Why Sola Scriptura fails

[joe371]

Somewhat analogous to theoretical science and applied science. Applied science puts into practice what is known in theory. A physical manifestation of and connection to spiritual truth. ** The Church can only practice what is revealed by God**.

 

[Simka]

If everything that is necessary for a Christian’s salvation is found in the holy bible then what’s the church’s role, in terms of salvation, in your opinion? It should be the same as it was in the 1st century…

Joe, you oversimplified what I said. It’s not that “everything” necessary is found in the Bible. The knowledge necessary is contained therein.

The church’s role? That, too, is contained in Scripture. The church exists for those who are not yet its members. We should all be disciples who make disciples. The church I’m now attending tries to live up to its vision statement: “United by Christ’s love, we share Him with the world.”

 

[joe371]

Joe, you oversimplified what I said. It’s not that “everything” necessary is found in the Bible. The knowledge necessary is contained therein.

The church’s role? That, too, is contained in Scripture. The church exists for those who are not yet its members. We should all be disciples who make disciples. The church I’m now attending tries to live up to its vision statement: “United by Christ’s love, we share Him with the world.”

Oops…I did not mean to oversimplify…I understand… After all the church is called the pillar and foundation of truth, so it is a critical part of the faith, regardless of denomination.

 

[Nicea325]

Joe, that depends on whether you want to talk about the 16th century articulation of SS, that preceded the Council of Trent, or if you’re trying to wrestle with any of the more modern applications of it. As it was articulated by the Reformers (Luther and his contemporaries) it was quite simple: “Scripture contains all knowledge necessary for salvation and holy living.”

It did not attempt to invalidate the use of church tradition, or wise counsel, or any other source, in determining what Scripture meant by what it said. It did not require study in isolation, separated from any other resources, to learn what Scripture taught. What it did say was that no extrabiblical authority should be recognized as being empowered to overrule the Inspired Word of God. And again, specifically in the matter of one’s salvation, Scripture alone was both necessary and sufficient; no doctrine supplemental to Biblical content was required to be accepted or believed.

In response, for the first time in its history, the church said, “Not true!”

And since then, there have been many re-interpretations of SS, using the same Latin name, but sometimes so far removed as to make it difficult to see the connection with the underlying original.

Which you have yet to provide a single ancient document showing us “the” church which declared,defined and ratified this “original” definition of SS.

Still waiting to read this “knock-out” document clearly proving SS existed and was ratified.

 

[PRmerger]

I do not believe anyone knows exactly what it means.

Yes. I think it is an evanescent ideal that changes as the refutation arises.

 

[Nicea325]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Simka
I regret I wasn’t here then … it would have been good to read something intellectual in that covered ground. But it probably would not have been as entertaining as “wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong” – unless that was your style then, too.

All I asked for from you was a rational discussion, instead of belligerent bluster. I’m sorry if that’s too much to expect from you.

BTW – you haven’t offered one shred of factual evidence or data to legitimize your insistence that I was wrong … only prejudice.

Nicea325:
With all due respect, I did offer intellectual insight, whether you care to read it or acknowledge it or flat out ignore it makes no difference to me. I do not need to provide a shred of evidence because countless of ECF have said enough and again…NOT ONE ever promotes,advocates, defends, or writes exhaustively on the bogus belief called SS. More important, SS never ever was ecumenically declared a doctrine or principle to be practiced…PERIOD! Equally important, where are the attacks by heretical sects attacking SS as unorthodox belief and yet being defended HEAVILY by ONE ECF as being an orthodox doctrine? NO WHERE-PERIOD!

The mother of all doctrines/principles yet is virtually ignored at ALL ecumenical councils? Open your eyes.

Simka…well? Would you kindly show me ONE early church father’s support, promotion of SS and defending it against heretics as a orthodox doctrine or principle? Who supported him? Name one ecumenical council endorsing SS as an Apostolic Deposit of Faith?

 

[Porknpie]

holy moly! 27 pages?! I’m the OP, but I don’t think I could keep up with all this. I haven’t looked at it since page 5 I think. haha.

Scanning the thread, **I find it funny to hear Protestants debating Sola Scriptura. **

KEP,

SS is debated by protestants, because by removing scripture from the faith that produced it, all kinds of errors occur…and none of them agree on what scripture is saying. You’ve heard the issues before.

