Swag365

Well-Known Member
Dec 25, 2019
1,352
481
USA
✟50,429.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Single
As opposed to...what?
As opposed to faith and the prompting of the Holy Spirit. Do you believe that these played any role in your choice to become an Anglican, or do you think your choice was purely a matter of reason?

No, I have referred to what the Catholic Church actually does teach about the matter. But I agree with you that the way she explains it is carefully manipulated to make that POV look like it is something more mystical, more uniform or homogenous, and therefore more credible.
No, you have referred to your personal, unsubstantiated opinion of what the Catholic Church teaches. I posted precisely what She has taught.

Everyone has an opinion but unless you substantiate it with evidence it is to be rejected. Otherwise, I could assert anything I want about your church or any other church. I could say "Well, the Anglican Church really teaches that infant baptism is improper although Her official teaching "carefully manipulates" the explanation to make it appear that infant baptism is proper." If I wrote such a thing you would say that is ridiculous, where is you proof?

But that is precisely what you have done, and it is to be rejected.

Have a nice day.

 
Upvote 0

packermann

Junior Member
Nov 30, 2003
1,446
375
71
Northwest Suburbs of Chicago, IL
✟45,845.00
Faith
Catholic
Politics
US-Republican
But this verse--the very word of God--says that what is there is sufficient.

The most you can say is that the Gospel of John is sufficient, which means the rest of the Bible is superfluous.

Unless there is some other verse somewhere that denies it, we do not need to check off every other book and every other verse in the Bible! This one gives us the meaning.

Your argument is invalid for two reasons. First of all, it is unreasonable to require me to prove a negative. Sola scriptura was started in the Reformation - about 1500 year after that the books of the Bible was written. It is highly unlikely that the Bible writers would write about an issue that did not come up until 1500 years later! There are many things that we believe that is not in the Bible. We believe that polygamy is wrong, but there is not one verse in the Bible that says it is a sin (there is a verse that says that a bishop should be the husband of one wife, but that does not mean that one who is not a bishop must be monogamous). Also, there is no verse in the Bible that says we cannot own slaves. Do you believe that slavery is OK since it is not forbidden in the Bible?

Also, it assumes what you are seeking to prove. You assume sola scriptura to be true that as your basis to prove that sola scriptura is true. Since I do not believe in sola scripture, I do not need a scripture verse in the Bible to believe that sola scriptura to be false. But you need to provide a verse that positively asserts sola scripture - because if you cannot provide a scripture verse to prove that all that we believe must be in the Bible then your belief in that we believe must be in the Bible must be false. So if you are right then you would be wrong.

However, even though I do not need to have a passage that denies sola scripture, there are verses to indicate that the Bible writers assumed that our source for spiritual truth is not limited to what was written. Here is one of them.

So then, brothers and sisters, stand firm and hold fast to the teachings we passed on to you, whether by word of mouth or by letter.
1 Thessalonians 2:15

Paul is telling them to hold to teachings, whether it was written or spoken. If they were holding fast to his oral teachings, that means that they were passing it on from generation to generation.

Actually, the word for "teachings" in the above verse is in Greek is παραδόσεις, which means "tradition". So Paul is saying that we should hold on to the oral traditions and the written traditions from Paul.

If you do not believe me that the word actually mean tradition, see the non-Catholic web site the Bible Hub (the link is right below)

2 Thessalonians 2:15 Interlinear: so, then, brethren, stand ye fast, and hold the deliverances that ye were taught, whether through word, whether through our letter;

I can never understand why sola scriptura Christians do not learn Hebrew and Greek. Those languages should be required in every Protestant Bible-only Church Sunday School. The ignorance of Hebrew and Greek just shows to me that no sola scriptura Christian actually believes in sola scriptura. Remember, no English translation of the Bible is the Word of God - only the originals documents are, and the originals were written in Hebrew and Greek.
 
Upvote 0

JAL

Veteran
Site Supporter
Oct 16, 2004
10,777
928
Visit site
✟343,550.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Why is Sola Scriptura a false doctrine?

