Sola Scriptura

  • Thread starter Thread starter Kaily
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
The author points out:
The real question is what to do now that the Apostles have reposed; we no longer have visions and prophets; but we have the scriptures.
And those Scriptures tell us that who has the Authority? The Church.
 
Then our friend gives a circular argument:
Scripture is God’s word, and His children recognize His voice. The books declare themselves to be God’s word.
The books do not declare themselves to be the divine word of God. And the author continues citing another expert:
Knowing the canon is simply receiving God’s word. God says “this is My Word”, and we believe Him. Other books do not declare themselves to be God’s Word, so we leave them out of the canon.
I’d like to ask where in Philemon, or numerous other books, do we see “This is My Word”.

And we can’t just take them because they are written by witnesses. Paul wrote at least four letters to the Church in Corinth. If Paul’s letters were Sacred Scripture, would God let two of the letters to be lost?
 
I’ll give up after this point:
The scripture declares itself to be authoritative and that its revelation is sufficient for salvation, but scripture does not denounce all other authorities. But scripture is “sola” because it’s the last man standing, given the errors of popes and councils.
The Scriptures, in an effort to beat a dead horse, do not declare themselves authoritative. They declare the Church to be authoritative. If the popes and councils have erred, then Scripture has erred. So you would have to throw out the baby with the bath water, so to speak.

And 2nd Timothy does not say that Scripture is sufficient for salvation. It says it is “profitable”, but not sufficient (KJV). There is a huge difference.
 
The books do not declare themselves to be the divine word of God.
And we can’t just take them because they are written by witnesses. Paul wrote at least four letters to the Church in Corinth. If Paul’s letters were Sacred Scripture, would God let two of the letters to be lost?
Did it ever occur to you, A prophet who has written under inspiration could also write uninspired personal letters to friends and family and even uninspired letters to the church? Is there anything anywhere that says once a man writes something inspired, everything he writes is inspired?

Paul even made uninspired comments in his inspired letters saying, 1Cr 7:12 “But to the rest speak I, not the Lord: …”

Paul knew he was writing inspired Scripture and made sure to clarify when he was not speaking for God, but merely giving his opinion.

Maybe those two lost letters were not inspired and God was ensuring people didn’t use them as such. 🤷
 
Did it ever occur to you, A prophet who has written under inspiration could also write uninspired personal letters to friends and family and even uninspired letters to the church? Is there anything anywhere that says once a man writes something inspired, everything he writes is inspired?

Paul even made uninspired comments in his inspired letters saying, 1Cr 7:12 “But to the rest speak I, not the Lord: …”

Paul knew he was writing inspired Scripture and made sure to clarify when he was not speaking for God, but merely giving his opinion.

Maybe those two lost letters were not inspired and God was ensuring people didn’t use them as such. 🤷
I agree! Although I question whether Paul knew he was writing inspired Scripture, but that’s not important.

What is important is that the author in the OP’s original document states that each book claims to be inspired. I used Paul’s letters to question this statement, for I don’t see Paul saying that.

I also brought up the 4 letters to Corinth to show that simply because Paul wrote it, doesn’t mean its Scripture.
 
BTW, does the author of the original “Pro Sola Scriptura” essay realize that Canon means something like used in Liturgy (I’d love to get the actual meaning - how about it Greek or Latin scholars!). One of the main reasons the Catholic Church chose the 27 New Testament books was so that they would read from the same books during the Catholic Mass (the Liturgy). In doing so, they chose the books that reflected Catholic teaching.
 
BTW, using 2nd Timothy 3:16 to claim that Scripture is the only authority necessary, since its profitable, is like… well, let me give an example.

We all know that exercise is profitable to being healthy. But if someone uses this fact to claim that its sufficient, that would be misleading. I could show you that a poor diet, smoking, and a other vices would quickly deteriorate one’s health, no matter the exercise.

So, while one needs to exercise to stay healthy, they also need a good diet and avoid self-destructive vices.

Just as one needs Scripture, but one also needs to have “the Faith of obedience” in Christ and the Church He left us.
 
I’ll give up after this point:
The Scriptures, in an effort to beat a dead horse, do not declare themselves authoritative. They declare the Church to be authoritative. If the popes and councils have erred, then Scripture has erred. So you would have to throw out the baby with the bath water, so to speak.

