- Jul 1, 2013
- 9,199
- 8,425
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Catholic
- Marital Status
- Married
Good points. And obviously I agree.We arrive at the usual issues.
1/ Scripture is ambiguous. Using and quoting exactly the same scriptures arrives at a myriad of protestant interpretations on every aspect of doctrine, baptism, eucharist, salvation, remarriage, end times. It is why they schism with monotony. So scripture is not enough
2/ The early christians were certainly not sola scriptura. Faith was handed down" paradosis" by word of mouth and letter, The word now translated as tradition which gives a wrong connotation. Study that tradition and you see the meaning of scripture.
3/ Finally there is authority. Clearly there in the bible which is the power to "bind and loose". Give definitive interpretation of matters of law and doctrine. It is by that power the church identified heresies, created the creed and selected the canon. It is why scripture says "the foundation of truth is the church" Which is the physical church "household of God"
So 4/ Sola scriptura is easily defeated by simple logic, history and even scripture refutes it, by identifiying authority outside of itself.
Like a table with three legs. If you lose authority and tradition, the table falls over. Scripture is not enough by itself. It is also fascinating, that many churches repudiate tradition , then create "articles or confessions" which are ...you guessed it, their version of tradition. Difference is these were man made at the reformation!
One question I struggled with as a Protestant concerning "sola scriptura" was precisely when the doctrine became binding upon the faithful. Because certainly ancient judaism was not a "sola scriptura" religion. Nor was Christianity when the NT was being written. So did "sola scriptura" become binding doctrine upon the faithful with the completion of the true canon? Or the death of the last surviving apostle? Or the recognition of the true canon? Or as Sacred Scripture became more accessible to the public?
When?
And since we're at it, Christians generally acknowledge that the Holy Spirit inspired the writers of scripture to write. Presumably, the Spirit also protected them from error. So why wouldn't the Spirit guide the Church in recognizing the canon?
Why wouldn't the Spirit continue leading the Church into all truth?
Obviously these questions are not challenging at all for Catholics. But as an evangelical, I never found satisfactory answers... apart from somebody giving yet another quotation of 2 Timothy 3:16, as if that answers anything relevant concerning those questions.
Upvote
0