Sola Scriptura: Are the Scriptures Sufficient as a Rule of Faith?

Tradidi · Jul 11, 2020

Athanasius377 said:
My question is, what besides scripture does the church possess that is God-Breathed or θεόπνευστος?

Irrelevant to the claim in the OP.

Athanasius377 said:
So the NT is not to be considered scripture or is there an alternative meaning to the word "all"?

There is.

As some have already pointed out, when Paul told Timothy that "all Scripture is inspired", he could not have meant "the 66 books that Luther will one day declare to be Scripture", simply because they were not all written yet. In fact, at some point we even see Paul himself doubting whether his own writings were inspired. Instead, Paul was talking about the nature of Scripture: "If or when we come across a book that is Scripture, then we know that it is inspired", in other words: "every book whose nature is Scripture is inspired, both the ones we already have, and the ones that will be written after me [Paul]".

Agree?

A simple, clear and direct answer would greatly facilitate this debate.

Lost4words · Jul 11, 2020

A good video on the subject. No doubt Sola Scriptura believers will dismiss it all.

DamianWarS · Jul 11, 2020

Albion said:
I don't know where such a notion as that might have come from, but it's not so. Scripture was known. The books had been canonized in the 4th century AD. A Bible scholar and monk like Luther certainly knew the Bible as did the leaders and theologians of the Church of Rome. There is no doubt about that, even if copies were not universally available and literacy was less then than it is today in Western society.

Known but accessible to few. Most people's source of scripture was the church itself.

Albion · Jul 11, 2020

DamianWarS said:
Known but accessible to few. Most people's source of scripture was the church itself.

Sure, but that doesn't have anything to do with Sola Scriptura.

eleos1954 · Jul 11, 2020

Tradidi said:
This thread is in reply to a double invitation by @Athanasius377 to a debate (here and here).

The topic I proposed was Sola Scriptura, but @Athanasius377 chose to limit the scope of the debate to the sufficiency of the Scriptures. So here we go.

Based on James White's definition of Sola Scriptura (here), which I believe most Protestants can agree with, here is the claim I would like to discuss:

Claim: "The Scriptures are sufficient to function as a Rule of Faith."

Challenge: Prove it!

Rules: Be charitable and respectful, stick to the topic, be as brief and clear as possible.

The scriptures are sufficient .... period.

Faith isn't a "rule"

Faith is a gift from God

Ephesians 2:8
For by grace you have been saved through faith. And this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God

Hebrews 12:2
New Living Translation
We do this by keeping our eyes on Jesus, the champion who initiates and perfects our faith. Because of the joy awaiting him, he endured the cross, disregarding its shame. Now he is seated in the place of honor beside God’s throne.

Faith is an active trust in God, a belief in what He says is true that results in action. We believe that we are sinners deserving of eternal punishment (Romans 3:23). We believe that Jesus came into the world to live a perfect life, die on our behalf, and rise again victorious over sin and death (John 3:14–18; Romans 5:6–11; 1 Corinthians 15:3–5, 20–22; 2 Corinthians 5:18–21). We trust in Jesus to save us from our sins. We have faith that He gives us as a gift through His Holy Spirit, as He promised (John 14:15–17; 16:4–15). We then trust in the work of the Holy Spirit to do His work of sanctification in us (Romans 8; 2 Corinthians 3:18). We live to honor God, relying on His forgiveness and trusting that His ways are truly best (John 15:1–27; Romans 13:8–14; 2 Corinthians 5:17; Colossians 3; 2 Peter 1:3–11).

dqhall · Jul 11, 2020

Tradidi said:
This thread is in reply to a double invitation by @Athanasius377 to a debate (here and here).

The topic I proposed was Sola Scriptura, but @Athanasius377 chose to limit the scope of the debate to the sufficiency of the Scriptures. So here we go.

Based on James White's definition of Sola Scriptura (here), which I believe most Protestants can agree with, here is the claim I would like to discuss:

Claim: "The Scriptures are sufficient to function as a Rule of Faith."

Challenge: Prove it!

Rules: Be charitable and respectful, stick to the topic, be as brief and clear as possible.

If scriptures began with Genesis and ended with Revelation, and that is all you have, you may be out of luck. God is alive today and is more than a few pages written centuries ago by people who thought the sun revolves around the earth.

Dale · Jul 11, 2020

I'm a Protestant and I've never heard the words "Sola Scriptura" in church.
It's the Catholics who use Latin words, not Protestants.

pescador · Jul 11, 2020

Lost4words said:
A good video on the subject. No doubt Sola Scriptura believers will dismiss it all.

You're right. We Sola Scriptura believers dismiss it all.

pescador · Jul 11, 2020

Lost4words said:
Exactly.

Yes, the church got it wrong on some aspects of its teachings, but, show me any 'religion' 'organisation' etc etc that is and always has been 100% perfect.

The church has weathered many a rough storm since its inception but, with Jesus at the helm, its always going to get back on course!

Since the reformation 1,000's of Sola Scriptura faiths / churches have sprouted up. Each claiming only they know the truth! Each, like rudderless boats in a vast ocean, not knowing where they are going!

I'm not sure where you get the idea that 1,000's of Sola Scriptura faiths / churches [whatever that means] have sprouted up.

The source of all truth is God and His Word (The Bible). The teachings and behavior of men, including the Pope, are contradictory, fallible, and sometimes dangerous.

pescador · Jul 11, 2020

dqhall said:
If scriptures began with Genesis and ended with Revelation, and that is all you have, you may be out of luck. God is alive today and is more than a few pages written centuries ago by people who thought the sun revolves around the earth.

