Were first-century Christians Sola Scriptura?

[Root of Jesse]

All the Gospels were written within a decade after the date of Christ's crucifixion.

john's gospel was not...

 

[Root of Jesse]

The Bible set in order all those things that were being discussed, promulgated, promoted, observed, demanded, exaggerated, imagined...... all those products of intellect, rumor, magnification, and personal glorification examined and subsequently accurately presented in One Book, itself. It is in and of itself THE sole Spiritual context, from Genesis 1 through Revelation 22.

The OT explored and revealed the struggle that God had with humanity, even after He selected the Chosen People, those called Hebrews, and in other terminology, Jews. The NT explores and reveals the introduction of Jesus, that Most Holy One called to explain and define the Old, appealing to God's Chosen to receive Him in the Grace promised in the Abrahamic Covenant. Some did, most did not, due to the blasphemy of their leadership. At the Cross Jesus closed the books on the ritualistic, paying the price for ALL who would believe, minus the impossible criteria of the Law. At the Cross Jesus set in motion the calling of the evil Pharisee, Saul, providing Grace through Faith through his ministry as Paul. Paul, in Romans 10:8-13, laid the foundation of Grace for everyone, Jew, non-Jew. Romans 8:1, among numerous other scriptures, reveals the Truth that confession of Jesus as Savior is solid, permanent, impossible to undo.

Where does that leave all the probabilities promoted by "tradition" or "holy tradition," which in fact conflict with Scripture? Denominations. Belief "systems." Organized religion. Christianity is none of those. It is THE one-to-one relationship with our Savior, Jesus, the GIFT of God. Those who walk in that Truth are saved for eternity. Here is a comment made in this thread that is utterly in error:

"For example, Church Tradition says baptism saves, regenerates believers and is necessary for salvation. All Christians everywhere have believed that Tradition from the beginning. Yet sola scriptura says you can reject that Christian teaching if it doesn't agree with your own personal interpretation of scripture."

No authentically Spiritually birthed Believer in Jesus Christ as Savior and Lord will EVER lean to his or her own understanding. Scripture is God-breathed, interpreted and applied by the Holy Spirit and none other. Faith comes by hearing the Holy Spirit, and hearing by the Word of God. Period.

It has been a tradition in our entire family to attempt to assemble at some point during the Christmas season. Does that make it a required observance? Do we have to assemble on a date certain? What about those who can't attend? When we sit around discussing Christmas past do our discussions have to be flawless? Do we have to recall everything that happened even during the season last year? Dare we pass along everything that happened as truth?

"John sure drove a beautiful Chevy this time." "No, it was a Ford." "The color was blue." "No, it was gray." "Maybe it was the year before he drove the Chevy." "Nope. He traded in a Dodge." "I remember the first car Mom and Dad owned..... a Chrysler." "Actually, I clearly remember it was a Pontiac." "We've got photos of them with the Chrysler!" "Impossible."

Try writing a family diary.

Sola Scriptura. Don't venture outside the Word.

The problem is that you don't have agreement as to what constitutes "the Word". We believe God speaks to some men even now, and we believe that certain books are to be included in the Bible.

 

[Paul Yohannan]

How could they be when even after all of the NT canon was finished, toward the end of the first century, most likely no single church had copies of every book in it? Also no church would know which writings weren't canon, since there were probably a ton of epistles going around, and there is not record of an epistle listing all the books of the New Testament and saying, "This is all you need."

Indeed.

 

[Paul Yohannan]

john's gospel was not...

Indeed.

The problem is that you don't have agreement as to what constitutes "the Word". We believe God speaks to some men even now, and we believe that certain books are to be included in the Bible.

John 1:1-14 provides a very definite definition of the Word.

One thing I very much dislike about your Novus Ordo Missae is that not only has the Last Gospel been deleted, but the "The Word of the Lord" at the end of each scripture lesson appears to contradict it. It would be much better had the Roman Catholic church not engaged in any liturgical reforms after those of Pius X (which was not so much of an actual reform as a very modest adjustment to make the liturgical calendar more coherent and to improve the functionality of the Breviary).

 

[Root of Jesse]

Indeed.



John 1:1-14 provides a very definite definition of the Word.

One thing I very much dislike about your Novus Ordo Missae is that not only has the Last Gospel been deleted, but the "The Word of the Lord" at the end of each scripture lesson appears to contradict it. It would be much better had the Roman Catholic church not engaged in any liturgical reforms after those of Pius X (which was not so much of an actual reform as a very modest adjustment to make the liturgical calendar more coherent and to improve the functionality of the Breviary).

I beg to differ about the Gospel of John. We read it almost entirely during each Lenten/Easter season and Advent/Christmas...

 

[Paul Yohannan]

I beg to differ about the Gospel of John. We read it almost entirely during each Lenten/Easter season and Advent/Christmas...

Indeed, but you used to read it at the end of every Mass. Specifically John 1:1-14 (the phrase Last Gospel refers to these verses). John 1:1-14 are still read at the end of Diocesan Tridentine masses, and at the end of masses in certain Eastern Catholic rites; furthermore the Armenian Orthodox and the Armenian Catholics retain this usage (which along with the Latin style mitre was introduced into the Armenian church during a period of contact with the West).

The only major exception to the above would be the old Dominican Rite; Dominican friars had a mass which was slightly different than the standard Tridentine mass and tended either not to recite the Last Gospel, or else tended to extinguish the candles on the altar while reciting it. This variation is broadly in accord with the increased simplicity of the Dominican Rite. The blog/website New Liturgical Movement ran an interesting article on this subject a while back.