Sola Scriptura defined....

[Open Heart]

If you believe the RCC went against the word of God, would you not make the same decision?

As a devout Catholic, I don't believe that anything my church teaches goes against the word of God, so that problem doesn't arise. It is Catholic dogma that no Catholic teaching may arise that contradicts earlier dogma, including the dogmas from scripture. When Protestants state that Catholic teaching contradicts the Bible, what they actually are saying is that it contradicts their interpretation of the Bible.

 

[Phil 1:21]

As a devout Catholic, I don't believe that anything my church teaches goes against the word of God, so that problem doesn't arise. It is Catholic dogma that no Catholic teaching may arise that contradicts earlier dogma, including the dogmas from scripture.

Thank you for your response.

 

[Open Heart]

Thank you for your response.

No problem. It was a good question.

We deal with this ourselves from time to time. There is presently a conflict in the Catholic Church over a Papal document called Amoris Laetitia. In this document, the Pope suggests in a footnote that it may be possible in some cases to allow some Catholics who are divorced and remarried to take communion. It is not the suggestion itself, but the fact that the Pope will not clarify or explain that is the problem. I mean, let's give the guy the benefit of the doubt -- perhaps he has seen that there is some exception where it is not adultery. The problem is, he won't answer any questions. It's driving everyone nuts. But you don't see people leaving the church in hoards. It's because we have faith that God's teaching doesn't change. Sometimes it gets clarified. But it doesn't change.

 

[tulipbee]

Do not forget Prov. 23:9 my friend.

wrong response. let the bible speak in its own words and numbers.
wrong response

 

[tulipbee]

we can see that salvation is by faith alone in Christ alone. Did you also know that adding works to salvation is condemned in scripture?

• "You foolish Galatians, who has bewitched you, before whose eyes Jesus Christ was publicly portrayed as crucified? 2 This is the only thing I want to find out from you: did you receive the Spirit by the works of the Law, or by hearing with faith? 3 Are you so foolish? Having begun by the Spirit, are you now being perfected by the flesh?" (Gal. 3:1-3).
• "Behold I, Paul, say to you that if you receive circumcision, Christ will be of no benefit to you. 3 And I testify again to every man who receives circumcision, that he is under obligation to keep the whole Law. 4 You have been severed from Christ, you who are seeking to be justified by law; you have fallen from grace." (Gal. 5:2-4).
• “Many will say to Me on that day, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in Your name, and in Your name cast out demons, and in Your name perform many miracles?’ 23 “And then I will declare to them, ‘I never knew you; depart from Me, you who practice lawlessness.’" (Matt. 7:22-23).

 

[tulipbee]

So.....As a Protestant, you don't believe that Sola Scriptura (the bible alone) is sufficient as a sole rule of faith? If not, what is your belief?



When you say "protestants obey their elders,pastors and sacraments" are you suggesting all Protestants are doing so equally and in full unity?



No.



????

FYI. For Catholics, the Pope is the Supreme Pastor. of Christ's Church. (John 21,15-17) That means that he represents Christ's love and concern for every single individual. Including you.

supreme leader of the Roman denomination founded 3rd-6th century. way too late to be mine.

 

[tulipbee]

It seems that you are asking an opened question to anyone so I will give you my thoughts.

It is because the RCC has some doctrines that are NOT found in the Bible but are found in one or some of the apocrypha books.

Example:
Purgatory is NOT found in the Bible anywhere neither is it suggested.
Purgatory originated with Greek and pagan philosophy, in particular Plato, and was introduced into the church through Origen in the 3rd Century, who is considered a heretic by the Roman Catholic Church. In addition, the teaching of purgatory is contradictory to Scripture for it undermines its clear teaching of the sufficiency of Jesus Christ and is not taught in the Old and New Testaments.

That lead to the selling of "indulgence" and is the idea that by contributing some money to the Roman Catholic Church, you could "indulge" in a certain sin and not have to worry about the punishment for that sin.

Anyone who accepts the idea of Purgatory has rejected the Bible fact that what Jesus did on the cross was not enough to save men.

selling indulgence to build a bigger taller roman denomination building is creepy to the Christians

 

[Fidelibus]

supreme leader of the Roman denomination founded 3rd-6th century. way too late to be mine.

