Solas of the Protestant Reformation

[Prodigal_Son1]

The King James Version of the Bible should not be considered dependable:

The king gave the translators instructions designed to guarantee that the new version would conform to the ecclesiology and reflect the episcopal structure of the Church of England and its beliefs about an ordained clergy.

Martin Luther added the word alone to Romans 3:28 and did not deny it:

You tell me what a great fuss the Papists are making because the word alone in not in the text of Paul…say right out to him: ‘Dr. Martin Luther will have it so,’…I will have it so, and I order it to be so, and my will is reason enough.

Martin Luther had problems with other books in the New Testament:

St. James’ epistle is really an epistle of straw…for it has nothing of the nature of the gospel about it” (Luther, M. Preface to the New Testament, 1546

Martin Luther wrote about the book of Revelations:

About this book of the Revelation of John…I miss more than one thing in this book, and it makes me consider it to be neither apostolic nor prophetic…I can in no way detect that the Holy Spirit produced it.

Martin Luther did not care for more books of the Old Testament:

“Job spoke not as it stands written in his book, but only had such thoughts. It is merely the argument of a fable. It is probable that Solomon wrote and made this book.”…

“Ecclesiastes ought to have been more complete. There is too much incoherent matter in it…Solomon did not, therefore, write this book.”…

“The book of Esther I toss into the Elbe. I am such an enemy to the book of Esther that I wish it did not exist, for it Judaizes too much…”

“The history of Jonah is so monstrous that it is absolutely incredible.” (as quoted in O’Hare, p. 202).

Martin Luther did not care for the first 5 books of the Old Testament:

Of the Pentateuch he says: “We have no wish either to see or hear Moses” (Ibid, p. 202).

Ironic he chose the Hebrew Old Testament as much as Martin Luther hated Jews:

…to burn down Jewish schools and synagogues, and to throw pitch and sulphur into the flames; to destroy their homes; to confiscate their ready money in gold and silver; to take from them their sacred books, even the whole Bible; and if that did not help matters, to hunt them of the country like mad dogs (Luther’s Works, vol. Xx, pp. 2230-2632 as quoted in Stoddard JL. Rebuilding a Lost Faith, 1922, p.99).

Now, can we get back to the topic of this thread and the first item on the OP’s list of solas? Will you please provide scriptural support for sola scriptura?

May the peace of the Lord be with you,
Prodigal Son1

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

Since the OP is Reformed, I will post the Westminster Confession’s definition of Sola Scriptura, along with the Scripture proofs for each statement. It is an accurate representation of the doctrine:

Although the light of nature, and the works of creation and
providence do so far manifest the goodness, wisdom, and power of
God, as to leave men unexcusable;(Rom. 1:19-20, 2:14-15; Psa. 19:1-4): yet are they not sufficient to give that knowledge of God, and of his will, which is necessary unto salvation (John 17:3; 1 Cor. 1:21, 2:13-14) Therefore it pleased the Lord, at sundry times, and in divers manners, to reveal himself, and to declare that his will unto his church; (Heb. 1:1-2) and afterwards, for the better preserving and propagating of the truth, and for the more sure establishment and comfort of the church against the corruption of the flesh, and the malice of Satan and of the world, to commit the same wholly unto writing: (Luke 1:3-4; Rom. 15:4; Matt. 4:4, 7, 10; Isa. 8:20) which maketh the Holy Scripture to be most necessary; (2 Tim. 3:15; 2 Pet. 1:19) those former ways of God’s revealing his will unto his people being now ceased (John 20:31; 1 Cor. 10:11, 14:37; 1 John 5:13, Heb. 1:1-2, 2:2-4).

Under the name of Holy Scripture, or the Word of God written,
are now contained all the books of the Old and New Testament,
which are these: Of the Old Testament; Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy, Joshua, Judges, Ruth, 1 Samuel, 2 Samuel, 1 Kings, 2 Kings, 1 Chronicles, 2 Chronicles, Ezra, Nehemiah, Esther, Job, Psalms, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, The Song of Songs, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Lamentations, Ezekiel, Daniel, Hosea, Job, Amos, Obadiah, Jonah, Micah, Nahum, Habakkuk, Zephaniah, Haggai, Zechariah, Malachi: Of the New Testament; Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, The Acts of the Apostles, Pauls Epistles to the Romans, Corinthians 1, Corinthians 2, Galatians, Ephesians, Philippians, Colossians, Thessalonians 1, Thessalonians 2, to Timothy 1, to Timothy 2, to Titus, to Philemon, The Epistle to the Hebrews, The Epistle of James, The first and second Epistles of Peter, The first, second, and third Epistles of John, The Epistle of Jude, The Revelation of John.
All which are given by inspiration of God to be the rule of faith and
life (Luke 16:29, 31, 24:27, 44; 2 Tim. 3:15-16; John 5:46-47).

