What is Sola Scriptura?

[Bastoune]

Infallible are the Scriptures, but by whose standards? St. Vincent De Lerins stated:

"I have often then inquired earnestly and attentively of very many men eminent for sanctity and learning, how and by what sure and so to speak universal rule I may be able to distinguish the truth of Catholic faith from the falsehood of heretical depravity; and I have always, and in almost every instance, received an answer to this effect: that whether I or anyone else should wish to detect the frauds and avoid the snares of heretics as they arise, and to continue sound and complete in the Catholic faith, we must, the Lord helping, fortify our own belief in two ways: first, by the authority of the divine law [Scripture], and then by the tradition of the Catholic Church. But here some one perhaps will ask, ‘Since the canon of Scripture is complete, and sufficient of itself for everything, and more than sufficient, what need is there to join with it the authority of the Church’s interpretation?’ For this reason: Because, owing to the depth of holy Scripture, all do not accept it in one and the same sense, but one understands its words in one way, another in another, so that it seems to be capable of as many interpretations as there are men. . . . Therefore, it is very necessary, on account of so great intricacies of such various errors, that the rule for the right understanding of the prophets and apostles should be framed in accordance with the standard of ecclesiastical and Catholic interpretation" (The Notebooks 2:1–2 [A.D. 434]).

After all, where did the Scriptures come from? Who compiled, copied and distributed them? The Catholic Church. It wasn't until AD 300 that all the "books" (scrolls) of NT writings (and these, only COPIES of copies by then) were compiled TOGETHER, but even this compilation was not the total canon which was not agreed upon until between 380-395. And even then, chapters were not put into the Bible until the 12th Century, and verse numbers came at the time of the printing press.

So "sola Scriptura" can only be correct if God dropped the Bible out of the
sky and told people to trust it. He did not do that. The Scriptures are God-breathed, yet inseparable from the Church, the Body of Christ. The Word of God revealed to us in the Person of Jesus Christ, is the Gospel... the Church and the Scriptures together testify to the Gospel.

That's the reality.

 

[Bastoune]

Scripture, btw, was always available to everyone... anyone could hear it read during the liturgy, anyone who could read could read it (Anyone literate already knew Latin, so they could read it in Latin, or else in the other tongues, such as English or French, which were commonly available; but Latin was not a restriction for the people, because it was the common tongue of the times). Just before the invention of the printing press, books were extremely rare and expensive.



Common people didn't have Bibles in their homes because they could not afford them. Bibles were kept safely (yet accessible) by monks and clerics. If not for the Catholic Church, there would be no Bible.

So for all we know (as the heathens will tell us) the Catholic Church changed everything to suit her personal needs and goals... in that case, if we cannot rely on the Scriptures as accurate, than how can even Protestants stand up for "sola Scriptura"? Basically, if you believe in the Bible, you have to yield to the Church who compiled, preserved, canonized, preached from, and evangelized with it.

That Church is the Catholic Church.

 

[Arc]

If the Bible alone is authority and there is no Papacy, heirarchy, whether in Catholicism, Anglicanism, Baptists etc, how can a book be authority?

This statement troubles me greatly. Maybe I'm just misunderstanding. Are you saying the Bible is only a book? The Word of God to us is insufficient without man's interpretation added to it. So until something man (wether RC or Reformed or whatever) adds the Gospel, (that were are commanded to spread to the whole world) it is not engergized somehow it woun't work.

Again what puzzles me is that this book the Bible says:

Eph 1:13 In Him, you also, after listening to the message of truth, the gospel of your salvation--having also believed, you were sealed in Him with the Holy Spirit of promise,
14 who is given as a pledge of our inheritance, with a view to the redemption of God's own possession, to the praise of His glory.

If the Word of God is enough, how can man make it better? I'm not discounting Christian living, walking in the Spirit, Baptism, Communion, etc. I'm asking why is it that every Chruch I look at divides itself from the next denomination over man made traditions formed after the apostolic age.

If we are "one in Christ", and we got "in Christ" be hearing the Gospel and believing, and we, by our Faith expressed in works remain in Christ then how can we be divided?

 

[nyj]

I guess we're starting to see the effects of closing down IDD.

 

[nyj]

Perhaps instead of obtaining ones definition of Sola Scriptura from your personal interactions with people in IDD, you should try to understand it according to the manner in which it is outlined in the creeds of the Reformation. Every denomination, including your own, could be perceived as inconclusive on matters of faith if we were to base our understanding of things from the posts of individuals representing their communions.

But Jason, here is where the paradox of sola scriptura comes into play. You say that I should not look at people in IDD to give me an answer but instead turn to the creeds of the Reformation for my answer. Yet, were those just people as well? So you're telling me to not look for my answer with one set of people and instead look for my answer with another set.

You see, the difference between me referring you to the teachings of the Church, by the Church, and you referring me to the teachings of the Reformation are two different things. My church rules on things infallibly, your faith does not make any such claim and therefore their teachings can be error prone. I have no problem having you hold me to a definitive answer, as God is absolute and His Church teaches (Tradition AND Scripture) absolutely too. Yet, it appears as if I can never hold you to a definitive answer because nothing except Scripture is absolute for you.

 

[Jason1646]

Would it be okay if I answered this here? If not, I could post it in PRE. I think I can sufficiently clarify the matter without it becoming a reason for contention.

Sincerely in Christ,

~Jason