"Sola Scriptura"

[po18guy]

No. Christ is the message of both old and new testaments.
The church is entrusted with that revelation, not to add something new.

What does John say in 20:30 and 21:25? So, all of Jesus, every word, everything He did is in the bible? Really? If so, then everything Jesus did and said which is not in the bible is not the truth. See where this reasoning takes us?

The Apostles taught from the old testament. Their message was founded upon the law, prophets, and ministry of Jesus.

Where does this leave the leading of the Holy Spirit? So, the Apostles did not have Him with them? Are you saying that they just read from scripture which they did not possess, since it was guarded in the Temple?

Any and all teachings taught by any church ought to be founded upon the law, prophets, Gospels, and apostolic writings.

Interesting opinion, but again, it excludes the Holy Spirit. Was there a Pentecost or not? Did the Holy Spirit, once received, have any effect upon the revelation of truth, or not?

 

[lofktis14kr]

What does John say in 20:30 and 21:25? So, all of Jesus, every word, everything He did is in the bible? Really? If so, then everything Jesus did and said which is not in the bible is not the truth. See where this reasoning takes us?

My point is this: the OT and NT reveal a sufficient message of the gospel. John included what he was divinely inspired to include. Of the many works and words of Christ, John recorded what he felt was a sufficient witness to Christ as the Saviour, as he testified,
John 20:31 “but these are written so that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that by believing you may have life in his name.”

Where does this leave the leading of the Holy Spirit?

John was led by the Spirit to write his gospel as were all the writers of the OT and NT.

So, the Apostles did not have Him with them? Are you saying that they just read from scripture which they did not possess, since it was guarded in the Temple?

See my remark below…

Interesting opinion, but again, it excludes the Holy Spirit. Was there a Pentecost or not? Did the Holy Spirit, once received, have any effect upon the revelation of truth, or not?

Of course there was a Pentacost. The Spirit’s influence was amazing upon both preacher and hearer.
The preacher declared the life, death, and ressurection of Jesus and demonstrated that He was the Christ by expounding the Scriptures of the OT. Acts 2, for example.
All those who would believe were irresistably moved by the Spirit to recieve the Scriptures preached as indicated by Luke in Acts 13:48. “And when the Gentiles heard this, they began rejoicing and glorifying the word of the Lord, and as many as were appointed to eternal life believed.”
The Word preached was a mighty sword in the hand of God’s quickening Spirit. As a result, the elect were “cut to the heart.”

 

[po18guy]

My point is this: the OT and NT reveal a sufficient message of the gospel. John included what he was divinely inspired to include. Of the many works and words of Christ, John recorded what he felt was a sufficient witness to Christ as the Saviour, as he testified,
John 20:31 “but these are written so that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that by believing you may have life in his name.”

Ah, but it seems that John also preferred oral communication to writing:

2 John 1:12"I have much to write to you, but I do not want to use paper and ink. Instead, I hope to visit you and talk with you face to face, so that our joy may be complete."

John was led by the Spirit to write his gospel as were all the writers of the OT and NT. Of course there was a Pentacost. The Spirit’s influence was amazing upon both preacher and hearer. The preacher declared the life, death, and ressurection of Jesus and demonstrated that He was the Christ by expounding the Scriptures of the OT. Acts 2, for example. All those who would believe were irresistably moved by the Spirit to recieve the Scriptures preached as indicated by Luke in Acts 13:48. “And when the Gentiles heard this, they began rejoicing and glorifying the word of the Lord, and as many as were appointed to eternal life believed.” The Word preached was a mighty sword in the hand of God’s quickening Spirit. As a result, the elect were “cut to the heart.”

Does the Holy Spirit still lead the church, or was it just back then? That is my point. The Holy Spirit leads, has lead, and will continue to lead until the last day. Thus, the Church, the “pillar and foundation” of truth, must be constantly lead by the Holy Spirit. It cannot be lead solely by the bible, whose words are static, but must rely on living preachers who are lead by the Spirit.

 

[Junebug999]

Growing up being taught Sola Scriptura never made sense to me. Because even in my own Landmark Baptist family there were divisions of beliefs of LANDMARD Baptists with church splits over things like a pastor’s wife wearing a red dress or could a church member work in a grocery store if it sold wine. And no one could ever produce that from a KJV Bible.

If I ever write a book about my journey back home to the Catholic Church (returning from ancestors who broke away centuries ago) it would be entitled “Who’s in Charge Here?” Someone has to be in charge, and Jesus himself gave that authority to the Church through Peter.