• salvation by faith alone or is faith made complete by works as the bible says?
• sacramental baptism or not?
• infant baptism or not?
• the Real Presence of Christ in the Eucharist …or symbolic not?
• Once saved, always saved…or not?
• have to keep the commandments or were the Lords words only a suggestion?
• do we have to forgive another?
• Saturday or Sunday worship?
• 73 books are the written Word of God or 66?
• one visible Church built on St Peter or an invisible church with 42,000 denominations?
  Etc

Again, it all comes down to authority…what was that Church that Jesus built on St Peter…and why and how would a Church 1500 to 2000 years later lay claim to being that Church…? Especially one that Christ himself said he would lead to all Truth and would be with until the end of time.

 

[PRmerger]

For in many things we all !!!] offend πταίω = err, make a mistake]. If any man offend not in word, the same is a perfect man." That seems to call into question the whole concept of infallibility of one man.

You seem to be operating under a misapprehension that “perfect” is synonymous with the charism of infallibility.

 

[Simka]

… the church is called the pillar and foundation of truth, so it is a critical part of the faith, regardless of denomination.

Absolutely … so long as we realize that as a pillar, and as a foundation, it does not exist for its own benefit. It is a basic support structure for something even greater.

 

[Nicea325]

Yes. I think it is an evanescent ideal that changes as the refutation arises.

Not according to Simka. Simka clearly believes there is an “original” defintion of SS and the early church practiced it?

Still waiting to read those ancient sources clearly telling us the place and date when SS was ratified at a local synod or ecuemnical council giving us the “original” definition of SS?

 

[ConstantineTG]

So after 2,000 years, God has only protected 2.3 million people from error-- even though LCMS admit the Holy Spirit doesn’t protect them from error.

Don’t laugh at this, the number might actually be smaller. As history would show us, those “within” the Church, whether Catholic or Orthodox, often do not act accordingly and are often the persecutors themselves. We may claim our respective Churches have the fullness of truth, but most of us hardly act like it.

 

[KEP1983]

Don’t laugh at this, the number might actually be smaller. As history would show us, those “within” the Church, whether Catholic or Orthodox, often do not act accordingly and are often the persecutors themselves. We may claim our respective Churches have the fullness of truth, but most of us hardly act like it.

Correct, we have access to the truth, but we don’t accept it (and thus don’t act like we know it).

That’s much different than saying the other 2 billion “Christians” simply don’t have access to the truth.

The LCMS believe they are the only ones with the real truth. All the Catholics and Protestants are wrong-- they alone are right.

That means the millions of people who are seeking the truth can’t really find it, because the likelihood they’ll find an LCMS Church is very very small. On top of that, the Holy Spirit seems to lead very very few people into the LCMS, and leads more people into heretical Churches, like the other 40,000 Protestant denominations or the Catholic Church.

The Holy Spirit is also incapable of protecting the truth, because the Protestant sects and Catholic Church have so massively outnumbered the LCMS. The “true” theology of the LCMS is unheard of by most Christians throughout history and the world; so the vast majority have no access to it. I guess God can’t protect the Church from error, nor can He lead many true believers to the correct Church.

So either the Holy Spirit purposely leads people into heretical Churches, or the LCMS isn’t the true Church.

 

[layman2]

[Disclaimer: the examples I give below are not meant to start a separate debate on those topics; I simply bring them up to ILLUSTRATE my point.]

Sola Scriptura means Scripture has the last word, that’s all. It doesn’t mean what so many people here misinterpret it to mean. If I’m told, for example, that I can’t eat meat on Friday, I can confidently say, nowhere in Scripture (O.T. or N.T.) does it teach that, even by implication (on the contrary, there are verses teaching just the opposite, viz. 1 Tim. 4:3 & Rom. 14:1-3) . If I’m told that priests have to be celibate, on the contrary (issue of non-existence of priests in the N.T. aside), the Scriptures ASSUME that the shepherds of the flock will be married and, what’s more, have children!! (1 Tim.3:2 & 4; Titus 1:6).

