Sola scriptura, a blessing from God

Neostarwcc · May 8, 2020

By this topic I'm not saying or claiming that only Calvinists and Reformists are Christians or even Protestants for that matter. I recognize and believe that God's elect or if you want to put it the way God put it sheep. Ir to really clear it up those written in the lambs book of life. Are sheep from all different denominations regardless if I believe that John Calvin and the reformists over the years have "fully omprehended and interpreted what scripture says". I recognize that not every Christian will agree with me (or any other solid doctrine like predestination. Its believed by 90% of the church but in all different shapes and forms." But merely that we as Gods sheep should come to a common ground and be able to debate with each other peacefully. We, the true sheep of the world who Hod has promised to save,preserve, and grow.

But anyway, this topic is on the Protestant doctrine sola scriptura or "Scripture alone." Its the belief started by Martin Luther. But its argued that it was a Christian belief at the very least in the beginning of Peter's church. It was taught by the apostles and the Old testament for years to come. Even Christ himself believed in Gods word being the supreme and ultimate authority in life. When he talked about God he used scripture. When he defended himself against the pharisees and Satan himself, he used scripture. Jesus went by no other authority than God himself otherwise he would have sinned this was the argument of Luther and my fellow Protestant brothers and sisters for over 500 years.

I have to admit Sola Scriptura does present its problems though. No two Protestant denominations completely agree the baptists dont agree with the Lutherans, the methodists dont agree with the Presbyterians, even the Calvinists dont completely agree with the reformed despite our theologies being virtually exactly the same.

No Christian has the same complete interpretation of scripture. However one thing Sola Scriptura does/did accomplish is it made people over the last 500 years study their bibles a lot harder and a lot of Christian's agree on most things. Like the fact that we are saved by faith and not works. Like many of the things Jesus said and taught during his life. It is clear (and should be clear) that the Bible teaches the biblical roles of a husband and a wife, that God hates divorces and considers those who divorce and remarry without adultery being involved to be adulterers themselves. Like how every sheep of Christ will naturally bear fruit.

Of course there are Christian's that deny these facts and go to any website, pastor, or source that will tell them otherwise but it doesnt change the fact that Christ and the apostles taught these "Godly ways of living" and any pastor, source, or Christian who truly accepts and follows the Bible should agree with what I just said. These are basic things taught in scripture.

But then we have the more difficult topics. Like the Trinity and exactly how God is and works. How exactly Christs sheep are and work. Exactly how we are saved, is it Gods work or through our own merits? Subjects like Eternal Security, the five points of calvinism, predestination in itself. When people were written in the book of life. Whether or not Christ is present during the eucharist, it's his actual body and blood or whether it symbolizes what Jesus did.

Christian's have been arguing about these subjects since the apostles died. Only the apostles had complete 100% correct theology and they tried to write it down for us but now 2,000 years later nobody agrees on exactly what the apostles, christ, prophets, you name it... actually said.

But thanks to sola scriptura we have some basic facts that cannot and should not be ignored. Scripture teaches a Christian how to grow, how to live, and exactly what commands to obey from the new covenant (it wasnt just love God and love your neighbor those are the greatest commandments but were not the OMLY commandments given in the new testament). It teaches us the fact that many Christian's seem to forget or not want to admit. That one day ALL of humanity is going to have to give an account of their lives to God even Christian's. Yes our sins are forgiven but our judgement is not about sin, or judgement is about how well weve served God in our lives. Idk about you but I'd rather be praised by God than be scorned, disciplined, and be called a hypocrite. Again not saying that this group arent Gods sheep but merely that they will be disciplined by the good Shepard by loss if rewards. Scripture is clear that only rewards can be lost.

Sola scriptura reminds us to all turn to scripture and scripture alone for whatever doctrines we believe and hold on to and defend in Jesus's name and that causes us go grow and bring forth fruit. Its caused a division in Protestantism and all of Christianity but really we as Gods children should be doing the things that God told us to do not do what we want to do and follow man made doctrines. We all should be turning to and obeying scripture.

thecolorsblend · May 8, 2020

A certain amount of non-scriptural authority is needed in order to determine what Sacred Scripture even is.

This "sola scriptura" thing is a logical dead end.

BBAS 64 · May 8, 2020

Good Day, Neostarwcc

Sola Scriptura rightly defined:

And let me begin by defining what the doctrine of sola scriptura does not say.

