Some think Matthew 4:4 is teaching sola Scriptura

[bobperk]

Not sure what your point is here. Satan was at work in Judas, and he handed the Lord over to be arrested. Judas was personally guided by the Lord and rejected Him. Just as we believe He still guides the Church, and some within her ranks commit terrible sins.

To your point about the Jews and the OT: they wrote it, and obviously also wrote all of the books accepted by the Catholic Church. Jews became the first Christians; but many rejected Christ too. But you seem to accept their “tradition” concerning the OT while rejecting the Tradition of the Catholic Church. You seem to claim that the Catholic OT is “man made” but the Jewish OT canon, while still passed on by a tradition, is correct.

 

[medwigel]

Judas was personally guided by the Lord and rejected Him. Just as we believe He still guides the Church, and some within her ranks commit terrible sins.

Right, so if someone can be with Christ and still reject Him and sin, and we see others in the ranks of the Church commit sins, why would we look to people as the final authority in all things Christ? Wouldn’t it make sense to rely on the only infallible source we know, and that’s the Scripture. Hence my assertion the Bible should be the final authority, not the traditions of man- even if the men are leaders of the Church.
If the Church comes up with a doctrine, that doctrine should ultimately have it’s basis in the Bible.

 

[medwigel]

But you seem to accept their “tradition” concerning the OT while rejecting the Tradition of the Catholic Church. You seem to claim that the Catholic OT is “man made” but the Jewish OT canon, while still passed on by a tradition, is correct.

The fact that the Jews played such a pivotal role in what we as Christians use means that their perspective deserves some consideration. What about these books gives them pause? What did they find questionable and why? We accepted everything else they designated as canon so maybe they are on to something.
We can’t discount them and their contributions simply because they didn’t accept Christ. Technically, those who rejected Him were needed to help fulfill the Scripture, and when Christ was on the cross He forgave them.
Just like at the last supper Jesus knew Judas would betray Him, but He didn’t stop Judas because He knew that Judas’ actions were necessary to complete His mission and fulfill the Scripture written of Him (by the Jews).

 

[Cathoholic]

Medwigel . . .

The fact that the Jews played such a pivotal role in what we as Christians use means that their perspective deserves some consideration.

Which Jews?

The Jews that accepted the Deuteros as Scripture?

The Pharasee Canon that we are not sure of, until it was changed or reaffrimed (we can’t be sure) at Jamnia? (And even then, we don’t see a well-developed definition of what we call the Canon).

The Jews who were the Sadducees?

The same Sadducees that may have accepted only the Torah? Or possibly in addition to the Torah, only “wriiten laws” (depending on your take because we don’t know for sure). But everyone agrees that the Pharisees and not the Sadducees were the ones involved in the School of Jamnia.

Today’s Ethiopian Jews? (Which have an identical Canon to the Catholic Old Testament Canon).

The Essene Jews and their Dead Sea Scrolls which have some differing books than Protestant and Catholic Canons?

.

The fact that the Jews played such a pivotal role in what we as Christians use means that their perspective deserves some consideration.

Which Jews?

I think their perspective received “some consideration” medwigel.

 

[jlhargus]

deleted post

 

[Sean77]

Sometimes some non-Catholics attempt to see Matthew 4:4 as teaching sola Scriptura.

Are there are any non-Catholics here that think this, that would like to posit WHY?

I think discussing that issue might be a good thing.

I would be glad to respond as a Protestant if you like. I personally do not see Matthew 4:4 on its own teaching Sola Scriptura. However, it is certainly quite instructive that Jesus constantly counters the Satan’s overtures through the use of scripture due to its inherent authority as the word of God. The other thing that is interesting about this passage is that Satan actually quotes scripture back to Christ in his continued attempt to tempt him to sin. However, Christ over and over again quotes scriptures in their context to counter the misuse of God’s word. So while I wouldn’t say it teaches Sola Scriptura in and of itself, it is a good model. I would say it teaches us Tota Scriptura in that we allow all of scripture to speak instead of ripping verses out of context.

 

[Cathoholic]

Sean77 . . .

. . . .However, Christ over and over again quotes scriptures in their context to counter the misuse of God’s word. . . .

Agreed but Jesus ALSO says we are to live by EVERY WORD that comes from the mouth of God.

Jesus is quoting Scripture in His replies, but Jesus isn’t MERELY quoting Scripture here.

 

[Cathoholic]

Sean77 (on Matthew 4:4) . . .

I would say it teaches us Tota Scriptura . . .

What is “Tota Scriptura”? How are you defining this?
(And where is “Tota Scriptura” defined in Scripture)?

 

[Sean77]

“Tota” meaning “All.” We don’t just read a verse out of scripture and attempt to shoehorn it into whatever meaning we care to give it. We need to look at the context in and around the verse or passage being discussed to ensure our interpretation is consistent with the original intended meaning of the author. After that it is also a good practice to look at parallel passages from other books. And while you are attempting to be argumentative, I am sure you can agree with me on that. And this is a basic principle of reading comprehension. No scripture is needed for this one.

