Why do you believe in Sola Scriptura?

  • Thread starter Thread starter SeekerofTruth27
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
FathersKnowBest said:
Then those claims need to be evaluated.
Which office in YOUR church do you think has a legitimate claim?
Click to expand...
How would I go about evaluating those claims? Both the Patriarch of Antioch and the Pope of Rome seem to have a valid claim, as well as any other bishop. And I don’t see someone in church history claiming that this person or that person is the SOLE successor of Peter, at least not for hundreds of years. I am happy to concede that they BOTH are the successor of Peter. Even then, it seems that most in the early church and the eastern church today believe that ALL bishops are the successor to Peter. I am okay with that as well.

That being said, then my pastor, bishop, and archbishop are the successors of Peter. Although we don’t like to call them bishop and archbishop, those are Catholic words, please don’t use them around me.
 
House_Harkonnen said:
Although we don’t like to call them bishop and archbishop, those are Catholic words, please don’t use them around me,
Click to expand...
We say, “Pastor” at my Church. I shudder every time I hear anyone say “Priest” even when I read it in the Bible… those are Catholic words. ugh.
 
House_Harkonnen said:
I don’t believe that the scriptures alone is the only source giving us the deep explanation of the Trinity. That’s silly.

What I do believe is that any explanation of the Trinity has to be normed by scripture, it being the highest authority.
Click to expand...
Dear Bishop Harkonnen,

How does Scriptures norm the Trinity a la Sola?

Respectfully,

Bishop Atreides
 
Isaiah45_9 said:
That would require you to explain it to me. Thus, not alone
Click to expand...
I see. So you didn’t actually want the Trinity from scripture, you had already prepared your next response. If you already had your next response, why did you ask at all?

No. I don’t have to do any explaining, you can just read the verses for yourself. Although explanation might be helpful.

Lutherans don’t reject such explanations.

Sola Scriptura doesn’t mean for us that we use the scriptures and nothing else. That would be a gross oversimplification and a glib analysis.
 
House_Harkonnen said:
I see. So you didn’t actually want the Trinity from scripture, you had already prepared your next response. If you already had your next response, why did you ask at all?

No. I don’t have to do any explaining, you can just read the verses for yourself. Although explanation might be helpful.

Lutherans don’t reject such explanations.

Sola Scriptura doesn’t mean for us that we use the scriptures and nothing else. That would be a gross oversimplification and a glib analysis.
Click to expand...
That’s what Sola means - alone.

No glib at all, it’s just silly (to use your own argumentation) that you use Alone when it is not alone.

Are you familiar with formal and material sufficiency?
 
Isaiah45_9 said:
That’s what Sola means - alone.

No glib at all, it’s just silly (to use your own argumentation) that you use Alone when it is not alone.

Are you familiar with formal and material sufficiency?
Click to expand...
No, I use scripture alone to norm doctrine. I don’t use scripture alone for all religious truth, that would be silly.

And that’s not what I mean when I say sola scripture, and neither was it of the Reformers.

I know about material versus formal sufficiency, I am actually comfortable as a Lutheran with the distinction, and I know of no Lutheran theologian that argues for FS.
 
dronald said:
We say, “Pastor” at my Church. I shudder every time I hear anyone say “Priest” even when I read it in the Bible… those are Catholic words. ugh.
Click to expand...
I called my pastor “father” once (old habits).

I received a formal letter or reproof from the Lutheran Overlords of Wittenberg.
 
House_Harkonnen said:
I see. So you didn’t actually want the Trinity from scripture, you had already prepared your next response. If you already had your next response, why did you ask at all?

No. I don’t have to do any explaining, you can just read the verses for yourself. Although explanation might be helpful.

Lutherans don’t reject such explanations.

Sola Scriptura doesn’t mean for us that we use the scriptures and nothing else. That would be a gross oversimplification and a glib analysis.
Click to expand...
The doctrine of the Trinity is implicit in Scripture,not explicit. Again,those verses are being used in lieu of what has been handed down to you over the centuries. It is the church which provided and explained the deeper complexity of the doctrine. Sorry,but does not matter how you wish to present it, it is a fact of church history.
 
House_Harkonnen said:
I don’t believe that the scriptures alone is the only source giving us the deep explanation of the Trinity. That’s silly.

What I do believe is that any explanation of the Trinity has to be normed by scripture, it being the highest authority.
Click to expand...
Well you sure present the argument that without written scripture we are clueless about doctrine? Exactly! The scriptures describe and explain the Trinity implicitly,not explicitly. Precisely why God founded His church to take care of such a deep matters.
 
Nicea325 said:
The doctrine of the Trinity is implicit in Scripture,not explicit. Again,those verses are being used in lieu of what has been handed down to you over the centuries. It is the church which provided and explained the deeper complexity of the doctrine. Sorry,but does not matter how you wish to present it, it is a fact of church history.
Click to expand...
Fine. The doctrine can still be normed by scripture. That it is a scriptural doctrine. I can accept church consensus on the matter.
 
