Name one doctrine that is not supported by Scripture.

public hermit said:

Great question. Long thread. Didn't read.

I think there are nuances to some doctrines that can be supported with scripture, but only by way of implication.

Take the distinction between homo-ousia vs. homoi-ousia in the Trinitarian debates. Same essence or like essence between the 1st and 2nd Persons? That is a very fine-grained distinction that is such each could be supported by the scriptures since the scriptures weren't interested in such a fine distinction. We can say the scriptures support the Trinity, but how that breaks down in a fine-tuned way is open for debate (or was), if all we use is scripture. The Trinitarian debate between Augustine and Maximinus (Ulfilan Arianism) is interesting on this account. Whereas earlier debates dealt in both the scriptures and philosophical details, this one was primarily concerned with scriptural support.

One could make a similar point about the two natures of Christ. Once you start fine tuning, the scriptures are less helpful than one might hope, I think.

Just in reading the primary sources of the debates which were settled at councils, one can see both sides using the same scriptures in support. That's telling and explains why the idea that one can make their argument on scripture alone is not tenable.

Click to expand...