 

[Cathoholic]

Sean77 . . .

“Tota” meaning “All.” We don’t just read a verse out of scripture and attempt to shoehorn it into whatever meaning we care to give it. We need to look at the context in and around the verse or passage being discussed to ensure our interpretation is consistent with the original intended meaning of the author. After that it is also a good practice to look at parallel passages from other books.

Sean77. I saw this and I was just about to reply “fair enough” until I read your next sentence, which was . . .

And while you are attempting to be argumentative, I am sure . . .

And then this . . .

And this is a basic principle of reading comprehension.

.

So I’ll just ignore those last two “comments” and focus back to the issue.

(You know Sean77. If I assume things, I risk getting accused of “putting words in people’s mouth”.
If I seek clarity, I am allegedly being “argumentative”.
It’s a catch-22 that I am not going to abide by.
My questions were appropriate.)

 

[Cathoholic]

MATTHEW 4:4 4 But he answered, “It is written,
‘Man shall not live by bread alone,
but by every word that proceeds from the mouth of God.’”

.

I have no problem using the totality of Scripture Sean77.

That was my whole point regarding Matthew 4:4.

Jesus answers “It is written . . .”, then our Lord and Savior Jesus says something that points us BEYOND the printed page.

Jesus says we are to live by “EVERY WORD that proceeds from the mouth of God.”

We both know that goes beyond Scripture because “THE WORD was made flesh. . .”.

And if there is still questioning . . . my . . . using the totality of Scripture, . . . St. John reaffirms the limitations of the printed page saying . . .

JOHN 21:24-25 24 This is the disciple who is bearing witness to these things, and who has written these things; and we know that his testimony is true. 25 But there are also many other things which Jesus did; were every one of them to be written, I suppose that the world itself could not contain the books that would be written.

.

“EVERY WORD that proceeds from the mouth of God” of course does not have such limitations.

Sean77. Are you asserting sola Scriptura?

You said . . .

I personally do not see Matthew 4:4 on its own teaching Sola Scriptura.

I agree with that.

You also said . . .

However, it is certainly quite instructive that Jesus constantly counters the Satan’s overtures through the use of scripture due to its inherent authority as the word of God. . . .
. . . So while I wouldn’t say it teaches Sola Scriptura in and of itself, it is a good model. . . .

And I agree with this too.

But I am still not sure what you are trying to say concerning sola Scriptura?

 

[Chris4]

Yes Cathoholic I have been following your chats withSean77 and others. Our brethren with their obsession with Luther’s scripturally indefensible Sola Scriptura doctrine are just unnecessarily stubborn. The quote from the last chapter of St. John, his last two epistles, should point out the impossibility of limiting God to a few pages of the Bible. The WORD can never be shrunk to fit in there. Can immense zillions of billions of terabytes of God’s power and knowledge, O yes God’s Essence fit into a miserably tiny bit of kb of all:worried: human capacity pooled together? Or can a signpost by the road side give you all the information about your destination? Ask them to read John 5:39 and meditate with with any balance of humility if they still have any left.

 

[jlhargus]

I would be glad to respond as a Protestant if you like. I personally do not see Matthew 4:4 on its own teaching Sola Scriptura. However, it is certainly quite instructive that Jesus constantly counters the Satan’s overtures through the use of scripture due to its inherent authority as the word of God. The other thing that is interesting about this passage is that Satan actually quotes scripture back to Christ in his continued attempt to tempt him to sin. However, Christ over and over again quotes scriptures in their context to counter the misuse of God’s word. So while I wouldn’t say it teaches Sola Scriptura in and of itself, it is a good model. I would say it teaches us Tota Scriptura in that we allow all of scripture to speak instead of ripping verses out of context.
[/QUOTE]
I would say Satan quotes scripture back to Christ just as those who hold Sola Scriptura. Taking isolated verses without taking into account what the rest of Scripture teaches. Yes Scripture is authoritative but as your sole authority scripture teaches it is not the only authority. God’s wisdom is now known by the Church.

[Eph3:9 And to make all men see what is the fellowship of the mystery, which from the beginning of the world hath been hid in God, who created all things by Jesus Christ: 10 To the intent that now unto the principalities and powers in heavenly places might be known by the church the manifold wisdom of God, 11 According to the eternal purpose which he purposed in Christ Jesus our Lord:]

 

[medwigel]

I would say Satan quotes scripture back to Christ just as those who hold Sola Scriptura. Taking isolated verses without taking into account what the rest of Scripture teaches. Yes Scripture is authoritative but as your sole authority scripture teaches it is not the only authority. God’s wisdom is now known by the Church.

