Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Book Review: 100 Biblical Arguments Against Sola Scriptura
Vivificat - from Contemplation to Action ^ | July 3, 2012 | TDJ

Posted on 07/03/2012 9:31:36 AM PDT by Teˇfilo

Another nail in the coffin of the foundational Protestant dogma

Sola scriptura is dead, or at least is undead, a zombie still stalking the darkened hallways of Protestantism. Many well-meaning Protestant Christians don’t see the zombie-dogma for what it is; instead, they choose to see it as a being of light. My friend Dave Armstrong has returned to blow the old decrepit sola scriptura monsters one at a time in his latest work, 100 Biblical Arguments Against Sola Scriptura100 Biblical Arguments Against Sola Scriptura.

Let’s recall the definition of the sola scriptura dogma – yes, it is a dogma – as understood by Norman Geisler, a recognized Protestant authority Dave quotes in his work:

By sola scriptura orthodox Protestants mean that Scripture alone is the primary and absolute source of authority, the final court of appeal, for all doctrine and practice (faith and morals)… (p.16)
Geisler, and other authorities Dave quotes, further explain that other authorities exist, but that these are of secondary importance. Geisler also defends what he calls the perspicuity of Holy Writ, which means that anyone can understand the basic truths of Scripture: the plain things are the main things and the main things are the plain things, Geisler states. (p.17). As a true analyst, Dave separated the sola scriptura dogma into its constituents claims, found out its contents, examined its individual parts, and studied the structure of sola scriptura as whole. He found them defective and insufficient to expound and explain the full spectrum of Christian claims.

Dave kills the sola scriptura zombie by selecting 100 verses from Scripture contradicting this central Protestant claim. I guess he selected 100 verses because the number “100” gives the reader a sense of exhaustive answer and completion, not because there are only 100 verses that should make all sincere Protestant Christian at least uncomfortable with the teaching. In fact, Dave is the author of another related work, 501 Biblical Arguments Against Sola Scriptura: Is the Bible the Only Infallible Authority?, which is useful if you need another 401 arguments to kill the sola scriptura zombie dead.

100 Biblical Arguments Against Sola Scriptura. is a distillation of the 501 Biblical Arguments… in a more manageable, less overwhelming fashion for the beginning reader. It’s 133 pages in length and divided into two parts. In Part 1 Dave discusses the binding authority of Tradition, as substantiated in Scripture, and in Part 2 he discusses the binding authority of the Church, again from Scripture. The result must be uncontestable to the sincere Protestant Christian as well as eye opening to the full range of deeds and wonders the Incarnation of the Word of God brought to history.Will the sola scriptura zombie really die after Dave’s work? This is a senseless question because the zombie is already dead. It’s kept ambulating by strings pulled from the most diehard of its followers. Those strings must be cut by the individual, sincere Protestant Christian himself. Dave Armstrong’s work, 100 Biblical Arguments Against Sola Scriptura100 Biblical Arguments Against Sola Scriptura. not only blows the zombie of sola scriptura away, he also provides the truth-searcher with the scissors to cut off the strings.


TOPICS: Apologetics; Catholic; Evangelical Christian; Mainline Protestant
KEYWORDS:
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 401-420421-440441-460 ... 501-503 next last
To: Uri┬ĺel-2012; Tao Yin; .45 Long Colt; BipolarBob; Springfield Reformer; Nervous Tick
“Shekinah” — so do you mean that Jesus was just a resting place for God? Just a vessel?

Ok, so the body or figure of a man on whom God's spirit dwelt until the cross?

421 posted on 07/04/2012 11:25:26 PM PDT by Cronos (**Marriage is about commitment, cohabitation is about convenience.**)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 384 | View Replies]

To: Belteshazzar
well, we've had disputes about the exact number.

