Cons of sola scriptura
- Thread starter Theatreguy18
- Start date
Soyeong
Well-Known Member
- Mar 10, 2015
- 12,433
- 4,605
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Messianic
- Marital Status
- Single
Sola scriptura does not suggest that you shouldn't seek help to understand the Bible, but rather it says that if there is a conflict between the Bible and what someone days, then the Bible is the final authority.
Upvote
0
There is a question which has perplexed me for several years (and I mean no disrespect, I am just curious).
When all truth is contained in the Bible, and everything in the Bible is to be interpreted literally, what do evangelical ministers study in their years in seminary?
Even literature majors spend much of their time interpreting, postulating theses, comparing different works of literature, etc. But if there is no interpretation, postulation of theses, comparisons with other religious texts, theorizing, etc. what do they study?
I can understand what Bible Study groups study in evangelical churches, and have even participated in a few here and there. They are applying the words in the Bible to their own lives (which to me is much more fruitful than pedagogical studies, anyway). But seminary isn't Bible study. What do they study?
When all truth is contained in the Bible, and everything in the Bible is to be interpreted literally, what do evangelical ministers study in their years in seminary?
Even literature majors spend much of their time interpreting, postulating theses, comparing different works of literature, etc. But if there is no interpretation, postulation of theses, comparisons with other religious texts, theorizing, etc. what do they study?
I can understand what Bible Study groups study in evangelical churches, and have even participated in a few here and there. They are applying the words in the Bible to their own lives (which to me is much more fruitful than pedagogical studies, anyway). But seminary isn't Bible study. What do they study?
Upvote
0
Soyeong
Well-Known Member
- Mar 10, 2015
- 12,433
- 4,605
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Messianic
- Marital Status
- Single
One of the wonderful things about the Bible is that it had simple concepts that anyone can grasp, but at the same time it has such depth that people can study it their entire lives and still be learning. God wants us to always seek after Him, to keep our focus always on Him, to learning about Him, do His will, and to form a relationship with Him based on faith. If the Bible didn't have such depth, then it would be easier to get distracted by something else and lose our focus on Him.
The problem is that the Bible should not always be interpreted literally. For instance, when Jesus said to cut off your hand if it was causing you to sin, we need to interpret whether Jesus was using hyperbolic language to emphasize the seriousness of sin and was wanting us to remove the things from our lives that are causing us to sin, or whether Jesus was expecting us to start chopping off our limbs. Often times when something is translated from one language to another things can get lost in translation, especially if there is more than one step involved. For instance, a Hebrew idiom might get translated literally into Greek and then by the time it is translated into English, the words mean something very different than what was intended to be communicated. Sometimes words can have a wide range of meanings or two different people can understand a word differently. For example, in this thread Catholics are meaning something different by "sola scriptura" than Protestants are, so we're having communication problems.
Studying the Jewish cultural context of the Bible can help give a better understanding of how the original audiences understood it. For instance, if you don't take an honor/shame culture into account and assume that they think like you do in an individualistic culture, then you're not going to understand what Jesus was talking about when he said to turn the other cheek. Knowing about things like Jewish inheritance laws gives a fuller understanding of the parable of the Prodigal Son, which should really be called the parable of the Lost Sons.
Christianity also has a very rich intellectual heritage that many people who haven't studied it may not even be aware of. For instance, how much do you know about Augustine or Aquinas? In my opinion, Aquinas is one of the most underrated people in history. How much do you know about how Christian thought has changed over the centuries? How much do you know about what Christianity has done over the centuries?
You can also go to seminary to learn how to be a Pastor or a Priest, how to put together a sermon, how to deliver a sermon, how to deal with conflicts within a church, how to minister to your flock, how to run the administrative aspect of a church, how to lead, how to delegate, etc.
Last edited:
Upvote
0
- Jun 15, 2015
- 512
- 126
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Episcopalian
- Marital Status
- Single
- Politics
- US-Democrat
Upvote
0
As with the writers of the original documents of Scripture, the translators of Septuagint, the KJV translators were inspired to by God as they performed their duties as translators.
That has nothing to do with what I am saying.
