Sola Scriptura believers, please explain this.

[Unofficial Reverand Alex]

"With many such parables He [Jesus] spoke the Word to them." --Mark 4:33

Looks like not all the parables are recorded.

"He began to teach them many things." --Mark 6:34

We're not told what these "many things" are.

"I have yet many things to say to you, but you cannot bear them now." --John 16:12

Once again, we're never told what these things are. Perhaps these "many things " were the teachings alluded to in the opening of Acts, but even then, very limited information is given.

"Now, Jesus did many other things in the presence of the disciples, which are not written in this book." --John 20:30
"But there are also many other things which Jesus did; were they all to be written down, I suppose the world itself could not contain all the books that would be written." --John 21:25

These verses seem to really kill the notion of seeing the Bible alone as sufficient for understanding all of God's teachings.

Many times over, in every Gospel, Jesus is mentioned as teaching, preaching, or otherwise explaining the Word to all who were listening, without the Bible saying what, exactly, Jesus was teaching. Far more times, Jesus is healing, staying in Jerico, in the synagogues, or doing something else where He could very likely be teaching, but as usual, what He taught isn't recorded.
Even where He is teaching, nowhere does it say that the words that were written down were the only things He taught! It's very logical that He taught more than is recorded, for if a crowd of people has traveled to hear Him speak, they will obviously want to hear more than a couple parables; who travels to a concert, hears 1 good song, and the concert ends?

Clearly, not everything that Jesus taught is recorded in the pages of the Bible. It's very likely that He taught about such issues as purgatory, Mary's sinlessness, the papicy, and other controversial subjects; after all, if not all of His teachings are in the Bible, then saying "Nowhere in the Bible does it say that" doesn't hold as much weight as Sola Scriptura beievers would like to believe.

I didn't make this thread with the intention of debating individual issues, such as purgatory & Mary's sinlessness; rather, I would just like explanations as to how Sola Scriptura is logical, when Scripture itself admits that not all of Christ's teachings are in the Bible.

 

[royal priest]

Clearly, not everything that Jesus taught is recorded in the pages of the Bible.

God made sure the important things were recorded for us. John 21:25

 

[thecolorsblend]

Even where He is teaching, nowhere does it say that the words that were written down were the only things He taught! It's very logical that He taught more than is recorded, for if a crowd of people has traveled to hear Him speak, they will obviously want to hear more than a couple parables; who travels to a concert, hears 1 good song, and the concert ends?

It's even bigger than that, friend. In the ancient world, public speakers were expected to be able to speak at length and even answer questions from the crowd. Sola Scriptura would've been absolutely foreign to them, both on a cultural level but also on the more practical level that literacy back in the ancient world was obviously much lower than it is compared to today.

When St. Paul claimed that he spoke simply and didn't make a big production out of public speaking, it's important to remember that he was being pretty counter-cultural for his time... and he obviously was suffering the consequences of it. He viewed saving souls to be more important than showing off how smart he was. But it still speaks to the bigger cultural expectation people had back then.

I didn't make this thread with the intention of debating individual issues, such as purgatory & Mary's sinlessness; rather, I would just like explanations as to how Sola Scriptura is logical, when Scripture itself admits that not all of Christ's teachings are in the Bible.

Indeed. And even when I was an evangelical, I always wondered why the scriptures didn't explicitly affirm Sola Scriptura. It bothered me that including something like that in scripture would've been obvious... if one's intention was to set scripture as the sole authority.

 

[archer75]

Seems to me the main problem with SS is not these passages that say that was unrecorded material, but the simple question of "on whose authority do you accept that these writings are anything at all?"

 

[Unofficial Reverand Alex]

God made sure the important things were recorded for us. John 21:25

Where in there does it say the important things were recorded?
I find it interesting that we quoted the same verse in different directions, but I don't see where your point comes from in this verse.

Seems to me the main problem with SS is not these passages that say that was unrecorded material, but the simple question of "on whose authority do you accept that these writings are anything at all?"

True. Close to 400 years of debate went into the decision of which books would officially constitute the Bible, a decsion made by man, by the original, tradition-believing Christian Church.

 

[Albion]

These verses seem to really kill the notion of seeing the Bible alone as sufficient for understanding all of God's teachings.