The books commonly called Apocrypha, not being of divine
inspiration, are no part of the canon of the Scripture, and therefore
are of no authority in the church of God, nor to be any otherwise
approved, or made use of, than other human writings (Rev. 22:18-19; Rom. 3:2; 2 Pet. 1:21).

The authority of the Holy Scripture, for which it ought to be believed, and obeyed, dependeth not upon the testimony of any man, or church; but wholly upon God (who is truth itself) the author thereof: and therefore it is to be received, because it is the Word of God (2 Pet. 1:19-20; 2 Tim. 3:16; 1 John 5:9; 1 Thess. 2:13; Rev. 1:1-2).

We may be moved and induced by the testimony of the church
to an high and reverent esteem of the Holy Scripture (1 Tim. 3:15). And the heavenliness of the matter, the efficacy of the doctrine, the majesty of the style, the consent of all the parts, the scope of the whole (which is, to give all glory to God), the full discovery it makes of the only way of man’s salvation, the many other incomparable excellencies, and the entire perfection thereof, are arguments whereby it doth abundantly evidence itself to be the Word of God: yet notwithstanding, our full persuasion and assurance of the infallible truth and divine authority thereof, is from the inward work of the Holy Spirit bearing witness by and with the Word in our hearts (1 Cor. 2:9–10; Heb. 4:12; John 10:35; Isa. 55:11; Ps. 19:7–11; 1 Thess. 1:5; 1 John 2:20, 27)

The whole counsel of God concerning all things necessary for
his own glory, man’s salvation, faith and life, is either expressly set down in Scripture, or by good and necessary consequence may be deduced from Scripture: unto which nothing at any time is to be added, whether by new revelations of the Spirit, or traditions of men (2 Tim. 3:16–17; Gal. 1:8–9; 2 Thess. 2:2). Nevertheless, we acknowledge the inward illumination of the Spirit of God to be necessary for the saving understanding of such things as are revealed in the Word (John 6:45; 1 Cor. 2:12, 14–15, 4:6; Eph. 1:18): and that there are some circumstances concerning the worship of God, and government of the church, common to human actions and societies, which are to be ordered by the light of nature, and Christian prudence, according to the general rules of the Word, which are always to be observed (1 Cor. 11:13–14, 14:26, 40).

Nice smoke screen there.

So you provide someone’s interpretation that supports sola scriptura but no scriptures supporting sola scriptura?

From scriptures, provide support for sola scriptura.

I know it can’t be done.

May the peace of the Lord be with you,
Prodigal Son1

 

[TriuneUnity]

continued…

All things in Scripture are not alike plain in themselves, nor
alike clear unto all: (2 Pet. 3:16) yet those things which are necessary to be known, believed, and observed for salvation, are so clearly propounded, and opened in some place of Scripture or other, that not only the learned, but the unlearned, in a due use of the ordinary means, may attain unto a sufficient understanding of them (Ps. 119:105, 130; Deut. 29:29, 30:10–14; Acts 17:11).

The Old Testament in Hebrew (which was the native language
of the people of God of old), and the New Testament in Greek
(which, at the time of the writing of it, was most generally known to the nations), being immediately inspired by God, and, by his singular care and providence, kept pure in all ages, are therefore authentical; (Matt. 5:18; Ps. 119:89) so as, in all controversies of religion, the church is finally to appeal unto them (Isa. 8:20; Matt. 15:3, 6; Acts 15:15). But, because these original tongues are not known to all the people of God, who have right unto, and interest in the Scriptures, and are commanded, in the fear of God, to read and search them (John 5:39; Acts 17:11; Rev. 1:3), therefore they are to be translated into the vulgar language of every nation unto which they come (Matt. 28:19–20), that, the Word of God dwelling plentifully in all, they may worship him in an acceptable manner (Col. 3:16); and, through patience and comfort of the Scriptures, may have hope (Rom. 15:4).