1) God is indeed alive today.
2) The Bible is the perfect word of God. If you don't understand it, don't criticize it.

Lost4words · Jul 11, 2020

pescador said:
I'm not sure where you get the idea that 1,000's of Sola Scriptura faiths / churches [whatever that means] have sprouted up.

The source of all truth is God and His Word (The Bible). The teachings and behavior of men, including the Pope, are contradictory, fallible, and sometimes dangerous.

Check out the 1,000's of protestant churches that have been made since the reformation. Each supporting Sola Scriptura. Each, interpreting scripture 'as they see fit'. Each with their very own 'traditions'.

James A · Jul 11, 2020

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

GodsGrace101 · Jul 11, 2020

Tradidi said:
This thread is in reply to a double invitation by @Athanasius377 to a debate (here and here).

The topic I proposed was Sola Scriptura, but @Athanasius377 chose to limit the scope of the debate to the sufficiency of the Scriptures. So here we go.

Based on James White's definition of Sola Scriptura (here), which I believe most Protestants can agree with, here is the claim I would like to discuss:

Claim: "The Scriptures are sufficient to function as a Rule of Faith."

Challenge: Prove it!

Rules: Be charitable and respectful, stick to the topic, be as brief and clear as possible.

Hi Tradidi...
Guess you were right....already up to page 5 and it just started.

Anyway, we were discussing doctrine of the CC.
Everything you posted in the other thread is right, of course. Re the fact that some beliefs are held for a long time but at some point become a doctrine.

As I'm sure you must know, the Pope must take an oath not to change or abolish is current doctrine, and in fact, I don't believe this has ever happened.

Before 1917 remarrieds were not allowed to participate at Mass, but this has since changed and it does not qualify as a doctrine.

The one I do believe has changed, and by Francis, is the doctrine, or church teaching, that does not allow remarrieds to receive communion and I'm sure you know why.

Francis, about 5 years ago, ventured on a journey that ended with individual priests making their own decision as to whether or not give communion to remarrieds (where there is no annulment).

This is clearly a change in doctrine.
Wouldn't you agree?

GodsGrace101 · Jul 11, 2020

concretecamper said:
which is a position anyone is free to take, just dont claim it is biblical.

What things necessary for salvation do you think are NOT in the N.T.?

chevyontheriver · Jul 11, 2020

Dale said:
I'm a Protestant and I've never heard the words "Sola Scriptura" in church.
It's the Catholics who use Latin words, not Protestants.

You've never heard of 'Sola Scriptura'? Wow! OK.

Have you heard of 'Bible alone'?

Maybe your people just don't use the term. Let me know. I had three years of Latin in high school so it's no biggie for me.

chevyontheriver · Jul 11, 2020

Lost4words said:
Check out the 1,000's of protestant churches that have been made since the reformation. Each supporting Sola Scriptura. Each, interpreting scripture 'as they see fit'. Each with their very own 'traditions'.

AS the OP was about 'the sufficiency of Scripture' that's what we should be trying to steer the discussion back to. And I think the thousands of denominations indicates most clearly that the Scriptures alone are insufficient. If they were sufficient all of these groups claiming to follow Scripture alone would have never disagreed and never diverged. There are two possible scenarios here. First is that Scripture is sufficient but only one group actually follows Scripture like they all claim to. Which is to say Scripture is sufficient only under the rarest of circumstances. Second is that Scripture just isn't sufficient at all and the result is conflict over what Scripture means.

chevyontheriver · Jul 11, 2020

Dave L said:
You would need to abandon your entire religion if I'm right.

Are you right? How would anyone know for sure whether you are right?

Ed Parenteau · Jul 11, 2020

"The Nature of the Catholic faith is such that nothing can be added to it, nothing taken away. Either it is held in its entirety or it is rejected totally. This is the Catholic faith which, unless a man believes faithfully and firmly, he cannot be saved"....Pope Benedict XV

concretecamper said:
so you dont go beyond the Tanakh? Ok, that is up to you.
I would agree that we should not add or take away from the Apocalypse.
I would agree

Still waiting for the ONLY part of the SS argument.

So, you believe that Paul was referring to the Tanakh? Since that's what YOU believe Paul was referring to, then the question is whether or not YOU believe him and whether or not YOU obey his statement. That is "scripture only" but confined to the Tanakh.

ewq1938 · Jul 11, 2020

concretecamper said:
at the time period Acts was written, what was considered scripture? The Tanakh was considered scripture. This passage cannot apply to the Bible as you know it.

I didn't say it was talking about the bible as I know it. It was the bible as they knew it and they practiced Sola Scriptura to make sure what was taught to them was correct and they did that daily. We today have a larger bible in which to practice Sola Scriptura to make sure what people are teaching matches what is in the bible.

pescador · Jul 11, 2020

Lost4words said:
Check out the 1,000's of protestant churches that have been made since the reformation. Each supporting Sola Scriptura. Each, interpreting scripture 'as they see fit'. Each with their very own 'traditions'.

And the Catholic church doesn't put their own interpretation of Scripture out there as truth? And they don't have a whole bunch of man-made traditions? Give me a break!!

Sola Scriptura: Are the Scriptures Sufficient as a Rule of Faith?

Active Member

Jesus I Trust In You

Follower of Isa Al Masih

Facilitator

God is Love

Well-Known Member

Senior Veteran

Wise old man

Wise old man

Wise old man

Jesus I Trust In You

Active Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

I love you three.

Wise old man

Similar threads