A Biblical Defense of Sola Scriptura!
- Thread starter Jason0047
- Start date
-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
Most churches really don't follow God and His Word anymore. Most of them put on a big show and they really don't care who you are when you walk in. Most of them are in it for the money. Being a part of a church is having fellowship with like minded believers (Which can be 2 or three people) who truly want to love you and to spread the gospel of Jesus Christ to their neighborhood. No church I have ran into is out handing tracts and telling people about Jesus for the salvation of souls. Nobody is out inviting the poor into their church. For the true church is not a church building with a set of man made doctrines in addition to the Word of God. For we are living in the last days where the love of many is waxing cold. People put on a nice show. But that is it.
So you don't read the Bible because it is too long and drawn out? What I have written involves Scripture. If you are man of God who loves Scripture and you care about standing on the authority of God's Word alone, then surely you want to read it. But if you don't care, then you are not going to make the effort.
It's important because there are many people out there who try to add to God's Word. There are Catholics who try to add to God's Word with church words or teachings. There are Muslims and Mormons who follow another book because they don't believe in Sola Scriptura and they think the Bible can be added upon with another Revelation. Seeing Catholics, Muslims, Mormons, Jehovah's Witnesses all add to Scripture and claim to use the Bible as their authority, they have to realize that the very Bible that they hold in their hands refutes any new revelation or added words to the Bible. In other words, if they were honest with themselves and let the seed of the Word of God sow into their heart about those passages that talk about Sola Scriptura, then they will abandon their false religion and come to accept Jesus Christ as their Savior for real.
So you don't read the Bible because it is too long and drawn out? What I have written involves Scripture. If you are man of God who loves Scripture and you care about standing on the authority of God's Word alone, then surely you want to read it. But if you don't care, then you are not going to make the effort.
It's important because there are many people out there who try to add to God's Word. There are Catholics who try to add to God's Word with church words or teachings. There are Muslims and Mormons who follow another book because they don't believe in Sola Scriptura and they think the Bible can be added upon with another Revelation. Seeing Catholics, Muslims, Mormons, Jehovah's Witnesses all add to Scripture and claim to use the Bible as their authority, they have to realize that the very Bible that they hold in their hands refutes any new revelation or added words to the Bible. In other words, if they were honest with themselves and let the seed of the Word of God sow into their heart about those passages that talk about Sola Scriptura, then they will abandon their false religion and come to accept Jesus Christ as their Savior for real.
I just go by the definite articles used...
In beginning was The WORD and THE word came to be flesh and dwelt among US
We have THE mind of Christ<----Bible
Be mindful of THE word that was SPOKEN before by the Holy Prophets and THE commandments of us the apostles
If we reject the SPOKEN word...we are not rejecting MAN, but GOD
The word of God is a sharper than a two edged Sword
and the word ALL....
ALL scripture is given by inspiration and is PROFITABLE.......
It seems that the words spoken by Christ, written under inspiration by those inspired to write and proclaimed by any man being truly led by God and the Holy Spirit of God is the word of God.......If anyone of us quotes truth it is accompanied by the Holy Spirit and is in deed the word of God<-----KEY is QUOTES Scripture and not opinion, conjecture, supposition and or (in my view)....
At the end of the day the bible should be where we make our stand...anything less is the proverbial sinking sand!
In beginning was The WORD and THE word came to be flesh and dwelt among US
We have THE mind of Christ<----Bible
Be mindful of THE word that was SPOKEN before by the Holy Prophets and THE commandments of us the apostles
If we reject the SPOKEN word...we are not rejecting MAN, but GOD
The word of God is a sharper than a two edged Sword
and the word ALL....
ALL scripture is given by inspiration and is PROFITABLE.......
It seems that the words spoken by Christ, written under inspiration by those inspired to write and proclaimed by any man being truly led by God and the Holy Spirit of God is the word of God.......If anyone of us quotes truth it is accompanied by the Holy Spirit and is in deed the word of God<-----KEY is QUOTES Scripture and not opinion, conjecture, supposition and or (in my view)....
At the end of the day the bible should be where we make our stand...anything less is the proverbial sinking sand!
