.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.
>> What really matters is that one follow’s Christ’s teachings
Where does one find these teachings?
>> He tells us to repent, believe, be baptised, eat of His body and Blood and endure to the end.
Among other things. Tell me — how do you know that? Did the Pope send you an email? :-) Or did you read about them “somewhere”?
I detect a pattern in 476, 477, and 478. You’re picking at isolated nits but ignoring the bulk, and key point, of my post #437.
Are you ever going to answer the question I posed to you in #435?
How can you say that with a straight face???
The JW's created their own bible...
Why didn't you also mention that the muzlims hold to 'sola scripture'???
Dunno -- do you?
Good post.
Exactly my point, s s leads to radically different concepts on the fundamentals of Christian faith. It has led to Unitarians, Jehovah’s Witnesses, Oneness Pentecostals, 9-gods Benny Hinn, etc. etc.
yes, in the Bible
What does Jesus say saves us?
| 13But he that shall endure unto the end, the same shall be saved. |
Jesus said it is not faith ALONE. We are saved by God's GRACE. Full-stop.
James 2:17 Even so faith, if it hath not works, is dead, being alone. -- it's never faith ALONE. Note that
no one is denying that one MUST have faith to be saved by the freely given grace of salvation, however, it is not faith ALONE. As shown above, Jesus Himself said that
He who believes and is baptized will be saved. (Mk 16:16)
[U]nless you repent you will all likewise perish. (Lk 13:3
[H]e who eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up at the last day. (Jn 6:54)
So, do listen to the words of Jesus who said it is faith+ repentance+baptism+the Eucharist+endurance, not any of these in isolation. Of course, these don't "save us" per se, since it is Christ's sacrifice on the Cross that grants us our salvation that we can accept or reject
The problem happens when one takes one section of what Jesus (WHO is the Word of God) says in isolation.
No. And that is not Church teaching either -- Church teaching is that To these other Christian Churches the Catholic Church is bound in many ways: through reverence for God's word in the Scriptures; through the fact of baptism; through other sacraments which they recognize." -- now, if you were a person who reject God's grace, I would say your salvation is at risk, otherwise that is between you and God
if you hold to the tenets in the Nicene creed, I hold you as a brother who holds to same basic fundamental beliefs as I do. If not, then as a fellow child of God who has errors.
But not only would I not say you're unsaved JUST for not being Catholic, i would argue with any Catholic who says so.
Well, this Catholic wouldn't be, neither should any Catholic who knows Church teachings which are "All men are called to this catholic unity of the People of God.... and to it, in different ways, belong or are ordered: the Catholic faithful, others who believe in Christ, and finally all mankind, called by God's grace to salvation."...
"The Church knows that she is joined in many ways to the baptized who are honored by the name of Christian, but do not profess the Catholic faith in its entirety or have not preserved unity or communion under the successor of Peter."
Those "who believe in Christ and have been properly baptized are put in a certain,.., communion with the Catholic Church."
while I oppose the dogma of Calvinism, I am not going to be such a fool as to comment on the salvation of any one particular Calvinist unless he's on par with Charles Manson (and a Charles Manson who was Catholic or Churches of Christ or whatever is going to heck, imho)
You are not Moslems like one on this board, as you fully accept Christ as Lord, God and Savior. On that common point we can debate or even argue, but not fight.
>> Exactly my point, s s leads to radically different concepts on the fundamentals of Christian faith.
Because Scripture can be (and has been) twisted by men to justify inappropriate paths does not by any means that relying on it solely is a doctrinal error.
Nor does the fact that Scripture has been misused prove any sort of “cause and effect”, as you suggest when you say “s s leads”. The Holy Scripture itself DID NOT “lead” men to err. They freely choose to err.
Did not Satan twist scripture when he tempted Jesus? And did not the Christ USE SCRIPTURE to refute him?
>> if you hold to the tenets in the Nicene creed, I hold you as a brother who holds to same basic fundamental beliefs as I do. If not, then as a fellow child of God who has errors.
Excellent. I am happy to hear you say that.
>> So, do listen to the words of Jesus who said it is faith+ repentance+baptism+the Eucharist+endurance, not any of these in isolation.
Yes — or as our Pastor puts it, “Saved by grace through faith for a purpose”. THat purpose being to be “doers” of God’s commandments, thus outworking our faith as James teaches. “Show me your faith apart from your works, and I will show you my faith BY my works.”
>> you fully accept Christ as Lord, God and Savior. On that common point we can debate or even argue, but not fight.
Good. I hope not to fight.
By the way, I find this discussion to be uplifting and challenging, thereby teaching me and strengthening my faith. I appreciate your thoughtful posts, and also those of Springfield Reformer. Actually, most of the posts on this thread are useful and thoughtful — but particularly you two.
Because Scripture can be (and has been) twisted by men to justify inappropriate paths does not by any means that relying on it solely is a doctrinal error. -- I disagree.
My point of view is that the hallmark of knowing what is the correct view is to note what our ancestors in spirit were taught. The basis of orthodoxy -- called prawosławny (or true words) is just that, that the Apostles were taught the right way to interpret inerrant scripture by Jesus Christ and this was handed down.
Theological matters are to be debated yes. We're humans and will debate on everything. But I cannot talk with some folk who would just call me damned for being a Catholic -- just as you can't talk to folks who say the same about you not being a Catholic. Such folks gain no understanding, forget about converts
exactly. With regard to God, there is no strict right to any merit on the part of man. Between God and us there is an immeasurable inequality, for we have received everything from him, our Creator.
Man's merit, moreover, itself is due to God, for his good actions proceed in Christ, from the predispositions and assistance given by the Holy Spirit....Since the initiative belongs to God in the order of grace, no one can merit the initial grace of forgiveness and justification
But all the merit can't provide salvation. That comes from the one-time act that we celebrate and participate in during the Divine Liturgy, with our High Priest - Jesus Christ leading.
No, the problem comes when you run all the scriptures together to justify your religion and then end up with contradictions in the scriptures...
Your religion is forced to ignore much scripture because much of it destroys the theology your religion has constructed for itself...
If you or your religion can not reconcile ALL of the NT scripture, you can't legitimately claim any of it...And your religion can not reconcile all of the scripture...
We Christians consider the Bible as scripture, not the Koran. Whatever you want to consider, that's your choice
We Christians consider the Bible as scripture, not the Koran. Whatever you want to consider, that's your choice
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.