I will raise you to be 5 predominate if convenient canards, or largely straw men used by RC apologists is that sola scriptura SS meant and means that all that that can be known/revealed is in the canonized scriptures,
and only what is explicitly taught can be doctrine,
and all that is needed for growth unto perfection is formally provided in Scripture,
and that Scripture is all that is to be used in understanding God's will, thus it was and is to be read by itself, without reference to historical ecclesiastical doctrines or writings that can make it more comprehensible .
And that salvation does not require good works in imitation of Christ, but solely an intellectual faith in Christ.
SS does not mean that all that can be known from God is in Scripture, as it testifies otherwise, (Jn. 21:25; 2Cor. 12:4; Rv. 10:4) and natural revelation as manifesting God's power, wisdom, grace and judgment. Ps. 19:1-6; Rm. 1:19-20; 2:14) But that Scripture alone is the infallible standard for Truth as the assured, established Word of God, providing what is needed for salvation and growth toward perfection. It formally provides what is needed for conversion and basic growth, so that normally a soul can for example, by God's grace, read a text such as Acts 10:36-43,47 and believe and be born again, justified by faith, (Acts 15:7-9) by baptized, and by other writings begin to grow in grace.
And that materially Scripture provides for such things as reason, teachers, magisterial authority, etc., including writings of God being recognized and established as being so, and thus by extension, for a canon.
“all things in Scripture are not alike plain in themselves, nor alike clear unto all, what is necessary is either expressly set down in Scripture, or by good and necessary consequence may be deduced from Scripture, and Scripture is such that “not only the learned, but the unlearned, in a due use of the ordinary means, may attain unto a sufficient understanding of them.”
Cp. VI: Nevertheless, we acknowledge the inward illumination of the Spirit of God to be necessary for the saving understanding of such things as are revealed in the Word: and that there are some circumstances concerning the worship of God, and government of the Church, common to human actions and societies, which are to be ordered by the light of nature , and Christian prudence, according to the general rules of the Word, which are always to be observed.
III. It belongs to synods and councils, ministerially to determine controversies of faith, and cases of conscience; to set down rules and directions for the better ordering of the public worship of God, and government of his Church; to receive complaints in cases of maladministration, and authoritatively to determine the same; which decrees and determinations, if consonant to the Word of God, are to be received with reverence and submission; not only for their agreement with the Word, but also for the power whereby they are made, as being an ordinance of God appointed thereunto in His Word. — http://www.spurgeon.org/~phil/creeds/wcf.htm
Thus while even nature can provide light, it is judged by Scripture as the infallible source, but the Truths of which by "good and necessary consequence may be deduced from Scripture," and the due use of the ordinary means [in which the church is a part]. .
And thus it provides for study helps, which evangelicals have much in via classic and largely complementary commentaries besides contemporary teachers. And rather than being hopeless divided, due to a common assent to core Truths, they historically contended against those who denied core salvific truths, both against cults and Catholic distortions.
In addition, as regards ignoring doctrines and historical church writings, while one may, yet Reformers did not. As Alister McGrath's [Irish theologian, pastor, intellectual historian and Christian apologist, currently Professor of Theology, Ministry, and Education at Kings College London] states in The Genesis of Doctrine: A Study in the Foundation of Doctrinal Criticism,
Although it is often suggested that the reformers had no place for tradition in their theological deliberations, this judgment is clearly incorrect. While the notion of tradition as an extra-scriptural source of revelation is excluded, the classic concept of tradition as a particular way of reading and interpreting scripture is retained. Scripture, tradition and the kerygma are regarded as essentially coinherent, and as being transmitted, propagated and safeguarded by the community of faith. There is thus a strongly communal dimension to the magisterial reformers' understanding of the interpretation of scripture, which is to be interpreted and proclaimed within an ecclesiological matrix. It must be stressed that the suggestion that the Reformation represented the triumph of individualism and the total rejection of tradition is a deliberate fiction propagated by the image-makers of the Enlightenment. — Quoted by James R. Payton in, “Getting the Reformation Wrong: Correcting Some Misunderstandings; http://beggarsallreformation.blogspot.com/2010/10/deliberate-fiction.html”
In fact, it was because of this that no less a neo-ultramontanist as Manning affirmed that history is only what Rome says it is:
It was the charge of the Reformers that the Catholic doctrines were not primitive, and their pretension was to revert to antiquity. But the appeal to antiquity is both a treason and a heresy. It is a treason because it rejects the Divine voice of the Church at this hour, and a heresy because it denies that voice to be Divine....I may say in strict truth that the Church has no antiquity. It rests upon its own supernatural and perpetual consciousness. Its past is present with it, for both are one to a mind which is immutable. Primitive and modern are predicates, not of truth, but of ourselves....The only Divine evidence to us of what was primitive is the witness and voice of the Church at this hour. — Most Rev. Dr. Henry Edward Cardinal Manning, Lord Archbishop of Westminster, “The Temporal Mission of the Holy Ghost: Or Reason and Revelation,” (New York: J.P. Kenedy & Sons, originally written 1865, reprinted with no date), pp. 227-228 .
