Is Sola Scriptura biblical? {Open)

www.cronos.com ^ | 31-May-2010 | Self Topic

[Cronos]

1. Where does the Bible claim sola scriptura?

2. 2 Timothy 3:16-17 says "All Scripture is given by inspiration of God and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteous- ness; That the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works." --> it doesn't say that Scriptura is sufficient, just that it is profitable i.e. helpful. the entire verse from 14 to 17 says "But continue thou in the things which thou hast learned and hast been assured of, knowing of whom thou hast learned them; and that from a child thou hast known the holy scriptures, which are able to make thee wise unto salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus. All Scripture is given by inspiration of God (Greek: theopneustos = "God-breathed"), and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: That the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works"
3. Where else do we have the term "sola scriptura" in the Bible?

4. Matthew 15 - Jesus condemns corrupt tradition, not all tradition. At no point is the basic notion of traidition condemned

5. 2 Thessalonians 2:15 "So then, brehtern, stand firm and hold to the traditions which you were taught by us, either by word of mouth or by letter"

6. 1 Timothy 3:14-15

14Although I hope to come to you soon, I am writing you these instructions so that, 15if I am delayed, you will know how people ought to conduct themselves in God's household, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and foundation of the truth.

note that the Pillar and Foundation of the Truth is The Church of the Living God

7. Nowhere does Scripture reduce God's word down to Scripture ALONE. Instead the Bible tells us in many places that God's authoritative Word is found in The Church: in Tradition (2 Th 2:15, 3:6) and in the Church teaching (1 Pet 1:25, 2 Pet 1:20-21, Mt 18:17). This supports the Church principle of sola verbum Dei, 'the Word of God alone'.

8. The New Testament was compiled at the Council of Hippo in 393 and the Council of Carthage in 397, both of which sent off their judgements to Rome for the Pope's approval.

9. Yet, the people HAD the Canon, the Word of God before the scriptures were compiled, and even before some were written

10. Books that were revered in the 1st and 2nd centuries were left out of canon. Book slike the Epistle of Barnabas, the Shepherd of Hermas and the Acts of Paul. Why?

11. There were disputes over 2 Peter, Jude and Revelation, yet they are in Scripture. Whose decision was trustworthy and final, if the Church doesn't teach with infallible authority?

12. How are Protestants sure that the 27 books of the New Testaments are themselves the infallible Word of God if fallible Church councils and Patriarchs are the ones who made up or approved the list (leaving out the Acts of Paul, yet leaving in Jude and Revelation)?

13. Or do Protestants have a fallible collection of infallible documents? And how do they know that Jude is infallible? And how do they know that the Epistle of Barnabus is not?

14. "And his gifts were that some should be apostles, some prophets, some evangelists, some pastors and teachers, to equip the saints for the work of ministry, for building up the body of Christ, until we all attain to the unity of the faith and of the knowledge of the Son of God, to mature manhood, to the measure of the stature of the fullness of Christ; so that we may no longer be children, tossed to and fro and carried about with every wind of doctrine, by the cunning of men, by their craftiness in deceitful wiles. Rather, speaking the truth in love, we are to grow up in every way into him who is the head, into Christ" (Eph. 4:11–15).

[OneWingedShark]

>Cronos: Q: Why would anyone except a Pythagorean pray to angles?
>
>OQS: A: Because they were deceived by a false doctrine.
>
>you mean these were not the right angles? There was no congruence?

None whatsoever... they were Left-angles, which at the day of Judgment will be damned to everlasting hell (Geometry class), for they have SIN’ed and SIN’ed greatly.

COS there is only one way to be correct... use COS.

[Cronos]

1. The three persons are called God. Good. But where is the description of the Trinity as ONE God, three hypostases? Are these 3 separate persons in your opinion or just facets/views of the same person? Where do they have the same essence, the same homousis?

2. Mormon doctrine, like all other 4th generation PRotestant doctrine (Christian Scientists, JWs etc) is false.

[My hearts in London - Everett]

"Sorry, the Army-culture I was in for the last decade is coming through; I’ll try to rectify the problem."

OWS, please don't make excuses. It doesn't become you as a Christian. I am in your corner in this theological discussion, but you've been on FR long enough to know better than to use such language and especially on a thread such as this.

