Easiest Defense of Sola Scriptura

fhansen · Apr 22, 2018

Bible2+ said:
Note that sola scriptura in no way negates the Holy Spirit's teaching of Christians (1 John 2:27), through His scriptures (Ephesians 6:17; 2 Timothy 3:15 to 4:4). Instead, sola scriptura simply means that no human teaching is necessarily true unless it is taught by the Bible itself (Acts 17:11b).

The Catholic Church teaches that both Scripture and Tradition are revelation from God, coming from the same source, neither of human origin. Humans necessarily come into play, however, whenever they attempt to interpret one or the other and proclaim/teach on their meaning.

fhansen · Apr 22, 2018

Albion said:
...which necessarily means that Scripture is not sufficient.

It's not Scripture that's insufficient; it's human understanding and abilities that are insufficient.

Kaon · Apr 22, 2018

Bible2+ said:
Note that this is not always the case.

2 Peter 1:20 Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation.
21 For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Spirit.

2 Timothy 3:16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God . . .

Acts 1:16 . . . the Holy Spirit by the mouth of David spake . . .

Acts 28:25 . . . Well spake the Holy Spirit by Isaiah the prophet . . .

2 Peter 1:16 . . . we have not followed cunningly devised fables, when we made known unto you the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, but were eyewitnesses of his majesty.

Hebrews 2:1 Therefore we ought to give the more earnest heed to the things which we have heard, lest at any time we should let them slip.
2 For if the word spoken by angels was stedfast, and every transgression and disobedience received a just recompence of reward;
3 How shall we escape, if we neglect so great salvation; which at the first began to be spoken by the Lord, and was confirmed unto us by them that heard him;
4 God also bearing them witness, both with signs and wonders, and with divers miracles, and gifts of the Holy Spirit, according to his own will?

Note that the Word of God being written on our hearts in no way contradicts that we need a text, as in 2 Timothy 3:15 to 4:4. Instead, the text is there to make sure that we do not make stuff up out of our own hearts, and then try to claim that it is God's Word.

Proverbs 28:26 He that trusteth in his own heart is a fool . . .

Jeremiah 17:9 The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately wicked: who can know it?

Note that it does not.

Indeed, the Bible, in English translations, sometimes calls the New Covenant the New Testament. For the original Greek word "diatheke" (G1242) can be translated into English as either "covenant" (Hebrews 8:8) or "testament" (Hebrews 9:15). So when Christians refer to the two main parts of the Bible as the Old Testament and the New Testament, what they are really referring to are the two parts of the Bible which focus (for the most part) on the Old Covenant and the New Covenant.

Note that it is not either/or, but both/and. For the "other people" who wrote the New Testament truly know the Father (1 John 1:3). So if you ignore their writings regarding Him, you could be led astray to follow someone else as your father who is not truly the Father (cf. John 8:44-47).

Also, you could even be deceived into following "another Jesus" (2 Corinthians 11:4).

Indeed, all Christians need to be aware that during the future Antichrist's literal 3.5-year worldwide reign (Revelation 13:4-18), even though the world will consciously and openly worship Lucifer (Satan, the dragon) and the Antichrist (the individual-man aspect of Revelation's "beast") (Revelation 13:4-8, Revelation 12:9), this will not require that the Antichrist's one-world religion will say that Jesus is evil, or will turn the world against Jesus. For almost the entire world reveres Jesus, at least as being a good man. The Antichrist could confirm this basic world belief, but simply (in his words) "clarify" that while Jesus is indeed a good man, he is not the Christ or the Son of God (1 John 2:22). No doubt the Antichrist will also deny that Jesus suffered and died on the Cross for our sins, as this, just as believing that Jesus is the Christ and the Son of God (John 20:31, John 3:36), is one of the core beliefs of the Gospel by which people become saved (1 Corinthians 15:1-4).

So what the Antichrist could do is keep the idea of a good Jesus, but strip it of everything by which Jesus saves people from hell. And this would not require that the Antichrist deny Jesus' Second Coming. Indeed, the Antichrist and his False Prophet (of Revelation 19:20) could even try to employ to their own ends the Biblical prophecy of Jesus' Second Coming, as well as the Muslim prophecy which says that the miracle-working prophet Jesus will return bodily from heaven in the last days in order to bring the whole earth into the worship of the true God. For the False Prophet could claim that he is Jesus returned (via "reincarnation"). And he could perform amazing miracles (Revelation 13:13) as purported proof of his claim (cf. John 3:2). This is one reason why it is important to know when and how the real Jesus' Second Coming will occur (Matthew 24:29-31; 2 Thessalonians 2:1-8; 1 Thessalonians 4:14-17, Revelation 19:7 to 20:6, Zechariah 14:3-21).

