A verse that supports Sola Scriptura

[Peter]

In the OP, it was stated "Moses TOLD this to the Israelites." Funny, why didn't he READ it to them?

Dragon87 you are very young and very zealous (the two usualy go hand in hand). Never lose the zeal, but be open to new instruction. As you mature, you will see the world with different eyes. Your opinions on a lot of things will change. Don't be so quick to draw your sword. Remember, it's better to be silent and thought a fool, than to speak and remove all doubt.

Let me recommend a very good book, "Whose Bible Is It". It is written by Jaroslav Pelikan, a Sterling Professor of History at Yale. This book was awarded the John W. Kluge Prize for Lifetime Achievement in Human Science. Because of this book, Dr. Pelikan received an honorary Doctor of Laws degree from the Jewish Theological Seminary of America, and Dr. Pelikan is an Orthodox Christian. The ISBN number for this book is 0670033855 and was published through Viking Press.


The Reader Peter

 

[nephilimiyr]

"Do not add to what I command you and do not subtract from it, but keep the commands of the LORD your God that I give you." Deuteronomy 4:2

Opinions? In relation to the verse please.

I haven't read through this thread but just want to reply to this post.

I believe and adhere to sola scriptura but Dragons87, what Catholics say is that what's in the Bible is not all of God's word. I know what you're thinking and why you posted what you posted but no matter what you find in the Bible that you think may prove sola scriptura is the way to go Catholics will always disagree.

 

[albertmc]

"Do not add to what I command you and do not subtract from it, but keep the commands of the LORD your God that I give you." Deuteronomy 4:2

Moses told this to the Israelites just before they were going to enter the Promised Land. Everything regarding the Jewish faith is written into the Torah. Even traditions were written into the law, traditions such as detailed descriptions of the erection of the Tabernacle. Everything we need to know is in the Word. Anything else we add on, the artificial traditions, are just - add-ons, when we were specifically told not to add on anything to God's commands.

Opinions? In relation to the verse please.

This is one of the sillier defenses I have seen. Are we to discard every Biblical book after the Penteteuch? Are you saying the Saducees were right after all? Then there is no resurrection of the dead and no Messiah and I guess we can all stop posting here.

This passage is not making a general statement but a statement on not altering the Law as given to Moses. It also says nothing about sola scriptura. It states to keep all the commands as given but does not once mention the source of those commands.

In fact, it could not be endorsing sola scriptura since this event preceded the writing of Deuteronomy (else how could it be in Deuternonomy?). It is known that many things the Israelites kept to were included in liturgical books used in worship and not in their Scriptures. You even see some of these books mentioned in Scripture itself. Learn some history and try again.

 

[lismore]

Revelation 22:18 NIV
I warn everyone who hears the words of the prophecy of this book: If anyone adds anything to them, God will add to him the plagues described in this book.

 

[Oblio]

The operative word being book. There are other problems with your personal interpretation, but the above should suffice.

 

[albertmc]

""By mouth" may mean Sunday sermons, based on the Scripture."



Then there would be no point in mentioning it, would there? Tradition literally means what is handed on. The Bible is in fact part of tradition. Also remember that Jesus did not condemn tradition nor even "traditions of men" but condemned "traditions of men which nullify the Word of God."

You are trying to force a theological argument from the Western Church in the late medieval period onto the Second Temple/New Testament context. People didn't think in those categories then and to make them do so is anachronistic.

 

[Peter]

Revelation 22:18 NIV
I warn everyone who hears the words of the prophecy of this book: If anyone adds anything to them, God will add to him the plagues described in this book.

That's why I stay away from THAT BOOK!

The Reader Peter

 

[Borealis]

"Do not add to what I command you and do not subtract from it, but keep the commands of the LORD your God that I give you." Deuteronomy 4:2

Moses told this to the Israelites just before they were going to enter the Promised Land. Everything regarding the Jewish faith is written into the Torah. Even traditions were written into the law, traditions such as detailed descriptions of the erection of the Tabernacle. Everything we need to know is in the Word. Anything else we add on, the artificial traditions, are just - add-ons, when we were specifically told not to add on anything to God's commands.