Nicea325 said:
Well you sure present the argument that without written scripture we are clueless about doctrine? Exactly! The scriptures describe and explain the Trinity implicitly,not explicitly. Precisely why God founded His church to take care of such a deep matters.
Click to expand...
If I presented the argument that without scripture we would be clueless about doctrine then I am sorry, that’s not even close to what I mean. Scripture is the highest authority, not the only authority. Without it we would be extremely hobbled but we could still rely on other lesser sources of authority, the church, tradition, reason, etc.
 
House_Harkonnen said:
If I presented the argument that without scripture we would be clueless about doctrine then I am sorry, that’s not even close to what I mean. Scripture is the highest authority, not the only authority. Without it we would be extremely hobbled but we could still rely on other lesser sources of authority, the church, tradition, reason, etc.
Click to expand...
See here is where you are in error,sorry but you are. You are aware the words of red are the beliefs of Lutherans-right? You flat out admitted the church is a lesser authority than the written Word. Not the Word of God in general,but the written word. Again,no where does Scripture even hint such a belief that the church is of “lesser” authority.The early church never believed and practiced such a premise. I can respect it,but fortunately I adhere to what the church has always believed,not something taught centuries later.
 
what is the practical application of saying this: “Scripture is the highest authority”?

scripture is an inanimate object. how does an inanimate object exercise authority over human beings?

that concept simply seems totally irrational or illogical.

an inanimate object is the highest authority?

how does an inanimate object even convey something, anything, to human beings?

it must first be read by human beings. after being read, it must be understood by human beings.

it seems to me that this inanimate object we call sacred scripture is entirely dependent on human beings for having any impact on them, much less possessing authority over them.

most certainly, there is nothing in sacred scripture that indicates Jesus gave His authority to an inanimate object containing a bunch of words that are not always easily understood.

i mean if there is somewhere in scripture where Jesus even indicates a little bit that His authority would reside in words to be written fifty years after His Ascension, i would be willing to discuss that scripture verse. however, to the best of my knowledge, such a verse does not exist.
 
eddie_too said:
what is the practical application of saying this: “Scripture is the highest authority”?

scripture is an inanimate object. how does an inanimate object exercise authority over human beings?

that concept simply seems totally irrational or illogical.

an inanimate object is the highest authority?

how does an inanimate object even convey something, anything, to human beings?

it must first be read by human beings. after being read, it must be understood by human beings.

it seems to me that this inanimate object we call sacred scripture is entirely dependent on human beings for having any impact on them, much less possessing authority over them.

most certainly, there is nothing in sacred scripture that indicates Jesus gave His authority to an inanimate object containing a bunch of words that are not always easily understood.

i mean if there is somewhere in scripture where Jesus even indicates a little bit that His authority would reside in words to be written fifty years after His Ascension, i would be willing to discuss that scripture verse. however, to the best of my knowledge, such a verse does not exist.
Click to expand...
Precisely why it is an innovation of centuries later.
 
Nicea325 said:
See here is where you are in error,sorry but you are. You are aware the words of red are the beliefs of Lutherans-right? You flat out admitted the church is a lesser authority than the written Word. Not the Word of God in general,but the written word. Again,no where does Scripture even hint such a belief that the church is of “lesser” authority.The early church never believed and practiced such a premise. I can respect it,but fortunately I adhere to what the church has always believed,not something taught centuries later.
Click to expand...
I disagree. I believe many early church fathers practice Sola Scriptura, that is scripture being the norming norm of doctrine. Would you like to read some of them?
 
eddie_too said:
what is the practical application of saying this: “Scripture is the highest authority”?

scripture is an inanimate object. how does an inanimate object exercise authority over human beings?

that concept simply seems totally irrational or illogical.

an inanimate object is the highest authority?

how does an inanimate object even convey something, anything, to human beings?

it must first be read by human beings. after being read, it must be understood by human beings.

it seems to me that this inanimate object we call sacred scripture is entirely dependent on human beings for having any impact on them, much less possessing authority over them.

most certainly, there is nothing in sacred scripture that indicates Jesus gave His authority to an inanimate object containing a bunch of words that are not always easily understood.

i mean if there is somewhere in scripture where Jesus even indicates a little bit that His authority would reside in words to be written fifty years after His Ascension, i would be willing to discuss that scripture verse. however, to the best of my knowledge, such a verse does not exist.
Click to expand...
I vehemently disagree with your analysis and assessment of scripture.

Scripture is not an “inanimate object”. On the contrary:
For the word of God is alive and active. Sharper than any double-edged sword, it penetrates even to dividing soul and spirit, joints and marrow; it judges the thoughts and attitudes of the heart.
*
i mean if there is somewhere in scripture where Jesus even indicates a little bit that His authority would reside in words to be written fifty years after His Ascension, i would be willing to discuss that scripture verse. however, to the best of my knowledge, such a verse does not exist.
Click to expand...
Jesus words are authoritative because he is God. Can you name for me an authority that is more authoritative than Jesus own words?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top