Is there an objective standard by which to distinguish sound doctrine from false?

BobRyan

Junior Member
Angels Team
Supporter
Nov 21, 2008
51,118
10,507
Georgia
✟899,902.00
Country
United States
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Married
The Westminster Confession Section VI on the Holy Scriptures seems to recognise two kinds of doctrines: (1) Those which are expressly set forth in scripture and (2) Those which by good and necessary consequence may be deduced from the scriptures. Does not the latter actually undermine and totally destroy the authority of scripture as our only and final authority?

Sound doctrine is established in scripture and tested by scripture. But that was also true when Christ was being baptized. It did not "become true - later". It was already true.

Acts 17:11 they "studied the scriptures daily to see IF those things spoken to them by the Apostle Paul - were SO" -- that is sola scriptura testing - BEFORE the NT is completed. Sola Scriptura testing did not 'become true' later. It was already true.

Bob, testing by scripture alone involves asking 3 questions:
(1) Can this doctrine be stated in the pure words of the Lord? (Ps.12:6)
(2) Can this doctrine be stated in pure words of the Lord apart from any additional words? (Prov.30:5,6)
(3) Can this doctrine be stated in words which the Holy Spirit teaches apart from any words which man's wisdom teaches? (I Cor.2:13)

In each case you give a text reference - but then only "quote you".
For example Psalms 12:6 says God's Word are pure - but does not say that no doctrine is possible if it is not merely a quote of a previous statement of God.

Isaiah 8:20 is one of the early places to find "sola scriptura" testing in the Bible "To the LAW and to the Testimony - if they speak not ACCORDING to this WORD they have no light".

Pure doctrine is in accord with the Word of God and not "contrary to the Word" - but they you are turning the text - it would be like saying that no doctrine, no teaching can be correct that was given after Isaiah 8:20 unless that teaching is nothing more than a paraphrase of an earlier text.




These tests eliminate as false doctrines all doctrines like "purgatory", "Mary's perpetual virginity", "infant baptism", "justification by faith ALONE", "PRE-TRIBULATION RAPTURE", "penal substitution", a "seven year tribulation" etc etc.

I agree that the test the way you state it eliminates things - but it also eliminates all scripture after Isaiah 8:20
 
Upvote 0

Bruce Woodford

Active Member
Aug 16, 2018
60
3
71
Norwich
✟16,432.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Sound doctrine is established in scripture and tested by scripture. But that was also true when Christ was being baptized. It did not "become true - later". It was already true.

Acts 17:11 they "studied the scriptures daily to see IF those things spoken to them by the Apostle Paul - were SO" -- that is sola scriptura testing - BEFORE the NT is completed. Sola Scriptura testing did not 'become true' later. It was already true.



In each case you give a text reference - but then only "quote you".
For example Psalms 12:6 says God's Word are pure - but does not say that no doctrine is possible if it is not merely a quote of a previous statement of God.

Isaiah 8:20 is one of the early places to find "sola scriptura" testing in the Bible "To the LAW and to the Testimony - if they speak not ACCORDING to this WORD they have no light".

Pure doctrine is in accord with the Word of God and not "contrary to the Word" - but they you are turning the text - it would be like saying that no doctrine, no teaching can be correct that was given after Isaiah 8:20 unless that teaching is nothing more than a paraphrase of an earlier text.






I agree that the test the way you state it eliminates things - but it also eliminates all scripture after Isaiah 8:20
Bob, you make a very false and erroneous assumption about Is.8:20!
 
Upvote 0

BobRyan

Junior Member
Angels Team
Supporter
Nov 21, 2008
51,118
10,507
Georgia
✟899,902.00
Country
United States
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Married
The Westminster Confession Section VI on the Holy Scriptures seems to recognise two kinds of doctrines: (1) Those which are expressly set forth in scripture and (2) Those which by good and necessary consequence may be deduced from the scriptures. Does not the latter actually undermine and totally destroy the authority of scripture as our only and final authority?

Sound doctrine is established in scripture and tested by scripture. But that was also true when Christ was being baptized. It did not "become true - later". It was already true.

Acts 17:11 they "studied the scriptures daily to see IF those things spoken to them by the Apostle Paul - were SO" -- that is sola scriptura testing - BEFORE the NT is completed. Sola Scriptura testing did not 'become true' later. It was already true.

Bob, testing by scripture alone involves asking 3 questions:
(1) Can this doctrine be stated in the pure words of the Lord? (Ps.12:6)
(2) Can this doctrine be stated in pure words of the Lord apart from any additional words? (Prov.30:5,6)
(3) Can this doctrine be stated in words which the Holy Spirit teaches apart from any words which man's wisdom teaches? (I Cor.2:13)

In each case you give a text reference - but then only "quote you".
For example Psalms 12:6 says God's Word are pure - but does not say that no doctrine is possible if it is not merely a quote of a previous statement of God.

Isaiah 8:20 is one of the early places to find "sola scriptura" testing in the Bible "To the LAW and to the Testimony - if they speak not ACCORDING to this WORD they have no light".

Pure doctrine is in accord with the Word of God and not "contrary to the Word" - but they you are turning the text - it would be like saying that no doctrine, no teaching can be correct that was given after Isaiah 8:20 unless that teaching is nothing more than a paraphrase of an earlier text.




These tests eliminate as false doctrines all doctrines like "purgatory", "Mary's perpetual virginity", "infant baptism", "justification by faith ALONE", "PRE-TRIBULATION RAPTURE", "penal substitution", a "seven year tribulation" etc etc.

I agree that the test the way you state it eliminates things - but it also eliminates all scripture after Isaiah 8:20

Bob, you make a very false and erroneous assumption about Is.8:20!


Not true in real life. In real life Isaiah 8:20 says "to the Law and to the Testimony - if they speak not according to this Word - there is no light in them". Testing everything "sola scriptura".

'Though we (Apostles) or an angel from heaven should come to you preaching a different gospel - let him be accursed" Gal 1:6-9
 
Upvote 0

BobRyan

Junior Member
Angels Team
Supporter
Nov 21, 2008
51,118
10,507
Georgia
✟899,902.00
Country
United States
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Married
I entirely agree that the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit are God. But they are NOT "TRINITY OF PERSONS"!

They are the triune Godhead and each person is a person in that Godhead.
 
Upvote 0

YeshuaFan

Well-Known Member
Oct 19, 2018
3,003
996
63
Macomb
✟56,324.00
Country
United States
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
I entirely agree that the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit are God. But they are NOT "TRINITY OF PERSONS"!
Christians do not hold to Modulaism though, as in Jesus being all three of them at the same time!
 
Upvote 0