is clear and easily understood by any average 6th grader.

I’m not interested in arguing this with you. You have varying factions, such as, Sedevacantists, SSPX, traditionalists, cafeterias, right down the differences between individuals in their understanding of RC teachings, and each of those groups claims to be Catholic. There’s no need to go any deeper than that for me.

You are not interested in discussing what you allege are the divisions in the Catholic Church because you can’t find any. If you could, you’d be shouting them out as loud as you could. As I’ve already told you, there are no divisions in the Catholic Church. The sects you mention are not in the Catholic Church. They have separaged themselves from the Church. That some of them call themselves Catholics is irrelevant. They can call themselves a flock of geese if they want to, but they better start growing feathers and working of their quacks if they want to be taken seriously. That you take them seriously says more about you than it does about the Church.

That’s your summary of the Catholic position, Randy; thanks for that.

It is noted you have nothing to say in rebuttal.

Akin is certainly entitled to present a response to the “you are also,” argument.

Which, when you used it on me, I called ‘the so’s-your-old-man’ argument; the clearest evidence you have nothing to say.

I’ve already answered that question in an earlier post to Josie L, I think it was—sin, and that people pick and choose what they’ll believe, and what they won’t believe.

A good description of the 40,000 sects we were talking about, isn’t it? The ones you cannot account for in your false doctrine of sola scriptura.

 

[SHW]

That’s an important verse in Reformed churches as well. We recognize the Truth that pillar and the foundation uphold is the Truth found in Scripture (cf Jn 17:17). Furthermore, we recognize the necessity of teachers as illustrated in Acts 8:27ff (cf Eph 4:11), and the statements concerning the submission to elders in Heb 13.

Sorry, but Scripture refers to the Church as the pillar and foundation of the truth. It definitely **does not **state that Scripture is the pillar and foundation of the truth!

1 Timothy 3:15 “but if I am delayed, I write so that you may know how you ought to conduct yourself in the house of God, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and ground of the truth.”

As you can see, the house of God is the Church. The pillar and ground of the truth is the Church of the living God.

There is no mention of “Scripture” in this verse at all, so no one should claim for Scripture what it does not claim for itself. This so-called doctrine of “Sola Scriptura” is a fable.

2 Timothy 4:3-5 “For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine, but according to their own desires, because they have itching ears, they will heap up for themselves teachers; 4 and they will turn their ears away from the truth, and be turned aside to fables. 5 But you be watchful in all things, endure afflictions, do the work of an evangelist, fulfill your ministry.”

John 17:17 “Sanctify them by Your truth. Your word is truth.”

The whole gospel of Jesus is Jesus’ word and of course, it is truth.

Ephesians 1:13 “In Him you also trusted, after you heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation; in whom also, having believed, you were sealed with the Holy Spirit of promise,”

Colossians 1:4-6 “since we heard of your faith in Christ Jesus and of your love for all the saints; 5 because of the hope which is laid up for you in heaven, of which you heard before in the word of the truth of the gospel, 6 which has come to you, as it has also in all the world, and is bringing forth fruit, as it is also among you since the day you heard and knew the grace of God in truth;”

Jesus established a hierarchy and apostolic succession. The first record of this is in Acts 1:15-26. New members of the hierarchy (bishops, priests, deacons) are taught by the current hierarchy and these new leaders in turn teach others. (cf. 2 Timothy 2:2)

Pax,
SHW

 

[Howie01]

Sorry, but Scripture refers to the Church as the pillar and foundation of the truth. It definitely **does not **state that Scripture is the pillar and foundation of the truth!

Right; that’s what I said, viz: the Church is the pillar and foundation of the truth; perhaps you should read what I said again.

The pillar and foundation—the Church—upholds the truth—the truth is found in the Scriptures.

 

[Ferde_Rombola]

And so are those churches holding to the Reformed position still one, holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church, as Godfrey notes in the opening of his article.

I didn’t mention ‘churches.’ I spoke of the one, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church. One Church. People or groups who have excommunicated themselves from the Church do not belong in the discussion and it’s a false argument to even mention them. Protestant apologists are expected to argue the same false doctrine you do so what’s the point of me paying the slightest attention to Godfrey when I can get it from you?

FERDE: “You can’t possibly allege the truth is ever revealed to any protestant sect, which, collectively, have 40,000 versions of ‘the truth.’”