Thus SS does not hold that all that can be known/revealed is in the canonized scriptures, and only what is explicitly taught can be doctrine, and all that is needed for growth unto perfection is formally provided in Scripture, and that Scripture is all that is to be used in understanding God's will, that thus it was and is to be read by itself, without reference to historical doctrines or writings that can make it more comprehensible (elucidate it).
Finally, as for that salvation does not require good works in imitation of Christ, but solely an intellectual faith in Christ, this is false, and we have dealt with this before, for as while sola fide holds that it is precisely (God-given) repentant (God-granted) faith alone that appropriates justification before God for the God-motivated soul, "purifying the heart by faith," (Acts 15:7-9) not any system of actual merit, yet the kind of faith that justifies is not an intellectual faith, which even demons have, but is a faith that effects the "obedience of faith," (Rm. 16:26; Acts 26:20) "faith which worketh by love," (Gal. 5:6) given opportunity, confessing the Lord Jesus in word and deed, baptism being the first formal expression of that, manifesting "things which accompany salvation." (Heb. 6:9)
And as baptism expresses faith, it can be the occasion of conversion by faith, but neither it nor any works are the basis for it, and therein lies the difference. Salvation is promised and given to those who manifest the obedience of faith, (Jn. 10:27,28; Heb. 5:9) because this testifies to faith, which God rewards, but not because the works earn one eternal life, as what they earn is damnation. (Rm. 6:23)
And in contrast to the RC straw man that has Reformers preaching both a regeneration that leaves the redeemed simply whitewashed, with not interior change, and justified by a mere head vs. heart faith, that does not need to be a faith that effects obedience, Reformers clearly taught otherwise:
In those therefore in whom we cannot realize good works, we can immediately say and conclude: they heard of faith, but it did not sink into good soil. For if you continue in pride and lewdness, in greed and anger, and yet talk much of faith, St. Paul will come and say, 1 Cor. 4:20, look here my dear Sir, "the kingdom of God is not in word but in power." It requires life and action, and is not brought about by mere talk.” [Sermons of Martin Luther 2.2:341-342]
This is what I have often said, if faith be true, it will break forth and bear fruit. If the tree is green and good, it will not cease to blossom forth in leaves and fruit. It does this by nature.” [Sermons of Martin Luther 2.2:340-341]
“This is why St. Luke and St. James have so much to say about works, so that one says: Yes, I will now believe, and then he goes and fabricates for himself a fictitious delusion, which hovers only on the lips as the foam on the water. No, no; faith is a living and an essential thing, which makes a new creature of man, changes his spirit and wholly and completely converts him. It goes to the foundation and there accomplishes a renewal of the entire man; so, if I have previously seen a sinner, I now see in his changed conduct, manner and life, that he believes. So high and great a thing is faith.”[Sermons of Martin Luther 2.2:341]
“For it is impossible for him who believes in Christ, as a just Savior, not to love and to do good. If, however, he does not do good nor love, it is sure that faith is not present." [Sermons of Martin Luther 1:40]
Contemporary Calvinistic theologian R. C. Sproul writes, The relationship of faith and good works is one that may be distinguished but never separated...if good works do not follow from our profession of faith, it is a clear indication that we do not possess justifying faith. The Reformed formula is, “We are justified by faith alone but not by a faith that is alone.”[[“Essential Truths of the Christian Faith,” Google books]
Also, rather than the easy believism Rome associates with sola fide, in Puritan Protestantism there was often a tendency to make the way to the cross too narrow, perhaps in reaction against the Antinomian controversy as described in an account (http://www.the-highway.com/Early_American_Bauckham.html) of Puritans during the early American period that notes,
“They had, like most preachers of the Gospel, a certain difficulty in determining what we might call the ‘conversion level’, the level of difficulty above which the preacher may be said to be erecting barriers to the Gospel and below which he may be said to be encouraging men to enter too easily into a mere delusion of salvation. Contemporary critics, however, agree that the New England pastors set the level high. Nathaniel Ward, who was step-son to Richard Rogers and a distinguished Puritan preacher himself, is recorded as responding to Thomas Hooker’s sermons on preparation for receiving Christ in conversion with, ‘Mr. Hooker, you make as good Christians before men are in Christ as ever they are after’, and wishing, ‘Would I were but as good a Christian now as you make men while they are preparing for Christ.’”
