The Seismic Paradigm Shift

[Randy_Carson]

The Paradigm Shift Argument

Everyone should admit that sola scriptura was not being used while the Bible was still being written. In the Old Testament there were prophets giving God’s word, and if you asked a person, “Do you have to get all your knowledge of God from Scripture alone?” He would say, “Of course not. If God says anything, whether it is through Scripture or through a prophet, I have to listen to it. I am bound by the Word of God regardless of the channel through which it comes.” The position of a person in Bible times would thus be sola verba, not sola scriptura.

In the New Testament period there were the Old Testament Scriptures, a few New Testament prophets, and the Traditions of the apostles, all of which were binding. If you asked a New Testament believer, “Do you have to get all of your knowledge of God from Scripture alone?” He would say, “Of course not! I have to heed the word of God regardless of how it comes to me, whether in Scripture or in the Traditions of the apostles!” His position, like the Catholic’s, would also be sola verba, not sola scriptura.

Thus someone who denies the Catholic position is going to have to admit that the principle used in Bible times was not sola scriptura. To show sola scriptura is binding now, even though it was not binding then, the critic will have to show the New Testament teaches there will be a massive paradigm shift at the end of the apostolic age. He must produce verses that state the Apostolic Traditions will all be written down so that there is now only one source of Apostolic Tradition.

But he can’t do this. There are no such verses. Furthermore, since the Apostolic Traditions passed down outside of Apostolic Scripture do not have to be materially different from those in Apostolic Scripture, but simply restatements or authentic interpretations of Apostolic Scripture, a critic would have to prove the impossible proposition that no authentic interpretations of Apostolic Scripture have been passed down from the apostolic age. And he simply can’t do this.

From an Article by Jimmy Akin

 

[Catholic_Dude]

I have pointed out before that letters like Titus, Philemon and 1&2 Timothy were PRIVATE letters written to select individuals so that undermines the notion of SS right there.

 

[RNRobert]

Frank Sheed has an interesting insight in his book Theology for Beginners:

                                               It seems strange so many Christians think the Apostles fulfilled their commission by writing the New Testament, leaving behind them no successors, nor any need for successors, with the authority Our Lord had given themselves. It seems strange, for one reason, that it would mean only five of the Twelve had obeyed their Master…

It would seem strange for another reason- that the Church Christ founded would have been a teaching church only for a half-century or so, in all the centuries since merely a library.

Circumstances change and someone must have the authority to apply the teachings to the new circumstances; otherwise they end up as frustrations rather than teachings. Even in the doctrines themselves there are depths which the believing mind can explore, with all the danger of error but all the rich possibilities of development. With every operation of the unstagnant mind of man upon the truth, the question must arise, “What did Christ mean?”

So it has proved. There is not a word uttered by Christ which has not met a number of diverse interpretations, some of them intelligent, some immensely attractive, but contradicting each other. How are we to know? It is not enough to have Our Lord’s words; the words themselves can only be a kind of talisman without the meaning. Without a teacher- to tell us, beyond the possibility of error, which of the various meanings is Christ’s- we should have no revelation but only an everlasting pile of conundrums.

 

[metal1633]

Sola Verba…

I like that. It goes right along with…

Isaiah 59:20And there shall come a redeemer to Sion, and to them that return from iniquity in Jacob, saith the Lord. 21This is my covenant with them, saith the Lord: My spirit that is in thee, and my words that I have put in thy mouth, shall not depart out of thy mouth, nor out of the mouth of thy seed, nor out of the mouth of thy seed’s seed, saith the Lord, from henceforth and for ever.

The Word of the Lord. Passed by word of mouth…FOREVER.

 

[RNRobert]

This thread is about two weeks old, and yet there’s been no attempt by non-Catholics to refute it. Odd…

 

[BobCatholic]

They can’t refute it because sola scriptura cannot be practiced.

 

[Tomster]

Sola Scriptura is a Protestant aberration. It is not only illogical, it is also contradictory

 

[Steven_Merten]

Hello Randy,

I do not know if I am understanding your post correctly. It seems to indicate that Protestants believe that if something is not in the New Testament bible “sola scripture” it does not have to be obeyed. And, if something is in the New Testament bible, it does have to be obeyed.

This not what Protestants believe. Protestants reject much, if not most of Jesus teachings, in the New Testament bible.

It seems to me we should focus on the “Sola Scriptura” words from the New Testament scriptures out of the mouth of Jesus which Protestants oppose, hate and reject as erroneous. Martin Luther boldly quotes Jesus teachings from the New Testament (Sola Scriptura) as his opponent. Most Protestants today also reject the same New Testament “sola scriptura” from Jesus that Martin Luther opposes and rejects.

