there is no more illogical doctrine than that of sola scriptura.
for it to be true, we would first need an infallible canon of Scripture. since the Scriptures themselves do not tell us infallibly what the canon is, we only can truly rely on an infallible Church to define the canon. the Church using Sacred Tradition. so right away the doctrine falls apart.
secondly, the Apostles not only did not teach or practice sola scriptura, they specifically taught the opposite as Paul instructs in Thessalonians.
finally, while i appreciate the attempt to point to the Catholic Fathers to support sola scriptura, since the Bible doesn’t teach it ( pretty ironic, eh? ) as a previous post shows, the Fathers did not teach sola scriptura.
of even greater irony, all the Catholic Fathers listed held to the Catholic Faith, including:
baptismal regeneration
real presence in the Eucharist
the Mass as a Sacrifice
one visible Church
the “apocrypha” as Scripture
infant baptism
prayers to saints
prayers for the dead
veneration of Mary
apostolic succession
the same people who point to these great saints to support this unbibilical doctrine they did not teach, are the first to accuse today’s Catholics who hold these very same doctrines as unsaved, heretics and idol worshippers.
as alanis morissette said “isn’t it ironic”
the other obvious refutation of SS is Protestantism itself.
yesterday, we had a thread where good old sola scriptura believers were having at each other over infant baptism. each claimed scriptural authority for their belief. one had to be wrong. who is right the Baptist or the Lutheran?
no one knows how many contradictory sects there are now, 9,000, 16000, 30,000? it gets larger every year.
all claim an infallible book, but no infallible teacher. all oppose historical, orthodox Christianity, many have no clue they do.
you want another battle amongst the SS crowd, mention Calvinism and then stand back and watch the fur fly!
Quote Catholic
Tertullian on disallowing Heretics’ appeal to Sacred Scripture
March 25, 2010
Kevin Author T, Heresy, Sacred Scripture Comments Off
Our appeal [in debating with the heretics], therefore, must not be made to the Scriptures; nor must controversy be admitted on points in which victory will either be impossible, or uncertain, or not certain enough. For a resort to the Scriptures would but result in placing both parties on equal footing, whereas the natural order of procedure requires one question to be asked first, which is the only one now that should be discussed: “With whom lies that very faith to which the Scriptures belong? From what and through whom, and when, and to whom, has been handed down that rule by which men become Christians? For wherever it shall be manifest that the true Christian rule and faith shall be, there will likewise be the true Scriptures and expositions thereof, and all the Christian traditions”
Since this is the case, in order that the truth may be adjudged to belong to us, “as many as walk according to the rule,” which the church has handed down from the apostles, the apostles from Christ, and Christ from God, the reason of our position is clear, when it determines that heretics ought not to be allowed to challenge an appeal to the Scriptures, since we, without the scriptures, prove that they have nothing to do with the Scriptures. For as they are heretics, they cannot be true Christians, because it is not from Christ that they get that which they pursue of their own mere choice, and from the pursuit incur and admit the name of heretics. Thus not being Christians, they have acquired no right to the Christian Scriptures; and it may be very fairly said to them, “Who are you?”
this is Tertullian on Sacred Tradition, the Scriptures and Heretics - “Who are you”!!
from the website quotecatholic
Any final, infallible authority requires circular reasoning--(since logically, no higher authority can validate it but itself), which as you can see, applies to "Sacred Tradition" in the say way you attempted to apply it to scripture.
You can either rely on the written testimony of the Apostles themselves (the bible) or have faith that some (repeatedly, over and over and over) demonstrably corrupt (heard anything about homosexual predator priests being moved around lately??) institution is somehow, in some limited, undefined sense "infallible" in telling you that what (undefined) tradition mixed with the bible....says.
As for me and my house, we'll follow God's word, not that of an old, VERY FALLIBLE, human institution based in the pagan capital of the ancient world.
The writings of the apostles were scripture from the time the ink dried on the page--and didn't need official approval of the Bishop of Rome to become that way. They are the self-identified only final authority, the Word of God--which all of the Church is bound to obey.