Were first-century Christians Sola Scriptura?

[Wolf_Says]

I'm sorry, but it's the term that originated with the Reformation. The idea was Apostolic and the Reformers were merely asserting that the churches ought to go back to that standard and reject the slew of additions to the faith that came along during the Middle Ages (Purgatory, Indulgences, Transubstantiation, for example).


You did state it that way, but you're wrong. That's not a part of Sola Scriptura. SS means simply that Scripture is the ultimate determiner of essential doctrine to the exclusion of human speculation, custom, etc.

Purgatory is indeed refrenced in the Bible, I have posted it in other threads. As is the concept of Transubstantiation.

Then explain all the denominations all claiming to run on SS, yet differ incredibly in their beliefs.

 

[Albion]

Purgatory is indeed refrenced in the Bible, I have posted it in other threads. As is the concept of Transubstantiation.

I'd disagree with that, although there are a few verses that were tortured to produce a scriptural justification for the invention of both of them. The bigger point is that they were NOT taught by the Church until the Middle Ages so that makes them as much innovations as you have been trying to claim that Sola Scriptura is.

Then explain all the denominations all claiming to run on SS, yet differ incredibly in their beliefs.

Two points.

How do you explain that of the "Catholic" churches, no two of them have the same doctrines, although all of them say that they follow "Holy Tradition" instead of Sola Scriptura??

Second, you're still misusing or misunderstanding Sola Scriptura. As I explained, it means that we use Scripture, not something else that some churches claim is as authoritative as Scripture. It does NOT guarantee that every one will use it correctly. That's not part of the meaning, the principle, of Sola Scriptura.

 

[-57]

Sola Scriptura fails its own test as the Bible never says all right doctrine must be based solely on it

Acts 17:11 Now these Jews were more noble than those in Thessalonica; they received the word with all eagerness, examining the Scriptures daily to see if these things were so.

 

[-57]

Purgatory is indeed refrenced in the Bible, I have posted it in other threads. As is the concept of Transubstantiation.

Then explain all the denominations all claiming to run on SS, yet differ incredibly in their beliefs.

Only if you insert "doctrine" between the lines. But, in reality Purgatory isn't in the bible.

 

[Albion]

Only if you insert "doctrine" between the lines. But, in reality Purgatory isn't in the bible.

Well, the word "fire" is, and it's associated with coming events. I'm giving him that much, although that constitutes about 5% of what Purgatory is supposed to be about.

 

[Wolf_Says]

I'd disagree with that, although there are a few verses that were tortured to produce a scriptural justification for the invention of both of them. The bigger point is that they were NOT taught by the Church until the Middle Ages so that makes them as much innovations as you have been trying to claim that Sola Scriptura is.


Two points.

How do you explain that of the "Catholic" churches, no two of them have the same doctrines, although all of them say that they follow "Holy Tradition" instead of Sola Scriptura??

Second, you're still misusing or misunderstanding Sola Scriptura. As I explained, it means that we use Scripture, not something else that some churches claim is as authoritative as Scripture. It does NOT guarantee that every one will use it correctly. That's not part of the meaning, the principle, of Sola Scriptura.

For the first statement, wrong. In fact many of the Doctors of the Church agree that purgatory exists.
I will simply leave this link to not take this thread too far off topic. http://www.biblicalcatholic.com/apologetics/a105.htm

Second statement. Wrong, the Catholic church does hold the same doctrine through-out, the most amount of differences I tend to see are alter-boy only or allow alter-girls? Receive communion kneeling down or in the hand? Placement of the tabernacle. That is NOT to say that there aren't any "Church of Nice" Catholic Churchs out there. There are, but the actual MASS is the same.

This still done not answer my question, because without some authority, which Sola Scriptura throws away and places it solely on the individual, you have all of these denominations ALL CLAIMING TO HAVE AND KNOW THE TRUTH. Yet they all differ widely in their beliefs. Sola Scriptura does not work. PERIOD.

 

[Wolf_Says]

Only if you insert "doctrine" between the lines. But, in reality Purgatory isn't in the bible.

Well, the word "fire" is, and it's associated with coming events. I'm giving him that much, although that constitutes about 5% of what Purgatory is supposed to be about.

There is also "souls under the earth" that will bow and proclaim Jesus is Lord. I ask what is this "under the earth"? Certainly not hell since that is the realm of the devil and hates everything about God. It means there must be another place, a place where souls go apart from heaven even though they are in favor with God.