That error has been explained many times here on CF, but here is one more try--Sola Scriptura means that everything necessary for our salvation is found in God's word, Holy Scripture. It does not posit that everything which can be known by man is to be found there.

I would also point out that although the verses you cited say that there is more which is not recorded in Scripture, they suggest that the additional information, if recorded, would not add to or change what is recorded.

You cited John 20:30 for example, but had you also cited the next verse, John 20:31, you would have verified this point I am making now.

 

[A_Thinker]

God made sure the important things were recorded for us.

John 20

30 Jesus performed many other signs in the presence of His disciples, which are not written in this book. 31 But these are written so that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that by believing you may have life in His name.

 

[A_Thinker]

Indeed. And even when I was an evangelical, I always wondered why the scriptures didn't explicitly affirm Sola Scriptura.

John 5:39 Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me.

Acts 17:11 Now the Berean Jews were of more noble character than those in Thessalonica, for they received the message with great eagerness and examined the Scriptures every day to see if what Paul said was true.

2 Timothy 3:16 All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness, 17 so that the servant of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work.

Hebrews 4:12 For the word of God is alive and active. Sharper than any double-edged sword, it penetrates even to dividing soul and spirit, joints and marrow; it judges the thoughts and attitudes of the heart.

1 John 2:27 But you have received the Holy Spirit, and he lives within you, so you don't need anyone to teach you what is true. For the Spirit teaches you everything you need to know, and what he teaches is true--it is not a lie. So just as he has taught you, remain in fellowship with Christ.

1 Corinthians 4:6 Brothers, I have applied these things to myself and Apollos for your benefit, so that you may learn from us not to go beyond what is written. Then you will not take pride in one man over another.

 

[Radagast]

Where in there does it say the important things were recorded?

John 20:30-31: And many other signs truly did Jesus in the presence of his disciples, which are not written in this book: But these are written, that ye might believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing ye might have life through his name.

Edit: I see somebody already posted this.

 

[Citizen of the Kingdom]

...
1 Corinthians 4:6 Brothers, I have applied these things to myself and Apollos for your benefit, so that you may learn from us not to go beyond what is written. Then you will not take pride in one man over another...

You have to wonder when doctrine is built around everything but the obvious.

 

[Tree of Life]

These verses seem to really kill the notion of seeing the Bible alone as sufficient for understanding all of God's teachings.

The doctrine of Sola Scriptura is that Scripture alone functions as the ultimate authority. It has no equal. It does not mean that the Bible alone is sufficient for understanding the Bible. In order to understand the Bible we need other sources of revelation such as creation (general revelation), history, logic, experience, and even church tradition.

Clearly, not everything that Jesus taught is recorded in the pages of the Bible.

No one disagrees with this.

It's very likely that He taught about such issues as purgatory, Mary's sinlessness, the papicy, and other controversial subjects; after all, if not all of His teachings are in the Bible, then saying "Nowhere in the Bible does it say that" doesn't hold as much weight as Sola Scriptura beievers would like to believe.

Is it really "very likely" that he taught on these subjects? On what do you base this probability? Couldn't I just as easily assert that it is "very likely" that Jesus spoke about extra terrestrial life, the zodiac, and the virtues of acupuncture?

I didn't make this thread with the intention of debating individual issues, such as purgatory & Mary's sinlessness; rather, I would just like explanations as to how Sola Scriptura is logical, when Scripture itself admits that not all of Christ's teachings are in the Bible.

Sola Scriptura doesn't deny that there are unrecorded sayings of Jesus. We would even admit that there are lost letters of Paul (the real 2 Corinthians - "2 Corinthians" as we know it is probably Paul's third letter to Corinth). These lost letters would be the word of God, even though they no longer exist. Also Sola Scriptura does not deny that there are other important sources of information which aid us in interpreting Scripture. It simply claims that there is no source of authority which is equal to Scripture when it comes to determining truth. Scripture is alone in the position that it holds.

 

[Tree of Life]

Seems to me the main problem with SS is not these passages that say that was unrecorded material, but the simple question of "on whose authority do you accept that these writings are anything at all?"

I accept it on God's authority - since the Scriptures are his very word.

