WHY SOLA SCRIPTURA MAKES SENSE - A REBUTTAL

[YouAreAwesome]

Seems many are trying to destroy the sword of the Spirit which we are to live by

What is the sword of the Spirit? (Keep in mind, the Bible didn't exist when these words were penned; only some older scriptures).

 

[JAL]

New Testament prophecy is not direct revelation from God. If it was, God is giving new Scripture which should be added to what is already there, because when God speaks directly, He is speaking Scripture.

You're making a distinction that is unclear. Let's start with some conclusions that do seem clear.
(1) The Hebrew word for prophet translates into the Greek word prophet. To say that the OT prophet differs from the NT prophet is somewhat like arguing that OT saints drank a different kind of water than we do. We drink H-2-0 and they drank - what? An excellent example is John the Baptist who was a prophet in the magnitude of Elijah - and who preached the NT gospel. He was both an OT and NT prophet.
(2) Most prophecy wasn't canonized. Philip "had four unmarried daughters who prophesied."
(3) The NT word for Direct Revelation is the word "revelation" and it is applied indiscriminately to all kinds and thus to all the saints (not just to canonized revelations). Examples:

"Now, brothers and sisters, if I come to you and speak in tongues, what good will I be to you, unless I bring you some revelation or knowledge or prophecy or word of instruction?" (1Cor 14)

"When you come together, each of you has a hymn, or a word of instruction, a revelation, a tongue or an interpretation." (1Cor 14)

"Two or three prophets should speak, and the others should weigh carefully what is said. 30And if a revelation comes to someone who is sitting down, the first speaker should stop. 31For you can all prophesy in turn so that everyone may be instructed and encouraged."(1Cor 14)

"I keep asking that the God of our Lord Jesus Christ, the glorious Father, may give you the Spirit of wisdom and revelation, so that you may know him better" (Eph 1).

"“I praise you, Father, Lord of heaven and earth, because you have hidden these things from the wise and learned, and revealed them to little children" (Mat 11)

When you say that all direct revelation is canonized revelation, it sounds similar to the bogus cessationist claim to the effect that, "God doesn't speak today because, if He did, we'd have to canonize it" - silly because it insinuates that clear speech from God is a threat to us. Much safer for the church to be led by a bunch of fallible exegetical scholars taking shots in the dark.

 

[LoveGodsWord]

@LoveGodsWord

I'm trying to understand, which do you believe?
1. The Word of God is the Bible
2. The Word of God is Jesus
3. Both 1 and 2 are correct
4. The Word of God is God speaking to us
5. All of the above

This is not a trick question. SDA's don't hold a firm view on this from memory. So which one do you believe? I'm just trying to understand where you're coming from.

All of the above. I am only stating that direct revelation needs to be supported by scripture and it does not delete or do away with the scriptures.

 

[chilehed]

Sure I do I am working through it. Why would you suggest otherwise.

Because you are so badly misrepresenting it, and utterly failing to respond to what I actually said.

 

[JAL]

You see, you are making assumptions about what I believe concerning prophecy without knowing my background, training, and experience in the prophetic.

In my 20s, I spent three years under the discipleship of a mature traditional Pentecostal pastor who was very experienced in the ministry of healing, with a few notable miracle healings to his credit, including his own, having been sent home from hospital in his 40s with an enlarged heart and was expected to die. He prayed and trusted God and was totally healed. He actually died in his late 70s of pneumonia after suffering a major stroke. He was also very experienced in the prophetic, and believed that one had to be a man of the Word and of prayer to be able to move in it successfully. He was very strict, and did not hesitate to tell someone to stop and sit down if he thought they were prophesying something that did not line up with Scripture.

When he used to correct me, which was often, he would get out his big black Bible and show me through Scripture where I went wrong. He was never wrong with his correction of me. He was so strict, that I was too scared to open my mouth to give a prophecy unless I knew beyond doubt that it was from the Lord. When he told me that my gift was genuine, and I should never give it up, I took that as a serious badge of honour.

