Why Sola Scriptura isn't God's plan

[Standing Up]

the early church did not believe that, nor does scripture say that.

The Church is the pillar and foundation of truth because it is led by the Holy Spirit.

Sure they did all through their writings. Here's a brief sample:

Irenaeus:
We have learned from none others the plan of our salvation, than from those through whom the Gospel has come down to us, which they did at one time proclaim in public, and, at a later period, by the will of God, handed down to us in the Scriptures, to be the ground and pillar of our faith.33093309 See 1 Tim. iii. 15, where these terms are used in reference to the Church.
ANF01. The Apostolic Fathers with Justin Martyr and Irenaeus | Christian Classics Ethereal Library

Clement of Rome:
Ye are fond of contention, brethren, and full of zeal about things which do not pertain to salvation. Look carefully into the Scriptures, which are the true utterances of the Holy Spirit. Observe194194 Or, “Ye perceive.” that nothing of an unjust or counterfeit character is written in them.
ANF01. The Apostolic Fathers with Justin Martyr and Irenaeus | Christian Classics Ethereal Library

Barnabas c100ad:
Let us beware lest we be found [fulfilling that saying], as it is written, “Many are called, but few are chosen.”14801480 An exact quotation from Matt. xx. 16or Matt. xxii. 14. It is worthy of notice that this is the first example in the writings of the Fathers of a citation from any book of the New Testament, preceded by the authoritative formula, “it is written.”
http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/anf01.vi.i.html

Nothing about Tradition. Nothing about Bishops having the ability to add to or subtract from scripture.

 

[heymikey80]

So the Ethiopian was wrong to ask for help from the Deacon? (See Acts).

They should have said at the end "Don't do this!"

Nope, in fact the Scripture actually has no trouble with the Ethiopian asking a deacon to assist in his understanding. Witnessing isn't lording over the conscience.

But I'm sure an orthodox priest has already said, "Don't do this!"

"In keeping with Eastern tradition he is not permitted to perform any Sacred Mysteries (sacraments) on his own, except for Baptism in extremis (in danger of death)" Wikipedia

Funny, the Ethiopian didn't look sick.

 

[Standing Up]

yes we need priest and bishop. Why would St. Ignatius, who was a student of the apostle John say "do nothing without the consent of the Bishop". And that there can be no Church with an apostolic bishop.

The reason why an apostolic bishop was so important, was to prevent any schmoo from trying to institute himself as a bishop or head of a certain city Church. Rather the Catholic Church looked for people with experience and people who were involved with the apostles, like Igantius, Clement of Rome, Linius, Polycarp, Papias, Irenaeus, Timothy, and Titus. Just as they only allowed people who were seriously involved with Christ's ministry to be candidates for the place of Judas.

You seriously need to read Eusebuis Church history to get a grasp of the early church, as it had a hierarchy right from the starting of Jesus choosing the 12 apostles and later the 70. You think St. Paul was just traveling to preach only? No, he was also instituting bishops, deacons, and priests in the areas of Lydia and Greece. Stephen himself, the first christian martyr, was a deacon.

Let's look at the qualifications to which you allude. Here's Irenaeus (Tertullian makes similar observations, as do many others):

Written scripture:
1. When, however, they are confuted from the Scriptures, they turn round and accuse these same Scriptures, as if they were not correct, nor of authority, and [assert] that they are ambiguous, and that the truth cannot be extracted from them by those who are ignorant of tradition. For [they allege] that the truth was not delivered by means of written documents, but vivâ voce: wherefore also Paul declared, “But we speak wisdom among those that are perfect, but not the wisdom of this world.”33113311 1 Cor. ii. 6.

Tradition, but note very carefully what is required:
2. But, again, when we refer them to that tradition which originates from the apostles, [and] which is preserved by means of the succession of presbyters in the Churches, they object to tradition, saying that they themselves are wiser not merely than the presbyters, but even than the apostles, because they have discovered the unadulterated truth.

It is not as you say simply a matter of calling oneself an apostolic bishop as some are in the habit of doing. The only thing that matters is that tradition originate from the apostles. Then, and only then, may it be preserved by means of succession. IOW, it is up to the person declaring a 1950 dogma about the assumption of Mary to prove that the tradition originated from apostles. Can you provide that? If not, the Church rejects it.

 

[Thekla]

What keeps Sola Scriptura free from Satan's error when using Scripture; for example (Matthew 4) Satan states, "it is written ...".

 

[DiligentlySeekingGod]

What keeps Sola Scriptura free from Satan's error when using Scripture; for example (Matthew 4) Satan states, "it is written ...".

Um... God.

Jesus did rebuke the devil you know, using "it is written..."

Jesus said, “It is written, ‘Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceeds from the mouth of God.’”

He also said, "It is written again, ‘You shall not tempt the LORD your God.’”

And again, “Away with you, Satan! For it is written, ‘You shall worship the LORD your God, and Him only you shall serve.’”

And then Satan left Him. Jesus defeated Satan using "IT IS WRITTEN..." He defeated Satan with Scripture.

 

[sheina]

Um... God.

Jesus did rebuke the devil you know, using "it is written..."

Jesus said, “It is written, ‘Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceeds from the mouth of God.’”

