• Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.

  • CF has always been a site that welcomes people from different backgrounds and beliefs to participate in discussion and even debate. That is the nature of its ministry. In view of recent events emotions are running very high. We need to remind people of some basic principles in debating on this site. We need to be civil when we express differences in opinion. No personal attacks. Avoid you, your statements. Don't characterize an entire political party with comparisons to Fascism or Communism or other extreme movements that committed atrocities. CF is not the place for broad brush or blanket statements about groups and political parties. Put the broad brushes and blankets away when you come to CF, better yet, put them in the incinerator. Debate had no place for them. We need to remember that people that commit acts of violence represent themselves or a small extreme faction.

Evidence from Sola Scriptura - right from the Bible itself

EastCoastRemnant

I Must Decrease That He May Increase
Site Supporter
Dec 8, 2010
7,665
1,505
Nova Scotia
✟210,609.00
Gender
Male
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Married
If you are going to post something, post the whole thing, and not just an exert. This tells no one nothing.

Not exactly, if this writer was sincere, and endorsed by the Papacy, then all it would have to be proven is that the disciples misunderstood the Lord in what He spoke. If this is done, then his statement would be an admission of Papal error in teaching transubstantiation.
 
Upvote 0

patricius79

Called to Jesus Through Mary
Sep 10, 2009
4,186
361
✟28,891.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Each time you argue that these texts could not possibly exist because the unborn children of the NT Bible writer had not come along yet to tell them what is scripture - you show that your speculation does not "survive the text". --



Acts 17
11 Now these were more noble-minded than those in Thessalonica, for they received the word with great eagerness, examining the Scriptures daily to see IF these things were so.


Luke 24


27 Then beginning with Moses and with all the prophets, He explained to them the things concerning Himself in all the Scriptures.

44 Now He said to them, “These are My words which I spoke to you while I was still with you, that all things which are written about Me in the Law of Moses and the Prophets and the Psalms must be fulfilled.” 45 Then He opened their minds to understand the Scriptures, 46 and He said to them, “Thus it is written, that the Christ would suffer and rise again from the dead the third day, 47 and that repentance for forgiveness of sins would be proclaimed in His name to all the nations, beginning from Jerusalem.

And Christ said this - about "Sola Scriptura" testing of church tradition and doctrine.


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.

In Isaiah 8:19 we find this "to the Law and to the Testimony if they speak not according to this Word there is no light in them".

There again we have sola scriptura - being taught.


And Paul insists that he and everyone else be tested that same way -

Gal 1:6-9
6 I am amazed that you are so quickly deserting Him who called you by the grace of Christ, for a different gospel; 7 which is really not another; only there are some who are disturbing you and want to distort the gospel of Christ. 8 But even if we, or an angel from heaven, should preach to you a gospel contrary to what we have preached to you, he is to be accursed! 9 As we have said before, so I say again now, if any man is preaching to you a gospel contrary to what you received, he is to be accursed!

From my perspective, it sounds like you are assuming that accepting the authority of Scripture means accepting the authority of Scripture alone. And that when the Bible refers to "the Word of God" it is referring to Scripture alone. But the Bible says to hold fast to he oral Word. (Luke 10:16, 2 Thessalonians 2:15)
 
Upvote 0

BobRyan

Junior Member
Angels Team
Site Supporter
Nov 21, 2008
53,469
11,971
Georgia
✟1,106,713.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Married
I am not arguing against God speaking outside of what is already written in the Bible at any point in time. For example in the OP I point so the SS method used in Isaiah 8. This is not a claim that no Bible text exists after Isaiah 8.

But there are those arguing that the NT texts quoted "should not exist" because they could not "know scripture" until their unborn children came along to tell them what it is.
 
Upvote 0

EastCoastRemnant

I Must Decrease That He May Increase
Site Supporter
Dec 8, 2010
7,665
1,505
Nova Scotia
✟210,609.00
Gender
Male
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Married
From my perspective, it sounds like you are assuming that accepting the authority of Scripture means accepting the authority of Scripture alone. And that when the Bible refers to "the Word of God" it is referring to Scripture alone. But the Bible says to hold fast to he oral Word. (Luke 10:16, 2 Thessalonians 2:15)

The oral word, as you and others have pointed out, is what was not already in written form... epistles from the apostles and the revelation given to John that were later set to parchment.
 
