St. Paul Demonstrating Sola Scriptura In Scripture

[Thursday]

He was trying to make the point that Paul meant that scripture alone was sufficient, but Paul was only referring to the Old Testament.

 

[Thursday]

The scriptures testify of Christ, His sufferings, laying our iniquities upon him is part of the New Covenant in His blood that is testified of in the scriptures.

True. The scriptures also tell us to hold fast to the traditions we have been taught, whether by written word or orally.

Scripture also tells us that the church is the pillar and foundation of truth.

 

[Citizen of the Kingdom]

He was trying to make the point that Paul meant that scripture alone was sufficient, but Paul was only referring to the Old Testament.

Holy Scripture is still Holy Scripture no matter if anyone is claiming to have humanly constructed it or not.

 

[Fireinfolding]

True.

Miss this yes, as well as other true things

The scriptures also tell us to hold fast to the traditions we have been taught, whether by written word or orally.

Scripture also tells us that the church is the pillar and foundation of truth.

True, they used the scriptures to preach the gospel since the testimony of Jesus Christ is in them, showing the gospel itself of His sufferings is testified of in the scriptures (even those of old).

You should start holding fast to that tradition which shows like Philip, Apollos, and Paul preaching out of the same in order to persuade of Jesus Christ. Even Jesus passed doing just that onto them.

 

[PeaceByJesus]

True. The scriptures also tell us to hold fast to the traditions we have been taught, whether by written word or orally.

And so do SS preachers in orally preaching Scriptural Truths, and can do so to people who cannot read and or have no Scriptures. But as with the apostles themselves, such preaching is subject to the Scriptures as the supreme standard to which all must conflate and compliment.

Now the apostles and others also could provide new conflative and complimentary revelation, and and write under full inspiration of the Spirit, neither of which Rome claims to do.

Scripture also tells us that the church is the pillar and foundation of truth.

And that is all it says, if that considering the few words in the Greek, but out of which Catholics extrapolate an infallible church that is the supreme authority over Scripture. Their reasoning, particularly RCs, is that an assuredly (if conditional) infallible magisterium is essential for determination and assurance of what writings (and men) are of God, and to fulfill promises of God's presence, providence of Truth, and preservation of faith, and authority.

And that being the historical instruments and stewards of Divine revelation (oral and written) means that this entity is that assuredly infallible magisterium. Therefore any who knowingly dissent from the latter must be in rebellion to God.

Does this fairly represent what you hold to or in what way does it differ?

 

[Rick Otto]

So we shouldn't believe the New Testament?

Not if you don't believe the Old Testament.

 

[Rick Otto]

Thursday said: ↑
True. The scriptures also tell us to hold fast to the traditions we have been taught, whether by written word or orally.

Said before the Roman Catholic Church existed.

Really, it is beside the point that SS presents: Verify by scripture.

 

[Fireinfolding]

Yeah, Jesus said,

John 5:46 For had ye believed Moses, ye would have believed me: for he wrote of me.

John 5:47 But if ye believe not his writings, how shall ye believe my words?

 

[BobRyan]

When Protestantism (even in a context of SS) is defined as including Unitarians, Scientologists and Swedenborgian disciples as well as liberal Protestants for whom Scripture is hardly authoritative, it is easier to ignore the evidence that those who hold most strongly to Scripture as being the wholly inspired accurate word of God (which is essential for SS and contrary liberal Prots) are far more unified in core beliefs and issues than the overall fruit of Catholicism (which testifies to what they really believe).
.

I agree that the schism factory of history has been Catholicism resulting in a great many - other spin-offs as those reformers try to get back to the first century grounded-in-the-truth state of the church.

 

[BobRyan]

True. The scriptures also tell us to hold fast to the traditions we have been taught, whether by written word or orally.

Scripture also tells us that the church is the pillar and foundation of truth.

scripture tells us that the traditions of the ONE True nation-church started by God at Sinai were hammered by Christ - "Sola Scriptura" in Mark 7:6-13

 

[sculleywr]

I wouldn't presume to ask you not, regardless of your confusion.

It isn't exactly confusion. Atheists and other non-Christians already know it. They know that different churches teach different gospels. It's only people inside Protestant churches that don't seem to realize it.

