Refuting Sola Scriptura - Why the Bible Alone is Not Sufficient

[tulipbee]

My math teacher had authority. It's called education, and a license. Peter and the apostles were given education and authority (What you open, no one may shut, what you shut no one may open), license, to teach as well. I don't see any such thing for Panin.

Then my masters is good. Panin doesnt matter. The facts are still there in the bible cause the God is the source of the facts. If you say the extra 7 books are inspired and God said it isn't then you're in very big trouble.

 

[tulipbee]

I don't know what GMO bible is, but I don't kowtow to strength in numbers. Lots of Catholics have their faith wrong. Christ exhibited that he's not interested in numbers of followers when he proclaimed that his disciples must eat his flesh and drink his blood. When they reviled him, he just let them go back to their former lives.
God's word is organic. It is the whole of written Scripture, and the whole of Sacred Tradition. Remove anything, and you weaken the whole Truth.

GMO bible is heavily modified bible using added cheap non organic papal juice. We see evidence you didn't bother with the source of the proofs I provided No point to doing old outdated noneffective arguments. Thank God He lead the Protestants. He kept the church alive. Just like He said He would.

 

[Goatee]

GMO bible is heavily modified bible using added cheap non organic papal juice. We see evidence you didn't bother with the source of the proofs I provided No point to doing old outdated noneffective arguments. Thank God He lead the Protestants. He kept the church alive. Just like He said He would.

Read these 'Facts' and see how wrong you are! God bless you

http://catholicsilentcrusade.blogspot.co.uk/2014/04/why-protestant-bible-has-only-66-books.html

 

[BobRyan]

QUOTE="BobRyan, post: 68621958, member: 235244"]

Mark 7:6-13 is a clear case of the sola scriptura method used to hammer those who 'sit in the seat of Moses' - apostolic succession for the one true nation church started by God at sinai.

Christ's doctrine on "sola scriptura testing" - resulted in hammering the traditions of the Jewish magisterium of His day and promoting the authority of the Word of God - yes even as found in the Ten Commandments.


Mark 7

7 Howbeit in vain do they worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men.
8 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.
9 And he said unto them, Full well ye reject the commandment of God, that ye may keep your own tradition.
10 For Moses said, Honour thy father and thy mother; and, Whoso curseth father or mother, let him die the death:
11 But ye say, If a man shall say to his father or mother, It is Corban, that is to say, a gift, by whatsoever thou mightest be profited by me; he shall be free.
12 And ye suffer him no more to do ought for his father or his mother;
13 Making the Word of God of none effect through your tradition, which ye have delivered: and many such like things do ye.

That is a case of Christ demonstrating the way that the magisterium is hammered "sola scriptura" in the cases where it's traditions and "doctrines of men" are at odds with scripture.

The elders consisting of scribes and pharise es are in fact the "magisterium" even Paul admits to this. And Jesus shows how they claim to "sit in the chair of Moses" as church magisterium .

Then Jesus spoke to the crowds and to his disciples, saying, The scribes and the Pharisees have taken their seat on the chair of Moses. Therefore, do and observe all things whatsoever they tell you, but do not follow their example. For they preach but they do not practice. (Matthew 23:1-3)[/QUOTE]

Mark 7 is about 'OT' scripture! The Old Covenants. NT scripture was only starting! Jesus was on about OT Scripture!!

Jesus said "THIS GOSPEL of the kingdom shall be preached in all the world and THEN shall the end come" Matt 24.

Your argument seems to be that the teaching of Jesus at that time is of no interest to some CHRISTians.

I think you are missing a few details.

Matt 5
17 Do not think that I came to destroy the Law or the Prophets. I did not come to destroy but to fulfill. 18 For assuredly, I say to you, till heaven and earth pass away, one jot or one tittle will by no means pass from the law till all is fulfilled. 19 Whoever therefore breaks one of the least of these commandments, and teaches men so, shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven; but whoever does and teaches them, he shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.


