Refuting Sola Scriptura - Why the Bible Alone is Not Sufficient

[Chandler50]

To be honest i am sure the Pope knew what was going on but turned a blind eye to it!

Maybe, but Popes are sinful men as well. But the point is that it was never officially taught by the Church. That is why I emphasized that Christ said the gates of hell will not prevail over the church. Because men are sinful, but the institution of the Church is protected by Christ's promise.

 

[Chandler50]

I don't think you have enough silly putty in the world to make the connection between what I said and your responce.

You said Christ is the GPS. And then you said the Satan can move the direction. Seems straight forward to me.

Regardless, we are speaking within an hour of each other and misinterpreting each other. How much more do people misinterpret scripture written 2000 years ago in a different language.

 

[AHH who-stole-my-name]

I already addressed the issue of selling indulgences. Selling indulgences has never been approved by the Church, ever. That was happening at the local level by a few corrupt men. And Luther was not a 'whistle blower', don't give him that much credit. Other men were addressing this issue already. All Luther did was throw a hissy fit because reformation was not abiding by his schedule and decided to just form his own religion.

If my assesment of Luther was in error, then I appologize for that, but Theindulgances were allowed to stand. The power of an instituon is the ability to police itself. This has never been untrue. Even today it is those who act out who give Christianity the name it holds.
Timelines are a unique things. Some use them to further their causes. Some us them to wait out the clock and walk away when the attention of others is deverted.

 

[Chandler50]

If my assesment of Luther was in error, then I appologize for that, but Theindulgances were allowed to stand. The power of an instituon is the ability to police itself. This has never been untrue. Even today it is those who act out who give Christianity the name it holds.
Timelines are a unique things. Some use them to further their causes. Some us them to wait out the clock and walk away when the attention of others is deverted.

Did Christ promise us a church without sinful people? No, he said the gates of hell would not prevail over it. Which implies that sin will be in the Church if Christ had to specify that the Church would not be destroyed by sin.

 

[AHH who-stole-my-name]

You said Christ is the GPS. And then you said the Satan can move the direction. Seems straight forward to me.

Regardless, we are speaking within an hour of each other and misinterpreting each other. How much more do people misinterpret scripture written 2000 years ago in a different language.

Satan can manipulate what people see and sence. The path is there for those who work diligently to find it. A magnet can be found when it alters a GPS, because no matter which dirrection you turn it will always point towards the magnet.

What part of diligence don't you understand. You have to be aware of what is around you and who you listen to. Why do you think the part about "by their own fruit they will be known" was placed in the Bible. If something doesn't feel right then it might not be right.

Jesus will always guide us, but satan will always be a distraction and when that happens we have got to diligently look for them, remove them, if we can and pray to have them removed when we can't.

 

[AHH who-stole-my-name]

To be honest i am sure the Pope knew what was going on but turned a blind eye to it!

Agreed. I'm nort going to comment on why he did so. Best case senario is he was trying to protect the prestige of the church.

 

[Chandler50]

Satan can manipulate what people see and sence. The path is there for those who work diligently to find it. A magnet can be found when it alters a GPS, because no matter which dirrection you turn it will always point towards the magnet.

What part of diligence don't you understand. You have to be aware of what is around you and who you listen to. Why do you think the part about "by their own fruit they will be known" was placed in the Bible. If something doesn't feel right then it might not be right.

Jesus will always guide us, but satan will always be a distraction and when that happens we have got to diligently look for them, remove them, if we can and pray to have them removed when we can't.

And what are fruits of sola scriptura? Thousands of denominations claiming truth. Millions led astray from God's authority.

 

[AHH who-stole-my-name]

And what are fruits of sola scriptura? Thousands of denominations claiming truth. Millions led astray from God's authority.

I've already addressed this. If you want a rehashing of this please ask an admin to print out a duplicate for your indulgance.

 

[BobRyan]

QUOTE="BobRyan, post: 68578012, member: 235244"]Nothing in Christ's statement to the magisterium in Mark 7 claims "this is not from scripture but from the church".

