Why sola Scriptura?

[Isaiah45_9]

From the date of 2 Peter at least (I suspect that most here will put it in the first century, rather than the more common date among scholars of the early second century–but it was certainly written long before the fourth century) there was a concept of New Testament Scripture. There was some debate about the margins of the canon until the late fourth century, and perhaps to some degree even until the Council of Trent. But it is nonsensical to claim that for that reason there was no such thing as the New Testament.

I agree with this, of course, with the caveat that what they understood as the New Testament did have more books than what we have now.

We can see from Justin Martyr’s 1st Apology that the Early Church was already using writings from the Apostles and that they had already identified some of these writings as Gospels. What we don’t have is a definitive list of the 27 being consistently used for the first 300 years or so.

CHAPTER LXVI – OF THE EUCHARIST.

And this food is called among us Eukaristia [the Eucharist], of which no one is allowed to partake but the man who believes that the things which we teach are true, and who has been washed with the washing that is for the remission of sins, and unto regeneration, and who is so living as Christ has enjoined. For not as common bread and common drink do we receive these; but in like manner as Jesus Christ our Saviour, having been made flesh by the Word of God, had both flesh and blood for our salvation, so likewise have we been taught that the food which is blessed by the prayer of His word, and from which our blood and flesh by transmutation are nourished, is the flesh and blood of that Jesus who was made flesh. **For the apostles, in the memoirs composed by them, which are called Gospels, have thus delivered unto us what was enjoined upon them; **that Jesus took bread, and when He had given thanks, said, “This do ye in remembrance of Me, this is My body;” and that, after the same manner, having taken the cup and given thanks, He said, “This is My blood;” and gave it to them alone. Which the wicked devils have imitated in the mysteries of Mithras, commanding the same thing to be done. For, that bread and a cup of water are placed with certain incantations in the mystic rites of one who is being initiated, you either know or can learn.

CHAPTER LXVII – WEEKLY WORSHIP OF THE CHRIS- TIANS.

And we afterwards continually remind each other of these things. And the wealthy among us help the needy; and we always keep together; and for all things wherewith we are supplied, we bless the Maker of all through His Son Jesus Christ, and through the Holy Ghost. And on the day called Sunday, all who live in cities or in the country gather together to one place, and the memoirs of the apostles or the writings of the prophets are read, as long as time permits; then, when the reader has ceased, the president verbally instructs, and exhorts to the imitation of these good things. Then we all rise together and pray, and, as we before said, when our prayer is ended, bread and wine and water are brought, and the president in like manner offers prayers and thanksgivings, according to his ability, and the people assent, saying Amen; and there is a distribution to each, and a participation of that over which thanks have been given, and to those who are absent a portion is sent by the deacons. And they who are well to do, and willing, give what each thinks fit; and what is collected is deposited with the president, who succours the orphans and widows and those who, through sickness or any other cause, are in want, and those who are in bonds and the strangers sojourning among us, and in a word takes care of all who are in need. But Sunday is the day on which we all hold our common assembly, because it is the first day on which God, having wrought a change in the darkness and matter, made the world; and Jesus Christ our Saviour on the same day rose from the dead. For He was crucified on the day before that of Saturn (Saturday); and on the day after that of Saturn, which is the day of the Sun, having appeared to His apostles and disciples, He taught them these things, which we have submitted to you also for your consideration.

(Bold mine)

 

[Randy_Carson]

But the bigger point is that the methodology is hopelessly flawed. You know that there aren’t 242 Catholic denominations, right? You know that any definition of “denomination” that leads to that result is irrelevant for ecclesiological purposes.

For instance, many Protestant denominations agree doctrinally with each other and cooperate completely with each other. It’s a complicated picture–there isn’t a clear-cut criterion that distinguishes which denominations are functionally the same “church” with each other and which aren’t. (Transitivity doesn’t necessarily apply: for instance, the Episcopal Church is in full communion with the ELCA, and the ELCA is in full communion with several denominations of Reformed origin, but these denominations are not in full communion with the Episcopal Church. The relationships among evangelical denominations and independent congregations are much more complex and hard to define.)

Institutional decentralization is one thing; ecclesial disunity is another. Both exist within Protestantism, and Catholics have a very strong argument from Protestant disunity. But the argument is obscured when Catholics show total ignorance about what a Protestant denomination is, and/or a lack of interest in speaking precisely on the subject.

Edwin

Some Catholics are former Protestants and have personal experience with the issues that divide their faith communities. Others are cradle Catholics who have simply done their homework.