I look to the Early Fathers for some guidance at times.
But they always agree with scripture so I have no problem.
I'm no Catholic but I appreciate the Catholic contributions on this thread. They have supplied several rebuttals to Sola Scriptura that I myself hadn't thought of.
 
Upvote 0

Albion

Facilitator
Dec 8, 2004
111,138
33,258
✟583,842.00
Country
United States
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Married
As opposed to faith and the prompting of the Holy Spirit. Do you believe that these played any role in your choice to become an Anglican, or do you think your choice was purely a matter of reason?
No, I wouldn't say it was "purely" a matter of reason.

No, you have referred to your personal, unsubstantiated opinion of what the Catholic Church teaches.
I assure you that it's not that. It is based upon a lot of study, more that you realize. And so it is "substantiated." ;)
 
Upvote 0

Albion

Facilitator
Dec 8, 2004
111,138
33,258
✟583,842.00
Country
United States
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Married
The most you can say is that the Gospel of John is sufficient, which means the rest of the Bible is superfluous.


I agree that we can read those verses to say what you did--that what is written there, in John, is given so that we may know that Jesus is the Savior, etc.

However, what these verses are saying is that this IS sufficient.

That information is the heart of the Gospel's message. That is what leads to salvation. Since revealing that is the purpose of Scripture, it is not simply one more commandment, one more assurance of God's love, one more description of Jesus' doings on Earth, etc. etc., as valuable as those other revelations may be.
 
Upvote 0

Swag365

Well-Known Member
Dec 25, 2019
1,352
481
USA
✟50,429.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Single
I assure you that it's not that. It is based upon a lot of study, more that you realize. And so it is "substantiated." ;)
Plenty of people study all sorts of things for vast amounts of time, and remain in error. You'll have to forgive me if I don't find your assurance very reassuring.
 
Upvote 0

Albion

Facilitator
Dec 8, 2004
111,138
33,258
✟583,842.00
Country
United States
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Married
Plenty of people study all sorts of things for vast amounts of time, and remain in error. You'll have to forgive me if I don't find your assurance very reassuring.
I really don't care what you choose to believe, especially since you have nothing on which to make a decision about this.

But the claim was that my knowledge is simply this: "No, you have referred to your personal, unsubstantiated opinion...."

In addition to such a comment being highly presumptuous, and insulting, it is also ignorant. It suggests, in addition, that when I explain that I have come to my convictions after quite a lot of study, that is simply rejected out of hand on the basis of nothing whatsoever.
 
Upvote 0

Swag365

Well-Known Member
Dec 25, 2019
1,352
481
USA
✟50,429.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Single
I really don't care what you choose to believe, especially since you have nothing on which to make a decision about this.

But the claim was that my knowledge is simply this: "No, you have referred to your personal, unsubstantiated opinion...."

In addition to such a comment being highly presumptuous, and insulting, it is also ignorant. It suggests, in addition, that when I explain that I have come to my convictions after quite a lot of study, that is simply rejected out of hand on the basis of nothing whatsoever.
Friend, what definition of "substantiate" are you using? Let me provide you with a definition:

SUBSTANTIATE | meaning in the Cambridge English Dictionary
Substantiate: to show something to be true, or to support a claim with facts.

Now, with respect to the issue we were discussing, you did not show what you wrote to be true, nor did you support your claim with facts.

Therefore, your claim is unsubstantiated.

Have a nice day.
 
Upvote 0

Albion

Facilitator
Dec 8, 2004
111,138
33,258
✟583,842.00
Country
United States
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Married
Now, with respect to the issue we were discussing, you did not show what you wrote to be true, nor did you support your claim with facts.

Therefore, your claim is unsubstantiated.
You missed the point that it is not right and not called for to simply ASSUME, and then CLAIM, without any basis, that what the other person reported about his background. training, education, etc. is false.

That's what was done.

No amount of talking around this fact will change it. And that is what you are attempting to do.
 
Upvote 0

Swag365

Well-Known Member
Dec 25, 2019
1,352
481
USA
✟50,429.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Single
You missed the point that it is not right and not called for to simply ASSUME, and then CLAIM, without any basis, that what the other person reported about his background. training, education, etc. is false.

That's what was done.

No amount of talking around this fact will change it. And that is what you are attempting to do.
I did not make any claims about your background, training, or education.

