Replies

>>Sola Scriptura is simple never stated in the scripture.<<

Ok what is your understanding of Sola Scriptura? Or is your understanding actually “Solo Scriptura?” The Reformers clearly had Sola in mind not Solo.

Better, putting aside debates of the 16th century, how did the apostles see the position of Inspired Scriptures to test truth claims which would include testing doctrines, creeds and rules of faith (which is what the early church fathers deemed as tradition as well as the Reformers later)

Not surprisingly Jesus Christ and the apostles used TaNaKh (OT).

Jesus Christ used Torah to rebuke the Devil (Matthew 4)

Jesus Christ used the OT to rebuke and condemn the Pharisees, lawyers, Saducees and Scribes throughout all 4 Gospels.

Jesus Christ literally fulfilled Messianic prophecies written throughout the OT.

Peter used a wide array of OT scriptures to proclaim Jesus Christ as the promised Messiah and King all Israel awaited (Acts 2-ff)

Phillip used Isaiah to preach the Gospel to the Ethiopian eunuch.

Peter used the OT scriptures and not a mitre to preach the Gospel to the first Gentile converts (Acts 10)

Paul never failed to use the entire volume of OT scriptures to preach Christ as Lord and Savior, and to reprove and correct false doctrines (Acts 15, Romans, Ephesians, Hebrews much more)

James, John and Jude same as the above as a trend has been established.

And we are left with this which sums it all:

2 Timothy 3:

13 But evil men and seducers shall wax worse and worse, deceiving, and being deceived.

14 But continue thou in the things which thou hast learned and hast been assured of, knowing of whom thou hast learned them;

15 And that from a child thou hast known the holy scriptures, which are able to make thee wise unto salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus.

16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:

17 That the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works.(KJV)

I think that was quite clear above.

And as the Reformers pointed out Sola Scriptura meant to them all creeds, confessions, doctrines and rules of faith must meet the muster of Holy Inspired Scriptures for all truth claims. We see our Savior Jesus Christ using this standard against the father of lies, against the sons of Satan who opposed Jesus Christ; His apostles also following the same standard, so why not us?

So instead of using terms from the 16th century, what if I said: Holy Inspired Scriptures is the standard in which we test truth claims on doctrine, church conduct, discipline, and traditions.

Would you agree with the above statement as which Paul addresses to Timothy?

Merry Christmas!

I have a present for you:

This icon shows Christ, on his Mother's lap, receives the vision of the instruments of His torture and clings to His mother. Please pray that we receive her consolation when the hour of our trial comes.

Holy Inspired Scriptures is the standard in which we test truth claims on doctrine, church conduct, discipline, and traditions.

That is false, heretical and anti-scriptural statement. If it were true, the Holy Scripture would have contained something like that. It doesn't.

The Holy Scripture is to be studied, proclaimed, used in arguments -- all that, just like St. Paul said to St. Timothy. That is the Catholic teaching. In fact the entire Scripture -- "All scripture", as St. Paul pointedly said, including the seven Deuterocanonical books that Protestants redacted from their castrated "canon" -- is the teaching of the Catholic Church. As such it is an important part of the rule of faith -- what you call "the standard in which we test truth claims on doctrine, church conduct, discipline, and traditions". But it is not the entire rule of faith: the entire teaching of the Holy Catholic Church in atiquity, Middle Ages and our age is. That is biblical:

I will ask the Father, and he shall give you another Paraclete, that he may abide with you for ever. The spirit of truth, whom the world cannot receive, because it seeth him not, nor knoweth him: but you shall know him; because he shall abide with you, and shall be in you. (John 14:16-17)
the Paraclete, the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, he will teach you all things, and bring all things to your mind, whatsoever I shall have said to you. (John 14:26)

Observe: the Holy Ghost will speak in all times. The Holy Scripture is not mentioned even though, of course, the Holy Ghost inspired it as well.

I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. And I will give to thee [Peter] the keys of the kingdom of heaven. And whatsoever thou shalt bind upon earth, it shall be bound also in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose upon earth, it shall be loosed also in heaven. (Matthew 16:18-19)
if he will not hear the church, let him be to thee as the heathen and publican. Amen I say to you, whatsoever you shall bind upon earth, shall be bound also in heaven; and whatsoever you shall loose upon earth, shall be loosed also in heaven. (Matthew 18:17-18)

Observe: that is what the rule looks like: You decide what the rule is on earth and Christ binds and looses according to that rule in heaven. Who gets to decide? People, not books. Should they consult the Scripture? Of course. But the Scripture is not mentioned. The important thing is that they agree "in His name".

This is why the exercise: where the prayers to Mary are in the scripture? -- is silly.

And as the Reformers pointed out Sola Scriptura meant to them all creeds, confessions, doctrines and rules of faith must meet the muster of Holy Inspired Scriptures for all truth claims.

For as often shown, the fact is that it is abundantly evidenced that Scripture was the transcendent supreme standard for obedience and testing and establishing truth claims as the wholly Divinely inspired and assured, Word of God.

And which testifies (Lk. 24:27,44, etc.) to writings of God being recognized and established as being so (essentially due to their unique and enduring heavenly qualities and attestation), and thus they materially provide for a canon of Scripture (as well as for reason, the church, etc.)

While before before any Scripture was written, God expressly spoke in a very limited way to a very limited amount of people, using men whom He supernaturally attested were of God, yet as written, the written word of God became the supreme standard, as Ps. 119 among multitude other tests, testifies to.

To which body additional conflative, complimentary writings were added.

While RCs assert that the church is the supreme rule of faith, this imagines that the church established itself upon its own authority - which in fact Rome effectively does - but the Lord and the NT church did so under the premise of the Scriptures being the supreme standard, as the wholly inspired word of God.

No other distinct body of truth has this claim, despite some RCs who assert that some Catholic teaching which expresses oral tradition is wholly inspired of God, or that "infallible" statements do, while all Truth claims are subject to testing by Scripture.

And under which the magisterium has its authority, and can issue penalties for dissent against its judgement, which could even mean death. But never under the premise of perpetual assured magisterial infallibility, which is an unnecessary novelty in Scripture.

RCs cannot establish this as Scriptural, nor such traditions as prayer to departed saints in Heaven, despite their spurious extrapolations based upon fallacious premises, and thus their typical recourse is assert one needs Rome in order to see these things. For under they imagine an infallible magisterium is essential to correctly know which writings are of God, even adding to Scripture obscure disputed books, and their meaning.

For in reality, the basis for RC assurance of Truth is not the weight of Scriptural substantiation, by the premise of the assured veracity of Rome herself.

Thus with the strongly deceived RCs, no amount of evidence moves them, anymore than it does a committed hardened atheists. Both of which condemned souls would support such things as putting evangelicals to the sword, as in the past. For "as then he that was born after the flesh persecuted him that was born after the Spirit, even so it is now." (Galatians 4:29)

So instead of using terms from the 16th century, what if I said: Holy Inspired Scriptures is the standard in which we test truth claims on doctrine, church conduct, discipline, and traditions.

That as written, it became the supreme standard as the wholly inspired word of God. That would be entirely incontrovertibly correct, but which Caths must deny due to ignorance and or cultic devotion to a false teaching, which imagines Scripture obtains its authority from the church, and that the latter came first, and the people need an infallible magisterium to know what revelation is of God, and that church teaching is the supreme law, and the one duty of the multitude is to follow the pastors as (dumb) docile sheep. From such cults turn away.