 

[Tree of Life]

True. Close to 400 years of debate went into the decision of which books would officially constitute the Bible, a decsion made by man, by the original, tradition-believing Christian Church.

Actually we believe that this decision was ultimately made by God. God authored the books of the canon and he chose the canon. The church just ended up agreeing with God.

 

[royal priest]

The doctrine of Sola Scriptura is that Scripture alone functions as the ultimate authority. It has no equal. It does not mean that the Bible alone is sufficient for understanding the Bible. In order to understand the Bible we need other sources of revelation such as creation (general revelation), history, logic, experience, and even church tradition.

That's right.
God gave authority to the church, but it was an authority that was subject to Christ's authority whose will for the church is recorded in the Scriptures. Howbeit, Rome raised herself as the arbiter of truth. The early church should have nipped this in the bud. Instead, she stood by as Rome imposed her empirical authority as a means to to achieve ecclesiastic dominance. (a blatant disregard of the spiritual nature of the kingdom of God) It speaks volumes of the intoxicating influence of power.

 

[Humble me Lord]

So you are saying....God, who created the heavens and earth and everything in it, is going to leave us with a bible that is incomplete?
That the parts that were left out are fill in the blank?

We know the Bible is the word of God. God breathed, inerrant and authorative. The Bible cannot contradict itself.
So, how do we avoid tradition being held above God's word? Check it against what we know is God's word, the Holy Bible.
I don't have a problem with traditions, unless they are in-biblical.

 

[Unofficial Reverand Alex]

That error has been explained many times here on CF, but here is one more try--Sola Scriptura means that everything necessary for our salvation is found in God's word, Holy Scripture. It does not posit that everything which can be known by man is to be found there.

I would also point out that although the verses you cited say that there is more which is not recorded in Scripture, they suggest that the additional information, if recorded, would not add to or change what is recorded.

You cited John 20:30 for example, but had you also cited the next verse, John 20:31, you would have verified this point I am making now.

I see your point now, with John 20:31, as to the important things. Belief in Christ, and the salvation thereof, is the definition of a Christian, the foundation of Christianity.
Still, other teachings were not recorded in the pages of the Bible, and thus must be retained in the traditions of the Church; something the Catholics & Orthodox still do, but was completely lost when Luther split from the Church.

John 5:39 Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me.

Acts 17:11 Now the Berean Jews were of more noble character than those in Thessalonica, for they received the message with great eagerness and examined the Scriptures every day to see if what Paul said was true.

2 Timothy 3:16 All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness, 17 so that the servant of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work.

Hebrews 4:12 For the word of God is alive and active. Sharper than any double-edged sword, it penetrates even to dividing soul and spirit, joints and marrow; it judges the thoughts and attitudes of the heart.

1 Corinthians 4:6 Brothers, I have applied these things to myself and Apollos for your benefit, so that you may learn from us not to go beyond what is written. Then you will not take pride in one man over another.

First crucial point: your cited verses prove, paradoxically, too much. Scripture as everyone living in this time period would have known it was the Old Testament, nothing more. Viewed through the lens of history, you're saying that all we need is the OT, no need for any of this New Testament writings, for that's going beyond what was written at the time of these letters. The New Testament wasn't decided upon until 397 AD, centuries after these writings.

Second crucial point: Scripture still includes plain statements about the inadequacy of only Scripture; far more teachings were done than what was recorded in writing. Don't go beyond Scripture that tells us to go beyond Scripture.
So what's the point of saying "Don't go beyond what's written", when what's written tells us to go beyond itself? Seems as if the second half of the cited Corintians verse explains its purpose: "...Then you will not take pride in one man over another." It's more about not thinking you're higher than another, as opposed to not going beyond the Old Testament. As is especially obvious, when reading all of 1 Corinthians 4, this whole passage is about avoiding pride & arrogance!
Oh, and "Learn from us" sounds like a reference to something not written in Scripture--once again, Scriputre explicitly & implicitly tells us that Scripture alone is not enough. This is telling us that there's more to the story than what is written, in your own verse to explain "Don't go beyond what is written".

Yes, all scripture is useful, a tool for making us thoroughly equipped--not the only tool. It says nothing against the necessity of more than was written; simply, it rightly says that Scripture is an essential part of the formation of rightousness in us.