One cannot Biblically believe on the Lord Jesus without if effecting one's life, and to believe on Him as such is an act of implicit heart repentance that will be manifested in outward actions. And as works are saving faith in action, in contrasting mere intellectual faith, they can be said to justify, as they justify one as having a true faith, versus inert, dead.
We having the same spirit of faith, according as it is written, I believed, and therefore have I spoken; we also believe, and therefore speak; (2 Corinthians 4:13)
By faith Noah, being warned of God of things not seen as yet, moved with fear, prepared an ark to the saving of his house; by the which he condemned the world, and became heir of the righteousness which is by faith. (Hebrews 11:7)
And thus believers are judged by their works as having true faith, (1Thes. 1:4-10) and being are fit to be recompensed, God rewarding faith, (Heb. 10:35) in recognition of what it effected. Thus those who showed love to "the least of My brethren" enter glory, (Mt. 25:31-40) not because their works earned them the "gift' of eternal life, for they really deserve Hell, (cf. Rm. 6:23) but because such testifies of faith which works virtue.
Thank you for your shut down of the typical straw man so often set up to dispute sola fide. If we actually understand who Jesus is and the sacrifice He made for our sins - I mean deep-down-in-the-gut getting it - how can we NOT also surrender our lives to Him? Once we understand that He is the Creator of the universe and He humbled Himself to enter into our experience of being a human being so that He could redeem us from eternal damnation separated from Him, how could we possibly imagine that our lives could ever be the same again?
We receive Jesus as Savior and Lord because He IS both. The sheer magnitude of understanding His calling to us and of His knowing us before the foundation of the world, conforming us into His image, is enough - or should be - to keep us ever in humble gratitude and love for His great mercy and grace. Anyone who says he is a believer in Christ, but who has had no deep-down heart change so that he can't help but notice it, should examine his heart to see if he is really in the faith. It is a serious and life-changing decision and one that we couldn't turn back from even if we tried. The indwelling Holy Spirit testifies to our spirits that we ARE the children of God. Praise be to Him! We must never treat the grace of God as meaningless. He saved us for HIS purposes and we will have all eternity to thank Him.
Wonderful. So next time someone thinks he defeated the Catholic doctrine by "'purgatory' is not in the scripture" or "where is praying to saints in the scripture" or "where is the word 'catholic' in the scripture" you will be with me explaining such primitive and legalistic approach to be without merit?
Next question: does "the Paraclete, the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, he will teach you all things, and bring all things to your mind, whatsoever I shall have said to you. (John 14:26) say that the Church will continue to be inspired by the Holy Ghost to the extent that whatever is on the mind of the Church is as good as if Christ is saying it? Or is it the case where a Protestant must reach somewhere in the "traditions" of Luther and the rest of the charlatans to avoid taking this scripture as written?
a faith that effects the "obedience of faith,"
Great again; as I like to point out, "faith is what we do". So again, when someone tells me that "baptism does not save because to baptize is to work", or that "good works do not save because it is like purchasing salvation" you will see through the cheap illusion that these "objections" construct?
Excellent post.