sola scriptura

[PRmerger]

This is what’s so confusing to me. I agree completely. Men can be wrong. I can be wrong. You can be wrong. The IDEA of an infallible magisterium is comforting, but it doesn’t makes sense to me because that magisterium is made up of men, which we’ve already discussed can be wrong.

But you have already acknowledged that you do believe that men can be infallible, yes?

Peter, Paul, Matthew, Mark, Luke, John. Yes?

So I don’t see what your objection is.

Is this something catholics take on faith, that the Holy Spirit wouldn’t let the church be led astray?

No, not only on faith, Traverse.

The Infallibility of the Catholic Church Proved from Scripture

The following verses suggest that the Catholic Church is prevented from teaching error in matters of faith and morals by God Himself. I provide questions below each verse to illustrate why it is applicable to our understanding of infallibility.

Matthew 16:18
And I tell you that you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of Hades will not overcome it.

Q: If Jesus promised to build his own church and that Church ever fell into doctrinal error, would this mean that a) Jesus was a liar, b) Jesus did not have the power to protect his own church, or c) Jesus was incompetent as a church builder?

Matthew 28:20
And surely I am with you always, to the very end of the age.

Q: If the Church fell into doctrinal error at any time during the 1500 years before the Protestant Reformation, would that suggest that Jesus did not remain with the Church “always”?

John 14:15-16
15"If you love me, you will obey what I command. 16And I will ask the Father, and he will give you another Counselor to be with you forever—

Q: If the Church ever fell into doctrinal error, would that mean that Jesus did not give the Counselor or that the Counselor simply failed to remain with the Church “forever”?

John 14:18
18I will not leave you as orphans; I will come to you.

Q: If the Church ever fell into doctrinal error, would that imply that Jesus actually did leave us as “orphans” during all that time?

John 14:26
26But the Counselor, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, will teach you all things and will remind you of everything I have said to you.

Q: If the Church fell into error despite this promise, would that mean the Holy Spirit failed to teach the Church “all things” or to remind the Church of the things that Jesus had said to the Apostles?

John 16:13
But when he, the Spirit of truth, comes, he will guide you into all truth. He will not speak on his own; he will speak only what he hears, and he will tell you what is yet to come.

Q: Could the Holy Spirit fail to guide the Church into all truth - or allow the Church to fall into error - if Jesus promised otherwise?

Now, consider the following three verses:

1 John 4:4
4You, dear children, are from God and have overcome them, because the one who is in you is greater than the one who is in the world.

1 Timothy 3:13
15if I am delayed, you will know how people ought to conduct themselves in God’s household, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and foundation of the truth.

Mark 3:27
27In fact, no one can enter a strong man’s house and carry off his possessions unless he first ties up the strong man. Then he can rob his house.

Q: Is Satan stronger than Jesus, is the Church the household of God, and can Satan rob the Church of the deposit of truth by “binding” Jesus in any way?

In light of the above, is it possible for the Church to fall into doctrinal error? Taken individually, each of these verses creates a problem for those that assert that the Church “went off the rails” at some point in history or that the Church is fallible.

Taken as a whole, they portray Christ’s own involvement in building, nurturing and protecting His Church until the end of time. The Catholic Church remains strong and vibrant – not by her own efforts or innate qualities – but because God Himself is leading and guiding her to ensure that “the gates of hell will not overcome it.”–originally posted by Randy Carson

 

[Traverse]

But you have already acknowledged that you do believe that men can be infallible, yes?

Peter, Paul, Matthew, Mark, Luke, John. Yes?

So I don’t see what your objection is.

The objection is that it doesn’t necessarily follow that men can be infallible today.

No, not only on faith, Traverse.

The Infallibility of the Catholic Church Proved from Scripture

The following verses suggest that the Catholic Church is prevented from teaching error in matters of faith and morals by God Himself. I provide questions below each verse to illustrate why it is applicable to our understanding of infallibility.

…]

In light of the above, is it possible for the Church to fall into doctrinal error? Taken individually, each of these verses creates a problem for those that assert that the Church “went off the rails” at some point in history or that the Church is fallible.

Taken as a whole, they portray Christ’s own involvement in building, nurturing and protecting His Church until the end of time. The Catholic Church remains strong and vibrant – not by her own efforts or innate qualities – but because God Himself is leading and guiding her to ensure that “the gates of hell will not overcome it.”–originally posted by Randy Carson

This just goes back to my earlier concerns that aren’t really a part of this thread. I don’t deny that Christ established a church that the gates of hades will not overpower… but I question whether the catholic church IS that church.

 

[PRmerger]

The objection is that it doesn’t necessarily follow that men can be infallible today.

This just goes back to my earlier concerns that aren’t really a part of this thread. I don’t deny that Christ established a church that the gates of hades will not overpower… but I question whether the catholic church IS that church.

Fair enough.

But we have established that you believe that men can be infallible, yes?

And that you submit to the authority of the CC when you quote from the NT, yes?

Which means that you are not Sola Scriptura, yes?