Upvote 0

BobRyan

Junior Member
Angels Team
Site Supporter
Nov 21, 2008
53,469
11,971
Georgia
✟1,106,713.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Married
If you are going to post something, post the whole thing, and not just an exert. This tells no one nothing.

Would you like the entire book quoted?? the entire chapter?? Are you in doubt that this author is fully opposed to the non-Catholic POV, while at the same time scholarly enough to admit to the implications of it?

Here is the post - what "more" were you hoping for??

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

There are some exchanges here that contrast the RCC view of the wafer - the bread - in the communion service vs the non-RCC view.

There is a Catholic Commentary on the Baltimore Catechism after Vatican II that also addresses the two widely different points of view.

The Catholic statement we find in "The Faith Explained" by Leo Trese is 'instructive' even if this is a Catholic statement and I am not a Catholic.

Will post it. (However I don't know that this subject is specific to the OP about the Bible - unless the claim is that if you view the Mass as do many Catholics here - then you would have to reject Sola Scriptura testing of doctrine and tradition)

In any case - division on the POV exists - between Catholic and Protestants - so let's see what the Catholic view of that GAP is -


The Faith Explained – A bestselling RC commentary on the Baltimore Catechism post Vatican II by Leo J. Trese is promoted as “A standard reference for every Catholic home and library”. Complete with Papal Imprimatur -- Quote from page 350-351

Parenthetical inserts “mine”

===================quote

The Faith Explained – Page 350

“On this, the last night before His death, Jesus is making His last will and testament.

Ibid. Page 351

A last will is no place for figurative speech ; under the best of circumstances (human) courts sometimes have difficulty in interpreting a testator’s intentions aright, even without the confusion of symbolic language. Moreover, since Jesus is God, He knew that as a result of His words that night, untold millions of people would be worshiping him through the centuries under the appearance of the bread. if he would not really be present under those appearances, the worshippers would be adoring a mere piece of bread, and would be guilty of idolatry,. Certainly that is something that God Himself would set the stage for, by talking in obscure figurative speech.



IF Jesus was using a metaphor; if what He really meant was, “This bread is a sort of SYMBOL of My Body, and this is a SYMBOL of My Blood (not yet spilled – so they were not then participating in sacrifice); hereafter, any time that My followers get together and partake of the bread and wine like this, they will be honoring Me and representing My death”; if that IS what Jesus meant (as many protestants claim), then the apostles got Him all wrong . And through their misunderstanding ,mankind has for centuries worshiped A PIECE OF BREAD as God
 
Upvote 0

Erose

Newbie
Jul 2, 2010
9,009
1,471
✟75,992.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
Would you like the entire book quoted?? the entire chapter?? Are you in doubt that this author is fully opposed to the non-Catholic POV, while at the same time scholarly enough to admit to the implications of it?

Here is the post - what "more" were you hoping for??

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

There are some exchanges here that contrast the RCC view of the wafer - the bread - in the communion service vs the non-RCC view.

There is a Catholic Commentary on the Baltimore Catechism after Vatican II that also addresses the two widely different points of view.

The Catholic statement we find in "The Faith Explained" by Leo Trese is 'instructive' even if this is a Catholic statement and I am not a Catholic.

Will post it. (However I don't know that this subject is specific to the OP about the Bible - unless the claim is that if you view the Mass as do many Catholics here - then you would have to reject Sola Scriptura testing of doctrine and tradition)

In any case - division on the POV exists - between Catholic and Protestants - so let's see what the Catholic view of that GAP is -


The Faith Explained – A bestselling RC commentary on the Baltimore Catechism post Vatican II by Leo J. Trese is promoted as “A standard reference for every Catholic home and library”. Complete with Papal Imprimatur -- Quote from page 350-351

Parenthetical inserts “mine”

===================quote

The Faith Explained – Page 350

“On this, the last night before His death, Jesus is making His last will and testament.