1 John 2:27 But you have received the Holy Spirit, and he lives within you, so you don't need anyone to teach you what is true.

...as you teach me what is true.
If the Holy Spirit did guide everyone as you seem to suggest, there would only be 1 denomination, and we wouldn't be holding this debate. Are we being guided? Of course! It's just that there's far more than the Holy Spirit that tries to guide us, sometimes in the wrong directions, and clearly in different directions. The idea that the Holy Spirit would guide us all to truth, without needing an authoritative Church, was popularized by Martin Luther, who in his own lifetime saw an increasing amount of denominations splitting off from his, and we are currently around 35,000 or 40,000 flavors of Christianity as a result.

Is it really "very likely" that he taught on these subjects? On what do you base this probability? Couldn't I just as easily assert that it is "very likely" that Jesus spoke about extra terrestrial life, the zodiac, and the virtues of acupuncture?

Yes, it is very likely. Church tradition, through the Catholic & Orthodox churches, has maintained the subjects I mentioned, and although the Catholics & the Orthodox sometimes hold slightly differing views on these subjects, the primary teaching is still prevelant in both.
Aliens, zodiac, and acupuncture? I don't know of any church father or theologian that mentions a Church teaching on these subjects. Following the instructions on the Apostle Paul, the Church has "Maintain[ed] the traditions" (1 Corinthians 11:2, and many others) of Christ's teachings. There is Biblical evidence for all of these teachings, though at my own request, I won't go into explanations for any issue in particular.

By the way, much of what I've explained here has been from a fantastic book called "A Biblical Defense of Catholicism". It's written by an Evangelical Protestant who went into an in-depth Bible study to disprove Catholicism, and converted. It goes into much more detail on these subjects & many more than I can; these things are not simple, and can't be summed up by just a few Bible verses. The book is nearly 300 pages long, and the whole first chapter is spent disproving Sola Scriptura & reinforcing the necessity of Church tradition. I say this not because I get any sort of profit from the book, but as a symbol of how these things are not solved by simple nuggets of verses like we'd like to think.

My apologies if any of my post came out as harsh; that was not the intention, I'm just kind of bad at explaining things in text format without sometimes sounding angry. If you thought I was, I'm sorry, I'm trying to hold a civil debate. If you didn't, well, disregard this paragraph.

 

[thecolorsblend]

John 5:39 Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me.

Acts 17:11 Now the Berean Jews were of more noble character than those in Thessalonica, for they received the message with great eagerness and examined the Scriptures every day to see if what Paul said was true.

2 Timothy 3:16 All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness, 17 so that the servant of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work.

Hebrews 4:12 For the word of God is alive and active. Sharper than any double-edged sword, it penetrates even to dividing soul and spirit, joints and marrow; it judges the thoughts and attitudes of the heart.

1 John 2:27 But you have received the Holy Spirit, and he lives within you, so you don't need anyone to teach you what is true. For the Spirit teaches you everything you need to know, and what he teaches is true--it is not a lie. So just as he has taught you, remain in fellowship with Christ.

1 Corinthians 4:6 Brothers, I have applied these things to myself and Apollos for your benefit, so that you may learn from us not to go beyond what is written. Then you will not take pride in one man over another.

None of these are explicit. Suggestive in places, yes. But hardly irrefutable. Heck, 1 John 2:27 possibly argues against sola scriptura. Ditto Acts 17 and St. John 5:39, for that matter.

Again, if sola scriptura was to be understood as the norm, I would think sacred scripture would say so in clear, unambiguous terms that aren't contradicted by other passages (some written by the same human writer!). But I haven't seen anything along those lines.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

A Biblical Defense of Sola Scriptura!

Sola Scriptura is the position that you can trust Scripture and Scripture alone as your sole authority for your faith and life. That the revelation known as the Bible can be trusted as your final word of authority for knowing God, salvation, true love, right living, and truth. Now, while there may be other books, letters, or epistles mentioned in Scripture that we don't have currently, they are not a part of the cannon of God's Word today, for there is no other written texts or revelations that is needed besides the Bible for all spiritual matters. For the Bible is unlike any other book in human history. It is clearly a book that is divine in origin that is backed up by many evidences in Science and History.