Food will not commend us to God. We are no worse off if we do not eat, and no better off if we do. (1 Cor. 8:8)

So, the ultimate test of what is binding on the believer is always God’s Holy Bible. As Jesus said, Scripture can not be broken (Jn. 10:35).

 

[joe371]

Absolutely … so long as we realize that as a pillar, and as a foundation, it does not exist for its own benefit. It is a basic support structure for something even greater.

 

[Simka]

Sola Scriptura means Scripture has the last word, that’s all. It doesn’t mean what so many people here misinterpret it to mean.

Layman, as a general principle I agree with you that Scripture is the ultimate authority … has the last word. But I have a significantly different take on what “Sola Scriptura” means – or rather, what it meant when it was the rallying cry of the reformers in the 16th century. (cf. message #403). If you care to look at that, I’d be interested in your further comments.

 

[joe371]

Layman, as a general principle I agree with you that Scripture is the ultimate authority … has the last word. But I have a significantly different take on what “Sola Scriptura” means – or rather, what it meant when it was the rallying cry of the reformers in the 16th century. (cf. message #403). If you care to look at that, I’d be interested in your further comments.

How can a collection of books aka the bible, have the last word. the holy bible cannot speak…Just joking around, kind of…My sister always says that too, but I never hear the bible speak, just her speaking her “correct” interpretation of the bible.

 

[Simka]

How can a collection of books aka the bible, have the last word. the holy bible cannot speak…Just joking around, kind of…My sister always says that too, but I never hear the bible speak, just her speaking her “correct” interpretation of the bible.

Joe, as I’m sure you recognize, attributing ultimate authority to the Inspired Word of God does not, at the same time, imply you will always immediately have an accurate understanding of what it says.

Let me offer an analogy. A police officer pulls you over and gives you a ticket for speeding. He’s interpreting the local Traffic Act as he understands it. But he’s not the ultimate authority. You can take your case to the court system, and a learned judge will decide the case, based on the law. You and the officer may both learn something about it you didn’t know before … but the written law is the ultimate authority in this situation. Expose yourself to it often enough and your understanding of it will improve dramatically.,

 

[joe371]

Joe, as I’m sure you recognize, attributing ultimate authority to the Inspired Word of God does not, at the same time, imply you will always immediately have an accurate understanding of what it says.

Me? No I agree.

Let me offer an analogy. A police officer pulls you over and gives you a ticket for speeding. He’s interpreting the local Traffic Act as he understands it. But he’s not the ultimate authority. You can take your case to the court system, and a learned judge will decide the case, based on the law. You and the officer may both learn something about it you didn’t know before … but the written law is the ultimate authority in this situation. Expose yourself to it often enough and your understanding of it will improve dramatically.,

Good analogy and probably the reason why Matthew 18 tells people, in the end, if they cannot resolve their differences, to take it to the church which has the authority to decide the case based on things like the infallible word of God. Of course I would not trust their decision if I didn’t believe that God was working behind the scenes ensuring in an ineffable way, that the decision aligns with what God wants. That is the same reason why I trust that the bible is the word of God. God preserves and transmits truth via His church, again, why we can trust the holy writ. Well, that’s what I believe, (have faith in) and if I didn’t I probably would not be a Christian. Of course I respect everyone’s beliefs because I respect every person.

 

[Hleb2332]

2 Timothy 3:16-17 All Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness; so that the man of God may be adequate, equipped for every good work.

Hebrews 4:12 For the word of God is living and active and sharper than any two-edged sword and piercing as far as the division of soul and spirit, of both joints and marrow, and able to judge the thoughts and intentions of the heart.

James 1:22 But prove yourselves doers of the word, and not merely hearers who delude themselves.

1 Peter 2:1-2 Therefore, putting aside all malice and all deceit and hypocrisy and envy and all slander, 2. like newborn babies, long for the pure milk of the word, so that by it you may grow in respect to salvation.

We recieve God’s Word through the Bible. I prefer to put my faith in something that I know is from God, than traditions of men, most of which were started years after the writings in the Bible.

 

[joe371]

2 Timothy 3:16-17 All Scripture

is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness; so that the man of God may be adequate, equipped for every good work.

All scripture, not only scripture…

Hebrews 4:12 For the word of God