Some will argue that true Christians should not obey the teaching of Christ before the cross because... that was before the cross.
33 minutes ago #486

Matt 28: 16 But the eleven disciples proceeded to Galilee, to the mountain which Jesus had designated. 17 When they saw Him, they worshiped Him; but some were doubtful. 18 And Jesus came up and spoke to them, saying, “All authority has been given to Me in heaven and on earth. 19 Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit, 20 teaching them to observe all that I commanded you; and lo, I am with you always, even to the end of the age.

Which is what Matthew, Mark, Luke and John do ... AFTER the cross -- in their Gospels. (They don't rehearse just how it is you sacrifice an animal "as if" this is what Christ taught them that whole time.)

so when Matthew reports "THIS GOSPEL of the kingdom shall be preached in all the world and THEN shall the end come" Matt 24 -- well there are Christians today that will sit up and take notice, especially given the way Matthew ends his gospel.

Jesus brought the New Covenant! New teachings! Apostles! A new 'Tradition'. The Holy Spirit working through the 'Church'.

Did you suppose that there is an actual text in the Bible saying "do not use Jesus' method of sola scriptura testing of all doctrine and tradition - after the cross"???

in Christ,

Bob

 

[Goatee]

Mark 7 refers to people and the OT not the way that Jesus was teaching. Jesus made a new covenant. With Jesus and the Apostles came 'Tradition' Guided by the Holy Spirit! The 'New' Church formed by Jesus himself!

 

[Albion]

Mark 7:6-13 is a clear case of the sola scriptura method used to hammer those who 'sit in the seat of Moses' - apostolic succession for the one true nation church started by God at sinai.

Christ's doctrine on "sola scriptura testing" - resulted in hammering the traditions of the Jewish magisterium of His day and promoting the authority of the Word of God - yes even as found in the Ten Commandments.


Mark 7

7 Howbeit in vain do they worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men.
8 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.
9 And he said unto them, Full well ye reject the commandment of God, that ye may keep your own tradition.
10 For Moses said, Honour thy father and thy mother; and, Whoso curseth father or mother, let him die the death:
11 But ye say, If a man shall say to his father or mother, It is Corban, that is to say, a gift, by whatsoever thou mightest be profited by me; he shall be free.
12 And ye suffer him no more to do ought for his father or his mother;
13 Making the Word of God of none effect through your tradition, which ye have delivered: and many such like things do ye.

That is a case of Christ demonstrating the way that the magisterium is hammered "sola scriptura" in the cases where it's traditions and "doctrines of men" are at odds with scripture.

The elders consisting of scribes and pharise es are in fact the "magisterium" even Paul admits to this. And Jesus shows how they claim to "sit in the chair of Moses" as church magisterium .

Then Jesus spoke to the crowds and to his disciples, saying, The scribes and the Pharisees have taken their seat on the chair of Moses. Therefore, do and observe all things whatsoever they tell you, but do not follow their example. For they preach but they do not practice. (Matthew 23:1-3


Jesus said "THIS GOSPEL of the kingdom shall be preached in all the world and THEN shall the end come" Matt 24.

Your argument seems to be that the teaching of Jesus at that time is of no interest to some CHRISTians.

I think you are missing a few details.

Matt 5
17 Do not think that I came to destroy the Law or the Prophets. I did not come to destroy but to fulfill. 18 For assuredly, I say to you, till heaven and earth pass away, one jot or one tittle will by no means pass from the law till all is fulfilled. 19 Whoever therefore breaks one of the least of these commandments, and teaches men so, shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven; but whoever does and teaches them, he shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.


Some will argue that true Christians should not obey the teaching of Christ before the cross because... that was before the cross.
33 minutes ago #486

Matt 28: 16 But the eleven disciples proceeded to Galilee, to the mountain which Jesus had designated. 17 When they saw Him, they worshiped Him; but some were doubtful. 18 And Jesus came up and spoke to them, saying, “All authority has been given to Me in heaven and on earth. 19 Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit, 20 teaching them to observe all that I commanded you; and lo, I am with you always, even to the end of the age.

