Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
My apologies i thought i was speaking at chestertonrules (a catholic)
I came across this article a while ago:
The Practical Problems With Sola Scriptura
Protestant apologists, please read and counter the above criticism against sola scriptura.
Thanks!
Yes, as am I.Martin Luther is a saint?
And therein you have hit upon the one critical mistake which invalidates the underlying premise of the article. But alas, Anoetos, you can post this all day and the deniars of SS will never respond; beating a straw dog is better than no dog apparently.As much as I like Akin, his problem with this article is that he boils Sola Scriptura down to private interpretation.<snip>
I read the first sentence in the link. Lets begin there. The article claims that Sola Scriptura is a doctrine. It is not. It is a praxis.
As much as I like Akin, his problem with this article is that he boils Sola Scriptura down to private interpretation.
In reality, the vast majority of Protestants read and interpret scripture within a confessional context, giving full appreciation to the importance of all the historical figures who have gone before us in understanding and interpreting it. The difference is that we do not accord them any level of necessary infallibility.
Strange, this verse didn't give me that impression at all.
"The scribes and the Pharisees sit on Moses seat; so practice and observe whatever they tell you, but not what they do; for they preach, but do not practice" (Matt. 23:23).
"The Pharisees believed that in addition to the written Torah recognized by both the Sadducees and Pharisees and believed to have been written by Moses, there exists another Torah, consisting of the corpus of oral laws and traditions transmitted by God to Moses orally, and then memorized and passed down by Moses and his successors over the generations. The Oral Torah functioned to elaborate and explicate what was written, and the Pharisees asserted that the sacred scriptures were not complete on their own terms and could therefore not be understood."
Pharisees - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Interesting, this sounds very much like apostolic succession and the handing down of Christian Tradition to me.
Not having consensus only prevents labeling, it doesn't prevent you from being able to deal with the issues of either or any case.Some protestants call it a doctrine. I've also heard it called an idealogy and a method. And therein lies the problem with SS, there isn't any consensus on what it is. This could be alleviated if their was a central definition of SS to which all adherents of SS agreed but there isn't one of those either. The problem is further illuminated by the fact that the most in depth treatises on such an important doctrine/praxis/ideology/method of Christianity have been written in the last 100 years.
The strongest arguments against Sola Scriptura are:
A) It is completely and utterly at odds with how the canon was formed.
B) There is no historical basis for it.
C) In order to rationalize it as being historical, one must pile on assumption after assumption about the nature of divine revelation and the nature of the Church. All of these assumptions themselves are also unsupported.
Let's stay on topic please...the defense of sola scriptura
Not having consensus only prevents labeling, it doesn't prevent you from being able to deal with the issues of either or any case.
In fact, doctrine requires a consensus even if limited, & you say "some protestants" as if it does matter.
It isn't a "deep" or difficult to understand practice, being illustrated in just a few sentences in Acts 17.
In depth treatises are completely unnecessary for such a simple thing as solan scriptura whether you call it doctrine, practice. or some anti-Protestant term.
Says who? Pick one & deal with it or ignore the irrelevance of all of them & just deal with what it is: using scripture to verify God's truth.quote=tadoflamb;Exactly, and we can't label the doctrine, praxis, ideology, method of SS
That simply isn't true.Truth does matter, and with the doctrine/praxis/ideology/method of SS, when practically applied it's impossible to discern what exactly is the truth.
Every person is responsible to develope enough critical thinking skills to be able to "study to show yourself approved" & 'have ready an answer for the hope that is in you'. "Common parlance" it seems, is a euophemism for "anti-Protestant jargon". The "teachings of men" always start out with the authority of the teachings of the men attempting to teach us.As the article stated, the first fruit of SS is private judgement, known in common parlance as 'the teachings of men'.
Even the most casual reader can see the the reason they accepted the "oral teachings" of Paul was because what he said agreed with scripture; oila! Sola Scriptura. Call it whatever you want, it is just checking the most reliable source to get an idea of what is realy true.The Bereans accepted oral tradition as taught by St. Paul and therefore can not be consider practicioners of SS.
Call it standard bible study procedure: Check Scripture.I call SS what the professers of SS call it; a doctrine/praxis/ideology/method.
No need to defend the sole authority of scripture. No other revelation is God breathed and profitable for teaching, reproof, correction, and training in righteousness.
And I would go a step further to say that if using Scripture to verifySays who? Pick one & deal with it or ignore the irrelevance of all of them & just deal with what it is: using scripture to verify God's truth.
You truly don't see it?Well that arrogant Chesterton guy seems to say otherwise, lol. Is that what goes on in Eastern Orthodox. I don't see what the big fuss is about Sola Scriptura,
Not sure what you mean. Do you mean hearing directly from God?would some of these people just reccomend what Pentecostals do? lol
And I apologize for over-reacting. I'm deleting the original...That's an admonishment from one of my bishops to me.
I apologize if you take offense.
Well, God used men to 'finalize" what He had already decreed.
Sure there is. I can show you where the majority of the first and second century ECFs used scripture alone. Heck, if the bible was ever lost we could rewrite it just from the writings of the early ECFs.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?