Do you first of all agree that Protestants do not obey much of what they read in “Sola Scriptura”?

Martin Luther
The doctrine of our opponents is similar to that of the false apostles in Paul’s day.Our opponents teach, "If you want to live unto God, you must live after the Law, **for it is written, Do this and thou shalt live."**Quoted from Project Wittenberg, Commentary on the Epistle to the Galatians, (1535) by Martin Luther, Chapter 2 v 19iclnet.org/pub/resources/…b/gal2-17.html

NAB MAT 19:16
“Teacher, what good must I do to possess everlasting life?” He answered, “Why do you question me about what is good? There is One who is good. If you wish to enter into life, keep the commandments.” NAB DEU 30:15 The Choice before Israel.

“Here then, I have today set before you life and prosperity, death and doom. If you obey the commandments of the LORD, your God, which I enjoin on you today, loving him, and walking in his ways, and keeping his commandments, statutes and decrees, you will live…”​

NAB LUK 10:25
"Teacher, what must I do to inherit everlasting life?" Jesus answered him:**"What is written in the law? How do you read it?" He replied:"You shall love the Lord your God ****with all your heart, ****with all your soul, ****with all your strength, ****and with all your mind; **and your neighbor as yourself." Jesus said, “You have answered correctly. Do this and you shall live.”

 

[RNRobert]

Hi Steve,

I think the point that Randy was trying to make was that Sola Scriptura couldn’t have been practiced during the Apostolic era since the only ‘scriptura’ was the OT- the NT teachings were primarily by word of mouth. If after their deaths, their teaching authority was to pass from living teachers into Apostolic writings, their should be some indication of this in their writings. But there isn’t.

 

[Steven_Merten]

Hi Steve,

I think the point that Randy was trying to make was that Sola Scriptura couldn’t have been practiced during the Apostolic era since the only ‘scriptura’ was the OT- the NT teachings were primarily by word of mouth. If after their deaths, their teaching authority was to pass from living teachers into Apostolic writings, their should be some indication of this in their writings. But there isn’t.

Hello Robert,

Can you see my point?

Protestants will agree that they reject many of the New Testament scriptural teachings from the mouth of Jesus. For Catholics to respond to Protestant rejection of the biblical “Sola Scriptura” teachings of Jesus Christ with the argument that the Protestants should at least believe in the non scriptural teachings of the Catholic Church, seems a bit odd. Why do not the Catholics instead use the big guns, the NT Words Of Jesus Christ, which the Protestants admit that they reject, to confront the Protestants?

Please visit: Will Jesus judge people into heaven (through Him) or Hell based on conduct?

 

[RNRobert]

Hello Robert,

Can you see my point?

Protestants will agree that they reject many of the New Testament scriptural teachings from the mouth of Jesus. For Catholics to respond to Protestant rejection of the biblical “Sola Scriptura” teachings of Jesus Christ with the argument that the Protestants should at least believe in the non scriptural teachings of the Catholic Church, seems a bit odd. Why do not the Catholics instead use the big guns, the NT Words Of Jesus Christ, which the Protestants admit that they reject, to confront the Protestants?

I think I see where you’re coming from. However, can you be specific as to which verses they say they reject? I know they do ‘lateral arabesques’ with regard to some verses. For instance Catholics take Jesus words in John 6 literally, while Protestants do all sorts of gyrations to claim He was only speaking figuratively.
One problem I had as a former Baptist was the whole “faith alone.” I would hear a couple of quotes from Romans to ‘prove’ that faith alone was all we needed. Yet, when I read the words of Jesus (particularly Matthew 25), it didn’t jive with what I was hearing from the pulpit. It’s one of the reasons I became Catholic.

 

[Steven_Merten]

I think I see where you’re coming from. However, can you be specific as to which verses they say they reject?

Hello Robert,

I would be glad to. There are so many that I will leave you with a couple of links. But I can post more quotes from Jesus which the Protestants reject. There are so many and that is why it seems to odd to me for anyone to go anywhere else than “Sola Scriptura”, Jesus words, when confronting the Protestants.

Please visit: Will Jesus judge people into heaven (through Him) or Hell based on conduct?

Jesus, What Must I Do To Share In Everlasting Life?