Ibid. Page 351

A last will is no place for figurative speech ; under the best of circumstances (human) courts sometimes have difficulty in interpreting a testator’s intentions aright, even without the confusion of symbolic language. Moreover, since Jesus is God, He knew that as a result of His words that night, untold millions of people would be worshiping him through the centuries under the appearance of the bread. if he would not really be present under those appearances, the worshippers would be adoring a mere piece of bread, and would be guilty of idolatry,. Certainly that is something that God Himself would set the stage for, by talking in obscure figurative speech.



IF Jesus was using a metaphor; if what He really meant was, “This bread is a sort of SYMBOL of My Body, and this is a SYMBOL of My Blood (not yet spilled – so they were not then participating in sacrifice); hereafter, any time that My followers get together and partake of the bread and wine like this, they will be honoring Me and representing My death”; if that IS what Jesus meant (as many protestants claim), then the apostles got Him all wrong . And through their misunderstanding ,mankind has for centuries worshiped A PIECE OF BREAD as God
I'm hoping that just once, just once, you post something in its full context. That would be a great start.
 
Upvote 0

Erose

Newbie
Jul 2, 2010
9,009
1,471
✟75,992.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
Not exactly, if this writer was sincere, and endorsed by the Papacy, then all it would have to be proven is that the disciples misunderstood the Lord in what He spoke. If this is done, then his statement would be an admission of Papal error in teaching transubstantiation.
That isn't how it works. Also we don't really know what the author actually said because all that he said wasn't posted. Only a small bit. Its like saying that the Bible says "that there is no God", which is obviously taking a part out of context by not added the important part, i.e. "A fool says in his heart, that there is no God" You get what I'm saying here. Context is everything, and you guys love to post things out of context.
 
Upvote 0

mark46

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Jan 29, 2010
20,764
5,077
✟1,028,248.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Democrat
From my perspective, it sounds like you are assuming that accepting the authority of Scripture means accepting the authority of Scripture alone. And that when the Bible refers to "the Word of God" it is referring to Scripture alone. But the Bible says to hold fast to he oral Word. (Luke 10:16, 2 Thessalonians 2:15)

This analysis is a good addition.

Scripture is our primary authority. This is teaching of the early church fathers. Everything must be measured against Scripture. It does NOT follow that Tradition is not needed to interpret Scripture or even that Scripture is the only source of understanding regarding the faith.

Many current evangelicals believe "sola scripture" to mean that Tradition and the interpretation of Scripture by the Church should be rejected. That is NOT the teaching of those of the Reformation, and certainly not the teaching of Luther. Sola scriptura as understood in the Reformation was much closer to what we now call prima scriptura than to the solo scriptura of some modern day evangelicals. Nowhere is Scripture is it said that Scripture speaks for itself and the interpretation of the community and Church isn't critical to the understanding of doctrine.

This is made obvious by the current situation where any non-denominational pastor can have his own interpretation of the Word, and parishioners who follow his interpretations. Or worse, we could be left to individuals telling us how the Spirit tell them what is clear in Scripture, since Scripture speak for itself (this is the heresy of Gnosticism). On a gentler level, we have traditional churches who have protected the teachings of the apostles and have passed them down to us. Unfortunately, the schisms have given us several traditional churches who agree on so much, but disagree on some important issues. There are indeed separated brethren (to out the issue in RCC terms).
 
Upvote 0

BobRyan

Junior Member
Angels Team
Site Supporter
Nov 21, 2008
53,469
11,971
Georgia
✟1,106,713.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Married
The point in contention is that we have examples in Acts 17:11, and in Mark 7:6-13 where it is not "scripture plus tradition" but scripture alone that is testing all tradition, doctrine, practice etc. Those texts "should not exist" if the anti-SS position were correct.
 
Upvote 0

mark46

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Jan 29, 2010
20,764
5,077
✟1,028,248.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Democrat
The point in contention is that we have examples in Acts 17:11, and in Mark 7:6-13 where it is not "scripture plus tradition" but scripture alone that is testing all tradition, doctrine, practice etc. Those texts "should not exist" if the anti-SS position were correct.
IMHO, you are conflating two issues.

