More on the Sola Scriptura ComBox Discussion at Nick’s Catholic Blog

lozeerose said…

For the Protestant: If the matter is solely inspiration then I pose a few questions::
1. Outside of 2 Tim 3:16, how do you know the Bible, especially the NT canon, is inspired? Is there some prophecy or reference n the OT.
2. If the canon was not already established, how do you go about defining the canon? If there is a TOC in the Scripture, please identify.
3. Under whose authority did Luther remove the 6 Deuterocanonical texts and why should we trust a disgruntled ex-priest? Was his work inspired? If so, please provide evidence. If, not why follow a heretic?
4. Please respond to how the word found in John 20:21, “When he had said this, he breathed on them; and he said to them: Receive ye the Holy Spirit.” And 2 Thes 2:15, “Therefore, brethren, stand fast; and hold the traditions which you have learned, whether by word, or by our epistle.” Also 1 Peter 1:20, “Understanding this first, that no prophecy of scripture is made by private interpretation.” All favor Sola Fide?

Rhology said…

Anonymous:
The canon of the Bible refers to the definitive list of the books which are considered to be divine revelation and included therein

Just remember this, however:
1) The RCC does not have a definite closed Canon of Scripture, fallible OR infallible
2) For a Sola Scripturist like me, the Canon of Scr is my list of infallible, authoritative teachings. For the RC, “Sacred Tradition” + Scripture + Magisterial teaching are infallible, authoritative teachings. Where is RCC’s infallible list of those teachings? Nowhere.
3) For that matter, where is ANY, FALLIBLE list of those teachings? Also nowhere.
So actually, the Sola Scripturist is in a better position with respect to this question.

Joe Heschmeyer,

Yeah, he’s right on

Thanks for letting me know. Unfortunately, what lozeerose said was largely incoherent, so…so much the worse for your position.

(1) 2 Tim 3:13-17 originally referred to the OT

Of course it did – v 15 makes that very clear.
Yet by extension, it doesn’t say “Only the Scripture that has been given up to this day”; it says “All Scripture”. So that point doesn’t do anything for you.

Paul’s Acts 11 sermon has a profound set of OT prophesies

Yes, definitely. I don’t know how that’s relevant to this question, though. It’s not as if I’m New-Testament-only.

Proving Scripture is God-breathed doesn’t prove that only Scripture is God-breathed.

One would think that it might refer to another God-breathed source, then, rather than explicitly instructing us to subject all so-called authoritative tradition to the standard of Scripture to be judged by it.

But inscripturization is an extra-Biblical tradition.

What does that even mean? It’s not a “tradition” – it’s an event.

How do we know that what was delivered once remains pure? There are two ways. First, the Holy Spirit. Second, the Church

Or…one way – the Scripture.
Especially if you want to test whether the Church is getting it right. It IS made up of sinful people, after all.

Peace,
Rhology

lozeerose said…

To Rhology
1)No defined Canon of ScriptureYou are wrong here. The Church does have an infallibly defined set of Scripture canon 27 books in the New & 46 in the Old. The Church is infallible & scripture is inerrant. But which came first the Canon or the Church?
2)Canon of Scr is my list of infallible, authoritative teachings.You said it here – my li Who gave you the authority to define canon? Plus your extension of infallibility to SS is incorrect. SS is inerrant & the canon was infallibly defined. Infallibility, is inability to teach error. This prevents the Church from proclaiming dogmatic error. Sacred Tradition is inerrant but what is defined as such is done so infallibly. The mechanism for such definition is the Magisterium which is infallible in the matter of faith & morals (see 2 Thes 2:15 & Matt 16:18). There is nothing that is infallibly taught by the Church that can be contradicted in Scripture, yet sola sciptura is in itself without scriptural founding. & for a list of teachings please refer to the Catechism
3) For that matter, where is ANY, FALLIBLE list of those teachings? Also nowhere. The CCC. Read it & know what, why & how the Church truly believes.So actually, the Sola Scripturist is in a better position with respect to this question. Do you have more verification for this in scripture or even proof that the first Christians also believed this. As far as history can tell this only came about during the “Reformation.”

lozeerose said…

Responding to a comment made through a response of Joe H.’s comment
Thanks for letting me know. Unfortunately, what lozeerose said was largely incoherent, so…so much the worse for your position. Really, so why not refute my arguments directly? Or for that matter answer the 4 questions of my previous comment?
(1) 2 Tim 3:13-17 originally referred to the OT Yet by extension, it doesn’t say “…up to this day”; it says “All Scripture”. So that point doesn’t do anything for you. You are reading into scripture what you wish. NT canon was not defined then plus, the inspired author’s did not know they were being “inspired” with exception to John when he penned the book of Revelation.”
Paul’s Acts 11 sermon has a profound set of OT prophesies
Yes, definitely. I don’t know how that’s relevant to this question, though. It’s not as if I’m New-Testament-only. Goes to further my original point that references to inspired scripture always went back to the OT as the NT was being written & not yet recognized by all as “inspired.”
Proving Scripture is God-breathed doesn’t prove that only Scripture is God-breathed.
One would think that it might refer to another God-breathed source, then, rather than explicitly instructing us to subject all so-called authoritative tradition to the standard of Scripture to be judged by it. John 20:21 says that Jesus, who is God, breathed on the apostles & sent them…to forgive sins. But of course, a similar thing happened at Pentecost: “And suddenly a sound came from heaven like the rush of a mighty wind, & it filled all the house where they were sitting (Acts 2:2).” & they went on to fulfill Mt 16:18 – the Church, which is the”the household of God…the church of the living God, the pillar & bulwark of the truth (1 Tim 3:15). Oh & take Acts 2:2 back to Genesis 1:2, 2:7 & 3:8 where the verbs moving, breathed & walking were, if I recall correctly, all the same in the original Hebrew & all referred to wind/breathing.
How do we know that what was delivered once remains pure?
Or…one way – the Scripture. Well who’s going to interpret scripture & get it right? apparently I can go to several churches of the same protestant denomination & get a whole slew of contradicting interpretations on scripture “For God is not a God of confusion but of peace… (1 Cor 14:33)?” Also consider Paul’s appeal in 1 Cor 1:10, “I appeal to you, brethren, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that all of you agree & that there be no dissensions among you, but that you be united in the same mind & the same judgment.”
Especially if you want to test whether the Church is getting it right. It IS made up of sinful people, after all. But is protected from teaching error by He Who is not sin or sinful.

Come join the fray won’t you?

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s