The infallible rule of interpretation of Scripture is the Scripture
itself: and therefore, when there is a question about the true and
full sense of any Scripture (which is not manifold, but one), it must be searched and known by other places that speak more clearly (Acts 15:15; John 5:46).

The supreme judge by which all controversies of religion are
to be determined, and all decrees of councils, opinions of ancient
writers, doctrines of men, and private spirits, are to be examined,
and in whose sentence we are to rest, can be no other but the Holy Spirit speaking in the Scripture (Matt. 22:29, 31; Acts 28:25).

 

[TriuneUnity]

Nice smoke screen there.

So you provide someone’s interpretation that supports sola scriptura but no scriptures supporting sola scriptura?

From scriptures, provide support for sola scriptura.

I know it can’t be done.

May the peace of the Lord be with you,
Prodigal Son1

The statements posted show the scriptures each statement is based on. Since the statements argue for sola scriptura, the scriptures posted show sola scriptura.

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

continued…

All things in Scripture are not alike plain in themselves, nor
alike clear unto all: (2 Pet. 3:16) yet those things which are necessary to be known, believed, and observed for salvation, are so clearly propounded, and opened in some place of Scripture or other, that not only the learned, but the unlearned, in a due use of the ordinary means, may attain unto a sufficient understanding of them (Ps. 119:105, 130; Deut. 29:29, 30:10–14; Acts 17:11).

The Old Testament in Hebrew (which was the native language
of the people of God of old), and the New Testament in Greek
(which, at the time of the writing of it, was most generally known to the nations), being immediately inspired by God, and, by his singular care and providence, kept pure in all ages, are therefore authentical; (Matt. 5:18; Ps. 119:89) so as, in all controversies of religion, the church is finally to appeal unto them (Isa. 8:20; Matt. 15:3, 6; Acts 15:15). But, because these original tongues are not known to all the people of God, who have right unto, and interest in the Scriptures, and are commanded, in the fear of God, to read and search them (John 5:39; Acts 17:11; Rev. 1:3), therefore they are to be translated into the vulgar language of every nation unto which they come (Matt. 28:19–20), that, the Word of God dwelling plentifully in all, they may worship him in an acceptable manner (Col. 3:16); and, through patience and comfort of the Scriptures, may have hope (Rom. 15:4).

The infallible rule of interpretation of Scripture is the Scripture
itself: and therefore, when there is a question about the true and
full sense of any Scripture (which is not manifold, but one), it must be searched and known by other places that speak more clearly (Acts 15:15; John 5:46).

The supreme judge by which all controversies of religion are
to be determined, and all decrees of councils, opinions of ancient
writers, doctrines of men, and private spirits, are to be examined,
and in whose sentence we are to rest, can be no other but the Holy Spirit speaking in the Scripture (Matt. 22:29, 31; Acts 28:25).

So you think this proof of sola scriptura? So the Bible alone is it’s own authority according to man? So all the thousands of denominations that have different interpretations are justified? I’m afraid that amounts to confusion and God is not confusion. Confusion is more of the fallen one.

May the peace of the Lord be with you,
Prodigal Son1

 

[TriuneUnity]

So you think this proof of sola scriptura? So the Bible alone is it’s own authority according to man? So all the thousands of denominations that have different interpretations are justified? I’m afraid that amounts to confusion and God is not confusion. Confusion is more of the fallen one.

May the peace of the Lord be with you,
Prodigal Son1

I would suggest analyzing the statements and reading the Scriptures they reference before turning to Dave Armstrong mode

 

[anon52328184]

interesting. i have no desire to debate this thread, but this is the first time i have heard of 5 solas. i had heard of sola scripture before, and recently of sola fide, but this was the first time to read of the other 3. i am a new catholic, so i don’t feel like going through this. i already had a friend/neighbor
who dragged me to her church and kept giving me literature to read. i think they were followers of john calvin. i just know, it didn’t appeal to me.
i think protestantism is more black and white-just the facts ma’am to quote joe friday from the old tv show. LOL i am just happy i found my way to the roman catholic church.

whereas catholicism is more about the mystery of the scripture.

that’s my opinion.