Now, some might object and point out that you can't prove Sola Scriptura from Scripture because such a position wouldn't have existed until the close of Revelation because the apostles were still speaking and writing the Word of God. However, that is not Sola Scriptura, though. Sola Scriptura is putting your faith in the written Word of God and believing it is suffient for all matters concerning one's faith in God. But what about the spoken Word of God? Does that not conflict with Sola Scriptura? No. First, the spoken Word of God was confirmed by the written Word of God (Acts 17:11). Second, one truth (the Spoken Word of God) was not in conflict with another truth (i.e. the Written Word of God). They both breathed in harmony until one passed away. In other words, picture it in your mind that there are two branches or sticks. One branch represents the Spoken Word and the other branch represents the Written Word. Now imagine one of those branches starting to vanish away out of thin air until it is gone. Is the one branch that remains any different just because the other branch is gone? Yeah, but wouldn't Sola Scriptura only exist until after the close of Revelation with Revelation 22:18-19 because you can't add anymore words to God's Word? No. This is not an exclusive teaching within Scripture; For the Bible teaches elsewhere that we are not to add to the written Word of God, too (Deuteronomy 4:2) (Deuteronomy 12:32) (Proverbs 30:5-6).

Anyways, the purpose of this study is to provide passages to help the reader in possessing Scripture so that they can trust in one divinely inspired written revelation or book (i.e. the Bible) for all spiritual matters in regards to having love, faith, and salvation in Him.

Also, before we examine this study, it is important to note that there are 3 major Words spoken about within Scripture that are connected to one another. There is the:

(1) Living Word of God (Jesus),
(2) Spoken Word of God (Either from God or His people),
(3) Written Word of God (Scripture).

All three are perfect and will endure for forever.
All three are tied together and are always connected.

The Biblical Case for Sola Scriptura:

I. All Scripture is Profitable for Doctrine, Correction, Righteous Teaching.

2 Timothy 3:16-17
"All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works."

A. All Scripture is profitable:

(a) for doctrine, (because)
~ (1) Scripture is sufficient for eternal life (1 John 5:13).
(b) for correction (and)
(c) for instruction in righteousness,
(It is sufficient in righteous training because):
~ (1) Scripture brings about hope (faith). (Romans 15:4).
~ (2) Scripture can be hid within one's heart so as not to sin against God. (Psalm 119:11)

All Scripture is profitable so that the man of God:
(d) May be perfect.
(e) Completely furnished unto all good works.
~ (1) For speaking Scripture provides spiritual nutrition or life (Matthew 4:4)
~ (2) For Scripture brings about joy (1 John 1:4)
(In fact, one of the fruits of the Spirit is joy) (Galatians 5:22)
All Scripture is profitable so that the man of God may be perfect andcomplete unto all good works. For Scripture is profitable in (1) doctrine, (2)correction, and (3) training in righteousness. All three of these things are essential to a person's faith in God and will lead the man of God to beperfect and completeunto all good works. Not some good works. But allgood works. No oral Words of God alone were ever mentioned to do such a thing for us currently or during the time the "Written Word of God" came into being. No "Spoken Word of God" was ever mentioned to make the man of God perfect and complete unto all good works in addition to Scripture. This shows us that Scripture and Scripture alone is sufficient in and of itself because it will lead the man of God unto perfection and being fully furnished unto every good work.

For man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceeds out of his mouth that is from God. This is to live spiritually. For it is how one's faith even begins. So we gain faith and a life with God. We gain spiritual nutrients from speaking God's Word, whereby we can grow spiritually so as to conform to the image of Christ in being perfect and to allow Christ to do every good work within us. For you are what you eat. For the seed of the Word took root within your heart when you first believed and it grows within you to bring forth much fruit. However, how can you believe or grow if there is no "Written Word of God" which is nailed down in written form for all to agree?

II. Do Not Add or Take Away or Go Beyond What is Written:

A. Do Not Add or Take Away From God's Word -

Revelation 22:18-19
"For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book, If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book: And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book."