That place has been given the name Purgatory by the Catholic Church, but there is certainly biblical evidence of it.

Clearly you do not understand Purgatory. It is the place where, those in favor with God, go after they die to have the stain of their sins removed from their souls; by fire, so that they can be pure and appear before the eyes of God.

 

[-57]

Well, the word "fire" is, and it's associated with coming events. I'm giving him that much, although that constitutes about 5% of what Purgatory is supposed to be about.

The word "fire" has several nuances in the bible. Would all references of fire presented in the future mean purgatory?

 

[Uber Genius]

Sola Scriptura

The Council of Trent in the 16th century declared that the revelation of God was not contained solely in the Scriptures. It declared that it was contained partly in the written Scriptures and partly in oral tradition and, therefore, the Scriptures were not materially sufficient.

It was neither grounded in scripture or in the church tradition, ironically.

Here is a quick definitional statement of sola scriptura as held by the Church until Trent.

"The Bible claims to be the sole and sufficient rule of faith for the Christian Church. The Scriptures are not in need of any supplement. Their authority comes from their nature as God-breathed revelation. Their authority is not dependent upon man, Church or council. The Scriptures are self-consistent, self-interpreting, and self-authenticating. The Christian Church looks at the Scriptures as the only and sufficient rule of faith and the Church is always subject to the Word, and is constantly reformed thereby." Dr. James White

All Scripture is breathed out by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, that the man of God may be complete, equipped for every good work. (‭2 Timothy‬ ‭3‬:‭16-17‬ ESV)

Paul didn't add anything else to his list as rules of faith other than God-breathed scripture. Paul doesn't suggest you can be almost complete. He doesn't suggest that the man of God is partially equipped given the right penance, and sacramental means of grace.

Further, The Early Church Fathers (Ignatius, Polycarp, Clement, the Didache, and Barnabus) taught doctrine and defended Christianity against heresies. In doing this, their sole appeal for authority was Scripture.

"This seal have thou ever on thy mind; which now by way of summary has been touched on in its heads, and if the Lord grant, shall hereafter be set forth according to our power, with Scripture proofs. For concerning the divine and sacred Mysteries of the Faith, we ought not to deliver even the most casual remark without the Holy Scriptures: nor be drawn aside by mere probabilities and the artifices of argument. Do not then believe me because I tell thee these things, unless thou receive from the Holy Scriptures the proof of what is set forth: for this salvation, which is of our faith, is not by ingenious reasonings, but by proof from the Holy Scriptures." (Cyril of Jerusalem mid-4th century)

Read more at: http://www.christiananswers.net/q-eden/sola-scriptura-earlychurch.html

Entire books are written on this topic, but I suggest that we focus our discussion on the evidence to and against sola. I have highlighted a short positive case.

 

[-57]

There is also "souls under the earth" that will bow and proclaim Jesus is Lord. I ask what is this "under the earth"? Certainly not hell since that is the realm of the devil and hates everything about God. It means there must be another place, a place where souls go apart from heaven even though they are in favor with God.

That place has been given the name Purgatory by the Catholic Church, but there is certainly biblical evidence of it.

Clearly you do not understand Purgatory. It is the place where, those in favor with God, go after they die to have the stain of their sins removed from their souls; by fire, so that they can be pure and appear before the eyes of God.

I see it this way...if purgatory was real, so important to our stained should....the bible would have talked about it in more and definite details. Currently you have to insert betwen the lines and play word association games to develop the doctrine.

As far as the stain of sin goes.....The blood of Christ Jesus washes away the stain of sin. That's all we need.

 

[dqhall]

No they were not, and Sola Scriptura is an unbilbical heretical idea that has festered now for the last 500 years after the protestant reformation.

SS claims that Scripture alone, and that everybody has their own authority in interpreting the Bible. Hence why in terms of protestants, there are now about 40,000 different denominations throughout the world. All claiming to only follow the Bible, and then disagree on many different major issues.

If the scripture says you should not fornicate, then you should not fornicate. You are more likely to avoid trouble by not fornicating. Having scripture is one thing, properly following instructions is another. Many people are trying to lose weight to gain better health. Not all succeed. There is a passage somewhere in the Bible (Philippians 3:19-20) There is another passage or two in Proverbs against gluttony as well. On the other hand if the scripture says you must stone someone who does work on the Sabbath (Saturday), you may need to know that the commandment not to kill is greater than the commandment that requires killing someone for working. Merely having the scriptures may be a plus, but success is determined by how well someone uses them.

