Sola Scriptura Doesn't Make Sense

JAL · Apr 13, 2020

Are you posting on the wrong thread? Whom are you addresssing? I'm not going to respond to all of this because it has ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to do with my position.

Bible Highlighter said:
Well, I am not discounting that men of God spoke as they were moved by the Holy Ghost, or they were inspired by the Spirit to write what they did. If such did not happen, we would not have the Bible we do today. But you have to prove that men are still speaking and writing new authoritative level of communications that needs to be added to the back of our Holy Bibles as if they should be the 67th book, 68th book, the 69th book, etc.

I have to prove - what? What has canonization got to do with anything I wrote? The majority of prophetic utterances were never canonized (and in fact the majority of divine revelations are for individual consumption rather than public proclamation). When Paul said, "he who prophesies, edifies the church", he was referring to numerous edifying utterances that never got canonized. When Luke speaks of "Philip the evangelist, one of the Seven. 9He had four unmarried daughters who prophesied.", he again is referring to numerous uncanonized prophesies.

In fact, a while back, in a rebuttal to you that you never addressed (see post 179 on another thread, and post 180), I demonstrated that evangelism itself is biblically defined as prophetic utterance - so then your claim is that all evangelism must be canonized? Huh?

You create this strawman for lack of any cogent rebuttal. You simply can't rebut a position that stands four-square on one universally undeniable tautology:

"If I feel certain that action-A is evil, and B is good, I should opt for B".

Is there a way we can test your communications to show that they are truly from God?

You have ONE undeniable obligation to God. Follow the rule:

"If I feel certain that action-A is evil, and B is good, I should opt for B".

Technically that's all I need to say or conclude on the matter of "testing", but I think I can safely extrapolate (i.e. opine) a bit further, for the sake of a more complete epistemology. How did the prophets recognize God's voice? Feelings of certainty. All of us have feelings of certainty, but if we are men of sound conscience (i.e. we are not psychopaths), our conscience will demand absolute certainty(100% certainty) in particular kinds of scenarios, such as:
(1) The prophet Abraham's attempt to slaughter his son.
(2) The effort by prophets Moses and Joshua to slaughter 7 nations to lay hold of Canaan.

And Hebrews 11 refers to this prophetic state of 100% certainty as "faith" (so much for the theory that prophecy isn't for all believers). Let's add a third:

(3) Public proclamation of a message under the rubric, "Thus saith the Lord". This too calls for 100% certainty, for hopefully obvious reasons. Absent 100% certainty, you need not be silent, necessarily, but you will, if acting in good conscience, begin with a DIFFERENT RUBRIC. You will preface like this, "I'm not really sure that I heard God speaking, but here's what I SEEM to have heard - take it with a grain of salt."

What now of the audience? How will THEY know that your message is from God? Same way. The prophetic dynamic implies that God must ALSO copy the 100% certainty of the prophet to the hearts of His targeted members in a given audience. That's the very NATURE of the prophetic ministry, which EXPLAINS why it is the ideal ministry for evangelism. Why so? Because think of how effective you would be, as an evangelist, if your audiences often felt 100% certain that God was speaking through you.

In regard to the SPECIFIC PASSAGES about "testing" a message, I already replied to you at post 123.

JAL · Apr 13, 2020

DamianWarS said:
Sure but not in conflict with biblical teaching. We may receive revelation like "go here" or "do this" and pretty much should expect this but not stuff like kill your neighbour because he is the anti-christ or God told me Moses was a woman.

If you have concerns about how I would test a message please see the comments on my last post 181.

JAL · Apr 13, 2020

Bible Highlighter said:
@JAL

The saints at Ephesus were told by Paul that they (believers) were laid upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets.

Ephesians 2:20 says,
"And are built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ himself being the chief corner stone;"

This means that there are no more apostles or prophets today because Paul was telling the believers at Ephesus that they were laid upon them in that they were like a foundation. If Paul thought that things continued in the way that you suggest, then he would have included the Ephesian believers in that foundation within verse 20.

