Why Sola Scriptura Honestly Scares Me

http://www.patheos.com ^ | July 22, 2013 | Ryan Adams

[BipolarBob]

Above all, he cites the authoritative tradition of the Church of Rome

If this is actually correct (and who knows for certain?), then Irenaeus was erroneous. All the more reason to stick to the Word of God rather than man.

[Gamecock]

Because it disrupts the Roman Catholic meme.

[Gamecock]

by oral and practical tradition in the churches which the Apostles founded

And why should we believe that THAT wasn't distorted over time? We know that they so called fathers didn't agree on everything? Who is correct?

Tis why we rely on Scripture.

[don-o]

We do know of a Jewish carpenter....

Please cite Scripture for that.

Why is it a stretch to acknowledge that there were thousands of copies of various books that what we now call the NT being read in various Christian assemblies before Rome consolidated it’s power?

Acknowledge? You mean imagine, don't you? There was nothing to read for several years and there was confusion on what to read once purported documents began to appear. "The Gospel of Thomas" sounds pretty interesting. The Apostle who actually touched the Risen Lord? Wouldn't he have some valuable things to relate?

[Mrs. Don-o]

"His Church and the RCC are two completely different things"

Not "completely" different things. The word "Church" can be and is correctly used in senses which include both RCC's and many people who would never even have heard the term "Roman Catholic."

We say the Church founded by Jesus Christ "subsists" in the Catholic Church. Which means that elements of truth and sanctification exist also outside of the visible limits of Roman Catholicism (LINK)

It's worth looking into, if you're actually interested in what the Catholic Church teaches.

[BipolarBob]

Who said a carpenter was poor?

My exhaustive work on the minimum wage on carpenters on in that period says so. So you propose that Joseph and Mary were well to do folks? 1 percenters? Did Joseph land a big fat government contract job for making crosses to crucify criminals? Why would anyone think Joseph to be a man of means? Jesus had humble beginnings here on earth. No life of leisure for Him.

[Mrs. Don-o]

Oops, I meant to say "Jerusalem, Antioch, Constantinople, Alexandria, and Rome. Alexandria was big.

[GeronL]

They paid taxes, they traveled to Jerusalem at least once. They didn’t live in a cave or a dirt/mud hovel. Joseph had a skill that was probably in demand.

I never said they were wealthy.

[BipolarBob]

We do know of a Jewish carpenter.... Please cite Scripture for that.

Luke 4:16 it's in the Bible if you read it. Do I need to give a reference that He could write as well?

[don-o]

If you had been converted on the Day of Pentecost, how would you have learned about your new faith?

[don-o]

Where does that say that Jesus was a carpenter? If you are going to insist “like father, like son” then you are getting into tradition and cultural norms.

[BipolarBob]

Where does that say that Jesus was a carpenter?

It was the cultural norm for the eldest son to follow in His fathers footsteps. I would say most Biblical scholars believed that Jesus worked in Josephs shop to help out. But if you disagree, what occupation do you think He had and why?

[Gamecock]

***Please cite Scripture for that.**

You have got to be kidding.

Luke 4:16 He went to Nazareth, where he had been brought up, and on the Sabbath day he went into the synagogue, as was his custom. He stood up to read,

**You mean imagine, don't you?**

No. I don't. Jesus expected some to read:

Matthew 19:4 “Haven’t you read,” he replied, “that at the beginning the Creator ‘made them male and female,’

Matthew 12:3 He answered, “Haven’t you read what David did when he and his companions were hungry?

Matthew 12:5 Or haven’t you read in the Law that the priests on Sabbath duty in the temple desecrate the Sabbath and yet are innocent?

Matthew 21:16 “Do you hear what these children are saying?” they asked him. “Yes,” replied Jesus, “have you never read, “‘From the lips of children and infants you, Lord, have called forth your praise’?”

Matthew 24:15 “So when you see standing in the holy place ‘the abomination that causes desolation,’ spoken of through the prophet Daniel—let the reader understand— (I guess there were no readers, according to your argument)

Acts 15:21 For the law of Moses has been preached in every city from the earliest times and is read in the synagogues on every Sabbath.”

Acts 15:31 The people read it and were glad for its encouraging message. (What people read it? They were illiterate, were they not? </sarc>

2 Corinthians 3:2 You yourselves are our letter, written on our hearts, known and read by everyone.

[Mrs. Don-o]

But the Word of God as existing in the ancient manuscripts, was not all bound up as one Book, nor did it have a Table of Contents or an Index. There was no internal indication of who wrote the most important ones. The Gospels (and Acts) are anonymous, in that none of them name an author, and likewise the five books of the Torah.

How do we know, or think we know, that Moses was the author of the Torah and Matthew, Mark, Luke and John are the authors of their respective Gospels. None of them are actually signed, nor do they name an author.

You have no (internal) Binblical definition of what the Bible IS. Whuich bnooks. Which authors. Nowhere in the actual manuscripts is there a 66-book or 73-book or 83-book list of what's IN the Bible.

We know only through Oral Tradition, that is, what has come down to us as commentary, scribal notes or interpretation, later of course written down itself.

That's what Irenaeus cited. That's how he refuted the Gnostics, who were pushing their own, spurious set of Scriptures.

Aren't you glad Irenaeus did that? Otherwise you might have been raised a Gnostic!

[Mrs. Don-o]

You wouldn’t even know what Scripture IS without these guys.

[WVKayaker]

If you had been converted on the Day of Pentecost, how would you have learned about your new faith?

What does that question have to do with the thread's theme?

There were lots of people in the Upper Room. We see in Acts 1 a number of 120. We do not know the number in that upper room on the day of Pentecost. But, Peter preached to the Jews that were present. That was Peter's ministry, to the JEWS. Paul, the oft overlooked (by RC's) writer of most of the New Testament, was the ministers to the world at large. If anyone holds the role of the earthly head of the new church, it would be Paul.

You can keep posting all of your catechism teachings, but It does not agree with Scripture on the basic tenets of Christianity. Only the Word of God, as led by His Holy Spirit, illuminates our hearts to believe!

Acts 2" 17 “‘In the last days, God says,
I will pour out my Spirit on all people.
Your sons and daughters will prophesy,
your young men will see visions,
your old men will dream dreams.
18 Even on my servants, both men and women,
I will pour out my Spirit in those days,
and they will prophesy.
19 I will show wonders in the heavens above
and signs on the earth below,
blood and fire and billows of smoke.
20 The sun will be turned to darkness
and the moon to blood
before the coming of the great and glorious day of the Lord.
21 And everyone who calls
on the name of the Lord will be saved.’

[gitmo]

I’ve never known believers who follow this model of scripture interpretation. I doubt this writer was really in a Bible based community of believers.

[Gamecock]

You underestimate what God can do. He just happened to use them, like he used others throughout Scripture.

No kudos to the Roman Catholics on this one.

[don-o]

Post 244 begins:

(Gamecock):We do know of a Jewish carpenter....

(don-o): Please cite Scripture for that.

--------------------------------

Let me elaborate. Please cite Scripture that affirms that Jesus was a carpenter.

[don-o]

What does that question have to do with the thread's theme?

It has to do with question I asked in post 210. A few have kind of engaged in discussion of THAT question.

For you consideration, here is my question:

The question this raises is this: What was the means by which (corr typo) the early church (for at least a couple hundred years) was kept free from error? How was anyone to know to not consult, say, The Gospel of Thomas?