Question about "sola scriptura"

[Wolf_Says]

Can you show me where it says the apostles had the power to 'retain sins' of people? I've never heard that before.

You need to explain yourself better and include scripture. I cannot understand what you are saying? It is very confusing the way that you word things. Without scripture, I can't see where you are coming from at all.

Exactly how am I difficult to understand? Please explain?

 

[South Bound]

[Staff edit]

Because things that are different are not the same. The Catholic Church teaches that she alone possesses the fullness of truth. Now, an outsider can agree or disagree with that proposition but that's irrelevant. A Catholic cannot in good faith disagree with that proposition. The Church's teaching authority is regarded as being infallible with respect to the necessities of belief regarding faith and morals. Forgive me for saying so but this is a degree of authority most Protestant bodies do not claim to possess.

But we're not talking about "Protestant bodies". We're talking about the authority of the Word of God.

For example, the Southern Baptist Convention (for reasons I can't say I fully understand) has all but vilified the consumption of alcohol. This doesn't stop the majority of Southern Baptists I know from imbibing... and their disagreement doesn't somehow rupture their "communion" (for lack of a better term) with the SBC.

Because the SBC [staff edit] took an official stand as an organization against it in 2006 but still recognizes it as a matter of conscience on the individual level.

It's a matter adiaphora and they treat it as such, just as the Bible tells them to.

 

[Wolf_Says]

[Staff edit]

Well for one thing, a whole bunch of different denominations differ on their belief when it comes to baptism (which is a big one).
Also, churches such as the united pentacostal church do not believe in the trinity and that Jesus is it. They are also Sola Scriptura.

Then there is the Eucharist. Some Churches believe that it should be done, some don't. Some believe that it is symbolic, while others believe that it is spiritual.

Then we have calvinism with it's predestination theology, and they claim to be SS as well.

From what I have seen, because my wife's side of the family church hops, the only thing that many protestant churches agree on is the Bible, and Jesus Christ as our Lord and Savior.

Other than that, there are differences between all of them, whether they are small nuances or complete opposites in belief.

If this weren't the case, we would NOT have over 30 thousand Protestant denominations that we see today.

 

[S.O.J.I.A.]

The 12 recieved the power to forgive or retain sins. Different from the keys to the kingdom.

they got that too(john 20:22-23), along with the ability to bind and lose, which is what the keys to the kingdom gave them. I don't expect you to budge on this, as there's WAY too much riding on this unfortunately erroneous interpretation for romanists. the doctrine of the papacy would collapse.

Wrong, SS is about believing that the Bible is the sole authority on earth in regards to salvation, which it is not. SS is believing that if it is not in the Bible it is therefore wrong, however SS is not taught anywhere in the Bible.

SS is the bible being the soul rule of faith and life for followers of Christ because it's the Word of God. Yes, anything that contradicts the Bible, which is God's Word, is indeed wrong and should not be regarded as authoritative or binding on believers.

[Staff edit].

 

[South Bound]

Well for one thing, a whole bunch of different denominations differ on their belief when it comes to baptism (which is a big one).

So, you can't tell us which denominations and what the differences are, either.

Also, churches such as the united pentacostal church do not believe in the trinity and that Jesus is it. They are also Sola Scriptura.

Irrelevant. The claim was "Protestant denominations", not "Protestant denominations and Oneness Pentecostal cults".

Then there is the Eucharist. Some Churches believe that it should be done, some don't. Some believe that it is symbolic, while others believe that it is spiritual.

Again, you don't tell us which denominations or what "differences".

Then we have calvinism with it's predestination theology, and they claim to be SS as well.

Yes, we believe in predestination and adhere to the Biblical praxis of sola scriptura. Did you have a point to make about that

Other than that, there are differences between all of them, whether they are small nuances or complete opposites in belief.

Thank you for that scholarly and persuasive rebuttal.

If this weren't the case, we would NOT have over 30 thousand Protestant denominations that we see today.

Actually, the "33k denominations" lie has been debunked many, many times now. But if you think continuing to spread that [staff edit] makes Catholicism look good then you go right on ahead.

Incidentally, the same source Catholics use to justify this [staff edit] also lists 242 similar divisions within Catholicism. So you might want to work on the 242 divisions within Catholicism before you complain about the dozens of different denominations within Protestantism. Clearly, your doctrine of sola ecclesia isn't working out for you or else you wouldn't have 242 divisions within the Catholic Church.

