Defining sola scriptura.

[Albion]

Who is the arbiter in the arbitration?

Seriously...why don't you start a thread and explore that question? This thread is about the definition of Sola Scriptura (which has been done only about thirty times now ) .

 

[CaliforniaJosiah]

Seriously...why don't you start a thread and explore that question? This thread is about the definition of Sola Scriptura (which has been done only about thirty times now ) .

ANYTHING to evade the topic...... while insisting they are ignorant of the topic, but refusing to be informed about it - all the while condemning what they admit they are ignorant of as being bad, wrong, terrible, unbiblical - but they don't know what it is and won't discuss it and won't read anything that would inform them.


Friend, this IS revealing. Not only the point that they are condemning something they admit they don't know a thing about, but because they must evade the issue of accountability.

In debate, if one is "trapped" a common technique is called "the shell game." The idea is to keep changing the subject, never allowing the point to get discussed but keep the other side racing and guessing as you keep changing the subject. When the other makes that point you need to evade, move the cups. I think that's what we're witnessing here. With all due respect to my friends here (as they do what they must), I honestly don't think this thread was EVER, in any sense whatsoever, a sincere quest to learn the definition of this practice. I think it was an effort to see how confused it could be made to SEEM as they shell game is played, as the shells are moved so quickly and to confuse all. It doesn't impact my feelings toward the protesters here - heck, in their shoes, I'd do the same thing: it's a good debate technique when the issue must be evaded. And some are doing it well. I think, however, it MAY mean it's poor stewardship to spend considerable time being played with - but it could be SOME coming to this thread ARE interested in the topic, and there are helpful posts here. For them.

Friend, how are YOU doing? You seem to not be getting confused, no matter how fast they move the shells...... You seem to be doing well in keeping your eye on the ball. Good for you! But you must give the protestors credit for playing their game well....



Well...... back to the ATTEMPT to keep on topic....



See post 120





Pax


- Josiah





.

 

[Albion]

Friend, how are YOU doing? You seem to not be getting confused, no matter how fast they move the shells...... You seem to be doing well in keeping your eye on the ball. Good for you! But you must give the protestors credit for playing their game well....

Thank you for asking. I meant it when I wrote a little while ago that this has all the earmarks of a shell game (to borrow the expression you used), intended to string along their targeted opponents. As a result, and in the realization that nothing more can be done in the way of defining Sola Scriptura after it's been done repeatedly, my opinion is that continuing to be played isn't worth doing. Yeh, a comment here or there might be in order, but that's all.

 

[tadoflamb]

Thank you for asking. I meant it when I wrote a little while ago that this has all the earmarks of a shell game (to borrow the expression you used), intended to string along their targeted opponents. As a result, and in the realization that nothing more can be done in the way of defining Sola Scriptura after it's been done repeatedly, my opinion is that continuing to be played isn't worth doing. Yeh, a comment here or there might be in order, but that's all.

Yeah, seventeen words from a Lutheran document and much explanation from a 21st century pundit don't really explain the difficulties sola scripturists have in presenting a concise, consistent definition of the principle/practice/teaching/doctrine of sola scriptura. At this moment, I'll accept that what has been presented may or may not reflect the Lutheran Church Missouri Synods position on this controversial principle/practice/teaching/doctrine. That's fine, if other sola scripturists, in the absence of anything better want to adopt Josiah's position as their own, but I find it strange that the Anglican Communion has nothing to say on the matter. It appears the principle/practice/teaching/doctrine of sola scriptura isn't a part of their tradition.

 

[CaliforniaJosiah]

Yeah, seventeen words from a Lutheran document a don't really explain the difficulties sola scripturists have in presenting a concise, consistent definition of the practice of sola scriptura.

Wrong. The definition is the definition.

You may not like it... as a Catholic you must protest it and cannot use it.... but it is what it is. And correct, I did not write it in 1577 (glad we FINALLY agree on that!)





.