Before you say it, yes, I am aware that Revelation 22:18-19 is speaking in context of the book of Revelation. However, we have to think about this logically, though. If you can't add any words to the book of Revelation, then you can't add any words to the Bible, too. Why? Well, the book of Revelation is the end of the Bible. It is the close of the whole book known as the Bible. It is the end. This is why I believe Revelation 22:18-19 is prophetic in the fact that it has a secondary fulfillment of speaking about "this book" in reference to "Revelation" in being a part of the book known as the Bible. How so? Well, there are several passages that have a double fulfillment to them. Here is one them:

Hosea 11:1
"When Israel was a child, then I loved him, and called my son out of Egypt."

First Fulfillment (That was in the Past):
Reference to the exodus of the children of Israel out of the land of Egypt.

Secondary Fulfillment (That was in the Future):
Reference to the Love of God calling his Son back to the comparative safety in Egypt so that he might die for his people. Matthew 2:15 - "that it might be fulfilled which was spoken of the Lord by the prophet, saying, Out of Egypt have I called my son."

Also, in Revelation 2-3, Jesus gives His assessment of various churches. In these chapters, Jesus spoke of real churches that existed at the time when John written the book of Revelation, but also to the spiritual state of churches thru out time and today, too. For one of the churches is told to repent or they will go thru the tribulation. For obviously there has been Luke warm churches thru out history and today like the Laodician church.

Besides, there are hundreds of double fulfillment passages in the Bible. How so? Well, the "Typifications of Christ" in the Old Testament are essentially double fulfillment type passages (See this forum thread here to check them out). In fact, Jesus said, "Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me." (John 5:39). In other words, the OT Scriptures are a double fulfilment. For the Old Testament Scriptures spoke of the events of it's time and they also spoke about Jesus Christ, too; For Jesus said so Himself.

Also, consider the prophecy in the book of Daniel which was to seal up vision and prophecy versus the prophecy of the book of Revelation which is not sealed.

~ Daniel's End Times prophecy speaks of the events in Revelation. These prophecies of the End Times (that were in a book, i.e. scroll) were to be sealed up and closed (Daniel 12:4) because they were a far way off because Jesus still needed to come to save His people from their sins.

Revelation 22:10 mentions the spirit of prophecy that the book is open.

~ Now, the book is open whereby the things within Revelation (That Daniel also talks about) is exposed so that it will be fulfilled in bringing in the End with Christ's return.

For the entire book of Revelation is about the End Times leading up to Christ's return.

For the end of Revelation closes with Jesus saying,

"Surely I come quickly." (Revelation 22:20).

This means that we should be looking to Jesus return and not some new Revelation.

Paul said if we or an angel from heaven preach to you another gospel, let him be accursed (Galatians 1:8). It is strange that both the Mormon and the Muslim religion are founded on a revelation that comes from angels. Yet the Bible warns against this very thing.

In fact, Jesus Christ commanded that we as believers were to preach this gospel unto all the world (or all nations) until Christ's return.

Matthew 24:14
"And this gospel of the kingdom shall be preached in all the world for a witness unto all nations; and then shall the end come."

This is also what we see in Revelation. For this same gospel message was still going out to every nation, kindred, tongue, and people (That is still an ongoing process today).

Revelation 14:6
"And I saw another angel fly in the midst of heaven, having the everlasting gospel to preach unto them that dwell on the earth, and to every nation, and kindred, and tongue, and people,"

In other words, God knew that the book of Revelation was going to be a part of the Bible. For surely God does not want us accepting new revelations or additional written works to add to the Bible like with the book of Mormon, the Koran, the added oral traditions of the RCC (Roman Catholic Church), and or the added writings of the Jehovah's Witnesses. For it is not a coincidence that this warning in Revelation 22 is at the close of our Bibles. In other words, the new reader (Who is unaware that the Bible is made up of 66 books) would understand that you are not to add or subtract from the book (i.e. the Bible) that they were reading. For God obviously intended Scripture to be compiled into one book known as the Bible. For Christians today do regard the Bible as one book, for it is published as one book and it is not generally published into 66 individual books or a 66 book volume set. There are no 66 individual old manuscripts in their original form anymore; And God does not exist in the past abiding with these old manuscripts. These manuscripts are dead and gone. For they were written in a language that is dead. All these things are in the past. However, our God is not a God who just exists in the past. Our God is present and ever active with His people today. For our God is not the God of the dead but of the living. He works with His people who are alive with the written Revelation known as the Bible. Adding any new words to that revelation would be adding to God's Holy written Word as it currently exists with His people who live today.