 

[Wolf_Says]

they got that too(john 20:22-23), along with the ability to bind and lose, which is what the keys to the kingdom gave them. I don't expect you to budge on this, as there's WAY too much riding on this unfortunately erroneous interpretation for romanists. the doctrine of the papacy would collapse.

You just gave me back my own quote to show me....what exactly? I posted that as to show that the apostles had the ability to forgive sins or retain them. Peter was given the keys that allowed him the ability to either bind those on earth and therefore in heaven or lose them on earth and therefore in heaven. These are different.

Retain sins means that they are NOT FORGIVEN by God, to lose means that you are essentially KICKED OUT OF THE CHURCH and therefore kicked out of heaven.

SS is the bible being the soul rule of faith and life for followers of Christ because it's the Word of God. Yes, anything that contradicts the bible, which is God's Word, is indeed wrong and should not be regarded as authoritative or binding on believers.

Which is incorrect because the Bible doesn't claim to be the sole rule of faith and life. The Bible only points to 1 place as the pillar and bulwark of truth, the Church of the living God. 1 Timothy 3:15 " if I am delayed, you may know how one ought to behave in the household of God, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and bulwark of the truth."

Also, there is nothing that the Catholic Church teaches that contradicts the Bible. You have yet to give me a doctrine that contradicts the Bible.

[Staff edit].

Guess what it also doesn't say in the Bible, that God is a Trinity, yet we all know this and accept it as one of the foundational truths of Christianity.

[Staff edit].

 

[thecolorsblend]

they got that too(john 20:22-23), along with the ability to bind and lose, which is what the keys to the kingdom gave them. I don't expect you to budge on this, as there's WAY too much riding on this unfortunately erroneous interpretation for romanists. the doctrine of the papacy would collapse.

Um, many Christian bodies interpret the imperative for clergy to hear confessions and forgive (or not forgive) sins from that passage: Catholics, Eastern Orthodox, Oriental Orthodox, many Anglicans, many Lutherans, etc. This is a very old doctrine, going back to the earliest chapters of the Church.

[Staff edit].

 

[Wolf_Says]

Incidentally, the same source Catholics use to justify this [staff edit] also lists 242 similar divisions within Catholicism. So you might want to work on the 242 divisions within Catholicism before you complain about the dozens of different denominations within Protestantism. Clearly, your doctrine of sola ecclesia isn't working out for you or else you wouldn't have 242 divisions within the Catholic Church.

There are hardly different divisions in the Catholic Church, there are different rites, however these rites are in full communion with the bishop of Rome, and therefore with the Roman Catholic Church.

I am from the Slovak Catholic Church, which is in full communion with the bishop of Rome.

So I fail to see what you are talking about. If they are not in full communion with the bishop of Rome, then they are not part of the Catholic Church. It is a simple as that.

You are trying to compare apples to oranges.

But in regards to the rest of your post, allow me some time to build a list, it will take a while and I am rather busy at the moment.

 

[Fidelibus]

Hello everyone! I am new to Christian Forum and hoping to engage in some healthy and friendly discussions. Being a cradel Catholic, the doctrine of sola scriptura has always been an interest of mine. I have been in many a discussion about sola scriptura with many of my Protestant/non-Catholic friends of mine. Like many of the Protestant and non-Catholic postings I've seen so far on this thread, my sola scripturists friends also believe that the doctrine of sola scriptura teachies that the Bible is complete and that it is all one needs as a sole rule of faith. Along with this, they proclaim that all answers are given by Scripture alone
This is where our discussions become interesting. I have asked them if all answers are given by Scripture to give me the reference to a few Bible passages to no avail. So I am hoping some of the sola scripturists on this forum could. For example, in Matt. 11:21 it says..., "Woe to thee, Corozain...For if in Tyre and Sidon had been worked the miracles that have been worked in you, they would have repented long ago in sackcloth and ashes."

And my question is, What are these miracles in Corozain? Where is the reference? Also in Matt.23:2 it says, "The Scribes and the Pharisees have sat on the chair of Moses." Where is this 'chair of Moses' referenced in Scripture? Again in Matt. 2:23 it says, "And He went and settled in a town called Nazareth; that there might be fulfilled what was spoken through the prophets, He shall be called a Nazarene." In what verse did the prophets say this?
In Acts 20:35 it reads, "In all things I have shown you that by so toiling you ought to help the weak and REMEMBER the Word of the Lord Jesus, that He Himself said, 'It is more blessed to give than to receive.'" Can a sola scripturists show me the verse where Jesus said these words? And one more, in James 4:5 it says,, "Or do you think that the Scripture says in vain, "The Spirit which dwells in you covets unto jealousy." Where does Scripture reference this?

