It is true that the Scriptures are materially sufficient to equip believers in the faith; however, would you equip a young soldier with a uniform and rifle and send him out into battle without training him first?
Consider: Lutherans and Calvinists believe in unconditional election as regards predestination. However, Lutherans do not believe in a predestination to Hell, while Calvinists do (aka double predestination). Both denominations subscribe to Sola Scriptura and Sola Fide. Which of the two is correct?
Or what of the denominations influenced by Arminianism, such as Methodism? Arminianism holds to conditional election, contrasting with Calvinism in particular. Who is correct?
Or consider baptismal regeneration, which is held by Lutherans. Evangelicals, Baptists, and Fundamentalists (among others) disagree that water baptism is necessary for salvation. All subscribe to Sola Scriptura and Sola Fide. Who is correct?
Or what of salvation in general? Lutherans and Anglicans believe that salvation can be lost by a baptized Christian, that they may fall away. Calvinists, Presbyterians, Baptists, and Evangelicals would disagree. Who is correct?
These are not minor quibbles, for they are issues of tremendous significance on how a Christian is to live!
If all these denominations claim Sola Scriptura and Sola Fide, yet arrive at wildly different conclusions, it logically means that some are interpreting Scripture incorrectly.
How do you tell which interpretation is correct?
1140 AD The Doctrine of Seven Sacraments in Catholicism declared
1184 AD The Inquisition becomes official Catholic policy
1190 AD The sale of Indulgences instituted to pay for the Vatican building program
1220 AD Adoration of the wafer adopted
1545 AD 'Tradition' given equal authority with Scripture
1966 AD JPII dismisses the idea that one can only obtain forgiveness directly from God
Who to turn to for truth??? Ah, that magicsteeringthem can do it! Look at some of the drek they have declared. Whatta buynch!
And lest we forget, 1076 AD The Doctrine of Papal Infallibility proclaimed, then 1229 AD the catholic Church forbids the Bible to laymen. Wycliffe and Hus must have liked that one!
No, it means they have made the same mistake Catholicism makes and that is going beyond what the Bible teaches and winging it. Sola Scrptura is not the problem. Man made denominations trying to brand and market themselves is the problem.
If all these denominations claim Sola Scriptura and Sola Fide, yet arrive at wildly different conclusions, it logically means that some are interpreting Scripture incorrectly.
How do you tell which interpretation is correct?
They're not much different than the differences which exist between the Roman Church and the EO.
So it's your opinion that the differences between different Prot denominations is *significant*. That's nice.
Claiming that they are significant and then using it as a club to bludgeon sola Scriptura with is not real solid ground to stand on. ESPECIALLY in light of the differences between the EO and Roman Catholicism.
Catholics on this board have told us that outside of what the church has interpreted there is wide leeway in how Scripture is interpreted.
Why is it OK for Catholics but not Protestants?
And where in Scripture is lockstep adherence to a certain doctrinal position required for salvation?
Have you ever read Romans 14? GOD allows for leeway in "disputable matters". Far more than Catholics do for Prots.
Catholics lay requirements on Prots that God never did.
What's with that?
The answer I gave satisfies the initial phase of regeneration, which is what that passage was about. In it, Philip departed, leaving the newborn babe in Christ with the Scriptures then available, with the indwelling Holy Ghost, and with the substance of Philip's inspired teaching of the oral precepts of the New Covenant as his path to maturity.
Going on, Jesus' Upper Room discourse tells us this:
"Judas saith unto him, not Iscariot, Lord, how is it that thou wilt manifest thyself unto us,
and not unto the world?
Jesus answered and said unto him, If a man love me, he will keep my words: and my
Father will love him, and we will come unto him, and make our abode with him.
He that loveth me not keepeth not my sayings: and the word which ye hear is not mine,
but the Father's which sent me.
These things have I spoken unto you, being yet present with you.
But the Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, he
shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have
said unto you" (Jn. 14:22-26 AV; cf Deut. 8:3, Mt. 4:4, Lk. 4:4)
The Holy Ghost has always taught through the verbally inspired, inerrant, plenary, and faithfully preserved written record of The God's spoken words, summed up as The Truth.