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

The statements posted show the scriptures each statement is based on. Since the statements argue for sola scriptura, the scriptures posted show sola scriptura.

No, you haven’t produced any scriptures supporting sola scriptura. You have however provided a smoke screen to avoid providing scriptures.

Simply list the scriptures stating all is needed is the Bible alone.

See the flaw in your logic is this. The Church and the faith existed prior to the Bible. The letters and epistles of the Bible were not written until 10 to 15 years after the death and resurrection of the Lord. Those individual letters and epistles did not come together until around the 4th century and that was through the canonization through the Holy Spirit protected Church. The Lord did not write anything down nor did he have anything scribed.

There is nothing that separates the Church, traditions and scriptures except for men. Men like the reformers who didn’t believe in Christ’s promise to be with His Church until the consummation of the world.

It’s a catch-22 and we ALL know it. Nowhere did the Lord or Apostles tell men to take the Bible and run with it. And that my friend is from scriptures:

1Co 11:2 Now I praise you, brethren, that in all things you are mindful of me and keep my ordinances as I have delivered them to you.

2Th 2:15 (2:14) Therefore, brethren, stand fast: and hold the traditions, which you have learned, whether by word or by our epistle.

2Th 3:6 And we charge you, brethren, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that you withdraw yourselves from every brother walking disorderly and not according to the tradition which they have received of us.

Joh 21:25 But there are also many other things which Jesus did which, if they were written every one, the world itself. I think, would not be able to contain the books that should be written.

Mar 13:31 Heaven and earth shall pass away: but my word shall not pass away.

Paul records words of Jesus not found in the Gospels

Act 20:35 I have shewed you all things, how that so labouring you ought to support the weak and to remember the word of the Lord Jesus, how he said: It is a more blessed thing to give, rather than to receive.

2Ti 1:13 Hold the form of sound words which thou hast heard of me: in faith and in the love which is in Christ Jesus.

2Ti 2:2 And the things which thou hast heard of me by many witnesses, the same commend to faithful men who shall be fit to teach others also.

2Pe 1:20 Understanding this first: That no prophecy of scripture is made by private interpretation.

2Pe 3:15 And account the longsuffering of our Lord, salvation: as also our most dear brother Paul, according to the wisdom given him, hath written to you:
2Pe 3:16 As also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things; in which are certain things hard to be understood, which the unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, to their own destruction.

1Pe 1:25 But the word of the Lord endureth for ever. And this is the word which by the gospel hath been preached unto you.

Rom 10:17 Faith then cometh by hearing; and hearing by the word of Christ.

1Co 15:1 Now I make known unto you, brethren, the gospel which I preached to you, which also you have received and wherein you stand.
1Co 15:2 By which also you are saved, if you hold fast after what manner I preached unto you, unless you have believed in vain.

Mar 16:15 And he said to them: Go ye into the whole world and preach the gospel to every creature.

Mat 23:2 Saying: The scribes and the Pharisees have sitten on the chair of Moses.
Mat 23:3 All things therefore whatsoever they shall say to you, observe and do: but according to their works do ye not. For they say, and do not.

May the peace of the Lord be with you,
Prodigal Son1

 

[Reformed]

Wow, you’ve changed your stance then.

By which authority do you get your interpretation of scriptures?

God Bless,
Prodigal Son1

I wrote that exact statement on the other site too. It is a biblical statement.

 

[TriuneUnity]

No, you haven’t produced any scriptures supporting sola scriptura. You have however provided a smoke screen to avoid providing scriptures.

Okay. Well, it was nice chatting with you, but since you want to turn all of my statements around for apologetic purposes and avoid the fact that I did post scripture to back up what we hold as Sola Scriptura, as defined by a reformation confession of faith, rather than having an intelligent conversation… I will wish you Christ’s peace.

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

I wrote that exact statement on the other site too. It is a biblical statement.

It’s a Biblical statement? Where can I read this in the Bible then?

You could have typed the scripture reference just as easy as typing that you have answered it. You did the same evasive manuvers on the other site.

May the peace of the Lord be with you,
Prodigal Son1

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

Okay. Well, it was nice chatting with you, but since you want to turn all of my statements around for apologetic purposes and avoid the fact that I did post scripture to back up what we hold as Sola Scriptura, as defined by a reformation confession of faith, rather than having an intelligent conversation… I will wish you Christ’s peace.

