Easiest Defense of Sola Scriptura

[Albion]

Well, there are also plenty of Christians who'd deny that those things are supported by Scripture.

Then they'd better not claim that they ARE supported by Scripture--which is normally what defenders of Holy Tradition do. They insist that the doctrines they've come up with through custom, legend, and human speculation, are supported by Scripture or have a basis from Scripture.

 

[Albion]

I don't know any opponents of SS who claim the unwritten tradition is better than the written tradition (scripture). Everyone I know thinks God's word is equal and the highest authority whether it is written or unwritten.

I disagree. They claim that Tradition includes Scripture, which means that the inventions that go under the term Holy Tradition are thought to be amplifications of Scripture.

Sure I can. I believe the Trinity is true based on Tradition.

The Trinity is definitely indicated by Scripture, so try again.

I believe in baptismal regeneration, infant baptism, and the necessity of baptism for salvation based on Tradition.

They're all to be found in Scripture, so you haven't shown--with even a single example--why "Tradition" would matter.

That is a completely false accusation. I consider God's word the highest authority and don't want anyone to doubt it.

What I was saying is that anyone can say that they believe "God's word," but if one believes God's word to be the "highest" authority he can't logically insist that it can't stand on its own and that something else is equally authoritative. It cannot be both at once.

 

[Albion]

John 1 says Jesus is the Word.

True. But you said this:

Everything Jesus said is God's word

Not the same, are they?

 

[fhansen]

Then they'd better not claim that they ARE supported by Scripture--which is normally what defenders of Holy Tradition do. They insist that the doctrines they've come up with through custom, legend, and human speculation, are supported by Scripture or have a basis from Scripture.

Wishful thinking. All the items mentioned can be-and are-argued plausibly both ways...with Scripture.

 

[Thursday]

Late 4th century; when did you get the news?

You weren't alive in the 4th century. The truth is, as you know, that the Holy Spirit worked through the Church. You learned which books should be in the New Testament from the Catholic Church.

 

[Thursday]

The Holy Spirit is the Supreme Authority in the Spiritual interpretation and Application of Scripture. (I love capital letters when referring to that which is Holy).

Then why do so many Christians disagree? How do we know who is led by the Holy Spirit?

Matt 18:17
If they still refuse to listen, tell it to the church; and if they refuse to listen even to the church, treat them as you would a pagan or a tax collector.

 

[Albion]

Wishful thinking. All the items mentioned can be-and are-argued plausibly both ways...with Scripture.

If it IS in Scripture, there's no logic in denying the principle we call Sola Scriptura.

 

[civilwarbuff]

You weren't alive in the 4th century. The truth is, as you know, that the Holy Spirit worked through the Church. You learned which books should be in the New Testament from the Catholic Church.

No, it was given by the Holy Spirit who acts through men (not organizations or denominations) which is how He accomplishes his tasks. And, as I pointed out, it was done over centuries not in a few relatively short meetings. I certainly don't expect a Catholic to admit to such as that would greatly diminish the authority of the Catholic Church as well as go directly against its teachings.

 

[Thursday]

Oh, hmm, can you show me where Jesus told us to "listen to the church"?

Matt 18:17 If they still refuse to listen, tell it to the church; and if they refuse to listen even to the church, treat them as you would a pagan or a tax collector.

Luke 10:16
"Whoever listens to you listens to me; whoever rejects you rejects me; but whoever rejects me rejects him who sent me."

John 20
21Again Jesus said, “Peace be with you! As the Father has sent me, I am sending you.” 22And with that he breathed on them and said, “Receive the Holy Spirit. 23If you forgive anyone’s sins, their sins are forgiven; if you do not forgive them, they are not forgiven.”

 

[Thursday]

No, it was given by the Holy Spirit who acts through men (not organizations or denominations) which is how He accomplishes his tasks. And, as I pointed out, it was done over centuries not in a few relatively short meetings. I certainly don't expect a Catholic to admit to such as that would greatly diminish the authority of the Catholic Church as well as go directly against its teachings.

The Catholic Church chose the books of the New Testament with the guidance of the Holy Spirit. You can deny reality but you can't change it.

 

[Colter]

Religious institutions are founded on authority. Well meaning men found it too difficult to refer to the intangible behind the veil of mystery, the unseen God, so instead they use what can be seen, the evolved scripture. For this very reason man has forever worshiped everything under the sun including man himself. The purported writings of God became a substitute for the Golden Calf. But now we have made the scripture into a Golden Calf, frozen in time, as limited as the men who created them. The consequence is that, while the scripture contains things which are true, great wisdom and spiritual truth, they contain much that is not representative of the Father in heaven or historic accuracy. So while you guys and girls attempt to out-pious each other, people are wandering in confusion and hopelessness as never before.

