Why do you believe in Sola Scriptura?

  • Thread starter Thread starter SeekerofTruth27
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Really?! And where do you get this from?
Click to expand...
The books of the New Testament were already accepted by the churches as scripture far prior to the final canon was accepted.
Click to expand...
Really? Tell me exactly which books were already accepted and exactly who approved them? Simply because what we have today does not justify it as being the case nearly 2,000 years ago.
Acts 17:11 - the Berean’s search the scripture to see if Paul is telling the truth. Why should they! Paul’s an apostle! It’s because Paul (in himself) is nothing. Because God ‘breathed out’ His Word through Paul, doesn’t mean anything Paul decides is as important as scripture! Same is true for the church. Even if the church ‘decided’ what the books of the bible were (and were led by God to do this), it’s a big leap to say the church now has authority over scripture!
Click to expand...
I do not think so. Do you believe St.Paul was teaching to rely solely on Scripture-alone? Did it include the current NT canon? Paul was not teaching them to practice Sola Scriptura,moreover,he was telling them to search the Scriptures in reference to the messiah. It is not a big leap that the church was GIVEN authority to determine what was Scripture.
Moses definitely had authority over the Jews, yet God didn’t even let him enter the holy land, because he went against God! We humans are sinners - even the Catholic Church leaders. We cannot be on equal footing as God. God’s Word stands alone…
Click to expand...
And God’s word is binded to written words alone? Chapter and verse please…
 
Isaiah45_9 said:
That’s dividend on your checking account. You’d like to go higher
Click to expand...
Ohhhh, I was reading that like I was taking a loan; after all I’m in the process of it now for a home.

Good thing the terms and what’s happening would be right there in writing.
 
SyCarl said:
John Chrysostom indicates that we can learn all things from the Scripture.

John Chrysostom, Homilies on 1 Timothy, Homily 1)
ccel.org/ccel/schaff/npnf113.v.iii.ii.html

All the necessary things are in Scripture (material sufficiency) and are clear and open or plain. (formal sufficiency)

John Chrysostom, (Homilies on Second Thessalonians, 3, v. 5)
newadvent.org/fathers/23053.htm

An exposition on 2 Timothy 3:16. If we would know anything we can learn it from Scripture. We have Scripture instead of the Apostle Paul.

John Chrysostom (Homilies on Second Timothy, 9, 3:16-17)
newadvent.org/fathers/230709.htm

Scripture is the square and rule for all things.

John Chrysostom (Homilies on 2 Corinthians, Homily 13)
newadvent.org/fathers/220213.htm

Gregory of Nyssa indicates Scriptures are the rule and measure of every tenet.

Gregory of Nyssa (On the Soul and the Resurrection)
ccel.org/ccel/schaff/npnf205.x.iii.ii.html
Click to expand...
No offense,but I admire your effort to support and believe the ECF were advocates of SS. To bad it is not true. Does not matter how many times Protestants pull quotes to present a smoking gun to prove SS,it simply is false. When the ECF’s quotes are presented in support of the bogus practice of SS and yet when read in their entire proper context nothing can be further from the truth.

Tell me something,if the ECF were such SS supporters,how strange not one ECF ever wrote extensively or exhaustively on SS being that it is the highest authority?
 
dronald said:
Ohhhh, I was reading that like I was taking a loan; after all I’m in the process of it now for a home.

Good thing the terms and what’s happening would be right there in writing.
Click to expand...
Aha!!!

Where is this universal definition of SS and how it is exactly applied?

And

Where is it in Scriptures themselves? And the books it includes?
 
Nicea325 said:
No offense,but I admire your effort to support and believe the ECF were advocates of SS. To bad it is not true. Does not matter how many times Protestants pull quotes to present a smoking gun to prove SS,it simply is false. When their quotes in support of the bogus practice of SS is read in their entirety nothing can be further than the truth.

Tell me something,if the ECF were such SS supporters,how starnge not one ECF ever wrote extensively or exhaustively on SS.
Click to expand...
All of their beliefs and explanations of beliefs (in the first two centuries) are pulled from Scripture. Read Irenaeus, Origen, Eusebius, Justin Martyr, etc. They quote Scripture a ridiculous amount of times to prove the truth of their Faith.

Never once do they pretend something should be believed that isn’t written down. They never once said, “Paul said this, but we don’t have it in writing.” Or, “Jesus said this, but you won’t find it in any writing.” Rather, they only quoted Scripture to prove their beliefs.
 
Isaiah45_9 said:
Aha!!!

Where is this universal definition of SS and how it is exactly applied?