NAB MAT 19:16 “Teacher, what good must I do to possess everlasting life?” He answered, “Why do you question me about what is good? There is One who is good. If you wish to enter into life, keep the commandments." “Which ones?” he asked. Jesus replied “You shall not kill”; ‘You shall not commit adultery’; ‘You shall not steal’; ‘You shall not bear false witness’; ‘Honor your father and mother’; and ‘Love your neighbor as yourself.’”
NAB JOH 5:27

"The Father has given over to him power to pass judgment because he is Son of Man; no need for you to be surprised at this, for an hour is coming in which all those in their tombs shall hear his voice and come forth. Those who have done right shall rise to live; the evildoers shall rise to be damned." NAB ROM 2:6 (St. Paul is speaking)

. . . when he will repay every man for what he has done: eternal life to those who strive for glory, honor, and immortality by patiently doing right; wrath and fury to those who selfishly disobey the truth and obey wickedness. **NAB **REV 22:12

“Remember, I am coming soon! I bring with me the reward that will be given to each man as his conduct deserves. I am the Alpha and the Omega, the First and the Last, the Beginning and the End! **Happy are they who wash their robes so as to have free access to the tree of life **and enter the city through its gates Outside are the dogs and sorcerers, the fornicators and murderers, the idol-worshipers and all who love falsehood.” NAB MAT 25:31

"When the Son of Man comes in his glory, and all the angels with him, he will sit upon his glorious throne, and all the nations will be assembled before him. And he will separate them one from another, as a shepherd separates the sheep from the goats. He will place the sheep on his right and the goats on his left. Then the king will say to those on his right, 'Come, you who are blessed by my Father. Inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world. For I was hungry and you gave me food, I was thirsty and you gave me drink, a stranger and you welcomed me, naked and you clothed me, ill and you cared for me, in prison and you visited me.’ Then the righteous will answer him and say, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry and feed you, or thirsty and give you drink? When did we see you a stranger and welcome you, or naked and clothe you? When did we see you ill or in prison, and visit you?’ And the king will say to them in reply, 'Amen, I say to you, whatever you did for one of these least brothers of mine, you did for me.’ Then he will say to those on his left, 'Depart from me, you accursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels. For I was hungry and you gave me no food, I was thirsty and you gave me no drink, a stranger and you gave me no welcome, naked and you gave me no clothing, ill and in prison, and you did not care for me.’ Then they will answer and say, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry or thirsty or a stranger or naked or ill or in prison, and not minister to your needs?’ He will answer them, ‘Amen, I say to you, what you did not do for one of these least ones, you did not do for me.’ And these will go off to eternal punishment, but the righteous to eternal life."

 

[Steven_Merten]

Continued from previous post:

NAB JOH 12:44 Jesus proclaimed aloud: “Whoever puts faith in me believes not so much in me as in him who sent me; and whoever looks on me is seeing him who sent me. I have come to the world as its light, to keep anyone who **believes **in me from remaining in the dark. If anyone hears my words and does not keep them, I am not the one to condemn him, for I did not come to condemn the world but to save it. Whoever rejects me and does not accept my words already has his judge, namely, the word I have spoken it is that which will condemn him on the last day. For I have not spoken on my own; no, the Father who sent me has commanded me what to say and how to speak. Since I know that his commandment means eternal life, whatever I say is spoken just as he instructed me.”
NAB JOH 15:10

"You will live in my love if you keep my commandments, even as I have kept my Father’s commandments, and **live **in his love."
**NAB MAT **7:12

Enter through the narrow gate. The gate that leads to damnation is wide, the road is clear, and many choose to travel it. But how narrow is the gate that leads to life, how rough the road, and how few there are who find it!"
“Be on your guard against false prophets, who come to you in sheeps’ clothing but underneath are wolves on the prowl. You will know them by their deeds. Do you ever pick grapes from thronbushes, or figs from prickly plants? Never! Any sound tree bears good fruit, while a decayed tree bears bad fruit. A sound tree cannot bear bad fruit any more than a decayed tree can bear good fruit. Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire. You can tell a tree by its fruit. None of those who cry out, ‘Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in your name? Have we not exorcised demons by its power? Did we not do many miracles in your name as well?” They I will declare to them solemnly, “I never knew you. Out of my sight, you evildoers!”

NAB MAT 18:21**‘You wicked servant! I forgave you your entire debt because you begged me to. Should you not have had pity on your fellow servant, as I had pity on you?’ Then in anger his master handed him over to the torturers until he should pay back the whole debt. So will my heavenly Father do to you, unless each of you forgives his brother from his heart."**

**NAB MAT 13:47-50 **The reign of God is also like a dragnet thrown into the lake, which collected all sorts of things. When it was full they hauled it ashore and sat down to put what was worthwhile into containers. What was useless they threw away. That is how it will be at the end of the world. Angels will go out and separate the wicked from the just and hurl the wicked into the fiery furnace, where they will wail and grind their teeth.

