.jpg)
Posted on 07/03/2012 9:31:36 AM PDT by Teófilo
Another nail in the coffin of the foundational Protestant dogma
Sola scriptura is dead, or at least is undead, a zombie still stalking the darkened hallways of Protestantism. Many well-meaning Protestant Christians don’t see the zombie-dogma for what it is; instead, they choose to see it as a being of light. My friend Dave Armstrong has returned to blow the old decrepit sola scriptura monsters one at a time in his latest work, 100 Biblical Arguments Against Sola Scriptura100 Biblical Arguments Against Sola Scriptura.
Let’s recall the definition of the sola scriptura dogma – yes, it is a dogma – as understood by Norman Geisler, a recognized Protestant authority Dave quotes in his work:
By sola scriptura orthodox Protestants mean that Scripture alone is the primary and absolute source of authority, the final court of appeal, for all doctrine and practice (faith and morals)… (p.16)Geisler, and other authorities Dave quotes, further explain that other authorities exist, but that these are of secondary importance. Geisler also defends what he calls the perspicuity of Holy Writ, which means that anyone can understand the basic truths of Scripture: the plain things are the main things and the main things are the plain things, Geisler states. (p.17). As a true analyst, Dave separated the sola scriptura dogma into its constituents claims, found out its contents, examined its individual parts, and studied the structure of sola scriptura as whole. He found them defective and insufficient to expound and explain the full spectrum of Christian claims.
Dave kills the sola scriptura zombie by selecting 100 verses from Scripture contradicting this central Protestant claim. I guess he selected 100 verses because the number “100” gives the reader a sense of exhaustive answer and completion, not because there are only 100 verses that should make all sincere Protestant Christian at least uncomfortable with the teaching. In fact, Dave is the author of another related work, 501 Biblical Arguments Against Sola Scriptura: Is the Bible the Only Infallible Authority?, which is useful if you need another 401 arguments to kill the sola scriptura zombie dead.
100 Biblical Arguments Against Sola Scriptura. is a distillation of the 501 Biblical Arguments… in a more manageable, less overwhelming fashion for the beginning reader. It’s 133 pages in length and divided into two parts. In Part 1 Dave discusses the binding authority of Tradition, as substantiated in Scripture, and in Part 2 he discusses the binding authority of the Church, again from Scripture. The result must be uncontestable to the sincere Protestant Christian as well as eye opening to the full range of deeds and wonders the Incarnation of the Word of God brought to history.Will the sola scriptura zombie really die after Dave’s work? This is a senseless question because the zombie is already dead. It’s kept ambulating by strings pulled from the most diehard of its followers. Those strings must be cut by the individual, sincere Protestant Christian himself. Dave Armstrong’s work, 100 Biblical Arguments Against Sola Scriptura100 Biblical Arguments Against Sola Scriptura. not only blows the zombie of sola scriptura away, he also provides the truth-searcher with the scissors to cut off the strings.
“”For me, I will treat His written word with reverence and trust.”
Are you sure you aren’t Catholic? “
I don’t care about titles. I started in a Pentecostal church, then a nondenominational. Now I’m in a Assembly of God, which is a form of Pentecostal.
I’ve disagreed with the RCC, and with the Protestant doctrine of the Salvation Prayer as nothing but formula.
There are good people within the Catholic church, and evil people. Same with any church.
I’m a believer in the continued gifts of the Spirit, including healing and tongues. I pray in tongues daily and am surrounded by like minded people. But many protestants are as against that as the traditional RCC. But I’ve heard that not all RCC are against tongues either.
I will listen to any man I think is Godly. If his words line up with scripture, then they are true. if they counter scripture, they are false. All else can be argued until the Second Coming.
Maybe you are more than a little bit Catholic.....
Flannery O’Connor, an American author and Catholic related an incident at a dinner party to which she had been invited along with author and political activist Mary McCarthy and at which she seems to have felt “set up” when the conversation turned to the Eucharist, “which I, being the Catholic, was obviously supposed to defend.”
When Mary McCarthy, after explaining her previous misunderstanding of the Eucharist, said that she “now thought of it as a symbol and implied that it was a pretty good one,” O’Connor uttered her oft-quoted comment, “If it’s a symbol, then to hell with it.”
