Sola Scriptura

[robert derrick]

Sola Scriptura is not a degrading term for Catholics. It is a term Catholics degrade and demonize.

I don't know the source of the term nor the particular details of its' beginning', but my understanding is that it came from Martin Luther in his efforts to reform the 'church' from it's worst errors and abuses by relying solely upon Scripture for all doctrine of Christ.

The papacy then tried to have him killed as an heretic, because this ran counter to the Catholic Religion that relied on traditions for doctrine of Christ, that were not proven to be of Christ, because the Scriptures of the apostles did not agree with them as such.

Sola Scriptura to me is:
1. Only that which is written as Scripture or is plainly proven by Scripture, is to be taught for truth of God and doctrine of Christ.

2. Sola Scriptura does not shun oral and written traditions that are not exactly written in Scripture: it does not advocate reading the Bible only and nothing else. It only states that if there is anything oral or written, it must be proven by Scripture to be believed as truth of God in worship, religion, doctrine, law, commandment, etc...

3. Even as there be many voices, and each voice has it's own significance (1 Cor 14:10), only that voice approved of Scripture truly proceeds from the mouth of God.

All other voices may have merit, but without Scriptural proof, they are not to be believed as truth of God, much less obeyed as commandment of God.

 

[David in NJ]

Sola Scriptura is the only way to God - It is the Vatican's worse nightmare.

In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. John 1:1

God (the Word) spoke directly to Abraham. Abraham believed the Word.
And the LORD took him outside and said, “Now look to the heavens and count the stars, if you are able.” Then He told him, “So shall your offspring be.”
Abram believed the LORD, and it was credited to him as righteousness. Genesis 15:6

Today, God is calling His People to return to Sola Scriptura.

Then I heard another voice from heaven say: “Come out of her, My people, so that you will not share in her sins or contract any of her plagues." Revelation 18:4

 

[Mungo]

Sola Scriptura is not a degrading term for Catholics. It is a term Catholics degrade and demonize.

I don't know the source of the term nor the particular details of its' beginning', but my understanding is that it came from Martin Luther in his efforts to reform the 'church' from it's worst errors and abuses by relying solely upon Scripture for all doctrine of Christ.

The papacy then tried to have him killed as an heretic, because this ran counter to the Catholic Religion that relied on traditions for doctrine of Christ, that were not proven to be of Christ, because the Scriptures of the apostles did not agree with them as such.

Sola Scriptura to me is:
1. Only that which is written as Scripture or is plainly proven by Scripture, is to be taught for truth of God and doctrine of Christ.

2. Sola Scriptura does not shun oral and written traditions that are not exactly written in Scripture: it does not advocate reading the Bible only and nothing else. It only states that if there is anything oral or written, it must be proven by Scripture to be believed as truth of God in worship, religion, doctrine, law, commandment, etc...

So prove the man made tradition of Sola Scriptura from the Bible

 

[An Apologetic Sheepdog]

So prove the man made tradition of Sola Scriptura from the Bible

2 Timothy 3:16 is a good start.

The church is an assembly of believers, not an authority for believers to be subjugated to.

 

[Mungo]

2 Timothy 3:16 is a good start.

A good start? It doesn't even get out of the starting blocks!

All scripture is inspired by God and profitable [or useful in some translations] for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness. Profitable/useful yes, of course. But that does not say only scripture is profitable/useful.​

Try again.

 

[An Apologetic Sheepdog]

A good start? It doesn't even get out of the starting blocks!
All scripture is inspired by God and profitable [or useful in some translations] for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness. Profitable/useful yes, of course. But that does not say only scripture is profitable/useful.

Oh yee of little internal knowledge and even less awareness of the subject. ( not to mention applicational specificity)

Scripture (the authority) also says (paraphrased for brevity)

There are no new prophesies ( thus no office of prophet)

No new Apostles ( the office as a requirement was a physical witness to the physical resurrection of Christ)

No new High Priest ( the authority to speak for God) as Jesus was the last one

The Holy Spirit ( direct line to the CIC) is within the believer now

So in terms of "authority" ( as in leadership , management or self imposed man made state of some religious supremacy) Scripture does say nothing else has authority to speak as or for God "officially" so by default that's the answer.

In general terms of "profitable or useful"- a "cook book" is profitable and useful in feeding the hungry in service of the Lord but does not carry the authority of Scripture.

You would really profit greatly by attempting to actually study scripture and learn what it means and actually says.