[Leoni]

Leoni, you are on short precipice with this “line of Latin catholic intellectual reasoning”...beware you don’t step off!

You are already "stepped off".You are riding on YOPIOS, your take, what you want to hear. Your religion is a mirror of yourself. You are your own pope and judge.

I am riding on the shoulders of one continuous intelligent institution that has been thinking about thinking for two thousand years. Its experience naturally covers nearly all experiences; and especially nearly all errors. The result is a map in which all the blind alleys and bad roads are clearly marked, all the ways that have been shown to be worthless by the best of all evidence: the evidence of those who have gone down them.”

[Leoni]

Leoni, you are on short precipice with this “line of Latin catholic intellectual reasoning”...beware you don’t step off!

You are already "stepped off".You are riding on YOPIOS, your take, what you want to hear. Your religion is a mirror of yourself. You are your own pope and judge.

I am riding on the shoulders of one continuous intelligent institution that has been thinking about thinking for two thousand years. Its experience naturally covers nearly all experiences; and especially nearly all errors. The result is a map in which all the blind alleys and bad roads are clearly marked, all the ways that have been shown to be worthless by the best of all evidence: the evidence of those who have gone down them.”

[Cronos]

Good, you agree with that. The WORD of God is not limited by a book. When THE WORD came, as in John 1:1, it was not and never marked as limited to the WRITTEN Word.

God is not an either/or but and. He is not either Scripture or Holy Tradition but Scripture AND Holy Tradition.

[Cronos]

You don’t have to “agree” on but have to obey Catholic doctrine. If you don’t want to “agree”, you have a nice choice “leave and become a Protestant” or stay and obey.

[Leoni]

done!

[Cronos]

Praying to Angles? Even Metatron?

[Cronos]

The two posts are not linked — “I pray to you to...” is a perfectly correct if antiquated English phrase that came be used in place of “I request you to...”. Prayer does not necessarily have to be synonymous with worship even in the gloriously messy English language. and even less so in more specific languages like Latin and GReek

[Cronos]

OWS: "Baptists aren’t protestants... just to be technical."

Ok. If I may ask please -- are you Baptist to be able to state that?

[bkaycee]

Actually, the Jerusalem Church WAS the first Church! All others are branches.

[Leoni]

Strawman!

I didn't say that praying to God is talking to yourself. I said "Confessing your sins direct to God is no different than confessing to yourself". Two totally different doctrines.

[Admin Moderator]

If someone asks to be removed from a ping list, please do so promptly. Thanks.

[papertyger]

If prayer were completely discrete from worship then I would ask that you explain “Daniel and The Lion’s Den” & “The Fiery Furnace” wherein Daniel is given a capital punishment for praying to some God or man who was not the king AND the capital punishment imposed on Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego {SP? I’m typing from memory here} for failure to worship the King’s image.

I see nothing here that needs explaining. There is nothing in your reference more compelling than "franks and beans" being often served together.

[OneWingedShark]

Who was making an excuse?
I admitted fault (’rectify the problem’).
That I was in the Army for a decade was only explanation.

[Cronos]

Old testament is very clear about not praying or worshipping to idols or any lesser thing other than to God. Even God’s angels would tell men not to worship them.

Yup. No WORSHIPPING. And in THe CHurch we do not worship statues. We can hold what they represent in honor, yes, but those statues do not hold or "contain" God in the way that Hindu or Asherah statues hold their God.

Even Protestants put up cribs for Christmas. Do they worship those statues? NO. But they treat those images with respect because of what they represent. Do you WORSHIP your Bible when you kneel before it at night to pray? NO. You use it as a tool to talk to God, you use it as a "focuser" to focus on God.

Interestingly, the OT does not forbid the making of images (the serpent on the pole, the decoration of the temple, the angels on the Ark etc.) and neither does The Church,

[Cronos]

Of course it's the answer. YOU jumped on this thread and when you get answers that show that the SOLA opinion is wrong, you say “Please stop sending me posts. I have no desire to speak with such a person as you.” --> very strange.

Perhaps one should say "Get behind me Satan" and "I will dust the dust off my shoes"...

[papertyger]

What law are you referring to?

[Cronos]

I would suggest you mind your language. that is NOT allowed on FR. Please keep it civil