Peace be with you
You must have not gotten the memo.
News flash: it’s possible to be both Catholic and Jewish. In fact, being Catholic is the most Jewish thing anybody can be.
The last Old Testament prophet predicted that the messenger coming to Israel from God would be the forerunner of Christ (Malachi 3:1). Most of the Apocryphal books were written during the period between Malachi and Christ. That SHOULD be proof enough that the apocrypha is NOT part of the canon of Scripture.
News flash: it’s possible to be both Catholic and Jewish. In fact, being Catholic is the most Jewish thing anybody can be.
...........
My pastor is a Messianic Jew. He would probably disagree with you on that point—but of course, I would leave that to him.
“Mary is the true Ark of the Covenant, and her immaculate conception is the key to our redemption. Her preservation from sin from the first moment of her life is not about her at all, but about her son and his salvific work.
If you want to know Jesus better, get to know his mother.”
Friend, you just couldn’t be any more wrong. God the Holy Spirit uses the tabernacle and the furniture in it as typical things to show us the excellence, pre-eminence, and glory of the Lord Jesus Christ as our Divine Redeemer and Savior(Hebrews 9:1-5).
All the “ordinances of divine service” all the rites and ceremonies, and the “worldly sanctuary” itself, the tabernacle, were types of Christ. You will never understand the Old Testament Scriptures until you see that everything in the Old Testament Scriptures represents, points to, and pictures Christ, our Substitute (Luke. 24:27; 44-45).
• The Tabernacle – Christ – Glorious within/Humble without.
• The Brazen Altar – Christ’s sufferings and death.
• The Laver – Christ our Fountain, opened for cleansing.
• The Candlestick – Christ the Light of the World.
• The Table of Shewbread – Christ the Bread of Life.
• The Altar of Incense – Christ our Intercessor.
• The Veil – Christ the Door.
• The Ark of the Covenant – Christ our Reconciliation.
The Arc of the Covenant is one of the clearest “types” of the Lord Jesus Christ in all the Bible.
LOL, that's no answer! Faith doesn't exist floating alone in space. Faith needs an object: in what do you have faith? Yourself? the Koran? America? Free Markets? Jesus? You can't just toss out "FAITH" and congratulate yourself for a crushing response -- you haven't said squat.
If you believe the Bible is God's word because of faith, how did that faith come to you? If you were taught, why is that not a tradition of men?
If you are claiming a direct infusion by the Holy Spirit, how do you know what you received is of God? Oh, right -- faith. In other words, your reasoning is entirely circular, and you have no answer beyond "just because".
"Always be prepared to make a defense to any one who calls you to account for the hope that is in you." Well?
For the most part they probably don't know what they believe because it's all too complex for any but specialists to really dig into it. Still, they believe something. And, they feel comfortable with what they believe ~ and some don't.
I"m not among the rebels, but I do belong to a church that was founded precisely for the purpose of recreating the First Century Church. First thing they did was abolish that business about circumcision ~ made darned sure of that one.
Eventually, after working their way through all the obligations and traditional behaviors they came to a conclusion that the First Century just wasn't enough. They needed some church rules ~ a statement of faith of some sort ~ and that jumped right into the Second Century.
That precipitated some church divisions ~ for one thing the Primitive Baptists pealed off on their own because, as they said, Sunday School ain't in there, and, I guess, it's not, but is Wednesday night in there?
Then, they had a bunch who were unhappy with the acceptance of the KJV as reviewed against Catholic versions (In English) and they seem to have wandered in the direction of Joseph Smith. Guess they liked a whole 'nuther translation of something eh.
A little later one group observed (And observations are always human made observations) that if we were doing things the way they were said to be done in the New Testament in the first and second centuries, there were NO MUSICAL INSTRUMENTS, so it was out with the organs, violins, pianos, banjos, jews harps, tambourines, and certainly THE DRUMS (an idea that showed up later in the Grand Ole' Opry ~ same folks, of course)
Other divisions showed up as the adherents of this newly revived faith determined that you didn't need bishops, and you didn't need ministerial associations, and you probably shouldn't waste money on foreign missions.
Those were all weighty issues, but when they were done there were roughly two denominations and one movement with a lot of independent churches.
