1. Defining Terms: Sola Scriptura means "All tradition and doctrine to be tested by the Bible to see IF it is in line with scripture or if scripture shows it to be error, or fluff, or true".
2. A question: I notice that while many Christians affirm this principle of "sola scriptura" Catholics will almost always oppose it "right out of the gate". Which is strange since all Christians are "supposed" to be saying "sure we support sola-scriptura testing because our church doctrine is perfectly in line with the Bible".
Here is a post to show the state of the conversation so far.
===================================================
One earlier post suggested the wild speculation that the Bible teaching on "sola scriptura" is mere "fairy tale" -- it got this response
Good point.
No wonder the Bible so strongly affirms "sola scriptura"
Acts 17:11 is not unbiblical. And it came wayyy before the reformation.
Mark 7:6-13 is not "unbiblical" and it came wayyy before the reformation
Isaiah 8:20 is not unbiblical and it came wayyy before the reformation
"20 To the law and to the testimony! If they do not speak according to this word, it is because they have no light."
Do you expect that we would agree with that speculative statement you are making? You have free will of course and can have any preference that you wish. But if you want to frame it as a compelling argument in favor of you POV you need substance in it - by addressing the details in the post.
Acts 17:11 "They searched THE SCRIPTUREs daily to SEE IF those things spoken to them by the APOSTLE Paul - WERE SO"
How is that NOT - "Sola Scriptura"???
Mark 7
6 And He said to them, “Rightly did Isaiah prophesy of you hypocrites, as it is written:
‘This people honors Me with their lips,
But their heart is far away from Me.
7 ‘But in vain do they worship Me,
Teaching as doctrines the precepts of men.’
8 Neglecting the commandment of God, you hold to the tradition of men.”
9 He was also saying to them, “You are experts at setting aside the commandment of God in order to keep your tradition. 10 For Moses said, ‘Honor your father and your mother’; and, ‘He who speaks evil of father or mother, is to be put to death’; 11 but you say, ‘If a man says to his father or his mother, whatever I have that would help you is Corban (that is to say, given to God),’ 12 you no longer permit him to do anything for his father or his mother; 13 thus invalidating the word of God by your tradition which you have handed down; and you do many things such as that.”
On the contrary --
1. How is that NOT "sola scriptura" testing tradition.
2. How is that NOT calling the Word of God = Commandment of God = Moses said.
3. How is that NOT sola-scriptura hammering the tradition of the accepted magesterium of the nation-church that GOD started at Sinai - in the days of Christ
On the contrary --
1. How is that NOT "sola scriptura" testing tradition
On the contrary --
1. How is that NOT "sola scriptura" testing tradition??
You have framed your response in a kind of "by faith alone" fashion just then.
Does not help your point.
1. The Bereans were not Christians and yet EVEN they had the ability to test "sola scriptura" to "SEE IF" the doctrine was true.
2. The Bereans were testing the doctrine of a living Apostle. Not just "anyone" -- and affirmed in scripture for doing so.
3. The result of the "testing" sola scriptura would determine if they accepted or rejected all of Christianity - - not merely testing "one tradition within Christianity".
Correction.
Opening post.
Point 1
1. Defining Terms: Sola Scriptura means "All tradition and doctrine to be tested by the Bible to see IF it is in line with scripture or if scripture shows it to be error, or fluff, or true".
Not true in real life. In real life it is not protestants that complain about my statement above - it is you...
Meanwhile you post "as if" you agree with my sola-scriptura doctrinal statement but "imagine" that all the protestants will be the ones objecting to it. How odd that "in real" life that never happens.
were we simply "not supposed to notice"???
Wrong.
In Mark 7:6-13 Christ flat out condemns the reigning church magisterium of the one-true-nation-church started by God at Sinai.
Paul Himself argues "If WE APOSTLES or an ANGEL from heaven should come to you with a different doctrine - let him be ACCURSED" Gal 1:6-9
You know - all "the Bible details" listed above that you need to ignore.
Your argument is of the form "if a legit church group has any authority at all - then no possibility of testing it by the Bible to SEE IF THOSE THINGS are SO" ... yet you are confronted with explicit refutation of your own argument in Acts 17:11.
The point remains.
Were that even remotely true - you would be PRAISING the very thing that you claim fully supports your teaching (Sola Scriptura testing ) -- not at war with it.
You would be insisting that we get down "to the details" with Eucharist, or prayers to the dead, or purgatory, or immaculate conception or indulgences or bowing down before images and promising to serve those they represent ... and see just how "fully supported" those man-made-traditions are. But you don't because you know that the bible would refute them.
