-— WHAT SOLA SCRIPTURA IS
1. The doctrine of sola scriptura, simply stated, is that the Scriptures alone are sufficient to function as the regula fidei, the infallible rule of faith for the Church-—
Where’s that in the Bible? Or 2b and 3b? Or 4b?
“If he won’t listen to the church, treat him as a pagan or tax collector.” —Jesus
If Luther’s doctrine is true, how could the Scriptures ever come together to begin with, when the Church preceded the canon of Scripture, and even the writing of some books? By what authority could the Church say, “this new book of Revelation is Scripture”? For this theory to be coherent, the Bible would have to have canonized itself.
If the Church can err, then the canon can be erroneous. As R.C. Sproul famously said, “the Bible is a fallible collection of infallible books.”
By what authority did Luther remove several books from the accepted canon of Scripture? Luther violated his own principle of the Bible as the ultimate authority.
He acted from a position of Scriptural superiority.
“Where’s that in the Bible? Or 2b and 3b? Or 4b?”
I see the issue now. You appear to be unfamiliar with the Scripture’s claims for itself.
Since it is late, I suggest you read the complete link I referenced to familiarize yourself with the Scriptures and the history.
Your other points are fallacies of logic.
You are assuming the "church" is who determined what books were Divinely-inspired? Did the Jewish magesterium presume to dictate to God which of His prophets they would heed and whether or not their writings would be authoritative? No, the church received the writings from the Apostles and their disciples as they were given to them because they recognized their authority and the presence of God in those letters. Their words had power. Paul said if someone did not obey what he wrote to them they should be noted and corrected. The Christians had ALREADY accepted the Old Testament writings as from God because most of them WERE Jews and raised to see them that way. The Gentiles were also taught to respect and believe the Scriptures and they confirmed the promise of Christ. Do you actually think any local church could tell God what they would or would not accept from Him?
If the Church can err, then the canon can be erroneous. As R.C. Sproul famously said, “the Bible is a fallible collection of infallible books.”
Sproul doesn't speak for anyone but himself, but remember he is talking about the "canon" and not each of the books that made up that collection. Those books are and remain the word of God and holy men of God spoke as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit. What fool would presume to tell God what He gave them was rejected? Those who actually did that were seen as heretics from the start. The canon IS a collection of the inspired books (scrolls, actually) called "The Holy Bible". But those books were inspired before that collection was placed together as one Bible. This could be the meaning behind Sproul's comment. And, yes, the "Catholic" church has erred many times. Case in point... including the Apocrypha as part of the canon.
By what authority did Luther remove several books from the accepted canon of Scripture? Luther violated his own principle of the Bible as the ultimate authority. He acted from a position of Scriptural superiority.
Why do you persist in making that false statement? You really SHOULD know by now that Luther did not remove ANY books from his German translation of the Bible. The Apocryphal books were in an "intertestamental" section in the same way Jerome and others did before him. The canon the Roman Catholic church eventually got around to formalizing in the SIXTEENTH century at Trent placed them along side the inspired books and concluded, falsely, that they were ALSO Divinely-inspired. The only way that Scripture retains its OWN superiority is by esteeming ALL the books as from God - and the Apocryphal books NEVER claimed to be that. The Roman Catholic church, as all other Christian churches, is to be submissive to the word of God, NOT the other way around.
I suspect that by including the painfully obvious errant human-originated writings - NOT God-breathed by any stretch of the imagination - into their canon, the Roman Catholic church asserted she was in authority over God's word. And, by that, she presumed the power to declare whatever she decided was doctrine/dogma to be believed by ALL Christendom. By casting doubt upon the veracity of Scripture, she pronounced herself ABOVE Scripture and the sole interpreter of what it does or doesn't say including NOT basing doctrines on Scriptural warrant. That attitude was the impetus of the Reformation and, as you can see, has NEVER been resolved.
There you go again for at LEAST the third time in this thread.
You are one cherry pickin' dude!