The current situation is that the congregations that sought out independence are most faithful to the original aims of the founders. The congregations that sought to have more church structure ~ with an annual convention where they pass all sorts of silly resolutions ~ like the methodists in fact ~have found themselves subject to infiltration by terrorists and socialists ~ Jim Jones did that ~ they are still trying to crack down, and may use the Catholic method of writing up some rules ~ and it's dollars to doughnuts they use the second century rules. I think that gives us some insight into why the Catholics came up with the magesterium ~ sure, they say God told them to do it ~ but I bet it was much more like a need for quality control to keep the gnostics at bey.
The non-instrumental crowd are still non-instrumental but I've read where they have some problem with Pentacostalism ~ we'll see how that works out someday. Frankly, I don't know how you do that stuff a capella.
Remember, what I was reporting on was a single religious movement that took place in America to create a single ecumenical church that conformed in all respects with the New Testament ~ and rejected all outside notions.
It didn't work all that well, and certainly not the way the founders thought it would.
A fine point but Jesus must fulfill the prophecies. They are jewish prophecies.
Golden Box: Ark of the Old Covenant
Mary: Ark of the New Covenant
The ark traveled to the house of Obed-edom in the hill country of Judea (2 Sam. 6:1-11).
Mary traveled to the house of Elizabeth and Zechariah in the hill country of Judea (Luke 1:39).
Dressed as a priest, David danced and leapt in front of the ark (2 Sam. 6:14).
John the Baptist — of priestly lineage — leapt in his mother’s womb at the approach of Mary (Luke 1:41).
David asks, “How can the ark of the Lord come to me?” (2 Sam. 6:9).
Elizabeth asks, “Why is this granted me, that the mother of my Lord should come to me?” (Luke 1:43).
David shouts in the presence of the ark (2 Sam. 6:15).
Elizabeth “exclaimed with a loud cry” in the presence of the Mary (Luke 1:42).
The ark remained in the house of Obed-edom for three months (2 Sam. 6:11).
Mary remained in the house of Elizabeth for three months (Luke 1:56).
The house of Obed-edom was blessed by the presence of the ark (2 Sam. 6:11).
The word blessed is used three times; surely the house was blessed by God (Luke 1:39-45).
The ark returns to its home and ends up in Jerusalem, where God’s presence and glory is revealed in the temple (2 Sam. 6:12; 1 Kgs. 8:9-11).
Mary returns home and eventually ends up in Jerusalem, where she presents God incarnate in the temple (Luke 1:56; 2:21-22).
When the ark was completed, the glory cloud of the Lord (the Shekinah Glory) covered the tent of meeting, and the glory of the Lord filled the tabernacle (Ex. 40:34-35; Num. 9:18, 22).
The Spirit comes upon the Virgin Mary and “overshadows” her, so that she might conceive and give birth to Jesus. On the mountain of Transfiguration, the Spirit in the “cloud came and overshadowed” Jesus, Moses and Elijah, Peter, James and John, and “a voice came out of the cloud, saying, ‘This is my Son, my Chosen; listen to him!”’ Finally, the cloud took Jesus out of the sight of the disciples on the day of his Ascension and will reveal him as Son of man in glory on the day of his final coming.
The stone tablets of the law — the word of God inscribed on stone.
The body of Jesus Christ — the word of God in the flesh.
The urn filled with manna from the wilderness — the miraculous bread come down from heaven.
The womb containing Jesus, the bread of life come down from heaven (John 6:41).
The rod of Aaron that budded to prove and defend the true high priest.
Jesus, the actual and eternal High Priest.
Hope this helps.
Duly noted what YOU think of faith. God thinks a little different. But that's in the Bible.
Not to get off the track here, but the Hindu prophecies and then lives of their messiahs (two in relatively recent times, and maybe more than 2 in the antedeluvian period) follow essentially the same pattern, and have the mothers doing many of the same things we see in the Judeo-Christian prophecies.
This particular pattern was curious enough to the Moslem scholars in the early period 8th/9th century that they ended up writing some quite extensive evaluations of it ~ and pulling together elements of the Koran and the Hadiths to show where it seemed to be implicit in their own literature.