And 2nd Timothy does not say that Scripture is sufficient for salvation. It says it is “profitable”, but not sufficient (KJV). There is a huge difference.
Good to hear from you, John! Also, I like to point out that 2nd Timothy says “all scripture” and NOT “scripture is all”. Another big difference. If scripture is all that is needed, then pastors are not needed. How long would any church survive without a head?

“Make a tree good and its fruit will be good” Look at the fruits of sola scriptura. Thousands of disagreeing denominations with no authority to go to in resolving disputes. Thus, the fracturing of the Body of Christ, to the delight of the evil one.

Christ’s peace.
 
Good to hear from you, John! Also, I like to point out that 2nd Timothy says “all scripture” and NOT “scripture is all”. Another big difference.** If scripture is all that is needed, then pastors are not needed. How long would any church survive without a head?**
“Make a tree good and its fruit will be good” Look at the fruits of sola scriptura. Thousands of disagreeing denominations with no authority to go to in resolving disputes. Thus, the fracturing of the Body of Christ, to the delight of the evil one.

Christ’s peace.
Scripture teaches the church offices and so forth. Just saying…
 
Scripture teaches the church offices and so forth. Just saying…
But does the pastor have authority? Or simply the knowledge to teach. It would seem that, with Sola Scriptura, the pastor has no authority.
 
Scripture teaches the church offices and so forth. Just saying…
Understood. However, only the barest essentials of the Apostolic organization of the early church is in scripture. Do you suppose God intended man to just “wing it”? Or, did he, in His infinite wisdom, provide for an “organizational tradition” to be followed and handed on? The organization itself has nothing to do with the revealed truth, only the continuation of its teaching, so the two can be separated.

It’s structure is mentioned in scripture, but had to be written of and carried on outside of scripture. This is written of mostly in the non-canonized writings of the early Church fathers. Whether you agree or strongly disagree with Catholicism, 1,975 years of non-stop teaching and preaching point to more than just scripture being required for a permanent organization.
 
BTW, using 2nd Timothy 3:16 to claim that Scripture is the only authority necessary, …
Actually, God is the only authority necessary because He is always right and never makes mistakes. The Bible is His Word preserved in written form as a guide for Christians to follow.

While verse 16 states, “All scripture [is] given by inspiration of God, and [is] profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:”
verse 17 says, “That the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works.”
 
Actually, God is the only authority necessary because He is always right and never makes mistakes. The Bible is His Word preserved in written form as a guide for Christians to follow.

While verse 16 states, “All scripture [is] given by inspiration of God, and [is] profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:”
verse 17 says, “That the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works.”
Christ established the Catholic Church and gave it authority.
The New Testament was written by the first Catholics, i.e the oral traditions of Christ written down by the Apostles. The Church came before the Bible.
The Bible which we have today (including the New Testament which Protestants accept) was compiled by the Catholic Church under the guidance of the Holy Spirit.

Tell us where in the Bible it says Bible only because your references to 2 Tim 3:16-17 do not say that.

A few comments from the link I have given below:

“All Scripture is Inspired”- 2 Tim. 3:16-17

2 Tim. 3:14 - Protestants usually use 2 Tim. 3:16-17 to prove that the Bible is the sole authority of God’s word. But examining these texts disproves their claim. Here, Paul appeals to apostolic tradition right before the Protestants’ often quoted verse 2 Tim. 3:16-17. Thus, there is an appeal to tradition before there is an appeal to the Scriptures, and Protestants generally ignore this fact.

2 Tim. 3:15 - Paul then appeals to the sacred writings of Scripture referring to the Old Testament Scriptures with which Timothy was raised (not the New Testament which was not even compiled at the time of Paul’s teaching). This verse also proves that one can come to faith in Jesus Christ without the New Testament.

2 Tim. 3:16 - this verse says that Scripture is “profitable” for every good work, but not exclusive. The word “profitable” is “ophelimos” in Greek. “Ophelimos” only means useful, which underscores that Scripture is not mandatory or exclusive. Protestants unbiblically argue that profitable means exclusive.

