Refuting Sola Scriptura - Why the Bible Alone is Not Sufficient

Do You Adhear to Sola Scriptura?


  • Total voters
    97
Status
Not open for further replies.
Apr 5, 2015
271
11
✟462.00
Faith
SDA
Yes, how DO you know those are Sacred Scripture? Where is the table of contents, in the Bible?
Are you saying that the verses cited* are not Sacred Scripture? How did you determine this, if so?

* - http://www.christianforums.com/thre...-not-sufficient.7906273/page-66#post-68726286

I might recommend to you, for a table of contents [Jesus said, "law of Moses", "prophets", "psalms", in regards the OT], discussion [but I could see how some may not desire to]:

 
Upvote 0
Apr 5, 2015
271
11
✟462.00
Faith
SDA
I see. I can point back to Councils where the canon was discussed and ultimately agreed upon by men who feared for their souls if they were wrong and thus undertook the endeavor with the utmost seriousness before reaching their conclusions.

But you have faith, that's nice.
Did Jesus quote from the scriptures? Did Jesus know what the scriptures were in his days upon earth as man?

Yes, indeed, the Just shall live by Faith, even as Adam had to live by Faith that Jesus created Him. :)
 
Upvote 0

thecolorsblend

If God is your Father, who is your Mother?
Site Supporter
Jul 1, 2013
9,199
8,425
Gotham City, New Jersey
✟308,231.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Did Jesus quote from the scriptures?
Not all of them.

Did Jesus know what the scriptures were in his days upon earth as man?
Whether He did or whether He didn't, He never laid out a comprehensive list of what is and is not OT canon.

Even if He did, it still wouldn't help much because that still leaves the entire NT on the table... the content of which I can justify by pointing back to Church councils which settled these matters. But you guys have faith, which is nice.

Yes, indeed, the Just shall live by Faith, even as Adam had to live by Faith that Jesus created Him. :)
Faith is obedience.
 
Upvote 0

Standing Up

On and on
Sep 3, 2008
25,360
2,757
Around about
✟66,235.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
Actually, I don't believe that the EO and the Catholic Church are that far apart on Tradition.

Tradition is provable.

How can we test Scripture?
Miles apart are EO and RC. Papacy come to mind?

Tradition is not provable because it was, for the most part, unwritten or melded from outside sources.

Test NT scripture for what? It was handed down as divine (see your catechism and Athanasius). And you know from past conversations with me the meaning of the renaming of the sons of Zebedee (first and last apostles to die, between which the NT was written and IMO assembled, sons of Thunder, but not everyone agrees).
 
Upvote 0

Standing Up

On and on
Sep 3, 2008
25,360
2,757
Around about
✟66,235.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
He never laid out a comprehensive list of what is and is not OT canon.
Perhaps He did in commenting on the blood of prophets from Abel to Zechariah (IMO the last of the prophets along with Malachi). There were no prophets until fulfillment of Malachi's prophecy: John the Baptist (forerunner).
 
Upvote 0

thecolorsblend

If God is your Father, who is your Mother?
Site Supporter
Jul 1, 2013
9,199
8,425
Gotham City, New Jersey
✟308,231.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
That, of course, raises the question of how the Law, the Wisdom Literature and the entire New Testament could fit in absent the authority of a council. But you guys have faith, which is nice.
 
Upvote 0

TheDag

I don't like titles
Jan 8, 2005
9,457
267
✟28,794.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Well, the division is, mostly, Protestant from Catholic, and the bad fruit, we would say, is the Protestant debarkation from Sacred Tradition.
Why are you ignoring the division within the catholic church itself especially fiven the passage you quoted clearly talked about the same church not between different groups. It was people in the same congregation. Stop ignoring it. Or just admit that ok that argument was a poor one and you shouldn't have used it and edit your post and leave the other points.

Practices are completely different from doctrine, as I've been pointing out.
You can make this excuse all you like but when you have a practice going for over two thousand years and nobody says one word against it then sorry but it is safe to say it is doctrine.