Sorry tulipbee, but Early Church history disagrees with you. Being a former Protestant, I realize that early Church history is not a friend of Protestantism.... hence..... Protestants are not too much into it. (history)


Dr. Michael Scott Horton, Vice Chairman of the Alliance of Confessing Evangelicals even admits this in chapter 5 of 'Evangelicals, Catholics and Unity." In chapter 2, Dr. Horton classifies himself and other Protestants as members of the "early Catholic Church". He defines the "early Catholic Church" by saying:

"Catholic means universal, and it refers to those truths that are, as St. Paul identified them, to be held "without controversy" (1 Tim 3:16 KJV). It also refers to that body of Christians who, distinct from the heretical and schismatic sects that have plagued Christian unity throughout the ages, submit to the doctrine and discipline of Christ as he mediates his prophetic, priestly, kingly ministry in the visible church throughout the Scriptures."

He also says, "It was the early Roman Catholic Church that successfully opposed the Gnostics, Arians, Pelagians, and numerous other false movement, and we who count ourselves evangelical Protestants belong to this Catholic Church today."

Not to mention the historicaly proven lineage of every single Pope from St.Peter to our current Pope Francis.

Now.... how about we please get back to the topic at hand....Sola Scriptura and the questions you have yet to address.


1. Where in the Bible does it say that "Scripture Alone" (the bible alone) is sufficient as a sole rule of faith is taught?

2. Did Jesus and the Apostles ever teach Sola Scriptura (the bible alone) is all one needs a a sole rule of faith?

3. If your answer is 'yes,' Could you show Book, Chapter and verse where they taught it?

 

[Fidelibus]

we can see that salvation is by faith alone in Christ alone. Did you also know that adding works to salvation is condemned in scripture?

Interesting..... could you show where the phrase "faith alone" or anything like it occurs in the Bible?

Thank you

 

[tulipbee]

Interesting..... could you show where the phrase "faith alone" or anything like it occurs in the Bible?

Thank you

ha ha. how about the phrase, "bible" or Jesus is God? you need to update yourself to 21st century. faith alone real means that God is the only one that can save.

are you creative?

 

[tulipbee]

Sorry tulipbee, but Early Church history disagrees with you. Being a former Protestant, I realize that early Church history is not a friend of Protestantism.... hence..... Protestants are not too much into it. (history)


Dr. Michael Scott Horton, Vice Chairman of the Alliance of Confessing Evangelicals even admits this in chapter 5 of 'Evangelicals, Catholics and Unity." In chapter 2, Dr. Horton classifies himself and other Protestants as members of the "early Catholic Church". He defines the "early Catholic Church" by saying:

"Catholic means universal, and it refers to those truths that are, as St. Paul identified them, to be held "without controversy" (1 Tim 3:16 KJV). It also refers to that body of Christians who, distinct from the heretical and schismatic sects that have plagued Christian unity throughout the ages, submit to the doctrine and discipline of Christ as he mediates his prophetic, priestly, kingly ministry in the visible church throughout the Scriptures."

He also says, "It was the early Roman Catholic Church that successfully opposed the Gnostics, Arians, Pelagians, and numerous other false movement, and we who count ourselves evangelical Protestants belong to this Catholic Church today."

Not to mention the historicaly proven lineage of every single Pope from St.Peter to our current Pope Francis.

Now.... how about we please get back to the topic at hand....Sola Scriptura and the questions you have yet to address.


1. Where in the Bible does it say that "Scripture Alone" (the bible alone) is sufficient as a sole rule of faith is taught?

2. Did Jesus and the Apostles ever teach Sola Scriptura (the bible alone) is all one needs a a sole rule of faith?

3. If your answer is 'yes,' Could you show Book, Chapter and verse where they taught it?

I'm not protesting anything. I just use the 66 book bible, alone. like read it for myself to see if you're right. universal catholic isn't the roman catholic. roman catholic is an offspring. Using the bible alone, I don't see any support to most of your claims. you're on your own. sola scriptura is alone with the universal Catholics. sola scriptura does not mix with the roman offspring denomination. jesus is our rock and cornerstone. peter is not the cornerstone. peter is not Jesus. Mary doesn't save nor Peter. you can't read the bible alone. what the point in debatung with you if you refuse to label jesus as the cornerstone?

in other words, the romans built their own church apart from Jesus. you made peter more important than jesus. the protestants made Jesus more important than peter. BIG DIFFERENCE!