First of all, it is not a claim that the Bible contains all knowledge. The Bible is not exhaustive in every detail. John 21:25 speaks to the fact that there are many things that Jesus said and did that are not recorded in John, or in fact in any book in the world because the whole books of the world could not contain it. But the Bible does not have to be exhaustive to function as the sole rule of faith for the Church. We do not need to know the color of Thomas' eyes. We do not need to know the menu of each meal of the Apostolic band for the Scriptures to function as the sole rule of faith for the Church.

Secondly, it is not a denial of the Church's authority to teach God's truth. I Timothy 3:15 describes the Church as "the pillar and foundation of the truth." The truth is in Jesus Christ and in His Word. The Church teaches truth and calls men to Christ and, in so doing, functions as the pillar and foundation thereof. The Church does not add revelation or rule over Scripture. The Church being the bride of Christ, listens to the Word of Christ, which is found in God-breathed Scripture.

Thirdly, it is not a denial that God's Word has been spoken. Apostolic preaching was authoritative in and of itself. Yet, the Apostles proved their message from Scripture, as we see in Acts 17:2, and 18:28, and John commended those in Ephesus for testing those who claimed to be Apostles, Revelation 2:2. The Apostles were not afraid to demonstrate the consistency between their teaching and the Old Testament.

And, finally, sola scriptura is not a denial of the role of the Holy Spirit in guiding and enlightening the Church.

What then is sola scriptura?

The doctrine of sola scriptura, simply stated, is that the Scriptures and the Scriptures alone are sufficient to function as the regula fide, the "rule of faith" for the Church. All that one must believe to be a Christian is found in Scripture and in no other source. That which is not found in Scripture is not binding upon the Christian conscience. Sola Scriptura doesn't deny the presence of other authorities subordinate to the Scriptures. The "Sola" refers to its status as the only infallible authority, not the only authority.

The historical doctrine of SS has nothing to do with interpretation of said scripture, but the nature of scripture it's self.

Nor do I believe this doctrine started with Luther once it rightly defined and correctly understood.

David King has written a 2 volume work on the doctrine of SS and the early church, you may find that useful.

In Him

Bill

BBAS 64 · May 8, 2020

thecolorsblend said:
A certain amount of non-scriptural authority is needed in order to determine what Sacred Scripture even is.

This "sola scriptura" thing is a logical dead end.

Good Day, TCB

Or it could be purely a historical question:

Proving Inspiration

Snip:

Further, Christ said he would found a Church. Both the Bible (still taken as merely a historical book, not yet as an inspired one) and other ancient works attest to the fact that Christ established a Church with the rudiments of what we see in the Catholic Church today—papacy, hierarchy, priesthood, sacraments, and teaching authority.

We have thus taken the material and purely historically concluded that Jesus founded the Catholic Church. Because of his Resurrection we have reason to take seriously his claims concerning the Church, including its authority to teach in his name.

This Catholic Church tells us the Bible is inspired, and we can take the Church’s word for it precisely because the Church is infallible. Only after having been told by a properly constituted authority—that is, one established by God to assure us of the truth concerning matters of faith—that the Bible is inspired can we reasonably begin to use it as an inspired book.

Your Church tells you it is inspired that is why you know. For the non roman church member we know because it is Gods breathed out word as such is directly from Him,

In Him

Bill

Albion · May 8, 2020

Neostarwcc said:
I have to admit Sola Scriptura does present its problems though. No two Protestant denominations completely agree the baptists dont agree with the Lutherans, the methodists dont agree with the Presbyterians, even the Calvinists dont completely agree with the reformed despite our theologies being virtually exactly the same.

I'm sorry to see one more thread on this subject, considering how many others there have been, but I'm especially disappointed to see you start us off with this error.

Sola Scriptura says that Scripture is our guidebook to necessary doctrine and nothing else is needed. It does NOT say or imply that everybody reading it will understand it the same way or to the same degree, however.

That is a separate issue and does not cast doubt upon the importance and sufficiency of Scripture. (Nor is any alternate source of doctrine free of this same issue).

bling · May 8, 2020

Neostarwcc said:
By this topic I'm not saying or claiming that only Calvinists and Reformists are Christians or even Protestants for that matter. I recognize and believe that God's elect or if you want to put it the way God put it sheep. Ir to really clear it up those written in the lambs book of life. Are sheep from all different denominations regardless if I believe that John Calvin and the reformists over the years have "fully omprehended and interpreted what scripture says". I recognize that not every Christian will agree with me (or any other solid doctrine like predestination. Its believed by 90% of the church but in all different shapes and forms." But merely that we as Gods sheep should come to a common ground and be able to debate with each other peacefully. We, the true sheep of the world who Hod has promised to save,preserve, and grow.