A discussion with an ignorant or lazy Catholic may be more difficult, but the arguments against denominationalism still remain despite that individual’s ability or willingness to articulate them well.

 

[Randy_Carson]

This is simplistic, and in the current era, inaccurate. The vast number of protestants don’t even think about or care about the Catholic Church. They were raised in their current communion. They’re not protesting anyone else.

Yes and no, Jon. Since you are not Catholic, you may not be as sensitive to the anti-Catholic rhetoric that is common in some Protestant circles…even from the pulpits. Of course, you have seen it often enough in this forum.

The name of your Church probably shelters you from some of that, but I’d be willing to bet that if many Baptists knew what you really think about the real presence, for instance, they would be just as suspect of you as they are of me.

 

[Randy_Carson]

Consider that the Roman See has been in Schism with the East for twice as long as the events of the Reformation, one could ask the same question of it.

Since Peter was named by Jesus as the head of the Church, and since we have the Chair of Peter to this day…

 

[Per_Crucem]

Some Catholics are former Protestants and have personal experience with the issues that divide their faith communities. Others are cradle Catholics who have simply done their homework.

A discussion with an ignorant or lazy Catholic may be more difficult, but the arguments against denominationalism still remain despite that individual’s ability or willingness to articulate them well.

True, but the argument also assumes that non-Catholic churches accept denominationalism as valid (depending on how denominationalism is defined).

 

[Per_Crucem]

Yes and no, Jon. Since you are not Catholic, you may not be as sensitive to the anti-Catholic rhetoric that is common in some Protestant circles…even from the pulpits. Of course, you have seen it often enough in this forum.

The name of your Church probably shelters you from some of that, but I’d be willing to bet that if many Baptists knew what you really think about the real presence, for instance, they would be just as suspect of you as they are of me.

You wouldn’t have to bet!

 

[pocohombre]

Yep. That’s what I took my excerpt from, above.

GKC

. What was that joke about lying and statistics ? Did you miss the excerpt where by the same parameters of “denomination” Catholicism has thousands also. You must keep it apples to apples when viewing this study, which has many, many descriptions/parameters in it’s study.

 

[Randy_Carson]

True, but the argument also assumes that non-Catholic churches accept denominationalism as valid (depending on how denominationalism is defined).

Boy, I sure wish they didn’t but from all outward appearances, everyone is okay with the status quo.

 

[pocohombre]

Since the Protestants pride themselves on repudiating infallibility in the Catholic Church, it would seem they also have to repudiate it among themselves. No wonder there are so many differing sects. They all accept that they might be in error, and they are all resigned to swimming against the turbulent waters of uncertainty.

Uncertainty as in the teaching of uncertainty of one’s salvation being proper, as in hoping in salvation but not being certain ? Why is this ok yet it is wrong to apply the same to one’s church ? Why is it wrong for once saved always saved (OSAS) yet a church is once right always right (ORAR)? Isn’t it ironic that they (Protestants) may be humble enough to admit there may be error in their church, even in themselves, yet have such strong certainty of His salvation ?

 

[Per_Crucem]

Boy, I sure wish they didn’t but from all outward appearances, everyone is okay with the status quo.

Not quite. Well, perhaps somewhat so. It is true that many evangelicals in America really have a somewhat laissez-faire attitude toward differing denominations. I can only speak from my own perspective as a Lutheran and say that all other “denominations” are in error. But I don’t expect I will be ending a multiplication of church bodies by saying so.

 

[Randy_Carson]

Uncertainty as in the teaching of uncertainty of one’s salvation being proper, as in hoping in salvation but not being certain ? Why is this ok yet it is wrong to apply the same to one’s church ? Why is it wrong for once saved always saved (OSAS) yet a church is once right always right (ORAR)? Isn’t it ironic that they (Protestants) may be humble enough to admit there may be error in their church, even in themselves, yet have such strong certainty of His salvation ?

Well, let’s see…

Could it be that there is scriptural evidence that Jesus did intend to build an infallible Church? :yup:

And could it be that there is scriptural evidence that salvation can be lost? :yup:

 

[Charlemagne_II]

And could it be that there is scriptural evidence that salvation can be lost?