While Jesus is the "Truth" (John 14:6). "Truth" in John 16:13 is in context of speaking about the Communicated Word of God and not the Living Word. In the very next chapter we see Jesus praying to the Father, and Jesus says to Him, "Sanctify them through thy truth: thy word is truth." (John 17:17). While this is the Spoken Word of God. We have to understand that Revelation closes any new added words of God or new revelations to mankind. We are now looking for Christ's return and not a new doctrine or teaching. We are to spread the gospel we currently have and not a new one. For in Ephesians 5:25-26 we see that Jesus sanctifies the church with the washing of the water of the Word. In other words, a believer walks in sanctification by walking with God in obedience to His Word. For the Psalms tell us to hide His Word within our heart so that we may not sin against Him. Seeing the "Spoken Word of God" was confirmed by the "Written Word of God" like in the example with the Bereans (Which made them more noble) (Acts 17:11), we can see that the "Written Word of God" (Which is the Communicated Word of God) is the final and ultimate view for us believers today in regards to John 16:13. For the Spirit will guide us into all truth within His Holy Written Word and not from some dream somebody had or from strange code that is on the back of a cereal box.
Last edited:
So, what biblical defense could Christians possibly have for 'Sola Scriptura' in those first several centuries of Christianity before there even was a bible? Before the Catholic Church - under the guidance of the Holy Spirit - assembled that Canon of early Christian writings (along with the Pentateuch and OT) which we call the bible?
First, the formation of the Catholic Church came way later (With it's popes, bishops, and cardinals). This obvious by the fact that we see no description in the Scriptures of anything resembling people acting like popes thru out history and today within the Bible. No confessions to a priest. No gathering of people looking up to one man thinking he is a god. No buidling of great palaces to worship in. This is also obvious in the fact that none of the pagan practices of the RCC can be seen in the New Testament clearly, too (Like praying to Mary, and or bowing down to statues, etc.). None of this can be seen in the New Testament. One has to insert such a thing with having a wild imagination and twist a select few verses out of context to make that happen.
Second, before book publishing, the Holy Scriptures existed in manuscript form and were spread amongst believers. Before the Holy Scriptures were canonized, men were still trusting in the authority of Scripture alone with the understanding that Revelation 22:18-19 was in reference to the book of Revelation (Which is it's first fulfillment) and not it's secondary fulfillment (that came later) which would be in reference to the Written Word of God in it's completed form as it exists today. For there are many "double fulfillment" type passages that exist within the Scriptures (of which I talk about in my original post).
Second, before book publishing, the Holy Scriptures existed in manuscript form and were spread amongst believers. Before the Holy Scriptures were canonized, men were still trusting in the authority of Scripture alone with the understanding that Revelation 22:18-19 was in reference to the book of Revelation (Which is it's first fulfillment) and not it's secondary fulfillment (that came later) which would be in reference to the Written Word of God in it's completed form as it exists today. For there are many "double fulfillment" type passages that exist within the Scriptures (of which I talk about in my original post).
Last edited:
Jason, I looked at the OP. It does not answer my question.
You posted:
Apart from the Bible, what other source of God's Word do you have, a source readily available to men in generak on earth? After you bring it forth, can you prove it is God's Word?
I didn't ask you to "back up God's Word."
For starters name one other source (of God's Word besides the Bible) available to men on earth in general.
You posted:
Apart from the Bible, what other source of God's Word do you have, a source readily available to men in generak on earth? After you bring it forth, can you prove it is God's Word?
I didn't ask you to "back up God's Word."
For starters name one other source (of God's Word besides the Bible) available to men on earth in general.
Last edited:
Maynard, do you agree that the 66 books are God's word? It is self-evident that they are God's word; I think that probably the proposition that "The Bible is God's Word" is common ground between you & I.
The Bible is the only document that I know of that is God's Word. Now if you have some other document that you claim is also God's word, bring it forth & prove it is God's Word.
What other document is generally available to men on earth is God's Word, beside the Bible? If you have no such document, will you not be in the Sola Scriptura situation?
The Bible is the only document that I know of that is God's Word. Now if you have some other document that you claim is also God's word, bring it forth & prove it is God's Word.
What other document is generally available to men on earth is God's Word, beside the Bible? If you have no such document, will you not be in the Sola Scriptura situation?
Not to be mouthy and just stating.....DAY unto DAY setteth forth speech and Night unto Night sets forth knowledge...NO language where their voice is not heard...THE invisible things of GOD testify and are seen and understood by creation...to some extent creation does speak if humanity will listen.......just a few points to ponder......otherwise I agree......! Psalm 19, Romans 1
Last edited:
Maynard, say hello to Dobie for me.
