Some think Matthew 4:4 is teaching sola Scriptura

[Agathon]

bobperk:

what would cause someone to connect those books to 2 Timothy?

Because it says, “All Scripture is given by inspiration of God,”, and John and Revelation were both given by inspiration of God, so it fits the criteria that Paul has set for “All Scripture”.

How do you know those books are inspired?

 

[medwigel]

How do you know those books are inspired?

So are you saying that 2 Timothy, John and Revelation are not inspired by God?

 

[Agathon]

Agathon:

How do you know those books are inspired?

So are you saying that 2 Timothy, John and Revelation are not inspired by God?

No. I merely asked a question. Will you answer it?

 

[medwigel]

No. I merely asked a question. Will you answer it?

These books have been vetted by theologians and historians and have been found to be authentic.

 

[Cathoholic]

medwigel . . .

These books have been vetted by theologians and historians and have been found to be authentic.

Those “theologians and historians” that did that vetting back in the 300’s were Catholic Bishops.

 

[Cathoholic]

medwigel’s pastor on sola Scriptura . . .

My Pastor then refers you to . . . . 2 Peter 1:21

In 2nd Peter 1:21 St. Peter is essentially saying we believe Jesus as we SAW (not read about) Jesus TRANSFIGURED on the Mount of Transfiguration!
Also St. Peter is saying "We HEARD (not read) the VOICE OF GOD up there on that Mountain!

2nd PETER 1:16b-18 . . . we were eyewitnesses of his majesty. 17 For when he received honor and glory from God the Father and the voice was borne to him by the Majestic Glory, “This is my beloved Son, with whom I am well pleased,” 18 we heard this voice borne from heaven, for we were with him on the holy mountain.

• Eyewitnesses (not merely reading about this in Scripture and formulating your own mere opinions)
• His majesty (Jesus and/or God the Father here. Not the printed page)
• The voice from Heaven (voice from God, not from reading Scripture)
• Majestic Glory involved with this voice (reaffirming it is God, not them reading anything)
• “This is my beloved Son, with whom I am well pleased” (this is a direct quote from what occurred on the Mount of Transfiguration. Not him reading under a fig tree or some such)
• We heard this voice borne from heaven (more than one eye witness
  and for that matter “ear-witness” as God put it unmistakenly on their heart
  that this voice came from Heaven)
• We were with him on the holy mountain (again testimony to multiple eyewitnesses–Peter himself, James, and John. Nothing about Scripture here.)
• We were with him on the holy mountain (Peter wanted to dedicate this HOLY PLACE! Nothing about reading any printed material here either).

.

.

MARK 9:2-7 2 And after six days Jesus took with him Peter and James and John, and led them up a high mountain apart by themselves; and he was transfigured before them, 3 and his garments became glistening, intensely white, as no fuller on earth could bleach them. 4 And there appeared to them Eli′jah with Moses; and they were talking to Jesus. 5 And Peter said to Jesus, “Master, it is well that we are here; let us make three booths, one for you and one for Moses and one for Eli′jah.” 6 For he did not know what to say, for they were exceedingly afraid. 7 And a cloud overshadowed them, and a voice came out of the cloud, “This is my beloved Son; listen to him.”

.

MATTHEW 17:1-7 1 And after six days Jesus took with him Peter and James and John his brother, and led them up a high mountain apart. 2 And he was transfigured before them, and his face shone like the sun, and his garments became white as light. 3 And behold, there appeared to them Moses and Eli′jah, talking with him. 4 And Peter said to Jesus, “Lord, it is well that we are here; if you wish, I will make three booths here, one for you and one for Moses and one for Eli′jah.” 5 He was still speaking, when lo, a bright cloud overshadowed them, and a voice from the cloud said, “This is my beloved Son, with whom I am well pleased; listen to him.” 6 When the disciples heard this, they fell on their faces, and were filled with awe.

See also Luke 9.

 

[Cathoholic]

2nd PETER 1:16b-18 . . . we were eyewitnesses of his majesty. 17 For when he received honor and glory from God the Father and the voice was borne to him by the Majestic Glory, “This is my beloved Son, with whom I am well pleased,” 18 we heard this voice borne from heaven, for we were with him on the holy mountain.

.

And then in 2nd Peter, St. Peter goes on to WARN AGAINST sola Scriptura several verses later

.

2nd PETER 1:18-21 18 we heard this voice borne from heaven, for we were with him on the holy mountain. 19 And we have the prophetic word made more sure. You will do well to pay attention to this as to a lamp shining in a dark place, until the day dawns and the morning star rises in your hearts. 20 First of all you must understand this, that no prophecy of scripture is a matter of one’s own interpretation, 21 because no prophecy ever came by the impulse of man, but men moved by the Holy Spirit spoke from God.