But I do allege that Ferde, which you’d know if you’d only pay attention; that’s because I don’t collectivize them, as you do.

My mistake. I should have said 'no rational, honest person could possible allege the truth is ever revealed to any protestant sect which, collectively, have 40,000 versions of the truth. I know you do allege it, and it speaks directly to your obstinent insistence that wrong is right, up is down and in is out. It speaks also to your inablity to comprehend the plain words of Scripture and your denial of revealed truth and of the words of the Lord. That you don’t “collectivize” the 40,000 is merely more denial. Whether you collectivize them or not is irrelevant to their existence and the fact they rise from the false doctrine of sola scriptura.

I find my conclusions supported by Scripture. There’s the impasse.

You do not find support for your conclusions in Scripture and I have proved it to you. Blindly insisting you have support in Scripture is an empty boast unless you show it by quoting Scripture which actually supports what you allege. You haven’t done it yet and you can’t because it isn’t there.

That verse is not the standard of truth, Ferde, but a directive from the standard, that standard being the Scriptures.

It (Mt. 16:17-19) is the standard for anyone who can read. You can insist it isn’t until you’re blue in the face, but denial is a poor argument and all you have is denial.

The church’s authority is not to determine these things, but to declare the judgment of heaven based on the principles of God’s Word. In making such judgments on the basis of God’s Word, the local church can be sure heaven is in accord. In other words, whatever they “bind” or “loose” on earth is already “bound” or “loosed” in heaven. When the church says the unrepentant person is bound in sin, the church is saying what God says about that person. When the church acknowledges that a repentant person has been loosed from that sin, God agrees.

Arrant nonsense and a reading into Scripture what isn’t there. In spades! You made all that up and if you want to say you didn’t, show it to me chapter and verse. It is beyond belief that you can come in here expounding the false doctrine of sola scriptura, then try to prove it with a fictitious interpretation you know isn’t in Scrpture. That says quite a lot about you, Howie, and it isn’t flattering.

I’m not speaking for all of “Protestantism,” but for Reformed churches only in accord with the instructions of Mt 18:15-17.

That passage concerns personal behavior and obligations. You are making things up again. The passage has nothing to do with the 40,000 versions of the truth you are trying, against all logic, to defend and now, it seems, to ignore. The fact you bring it into the discussion indicates to me you have no idea what you believe and certainly no valid reason for believing it, whatever it is.

What I do remember is my analogy wasn’t a response to you, but to inkaneer.

Your analogy was as I described it to you and it makes no difference who it was directed to. It was an invalid and inept analogy whose only purpose was to show clearly you are a seriously confused individual.

…but I’m not separating myself from SS. I am separating myself from many of the errant teachings of those claiming to be adherents of SS, and I’m not responsible for what they teach; they are; that is the fact that escapes you.

You seem to find some comfort in pointing out what you think escapes me. As I told you, nothing you say escapes me. It appears to escape you on a regular basis, but I am 100%aware of everything you say. You, apparently, are not. If you were, you’d know there are no “errant teachings of those claiming to be adherents of SS.” There is the doctrine of SS and it stands on its own impervious to interpretation. It means the inerrant word of God is to be found in Scripture alone and nowhere outside of Scripture. That’s the doctrine you say you believe and the doctrine you can’t defend from Scripture or any other way.

Not putting words in my mouth, are you Howie? I don’t separate myself from heretics since I’ve never been joined to them. What are you talking about?? As for the rest of it, see above.

That’s shorthand to me. I have no idea what you’re getting at.

The lesson I tried to teach you was the evidence in Scripture conferring infallible authority on faith and morals to the bishops of the Catholic Church. Nothing else. I said it was the standard you say is not found in Scripture, which it is notwithstanding your denial. If I appplied ‘another standard’ to you, you’ll have to show it to me. I don’t think I did.

Happy Easter.

 

[Ferde_Rombola]

Right; that’s what I said, viz: the Church is the pillar and foundation of the truth; perhaps you should read what I said again.

The pillar and foundation—the Church—upholds the truth—the truth is found in the Scriptures.

Wrong. That’s not what you said. How about YOU going back and reading it, since you don’t even know what you’re saying now.

 

[baddog]

Right; that’s what I said, viz: the Church is the pillar and foundation of the truth; perhaps you should read what I said again.