The Lord Jesus taught that His sheep heard His voice. That implies that the Children of God, Believers in the Lord Jesus as only & sufficient Savior (not as mere "chance-giver), discern God's Word intuitively. The early Christians received God's word from the prophets & apostles as it was produced by the Lord through them. When the Corinthians received prophet Paul's Word of God they were responsible at once to obey it; same with all the rest of the Bible. And BTW, the Thessalonians were commended for recognizing and accepting the prophetic word from Paul.
This idea of "canon" is a blatant error. The early Christians did not wait around 300 years for ecclesiasticals in beard & clerical garb to tell them what was scripture, God's Word. Peter already recognized Paul's letters as scripture. And the NT no where tells Christians that they have no scripture until 300 years later.
The Body of Christ in its individual members (the Actual catholic universal Church) accepted God's word as it came out, because "My sheep hear My voice."
Now what is your primary position?
Is it that the Catholic denomination is true because the Bible says so?
Or is it that the Bible is true because the Catholic denomination says so?
You can't have it both ways without doing circular reasoning.
The Lord Jesus taught that His sheep heard His voice. That implies that the Children of God, Believers in the Lord Jesus as only & sufficient Savior (not as mere "chance-giver), discern God's Word intuitively. The early Christians received God's word from the prophets & apostles as it was produced by the Lord through them. When the Corinthians received prophet Paul's Word of God they were responsible at once to obey it; same with all the rest of the Bible. And BTW, the Thessalonians were commended for recognizing and accepting the prophetic word from Paul.
This idea of "canon" is a blatant error. The early Christians did not wait around 300 years for ecclesiasticals in beard & clerical garb to tell them what was scripture, God's Word. Peter already recognized Paul's letters as scripture. And the NT no where tells Christians that they have no scripture until 300 years later.
The Body of Christ in its individual members (the Actual catholic universal Church) accepted God's word as it came out, because "My sheep hear My voice."
Now what is your primary position?
Is it that the Catholic denomination is true because the Bible says so?
Or is it that the Bible is true because the Catholic denomination says so?
You can't have it both ways without doing circular reasoning.
Dcon: Let me ask you to reconsider that claim. First, what is your proof that 2 definite articles and a be verb make statements interchangeable in Greek?
Second, God is love. But the abstract principle of love is not God. It is a graphic figure of speech to emphasize that God is loving.
Neither is the Spirit of God some abstract principle. He is a person.
Consider this quote:
"Howbeit when he, the Spirit of (the*) truth, is come, he shall guide you into all the truth:" ( *In Greek the article is there.)
Now if the Spirit = truth, & truth = the Spirit, then you could translate the above:
"Howbeit, when he, the Truth of the truth is come"
Or you could translate it:
"Howbeit when he, the Spirit of the Spirit is come . . . ."
What results is nonsense.
Second, God is love. But the abstract principle of love is not God. It is a graphic figure of speech to emphasize that God is loving.
Neither is the Spirit of God some abstract principle. He is a person.
Consider this quote:
"Howbeit when he, the Spirit of (the*) truth, is come, he shall guide you into all the truth:" ( *In Greek the article is there.)
Now if the Spirit = truth, & truth = the Spirit, then you could translate the above:
"Howbeit, when he, the Truth of the truth is come"
Or you could translate it:
"Howbeit when he, the Spirit of the Spirit is come . . . ."
What results is nonsense.
Of can be translated of or from and both indicate source.....The Spirit is the TRUTH and an over all view of pnuema (breath) and that which is SPOKEN indicates what is being said.....The Spirit OF/From the truth...
Second...No scriptures that state....The GOD IS THE LOVE as Love is a characteristic of GOD where as there are numerous verses that indicate the interchangeability of truth and spirit
The Spirit goes before and leads and guides into ALL truth
The words that I speak unto you ARE SPIRIT and they are ALSO TRUTH as well as LIFE....IT is the SPIRIT that RAISED JESUS from the dead...IF the spirit that raised up Jesus dwell in YOU
GOD's word IS SPIRITUAL and TRUTH at the same time..
1st John 5:6 .....because THE SPIRIT IS THE TRUTH<---definite article is in the Greek and left out of the King Jimmy
The CAR is THE automobile
The Earth is THE PLANET
THE COW is THE BEEF
Quite simple to me.....