Even as a child I used to notice all the scriptures that just were glossed over because if they spent too much time reading it, it would lead them directly to the very Catholic Church they were railing against.

Sola Scriptura is heresy, always has been, always will be.

Only in the Holy and Apostolic Catholic Church is the whole and complete Truth.

 

[po18guy]

Growing up being taught Sola Scriptura never made sense to me. Because even in my own Landmark Baptist family there were divisions of beliefs of LANDMARD Baptists with church splits over things like a pastor’s wife wearing a red dress or could a church member work in a grocery store if it sold wine. And no one could ever produce that from a KJV Bible.

If I ever write a book about my journey back home to the Catholic Church (returning from ancestors who broke away centuries ago) it would be entitled “Who’s in Charge Here?” Someone has to be in charge, and Jesus himself gave that authority to the Church through Peter.

Even as a child I used to notice all the scriptures that just were glossed over because if they spent too much time reading it, it would lead them directly to the very Catholic Church they were railing against.

Sola Scriptura is heresy, always has been, always will be.

Only in the Holy and Apostolic Catholic Church is the whole and complete Truth.

No varnish on this truth! Welcome home!

 

[lofktis14kr]

Ah, but it seems that John also preferred oral communication to writing:
He preferred both? I know what you meant.
2 John 1:12"I have much to write to you, but I do not want to use paper and ink. Instead, I hope to visit you and talk with you face to face, so that our joy may be complete."

Does the Holy Spirit still lead the church,

 

[po18guy]

What about through eternity?

As long as this earth endures, yes. After that, we will either be with Him eternally, or spend eternity wishing we were…

Do you mean by that, stable? or unchanging?

Well, they are “dead” words, being dried ink on paper, and can neither explain themselves, nor teach “live” as Christ and the Apostles did. This is the value of the oral tradition. It could teach live audiences under the power of the Holy Spirit, and correct those who misunderstood.

 

[benedictus2]

Even as a child **I used to notice all the scriptures that just were glossed over because if they spent too much time reading it, it would lead them directly to the very Catholic Church they were railing against. **

A point I myself have made many times over in different threads.

And you know what? Not one has actually come back with a defense. I have actually renamed this doctrine to: “SOME PARTS OF THE BIBLE ALONE”

 

[lofktis14kr]

Well, they are “dead” words, being dried ink on paper,

Yes, though the Bible stands apart from other books as uniquely inspired by God, it cannot give life to the reader in itself. That happens by the will of God.
“Sanctify them by Thy truth. Thy Word is truth.”

and can neither explain themselves

Surely you’d have a hard time convincing the ‘noble’ Bereans of that.(Acts 17:11) Their esteem for the Scriptures as the standard of testing Truth was most commendable.

This is the value of the oral tradition. It could teach live audiences under the power of the Holy Spirit, and correct those who misunderstood.

By oral tradition, do you mean preaching the gospel?
1Cor. 2:2 For I determined not to know anything among you, save Jesus Christ, and him crucified…
… my speech and my preaching were not in persuasive words of wisdom, but in demonstration of the Spirit and of power:

 

[guanophore]

Surely you’d have a hard time convincing the ‘noble’ Bereans of that.(Acts 17:11) Their esteem for the Scriptures as the standard of testing Truth was most commendable.

Yes, but this is a commonly misunderstood scripture. What defined the Bereans as “noble” was not so much the checking with scripture, as others had done this also, but the attitude of their heart.

"That very night the believers sent Paul and Silas off to Beroea; and when they arrived, they went to the Jewish synagogue. 11 **These Jews were more receptive **than those in Thessalonica, **for they welcomed the message very eagerly **and examined the scriptures every day to see whether these things were so. 12 Many of them therefore believed, including not a few Greek women and men of high standing. " Acts 17:10-12

This is the nobility that is lacking in the Sola Scriptura communities today. They are not receptive to the Apostolic Teaching and do not welcome the successors of the apostles eagerly.

By oral tradition, do you mean preaching the gospel?
1Cor. 2:2 For I determined not to know anything among you, save Jesus Christ, and him crucified…
… my speech and my preaching were not in persuasive words of wisdom, but in demonstration of the Spirit and of power:

Sacred Tradition is the living presence of Jesus in the Church, the letter written upon the hearts of the faithful. It was never meant to be separated from the Scripture that it produced.

 

[po18guy]

Yes, though the Bible stands apart from other books as uniquely inspired by God, it cannot give life to the reader in itself. That happens by the will of God.
“Sanctify them by Thy truth. Thy Word is truth.”