 

[Mungo]

Oh yee of little internal knowledge and even less awareness of the subject. ( not to mention applicational specificity)

Scripture (the authority) also says (paraphrased for brevity)

There are no new prophesies ( thus no office of prophet)

No new Apostles ( the office as a requirement was a physical witness to the physical resurrection of Christ)

No new High Priest ( the authority to speak for God) as Jesus was the last one

The Holy Spirit ( direct line to the CIC) is within the believer now

So in terms of "authority" ( as in leadership , management or self imposed man made state of some religious supremacy) Scripture does say nothing else has authority to speak as or for God "officially" so by default that's the answer.

In general terms of "profitable or useful"- a "cook book" is profitable and useful in feeding the hungry in service of the Lord but does not carry the authority of Scripture.

You would really profit greatly by attempting to actually study scripture and learn what it means and actually says.

More opinions.
Your challenge is to prove Sola Scriptura from scripture not from your opinions.
If you cannot provide any scripture than please don't waste my time.

 

[An Apologetic Sheepdog]

More opinions.
Your challenge is to prove Sola Scriptura from scripture not from your opinions.
If you cannot provide any scripture than please don't waste my time.

I did provide scripture (by reference) and it is correct. Nothing I quoted was my "opinion" or authorship.

What I'm not doing is taking the bait because you simply want to argue data points from your software that you think gives you some kind of intellectual superiority because of the "file and folder " mindset often says so. That's what they teach you to do because you "assume" some type of moral or intellectual high ground which you don't have in reality.

What I continuously do is show the comprehensive weakness of your total subject matter knowledge and inability to actually think, analyze, reason or intellectually discuss anything of your own accord. That actually makes you somewhat weak even among the RCC types.

All you do is answer with a circular whine yet never actually refuting a single point I make ( because you would have to actually know the subject and then at a level to discuss it)

That's where a word search and a TOC end and that's the limit of your ability.

I do hope you will eventually grow beyond that because even in your ignorance, I see the faint glimmer of potential in your efforts.

 

[Mungo]

did provide scripture (by reference) and it is correct. Nothing I quoted was my "opinion" or authorship.

What I'm not doing is taking the bait because you simply want to argue data points from your software that you think gives you some kind of intellectual superiority because of the "file and folder " mindset often says so. That's what they teach you to do because you "assume" some type of moral or intellectual high ground which you don't have in reality.

What I continuously do is show the comprehensive weakness of your total subject matter knowledge and inability to actually think, analyze, reason or intellectually discuss anything of your own accord. That actually makes you somewhat weak even among the RCC types.

All you do is answer with a circular whine yet never actually refuting a single point I make ( because you would have to actually know the subject and then at a level to discuss it)

That's where a word search and a TOC end and that's the limit of your ability.

I do hope you will eventually grow beyond that because even in your ignorance, I see the faint glimmer of potential in your efforts.

You have given not a single scripture or scripture reference to anything.
Your challenge is to prove Sola Scriptura from scripture not from your opinions.
If you cannot provide any scripture than please don't waste my time.

 

[An Apologetic Sheepdog]

You have given not a single scripture or scripture reference to anything.
Your challenge is to prove Sola Scriptura from scripture not from your opinions.
If you cannot provide any scripture than please don't waste my time.

You can read English cant you?

Surely one of your "superior intellect" can do a quick content search of each point I raised and come up with the supporting scriptures and answer your own longing.

The reason you don't is simply because your knowledge of scripture and what it actually says/means is so lacking and void that you cant. That exposes your inadequacies right in front of you and you just don't like that.

See, I deal with you basically like Kirk dealt with Khan.

Why don't you prove me wrong instead of repeating the same worn out non answers you routinely do?

Pick one and look up the base scripture (s) I paraphrased then analyze it in proper context then you will see they are not my "opinions".

People with subject matter knowledge, average intelligence, reasoning and analytical capability can do that with ease- can you?

This will be a task far beyond a word search program though- are you up for it?

I can help you if you need it.

 

[Mungo]

You can read English cant you?

Surely one of your "superior intellect" can do a quick content search of each point I raised and come up with the supporting scriptures and answer your own longing.

The reason you don't is simply because your knowledge of scripture and what it actually says/means is so lacking and void that you cant. That exposes your inadequacies right in front of you and you just don't like that.

See, I deal with you basically like Kirk dealt with Khan.

Why don't you prove me wrong instead of repeating the same worn out non answers you routinely do?

Pick one and look up the base scripture (s) I paraphrased then analyze it in proper context then you will see they are not my "opinions".

People with subject matter knowledge, average intelligence, reasoning and analytical capability can do that with ease- can you?

This will be a task far beyond a word search program though- are you up for it?

I can help you if you need it.

Still no scripture.
Your challenge is to prove Sola Scriptura from scripture not from your opinions.
If you cannot provide any scripture than please don't waste my time.