Lastly your reference to John's gospel contradicts the way it was written so....I have no problem with viewing it the way it was given in 1st John 5 and both statement are correct
When the Spirit of the Truth is come he will lead and guide you into all truth and
The spirit is the truth....BOTH are correct and biblical!
Not to mention that my reference was to 1st John 5:6 and NOT the gospel of John.....
Two definite articles point to what is known and the be verb shows state of being!
Second...No scriptures that state....The GOD IS THE LOVE as Love is a characteristic of GOD where as there are numerous verses that indicate the interchangeability of truth and spirit
The Spirit goes before and leads and guides into ALL truth
The words that I speak unto you ARE SPIRIT and they are ALSO TRUTH as well as LIFE....IT is the SPIRIT that RAISED JESUS from the dead...IF the spirit that raised up Jesus dwell in YOU
GOD's word IS SPIRITUAL and TRUTH at the same time..
1st John 5:6 .....because THE SPIRIT IS THE TRUTH<---definite article is in the Greek and left out of the King Jimmy
The CAR is THE automobile
The Earth is THE PLANET
THE COW is THE BEEF
Quite simple to me.....
Lastly your reference to John's gospel contradicts the way it was written so....I have no problem with viewing it the way it was given in 1st John 5 and both statement are correct
When the Spirit of the Truth is come he will lead and guide you into all truth and
The spirit is the truth....BOTH are correct and biblical!
Not to mention that my reference was to 1st John 5:6 and NOT the gospel of John.....
Two definite articles point to what is known and the be verb shows state of being!
Last edited:
Those letters you speak of.
Is 'The Letters of Ignatious, Bishop of Antioch' scripture? Is 'Justin Martyr's Dialogue with Trypho' scripture? Is the 'Letter of Ignatious to the Romans' scripture? Is Tertullian's 'On Baptism' scripture? Etc.. etc.. etc..
My classes this semester alone include Old Testament Pentateuch and Historical Books, Church History, and Patristics (the writings of the Church Fathers, i.e. those letters you mention).
Your condescending response however does not answer my question.
Yes the early Christians wrote and shared those letters - many of which the Church did not include in the biblical canon (scripture). So what we (including Jason) call "scripture" is something quite different than the body of writings which Christians read in those early centuries of Christianity. And so "sola scriptura" could not have even possibly existed for centuries after the birth of Christianity.
You simply cannot connect the dots, dcon. None of you can.
Your arguments typically amount to nothing more than emotional spasms. Utterly lacking any real foundation.
Is 'The Letters of Ignatious, Bishop of Antioch' scripture? Is 'Justin Martyr's Dialogue with Trypho' scripture? Is the 'Letter of Ignatious to the Romans' scripture? Is Tertullian's 'On Baptism' scripture? Etc.. etc.. etc..
My classes this semester alone include Old Testament Pentateuch and Historical Books, Church History, and Patristics (the writings of the Church Fathers, i.e. those letters you mention).
Your condescending response however does not answer my question.
Yes the early Christians wrote and shared those letters - many of which the Church did not include in the biblical canon (scripture). So what we (including Jason) call "scripture" is something quite different than the body of writings which Christians read in those early centuries of Christianity. And so "sola scriptura" could not have even possibly existed for centuries after the birth of Christianity.
You simply cannot connect the dots, dcon. None of you can.
Your arguments typically amount to nothing more than emotional spasms. Utterly lacking any real foundation.
Ok...whatever! Catholics will taint history, cover up history and reject history because it contradicts Catholic dogma......I could care less what the men you named teach, taught and or wrote about....My bible...Which overrides Catholic dogma teaches me that they shared the Letters written by the Apostles so.....swallow hook, line and sinker the pseudo history that you are learning and remain blind to the truth Maynard...The Catholic (so called church) does not teach the truth whatsoever at all........The worship of men, bones, hair samples and finger nail clippings and images of weeping women prove the heretical stance of the Catholic (so called church)....so like I said...remain in darkness if that is what you choose to do MAYNARD! Just like right now on Aljazeera news...poor blind people praying to some stupid statue and pictures of some so called saints that have been sainted by some mere man....crying shame for sure!
The key words must be 2 Timothy 3:16-17
"All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works."
