[Dr. Eckleburg]

IS SOLA SCRIPTURA A PROTESTANT CONCOCTION/
A Biblical Defense of Sola Scriptura
by Dr. Greg Bahnsen

[Dr. Eckleburg]

Meant to ping you, too, to 807.

[annalex]

From your link:

My challenges to my Roman Catholic friends: give me a convincing example of some doctrinal or ethical principle which make the following five criteria. Give me an example of some doctrinal or ethical principle that is (1) not already in Scripture; (2) not contrary to Scripture; (3) based upon what is properly identified as tradition (that’s what all these introductory questions were about); (4) is necessary in some sense to the Christian life or Church (necessary); and (5) could not have been revealed during the days of the Apostles.

If the Roman Catholic Church intends to be taken seriously when it tells us that tradition supplements Scripture, then it should be able to offer an example of something that is not in the Bible, that’s not contrary to the Bible, it’s part of what’s properly considered tradition, is necessary for the Church but could not be revealed in the days of the Apostles. We have to understand why it couldn’t have been revealed in the days of the Apostles! That’s the first problem that I would give to my Roman Catholic friends. Can you even give me a convincing illustration of something that matches all these criteria?

Any teaching on the moral dilemmae of out modern time would do, for example, the Catholic Church's teaching on abortion, cloning, artificial insemination, or euthanasia; or evolution and other scientific claims.

[Uncle Chip]

From the article, regarding holy tradition:

Roman Catholics present these very same arguments to argue in favor of Roman tradition, papal tradition! And then you turn around and find out that Eastern Orthodox polemicists use exactly the same arguments in favor of what they call their ‘Holy Tradition’ which is contrary to papal tradition. And so here you have two august Christian bodies (professedly Christian bodies) claiming the authority of tradition, and yet their authorities conflict with each other; their traditions conflict with each other. And yet, they laugh at Protestants for their ‘paper’ pope.

Something that I never thought about and most Catholics either. Every Church has its traditions, some more sacred than others, but Protestants don't elevate their traditions to the level of Scripture, or atleast they shouldn't. Some traditions conflict with others. Some patriarchs disagree with others. The early writings of some patriarchs disagree with their later writings. And where many of these patriarchs are now, I'm sure that they might wish that they could take back some of the things that they wrote. It is definitely not so with the writers of the Scriptures.

[Uncle Chip]

The office of Apostle is not a continuing office in the Church! To be an Apostle it was required to be a witness of the resurrected Christ as we see in Acts 1:22 — also reflected in Paul’s defense of his Apostolic credentials in I Corinthians 9:1. Moreover, it was required that you be personally commissioned by the Lord Himself which is what Paul claims in Galatians 1:1, that He is an Apostle not by the Word of men but by revelation of Jesus Christ! The Apostles were those who were witnesses of the resurrected Christ and personally commissioned by Him. And thus the Apostolic office was restricted to the first generation of the Church. Paul considered Himself “the least” (perhaps translated “the last”) of the Apostles in I Corinthians 15. And Paul’s personal successor Timothy is never given that title in the New Testament. And so in the very nature of the case, Apostolic revelation did not extend beyond the Apostolic generation. It never extended beyond the foundational days of the Church! Ephesians 2:20 says the Church is founded upon the Apostles and Prophets, Christ being the chief cornerstone. And beyond the foundational days of the Church, the foundation-laying days of the Church, there is no Apostolic revelation. And that’s why when you look at Jude (the 3rd verse) you see the author in his own day — when Apostolic instruction was still current by the way — Jude in his own day could speak of “the faith” as “once for all delivered unto the saints.” The ‘faith’ here is the teaching content of the Christian faith! It is that dogma (if you will), that truth given by the Apostles through the Revelation of the Father, Son, and Spirit. Jude says “the faith” has “once for all” been “delivered unto the saints.”

This is an excellent point. The Apostles had Jesus's Power of Attorney, so to speak, and a Power of Attorney cannot pe passed on by one who has been granted it. And neither can an Apostle.

[adiaireton8]

According to the fathers, one of the signs of heresy is novelty, something that wasn't with us from the beginning. Sola scriptura was unheard of for 1500 years of Church History. That is one of the reasons why sola scriptura is a heresy. It is a modern invention.

-A8

[bornacatholic]

Ezechiel 34...

I will feed my sheep: and I will cause them to lie down, saith the Lord God.

Then, later on in the same chapter, God says, ...

AND I WILL SET UP ONE SHEPHERD OVER THEM, and he shall feed them, even my servant David: he shall feed them, and he shall be their shepherd.

"Could one be a practicing and faithful Jew if one repudiated the authority established by God? (David and his sucessors)

In the New Testament, Jesus repeats the same pattern...

John 10 I am the good shepherd.

Then, in John 21, Jesus, following His Resurrection, which followed His building His Church upon Peter, the Rock, Jesus taeches us He is making Peter the Shepherd. And ONLY Peter. Jesus says these words only to Peter.

When therefore they had dined, Jesus saith to Simon Peter: Simon son of John, lovest thou me more than these? He saith to him: Yea, Lord, thou knowest that I love thee. He saith to him: Feed my lambs. He saith to him again: Simon, son of John, lovest thou me? He saith to him: Yea, Lord, thou knowest that I love thee. He saith to him: Feed my lambs. He said to him the third time: Simon, son of John, lovest thou me? Peter was grieved, because he had said to him the third time: Lovest thou me? And he said to him: Lord, thou knowest all things: thou knowest that I love thee. He said to him: Feed my sheep.

*Can one be a practicing faithful Christian if one respudiates the authority established by Jesus? (Peter and his sucessors)

The Old Testament is fulfilled in the new and the archtypes present in the OT are revealed in full in the New Testament. The pattern is clear for those with eyes to see

[wmfights]

I aways love you links, thanks.

I pulled out of this thread awhile ago. When posters start claiming "offense" and "ad hominen" attacks it's clear nothing is going to be discussed and the real agenda is to try and get someone banned.