Sola scriptura?

[i submitted to the Lord]

I understand. The conscience ALSO bears witness. I was speaking of the true Light which lighteth every man that comets into the world. The conscience can be defiled but the true Light (God) cannot fir God is Light.

I share this wonderful mystery

John 1:9. That was the true Light, which lighteth every man that cometh into the world.”

John 3:20. For every one that doeth evil hateth the light, neither cometh to the light, lest his deeds should be reproved.21. But he that doeth truth cometh to the light, that his deeds may be made manifest, that they are wrought in God.”

Ephesians 5:13. But all things that are reproved are made manifest by the light: for whatsoever doth make manifest is light.”

2 Corinthians 4:4. In whom the god of this world hath blinded the minds of them which believe not, lest the light of the glorious gospel of Christ, who is the image of God, should shine unto them.5. For we preach not ourselves, but Christ Jesus the Lord; and ourselves your servants for Jesus' sake.6. For God, who commanded the light to shine out of darkness, hath shined in our hearts, to give the light of the knowledge of the glory of God in the face of Jesus Christ.7. But we have this treasure in earthen vessels, that the excellency of the power may be of God, and not of us.”

Very true. Conscience can be, and usually is, defiled. By conscience alone, one can get lost in evil as well, not knowing it is evil! I've seen that happen to others who claim to seek purity by their consciences alone, having little light in them....

But to me it is a very small thing that I may be examined by you, or by any human court; in fact, I do not even examine myself. For I am conscious of nothing against myself, yet I am not by this acquitted; but the one who examines me is the Lord. Therefore do not go on passing judgment before the time, but wait until the Lord comes who will both bring to light the things hidden in the darkness and disclose the motives of men’s hearts; and then each man’s praise will come to him from God.
1 Corinthians 4:3‭-‬5 NASB

But l so, conscience can be cleansed, though, and made good by that true light of God that is Christ, when we are truly born again in Him, if that is what one truly and earnestly desires and faithfully strives for:

Corresponding to that, baptism now saves you—not the removal of dirt from the flesh, but an appeal to God for a good conscience—through the resurrection of Jesus Christ,
1 Peter 3:21 NASB

Indeed, a good conscience upon which the true, good light of Christ continuously shines so as to lead to a love like this:

But the goal of our instruction is love from a pure heart and a good conscience and a sincere faith. For some men, straying from these things, have turned aside to fruitless discussion, wanting to be teachers of the Law, even though they do not understand either what they are saying or the matters about which they make confident assertions.
1 Timothy 1:5‭-‬7 NASB

 

[JAL]

I understand. The conscience ALSO bears witness. I was speaking of the true Light which lighteth every man that comets into the world. The conscience can be defiled but the true Light (God) cannot fir God is Light.

The conscience is obligatory regardless whether it is defiled. This is because there are no exceptions to the following rule of conscience:

"If I feel certain that action-A is evil, and action-B is good, I should go with B".

This was already explained in the link that I gave you on the authority of conscience, in refutation of Sola Scriptura.

 

[quintessentialramble]

I think that many refuse to distinguish between the doctrines of the "scripture alone" and "sufficiency of scripture".

I suspect that almost all believe that all that is needed for salvation is contained within Scripture. That is the doctrine of sufficiency. There still are the matters of translation and interpretation.

I also believe that almost all believe that any doctrine that we hold cannot be in contradiction of Scripture.
Scripture alone is the supreme authority to go when we seek to evaluate doctrine. Again, there are the matters of translation and interpretation.

The view of Scripture championed by Lerens and by Luther do not have these issues. All, this isn't an issue for the Orthodox.
=======
I find very strange the rather new doctrine that Scripture speaks for itself and requires no interpretation. This doctrine is often called "Sola scriptura" and falsely attributed to the Reformation leaders. I think that Luther, Calvin and Wesley would be appalled at such a doctrine (and probably Svingli also).

actually there are many denominations that suggest we have been given new revelations, and many others that say culture was different, so teachings have changed. I would not agree with these...but there are plenty of people that say we have new teachings.

 

[quintessentialramble]

...

Whaa?

The long and the short of it seems to be that the Holy Spirit can inspire men to write Sacred Scripture.

That same Holy Spirit can guide men in correctly recognizing inspired scripture from uninspired texts.

However, that same Holy Spirit either can't or won't continue guiding the Church to this very day because reasons.

