Why does any teaching have to be in scripture?

[dcdurel]

I keep on reading this question, “Where is that in scripture?”

Where does God say that all teachings have to be in scripture, or even that any teaching has to be in scripture?

Didn’t the Holy Spirit teach “all things” to the apostles?
But the Counselor, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, will teach you all things and will remind you of everything I have said to you. (john 14:26)

Didn’t Jesus teach his apostles “everything.”
15Henceforth I call you not servants; for the servant knoweth not what his lord doeth: but I have called you friends; for all things that I have heard of my Father I have made known unto you. (john 15:15)

And since Jesus came to proclaim the Gospel, the “Good News” of salvation, doesn’t that mean the apostles learned “all things” refer to salvation, and thus they learned everything concerning salvation directly from God, that is from Jesus and the Holy Spirit?

         Thus since Jesus founded His Church upon the apostles and told them, in Mark 16:15-16

“Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature.
He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned”.

Doesn’t that mean salvation comes from hearing the Gospel, the word of God, His Church teaches and preaches, that is handed down in sacred Tradition?

The Church teaches that the Gospel the apostles “preached”, not wrote is the source of all saving truth;
75. "Christ the Lord, in whom the entire Revelation of the most high God is summed up, commanded the apostles to preach the Gospel, which had been promised beforehand by the prophets, and which he fulfilled in his own person and promulgated with his own lips. In preaching the Gospel, they were to communicate the gifts of God to all men. This Gospel was to be the source of all saving truth and moral discipline.

And since no where does Jesus say salvation comes from believing scripture, reading scripture, studying scripture, studing the bible, reading the bible, believing the bible, then why does any teaching have to be in the bible?
Obviously God Himself says salvation comes from believing the Gospel, the word of God that was taught and preached, that is, the Catholic faith. This Gospel is presented in the Catechism of the Catholic Church. This Catechism is a summery of what the apostles taught, and it is also a deeper penetration of the Gospel that they taught. The Church already knows the entire Gospel, and hands it down in Tradition. So where do men get this man made teaching that doctrines MUST be found in scripture? Jesus certainly never taught it. Who made up this teaching???

 

[Teresita99]

I keep on reading this question, “Where is that in scripture?” Where does God say that all teachings have to be in scripture, or even that any teaching has to be in scripture?

**From Dei Verbum 25: **

The sacred synod . . . earnestly and especially urges all the Christian faithful, especially Religious, to learn by frequent reading of the divine Scriptures the “excellent knowledge of Jesus Christ” (Phil. 3:8). “For ignorance of the Scriptures is ignorance of Christ.”

 

[GRATEFULONEjim]

The Catholic Church uses Apostolic Tradition, Sacred Scripture,and the Magesterium, to base its faith on. That is one of the big issues protestant denominations have with the CC.

 

[dcdurel]

**From Dei Verbum 25: **

The sacred synod . . . earnestly and especially urges all the Christian faithful, especially Religious, to learn by frequent reading of the divine Scriptures the “excellent knowledge of Jesus Christ” (Phil. 3:8). “For ignorance of the Scriptures is ignorance of Christ.”

Of course ignorance of scripture is ignorance of Christ. Of course we learn to love Jesus from scripture. But, again, why do any of His teachings have to be in scripture, since He taught “all things” and the Holy Spirit taught “all things” to his apostles. The apostles did NOT learn the Gospel by reading scripture.

Scripture is salvation history.
Through scripture we learn how Jesus acted, thus we can learn to imitate him.
The Church teaches Scripture is useful for nourishing doctrine, illuminating doctrine and as a witness to the teachings the apostles learned from God.

But no where does the Church or the bible teach that all teachings of the Gospel, or most teachings of the Gospel must be in scripture.

The Church did not learn the teachings of the Gospel from scripture, but directly from Jesus and the Holy Spirit.

Salvation comes from believing this Gospel that the apostles taught and preached.

Salvation does not come from believing scripture or the bible, reading scripture or the bible, or studying scripture or the bible.

Who made up this teaching that all doctrines must be in scripture or that any doctrine must be in scripture?

 

[nickybr38]

Of course ignorance of scripture is ignorance of Christ. Of course we learn to love Jesus from scripture. But, again, why do any of His teachings have to be in scripture, since He taught “all things” and the Holy Spirit taught “all things” to his apostles. The apostles did NOT learn the Gospel by reading scripture.

