The 21 reasons behind the rejection of the "Bible-Only"

3.The Church is the Pillar of Ground and Truth not the Bible as far as scripture is of concern.

Funny thing it is the Scriptures that give us that Truth, therefore the Church may be the pillar...but the Scriptures are the Foundation.

7.The Church Produced the Bible but it's not the Bible that produced the Church

Genesis to Malachi was here long before the Church came to be.

All Scripture is breathed out by God (not the Church) and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness,
(2Ti 3:16)

This seems to be an effort to support man-made religions and religious sects. All Christian testimony MUST come out of the pure Word of God without additions or deletions:

Linet Kihonge said:

1. No scripture says the Scripture should be the only source of inspiration; [God is our only source, and He speaks by His immutable Word, and will not hold man responsible for anything He has not told us in His Word given to us ---certainly not by various ideas and innovations of men]
2. The Bible advocates for oral tradition besides written word. [Only preaching of God's Word]
3. The Church is the Pillar of Ground and Truth not the Bible as far as scripture is of concern. [ One can only know ANYTHING about the mind of God from what He tells us in His Word; and Satan will of course try to dispute that]
4. Based on Matthew 18:17 it's sinful not to listen to the Church. [One should know that this verse applies to local discipline by the local assembly which God establishes by His Word only]
5. The Bible cannot exactly teach everything a believer needs to know but he needs an interpreter. [The interpreter must be respnsible Elders in the Bible-only church God establishes]
6. The Early Christians didn't have a Bible [This is an attempt to disqualify God's Word, but history shows that after the Apostles departed the many writings and manuscripts were assembled by the Spirit of God to deliver the written Word to mankind ---thank God for that]
7. The Church Produced the Bible but it's not the Bible that produced the Church [This is again opposing the Word of God (a dangerous thing); for God established the Church as in Acts 2 (a spiritual work in the hearts of men to become "the Church", and the Apostles were given the authority and power of God to minister and establish the Church in the world; and it is preserved down through history for us all ---those who will value and receive it.]
8. There's no Darn way the Scripture's authority was independent of the Teaching Authority of the Church. They existed in three harmonies Scripture, Tradition and Magisterium of the Church. [There is no need to cuss about it, and it is clearly wrong to say the Bible is not God's immutable Word to man; and ALL TEACHING has always been intended by God to be "all the counsel of God" and "rightly dividing the Word of Truth" as God has told us]
9. The Bible-Only Doctrines were interpreted apart from Tradition and the Magisterium. [Not true and not substantiated by the Holy Bible]
10. Canon of the Bible was not settled until the 4th Century [Again, one needs to appreciate that the Old Testament manuscripts and the NT are both God's Word to man, and supersedes anything man might promote]
11. An "Extra-Biblical" Authority Identified the Canon of the Bible - Bible Only Pips just run wild with the Bible coming up with all sorts of interpretations. [Certainly man will always seek to promote ideas contrary to the Word ---even as was done in this original post]
12. Scripture is not self-authenticating flushed [I assume that means it did not write itself, which no one has suggested]
13. There's hardly any evidence of the Original Manuscripts (most are copies). [Which statement is irrelevant to the issue here.]
14. Biblical Manuscripts contain thousands of variations. [One needs to study the history of the Bible to appreciate what God has preserved for us]
15. There are Hundreds of Bible versions. [Man's failure and Satan's attacks on God's Word does NOT invalidate His message to man]
16. The Bible was made available to individuals in the 15th Century. [I think your dates are quite wrong]
17. The Bible-Only pips came to existence after the 14th Century. [Not true, and we don't have time here to go into the history here]
18. The Bible-Only produced divisions, and disunity (horrible outcomes of the Church Jesus Intended) [Again you ignore the fact that man's rebellion against God does not justify throwing out the Bible; and one needs to come to value Bible-only for our only hope to being in conformity to God]
19. Un-uniform interpretation of the Scripture.
20. There are 7 Books missing from the Book (Maccabees, Tobit, Sirach, Portions of Esther, Judith, Baruch, Portions of Daniel, and Wisdom.
21. Founder of the Sola-Scripture was Cockoos.