The man-made doctrine of "sola scriptura" is utterly incoherent.

See my passage--not all are in agreement that the Council were spirit-led---some people say they were agreed upon based on the accuracy and historicity of the texts. I would probably agree with that notion...seeing s spiritual gifts/prophetic vision/tongues weren't introduced until the 1900's.
Sola Scriptura just means Scripture alone...we take the Bible as it is, there are no other holy books---such as Quran or Book of Mormon--this is why Sola Scriptura came to be--basically to defend against other religions trying to add to Scripture. We do see this today...only in different ways.

 

[thecolorsblend]

See my passage--not all are in agreement that the Council were spirit-led---some people say they were agreed upon based on the accuracy and historicity of the texts. I would probably agree with that notion...seeing s spiritual gifts/prophetic vision/tongues weren't introduced until the 1900's.
Sola Scriptura just means Scripture alone...we take the Bible as it is, there are no other holy books---such as Quran or Book of Mormon--this is why Sola Scriptura came to be--basically to defend against other religions trying to add to Scripture. We do see this today...only in different ways.

It’s a lovely sentiment in some ways. But the doctrine is rife with the probability of error.

For example, doctrines formulated exclusively from Sacred Scripture are vulnerable to misunderstanding based on whichever translation of scripture is used for study. Given the self-evident fact that scripture was originally written in languages which are dead in modern times, most people are unable to read the original language. They are therefore dependent upon translations of those languages. And there is plenty of room for a healthy scholarly debate as to how a word, verse, chapter or even an entire book is to be translated. There are many possible ways of translating a given passage but, in theory, only one of them can be correct.

The entire process places a completely unrealistic and highly inappropriate burden of knowledge, intellect and scholarship upon the layman. While some can bear up to it, the vast majority cannot.

This is not a problem for me as a Catholic. I have a living authority in the Church who can guide my spiritual life and exercise proper authority in matters of faith and morals.

 

[LoveofTruth]

The conscience is obligatory regardless whether it is defiled. This is because there are no exceptions to the following rule of conscience:

"If I feel certain that action-A is evil, and action-B is good, I should go with B".

This was already explained in the link that I gave you on the authority of conscience, in refutation of Sola Scriptura.

Conscience implies co- with and science- knowledge. Or with knowledge. This knowledge that all men have is limited to how they receive the Light of Christ and some have only certain knowledge of things. For example the Old Testament saints only had certain knowledge of Gid’s wirk they did not see the fulness if Christ shed blood and finished work yet. Do we read

Hebrews 9:8. The Holy Ghost this signifying, that the way into the holiest of all was not yet made manifest, while as the first tabernacle was yet standing:9. Which was a figure for the time then present, in which were offered both gifts and sacrifices, that could not make him that did the service perfect, as pertaining to the conscience;10. Which stood only in meats and drinks, and divers washings, and carnal ordinances, imposed on them until the time of reformation.”

And so since Christ did not yet finished his work they could not have a clean or perfect conscience, But they had some knowledge though not a perfect conscience or perfect knowledge .
But when Christ came and shed his blood and rose again it was finished and this knowledge purges our conscience and we have the answer or inquiry of a good conscience and full assurance by the shed bliss of Jesus and his resurrection.

14. How much more shall the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered himself without spot to God, purge your conscience from dead works to serve the living God?”

1 Peter 3:21. The like figure whereunto even baptism doth also now save us (not the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God,) by the resurrection of Jesus Christ”

so in the Old Testament they could be saved and have faith and have Christ dwelling in them in the new birth but the knowledge of how this was and the full assurance and perfect conscience cleansed and purged could not be known yet. Even though they could still be saved and have a pure heart inwardly.

The saving baptism is into Christ by the Spirit. This is by by the answer or the inquiry of a good conscience by faith in Jesus Christ who died for our sins and rise again. The believer also has the full assurance of being risen with Christ as well.

 

[JAL]

Conscience implies co- with and science- knowledge. Or with knowledge. This knowledge that all men have is limited to how they receive the Light of Christ and some have only certain knowledge of things. For example the Old Testament saints only had certain knowledge of Gid’s wirk they did not see the fulness if Christ shed blood and finished work yet. Do we read

Hebrews 9:8. The Holy Ghost this signifying, that the way into the holiest of all was not yet made manifest, while as the first tabernacle was yet standing:9. Which was a figure for the time then present, in which were offered both gifts and sacrifices, that could not make him that did the service perfect, as pertaining to the conscience;10. Which stood only in meats and drinks, and divers washings, and carnal ordinances, imposed on them until the time of reformation.”