But anyway, this topic is on the Protestant doctrine sola scriptura or "Scripture alone." Its the belief started by Martin Luther. But its argued that it was a Christian belief at the very least in the beginning of Peter's church. It was taught by the apostles and the Old testament for years to come. Even Christ himself believed in Gods word being the supreme and ultimate authority in life. When he talked about God he used scripture. When he defended himself against the pharisees and Satan himself, he used scripture. Jesus went by no other authority than God himself otherwise he would have sinned this was the argument of Luther and my fellow Protestant brothers and sisters for over 500 years.

I have to admit Sola Scriptura does present its problems though. No two Protestant denominations completely agree the baptists dont agree with the Lutherans, the methodists dont agree with the Presbyterians, even the Calvinists dont completely agree with the reformed despite our theologies being virtually exactly the same.

No Christian has the same complete interpretation of scripture. However one thing Sola Scriptura does/did accomplish is it made people over the last 500 years study their bibles a lot harder and a lot of Christian's agree on most things. Like the fact that we are saved by faith and not works. Like many of the things Jesus said and taught during his life. It is clear (and should be clear) that the Bible teaches the biblical roles of a husband and a wife, that God hates divorces and considers those who divorce and remarry without adultery being involved to be adulterers themselves. Like how every sheep of Christ will naturally bear fruit.

Of course there are Christian's that deny these facts and go to any website, pastor, or source that will tell them otherwise but it doesnt change the fact that Christ and the apostles taught these "Godly ways of living" and any pastor, source, or Christian who truly accepts and follows the Bible should agree with what I just said. These are basic things taught in scripture.

But then we have the more difficult topics. Like the Trinity and exactly how God is and works. How exactly Christs sheep are and work. Exactly how we are saved, is it Gods work or through our own merits? Subjects like Eternal Security, the five points of calvinism, predestination in itself. When people were written in the book of life. Whether or not Christ is present during the eucharist, it's his actual body and blood or whether it symbolizes what Jesus did.

Christian's have been arguing about these subjects since the apostles died. Only the apostles had complete 100% correct theology and they tried to write it down for us but now 2,000 years later nobody agrees on exactly what the apostles, christ, prophets, you name it... actually said.

But thanks to sola scriptura we have some basic facts that cannot and should not be ignored. Scripture teaches a Christian how to grow, how to live, and exactly what commands to obey from the new covenant (it wasnt just love God and love your neighbor those are the greatest commandments but were not the OMLY commandments given in the new testament). It teaches us the fact that many Christian's seem to forget or not want to admit. That one day ALL of humanity is going to have to give an account of their lives to God even Christian's. Yes our sins are forgiven but our judgement is not about sin, or judgement is about how well weve served God in our lives. Idk about you but I'd rather be praised by God than be scorned, disciplined, and be called a hypocrite. Again not saying that this group arent Gods sheep but merely that they will be disciplined by the good Shepard by loss if rewards. Scripture is clear that only rewards can be lost.

Sola scriptura reminds us to all turn to scripture and scripture alone for whatever doctrines we believe and hold on to and defend in Jesus's name and that causes us go grow and bring forth fruit. Its caused a division in Protestantism and all of Christianity but really we as Gods children should be doing the things that God told us to do not do what we want to do and follow man made doctrines. We all should be turning to and obeying scripture.

You say: “Sola scriptura reminds us to all turn to scripture and scripture alone for whatever doctrines we believe…”, but do you go to some other source (commentary/book) to get “your” interpretation of scripture?

Several times Jewish teacher (especially Pharisees) tried to get Jesus into an intellectual debate over two different schools of thought that would have lots of tick for tat responses with them knowing how to defend either side and what did Jesus do? Jesus avoided the debate and went back to the scripture: “What does scripture say”?

Personally, I wish all these commentary and doctrinal books were burned. When someone comes to me with a different “doctrine”, I ask them lots of questions (like Christ asked lots of questions) and I find the person cannot defend their ideas because they are not “their” conclusions, but the conclusion of some dead author they agree with. I windup asking questions of a dead person, who does not answer and the person I am talking with “assumes” their dead author friend would have an answer and just go on believing the author (not scripture). They also have to interpret scripture according to the conclusions of the author and not the most logical interpretation.