If you use the Wisdom of man to determine the flow of scripture you will see all the inconsistencies because you think you can reason out the Bible but when you read the Bible using the Holy Spirit you will see it's FLOWS and The FLAWS from the "deleted" Canon. There's a way God talks and you will know when it's not HIM, sadly, the only reason why it's easy to still not consider some of the Apocrypha is because God's voice is Uniform and I know the LORD can Never contradict his own words. IOW, the only thing that has been missing is the Spirit of TRUTH!!!

Click to expand...

Well, dear one I hope you are a true "born again" believer in Jesus, the Christ of God, and not just a religious type seeking to draw souls away from God and His "exceeding great and precious promises" as given. Look up!

Yet another attempt to denigrate the Word of God. Sad.

Linet Kihonge said:

1. No scripture says the Scripture should be the only source of inspiration;

Click to expand...

That is irrelevant. The Bible comes from God Himself, and has been given to us by God for a purpose. Nothing that contradicts the word of God is from God, because God does not contradict Himself. So, if any "inspiration" says something contrary to the word of God, it is not of God.

Linet Kihonge said:

The Bible advocates for oral tradition besides written word.

Click to expand...

The Bible comes from a culture that valued oral tradition, and that oral tradition was later written down. The bottom line is, it is the inspired word of God. Again, if any "oral tradition" contradicts the Bible, then it is not of God.

Linet Kihonge said:

[*]The Church is the Pillar of Ground and Truth not the Bible as far as scripture is of concern.

Click to expand...

I'm not sure what you are trying to say here, but the "Church" can definitely be wrong, and has been about many things. The Bible is the inspired word of God, not the word of man. As such, all Church teachings and doctrines MUST line up with the word of God. Any teaching or doctrine that contradicts the word of God, is not of God.

Linet Kihonge said:

[*]Based on Matthew 18:17 it's sinful not to listen to the Church.

Click to expand...

And what is the Church? The church is all true believers who have repented and turned to God, and who walk in obedience to Him. (The Church is not confined to one single denomination) And God has given us His word so that we can learn and know what we must do to obey Him, and so that we can have discernment and know what is of Him and what is not.

Linet Kihonge said:

[*]The Bible cannot exactly teach everything a believer needs to know but he needs an interpreter.

Click to expand...

Our "Interpreter" is not man (or woman) but the Holy Spirit. He gives us discernment and guidance in all things. (As Jesus Himself promised) And He will not teach ANYTHING contrary to the word of God.

Linet Kihonge said:

[*]The Early Christians didn't have a Bible

Click to expand...

Indeed. In fact, the Catholic Church made sure of this, persecuting and even killing anyone who would dare read the Scriptures for themselves, or those who tried to put the Bible in the hands of Christians. The Church, rather than punishing people for desiring to have and read the Bible, should have been working to make the word of God available to ALL Christians, they did not. This does NOT mean reliance on the Bible above Church teaching is somehow wrong, it means the Church purposely and intentionally kept the Bible from Christians, while elevating their (often false) church teachings above Scripture. Why do you think they would do such a thing? The answer seems quite obvious to me. They didn't want people to know their teachings were not of God.

Linet Kihonge said:

[*]The Church Produced the Bible but it's not the Bible that produced the Church

Click to expand...

Wrong. GOD "produced the Bible, it is HIS word, not the word of the Church. And the true Church is all believers who have turned from their sins, repenting, calling on the name of Jesus to be saved, and walking in obedience to Him.

Linet Kihonge said:

[*]There's no Darn way the Scripture's authority was independent of the Teaching Authority of the Church. They existed in three harmonies Scripture, Tradition and Magisterium of the Church.

Click to expand...

Actually, they did not always "exist in harmony." (and sometimes still don't) The Church kept the Bible from Christians, all the while teaching many false and heretical things, some of which continue to this day. For any Church teaching to be truly "authoritative", it MUST be in agreement with the word of God. Any teaching or doctrine that contradicts the word of God, is not of God.

Linet Kihonge said:

[*]The Bible-Only Doctrines were interpreted apart from Tradition and the Magisterium.