And so since Christ did not yet finished his work they could not have a clean or perfect conscience, But they had some knowledge though not a perfect conscience or perfect knowledge .
But when Christ came and shed his blood and rose again it was finished and this knowledge purges our conscience and we have the answer or inquiry of a good conscience and full assurance by the shed bliss of Jesus and his resurrection.

14. How much more shall the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered himself without spot to God, purge your conscience from dead works to serve the living God?”

1 Peter 3:21. The like figure whereunto even baptism doth also now save us (not the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God,) by the resurrection of Jesus Christ”

so in the Old Testament they could be saved and have faith and have Christ dwelling in them in the new birth but the knowledge of how this was and the full assurance and perfect conscience cleansed and purged could not be known yet. Even though they could still be saved and have a pure heart inwardly.

The saving baptism is into Christ by the Spirit. This is by by the answer or the inquiry of a good conscience by faith in Jesus Christ who died for our sins and rise again. The believer also has the full assurance of being risen with Christ as well.

It really took you all those words to convey that you still don't have an exception to the rule of conscience? You could have saved yourself a lot of typing.

 

[coffee4u]

well, remind me

please

tell me again

How do we know what canon consists of?

Canon is, obviously & clearly ________________________________________________

Please fill in the blank?

You do realize that protestants run from the left to the right to those steeped in tradition to those with no tradition. There are protestants who sit and sing old hymns to those who wave and clasp. Saying "protestants believe this/act this way" is as meaningful and wrong as me saying "all Americans eat grits" There is no one protestant view.

As an evangelical, I believe all the Bible is scripture.

2 Timothy
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.

Tenet one of Evangelical belief
1. Bible. We believe that the Bible is the Word of God; without error as originally written. Its content has been preserved by Him, and is the final authority in all matters of doctrine and faith-above all human authority. SCRIPTURAL SUPPORT

What else are you after?

 

[BobRyan]

For example, doctrines formulated exclusively from Sacred Scripture are vulnerable to misunderstanding .

compared to what?

Notice how Christ slam-hammers the supposedly "Sacred tradition" of the one true nation church of his day started by God at sinai in Mark 7? He does it via a sola-scriptura test.

Mark 7
‘This people honors Me with their lips,
But their heart is far away from Me.
7 ‘But in vain do they worship Me,
Teaching as doctrines the precepts of men.’

8 Neglecting the commandment of God, you hold to the tradition of men.”

9 He was also saying to them, “You are experts at setting aside the commandment of God in order to keep your tradition. 10 For Moses said, ‘Honor your father and your mother’; and, ‘He who speaks evil of father or mother, is to be put to death’; 11 but you say, ‘If a man says to his father or his mother, whatever I have that would help you is Corban (that is to say, given to God),’ 12 you no longer permit him to do anything for his father or his mother; 13 thus invalidating the word of God by your tradition which you have handed down; and you do many things such as that.”

The very method that is promoted in the "sola scriptura" model today.

Acts 17:11 Now these were more noble-minded than those in Thessalonica, for they received the word with great eagerness, examining the Scriptures daily to see whether these things were so.

The very response that the "sola scriptura" model would require EVEN when hearing the teaching of an Apostle.

 

[Albion]

I
This is not a problem for me as a Catholic. I have a living authority in the Church who can guide my spiritual life and exercise proper authority in matters of faith and morals.

What makes you think it's a problem for the rest of us? It isn't. Our respective churches have stated beliefs which we subscribe to just as you do yours.

Well, the way you can do it is by insisting upon talking as though any Christian who is called a "Protestant" has to be a de facto member of every Protestant denomination at once.

But of course, they aren't.

I'm not an "Anglican-Presbyterian-Lutheran-Pentecostal-Methodist-Congregationalist" any more than you are a "Roman Catholic-Orthodox Eastern-Coptic-Armenian Apostolic Christian."

 

[thecolorsblend]

compared to what?

Notice how Christ slam-hammers the supposedly "Sacred tradition" of the one true nation church of his day started by God at sinai in Mark 7? He does it via a sola-scriptura test.

