Book Review: 100 Biblical Arguments Against Sola Scriptura

Vivificat - from Contemplation to Action ^ | July 3, 2012 | TDJ

[Teófilo]

Typos. Blunders. Mine.

[Teófilo]

PING!

[muawiyah]

There is a sort of logical error in using Bible scripture to argue sola scriptura is not Biblical.

Anyone catch that?

I mean, really, why would anyone believe the argument!

I"m returning to the counting of the angels on the head of this pin ~ should keep me occupied for a good long while too.

[driftdiver]

balderdash

[beethovenfan]

What about the “zombie-dogma” that Peter was the first pope?

[verga]

Just in case you decide to come over to the right side.
BTW I still have that CD from Tim Staples about how Jimmy Swaggert made him Catholic

[cuban leaf]

I dunno. Sola Scriptura sounds foreign.

[driftdiver]

So who gets to determine which parts of the Bible aren’t correct or sufficient?

Does that change on Monday vs Friday night?

[SVTCobra03]

What about the “zombie-dogma” that Peter was the first pope?

Not only that, but the RCC cult was founded on a lie. If you read the original Greek and Hebrew you will see that Jesus did not say He would found His Church on Peter. What He said was that He would found His Church on Peter's confession that Jesus was the Son of God. Why would Jesus found His Church on a sinner?

[cuban leaf]

Well, if we abandon it, it means we need to return to stoning false prophets.

[FortWorthPatriot]

"Why would Jesus found His Church on a sinner?"

An excellent point.

[cuban leaf]

—What about the “zombie-dogma” that Peter was the first pope?—

Or that Mary, like Jesus, was without sin? Or that Mary NEVER had sex with Joseph?

[refreshed]

You can’t use the authority of the Bible to disprove the Bible’s authority. Definitely a logical failure.

[Mr. K]

I can’t remember-

Which commandment was it again that said “Thou shalt create a huge bureacracy, and fill it with paperwork and rules, that thou shalt feverishly argue upon, in my name.”

[Teófilo]

Don’t believe me? Read the book. :-)

[throwback]

LOL! Too obvious I guess.

[MNDude]

Who needs the Bible when I can get “God told me...” from those like Pat Robertson.

[driftdiver]

I was referring to the book, not you. Don’t need to read the book.

[xzins]

Teofilo, haven’t heard from you in ages. How’s it going, FRiend?

Good point up above. Why use biblical arguments to counter the doctrine of “Settle theological debates with Scripture (Sola Scriptura)”?

I read it as “Use the words of Prophets/Apostles to settle theological disputes”.

[wafflehouse]

Well, if we abandon it, it means we need to return to stoning false prophets.

im not seeing the down side here. there would be a lot less false prophets. on the other hand, legitimate prophets generally met with unpleasant ends also