 

[Root of Jesse]

Well now, Sola Scriptura is intended to norm doctrine, but that doesn't mean everyone is going to do it!

We have all sorts of people around here who would rather follow some supposedly infallible person's pronouncements or custom or popular legend rather than follow Scripture, but Sola Scriptura still is what it is.



No, that would be the case if Scripture were defective. Or if there were actually some authority higher and more reliable than divine revelation! Are you prepared to argue that there is?


But that doesn't make any sense. What alternative is free from your criticism? None. That's easily proven. So how can it be that there is something wrong with relying upon God's word in preference to ... what?

I don't know anyone who's infallible. Can you point out those who do, and who that might be?

 

[Root of Jesse]

You may be attempting to play denominations off against each other, Catholic vs Protestant and Protestant vs Protestant, but the thread is about defining Sola Scriptura.

And the point is that there is not one and only one definition of the phrase. That's what we're trying to get at. There isn't one definition. Just like there's different ideas about what baptism is and does. Until you can agree on the basics, you can't really agree at all.
To use the example someone else provided, if you put a 1 degree difference in a 90 degree angle, eventually, there's a huge gap between true and actual.

 

[Root of Jesse]

"Scripture Alone" means relying upon Scripture as the most reliable guide to doctrine, to the exclusion of competing and manmade alternative authorities.


It was presented as the alternative to a corrupted process, you could say. That's what reform normally is--correcting something that's gone awry and returning to the original.


Each of us will have to decide that for ourselves, I guess. However, I have no hesitation in saying that the superstition-ridden and thoroughly politicized and corrupted Medieval Church that, BTW, your EO churches would not reconcile with either, needed reform.

But if someone who has only a dreamy idea of the Middle Ages as a time of lovely Gothic cathedrals and knightly codes of chivalry (and I'm not speaking of you here, in case there's any doubt), he's likely to think that everything was just fine and should have gone on forever. Those people also are unaware that almost all of the key changes that the Protestant churches wanted and instituted have been adopted also by the Roman Catholic Church itself in the years since.

In short, the return to Apostolic standards has my approval.

If that's what it is, then the Catholic Church is, as well.

 

[Albion]

Yeah, seventeen words from a Lutheran document

Since the Lutherans were the first to define Sola Scriptura and are the best known for articulating the concept, that's the answer.

You appear to me now to be objecting simply for the sake of objecting.

 

[CaliforniaJosiah]

I don't know anyone who's infallible.

The RCC claims it's own Pontiff in Rome is (conditionally) and of course that it itself (individually, singularly, uniquely, particularly) is.... in formal doctrine AT LEAST. That's its whole basis for rejecting accountability in the sole case of it itself and of protesting the practice of Sola Scripture. But personally, I'm with you: infallibility is an attribute of God, not any individual bishop or denomination (and especially not simply because of the self same alone so claims such for self uniquely).






.

 

[CaliforniaJosiah]

That's what we're trying to get at. There isn't one definition.

And of course, you are wrong. I've not found ONE Protestant who has offered a different definition - just Catholics and Mormons. Yes, SOME may ADD an explanation of why Scripture or may ADD an explanation as to how this Scripture is to be interpreted (anticipating the worn diversions of Catholics and Mormons) but adding those explanations to the definition doesn't change the definition - it just anticipates the worn diversions and addresses them in addition to the definition. We all agree: the practice is using Scripture as the rule in the norming of doctrines.

Of course, Catholics will INSIST that they have no idea what the practice is - they are ignorant about it - but then will INSIST that it's bad, wrong, horrible, condemnable, unbiblical and new (it's just that they STRESS they have no idea what they are talking about). And yes, often they will (absurdly!) insist Lutherans invited this but then go on to stress that Lutherans don't have a clue what it is that they invented and thus are unauthorized to define it, so no one can which is why Catholics don't have a clue what it is only that whatever "it" is is condemned, rebuked, horrible, bad, wrong, unbiblical (whatever "it" is.... ask the Lutherans, no, don't cuz they wouldn't know).





