Sola Scriptura -- what is the actual authority?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Lenten_ashes
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
🤔 I grew up ELCA. Went to Sunday school and none of it made any sense to me. Met my ex wife in a non denomination community. Now that was a trip.

But, still. My basic point remains though about Sola Scriptura: Doesn’t make any sense and refutes itself. As well as opening things up to where anybody can claim anything based on his own interpretation and there’s no consistent authority to rein all that mess in.
 
Michael16 said:
I grew up ELCA. Went to Sunday school and none of it made any sense to me.
Click to expand...
Lots of poor catechesis going on, particularly after the formation of the ELCA. Dad passed away before it got really bad, Rest his soul.
Michael16 said:
But, still. My basic point remains though about Sola Scriptura: Doesn’t make any sense and refutes itself. As well as opening things up to where anybody can claim anything based on his own interpretation and there’s no consistent authority to rein all that mess in.
Click to expand...
The bolded is not sola scriptura. If you were Lutheran, you know that Lutheranism is a doctrinal, confessional tradition not availing itself of personal interpretation. I was not once told to go read the Bible and determine for myself what it meant.
This is also certain, that no one should rely on his own wisdom in the interpretation of the Scripture, not even in the clear passages… We also gratefully and reverently use the labors of the fathers who by their commentaries have profitably clarified many passages of the Scripture. And we confess that we are greatly confirmed by the testimonies of the ancient church in the true and sound understanding of the Scripture. Nor do we approve of it if someone invents for himself a meaning which conflicts with all antiquity, and for which there are clearly no testimonies of the church. - Martin Chemnitz
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Respectfully, I still disagree with you about Luther’s Revolt. He stepped outside the Church and made an in house problem into everyone’s problem and involved lay politics in what was essentially a theological problem.

Plus, his assertions about many things are errors to say the least.
 
My point exactly: Rely on learned authority to interpret Sacred Scripture. Not each man his own priest. Sheesh.
 
Okay. Then, where did all the hostility come from? The positions to me are clear: I believe, and you’re free to disagree with me; that Luther went off the rails and made misinterpretations of Sacred Scripture.
 
I’m with you here Michael, but this is plain inaccurate. Luther notoriously had a huge row with Zwingli at the Marburg colloquy about the Eucharist. He was quite clear about Real Presence. No normative Lutheran writing I’m aware of say otherwise.
 
I remember reading about that. I forget which one, but one said he’d rather hear a Catholic Mass than one of his services.
 
But the problem remains: Luther’s Solas Scriptura and Fide are errors and I have yet to hear a Protestant apologist convince me otherwise. I respectfully stand firm on that.

The basic point being: How can one man, after 1,500 years of carefully preserved Tradition and doctrines; supposedly discover he alone possesses the unadulterated truth and that the Church supposedly got it wrong all that time?
 
Last edited:
Michael16 said:
Okay. Then, where did all the hostility come from? The positions to me are clear: I believe, and you’re free to disagree with me; that Luther went off the rails and made misinterpretations of Sacred Scripture.
Click to expand...
I think there was plenty of hostility on both sides during that era.
 
True. But, the point remains. Luther was wrong in Solas Scriptura and Fide. I’ve made my points clear on that.
 
Last edited:
Michael16 said:
Respectfully, I still disagree with you about Luther’s Revolt. He stepped outside the Church and made an in house problem into everyone’s problem and involved lay politics in what was essentially a theological problem.

Plus, his assertions about many things are errors to say the least.
Click to expand...
I respect your disagreement. There are two sides to every coin. I don’t try to guild the Reformation as entirely good, or entirely bad. I obviously lament the fracturing of the Church, and look forward to its reunification based on unity found in agreement on sound doctrine.
 
I lament the fragmentation too. That’s one of the reasons I get sooo upset when discussing Luther. It’s hard to keep a cool head.
 
I never knew he said that. All I know is that the Protestant movement didn’t even last a generation before it fell apart into really bad mutual vilification.
 
Michael16 said:
My point exactly: Rely on learned authority to interpret Sacred Scripture.
Click to expand...
Just like St. Peter did to answer that great question put to all, " whom do you say that I (Jesus) am?"…not (rely on learned authority).
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top