mwdegutis Loc: Illinois

If you dare answer Doc...not as wordy as you. I trust sola scriptura as described here. I am NOT a Protestant nor do I belong to any Protestant denomination...I am a disciple of Jesus Christ.

What is sola scriptura?
gotQuestions.org
The phrase sola scriptura is from the Latin: sola having the idea of “alone,” “ground,” “base,” and the word scriptura meaning “writings”—referring to the Scriptures. Sola scriptura means that Scripture alone is authoritative for the faith and practice of the Christian. The Bible is complete, authoritative, and true. “All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness” (2 Timothy 3:16).

Sola scriptura was the rallying cry of the Protestant Reformation. For centuries the Roman Catholic Church had made its traditions superior in authority to the Bible. This resulted in many practices that were in fact contradictory to the Bible. Some examples are prayer to saints and/or Mary, the immaculate conception, transubstantiation, infant baptism, indulgences, and papal authority. Martin Luther, the founder of the Lutheran Church and father of the Protestant Reformation, was publicly rebuking the Catholic Church for its unbiblical teachings. The Catholic Church threatened Martin Luther with excommunication (and death) if he did not recant. Martin Luther's reply was, “Unless therefore I am convinced by the testimony of Scripture, or by the clearest reasoning, unless I am persuaded by means of the passages I have quoted, and unless they thus render my conscience bound by the Word of God, I cannot and will not retract, for it is unsafe for a Christian to speak against his conscience. Here I stand, I can do no other; may God help me! Amen!”

The primary Catholic argument against sola scriptura is that the Bible does not explicitly teach sola scriptura. Catholics argue that the Bible nowhere states that it is the only authoritative guide for faith and practice. While this is true, they fail to recognize a crucially important issue. We know that the Bible is the Word of God. The Bible declares itself to be God-breathed, inerrant, and authoritative. We also know that God does not change His mind or contradict Himself. So, while the Bible itself may not explicitly argue for sola scriptura, it most definitely does not allow for traditions that contradict its message. Sola scriptura is not as much of an argument against tradition as it is an argument against unbiblical, extra-biblical and/or anti-biblical doctrines. The only way to know for sure what God expects of us is to stay true to what we know He has revealed—the Bible. We can know, beyond the shadow of any doubt, that Scripture is true, authoritative, and reliable. The same cannot be said of tradition.

The Word of God is the only authority for the Christian faith. Traditions are valid only when they are based on Scripture and are in full agreement with Scripture. Traditions that contradict the Bible are not of God and are not a valid aspect of the Christian faith. Sola scriptura is the only way to avoid subjectivity and keep personal opinion from taking priority over the teachings of the Bible. The essence of sola scriptura is basing your spiritual life on the Bible alone and rejecting any tradition or teaching that is not in full agreement with the Bible. Second Timothy 2:15 declares, “Do your best to present yourself to God as one approved, a workman who does not need to be ashamed and who correctly handles the word of truth.”

Sola scriptura does not nullify the concept of church traditions. Rather, sola scriptura gives us a solid foundation on which to base church traditions. There are many practices, in both Catholic and Protestant churches, that are the result of traditions, not the explicit teaching of Scripture. It is good, and even necessary, for the church to have traditions. Traditions play an important role in clarifying and organizing Christian practice. At the same time, in order for these traditions to be valid, they must not be in disagreement with God’s Word. They must be based on the solid foundation of the teaching of Scripture. The problem with the Roman Catholic Church, and many other churches, is that they base traditions on traditions which are based on traditions which are based on traditions, often with the initial tradition not being in full harmony with the Scriptures. That is why Christians must always go back to sola scriptura, the authoritative Word of God, as the only solid basis for faith and practice.

On a practical matter, a frequent objection to the concept of sola scriptura is the fact that the canon of the Bible was not officially agreed upon for at least 250 years after the church was founded. Further, the Scriptures were not available to the masses for over 1500 years after the church was founded. How, then, were early Christians to use sola scriptura, when they did not even have the full Scriptures? And how were Christians who lived before the invention of the printing press supposed to base their faith and practice on Scripture alone if there was no way for them to have a complete copy of the Scriptures? This issue is further compounded by the very high rates of illiteracy throughout history. How does the concept of sola scriptura handle these issues?

The problem with this argument is that it essentially says that Scripture’s authority is based on its availability. This is not the case. Scripture’s authority is universal; because it is God’s Word, it is His authority. The fact that Scripture was not readily available, or that people could not read it, does not change the fact that Scripture is God’s Word. Further, rather than this being an argument against sola scriptura, it is actually an argument for what the church should have done, instead of what it did. The early church should have made producing copies of the Scriptures a high priority. While it was unrealistic for every Christian to possess a complete copy of the Bible, it was possible that every church could have some, most, or all of the Scriptures available to it. Early church leaders should have made studying the Scriptures their highest priority so they could accurately teach it. Even if the Scriptures could not be made available to the masses, at least church leaders could be well-trained in the Word of God. Instead of building traditions upon traditions and passing them on from generation to generation, the church should have copied the Scriptures and taught the Scriptures (2 Timothy 4:2).

Again, traditions are not the problem. Unbiblical traditions are the problem. The availability of the Scriptures throughout the centuries is not the determining factor. The Scriptures themselves are the determining factor. We now have the Scriptures readily available to us. Through the careful study of God’s Word, it is clear that many church traditions which have developed over the centuries are in fact contradictory to the Word of God. This is where sola scriptura applies. Traditions that are based on, and in agreement with, God’s Word can be maintained. Traditions that are not based on, and/or disagree with, God’s Word must be rejected. Sola scriptura points us back to what God has revealed to us in His Word. Sola scriptura ultimately points us back to the God who always speaks the truth, never contradicts Himself, and always proves Himself to be dependable.

