Why Sola Scriptura isn't God's plan

[Montalban]

People had compilations.

I agree. I don't know what difference you think that makes

The first we have evidence for is that of Marcion

Some had more some had less. it isn't as if no one had any idea of what comprised the body of scripture until the councils got around to asserting their dubious authority over it.

Absolutely! You've just undermined sola scriptura. The scriptures themselves didn't authorise themselves. They didn't point to what was 'obvious' for collection.

You've gone from very odd comments to now arguing against yourself!

 

[Montalban]

I love how you demand Sola Scriptura for satisfaction.
It tickles me every time.

Yes, I realise you don't get it.

If you think Scripture is the only authority then you should be able to show from scripture that it is the only authority.

If you think that there is something OTHER THAN Scripture to show that only scripture is an authority, then you've just argued against youself by introducing something outside of scripture that's an authority.

 

[Ortho_Cat]

Turned to for what? They had apostles right there among them.

Bingo! Which is why we have the descendants of the apostles still with us today, to preserve the holy orthodox faith that was handed down to us by the apostles and proclaimed by the scriptures!

So who did the early Christians look to for authority and guidance in the faith when there was no NT scripture after the ascension?

 

[Montalban]

People who reject the Apostles teachings and claiming to follow the Apostles is rather strange.

When Paul talks of selections for bishops you can find Protestant churches that don't even have bishops.

But they claim to follow the Apostles!

 

[MamaZ]

People who reject the Apostles teachings and claiming to follow the Apostles is rather strange.

When Paul talks of selections for bishops you can find Protestant churches that don't even have bishops.

But they claim to follow the Apostles!

So do you have pastor, teachers in your body of believers? All being fellow elders?

 

[sunlover1]

People who reject the Apostles teachings and claiming to follow the Apostles is rather strange.

When Paul talks of selections for bishops you can find Protestant churches that don't even have bishops.

But they claim to follow the Apostles!

Claim to follow the SCRIPTURES is not the same as following the Apostles.
Men versus God's Words
HUGE difference.
The apostles were human and even sinned.
They were not infallible.

So to follow the words OF the Apostles that were God breathed
is not at all the same thing.

Just saying

 

[Standing Up]

People who reject the Apostles teachings and claiming to follow the Apostles is rather strange.

When Paul talks of selections for bishops you can find Protestant churches that don't even have bishops.

But they claim to follow the Apostles!

Even Tertullian knew that it was the apostolic teaching that mattered, not a lineage. If a group taught the same faith, they were by definition, apostolic.

Besides, there is no group that can unequivocally prove their direct physical connection to an apostle. You know, unfold the rolls of your bishops.

 

[Standing Up]

Bingo! Which is why we have the descendants of the apostles still with us today, to preserve the holy orthodox faith that was handed down to us by the apostles and proclaimed by the scriptures!

So who did the early Christians look to for authority and guidance in the faith when there was no NT scripture after the ascension?

Does EO and RC understand that just because someone supposedly laid hands on someone else that that in itself means nothing as regards teaching the same thing as the apostles? Surely you do because you may toss the bishop as a wolf.

So, the question remains, what standard will you use to do that? The ECFs pointed to scripture and apostolic-tied tradition. You folks are comfortable having leaders that may teach whatever just because of their hands-on claim?

 

[Thekla]

As before, (Tradition thread) Tradition includes praxis, mindset, ithos (and ethos), disposition, etc.

When 'following the apostles' we do not follow men, but what is of God in their witness (including of course, the Revelation as recorded in the Holy Scriptures, but also spoken and demonstrated).

(We don't say that using the Holy Scriptures - the Revelation recorded by people - is "following men".)

 

[GQ Chris]

It sounds like Orthodox Christians do not have a high view of scripture. That's pretty bad. From the input of the EO Christians here, it seems as if they are more into their "traditions" rather than what the Word of God says. Sounds a lot like Roman Catholicism.

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

It sounds like Orthodox Christians do not have a high view of scripture. That's pretty bad. From the input of the EO Christians here, it seems as if they are more into their "traditions" rather than what the Word of God says. Sounds a lot like Roman Catholicism.

Was gonna leave a message on yer profile board, but it wasn't showing

 

[heymikey80]

If no human is immune from deception, how can Sola Scriptura be excluded ? It is, for example, Arius who wandered from Tradition and promulgated false teachings derived from Scripture. What makes Sola Scriptura different ?

Last I checked, scripture wasn't human.

No one makes the claim that sola scriptura claimants are immune from deception -- least of all, Scripture! And that is very much the point. If the Scripture from God denies immunity to councils, or churches -- then countering such a denial doesn't really hold for reality. I vaguely remember someone saying, "Let God be true, and every man a liar!"

Do we entrust ourselves to fallen councils, congregations of people Scripture identifies as fallible? Or do we entrust ourselves to God through Christ our Lord?

 

[Ortho_Cat]

If you adhere to Sola Fide and Sola Scriptura, then you follow Luther and his particular interpretations of scripture (as well his interpolations thereof, since he added the word "alone" into german bibles to emphasize his doctrines).

Luther Bible - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[sheina]

It sounds like Orthodox Christians do not have a high view of scripture. That's pretty bad. From the input of the EO Christians here, it seems as if they are more into their "traditions" rather than what the Word of God says. Sounds a lot like Roman Catholicism.

Same family....like kissing cousins!

 

[Ortho_Cat]

Does EO and RC understand that just because someone supposedly laid hands on someone else that that in itself means nothing as regards teaching the same thing as the apostles? Surely you do because you may toss the bishop as a wolf.

So, the question remains, what standard will you use to do that? The ECFs pointed to scripture and apostolic-tied tradition. You folks are comfortable having leaders that may teach whatever just because of their hands-on claim?

Answer my question and then i'll answer your's...

 

[Ortho_Cat]

Same family....like kissing cousins!

Ah, how quickly we forget, you were part of that same family at one time as well...

 

[Montalban]

It sounds like Orthodox Christians do not have a high view of scripture.

That straw-man's come up by just about every Protestant here.

It's gravely telling of a position where people continually resort to this tactic!

 

[Montalban]

Same family....like kissing cousins!

According to you, we're all in the same invisible church, aren't we? Or have you ditched that belief too?

 

[Ortho_Cat]

It sounds like Orthodox Christians do not have a high view of scripture. That's pretty bad. From the input of the EO Christians here, it seems as if they are more into their "traditions" rather than what the Word of God says. Sounds a lot like Roman Catholicism.

So let me get this straight then...

Protestants adhere to Sola Scriptura
Protestants love their Bibles
Orthodox do not adhere to Sola Scriptura
Therefore, Orthodox do not love their Bibles?

sounds like it's time for another logic lesson...

Non sequitur - Definition and More from the Free Merriam-Webster Dictionary

 

[Ortho_Cat]

According to you, we're all in the same invisible church, aren't we? Or have you ditched that belief too?

Most baptists i've encountered or known growing up do not even consider Catholics as Christian...I would assume EO's are grouped along with them for the most part. Oh sweet irony...