Replies

Thank you for posting this terrific thread, bkaycee. William Webster knows of what he speaks.

Therefore, the Protestant teaching of sola scriptura is not a heresy or a novel doctrine, but in reality it is a reaffirmation of the faith of the early church. It is both biblical and historical, yet the Roman Catholic Church continues to teach that oral tradition is a second source of divine revelation, equally as authoritative as Scripture and that this was the view held by the church Fathers. Such a claim, however, contradicts both Scripture and history. When the Fathers speak of a tradition handed down from the apostles independent of Scripture, they are referring to ecclesiastical customs and practices, never to doctrine. Tradition was always subordinate to Scripture as an authority, and the Word of God itself never teaches that tradition is inspired. The Scriptures give numerous warnings against tradition,9 and the Fathers rejected the teaching of an apostolic oral tradition independent of Scripture as a gnostic heresy. For the church Fathers apostolic tradition or teaching was embodied and preserved in Scripture. The teaching of the Fathers is this: What the apostles initially proclaimed and taught orally, they later committed to writing in the New Testament. Irenaeus succinctly states it in these words:
We have learned from none others the plan of our salvation, than from those through whom the gospel has come down to us, which they did at one time proclaim in public, and, at a later period, by the will of God, handed down to us in the Scriptures, to be the ground and pillar of our faith.

AMEN!

Speaking of tradition vs. scripture I can't help but to think of this when I see the rambling prayer threads.

Matthew 6:5-7 And when thou prayest, thou shalt not be as the hypocrites are: for they love to pray standing in the synagogues and in the corners of the streets, that they may be seen of men. Verily I say unto you, They have their reward. But thou, when thou prayest, enter into thy closet, and when thou hast shut thy door, pray to thy Father which is in secret; and thy Father which seeth in secret shall reward thee openly. But when ye pray, use not vain repetitions, as the heathen do: for they think that they shall be heard for their much speaking.

Essentially, God wants us to "talk" with Him not chant to Him some prepared monologue.

“When the Fathers speak of a tradition handed down from the apostles independent of Scripture, they are referring to ecclesiastical customs and practices, never to doctrine.”

Wow. No.

They are referring to Chalcedon, to Ephesus, to Nicaea, to Constantinople.

They are referring to the Trinity, which is doctrinal.

I’ll make the outrageous claim that no Protestant truly believes in Sola Scriptura. You just like to think you do.

For the Record Was That written After this and still in Context.

Looks Catholic To Me

IRENAEUS-"It is possible, then, for everyone in every church, who may wish to know the truth, to contemplate the tradition of the apostles which has been made known throughout the whole world. And we are in a position to enumerate those who were instituted bishops by the apostles and their successors to our own times—men who neither knew nor taught anything like these heretics rave about.

“But since it would be too long to enumerate in such a volume as this the successions of all the churches, we shall confound all those who, in whatever manner, whether through self-satisfaction or vainglory, or through blindness and wicked opinion, assemble other than where it is proper, by pointing out here the successions of the bishops of the greatest and most ancient church known to all, founded and organized at Rome by the two most glorious apostles, Peter and Paul, that church which has the tradition and the faith which comes down to us after having been announced to men by the apostles.

“With this church, because of its superior origin, all churches must agree—that is, all the faithful in the whole world—and it is in her that the faithful everywhere have maintained the apostolic tradition” (ibid., 3:3:1–2).

I think many of the arguments concerning tradition and Scripture overlook a simple fact: Not all traditions, even those not specifically discussed in Scripture are wrong.

As an example, consider the passover meal and the foodstuffs present. In the first a roasted lamb, bitter herbs and unfermented bread was the meal taken while standing up. Yet the passover meal in Christ's time was the bread and wine taken while reclining at a low table. (Lev. 12:8-11)
The use of wine in the meal had become a tradition but not one that contradicted Scripture.

So too the paying of the temple tax though not based upon a census. (Matt. 17:24-27)

The traditions of men that were laid down as commandments from God were wrong. (Mark chapter 7) or that involved outright violations of God's commandments. (1 Peter 1:18)

sola scripture? Jesus said the Jewish religious leaders had the Scriptures and searched them daily in the hopes of finding everlasting life. (John 5:39) Yet if they couldn't do so, why not? They lacked God's spirit and they weren’t seeking the truth. (John 4:23, 24)

As for an appeal to the writings of the so called “church fathers”, even while the Apostles lived there were apostate “church fathers” arising within the congregation. (1 Cor. 5:8) with false doctrines and practices. (Phil. 3:2)

Mutilation of the flesh? Sound familiar?

So while early writing of the “doctors of the church” may have value as to what they believed they are no guide for Christians today.