Which is what Matthew, Mark, Luke and John do ... AFTER the cross -- in their Gospels. (They don't rehearse just how it is you sacrifice an animal "as if" this is what Christ taught them that whole time.)

so when Matthew reports "THIS GOSPEL of the kingdom shall be preached in all the world and THEN shall the end come" Matt 24 -- well there are Christians today that will sit up and take notice, especially given the way Matthew ends his gospel.





Did you suppose that there is an actual text in the Bible saying "do not use Jesus' method of sola scriptura testing of all doctrine and tradition - after the cross"???

in Christ,

Bob

What all of this comes down to is nothing more than this...

The Bible says that it's God's revealed word given to man. Catholics as well as Protestants agree to that. But nowhere does it say "However, this doesn't mean that there's not something else of equal importance. I won't tell you what it is but whatever you think it might be...it is." Why would God's word have to include such a disclaimer? And if it did, it would certainly tell us what the other truth IS or WHERE to find it! Of course, none of that applies. It's just "make it up as needed."

 

[Root of Jesse]

Then my masters is good. Panin doesnt matter. The facts are still there in the bible cause the God is the source of the facts. If you say the extra 7 books are inspired and God said it isn't then you're in very big trouble.

Where'd you get your authority, though? That's more important than the education you received.
You haven't shown where God said the Deuterocanonical books aren't inspired.

 

[Root of Jesse]

GMO bible is heavily modified bible using added cheap non organic papal juice. We see evidence you didn't bother with the source of the proofs I provided No point to doing old outdated noneffective arguments. Thank God He lead the Protestants. He kept the church alive. Just like He said He would.

Actually, my Bible comes from Christ's mouth and His example. No 'papal juice' in my Bible, at all. Christ's Church is indeed alive, despite what humans have done to it, over time. The Truth is in the Catholic Church, regardless of the actions of her members. At least I know how you really feel, and it feels like Christ would love to take you into His heart.

 

[Albion]

Where'd you get your authority, though? That's more important than the education you received.
You haven't shown where God said the Deuterocanonical books aren't inspired.

God doesn't need to say that any particular writing isn't inspired. It's what IS inspired that matters.

The list would be miles long if all the religious writings that exist, for some reason had to be named in Scripture as "inspired" or "not inspired." And by this logic of yours, what doctrines that could possibly be proclaimed by Papal Infallibility are NOT eligible? Name them.

 

[Root of Jesse]

What all of this comes down to is nothing more than this...

The Bible says that it's God's revealed word given to man. Catholics as well as Protestants agree to that. But nowhere does it say "However, this doesn't mean that there's not something else of equal importance. I won't tell you what it is but whatever you think it might be...it is." Why would God's word have to include such a disclaimer? And if it did, it would certainly tell us what the other truth IS or WHERE to find it! Of course, none of that applies. It's just "make it up as needed."

Why would you limit God's word to only what's been written and canonized (by the Catholic Church)? You think God only speaks through Sacred Scripture, I guess...

 

[Root of Jesse]

God doesn't need to say that any particular writing isn't inspired. It's what IS inspired that matters.

The list would be miles long if all the religious writings that exist, for some reason had to be named in Scripture as "inspired" or "not inspired." And by this logic of yours, what doctrines that could possibly be proclaimed by Papal Infallibility are NOT eligible? Name them.

He said that Scripture proves it. I'm waiting for proof. God inspired the Church to include 73 books in what she considers 'good for worship'.
I'll name one. The Pope's declaration that global warming is anthropomorphic is not an infallible statement. Infallibility comes when the Pope speaks to the entire Church on matters of faith and morals.

 

[Albion]

Why would you limit God's word to only what's been written and canonized (by the Catholic Church)? You think God only speaks through Sacred Scripture, I guess...

You would like us to think that "God speaks to man" is the issue here, I suppose. But it's not the topic. The topic and the issue is Sola Scriptura, which refers to the basis on which the church defines doctrines.

 

[Albion]

He said that Scripture proves it. I'm waiting for proof. God inspired the Church to include 73 books in what she considers 'good for worship'.

Prove that for us.