Mark 7
‘This people honors Me with their lips,
But their heart is far away from Me.
7 ‘But in vain do they worship Me,
Teaching as doctrines the precepts of men.’

8 Neglecting the commandment of God, you hold to the tradition of men.”

9 He was also saying to them, “You are experts at setting aside the commandment of God in order to keep your tradition. 10 For Moses said, ‘Honor your father and your mother’; and, ‘He who speaks evil of father or mother, is to be put to death’; 11 but you say, ‘If a man says to his father or his mother, whatever I have that would help you is Corban (that is to say, given to God),’ 12 you no longer permit him to do anything for his father or his mother; 13 thus invalidating the word of God by your tradition which you have handed down; and you do many things such as that.”

The very method that is promoted in the "sola scriptura" model today.

Acts 17:11 Now these were more noble-minded than those in Thessalonica, for they received the word with great eagerness, examining the Scriptures daily to see whether these things were so.

The very response that the "sola scriptura" model would require EVEN when hearing the teaching of an Apostle.

Our Lord condemned man-made traditions; not Sacred Tradition.

 

[i submitted to the Lord]

Conscience implies co- with and science- knowledge. Or with knowledge. This knowledge that all men have is limited to how they receive the Light of Christ and some have only certain knowledge of things. For example the Old Testament saints only had certain knowledge of Gid’s wirk they did not see the fulness if Christ shed blood and finished work yet. Do we read

Hebrews 9:8. The Holy Ghost this signifying, that the way into the holiest of all was not yet made manifest, while as the first tabernacle was yet standing:9. Which was a figure for the time then present, in which were offered both gifts and sacrifices, that could not make him that did the service perfect, as pertaining to the conscience;10. Which stood only in meats and drinks, and divers washings, and carnal ordinances, imposed on them until the time of reformation.”

And so since Christ did not yet finished his work they could not have a clean or perfect conscience, But they had some knowledge though not a perfect conscience or perfect knowledge .
But when Christ came and shed his blood and rose again it was finished and this knowledge purges our conscience and we have the answer or inquiry of a good conscience and full assurance by the shed bliss of Jesus and his resurrection.

14. How much more shall the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered himself without spot to God, purge your conscience from dead works to serve the living God?”

1 Peter 3:21. The like figure whereunto even baptism doth also now save us (not the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God,) by the resurrection of Jesus Christ”

so in the Old Testament they could be saved and have faith and have Christ dwelling in them in the new birth but the knowledge of how this was and the full assurance and perfect conscience cleansed and purged could not be known yet. Even though they could still be saved and have a pure heart inwardly.

The saving baptism is into Christ by the Spirit. This is by by the answer or the inquiry of a good conscience by faith in Jesus Christ who died for our sins and rise again. The believer also has the full assurance of being risen with Christ as well.

Most cannot see nor hear what you're stating, for their eye is not good nor simple. But, how long it took you to understand these things? I'm quite joyful to see someone understand. Because while these things are plain to see, they usually remain hidden... I know that as well.

 

[mark46]

I agree.

I would note that there are at least 3 elements where Protestants differ greatly among themselves. One is with regard to Tradition. A second is the place (if any) of the Church. The other is with regard to the real presence in the Eucharist.
====
As an aside, I suspect that Luther, Calvin and Wesley would be much more comfortable with current Roman Catholics than with current Baptists and Pentecostals.
=====
As you well know, there are even great differences within Protestant denominations, with almost all of them splitting into at least 2 parts.

What makes you think it's a problem for the rest of us? It isn't. Our respective churches have stated beliefs which we subscribe to just as you do yours.

Well, the way you can do it is by insisting upon talking as though any Christian who is called a "Protestant" has to be a de facto member of every Protestant denomination at once.

But of course, they aren't.

I'm not an "Anglican-Presbyterian-Lutheran-Pentecostal-Methodist-Congregationalist" any more than you are a "Roman Catholic-Orthodox Eastern-Coptic-Armenian Apostolic Christian."

 

[Albion]

Our Lord condemned man-made traditions; not Sacred Tradition.

Sacred Traditions ARE man-made traditions. The only reason we call them "Sacred" or "Holy" is because men, i.e. church leaders, have chosen to call the doctrines that they themselves defined by a term that they themselves coined.