.

 

[tadoflamb]

And of course, you are wrong. I've not found ONE Protestant who has offered a different definition

Really? A quick internet search for 'definition of sola scriptura' turns up about a half dozen different definitions, all which vary from yours and of which yours is conspicuously absent.

Did you know there's even a Sola Scriptura Bible College?

 

[Albion]

Really? A quick internet search for 'definition of sola scriptura' turns up about a half dozen different definitions, all which vary from yours and of which yours is conspicuously absent.

I'm confident that you are mixing explanations given about Sola Scriptura with "definition."

 

[CaliforniaJosiah]

I'm confident that you are mixing explanations given about Sola Scriptura with "definition."

Yup.

 

[MoreCoffee]

The dictionary says:

Sola scriptura (Latin ablative, "by Scripture alone") is the Protestant Christian doctrine that the Bible is the supreme authority in all matters of doctrine and practice.​

Wikipedia says:

Sola scriptura (Latin ablative, "by Scripture alone") is the Protestant Christian doctrine that the Bible is the supreme authority in all matters of doctrine and practice. Sola scriptura does not deny that other authorities govern Christian life and devotion, but sees them all as subordinate to and corrected by the written word of God.

Sola scriptura is a formal principle of many Protestant Christian denominations, and one of the five solas. It was a foundational doctrinal principle of the Protestant Reformation held by the Reformers, who taught that authentication of Scripture is governed by the discernible excellence of the text as well as the personal witness of the Holy Spirit to the heart of each man. Some Evangelical and Baptist denominations state the doctrine of sola scriptura more strongly: Scripture is self-authenticating, clear (perspicuous) to the rational reader, its own interpreter ("Scripture interprets Scripture"), and sufficient of itself to be the final authority of Christian doctrine.

By contrast, the Anglican Communion and the Methodist Church, though generally considered a form of Protestantism, uphold the doctrine of prima scriptura, with Sacred Scripture being illumined by tradition, reason, and in Methodism, experience as well, thus completing the four sides of the Wesleyan Quadrilateral. (see here)​

CARM says:

Sola Scriptura is the teaching that the Scriptures contain all that is necessary for salvation and proper living before God. Sola Scriptura means that the Scriptures--the Old and New Testaments (excluding the Catholic apocrypha)--are the final authority in all that they address (1 Cor. 4:6); and that tradition, even so-called Sacred Tradition, is judged by Scriptures. Sola Scriptura does not negate past church councils or traditions. Those who hold to Sola Scriptura are free to consider past councils, traditions, commentaries, and the opinions of others. But, the final authority is the Scripture alone because the Scripture alone is what is inspired by God (2 Timothy 3:16) and not past church councils, tradition, commentaries, and opinions. Scripture is is above them all.

1Timothy 3:14-15, "I am writing these things to you, hoping to come to you before long; 15 but in case I am delayed, I write so that you may know how one ought to conduct himself in the household of God, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and support of the truth."

Paul the apostle says he is writing to the church, so that the church would know how to conduct itself. Paul's writings, which are Scripture, are above the church because Paul tells the church to behave according to what he writes. Therefore, we can see that the church along with its tradition and councils is subject to the word of God. (see here)​

The Christian Research Institute says:

PROTESTANT UNDERSTANDING OF SOLA SCRIPTURA
Sola Scriptura- A Definition By sola Scriptura Protestants mean that Scripture alone is the primary and absolute source for all doctrine and practice (faith and morals). Sola Scriptura implies several things. First, the Bible is a direct revelation from God. As such, it has divine authority. For what the Bible says, God says. Sola Scriptura- The Sufficiency of ScriptureSecond, the Bible is sufficient: it is all that is necessary for faith and practice. For Protestants “the Bible alone” means “the Bible only” is the final authority for our faith. Sola Scriptura- The Authority of ScriptureThird, the Scriptures not only have sufficiency but they also possess final authority. They are the final court of appeal on all doctrinal and moral matters. However good they may be in giving guidance, all the fathers, Popes, and Councils are fallible. Only the Bible is infallible. Sola Scriptura- The Clarity of ScriptureFourth, the Bible is perspicuous (clear). The perspicuity of Scripture does not mean that everything in the Bible is perfectly clear, but rather the essential teachings are. Popularly put, in the Bible the main things are the plain things, and the plain things are the main things. This does not mean — as Catholics often assume — that Protestants obtain no help from the fathers and early Councils. Indeed, Protestants accept the great theological and Christological pronouncements of the first four ecumenical Councils. What is more, most Protestants have high regard for the teachings of the early fathers, though obviously they do not believe they are infallible. So this is not to say there is no usefulness to Christian tradition, but only that it is of secondary importance. Solo Scriptura- The Interpretiveness of ScriptureFifth, Scripture interprets Scripture. This is known as the analogy of faith principle. When we have difficulty in understanding an unclear text of Scripture, we turn to other biblical texts. For the Bible is the best interpreter of the Bible. In the Scriptures, clear texts should be used to interpret the unclear ones. (see here)​

 

[tadoflamb]

The dictionary says:

Sola scriptura (Latin ablative, "by Scripture alone") is the Protestant Christian doctrine that the Bible is the supreme authority in all matters of doctrine and practice.​

Wikipedia says:

Sola scriptura (Latin ablative, "by Scripture alone") is the Protestant Christian doctrine that the Bible is the supreme authority in all matters of doctrine and practice. Sola scriptura does not deny that other authorities govern Christian life and devotion, but sees them all as subordinate to and corrected by the written word of God.

Sola scriptura is a formal principle of many Protestant Christian denominations, and one of the five solas. It was a foundational doctrinal principle of the Protestant Reformation held by the Reformers, who taught that authentication of Scripture is governed by the discernible excellence of the text as well as the personal witness of the Holy Spirit to the heart of each man. Some Evangelical and Baptist denominations state the doctrine of sola scriptura more strongly: Scripture is self-authenticating, clear (perspicuous) to the rational reader, its own interpreter ("Scripture interprets Scripture"), and sufficient of itself to be the final authority of Christian doctrine.

By contrast, the Anglican Communion and the Methodist Church, though generally considered a form of Protestantism, uphold the doctrine of prima scriptura, with Sacred Scripture being illumined by tradition, reason, and in Methodism, experience as well, thus completing the four sides of the Wesleyan Quadrilateral. (see here)​

CARM says:

Sola Scriptura is the teaching that the Scriptures contain all that is necessary for salvation and proper living before God. Sola Scriptura means that the Scriptures--the Old and New Testaments (excluding the Catholic apocrypha)--are the final authority in all that they address (1 Cor. 4:6); and that tradition, even so-called Sacred Tradition, is judged by Scriptures. Sola Scriptura does not negate past church councils or traditions. Those who hold to Sola Scriptura are free to consider past councils, traditions, commentaries, and the opinions of others. But, the final authority is the Scripture alone because the Scripture alone is what is inspired by God (2 Timothy 3:16) and not past church councils, tradition, commentaries, and opinions. Scripture is is above them all.

1Timothy 3:14-15, "I am writing these things to you, hoping to come to you before long; 15 but in case I am delayed, I write so that you may know how one ought to conduct himself in the household of God, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and support of the truth."

