Defining sola scriptura.

[barryatlake]

Josiah, get it right. Matt.18;15-18 is being misquoted or purposely being evaded by you. must I spoonfeed you the correct verse?

 

[CaliforniaJosiah]

the Bible alone is all that is necessary for salvation.

Read the definition in post #11 - the verbatim, official, formal, historical definition. Then just embolden and underline each of these two words in that definition: Necessary, salvation.


Then please document what you stated, that the Bible states, "The Holy Bible is incomplete" "There are essential dogmas all must believe that are missing from the Bible." "Jesus taught the Apostles Dogmas that are missing in the Bible." What you claim the Bible states.

Your denomination was certainly not in existence when Jesus made this verse of Matt.18; 15-18.

Irrelevant since it has NOTHING WHATSOEVER to do with the topic and NO denomination is named in the verse (yours or any other).






.

 

[ThatTrueLight]

Your denomination was certainly not in existence when Jesus made this verse of Matt.18; 15-18.
__________________

Nor was yours, is there a point you're trying to make?

 

[CaliforniaJosiah]

Josiah, get it right. Matt.18;15-18 is being misquoted

You didn't quote it AT ALL. I asked you to but so far you are refusing to do so. Just QUOTE it and then underline and embolden in it the following words, "The Holy Bible is incomplete" "The Holy Bible is missing essential dogmas all must believe." "Jesus taught His Apostles all kinds of dogmas missing in the Bible." What you claim it says.


Then, after you address that, try returning to the issue of the thread. See post # 11.






.

 

[Albion]

Albion, in reference to your post # 532 ; no verse tells us that the Bible alone is all that is necessary for salvation.

And there is no verse that says the Magic 8-ball isn't to be used. So do you? And if not, why wouldn't you if, as you say, the Bible doesn't explicitly say not to use a Magic 8-ball to solve all doctrinal disputes?

If you can figure out why that is...

you will also have answered why we should not go with legend, opinion, custom, myth, speculation, or anything else like that.

 

[ThatTrueLight]

Wow post 11 is a great explanation! Thanks for the reminder.

Once again, my imagination is severely limited here as I can't understand why the holy scriptures would not be our ruler (so to speak) for all things.

What else is there if we let God be true and all men be liars?

 

[barryatlake]

Josiah, in this verse of John 20:30-31 KJV Bible, " And many other signs truly did Jesus in the presence of his disciples which are not written in this book: [ 31 ] But....... that believing you MIGHT have life through his name." KJV.

 

[CaliforniaJosiah]

Josiah, in this verse of John 20:30-31 KJV Bible, " And many other signs truly did Jesus in the presence of his disciples which are not written in this book: [ 31 ] But....... that believing you MIGHT have life through his name." KJV.

Okay, sure, now just embolden and underline the words that state what you insist it states: "The Holy Bible is incomplete" "The Holy Bible is missing essential dogmas all must believe" "Jesus taught the Apostles dogmas that are missing in the Bible." Just underline and embolden those words you insist this verse(s) states.

Do the same for the other verse you insist also states that.



Thanks!




.

 

[barryatlake]

Thattruelight you said: "Once again, my imagination is severely limited here as I can't understand why the holy scriptures would not be our ruler (so to speak) for all things."

Because Jesus never left us with a completed Bible, He left us with "only His Apostolic/ Catholic [ universal in Greek ] Church, apostolic, because Jesus only taught His apostles for 3+ years , it was not your church or any of the new 16Th Century + later day churches.

 

[barryatlake]

Josiah, you do it, you're the one with the man-made concept of sola Scriptura.

 

[ThatTrueLight]

Because Jesus never left us with a completed Bible, He left us with "only His Apostolic/ Catholic [ universal in Greek ] Church, apostolic, because Jesus only taught His apostles for 3+ years , it was not your church or any of the new 16Th Century + later day churches.

