Why do you believe in Sola Scriptura

[SeekerofTruth27]

Hey everyone! This question is for Christians who accept the doctrine of Sola Scriptura (Scripture Alone). As a Catholic, I believe that we must follow both Sacred Scripture and Sacred Tradition. I was wondering, why do you follow Sola Scriptura?

I look forward to hearing and discussing your answers

God bless!

 

[JRKH]

You would probably get more replies if you post this in the non-catholic religions forum.

Just a thought.

Peace
James

 

[LegoGE1947]

Hey everyone! This question is for Christians who accept the doctrine of Sola Scriptura (Scripture Alone). As a Catholic, I believe that we must follow both Sacred Scripture and Sacred Tradition. I was wondering, why do you follow Sola Scriptura?

I look forward to hearing and discussing your answers

God bless!

Because there was a vehicle in front of me and the license plate said “SOLASCRPT” (I was following it)

 

[SeekerofTruth27]

You would probably get more replies if you post this in the non-catholic religions forum.

Just a thought.

Peace
James

Thanks JRKH! I just got started on here recently so advice is helpful!

God bless!

 

[jritenour]

I agree this is a great question. When I was going to a Protestant Church (PCA) I believed this because I thought only sacred scripture could be infallible. I had of course glossed over the fact that following tradition is mentioned and urged in the Bible. Once I began the understand the canon of Bible books it made perfect sense that there was no one “Bible” for many years even after Christ was crucified. The biblical canon is man-made. So, I have to ask myself, did Paul believe or preach Sola Scriptura? Did any of the other early Church Fathers believe this as well?

At any rate, this is a great question. Please see if you can put this in the non-Catholic subforums. You will get some great answers certainly from our Lutheran and PCA/reformed brothers (and other denominations of course!)

Peace

 

[Tom_Baum]

Hey everyone! This question is for Christians who accept the doctrine of Sola Scriptura (Scripture Alone). As a Catholic, I believe that we must follow both Sacred Scripture and Sacred Tradition. I was wondering, why do you follow Sola Scriptura?

I look forward to hearing and discussing your answers

God bless!

Wasn’t God-Incarnate’s, Jesus, invitation to “Come follow Me”?

 

[Tom_Baum]

I agree this is a great question. When I was going to a Protestant Church (PCA) I believed this because I thought only sacred scripture could be infallible. I had of course glossed over the fact that following tradition is mentioned and urged in the Bible. Once I began the understand the canon of Bible books it made perfect sense that there was no one “Bible” for many years even after Christ was crucified. The biblical canon is man-made. So, I have to ask myself, did Paul believe or preach Sola Scriptura? Did any of the other early Church Fathers believe this as well?

At any rate, this is a great question. Please see if you can put this in the non-Catholic subforums. You will get some great answers certainly from our Lutheran and PCA/reformed brothers (and other denominations of course!)

Peace

I can’t answer your “did Paul believe or preach Sola Scriptura” but he was writing what turned out to be part of Scripture in his preaching.

One thing about tradition is that at one time it was not tradition but something new.

 

[kkollwitz]

No text can defend itself from misinterpretation.

 

[adawgj]

Once I learned some basic history of the Bible I knew I couldn’t believe in Sola Scriptura, especially since it contradicts itself.

 

[philv]

This was a tough topic when I was entering the church as a convert. When I read 2 Thess. 2:15 (“Therefore, brothers, stand firm and hold fast to the traditions that you were taught, either by an oral statement or by a letter of ours”), I was in a delima: Either I can take the simplicity as this seems to be, or I can complicate it (and later arrive back to the simplicity). I saved my time on it - I went with the simple take. Best. Decision. Ever. Since there’s oral tradition as well, sola-scriptura is throwing out the apostles and running off with what they wrote down. It makes no sense! I want to be with the apostles and listen to them as well, and they left us successors (Titus comes to mind, and of course, the church).

 

[fisherman_carl]

Just saw this post and thought you might want to listen to this debate on sola scriptura between Fr. Mitch Pacwa and Kenneth Samples on YouTube.

m.youtube.com/watch?v=WsZhUgdqAxM

 

[calmthesea]

So, I have to ask myself, did Paul believe or preach Sola Scriptura? Did any of the other early Church Fathers believe this as well?

Peace

St Paul definitely DID NOT believe in Sola Scriptura. He was a Pharisee. He was taught in Rabbinical schools. The Pharisees were essentially the keepers of the “Oral Torah”. They equated the Oral Torah (oral tradition) to be equal with the written Torah.

The people of the Old Testament were all people of Scripture and Tradition. They didn’t believe that you could understand the written Torah without the Oral Torah. (I would say we agree!) (This also sheds light on some of our NT verses)

The Sadducees were the first sect to promote a Sola Torah. They may have started as a heretical Pharasiac offshoot around 200 bce.

The Sadducees were somewhat elitist. And, we could consider them quite secular. They sought to take power away from the scribes and teachers of the law. They didn’t want to be told what to do.

So, they worked to increase their numbers politically on the Sanhedrin Council. They were political enemies of the Pharisees. The Pharisees were concerned about loosing Hebrew culture completely, the language, and the lineage. (Hence, the comissioning of the Septuagint) The Sadducees embraced the Hellenization of the Jews while loosing hold of tradition. The Sadducees usurped the power of the teachers by claim their freedom through Sola Torah.

The Sanhedrin Council of Jesus’ day had a heavy influence, if not a majority of Sadducees as Jesus rode into Jerusalem.

They apparently disappeared around 70 AD. Judaism’s Rabbinical schools of the period all existed to debate and protect what we would call the oral tradition.

I would venture an educated guess, that all the disciples of Christ, and their converts, all believed in oral tradition.

I can give you many links to Jewish sites to elaborate further if you would like. Or, I’m sure that NewAdvent.org would substantiate most of this.

Best, Patrick

 

[calmthesea]

I would venture an educated guess, that all the disciples of Christ, and their converts, all believed in oral tradition.

Best, Patrick

I am certain that all in attendance at the Jerusalem Council were Jewish converts to the faith that had long practiced the concept of Oral Tradition.

Best Patrick:thumbsup:

 

[COPLAND_3]

As a former protestant myself i just assumed that Christianity came from the Bible but I discovered that my assumption was wrong and that the Bible came well after the Church began. I started asking myself why the Bible was the sole authority and who actually determined what was canonical. Long story short I realized the Church was Catholic from the beginning and that the Christian faith was not the result of the Bible but the Bible was the result of the Church.

 

[calmthesea]

As a former protestant myself i just assumed that Christianity came from the Bible but I discovered that my assumption was wrong and that the Bible came well after the Church began. I started asking myself why the Bible was the sole authority and who actually determined what was canonical. Long story short I realized the Church was Catholic from the beginning and that the Christian faith was not the result of the Bible but the Bible was the result of the Church.

AMEN

Best Patrick