The pillar and foundation—the Church—upholds the truth—the truth is found in the Scriptures.

Of course the Church upholds the truth. And the truth is found in the Scriptures. However, the truth isn’t found in Scripture alone.
It’s also found in Sacred Tradition, or else Paul wouldn’t have placed Tradition on the same par as Scripture.
2Thess. 2:15- So then, brethren, stand firm and hold to the traditions which you were taught by us, either by word of mouth or by letter.

Also, the Church upholds the truth by determining what truth is. It is the Church that gives us truth, which the Church also did when she formed the canon.

 

[SHW]

Right; that’s what I said, viz: the Church is the pillar and foundation of the truth; perhaps you should read what I said again.

The pillar and foundation—the Church—upholds the truth—the truth is found in the Scriptures.

But, that is not “all” that the Church is required to do. The Church is also required by Jesus to uphold the oral traditions (truths) of the Church which are just as important as the written Scriptures.

Sola Scriptura believers only have partial truth.

2 Thessalonians 2:15 “Therefore, brethren, stand fast and hold the traditions which you were taught, whether by word or our epistle.”

1 Corinthians 11:2 “Now I praise you, brethren, that you remember me in all things and keep the traditions just as I delivered them to you.”

Both oral and written traditions were taught by the Apostles. You need both of them in order to have the Church of Jesus Christ.

Thessalonians 3:6 “But we command you, brethren, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that you withdraw from every brother who walks disorderly and not according to the tradition which he received from us.”

Scripture does not record everything pertinent to the Jewish faith in the OT Scriptures and neither does the NT record everything that is pertinent to the Church of Jesus Christ.

For example, the whole ritual for preparing the red heifer and how it is to be used in Jewish worship is not in the OT, yet it is “all” very necessary for their worship service. betemunah.org/heifer.html

The New Testament Worship Service, the Mass or Divine Liturgy, is likewise not explained in the NT. There are only brief statements about it because it is taught by Apostolic Succession and it was kept secret because of persecution. Catechumens actually had to leave the Church before the consecration of the bread and wine. It was called the “secret” in the Western Rite and the “mystery” in the Eastern Rite Churches.

John states very clearly that not everything was written down.

John 21:25 “And there are also many other things that Jesus did, which if they were written one by one, I suppose that even the world itself could not contain the books that would be written. Amen.”

Paul does mention their own NT altar which the Jews (those who serve the tabernacle) have no right to eat.

Hebrews 13:10 “We have an altar from which those who serve the tabernacle have no right to eat.”

Of course, those persons receiving his letters knew exactly what he was talking about when he wrote “altar” since they could see him at the altar consecrating the bread and wine during the Mass. But untaught persons picking up a Bible 2000 years later cannot possibly know what he was talking about so it seems to them that these are merely vague references to unimportant things. (2 Peter 3:15-16, 2 Peter 2:12-13, Jude 1:10, 2 Timothy 4:3-5)

Paul speaks of the “laying on of hands” for the consecration of bishops but he does not state what this ritual actually entails (what prayers were used or blessings given or gestures used) during this consecration (2 Timothy 1:6). Jesus taught them by “showing” them how to do these things. Since it was to be handed down from person to person, there was no need to write these things down. They were extremely busy preaching, baptizing, and trying to stay alive during the persecutions of Christians by the Jews and then the Romans. It was not until Constantine legalized Christianity that they could take the time to compile the writings, decide which ones were inspired, and make the inspired manuscripts into a book.

The individual manuscripts (gospels, epistles, etc.) did not have the authority themselves to choose which of these manuscripts were inspired by God. A manuscript cannot authenticate itself! The Church used its authority given it by Jesus to decide which manuscripts were inspired and which were not so the Church is the authority, not Scripture. Also, Scripture cannot interpret itself. It is the Church’s duty to interpret Scripture. The Church existed for over 300 years before the writings were even compiled into the Bible as we know it today. The Church came first. The Church is the authority. The Church is the authorized custodian/protector/interpreter of the Word of God, both oral and written.

Pax,
SHW

 

[Randy_Carson]

The Greek word translated “does not obey,” is *apeitheō. *It’s a single word meaning “does not believe [in the Son].” That’s the context of the verse.

Perhaps you need to provide a more complete definition of the word?