Nor is your background, training, or education particularly relevant to me. But for the sake of argument, I will concede that you have a very fine background, that your training is top notch, and that you have received the best education.

That doesn't change the fact that what you wrote is unsubstantiated, and that I reject it because it is unsubstantiated.

Have a nice day.

P.S. To clarify what I wrote previously, I am not reassured by the fact that you or anyone else may have studied a particular subject in great depth. Plenty of people who have done that remain in error. So the fact that you have done that, as you claim, is no reassurance to me that what you wrote has any validity.
 
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

Swag365

Well-Known Member
Dec 25, 2019
1,352
481
USA
✟50,429.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Single
Look. Just let it go. It wasn't even the correct incident/exchange when you complained about "substantiated."
I need to let go of what exactly?

I am not the person in this thread taking personal offense at non-existent accusations concerning his background. If anyone needs to let something go I would think that it would be him.

Have a nice day.
 
Upvote 0

YouAreAwesome

☝✌
Oct 17, 2016
2,181
968
Lismore, Australia
✟94,543.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Ok, thought you said goodbye? I was wondering if I should respond to this or not as I did not want to go off topic to the op and there is already a Sabbath and Law section within the forum that these things can be discussed elsewhere but then I thought nuh this is a good chance to test the Spirits with the Word of God to see if a message that is proposed is of God not not of God with God's MAXIM the Word of God that is the true standard of truth and error. Let's bring everything to the light of God's Word on which we should try and bring our responses back to the OP here of the written Word of God being the final authority and God's standard of all truth and error.

JESUS and the Apostles teach that in the last days there will be many false prophets (messengers) and false teachers showing great signs and wonders that if it were possible they should deceive God's very elect *MATTHEW 24:24; ACTS OF THE APOSTLES 20:29 so it is to God alone we must turn with a prayerful guidence of his Spirit through His written Word to find out what is truth and what is error *JOHN 14:26: JOHN 16:13; HEBREWS 8:11.
This more so today as we see the warnings of JESUS being fulfilled more repidly, wars and romours of wars, pestilance, plague and fimine are all there for all to see. Today false prophets and teachers abound in over 40,000 different denominations of Christianity. Obviously they cannot all be right. Can they? How can you find your way when the road is dark and narrow? There is a way that seems right to a man but the end thereof is death. It is God that makes a separation between his laws as shown through his Word. Happy to share why through the scriptures if your interested as there is a lot of them. Just let me know. The only point I am trying to make here though is that we cannot know what truth and error is if there is no standard for truth and error and God is not our guide and teacher.

You have your facts mixed up dear friend. There is no directly translated words from the Hebrew and Greek to english for moral and ceremonial laws. That said the Greek equivallent for ceremonial laws are in ordinances is G1378 δόγμα; dogma which means civil, ceremonial laws or ordinances (Colossians 2:14; EPHESIANS 2:15) or G3544 νομικός; nomikos which means ceremonial law from TITUS 3:5.

While in the Hebrew sometimes the word חקּה; chuqqah is used for ordinances which are normally applied to matters of religious and ceremonial rituals. As for moral the closest is righteousness. In the Hebrew this is H664 RIGHTEOUSNESS; RIGHTEOUS; from צדק; tsedeq (H6663); meaning the right (natural, moral or legal; also (abstractly) equity or (figuratively) prosperity: - X even, (X that which is altogether) just (-ice), ([un-]) right (-eous) (cause, -ly, -ness). This does link into the english definiation of ceremonial laws however as we read from. The Greek is G1342 δίκαιος; dikaios From G1349; equitable in character or act; by implication innocent, holy (absolutely or relatively): - just, meet, right (-eous).

God's Word defines Righteousness or Righteouss as right doing and the moral standard as God's commandments. PSALMS 119:172 My tongue shall speak of your word for ALL YOUR COMMANDMENTS ARE RIGHTEOUSNESS <Right Doing - MORAL>

The above definitions all agree with the english definitions for ceremony; ceremonial and moral; right doing as shown below...

