Sola Scriptura

[Mungo]

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.

It's very simple. Claims that scripture says something is just an opinion.
A scripture reference is the standard reference to a verse or verses of scripture.- e.g. John1:1
A quote from scripture is the actual words in scripture (not a paraphrase, accompanied by a scripture reference -
e.g. "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God." John 1:1
I took that example from David in NJ's post above (post #13). Have a look and you will see how it is done.

Your challenge is to prove Sola Scriptura from scripture not from your opinions, giving actual quotes from scripture and references..

 

[Brakelite]

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

KJV Isaiah 8:20
20 To the law and to the testimony: if they speak not according to this word, it is because there is no light in them.

 

[Mungo]

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.

No, I'm not having a meltdown.
The OP stated that

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.

I'm only asking for the man made tradition of Sola Scriptura to be proved from scripture.
Why is that so difficult?

 

[An Apologetic Sheepdog]

It's very simple. Claims that scripture says something is just an opinion.
A scripture reference is the standard reference to a verse or verses of scripture.- e.g. John1:1
A quote from scripture is the actual words in scripture (not a paraphrase, accompanied by a scripture reference -
e.g. "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God." John 1:1
I took that example from David in NJ's post above (post #13). Have a look and you will see how it is done.

Your challenge is to prove Sola Scriptura from scripture not from your opinions, giving actual quotes from scripture and references..

If you cannot see the truth in the words I have given you then a direct reference would make no additional difference. You have already demonstrated a total lack of all relative subject matter knowledge and ability to reason. Only you can change that.

You are sinking in a sea of denial because addressing my points will point out the obvious errors you have built your entire being around and reduce you to ashes and all you believe you are will become null and void.

I understand that from personal experience. You aren't the first nor will you be the last.

The hardest part is getting the victim to see and accept everything they thought they knew was wrong and that takes a lot of character and inner strength to do. Many would rather submit to the error than acknowledge it because of the pain it will bring. Theirs will be a lake eventually.

I do see you having the potential to grow beyond your error but it has yet to be seen that you have the drive within to accomplish it.

I will be prepared to assist you if you ever cast the chains off and start to think freely and actually learn and grow in knowledge, truth and faith.

 

[An Apologetic Sheepdog]

I'm only asking for the man made tradition of Sola Scriptura to be proved from scripture.
Why is that so difficult?

Its not difficult at all. You are trying to set up a straw argument then beat it on your own terms so you can feel "smart" but you wound up being fooled yourself because nobody takes the bait.

Scripture is the authority because GOD through his agents said so. Man has/had no say in the content or authority in any of it.

The "manmade" doctrine of SS is no more valid than the RCC dogma it flies in the face of. Some elements of truth but in man's typical effort is solidly lacking in the end.

So, what value is there in attempting to prove/ disprove a falsehood to satisfy another falsehood?

 

[Mungo]

KJV Isaiah 8:20
20 To the law and to the testimony: if they speak not according to this word, it is because there is no light in them.

The law and testimony referred to in Is 8:20 is the law and testimony given to Isaiah in verse 16
"Bind up the testimony, seal the law among my disciples."
Which itself refers back to verse 1-2
Moreover the Lord said unto me, Take thee a great roll, and write in it with a man's pen concerning Mahershalalhashbaz.
And I took unto me faithful witnesses to record, Uriah the priest, and Zechariah the son of Jeberechiah.
It doesn't support Sola Scriptura in any way.

 

[Mungo]

Its not difficult at all. You are trying to set up a straw argument then beat it on your own terms so you can feel "smart" but you wound up being fooled yourself because nobody takes the bait.

Scripture is the authority because GOD through his agents said so. Man has/had no say in the content or authority in any of it.

The "manmade" doctrine of SS is no more valid than the RCC dogma it flies in the face of. Some elements of truth but in man's typical effort is solidly lacking in the end.

So, what value is there in attempting to prove/ disprove a falsehood to satisfy another falsehood?

So you agree that Sola Scriptura is a man made doctrine and is false.

 

[An Apologetic Sheepdog]

So you agree that Sola Scriptura is a man made doctrine and is false.

Nice try but you aren't that slick nor me that sloppy.
Yes the doctrine referred to is a manmade doctrine. It is not "false" in the sense that it is wholly inaccurate.

Just like RCC doctrine has some elements of truth to it in some areas, pagan in others, totally false in others. (Constantine really set the course of it to eventually overwhelm and weaken the true Christian catholic church because he couldn't outright destroy it)

None of that is a part of the fact that Scripture (in and of itself without any input from "man") is God inspired for our use and is the only documented authority given to man by God through His agents. No papacy, Latin or priests required for Salvation or growth.