These texts say that everything should be measured against Scripture. That is NOT the doctrine of sola scriptura. Rather that is doctrine of scriptural primacy, which has been taught since the early Church.
 
Upvote 0

EastCoastRemnant

I Must Decrease That He May Increase
Site Supporter
Dec 8, 2010
7,665
1,505
Nova Scotia
✟210,609.00
Gender
Male
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Married
That isn't how it works. Also we don't really know what the author actually said because all that he said wasn't posted. Only a small bit. Its like saying that the Bible says "that there is no God", which is obviously taking a part out of context by not added the important part, i.e. "A fool says in his heart, that there is no God" You get what I'm saying here. Context is everything, and you guys love to post things out of context.
He has given you an expanded version... beyond that my friend, it's your duty to check the references if you so choose. As Bob said, how much context do you need?
 
Upvote 0

BobRyan

Junior Member
Angels Team
Site Supporter
Nov 21, 2008
53,469
11,971
Georgia
✟1,106,713.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Married
The point in contention is that we have examples in Acts 17:11, and in Mark 7:6-13 where it is not "scripture plus tradition" but scripture alone that is testing all tradition, doctrine, practice etc. Those texts "should not exist" if the anti-SS position were correct.

IMHO, you are conflating two issues.

These texts say that everything should be measured against Scripture. That is NOT the doctrine of sola scriptura. Rather that is doctrine of scriptural primacy, which has been taught since the early Church.

"The Bible and the Bible alone is the standard by which all doctrine and tradition must be measured" -- is the sort of "Sola Scriptura" that I am talking about.

It is not of the form "All tradition is error". Nor is it "all doctrine is error".

But it is what we see in Acts 17:11 and Mark 7:6-13, Isaiah 8:20, Luke 24:25, and Gal 1:6-9 requires it for us all since we are not living at the time Paul wrote Galatians 1.

These texts say that everything should be measured against Scripture. That is NOT the doctrine of sola scriptura. .

If your argument is that everyone should be in full agreement that "everything should be measured against Scripture" - I for one am glad to hear it.

Now - how to get your fellow Catholics on this board and the EO members to sign up for that.
 
Upvote 0

patricius79

Called to Jesus Through Mary
Sep 10, 2009
4,186
361
✟28,891.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
The point in contention is that we have examples in Acts 17:11, and in Mark 7:6-13 where it is not "scripture plus tradition" but scripture alone that is testing all tradition, doctrine, practice etc. Those texts "should not exist" if the anti-SS position were correct.

I think that in both those cases, Scripture is being interpreted through Tradition or the Magisterium, not alone.

For example, Sola Scriptura were true, the Bereans would not have needed Paul and Silas to illuminate Scripture with the oral Word.

Moreover, Scripture says to hold fast to the traditions as they were given, whether orally or by letter 2 Thessalonians 2:15
 
Upvote 0

BobRyan

Junior Member
Angels Team
Site Supporter
Nov 21, 2008
53,469
11,971
Georgia
✟1,106,713.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Married
That isn't how it works. Also we don't really know what the author actually said because all that he said wasn't posted. Only a small bit.

Indeed he wrote an entire book.

But we can tell from that quote that he does not approve of the Protestant POV - yet can still state what the implications are if the non-RCC view is correct.

That is irrefutable.

Its like saying that the Bible says "that there is no God", which is obviously taking a part out of context

An interesting imagination.

This quote already given (if we give the RCC the benefit of the doubt) would be like Christians saying - "Some people who are not members of my church, oppose what we teach when they say 'there is no God' - if they are correct then we are worshiping something that does not exist, which would mean we have been wrong about this all these years".

The idea that this sort of writing is "too confusing to read" or that it means the author is against his own church when he writes to complain about the beliefs of those that oppose his doctrine and the implication of those beliefs - is not a compelling argument at all. This sort of writing is wayyy too easy to read, and obvious and in common use, for us all to pretend we are confused about the author's intent when we read it.
==============================

Note the details

Notice that in this quote - the Catholic author does not claim he is taking the Protestant and Evangelical POV - rather he simply states what it is and what "would be" the logical implications of taking such a view.