WEBSTERS DICTIONARY

MOR'AL, a. [L. moralis, from mos, moris, manner.]
1. Relating to the practice, manners or conduct of men as social beings in relation to each other, and with reference to right and wrong. The word moral is applicable to actions that are good or evil, virtuous or vicious, and has reference to the law of God as the standard by which their character is to be determined. The word however may be applied to actions which affect only, or primarily and principally, a person's own happiness.
Keep at the least within the compass of moral actions, which have in them vice or virtue.
Mankind is broken loose from moral bands.
2. Subject to the moral law and capable of moral actions; bound to perform social duties; as a moral agent or being.
3. Supported by the evidence of reason or probability; founded on experience of the ordinary course of things; as moral certainty, distinguished from physical or mathematical certainty or demonstration.
Physical and mathematical certainty may be stiled infallible, and moral certainty may be properly stiled indubitable.
Things of a moral nature may be proved by moral arguments.
4. Conformed to rules of right, or to the divine law respecting social duties; virtuous; just; as when we say, a particular action is not moral.
5. Conformed to law and right in exterior deportment; as, he leads a good moral life.

CEREMONIAL, a. [See Ceremony.]
1. Relating to ceremony, or external rite; ritual; according to the forms of established rites; as ceremonial exactness. It is particularly applied to the forms and rites of the Jewish religion; as the ceremonial law or worship, as distinguished from the moral and judicial law.
2. Formal; observant of old forms; exact; precise in manners.
[In this sense, ceremonious is now used.]

CEREMONIAL, n.
1. Outward form; external rite, or established forms or rites, including all the forms prescribed; a system of rules and ceremonies, enjoined by law or established by custom, whether in religious worship, in social intercourse, or in the courts of princes.
2. The order for rites and forms in the Romish church, or the book containing the rules prescribed to be observed on solemn occasions.

So as can be shown above Gods' LAW (10 commandments) are all Moral laws or according to the scriptures the standard of "RIGHTEOUSNESS" *PSALMS 119:172 and right doing. That is our duty of right doing (righteousness) to God and man.

While ceremonial laws are laws related to outward external religious rites and ceremonies such as the Sanctuary laws for remission of sins and sin offereings, Sanctuary laws and the Levitical priestly laws and ordinances.

Well this is a load of nonsense. You have been shown why through the scriptures and word definitions above proving that the 10 commandments are all moral laws of right doing or righteousness according to the scriptures definition *PSALMS 119:172 and the differnece between Moral and Ceremonial laws so do not need to comment much here eccept to say that it is impossible for God's 4th commandment to be a ceremonial law. Here is why.

1. God's 4th commandment is a "MEMORIAL" law it starts of saying...

EXODUS 20:8-11 [8], REMEMBER the SABBATH DAY, to KEEP IT HOLY. <Why?> [Because JESUS made it a Holy day of rest for mankind and commands us to keep it as a Holy day] [9], Six days shalt thou labor, and do all thy work: [10], But the SEVENTH DAY IS THE SABBATH of the LORD thy God [This is a direct reference from God's Word defining what the Sabbath is; The SABBATH = the SEVENTH DAY OF THE WEEK]: in it thou shalt not do any work, thou, nor thy son, nor thy daughter, thy manservant, nor thy maidservant, nor thy cattle, nor thy stranger that is within thy gates: <WHY> [11], For in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the SEVENTH DAY: wherefore the LORD BLESSED THE SABBATH, and HALLOWED IT.

Note it is pointing back to creation saying "REMEMBER THE SEVENTH DAY TO KEEP IT HOLY". It is pointing back to creation and God as the creator who "BLESSED THE SEVENTH DAY, and made the SEVENTH DAY a HOLY DAY of REST where no work is to be done.

2. We have already seen that all God's laws are "MORAL LAWS" of right doing to God and man or according to the scriptures definition the standard of all "RIGHTEOUSNESS" *PSLAMS 119:172 and the scripture definitions and meaning of MORAL and CEREMONIAL law.

Ok saved the best for last. Drum roll pleas...

3. Every ceremonial law from the Mosaic book of the old coveanant *EXODUS 24:7 was made and given to mankind as a part of the old covenant for sin and God's plan of salvation from sin for all mankind. God's SEVENTH DAY SABBATH was made BEFORE SIN and the fall of mankind when ceremonial laws did not exist!