Chatting? Wished I could say the same for reading your copy and pasted “chat” of the Westminister Confession.

God Bless,
Prodigal Son1

 

[anon52328184]

LOL you guys are funny. that was a quick discussion! LOL

 

[TriuneUnity]

LOL you guys are funny. that was a quick discussion! LOL

Sometimes, it just isn’t worth it because all it does is add to frustration which leads to anger, etc. Sometimes, it’s just better to walk away when you can see a conversation is going down the road of not being a conversation, but rather an attempt to flex apologetic muscle. It happens on every internet forum.

 

[Benadam]

Do you believe God gave us the Bible or did the Roman Catholic Church give us the Bible? Who do you thank at night for the Holy Bible?

 

[Reformed]

Reformed;4048754:

hello reformed, I’m not a former Protestant so I’m often surprised at the depth I’m missing when talking to my Protestant brothers about things. So forgive me if it takes a while for the light to blink on in my head. That being said, yeah here it comes, lol I’ve noticed that Protestant thinking about Catholic teaching often evokes the kind of questioning you posted above. An either or division that doesn’t have to exist and usually doesn’t for a Catholic.

I can thank God for Divine Revelation He delivered to the Church and the Church for it’s faith in living it and preserving it on earth untill Jesus returns. Both have proven to be necessary.

I believe that Divine Authority was exercised on earth, and being of God is like God , that is it was , is and always will be. Like wise, as it was on earth exercised by chosen and ordained ministers it is on earth exercised by ordained ministers ,being like God the same today yesterday and forever. If we admit that God’s Authority was given to the Apostles and exercised by them then to say it is no longer is to say it really is not eternal and changeless but perisheable.

T^he authority of Sacred Scriptures is ‘inherent’. It relies on authority that can be exercised. Symbols that can effectively express divine concepts cannot exercise authority and isn’t that necessary in order for anyone to be able to believe that God’s authority exists on earth at all?

Hi Benadam,

Thank you for your kind and respectful post. I know it is difficult to communicate through e-mail. We all have our presuppositions. I do not mean to state this in disrespect for Roman Catholic Christians. But, when you discuss and debate authority with LDS Christians (Mormons), they too will claim apostolic succession. Aposotlic sucession (Roman Catholic or LDS) is a different form of authority than Scripture alone. The basis of the Protestant Reformation is the rejection of the Catholic magestrium for final authority of Scripture. How does God speak to us authoratively? Here is a simple non-essential debate to illustrate my point. Do you believe the first Pope had a wife?

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

Benadam;4049423:

Hi Benadam,

Thank you for your kind and respectful post. I know it is difficult to communicate through e-mail. We all have our presuppositions. I do not mean to state this in disrespect for Roman Catholic Christians. But, when you discuss and debate authority with LDS Christians (Mormons), they too will claim apostolic succession. Aposotlic sucession (Roman Catholic or LDS) is a different form of authority than Scripture alone. The basis of the Protestant Reformation is the rejection of the Catholic magestrium for final authority of Scripture. How does God speak to us authoratively? Here is a simple non-essential debate to illustrate my point. Do you believe the first Pope had a wife?

I see nothing’s changed. You don’t provide scriptures supporting sola scriptura, but provide another question in place of an answer.

See ya around, but I’m not playing the game you wish to play.

You assert the 5 solas, now prove them. The proof is on you, not us.

And if you consider your comparison of the Mormon Church and Catholic Church close, you’ve got a lot of reading to do before entering into debates with Catholics. Personally, I wouldn’t put Jospeh Smith online with Luther even though they were both wrong.

God Bless,
Prodigal Son1

 

[Reformed]

Reformed;4049601:

I see nothing’s changed. You don’t provide scriptures supporting sola scriptura, but provide another question in place of an answer.

See ya around, but I’m not playing the game you wish to play.

You assert the 5 solas, now prove them. The proof is on you, not us.

And if you consider your comparison of the Mormon Church and Catholic Church close, you’ve got a lot of reading to do before entering into debates with Catholics. Personally, I wouldn’t put Jospeh Smith online with Luther even though they were both wrong.

