Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
Well, that's not what "sola scriptura" means historically, so ...
"sola scriptura" historically labels a view that Scripture understood through what the Spirit means is the sole infallible authority over faith and practice.
Y'got Scripture: infallible as understood by the Spirit of God; often plainly understandable; authoritative.
Y'got the Fathers: by special historical circumstance often directly knowledgeable, fallible, identifying of the church at the time.
Y'got teachers: fallible, often knowledgeable.
Y'got pastors: fallible, relational, practical.
Y'got elders: fallible, appointed as limited, delegated authorities in the church; tested to being knowledgeable, wise, careful with the teachings of the faith. Still fallible.
"Solo Scriptura" is a phrase used to identify the view that Scripture allows no other authorities, other views, counsel, or information from scholarly or knowledgeable sources, as being directly applicable to the individuals who read Scripture, the way they read it.
A Critique of the Evangelical Doctrine of Solo Scriptura
You've already tried this. I don't think he's got pretensions at being Jesus, but maybe you think so.Like Jesus?
Sure, I'm game. You haven't answered where in scripture does scripture say it's the only source to useAnd you didn't respond to my question:
how can you know for certain what word is the word of God outside the Bible?
The narrated rule was that nobleness of character & readiness of mind was notable & related to, not simply proximate with, their due diligence of making sense of new truths from new 'holy men'.quote=New_Wineskin; Exactly . It is simply mentioned by the auhor that they did that and were of noble character - just like the author mentioned that the disciples met the first day of the week - no example or rule - simply naration .
That would be a misapplication of an oversimplification. You are trying to force the general principle of sola scriptura onto specific subcategories. Age chauvinism claiming primacy in authority is a moot point because the lessons of the law & the messages of the prophets synthesize in the NT. There is inter-relation & overlapping of truths, but no hierarchy there. The Bereans saw the foreshadowing & types & the prophecies fulfilled in the new information, it wasn't simply "doctrine", it was revelation.Also , the Bereans were Jews and were supposed to look things up in the Scriptures - the Law and the Prophets . So , once again , if this is to be a rule and example , those that look at that verse as such should support all doctrine first and foremost by the Law and the Prophets - that which was used by the Berean Jews . It doesn't matter how much support from the newer Scriptures a doctrine has . If this is the support for "Scriptures only" , doctrines must have support by the older writings first .
Then scripture can't be used to understand scripture.Unfortunately, the historical definition for Sola Scriptura given above is fallible since it was determined by scholarly or by knowledgeable sources. And since Sola Scriptura is fallible it should not be used in understanding Scripture.
Something other the Holy Spirits words will define the Holy Spirits words?
Do you not see the circular-logic fail in there?
Thats why I posted it.
It says the Holy Spirit teaches by comparing spiritual things with spiritual, it says turn ye at my reproof (Which the scriptures are for) and I will pour out my spirit unto you and make my words known unto you.
I (personally) am only interested in His words.
Comparing spiritual with spiritual?
Whats that?
Thats why I posted it.
It says the Holy Spirit teaches by comparing spiritual things with spiritual, it says turn ye at my reproof (Which the scriptures are for) and I will pour out my spirit unto you and make my words known unto you.
I (personally) am only interested in His words.
Yes, now tell us how you determine what constitutes "His words".
The scriptures, you dont consider the scriptures His words?
I would tend to think that an all powerfull God who has complete sovereignty is more than capable of preserving the Bible exactly as He see's fit to.
If you can't trust what We have been given as being enough then I don't know what you would have to cling to!
Um, yeah, no one ever disputed that....
My point is that some people appear to have a difficult time saying exactly who it was who "gave" us the Scripture, and by what means.
Saying, "The Bible is the Bible because the Bible says so" is abysmal logic.
No, that faith and it's a gift!
No, its ignorance, and the lazy assumption that Christianity exists in a vacuum. It is the sort of logic a 5-year old would use. God gave us brains for a reason
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?