In order for all scripture to be so useful, all of it must be easily and uniformly understood by each reader without dissension among us, else it is not so profitable for those unable to understand it all. It is not given to us like two miss matched oxen unable to plow a straight furrow.That can't be due to confusion within the scriptures themselves since it is given by inspiration from God, and is perfect. I think the problem among many is a feeling the scriptures need to be interpreted again over and over, when it is sufficient to receive the translations into a language the reader can use. When existing translations were made the issue of transmission of meanings was settled before going to print. I find it easy to understand the more difficult passages upon matching them with other scriptures usually not many pages away, which requires much study of all the canonized scriptures. That becomes distorted when trying to mix in the apocrypha and other conflicting messages, doctrines of men, and stray traditions.
My opinion about 'three words of God' is there is only one Word of God which came by various means, that is, recorded spoken words (Gr. rhema) attributed to the three Godhead persons and those of mortal men; by record of acts of God (and men) such as the original inscription of Law on the stone tablets given to Moses, and other events witnessed by people; and by inspiration from God the Father and angels as in Daniel's experiences, the prophets, and contributions of the apostles by recall of what they saw and heard, amplified by the Holy Spirit, all recorded in letters (Gr. logos) by men. The textual scriptures are God's chosen manner of delivery of those records spoken and or inspired long ago. All the words from God, the recorded acts of God, and the eternal person of Jesus as revealed in the Bible constitute one Word of God.
An idea that supports that in me is the fact Jesus didn't take credit for anything He spoke or did (Jn 14:10), but spoke only what the Father said, and He did only what the Father did. When Jesus quoted scriptures as His teaching authority, by that same principle it was the Father God quoting His own word through Jesus. In other words Jesus didn't originate the words He delivered, like all true prophets of God per 2Peter 1:20-21. That's good enough for me to call all of holy scripture as represented in the Bible texts the one Word of God. That was embodied in Jesus such that because He totally lived by that word from Heaven he is called by God "The Word of God". One Word of God brought to us by several means, today entirely contained in the 66 books of the Bible.
Enjoying your discussion very much!
"All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works."
In order for all scripture to be so useful, all of it must be easily and uniformly understood by each reader without dissension among us, else it is not so profitable for those unable to understand it all. It is not given to us like two miss matched oxen unable to plow a straight furrow.That can't be due to confusion within the scriptures themselves since it is given by inspiration from God, and is perfect. I think the problem among many is a feeling the scriptures need to be interpreted again over and over, when it is sufficient to receive the translations into a language the reader can use. When existing translations were made the issue of transmission of meanings was settled before going to print. I find it easy to understand the more difficult passages upon matching them with other scriptures usually not many pages away, which requires much study of all the canonized scriptures. That becomes distorted when trying to mix in the apocrypha and other conflicting messages, doctrines of men, and stray traditions.
My opinion about 'three words of God' is there is only one Word of God which came by various means, that is, recorded spoken words (Gr. rhema) attributed to the three Godhead persons and those of mortal men; by record of acts of God (and men) such as the original inscription of Law on the stone tablets given to Moses, and other events witnessed by people; and by inspiration from God the Father and angels as in Daniel's experiences, the prophets, and contributions of the apostles by recall of what they saw and heard, amplified by the Holy Spirit, all recorded in letters (Gr. logos) by men. The textual scriptures are God's chosen manner of delivery of those records spoken and or inspired long ago. All the words from God, the recorded acts of God, and the eternal person of Jesus as revealed in the Bible constitute one Word of God.
An idea that supports that in me is the fact Jesus didn't take credit for anything He spoke or did (Jn 14:10), but spoke only what the Father said, and He did only what the Father did. When Jesus quoted scriptures as His teaching authority, by that same principle it was the Father God quoting His own word through Jesus. In other words Jesus didn't originate the words He delivered, like all true prophets of God per 2Peter 1:20-21. That's good enough for me to call all of holy scripture as represented in the Bible texts the one Word of God. That was embodied in Jesus such that because He totally lived by that word from Heaven he is called by God "The Word of God". One Word of God brought to us by several means, today entirely contained in the 66 books of the Bible.
Enjoying your discussion very much!
Great passage, which I would translate "expired of God." Theopneustos.
All of God's word is not uniformly understood by each reader without dissension. Peter says that there are difficult things to understand in Paul. Understanding is always less than perfect, but quite sufficient for salvation & all things that pertain to godliness. Even when it is less than 100 percent understood, we may read and the Spirit may use it in our lives.