Mark 7
7 Howbeit in vain do they worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men.
8 For laying aside the Commandment of God, ye hold the tradition of men, as the washing of pots and cups: and many other such like things ye do.
9 And he said unto them, Full well ye reject the commandment of God, that ye may keep your own tradition.
10 For Moses said, Honour thy father and thy mother; and, Whoso curseth father or mother, let him die the death:
11 But ye say, If a man shall say to his father or mother, It is Corban, that is to say, a gift, by whatsoever thou mightest be profited by me; he shall be free.
12 And ye suffer him no more to do ought for his father or his mother;
13 Making the Word of God of none effect through your tradition, which ye have delivered: and many such like things do ye.

Nor does Christ make the circular argument "your doctrine is unholy because it is unholy" -
This is a "not so subtle point" that keeps getting glossed over. circular arguments don't work.
Nor does Christ say "you do not have your scripture confirmed by an outside source"
Nor does Christ say "ignore the scripture I am quoting to prove you are in error"

We are talking about slamming the traditions of the church via the Mark 7 method - sola scriptura - where it is found to be in conflict with the Word of God.

I have not identified a single tradition of the Jews or the RCC in my comments - I merely point to the sola scriptura testing model used by Christ to slam the Jewish one-true-church magisterium.

=============================

That is not rejecting all tradition - but it is submitting all tradition to the "sola scriptura" test.
It is "more than a little obvious" that all the Jewish magisterium of Christ's day viewed the tradition he was slamming "sola scriptura" as "holy tradition".

Nothing in there about "your tradition in this case is unholy... because... it is unholy" as we can all see.
Not all tradition is bad when compared to the Bible "authority" defining what is acceptable and what is not.

All/any/whatever RCC tradition that is condemned by Protestants is considered "human tradition" by definition because it contradicts the Bible.

That is "a given".
The question is how is it determined? And the answer is - it is determined to be man-made by comparing it to the Word of God - just as Jesus is doing in Mark 7.

I think both sides can see this point clearly.
It is irrefutable. Which is why I select it.

I simply point out that in Mark 7 Christ is using sola scriptura just as all non-Catholics say it should be applied.
Do you consider Christ in Mark 7 to be a "random person spouting their opinions"???

I believe you are cherry-picking verses to support your position.

More precisely in the case of Mark 7:6-13 I have selected a teaching of Christ so profoundly in favor of sola-scriptura testing of all doctrine/tradition/practice that those who oppose it can only do so by avoiding the text entirely.

Mark seven is the only verse that condemns tradition.

Until you read Matt 16:
5 Now when His disciples had come to the other side, they had forgotten to take bread. 6 Then Jesus said to them, “Take heed and beware of the leaven of the Pharisees and the Sadducees.”
7 And they reasoned among themselves, saying, “It is because we have taken no bread.”
8 But Jesus, being aware of it, said to them, “O you of little faith, why do you reason among yourselves because you have brought no bread? 9 Do you not yet understand, or remember the five loaves of the five thousand and how many baskets you took up? 10 Nor the seven loaves of the four thousand and how many large baskets you took up? 11 How is it you do not understand that I did not speak to you concerning bread?—but to beware of the leaven of the Pharisees and Sadducees.” 12 Then they understood that He did not tell them to beware of the leaven of bread, but of the doctrine of the Pharisees and Sadducees.

And Mark 2:20-28

Do you believe that the apostles were just 'spouting' randomly when they used tradition pass on the good news?

As has been repeatedly stated - not all tradition contradicts the Bible. The testing of all tradition against the Bible as Christ is demonstrating for us in Mark 7 - will determine what fails and what stands.

Mark 7 is simply one of the best texts proving that the OP premise is flawed.

in Christ,

Bob

 

[tulipbee]

Now you get it.

And that certainly won't be RCC

 

[Chandler50]

I've already addreessed this. If you want a rehashing of this please ask an admin to print out a duplicate for your indulgance.

And so have I, in my OP. That is why I am challenging your use of the biblical passage. It utilized it to su

More precisely in the case of Mark 7:6-13 I have selected a teaching of Christ so profoundly in favor of sola-scriptura testing of all doctrine/tradition/practice that those who oppose it can only do so by avoiding the text entirely.