And that you acknowledge that Sacred Tradition gave you this canon of Scripture, yes?

 

[pablope]

pablope;10308841:

This is what’s so confusing to me. I agree completely. Men can be wrong. I can be wrong. You can be wrong. The IDEA of an infallible magisterium is comforting, but it doesn’t makes sense to me because that magisterium is made up of men, which we’ve already discussed can be wrong.

Is this something catholics take on faith, that the Holy Spirit wouldn’t let the church be led astray?

Travers…wrong in what sense?

Maybe this stories will help:

freerepublic.com/focus/f-religion/1858224/posts

How I solved the Catholic Problem

ewtn.com/library/ANSWERS/1ORTHO.htm

EVANGELICALS WHO JOURNEY EAST

 

[CopticChristian]

The objection is that it doesn’t necessarily follow that men can be infallible today.

**This just goes back to my earlier concerns that aren’t really a part of this thread. I don’t deny that Christ established a church that the gates of hades will not overpower… but I question whether the catholic church IS that church./**QUOTE]

Traverse,

You are on your way…whether the Catholic Church is that Church…

Where is that Church
What is that Church…

ask these questions and by elimination you can say…

The Church Christ founded is not Mormon perhaps
The Church Christ founded is not Jehovah Witness perhaps
The Church Christ founded is not the Protestant Church of Christ with Protestant roots and then keep going down the line…

 

[cargills112]

Sola scriptora question for an Anabaptist

“where in the bible do you see children waiting to the age of reason”

i am sorry for asking this but what do you mean by Sola Scriptora quesitons for an Anabaptisty ?

 

[Bella92]

Because it’s like saying, "I’ll take your money, mom, but when you tell me to clean my room I’m going to say, ‘You can’t tell me what to do!’ "

I’m 21, not 12. Whenever you decided to talk to me like a grownup, I might come back and have a chat with you.

 

[PRmerger]

I’m 21, not 12. Whenever you decided to talk to me like a grownup, I might come back and have a chat with you.

According to the Church we are all children, Bella. There’s nothing wrong with being a child. Jesus recommended it.

 

[Bella92]

According to the Church we are all children, Bella. There’s nothing wrong with being a child. Jesus recommended it.

I’m not a child, so don’t talk down to me like I was one. If you can’t do that, don’t talk to me at all.

 

[PRmerger]

I’m not a child, so don’t talk down to me like I was one. If you can’t do that, don’t talk to me at all.

I apologize, friend.

However, as for your taking the Bible while rejecting the Church, that is akin to a wife taking her husband’s money without acknowledging how hard he worked to get it for her.

 

[philv]

The Catholic Church has mass which is the celebration of the Eucharist. It’s not a bible study. If you want a bible study, you might check out the paper they hand out after every service. There’s a time for study, and there’s a time for church. However, the first part of mass is the reading of scripture, along with a homily. If you want to dive more into what is taught on Sunday, you can study yourself and find a bible group. If you reject going to them, then you might not want to point at the church.

 

[CopticChristian]

I apologize, friend.

However, as for your taking the Bible while rejecting the Church, that is akin to a wife taking her husband’s money without acknowledging how hard he worked to get it for her.

Merge,

It is worse than that…it is like someone promoting this…

Gangman Style

youtube.com/watch?v=9bZkp7q19f0

Not realizing that there was something that came before that looked like this…

Jim Carey

youtube.com/watch?v=0A7tLVIsuNw

and if it were not for this…

MC Hammer

youtube.com/watch?v=otCpCn0l4Wo

you may think that Gangman invented this stuff, but oh no…there was this

Michael Jackson

youtube.com/watch?v=kXhy7ZsiR50

and of course this…

Hines and hines

youtube.com/watch?v=jUFfdNAErRI

and long before that

Fred and Ginger

youtube.com/watch?v=mxPgplMujzQ

and the further you go back you realize that we are all descendants of…so you know that Gangman had nothing to do with it…that is how I see it…

 

[PRmerger]

Merge,

It is worse than that…it is like someone promoting this…

Not realizing that there was something that came before that looked like this…

and if it were not for this…

you may think that Gangman invented this stuff, but oh no…there was this

and of course this…

and long before that

and the further you go back you realize that we are all descendants of…so you know that Gangman had nothing to do with it…that is how I see it…

 

[PaulinePresbytr]

I love my protestant brothers and sister.

But why dont we take sola scriptura literally, and just read the bible during

service and have no preaching.

In short to be really bible based, why dont we stop all preaching and just have

someone read out of the bible without any sermons.

on paper Sola Scriptura simply means that all that is necessary to understand the doctrines which must be believed to be saved exist in scripture. By partaking in biblical apologetics catholic answers proves the doctrine of sola scriptura. This doesn’t mean that tradition has no role to play, as knowing what is and what is not scripture comes from tradition, but that all that we need for those salvific doctrines is in scripture. In practice you can either get what they have in the traditional protestant groups which actually follows this, or you can get the radical individualism that originated in the 19th century with people like Finney who decided after being a Christian for 2 years with no theological training whatsoever that they would be a preacher.