God Bless,
Prodigal Son1

I didn’t make that statement as an intended offense. If you want to understand Protestants, you have to try understand that we hear a different source of authority. Here are a few scriptures to support what I believe for the adopted children of God. If a person is in Christ, he is a new creation and hears the voice of God through the Scriptures. A child of God does not need a religious institution to teach him that the Bible is the Word of God, because the Spirit of God enables him to receive the Word of God as the Word of God. The Bible is self-authenticating for the adopted children of God.

And we also thank God constantly for this, that when you received the word of God, which you heard from us, you accepted it not as the word of men but as what it really is, the word of God, which is at work in you believers. 1 Thes 2;13

Whoever is of God hears the words of God. The reason why you do not hear them is that you are not of God.” - John 8:47

In addition, biblical truth is concealed to others until God grants the proper interpertation of Scripture through illumination of the Holy Spirit (revealment). Do you believe in a spiritual truth because the Roman Catholic Church told you it was true? Or, did you come to a conviction of a spiritual truth because God opened your mind to understand a truth revealed in the Scriptures?

But they did not understand this saying, and it was concealed from them, so that they might not perceive it. And they were afraid to ask him about this saying. - Luke 9:45

Luke 10:21
In that same hour he rejoiced in the Holy Spirit and said, “I thank you, Father, Lord of heaven and earth, that you have hidden these things from the wise and understanding and revealed them to little children; yes, Father, for such was your gracious will.

Luke 24:45
Then he opened their minds to understand the Scriptures,

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

I didn’t make that statment as an intended offense. If you want to understand Protestants, you have to try understand that we hear a different source of authority. Here are a few scriptures to support what I believe for the adopted chidren of God. If a person is in Christ, he is a new creation and hears the voice of God through the Scriptures. A child of God does not need a religious institution that the Bible is the Word of God, because the Spirit of God enables him to receive the Word of God as the Word of God. The Bible is self-authenticating.

And we also thank God constantly for this, that when you received the word of God, which you heard from us, you accepted it not as the word of men but as what it really is, the word of God, which is at work in you believers. 1 Thes 2;13

Whoever is of God hears the words of God. The reason why you do not hear them is that you are not of God.” - John 8:47

Before responding, please note I have bolded and underlined parts of the scriptures you provided for emphasis. I don’t think you realize what you’ve posted as it supports the argument I’m about to present. The scriptures you provided do NOT say what you read.

If I want to understand Protestants? I swam the Tiber in 1985, at which time I was 31 years old. Before that I was Protestant. I was raised Protestant.

Now the Bible has real meaning for me and is alot easier to understand. I can read it now and go check the Church’s interpretation and it matches!

You don’t read things in context. To get context you have to read a verse in the chapter it’s in. Then you have to read the chapter in context with the letter or epistle it’s in. Then you have to read it in context with the New Testament. Last, you have to read the New Testament in context with the Old Testament. Sound like a lot? It is! That’s why you need the Church’s teachings to get you through the rough spots.

The Apostles were a part of the Church Christ started. The Apostles wrote the letters and epistles of the Bible 10 to 15 years after the death and resurrection of Christ. It wasn’t until almost the 4 century that the same Church canonized the Bible. The point of all this? The Church and the faith existed before the Bible. That’s right! Thousands were brought to the faith without the Bible through oral tradition. When you see scriptures mentioned in the New Testament, they’re speaking about the Old Testament! The New Testament wasn’t written for the purposes of being a part of the Bible! The letters and epistles were instructions, corrections and praises to the Churches the Apostles started, through oral tradition.

Mat 18:17 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.

Mat 28:18 And Jesus came and said to them, “All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me.
Mat 28:19 Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit,
Mat 28:20 teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you; and lo, I am with you always, to the close of the age.”

Mar 16:15 And he said to them, "Go into all the world and preach the gospel to the whole creation.
Mar 16:16 He who believes and is baptized will be saved; but he who does not believe will be condemned.

Luk 10:16 “He who hears you hears me, and he who rejects you rejects me, and he who rejects me rejects him who sent me.”

Jesus didn’t tell the Apostles to go out and pass out Bibles! He said, “He who hears you hears me, and he who rejects you rejects me, and he who rejects me rejects him who sent me.”