I agree, it is His church, His body. has nothing to do with where I assemble with other believers. Same with you, where you meet other men to worship the Lord Jesus Christ has absolutely nothing to do with the place that you're in.

And the holy scriptures are my daily bread for sure;

All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: 17 that the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works.

 

[LostMarbels]

According to some definitions of sola scriptura it is, just not in the one offered to us in post #11.

To answer this I will return to the OP:

How does your denomination define its doctrine of scripture and does it have a specific section or sections that tell you that scripture alone is the only infallible rule of faith by which all controversies of religion are to be determined, and all decrees of councils, opinions of ancient writers, doctrines of men, and private spirits, are to be examined, and in whose sentence we are to rest is the Holy Spirit speaking in the holy scriptures?

If so can you quote from the official doctrinal standard, show what passages of holy scripture are used to support its declaration on this subject, and explain its meaning in your own words, please?

This was my response. #429

The doctrine I hold to is that God alone is sovereign. You guys are getting into a wonderful debate about the semantics, and traditional ideals of men concerning the topic.

My doctrine on the topic:

He answered and said unto them, Well hath Esaias prophesied of you hypocrites, as it is written, This people honoureth me with their lips, but their heart is far from me. Howbeit in vain do they worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men. For laying aside the commandment of God, ye hold the tradition of men, as the washing of pots and cups: and many other such like things ye do. And he said unto them, Full well ye reject the commandment of God, that ye may keep your own tradition.

Those words were spoken by the word of God himself. Christ is my doctrine.

So now... I am to believe my Christ is unable to explain himself? My God is unable to make his own point? Why do I need a man to explain what God has already? Why do I need meaningless dogma, and religious traditions?

My whole point is that this debate is not about the word of God. It is about ones chosen beliefs about the word of God.

So I ask again. Can the word of God alone without traditions of men interpret itself?

Does sound make a sound in a vacuum?

Sound needs a media to propagate. Sound can not propagate in a vacuum. Sound waves, unlike light, are essentially compression waves and the sound in order to move from one place to other needs molecules to compress and decompress against, hence the wave is transmitted. In a vacuum, there are no molecules. Hence no sound.

So since this is answered no, I will take it that you believe God is not able to convey his word without our help?

 

[tadoflamb]

You were relying upon Scripture to guide your decision.

Yeah, but I wasn't norming any dogma, so I couldn't be practicing sola scriptura as defined by post #11. Therefore, your guffaws betray the implausibility of your postition.

There's no guarantee that you will use it correctly.

Actually, I have the rest of the Sacred Scriptures, Sacred Tradition and the 2000 year teaching Magisterium of the Church. If I don't contradict those three with my personal reading of scripture, then I have used it correctly.

Those who allege to follow the principle/practice/rule/teaching/doctrine of sola scriptura, has as been admitted, have no guarantee nor assurance of doctrinal purity or cohesion. The best they can muster is an opinion with no real way to know whether they're in the realm of God's revealed Truth. That's why you have to suffer with the sola scripturist abiblical invention of denominationalism. It's just the opinions of men (and women).

 

[Albion]

Yeah, but I wasn't norming any dogma, so I couldn't be practicing sola scriptura as defined by post #11. Therefore, your guffaws betray the implausibility of your postition.

I'm "guffawing" right now, if you only knew.

 

[barryatlake]

ThattrueLight, you wrote: " I agree, it is His church, His body. has nothing to do with where I assemble with other believers. Same with you, where you meet other men to worship the Lord Jesus Christ has absolutely nothing to do with the place that you're in.

And the holy scriptures are my daily bread for sure;

ThatTrueLight, I haven't much time to answer you with all the Scripture that refutes your belief system but here is one or two verses [ Eph. 4:3-6 ] notive your new man-made system does not adhere to"..... one Lord, one faith, one Baptism one god and Father of all " and your church does not follow Luck 10: 16,

All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: 17 that the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works.


