.jpg)
Posted on 07/03/2012 9:31:36 AM PDT by Teófilo
Another nail in the coffin of the foundational Protestant dogma
Sola scriptura is dead, or at least is undead, a zombie still stalking the darkened hallways of Protestantism. Many well-meaning Protestant Christians don’t see the zombie-dogma for what it is; instead, they choose to see it as a being of light. My friend Dave Armstrong has returned to blow the old decrepit sola scriptura monsters one at a time in his latest work, 100 Biblical Arguments Against Sola Scriptura100 Biblical Arguments Against Sola Scriptura.
Let’s recall the definition of the sola scriptura dogma – yes, it is a dogma – as understood by Norman Geisler, a recognized Protestant authority Dave quotes in his work:
By sola scriptura orthodox Protestants mean that Scripture alone is the primary and absolute source of authority, the final court of appeal, for all doctrine and practice (faith and morals)… (p.16)Geisler, and other authorities Dave quotes, further explain that other authorities exist, but that these are of secondary importance. Geisler also defends what he calls the perspicuity of Holy Writ, which means that anyone can understand the basic truths of Scripture: the plain things are the main things and the main things are the plain things, Geisler states. (p.17). As a true analyst, Dave separated the sola scriptura dogma into its constituents claims, found out its contents, examined its individual parts, and studied the structure of sola scriptura as whole. He found them defective and insufficient to expound and explain the full spectrum of Christian claims.
Dave kills the sola scriptura zombie by selecting 100 verses from Scripture contradicting this central Protestant claim. I guess he selected 100 verses because the number “100” gives the reader a sense of exhaustive answer and completion, not because there are only 100 verses that should make all sincere Protestant Christian at least uncomfortable with the teaching. In fact, Dave is the author of another related work, 501 Biblical Arguments Against Sola Scriptura: Is the Bible the Only Infallible Authority?, which is useful if you need another 401 arguments to kill the sola scriptura zombie dead.
100 Biblical Arguments Against Sola Scriptura. is a distillation of the 501 Biblical Arguments… in a more manageable, less overwhelming fashion for the beginning reader. It’s 133 pages in length and divided into two parts. In Part 1 Dave discusses the binding authority of Tradition, as substantiated in Scripture, and in Part 2 he discusses the binding authority of the Church, again from Scripture. The result must be uncontestable to the sincere Protestant Christian as well as eye opening to the full range of deeds and wonders the Incarnation of the Word of God brought to history.Will the sola scriptura zombie really die after Dave’s work? This is a senseless question because the zombie is already dead. It’s kept ambulating by strings pulled from the most diehard of its followers. Those strings must be cut by the individual, sincere Protestant Christian himself. Dave Armstrong’s work, 100 Biblical Arguments Against Sola Scriptura100 Biblical Arguments Against Sola Scriptura. not only blows the zombie of sola scriptura away, he also provides the truth-searcher with the scissors to cut off the strings.
This is the catholic faith; which except a man believe faithfully and firmly, he cannot be saved.
And yet, no mention of a sinless Mary, or of the IC, or Co-Redemptrix in that creed. Certainly against the Arians, but not in support of Mariology. My bold.
Then why do you prone yourselves to and pray to these works of art???
If these images only glorify God, why do you ask these images or what these images represent to perform miracles and provide salvation for you???
I don't bow to these idols and I have no trouble focusing on God...Bowing and praying to these idols help you focus on who the idols represent, not God...
The Creeds (Credo), those statements of Christian belief preceded the Bible. The writings that were canonized as suitable for inclusion in the Bible were the ones that did not exceed or refute what was already in Tradition, not the other way around.
Also, if you are not in a Catholic Church you are not in an Apostolic Church.
Peace be with you.
how is this not personal?
Well, there is your problem.Catholics do not pray to idols or works of art. We I pray to God and ask our brothers and sisters to pray for us.
Why do you pray to printed words in a book and why are you so angry?
Peace be with you
Your religion steps all over itself trying to prove things that aren't...
Obviously this is called an 'artificial' sentence since no one with an ounce of education would use a sentence like that...So you have a non-existant analogy...
This is all the more clear if the reference to the car is two sentences earlier, as the reference to Peter’s profession is two sentences earlier than the term rock.
And of course your religion changes the rules when it comes to this verse...According to your rule, this verse proves God was the pillar and ground of the truth, and not the church...
1Ti 3:15 But if I tarry long, that thou mayest know how thou oughtest to behave thyself in the house of God, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and ground of the truth.
>>>If people can practice sola scriptura and can arrive at either: Christ is God, or Christ is not God<<<<
Oh, but D-fendr, that is just an inconsequential difference.
They all agree on everything concerning salvation, i.e. Sola Fide and Sola Gracia. Anything else is just minute differences, dontcha know? /////sarc
Thank you, but I didn't take it as personal. I understand Iscool has issues with Catholics and Catholicism, but the fact that the Holy Spirit keeps bringing him back to these threads so he can be presented with the truth gives me great solace. If he were to ignore me and these posts how will we ever reach him?
I am happy to suffer his abuse and turn the other cheek in His name.
Peace be with you.
Blessed Athansius stating Mary was “clothed with purity” means sinless. Your modern thinking of purity is flawed by only having sexual meaning to it.
You are wrong again and to prove it, I challenge you to provide the authentic spoken sacred tradition that your religion received from the Apostles that was not recorded in the scriptures...