When they had a prophetic forum on CF, I offered to give prophetic words to those who needed one, and I ended up giving around 200 prophetic words, and only one person did not concur and said he would think about it. One guy messaged me and asked me if I ate prophetic cornflakes for breakfast and drove a prophetic car to work. All the ones who fed back to me assured me that the word I gave them was of the Lord for them. I was amazed at that, because often I would have just a few minutes in the morning before I had to catch the bus to work and I quickly would ask the Lord, and the impression would come and I would give it in faith. Often someone would tell me that the Scripture I gave as part of the prophecy, they had been reading that very one and my prophetic word confirmed things for them. I never felt prophetic when I gave those words, and often I was apprehensive that I was giving a wrong word, but it never happened.

Then a couple of others on the prophetic forum would start giving long, negative, judgmental KJV prophecies which caused the staff to shut the forum down. Also, when some started using me as their prophetic vending machine, wanting prophecies every day, I asked the Lord and He told me to stop, not because I was doing wrong, but the devil was starting to muddy the waters because he didn't like what I was doing.

So, when you are speaking to me about the prophetic, you are preaching to the choir!

I think after all our conversations, we might be speaking past each other from different perspectives. I link the prophetic with the written Scriptures in the sense that to be prepared to move in the prophetic one must be totally familiar with the written Scriptures to the degree that when an impression comes I have to know instantly whether the impression is correct or not. I think this awareness comes through meditating in the Scriptures and taking plenty of time fellowshiping with the Lord in prayer, discussing the Scriptures with Him. After soaking in the Scriptures and prayer over a good period of time (and this is why novices should not rush into the prophetic) one then knows in his spirit that when an impression comes, it is the right one.

If this is what you are referring to as direct revelation, then I agree with you, as long as it is linked with an overall sense of what the Scripture teaches about the ways, plans and purposes of God, and are familiar with the presence of God through regular fellowship with Him. I used to live not too far from the coast where there was a very long wide beach, and I used to go there, walk along for a couple of hours with my hands in my pockets, having very pleasurable and fruitful discussions with the Lord about many things. Through that I got used to when the Lord spoke back to me, giving me insights into His plans and purposes through the Scriptures.

This goes right along with "My sheep know my voice, and they follow me, and they won't follow a stranger". This comes because the Middle Eastern shepherd almost lived with his sheep, guarded them, and spoke to them often. They became familiar with his voice, and could tell his voice from that of a stranger.

But what I do oppose, is people like Kenneth Copeland and Benny Hinn purporting to get direct revelation that is obviously contrary to God's true plans and purposes, and are drawing people away from the true gospel of Christ, to putting trust in their usurped authority. That's the sort of direct revelation that I will not agree with, not in a million years. I also don't concur with the pope sitting in the chair of Peter getting direct revelation that becomes part of tradition that effectively adds to Scripture.

I guess I may be playing more into your hands now, or are we coming to consensus?

I myself have never prophesied. I'm sorry if this offends you but I stick to my maxim - I treat all alleged prophecy with the strictest skepticism until it elevates my own level certainty to 100%, or close enough that I can no longer controvert it in good conscience. That's how the Voice self-authenticates - when you talk about using Scripture to test prophecy, I am not convinced that's a prophetic ministry. I don't believe that's how prophecy is supposed to work. It sounds illogical. I like to give this example. When Abraham and Moses heard the Voice, they didn't need to "check it out with Scripture". I suppose you'll claim that they received Direct Revelation, but we get something different. But I can't see any clear basis for those kinds of distinctions.

 

[LoveGodsWord]

You're missing the point. While it is helpful and beneficial to have a bible as a Christian, it is not necessary. China proves this. Therefore because sola scripture teaches the bible is the "sole infallible source of authority for Christian faith and practice" it is blasphemous against the Holy Spirits work.

Nonsense. If the scriptures teach that faith comes by hearing and hearing by the Word of God *ROMANS 10:17 and we are only saved by GRACE THROUGH FAITH which comes by the Word of God *EPHESIANS 2:8, how can you have faith that is a requirement for salvation when there is no Word when it is written whatsoever is not of faith is sin *ROMANS 14:23?