B. Warning Against Altering God's Word is Confirmed in Old Testament:

Forbidding in altering God's Word in Revelation 22:18-19 can also be seen in Deuteronomy 4:2 and Deuteronomy 12:32 which says not to add or take away from the words of God's commands. This was the written Word. The Law. God did not want His words being changed or altered in any way by adding or taking away from His words. In fact, if somebody were to try and destroy God's Word, we see that God would protect or preserve His Word. We see an example of this in Jeremiah 36:22-32where king Jehoiakim burns the scroll in a fire (i.e. to eliminate God's Word) and then later God has Jeremiah re-create another roll that says the same thing. In other words, the written Word could not be destroyed by fire, just as the Living Word cannot be destroyed by fire. For the fourth who was in the fiery furnace with Daniel's friends was the Son of God (Daniel 3:25). For even when Moses had broken or shattered the tablets of stone that had the direct hand written Word of God (i.e. the Ten Commandments) on it (Exodus 32:19), the Lord our God had hand written them down on tablets of stone again (Exodus 34:1). For the Word of God cannot be broken (John 10:35). For Jesus said, "Heaven and Earth shall pass away, but my words shall not pass away." (Matthew 24:35). Meaning, that Christ's words would be memorialized by being written down where they would not pass away (or be deleted by men).

C. Do Not Go Above What is Written on how we think about men:

The Bible says we are not to go above that which is written (concerning our thoughts of men). Granted, this verse is not all inclusive to the fact that we are not to go above Scripture on other matters, but what this passage does is show us a pattern that Scripture and Scripture alone is our sole authority on the faith and spiritual matters. It confirms that we are not to add or take away from God's Word.

1 Corinthians 4:6
"And these things, brethren, I have in a figure transferred to myself and to Apollos for your sakes; that ye might learn in us not to think of men above that which is written, that no one of you be puffed up for one against another."


III. Scripture Can Help us to Know the Certainty of Christ's Teachings.

Luke sets out an order of declaration amongst the ministers of the Word to write out the events in order to Theophilus so that he might know for certain of the truth (on Christ's teachings) which he had been instructed.

Luke 1:1-4
"Forasmuch as many have taken in hand to set forth in order a declaration of those things which are most surely believed among us, Even as they delivered them unto us, which from the beginning were eyewitnesses, and ministers of the word; It seemed good to me also, having had perfect understanding of all things from the very first, to write unto thee in order, most excellent Theophilus, That thou mightest know the certainty of those things, wherein thou hast been instructed."

IV. Christ quotes Scripture as an authority:

In all Jesus' teachings He referred to the divine authority of the Old Testament (Matthew 5:17-18; Matthew 8:17;Matthew 12:40-42; Luke 4:18-21; Luke 10:25-28; Luke 15:29-31; Luke 17:32; Luke 24:25-45; John 5:39-47). He quoted the Old Testament 78 times, the Pentateuch alone 26 times. He quoted from Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Deuteronomy, Psalms, Proverbs, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, Daniel, Hosea, Amos, Jonah, Micah, and Malachi. He referred to the Old Testament as “The Scriptures,” “the word of God,” and “the wisdom of God.” Jesus defeated the devil by using Scripture. For three words, "It is written" was said 3 times by Jesus in Matthew 4:1-11. This is confirmed by Ephesians 6 with how the Sword of the Spirit is the Word of God which is a part of putting on the armor of God so that one can stand against the wiles of the devil (Ephesians 6:11, 16). For the Living Word (Jesus) is like a two edged sword that divides asunder the soul and the spirit because He always speaks the words of God because He is God (Hebrews 4:12).