 

[RNRobert]

Hi Steve,

I don’t recall any Protestants (even when I was a Protestant) rejecting certain words of Jesus. However, I recall reading David Currie’s Born Fundamentalist, Born Again Catholic and he told of a dispensationalist minister who didn’t follow the Gospels because he believed “Christians were no longer in that dispensation.” He also pointed out that Evangelicals focused on Paul’s epistles (particularly Romans) while ignoring the Gospels.

 

[Steven_Merten]

Hi Steve,

I don’t recall any Protestants (even when I was a Protestant) rejecting certain words of Jesus. However, I recall reading David Currie’s Born Fundamentalist, Born Again Catholic and he told of a dispensationalist minister who didn’t follow the Gospels because he believed “Christians were no longer in that dispensation.” He also pointed out that Evangelicals focused on Paul’s epistles (particularly Romans) while ignoring the Gospels.

Hello Robert,

Yes, Protestants have many reasons for rejecting and ignoring Christ’s teachings.

Jesus says that He will judge us on judgement day (through Him) according to our conduct. Do Protestants believe Jesus on this? NO. Was Jesus confused or lying as to how it will happen in the future on judgement day?

Jesus answer to the question, “What must I do to share in everlasting life?” is to obey the commandments. Protestants hate this answer of Jesus. Luther quotes “sola scriptura” Christ’s answer as the teaching of his “opponant”.

Jesus says that those who feed the poor will enter into life (through Him). Jesus says that those who do not feed the poor He will cast into hell. Do Protestants belive that any charity to the poor on earth has anything to do with them being judged into eternal life? They hate any such concept as this.

Protestants reject Jesus teachings in the bible, “sola scriptura” so why do they make a big deal out of “sola scriptura” if they reject what is said by Jesus in NT scriptures? Bait and switch deception is the answer. Protestants know that they are not going to get many followers if they come out and say, “Most of what Jesus taught on what to do to go to heaven is not true. Let us teach you what is ‘true’”. The Protestant “sola scriptura” bait and switch deception works much better in gaining followers who will reject the teachings of Jesus Christ.

I can just see Satan holding up a bible, yelling “I believe!” and then telling the people to reject the NT teachings of Jesus Christ. Satan will give a great number of reasons why people should reject Jesus teachings on what to do to go to heaven in the New Testament. I can see Satan’s followers sceaming, “Hey he has a bible in his hand, He says he only accepts “sola scripture” as the true teachings of God. He is telling us to reject Christ’s teachings on what we should do to go to heaven. He must be right! He has a bible in his hand! He believes in ‘sola scriptura’! Let us reject the biblical teachings of Jesus Christ!”

What insanity! Smoke and mirrors. Bait and switch. Protestant leaders convince their followers that they are the ones who teach the true will of God exactly as “sola scriptura” teaches and then they switch to rejecting and condemning much of what Jesus taught in New Testament scriptures on what we must do to go to heaven. The sad part is that billions of Christians buy their bait and switch “sola scriptura” deception.

 

[RNRobert]

Hi Steve,

The whole ‘sola fide’ thing was one of the things I had trouble with as a Protestant. I would hear preachers in the pulpit or on the radio, and read Evangelical literature that usually focused on a couple passages in Romans on how “we are saved by faith” and this was given as proof for the doctrine of “faith alone.” The problem was, as a good Protestant who read his Bible, I found alot that contradicted with what I was being taught. There was for starters, the passage in James where he declares faith alone with out works is dead (no wonder Luther hated that epistle!). But then there were the words of our Savior Himself (I think some of the scariest parts of the Bible come from his lips). He said that not all who say “Lord, Lord” will be saved, and some of his parables (like those in Matthew 25) made it clear that salvation or damnation was clearly based on what we did or failed to do. As time went on, I could not reconcile Scriptures with what I had been taught as a Protestant. And, when I was able to drop my Protestant pride long enough to listen to what the Catholic Church taught, I saw that it was Biblically based.

 

[Steven_Merten]

Hi Steve,

The whole ‘sola fide’ thing was one of the things I had trouble with as a Protestant. I would hear preachers in the pulpit or on the radio, and read Evangelical literature that usually focused on a couple passages in Romans on how “we are saved by faith” and this was given as proof for the doctrine of “faith alone.” The problem was, as a good Protestant who read his Bible, I found alot that contradicted with what I was being taught. There was for starters, the passage in James where he declares faith alone with out works is dead (no wonder Luther hated that epistle!). But then there were the words of our Savior Himself (I think some of the scariest parts of the Bible come from his lips). He said that not all who say “Lord, Lord” will be saved, and some of his parables (like those in Matthew 25) made it clear that salvation or damnation was clearly based on what we did or failed to do. As time went on, I could not reconcile Scriptures with what I had been taught as a Protestant. And, when I was able to drop my Protestant pride long enough to listen to what the Catholic Church taught, I saw that it was Biblically based.