Again, Jesus emphasized to His disciple-apostles:
"But when the Comforter is come, whom I will send unto you from the Father, even the
Spirit of truth, which proceedeth from the Father, he shall testify of me:
And ye also shall bear witness, because ye have been with me from the beginning" (Jn. 15:26,27 AV).
And again:
"I have yet many things to say unto you, but ye cannot bear them now.
Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth: for he shall
not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak: and he will shew
you things to come.
He shall glorify me: for he shall receive of mine, and shall shew it unto you.
All things that the Father hath are mine: therefore said I, that he shall take of mine, and
shall shew it unto you" (Jn 16:12-15 AV).
These eleven apostles would receive and transmit to their personally supervised disciple-amanuenses the oral precepts given to them by their Master, for the sake of posterity, in their own tongue. As to sanctification, the growing and maturing of the new-born spiritual babe is also mentioned in His High Priestly prayer:
"They are not of the world, even as I am not of the world.
Sanctify them through thy truth: thy word is truth.
As thou hast sent me into the world, even so have I also sent them into the world.
And for their sakes I sanctify myself, that they also might be sanctified through the truth.*
Neither pray I for these alone, but for them also which shall believe on me through their word;
That they all may be one; as thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee, that they also may be
one in us: that the world may believe that thou hast sent me" (Jn. 17:16-21 AV; * = should be capitalized).
In the commission to recruit, induct, and instruct replicates of themselves, His imperative to them was that they shoud be:
"Teaching them** to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am
with you alway, even unto the end of the world" (Mt. 28:20 AV; ** = their disciples). In this, the sense of "observe" means not only to merely obey whatsoever Jesus had commanded them, but the verb "tereo" in the present tense infinitive means "to be persistently keeping watchful security against change or loss in any way" whatsoever, neglecting nothing, of all things pertaining to Jesus' commands to them.
The Beloved John rehearsed this in his letter to his disciples:
"These things have I written unto you concerning them that seduce you.
But the anointing which ye have received of him abideth in you, and ye need not that
any man teach you: but as the same anointing teacheth you of all things, and is truth,
and is no lie, and even as it hath taught you, ye shall abide in him" (1 Jn. 2:26-27 AV).
"Whosoever believeth that Jesus is the Christ is born of God: and every one that loveth
him that begat loveth him also that is begotten of him.
By this we know that we love the children of God, when we love God, and keep his
commandments.
For this is the love of God, that we keep his commandments: and his commandments
are not grievous.
For whatsoever is born of God overcometh the world: and this is the victory that
overcometh the world, even our faith" (1 Jn 5:1-4 AV).
=========
My FRiend, I know that any translation from the apographs of the NT books is not itself inspired, but it need not be grossly fallible. However, my feeling is that much of the differences between opinions on the content of the autographs arises from attempts to carry into the mind of the Gentile what existed in the mind of the first century Greek-speaker who came under the discipline of the prototype Jerusalem church model, and their practice is set forth in Acts 2: "Then they that gladly received his word were baptized: and the same day there
were added unto them about three thousand souls.
And they continued stedfastly in the apostles' doctrine and fellowship, and in
breaking of bread, and in prayers.
And fear came upon every soul: and many wonders and signs were done by the apostles.
And all that believed were together, and had all things common;
And sold their possessions and goods, and parted them to all men, as every
man had need" (Act 2:41-45 AV).
These new Christians had the excluisive treat of being discipled by the only men and women, including the mother of the Savior, who are the characters appearing in the pages of the New Testament, the only valid eye-witness information we have of The Faith which we now believe in, and the Master we have the privilege of serving.
Probably the best testimony to the validity of Sola Scriptura is the vignettte of the Risen Christ describing the prophecies of His mission from the pages od Scripture.
"Then he said unto them, O fools, and slow of heart to believe all that the prophets have spoken:
Ought not Christ to have suffered these things, and to enter into his glory?
And beginning at Moses and all the prophets, he expounded unto them in all the
scriptures the things concerning himself" (Lk. 24:25-27 Av).
Do you disagree with this viewpoint?
This approach to imparting Bible truths has never disappointed me as a student or as an instructor-servant of the Lord. Let me commend that method to you.