So the Apostles and Prophets were merely the foundation built upon the foundation of Jesus. “For through him we both have access by one Spirit unto the Father. Now therefore ye are no more strangers and foreigners, but fellow-citizens with the saints, and of the household of God; And are built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ himself being the chief cornerstone;” (Ephesians 2:18-20). We are said to have access by one Spirit unto the Father that is build upon the “foundation” of the apostles and prophets.

Being an apostle is a gift (See 1 Corinthians 12:28-31). The qualifications of being an apostle was to have seen the risen Lord Jesus Christ (See Acts of the Apostles 1:22-26). Paul said he met the qualifications as being an apostle because he had seen the risen Lord. 1 Corinthians 9:1 “…Am I not an apostle? Have I not seen Jesus our Lord?” Paul called himself the “last prophet.” (1 Corinthians 15:8-9). Paul says that God has set forth the apostles last (1 Corinthians 14:9).

Click here for a biblical rebuttal to your cessationist perspective on foundation. And no, Paul didn't call himself the last prophet. He simply referred to himself as the last-appointed apostle in the current set of apostles. A church without an apostle (to lay down the foundation ) eventually crumbles into ruins, which is precisely the sad state of the church for most of the last 2,000 years.

JAL · Apr 13, 2020

Bible Highlighter said:
@JAL

The saints at Ephesus were told by Paul that they (believers) were laid upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets.

Ephesians 2:20 says,
"And are built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ himself being the chief corner stone;"

This means that there are no more apostles or prophets today because Paul was telling the believers at Ephesus that they were laid upon them in that they were like a foundation. If Paul thought that things continued in the way that you suggest, then he would have included the Ephesian believers in that foundation within verse 20.

So the Apostles and Prophets were merely the foundation built upon the foundation of Jesus. “For through him we both have access by one Spirit unto the Father. Now therefore ye are no more strangers and foreigners, but fellow-citizens with the saints, and of the household of God; And are built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ himself being the chief cornerstone;” (Ephesians 2:18-20). We are said to have access by one Spirit unto the Father that is build upon the “foundation” of the apostles and prophets.

Being an apostle is a gift (See 1 Corinthians 12:28-31). The qualifications of being an apostle was to have seen the risen Lord Jesus Christ (See Acts of the Apostles 1:22-26). Paul said he met the qualifications as being an apostle because he had seen the risen Lord. 1 Corinthians 9:1 “…Am I not an apostle? Have I not seen Jesus our Lord?” Paul called himself the “last prophet.” (1 Corinthians 15:8-9). Paul says that God has set forth the apostles last (1 Corinthians 14:9).

A few more comments on this post are in order. Cessationism is indeed an INCREDIBLE position. For me, at least, it literally defies belief that theologians could arrive at such an exegetically implausible and irresponsible position. Cessationism implies that God is the dumbest instructor in human history. Let's see why.

Bear in mind that most theologians regard the Mosaic Law as a decent instruction manual relevant for several hundred years. Fair enough. What now of the NT?

The NT is a charismatically saturated book. I seem to recall, a while back, tallying about 20 allusions to charismatic dynamics in the very 1st chapter of Mark alone! The definition of the ekklesia (the assembly) given in 1Corinthians 12 (and elsewhere) is unequivocally a charismatic institution. It is an ecclesiology consisting of a charismatic church government, virtually a reinstanciation of biblical theocracy. And yet the cessationist claim is that, within a few dozen years of the manuscripting of this carefully-defined administration, it was already obsolete! Thus while God was wise enough to create an OT instructional manual that defined theocratic government for centuries, He apparently was too dumb to textually manuscript a NT definition of church government capable of lasting more than 50 years! And thus by the time the printing-press appeared around 1500 A.D, the NT definition of ecclesiology was already 1500 years out of date! This is nothing short of an UTTERLY PREPOSTEROUS conclusion.

Here's is Paul's definition of a NT church:

"And God has placed in the church first of all apostles, second prophets, third teachers, then miracles, then gifts of healing, of helping, of guidance, and of different kinds of tongues" (1Cor 12).