Hello Robert,

Let us go full circle now.

When you were a Protestant, which do you feel would help you more? A Catholic debating whether or not Apostolic Traditions should be considered as well as “sola scriptura” or a Catholic pointing out that Protestantism rejects and opposes the authority of Christ’s NT teachings through the disguise of “sola scriptura” and “sola fide”?

To me, to debate whether or not Catholic Tradition should be equated to “sola scriptura” gives a sence of Catholic credibility to the Protestant deceptive image of “sola scriptura”. The Protestant deceptive image of “sola scriptura” being that Protestants follow only the teachings of Jesus and NT teachers and not the authority of the Catholic Church. In actuallity the Protestants disgard and oppose the teaching authority of Jesus Christ’s NT scriptural teachings and hide this fact under the deceptive image of “sola scriptura”.

If we spent the next thirty years debating with Protestants that Catholic tradition should be considered equally to “sola scriptura”, and the Protestants finally did believe us, and then the Protestants threw Catholic tradition in the same garbage can that they throw the authority of Christ’s NT scriptural teachings, what have we gained?

 

[RNRobert]

Hello Robert,

Let us go full circle now.

When you were a Protestant, which do you feel would help you more? A Catholic debating whether or not Apostolic Traditions should be considered as well as “sola scriptura” or a Catholic pointing out that Protestantism rejects and opposes the authority of Christ’s NT teachings through the disguise of “sola scriptura” and “sola fide”?

To me, to debate whether or not Catholic Tradition should be equated to “sola scriptura” gives a sence of Catholic credibility to the Protestant deceptive image of “sola scriptura”. The Protestant deceptive image of “sola scriptura” being that Protestants follow only the teachings of Jesus and NT teachers and not the authority of the Catholic Church. In actuallity the Protestants disgard and oppose the teaching authority of Jesus Christ’s NT scriptural teachings and hide this fact under the deceptive image of “sola scriptura”.

If we spent the next thirty years debating with Protestants that Catholic tradition should be considered equally to “sola scriptura”, and the Protestants finally did believe us, and then the Protestants threw Catholic tradition in the same garbage can that they throw the authority of Christ’s NT scriptural teachings, what have we gained?

I think I see your point. IOW, instead of arguing the case for tradition, use the Scriptures themselves to disprove Protestantism by the fact that they themselves reject certain portions of Scripture.

 

[Catholic_Dude]

Hi Steve,

I don’t recall any Protestants (even when I was a Protestant) rejecting certain words of Jesus. However, I recall reading David Currie’s Born Fundamentalist, Born Again Catholic and he told of a dispensationalist minister who didn’t follow the Gospels because he believed “Christians were no longer in that dispensation.” He also pointed out that Evangelicals focused on Paul’s epistles (particularly Romans) while ignoring the Gospels.

The indirectly reject His teachings. Protestants admit those words/teachings are in the Bible but they dont read them or build their doctrines on them (apart from select passages). When you present them those passages they flip to St Paul and say “but this say faith alone” or just as bad some say “Jesus demanded those works to show it was impossible to obey the commandments and that we had to rely on faith alone”…no joke…they twist the words of Jesus so that at the end of the day Jesus is a philosopher that preaches mere ideas that sound good but are unrealistic.
This mentality existed from the time of the Pretend Reformers and which caused the Catholic Church to say stuff like this: CANON XX.-If any one saith, that the man who is justified and how perfect soever, is not bound to observe the commandments of God and of the Church, **but only to believe; **as if indeed the Gospel were a bare and absolute promise of eternal life, without the condition of observing the commandments ; let him be anathema. (Council of Trent, Session 6)
I personally dont think it can be stated any more clearly…yet people who preach “faith alone” are saying that whether they recognize it or not.

I think I see your point. IOW, instead of arguing the case for tradition, use the Scriptures themselves to disprove Protestantism by the fact that they themselves reject certain portions of Scripture.

Yes, that is correct. When the rubber meets the road Protestantism ultimately denies what Apostles and especially Jesus teach.

 

[Randy_Carson]

I think I see your point. IOW, instead of arguing the case for tradition, use the Scriptures themselves to disprove Protestantism by the fact that they themselves reject certain portions of Scripture.

This is dead on.

When debating Protestants, the only really meaningful approach is to confront them with Scripture and to illustrate their misinterpretations of it.

Otherwise, you might as well be reading from the Book of Mormon for all the good it will achieve.