Scripture is salvation history.
Through scripture we learn how Jesus acted, thus we can learn to imitate him.
The Church teaches Scripture is useful for nourishing doctrine, illuminating doctrine and as a witness to the teachings the apostles learned from God.

But no where does the Church or the bible teach that all teachings of the Gospel, or most teachings of the Gospel must be in scripture.

The Church did not learn the teachings of the Gospel from scripture, but directly from Jesus and the Holy Spirit.

Salvation comes from believing this Gospel that the apostles taught and preached.

Salvation does not come from believing scripture or the bible, reading scripture or the bible, or studying scripture or the bible.

Who made up this teaching that all doctrines must be in scripture or that any doctrine must be in scripture?

I think that’s an excellent question. The Bible tells us that Scripture is useful, it tells us also to cherish it but no where in the Bible does it tell us that all teaching is ONLY in the Scripture.

It DOES however tell us that Jesus taught His disciples MANY things but it couldn’t all be written down.

 

[Jesus_123]

"To be ignorant of Scripture
is to be ignorant of **
Christ**." **

• St. Jerome**

:coffeeread:
CATECHISM OF THE CATHOLIC CHURCH
PART ONE: THE PROFESSION OF FAITH

Article 2 - THE TRANSMISSION OF DIVINE REVELATION

81
Sacred Scripture is the speech of God as it is put down in writing under the breath of the Holy Spirit.

Article 3 - SACRED SCRIPTURE

104
In Sacred Scripture, the Church constantly finds her nourishment and her strength, for she welcomes it ** not** as human word, "but as what it really is, the Word of God."

In the sacred books,
the Father

who is in heaven comes lovingly

to meet his children, and talks with them.

:bible1: “How precious also are thy thoughts unto me, O God! how great is the sum of them! If I should count them, they are more in number than the sand …” Psalms 139:17-18b​

:bible1: “For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways, saith the Lord.” Isaiah 55:8​

:bible1: “So shall **my word **be that goeth forth out of **my **mouth: it shall not return unto me void, but it shall accomplish that which **I **please, and it shall prosper in the thing whereto **I **sent it.” Isaiah 55:11​

:bible1: “Heaven and earth shall pass away, but **my words **shall not pass away.” Matthew 24:35​

:bible1: “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.” John 1:1​

"And the
Word
was made flesh,
and dwelt among us,
and we saw his glory;
the glory as it were of the
only begotten of the Father,
full of grace and truth."
John 1:14
:bible1:

. . . all for Jesus+
. . . thank You Blessed Lord+
. . . thank You Sweet Spirit of our Holy God+
. . . thank you Holy Mother Mary+
. . . thank you Holy Mother Church+
. . . thank You Gracious Heavenly Father+​

 

[WatchfulPilgrim]

Wasn’t the purpose of writing the Scriptures so that we would know the “all things” that were entrusted to the Apostles? Don’t even the ECFs say that the church ought not go beyond that which is contained in the Holy Scriptures?

How does modern man determine what are the original, apostolic teachings if they cannot be found in the writings of the Scriptures?

 

[Jesus_123]

+
. . . :coffeeread: . . .
DOGMATIC CONSTITUTION
ON DIVINE REVELATION
DEI VERBUM
SOLEMNLY PROMULGATED
BY HIS HOLINESS
POPE PAUL VI
ON NOVEMBER 18, 1965

**
CHAPTER VI
SACRED :bible1: SCRIPTURE IN THE LIFE OF THE CHURCH **

1. The Church has always venerated the divine Scriptures just as she venerates the body of the Lord, since, especially in the sacred liturgy, she unceasingly receives and offers to the faithful the bread of life from the table BOTH of God’s word and of Christ’s body. She has always maintained them, and continues to do so, together with sacred tradition, as the supreme rule of faith, since, as inspired by God and committed once and for all to writing, they impart the word of God Himself without change, and make the voice of the Holy Spirit resound in the words of the prophets and Apostles. Therefore, like the Christian religion itself, all the preaching of the Church must be nourished and REGULATED by Sacred :bible1: Scripture. …

"For the word of God is living and active" (Heb. 4:12) and “it has power to build you up and give you your heritage among all those who are sanctified” (Acts 20:32; see 1 Thess. 2:13).