 

[CopticChristian]

on paper Sola Scriptura simply means that all that is necessary to understand the doctrines which must be believed to be saved exist in scripture. This doesn’t mean that tradition has no role to play, as knowing what is and what is not scripture comes from tradition, but that all that we need for those salvific doctrines is in scripture. In practice you can either get what they have in the traditional protestant groups which actually follows this, or you can get the radical individualism that originated in the 19th century with people like Finney who decided after being a Christian for 2 years with no theological training whatsoever that they would be a preacher.

Pauline,

I cannot understand this…

By partaking in biblical apologetics catholic answers proves the doctrine of sola scriptura.

Pauline say wha???

 

[PaulinePresbytr]

Pauline,

I cannot understand this…

Pauline say wha???

Of what sola scriptura has historically meant and what it still means on paper, which is that scripture contains all information for understanding doctrines which must be believed to be saved. I am not referring to the modern radically individualistic doctrine of sola scriptura which says that everyone can have their own personal interpretation and those interpretations are all valid and tradition doesn’t matter and etc.

 

[SteveVH]

Of what sola scriptura has historically meant and what it still means on paper, which is that scripture contains all information for understanding doctrines which must be believed to be saved.

But it doesn’t. The very canon of the Bible came from Sacred Tradtion which means that the truths contained in the sacred texts were already posessed by the Church. This wasn’t something new. And the Church never contemplated anyone using the Scriptures as their sole authority so they certainly weren’t concerned about making sure that every facet of the faith was covered. The Bible itself doesn’t claim to “contain all information for understanding doctrines which must be believed to be saved”?

How about the doctrine of Purgatory? Yes we can point to several places in Scripture that at least give evidence of a place other than heaven or hell but the doctrine is certainly not spelled out by any stretch of the imagination.

Why do we go to Mass on Sunday instead of Saturday? There is much more biblical evidence for worshipping on the Sabbath as opposed to the few mentions of meeting on “the day of the sun”. It is a mortal sin, however, to intentionally miss Mass on Sunday. Sounds like something that might affect one’s salvation to me and it certainly isn’t spelled out in the Bible.

Christ gave us a Church, he didn’t hand us a book. Those that rely solely on Sacred Scripture have abandoned nearly every facet of the Apostolic faith, including the source and summit of that faith, the Eucharist, as well as the majority of the other sacraments (which many don’t even consider sacraments but rather ordinances). Yet we are to belileve that the Bible contains “all information for understanding doctrines which must be believed to be saved”? If this is true, why are they all missing it?

 

[CopticChristian]

Of what sola scriptura has historically meant and what it still means on paper, which is that scripture contains all information for understanding doctrines which must be believed to be saved. I am not referring to the modern radically individualistic doctrine of sola scriptura which says that everyone can have their own personal interpretation and those interpretations are all valid and tradition doesn’t matter and etc.

Pauline,

I believe you are referring to what is distinguished as Material vs Formal Sufficiency of Scripture discussed here…

catholicfidelity.com/apologetics-topics/sola-scriptura/material-vs-formal-sufficiency-of-scripture-by-mark-shea/

 

[PaulinePresbytr]

But it doesn’t. The very canon of the Bible came from Sacred Tradtion which means that the truths contained in the sacred texts were already posessed by the Church. This wasn’t something new. And the Church never contemplated anyone using the Scriptures as their sole authority so they certainly weren’t concerned about making sure that every facet of the faith was covered. The Bible itself doesn’t claim to “contain all information for understanding doctrines which must be believed to be saved”?

How about the doctrine of Purgatory? Yes we can point to several places in Scripture that at least give evidence of a place other than heaven or hell but the doctrine is certainly not spelled out by any stretch of the imagination.

Why do we go to Mass on Sunday instead of Saturday? There is much more biblical evidence for worshipping on the Sabbath as opposed to the few mentions of meeting on “the day of the sun”. It is a mortal sin, however, to intentionally miss Mass on Sunday. Sounds like something that might affect one’s salvation to me and it certainly isn’t spelled out in the Bible.

Christ gave us a Church, he didn’t hand us a book. Those that rely solely on Sacred Scripture have abandoned nearly every facet of the Apostolic faith, including the source and summit of that faith, the Eucharist, as well as the majority of the other sacraments (which many don’t even consider sacraments but rather ordinances). Yet we are to belileve that the Bible contains “all information for understanding doctrines which must be believed to be saved”? If this is true, why are they all missing it?

They are all missing it because they chose to ignore what scripture teaches because they don’t like it, the info is in there. And the canon being tradition shows the obvious need for tradition.

 

[SteveVH]

They are all missing it because they chose to ignore what scripture teaches because they don’t like it, the info is in there. And the canon being tradition shows the obvious need for tradition.

So if the Bible contains all information that we need to believe in order to be saved then why is there any need for Tradition (with a big T)? You have me completley confused at this point.