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.
---
“Please keep in mind that when asked: “What would Jesus do?”
“Knocking over tables and using a bullwhip are listed among the possibilities. “
1. You are not HIM, God in human flesh, or you chose the wrong screen name.
2. HE did this before HE commanded believers to love each other.
3. Why rationalize disobedience?
I will assume from here out that you are not a Christian. Based on that, carry on and we will know what to expect in your posts.
I still wish you the best.
“Perhaps you ain’t considered to be a CHRISTIAN.
“That COULD be the explanation.
And yet that poster claims to at least be a follower of Rome. They recognize me as a Christian. Perhaps obedience to Rome and obedience to Christ are quite different.
With the exception of one prot, that is the way I feel about the rest of you.
| Trying | something | simple |
Who knew?!
Now if I can only remember next time.
You know I have found that there are three things that go when you get older..
but I forgot what they were.
Thanks Elsie
AMDG
Can’t you read? That’s not what I claimed at all.
Okay, I’m sick enough of dealing with this for now.
Alamo-Girl
Howbeit in vain do they worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men - Mark 7:7 #268
CynicalBear
That should frighten even the most ardent Catholic into understanding that the Catholic Church teaches doctrines not taught in scripture. It’s possible to worship God in vain. What a sobering thought. #274
dsc
Only if it meant what you think it does, which it doesn’t. #304
There is much that was passed down sola word-of-mouth, and more that we received through personal revelations. #270
Just hunting for a little honesty...Guess I'll have to keep looking...
“I will assume from here out that you are not a Christian.”
bad, bad, bad...
bad assumption, based on bad information and bad conclusions...
and definitely NOT a Christian thing to say to anyone.
wow..
AMDG
actually Is....
there is only 10% separating me as a Catholic and you as a protestant.
lets say that you and I agree that there is only ONE TRUTH,
and that you and a disparate group of your fellow protestants in a bible study group decide one particular Scriptural text, that may be open to discussion,
throughout the evening everyone in turn gets to standup and give their opinion on exactly what that passage means, but...
you end up with 10 quite different interpretations of that passage....
now since you know you bible text and since that passage happens to be one you have studied long and hard, you could probably assume that, since there is only one truth, you are the only ONE in TEN with the correct interpretation, so you could say only 10% of the room had the truth.
Now if I looked in and heard your interpretation, of course as a Catholic, I would consider your interpretation to be wrong, 0 in 10 and mine to be right.
Therefore, voila, we are only 10% apart!
Here is where I would stick in a smiley face but Elsie didn’t show me how to do that, yet!
Lurking’
AMDG
LS98,
When someone doesn’t obey the commands of Christ, but claims she is a Christian, she is either living a carnal life of disobedience or isn’t really a Christian.
I expect a Christian would follow Christ’s commands. I expect a non-Christian to act like a non-Christian. I was one.
In this instance, I cannot know this poster is a believer by their choices. It seems a kinder assumption all round to assume they are a non-believer and expect a lower standard. If they need to know the Savior, I can only pray they come to know His grace. If it turns out they know the Savior, their lives will reflect this.
Once again; the anonymous broad brush comes out.
Easy, friend.
E-mail yourself a How-To letter.
no thanks needed.
There's an HTML workshop or something on FR that's a BIG help for some of this stuff.
| LurkingSince'98 wrote: | |||
Who knew?! |
Yet?
You KNOW that I am perfectly able to resist the Teaching Gene; don't you?
I would hope that a person, who is trying to follow Christ's commands, would do some research to see if those 'commands' REALLY come from Christ!
| Red | Blue | White |
Thanks for the ping, dear Iscool!
dear verga,
it’s Lent - you need to look at it like it’s penance.
and remember after all they are protestant and when all is said and done we are Catholic and never the twain shall meet.
Ad Majoram Dei Gloriam
spectacular!!!
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.