2 Tim. 3:14 - ThattrueLight, you use 2 Tim. 3:16-17 to prove that the Bible is the sole authority of God's word. But examining these texts disproves their claim. Here, Paul appeals to apostolic tradition right before the Protestants' often quoted verse 2 Tim. 3:16-17. Thus, there is an appeal to tradition before there is an appeal to the Scriptures, and Protestants generally ignore this fact.

2 Tim. 3:15 - Paul then appeals to the sacred writings of Scripture referring to the Old Testament Scriptures with which Timothy was raised (not the New Testament which was not even compiled at the time of Paul's teaching). This verse also proves that one can come to faith in Jesus Christ without the New Testament.

 

[CaliforniaJosiah]

Wow post 11 is a great explanation! Thanks for the reminder.

Thank you! Welcome!





.

 

[CaliforniaJosiah]

Josiah, in this verse of John 20:30-31 KJV Bible, " And many other signs truly did Jesus in the presence of his disciples which are not written in this book: [ 31 ] But....... that believing you MIGHT have life through his name." KJV.

Okay. Just embolden and underline the following words:
"The Holy Bible is incomplete"
"The Holy Bible is missing essential dogmas we all must believe"
"Jesus taught the Apostles dogmas that were left out of the Bible"


This verse appears to be saying that Jesus DID (nothin about teaching) some things not written in the Gospel of John (nothin about the Bible), but hey, just underline and embolden the words you claim are here - and that will clear it all up (simple).


When you document what you claimed, perhaps we can finally get to the issue of this thread and perhaps you'll read post # 11? That would be most helpful! Thanks!






.

 

[ThatTrueLight]

ThatTrueLight, I haven't much time to answer you with all the Scripture that refutes your belief system but here is one or two verses [ Eph. 4:3-6 ] notive your new man-made system does not adhere to"..... one Lord, one faith, one Baptism one god and Father of all " and your church does not follow Luck 10: 16,

Dear Brother, Neither have I any man made system or a church of my own. I am simply a member of HIS BODY and believe His word which is written in the holy scriptures.

2 Tim. 3:14 - ThattrueLight, you use 2 Tim. 3:16-17 to prove that the Bible is the sole authority of God's word. But examining these texts disproves their claim. Here, Paul appeals to apostolic tradition right before the Protestants' often quoted verse 2 Tim. 3:16-17. Thus, there is an appeal to tradition before there is an appeal to the Scriptures, and Protestants generally ignore this fact.

What tradition might you be speaking of here which might be before holy scripture as you suggest?

2 Tim. 3:15 - Paul then appeals to the sacred writings of Scripture referring to the Old Testament Scriptures with which Timothy was raised (not the New Testament which was not even compiled at the time of Paul's teaching). This verse also proves that one can come to faith in Jesus Christ without the New Testament.

That's an interesting comment. I wouldn't think that any man could come to faith in Jesus Christ without the NT knowing that Christ was not yet revealed in the OT.

Faith in God and in the Law of Moses, absolutely.

Grace and truth by Jesus Christ, not yet.

John's gospel reminds us that the Spirit was not yet given as Christ was not yet glorified. The Holy Spirit spoke only through the prophets in the OT, and was not poured out upon men as it was on that first Pentecost following the death, burial, and resurrection of our Lord Jesus Christ.

 

[tadoflamb]

So I ask again. Can the word of God alone without traditions of men interpret itself?

You're going to have to bring that up with the author of post #11. According to him, 'scripture interprets scripture' is not part of the definition of the principle/praxis/rule/teaching/doctrine of sola scriptura.

 

[Standing Up]

-snip-
Actually, I have the rest of the Sacred Scriptures, Sacred Tradition and the 2000 year teaching Magisterium of the Church. If I don't contradict those three with my personal reading of scripture, then I have used it correctly.
-snip- It's just the opinions of men (and women).

Have you found any contradictions? New thread perhaps?