[Eph3:9 And to make all men see what is the fellowship of the mystery , which from the beginning of the world hath been hid in God , who created all things by Jesus Christ: 10 To the intent that now unto the principalities and powers in heavenly places might be known by the church the manifold wisdom of God , 11 According to the eternal purpose which he purposed in Christ Jesus our Lord :]

Isaiah 30:12-13
12 Therefore, the Holy One of Israel says this,

“Because you have refused and rejected this word [of Mine]
And have put your trust in oppression and guile, and have relied on them,
13
Therefore this wickedness [this sin, this injustice, this wrongdoing] will be to you
Like a crack [in a wall] about to fall,
A bulge in a high wall,
Whose collapse comes suddenly in an instant,

 

[jlhargus]

I would say Satan quotes scripture back to Christ just as those who hold Sola Scriptura. Taking isolated verses without taking into account what the rest of Scripture teaches. Yes Scripture is authoritative but as your sole authority scripture teaches it is not the only authority. God’s wisdom is now known by the Church.

[Eph3:9 And to make all men see what is the fellowship of the mystery , which from the beginning of the world hath been hid in God , who created all things by Jesus Christ: 10 To the intent that now unto the principalities and powers in heavenly places might be known by the church the manifold wisdom of God , 11 According to the eternal purpose which he purposed in Christ Jesus our Lord :]

Isaiah 30:12-13
12 Therefore, the Holy One of Israel says this,

“Because you have refused and rejected this word [of Mine]
And have put your trust in oppression and guile, and have relied on them,
13
Therefore this wickedness [this sin, this injustice, this wrongdoing] will be to you
Like a crack [in a wall] about to fall,
A bulge in a high wall,
Whose collapse comes suddenly in an instant,

Your post makes no sense. But actually your post has proved my point. Taking isolated verses without taking into account what the rest of Scripture teaches.

 

[Matthew1618]

No where does that indicate Sola Scriptura. The verse is in reference to Deuteronomy, in which Moses is commanding the Hebrews to remember the Lord and his commandments (that being the “word” referenced above). That is what it is referring to, yet even if it was in reference to scripture it still would not mean that we live solely by the “word that proceeds from the mouth of God” (or scripture) alone seeing as both tradition and the magesterium are later endorsed by St. Paul.

 

[medwigel]

both tradition and the magesterium are later endorsed by St. Paul.

Uh, where does Paul endorse the “magisterium” as an authority over scripture?

 

[jlhargus]

Matthew1618:

both tradition and the magesterium are later endorsed by St. Paul.

Uh, where does Paul endorse the “magisterium” as an authority over scripture?

Paul endorsed the Magisterium teaching authority checking his own teaching with it.

[Gal2:1 Then fourteen years after I went up again to Jerusalem with Barnabas, and took Titus with me also. 2 And I went up by revelation, and communicated unto them unto them that gospel which I preach among the Gentiles, but privately to them which were of reputation, lest by any means I shouldrun, or had run, in vain.]

http://www.scborromeo.org/ccc/p1s1c2a2.htm#86
85 "The task of giving an authentic interpretation of the Word of God, whether in its written form or in the form of Tradition, has been entrusted to the living teaching office of the Church alone. Its authority in this matter is exercised in the name of Jesus Christ."47 This means that the task of interpretation has been entrusted to the bishops in communion with the successor of Peter, the Bishop of Rome.

86 “Yet this Magisterium is not superior to the Word of God, but is its servant. It teaches only what has been handed on to it. At the divine command and with the help of the Holy Spirit, it listens to this devotedly, guards it with dedication and expounds it faithfully. All that it proposes for belief as being divinely revealed is drawn from this single deposit of faith.”

You claim scripture as your only authority yet reading your posts you refer to your pastor’s authority concerning scripture.

 

[Matthew1618]

I never said that the magisterium is an authority over scripture, but it is one of the three sources of spiritual authority for the church, and therefore helps us interpret scripture as a result. Paul endorses the magisterium in 1 Timothy 3:15, where he identifies the church as “the pillar and foundation of truth,” a description of its ordained role in supporting and preserving the truth in all things on earth.

 

[medwigel]

[Gal2:1 Then fourteen years after I went up again to Jerusalem with Barnabas, and took Titus with me also. 2 And I went up by revelation, and communicated unto them unto them that gospel which I preach among the Gentiles, but privately to them which were of reputation, lest by any means I shouldrun, or had run, in vain.]

Maybe you need this verse in a different version:
NIV:
2 Then after fourteen years, I went up again to Jerusalem, this time with Barnabas. I took Titus along also. 2 I went in response to a revelation and, meeting privately with those esteemed as leaders, I presented to them the gospel that I preach among the Gentiles. I wanted to be sure I was not running and had not been running my race in vain.

Paul says that he went to Jerusalem to preach the same Gospel to the Jews that he was preaching to the Gentiles, and because he’s a man of order he went to the leaders of the Jerusalem church first to present what he wants to preach.
It doesn’t say he spoke with them and gave them overriding authority over the Scripture. It doesn’t say that any overriding authority over Scripture was given to the leaders.

I refer to what my Pastor teaches about the Scripture, not his own idea independent of the Bible as the ultimate authority. Anything my Pastor teaches, he will ALWAYS refer back to the Bible to justify any statement or claim that he makes; the Catholic church can’t make that same claim. The Bible is the authority of what we are taught, not the tradition of men. I said if before and I will say it again, the traditions of man are fallible therefore are not always reliable.