.

“The prophetic Word” that they have is God Himself!

All Bible-only denominations THINK and SAY they have
the Holy Spirit “interpreting” for them.
They ALL say the same thing.

Yet they ALL keep coming to DIFFERING CONCLUSIONS on various DIFFERING DOCTRINES.

Worship on Sabbath instead of the Fulfilled Sabbath (“The Lord’s Day”)
Baptizing babies
Baptizing adults
Baptismal regeneration
Pictures of Jesus or not
Stained glass windows or not
Power structure from hierarchy vrs. Congregationalist decision making structure

Even overtly FALSE doctrines like Denying the Divinity of Jesus (like Unitarians do)
Or the various “flavors” of “The Rapture” (another phony doctrine unless you define "The Rapture as the “Second and Final Coming of Jesus”).

If you take only 8 mere doctrinal differences with sola Scriptura and look at the various permutations and combinations you can get with only eight doctrunal disputes (there are many more than eight) you get . . . 8! Belief Systems!!

8x7x6x5x4x3x2x1 = 40,320.

Forty THOUSAND differing religious BELIEF SYSTEMS with a mere 8 doctrinal differences are possible!

Think about that medwigel.

This is more confusion than a proverbial tower of Babel.

The Holy Spirit “interpreting” does NOT bring religious confusion.

If there are 10,000 guys in a room all with a Bible ALL CLAIMING to have protection of the Holy Spirit, but ALL coming to DIFFERING religious “truths” . . . .YOU KNOW . . . .

. . . .YOU KNOW 9,999 of them at LEAST . . . . ARE WRONG (at least somewhere).

And if they are WRONG, you know they are NOT PROTECTED by the Holy Spirit in their interpretations!

Welcome to sola Scriptura medwigel.

2nd PETER 1:20-21 20 First of all you must understand this, that no prophecy of scripture is a matter of one’s own interpretation, 21 because no prophecy ever came by the impulse of man, but men moved by the Holy Spirit spoke from God.

The very passage your pastor has been using to teach you sola Scriptura . . . .warns against it!

 

[medwigel]

medwigel’s pastor on sola Scriptura . . .

My Pastor then refers you to . . . . 2 Peter 1:21

Please pay attention to the original question I was asked:
——————
medwigel . . .

If you would like for me to ask my Pastor a question for you, you need to ask a real and clear question.
.
I (cathoholic) did.
WHERE in the Bible is the verse that lists the New Testament Canon?

————————

My Pastor responded your question regarding New Testament canon, not about sola scripture.

A good rule for honest and open dialogue would be to not apply answers from one question to a whole new and unrelated question in order to twist someone else’s words; that is dishonest and it is misleading.

 

[Cathoholic]

medwigel . . .

If you would like for me to ask my Pastor a question for you, you need to ask a real and clear question.

.

I did.

WHERE in the Bible is the verse that lists the New Testament Canon?

Some think Matthew 4:4 is teaching sola Scriptura Sacred Scripture

medwigel . . . If you would like for me to ask my Pastor a question for you, you need to ask a real and clear question. . I did. WHERE in the Bible is the verse that lists the New Testament Canon?

.

.

Then this response below from here . . .

Answer to your question from my Pastor:
Such a verse can’t exist since most of the books were written independently of each other.
Therefore we have a table of contents that lists the canon.
My Pastor then refers you to 2 Timothy 3:16-17 and 2 Peter 1:21.
And if that is not good enough he has referred you to 2 Timothy 2:14.

.

.

Are you telling me this . . .

2nd PETER 1:20-21 20 First of all you must understand this, that no prophecy of scripture is a matter of one’s own interpretation, 21 because no prophecy ever came by the impulse of man, but men moved by the Holy Spirit spoke from God.

. . . sorts out the Canon of Scripture?

WHAT are you attempting to say here?

 

[Cathoholic]

Medwigel . . .

And if that is not good enough he has referred you to 2 Timothy 2:14.

.

All THAT says is St. Timothy knew what the Old Testament was, “from childhood”.

THAT doesn’t say ANYTHING about what is included in the Canon of Scripture.

It is yet another CIRCULAR REASONING argument your pastor is attempting to give you medwigel.

And he HAS TO use fallacious reasoning.

Because if he tells you the truth (at least about the New Testament), he is going to HAVE TO tell you men had INFALLIBLE God-given AUTHORITY (what good would infallible Scripture be if it was only a FALLIBLE LIST of books and letters?).

.

See the whole CIRCULAR REASONING spoof played out here . . .