I have Christian friends in the unregistered Churches in China and teach Chinese student here in the USA while they are in the Universities. They really practice “Sola scriptura”, since they only have the Bible (which is great!!) and I only use the Bible in studying with them.

In Communist China the unregistered Church is not broken up into “denominations” since they virtually all teach the same thing. Again remember they only have the Bible, but another reason they all teach the same is the fact when they started registered churches they publicly listed out what could not be taught in the church, like communion, adult emersion baptism, the indwelling Holy Spirit, and lots of other things, so the unregister churches took the list and made it what they were going to teach.

Who is really practicing “Sola scriptura” in more then just “word”?

Albion · May 8, 2020

bling said:
Who is really practicing “Sola scriptura” in more then just “word”?

Most Protestants, I would think.

At least that's so if we use the term correctly and do not insert the familiar distractions into the question (How do we interpret Scripture, it doesn't tell us everything that can be known?, etc.).

pescador · May 8, 2020

thecolorsblend said:
A certain amount of non-scriptural authority is needed in order to determine what Sacred Scripture even is.

This "sola scriptura" thing is a logical dead end.

Exactly! That is why faith is different from logic. The Word of God is flawless, people are not. There have been many errors made by "the church" from day one; read the beginning of Revelation to see ample proof of that, and/or Paul's criticisms of the churches and individuals of his time. Today's church leaders are not infallible; only God, through His Word, is infallible.

BBAS 64 · May 8, 2020

bling said:
You say: “Sola scriptura reminds us to all turn to scripture and scripture alone for whatever doctrines we believe…”, but do you go to some other source (commentary/book) to get “your” interpretation of scripture?

Several times Jewish teacher (especially Pharisees) tried to get Jesus into an intellectual debate over two different schools of thought that would have lots of tick for tat responses with them knowing how to defend either side and what did Jesus do? Jesus avoided the debate and went back to the scripture: “What does scripture say”?

Personally, I wish all these commentary and doctrinal books were burned. When someone comes to me with a different “doctrine”, I ask them lots of questions (like Christ asked lots of questions) and I find the person cannot defend their ideas because they are not “their” conclusions, but the conclusion of some dead author they agree with. I windup asking questions of a dead person, who does not answer and the person I am talking with “assumes” their dead author friend would have an answer and just go on believing the author (not scripture). They also have to interpret scripture according to the conclusions of the author and not the most logical interpretation.

I have Christian friends in the unregistered Churches in China and teach Chinese student here in the USA while they are in the Universities. They really practice “Sola scriptura”, since they only have the Bible (which is great!!) and I only use the Bible in studying with them.

In Communist China the unregistered Church is not broken up into “denominations” since they virtually all teach the same thing. Again remember they only have the Bible, but another reason they all teach the same is the fact when they started registered churches they publicly listed out what could not be taught in the church, like communion, adult emersion baptism, the indwelling Holy Spirit, and lots of other things, so the unregister churches took the list and made it what they were going to teach.

Who is really practicing “Sola scriptura” in more then just “word”?

Good Day, Bling

This sounds more like Nuda Scriptura as opposed to SS.

Not Just Me and My Bible: What ‘Sola Scriptura’ Doesn’t Mean

In HIm,

Bill

BobRyan · May 8, 2020

Neostarwcc said:
Sola scriptura reminds us to all turn to scripture and scripture alone for whatever doctrines we believe and hold on to and defend in Jesus's name and that causes us go grow and bring forth fruit.

Amen.

We see it in Acts 17:11 "they studied the scriptures daily to SEE IF those things spoken by the Apostle Paul - were SO"

And we see it in Mark 7:6-13 where Jesus hammers the magisterium traditions of the one true nation church started by God at Sinai - sola scriptura.

6 And He said to them, “Rightly did Isaiah prophesy of you hypocrites, as it is written:
‘This people honors Me with their lips,
But their heart is far away from Me.
7 ‘But in vain do they worship Me,
Teaching as doctrines the precepts of men.’
8 Neglecting the commandment of God, you hold to the tradition of men.”
9 He was also saying to them, “You are experts at setting aside the commandment of God in order to keep your tradition. 10 For Moses said, ‘Honor your father and your mother’; and, ‘He who speaks evil of father or mother, is to be put to death’; 11 but you say, ‘If a man says to his father or his mother, whatever I have that would help you is Corban (that is to say, given to God),’ 12 you no longer permit him to do anything for his father or his mother; 13 thus invalidating the word of God by your tradition which you have handed down; and you do many things such as that.”