 

[David in NJ]

Sola Scriptura starts here: "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God." John 1:1

If you fail to understand this Scripture - you fail.

 

[David in NJ]

A good start? It doesn't even get out of the starting blocks!

All scripture is inspired by God and profitable [or useful in some translations] for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness. Profitable/useful yes, of course. But that does not say only scripture is profitable/useful.​

Try again.

Sola Scriptura starts here: "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God." John 1:1

If you fail to understand this Scripture - you fail.

 

[Mungo]

Sola Scriptura starts here: "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God." John 1:1

If you fail to understand this Scripture - you fail.

Please explain how John 1:1 proves Sola Scriptura.

 

[An Apologetic Sheepdog]

Still no scripture.
Your challenge is to prove Sola Scriptura from scripture not from your opinions.
If you cannot provide any scripture than please don't waste my time.

Paging Billy Preston

I've got a song, I ain't got no melody
I'ma gonna sing it to my friends
I've got a song, ain't got no melody
I'ma gonna sing it to my friends

Will it go round in circles?
Will it fly high like a bird up in the sky?
Will it go round in circles?

Still not even the attempt to reason through and have an intelligent discussion- hmmmmmmmmmmmmm

 

[Mungo]

Paging Billy Preston

I've got a song, I ain't got no melody
I'ma gonna sing it to my friends
I've got a song, ain't got no melody
I'ma gonna sing it to my friends

Will it go round in circles?
Will it fly high like a bird up in the sky?
Will it go round in circles?

Still not even the attempt to reason through and have an intelligent discussion- hmmmmmmmmmmmmm

Still no scripture.
Your challenge is to prove Sola Scriptura from scripture not from your opinions.
If you cannot provide any scripture than please don't waste my time.

 

[An Apologetic Sheepdog]

Still no scripture.
Your challenge is to prove Sola Scriptura from scripture not from your opinions.
If you cannot provide any scripture than please don't waste my time.

I did already and denial is not just a river in Egypt.

You know it and you acknowledge it- you just cant refute it with your RCC dogma without further exposing the organizational falsehoods in front of one capable of exposing them so you take the flanking way out and just talk in circles while saying nothing hoping nobody calls your hand on it.

I have already diffused any strength any position you present has by your inability to form and proffer an independent thought requiring anything close to analytical reasoning or subject matter knowledge.

See, you don't want to discuss, debate or even educate- you want to dominate and feel secure in the superiority you think you have.

That's why you don't get in the Octagon because you tapped out before you even got to the arena.

You know your points have no substance and you cant bring yourself to face it.

I challenge you to rise above that and try. I will help and eventually teach you the truth and show you the error in your ways. (as soon as you are ready to listen) I see promise and potential in you grasshopper.

 

[Mungo]

I did already and denial is not just a river in Egypt.

You know it and you acknowledge it- you just cant refute it with your RCC dogma without further exposing the organizational falsehoods in front of one capable of exposing them so you take the flanking way out and just talk in circles while saying nothing hoping nobody calls your hand on it.

I have already diffused any strength any position you present has by your inability to form and proffer an independent thought requiring anything close to analytical reasoning or subject matter knowledge.

See, you don't want to discuss, debate or even educate- you want to dominate and feel secure in the superiority you think you have.

That's why you don't get in the Octagon because you tapped out before you even got to the arena.

You know your points have no substance and you cant bring yourself to face it.

I challenge you to rise above that and try. I will help and eventually teach you the truth and show you the error in your ways. (as soon as you are ready to listen) I see promise and potential in you grasshopper.

You have given not a single scripture or scripture reference to anything.
Your challenge is to prove Sola Scriptura from scripture not from your opinions.
If you cannot provide any scripture than please don't waste my time.

 

[An Apologetic Sheepdog]

You have given not a single scripture or scripture reference to anything.
Your challenge is to prove Sola Scriptura from scripture not from your opinions.
If you cannot provide any scripture than please don't waste my time.

Man, you got it bad and if anyone ever wonders about the dangers of indoctrination by cultist doctrines, you are a prime example.

Gotta stick to the script no matter what and just talk in circles.

Reminds me of the current administration in a sad way.

 

[David in NJ]

You have given not a single scripture or scripture reference to anything.
Your challenge is to prove Sola Scriptura from scripture not from your opinions.
If you cannot provide any scripture than please don't waste my time.

Mungo, your having a meltdown over simple truth that you cannot bear. Read and Pray the Gospel of John so that God may help you.

I was raised a Roman Catholic. I know Her evil ways and the Lord Jesus Christ commands us to 'Come out of her My People, less you receive of her sins and plagues....' Revelation