Upvote
0
Soyeong
Well-Known Member
- Mar 10, 2015
- 12,433
- 4,605
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Messianic
- Marital Status
- Single
I think faith alone is a misleading concept. Faith is an action, so it is not just saying that you trust someone, but it acting in a way that demonstrates that you do. For instance, Hebrews 11 is full of examples of people who demonstrated their faith by acting in obedience to God. If you say that you trust someone, but you refuse to take a risk and act in a way that demonstrates it, then do you really trust them? So faith can not be properly understood apart from works, but it is not the works that save us, lest any man should boast. Rather, we are saved by being in the right relationship with God, which is based on faith and love. Good works are not an outflowing of our eternal faith in our salvation, but of our day to day faith in God to lead us through each day. So good works are not about our justification, but are about our sanctification, as we are transformed by God by grace through faith and by the leading of the Holy Spirit to be more like Christ in his obedience to God.
Upvote
0
And without tradition you have no scripture. I am not sure why this is difficult for you.
It has been tradition that has said which scriptures are true.
Upvote
0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums
I think we rely on the Spirit to lead us into all truth (regarding the Word). The Spirit of Christ is not tradition but a Person.
Basically, you are saying if you don't see any relief for a scripture that you don't understand then you can add to or take away from the Scriptures.
Last edited:
Upvote
0
Catherineanne
Well-Known Member
- Sep 1, 2004
- 22,924
- 4,645
- Country
- United Kingdom
- Faith
- Anglican
- Marital Status
- Widowed
Upvote
0
The negative side-effects come from trying to combine false doctrines like the law of sin and death and the need for atonement with the gift of grace. They do not belong together.
Upvote
0
Elder 111
Member
- Mar 12, 2010
- 5,104
- 110
- Faith
- Christian
- Marital Status
- Married
Do you really believe that Jesus meant for us to remove our eyes or hands? This argument is baseless for suggesting that we need tradition. If we are to accept your interpretation here God would have every Christian blind and without hands. Jesus was not talking about actually deforming ourselves, He was speaking of self control and surrender to him.
Upvote
0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums
Albion
Facilitator
Thank you! No, I don't do that any more than Roman Catholics or members of other Catholic churches do.
Certainly not. There is no conflict there at all, nor does believing in Scripture Alone mean to do such a thing, although most people who denigrate Sola Scriptura love to think that this is automatically what is done.
OK. That's what I believe. I guess I'm glad to be declared part of the "norm."
I'm surprised to have you say this, considering that I have answered dozens and dozens of posters who insist that Scripture is NOT sufficient for all essential doctrine and attacking me for thinking that it is.
Upvote
0
Albion
Facilitator
What you are not understanding is that you HAVE Scripture, the Word of God, divine revelation. YOU HAVE IT. Yes, we can talk about who first recognized it as the Word of God, but we all now HAVE IT!
What are you going to do with it then--set it aside in favor of making doctrine out of custom, speculation, and legend??
And why would anyone want to do that?
Last edited:
Upvote
0
Thank you! No, I don't do that any more than Roman Catholics or members of other Catholic churches do.
Certainly not. There is no conflict there at all, nor does believing in Scripture Alone mean to do such a thing, although most people who denigrate Sola Scriptura love to think that this is automatically what is done.
OK. That's what I believe. I guess I'm glad to be declared part of the "norm."
I'm surprised to have you say this, considering that I have answered dozens and dozens of posters who insist that Scripture is NOT sufficient for all essential doctrine and attacking me for thinking that it is.
If Scripture was inspired by the Holy Ghost then only those with the Holy Ghost can understand it.
Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation. (the interpretation comes from the Spirit of God). For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost. (2Pe 1:20-21)
and why is that?
Now we have received, not the spirit of the world, but the spirit which is of God; that we might know the things that are freely given to us of God. Which things also we speak, not in the words which man's wisdom teacheth, but which the Holy Ghost teacheth; comparing spiritual things with spiritual. But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned. (1Co 2:12-14)
Scripture AND the Holy Spirit are essential for understanding the things that are freely given to us of God.
Howbeit in vain do they worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men. (Mar 7:7)
And he said unto them, Full well ye reject the commandment of God, that ye may keep your own tradition. (Mar 7:9)
Last edited:
Upvote
0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums
Albion
Facilitator
Since you seem to have meant that comment for me, my reply is that, yes, what you say is reasonable and in keeping with Scripture.
Well, that's about "prophesy," not everything that's in Scripture, you know; but I basically agree that private interpretation is dangerous, no matter whether it's done by Catholics, Protestants, or the unaffiliated.
Upvote
0
Similar threads