 

[JAL]

@LoveGodsWord

I'm trying to understand, which do you believe?
1. The Word of God is the Bible
2. The Word of God is Jesus
3. Both 1 and 2 are correct
4. The Word of God is God speaking to us
5. All of the above

This is not a trick question. SDA's don't hold a firm view on this from memory. So which one do you believe? I'm just trying to understand where you're coming from.

Yeah good luck with that. She seems to oscillate between all possible positions. I gave up on debating with THAT moving target a long while back.

 

[LoveGodsWord]

It is interesting that many Charismatics believe in direct revelation from the Holy Spirit taking priority over written Scripture. One of the faults of the movement is that they accept everything supernatural as coming from the Holy Spirit, and therefore do not have accurate discernment about whether something supernatural is actually from God or not.

I am not knocking the Charismatic movement as some like to do out of ignorance concerning what it is really about. Most Charismatics are Bible-believing Christians who enjoy church more than others.

But the notion of "direct revelation" has brought in invasion of the occult in many wacky kundalini manifestations such as jerking, falling down, rolling on the floor, shaking, and other out of control behaviour; as well as Hindu mind-control ideas, such as "if I believe hard enough it will happen", positive thinking and confession; plus prosperity and guaranteed healing teaching. Much of this spurious stuff would be eliminated if believers properly searched and consulted the written Scripture to determine whether these manifestations and teachings are really Biblical, or not.

Yes this is quite sad really. You can understand why the devil would want to get rid of the Word of God. It is our only safety in the last days according to MATTHEW 24:24.

 

[LoveGodsWord]

Yeah good luck with that. She seems to oscillate between all possible positions. I gave up on debating with THAT moving target a long while back.

Nonsense. Please stop making things up. Hears an idea how about you address the OP the refutes your teachings. If you cannot why do you follow the teachings and traditions of men over the Word of God? JESUS warned us not to do this in MATTHEW 15:2-9

 

[LoveGodsWord]

Because you are so badly misrepresenting it, and utterly failing to respond to what I actually said.

Hmm ok how about you prove it rather than trying to get personal. I posted earlier what you fail to see in your posts is that God is in control of His Word. If you knew what this means you would understand why your argument is invalid.

 

[LoveGodsWord]

I never encountered "unregulated exegesis" in my post-graduate study of it. But I did learn the difference between exegesis and eisegesis. Do you know the difference?

I would say neither matter to those who seek to get rid of the scriptures.

 

[YouAreAwesome]

All of the above. I am only stating that direct revelation needs to be supported by scripture and it does not delete or do away with the scriptures.

We are in agreement. Direct Revelation will not delete scripture. Direct Revelation will be supported by scripture where possible. So for me the main point of difference is in the wording "the sole infallible source of authority for Christian faith and practice". Surely God Himself is the Sole Infallible Source of authority for Christian faith and practice? Do you think it is okay to put the bible up above God Himself? Isn't that blasphemy?

I hold the bible in high regard. But I worship God. Can you see the contention?

 

[LoveGodsWord]

No it's not. You can't dismiss human fallibility with a wave of the hand. There are 100 billion souls at stake here - hence no margin for error. Only Direct Revelation offers real hope of infallible information from God.
Again, you can't even read Scripture, and deduce doctrine from it, without a man-made lexicon (or man-made translations) and man-made exegetical proofs. The whole process is fallible.

The above are your words. Then we have God's Word that says...
2 TIMOTHY 3:16 ALL SCRIPTURE IS GIVEN BY INSPIRATION OF GOD AND IS PROFITABLE FOR DOCTRINE, FOR REPROOF, FOR CORRECTION, FOR INSTRUCTION IN RIGHTEOUSNESS.
Now who should I believe? Yep not you.

 

[YouAreAwesome]

Nonsense. Faith comes by hearing and hearing by the Word of God *ROMANS 10:17. If we are only saved by GRACE THROUGH FAITH which comes by the Word of God *EPHESIANS 2:8, how can you have faith that is a requirement for salvation when there is no Word when it is written whatsoever is not of faith is sin *ROMANS 14:23?