I'll name one. The Pope's declaration that global warming is anthropomorphic is not an infallible statement. Infallibility comes when the Pope speaks to the entire Church on matters of faith and morals.

Sorry, but that is a fail. The question concerns what is out of consideration as being made a doctrine via Papal Infallibility. There is nothing that would prevent a doctrine about the sacredness of the Earth, blah blah blah being made a dogma through a Papal decree. So now, according to your own reasoning, there is an obligation for someone to list all the other potential doctrines...or else, as you say, we cannot presume anything about the limits on such decisions.

Obviously, all this is ridiculous. But that's what saying "God didn't (or the Bible didn't) say X is NOT to be believed, SO it's OK to consider it a dogma for that reason alone" amounts to.

 

[BobRyan]

Mark 7 refers to people and the OT not the way that Jesus was teaching. Jesus made a new covenant. With Jesus and the Apostles came 'Tradition' Guided by the Holy Spirit! The 'New' Church formed by Jesus himself!

Jer 31:31-33 is the New Covenant -- turns out that is not introduced by Jesus in Mark 7... rather it is in the OT centuries before Christ - and quoted as "unchanged" in Heb 8:6-10.

No wonder because as Heb 4:2 states the "Gospel was preached to US just as it was to THEM also" -

so then we accept the teaching of Christ in Mark 7 as he shows the "sola scriptura method" used to hammer the traditions of the magisterium of the one true nation church in Christ's day. A model we gladly follow.

To say that another book of the Bible is also inspired by God - not just Mark 7 - is not to take away from Mark 7.

 

[tulipbee]

Actually, my Bible comes from Christ's mouth and His example. No 'papal juice' in my Bible, at all. Christ's Church is indeed alive, despite what humans have done to it, over time. The Truth is in the Catholic Church, regardless of the actions of her members. At least I know how you really feel, and it feels like Christ would love to take you into His heart.

He takes only the elects into His heart cause God drew them and gave them to Jesus. He died only for God's children according to the 66 bible. You're reading stuff from from the extra books and bogus traditions

 

[tulipbee]

He said that Scripture proves it. I'm waiting for proof. God inspired the Church to include 73 books in what she considers 'good for worship'.
I'll name one. The Pope's declaration that global warming is anthropomorphic is not an infallible statement. Infallibility comes when the Pope speaks to the entire Church on matters of faith and morals.

Forget the Pope. You're getting deeper and deeper into trouble. See post #361

 

[tulipbee]

Why would you limit God's word to only what's been written and canonized (by the Catholic Church)? You think God only speaks through Sacred Scripture, I guess...

canonized by common men according to the proofs already provided

 

[tulipbee]

Where'd you get your authority, though? That's more important than the education you received.
You haven't shown where God said the Deuterocanonical books aren't inspired.

What's my authority got to do with the 66 books? The patterns are completely gone in the extra books. Npo numerical proofs ast all. Totally gone. Not inspired at all. Dead books written by dead guys that never heard God. Completely gone. Fiction it is

 

[BobRyan]

You would like us to think that "God speaks to man" is the issue here, I suppose. But it's not the topic. The topic and the issue is Sola Scriptura, which refers to the basis on which the church defines doctrines.

Yes that is right.

The title "Refuting Sola Scriptura" means we need to defend the practice and those who oppose it need to show why Christians should abandon it.

The suffix for the title "why the Bible Alone is insufficient" is redirect reference to "scripture alone" sola scriptura -- seemingly claiming that if one were to test tradition/doctrine by the Bible they might get a false result.

In Mark 7:6-13 Christ does not hesitate to use the sola scriptura model. Which is a big surprise since the Bible is the "Word of God" and everything Christ said was also the "Word of God" --- if anyone had the right to "just quote Himself" to make his case, it was Christ. Yet even HE demonstrates for us - how the sola scriptura method is to be applied to so-called sacred/holy/infallible tradition/teaching/doctrine.

 

[Root of Jesse]

Forget the Pope. You're getting deeper and deeper into trouble. See post #361

I didn't bring up the pope. Albion did. You did, too. Why not stay out of other's conversations?