1. Easy access to Sacred Scripture should be provided for all the Christian faithful. …
2. The bride of the incarnate Word, the Church taught by the Holy Spirit, is concerned to move ahead toward a deeper understanding of the Sacred Scriptures so that she may increasingly feed her sons with the divine words. Therefore, she also encourages the study of the holy Fathers of both East and West and of sacred liturgies. Catholic exegetes then and other students of sacred theology, working diligently together and using appropriate means, should devote their energies, under the watchful care of the sacred teaching office of the Church, to an exploration and exposition of the divine writings. This should be so done that as many ministers of the divine word as possible will be able effectively to provide the nourishment of the Scriptures for the people of God, to enlighten their minds, strengthen their wills, and set men’s hearts on fire with the love of God. (1) The sacred synod encourages the sons of the Church and Biblical scholars to continue energetically, following the mind of the Church, with the work they have so well begun, with a constant renewal of vigor. (2)

Sacred theology rests on the
written :bible1: word of God,
together
with sacred tradition,
as its primary and perpetual foundation.

By scrutinizing in the light of faith all truth stored up in the mystery of Christ, theology is most powerfully strengthened and constantly rejuvenated by that word. For the Sacred Scriptures contain the word of God and since they are inspired really are the word of God; and so the study of the sacred page is, as it were, the soul of sacred theology. (3) By the same word of Scripture the ministry of the word also, that is, pastoral preaching, catechetics and all Christian instruction, in which the liturgical homily must hold the foremost place, is nourished in a healthy way and flourishes in a holy way.

1. Therefore, all the clergy must hold fast to the Sacred Scriptures through diligent sacred reading and careful study, especially the priests of Christ and others, such as deacons and catechists who are legitimately active in the ministry of the word. This is to be done so that none of them will become “an empty preacher of the word of God outwardly, who is not a listener to it inwardly” (4) since they must share the abundant wealth of the divine word with the faithful committed to them, especially in the sacred liturgy. The sacred synod also earnestly and especially urges all the Christian faithful, especially Religious, to learn by frequent reading of the divine Scriptures the “excellent knowledge of Jesus Christ” (Phil. 3:8). **“For ignorance of the Scriptures is ignorance of Christ.”**95) … And let them remember that prayer should accompany the reading of Sacred Scripture, so that God and man may talk together; for "we speak to Him when we pray; we hear Him when we read the divine saying." (6)

It devolves on sacred bishops “who have the apostolic teaching”(7) to give the faithful entrusted to them suitable instruction in the right use of the divine books, especially the New Testament and above all the Gospels. …

1. In this way, therefore, **through the reading and study of the sacred books **“the word of God may spread rapidly and be glorified” (2 Thess. 3:1) and the treasure of revelation, entrusted to the Church, may more and more fill the hearts of men. Just as the life of the Church is strengthened through more frequent celebration of the Eucharistic mystery, similar we may hope for a new stimulus for the life of the Spirit from a growing reverence for the word of God, which "lasts forever" (Is. 40:8; see 1 Peter 1:23-25).

1. +
   :compcoff: **Link: **vatican.va/archive/hist_councils/ii_vatican_council/documents/vat-ii_const_19651118_dei-verbum_en.html

. . . all for Jesus+
. . . thank You Divine Spirit of our Holy God+
. . . thank you Holy Mother Church+​

 

[ConstantineTG]

The Catholic Church uses Apostolic Tradition, Sacred Scripture,and the Magesterium, to base its faith on. That is one of the big issues protestant denominations have with the CC.

Given the do not have a magisterium (every minister of the same “church” would interpret the same passage differently) and that they do not have tradition prior to Luther, then what else can they base their faith on?

 

[regression]

Wasn’t the purpose of writing the Scriptures so that we would know the “all things” that were entrusted to the Apostles? Don’t even the ECFs say that the church ought not go beyond that which is contained in the Holy Scriptures?

How does modern man determine what are the original, apostolic teachings if they cannot be found in the writings of the Scriptures?

Didn’t at the end of John’s gospel he say not everything was written down?