I do admit that I'm troubled by some factionalism -- I'll take the Lutheran point of view for instance. Of course the ELCA is no longer Lutheran, but the conservative groups like WELS or LCMS should, in my humble, outsider's perspective, no longer be separate acronyms but one conservative Lutheran Church. Let individual parishes keep their own administration but the basic tenets are to be locked, unviolable. Dividing up conservative forces makes it easier for us to get picked on one by one

422 posted on 07/04/2012 11:29:27 PM PDT by Cronos (**Marriage is about commitment, cohabitation is about convenience.**)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 388 | View Replies]

To: Belteshazzar
We have been since the coming of the Christ Agreed and agree with you on the rest of your post.
423 posted on 07/04/2012 11:30:30 PM PDT by Cronos (**Marriage is about commitment, cohabitation is about convenience.**)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 392 | View Replies]

To: .45 Long Colt
.45 --> "I know extent of the claim to infallibility"

But you got it wrong when your post called the pope infallible. Papal infallibility has nothing to do with the fallibilty of the person itself holding that office — who is a fallible being. P.i. is specifically that on matters of doctrine, when pronouncing a decision on matters and only when spoken with the authority invested in the chair of Peter, under the grace of God and thanks to the Holy Spirit — only that decision is infallible.

I humbly submit that you did not correctly state what papal infallibility is

424 posted on 07/04/2012 11:32:36 PM PDT by Cronos (**Marriage is about commitment, cohabitation is about convenience.**)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 400 | View Replies]

To: .45 Long Colt; Rashputin; Natural Law
.45 --> " See if the claims of Rome are in line with the Word"

i have, and they are. Again, don't assume that Catholics don't read the written Word of God and worship with The Word -- Jesus Christ.

Also, your two statements are in opposition to each other, if you say that "I have studied" and at the same time say " Resting on the teachings of" -- your first statement is wrong

The Church rests on the Word of God -- Jesus Christ. All the rest are commentaries or elaborations on the Word.

I again submit that you have not adequately studied the Church.

425 posted on 07/04/2012 11:36:01 PM PDT by Cronos (**Marriage is about commitment, cohabitation is about convenience.**)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 400 | View Replies]

To: Iscool

Go back to reading the Kroan.


426 posted on 07/04/2012 11:40:13 PM PDT by Cronos (**Marriage is about commitment, cohabitation is about convenience.**)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 337 | View Replies]

To: .45 Long Colt; verga
.45, you are jumping topic. Let's review. you said in post 85 claiming that Roman Catholics gave us the Bible.

to which verga asked you So where did the Bible come from? Who decided that Matthew was in and the Gosple of Peter was out? Who decided that Philemon was in and the Didache was out?

Hint Councils of Hippo and Carthage 393 and 397 respectively.

your statement There was broad consensus, often before 100 A.D., among the early Christians as to which books were inspired and which ones were not is incorrect -- because for instance the Revelation of John was right until the 300s rejected by most communities as non-inspired. The Georgian Orthodox Church doesn't include it in its canon

the question still holds -- "And how do you know what’s authentic Scripture and what isn’t?" on what basis would you say that the Shepherd of Hermes is not to be added in? And also note that Luther called the Epistle of St. James as the epistle of straw and, also Jewish canon was only closed in AD 70 -- yes, 40 odd years after Christ's death,

Marcion ws the first to put together a Biblical canon: This included 10 epistles from St. Paul, as well as a version of the Gospel of Luke, which today is known as the Gospel of Marcion.

Or, Origen of Alexandria whose canon include all of the books in the current Catholic canon except for four books: James, 2nd Peter, and the 2nd and 3rd epistles of John but included the Shepherd of Hermas

so how do you know that the list of inerrant books you have is complete or contains extra books?

As verga told you, this was due to the Holy Spirit acting in the councils of the Church.