Now with that out of the way, you answer again and still no scriptures to backup your argument for sola scriptura. Of course you’re not going to find anything supporting sola scriptura. Martin Luther created that idea to justify his schism! As soon as he spoke his interpretation was the only one that counted, he realized he opened a can of worms. His followers started using sola scriptura to break away from his Church. Those schisms continued until present day. Now look at the number of Churches claiming to be Christian, all created through private interpretations, all with slightly different doctrines.

Jesus and the Apostles taught ONE CHURCH!

Joh 10:16 And I have other sheep, that are not of this fold; I must bring them also, and they will heed my voice. So there shall be one flock, one shepherd.

Eph 4:3 eager to maintain the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace.
Eph 4:4 There is one body and one Spirit, just as you were called to the one hope that belongs to your call,
Eph 4:5 one Lord, one faith, one baptism,
Eph 4:6 one God and Father of us all, who is above all and through all and in all.

Rom 16:17 I appeal to you, brethren, to take note of those who create dissensions and difficulties, in opposition to the doctrine which you have been taught; avoid them.

1Co 1:10 I appeal to you, brethren, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that all of you agree and that there be no dissensions among you, but that you be united in the same mind and the same judgment.

Php 2:2 complete my joy by being of the same mind, having the same love, being in full accord and of one mind.

Rom 15:5 May the God of steadfastness and encouragement grant you to live in such harmony with one another, in accord with Christ Jesus,
Rom 15:6 that together you may with one voice glorify the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ.

Joh 17:17 Sanctify them in the truth; thy word is truth.
Joh 17:18 As thou didst send me into the world, so I have sent them into the world.
Joh 17:19 And for their sake I consecrate myself, that they also may be consecrated in truth.
Joh 17:20 "I do not pray for these only, but also for those who believe in me through their word,
Joh 17:21 that they may all be one; even as thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee, that they also may be in us, so that the world may believe that thou hast sent me.
Joh 17:22 The glory which thou hast given me I have given to them, that they may be one even as we are one,
Joh 17:23 I in them and thou in me, that they may become perfectly one, so that the world may know that thou hast sent me and hast loved them even as thou hast loved me.

1Co 12:13 For by one Spirit we were all baptized into one body–Jews or Greeks, slaves or free–and all were made to drink of one Spirit.

Rom 12:4 For as in one body we have many members, and all the members do not have the same function,
Rom 12:5 so we, though many, are one body in Christ, and individually members one of another.

Eph 4:4 There is one body and one Spirit, just as you were called to the one hope that belongs to your call,

Col 3:15 And let the peace of Christ rule in your hearts, to which indeed you were called in the one body. And be thankful.

Anyone who researchs the history of the Bible, the Church and the tradition, with open eyes, is going to be Catholic.

May the peace of the Lord be with you,
Prodigal Son1

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

In addition, biblical truth is concealed to others until God grants the proper interpertation of Scripture through illumination of the Holy Spirit (revealment). Do you believe in a spiritual truth because the Roman Catholic Church told you it was true? Or, did you come to a conviction of a spiritual truth because God opened your mind to understand a truth revealed in the Scriptures?

But they did not understand this saying, and it was concealed from them, so that they might not perceive it. And they were afraid to ask him about this saying. - Luke 9:45

Luke 10:21
In that same hour he rejoiced in the Holy Spirit and said, “I thank you, Father, Lord of heaven and earth, that you have hidden these things from the wise and understanding and revealed them to little children; yes, Father, for such was your gracious will.

Luke 24:45
Then he opened their minds to understand the Scriptures,

You are wrong. He opened their minds to what was being said to them, not scriptures. Read my previous post which was posted evidently as you were editing. Jesus was not talking about New Testament scriptures as I explained in my previous post. He was talking about the scriptures of the Old Testament. The New Testament scriptures were not even written yet!

Watch what happens when you start to put things into context:

Luk 24:44 And he said to them: These are the words which I spoke to you while I was yet with you, that all things must needs be fulfilled which are written in the law of Moses and in the prophets and in the psalms, concerning me.
Luk 24:45 Then he opened their understanding, that they might understand the scriptures.
Luk 24:46 And he said to them: Thus it is written, and thus it behoved Christ to suffer and to rise again from the dead, the third day:

I only added two verses and it changed the entire message you were trying to get across.

May the peace of the Lord be with you,
Prodigal Son1