Click to expand...

Actually, Church "Tradition" and "the Magisterium" became separate from the word of God. The Church was able to promote these traditions and teachings precisely because they did not allow Christians to have accesss to the Bible. In this way, Christians accepted the teachings of the Church as authoritative, because they had no way of knowing what the Bible actually said about particular things. This was a blatent and dispicable misuse of authority by the Church. They deliberately decieved and mislead people.

Linet Kihonge said:

[*]Canon of the Bible was not settled until the 4th Century

Click to expand...

The formation of God's word into the collection we now have as the Bible, was indeed a process, just as the actual writing of it was. But this process, however lengthy, was guided by God. The Bible is HIS word, not man's.

Linet Kihonge said:

[*]An "Extra-Biblical" Authority Identified the Canon of the Bible - Bible Only Pips just run wild with the Bible coming up with all sorts of interpretations.

Click to expand...

I'm not sure what you mean by "extra-Biblical". God guided and inspired the writing and formation of His word from start to finish. That people interpret it incorrectly says nothing about the authenticity of the Bible itself, or its Author, God.

Linet Kihonge said:

[*]Scripture is not self-authenticating flushed[*]There's hardly any evidence of the Original Manuscripts (most are copies).

Click to expand...

Indeed, this is well known. And yet, the Bible remains the inspired word of God, preserved by Him throughout history.

Linet Kihonge said:

[*]Biblical Manuscripts contain thousands of variations.

Click to expand...

It is no question that God used man to write His inspired word, and so we can see different writing styles and perspectives coming through in the writings. This does not change the fact that the Bible is God's word, not man's. God has inspired and guided the entire process when it comes to His word. He was and is in control.

Linet Kihonge said:

[*]There are Hundreds of Bible versions.

Click to expand...

Indeed. But again, the Bible is God's word, not man's. He has ensured that His truth remains.

Linet Kihonge said:

[*]The Bible was made available to individuals in the 15th Century.

Click to expand...

As noted earlier, the Church is actually part of the reason it took so long for the Bible to be made available to individuals. The Church should have been working to make this possible far sooner, rather than persecuting and killing anyone who desired to have or read the Bible for themselves.

Linet Kihonge said:

[*]The Bible-Only pips came to existence after the 14th Century.

Click to expand...

There were many many Christians who thought this way much earlier than the 14th Century, if you research Church history, you will find out what happened to them.

Linet Kihonge said:

[*]The Bible-Only produced divisions, and disunity (horrible outcomes of the Church Jesus Intended)

Click to expand...

There are good reasons Christians broke away from the Catholic Church. When they finally did have a Bible for themselves, they could see that much of what the Church taught was not of God. Again, God does not contradict Himself, and we should not have unity with anyone who teaches things that go against what God teaches us in His word.

Linet Kihonge said:

[*]Un-uniform interpretation of the Scripture.

Click to expand...

There is no doubt that various Scriptures have been interpreted in many different ways, and I'm not saying this isn't an issue. However, the Catholic Church itself misused and even contradicted much of the Bible. So, to say that Protestants have also done so, is not an excuse for the Catholic Church's errors. There are many Scriptures that are not open to interpretation, however. The central beliefs held by Christians (that Jesus died for our sins, that He is the Son of God who has redeemed us, that He is the Way, the Truth and the Life, the only way to the Father) are absolutely unquestionable.

Linet Kihonge said:

[*]There are 7 Books missing from the Book (Maccabees, Tobit, Sirach, Portions of Esther, Judith, Baruch, Portions of Daniel, and Wisdom.

Click to expand...

These 7 books were not even regarded as the word of God by the Jewish people themselves. The Catholic Church added them to the Bible much later. (At the Council of Trent in 1546 AD) Here is a link to a list of reasons why the Apocrypha/Deutero-Canonical books should not be included in the Bible as the word of God.

Linet Kihonge said:

[*]Founder of the Sola-Scripture was Cockoos.

Click to expand...

I fail to see how turning to the word of God above the teachings and traditions of ANY church makes someone "cockoos." What an absurd claim.