Some think Matthew 4:4 is teaching sola Scriptura Sacred Scripture

medwigel . . . If you would like for me to ask my Pastor a question for you, you need to ask a real and clear question. . I did. WHERE in the Bible is the verse that lists the New Testament Canon? Cathoholic from here . . . . But how do you know 2nd Timothy is part of the Scriptures? Because All Scripture is inspired. How do you know this? From 2nd Timothy 3. How do you know 2nd Timothy itself is part of the Scriptures? Because all Scripture is inspired. How do you know that? F…

 

[medwigel]

And if that is not good enough he has referred you to 2 Timothy 2:14.

Um , have you even read 2 Timothy 2:14? If not let me help you out:

2 Timothy 2:14 “Remind your people of this, and give them a solemn warning in God’s presence not to fight over words. It does no good, but only ruins the people who listen.”

I think you should take heed to this.

 

[Cathoholic]

Thanks for the correction.

I directed it to 2nd Timothy 3:15 by heart (instead of 2nd Timothy 2:14).

2nd TIMOTHY 3:15-16a 15 and how from childhood you have been acquainted with the sacred writings which are able to instruct you for salvation through faith in Christ Jesus. 16 All scripture is inspired by God

My mistake.

.

.

I am flummoxed that your pastor would consider a discussion over the Canon of Scripture as “Godless chatter”.

2nd TIMOTHY 2:14-16a 14 Remind them of this, and charge them before the Lord to avoid disputing about words, which does no good, but only ruins the hearers. 15 Do your best to present yourself to God as one approved, a workman who has no need to be ashamed, rightly handling the word of truth. 16 Avoid such godless chatter . . .

What about theologians and historians and all of that?

What about following the Bible ALONE? (You know you HAVE TO go to AUTHORITATIVE Apostolic Tradition to know the Canon).

Circular reasoning is the “Godless chatter” here medwigel.

Why not strive to “rightly handle the word of truth”?

 

[medwigel]

I am flummoxed that your pastor would consider a discussion over the Canon of Scripture as “Godless chatter”.

The discussion becomes Godless chatter when you come up with “spoofs”, you misquote people and you slander others (in this I’m referring to the post about Seventh Day Adventists that you put yesterday, that I had in moderator remove because it was mean spirited).

 

[Cathoholic]

I admitted my “misquote” (“My mistake”).

I didn’t notice the chapter 2 and incorrectly assumed it was chapter 3.

I apologize. That’s the best I can do.

I have since dealt with your pastor’s chapter 2 issue.

There was no “slander”.

“it was mean spirited”

.

No it was NOT “mean spirited”.

It was a preparation for you to be proverbially immunized against that argument if it was ever used AGAINST YOU (by saying it against the Catholic Church).

What was “mean spirited” was YOUR comment

Um , have you even read 2 Timothy 2:14? If not let me help you out:

You know almost for sure . . . you know full well I’ve read 2nd Timothy chapter 2.

And I just ignored your “mean spirited” comment directed at me.

(And I still would be ignoring it except YOU brought up this stuff)

.

The “circular reasoning” warning I gave you was a favor for you (so you could see it when you got it).
And it was right on.

That is the best your pastor can do.
Or he can just admit the full truth (instead of selected “parts”) to you about the Canonization of Scripture.

Or you can find out yourself here

https://www.amazon.com/Where-Bible-...634363&sr=8-2&keywords=Where+we+got+the+Bible

 

[bobperk]

As you mentioned, and have proved with every post, all of these arguments for Sola Scriptura are self-defeating and involve stretching verses to support it. That’s how “All Scripture” becomes “Only Scripture,” and not just that, to somehow encapsulate any NT writing that did not even exist when Paul wrote 2 Timothy, a verse from Amos is used to refute seven books of the OT, etc. Well, ultimately one is left wondering why if Sola Scriptura is so crystal clear, God would have let Christians flounder about for 15 or so centuries until it became evident.

 

[Gorgias]

Gorgias:

Wait a minute, though: how do you know that divine utterance did not exist in that time period? You can’t just make the bald assertion that it’s true without having something to support the claim!

Amos 8:11-12 “Behold, the days are coming,” says the Lord God, “That I will send a famine on the land, Not a famine of bread, Nor a thirst for water, But of hearing the words of the Lord. They shall wander from sea to sea, And from north to east; They shall run to and fro, seeking the word of the Lord, But shall no find it.”

Amos is predicting the fall of the Northern Kingdom. In fact, it did fall, and the people were led away to exile by the Assyrians, and scattered, and lost. This happened in around 740 BC, far earlier than the period you assert is ‘silent’ in Scripture.

