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.
---
And Luther drank judgement on himself - all by himself.
Right. The Roman church Judges. Riiiiiight.
Baloney.
Aside from the condescending arrogance you are correct...And it tells me that DManA is a bible believing Christian who knows enough scripture to not be taken in and be deceived by false teachers who attempt to usurp the authority of God...
It also tells us a lot about the person who presents the false information and those who defend it...
Apostles didn’t mention it - see the Third Council of Ephesus - circa 431AD
http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/05491a.htm
AMDG
Please show where Jesus said that? While you are at it, please show from the Greek text where the word “church” as the Catholics use it is found.
'What difference does it make'? My Catholic in-laws tell me that the Old Testament is nothing more than allegory. Except where Rome could insert Mary in place of whom the original had named.
Jesus NEVER used the words Catholic Church....
you are really funny - when you are a member of a Church you abide by its rules not your own - if you don’t like it you pick yup your marbles and leave - Exactly what Luther did.
So the Catholic Church EXCOMMUNICATED him - get it?
AMDG
Why do you say I present false information when the Catholic Church was there long before Luther?
Okay. Now if we just agree on what and where God’s household is we’ll be okey dokey.
“But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed. As we said before, so say I now again, If any man preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed.” Galatians 1:8-9
Please show another provable source of what the apostles taught other then what we have in scripture.
Fair enough.
St Iraenius of Antioch was recruited by John The Apostle and made 3 of 5 pilgrimages with Peter...
Early Church Fathers They all wrote of the Real Presence...of Jesus in the Eucharist St Athanasius St John Chrystonom.. The New testament is the New Covenant the Only Covenant was the TRUE Presence in the Eucharist.You Must EAT my Body & Drink my Blood if you want Eternal life.
Every Book Chosen for the New Testament contributed in some manner to the Holy Eucharistic Liturgy.The early Church fathers writing always supported the writings of the apostles if they contradicted they were not included as Catholic Tradition.
You can read how they went out with Apostles were Trained in an evangelizing Bootcamp. the Towns they Visited they talked about writings of Apostles they Taught the Mostly Illiterate followers The OUR FATHER, the ten Commandments and then they performed the Eucharistic Liturgy as Christ performed it in the Upper room. offering bread and wine. This finally formalized by St Justin martyr in AD 128 this is the Mass we celebrate worldwide today!
Sola Scriptura wasn’t even a Possibility until 4th Century were they all Blasphemers?
Typical Roman misuse of Scripture. You cannot take an isolated verse and prove anything.
eg. Matthew 16:18
And I tell you that you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of Hades will not overcome it.
sorry Cyn,
I’m still stuck on my question to him “for a quote where it says “the Bible alone”?
How about you: where does it say in the Bible “the Bible alone”???
AMDG
No no no. Don’t give me a link just tell me where the keys are. And how many? Do you know?
You raise a really good question.
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.
“But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed. As we said before, so say I now again, If any man preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed.” Galatians 1:8-9
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.