Opinions? In relation to the verse please.

Well, until you can tell me the exact details of how to prepare and make a sin offering, strictly from the Bible itself, your assumption about everything being written in the Bible is erroneous to start with.

As for the verse, if Deuteronomy states that we're not to add or subtract from the commands, then why is the New Testament, which is a definite major addition, included in the Bible in the first place? It changed quite a few things from the old law, didn't it?

Maybe it changed the rule that everything needs to be written down, too.

 

[lismore]

I haven't read through this thread but just want to reply to this post.

I believe and adhere to sola scriptura but Dragons87, what Catholics say is that what's in the Bible is not all of God's word. I know what you're thinking and why you posted what you posted but no matter what you find in the Bible that you think may prove sola scriptura is the way to go Catholics will always disagree.

Well if Catholics say they have additional revealation we can apply the test of the berean and search the scriptures. If their doctrines conflict with existing scripture then its out.

If they say Mary had an Immaculate conception we see the scriptures where Jesus had brothers and sisters. OUT

If they say the pope is infallible we see the scriptures that say only God is infallible. OUT

If they say to have a separate priesthood we read the scriptures that say all believers are priests and kings. OUT

If they say to have a celibate group we can read in the scripture where Paul says the false group will arise who will forbid people to marry. We read that peter had a wife. OUT

If they say pray to mary, with, from, at or whatever with mary we read in the scripture where jesus says how to pray. never in the name of Mary or invoking Mary or other deceased believers in any way. OUT.

If you read the scriptures catholicism falls. It can only stand if you add to the scriptures.

 

[albertmc]

Revelation 22:18 NIV
I warn everyone who hears the words of the prophecy of this book: If anyone adds anything to them, God will add to him the plagues described in this book.

I am not aware of any church adding words to the Book of Revelation. Do remember that the Scriptures would not be "a book" for some time. He was referring to the prophecies within the Book of Revelation. This is what happens with out-of-context prooftexting.

 

[lismore]

I am not aware of any church adding words to the Book of Revelation. Do remember that the Scriptures would not be "a book" for some time. He was referring to the prophecies within the Book of Revelation. This is what happens with out-of-context prooftexting.

Heres a point about out of context prooftexting:

Revelation 12:1 NIV
A great and wondrous sign appeared in heaven: a woman clothed with the sun, with the moon under her feet and a crown of twelve stars on her head.

The late Pope said this referred to Mary. This view doesnt fit the chronology of revelation. So if you search
the scriptures with the rule of using scripture to interpret scripture you find the same picture, the sun, the moon and the stars have appeared before.

Josephs Dream:


Genesis 37:9 NIV
Then he had another dream, and he told it to his brothers. "Listen," he said, "I had another dream, and this time the sun and moon and eleven stars were bowing down to me."

He being the 12th star.

From scripture, the woman clothed with the sun is Israel. And this fits with the chronology in revealation.

 

[Dragons87]

Dude, go ahead and believe what you want. It make no difference what I say, you are going to anyways. Have fun proving your point to yourself.

My interpretation is valid. Realise in that verse that traditions taught through "word of mouth" is not compared to the Word of God, but compared to "letters".

Paul is simply outlining the methods in which these traditions were taught to the Church, not holding the "word of mouth" and "letters" to have the same authority as the Word of God.

 

[Dragons87]

Another argument:

God doesn't really like the human mouth (not in the sense of creation, but what comes out of it). In many many occasions, we are told that the mouth is capable of doing more evil than anything else.

This is relevant, for the words in a book does not change as easily as the words from a mouth changes. We forget, we misspeak, we lie, but a book, if left alone, never changes. That's why we like to establish written contracts. That's why God contracted with us with written Old and New Testaments. If there was something so important that God wants us to know, I suppose He would want us to write it down so we won't forget, or misspeak about.

I'm not advocating throwing away traditions, but questioning the validity of holding oral-passed traditions as high as the written Book. Just logical. And I'm still open to informed and intelligent arguments. As I always should be. If in any case you feel that I've been arrogant or proud, please strike me down.

 

[Tonks]

Stepping outside of the box here for a second and attempting to find verses to prove or disprove sola scriptura one needs to look at the actual purposes of the Bible.

