Easiest Defense of Sola Scriptura

[Albion]

And then there is The Old Catholic Church on the menu of "one trues".

Not to mention the Society of St. Pius X and the Society of St. Pius V, both of which insist that it is the real Roman Catholic Church.

 

[Albion]

The Old Catholic Church is a protestant denomination that has nothing to do with the Catholic Church built by Jesus.

You must be the only one on CF who imagines that.

Do you think that Buddhism and Scientology and Wicca are "Protestant" churches, too?

 

[Colter]

Jesus gave Simon alone the keys to the Kingdom.

You are confusing promises made to the leaders of the Church with promises made to all believers.

We each have different roles in the Church. We don't all have the same authority to teach and make rules.

That's what you get from protestantism, which is why there are thousands of denominations teaching contradictory doctrines.

The Catholic church simply imported the Sanhedrin along with a new chosen people attitude. All the material churches became an unfortunate substitute for the spiritual kingdom established by Jesus.

 

[Albion]

The thread is about what the OP says it's about, and I'm responding to exactly what it said (incoherent claims to the contrary notwithstanding].

Well, the title and the OP are both about Sola Scriptura, so tell us what you have to add to the discussion of that subject, not including random potshots at other contributors, that is.

 

[AnticipateHisComing]

One of the premises of the thread is that there is no source of incontravertible truth other than the bible, and I assume you agree with that premise. I asked how we know what books really belong in the bible, and you said we really don't but we need to trust the judgement of the body of Christ (not your exact words, but I think a fair paraphrase).

If we have to rely on the judgement of the body of Christ (which is the church) to determine what is scripture, but that judgement is not incontravertible because it's outside of scripture, then we don't really know what the true canon is.

On the other hand, if we really do know that the canon established by the church is truly incontrovertible, then we have a source of incontrovertable truth other than the bible. Q.E.D.

Applying your "logic" to the Pharisees of Jesus' day and you can see how baseless it is to assume truth/authority above God's word, from those assigned to be leaders of the church. The Pharisees failed miserably at this and Jesus called them out for forcing their traditions on the Church.

The Jews were responsible for giving us the OT. And the NT credits them for this. In the same chapter Paul says this does not guarantee that they persist in or always speak the truth.

You Catholics are grasping at straws because you can't prove what you believe. You think we must prove scripture is true. Again, look at Jesus' teaching. He did not have to prove the OT. He proved that he was fulfilled prophecy in the OT. God's people did not question scripture. They followed it because they followed God.

 

[Colter]

Are you owning yours?

You go first.....ok, I accept your apology and I apologize as well. Btw, I usually like your demeanor.

 

[Catherineanne]

This is not going to be some long winded word game. It is easy.

1) God's Word is True, incontrovertibly true.
2) Scripture is God's Word.
3) Scripture is incontrovertibly true.

4) Prove another source of incontrovertible truth.
5) No other physical source of incontrovertible truth on earth has been proven.

By default, there is only Sola Scriptura.

Yes, there have been multiple threads on SS. The problem is that all the attacks on SS put the burden to prove there are no other source of incontrovertible truth on the holders to SS. How ridiculous is that? The burden is on those that believe in another source of incontrovertible truth. Despite being asked multiple times in other threads, no proof has been given for incontrovertible truth in any other earthly source.

So if you think anything but SS, I challenge you to prove to me another source of incontrovertible truth.

First you show me where any of that is written in Scripture.

Clue: it isn't.

Therefore this is unScriptural twaddle, aka a modern man made gospel.

 

[SteveCaruso]

- Matthew 19:24 - In Aramaic, Camel = Rope ... http://www.biblicalhebrew.com/nt/camelneedle.htm

The verse is working off of a Jewish idiom of that era where you thread a rope through the eye of a needle. Has nothing to do with camels.

Aramaic point of order: The additional meaning of "rope" for גמל does not appear until the 10th and 11th centuries (first recorded in the famous Syriac-Arabic dictionary of Bar-Bahlul), and then it was only among Syriac-speaking Christians, not Jews.

It only meant "camel" in Jesus' day in this particular context, and the same turn of phrase occurs in the Talmud where we find an elephant in the camel's place (and there is no potential for a pun there at all).

- NT Bible was written in Aramaic, not Koine Greek... meaning our best original copies, have already been translated out of Aramaic into Greek

Another Aramaic (and Greek) point of order: The NT was compiled in Koine Greek, not in Aramaic. Although it is believed that large portions of the Gospels came from an originally Aramaic source, the form and order we have them in today could have only happened in Greek.

 

[Albion]

You go first.....ok, I accept your apology and I apologize as well. Btw, I usually like your demeanor.

Very well, but I am having some difficulty deciding how to pick up where we left off when this is what came out of left field from you: "You are a good example of the irrational thinking of authoritarians."

I suppose that anything I say will be dismissed as either irrational or, if sensible, just the kind of thing a tyrant would say, right?

 

[Albion]

First you show me where any of that is written in Scripture.

Clue: it isn't.

Therefore this is unScriptural twaddle, aka a modern man made gospel.