BTW by about 1000 Islam was finished with any sort of exegesis and it's been down hill all the way ever since. A few years back an islamic group in Alexandria VA got reinvolved in these matters and had many of the 8th century tracts translated and published. I had a customer who worked for the printer and he provided me some 'fresh stuff' ~
There does appear to be a common pattern to Messianic appearances. Moses' life isn't necessarily a derivative of Sargon (the last Sumerian king of Sumer), nor is prophecies regarding Christ something picked up by the Jews in the 1000 BC to 300 BC period, nor are the extant prophetic appearances of messianic beings in Indian similar just because that's how HIndus tell the story.
This is the issue being addressed with the question about "Appolo" appearing in the midst of the New Testament's materials. But I kind of wonder if there isn't still a Greek Messiah out there somewhere whose time has not yet come. They need one real bad!
We all await the NEXT COMING ~ guaranteed!
Do you understand what you're writing? Jesus to the Apostles. When I go to church, we read the Bible. I hear the Apostles. I am a member of an Apostolic church. I do not reject the Apostles.
There is no mention of apostolic succession. This would have been a perfect time to add that little detail. Maybe something like, "he who hears those that follow you hear you" or something like that.
If you listen to any of the creeds, which we recite in church every week, you have the faith crystallized. There is no mention of apostolic succession. There is no mention of anything extra Biblical. Mary is a virgin and that's it.
Those that wrote the creeds made sure they did not exceed Apostolic tradition as expressed in the Bible. Good lesson to learn.
Im tired of this, so I’m not about to waste any more time.
If you could only see without your Roman glasses.
Are you insane?
When Peter tells of the good news, when they wrote all of the Apostolic letters, when they wrote the creeds; never once did this piece of information deem worthy of mention.
The truth of the immaculate conception has zero to do with my salvation. I don't care a whit about your human reason and rationalizations about why the immaculate conception was necessary. Jesus died for my sins and rose again. That is the key to my redemption.
The Arc of the Covenant is one of the clearest “types” of the Lord Jesus Christ in all the Bible.
This is true,dear friend but what you are neglecting to realize that it also types the importance of the Incarnation of Christ fulfilled through the Blessed Mother following the will of God perfectly.
The early Christians recognized this in being led by The Holy Spirit
A few writings....
Athanasius of Alexandria (c. 296–373) was the main defender of the deity of Christ against the second-century heretics. He wrote: “O noble Virgin, truly you are greater than any other greatness. For who is your equal in greatness, O dwelling place of God the Word? To whom among all creatures shall I compare you, O Virgin? You are greater than them all O [Ark of the] Covenant, clothed with purity instead of gold! You are the ark in which is found the golden vessel containing the true manna, that is, the flesh in which divinity resides” (Homily of the Papyrus of Turin).
Gregory the Wonder Worker (c. 213–c. 270) wrote: “Let us chant the melody that has been taught us by the inspired harp of David, and say, ‘Arise, O Lord, into thy rest; thou, and the ark of thy sanctuary.’ For the Holy Virgin is in truth an ark, wrought with gold both within and without, that has received the whole treasury of the sanctuary” (Homily on the Annunciation to the Holy Virgin Mary).
>>>”If you listen to any of the creeds, which we recite in church every week, you have the faith crystallized. There is no mention of apostolic succession.
You do not recite the Nicene Creed then?
“FAITH
LOL, that’s no answer!”
Um, faith is always circular because it can’t be proven. All faith is the gift of God Himself. How can you not understand that? Ultimately, faith is all we have. He isn’t going to come down and engrave a personal stone for each of us. We must believe in what we have seen, not demand a sign.
I begin to understand why you need rituals and dogma. Why you reject the Word of God. You can’t simply believe it is His Word, protected and ordained by Him. I can’t prove the Word of God to you. You have to decide if it is true, without any personal proof.
FAITH, wasn’t intended as a ‘crushing response’ It was just a statement of my belief. Nor is it ‘just because’. It is because I decided to believe, whether I can prove it or not. Faith is the choice to believe. How do you get by your walk without faith?
My faith is in God, that he will protect His written word and give me understanding as He sees fit.
upon this ROCK (pointing to Himself)
pointing to himself? Is that actually in the verse in the Bible you have?
Hmmmmm......
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.