So, while "Roman Catholics" as in verga and me from the 21st century :) didn't give you the Bible, the One Holy Apostolic Catholic Church, under the grace of God and the power of the Holy Spirit DID collect together and define the books that form canon

427 posted on 07/04/2012 11:50:30 PM PDT by Cronos (**Marriage is about commitment, cohabitation is about convenience.**)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 403 | View Replies]

To: LevinFan
"And Paul came along well after that, yet the book of Acts doesn’t read like a Catholic church."

Actually, it does. Note that the bit about Mary you bring up -- during the Mass where the High Priest is Jesus Christ, Mary is mentioned but once -- during the Creed.

In the Acts chapter one, one sees the start of Apostolic succession where Matthias is added to the 12 (or rather to the 11)

In chapter 2 one sees the spreading of Christianity beyond it's Hebrew/Aramaic/Greek language boundaries

In chapter 3 we see Peter in the name of Jesus Christ performing a miracle - and a miracle can only be performed in the name of God

so on, it takes about "And by the hands of the apostles were many signs and wonders wrought among the people" (Acts 5:12).

Later you read about the Grecian Jews saying that their widows were neglected in the daily ministration and the first appointment of Deacons -- just as we have in the Church today

You see Peter through the book of Acts as a person who, yes, inspite of himself is leading the way forward. He doesn't understand it, but God leads through Him -- from the baptism of the first gentile to the signs of the eating of erstwhile forbidden food.

And we see that in the Church where the only explanation for this role to continue is that God's grace is on it, nothing else. This is inspite of the few corrupt and even fewer incredibly corrupt men who have filled it.

in Acts 1:8 we see Jesus declaring that the Apostles should receive power when the Holy Ghost should come upon them, and should be His witnesses both in Jerusalem and in all Judea and Samaria, and unto the uttermost parts of the earth

The Church developed according to the plan conceived by Christ. Christ's great plan of the Church comes to fruition in Acts

Isn't it strange the the end of Acts (chapter 28) is in Rome? Jesus in Acts 1:8 says to take his message to the "ends of the earth" -- to Rome?

428 posted on 07/05/2012 12:03:58 AM PDT by Cronos (**Marriage is about commitment, cohabitation is about convenience.**)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 404 | View Replies]

To: LevinFan
The Church developed according to the plan conceived by Christ. Christ's great plan of the Church comes to fruition in Acts

Isn't it strange the the end of Acts (chapter 28) is in Rome? Jesus in Acts 1:8 says to take his message to the "ends of the earth" -- to Rome?

Rome formed a great Empire and God used this to spread His Word

Remember that saying “All roads lead to Rome.”? Christianity went to Rome, the roads' starting point of it's spread -- God's will. Rome is the symbol of this world-wide mission because Rome was the center of the known world to many in the 1st century

429 posted on 07/05/2012 12:06:47 AM PDT by Cronos (**Marriage is about commitment, cohabitation is about convenience.**)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 404 | View Replies]

To: LevinFan

We also read of the first developments of the Eucharist and Mass — Acts 2:46 and the works of the Spirit


430 posted on 07/05/2012 12:07:49 AM PDT by Cronos (**Marriage is about commitment, cohabitation is about convenience.**)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 404 | View Replies]

To: LevinFan; Natural Law
We’re told we worship a book, while they follow the words of men alone.

and here I thought you were the one who said not to distort the words of others. No one said to follow the words of men, alone or otherwise.

431 posted on 07/05/2012 12:24:00 AM PDT by Cronos (**Marriage is about commitment, cohabitation is about convenience.**)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 406 | View Replies]

To: .45 Long Colt
I pray the Lord opens your eyes. Your posts have consistently been wrong on this thread.. your posts have also consistently given false statements about what we Christians in the Church believe -- right from your post's false statement about infallibilty to the incorrect statement about mediatorship

To be fair, your statements look like they come out of a standard "this is why caflix are wrong" and are unresearched from Catholic sources.

For instance,


432 posted on 07/05/2012 12:29:29 AM PDT by Cronos (**Marriage is about commitment, cohabitation is about convenience.**)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 405 | View Replies]

To: xone

yes, sorry for that earlier error.


