Sola Scriptura is overrated, the first christians didn't need it so neither do we.

[samir]

Yes, we're all Christians, samir.

Where does scripture say we're all Christians? Chapter and verse please.

 

[Winken]

To state my position clearly: I believe that the Bible is the 'inspired Word of God'. But just 'reading it' is not able to reveal God's 'truth'. It takes the guidance and conviction of the Holy Spirit to reveal 'the truth' contained within it's pages.

Blessings,

MEC

I'm glad you cleared that up.

 

[Winken]

Brethren, we've got some razor-thin differences of opinion going on. It is sad that no one recognizes that. No one can "just read" scripture in order to "figure it out" on his / her own. The Holy Spirit has to be involved. He will provide interpretation and application of scripture using scripture alone. He isn't going to provide I & A differently to Spiritually-birthed Christians. There is only one way that He is going to provide Spiritual I & A to non-Believers: Convicting them of their lost estate; calling them to confess Jesus as Savior.

 

[W2L]

There is nothing wrong with reading and studying scripture on your own. The problem is when people interpret scripture in a new way that contradicts what Christians have always believed based on the constant teaching of the church. It is pride because it means the person thinks he's wiser and better able to interpret scripture than all the Christian leaders of the church before him. It's also disrespectful of God's word because it would mean God was so unclear that no one was able to understand what He wrote for more than 1,000 years.

Here's an example from Zwingli in the 16th century:

"In this matter of Baptism, all the doctors have been in error from the time of the Apostles... For all the doctors have ascribed to the water a power which it does not have and the holy apostles did not teach... The fathers were in error... because they thought that the water itself effects cleansing and salvation."

Since the church had taught baptismal regeneration for over 1,500 years, to disagree would mean one thinks he can understand scripture better than the church and all the theologians which is the height of arrogance.

I don't agree. The Churches themselves are divided, which shows they are wrong. The apostle said a time would come when people would no longer endure sound doctrine and would heap teachers to themselves, to tell them what they want to hear. I believe we are responsible to follow the apostles in scripture and not to blindly follow teachers. This isn't pride but is discernment.

 

[W2L]

The early Church didn't abide by Sola Scriptura. Indeed, they likely would've found the entire concept rather absurd.

Acts 15 chronicles the Council of Jerusalem. The council's decision was binding upon the Church then and it remains binding today. Just about everybody agrees on that.

With that as the background, here's my question.

When did the council's decision become binding and authoritative?

Was it when the council orally announced its decision? Or was it when Acts was written and distributed to the Church?

Actually no. Consider that scripture is the word they gave us, and they tell us to follow them and to beware of teachers. Thus sola scripture is not absurd, nor would it be considered that way if the apostles could see what people follow today

 

[W2L]

If that was a practice common to members of the church these threads would die for lack of attention don't you think?

Many of them would, but not all. Some threads are good bible study and take advantage of group study, and actually reflect sola scripture

 

[Albion]

The early Church didn't abide by Sola Scriptura. Indeed, they likely would've found the entire concept rather absurd.

Well, the fact is that (as has been noted repeatedly here) the Fathers cited Scripture as the basis for their assertions and even the Nicene Creed does that. So where are any of these making a brief for "Holy Tradtion?"

Acts 15 chronicles the Council of Jerusalem. The council's decision was binding upon the Church then and it remains binding today. Just about everybody agrees on that.

That's not Holy Tradition. And you know of it only because of...wait for it...SCRIPTURE.

With that as the background, here's my question.

When did the council's decision become binding and authoritative?

Was it when the council orally announced its decision? Or was it when Acts was written and distributed to the Church?

Once again, we are faced with a poster denouncing Sola Scriptura but not knowing what the term means.

 

[Albion]

Completely false. You are bearing false witness.

(sigh) You were telling me how proud it makes you to consider yourself a Christian. Shouldn't that include acting like one?

 

[amariselle]

This is what you said to me, (and I hadn't said ONE thing to you when you wrote this):

The choice is between your own personal interpretations (relying on your own wisdom and human reasoning) or that of the Church founded by Jesus that has taught the same faith since the first century. Those who are humble and love God choose the Church. Those who are arrogant and swollen with pride choose themselves.

In reality, the highest authority for you is yourself since you just interpret whatever verses you like to say whatever you want to believe. If the Bible was the highest authority, you would submit to the Church that gave us the Bible and has understood it consistently since the first century.

The Bible is the written tradition of the Church. There aren't any church traditions that contradict scripture even though modern erroneous interpretations may not agree with it.

To which I then answered:

I'm not willing to discuss things with anyone who just wants to be judgmental and tell me what I do or don't think and/or believe.

And then you replied with:

The truth hurts but I tell you because I'm a Christian. If you humble yourself and listen to your conscience instead of rushing to judge me, I think you will understand.

You told me that I am my own "highest authority", when I had written that Scripture is of higher authority to me than church teachings and traditions, and you proceeded to tell me how I interpret the Bible and that I "just interpret whatever verses you like to say whatever you want to believe."

You know not one consequential thing about me, and you have made entirely unfounded accusations. So, who is being judgmental here? I never said a SINGLE thing about you or your faith, and yet you took it upon yourself to judge and condemn me.

And I have noticed that you are consistently combative with your brothers and sisters in Christ. Why do you feel the need to treat others in such a way?

 

[Hieronymus]

Scripture commands believers to follow Holy Tradition

Verses?

 

[Gregory Thompson]

You sound like one who is clueless.

@Job8 - Yeah, God's wisdom has this way of looking foolish from time to time

By the way, great conversation everyone.

Bless.