 

[Fidelibus]

jesus is our rock and cornerstone. peter is not the cornerstone. peter is not Jesus. Mary doesn't save nor Peter. you can't read the bible alone. what the point in debatung with you if you refuse to label jesus as the cornerstone?

Really? Where did you get this idea? Let's see what Pope Francis has to say about it.

In the Bible, Jesus always “prays for his people” and continues doing so today, the pope said during an early morning Mass in the chapel of the Domus Sanctae Marthae.

“On the Mount of Olives, Jesus prays; on the cross he prayed; his life ended in prayer,” the pope said. “And this is our security, this is our foundation, this is our cornerstone: Jesus who prays for us! Jesus who prays for me.”

The day’s Gospel reading described Jesus going up to the mountain and spending “the night in prayer to God” before choosing his disciples the next day.

“The cornerstone of the church is the Lord in front of the father who intercedes for us, who prays for us,” the pope said. “We pray to him, but the foundation is he who prays for us.” [Hebrews 7:27 says: “Therefore He is able also to save forever those who draw near to God through Him, since He always lives to make intercession for them” ]

Knowing that Jesus continues to pray for his people, Christians should feel a sense of security and belonging, the pope said.

“Today it would do us well to think of the church, to reflect on this mystery of the church. We are all like a building, but the foundation is Jesus; it is Jesus who prays for us. It is Jesus who prays for me,” the pope said.

After reading this, care to retract your statement and continue our discussion on the topic "Sola Scriptura?" If so, the questions remain: (That is, if you are still serious about have a discussion minus the games.)


1. Where in the Bible does it say that "Scripture Alone" (the bible alone) is sufficient as a sole rule of faith is taught?

2. Did Jesus and the Apostles ever teach Sola Scriptura (the bible alone) is all one needs a a sole rule of faith?

3. If your answer is 'yes,' Could you show Book, Chapter and verse where they taught it?

 

[Major1]

selling indulgence to build a bigger taller roman denomination building is creepy to the Christians

Agreed, but "indulgencies" go much deeper that just building buildings.

 

[Major1]

Interesting..... could you show where the phrase "faith alone" or anything like it occurs in the Bible?

Thank you

Can YOU show where the word......"Rosary" is or anything like it in the Bible?

 

[Major1]

I'm not protesting anything. I just use the 66 book bible, alone. like read it for myself to see if you're right. universal catholic isn't the roman catholic. roman catholic is an offspring. Using the bible alone, I don't see any support to most of your claims. you're on your own. sola scriptura is alone with the universal Catholics. sola scriptura does not mix with the roman offspring denomination. jesus is our rock and cornerstone. peter is not the cornerstone. peter is not Jesus. Mary doesn't save nor Peter. you can't read the bible alone. what the point in debatung with you if you refuse to label jesus as the cornerstone?

in other words, the romans built their own church apart from Jesus. you made peter more important than jesus. the protestants made Jesus more important than peter. BIG DIFFERENCE!

You are getting really very close on the description of the RCC when you said..................
"in other words, the romans built their own church apart from Jesus. you made peter more important than jesus".

 

[thecolorsblend]

I have given you the definition of Sola Scriptura now about 3 times. I have to ask you now why is it that you keep asking for it?

Frankly I can't remember asking for it. Perhaps I did. Admittedly, I do think I remember saying at least three times in this thread that nobody seems to really agree on what sola scriptura is or, crucially, how to apply it.

And as it happens, I remain correct about that.

That does not mean that every single person who ascribes to Sola Scriptura will agree on every single doctrine.

I've always found that fact rather curious. Even back in my pre-Catholic days it seemed astonishing that people can read the same text but extract vastly different ideas from it; St. John 3 is a good example of this.

The struggle I had back then was figuring out why seemingly intelligent (or at least rational) adults couldn't agree on more than two or three points of doctrine. If these "truths" are so obvious as to be self-evident based upon a cursory (or even extensive) reading of the scriptures, it was puzzling that there was so little consensus. Forget about unanimity (we're way past that now), even basic doctrines are seemingly up for grabs among the various Protestant ecclesial communities.

No one will agree on everything found in the Bible but..........

Or, indeed, the canon which comprises the Bible.

what is necessary for our salvation and spiritual life is found in the bible and only the Bible.

A claim which sacred scripture doesn't make about itself, interestingly enough.