Once the False Prophet by his amazing miracles has brought the world under his spell (Revelation 13:13-18, Revelation 19:20), including many Muslims and Christians who may not care much for scriptural dogma, but could go wild over his signs and wonders, he could begin to (in his words) "restore to the world the real message which was spoken by me (Jesus) at my first coming, and by the great prophet Mohammed, but which message became corrupted by power-hungry men when they copied and changed the early manuscripts of the Bible and the Koran". He could then gradually initiate the world into the Antichrist's Gnostic Luciferianism (1 John 4:3, Revelation 13:4-6), also called Satanism, a religion which could have existed since ancient times in some "mystery" cults, and which still exists today in the highest degree of initiation of a worldwide secret society. The False Prophet could present his miraculously calling fire down from heaven (Revelation 13:13) as purported proof that Lucifer (the dragon, Satan) and the Antichrist are the true God (Revelation 13:4-8, Revelation 12:9), in an inversion of how back in Old Testament times the prophet Elijah miraculously called fire down from heaven in order to prove that YHWH is the true God (1 Kings 18:37-39).

The person whom the Antichrist will revile is YHWH (Revelation 13:6, Daniel 11:36), whom many people mistakenly think of as being (in their words) "the God of only the Old Testament, that cruel and hateful God who commanded people to commit genocide and to kill babies (1 Samuel 15:3), whereas Jesus came and preached love for everyone (Matthew 5:44)". The truth is that Jesus Christ confirmed that the God of the Old Testament, YHWH (Deuteronomy 6:4-5, Leviticus 19:18), is the same as the God of the New Testament (Mark 12:29-31), and that the Old Testament is true (Matthew 5:17-18, Luke 24:44-48). Jesus suffered and died for our sins in fulfillment of Old Testament prophecy from YHWH (Isaiah 53; 1 Peter 2:24). And He rose from the dead in fulfillment of Old Testament prophecy from YHWH (e.g. Psalms 16:10, Acts 2:31). Jesus died to establish the New Covenant (Matthew 26:28), which YHWH had foretold in the Old Testament (Jeremiah 31:31-34). And Jesus died to bring about the defeat of Satan (Hebrews 2:14), which YHWH had foretold from even the first book of the Old Testament (Genesis 3:15).

Nonetheless, building on many people's misconceptions of YHWH as being (in their words) "the cruel God of the Old Testament", no doubt one of the future Antichrist's chief blasphemies against YHWH (Revelation 13:6, Daniel 11:36) will be that YHWH is an evil god. This is one of the ancient blasphemies of Gnosticism, another being the antichrist lie that Christ is not in the flesh (2 John 1:7). The world will be deceived into completely rejecting YHWH, and worshipping Satan and the Antichrist instead (Revelation 13:4-8, Revelation 12:9). But Satan might not be worshipped as "Satan", which almost everyone sees as a bad name (it means "Adversary"), but as "Lucifer" (Isaiah 14:12), which means "the morning star". The Antichrist could falsely say that it is YHWH who is the true "Satan", the true "Adversary" of mankind. And the Antichrist could claim that even 2 Samuel 24:1 and 1 Chronicles 21:1 together prove this by showing that it was the single entity of YHWH/Satan who moved King David to number Israel. Of course, the truth is that 2 Samuel 24:1 and 1 Chronicles 21:1 together simply mean that YHWH used Satan to move David. YHWH elsewhere rebuked Satan (Zechariah 3:2), so they are in no way the same person.

Because the Antichrist and his False Prophet (possibly masquerading as Jesus) will deny that Jesus is the Christ (1 John 2:22), and will deny that Christ is in the flesh (1 John 4:3), and because they will bring the unsaved world into the worship of Lucifer (Satan, the dragon) instead (Revelation 13:4, Revelation 12:9), they could falsely say that (the non-mortal flesh) Lucifer is the Christ, that the new name of Christ (Revelation 3:12c) is "Lucifer Christ". For just as "Lucifer" means "the morning star", so Christ is the morning star (Revelation 22:16b). Also, Christ identified himself with the serpent (John 3:14), and Lucifer is the serpent (Revelation 12:9). Also, Christ said: "Ye are gods" (John 10:34), and it was the serpent who said: "ye shall be as gods" (Genesis 3:5).

