Replies

yet the doctrine advocates believers not come to God through faith in Christ, in what He has provided in Scripture as the Word of God.

I'm sorry, I don't understand! Nie rozumiem, przkro mi!

Whenever the doctrines being advocated seek to remove a believer from fellowship with God through faith in Christ, then the doctrine is false.

True. And Church teachings (whether Orthodox, Oriental or Catholic) do not seek to do that. Neither do most mainstream Protestant groups.

Sticking to this thread's theme, why would sola scriptura stop that? I've seen many (not all of course) Protestants focus more on St Paul's epistles than on the Gospels (I know it's a generalization, but it seems that way to me).

Within The Church we do see our aim as being to get closer in fellowship with God through faith in Christ. And Church doctrine merely enunciates that desire.

I've seen many (not all of course) Protestants focus more on St Paul's epistles than on the Gospels (I know it's a generalization, but it seems that way to me).

As a Protestant and Presbyterian, I would generally agree with that statement. In my experience, it is more true of Presbyterians than any other Protestant group. Jesus had this troubling habit of saying things that don't fit well into our systematic theologies.

I think that we all sometimes need to step back and examine ourselves. While Reformed Christians rightfully IMO criticize the Roman Catholic tendency to over-rely on tradition, they need to recognize that their own confessions in many ways have become basically the same thing, man-made traditions.

In reformed, confessional circles, a new insult has arisen. "Biblicist" is applied to someone who relies solely on a Bible text without support from a confession. I wear the insult as a badge of honor, BTW. I don't know how the people who consider this an insult and elevate confessions to such a level can also claim Solo Scriptura but they do.