 

[Mungo]

Nice try but you aren't that slick nor me that sloppy.
Yes the doctrine referred to is a manmade doctrine. It is not "false" in the sense that it is wholly inaccurate.

Just like RCC doctrine has some elements of truth to it in some areas, pagan in others, totally false in others. (Constantine really set the course of it to eventually overwhelm and weaken the true Christian catholic church because he couldn't outright destroy it)

None of that is a part of the fact that Scripture (in and of itself without any input from "man") is God inspired for our use and is the only documented authority given to man by God through His agents. No papacy, Latin or priests required for Salvation or growth.

Ignoring your anti-Catholic rhetoric you agreed that Sola Scriptura, as specified in the OP, is a false man made doctrine.
Excellent. We agree for once.

 

[farouk]

So you agree that Sola Scriptura is a man made doctrine and is false.

This is your agenda, to "prove" (from the Bible, of all places) that the Word of God is supposedly not the rule of faith for the believer.

 

[An Apologetic Sheepdog]

Ignoring your anti-Catholic rhetoric you agreed that Sola Scriptura, as specified in the OP, is a false man made doctrine.
Excellent.

You cant even twist words correctly. You are a defective drone at best.

I made the distinction clear and concise and in plain English.

Do you speak and read English or you working from a translation program?

 

[An Apologetic Sheepdog]

This is your agenda, to "prove" (from the Bible, of all places) that the Word of God is supposedly not the rule of faith for the believer.

His agenda is to promote RCC doctrine while feeling superior by doing it.

 

[Brakelite]

Ignoring your anti-Catholic rhetoric

If that were true I wouldn't have had anything to quote.

 

[MatthewG]

There are a lot of commandments to follow if you simply going to live by scripture alone.

1050 to be exactly. https://www.abc.net.au/reslib/201407/r1308729_17984331.pdf

That is up to you whether or not you do this; my choice is having faith in the Lord Jesus Christ who was able to hold all the commandments; and love God; and love neighbour by the spirit of Christ with-in me.

 

[David in NJ]

No, I'm not having a meltdown.
The OP stated that

I'm only asking for the man made tradition of Sola Scriptura to be proved from scripture.
Why is that so difficult?

Mungo, this is by far the best laughter i am having today = "man made tradition of Sola Scriptura to be proved from scripture"

The Vatican is founded on man made tradition.........lol

REMEMBER - I was a Roman Catholic - I know Her ways and God hates them."

 

[David in NJ]

This is your agenda, to "prove" (from the Bible, of all places) that the Word of God is supposedly not the rule of faith for the believer.

I am still busting a gut laughing - "man made tradition" from of all places = RCC

 

[An Apologetic Sheepdog]

I am still busting a gut laughing - "man made tradition" from of all places = RCC

That's like pot and kettle meeting at warp 9

 

[dev553344]

God has much to teach us well beyond scripture. Whether you can share what you've learned here on the forum is another issue. But I would recomend seeking the Lord's Holy Spirit and the gifts he has for us:

1 Corinthians 14:1 Follow after charity, and desire spiritual gifts, but rather that ye may prophesy.

We have a whole new world of truth that allows us to have cell phones, computers, medicines, cars, airplanes, ultrasounds. All these things came from God's spirit of truth in science.

 

[farouk]

God has much to teach us well beyond scripture. Whether you can share what you've learned here on the forum is another issue. But I would recomend seeking the Lord's Holy Spirit and the gifts he has for us:

1 Corinthians 14:1 Follow after charity, and desire spiritual gifts, but rather that ye may prophesy.

We have a whole new world of truth that allows us to have cell phones, computers, medicines, cars, airplanes, ultrasounds. All these things came from God's spirit of truth in science.

We must remember that God is not going to reveal anything that is not in accordance with what He has already revealed in His Word. This is indeed why His Word is so precious; Psalm 119.105; John 17.17; Hebrews 4.12; 2 Timothy 3.16-17.

 

[MatthewG]

Devin that is a very interesting way of putting it!

 

[An Apologetic Sheepdog]

God has much to teach us well beyond scripture. Whether you can share what you've learned here on the forum is another issue. But I would recomend seeking the Lord's Holy Spirit and the gifts he has for us:

1 Corinthians 14:1 Follow after charity, and desire spiritual gifts, but rather that ye may prophesy.

We have a whole new world of truth that allows us to have cell phones, computers, medicines, cars, airplanes, ultrasounds. All these things came from God's spirit of truth in science.

Be careful of that. While it is true that God still deals with us individually and collectively in unique personal ways- scripture makes it clear that God never changes and is the same always. That's uniformity in purpose so anything we are taught "beyond" written scripture cannot change or alter that which we do have that's written.

Many people peddle, promote and have fallen prey to false doctrine under the guise of "The spirit" made me do it. ( notice the lack of a capital S)