 

[Shane R]

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

Now that is an outliers' opinion within the scholastic community. What has led you to that conclusion?

 

[Wolf_Says]

I see it this way...if purgatory was real, so important to our stained should....the bible would have talked about it in more and definite details. Currently you have to insert betwen the lines and play word association games to develop the doctrine.

As far as the stain of sin goes.....The blood of Christ Jesus washes away the stain of sin. That's all we need.

So basically you tell me that, "since it is not clearly spelled out in the Bible, I don't believe it." The Trinity is ALSO not clearly spelled out in the Bible. In fact the very word Trinity appears nowhere in reference to God. And Yet we know that God is a trinity (Father, Son, and Holy Spirit).

Do you believe that the early Doctors of the Church are wrong? Keep in mind that these are some of the most brilliant minds in Christian history.

Jesus died for our sins, so that we me receive forgiveness, because prior to this point there was no way to be forgiven for your sins, which is why the gates of heaven were closed. This does not mean that we cannot sin. Are you telling me that you could rob and steal, and not have it be a sin? You still willfully commit the act and turned your back on God. We still sin, it is in our human nature, which is why Jesus gave the apostles the authority to forgive and retain sins. It is not their power, but through Jesus.

This means that Jesus himself recognized the fact that we will still sin, and that sin will stain. If we die in the grace of God, we will go to heaven. But chances our, we have still sinned in some way before we die (swearing, cheating, lying, ect) and that sin needs to be removed from our souls because only the pure will reach heaven.

 

[Wolf_Says]

If the scripture says you should not fornicate, then you should not fornicate. You are more likely to avoid trouble by not fornicating. Having scripture is one thing, properly following instructions is another. Many people are trying to lose weight to gain better health. Not all succeed. There is a passage somewhere in the Bible (Philippians 3:19-20) There is another passage or two in Proverbs against gluttony as well. On the other hand if the scripture says you must stone someone who does work on the Sabbath (Saturday), you may need to know that the commandment not to kill is greater than the commandment that requires killing someone for working. Merely having the scriptures may be a plus, but success is determined by how well someone uses them.

So tell me who is to determine who is correct then, if they are basing their beliefs all from the same book?

 

[-57]

So basically you tell me that, "since it is not clearly spelled out in the Bible, I don't believe it." The Trinity is ALSO not clearly spelled out in the Bible. In fact the very word Trinity appears nowhere in reference to God. And Yet we know that God is a trinity (Father, Son, and Holy Spirit).

I think the Trinity is a bad example.....The Trinity is easy to prove. It is clearly spelled out when all of the verses are looked at an analyzed. (topic for later if you desire)
On the other hand Purgatory isn't clearly spelled out.

Do you believe that the early Doctors of the Church are wrong? Keep in mind that these are some of the most brilliant minds in Christian history.

Do you mean doctors or doctrine?

Jesus died for our sins, so that we me receive forgiveness, because prior to this point there was no way to be forgiven for your sins, which is why the gates of heaven were closed. This does not mean that we cannot sin. Are you telling me that you could rob and steal, and not have it be a sin? You still willfully commit the act and turned your back on God. We still sin, it is in our human nature, which is why Jesus gave the apostles the authority to forgive and retain sins. It is not their power, but through Jesus.

Absolutly we can still sin and do....All of my sins ...past...present...future...were paid for with Christ Jesus' sacrificial atonement made on the cross.

As far as the apostles actually forgiving sin...no way. What they could do is say that if you believe then proclaim your sins are forgiven.

This means that Jesus himself recognized the fact that we will still sin, and that sin will stain. If we die in the grace of God, we will go to heaven. But chances our, we have still sinned in some way before we die (swearing, cheating, lying, ect) and that sin needs to be removed from our souls because only the pure will reach heaven.

As I said above all of my sins...past...present...and future....have already been forgiven. My sins (all of them) have been imputed to Christ and Christ righteous has been imputed to me. It's Christ righteousness that allows us into heaven...NOT OUR OWN.

 

[Thursday]

Sola Scriptura

The Council of Trent in the 16th century declared that the revelation of God was not contained solely in the Scriptures. It declared that it was contained partly in the written Scriptures and partly in oral tradition and, therefore, the Scriptures were not materially sufficient.