Michael Rich Loc: Lapine Oregon

Very interesting..thanks for taking the time. My dad told me when I was young, that if you read something in the bible and want to know more of what it means...read it again.

PeterS

Then why aren't we stoning homosexuals and adulterers and why is it a sin to bake a wedding cake for an unrepentant homosexual but you can vote for an unrepentant serial adulterer in Donald Trump?

Here is Trump saying he has never asked for forgiveness--only tries to do better. You would think he would figure out that adultery thing by now. I can't wait for you hypocrites to explain this one...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=336lpsPLpwo

mwdegutis Loc: Illinois

Hey Pete, I am discussing a rebuttal to a thread named "The Fatal Seduction of 'Sola Scriptura.'" I am not here to discuss things you know ABSOLUTELY NOTHING about and have ABSOLUTELY NO DESIRE to gain insight into. Why don't you leave? You're not welcome here.

PeterS

If you can't answer the questions I ask how is it you think you are capable of debating Doc?

mwdegutis Loc: Illinois

I’m only going to spend my valuable time answering one of your questions because it may very well be a complete waste of time replying to you even on this one. However, now that I’m done this answer is not just for you. If you “get” my answer and TRULY want to know more I’ll reply. Otherwise, FORGET ABOUT IT!

PeterS wrote:
Then why aren't we stoning homosexuals and adulterers?

mwdegutis wrote:
I’ll use an illustration from the Bible. Let’s see if you can comprehend it.

The scribes and Pharisees brought before Jesus a woman guilty of adultery. The fact is she was guilty of adultery and now her sin was exposed for Jesus and all to see. The sinful life she lived in private had become very public. The evidence was irrefutable. She had been caught in the very act. There was no doubt that she was guilty. The law of God declared that this woman should be put to death for her crime. She had committed deeds worthy of death. She was guilty; the evidence was there, and now her accusers cried out for her punishment to be swift and severe.

Clearly the scribes and Pharisees offered no compassion or sympathy for the woman. They dragged her in before Jesus, demanding that justice be carried out for her crimes. We may not be guilty of committing adultery, but we have all been guilty of committing sin. And God does not judge or categorize sin as we do. In His eyes, all sin is serious and creates division because of His holiness and our guilt.

As I stated, the scribes and Pharisees said to Jesus that the law of God declared that this woman should be put to death for her crime. They said this to tempt him that they might have reason to accuse him. This woman was just a pawn in a larger scheme of deception and rebellion. They felt as if they had placed Jesus in a position to which He could not respond. If He condemned her, He would have been viewed as one without compassion, not the friend of sinners. If He let her go, He would have been accused of disobeying the very law of God. She was used to get to Jesus.

They sought an argument with Jesus but He did not give them the satisfaction of their desire. He simply ignored them and wrote in the sand. We have no idea what He wrote, but we do know that Jesus refused to argue with them. Jesus ignored their critical, proud, self-righteous attitude for a while, but He didn't ignore it for long. He confronted them by saying, “He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her.” They had brought this woman in, supposing that she might be put to death, but Jesus turned the tables on them. He forced them to consider the sin in their own lives.

Can you imagine the scene? Just moments before there were cries for judgment. I'm sure that the accusers had made quite a scene. Now upon the rebuke of Jesus there was an eerie silence, only the sound of stones hitting the ground and men shamefully walking away.

The accusers had left, one by one, leaving only the accused woman and Jesus.

READ THIS CLOSELY PETE, IT IS VERY IMPORTANT!

There the woman faced Jesus, the One who had the authority to forgive or condemn. She stood face to face with the One she must reckon with. She was not worthy of His compassion, but Jesus stood there offering grace to one who was worthy of death. An eternal truth is revealed in this text. Man does not have the ability to condemn or declare guilt, but Jesus does. It makes no difference whether we have the approval of men, or their rejection for that matter. All must stand face to face with Christ, accountable to Him!

The Pharisees had left and now she faced the moment of truth. The charges had been revealed and the evidence presented. They were not worthy to stone her, but Jesus was. He could have put her to death for her sins, but He extended pardon rather than divine punishment. Jesus forgave her sin and cleansed her of all unrighteousness. Clearly she had dealt with the shame of her sin being made public. She had sought the mercy of the Lord and He had given grace and mercy. We too were all guilty before the Lord, condemned and worthy of death, but He made a way for all to be saved. We can be forgiven and cleansed in His precious blood.

Upon departing Jesus charged her to go, and sin no more. She had been delivered from her sin and she was expected to live a life that honored the Lord. That isn't to say that He expected her to live without sin, but that she was to seek the righteousness of God. She was no longer to willfully seek sin. Her life was to reflect the One who had forgiven.

This passage reveals that Christ has the power to confront and deal with sin on any level. Maybe there is some physical sin that you need to repent of Pete. Maybe it is a spiritual sin of self-righteousness or a condemning spirit. Maybe you have never been saved. Whatever the case may be, Jesus stands ready to forgive. He will condemn none who come to Him in repentance. Why not come as He leads?

This is why we don’t stone homosexuals and adulterers Pete.

The Romans Road to Salvation through Jesus Christ

Romans 3:23 “For all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God.”
Romans 6:23 “For the wages of sin is death, but the free gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord.”
Romans 5:8 “But God demonstrates His own love toward us, in that while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us”
Romans 10:9 “If you confess with your mouth Jesus as Lord and believe in your heart that God raised Him from the dead, you will be saved.”
Romans 10:13 “For whoever will call on the name of the Lord will be saved.”

If you, Pete, have not yet come to a saving knowledge of Jesus Christ as your own personal Savior, I encourage you to give your life to Christ. Just say a prayer and ask Jesus to forgive you of your sins and come into your heart, so that you might have eternal life and be “born again.”