 

[sculleywr]

Show me ANY reference to ANYONE in the NT text saying "we can't read that letter from Paul yet - we need to wait a few centuries for our unborn children to tell us what to think of it -- whether it is scripture or not"

Show me the first letter Paul sent to the Corinthians. Oh wait, you can't. It's referenced in First Corinthians, but you don't have it. They didn't ask that question, because they didn't just ASSUME that the letter was Scripture. But of course, you want to be solo scriptura. Granted, I'm wondering where the use of a piano comes from the Scripture, or a computer. You claim to be Sola Scriptura, but you act solo scriptura.

 

[sculleywr]

Holy Scripture is still Holy Scripture no matter if anyone is claiming to have humanly constructed it or not.

You can't practice Sola Scriptura if you don't know what Scripture is. You also can't practice Sola Scriptura if you can't read Scripture because of the lack of access, or because of the lack of linguistic training.

 

[Citizen of the Kingdom]

You can't practice Sola Scriptura if you don't know what Scripture is. You also can't practice Sola Scriptura if you can't read Scripture because of the lack of access, or because of the lack of linguistic training.

I have my bible to read what more do I need except perhaps a concordence to easily follow a word study to easily see the progression of the meaning God has revealed.

 

[sculleywr]

Said before the Roman Catholic Church existed.

Really, it is beside the point that SS presents: Verify by scripture.

Which is found nowhere in Scripture. Scripture doesn't say you need to verify everything by Scripture. It only shows occasionally where people use Scripture, not that they always used it. Extrapolation is notoriously inaccurate. Extrapolation also gave us the theory that all life came by evolution and random accident, as well as the Big Bang theory.

You're using that same method that gave us those false theories and using it to give us the idea that Scripture is somehow the only verifiable source of Truth.

 

[sculleywr]

I have my bible to read what more do I need except perhaps a concordence to easily follow a word study to easily see the progression of the meaning God has revealed.

And how do you know that Bible is the right Bible? You trust the translational traditions of the translators, as well as the canon traditions shown in the Table of Contents.

Because if it were that easy to find the Truth, then there wouldn't be division. It ISN'T that easy. The idea that it is that easy is ignoring the fact that men are easily swayed on their own. This is why the Church exists as the Pillar and Ground of the Truth. That is always true.

 

[Citizen of the Kingdom]

And how do you know that Bible is the right Bible? You trust the translational traditions of the translators, as well as the canon traditions shown in the Table of Contents.

Because if it were that easy to find the Truth, then there wouldn't be division. It ISN'T that easy. The idea that it is that easy is ignoring the fact that men are easily swayed on their own. This is why the Church exists as the Pillar and Ground of the Truth. That is always true.

You have your professional priests, professional physicians, professional lawyers etc. but it sure don't take away your responsibility of life does it...

 

[sculleywr]

You have your professional priests, professional physicians, professional lawyers etc. but it sure don't take away your responsibility of life does it...

My responsibility is to live rightly. It is not my responsibility to establish the doctrine I should live according to. That was established by the Apostles. It was preserved by the Spirit in the Pillar and Ground of the truth. It is not my job to replace the Pillar and Ground of the Truth. It is not my job to replace the Head of the Church with His Bible. It is my job to be in the Church and follow as God built it.

 

[Citizen of the Kingdom]

My responsibility is to live rightly. It is not my responsibility to establish the doctrine I should live according to. That was established by the Apostles. It was preserved by the Spirit in the Pillar and Ground of the truth. It is not my job to replace the Pillar and Ground of the Truth. It is not my job to replace the Head of the Church with His Bible. It is my job to be in the Church and follow as God built it.

The word of God is given to us, not to replace Christ with the written but to know His written word to be able to follow it. If any church is teaching differently it;s your job to get yourself where that is the norm/

 

[sculleywr]

The word of God is given to us, not to replace Christ with the written but to know His written word to be able to follow it. If any church is teaching differently it;s your job to get yourself where that is the norm/

So basically God doesn't care if you get the right interpretation of the Scripture, so long as you have the Scripture.

Good luck with that. That literally makes YOU the Pope. If you can't find a church that teaches as you understand the scripture, make one. The church you go to is no longer the Pillar and Ground of the Truth. You are that Pillar and Ground.