So why not do away with the ceremony most people go through to get married???
Well I must admit the whole idea of getting married sounds good if there was the traditional honeymoon period that existed in biblical times. One year off would be great!
 
Upvote 0

Albion

Facilitator
Dec 8, 2004
111,138
33,258
✟583,842.00
Country
United States
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Married
That, of course, raises the question of how the Law, the Wisdom Literature and the entire New Testament could fit in absent the authority of a council. But you guys have faith, which is nice.
Once again, you're referring to a stereotype of Sola Scriptura that's been fed to people by churches that reject Sola Scriptura. That's not Sola Scriptura itself.

But since we've explained what Sola Scriptura actually means--many times--I don't know how much more we can do.
 
Upvote 0

Root of Jesse

Admiral of the Fleet/First Sea Lord
Site Supporter
Jun 23, 2011
18,910
3,646
Bay Area, California
Visit site
✟354,065.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Constitution
Are you saying that the verses cited* are not Sacred Scripture? How did you determine this, if so?

* - http://www.christianforums.com/thre...-not-sufficient.7906273/page-66#post-68726286

I might recommend to you, for a table of contents [Jesus said, "law of Moses", "prophets", "psalms", in regards the OT], discussion [but I could see how some may not desire to]:

I know how Sacred Scripture was determined. I asked you how you think it's determined.
You can recommend, but there was no table of contents. The Catholic Church determined what constitutes the Bible.
There was no hebrew canon until there was a Christian (Catholic) Canon.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Root of Jesse

Admiral of the Fleet/First Sea Lord
Site Supporter
Jun 23, 2011
18,910
3,646
Bay Area, California
Visit site
✟354,065.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Constitution
Miles apart are EO and RC. Papacy come to mind?
Only in your mind.
Tradition is not provable because it was, for the most part, unwritten or melded from outside sources.
Tradition is in line with Sacred Scripture. That's how it's proven.
Test NT scripture for what? It was handed down as divine (see your catechism and Athanasius). And you know from past conversations with me the meaning of the renaming of the sons of Zebedee (first and last apostles to die, between which the NT was written and IMO assembled, sons of Thunder, but not everyone agrees).
You're the folks who say that Scripture can be tested. I asked how. Please answer, I'm really wanting to know. How do you test Scripture?
 
Upvote 0

Root of Jesse

Admiral of the Fleet/First Sea Lord
Site Supporter
Jun 23, 2011
18,910
3,646
Bay Area, California
Visit site
✟354,065.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Constitution
Why are you ignoring the division within the catholic church itself especially fiven the passage you quoted clearly talked about the same church not between different groups. It was people in the same congregation. Stop ignoring it. Or just admit that ok that argument was a poor one and you shouldn't have used it and edit your post and leave the other points.
I do not ignore the divisions within the Catholic Church. The devil constantly scatters the sheep by isolating the shepherd. There's many divisions, but Catholic doctrine is not one of them. Those who disagree with it are simply not "Catholic". Just as the disciples fell away when Jesus said they must eat His flesh and drink His blood.
You can make this excuse all you like but when you have a practice going for over two thousand years and nobody says one word against it then sorry but it is safe to say it is doctrine.
Practices are not divinely inspired. What practice has been going on over 2000 years that you consider wrong? (By the way, you just admitted that the Catholic Church is the Church Christ founded...)
Well I must admit the whole idea of getting married sounds good if there was the traditional honeymoon period that existed in biblical times. One year off would be great!
We're talking about ceremony.
 
Upvote 0

bbbbbbb

Well-Known Member
Jun 9, 2015
28,284
13,513
72
✟369,821.00
Faith
Non-Denom
I do not ignore the divisions within the Catholic Church. The devil constantly scatters the sheep by isolating the shepherd. There's many divisions, but Catholic doctrine is not one of them. Those who disagree with it are simply not "Catholic". Just as the disciples fell away when Jesus said they must eat His flesh and drink His blood.
Practices are not divinely inspired. What practice has been going on over 2000 years that you consider wrong? (By the way, you just admitted that the Catholic Church is the Church Christ founded...)