My Hebrew/Greek Key Study Bible (Zodhiates) provides the following in the definitions:

543 Apetheia; from the neg. a (1), without, and peitho (3982), to persuade. Disobedience (Heb. 4:6). In the NT it corresponds with the verb unbelief which opposes the gracious word and purpose of God. It is a stronger term than the syn. apistia (570). unbelief. Hence we have the sons of apeitheias, disobedience (Rom. 11:30, Eph 2:2, 5:6, Col. 3:6)

544 Apeitheo; from the neg. a (1), without, and peitho (3982), to persuade. Not to believe, to disbelieve implying disobedience also (John 3:36; Acts 14:2; Rom 10:21; Heb 3:18); to disobey as through unbelief

Now, I’m no Greek scholar, but I know that Zodhiates was no Catholic, either. He cites the very verse that I did.

If this Protestant reference work states that apeitheo implies disobedience, that’s good enough for me.

Now, back to my first post on this point:

John 3:36
36* He who believes in the Son has eternal life; he who does not obey the Son shall not see life, but the wrath of God rests upon him.

You can believe all you want, but if you fail to believe and to obey, you will not see life.

You can lose your salvation through disobedience.

Hope this helps. :tiphat:

 

[Randy_Carson]

It doesn’t matter what I say, but what the Scripture says:
2 Timothy 3:14-17

**14 You, however, continue in the things you have learned and become convinced of, knowing from whom you have learned them, **

15 and that from childhood you have known the sacred writings which are able to give you the wisdom that leads to salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus.

**16 All Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness; **

17 SO THAT the man of God may be adequate, equipped for every good work.
You’re looking for answers everywhere, other than where you should be looking.

Could you perhaps explain what scriptures Timothy would have been familiar with since his youth? Wouldn’t that be the OT only? And the Greek Septuagint, at that. So, your argument proves too much for Timothy would have been charged with clinging to the very scriptures which Catholics maintain to this day in the deuterocanonicals.

 

[Randy_Carson]

I have been, by using the “you also argument,” which Randy Carson has weighed in on.

But you don’t seem to grasp that the argument is invalid.

Akin addressed this, but you had nothing to offer in response other than to state the obvious point that Akin is entitled to his opinion.

As for SSPX and Sedevacantists, etc., there may be different opinions about what the Catholic Church teaches and varying degrees of acceptance, but there is no question that there is still only one authentically Catholic teaching.

Contrast this with Protestantisms cacophony of views on basic doctrines such as infant baptism, ordination of women, etc.

Sorry, but sola scriptura is not supported by the Bible itself; thus, it is self-refuting.

Moreover, the “fruit” of this “tradition of men” has been the fragmentation of the Protestant community.

Last time anyone ate fruit that bad, they were still in the Garden of Eden.

 

[fhansen]

That’s an important verse in Reformed churches as well. We recognize the Truth that pillar and the foundation uphold is the Truth found in Scripture (cf Jn 17:17). Furthermore, we recognize the necessity of teachers as illustrated in Acts 8:27ff (cf Eph 4:11), and the statements concerning the submission to elders in Heb 13.

**But which church would you consider Church? Perhaps the ones that teach that a person must be baptized in order to be saved or is it the ones that teach otherwise? Are the churches that agree with you the true churches or are they all true as long as we don’t look too close? Are JWs included? They include people who sincerely believe they’ve interpreted Scripture correctly. Their arguments based on Scripture against the deity of Jesus are not all unpersuasive. In fact, that’s why Arianism was able to get such a strong foothold.
**

 

[davidv]

That’s great, where did you find them? How did they look? Ralph

I found one of them at my parish church this past week. He was in apparently good health, and gave us wonderful instructions on how live out our Christian lives. He is our pastor, a member of the Magisterium of the Church.

 

[traillius]

I don’t believe that infants sin, however they were born in sin. Can mentally deficient people sin, I don’t think so, however ,they were born in sin. Did Jesus sin, no He did not sin. Yes, all have sinned and come short of the glory of God. Christ is God incarnate and could not sin. I somehow think you know that. Ralph

If all means every human ever, than by your definition, Jesus was born in sin, since he is fully human as well as fully divine. The only way that Jesus’ flesh could not be born in sin is if the mother of his flesh had no sin. Mary did not earn this, it was by the grace of God.
Either Mary and Jesus both were not born in sin, or they both were. It cannot be had both ways.