Not happy with that someone might post

fhansen said:
Sola Scriptura isn’t a blessing; it’s a joke and a fallacy..

So now - before looking to see what denomination that person says they are from - which one would "guess"??

How is it that this question divides so predictably along denomination lines if the problem with sola scriptura is really "in the text"?

bling · May 8, 2020

BBAS 64 said:
Good Day, Bling

This sounds more like Nuda Scriptura as opposed to SS.

Not Just Me and My Bible: What ‘Sola Scriptura’ Doesn’t Mean

In HIm,

Bill

The author uses Alexander Campbell as an example of someone who “used only the Bible and Himself”, but Campbell like everyone else presented his ideas and had a peer review of those ideas and listen to others of his time.

The author shares this concept with: “We need to hear the word of Christ from one another — to discuss what it means and how to live in light of it. The problem with dead authors is there is no discussing with them how they came to their conclusion in light of other conflicting information.

A true follower of the word today will, use fellow likeminded strong Christians to challenge his/her conclusions.

The “problems” I see in myself and can image to be in others is the “motive issue”. There is more information in scripture then I will ever have time to learn, so what is my reason for wanting to know what a particular verse has to say? If I am trying to know something to: win an argument, look very intellectual, write a book or article I can sell and receive prestige from, be able to put someone else down or support my conclusion, I can expect no help from the Spirit, but I could get interpretation right even though I am personally wrong.

The saying: “Those that can do, do and those who can’t do, teach” holds true. If one of these earlier teachers were truly able to make true disciples (mentor [allow the Holy Spirit to mentor through them] individuals to become just like they were [allowing the Holy Spirit to work through them to mentor]) the gospel would have already been individually available to the entire world (every individual would have Christ literally mentoring them though a Christian to be Christ like).

I, and others I know, have not had any issue with understanding any scripture we need to know. Yes, you do have to: read and study the scripture and context, pray a lot for help, meditate, wait for the Spirit’s help, fast if needed, share your ideas with fellow believers and keep you motive pure.

You seem to try to throw the first century Bible writers, in with “Christian” early writings, but we do not even know if these men were truly being led by the Spirit at the time of their writing, while we do know that of those who wrote scripture.

Yes, I can and have read first Clement and find it will written, but first Clement uses the same scripture we have to support every point he is making without “adding” anything that is not in scripture, so why not just stay with scripture?

I do like Barnes’ Notes, but that is partly do to the fact these are his personal notes found scatted in his office after his death, so he was not writing a book to sell or even to receive recognition.

Other authors have some truth, but also have unaddressed questions, so how do we use that?

Organic Growth like we are seeing in China does not lend itself well to the use of commentaries, the Bible is hard enough to get into everyone’s hands. A friend of mine was at a home church leader’s house and was introduced to his two sons (unique to have two children). The two were finishing up their mentoring teaching of their father and plain to leave that year for a province 500 miles away which had no Christians. My friend came to realize, they had only a few Bibles and enough money to go one way, so did not plan on returning. Did they have what they needed to make it work?

Neostarwcc · May 9, 2020

BBAS 64 said:
Good Day, Neostarwcc

Sola Scriptura rightly defined:

And let me begin by defining what the doctrine of sola scriptura does not say.

First of all, it is not a claim that the Bible contains all knowledge. The Bible is not exhaustive in every detail. John 21:25 speaks to the fact that there are many things that Jesus said and did that are not recorded in John, or in fact in any book in the world because the whole books of the world could not contain it. But the Bible does not have to be exhaustive to function as the sole rule of faith for the Church. We do not need to know the color of Thomas' eyes. We do not need to know the menu of each meal of the Apostolic band for the Scriptures to function as the sole rule of faith for the Church.

Secondly, it is not a denial of the Church's authority to teach God's truth. I Timothy 3:15 describes the Church as "the pillar and foundation of the truth." The truth is in Jesus Christ and in His Word. The Church teaches truth and calls men to Christ and, in so doing, functions as the pillar and foundation thereof. The Church does not add revelation or rule over Scripture. The Church being the bride of Christ, listens to the Word of Christ, which is found in God-breathed Scripture.

Thirdly, it is not a denial that God's Word has been spoken. Apostolic preaching was authoritative in and of itself. Yet, the Apostles proved their message from Scripture, as we see in Acts 17:2, and 18:28, and John commended those in Ephesus for testing those who claimed to be Apostles, Revelation 2:2. The Apostles were not afraid to demonstrate the consistency between their teaching and the Old Testament.