 

[Jesus_123]

:bible1: John 21:25 But there are also many other things which Jesus did; which, if they were written every one, the world itself, I think, would not be able to contain the books that should be written.​

God the Holy Spirit . . . selected the specific things which . . . God Himself . . . wanted to become Sacred :bible1: Scripture . . . no more . . . and no less . . . and guided our Apostolic Holy Roman Catholic Church very clearly in this matter . . .

. . . all for Jesus+
. . . thank you Lord+
​

 

[fhansen]

I keep on reading this question, “Where is that in scripture?”

Where does God say that all teachings have to be in scripture, or even that any teaching has to be in scripture?

Didn’t the Holy Spirit teach “all things” to the apostles?
But the Counselor, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, will teach you all things and will remind you of everything I have said to you. (john 14:26)

Didn’t Jesus teach his apostles “everything.”
15Henceforth I call you not servants; for the servant knoweth not what his lord doeth: but I have called you friends; for all things that I have heard of my Father I have made known unto you. (john 15:15)

And since Jesus came to proclaim the Gospel, the “Good News” of salvation, doesn’t that mean the apostles learned “all things” refer to salvation, and thus they learned everything concerning salvation directly from God, that is from Jesus and the Holy Spirit?

         Thus since Jesus founded His Church upon the apostles and told them, in Mark 16:15-16

“Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature.
He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned”.

Doesn’t that mean salvation comes from hearing the Gospel, the word of God, His Church teaches and preaches, that is handed down in sacred Tradition?

The Church teaches that the Gospel the apostles “preached”, not wrote is the source of all saving truth;
75. "Christ the Lord, in whom the entire Revelation of the most high God is summed up, commanded the apostles to preach the Gospel, which had been promised beforehand by the prophets, and which he fulfilled in his own person and promulgated with his own lips. In preaching the Gospel, they were to communicate the gifts of God to all men. This Gospel was to be the source of all saving truth and moral discipline.

And since no where does Jesus say salvation comes from believing scripture, reading scripture, studying scripture, studing the bible, reading the bible, believing the bible, then why does any teaching have to be in the bible?
Obviously God Himself says salvation comes from believing the Gospel, the word of God that was taught and preached, that is, the Catholic faith. This Gospel is presented in the Catechism of the Catholic Church. This Catechism is a summery of what the apostles taught, and it is also a deeper penetration of the Gospel that they taught. The Church already knows the entire Gospel, and hands it down in Tradition. So where do men get this man made teaching that doctrines MUST be found in scripture? Jesus certainly never taught it. Who made up this teaching???

The Church held and proclaimed the faith before one word of the NT was written down.

 

[Della]

Wasn’t the purpose of writing the Scriptures so that we would know the “all things” that were entrusted to the Apostles?

Actually no. The purpose depended very much on the kind of writing. For instance, the Gospels tell us many things about Jesus and his mission, but they don’t tell us everything he said and did. Nor do any of them say that they were written for the purpose you cite. Jesus told them everything they needed to know for them to do what he commissioned them to do–to take the Gospel to every creature, but he didn’t spell out Christian theology for them as we have it now. That he left to them to do when he told the Apostles “whoever hear you hears me” and “I will establish my Church and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.”

The Epistles, including the Book of Revelation, were written by the Apostles to solve issues that arose and to reaffirm the faith of the believers. The Acts of the Apostles is something of a history book written to one individual to “fill him in” on what had happened in the Church to that point, but here again, not everything the Apostles said and did was recorded.

Don’t even the ECFs say that the church ought not go beyond that which is contained in the Holy Scriptures?

You may be confusing the ECFs with a verse from the Book of Revelation 22:18 I warn every one who hears the words of the prophecy of this book: if any one adds to them, God will add to him the plagues described in this book… It doesn’t refer to the whole Bible or even the NT but only to the “book” within the Book of Revelation. If you have a citation from the ECFs that makes the statement you cited, please share it.

How does modern man determine what are the original, apostolic teachings if they cannot be found in the writings of the Scriptures?