Now with all due respect to you as a learned man and a Christian, may I say to you that most people who reject Sola Scriptura do so because they practice things which ARE NOT found in the Bible. So then, to feel not guilty of those things, they simply reject the method of learning which says the opposite.

Golly, I came in to this thread expecting discussion and instead got psychoanalysis. SCORE!

But seriously though you, unfortunately, are mistaken. I was raised and practiced my faith in childhood and into adulthood in Protestant ecclesial communities. But, as is frequently the case, life happened. Long story short, I found myself studying Catholic doctrine from Catholic sources. I found some of the Church's teachings easy to believe in while others were more challenging. But ultimately I found them all persuasive. So during the Easter Vigil 2015 I was welcomed into the Church.

You are welcome to disagree with me because I am not the expert. I am only posting here what the Bible says to me.

Remarks such as this are (somewhat passive-aggressive) appeals to authority. "You can think what you like but I just go by the Bible." The inference the reader is to draw is that your position is correct by virtue of the fact that your position seemingly aligns with sacred scripture, e.g., an inspired source. Thus the other side's position is de-legitimized due to the fact that, presumably, they disagree with sacred scripture.

All this to say that I do not find this type of rebuttal to be persuasive. Or, really, productive.

 

[Fidelibus]

ha ha. how about the phrase, "bible" or Jesus is God? you need to update yourself to 21st century. faith alone real means that God is the only one that can save.

are you creative?

But the question remains, where in scripture is the phrase "faith alone" or anything like it occurs in the bible?

 

[Fidelibus]

Can YOU show where the word......"Rosary" is or anything like it in the Bible?

Hey Maj1! good to hear from ya.....does this mean your not upset with me any longer? Now as for your post, you know darn good and well I am no longer an adherent to the unbiblical doctrine of sola scriptura. (the bible alone) I could turn it around and ask you where is the word "Trinity" is in the bible. We both know its not there but we believe it, right?

Maybe you could answer the question of where the phrase 'faith alone' or anything like it occurs in the bible?

And since we are back on talking terms, would you care to answer the question I've asked you many, many times and have yet got an answer from you?

If two non-Denominantionalist are in disagreement of the interpretation or understanding of a certain passage in Scripture, to whom or what authority would/could they turn, to decide who was in error, and who was not?

Again, good to hear from you!

 

[Fidelibus]

selling indulgence to build a bigger taller roman denomination building is creepy to the Christians

Not looking to derail this thread on Sola Scriptura, though I am most curious on what you believe an indulgence is? By the looks of this statement, I'm thinking yours and that of the Catholic Church's might be different. Maybe you could start a new thread on it.

 

[Fidelibus]

why does the Roman denomination believe the Apocrypha is Inspired of God?

I know you are trying to be cute, and feel you are making points with other non-Catholics, and getting under the skin of Catholics by refurring to The Holy Catholic Church as " the Roman denomination", but as far as Catholics go...We have a 2000 plus year history, and we've heard it all, so you are not saying anything we havent heard before.

As for the Deuterocanonical books, (what you call the Apocrypha) it's because they have always been part of the Bible. For example.... the Golden Rule which Jesus cites — "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you." — is almost a direct quote from Tobit 4:15. Wisdom 2:12-20 is a stunning and detailed prophecy of Jesus's death. Hebrews 11:35-38, part of a series extolling Old Testament saints, is only found in 2 Maccabees 6:18 — 7:42.

Did you also know that The Assyrian Church of the East, the Syrian Orthodox, the Armenian Apostolic, the Eastern Orthodox, and even the Ethiopian Jews (except for Ecclesiasticus)
accept these books into their canon, so this is not a recent Catholic innovation.

Are you also aware that Martin Luther included them in his first German translation? Not only that.....history shows.these books were included in almost every Bible until the Edinburgh Committee of the British Foreign Bible Society excised them in 1825. Until then, they had been included at least in an appendix of Protestant Bibles. It is historically demonstrable that Catholics did not add the books, Protestants took them out! Like I have proved to Maj1 over and over again tulipbee..... Early Christian history is not a friend of Protestantism as you now know. As Cardinal Newman once said, "To be deep in history is to cease to be Protestant."

My apologies to the OP for straying off topic. If this poster (tulipbee) wishes to continue on this subject futher, I ask that said poster start a new thread and I will particpate.