But the truth is that Lucifer fell from his office of morning star (Isaiah 14:12), and became Satan (cf. Luke 10:18). Jesus Christ has taken over the office of morning star (Revelation 22:16). And Jesus Christ identified Himself only with the brass serpent on the pole in Numbers 21:8-9 (John 3:14), which typified Jesus Christ's crucifixion for our sins (John 19:16, Matthew 26:28). And in John 10:34, Jesus Christ (John 20:31) was quoting YHWH in Psalms 82:6-7, which shows that even though humans have knowledge of good and evil as gods do (Genesis 3:22), they will still die like humans (Psalms 82:7), contradicting the serpent's lie (Genesis 3:4). Nonetheless, the Antichrist could falsely say that Lucifer is the Christ and the true and beneficent God of mankind, and that the False Prophet is the miracle-working prophet Jesus (cf. John 3:2, Acts 3:22-24) returned to point the world to the true Christ/God. The Antichrist could falsely say that he (the Antichrist) is the human/divine "Son" of Lucifer, who must be worshipped as God along with Lucifer (Revelation 13:4,8). This would be similar to how Biblical Christians rightly worship the human/divine Jesus Christ (John 1:1,14) as YHWH God (the Son) along with YHWH God the Father (John 20:28, Hebrews 1:8).

Near the end of the future Tribulation of Revelation chapters 6 to 18 and Matthew 24, unclean spirits like frogs will come out of the mouths of Lucifer, the Antichrist, and the False Prophet (Revelation 16:13). And these unclean spirits like frogs will go forth and perform amazing miracles to convince the world's armies to gather together at Armageddon (Har Megiddo: Mount Megiddo in northern Israel) (Revelation 16:16) in an attempt to fight and defeat YHWH Himself (Revelation 16:14, Revelation 19:19). After gathering together at Armageddon, the armies will travel south and pillage Jerusalem, right before the real Jesus (who is YHWH: John 10:30) returns from heaven and defeats them completely (Zechariah 14:2-21, Revelation 19:20 to 20:3).

So the Second Coming of Jesus Christ will be a total shock to the world. The world will have been expecting to wage war against some evil Old Testament god named "YHWH" with the help of the good Jesus (played by the False Prophet), and with the help of the true and beneficent Christ/God (played by Lucifer), and with the help of the good Son of God (played by the Antichrist), and with the help of the good angels of God (played by the fallen angels of Lucifer: Revelation 12:9). But then, instead of some evil god appearing in the sky, the world could see the glorious sign of the Cross (cf. Matthew 24:30), the symbol of the good YHWH suffering and dying for our sins (Acts 20:28b). And then the world will see the glorious appearance of the real Jesus sitting on a white horse descending from the sky (Revelation 19:11-21).

When the people of the world realize at that moment how thoroughly they have been duped, and see in the sky the huge angelic armies (2 Thessalonians 1:7, Matthew 25:31) of the true Jesus, the true Christ, the true Son of God, and the good YHWH, who are all the one and the same Jesus Christ of Nazareth, then they could utterly mourn and wail for themselves (Matthew 24:30, Revelation 1:7), knowing in their spirits that Jesus has returned in wrath to destroy most of them for their unrepentant sins (2 Thessalonians 1:8-9, Revelation 19:15-21).

You have given men and text too much power.

The Word of God is Living; He communicates the truth to us - even and especially when we do NOT read a text. Absolutely no text is the Truth, the Truth is also living. Do you remember what He said about Himself?

Do you come to the Father through text, or through the Living Word of God?

mark kennedy · Apr 22, 2018

Did the word of God come to Jeremiah (Jeremiah 1:4), how about Ezekiel (Ez. 18:1)? Did the Word of God come to John? If you believe that then it's the word of God and it's only capitalized in John 1:1 because Jesus is the Word of God that came to them.

The Word became flesh and made his dwelling among us. We have seen his glory, the glory of the one and only Son, who came from the Father, full of grace and truth. (John 1:4)

The word of God is a revelation, the most important expression of it being found in Christ. All the prophets spoke of him, that's where they were trying to get us. I fail to see how Christians could argue over such an obvious conclusion.

Kaon · Apr 22, 2018

mark kennedy said:
Did the word of God come to Jeremiah (Jerimiah 1:4), how about Ezekiel (Ez. 18:1)? Did the Word of God come to John? If you believe that then it's the word of God and it's only capitalized in John 1:1 because Jesus is the Word of God that came to them.

For us slower folk, what are you trying to say?

mark kennedy · Apr 22, 2018

Kaon said:
For us slower folk, what are you trying to say?