 

[Sketcher]

The traditions added since the New Testament was written are overrated, the first Christians didn't need them so neither do we.

 

[now faith]

Sola Scriptura is overrated, the first christians didn't need it so neither do we.

Because in the beginning was the Word and the Word was God.
Even in the Old Testament when God's people obeyed God's Word it gave life.
Turning away from God's Word will take you into Idolatry or another Pagan ritual.
Read the Book of Judges and see a 400 year Rollercoaster of obeying and prosperity, and Idolatry then misery.
God is Holy and His Word is Holy as Well.
In the early Churches and groups of the New Testament they Had the Pauline Epistles, as well the written Word from the other Apostles.
We are living in the Church age until the return of Christ all of our knowlage for Salvation rest in the living Word of God ,who's Spirit guides us to a higher understanding through The Holy Bible.

 

[samir]

(sigh) You were telling me how proud it makes you to consider yourself a Christian.

When did I do that? What post?

Shouldn't that include acting like one?

Absolutely. That's why I don't bear false witness. What do you accuse me of doing?

 

[samir]

You told me that I am my own "highest authority", when I had written that Scripture is of higher authority to me than church teachings and traditions, and you proceeded to tell me how I interpret the Bible and that I "just interpret whatever verses you like to say whatever you want to believe."

You know not one consequential thing about me, and you have made entirely unfounded accusations. So, who is being judgmental here? I never said a SINGLE thing about you or your faith, and yet you took it upon yourself to judge and condemn me.

And I have noticed that you are consistently combative with your brothers and sisters in Christ. Why do you feel the need to treat others in such a way?

What I was trying to say is that sola scriptura elevates oneself above everyone else. Sola scripturists, whether they intend to or realize it or not, are ultimately trusting in themselves because they are relying on their own personal interpretation influenced by their own beliefs, feelings, culture, and life experiences. For example, a person who feels trusting in Jesus is enough will surely interpret scripture to say faith alone. A person who feels baptism is unnecessary will interpret scripture to say it is unnecessary. Since most people hear from a pastor or another person before they read scripture, they are already biased the first time they read it.

I wasn't accusing you of doing anything deliberately. It's just that it's impossible to interpret scripture without your own opinions or what you've heard influencing how you interpret. The same is true of any document, such as the Constitution. Liberals and conservatives consistently interpret the document differently based on their ideology. One interpretation is clear to one group of people yet a completely contradictory interpretation is the clear teaching of scripture for another group.

My point - The choice isn't between scripture or Church/Tradition. The choice is between one's own personal interpretation versus the Church's interpretation/Tradition taught consistently since the first century.

I choose to trust the constant tradition of the Church and rely on the Church's interpretation instead of my own biased personal interpretation. Sola scripturists constantly tell me I'm trusting in a church instead of scripture which is completely false and offensive since I trust the Church because I consider scripture the highest authority and want to make sure I understand it correctly.

And I have noticed that you are consistently combative with your brothers and sisters in Christ. Why do you feel the need to treat others in such a way?

I correct the errors and false information about God and the gospel posted on these forums because I love God and my neighbors.

 

[davidcrosby]

In all this talk about church, Scripture, and tradition, I can't help but think how the Catholic Church never wanted anybody to read Scripture in fear they would realize the Truth the Way and Life of God's being by His word He's given us.

 

[Gregory Thompson]

Because in the beginning was the Word and the Word was God.
Even in the Old Testament when God's people obeyed God's Word it gave life.
Turning away from God's Word will take you into Idolatry or another Pagan ritual.
Read the Book of Judges and see a 400 year Rollercoaster of obeying and prosperity, and Idolatry then misery.
God is Holy and His Word is Holy as Well.
In the early Churches and groups of the New Testament they Had the Pauline Epistles, as well the written Word from the other Apostles.
We are living in the Church age until the return of Christ all of our knowlage for Salvation rest in the living Word of God ,who's Spirit guides us to a higher understanding through The Holy Bible.

@now faith - Just a point of curiosity, do you know where in the scripture the Word is there in the beginning. The instance in scripture John is referring to ... in the beginning was the word, and the word was God and is God ..

 

[Gregory Thompson]

In all this talk about church, Scripture, and tradition, I can't help but think how the Catholic Church never wanted anybody to read Scripture in fear they would realize the Truth the Way and Life of God's being by His word He's given us.

@davidcrosby - the protestant line churches have this fear as well regarding the preservation of their tradition. It's common to want to control your surroundings, it's probably a sin, but it's very common. The difference with the Catholic example, is that they had too much control to begin with because of the fall of Rome. A church being a political power, tends to cause armageddon.

 

[davidcrosby]

@davidcrosby - the protestant line churches have this fear as well regarding the preservation of their tradition. It's common to want to control your surroundings, it's probably a sin, but it's very common. The difference with the Catholic example, is that they had too much control to begin with because of the fall of Rome. A church being a political power, tends to cause armageddon.

Yeah, I hear ya. What ever happen to the word will set you free... Not we'll control you by our interpretation of the Word.

 

[Gregory Thompson]

Brethren, we've got some razor-thin differences of opinion going on. It is sad that no one recognizes that. No one can "just read" scripture in order to "figure it out" on his / her own. The Holy Spirit has to be involved. He will provide interpretation and application of scripture using scripture alone. He isn't going to provide I & A differently to Spiritually-birthed Christians. There is only one way that He is going to provide Spiritual I & A to non-Believers: Convicting them of their lost estate; calling them to confess Jesus as Savior.

@Winken - The journey is what is important. God gave us a mind, so doesn't remove it when we become born again, this is why there is a difference of opinion on how to interpret the scripture and the things of God that inspired the writing of scripture as we experience Him.