Huh? How is this a response to how God Himself saves people? China's church grew just fine with only the Holy Spirit. Many Muslims have been saved by Jesus Himself in dreams and visions. No bible needed. God Himself. You see, the Bible is meant to be an arrow, not an end in and of itself.

 

[LoveGodsWord]

We are in agreement. Direct Revelation will not delete scripture. Direct Revelation will be supported by scripture where possible. So for me the main point of difference is in the wording "the sole infallible source of authority for Christian faith and practice". Surely God Himself is the Sole Infallible Source of authority for Christian faith and practice? Do you think it is okay to put the bible up above God Himself? Isn't that blasphemy? I hold the bible in high regard. But I worship God. Can you see the contention?

I see better where your coming from YAW, but for me the scriptures are still the final authority as they are the test to know if someone has been given a revelation or not.

God bless.

 

[chilehed]

Hmm ok how about you prove it rather than trying to get personal.

I haven't gotten personal at all, not once. I've steadfastly addresed the content of your posts.

I posted earlier what you fail to see in your posts is that God is in control of His Word.

I said nothing that even remotely implies that he's not.

Tell you what: how about you construct the canon from scratch using nothing but the available ancient documents themselves. Prove which ones are Apostolic and which are not. If Sola Scriptura is true, that should be simple.

 

[LoveGodsWord]

Huh? How is this a response to how God Himself saves people? China's church grew just fine with only the Holy Spirit. Many Muslims have been saved by Jesus Himself in dreams and visions. No bible needed. God Himself. You see, the Bible is meant to be an arrow, not an end in and of itself.

What do those scriptures say or mean to you that are in the post you are quoting from. I am only asking to see how you understand them before I reply. I thought it was a straight forward question asked of you based on the scriptures.

 

[JAL]

The above are your words. Then we have God's Word that says...
2 TIMOTHY 3:16 ALL SCRIPTURE IS GIVEN BY INSPIRATION OF GOD AND IS PROFITABLE FOR DOCTRINE, FOR REPROOF, FOR CORRECTION, FOR INSTRUCTION IN RIGHTEOUSNESS.
Now who should I believe? Yep not you.

That letter was written to a "man of God" (Timothy) which is a rubric for a prophet. He was personally mentored by Paul, much like Moses mentored Joshua. That means that Timothy was no ordinary believer.

In the hands of a prophet, Scripture is consistently profitable for doctrine and instruction. In the hands of a fallible exegetical scholar, Scripture is potentially a recipe for disaster.

This is not is not an admonition to throw our bibles away - it's a warning that we need to prioritize Direct Revelation above all.

 

[LoveGodsWord]

I haven't gotten personal at all, not once. I've steadfastly addresed the content of your posts.


I said nothing that even remotely implies that he's not.

Tell you what: how about you construct the canon from scratch using nothing but the available ancient documents themselves. Prove which ones are Apostolic and which are not. If Sola Scriptura is true, that should be simple.

Your post...

chilehed said: ↑Because you are so badly misrepresenting it, and utterly failing to respond to what I actually said.

Sounds pretty personal to me. Empty claim you cannot prove while not addressing the post content provided to you. The rest of my post that you left out said what you fail to see in your posts is that God is in control of His Word. If you knew what this means you would understand why your argument is invalid.

 

[LoveGodsWord]

That letter was written to a "man of God" (Timothy) which is a rubric for a prophet. He was personally mentored by Paul, much like Moses mentored Joshua. That means that Timothy was no ordinary believer.

In the hands of a prophet, Scripture is consistently profitable for doctrine and instruction. In the hands of a fallible exegetical scholar, Scripture is potentially a recipe for disaster.

This is not is not an admonition to throw our bibles away - it's a warning that we need to prioritize Direct Revelation above all.

I guess there is many ways to deny God's Word if one does not believe them. For me I just believe what the scriptures say and they say the opposite to what you are teaching...
2 TIMOTHY 3:16 ALL SCRIPTURE IS GIVEN BY INSPIRATION OF GOD AND IS PROFITABLE FOR DOCTRINE, FOR REPROOF, FOR CORRECTION, FOR INSTRUCTION IN RIGHTEOUSNESS.
Now who should I believe? I know who I believe and it is not you.