If a prophet gets a message from God, that's the word of God. Christ is the fullest expression of that message, the prophets yearned to understand their own message:

Trying to determine the time and setting to which the Spirit of Christ in them was pointing when He predicted the sufferings of Christ and the glories to follow. It was revealed to them that they were not serving themselves but you, when they foretold the things now announced by those who preached the gospel to you by the Holy Spirit sent from heaven. Even angels long to look into these things. Therefore prepare your minds for action. Be sober-minded. Set your hope fully on the grace to be given you at the revelation of Jesus Christ. (1 Peter 1:11-13)

It's Christ, the Incarnate Word of God. When a prophet proclaims the word of God it's still revelation. The fullest expression of the Word of God is in the person and work of Christ. That doesn't make the other writings of less importance but the ultimate purpose is to bring us to Christ.

Grace and peace,
Mark

Albion · Apr 22, 2018

fhansen said:
The Catholic Church teaches that both Scripture and Tradition are revelation from God, coming from the same source, neither of human origin. .

That is indeed the belief. And that is the problem.

Eloy Craft · Apr 22, 2018

Kaon said:
Do you come to the Father through text, or through the Living Word of God?

What is the Living Word of God to you?

Kaon · Apr 22, 2018

Eloy Craft said:
What is the Living Word of God to you?

Christ Himself - the Living Word of God.

Root of Jesse · Apr 24, 2018

Albion said:
I was a Roman Catholic for longer than most of the Catholic warriors here have been, so that line isn't going to work on me.

That means very little. It is my contention, which I am sure you disagree with, but I'll present it anyway, that those who fall away from Catholicism do not know their faith very well. Or they want to have a church wedding after having gotten a divorce.
In our debates over the years, I have seldom seen you hold to a real Catholic belief. You don't even state many of them correctly. In fact, you're one of the reasons I'm still on here, because so many misrepresent the Catholic faith.
Because the Church has been around for what seems to us forever and has left its fingerprints everywhere in our history and culture, it is natural that myths and misconceptions hang about it. Most of them contain a kernel of truth. The Church makes a long list of claims about its mission and has built a vast pyramid of assertions about the ultimate ends of life and the truths of human nature. To reject these claims or dispute these assertions is not to be anti-Catholic. It is simply to be non-Catholic. To see the Church as a conspiracy, or to trade in half-truths and propaganda about it, on the other hand, is something else entirely. One of my purposes here is to sift out the difference between sharp, legitimate questions and ignorant, hostile smears and to teach those who are willing to listen what Catholicism is about. I would wager that I have put more time into understanding this faith in my 13 years as a Catholic than you did in your time as a Catholic.

Root of Jesse · Apr 24, 2018

Albion said:
...which necessarily means that Scripture is not sufficient.

Not sufficient does not mean insufficient.

Albion · Apr 24, 2018

Yes. It does.

Root of Jesse · Apr 24, 2018

Albion said:
Yes. It does.

A synonym for insufficient is 'inadequate', and in this sense, Sacred Scripture alone IS inadequate, in that the Bible is not self-explanatory. It requires context and explanation. Hence, my example-people do not agree on what John 6 really means. The Eunuch had to have Scripture explained to him by Phillip. The Trinity doesn't mean the same thing to everyone, and some don't even see it in Scripture.

AnticipateHisComing · Apr 25, 2018

Root of Jesse said:
I never declare Scripture insufficient. We merely claim that Scripture is not ALL of God's Word.

You argued so. I quoted your words doing so. Now you backpedal and change what you argued.

Root of Jesse said:
I have seldom seen you hold to a real Catholic belief. You don't even state many of them correctly.

You accuse another of what you do. Bad form.

How many times have I tried to teach you the RCC meaning of the Church and yet you still misuse it as if you own it.

Root of Jesse · Apr 25, 2018

AnticipateHisComing said:
You argued so. I quoted your words doing so. Now you backpedal and change what you argued.

You accuse another of what you do. Bad form.

How many times have I tried to teach you the RCC meaning of the Church and yet you still misuse it as if you own it.

Thanks for being a referee! Didn't know you got appointed. I didn't walk back anything, I clarified what I meant when it was clear that others misunderstood. Regarding your last point, you have to establish credentials or show Catholic literature that shows that what you're saying is right. I don't recall you doing that, nor do I recall Albion ever doing so. Mostly, he says "everybody knows...", which holds water like a sieve.
The Church is the body of Christ, with Him being the Head. All Christians are part of that body. Where did I ever state otherwise?

Easiest Defense of Sola Scriptura

Oldbie

Oldbie

Well-Known Member

Natura non facit saltum

Well-Known Member

Natura non facit saltum

Facilitator

Myth only points, Truth happened!

Well-Known Member

Admiral of the Fleet/First Sea Lord

Admiral of the Fleet/First Sea Lord

Facilitator

Admiral of the Fleet/First Sea Lord

Newbie

Admiral of the Fleet/First Sea Lord

Similar threads