 

[South Bound]

Hello everyone! I am new to Christian Forum and hoping to engage in some healthy and friendly discussions. Being a cradel Catholic, the doctrine of sola scriptura has always been an interest of mine. I have been in many a discussion about sola scriptura with many of my Protestant/non-Catholic friends of mine. Like many of the Protestant and non-Catholic postings I've seen so far on this thread, my sola scripturists friends also believe that the doctrine of sola scriptura teachies that the Bible is complete and that it is all one needs as a sole rule of faith. Along with this, they proclaim that all answers are given by Scripture alone
This is where our discussions become interesting. I have asked them if all answers are given by Scripture to give me the reference to a few Bible passages to no avail. So I am hoping some of the sola scripturists on this forum could. For example, in Matt. 11:21 it says..., "Woe to thee, Corozain...For if in Tyre and Sidon had been worked the miracles that have been worked in you, they would have repented long ago in sackcloth and ashes."

And my question is, What are these miracles in Corozain? Where is the reference? Also in Matt.23:2 it says, "The Scribes and the Pharisees have sat on the chair of Moses." Where is this 'chair of Moses' referenced in Scripture? Again in Matt. 2:23 it says, "And He went and settled in a town called Nazareth; that there might be fulfilled what was spoken through the prophets, He shall be called a Nazarene." In what verse did the prophets say this?
In Acts 20:35 it reads, "In all things I have shown you that by so toiling you ought to help the weak and REMEMBER the Word of the Lord Jesus, that He Himself said, 'It is more blessed to give than to receive.'" Can a sola scripturists show me the verse where Jesus said these words? And one more, in James 4:5 it says,, "Or do you think that the Scripture says in vain, "The Spirit which dwells in you covets unto jealousy." Where does Scripture reference this?

[Staff edit] It isn't that scripture is the sole rule of faith as much as it is the supreme rule of faith, that, being the revealed Word of God, it is the highest authority to which all other spiritual authorities are to defer.

[Staff edit] In fact, we draw our understanding of scripture from 2 Ti 3:16 which says that scripture is " for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness", not for being able to pull out arcane trivia facts to beat your friends on Quizzo night down at the local bar.

[Staff edit].

 

[S.O.J.I.A.]

You just gave me back my own quote to show me....what exactly? I posted that as to show that the apostles had the ability to forgive sins or retain them. Peter was given the keys that allowed him the ability to either bind those on earth and therefore in heaven or lose them on earth and therefore in heaven. These are different.

Retain sins means that they are NOT FORGIVEN by God, to lose means that you are essentially KICKED OUT OF THE CHURCH and therefore kicked out of heaven.

keys to kingdom = ability to bind and lose. all 12 got it. not just peter. Again, I understand you can't budge on that.

[Staff edit].

 

[Wolf_Says]

keys to kingdom = ability to bind and lose. all 12 got it. not just peter. again, I understand you can't budge on that.

So essentially you are not even quoting the right passage. You are talking about Matthew 18:18, and the complete paragraph is "“If your brother sins against you, go and tell him his fault, between you and him alone. If he listens to you, you have gained your brother. 16 But if he does not listen, take one or two others along with you, that every word may be confirmed by the evidence of two or three witnesses. 17 If he refuses to listen to them, tell it to the church; and if he refuses to listen even to the church, let him be to you as a Gentile and a tax collector. 18 Truly, I say to you, whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven. 19 Again I say to you, if two of you agree on earth about anything they ask, it will be done for them by my Father in heaven. 20 For where two or three are gathered in my name, there am I in the midst of them.”

Where Jesus gives some of the authority to the apostles, yet he did not give them the keys. He specifically gave St Peter the keys to the kingdom of heaven and no-one else. Your arguments have proved only that you do not understand the role of Peter in the Church.

[Staff edit].

 

[Wolf_Says]

In fact, we draw our understanding of scripture from 2 Ti 3:16 which says that scripture is " for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness", not for being able to pull out arcane trivia facts to beat your friends on Quizzo night down at the local bar.