2 Tim. 3:16 - further, the verse “all Scripture” uses the words “pasa graphe” which actually means every (not all) Scripture. This means every passage of Scripture is useful. Thus, the erroneous Protestant reading of “pasa graphe” would mean every single passage of Scripture is exclusive. This would mean Christians could not only use “sola Matthew,” or “sola Mark,” but could rely on one single verse from a Gospel as the exclusive authority of God’s word. This, of course, is not true and even Protestants would agree. Also, “pasa graphe” cannot mean “all of Scripture” because there was no New Testament canon to which Paul could have been referring, unless Protestants argue that the New Testament is not being included by Paul.

2 Tim. 3:16 - also, these inspired Old Testament Scriptures Paul is referring to included the deuterocanonical books which the Protestants removed from the Bible 1,500 years later.

2 Tim. 3:17 - Paul’s reference to the “man of God” who may be complete refers to a clergyman, not a layman. It is an instruction to a bishop of the Church. So, although Protestants use it to prove their case, the passage is not even relevant to most of the faithful.

2 Tim. 3:17 - further, Paul’s use of the word “complete” for every good work is “artios” which simply means the clergy is “suitable” or “fit.” Also, artios does not describe the Scriptures, it describes the clergyman. So, Protestants cannot use this verse to argue the Scriptures are complete.

scripturecatholic.com/scripture_alone.html
 
Actually, God is the only authority necessary because He is always right and never makes mistakes. The Bible is His Word preserved in written form as a guide for Christians to follow.

While verse 16 states, “All scripture [is] given by inspiration of God, and [is] profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:”
verse 17 says, “That the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works.”
I am so confused by this statement.

You declare that the Bible is the only authority. And then you ignore the authority that the Bible assigns to the Church?

That makes no sense!
 
While verse 16 states, “All scripture [is] given by inspiration of God, and [is] profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:”
verse 17 says, “That the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works.”
Ginger,

Profitable does NOT mean all that is necessary.

In order to be healthy, it is profitable to:
a) have a good balanced diet.
b) exercise regularly.
c) avoid harmful vices - excessive drinking and smoking.
d) have good genes.
e) reduce stress.

Now, I ask you Ginger, which one of these is the only thing necessary for good health?!?

Sola Scriptura makes absolutely no sense.
 
Tell us where in the Bible it says Bible only because your references to 2 Tim 3:16-17 do not say that.
When did I say anything about Bible only? Please site the post as I think you are confusing me with someone else.

What I said is “God is the only authority necessary because He is always right and never makes mistakes. The Bible is His Word preserved in written form as a guide for Christians to follow.”

The Bible tells us that God often uses other people, nature and incidents to interact with us.

I thought I was agreeing with you. 🤷

I agree that the Catholic definition of SS is a false doctrine. I’ve said this before in other threads. Do you not believe the Bible can be used as a guide? Kind of like using a road map helps you locate your physical destination, the Holy Scriptures help you find your spiritual destination.
 
I am so confused by this statement.

You declare that the Bible is the only authority. And then you ignore the authority that the Bible assigns to the Church?

That makes no sense!
Where in the world did I say “the Bible is the only authority”?

I absolutely reject that idea!
 
Where in the world did I say “the Bible is the only authority”?

I absolutely reject that idea!
Then maybe you can add more to this statement to help clear my confusion.
Actually, God is the only authority necessary because He is always right and never makes mistakes. The Bible is His Word preserved in written form as a guide for Christians to follow.
The typical argument, and the subject of this thread, is that either God left fallible men with some authority, or God left the Bible for authority, or some mixture of both.

When one sites 2 Timothy 3:16, it is usually to declare infallibly that the Bible is the only authority a Christian needs.
 
NotWorthy,

“When one sites 2 Timothy 3:16, it is usually to declare infallibly that the [Catholic Church] is the only authority a Christian needs.”

lol

Apparently you are trying to “read between the lines” rather than accept what is actually being said.

Sola Scripture is not actually a Protestant doctrine. Near as I can figure Protestants began trying to come up with an appropriate definition after Catholics began claiming Protestants believe the Bible contains all knowledge and nothing else is needed.

It’s hilarious, because one false accusation has led to Protestant attempts to define a doctrine that doesn’t even exist! 😃
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top