This one will be fun and is the easiest but lets see what you know. You do know that there were many difference kinds of Sabbaths in the old covenant right? Since your making the claims here that Hosea 2:11 is saying God's 4th commandment is to be abolished prove to me what Sabbaths are being spoken about in HOSEA 2:11 was it...

1. The Sabbaths of the Feast of unleavened bread (first and last day) that can fall on any day of the week *LEVITICUS 23:6-8
2. The Sabbath on the annual day of Atonement that can fall on any day of the week *LEVITICUS 23:27-32
3. The Sabbath on the annual Feast of Trumpets that can fall on any day of the week *LEVITICUS 23:24-25?
4. The Sabbath on the Feast of Booths that can fall on any day of the week *LEVITICUS 23:34-36
5. Feast of first fruits (first and last day) that can fall on any day of the week *LEVITICUS 23:39
6. The sabbaths (sabbaton plural) of holy convocations from the annual feast days *LEVITICUS 23:7-8; 21;24; 27; 35-36 that can fall on any days of the week
7. The Sabbath of the land (7 year single cycle) *LEVITICUS 25:2
8. The Sabbath of Jubilee - culminating of the 7x7 yearly cycles sabbaths *LEVITICUS 25:9-54
9. Or God's 4th commandment seventh day weekly Sabbath which is one of the 10 commandments that define sin when broken? *EXODUS 20:8-11 from GENESIS 2:1-3

Also why you at it what does HOSEA 2:11 mean when it says "HER" Sabbaths as opposed to God saying "MY" Sabbath?

Finally you might want to reconcile your intepretation of HOSEA 2:11 being in reference to God's 4th commandment seventh day Sabbath being no more to

ISAIAH 66:22-23 [22], For as the new heavens and the new earth, which I will make, shall remain before me, said the LORD, so shall your seed and your name remain. [23], And it shall come to pass, that from one new moon to another, and from one sabbath to another, shall all flesh come to worship before me, said the LORD.

Kind of a few problems with your interpretation of the scriptures dear friend don't you think?

Anyhow for anyone interested HOSEA 2:11 is in refence to the ceremonial sabbaths in the feast days of ISRAEL (Her sabbaths) which is the within scripture context there is a detailed scripture response starting here that includes this scripture in the linked thread.

Hope this helps.

Well obviously we disagree on nearly everything to do with the Mosaic Law, and therefore the Sabbath ceremony. But sticking to this topic derails the thread so I'll leave it at that.

I'm bowing out again, peace.
 
Upvote 0

LoveGodsWord

Well-Known Member
Jun 5, 2017
22,242
6,634
Queensland
Visit site
✟252,319.00
Country
Australia
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Married
Well obviously we disagree on nearly everything to do with the Mosaic Law, and therefore the Sabbath ceremony. But sticking to this topic derails the thread so I'll leave it at that.

I'm bowing out again, peace.

I did not think you would respond to post 118 linked as it shows why your claims are not true. Anyhow, If your interested go to the Sabbath and law forum. I believe only God's Word is true and we should believe and follow it over the teachings and traditions of men that seek to break the commandments of God *ROMANS 3:4; MATTHEW 15:2-9. Thanks for sharing.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

GodsGrace101

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Apr 17, 2018
6,713
2,298
Tuscany
✟231,507.00
Country
Italy
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Well I bowed out of this thread, but I can't help but jump in for a moment on this (as you are jumping in also!). Not all Christians separate the Old Testament into the three compartments of law that Adventists do: moral, ceremonial, and civil. Most do, but not all. I used to be an SDA so I know this is the normal teaching among Adventists. Many groups teach to keep the covenant as one moral whole. For example, the ceremonial laws are moral in that disobeying them is immoral. To keep the covenant one must continue to keep the ceremonial laws. To separate a covenant into moral laws is a man made construction that is not a part of the original covenantal plan. No where, that I am aware of, does the bible make a reference for moral laws to be decided upon and separated from ceremonial or civil laws. The whole covenant is moral.