And, finally, sola scriptura is not a denial of the role of the Holy Spirit in guiding and enlightening the Church.

What then is sola scriptura?

The doctrine of sola scriptura, simply stated, is that the Scriptures and the Scriptures alone are sufficient to function as the regula fide, the "rule of faith" for the Church. All that one must believe to be a Christian is found in Scripture and in no other source. That which is not found in Scripture is not binding upon the Christian conscience. Sola Scriptura doesn't deny the presence of other authorities subordinate to the Scriptures. The "Sola" refers to its status as the only infallible authority, not the only authority.

The historical doctrine of SS has nothing to do with interpretation of said scripture, but the nature of scripture it's self.

Nor do I believe this doctrine started with Luther once it rightly defined and correctly understood.

David King has written a 2 volume work on the doctrine of SS and the early church, you may find that useful.

In Him

Bill

Oops! I forgot to put that!

yes the Bible doesnt contain all knowledge I fully agree with you. We will never know everything and everything about God.Some things are meant only for God to know. I have a feeling that when we go to be with Jesus there will be many questions that he will refuse to answer. But that we will also know a lot more about theology and the mysteries of God than we can ever know now.

What I like about many pastors now though is that many of them are now using scripture in their teaching whereas pretty sola scriptura we just went by a pope who could be corrupted in what he taught. The word of God has remained and will remain the same forever. Theologians are going by what the entire bible says and not just the "good" parts. They study the Bible from Genesis to Revelation. Even Catholics who once only listened to the pope are opening their bibles and reading and learning from it. Sola scriptura changed the way Christianity works in where all Christian's get their theology.

I could respond to all your points but I have to say I agree with all of them and I should have included them in my OP. *blush*.

Neostarwcc · May 9, 2020

Albion said:
I'm sorry to see one more thread on this subject, considering how many others there have been, but I'm especially disappointed to see you start us off with this error.

Sola Scriptura says that Scripture is our guidebook to necessary doctrine and nothing else is needed. It does NOT say or imply that everybody reading it will understand it the same way or to the same degree, however.

That is a separate issue and does not cast doubt upon the importance and sufficiency of Scripture. (Nor is any alternate source of doctrine free of this same issue).

Well this is a hot topic like eternal security is. I like to make threads on all kinds of theology lol.

No it wasnt meant to be perfect and didnt make the claim that everyone would agree with each other. But, it is a problem. You'd think everyone who opens their bibles would adhere to the basic truths that scripture teaches. Especially everyone that's starting to study the words in depth. And whenever Christ says "let everyone hear what the spirit says to the churches" or truly I say to you".

I can give an example. Not every Christian believes in the Trinity or accepts that Jesus is the God of the old testament or that Jesus was even God in the flesh for crying out loud yet they're such basic truths taught in scripture that EVERY Christian should believe them. That's a problem. Especially if they consider scripture the ultimate authority like they claim.

Not calling them not Christian's but... yeah...

charsan · May 9, 2020

thecolorsblend said:
A certain amount of non-scriptural authority is needed in order to determine what Sacred Scripture even is.

This "sola scriptura" thing is a logical dead end.

Exactly

BBAS 64 · May 10, 2020

charsan said:
Exactly

Good Day, Charsan

In case you missed it

"The doctrine of sola scriptura, simply stated, is that the Scriptures and the Scriptures alone are sufficient to function as the regula fide, the "rule of faith" for the Church. All that one must believe to be a Christian is found in Scripture and in no other source. That which is not found in Scripture is not binding upon the Christian conscience. Sola Scriptura doesn't deny the presence of other authorities subordinate to the Scriptures. The "Sola" refers to its status as the only infallible authority, not the only authority."

In Him,

Bill;

charsan · May 10, 2020

BBAS 64 said:
Good Day, Charsan

In case you missed it

"The doctrine of sola scriptura, simply stated, is that the Scriptures and the Scriptures alone are sufficient to function as the regula fide, the "rule of faith" for the Church. All that one must believe to be a Christian is found in Scripture and in no other source. That which is not found in Scripture is not binding upon the Christian conscience. Sola Scriptura doesn't deny the presence of other authorities subordinate to the Scriptures. The "Sola" refers to its status as the only infallible authority, not the only authority."

In Him,

Bill;

Didn't miss it. You see the definition can be posted all day until the cows come home and really means absolutely nothing in practice. I reject Sola Scriptura and I am not an evangelical where I have to use such an animal nor do I agree with it.

