They stopped the first thread as 'unedifying'. I asked them for their definition of 'unedifying', so that we could avoid being 'unedifying' in their eyes, so that a good thread does not get shut down.
But I have not gotten a response yet. Therefore, to avoid being shut down, I plead with people to do three things:
1. Keep to topic.
2. No personal attacks
3. No cursing.
I normally keep 1 & 3, but I admit I have my own problem with 3, but will nevertheless try to lead the way in not doing so. And I will report others doing so, only so that the thread will not be shut down again. Why? Because it is a very profitable and necessary subject to the gospel of the cross being preached according to the scriptures.
There are two main arguments against Sola Scriptura:
1. Humans are flawed, and so the writers of the Bible were flawed, and so the Bible is flawed.
This is only saying that we all have flawed thinking of God, and so we are only able to flawingly grope around in darkness to find Him, and anyone's flawed perceptions of Him are equally flawed as any others.
I.e. Meaninglessly flawed reasonings and imaginations about God. To each his own. All are flawed and none are true, unless we want to believe it is true. Though flawed.
The Bible is flawingly true. Sometimes.
2. The original manuscripts are not with us anymore, and therefore there is no Sola Scriptura to trust in anymore.
This is the only serious response against Sola Scriptura.
Such people are saying that if the original manuscripts written by the prophets and apostles of God were still with us, then they would believe in Sola Scriptura, as them that did when the original manuscripts existed.
I.e. They believe the writings of the prophets and apostles of God were indeed all Scripture of truth, but those writings are not with us today, as they were truly and originally written.
A. This is walking by sight and not by faith. Except I have the original manuscripts in my hands, so that I can feel them and read them with my own eyes, I will not believe any book as being all Scripture of God.
Jesus saith unto him, Thomas, because thou hast seen me, thou hast believed: blessed are they that have not seen, and yet have believed.
B. This is a lack of trust in the God of the Bible to have His Word written in paper originally, and then does not ensure that written Word remains on paper today. It is a demand that God have His Word written on paper made into incorruptible tables of stone, so that cannot return to the dust from which they were made.
This is akin to relic worship and seeking after a physical sign to believe in. Desiring to see fire fall from heaven in their sight. (Rev 13)
C. The writings of the Bible, that we have today, prove themselves to be all Scripture of God. They have no self-contradiction, nor error of fact, nor righteousness commanded that is not righteous and true altogether.
Therefore, reducing Scripture of God to debates about manuscripts is an untrustworthy accusation against the God of the Bible, and that His Bible writings, as we have them today, are not truly all Scripture from Him: the writings we have in the Bible today cannot possibly be the written words of His prophets and apostles, because they are not written on the pen and paper they wrote with.
I.e. The God of the Scriptures of old is not the God of the Bible today.
The challenge therefore is to show a true contradiction of the writings in the Bible against themselves, in order to prove that they are not all Scripture of God.
But I have not gotten a response yet. Therefore, to avoid being shut down, I plead with people to do three things:
1. Keep to topic.
2. No personal attacks
3. No cursing.
I normally keep 1 & 3, but I admit I have my own problem with 3, but will nevertheless try to lead the way in not doing so. And I will report others doing so, only so that the thread will not be shut down again. Why? Because it is a very profitable and necessary subject to the gospel of the cross being preached according to the scriptures.
There are two main arguments against Sola Scriptura:
1. Humans are flawed, and so the writers of the Bible were flawed, and so the Bible is flawed.
This is only saying that we all have flawed thinking of God, and so we are only able to flawingly grope around in darkness to find Him, and anyone's flawed perceptions of Him are equally flawed as any others.
I.e. Meaninglessly flawed reasonings and imaginations about God. To each his own. All are flawed and none are true, unless we want to believe it is true. Though flawed.
The Bible is flawingly true. Sometimes.
2. The original manuscripts are not with us anymore, and therefore there is no Sola Scriptura to trust in anymore.
This is the only serious response against Sola Scriptura.
Such people are saying that if the original manuscripts written by the prophets and apostles of God were still with us, then they would believe in Sola Scriptura, as them that did when the original manuscripts existed.
I.e. They believe the writings of the prophets and apostles of God were indeed all Scripture of truth, but those writings are not with us today, as they were truly and originally written.
A. This is walking by sight and not by faith. Except I have the original manuscripts in my hands, so that I can feel them and read them with my own eyes, I will not believe any book as being all Scripture of God.
Jesus saith unto him, Thomas, because thou hast seen me, thou hast believed: blessed are they that have not seen, and yet have believed.
B. This is a lack of trust in the God of the Bible to have His Word written in paper originally, and then does not ensure that written Word remains on paper today. It is a demand that God have His Word written on paper made into incorruptible tables of stone, so that cannot return to the dust from which they were made.
This is akin to relic worship and seeking after a physical sign to believe in. Desiring to see fire fall from heaven in their sight. (Rev 13)
C. The writings of the Bible, that we have today, prove themselves to be all Scripture of God. They have no self-contradiction, nor error of fact, nor righteousness commanded that is not righteous and true altogether.
Therefore, reducing Scripture of God to debates about manuscripts is an untrustworthy accusation against the God of the Bible, and that His Bible writings, as we have them today, are not truly all Scripture from Him: the writings we have in the Bible today cannot possibly be the written words of His prophets and apostles, because they are not written on the pen and paper they wrote with.
I.e. The God of the Scriptures of old is not the God of the Bible today.
The challenge therefore is to show a true contradiction of the writings in the Bible against themselves, in order to prove that they are not all Scripture of God.