Paul the apostle says he is writing to the church, so that the church would know how to conduct itself. Paul's writings, which are Scripture, are above the church because Paul tells the church to behave according to what he writes. Therefore, we can see that the church along with its tradition and councils is subject to the word of God. (see here)​

The Christian Research Institute says:

PROTESTANT UNDERSTANDING OF SOLA SCRIPTURA
Sola Scriptura- A Definition By sola Scriptura Protestants mean that Scripture alone is the primary and absolute source for all doctrine and practice (faith and morals). Sola Scriptura implies several things. First, the Bible is a direct revelation from God. As such, it has divine authority. For what the Bible says, God says. Sola Scriptura- The Sufficiency of ScriptureSecond, the Bible is sufficient: it is all that is necessary for faith and practice. For Protestants “the Bible alone” means “the Bible only” is the final authority for our faith. Sola Scriptura- The Authority of ScriptureThird, the Scriptures not only have sufficiency but they also possess final authority. They are the final court of appeal on all doctrinal and moral matters. However good they may be in giving guidance, all the fathers, Popes, and Councils are fallible. Only the Bible is infallible. Sola Scriptura- The Clarity of ScriptureFourth, the Bible is perspicuous (clear). The perspicuity of Scripture does not mean that everything in the Bible is perfectly clear, but rather the essential teachings are. Popularly put, in the Bible the main things are the plain things, and the plain things are the main things. This does not mean — as Catholics often assume — that Protestants obtain no help from the fathers and early Councils. Indeed, Protestants accept the great theological and Christological pronouncements of the first four ecumenical Councils. What is more, most Protestants have high regard for the teachings of the early fathers, though obviously they do not believe they are infallible. So this is not to say there is no usefulness to Christian tradition, but only that it is of secondary importance. Solo Scriptura- The Interpretiveness of ScriptureFifth, Scripture interprets Scripture. This is known as the analogy of faith principle. When we have difficulty in understanding an unclear text of Scripture, we turn to other biblical texts. For the Bible is the best interpreter of the Bible. In the Scriptures, clear texts should be used to interpret the unclear ones. (see here)​

Thank you, More Coffee. Moreover, not one of the definitions I've found refers to sola scriptura as a practice. A principle, teaching or doctrine, but not a practice. Even what as been offered to us as the historic, formal, official, confessional, verbatim definition doesn't definitely affirm that sola scriptura as a practice. For me to say that sola scriptura is a practice and not a principle, teaching or doctrine I would have to take either yours or CJ's word for it. Maybe it's the delivery, or maybe it's your collective shoddy understanding of Catholicism, but I'm not ready to take anyone's on CF's word for it. It's been obvious to me that this is one I have to research myself, and in doing so have not been able to verify what so has been claimed. The best I've been able to find is the seventeen word definition buried in a paragraph in the Book of Concord, Formula of Concord, Solid Declaration, Rule and Norm, bracketed by two commas, with no statement saying this is the historic, formal, official, confessional, verbatim definition of sola scriptura, with no scriptural references, in a document that doesn't even mention the phrase, sola scriptura.

And I'm just supposed to take a self-professed fallible human being's word for it?

 

[tadoflamb]

Returning to Wikipedia:

Two Christian denominations that uphold the position of prima scriptura are the Anglican Communion and the Methodist Church.[1][4] In the Anglican tradition, Sacred Scripture, tradition, and reason form the Anglican triad or "three-legged stool", formulated by the Anglican theologian Richard Hooker.[4][33]

Sola scriptura - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Anyone else catch that or think it's bizarre that an Anglican would fight tooth and nail to uphold a principle/praxis/teaching/doctrine that the Anglican Communion doesn't even recognize?

Oh, what tangled webs we weave.

 

[Kristos]

The dictionary says:

Sola scriptura (Latin ablative, "by Scripture alone") is the Protestant Christian doctrine that the Bible is the supreme authority in all matters of doctrine and practice.​

Wikipedia says:

Sola scriptura (Latin ablative, "by Scripture alone") is the Protestant Christian doctrine that the Bible is the supreme authority in all matters of doctrine and practice. Sola scriptura does not deny that other authorities govern Christian life and devotion, but sees them all as subordinate to and corrected by the written word of God.