BBAS 64 · May 10, 2020

charsan said:
Didn't miss it. You see the definition can be posted all day until the cows come home and really means absolutely nothing in practice. I reject Sola Scriptura and I am not an evangelical where I have to use such an animal nor do I agree with it.

Good Day, Charsan

You may reject it and that is OK , but having a working definition will enable you to better understand it.

So when someone posts:

"A certain amount of non-scriptural authority is needed in order to determine what Sacred Scripture even is."

What they have is an lack of understanding, as by definition I have addressed that issue fully.
I guess it could be said the ability of understanding is what is lacking... Just because they do not understand does not mean it can not be correctly understood.

In Him,

Bill

charsan · May 10, 2020

BBAS 64 said:
Good Day, Charsan

You may reject it and that is OK , but having a working definition will enable you to better understand it.

Not really. Honestly I wasn't born yesterday and the stupid definition doesn't match any reality you people believe whatever you want the Bible to say and than say "Oh we just use Sola Scriptura".

JAL · May 11, 2020

These two theories are obviously at odds:
(1) The preeminence of Direct Revelation
(2) The preeminence of exegesis (bible scholarship).
With one accord, the Scriptures proclaim #1. With 100 billion souls at stake, after all, we need (infallible) Direct Revelation to guide our witnessing/evangelism. As a result, Scripture rightly defines evangelism as prophetic utterance/ministry (see post 179 on another thread, and post 180).

As a Calvinist, you're not terribly concerned about 100 billion souls. You should be, however, because your Calvinistic exegesis is fallible (and I'm quite confident incorrect). You cannot justifiably neglect to seek infallible revelation (1Cor 14:1).

Neostarwcc said:
But thanks to sola scriptura...

No thanks at all to a lie that has probably been the single most Spirit-stifling influence on the church.

...we have some basic facts that cannot and should not be ignored. Scripture teaches a Christian how to grow, how to live, and exactly what commands to obey from the new covenant (it wasnt just love God and love your neighbor those are the greatest commandments but were not the OMLY commandments given in the new testament). It teaches us the fact that many Christian's seem to forget or not want to admit. That one day ALL of humanity is going to have to give an account of their lives to God even Christian's. Yes our sins are forgiven but our judgement is not about sin, or judgement is about how well weve served God in our lives. Idk about you but I'd rather be praised by God than be scorned, disciplined, and be called a hypocrite. Again not saying that this group arent Gods sheep but merely that they will be disciplined by the good Shepard by loss if rewards. Scripture is clear that only rewards can be lost.

Thanks to Sola Scriptura? That's interesting. Abraham and his offspring (not to mention his predecessors) knew these fundamentals before a canon existed - by Direct Revelation. Don't you agree with Calvin's doctrine of the Inward Witness? According to him it is the Spirit who reveals to us that Scripture is inspired - this is a Direct Revelation. Thus
(1) Direct Revelation created the scriptures.
(2) Direct Revelation persuades us to believe the scriptures.

And yet you say - give thanks to Sola Scriptura? You're putting the cart before the horse.

Sola scriptura reminds us to all turn to scripture and scripture alone for whatever doctrines we believe and hold on to and defend in Jesus's name....

If that were true, you wouldn't remain Christian. The Inward Witness is not an event of your past. Rather this Direct Revelation - Christ's Voice - is your ongoing AUTHORITATIVE BASIS for accepting the Scriptures and the fundamentals of the faith. Nothing has changed since OT times:

"My sheep listen to my voice; I know them, and they follow me" (Jn 10:27).

The church is built on Christ. Not on a book. And exegesis doesn't unify us. It's what divides us.
(1) By virtue of the Inward Witness we have some degree of unity, on the fundamental issues.
(2) On the more obscure issues, we tend to look to exegesis, resulting in endless division.

fhansen · May 11, 2020

Neostarwcc said:
By this topic I'm not saying or claiming that only Calvinists and Reformists are Christians or even Protestants for that matter. I recognize and believe that God's elect or if you want to put it the way God put it sheep. Ir to really clear it up those written in the lambs book of life. Are sheep from all different denominations regardless if I believe that John Calvin and the reformists over the years have "fully omprehended and interpreted what scripture says". I recognize that not every Christian will agree with me (or any other solid doctrine like predestination. Its believed by 90% of the church but in all different shapes and forms." But merely that we as Gods sheep should come to a common ground and be able to debate with each other peacefully. We, the true sheep of the world who Hod has promised to save,preserve, and grow.