 

[Albion]

As an aside, I suspect that Luther, Calvin and Wesley would be much more comfortable with current Roman Catholics than with current Baptists and Pentecostals.

Although the Reformers held the corrupted Papacy of the Late Middle Ages in low esteem, what you say here is probably right IMO. Most of their issues concerned departures from the Apostolic faith on the part of the Church of Rome which came along only in the several centuries prior to the Reformation.

 

[BobRyan]

Our Lord condemned man-made traditions; not Sacred Tradition.

The Jewish leaders of the one true nation church started by God at Sinai - viewed themselves the infallible magisterium coming up with infallible tradition.

 

[Erik Nelson]

I believe all the Bible is scripture.

2 Timothy
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.

Tenet one of Evangelical belief
1. Bible. We believe that the Bible is the Word of God; without error as originally written. Its content has been preserved by Him, and is the final authority in all matters of doctrine and faith-above all human authority. SCRIPTURAL SUPPORT

What else are you after?

But what is "all of the Bible" ?

It is a Protestant man-made tradition, unveiled out of the blue left field woodwork 500 years ago, to adopt the Jewish Masoretic OT (which Jewish Rabbis say proves Jesus couldn't have been the Christ) and to reject the Apocrypha (which Jesus and the 12 widely quoted throughout the NT) because they aren't Hebrew enough and are too gentile Greek

If you pick & choose what "Scriptures" out there are most to your liking, you are basically "splicing God's words" together to "make God sing your favorite tune":

Our Lord condemned man-made traditions; not Sacred Tradition.

anything (actually factually) guided by the Holy Spirit -- which Jesus promised to his followers before the Crucifixion, and which was delivered at Pentecost afterwards, and which has (allegedly supposedly) remained resting on the Church ever since -- would be unforgivable to reject & mis-attribute to the Adversary (Matthew 12 = Mark 3), yes?

 

[Erik Nelson]

The Jewish leaders of the one true nation church started by God at Sinai - viewed themselves the infallible magisterium coming up with infallible tradition.

70 AD was (as Jesus prophetically forecast) a Divine Judgement ?

 

[coffee4u]

But what is "all of the Bible" ?

It is a Protestant man-made tradition, unveiled out of the blue left field woodwork 500 years ago, to adopt the Jewish Masoretic OT (which Jewish Rabbis say proves Jesus couldn't have been the Christ) and to reject the Apocrypha (which Jesus and the 12 widely quoted throughout the NT) because they aren't Hebrew enough and are too gentile Greek

If you pick & choose what "Scriptures" out there are most to your liking, you are basically "splicing God's words" together to "make God sing your favorite tune":

So you are asking do I believe in the apocrypha? That would be a no, along with Catholic church traditions and doctrines.

All the Bible means from Genesis 1 to Revelation 22 KJV with other versions alongside for clarity/ cross-referencing, occasionally checking a Hebrew or Greek word. I mostly use the NKJV for myself, but on here I tend more to the NIV.

If this isn't what you mean then I don't have a clue, nor am I watching anything to figure out your riddles. Ask a straightforward question and you will get a straightforward answer.

 

[Erik Nelson]

So you are asking do I believe in the apocrypha? That would be a no, along with Catholic church traditions and doctrines.

All the Bible means from Genesis 1 to Revelation 22 KJV with other versions alongside for clarity/ cross-referencing, occasionally checking a Hebrew or Greek word. I mostly use the NKJV for myself, but on here I tend more to the NIV.

If this isn't what you mean then I don't have a clue, nor am I watching anything to figure out your riddles. Ask a straightforward question and you will get a straightforward answer.

you recognize (from my link) that Jesus himself quoted widely from the Apocrypha?

Jesus and his apostles recognized the same body of Scripture as is currently preserved in the Greek LXX. The witness of the DSS shows that there was, in first century Judea, also a Hebrew version of the same collection of writings.

In theory, one could use the DSS fragments, as well as the M text, to "reverse translate" the Greek LXX back into Hebrew, so as to (try to) reconstruct that original first century Hebrew OT (including Apocrypha)

But, again, the Jewish Rabbis reject the Apocrypha on the grounds that those writings are too Greek, too gentile, to be authentic, and prefer their exclusively Hebrew M version of the remaining OT because, if scrutinized in detail, it disproves Jesus as Christ

How that, even if true, becomes the basis for any flavor of Christianity is an amazing anomaly of mis-cognition