Let's be clear on one thing - any ALTERNATIVE definition of a church is man-made, it is not Paul's definition of a church, and it did not come from Scripture. So even if it were true that Paul's definition of a church expired, cessationists have no right to claim that THEIR definition of church government came from Scripture. They first need to tell us where they got it from, and then explain to us why we should accept it. Period.

DamianWarS · Apr 13, 2020

JAL said:
If you have concerns about how I would test a message please see the comments on my last post 181.

if the received revelation is in conflict with biblical teaching you have a problem and if it's in agreement with biblical teaching then it's in agreement with sola scriptura. 'nuf said. perhaps it would be better to give us an example of what sort of revelation you are thinking of (even if an made up example) that would not be in agreement with sola scriptura?

ZNP · Apr 13, 2020

My brother and I once bought a stereo system to install in the car (volkswagen bus) and we were there for hours, couldn't get it to play. My brother assured me he had done everything the directions asked. I asked him "what is this wire?" He said, "oh, that is just the ground wire". I said let's hook it up anyway. Immediately it began to play.

To get the Lord speaking directly to your spirit you need to hook up the ground wire of the Bible.

Albion · Apr 13, 2020

DamianWarS said:
if the received revelation is in conflict with biblical teaching you have a problem and if it's in agreement with biblical teaching then it's in agreement with sola scriptura. 'nuf said.

That's certainly so. And I'd add that if it's purely personal, as most of these scattered visions, voices, and emotions are, then they likewise neither supplement the Bible nor improve upon it.

setst777 · Apr 13, 2020

JAL said:
I've done a couple of threads on this issue, but I still feel that virtually no one gets it. Let's try this again.

This time, I'll begin by showing that Sola Scriptura faces the same logical difficulty as Tradition. Once again, our basic choices are:
(1) Tradition
(2) Sola Scriptura
(3) Conscience, informed by Direct Revelation (my position).

Tradition is the claim, "Never rely on your own opinions, instead believe what the Catholic church teaches" (or Orthodox church). The logical difficulty here is obvious: if an agnostic gradually reaches the opinion that the Catholic church is the truth, he should not become a Catholic, because he was told to never rely on his own opinions. His opinions carry no weight. He is stuck.

Likewise, Sola Scriptura is the claim, "Never rely on your own opinions, instead believe what the Bible teaches." Same logical impasse - it implies that an agnostic who begins to form Christian opinions should not act on them because opinions carry no weight.

Thus Sola Scriptura is total nonsense. Moreover it couldn't even boast ubiquity for 90% of human history, until the dawn of the printing press around 1500 A.D.

Every historic wane of prophets is fertile ground for the spawn of a Bible-scholar movement (a Sola Scriptura movement) that artificially fills the (universally felt) need for religious leadership. In Christ's day, the Sola Scriptura parties largely consisted of the Pharisees, Saducees, and teachers of the law. In diametric opposition to this accursed epistemology, Christ The Prophet arrived as the antithesis of the Sola Scriptura insanity, denouncing the widely accepted beliefs and practices as man-made religious traditions. He made it clear that HIS teaching derived not from the seminaries of His day but directly from the Father, literally face to face, and thus by Direct Revelation.

History repeats itself. The wane of the early apostles/prophets culminated, once again, in the spawning of more Sola Scriptura movements. Even today's advocates of Tradition are actually Sola Scriptura advocates in disguise, because their conclusions are grounded four-square on Bible-scholarship - an exegetical analysis of scripture, history, and culture. And thus, as Andrew Murray lamented, the mistake of the Galatian church is repeated to this day in all the churches - even in the churches most confidently self-assured that they are free from the Galatian error.

We need revival. And the only sure way to get it - if Galatians 3 is any authority on the matter - is to receive outpourings of the Spirit via "the hearing of faith" (which is the literal rendering of the Greek). This is a clear reference to Direct Revelation, anecdotal indeed of Paul's own affair with Direct Revelation outlined in Galatians 1.