Linet Kihonge said:

If you use the Wisdom of man to determine the flow of scripture you will see all the inconsistencies because you think you can reason out the Bible but when you read the Bible using the Holy Spirit you will see it's FLOWS and The FLAWS from the "deleted" Canon. There's a way God talks and you will know when it's not HIM, sadly, the only reason why it's easy to still not consider some of the Apocrypha is because God's voice is Uniform and I know the LORD can Never contradict his own words. IOW, the only thing that has been missing is the Spirit of TRUTH!!!

Click to expand...

Exactly, so why do so many of the Church teachings contradict God's word?

I think you need to do more research into the claims that you're making here. Especially in regard to the Bible and how it was purposely kept from people by the Catholic Church and the Apocrypha and what it really is and when and why it was added to the Bible by the Catholic Church.

I have no idea why you are so offended by Christians who desire to go to the Bible and hold it above Church teachings and traditions. The Bible is God's word, given to us to guide and instruct us. Anything and everything a church teachings must not contradict God's word.

Blessings

~Amariselle

Linet Kihonge said:

Hi, I am against the list !!!

Click to expand...

Ha ha, my apologies.

I am too

I honestly thought you were arguing against "Sola Scriptura."

Linet Kihonge said:

No

Click to expand...

Will don't I feel silly?

Oh well, at least you know some of my reasons for objecting to that list.

Thanks for sharing it.

Looks like something I read reiterating the rejection of Sola Scriptura through the edict of the Catholic's council of Trent. A Catholic apologetics site if I am remembering correctly.

I believe God's revelations arrive in nature, the experience of the individual in faith to Jesus Christ, and through the Bible. But to reject the Bible in total as the only revelation of God when it was arrived at through oral revelations before the written is not wise in my opinion.

VanillaSunflowers said:

Looks like something I read reiterating the rejection of Sola Scriptura through the edict of the Catholic's council of Trent. A Catholic apologetics site if I am remembering correctly.

I believe God's revelations arrive in nature, the experience of the individual in faith to Jesus Christ, and through the Bible. But to reject the Bible in total as the only revelation of God when it was arrived at through oral revelations before the written is not wise in my opinion.

Click to expand...

I am by nature a cerebral person, somewhat of a skeptic, and a Mensa member. As a result I tend to think things out more than many people and often question what others have to say. Therefore I strongly believe that one doesn't get at The Truth by thinking about it and/or reasoning about the details in the Bible. Paul wrote to the Corinthians, "For the message of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God. For it is written: “I will destroy the wisdom of the wise; the intelligence of the intelligent I will frustrate.”Where is the wise man? Where is the scribe? Where is the philosopher of this age? Has not God made foolish the wisdom of the world?…"

We have been given the Holy Spirit, who will guide us into all truth. The church can establish rules and doctrine, scholars and lay people can debate all things about God, including what the Bible means, cults can develop devoted to one leader only, etc. but we have been given God's own spirit(!) so that we can discern spiritually what is from the Lord, how we are supposed to relate to others who are members of the same body, how we are to relate to those not in Christ, etc.

I wonder about many of the posts that I read on the Christian Forums that are written by people who call themselves Christians, yet exhibit none of the fruits of the Spirit. Jesus is our Lord and we are his servants. We are to do his will and to glorify God, not turn on each other and/or try to dominate each other. We have the Bible -- God's word spoken through the Spirit -- to guide us into becoming mature in Christ. To debate whether the Bible is "true", whether it contradicts itself, what an out of context verse or two mean, etc. is to miss the living God who is behind it all.

I'm a Jew, so I can say this without being bigoted: the Jews missed Christ because they went by the written word, not by the Word that became flesh. It is my prayer that the eyes of those in Christ be opened to his Spirit, by God's grace. Then we finally will become a shining city on a hill, shedding God's light on the world.

Linet Kihonge said:

I lifted this from a place I don't want to quote but next time you are told why it's outrageous to hold to the Bible you've known all your lifetime, this is why!!! disheartening in every sense of the definition!!!