 

[inkaneer]

Right; that’s what I said, viz: the Church is the pillar and foundation of the truth; perhaps you should read what I said again.

The pillar and foundation—the Church—upholds the truth—the truth is found in the Scriptures.

But where in the scriptures does it say that the truth upheld by the church is found only in the scriptures? You tell me. Because if you can’t find where the scriptures say that all truth is found in the scriptures then it’s something you added to the scriptures to support your failed belief system.

 

[Howie01]

Randy Carson:

Perhaps you need to provide a more complete definition of the word?

You’ve done that, Randy.

Here, look: 544 Apeitheo; from the neg. a (1), without, and peitho (3982), to persuade. Not to believe, to disbelieve implying disobedience also (John 3:36; Acts 14:2; Rom 10:21; Heb 3:18); to disobey as through unbeliefThat’s what I said, and the authority you cite, cites the verse under consideration, Jn 3:36, as an example of the usage: “He who believes in the Son has eternal life; but he who refuses to believe in the Son will not see life, but the wrath of God abides on him.” All unbelievers are presently under the wrath of God.
Randy Carson:

If this Protestant reference work states that apeitheo implies disobedience, that’s good enough for me.

Again, Randy, in context, the disobedience being described by John is refusal to believe in Christ.
Randy Carson:

You can believe all you want, but if you fail to believe and to obey, you will not see life.

You can lose your salvation through disobedience.

One who refuses to believe doesn’t have salvation.
Randy Carson:

Could you perhaps explain what scriptures Timothy would have been familiar with since his youth? Wouldn’t that be the OT only?

Right, it’s the OT:** Acts 17:2And according to Paul’s custom, he went to them, and…reasoned with them from the Scriptures, explaining and giving evidence that the Christ had to suffer and rise again from the dead, and saying, “This Jesus whom I am proclaiming to you is the Christ.”Jesus also used the OT Scriptures, which are able to bring one to the knowledge of salvation by faith, to explain the same: Luke 24:27Then beginning with Moses and with all the prophets, He explained to them the things concerning Himself in all the Scriptures.**And I’ll tie that back into the 2 Tim 3 passage, the early church had the sacred writings which are able to give the wisdom that leads to salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus, and they’re able to equip God’s people for every good work.
Randy Carson:

But you don’t seem to grasp that the argument is invalid.

Akin has spoken, the case is closed?
Randy Carson:

As for SSPX and Sedevacantists, etc., there may be different opinions about what the Catholic Church teaches and varying degrees of acceptance, but there is no question that there is still only one authentically Catholic teaching.

And there’s only one authentic teaching in SS as well. All of the other views of what scripture teaches are varying degrees of acceptance, or rejection of the truth.

 

[Howie01]

Ferde Rombola:

Wrong. That’s not what you said. How about YOU going back and reading it, since you don’t even know what you’re saying now.

Well you know, the one to whom that post is directed, and that’s not you, he understands what I’ve said.

It’s always you who doesn’t understand.

 

[Howie01]

fhansen:

But which church would you consider Church?

Common sense should bring to your mind that it’s the church in which I am.

fhansen:

Perhaps the ones that teach that a person must be baptized in order to be saved or is it the ones that teach otherwise?

If salvation comes about through baptism, then all of Israel has perished. But we know that’s not true.

But what is true is that salvation comes about by grace through faith (Eph 2:8). That’s not a NT truth only, but an eternal truth. That’s clearly taught by God with Abraham, who transcends the covenants. Was Abraham saved by circumcision? Was he saved by baptism? Or, was Abraham saved by faith?

fhansen:

Are the churches that agree with you the true churches or are they all true as long as we don’t look too close?

Again, common sense should answer that question for you.

fhansen:

Are JWs included?

No.

fhansen:

They include people who sincerely believe they’ve interpreted Scripture correctly.

Let me remind you that your church is another who sincerely believes that it’s interpreted Scripture correctly.

fhansen:

Their arguments based on Scripture against the deity of Jesus are not all unpersuasive.

They’re unpersuasive to me. Christ makes no bones about His deity, and neither do the scriptures. The Jews who opposed Jesus certainly understood that He made Himself equal to God (Jn 5:18).