ECT DID JESUS TEACH SOLA SCRIPTURA?

[WonderfulLordJesus]

It can be looked at another way. To claim the New Testament gospel of Jesus Christ and the apostles of scripture is not sufficient would be to claim they all came and went, without delivering the whole truth. This would be despite the warning we should not tolerate any other gospel. A person must be awfully stupid, to throw out the reliable truth of scripture and believe another gospel, believe the lie. Scripture is even clear the gospel was laid down already, was being taught by the apostles, done, finished, and hundreds of years before this cult at Rome was created.

Galatians 1

6 I marvel that ye are so soon removed from him that called you into the grace of Christ unto another gospel:
7 Which is not another; but there be some that trouble you, and would pervert the gospel of Christ.
8 But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed.
9 As we said before, so say I now again, If any man preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed.

 

[Cruciform]

If scripture can point to sola scriptura, then all of this (i.e. tradition) is not finally binding on the conscience of the believer.

You're suggesting that something which the Bible itself describes as the word of God is "not finally binding"?

Using just the passage I referenced...

Restrict myself exclusively to your selected out-of-context proof-text? Don't think so. You'll need a much better hermeneutic methodology than that. In any case, you've already been answered regarding the verse.

Now contrast that with tradition. The only time it is spoken of favorably is when it is something handed down directly by one of the apostles...

By the apostles and/or their ordained successors, the bishops (Ac. 15:2; 16:4; 1 Tim. 3:15).

...scripture was the only basis ever laid for the foundation of establishing an objective basis for Truth.

Again, categorically refuted here and here.



Gaudium de veritate,

Cruciform
+T+

 

[Cruciform]

Jesus didn't... but he promised that the Holy Spirit would be given and lead US into all truth.

To whom, specifically, did Jesus direct this promise? Christ was speaking to the apostles themselves---to the original Magisterium of His Church---not to every individual lay believer with an opinion. Thus, "all truth" is communicated to the ordained leaders of Christ's one historic Church, and received by the laity from the Magisterium of the Church. Sorry for your confusion.



Gaudium de veritate,

Cruciform
+T+

 

[Cruciform]

It can be looked at another way. To claim the New Testament gospel of Jesus Christ and the apostles of scripture is not sufficient would be to claim they all came and went, without delivering the whole truth.

No, it would simply mean that they had not communicated the entire truth IN WRITING---a fact that even Scripture itself affirms. Try again.



Gaudium de veritate,

Cruciform
+T+

 

[nikolai_42]

You're suggesting that something which the Bible itself describes as the word of God is "not finally binding"?

No...I'm suggesting that there is a very narrow definition of tradition as scripture

Restrict myself exclusively to your selected out-of-context proof-text? Don't think so. You'll need a much better hermeneutic methodology than that. In any case, you've already been answered regarding the verse.

You haven't made a clear case that the verse counters the sola of sola scriptura. Your comparison is faulty. If the Law and the Testimony carries the definition of scripture, then it clearly asserts the exclusivity of scripture.

By the apostles and/or their ordained successors, the bishops (Ac. 15:2; 16:4; 1 Tim. 3:15).


Again, categorically refuted here and here.



Gaudium de veritate,

Cruciform
+T+

 

[Cruciform]

If the Law and the Testimony carries the definition of scripture, then it clearly asserts the exclusivity of scripture.

No, at best it affirms the general authority of scripture, but not that ONLY Scripture is authoritative. In fact, the Scriptures themselves teach precisely the opposite.



Gaudium de veritate,

Cruciform
+T+

 

[nikolai_42]

No, at best it affirms the general authority of scripture, but not that ONLY Scripture is authoritative. In fact, the Scriptures themselves teach precisely the opposite.



Gaudium de veritate,

Cruciform
+T+

Paraphrase: "If they don't speak according to the scriptures, they have no authority" (can someone that "has no light in them" be in any sense authoritative?).

Therefore, if they don't speak from the scriptures, their word is not binding upon your conscience.

As such, sola is affirmed.

 

[Cruciform]

Paraphrase: "If they don't speak according to the scriptures, they have no authority" (can someone that "has no light in them" be in any sense authoritative?). Therefore, if they don't speak from the scriptures, their word is not binding upon your conscience.

Here you've concretely expressed your fundamental error on this issue: There is a qualitative difference between speaking "according to" Scripture and speaking "from" Scripture. The two are essentially different concepts, and cannot be equated, as you have erroneously attempted to do here.

Thus, while the Isaiah verse may affirm the former (one must speak according to---i.e., in agreement with, and not in contradiction of---the Scriptures), your proof-text decidedly does not demand the latter (that one must demonstrate every doctrinal concept by an explicit statement in Scripture alone, or sola scriptura).

Back to Post #106 above.

As such, sola is affirmed.

Already answered---and corrected---above.



Gaudium de veritate,

Cruciform
+T+

 

[oatmeal]

Did I miss something or am I still waiting for Cruciform to supply us with those traditions that Paul was writing about?

 

[Cruciform]

Did I miss something or am I still waiting for Cruciform to supply us with those traditions that Paul was writing about?

You missed something. Post #75.

Specifically, you were already answered on this point months ago here. Try again.



Gaudium de veritate,

Cruciform
+T+

 

[Cruciform]

>bump<

 

[Lon]

Matthew 4:4

 

[CabinetMaker]

I think it is important to note that on those few times that scripture records Jesus teaching directly from scripture, He taught from the actual scripture, not from peoples interpretations of those scriptures. Good roll model there.

 

[Cruciform]

Matthew 4:4

QUESTION: Where does Matthew 4:4 say anything at all about "scriptures," "writings," or a "Bible"? :think:

 

[Cruciform]

I think it is important to note that on those few times that scripture records Jesus teaching directly from scripture, He taught from the actual scripture, not from peoples interpretations of those scriptures. Good roll model there.

Hate to break it to you, but you are not Jesus Christ, the divine Son of God, nor do you possess his inherent doctrinal authority to interpret Divine Revelation or formulate binding Christian doctrine. He delegated that authority on earth to the apostles/bishops of his one historic Church alone, and you are decidedly not an apostle or bishop. Try again.



Gaudium de veritate,

Cruciform
+T+

 

[CabinetMaker]

Hate to break it to you, but you are not Jesus Christ, the divine Son of God, nor do you possess his inherent doctrinal authority to interpret Divine Revelation or formulate binding Christian doctrine. He delegated that authority on earth to the apostles/bishops of his one historic Church alone, and you are decidedly not an apostle or bishop. Try again.



Gaudium de veritate,

Cruciform
+T+

If scripture was good enough for my Lord and Savior, its good enough for me!

 

[Cruciform]

If scripture was good enough for my Lord and Savior, its good enough for me!

Scripture (the Torah), yes; "Scripture alone," no.

Back to Post #115 above.

 

[CabinetMaker]

Scripture (the Torah), yes; "Scripture alone," no.

Back to Post #115 above.

What else did Jesus ever quote from?

 

[Cruciform]

What else did Jesus ever quote from?

See this.

 

[CabinetMaker]

See this.

In other words, no. Thank you for supporting that with your link.