No need for us to imagine that the author "becomes anti-Catholic" by simply knowing and stating what the opposing view is. The author merely states "the obvious" about the opposing view and its logical implications about the Mass if that opposing view is correct. No leap of faith needed - no rocket science.

Obviously.


The Faith Explained – A bestselling RC commentary on the Baltimore Catechism post Vatican II by Leo J. Trese is promoted as “A standard reference for every Catholic home and library”. Complete with Papal Imprimatur -- Quote from page 350-351

Parenthetical inserts “mine”

===================quote

The Faith Explained – Page 350

“On this, the last night before His death, Jesus is making His last will and testament.

Ibid. Page 351

A last will is no place for figurative speech ; under the best of circumstances (human) courts sometimes have difficulty in interpreting a testator’s intentions aright, even without the confusion of symbolic language. Moreover, since Jesus is God, He knew that as a result of His words that night, untold millions of people would be worshiping him through the centuries under the appearance of the bread. if he would not really be present under those appearances, the worshippers would be adoring a mere piece of bread, and would be guilty of idolatry,. Certainly that is something that God Himself would set the stage for, by talking in obscure figurative speech.



IF Jesus was using a metaphor; if what He really meant was, “This bread is a sort of SYMBOL of My Body, and this is a SYMBOL of My Blood (not yet spilled – so they were not then participating in sacrifice); hereafter, any time that My followers get together and partake of the bread and wine like this, they will be honoring Me and representing My death”; if that IS what Jesus meant (as many protestants claim), then the apostles got Him all wrong . And through their misunderstanding ,mankind has for centuries worshiped A PIECE OF BREAD as God
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

BobRyan

Junior Member
Angels Team
Site Supporter
Nov 21, 2008
53,469
11,971
Georgia
✟1,106,713.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Married
Acts 17
11 Now these were more noble-minded than those in Thessalonica, for they received the word with great eagerness, examining the Scriptures daily to see IF these things were so.



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.

I think that in both those cases, Scripture is being interpreted through Tradition or the Magisterium, not alone.

not according to the texts.

In both cases the magisterium is the non-Christian Jewish magisterium that is totally condemning Christ and Paul's teaching.

This is incredibly obvious in both examples.
 
Upvote 0

patricius79

Called to Jesus Through Mary
Sep 10, 2009
4,186
361
✟28,891.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Acts 17
11 Now these were more noble-minded than those in Thessalonica, for they received the word with great eagerness,

I notice how the oral teaching of the Apostles is rightly called "the Word"

If Sola Scriptura is true, why did the Bereans need the oral Word to understand it?

And why does Paul say to hold fast to the traditions, whether given orally or by letter? 2 Thessalonians 2:15, 2 Timothy 2:2


examining the Scriptures daily to see IF
these things were so.

And they were. The Scriptures and the oral Word always go together.


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.

Are you assuming that "the Word of God" refers to Scripture alone?

not according to the texts.

In both cases the magisterium is the non-Christian Jewish magisterium that is totally condemning Christ and Paul's teaching.

This is incredibly obvious in both examples.

In both cases, the Jewish Magisterium has been superseded by the Christian Magisterium.
 
Upvote 0

Thursday

Well-Known Member
Jan 12, 2016
6,034
1,562
60
Texas
✟56,929.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Plenty of evidence in the Bible for the saints using the "sola scriptura" method to test all doctrine and tradition to "see IF those things are true"


Acts 17
11 Now these were more noble-minded than those in Thessalonica, for they received the word with great eagerness, examining the Scriptures daily to see IF these things were so.


Luke 24


27 Then beginning with Moses and with all the prophets, He explained to them the things concerning Himself in all the Scriptures.

44 Now He said to them, “These are My words which I spoke to you while I was still with you, that all things which are written about Me in the Law of Moses and the Prophets and the Psalms must be fulfilled.” 45 Then He opened their minds to understand the Scriptures, 46 and He said to them, “Thus it is written, that the Christ would suffer and rise again from the dead the third day, 47 and that repentance for forgiveness of sins would be proclaimed in His name to all the nations, beginning from Jerusalem.