That’s easy. The Church, more specifically, the Magisterium of the Church (all the bishops together with the pope), decide matters of faith and morals. Jesus gave his Apostles, and therefore their successors the charism of infallibility. It doesn’t mean that an individual bishop or even the pope talking about any old issue can’t be wrong. It means that when the Church pronounces on matters of faith and morals the Holy Spirit has spoken through the Church for Jesus promised the Holy Spirit would guide the Apostles into “all truth”. He did this because he knew, as the generations passed and societies came and went, that new issues would arise. Therefore, the Church’s teachings are those of Christ not of man since he promised he would never abandon his Church and that it would never fail. There have been many Church councils down through the ages that tackled some of our most basic truths, such as the divinity of Christ, the nature of the Trinity, etc. Neither of these (nor other things we hold true) are explicitly mentioned in the Bible. If they were, there would have been no need to hold councils to decide on them.

The Bible, like the Constitution of the USA or any other such document, is not an authority–it’s a source for authorities to cite to make decisions. The authority lies with those appointed to have it. In the case of the Bible, the authority was Jesus himself and he passed in on to the Apostles.

 

[ephesians2]

The first canon of the Bible was established in 382 AD. The meaning of “Canon” in Greek is “measuring rod or rule” it also means “standard”. The Bible is recognized by the Church as genuine and the inspired Word of God. The reason they wanted to establish the canon was to be able to distiguish Christian truth from heresy. I believe if something doesn’t line up with the Bible or cannot be proved by the Bible, the inerrent Word of God, then it is false doctrine. If a Mormon or Buddist or Muslim or any other cult member came up to me and told me their false doctrine, I would ask that question,“Can you show me that in Scripture?” (PS. the real Scripture, not the made up stuff!)

 

[nickybr38]

I think it’s obvious the Church places a HIGH value on Sacred Scripture but I still see no where where the Church states the Scripture is the ONLY source of teaching.

 

[WatchfulPilgrim]

Didn’t at the end of John’s gospel he say not everything was written down?

The end of John’s gospel says that there are many other things “which Jesus did”… It does not say that there are many other doctrines which are not written.

For that matter, the beginning of Luke says that these things are written that we might “know the certainty of those things” which they had been instructed in.

 

[Philthy]

Wasn’t the purpose of writing the Scriptures so that we would know the “all things” that were entrusted to the Apostles?

Great question, but not only don’t the authors of “Scripture” appear to know that they are writing Scripture, but they don’t claim that they are relating the “all things” that Christ taught them. Furthermore, a significant amount of material in Paul’s Epistles has to do with stuff that was going on at the local churches and not necessary what Christ taught them.

Don’t even the ECFs say that the church ought not go beyond that which is contained in the Holy Scriptures?

They say all sorts of things, but they never say that we have entered the age of Sola Scriptura…

How does modern man determine what are the original, apostolic teachings if they cannot be found in the writings of the Scriptures?

Through the “pillar and foundation of truth”, of course.

 

[Philthy]

The end of John’s gospel says that there are many other things “which Jesus did”… It does not say that there are many other doctrines which are not written.

Nor does it preclude that possibility. What is never claimed in any Gospel is that “these are the complete teachings of Christ written so that one who wished to know the fullness of the Christian faith can deduce it from these writings”. It is nowhere to be found nor is it even hinted at…

For that matter, the beginning of Luke says that these things are written that we **might “know **the certainty of those things” which they had been instructed in.

Uhhh, nooo, that’s not what it says. It is written to Theophilus so that HE might “realize the certainty of the teachings” he received. There is no extrapolation to “we” or us being certain of anything. There is no indication that Luke intended his letter to Theophilus to be shared with anyone, let alone become a part of Sacred Scripture. Furthermore, Luke doesnt mention exactly what those teachings received by Theophilus were and so we are left merely guessing how what is recorded relates to those teachings…

 

[Jesus_123]

I think it’s obvious the Church places a HIGH value on Sacred Scripture but I still see no where where the Church states the Scripture is the ONLY source of teaching.

One of our holy teaching priests shared the following understanding . . . perhaps his perspective can help in understanding the Catholic approach . . . which has never considered Sacred :bible1: Scripture alone as the only source of teaching . . .

“Like the Trinity . . .revelation . . . of the one God is Trinitarian in nature as well. God reveals himself to us by way of Sacred Scripture, Sacred Tradition, and Magisterial teaching—no one of which can subsist . . . without . . . the other two. To use an analogy, God is not God unless Father, Son, and Holy Spirit; and authentic Divine Revelation is not that unless Scripture, Tradition, and Magesterial teaching. The three are . . . one . . . indissoluble.”