Sola scriptura is a formal principle of many Protestant Christian denominations, and one of the five solas. It was a foundational doctrinal principle of the Protestant Reformation held by the Reformers, who taught that authentication of Scripture is governed by the discernible excellence of the text as well as the personal witness of the Holy Spirit to the heart of each man. Some Evangelical and Baptist denominations state the doctrine of sola scriptura more strongly: Scripture is self-authenticating, clear (perspicuous) to the rational reader, its own interpreter ("Scripture interprets Scripture"), and sufficient of itself to be the final authority of Christian doctrine.

By contrast, the Anglican Communion and the Methodist Church, though generally considered a form of Protestantism, uphold the doctrine of prima scriptura, with Sacred Scripture being illumined by tradition, reason, and in Methodism, experience as well, thus completing the four sides of the Wesleyan Quadrilateral. (see here)​

CARM says:

Sola Scriptura is the teaching that the Scriptures contain all that is necessary for salvation and proper living before God. Sola Scriptura means that the Scriptures--the Old and New Testaments (excluding the Catholic apocrypha)--are the final authority in all that they address (1 Cor. 4:6); and that tradition, even so-called Sacred Tradition, is judged by Scriptures. Sola Scriptura does not negate past church councils or traditions. Those who hold to Sola Scriptura are free to consider past councils, traditions, commentaries, and the opinions of others. But, the final authority is the Scripture alone because the Scripture alone is what is inspired by God (2 Timothy 3:16) and not past church councils, tradition, commentaries, and opinions. Scripture is is above them all.

1Timothy 3:14-15, "I am writing these things to you, hoping to come to you before long; 15 but in case I am delayed, I write so that you may know how one ought to conduct himself in the household of God, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and support of the truth."

Paul the apostle says he is writing to the church, so that the church would know how to conduct itself. Paul's writings, which are Scripture, are above the church because Paul tells the church to behave according to what he writes. Therefore, we can see that the church along with its tradition and councils is subject to the word of God. (see here)​

The Christian Research Institute says:

PROTESTANT UNDERSTANDING OF SOLA SCRIPTURA
Sola Scriptura- A Definition By sola Scriptura Protestants mean that Scripture alone is the primary and absolute source for all doctrine and practice (faith and morals). Sola Scriptura implies several things. First, the Bible is a direct revelation from God. As such, it has divine authority. For what the Bible says, God says. Sola Scriptura- The Sufficiency of ScriptureSecond, the Bible is sufficient: it is all that is necessary for faith and practice. For Protestants “the Bible alone” means “the Bible only” is the final authority for our faith. Sola Scriptura- The Authority of ScriptureThird, the Scriptures not only have sufficiency but they also possess final authority. They are the final court of appeal on all doctrinal and moral matters. However good they may be in giving guidance, all the fathers, Popes, and Councils are fallible. Only the Bible is infallible. Sola Scriptura- The Clarity of ScriptureFourth, the Bible is perspicuous (clear). The perspicuity of Scripture does not mean that everything in the Bible is perfectly clear, but rather the essential teachings are. Popularly put, in the Bible the main things are the plain things, and the plain things are the main things. This does not mean — as Catholics often assume — that Protestants obtain no help from the fathers and early Councils. Indeed, Protestants accept the great theological and Christological pronouncements of the first four ecumenical Councils. What is more, most Protestants have high regard for the teachings of the early fathers, though obviously they do not believe they are infallible. So this is not to say there is no usefulness to Christian tradition, but only that it is of secondary importance. Solo Scriptura- The Interpretiveness of ScriptureFifth, Scripture interprets Scripture. This is known as the analogy of faith principle. When we have difficulty in understanding an unclear text of Scripture, we turn to other biblical texts. For the Bible is the best interpreter of the Bible. In the Scriptures, clear texts should be used to interpret the unclear ones. (see here)​

Interesting samples.

Who does CARM "represent"?

 

[MoreCoffee]

Interesting samples.

Who does CARM "represent"?

CARM is a Calvinist apologetics group. They run a web site and discussion forum.

 

[tadoflamb]

Interesting samples.

Who does CARM "represent"?

Calvinists I think. I do know that's where CaliforniaJosiah has spent a lot of time recently.