But anyway, this topic is on the Protestant doctrine sola scriptura or "Scripture alone." Its the belief started by Martin Luther. But its argued that it was a Christian belief at the very least in the beginning of Peter's church. It was taught by the apostles and the Old testament for years to come. Even Christ himself believed in Gods word being the supreme and ultimate authority in life. When he talked about God he used scripture. When he defended himself against the pharisees and Satan himself, he used scripture. Jesus went by no other authority than God himself otherwise he would have sinned this was the argument of Luther and my fellow Protestant brothers and sisters for over 500 years.

I have to admit Sola Scriptura does present its problems though. No two Protestant denominations completely agree the baptists dont agree with the Lutherans, the methodists dont agree with the Presbyterians, even the Calvinists dont completely agree with the reformed despite our theologies being virtually exactly the same.

No Christian has the same complete interpretation of scripture. However one thing Sola Scriptura does/did accomplish is it made people over the last 500 years study their bibles a lot harder and a lot of Christian's agree on most things. Like the fact that we are saved by faith and not works. Like many of the things Jesus said and taught during his life. It is clear (and should be clear) that the Bible teaches the biblical roles of a husband and a wife, that God hates divorces and considers those who divorce and remarry without adultery being involved to be adulterers themselves. Like how every sheep of Christ will naturally bear fruit.

Of course there are Christian's that deny these facts and go to any website, pastor, or source that will tell them otherwise but it doesnt change the fact that Christ and the apostles taught these "Godly ways of living" and any pastor, source, or Christian who truly accepts and follows the Bible should agree with what I just said. These are basic things taught in scripture.

But then we have the more difficult topics. Like the Trinity and exactly how God is and works. How exactly Christs sheep are and work. Exactly how we are saved, is it Gods work or through our own merits? Subjects like Eternal Security, the five points of calvinism, predestination in itself. When people were written in the book of life. Whether or not Christ is present during the eucharist, it's his actual body and blood or whether it symbolizes what Jesus did.

Christian's have been arguing about these subjects since the apostles died. Only the apostles had complete 100% correct theology and they tried to write it down for us but now 2,000 years later nobody agrees on exactly what the apostles, christ, prophets, you name it... actually said.

But thanks to sola scriptura we have some basic facts that cannot and should not be ignored. Scripture teaches a Christian how to grow, how to live, and exactly what commands to obey from the new covenant (it wasnt just love God and love your neighbor those are the greatest commandments but were not the OMLY commandments given in the new testament). It teaches us the fact that many Christian's seem to forget or not want to admit. That one day ALL of humanity is going to have to give an account of their lives to God even Christian's. Yes our sins are forgiven but our judgement is not about sin, or judgement is about how well weve served God in our lives. Idk about you but I'd rather be praised by God than be scorned, disciplined, and be called a hypocrite. Again not saying that this group arent Gods sheep but merely that they will be disciplined by the good Shepard by loss if rewards. Scripture is clear that only rewards can be lost.

Sola scriptura reminds us to all turn to scripture and scripture alone for whatever doctrines we believe and hold on to and defend in Jesus's name and that causes us go grow and bring forth fruit. Its caused a division in Protestantism and all of Christianity but really we as Gods children should be doing the things that God told us to do not do what we want to do and follow man made doctrines. We all should be turning to and obeying scripture.

Most believers down through the centuries we’re illiterate to begin with, certainly not part of the plethora of amateur bible scholars and armchair theologians that prevail today. And even scholars disagree over the meaning of the words of Scripture for that matter.

Sola Scriptura isn’t a blessing; it’s a joke and a fallacy. As I’ve mentioned before, my semi-peasant grandmother, long deceased, from the foothills of the Italian Alps had one of the simplest, most beautiful, and most well-lived and applied faiths I’ve known based on the teachings she received from the Catholic Church. The problem is with us, not with those teachings. Some have taken the ball and run well with it while others have ignored it or found ways to justify the pursuit of their own agendas while pretending to heed sound teachings.

Sola scriptura, a blessing from God

We are saved purely by the work and grace of God.

If God is your Father, who is your Mother?

Contributor

Contributor

Facilitator

Regular Member

Facilitator

Wise old man

Contributor

Junior Member

Regular Member

We are saved purely by the work and grace of God.

We are saved purely by the work and grace of God.

Charismatic Episcopal Church

Contributor

Charismatic Episcopal Church

Contributor

Charismatic Episcopal Church

Veteran

Oldbie

Similar threads