2. A question: I notice that while many Christians affirm this principle of "sola scriptura" Catholics will almost always oppose it "right out of the gate". Which is strange since all Christians are "supposed" to be saying "sure we support sola-scriptura testing because our church doctrine is perfectly in line with the Bible".
Here is a post to show the state of the conversation so far.
===================================================
One earlier post suggested the wild speculation that the Bible teaching on "sola scriptura" is mere "fairy tale" -- it got this response
Good point.
No wonder the Bible so strongly affirms "sola scriptura"
Acts 17:11 is not unbiblical. And it came wayyy before the reformation.
Mark 7:6-13 is not "unbiblical" and it came wayyy before the reformation
Isaiah 8:20 is not unbiblical and it came wayyy before the reformation
"20 To the law and to the testimony! If they do not speak according to this word, it is because they have no light."
Do you expect that we would agree with that speculative statement you are making? You have free will of course and can have any preference that you wish. But if you want to frame it as a compelling argument in favor of you POV you need substance in it - by addressing the details in the post.
Acts 17:11 "They searched THE SCRIPTUREs daily to SEE IF those things spoken to them by the APOSTLE Paul - WERE SO"
How is that NOT - "Sola Scriptura"???
Mark 7
6 And He said to them, “Rightly did Isaiah prophesy of you hypocrites, as it is written:
‘This people honors Me with their lips,
But their heart is far away from Me.
7 ‘But in vain do they worship Me,
Teaching as doctrines the precepts of men.’
8 Neglecting the commandment of God, you hold to the tradition of men.”
9 He was also saying to them, “You are experts at setting aside the commandment of God in order to keep your tradition. 10 For Moses said, ‘Honor your father and your mother’; and, ‘He who speaks evil of father or mother, is to be put to death’; 11 but you say, ‘If a man says to his father or his mother, whatever I have that would help you is Corban (that is to say, given to God),’ 12 you no longer permit him to do anything for his father or his mother; 13 thus invalidating the word of God by your tradition which you have handed down; and you do many things such as that.”
On the contrary --
1. How is that NOT "sola scriptura" testing tradition.
2. How is that NOT calling the Word of God = Commandment of God = Moses said.
3. How is that NOT sola-scriptura hammering the tradition of the accepted magesterium of the nation-church that GOD started at Sinai - in the days of Christ
On the contrary --
1. How is that NOT "sola scriptura" testing tradition
On the contrary --
1. How is that NOT "sola scriptura" testing tradition??
You have framed your response in a kind of "by faith alone" fashion just then.
Does not help your point.
1. The Bereans were not Christians and yet EVEN they had the ability to test "sola scriptura" to "SEE IF" the doctrine was true.
2. The Bereans were testing the doctrine of a living Apostle. Not just "anyone" -- and affirmed in scripture for doing so.
3. The result of the "testing" sola scriptura would determine if they accepted or rejected all of Christianity - - not merely testing "one tradition within Christianity".
Correction.
Opening post.
Point 1
1. Defining Terms: Sola Scriptura means "All tradition and doctrine to be tested by the Bible to see IF it is in line with scripture or if scripture shows it to be error, or fluff, or true".
Not true in real life. In real life it is not protestants that complain about my statement above - it is you...
Meanwhile you post "as if" you agree with my sola-scriptura doctrinal statement but "imagine" that all the protestants will be the ones objecting to it. How odd that "in real" life that never happens.
were we simply "not supposed to notice"???
Wrong.
In Mark 7:6-13 Christ flat out condemns the reigning church magisterium of the one-true-nation-church started by God at Sinai.
Paul Himself argues "If WE APOSTLES or an ANGEL from heaven should come to you with a different doctrine - let him be ACCURSED" Gal 1:6-9
You know - all "the Bible details" listed above that you need to ignore.
Your argument is of the form "if a legit church group has any authority at all - then no possibility of testing it by the Bible to SEE IF THOSE THINGS are SO" ... yet you are confronted with explicit refutation of your own argument in Acts 17:11.
The point remains.
Were that even remotely true - you would be PRAISING the very thing that you claim fully supports your teaching (Sola Scriptura testing ) -- not at war with it.
You would be insisting that we get down "to the details" with Eucharist, or prayers to the dead, or purgatory, or immaculate conception or indulgences or bowing down before images and promising to serve those they represent ... and see just how "fully supported" those man-made-traditions are. But you don't because you know that the bible would refute them.