On a separate note, if you believe you can do a good job separating what you believe to be moral from the other laws, by what criteria will you make your judgments? I believe you will find the Sabbath, by definition to be a ceremony. Ceremony has the definition on Dictionary.com for example (but basically the same wherever you go):

a formal act or ritual, often set by custom or tradition, performed in observation of an event or anniversary:​

Do you think the formal act of stopping work weekly by tradition to rest and worship in observation of the Sabbath counts? So splitting the law this way undermines the Sabbath anyway. Thus even if we do split the Mosaic Covenant specifically into these sections, the Sabbath fits into the ceremonial law (see here for a quick summary of why the Sabbath doesn't fit into a moral category).

For a final punch, if moral law is eternal, how can God threaten to take something eternally moral, away?

Hosea 2:11 (NIV)
I will stop all her celebrations: her yearly festivals, her New Moons, her Sabbath days—all her appointed feasts.​



See one of @JAL 's explanations here.
I'm sorry, I don't understand your entire post.

I'm not sure what you think I believe.

The Ceremonial Laws have to do with the traditions of Israel's worship practices. For instance, there's a lot of this in Leviticus where it explains how to make a sacrifice.

Can we make sacrifices today?
No. So the Ceremonial Laws are abolished.

The Civil Laws taught how to live life in a general sense. Deuteronomy speaks to this....this is where Moses declares that a certificate of divorce must be given.

Can we live by the same standards of that time?
No. So the Civil Laws are abolished.

The Moral Law,,, which is the 10 Commandments is still in effect today....the moral law will never change because God gave these commands as He is a Moral Being.

Hope this clears up some issues.
 
  • Winner
Reactions: LoveGodsWord
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

GodsGrace101

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Apr 17, 2018
6,713
2,298
Tuscany
✟231,507.00
Country
Italy
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
For starters post 28 has a 10-point rebuttal, which LoveGodsWord challenged on this thread, with my follow-up responses at post 107 and post 109.
JAL
If you can't tell me in 25 words or less why you think Sola Scriptura is a false doctrine,,,then I'd say you maybe just can't explain it simply.

Which is all it would take.

How could Sola Scriptura be a false doctrine?
I understand how some might add info to it...
but you think it's FALSE??!!

No 10-point rebuttals for me.
Sorry....you don't have to answer if you don't want to.
But sending a person to a prior post is not really what these threads are here for.

No problem.
 
  • Useful
Reactions: LoveGodsWord
Upvote 0

GodsGrace101

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Apr 17, 2018
6,713
2,298
Tuscany
✟231,507.00
Country
Italy
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
I'm no Catholic but I appreciate the Catholic contributions on this thread. They have supplied several rebuttals to Sola Scriptura that I myself hadn't thought of.
Catholics are not so bad.
They just have some doctrine wrong...IMHO.
And it's too bad,,,because many of their teachings are
right on.

So like what, for instance?
What rebuttals to sola scriptura that you hadn't thought of?

You gonna send me to a previous post???
:doh:
 
  • Agree
Reactions: LoveGodsWord
Upvote 0

JAL

Veteran
Site Supporter
Oct 16, 2004
10,777
928
Visit site
✟343,550.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
JAL
If you can't tell me in 25 words or less why you think Sola Scriptura is a false doctrine,,,then I'd say you maybe just can't explain it simply.

Which is all it would take.

How could Sola Scriptura be a false doctrine?
I understand how some might add info to it...
but you think it's FALSE??!!

No 10-point rebuttals for me.
Sorry....you don't have to answer if you don't want to.
But sending a person to a prior post is not really what these threads are here for.

No problem.
You didn't have to read all 10. One would have been a good start.
 
Upvote 0

Swag365

Well-Known Member
Dec 25, 2019
1,352
481
USA
✟50,429.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Single
JAL
If you can't tell me in 25 words or less why you think Sola Scriptura is a false doctrine,,,then I'd say you maybe just can't explain it simply.

Which is all it would take.
The doctrine holds that all binding beliefs must be found in Sacred Scripture, but the doctrine itself is not found in Sacred Scripture. The doctrine refutes itself.

Moreover, Sacred Scripture itself contradicts the doctrine (see, e.g. 2 Thess 2:15).
 
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