Oh, Catherine. If you only knew how wrong you are. The Bible most definitely attests to its origin--God's revelation given to man who recorded it, and that it is true. That is attested to, in point blank terms, in many, many verses.

 

[Thursday]

The Catholic church simply imported the Sanhedrin along with a new chosen people attitude. All the material churches became an unfortunate substitute for the spiritual kingdom established by Jesus.

Jesus established a Church and gave it physical, human leaders.

Do you deny this?

 

[Catherineanne]

Oh, Catherine. If you only knew how wrong you are. The Bible most definitely attests to its origin--God's revelation given to man who recorded it, and that it is true. That is attested to, in point blank terms, in many, many verses.

http://anglicansonline.org/basics/thirty-nine_articles.html

See VI: of the sufficiency of the Holy Scriptures for salvation.

'Whatsoever is not read therein ... is not to be required of any man.'

QED

 

[VanillaSunflowers]

http://anglicansonline.org/basics/thirty-nine_articles.html

See VI: of the sufficiency of the Holy Scriptures for salvation.

'Whatsoever is not read therein ... is not to be required of any man.'

QED

You just in my opinion made Albion's point. Though you excerpted out of context the text of article 6 because the full text of it apparently helps prove Albion's point.

 

[redleghunter]

Yes to both questions. It was divinely revealed by the church.

What did the church fathers use to argue their point for Trinitarian doctrine?

 

[Colter]

Jesus established a Church and gave it physical, human leaders.

Do you deny this?

Jesus established the kingdom of heaven, in the failure to live up to his ideal, men established the church with many of the same evils as Judaism suffered from.

 

[chilehed]

Well, the title and the OP are both about Sola Scriptura, so tell us what you have to add to the discussion of that subject, not including random potshots at other contributors, that is.

I'm pointing out the incoherence of your argument. If you think that that constitutes an ad hominem attack against you then that's another example of the incoherence of your arguments.

The OP explicitly challenges us to demonstrate a source of incontrovertible truth other than scripture, and I responded directly to that challenge. You continue to insist that the question to which I'm responding, which I quoted from the OP, has nothing to do with the topic of the OP. If that's not incoherent, then nothing is.

And again, you steadfastly refuse to address the key questions.

 

[Thursday]

Jesus established the kingdom of heaven, in the failure to live up to his ideal, men established the church with many of the same evils as Judaism suffered from.

Wrong.

Jesus also established a physical Church on earth. He appointed leaders for his Church and he gave them his authority.

Matt 16
18And I tell you, you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.19I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.”

Matt 18:17
17If he refuses to listen to them, tell it to the church. And if he refuses to listen even to the church, let him be to you as a Gentile and a tax collector.

Acts 15
The Council’s Letter to Gentile Believers
22Then the apostles and elders, with the whole church, decided to choose some of their own men and send them to Antioch with Paul and Barnabas. They chose Judas (called Barsabbas) and Silas, men who were leaders among the believers. 23With them they sent the following letter:

The apostles and elders, your brothers,
To the Gentile believers in Antioch, Syria and Cilicia:

Greetings.
24We have heard that some went out from us without our authorization and disturbed you, troubling your minds by what they said. 25So we all agreed to choose some men and send them to you with our dear friends Barnabas and Paul—26men who have risked their lives for the name of our Lord Jesus Christ. 27Therefore we are sending Judas and Silas to confirm by word of mouth what we are writing.

 

[Colter]

Very well, but I am having some difficulty deciding how to pick up where we left off when this is what came out of left field from you: "You are a good example of the irrational thinking of authoritarians."

I suppose that anything I say will be dismissed as either irrational or, if sensible, just the kind of thing a tyrant would say, right?

Ok, you jumped to conclusions, I responded that I felt that was irrational. Just because one who is a disciple of Christ yet sees the scripture as quite flawed does not mean one just believes whatever they want.

 

[Colter]

Wrong.

Jesus also established a physical Church on earth. He appointed leaders for his Church and he gave them his authority.

Matt 16
18And I tell you, you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.19I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.”

Matt 18:17
17If he refuses to listen to them, tell it to the church. And if he refuses to listen even to the church, let him be to you as a Gentile and a tax collector.

Acts 15
The Council’s Letter to Gentile Believers
22Then the apostles and elders, with the whole church, decided to choose some of their own men and send them to Antioch with Paul and Barnabas. They chose Judas (called Barsabbas) and Silas, men who were leaders among the believers. 23With them they sent the following letter:

The apostles and elders, your brothers,
To the Gentile believers in Antioch, Syria and Cilicia:

Greetings.
24We have heard that some went out from us without our authorization and disturbed you, troubling your minds by what they said. 25So we all agreed to choose some men and send them to you with our dear friends Barnabas and Paul—26men who have risked their lives for the name of our Lord Jesus Christ. 27Therefore we are sending Judas and Silas to confirm by word of mouth what we are writing.

The church was built after Jesus left. As I said he has fostered it but eventually we will need to get back to the Kingdom of Heaven ideal of Jesus.

 

[Thursday]

The church was built after Jesus left. As I said he has fostered it but eventually we will need to get back to the Kingdom of Heaven ideal of Jesus.

Jesus gave us a Church he told us to listen to it.

Do you listen to his Church?