"Hearing of faith" replacing Sola Scriptura?

What to the Scriptures teach about that?

The Gospel was fully revealed and made known, plain to understand, through the Apostles - once for all entrusted to the Saints, and of which we are to earnestly fight to preserve...

Romans 16:25-27 (NIV)
25 Now to him who is able to establish you in accordance with my gospel, the message I proclaim about Jesus Christ, in keeping with the revelation of the mystery hidden for long ages past, 26 but now revealed and made known through the prophetic writings by the command of the eternal God, so that all the Gentiles might come to the obedience that comes from[a] faith— 27 to the only wise God be glory forever through Jesus Christ! Amen.

1 Peter 1 (WEB) Bolding mine… 10 Concerning this salvation, the prophets sought and searched diligently, who prophesied of the grace that would come to you, 11 searching for who or what kind of time the Spirit of Christ, which was in them, pointed to, when he predicted the sufferings of Christ, and the glories that would follow them. 12 To them it was revealed, that not to themselves, but to you, they ministered these things, which now have been announced to you through those who preached the Good News to you by the Holy Spirit sent out from heaven; which things angels desire to look into.

Romans 15 (WEB) Bolding mine…
17 I have therefore my boasting in Christ Jesus in things pertaining to God. 18 For I will not dare to speak of any things except those which Christ worked through me, for the obedience of the Gentiles, by word and deed, 19 in the power of signs and wonders, in the power of God’s Spirit; so that from Jerusalem, and around as far as to Illyricum, I have fully preached the Good News of Christ

Ephesians 3 (NIV) Bolding and underlining mine
4 In reading this, then, you will be able to understand my insight into the mystery of Christ, 5 which was not made known to people in other generations as it has now been revealed by the Spirit to God’s holy apostles and prophets. 6 This mystery is that through the gospel the Gentiles are heirs together with Israel, members together of one body, and sharers together in the promise in Christ Jesus.

Colossians 2 (NIV) 2 Bolding and underlining mine… My goal is that they may be encouraged in heart and united in love, so that they may have the full riches of complete understanding, in order that they may know the mystery of God, namely, Christ, 3 in whom are hidden all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge.

2 Timothy 3 (NIV) 16 All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness, 17 so that the servant of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work.

In light of all this inspired testimony, we must conclude that we, the Church, now possess the fullness of the Gospel, as a deposit of Faith, made plain to understand within our New Testament Holy Scriptures by the will of almighty God.

The Bible contains all the instruction a person requires to be saved, and to be thoroughly equipped for every good work. The Spirit works with the word to make this possible to those who will listen.

No more foundation is to be laid; no deeper meanings or new revelations that Scripture itself does not clearly teach. God fully revealed the one Gospel through Christ and His Apostles and the Apostolic Companion Writers Mark and Luke.

If you hear of someone who is providing some deeper revelation or interpretation that changes the Gospel, or saying you have to use their books to understand the Bible, or if anyone is trying to persuade you to follow, or pray to, anyone but Christ Jesus, or if that religion is teaching you to follow and obey themselves to be saved, rather than pointing to Christ – to give your pure devotion to Him – then do not listen, they are false prophets.

1 Timothy 2 (WEB) Bolding is mine.
3 For this is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Savior; 4 who desires all people to be saved and come to full knowledge of the truth. 5 For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus, 6 who gave himself as a ransom for all; the testimony given at its appointed time.

Acts 20 (NIV) 30 Even from your own number men will arise and distort the truth in order to draw away disciples after them.

Blessings

JAL · Apr 13, 2020

DamianWarS said:
if the received revelation is in conflict with biblical teaching you have a problem and if it's in agreement with biblical teaching then it's in agreement with sola scriptura. 'nuf said. perhaps it would be better to give us an example of what sort of revelation you are thinking of (even if an made up example) that would not be in agreement with sola scriptura?

Your terminology is incorrect. These two are not the same:
(1). Scripture
(2) Sola Scriptura
Since you are conflating apples with oranges, I can't make sense of your objection.