V. Spoken Word is confirmed by the Written Word. Acts 17:11

In Acts 17:11, we learn that the Bereans were more noble because they received the "Spoken Word of God" from Paul and Silas with an open mind but yet they searched the Scriptures (i.e. the Written Word of God) to see whether those things were so or not. So the "Spoken Word" is confirmed by the "Written Word." So the "Written Word" is a reliable authority that we can trust. For even Philip opened the heart of the Ethiopian’s understanding from a reading in Isaiah (Thereby confirming the Written Word of God) (Acts 8:26-35). Jesus had opened the disciple's understanding on the Scriptures when He was with them (Luke 24:32); And Paul had told the Corinthians that their words that they speak in Christ (i.e. the Spoken Word of God) were not like as with many others who had corrupted the Word of God (i.e. the Written Word of God) (2 Corinthians 2:17).

VI. 1 Corinthians 14:37 - What Paul had written is the Lord's commandments.

Paul had written to the Corinthians about how if anyone thought of themselves as spiritual or a prophet, they were to know that what he had written unto them was the Lord's commandments (1 Corinthians 14:37). In other words, the "Written of God" that came from Paul was the Lord's Commandments; And by the authority of the Lord: Paul gave commands to the brethren in doing many things (1 Corinthians 7:10) (2 Thessalonians 3:4, 6, 12) (1 Timothy 4:11) (1 Timothy 6:11, 12, 13, 14).

VII. The spoken/written Word is standard by which Jesus will Judge All Men.

John 12:48 essentially says, Christ will judge us by His Word in the last day.
Christ's spoken words have been memorialized within the Holy Scriptures for us to have faith in them. His words within the Bible will judge us in the last day.

In fact, the unsaved dead will be judged by their works at the Great White Throne Judgment in this life by what is written in various books of Judgment (Revelation 20:12). This shows us that the written Word of God has power and authority to judge just as the books of Judgment have power and authority to judge a person's actions on the last day.

For all believers will be judged by the Law of Liberty (James 2:12). This is the Law of Christ (Galatians 6:2) and or the Law of the Spirit of Life in Christ Jesus (Romans 8:2) or the royal Law of love under the New Testament (James 2:8) (Romans 13:8-10).

VIII. John's Gospel is sufficient alone for saving faith in Jesus Christ.

What is purpose of John's book or gospel?

John 20:30-31 says,
"And many other signs truly did Jesus in the presence of his disciples, which are not written in this book: But these are written, that ye might believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing ye might have life through his name."

Did you catch that? It essentially says these things (Within the book of John) are written, that ye might believe that Jesus is the Christ and that we might have life (eternal life) through his name. In other words, a person can receive eternal life or salvation in Jesus Christ by reading the book of John. This is the "Written of God." In other words, this shows that the "Written Word of God" alone is sufficient to bring us to saving faith in God.

Source:
Myself. I had written this document a long time ago.

 

[redleghunter]

I didn't make this thread with the intention of debating individual issues, such as purgatory & Mary's sinlessness; rather, I would just like explanations as to how Sola Scriptura is logical, when Scripture itself admits that not all of Christ's teachings are in the Bible.

What is your definition of Sola Scriptura? Defining the particulars might be in order.

Scripture does not "admit" nor does the Beloved Apostle indicate his gospel account is incomplete as @Albion pointed out previously.

Actually the Sacred Scriptures were in wide circulation by the turn of the first century and into the 2nd century. St Irenaeus in Against Heresies opined such:

1. We have learned from none others the plan of our salvation, than from those through whom the Gospel has come down to us, which they did at one time proclaim in public, and, at a later period, by the will of God, handed down to us in the Scriptures, to be the ground and pillar of our faith.
Against Heresies (Book III, Chapter 1)
CHURCH FATHERS: Against Heresies, III.1 (St. Irenaeus)

I didn't make this thread with the intention of debating individual issues, such as purgatory & Mary's sinlessness; rather, I would just like explanations as to how Sola Scriptura is logical, when Scripture itself admits that not all of Christ's teachings are in the Bible.

Great but notice you did not include the Eucharist in the above shot group. Don't know how it happens but these threads always turn into walls of catechism quotes.

 

[redleghunter]

Indeed. And even when I was an evangelical, I always wondered why the scriptures didn't explicitly affirm Sola Scriptura.

Frankly why did the NT authors have to? Again Irenaeus explains it nicely.

CHURCH FATHERS: Against Heresies, III.1 (St. Irenaeus)