So.... you draw it from a verse written by Paul in reference to the Old Testament and have taken it out of context to include the New Testament as well?

And added that, even though that verse says nothing about that we should use the Bible alone, that we should use the Bible alone?

Thanks for the understanding.

 

[S.O.J.I.A.]

So essentially you are not even quoting the right passage.

no I got the right one. matthew 16:19

"And I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven.”

so...again.

keys to the kingdom = binding and loosing


tell you what, you tell me the things scripture says that peter did in his ministry that the other 11 could not do?

 

[Thursday]

No, the Church that he restored according to prophecy was not new because it already existed back in Exodus.

You are mistaken. Jesus said I WILL BUILD, as in future tense.

 

[Thursday]

They could just as easily ask you, if the Catholic doctrine of sola ecclesia is true, then why don't Catholics agree about such things as whether or not Catholics are to pray to Mary or what the purpose of Purgatory is?

Faithful Catholics do agree. The Catholic Church is not responsible for those who call themselves Catholics but don't follow Church teaching.

Protestant churches, on the other hand, teach multiple contradicting dogmas.

For example, you can find protestant churches that teach:

1) Baptism is necessary for salvation
20 Baptism is not necessary for salvation
3) Speaking in tongues is a necessary sign of salvation
4) Speaking in tongues is of the devil
5) Infant Baptism is valid
6) Infant Baptism is not valid
7) Salvation is by faith alone
8) Works must accompany faith for salvation
9) A person once saved is always saved
10) Salvation can be lost.
11) Abortion is a terrible sin
12) Abortion is not a sin

Etc.

These are not minor issues.[/QUOTE]

 

[Thursday]

if you agree with my assessment than it has nothing to do with 2 macabees. it has to do with Paul saying it to be worthless to baptize someone in the name of and unto someone who is dead.

baptizing people for the dead is a Mormon practice.

Paul said no such thing. Regardless, the point here is that Paul is referencing scripture. This scripture was always part of Christianity until the Reformation. Even the King James bible originally contained these books.

Why do you think Luther removed them?

 

[Fidelibus]

[Staff edit]

it isn't that scripture is the sole rule of faith as much as it is the supreme rule of faith, that, being the revealed Word of God, it is the highest authority to which all other spiritual authorities are to defer.

Could you show the Book chapter and verse where Scripture claims this?

[Staff edit].

Now in reguards to 2Tim.3:16, " for teaching, for reproof, for correction and for training in righteousness." The question that arises is, granting that "all Scripture is God-breathed," how do you know which books are inspired Scripture and which books are not? Like Wolf and other Catholics have pointed out, history proves at the time 2 Timothy was composed, not all the N. T. books had even been written. By the time all the books of the N. T. were written, they were being circulated along with numerous other books and epistles of varying quality, all of which vied for the attention of the early Christians. If the "sufficiency" of Scripture of which Paul speaks is a total sufficiency, Scripture should somehow be able to answer the question, "How do you tell which books are inspired Scripture and which aren’t?"

[Staff edit].

 

[South Bound]

For example, you can find protestant churches that teach:

1) Baptism is necessary for salvation

Please name the Protestant denomination that believes baptism is necessary for salvation.

3) Speaking in tongues is a necessary sign of salvation
4) Speaking in tongues is of the devil

Adiaphora. We have the liberty to disagree over those things.

5) Infant Baptism is valid
6) Infant Baptism is not valid

Again, adiaphora.

7) Salvation is by faith alone
8) Works must accompany faith for salvation

Actually, these two things do not contradict one another because one refers to the means of salvation while the second refers to the results of salvation.

9) A person once saved is always saved
10) Salvation can be lost.
11) Abortion is a terrible sin
12) Abortion is not a sin

Each of which we have the liberty to disagree with.

What's next? Are you going to tell us how Catholicism must be true because some churches have carpets while some have hardwood floors?

 

[South Bound]

[Staff edit].

Could you show the Book chapter and verse where Scripture claims this?

First of all why does scripture have to claim it? What authority is there that is higher than God?

Now in reguards to 2Tim.3:16, " for teaching, for reproof, for correction and for training in righteousness." The question that arises is, granting that "all Scripture is God-breathed," how do you know which books are inspired Scripture and which books are not?

How do we decide which books belong in the Bible since the Bible does not say which books belong in the Bible?