Posted on 03/31/2014 5:45:28 PM PDT by matthewrobertolson
Sola Scriptura is the Protestant doctrine that the Bible contains all knowledge necessary for salvation and holiness. Under it, only doctrines that are found directly within the Bible or are drawn indirectly from it by simple reasoning are allowed. (See material vs. formal sufficiency & perspicuity.)“[The Church] does not, in the conventional phrase, believe what the Bible says, for the simple reason that the Bible does not say anything. You cannot put a book in the witness-box and ask it what it really means.” – G. K. Chesterton
2 Timothy 3:16-17 is the primary passage used to defend this view, which always boggles my mind. Perhaps I need spectacles, but I do not see an “Only” at the beginning of this verse. The Church teaches (as Scripture teaches) that all Scripture is valuable. She does not, however, turn it into an idol.
Some Protestants also claim to honor other authorities, like the Church – but do they really? In a short written debate with a Protestant professor, he said, “Sola Scriptura does not even claim that there is no other authority besides the Bible; it maintains that the Bible is alone (sola) as the only infallible authority.” Some apologists concede this position, but I see no reason to, and so I responded, “The practical effect [of Sola Scriptura] is that it denies the authoritativeness of any other authority – making that authority not an authority at all.” The professor quickly changed the topic.
Sacred Tradition (capital ‘T’) is, obviously, a stumbling block for many, but it is perfectly reasonable. Not everything of relevance could fit within the Bible (John 20:30-31, John 21:25). This is evidenced by the elaborations of the Church Fathers, as well as the decrees of the Councils. And much of this has been written and can therefore even qualify as (extra canon) Scripture! Anyway, all Scripture must be interpreted “according to the spiritual meaning which the Spirit grants to the Church” (Origen).
Pope Francis noted, “Sacred Scripture is the written testimony of the divine Word, the canonical memory that attests to the event of Revelation. However, the Word of God precedes the Bible and surpasses it. That is why the center of our faith isn’t just a book, but a salvation history and above all a person, Jesus Christ, the Word of God made flesh.” (cf. CCC #108). All teaching is valuable – God is not limited to a book compiled by His Bride. On this point, the Bible is like a wedding album shared by two spouses: the husband, typically, arranges and provides for everything, while his wife fills in the details – but still, at the end of the day, it does not sum up their whole marriage.
Another great blow to Sola Scriptura is that the Bible did not put itself together, and it does not list the books that belong within it. It took the Jews thousands of years to decide on the Tanakh (their canon) and, even then, “Hellenistic” Jews preferred the Septuagint! The only reason that we know which books comprise the Testaments is that the Church has informed us. If the Church, as Her own entity, is not infallible on such doctrine, then the Bible cannot be trusted.
Many Protestants also allude that absolute truth can only be found within the Bible. If I throw an apple up into the air, it will fall. Where is that in the Bible? Of course, one could quickly retort with the idea that the Bible only necessarily contains the absolute moral truth necessary for salvation. But many Protestants do not actually believe that – just look at the large crowds of literal creationists! To be clear, the Bible is not guaranteed to be totally historically or scientifically inerrant in a literal sense. “Inerrancy extends to what the biblical writers intend to teach, not necessarily to what they assume or presuppose or what isn’t integral to what they assert.” [Catholic Answers] And if a Protestant would like to say otherwise, he must prove his position from the Bible – which he cannot do, at least not to any definite degree. Even natural law, which exists outside of the Bible, does not encompass such. Leaders like Ken Ham could be defeated with these points.
I just cannot help but despise this great heresy of Sola Scriptura, the implication of which is that the Bride of Christ does not know Her Husband.
I love the Second Vatican Council’s statement on all of this: “[T]he task of authentically interpreting the word of God, whether written or handed on, has been entrusted exclusively to the living teaching office of the Church, whose authority is exercised in the name of Jesus Christ. This teaching office is not above the word of God, but serves it, teaching only what has been handed on, listening to it devoutly, guarding it scrupulously and explaining it faithfully in accord with a divine commission and with the help of the Holy Spirit, it draws from this one deposit of faith everything which it presents for belief as divinely revealed.” (Dei Verbum)
Let us put it this way: only trusting the Bible without the Church would be like loving “Romeo and Juliet” and hating Shakespeare’s explanation of it.
---
“Follow” me on Twitter, “Like” Answering Protestants on Facebook, Add Answering Protestants to your Circles on Google+, and “Subscribe” to my YouTube apologetic videos.