He also said, "It is written again, ‘You shall not tempt the LORD your God.’”

And again, “Away with you, Satan! For it is written, ‘You shall worship the LORD your God, and Him only you shall serve.’”

And then Satan left Him. Jesus defeated Satan using "IT IS WRITTEN..." He defeated Satan with Scripture.

 

[DiligentlySeekingGod]

The sword of the Spirit is the word of God (Ephesians 6:17). It is a vital piece of equipment in the full armor of God, which we are instructed to put on so we will be able to stand against the wiles of the devil (Ephesians 6:10-18).

Hebrews 4:12: "For the word of God is living and powerful, and sharper than any two-edged sword, piercing even to the division of soul and spirit, and of joints and marrow, and is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart."

Isaiah 55:11: "So shall My word be that goes forth from My mouth; It shall not return to Me void, But it shall accomplish what I please, and it shall prosper in the thing for which I sent it."

 

[heymikey80]

What keeps Sola Scriptura free from Satan's error when using Scripture; for example (Matthew 4) Satan states, "it is written ...".

So Jesus' "it is written" isn't a good argument?

Of course Satan can counterfeit theology. He can introduce traditions into the church, cause schisms in the church, and draw people's conscience astray by forcing them, brainwashing them, threatening them to trust things that are not right. Adding more entities that Satan can counterfeit doesn't resolve this issue.

 

[Standing Up]

What keeps Sola Scriptura free from Satan's error when using Scripture; for example (Matthew 4) Satan states, "it is written ...".

Study to show yourself approved

When, however, they are confuted from the Scriptures, they turn round and accuse these same Scriptures, as if they were not correct, nor of authority, and [assert] that they are ambiguous, and that the truth cannot be extracted from them by those who are ignorant of tradition. For [they allege] that the truth was not delivered by means of written documents, but vivâ voce: wherefore also Paul declared, “But we speak wisdom among those that are perfect, but not the wisdom of this world.”331133111 Cor. ii. 6.

PS remember the hedge 'round Job, eh?

 

[DiligentlySeekingGod]

2 Timothy 2:15: "Be diligent to present yourself approved to God, a worker who does not need to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth."

 

[sunlover1]

The sword of the Spirit is the word of God (Ephesians 6:17). It is a vital piece of equipment in the full armor of God, which we are instructed to put on so we will be able to stand against the wiles of the devil (Ephesians 6:10-18).

Hebrews 4:12: "For the word of God is living and powerful, and sharper than any two-edged sword, piercing even to the division of soul and spirit, and of joints and marrow, and is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart."

Isaiah 55:11: "So shall My word be that goes forth from My mouth; It shall not return to Me void, But it shall accomplish what I please, and it shall prosper in the thing for which I sent it."

 

[Montalban]

Ah, random Bible verses!

 

[sunlover1]

Ah, random Bible verses!

Not only that, we have NO idea what they might mean!

 

[Montalban]

So Jesus' "it is written" isn't a good argument?

Of course Satan can counterfeit theology. He can introduce traditions into the church, cause schisms in the church, and draw people's conscience astray by forcing them, brainwashing them, threatening them to trust things that are not right. Adding more entities that Satan can counterfeit doesn't resolve this issue.

I think you miss the point. Many different people can use the written word to formulate errors.

Simply because 'it is written' doesn't mean that your interpretation is correct.

 

[Montalban]

Not only that, we have NO idea what they might mean!

Some champion circular reasoning.

Apparently they just mean one thing and aren't open to interpretation. So therefore they just mean what they say (which will equate to whatever it is you happen to believe)

 

[DiligentlySeekingGod]

Not only that, we have NO idea what they might mean!

LOL

Not a clue...

 

[Montalban]

Not a clue...

I'm sure you have yourself to reference your own interpretations

Let's just take one example as given earlier by yourself

Hebrews 4:12: "For the word of God is living and powerful, and sharper than any two-edged sword, piercing even to the division of soul and spirit, and of joints and marrow, and is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart."

Where does it say 'the Word of God' is only that which is written.

You may 'plainly' see that it is so, so you believe it just is. I don't see that it refers to the written word, therefore what seems obvious to you isn't to everyone.

So simply quoting it doesn't prove your point.

But I accept that some people have an interpretation based on that they have it, based that they do, and therefore think it's obvious to everyone because it's a fact to them.

 

[ivebeenshown]

I wonder if some people think God has these for teeth:

"Every word from the mouth of God"...

 

[sheina]

But I accept that some people have an interpretation based on that they have it, based that they do, and therefore think it's obvious to everyone because it's a fact to them.

Would you mind interpreting that last statement into the English language, please?

 

[Montalban]

Would you mind interpreting that last statement into the English language, please?

That was in English.

A lot of people come to an 'understanding' of scripture. So when asked a question they may answer by posting scripture only, as if that answers the question.

They do this because for them their interpretation of scripture just 'is' what they think it is.

I pointed out an example of someone citing scripture about the word. That person supports sola scriptura because of this they just assume that the text they cited about the 'word' simply means the written word. Unfortunately it doesn't mean that at all... certainly not to me.

Simply citing the verses of the Bible as if it just means something 100% apparent doesn't work.

People interpret it differently.