Lest we forget: Only Jesus Christ is the Word - incarnate. The definition of “word” has been reduced to the misunderstood and misinterpreted bible alone. Wrong. John was emphatic and very clear when he spoke of the Word as the eternal Jesus Christ. Live teaching is what Christ used and is our best example. Scripture documents and backs up live teaching (the oral tradition). But, even the oral tradition must have the proper authority, as it was with Christ, who taught s one having authority, and not as the scribes and Pharisees.

Surely you’d have a hard time convincing the ‘noble’ Bereans of that.(Acts 17:11) Their esteem for the Scriptures as the standard of testing Truth was most commendable.

Likely not, since they heard the word proclaimed via oral tradition and used scripture to test it. I am in no way denigrating scripture! However, once separated from the Church authority which canonized it, the demon uses it to divide the Body of Christ. You and I are living proof of this.

By oral tradition, do you mean preaching the gospel

The oral tradition is everything that constituted the Gospel of Jesus Christ. Not just the limited and incomplete bible, but the entirety of God’s revelation through the Holy Spirit via the Apostles. It’s much more than just the bible, as the Bereans never heard many of the writings of the NT, and there was no canon of the OT at that time either, and for centuries after.

In combination with OT scripture and some of the epistles, the oral tradition spread the faith for 1,500 years. Until…

 

[Realcatholicgk]

freesmileys.org/smileys/forum/nothingtoadd.gif

 

[Realcatholicgk]

A point I myself have made many times over in different threads.

And you know what? Not one has actually come back with a defense. I have actually renamed this doctrine to: “SOME PARTS OF THE BIBLE ALONE”

**
[SIGN]"If you believe what you like in the gospels, and reject what you don’t like, it is not the gospel you believe, but yourself.” Saint Augustine. [/SIGN]Would you believe that even St Augustine understood sola Scriptura 1500 years ago! A 1,000 years before Marty made it “law”?

freesmileys.org/smileys/bounce016.gif**

 

[benedictus2]

[sign]"If you believe what you like in the gospels, and reject what you don’t like, it is not the gospel you believe, but yourself.” Saint Augustine. [/sign]
Would you believe that even St Augustine understood sola Scriptura 1500 years ago! A 1,000 years before Marty made it “law”?

freesmileys.org/smileys/bounce016.gif

Yup. And another one was about breaking up the Body of Christ. He said something like, the Body of Christ may be sick and covered with putrid sores but it is no reason to chop it up.

And this is so true with regards Luther. He saw there was a problem in the Church (and by golly the Body of Christ was indeed gravely ill) and his solution was let’s hack it.

If only like St Ignatius he knew about the discernment of the spirits then he would have known that the devil can exploit your good intentions for his own end.

What was that saying again, the road to hell is paved with good intentions?

 

[Realcatholicgk]

Yup. And another one was about breaking up the Body of Christ. He said something like, the Body of Christ may be sick and covered with putrid sores but it is no reason to chop it up.

And this is so true with regards Luther. He saw there was a problem in the Church (and by golly the Body of Christ was indeed gravely ill) and his solution was let’s hack it.

If only like St Ignatius he knew about the discernment of the spirits then he would have known that the devil can exploit your good intentions for his own end.

What was that saying again, the road to hell is paved with good intentions?

**

freesmileys.org/smileys/bounce014.gif**
freesmileys.org/smileys/bounce014.gif

Yup! Jesus made one church, Until 500 years ago there was still unity between Catholic churches because of doctrine. There are now estimated to be 33,000 counterfeit denominations with 28,000 imitation sub denominations with 1,375 doctrines This is actually true. Plus 95% of their practices, traditions, and beliefs are “Catholic”. They actually haven’t had enough time to developed their own beliefs, well except Sola Scriptura, and we know how that one is working! They just can’t let go of even a part of the “real” church! I think they might as well start swimming back. Before the water gets …eeerrr…HOT!

 

[benedictus2]

**Yup! Jesus made one church, Until 500 years ago there was still unity between Catholic churches because of doctrine. There are now 33,000 counterfeit denominations with 28,000 sub denominations with 1,375 doctrines This is actually true. Plus 95% of their practices, traditions, and beliefs are “Catholic” They actually haven’t had enough time to developed their own beliefs, well except Sola Scriptura, and we know how that one is working! They just can’t let go of even a part of the “real” church! I think they might as well start swimming back. Before the water gets …eeerrr…HOT! **

But some ARE swimming back. I owe a lot to Scott Hahn, Bob Sungenis, Cardinal Newman, Thomas Howards and theres a lot lot more. HHmmm, if only the others would dive into reading.