1. No scripture says that Scripture should be the only source of inspiration;
2. The Bible advocates for oral tradition besides written word.
3. The Church is the Pillar of Ground and Truth not the Bible as far as scripture is of concern.
4. Based on Matthew 18:17 it's sinful not to listen to the Church.
5. The Bible cannot exactly teach everything a believer needs to know but he needs an interpreter.
6. The Early Christians didn't have a Bible
7. The Church Produced the Bible but it's not the Bible that produced the Church
8. There's no Darn way the Scripture's authority was independent of the Teaching Authority of the Church. They existed in three harmonies Scripture, Tradition and Magisterium of the Church.
9. The Bible-Only Doctrines were interpreted apart from Tradition and the Magisterium.
   
10. Canon of the Bible was not settled until the 4th Century
11. An "Extra-Biblical" Authority Identified the Canon of the Bible - Bible Only Pips just run wild with the Bible coming up with all sorts of interpretations.
12. Scripture is not self-authenticating flushed
13. There's hardly any evidence of the Original Manuscripts (most are copies).
14. Biblical Manuscripts contain thousands of variations.
15. There are Hundreds of Bible versions.
16. The Bible was made available to individuals in the 15th Century.
17. The Bible-Only pips came to existence after the 14th Century.
18. The Bible-Only produced divisions, and disunity (horrible outcomes of the Church Jesus Intended)
19. Un-uniform interpretation of the Scripture.
20. There are 7 Books missing from the Book (Maccabees, Tobit, Sirach, Portions of Esther, Judith, Baruch, Portions of Daniel, and Wisdom.
21. Founder of the Sola-Scripture was Cockoos.

If you use the Wisdom of man to determine the flow of scripture you will see all the inconsistencies because you think you can reason out the Bible but when you read the Bible using the Holy Spirit you will see it's FLOWS and The FLAWS from the "deleted" Canon. There's a way God talks and you will know when it's not HIM, sadly, the only reason why it's easy to still not consider some of the Apocrypha is because God's voice is Uniform and I know the LORD can Never contradict his own words. IOW, the only thing that has been missing is the Spirit of TRUTH!!!

Click to expand...

It is easy to see the 'god of this world' at work. He would like everyone to take the author's word as truth. Surprise devil, I have power and authority over you!

pescador said:

I'm a Jew, so I can say this without being bigoted: the Jews missed Christ because they went by the written word, not by the Word that became flesh. It is my prayer that the eyes of those in Christ be opened to his Spirit, by God's grace. Then we finally will become a shining city on a hill, shedding God's light on the world.

Click to expand...

The Jews missed Christ because they went by their traditions.

Matthew 22:29 KJVS
[29] Jesus answered and said unto them, Ye do err, not knowing the scriptures, nor the power of God.

Mark 7:7-9 KJVS
[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.

And how often did Jesus have to remind the Jews, "it is written"?

VanillaSunflowers said:

Looks like something I read reiterating the rejection of Sola Scriptura through the edict of the Catholic's council of Trent. A Catholic apologetics site if I am remembering correctly.

I believe God's revelations arrive in nature, the experience of the individual in faith to Jesus Christ, and through the Bible. But to reject the Bible in total as the only revelation of God when it was arrived at through oral revelations before the written is not wise in my opinion.

Click to expand...

Hi.

I was just thinking that any revelations received by someone would still have to line up with what the Bible says. We can't pick and choose to make our own truths. There is truth and untruths. How many people would be getting 'revelations' that were all differrent. Oh brothers! Of course God wants us to know the truth. Plus, since we have it in that big written word vs.some people who don't have it, we are now responsible to know it.

Pamelav said:

Hi.

I was just thinking that any revelations received by someone would still have to line up with what the Bible says. We can't pick and choose to make our own truths. There is truth and untruths. How many people would be getting 'revelations' that were all differrent. Oh brothers! Of course God wants us to know the truth. Plus, since we have it in that big written word vs.some people who don't have it, we are now responsible to know it.

Click to expand...

I don't know about that. That God wouldn't show himself or give revelations or speak to us today.