2Jn 1:12 Having many things to write unto you, I would not write with paper and ink: but I trust to come unto you, and speak face to face, that our joy may be full.
So tell us, please...What did John say to the disciples that he didn't write down???
Natural Law wrote:
“Unless you assert that this ever increasing fractioning and balkanization of Christendom is the stated objective of the Holy Spirit you must conclude that Jesus intended for there to be a teaching authority to facilitate His call to unity. You can call it what you will, we call it the Magisterium.”
It seems to me that your statement has several problems.
First problem: “Unless you assert ... you must conclude ...”. Logically, that doesn’t hold water.
Second problem: Do the Scriptures not say that faithlessness and factionalism will increase as the end nears. I think so. Why would the Lord, who desired unity, foresee disunity? Did He not know whereof He spoke? (Doubtful) Or did the unity whereof He spoke consist in something the eye may* not see? (Likely) * I say “may” and not “can” because on the last day, God will allow the eye to see what He has always seen, the unity of the Church, the unity that is in Christ.
Third problem: Why must the unity of which our Lord speaks be defined in so crassly materialistic a way? That, it seems to me, is a way of thinking foreign to the prophetic and apostolic word. In fact, it is a worldly way of looking at things.
Finally, one can attain a state of confusion and misbelief through sectarian factionalism, that is true, as you point out. But one can also attain it through centralized groupthink. Both of which have manifested themselves in mankind throughout the centuries. I don’t find any comfort or certainty in either. I take no comfort or certainty in one pope or 33,000 popes. I do take comfort and certainty in the one Christ, Son of God and Son of Man, who is the same yesterday, today, and forever.
“”Then why do you prone yourselves to and pray to these works of art???”
Well, there is your problem.Catholics do not pray to idols or works of art. We I pray to God and ask our brothers and sisters to pray for us.
Why do you pray to printed words in a book and why are you so angry?
Peace be with you”
One mistake I see being made here is the belief that all Catholics are as one in every aspect of their faith. That simply isn’t true. Some are exactly as described, idol worshipers and ritual addicts. Others are blatant sinners who use Confession with the attitude of “Why go to confession if I have nothing to confess?” And many are genuine worshipers of the Lord, and our brothers and sisters regardless of what they think of us.
For those saying Catholicism isn’t Christianity, that’s bigotry. They worship the same God and believe in Christ, the definition of Christianity. Nor are all Catholics going to Hell. Again, that’s bigotry. Anyone who believes in Christ and repents their sins will be save, or we’re back to salvation through works again.
And that “printed book of words” is the Word of God even to your priests and Pope. If you are truly Catholic, you would understand that. Whatever my differences between their teachings and understanding, we are as one on that.
As for praying to it, I’ve never seen anyone bow before their bible. If I do, I’ll have a chat with them because even that is idol worship.
Well, that ain't scriptural.
You seem to wrong an awfully lot...
Act 17:11 These were more noble than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness of mind, and searched the scriptures daily, whether those things were so.
That's our test...That's our standard...
1Th 5:21 Prove all things; hold fast that which is good.
We have to have a standard with which to prove things...The standard is the scriptures...The Berreans knew that...We know that...
That anyone who reads "This is my body" to say "this is a symbol" should lay off the wine.
:)
Of course there are other references by him for that supposition?
Yet if one were to accept this supposition, why wasn't this understanding, that is in conflict with Scripture, not included in his creed which lays out the catholic faith? After all he includes in his creed this: it is necessary to everlasting salvation that he also believe faithfully the incarnation of our Lord Jesus Christ.
I guess this should have been my answer to the Catholic FReeper who asked "How can you ever talk about the idea of the incarnation without bringing her into the matter." (sic) Apparently Athanasius found no need to include Mary's participation in the Incarnation other then recognizing it as a Virgin birth.
pointing to himself? Is that actually in the verse in the Bible you have?
Ah, no. Just a Church tradition.
I take that as a complement coming from you since I would never align myself to your beliefs of denying the Trinity,a basic Christian teaching.
There is nothing in that verse that indicates that Jesus is speaking to or speaking of anyone but Peter.
There is certainly nothing in that verse that indicates that Jesus is pointing to himself, speaking to himself or speaking of himself.
In fact, no where in that passage or in any of the preceding or succeeding verses does Jesus refer to himself as rock.
If that is the tradition of your church, there is a serious disconnect between the actual words of Jesus and what this particular “church” wishes to believe.
I don’t suppose you care to point out where he was in error regarding using scripture to prove what was preached?
As for Trinity. I have found three types of belief in that.
1. The belief that God, Jesus, and Holy Spirit are One.
2. The belief that God, Jesus, and Holy Spirit are still one, but in three distinct roles. As I myself can be a father, I am a son, and I have a spirit. This isn’t really different from 1.
3. Multi-theism. The belief that there are three distinct individuals in the Godhead. This violates scripture which says that the Lord our God is One. There is no other but Him. That God is the Word, and that Jesus is the Word made flesh.
There is not writings that support Mary as sinful by Blessed Athanasius
Prayer by St. Athanasius
"It is becoming for you, O Mary, to be mindful of us, as you stand near him who bestowed upon you all graces, for you are the Mother of God and our Queen. Come to our aid for the sake of the King, the Lord God and Master who was born of you. For this reason you are called “full of grace.” Be mindful of us, most holy Virgin, and bestow on us gifts from the riches of your graces, O Virgin full of grace."
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.