JAL · Apr 13, 2020

setst777 said:
"Hearing of faith" replacing Sola Scriptura?

What to the Scriptures teach about that?

The Gospel was fully revealed and made known, plain to understand, through the Apostles - once for all entrusted to the Saints, and of which we are to earnestly fight to preserve...

Romans 16:25-27 (NIV)
25 Now to him who is able to establish you in accordance with my gospel, the message I proclaim about Jesus Christ, in keeping with the revelation of the mystery hidden for long ages past, 26 but now revealed and made known through the prophetic writings by the command of the eternal God, so that all the Gentiles might come to the obedience that comes from[a] faith— 27 to the only wise God be glory forever through Jesus Christ! Amen.

1 Peter 1 (WEB) Bolding mine… 10 Concerning this salvation, the prophets sought and searched diligently, who prophesied of the grace that would come to you, 11 searching for who or what kind of time the Spirit of Christ, which was in them, pointed to, when he predicted the sufferings of Christ, and the glories that would follow them. 12 To them it was revealed, that not to themselves, but to you, they ministered these things, which now have been announced to you through those who preached the Good News to you by the Holy Spirit sent out from heaven; which things angels desire to look into.

Romans 15 (WEB) Bolding mine…
17 I have therefore my boasting in Christ Jesus in things pertaining to God. 18 For I will not dare to speak of any things except those which Christ worked through me, for the obedience of the Gentiles, by word and deed, 19 in the power of signs and wonders, in the power of God’s Spirit; so that from Jerusalem, and around as far as to Illyricum, I have fully preached the Good News of Christ

Ephesians 3 (NIV) Bolding and underlining mine
4 In reading this, then, you will be able to understand my insight into the mystery of Christ, 5 which was not made known to people in other generations as it has now been revealed by the Spirit to God’s holy apostles and prophets. 6 This mystery is that through the gospel the Gentiles are heirs together with Israel, members together of one body, and sharers together in the promise in Christ Jesus.

Colossians 2 (NIV) 2 Bolding and underlining mine… My goal is that they may be encouraged in heart and united in love, so that they may have the full riches of complete understanding, in order that they may know the mystery of God, namely, Christ, 3 in whom are hidden all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge.

2 Timothy 3 (NIV) 16 All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness, 17 so that the servant of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work.

In light of all this inspired testimony, we must conclude that we, the Church, now possess the fullness of the Gospel, as a deposit of Faith, made plain to understand within our New Testament Holy Scriptures by the will of almighty God.

The Bible contains all the instruction a person requires to be saved, and to be thoroughly equipped for every good work. The Spirit works with the word to make this possible to those who will listen.

No more foundation is to be laid; no deeper meanings or new revelations that Scripture itself does not clearly teach. God fully revealed the one Gospel through Christ and His Apostles and the Apostolic Companion Writers Mark and Luke.

If you hear of someone who is providing some deeper revelation or interpretation that changes the Gospel, or saying you have to use their books to understand the Bible, or if anyone is trying to persuade you to follow, or pray to, anyone but Christ Jesus, or if that religion is teaching you to follow and obey themselves to be saved, rather than pointing to Christ – to give your pure devotion to Him – then do not listen, they are false prophets.

1 Timothy 2 (WEB) Bolding is mine.
3 For this is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Savior; 4 who desires all people to be saved and come to full knowledge of the truth. 5 For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus, 6 who gave himself as a ransom for all; the testimony given at its appointed time.

Acts 20 (NIV) 30 Even from your own number men will arise and distort the truth in order to draw away disciples after them.

Blessings

See post 189. You're making the same mistake.

JAL · Apr 13, 2020

Or at least I think it's the same mistake. Anyway I'm not trying to eliminate the Bible. Direct Revelation, rather, helps us COMPREHEND it better, because exegesis is a very fallible science.

Albion · Apr 13, 2020

JAL said:
Your terminology is incorrect. These two are not the same:
(1). Scripture
(2) Sola Scriptura
Since you are conflating apples with oranges, I can't make sense of your objection.