We're talking about ceremony.

I hope you understand what a slippery slope you have set up. It is a very rare Catholic that I have met who actually believes each and every doctrine ever believed and taught by the Catholic Church. In fact, now that I think of it, I have yet to meet a Catholic who meets those qualifications. Thus, there may well be no Catholics in this world with the possible exception of the Pope.
 
Upvote 0

Root of Jesse

Admiral of the Fleet/First Sea Lord
Site Supporter
Jun 23, 2011
18,910
3,646
Bay Area, California
Visit site
✟354,065.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Constitution
I hope you understand what a slippery slope you have set up. It is a very rare Catholic that I have met who actually believes each and every doctrine ever believed and taught by the Catholic Church. In fact, now that I think of it, I have yet to meet a Catholic who meets those qualifications. Thus, there may well be no Catholics in this world with the possible exception of the Pope.
It's not a slippery slope at all. Anyone who dissents from any Catholic doctrine separates himself from the totality of Catholicism. Me included. We strive, and persist, but we ultimately fail. As Jesus said, for mankind, it is impossible, but for God, all things are possible. Even Popes, while saying they agree totally with the teaching of the Church, have a hard time implementing that. That's why even Popes go to confession, Pope Francis says he goes every two weeks or so. The teachings of Christ are perfect, nonetheless, and this is, we believe, the Catholic Church.
 
Upvote 0

bbbbbbb

Well-Known Member
Jun 9, 2015
28,284
13,513
72
✟369,821.00
Faith
Non-Denom
It's not a slippery slope at all. Anyone who dissents from any Catholic doctrine separates himself from the totality of Catholicism. Me included. We strive, and persist, but we ultimately fail. As Jesus said, for mankind, it is impossible, but for God, all things are possible. Even Popes, while saying they agree totally with the teaching of the Church, have a hard time implementing that. That's why even Popes go to confession, Pope Francis says he goes every two weeks or so. The teachings of Christ are perfect, nonetheless, and this is, we believe, the Catholic Church.

Ah, it seems that you have now described an invisible church composed of non-members who cannot attain to membership.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Root of Jesse

Admiral of the Fleet/First Sea Lord
Site Supporter
Jun 23, 2011
18,910
3,646
Bay Area, California
Visit site
✟354,065.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Constitution
Ah, it seems that you have now described an invisible church composed of non-members who cannot attain to membership.
God is merciful, and allows those who strive with their whole hearts, even though they fail. We're members by God's grace, not our own.
 
Upvote 0
Apr 5, 2015
271
11
✟462.00
Faith
SDA
...Those who disagree with it are simply not "Catholic". Just as the disciples fell away when Jesus said they must eat His flesh and drink His blood. ...
The problem is, Roman Catholicism, takes some statements in John 6, and literalizes it/them [along with Mt 26:16; Mk 14:22; Lk 22:19; 1 Cr 11:24], which is exactly the problem the pharisees/scribes were continually doing to Jesus' words [not only in the Gospel of John, but in the others also], and misunderstanding them, thus abusing them to their own destruction. Many examples of this can be shown in demonstration, even in which John 6 is encompassed.

Those disciples who fell away [John 6:66] did not do so, because they were refusing what Roman Catholicism perceives as the precursor to its blasphemous transubstantiation mystagogy, but because they refused to accept, by faith, Jesus as the Messiah/Christ sent of God, who has the words/way of eternal Life brought down from the Father. They wanted a sign in demonstration, not faith in His word.
 
Upvote 0

bbbbbbb

Well-Known Member
Jun 9, 2015
28,284
13,513
72
✟369,821.00
Faith
Non-Denom
God is merciful, and allows those who strive with their whole hearts, even though they fail. We're members by God's grace, not our own.