And Christ said this - about "Sola Scriptura" testing of church tradition and doctrine.


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.

In Isaiah 8:19 we find this "to the Law and to the Testimony if they speak not according to this Word there is no light in them".

There again we have sola scriptura - being taught.


And Paul insists that he and everyone else be tested that same way -

Gal 1:6-9
6 I am amazed that you are so quickly deserting Him who called you by the grace of Christ, for a different gospel; 7 which is really not another; only there are some who are disturbing you and want to distort the gospel of Christ. 8 But even if we, or an angel from heaven, should preach to you a gospel contrary to what we have preached to you, he is to be accursed! 9 As we have said before, so I say again now, if any man is preaching to you a gospel contrary to what you received, he is to be accursed!

We can know what had been preached by Paul as of Gal 1... by reading the texts themselves.


There was no new testament when these things were written, but there was a Church:

1 Tim 3:15
14I am writing these things to you, hoping to come to you before long;15but in case I am delayed, I write so that you will know how one ought to conduct himself in the household of God, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and support of the truth.

2 Thes 2:15
So then, brothers and sisters, stand firm and hold fast to the teachings we passed on to you, whether by word of mouth or by letter.

1 Corinthians 11:2
I praise you for remembering me in everything and for holding to the traditions just as I passed them on to you.
 
  • Like
Reactions: patricius79
Upvote 0

BobRyan

Junior Member
Angels Team
Site Supporter
Nov 21, 2008
53,469
11,971
Georgia
✟1,106,713.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Married
Plenty of evidence in the Bible for the saints using the "sola scriptura" method to test all doctrine and tradition to "see IF those things are true"


Acts 17
11 Now these were more noble-minded than those in Thessalonica, for they received the word with great eagerness, examining the Scriptures daily to see IF these things were so.


Luke 24


27 Then beginning with Moses and with all the prophets, He explained to them the things concerning Himself in all the Scriptures.

44 Now He said to them, “These are My words which I spoke to you while I was still with you, that all things which are written about Me in the Law of Moses and the Prophets and the Psalms must be fulfilled.” 45 Then He opened their minds to understand the Scriptures, 46 and He said to them, “Thus it is written, that the Christ would suffer and rise again from the dead the third day, 47 and that repentance for forgiveness of sins would be proclaimed in His name to all the nations, beginning from Jerusalem.

And Christ said this - about "Sola Scriptura" testing of church tradition and doctrine.


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.

In Isaiah 8:19 we find this "to the Law and to the Testimony if they speak not according to this Word there is no light in them".

There again we have sola scriptura - being taught.


And Paul insists that he and everyone else be tested that same way -

Gal 1:6-9
6 I am amazed that you are so quickly deserting Him who called you by the grace of Christ, for a different gospel; 7 which is really not another; only there are some who are disturbing you and want to distort the gospel of Christ. 8 But even if we, or an angel from heaven, should preach to you a gospel contrary to what we have preached to you, he is to be accursed! 9 As we have said before, so I say again now, if any man is preaching to you a gospel contrary to what you received, he is to be accursed!

We can know what had been preached by Paul as of Gal 1... by reading the texts themselves.


There was no new testament when these things were written

Agreed. And these SS texts were true even then -- how much more so WITH the NT!




1 Tim 3:15
14I am writing these things to you, hoping to come to you before long;15but in case I am delayed, I write so that you will know how one ought to conduct himself in the household of God, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and support of the truth.

2 Tim 3:14-16
14 You, however, continue in the things you have learned and become convinced of, knowing from whom you have learned them, 15 and that from childhood you have known the sacred writings which are able to give you the wisdom that leads to salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus. 16 All Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness;

2 Thes 2:15
So then, brothers and sisters, stand firm and hold fast to the teachings we passed on to you, whether by word of mouth or by letter.

1 Corinthians 11:2
I praise you for remembering me in everything and for holding to the traditions just as I passed them on to you.