If we say, "Go with Scripture instead of something else" we are saying the same thing as if we used the theological term (Sola Scriptura) for the same exact thing.

Albion · Apr 13, 2020

JAL said:
Or at least I think it's the same mistake. Anyway I'm not trying to eliminate the Bible. Direct Revelation, rather, helps us COMPREHEND it better, because exegesis is a very fallible science.

Comprehending it is a totally different thing from what it is that we want to comprehend.

It is not a supplement, adjunct, or substitute for the authority that contains and conveys the information itself.

JAL · Apr 13, 2020

Albion said:
If we say, "Go with Scripture instead of something else" we are saying the same thing as if we used the theological term (Sola Scriptura) for the same exact thing.

Baloney. Direct Revelation isn't presumed to contradict Scripture. It is presumed to shed light on existing revelation, rather, and thus is properly understood here as the BEST MEANS of living and thinking in harmony with the principles of Scripture. It is thus precisely what it MEANS to "Go with Scripture". That's my theory defended here, anyway.

JAL · Apr 13, 2020

DamianWarS said:
if the received revelation is in conflict with biblical teaching you have a problem and if it's in agreement with biblical teaching then it's in agreement with sola scriptura. 'nuf said. perhaps it would be better to give us an example of what sort of revelation you are thinking of (even if an made up example) that would not be in agreement with sola scriptura?

Maybe I can help you grasp my distinctions a bit better.

Sola Scriptura is the claim that the bible is the only FINAL authority - it is the claim that we are REQUIRED to always "check it out with Scripture" (for example a voice). This contradicts the (tautological) rule of conscience expressed probably a 100 times on this thread, and also contradicts the facts of Scripture - the bible EXAMPLES of where the divine Voice availed of the rule of conscience time and again, in fact it contradicts even the Inward Witness itself. I did not have "check it out with Scripture" to become a Christian, rather the Inward Witness convicted my conscience DIRECTLY, and thus availed of the (tautological) rule of conscience.

JAL · Apr 13, 2020

Another way to put it is to say that the divine Voice is self-authenticating, and He accomplishes this self-authentication by availing of the rule of conscience.

DamianWarS · Apr 13, 2020

JAL said:
Your terminology is incorrect. These two are not the same:
(1). Scripture
(2) Sola Scriptura
Since you are conflating apples with oranges, I can't make sense of your objection.

Right... again in the confusions of apples and oranges an example of revelation that you feel is supra-sola scriptura would be helpful

JAL · Apr 13, 2020

DamianWarS said:
Right... again in the confusions of apples and oranges an example of revelation that you feel is supra-sola scriptura would be helpful

I don't think you're getting it. See post 195.

Albion · Apr 13, 2020

JAL said:
Baloney. Direct Revelation isn't presumed to contradict Scripture. It is presumed to shed light on existing revelation....

I covered that in my reply above.

DamianWarS · Apr 13, 2020

JAL said:
I don't think you're getting it. See post 195.

Again an example would go a long way.

Here is an example from me, A colleague and friend of mine had a revelation in October that a large storm was coming that would cover the earth. She also has had confirmation that more darkness is still to come. She feels of course the current covid pandemic is the storm, the darkness to come? She's not worried as she says God can see in the dark.

This revelation is not new doctrine and although the bible does not affirm this specific scenario it is still in agreement with how the bible reveals to the nature of God and it also fits with broader revelation, still of course unknown as to their specific roles but fully compatible with sola scriptura. She didn't need to check the bible to know it was God but that doesn't mean it's not inline and consistent with biblical teachings

Sola Scriptura Doesn't Make Sense

Veteran

Veteran

Veteran

Veteran

Follower of Isa Al Masih

Well-Known Member

Facilitator

Well-Known Member

Veteran

Veteran

Veteran

Facilitator

Facilitator

Veteran

Veteran

Veteran

Follower of Isa Al Masih

Veteran

Facilitator

Follower of Isa Al Masih

Similar threads