 

[Albion]

Religious institutions are founded on authority, well meaning men have found it too difficult to refer to the intangible behind the veil of mystery, the unseen God, so instead they use what can be seen, the evolved scripture. For this very reason man has forever worshiped everything under the sun including man himself. The purported writings of God became a substitute for the Golden Calf. But now we have made the scripture into a Golden Calf, frozen in time, as limited as the men who created them. The consequence is that, while the scripture contains things which are true, great wisdom and spiritual truth, they contain much that is not representative of the Father in heaven or historic accuracy. So while you guys and girls attempt to out-pious each other, people are wandering in confusion and hopelessness as never before.

And the basis for your theory of "Believe whatever you want" would be...what, exactly?

 

[Thursday]

Religious institutions are founded on authority.

This is true. Jesus founded the Catholic Church and gave it his authority:

John 20
21Again Jesus said, “Peace be with you! As the Father has sent me, I am sending you.” 22And with that he breathed on them and said, “Receive the Holy Spirit. 23If you forgive anyone’s sins, their sins are forgiven; if you do not forgive them, they are not forgiven.”

Matt 16
17Jesus replied, “Blessed are you, Simon son of Jonah, for this was not revealed to you by flesh and blood, but by my Father in heaven. 18And I tell you that you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of Hades will not overcome it. 19I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven; whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven.” 20Then he ordered his disciples not to tell anyone that he was the Messiah.

 

[fhansen]

If it IS in Scripture, there's no logic in denying the principle we call Sola Scriptura.

But if it can be just as intelligently argued that it is NOT in Scripture, then SS fails as a means of discerning the truth.

 

[chilehed]

In a sense, you don't know. Just as you don't "know" that I exist.

And we do know that some of the books of the Bible were probably written by someone other than the one whose name is on the book. But they have been judged, for a number of reasons, to be inspired works and there comes a time when you have to count on the decision made by almost the whole of Christianity over the course of 2000 years or else assume that almost nothing in life can be trusted to be what it appears to be.

So your position is that we don't really know that the books we think belong in the canon actually do belong?

 

[Albion]

But if it can be just as intelligently argued that it is NOT in Scripture, then SS fails as a means of discerning the truth.

I can't agree to that. Either it is or it is not. We have people here who have been told by their own denominations that it's not right, not in Scripture, etc. They naturally believe what their own clergy tell them. This -- misinformation -- cannot be the test of whether reliance upon God's word for doctrinal guidance is right or wrong.

You would not agree, I'm thinking, that if a member of your church thought (as 2/3 of them do) that the Eucharist is only symbolic of Christ's body and blood, that this in itself makes the Real Presence untrue.

 

[Albion]

So your position is that we don't really know that the books we think belong in the canon actually do belong?

How'd you get that out of my post?

 

[fhansen]

I can't agree to that. Either it is or it is not.
We have people here who have been told by their own denominations that it's not right, not in Scripture, etc. They naturally believe what their own clergy tell them. This -- misinformation -- cannot be the test of whether reliance upon God's word for doctrinal guidance is right or wrong.

Well, to say that Scripture is crystal clear on all matters, is, again, an exercise in wishful thinking IMO. Many of our most relevant doctrines were simply passed down through the centuries, and the Reformers simply received and accepted them, as we all have, as being non-negotiables, even though some, such as the Real Presence, may've been altered in concept.

You would not agree, I'm thinking, that if a member of your church thought (as 2/3 of them do) that the Eucharist is only symbolic of Christ's body and blood, that this in itself makes the Real Presence untrue.

That's the point though; it's not arrived at by majority vote, best-guess, or even by who has the most superior exegetical methodology. The truth is simply the truth, as it was handed down to the church. And those who think the Real Presence is not substantiated by Scripture can argue the point quite reasonably well.

 

[Colter]

And the basis for your theory of "Believe whatever you want" would be...what, exactly?

Exactly!! You are a good example of the irrational thinking of authoritarians. Never did I say "believe whatever you want", but by default you are saying believe what doesn't sound true for the sake of believing something.

Before Moses there wasn't any scripture, my gosh, one wonders how they didn't all just set themselves on fire out of sheer rudderless ignorance!

 

[Colter]

This is true. Jesus founded the Catholic Church and gave it his authority:

John 20
21Again Jesus said, “Peace be with you! As the Father has sent me, I am sending you.” 22And with that he breathed on them and said, “Receive the Holy Spirit. 23If you forgive anyone’s sins, their sins are forgiven; if you do not forgive them, they are not forgiven.”

Matt 16
17Jesus replied, “Blessed are you, Simon son of Jonah, for this was not revealed to you by flesh and blood, but by my Father in heaven. 18And I tell you that you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of Hades will not overcome it. 19I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven; whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven.” 20Then he ordered his disciples not to tell anyone that he was the Messiah.

* "for this was not revealed to you by flesh and blood" = the Father in their hearts revealing the identity of the Son.

* "on this rock I will build my church" = the Father in the heart of the believer bearing witness to the identity of the Son.

* Peter wasn't the rock, faith/trust in the Father is the rock.

* The church is fallible, albeit Jesus has fostered it as the best exponent of his life's work.