There is a scripture that tells us that God is unable to be contained in buildings created by human hands. Being we are also told that God is a spirit and being infinitely beyond our measure of comprehension in his totality, I can't say that he is limited in speaking to his children because a book was compiled to express his inspired word at one time.

I think that is the meaning behind the passage in acts. To tell us, especially when we are indwelt with his spirit, that when we are able to trust him and listen he will guide us. Which is why I think he tells us in Acts that nothing can contain him that is man made. I would certainly think that pertains to the Bible as well.
When we are indwelt and Jesus told us he would send that helper, God's most sacred and holy spirit, to guide us how can we accept that if we think that guidance is not something that speaks to each and every one of us as God sees fit?

Acts 17:24-25 God that made the world and all things therein, seeing that he is Lord of heaven and earth, dwelleth not in temples made with hands; 25 Neither is worshiped with men's hands, as though he needed anything, seeing he giveth to all life, and breath, and all things;

Acts 7:48-51 Howbeit the most High dwelleth not in temples made with hands; as saith the prophet, 49 Heaven is my throne, and earth is my footstool: what house will ye build me? saith the Lord: or what is the place of my rest? 50 Hath not my hand made all these things? 51 Ye stiffnecked and uncircumcised in heart and ears, ye do always resist the Holy Ghost: as your fathers did, so do ye.

God spoke to the prophetesses and prophets of old. Are we to think we are not worthy of his attentions after he sent his only begotten son to die for us and fulfill what was prophesied? I don't think so.

In this way I think Mark 7:7 was God's way of speaking then and eternally to us. And as a warning about those doctrines of men.
Jesus came to destroy religions and overcome doctrine. Are we to be consigned to that when those claim God can no longer, does no longer, speak to us save in the Bible compiled by men?

That is my faith in my Abba Father. I do not presume to say all must agree.

VanillaSunflowers said:

Looks like something I read reiterating the rejection of Sola Scriptura through the edict of the Catholic's council of Trent. A Catholic apologetics site if I am remembering correctly.

I believe God's revelations arrive in nature, the experience of the individual in faith to Jesus Christ, and through the Bible. But to reject the Bible in total as the only revelation of God when it was arrived at through oral revelations before the written is not wise in my opinion.

Click to expand...

Sorry, I must have misunderstood then. It Souded like you said people will get revelations outside of scripture by saying they can get them thru nature.
I do believe God speaks to people outside of scripture, but it must align with God's Word to know it was from Him!

Pamelav said:

Sorry, I must have misunderstood then. It Souded like you said people will get revelations outside of scripture by saying they can get them thru nature.
I do believe God speaks to people outside of scripture, but it must align with God's Word to know it was from Him!

Click to expand...

You understood me correctly. Nature is God's creation before humans came into being. Remember what David sang of in his song, Psalm, chapter 19? His song in Psalm 65:9-13?
Nature speaks of Abba Father. It is not independent of him. It is one with him as his creation that shows proof of his power and glory even to the skeptics in the world. This is what makes it but another example of God's divine revelation, reveal, of himself.
As I mentioned, I believe if we are to take council from the holy spirit that is indwelling us then we are to value God's wisdom for what it is. God cannot be contained to speak only through what is written down. He cannot be contained, his wisdom not compressed, into the words of man. Not when he speaks in the breeze, the sunlight, the song of birds, the crash of sea waves, and throughout all of nature.

Do you know of a scripture where God said he would only speak to us in a manner that conforms to 73 books contained in one volume? When he said he cannot be contained by structures crafted by human hands does that exempt a book crafted by human hands? That it contain his eternal and everlasting wisdom for eternity and insures he shall not speak outside of that ever again to us?

Linet Kihonge said:

I lifted this from a place I don't want to quote but next time you are told why it's outrageous to hold to the Bible you've known all your lifetime, this is why!!! disheartening in every sense of the definition!!!

1. No scripture says that Scripture should be the only source of inspiration;

Click to expand...

Indeed, Scripture is not the only source of inspiration and God has not limited His inspiration to only a select number of books. However, in order to discern whether something new has been inspired by God we should compare it what has already been accepted as inspired aka Scripture. If the new thing contradicts what God has inspired previously, then it can not also be inspired by God.