There is also Micah 3:4-8

Micah is declaring a series of judgements against the Southern Kingdom, Judah. He was a contemporary of Isaiah. He details what will happen to the people and to Jerusalem… and it did! The Southern Kingdom was overthrown by the Babylonians, and the people of God exiled to Babylon. This happened in the late 500’s BC, far earlier than the period in which you claimed a lack of divine utterance took place. In fact, following the return from exile, we see prophecies in the Book of the prophet Isaiah, talking to those who had returned. We also see the Book of Nehemiah, in which period of time Scripture is notably not silent, discussing what happened in the rebuilding of the temple following the return from exile!

Daniel 11 lists a series of prophesies of what will happen during this period of silence as well.

Daniel 11 talks about what will happen to the people of God under the rule of Persians and Greeks (but not, it seems, under the Romans, who took control around the 60’s BC).

However, Daniel 11 makes no mention of a period of “silence of divine utterance.” It talks about what various kings will do… but it says nothing about whether there will be a lack of Scriptural inspiration between 400 BC and the birth of Christ. The best that you can claim about Daniel 11 is that it doesn’t discuss Scripture and prophecy in the time prior to the birth of Christ.

So… you’re pointing out Scripture that doesn’t really jive with what you’re claiming. Moreover, nowhere does it claim what you’re attempting to assert – that the period between 400 BC and the birth of Christ will be a period lacking in “divine utterance.”

Again, then, I ask you: where does God tell us what you’ve claimed – namely, that there will be a period characterized by (what you’ve called) a ‘lack of divine utterance’ in the last 400 years prior to Jesus’ birth?

 

[medwigel]

These are all prophesies that do not place a time frame but describe the conditions that will take place. As a prophesy it can occur many centuries after it has been made; perfect example would be Isaiah predicting the coming of Christ.
You tell me to prove that this refers to the 400 years of silence and I tell you to prove that this is only referring to the Assyrian and Babylonian conquest.

 

[medwigel]

That’s how “All Scripture” becomes “Only Scripture,” and not just that, to somehow encapsulate any NT writing that did not even exist when Paul wrote 2 Timothy, a verse from Amos is used to refute seven books of the OT, etc.

So it seems you don’t believe in the concept of prophesy then it you think that people can’t write or know about events before hand.
And if that’s the case what’s your take on the book of Revelation, because most of those events have yet to occur. So since they have not happened, are the accounts in the book of Revelation true?

 

[Gorgias]

Agathon:

How do you know those books are inspired?

So are you saying that 2 Timothy, John and Revelation are not inspired by God?

No. We’re asking how you know that these are books that are inspired by God. The table of contents aren’t part of the Bible, properly speaking, and they aren’t inspired by God. Like your pastor says, early Bibles didn’t have a table of contents. So, the question becomes “how do you know they’re inspired?” Not “are there books that are inspired?” or “does God inspire humans to write Scripture?”, but only “how do you know which books are inspired? What authority tells you that these – and only these – books are the inspired books of Scripture?”

These books have been vetted by theologians and historians and have been found to be authentic.

You’re very, very close there.

Do “theologians and historians” define what the canon of Scripture is?

No… of course not! Do you know who does define the canon of Scripture?

The Fathers of the Church Jesus founded. In other words, the magisterium of the Catholic Church.

My Pastor responded your question regarding New Testament canon, not about sola scripture.

A good rule for honest and open dialogue would be to not apply answers from one question to a whole new and unrelated question in order to twist someone else’s words; that is dishonest and it is misleading.

Here’s the thing, though: if Sola Scriptura is true, then it will be found in the Bible. If it’s true, then it must (by the very definition of Sola Scriptura!) include a listing of the canon. If there’s no canon of Scriptural texts in the Bible, then Sola Scriptura, by its very definition, must be false! I’m not sure that @Cathoholic is being “dishonest and misleading”, so much as he’s applying the answers you gave him to the logical conclusions of the assertions you make.

 

[Gorgias]

These are all prophesies that do not place a time frame but describe the conditions that will take place.

Sure, but they’re not prophesying what you say happened in 400 BC. Moreover, they were already fulfilled in the exiles.

As a prophesy it can occur many centuries after it has been made; perfect example would be Isaiah predicting the coming of Christ.

Without a doubt. The problem isn’t that they’re old; the problem is that they’re not predicting what you claim happened.

You tell me to prove that this refers to the 400 years of silence and I tell you to prove that this is only referring to the Assyrian and Babylonian conquest.

That’s fair. Yet, if the prophet is speaking directly to the people and telling them what’s gonna happen to them – and it does! – then we’ve got a pretty clear warrant that this is what God was prophesying.

Do you have any sources from folks who even make the claim that you’re making here? After all, this is a new one by me (not surprising, since as a Catholic, I claim that there wasn’t a 400-year period of Scriptural silence)!