For example, Luke acknowledges that the faithful have already received the teachings of Christ and the Gospel is written only so that they will learn the certainty of the things that have been received - Luke is writing to verify oral tradition.

There are also numerous instances where the apostles, particularly Paul, refer to writings outside of what we now know as the Bible to impart teaching or to resolve certain issues.

In 2 Thess Paul again instructs individuals to obey tradition by noting that individuals are to keep away from those that lead an "unruly life" not in accordance with the "tradition that you have received from us."

Phil 4:9 notes that tradition is passed to future generations and it is incumbent on the coming generations to follow in the footsteps of their forebearers.

In many instances in the NT, there are numerous instructions given that rely on oral tradition that would be familar to the contemporary listener but none of which can be found in the OT - particularly all of the OT allusions in Jude.

 

[Dragons87]

Tonks: I concede that the correct traditions, a correct a way of life, is definitely important for Christian life.

But - according to the summaries you put, none of them:

1. say that these traditions are from God - "traditions that you have received from us (humans)"; unlike Moses, who specifically says that the law is from God.

2. say that these traditions hold the same standing as the Word.

3. say exactly what those traditions are. Again, if traditions were so so so important, wouldn't somebody actually write them down, lest they be forgotten?

Thanks.

 

[Benedicta00]

"Do not add to what I command you and do not subtract from it, but keep the commands of the LORD your God that I give you." Deuteronomy 4:2

Moses told this to the Israelites just before they were going to enter the Promised Land. Everything regarding the Jewish faith is written into the Torah. Even traditions were written into the law, traditions such as detailed descriptions of the erection of the Tabernacle. Everything we need to know is in the Word. Anything else we add on, the artificial traditions, are just - add-ons, when we were specifically told not to add on anything to God's commands.

Opinions? In relation to the verse please.

Then that means the NT is new and added on. If we go by your premise then the NT is invalid.

The thing about Christians is, we are no longer subject to the Jewish way of things. Jesus gave us a Church not a book of doctrine, not a book of laws. The completion, the fulfillment of divine public revelation was given to His Church that supercedes the Jewish way of doing things.

They may have wrote all of their stuff down but Jesus didn’t do it that way, he gave His word to His Church who in turns gives us the written form of that word.

 

[Benedicta00]

Again, if traditions were so so so important, wouldn't somebody actually write them down, lest they be forgotten?

How will they ever be forgotten? The Church has been here since day one teaching them to us and we do have written wittness of them, called the ECF.

 

[Dragons87]

Then that means the NT is new and added on. If we go by your premise then the NT is invalid.

The thing about Christians is, we are no longer subject to the Jewish way of things. Jesus gave us a Church not a book of doctrine, not a book of laws. The completion, the fulfillment of divine public revelation was given to His Church that supercedes the Jewish way of doing things.

They may have wrote all of their stuff down but Jesus didn’t do it that way, he gave His word to His Church who in turns gives us the written form of that word.

Granted. What I'm trying to get at is, if these traditions is so important, why weren't they written down in the Scriptures?

Thanks.

 

[Dragons87]

How will they ever be forgotten? The Church has been here since day one teaching them to us and we do have written wittness of them, called the ECF.

Who knows? There's always a risk in that. The Church has undergone many changes since Day One too, but Scripture hasn't changed (depending on what kind of changes we're talking about, but I'm talking about the quality and validity of God's Word).

Ask yourself. If you had something so important to remember, wouldn't you write it down? Telling others to help you remember is good too, but nothing beats writing things down.

I'm sorry. I'm not familiar with ECF. What is it?

Thanks.

 

[Benedicta00]

Granted. What I'm trying to get at is, if these traditions is so important, why weren't they written down in the Scriptures?

Thanks.

Because the Church is what Christ left, not a book. Do you think Paul, Peter, James, John, Jude and who ever else was writing letters expecting them to become part of a big canon of scripture?

This is what the commission was- TO TEACH not to WRITE. They were teaching by preaching and when they couldn’t be there, they wrote letters.

They were addressing certain issues in each one, they were not per say writing a catechism book. They were handling what they were at the time it came up.