Would you say Scripture is a reliable source for our instruction on its own?Del wrote: ↑Mon Oct 02, 2017 11:47 amThe Apostolic answer to the bolded questions above:Jester wrote: ↑Mon Oct 02, 2017 8:58 amI read through most of the Sola threads before posting this thread. I found this argument to be the most used. In fact this argument is the foundation of the other arguments against sola Scriptura. Not only do I find this an extremely weak argument (that was addressed by Luther himself), but I also find the basis of the argument to be void by the substance of the accusation. Reformers believe Scripture alone and the accusation attacks individuals apart from Scripture? Gods Word is insufficient because John Doe is illiterate?
I understand that the Word of God in the hands of any man can and will cause individual interpretation. I find this to be the same argument for taking citizens weapons. Some will be untrained, irresponsible and some may even use them to harm others or themselves. Therefore confiscate all weapons. The fact that someone can interpret Scripture to mean anything they want it to does not negate the fact that Scripture has one interpretation and it itself is sufficient for all knowledge of saving faith.
This does not reject the church, if anything it should solidify a Scripture teaching church. The church should be able to correctly teach what is in Scripture but to say that because Goose church cant do it also majorly points out that the Catholic and Orthodox church cant either. Which drives to the heart of the doctrine of sola Scriptura. All churches are under the authority of Christ by fallible men. When fallible men start to go astray we have a solid baseline that is sufficient for all teaching, rebuke, correction and training in righteousness so that the servant of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work.
What's really scary is that some may even get so pompous that they find their own knowledge of God to be so right that it is infallible. Getting so lofty they shoot their righteous arrows at the poor goose below them.
The Reformers were wrong because Scripture was never intended by God to be the only reliable source for our instruction. The New Testament Scriptures were written by the Apostles for Christians who had already been instructed in the basics of Christian faith by the Apostles. Sola Scriptura is a man-made doctrine opposed even to Scripture, and we all know the man who invented it.
As to the "illiteracy" of John Doe: It is also the great biblical scholars from the Reformation to the present day who cannot find enough evidence in Scripture to agree on the most basic Christian beliefs, including whether or not any of the 5 Solas are valid.The Bible wrote:15 So then, brothers and sisters, stand firm and hold fast to the teachings[c] we passed on to you, whether by word of mouth or by letter.
(c) 2 Thessalonians 2:15 Or traditions
translation and notes according to the NIV
Some basic questions that confound the children of the Reformation:
- What happens in Baptism?
- Should children be baptized?
- What happens in the Lord's Supper/Eucharist? How often should we celebrate it?
- What happens when a Christian dies?
The Apostles were not confused about these things, and were quick to correct those who were mistaken (e.g., 1 Thessalonians, 1 Corinthians).
Yet the practical experience from the experimental dogma of Sola Scriptura has been that we should be confused, and no one can correct us.
This is why the Reformation failed in its first generation.
I have never been to anything Catholic in my life and I agree these are basic questions. Basic questions you can find in Scripture alone. Now if your argument is you also need some information outside of Scripture for saving faith then it is on Catholicism to prove it and not the Scripture only crowd. Catholicism must prove to every other denomination that Scripture is insufficient, not teachable, rebuking, correcting and not sufficiently training in righteousness so that the man of God can be equipped for every good work.