How true. Hence, my understanding of God's church being composed of those who, by grace, are His own - known to Him but not necessarily identified as being a particular denomination.
 
Upvote 0
Apr 5, 2015
271
11
✟462.00
Faith
SDA
I know how Sacred Scripture was determined.
Really? How do you say it is determined, please explain, and then demonstrate why that decision/process was valid, and by what standard of measurement it is validated by?

I asked you how you think it's determined.
John 9:27 KJB - He answered them, I have told you already, and ye did not hear: wherefore would ye hear [it] again? will ye also be his disciples?

You can recommend, but there was no table of contents.
Did you even read the material presented in the links provided?

Do you accept this as scripture [barring for the moment, how we each arrived at that conclusion]?:

Luke 24:44 KJB - And he said unto them, These [are] the words which I spake unto you, while I was yet with you, that all things must be fulfilled, which were written in the law of Moses, and [in] the prophets, and [in] the psalms, concerning me.​

The Catholic Church determined what constitutes the Bible.
Like a mindless mantra, you say, but have no demonstration in fact, and cannot, as it has never been done, and will never be done. Bold statement, but easily refuted by simply producing the evidence, and the validation for that evidence, and the standard of measurement for that evidence. I [we all] await it. Since you made the statement, stating as 'fact', the burden is upon you.

There was no hebrew canon until there was a Christian (Catholic) Canon.
Again, the same repeated vain claptrap, all without substance and teeth. Sounding brass, tinkling cymbal. Vain jangling. Verily as rattling bones that turn over in the grave, falling over in decay, though having no life, move in crumbling in their return to their dust.

Jesus Christ, and Paul, Apollos, Peter, John, James, Jude, Luke, etc all quoted from the scriptures, according to the NT Koine Greek texts [which you yourself/ves accept as 'true' and 'canon']. The Jews, like Zacharias & Elisabeth, John the Baptist's father and his mother, quoted and read from the OT scriptures. Do you think that for a single moment that the faithful priests of the Temple and true prophets of God did not know what OT canon was and accepted as such by faith in their own times/days? Do you think for a single moment in the OT, that Gabriel himself did not know what the true canon was at the time of Daniel, when He spoke of the scriptures of truth? Do you think for a single moment that none of the prophets all the way back just before Moses, had no idea what was scripture from not scripture? That they all somehow wandered aimlessly, merely hoping to have quoted from something that could have been scripture, but never could be sure of it? Do you think that the people in the time of Moses, could not have had the scripture, or understand the difference between scripture as Moses, that Holy man of God wrote, and his daily writing of inventory in his own household?

If so, the Bible only has one word to identify such a person. It is a universal word, having only four letters.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

thecolorsblend

If God is your Father, who is your Mother?
Site Supporter
Jul 1, 2013
9,199
8,425
Gotham City, New Jersey
✟308,231.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
The problem is, Roman Catholicism, takes some statements in John 6, and literalizes it/them [along with Mt 26:16; Mk 14:22; Lk 22:19; 1 Cr 11:24], which is exactly the problem the pharisees/scribes were continually doing to Jesus' words [not only in the Gospel of John, but in the others also],
Yes indeed. It sure is a good thing it took over 1800 years for the Adventists to come along and finally get the Bible right, eh? Eh, Acts24Fourteen? Eh?

Those disciples who fell away [John 6:66] did not do so, because they were refusing what Roman Catholicism perceives as the precursor to its blasphemous transubstantiation mystagogy, but because they refused to accept, by faith, Jesus as the Messiah/Christ sent of God, who has the words/way of eternal Life brought down from the Father. They wanted a sign in demonstration, not faith in His word.
Really? Because the text and the people both say they departed because of their literal understanding of Our Lord's teaching and their inability to accept it.
 
Upvote 0
Status
Not open for further replies.