G K Chesterton said that as a protestant, you can’t be too careful of what you read. The truth is everywhere if you but look

 

[Realcatholicgk]

Yup. And another one was about breaking up the Body of Christ. He said something like, the Body of Christ may be sick and covered with putrid sores but it is no reason to chop it up.

And this is so true with regards Luther. He saw there was a problem in the Church (and by golly the Body of Christ was indeed gravely ill) and his solution was let’s hack it.

If only like St Ignatius he knew about the discernment of the spirits then he would have known that the devil can exploit your good intentions for his own end.

What was that saying again, the road to hell is paved with good intentions?

Even Jesus told us not to read the scriptures lookin g for Him,. Do the protestants listen? They say sola Scriptura but ignore Jesus:

[SIGN]John 5:39-40 You search the Scriptures, for in them you think you have eternal life; and these are they which testify of Me. But you are not willing to come to Me that you may have life. [/SIGN]

They learn of the cath;ic churc and jesus again told them in their scriptures (well "ours’’ actually they "borrowed them?)

[SIGN]John 6:36 But I said to you that you have seen Me and yet do not believe.[/SIGN]

They say that they can be saved by reading the Bible. I say they must “follow” what Jesus told them!

[SIGN]John 6:53 -55Then Jesus said to them, “Most assuredly, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink His blood, you have no life in you.Whoever eats My flesh and drinks My blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up at the last day. For My flesh is food indeed,[h] and My blood is drink indeed. [/SIGN]

**
And he didn’t mean grape juice and Oreos! He meant the Eucharist!**

 

[mackbrislawn]

Even Jesus told us not to read the scriptures looking for Him,. Do the protestants listen? They say sola Scriptura but ignore Jesus.

They say that they can be saved by reading the Bible. I say they must “follow” what Jesus told them!

Yes, thinking that you can be saved by reading the Bible alone is a very dangerous idea. Scripture itself warns against it:

2Peter 3:15-16: “…and regard the patience of our Lord to be salvation; just as also our beloved brother Paul, according to the wisdom given him, wrote to you, as also in all his letters, speaking in them of these things, in which are some things hard to understand, which the untaught and unstable distort, as they do also the rest of the Scriptures, to their own destruction.” NAS

What warning could be clearer? If you are untaught in the tradition handed down from the apostles, you are very likely to misunderstand scripture, to the very opposite of salvation.

 

[Realcatholicgk]

Even Jesus told us not to read the scriptures looking for Him,. Do the protestants listen? They say sola Scriptura but ignore Jesus.

They say that they can be saved by reading the Bible. I say they must “follow” what Jesus told them!

Yes, thinking that you can be saved by reading the Bible alone is a very dangerous idea. Scripture itself warns against it:

2Peter 3:15-16: “…and regard the patience of our Lord to be salvation; just as also our beloved brother Paul, according to the wisdom given him, wrote to you, as also in all his letters, speaking in them of these things, in which are some things hard to understand, which the untaught and unstable distort, as they do also the rest of the Scriptures, to their own destruction.” NAS

What warning could be clearer? If you are untaught in the tradition handed down from the apostles, you are very likely to misunderstand scripture, to the very opposite of salvation.

**That deserves to be said again! Someone just might read and understand! It may even snow here in San Antonio (73 degrees here right now!) today but both are really low on the probability scale! **

[SIGN]2Peter 3:15-16: "…and regard the patience of our Lord to be salvation; just as also our beloved brother Paul, according to the wisdom given him, wrote to you, as also in all his letters, speaking in them of these things, in which are some things hard to understand, which the untaught and unstable distort, as they do also the rest of the Scriptures, to their own destruction." [/SIGN] **
What astounds me is so many of the Protestants denominations have “Sola Scriptura”. But they have 1,375 doctrines and dogma developed through their misinterpretation of the same scriptures readings! What baffles me is that they can’t understand that they can’t all be correct. It is almost unbelievable. Many of them are very intelligent. I always tell my friends do you want proof the devil blinds people and takes their souls away from Jesus talk to a Protestant. Explain something in the bible that can’t be misunderstood like Jesus’ “Unless you eat my body, and drink my blood…” And watch them twist, distort, argue, and attempt to flee from the truth! **

 

[po18guy]

I have noted a consistent and almost desperate Protestant reliance upon scripture as being “sufficient” for salvation. What our separated brothers and sisters are saying is that they want to believe the bare minimum to enter the Kingdom. To go deeper into faith means becoming, ugh, Catholic! And, since they do not believe in purgatory, they are not even aiming for it. What if they miss?