Until you read Matt 16:
5 Now when His disciples had come to the other side, they had forgotten to take bread. 6 Then Jesus said to them, “Take heed and beware of the leaven of the Pharisees and the Sadducees.”
7 And they reasoned among themselves, saying, “It is because we have taken no bread.”
8 But Jesus, being aware of it, said to them, “O you of little faith, why do you reason among yourselves because you have brought no bread? 9 Do you not yet understand, or remember the five loaves of the five thousand and how many baskets you took up? 10 Nor the seven loaves of the four thousand and how many large baskets you took up? 11 How is it you do not understand that I did not speak to you concerning bread?—but to beware of the leaven of the Pharisees and Sadducees.” 12 Then they understood that He did not tell them to beware of the leaven of bread, but of the doctrine of the Pharisees and Sadducees.

And Mark 2:20-28



As has been repeatedly stated - not all tradition contradicts the Bible. The testing of all tradition against the Bible as Christ is demonstrating for us in Mark 7 - will determine what fails and what stands.

Mark 7 is simply one of the best texts proving that the OP premise is flawed.

in Christ,

Bob

I did not ask you to quote random verses that do not contain the word tradition. I asked how you can comprehend all the verses in support of tradition that I wrote about, with your Mark 7. If the entire bible is inspired, then you must show how all the verses work. If you say that you Mark 7 'trumps' everything else, then the entire Bible is not inspired. God's authority does not fluctuate. If you run on the logical the one verse trumps all, then I can use that for Matthew 16:16-18 where Peter is placed in charge of the church.

 

[Chandler50]

And that certainly won't be RCC

So close...

 

[tulipbee]

So close...

Light years far from it

 

[BobRyan]

And so have I, in my OP. That is why I am challenging your use of the biblical passage. It utilized it to su

I did not ask you to quote random verses that do not contain the word tradition. I asked how you can comprehend all the verses in support of tradition that I wrote about, with your Mark 7. If the entire bible is inspired, then you must show how all the verses work. If you say that you Mark 7 'trumps' everything else, then the entire Bible is not inspired. God's authority does not fluctuate. If you run on the logical the one verse trumps all, then I can use that for Matthew 16:16-18 where Peter is placed in charge of the church.

Bible avoidance with every point posted is not the "compelling solution" some have imagined when it comes to the unbiased objective reader.

To repeatedly dodge the text time after time - is to invite the text back -- over and over again.

 

[Standing Up]

They are extra-biblical, not anti-biblical. God does not contradict Himself, but he did not stop speaking to us.

Can you show me once where Christ says that he is done speaking to us? Then why would you imply that?

Again, you're the one claiming Christ only speaks to RC. I disagree with you. This is like your reply about Peter/keys issue. You seem to have a major double standard.

 

[Job8]

But there are many verses that say, even more emphatically, that not everyone will be saved. No conclusion about who will be saved and why that's so can omit that testimony.

Not everyone will be saved is absolutely true.
Not everyone will be saved because God wanted them to be lost is false.

 

[Job8]

Jesus knew who would not believe ahead of time. He does need to waste time. That's why He is busy saving His children.

With God and Christ time means absolutely nothing. Of course Jesus knew who would believe ahead of time. But He did not make it impossible for some to believe either. It was their choice to disbelieve and disobey the Gospel.

 

[AHH who-stole-my-name]

And so have I, in my OP. That is why I am challenging your use of the biblical passage. It utilized it to so

I have also answered that by stating that your cherry picked scriptures do not an arguement make.

 

[Chandler50]

Again, you're the one claiming Christ only speaks to RC. I disagree with you. This is like your reply about Peter/keys issue. You seem to have a major double standard.

How is that an outlandish claim? Christ instituted the Church, he speak to the church. Why would he speak to congregation that do not follow His teachings?

 

[Chandler50]

I have also answered that by stating that your cherry picked scriptures do not an arguement make.

I used one verse that says for there not be divisions among us. Is there another verse I do not know about that contradicts this? Does Christ or the apostles say it is good for there to be divisions among us?

If not, then divisions are bad. And sola scriptura has led to about 800 million Protestants who are all divided on Christ's teachings. Which is bad.

You only need one verse if there are no countering verses that must be taken as a whole, such as the one verse from Mark 7. Yes it is saying human tradition is bad, but there are four other verses that say tradition is good, so they all must right sense God does not make errors.