The Bible advocates for oral tradition besides written word.

Click to expand...

Indeed, but the Bereans in Acts 17:11 checked everything that Paul said against Scripture to see if what he said was true, so while oral traditions beside the written word are acceptable, they need to line up with Scripture.

The Church is the Pillar of Ground and Truth not the Bible as far as scripture is of concern.

Click to expand...

Psalms 119:142 Your righteousness is an everlasting righteousness, And Your law is truth.

Based on Matthew 18:17 it's sinful not to listen to the Church.

Click to expand...

It is speaking about bringing it before the church elders. However, the sin is in what they committed and their refusal repent from it, not in not listening to the church elders.

The Bible cannot exactly teach everything a believer needs to know but he needs an interpreter.

Click to expand...

Every form of communication inherently requires interpretation.

The Early Christians didn't have a Bible The Church Produced the Bible but it's not the Bible that produced the Church There's no Darn way the Scripture's authority was independent of the Teaching Authority of the Church. They existed in three harmonies Scripture, Tradition and Magisterium of the Church.

Click to expand...

The issue is what we should do when Scripture, Tradition, and Magisterium of the Church are not in harmony. For instance, if Tradition and Magisterium of the Church support something that goes against Scripture, then which has the highest authority? There is a theme throughout the Bible that we must obey God rather than man, so we should give priority to God's word over manmade traditions or man's authority.

The Bible-Only Doctrines were interpreted apart from Tradition and the Magisterium.

Click to expand...

Again, the issue is not that we should only use the Bible, but that it is a higher authority than tradition and the Magisterium, which is itself a tradition that has been handed down by church leaders.

Canon of the Bible was not settled until the 4th Century

Click to expand...

The bulk of the Canon was settled by the 2nd century, with disagreement about some of the outliers.

An "Extra-Biblical" Authority Identified the Canon of the Bible - Bible Only Pips just run wild with the Bible coming up with all sorts of interpretations.

Click to expand...

The formation of the Canon was less about some authority picking and choosing which books were inspired, and more about formally recognizing which books were already considered to be inspired.

Scripture is not self-authenticating flushed

Click to expand...

"An undesigned coincidence (so-named by J.J. Blunt and first discovered by William Paley) occurs when one account of an event leaves out a bit of information which is filled in, often quite incidentally, by a different account, which helps to answer some natural questions raised by the first."

There's hardly any evidence of the Original Manuscripts (most are copies).

Click to expand...

I'd say that the existence of copies is pretty solid evidence of original manuscripts.

Biblical Manuscripts contain thousands of variations.

Click to expand...

There are a lot more than thousands of variations, but they do not affect any major doctrinal issue. The fact that we have many copies that allow us to see where the variations are made is very helpful in determining what the originals said without having them.

There are Hundreds of Bible versions.

Click to expand...

For the most part they are based off of the same manuscripts.

The Bible was made available to individuals in the 15th Century.

Click to expand...

So?

The Bible-Only pips came to existence after the 14th Century.

Click to expand...

The people who used the Bible as the highest authority were around in Acts 17:11 and very likely were around earlier than that.

The Bible-Only produced divisions, and disunity (horrible outcomes of the Church Jesus Intended) Un-uniform interpretation of the Scripture.

Click to expand...

It takes two to have disunity.

There are 7 Books missing from the Book (Maccabees, Tobit, Sirach, Portions of Esther, Judith, Baruch, Portions of Daniel, and Wisdom.

Click to expand...

Yes, there is disagreement about which books were inspired or in regard to their authorship.

Founder of the Sola-Scripture was Cockoos.

Click to expand...

No you.

I noticed you were against the list half way through writing it, but decided to finish anyway.

The above reply referred in part to this sentence in an earlier post: "The Early Christians didn't have a Bible". I want to correct that totally misleading statement. They had the complete Old Testament in two separate formats: Hebrew-Aramaic (The Hebrew Bible) and Greek (Septuagint). Of course, they didn't have the New Testament bound in one volume, but did have the all the "books" (manuscripts) separately.