It was neither grounded in scripture or in the church tradition, ironically.

Here is a quick definitional statement of sola scriptura as held by the Church until Trent.

"The Bible claims to be the sole and sufficient rule of faith for the Christian Church. The Scriptures are not in need of any supplement. Their authority comes from their nature as God-breathed revelation. Their authority is not dependent upon man, Church or council. The Scriptures are self-consistent, self-interpreting, and self-authenticating. The Christian Church looks at the Scriptures as the only and sufficient rule of faith and the Church is always subject to the Word, and is constantly reformed thereby." Dr. James White

All Scripture is breathed out by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, that the man of God may be complete, equipped for every good work. (‭2 Timothy‬ ‭3‬:‭16-17‬ ESV)

Paul didn't add anything else to his list as rules of faith other than God-breathed scripture. Paul doesn't suggest you can be almost complete. He doesn't suggest that the man of God is partially equipped given the right penance, and sacramental means of grace.

Further, The Early Church Fathers (Ignatius, Polycarp, Clement, the Didache, and Barnabus) taught doctrine and defended Christianity against heresies. In doing this, their sole appeal for authority was Scripture.

"This seal have thou ever on thy mind; which now by way of summary has been touched on in its heads, and if the Lord grant, shall hereafter be set forth according to our power, with Scripture proofs. For concerning the divine and sacred Mysteries of the Faith, we ought not to deliver even the most casual remark without the Holy Scriptures: nor be drawn aside by mere probabilities and the artifices of argument. Do not then believe me because I tell thee these things, unless thou receive from the Holy Scriptures the proof of what is set forth: for this salvation, which is of our faith, is not by ingenious reasonings, but by proof from the Holy Scriptures." (Cyril of Jerusalem mid-4th century)

Read more at: http://www.christiananswers.net/q-eden/sola-scriptura-earlychurch.html

Entire books are written on this topic, but I suggest that we focus our discussion on the evidence to and against sola. I have highlighted a short positive case.

Where in the bible does it tell us which books should be in the New Testament?

 

[Thursday]

As I said above all of my sins...past...present...and future....have already been forgiven. My sins (all of them) have been imputed to Christ and Christ righteous has been imputed to me. It's Christ righteousness that allows us into heaven...NOT OUR OWN.

This is a dangerous and false assumption.

Matt 6:15
But if you do not forgive others their sins, your Father will not forgive your sins.

Heb. 10:26
If we deliberately keep on sinning after we have received the knowledge of the truth, no sacrifice for sins is left,

 

[Wolf_Says]

Do you mean doctors or doctrine?

No, Doctors of the Church such as St Augustine of Hippo, St Thomas Aquinas ect. These are men who lived and breathed the faith. The official definition of Doctors of the Church is Doctor of the Church (Latin doctor "teacher") is a title given by the Catholic Church to saints whom they recognize as having been of particular importance, particularly regarding their contribution to theology or doctrine.

As far as the apostles actually forgiving sin...no way. What they could do is say that if you believe then proclaim your sins are forgiven.

Wrong because this contradicts what Jesus told them. He breathed on them and said "Receive the Holy Spirit, and go and make desciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit. Whoever sins you forgive are forgiven, and whoever sins you retain are retained." John 20:22-23

As I said above all of my sins...past...present...and future....have already been forgiven. My sins (all of them) have been imputed to Christ and Christ righteous has been imputed to me. It's Christ righteousness that allows us into heaven...NOT OUR OWN.

I never said it was our own, do not put those words in my mouth. Where is the Bible does it state past present and future sins are forgiven? Why then did Jesus command his apostles to go and forgive sins after he was resurrected?

 

[-57]

This is a dangerous and false assumption.

Matt 6:15
But if you do not forgive others their sins, your Father will not forgive your sins.

Heb. 10:26
If we deliberately keep on sinning after we have received the knowledge of the truth, no sacrifice for sins is left,

Perhaps it is dangerous in your mind....but... what you present is absolutely DAMNING.

I'm sure somewhere in your life there is someone who you haven't forgiven.....Which means you're not forgiven.

 

[-57]

Where in the bible does it tell us which books should be in the New Testament?

Well, for starters I would use the apocrypha as an example of what shouldn't be in the bible considering the contradictions.