Matthew 25

The Judgment of the Nations.* 31f “When the Son of Man comes in his glory, and all the angels with him, he will sit upon his glorious throne, 32g and all the nations* will be assembled before him. And he will separate them one from another, as a shepherd separates the sheep from the goats. 33He will place the sheep on his right and the goats on his left. 34Then the king will say to those on his right, ‘Come, you who are blessed by my Father. Inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world. 35h For I was hungry and you gave me food, I was thirsty and you gave me drink, a stranger and you welcomed me, 36naked and you clothed me, ill and you cared for me, in prison and you visited me.’ 37Then the righteous* will answer him and say, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry and feed you, or thirsty and give you drink? 38When did we see you a stranger and welcome you, or naked and clothe you? 39When did we see you ill or in prison, and visit you?’ 40i And the king will say to them in reply, ‘Amen, I say to you, whatever you did for one of these least brothers of mine, you did for me.’ 41* j Then he will say to those on his left, ‘Depart from me, you accursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels. 42k For I was hungry and you gave me no food, I was thirsty and you gave me no drink, 43a stranger and you gave me no welcome, naked and you gave me no clothing, ill and in prison, and you did not care for me.’ 44* Then they will answer and say, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry or thirsty or a stranger or naked or ill or in prison, and not minister to your needs?’ 45He will answer them, ‘Amen, I say to you, what you did not do for one of these least ones, you did not do for me.’ 46l And these will go off to eternal punishment, but the righteous to eternal life.”

 

[Charlemagne_II]

**Randy

Could it be that there is scriptural evidence that Jesus did intend to build an infallible Church?**

If there is no infallible Church, the logical conclusion is that EVERYBODY may be wrong about Christ.

Protestantism opens the door to agnosticism and atheism.

 

[benjohnson]

If there is no infallible Church, the logical conclusion is that EVERYBODY may be wrong about Christ.

If one of your premises is that “only a perfect church leads to Christ” then your conclusion is correct. The Lutheran premise is that a “church where the Gospel is preaches and the Sacraments are administered can lead to Christ even if the church is a mess” would not necessarily lead to such a conclusion.

 

[Charlemagne_II]

**ben

If one of your premises is that “only a perfect church leads to Christ” then your conclusion is correct. The Lutheran premise is that a “church where the Gospel is preaches and the Sacraments are administered can lead to Christ even if the church is a mess” would not necessarily lead to such a conclusion. **

If by “mess” you mean the teaching of false doctrine everywhere, I don’t think either Christ or the Holy Spirit would stand for that. Somewhere in Christianity there must be lodged an infallible guide to understanding Christ and salvation.

Matthew 16:18 King James Version (KJV)

“And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.”

Surely the gates of hell must inclusively refer to false teachings!

 

[KP3243]

**Randy

Could it be that there is scriptural evidence that Jesus did intend to build an infallible Church?**

If there is no infallible Church, the logical conclusion is that EVERYBODY may be wrong about Christ.

Protestantism opens the door to agnosticism and atheism.

This is always been a concern of mine. Where the Church is strong and the significant majority we don’t have wavering public opinion on things and governments and legislation reflect Christ teachings. Protestants seem to target Catholic countries like the Philippines where they don’t believe people are saved because they are from the evil Catholic church and it opens Pandora ’s Box to everything. If the Catholics are not right, then everything they teach can be subject to interpretation like their stance on abortion being wrong. Europe is dying right now because no one knows what truth is any more.

 

[benjohnson]

If by “mess” you mean the teaching of false doctrine everywhere, I don’t think either Christ or the Holy Spirit would stand for that.

You’re assuming that my acknowledgement of my church’s failures centers around doctrine. Thankfully for me, that’s not the case.

If I did think that way, I’d wouldn’t be Lutheran. Our failures are more mundane.

The main problem I see with the Catholic idea of “the perfect church” is that when a Catholic lay person doesn’t experience that perfection - in a mumbling priest, or noisy children at mass, or in various slings and arrows, then they sometimes begin to doubt God’s perfection as well.

I’m not sure if this just a problem I see in my local (rather secular) area, so I can’t claim that this is a universal problem at all.

 

[Charlemagne_II]

**KP

Europe is dying right now because no one knows what truth is any more. **

Right. Actions have consequences. Inaction also has consequences.

 

[Charlemagne_II]

**ben

You’re assuming that my acknowledgement of my church’s failures centers around doctrine. Thankfully for me, that’s not the case.**

Then you believe your Church’s doctrines are infallible?

 

[Per_Crucem]

This is always been a concern of mine. Where the Church is strong and the significant majority we don’t have wavering public opinion on things and governments and legislation reflect Christ teachings. Protestants seem to target Catholic countries like the Philippines where they don’t believe people are saved because they are from the evil Catholic church and it opens Pandora ’s Box to everything. If the Catholics are not right, then everything they teach can be subject to interpretation like their stance on abortion being wrong. Europe is dying right now because no one knows what truth is any more.

You mean like France, Spain, Ireland, Belgium, and Italy? Those bastions of Protestantism?