And

Where is it in Scriptures themselves? And the books it includes?
Click to expand...
Wait, are we done talking about mortgages now? Because I liked your analogy.

The terms in writing say 8%, my banker says he was really only kidding and what it meant was 5%. Well, sorry Charlie; I have it in writing and that’s what I’ll accept.
 
dronald said:
Wait, are we done talking about mortgages now? Because I liked your analogy.

The terms in writing say 8%, my banker says he was really only kidding and what it meant was 5%. Well, sorry Charlie; I have it in writing and that’s what I’ll accept.
Click to expand...
I am challenging you to show me, in the same manner, where is SS in Scriptures and the books that are Scriptures.
 
dronald said:
All of their beliefs and explanations of beliefs (in the first two centuries) are pulled from Scripture. Read Irenaeus, Origen, Eusebius, Justin Martyr, etc. They quote Scripture a ridiculous amount of times to prove the truth of their Faith.

Never once do they pretend something should be believed that isn’t written down. They never once said, “Paul said this, but we don’t have it in writing.” Or, “Jesus said this, but you won’t find it in any writing.” Rather, they only quoted Scripture to prove their beliefs.
Click to expand...
Really? You mean more like:

All of their beliefs were pulled from Scripture,AFTER it had been taught orally for many years. Tell me how a baby runs before he or she crawls?

Quoting scripture does NOT prove or support the bogus practice of SS-sorry,it is a poor understanding of their works…sorry but it is.

You sure? Tell me where the canonization process is mentioned in the Bible?
 
the RCC has the authority to teach the world which writings are sacred scripture, that is inspired; but, it does not have the authority to tell us what those writings mean?

that does not make sense to me.
 
SeekerofTruth27 said:
Hey everyone! This question is for Christians who follow the doctrine of Sola Scriptura (Scripture Alone). As a Catholic, I believe in both Sacred Scripture and Sacred Tradition. I was wondering why you believe in following only Sacred Scripture.

I look forward to reading/discussing you answers!🙂

God bless!
Click to expand...
Because they are sheeple.

Paul said to timothy to remember the things he said in front of witnesses and to teach them to the next generation and pass them on.

If that isn’t the basis for what you guys from Rome call Tradition, I dunno what is.

Personally I think you guys take some things too far, but, to question TRADITION and claim sola scriptura is pure ignorance.

Not even Martin Luther would approve of today’s interpretation of Sola Scriptura.
 
dronald said:
All of their beliefs and explanations of beliefs (in the first two centuries) are pulled from Scripture. Read Irenaeus, Origen, Eusebius, Justin Martyr, etc. They quote Scripture a ridiculous amount of times to prove the truth of their Faith.

Never once do they pretend something should be believed that isn’t written down. They never once said, “Paul said this, but we don’t have it in writing.” Or, “Jesus said this, but you won’t find it in any writing.” Rather, they only quoted Scripture to prove their beliefs.
Click to expand...
Paul said exactly that. To teach what he said, and pass it down.

Was paul so much an idiot he needs your wisdom to fix his errors?

2 Timothy 2
Holman Christian Standard Bible (HCSB)
Be Strong in Grace

2 You, therefore, my son, be strong in the grace that is in Christ Jesus. 2 And what you have heard from me in the presence of many witnesses, commit to faithful men who will be able to teach others also.

1 Tim 6:Guard the Heritage

20 Timothy, guard what has been entrusted to you, avoiding irreverent, empty speech and contradictions from the “knowledge” that falsely bears that name. 21 By professing it, some people have deviated from the faith.
 
Isaiah45_9 said:
Orthodox reject it as well.

It cannot be proven from Scriptures, my friend.
Click to expand...
As a Prot, I can tell you anything can be proven in scriptures for the Evangelical crowd. You determine what you want it to conclude, then just tell the world over and over and over that’s what it means.
 
dronald said:
They have the same Scriptures and can’t agree on all doctrines as well. And it certainly can.
Click to expand...
Dronald, your answer is to put your fingers in your ears and say, “CAN TO” over and over until someone accepts your views?
 
dronald said:
I’ve done that already; SS is rejected by Catholics, so it doesn’t matter.
Click to expand...
It does not matter,because it is not a ***matter ***which had an existence in Christianity until the Reformation.

Again…SS means exactly that…ONLY WAS WRITTEN is to be followed and taught.

The Church Christ founded was not founded on such a belief nor did it ever practice it.

Again, if SS were such a vital practice, I find it very odd not ONE ECF ever defends it exhaustively and not once mentioned at any ecumenical council.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top