A

n infallible teaching by a pope or ecumenical council can contradict previous Church teachings, as long as they were not themselves taught infallibly. In this case, the previous fallible teachings are immediately made void. Of course, an infallible teaching cannot contradict a previous infallible teaching, **including the infallible teachings of the **Holy :bible1: Bible ****or Holy Tradition. …

In July 2005 Pope Benedict XVI asserted during an impromptu address to priests in Aosta that: “The Pope is not an oracle; he is infallible in very rare situations, as we know.”[11]

- Wikipedia​

. . . all for Jesus+
. . . thank you Holy Mother Church+​

 

[WatchfulPilgrim]

Actually no. The purpose depended very much on the kind of writing. For instance, the Gospels tell us many things about Jesus and his mission, but they don’t tell us everything he said and did. Nor do any of them say that they were written for the purpose you cite.

But the beginning of Luke certainly does claim to be written for the purpose I suggested; so that we may know with certainty… I did not claim that all things Jesus ever did were contained in Scripture. I am aware of the conclusion of the gospel of John, as someone else here mentioned.

Jesus told them everything they needed to know for them to do what he commissioned them to do–to take the Gospel to every creature, but he didn’t spell out Christian theology for them as we have it now. That he left to them to do when he told the Apostles “whoever hear you hears me” and “I will establish my Church and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.”

Right, Jesus did not spell it all out, but it must still have a Scriptural basis. As far as I remember, the Catholic Church claims that each of its teachings have a Scriptural basis. I am not aware of the CC ever taking the position that teachings do not need to be in Scripture.

You may be confusing the ECFs with a verse from the Book of Revelation 22:18 I warn every one who hears the words of the prophecy of this book: if any one adds to them, God will add to him the plagues described in this book… It doesn’t refer to the whole Bible or even the NT but only to the “book” within the Book of Revelation. If you have a citation from the ECFs that makes the statement you cited, please share it.

No, I wasn’t thinking of Revelation. I was remembering quotes from the ECFs, although it has been a while since I’ve read them.

Tertullian:

“We have learned from none others the plan of our salvation, than from those through whom the gospel has come down to us, which they did at one time proclaim in public, and, at a later period, by the will of God, handed down to us in the Scriptures, to be the ground and pillar of our faith.”

Cyril:

For concerning the divine and sacred Mysteries of the Faith,** we ought not to deliver even the most casual remark without the Holy Scriptures:** nor be drawn aside by mere probabilities and the artifices of argument. Do not then believe me because I tell thee these things, unless thou receive from the Holy Scriptures the proof of what is set forth: for this salvation, which is of our faith, is not by ingenious reasonings, but by proof from the Holy Scriptures."

Gregory of Nyssa:

we make the Holy Scriptures the rule and the measure of every tenet; we necessarily fix our eyes upon that, and approve that alone which may be made to harmonize with the intention of those writings."

I found these here in a quick search:
christiananswers.net/q-eden/sola-scriptura-earlychurch.html

I didn’t real the entire article, nor do I necessarily endorse the site - I was just looking for a quick resource for some quotes I remember having read in the past.

That’s easy. The Church, more specifically, the Magisterium of the Church (all the bishops together with the pope), decide matters of faith and morals. Jesus gave his Apostles, and therefore their successors the charism of infallibility. It doesn’t mean that an individual bishop or even the pope talking about any old issue can’t be wrong. It means that when the Church pronounces on matters of faith and morals the Holy Spirit has spoken through the Church for Jesus promised the Holy Spirit would guide the Apostles into “all truth”. He did this because he knew, as the generations passed and societies came and went, that new issues would arise. Therefore, the Church’s teachings are those of Christ not of man since he promised he would never abandon his Church and that it would never fail. There have been many Church councils down through the ages that tackled some of our most basic truths, such as the divinity of Christ, the nature of the Trinity, etc. Neither of these (nor other things we hold true) are explicitly mentioned in the Bible. If they were, there would have been no need to hold councils to decide on them.

I would contend, though, that they must at least (and indeed do claim to…) have a Scriptural basis.

The Bible, like the Constitution of the USA or any other such document, is not an authority–it’s a source for authorities to cite to make decisions.

Would you agree then that it is a rule of measure?