2 Peter 3
14 Therefore, beloved, since you look for these things, be diligent to be found by Him in peace, spotless and blameless, 15 and regard the patience of our Lord as salvation; just as also our beloved brother Paul, according to the wisdom given him, wrote to you, 16 as also in all his letters, speaking in them of these things, in which are some things hard to understand, which the untaught and unstable distort, as they do also the rest of the Scriptures, to their own destruction.
 
Upvote 0

Thursday

Well-Known Member
Jan 12, 2016
6,034
1,562
60
Texas
✟56,929.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Plenty of evidence in the Bible for the saints using the "sola scriptura" method to test all doctrine and tradition to "see IF those things are true"


Acts 17
11 Now these were more noble-minded than those in Thessalonica, for they received the word with great eagerness, examining the Scriptures daily to see IF these things were so.


Luke 24


27 Then beginning with Moses and with all the prophets, He explained to them the things concerning Himself in all the Scriptures.

44 Now He said to them, “These are My words which I spoke to you while I was still with you, that all things which are written about Me in the Law of Moses and the Prophets and the Psalms must be fulfilled.” 45 Then He opened their minds to understand the Scriptures, 46 and He said to them, “Thus it is written, that the Christ would suffer and rise again from the dead the third day, 47 and that repentance for forgiveness of sins would be proclaimed in His name to all the nations, beginning from Jerusalem.

And Christ said this - about "Sola Scriptura" testing of church tradition and doctrine.


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.

In Isaiah 8:19 we find this "to the Law and to the Testimony if they speak not according to this Word there is no light in them".

There again we have sola scriptura - being taught.


And Paul insists that he and everyone else be tested that same way -

Gal 1:6-9
6 I am amazed that you are so quickly deserting Him who called you by the grace of Christ, for a different gospel; 7 which is really not another; only there are some who are disturbing you and want to distort the gospel of Christ. 8 But even if we, or an angel from heaven, should preach to you a gospel contrary to what we have preached to you, he is to be accursed! 9 As we have said before, so I say again now, if any man is preaching to you a gospel contrary to what you received, he is to be accursed!

We can know what had been preached by Paul as of Gal 1... by reading the texts themselves.




Agreed. And these SS texts were true even then -- how much more so WITH the NT!




1 Tim 3:15
14I am writing these things to you, hoping to come to you before long;15but in case I am delayed, I write so that you will know how one ought to conduct himself in the household of God, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and support of the truth.

2 Tim 3:14-16
14 You, however, continue in the things you have learned and become convinced of, knowing from whom you have learned them, 15 and that from childhood you have known the sacred writings which are able to give you the wisdom that leads to salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus. 16 All Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness;



2 Peter 3
14 Therefore, beloved, since you look for these things, be diligent to be found by Him in peace, spotless and blameless, 15 and regard the patience of our Lord as salvation; just as also our beloved brother Paul, according to the wisdom given him, wrote to you, 16 as also in all his letters, speaking in them of these things, in which are some things hard to understand, which the untaught and unstable distort, as they do also the rest of the Scriptures, to their own destruction.


Your post does not change the fact that the bible explicitly says that the pillar and support of the truth is the Church, that we should hold to oral traditions, and that the Church was the ultimate authority for settling doctrinal disputes.

We all know that the bible is profitable for teaching, it is the Word of God!
 
Upvote 0

EastCoastRemnant

I Must Decrease That He May Increase
Site Supporter
Dec 8, 2010
7,665
1,505
Nova Scotia
✟210,609.00
Gender
Male
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Married
I notice how the oral teaching of the Apostles is rightly called "the Word"

If Sola Scriptura is true, why did the Bereans need the oral Word to understand it?

Because the Word spoken of by the apostles, had not been written down as the epistles at that time. They did indeed become part of the Word of the NT. These were men, who it is recorded, received the Holy Spirit breathed on them directly from Christ. Not as others claim in later ages, which we have no proof they were inspired, except in their own minds and by their own contention.

If I told you that I was a long lost relative of Peter and was inspired by the Holy Ghost and that I was shown that we are now to do some extra-Biblical action for our salvation, would you believe me? Then why, would you believe someone that wrote 1800 years ago, just because they said they were lead of the Spirit? and said they were connected with the apostles...
 
Upvote 0