---
Thought you might find this interesting. Given they never post any negative threads about the Protestant faith.
I just can't help but despise those who presume their church is in authority OVER the word of God.
Didn't you recently post this SAME Protestant-bashing propaganda here?
They Supported Abortion Resolution 1971
http://www.johnstonsarchive.net/baptist/sbcabres.html
Matthew! You sure know how to set the kitties among the pigeons.
I find it uncharacteristic for Freeper brothers and sisters to be in such a tizzy, Christian vs Christian.
Much protesting about the Cardinals! And for the Cardinals!
William Shakespeare summed it up:
Hamlet:
Madam, how like you this play?
Queen:
The lady doth protest too much, methinks.
Hamlet Act 3, scene 2, 222–230
and also this one:
Enter a Gentleman.
Q. Kath. How now!
Gent. An ’t please your Grace, the two great cardinals
Wait in the presence.
Q. Kath. Would they speak with me? 10
Gent. They will’d me say so, madam.
Q. Kath. Pray their Graces
To come near. [Exit Gentleman.] What can be their business
With me, a poor weak woman, fall’n from favour?
I do not like their coming, now I think on ’t. 15
They should be good men, their affairs as righteous;
But all hoods make not monks.
From: The Famous History of the Life of King Henry the Eighth
Act III. Scene I.
By the way, FE is a grateful Catholic now, having recovered from the Episcopalian death spiral and chosen to swim the Tiber. This was my personal decision, and nobody here has to agree with it. The Catholic religion helps me fulfill my spiritual life.
Still, we do not need to shred one another intellectually over such dogmatic divisive drivel.
This republic, and our freedoms, including religious freedom, and freedom to the liberty of life, are seriously in jeopardy in this country. We should stay focused on those threats, and how to protect against them.
I agree and new flash.... Luther is still dead....and ex-communicated.
It seems that some protestants here believe it is important that Luther should be reinstated..
why would that be?
What does repeating God’s name is I AM with “the Bible alone” which is what I am still waiting to get a source text for?
Thanks
I don’t disagree. But, that only further stands as testament to the Church because many heresies come from a flawed understanding of Scripture and the Church has always used Scripture along with Tradition to declare what is Truth and what isn’t.
You try and quote John to assert a proof for the extra-scriptural requirements for salvation, but skip the verse showing the sufficiency of the Gospel of John containing the things needed for salvation. Which is it? Don't you believe Scripture...correct?
Seriously? That’s your defense? Could you get more lame?
>> And how was it that the New Testament canon was determined?<<
Like I said. God used Judas, Balaam’s donkey, and Herrod. You want to take credit from God for preserving His word as He said He would? Good luck with that.
It is well documented that you are not listening.
However now that we have john 21:25 as the proper verse we know we don't need these written down.
1 John 5:13 tells us what we have written is sufficient to know we have eternal life.
So out of context that it is repeated in Revelation 22:18 For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book, IF any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book:
19 And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book?
Just so the 'context' is NOT lost: verse 16 "I Jesus have sent Mine angel to testify unto you these things in the (get this) churches. I am the Root, and the Offspring of David, and the bright and morning Star."
Please show those “20 passages” that are not also in other books of the Old Testament.
yeah eagle...
how about the word “alone” that Luther inserted after the word “faith”
just whose accuracy are you talking about?
AMDG
I’d like to see these also.
You raise a really good question.
Yes it is but you can't answer it because it doesn't exist...
A question of similar importance is: show another provable source of what Scripture really consists of other than what the (Catholic) church has preserved and taught.
We know the Jews never accepted the Catholic spurious books...We know that Jesus never accepted those books...
Luk_24:44 And he said unto them, These are the words which I spake unto you, while I was yet with you, that all things must be fulfilled, which were written in the law of Moses, and in the prophets, and in the psalms, concerning me.
Jesus never mentions the books that you guys so badly want to be part of scripture...And he certainly doesn't include them when he speaks of scripture that will be fulfilled...That's pretty cut 'n dried...
just why would you expect a faithful Catholic to listen to a protestant?
AMDG
Need a citation please. No ideas to the reference you are making.
It is in Scripture...all of it!
The Old Testemant Keys were Given to Davids caretakerp and a succesor to Davids original Caretaker was named Isaiah 22—15-25
New Testament matthew 16... Peter given keys
Acts 15:8 And God, who knows the heart, bore witness by granting them the holy Spirit just as he did us. 9 He made no distinction between us and them, for by faith he purified their hearts.
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.