433 posted on 07/05/2012 1:07:10 AM PDT by Cronos (**Marriage is about commitment, cohabitation is about convenience.**)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 398 | View Replies]

To: Iscool
I'm willing to read the book but I refuse to send 9 something plus S&H to read what some crackpot thinks who doesn't believe the bible anyway... The guy may make his fortune off of gullible Catholics but I doubt many non Catholics will buy the book...

Iscool I find this very difficult to believe since on three occasions I have offered to send you FREE of CHARGE a copy of Tim Staples CD on how reading the Bible converted him to the Catholic Church. I am pleased to hear that you have changed your mind. Please Frremail me an address where I can send this to you at MY EXPENSE.

ISCOOL I am still waiting for you to freemail me that address so that I can send you FREE OF CHARGE, AT MY EXPENSE, GRATIS, AT NO COST TO YOU WHAT SO EVER, the copy of Tim Staples CD on how he was converted to the Catholic Church by Jimmy Swaggert and the Bible. Did I mention that it was FREE, and was NOT COSTING YOU ONE READ CENT?

I mean you made the point that you were more than willing to read something if it wasn't going to cost you anything. This is even easier all you have to do is listen.

434 posted on 07/05/2012 3:05:59 AM PDT by verga (Every single cult leader believes in home schooling....Think about it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 157 | View Replies]

To: Cronos
This discussion is very interesting, but before we get too much further, I have a question for you.

I am a believing, baptized, and practicing Christian. I do not now, and never will, practice Christianity as a Roman Catholic.

So here comes the question: Simply because I am not Roman Catholic -- in your viewpoint (I'm not asking you to "play God", just your view) -- is my soul salvation at risk? Or not?

I will answer your question about my "stand" in a separate reply.

FRegards

435 posted on 07/05/2012 4:38:10 AM PDT by Nervous Tick (Trust in God, but row away from the rocks!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 414 | View Replies]

To: Cronos

Maybe your should read some of the stuff others have said to me. One guy laughed at me because I have faith that the bible is the word of God, ordained and protected by Him. I’m pretty sure the Pope and I are in agreement on THAT point. I’m not convinced the guy who laughed is really even Christian. He didn’t seem to understand that faith is a gift from God.
But there were a few in this thread with little or no respect for the Written Word. To them, the bible is Harry Potter.
I’m fine with you. You seem to have a respect for His written Word, and even I listen to my teachers and pastor. but I test what they say against His word. But as I said in and earlier post, not all Catholics are united. Nor are all members of my church.
We have people who are instructed by their pastor to read His Word, and they still don’t. Old joke is that the best place to hide something from a christian is inside their bible.


436 posted on 07/05/2012 5:21:30 AM PDT by LevinFan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 431 | View Replies]

To: Cronos
What is your stand on:

1. something as basic as Jesus was always God (Trinitarian position) or that Jesus Christ was man made God (Oneness PENTECOSTAL Protestant position) or the Angel Michael (Seventh Day Adventist Ellen G White teaching) -- all three use scripture alone to justify their points of view and have three diverge in their points of view

John 1:1: "In the beginning was the WORD, and the WORD was with God, and the WORD WAS GOD". Jesus was, is, and ever shall be God.

2.[T]he REAL Presence of Christ in the Eucharist (Lutheran, some Anglicans, maybe even Methodists), or is it just a symbol (as your post said)?

Ah, I see how you work: you copied these talking points from another reply to someone else. :-) I never replied to you about this issue before.

Communion is not "merely" a memorial to Jesus (as Church of Christ, for example). Nor does the bread literally become the body of Christ. During Communion with Christ, Christ draws *very* near in a powerful way and connects to believers to hear the groanings of their souls. That's what "communion" with another is, right? (*That's* a Methodist view, by the way, although it's tough to articulate in one phrase. Methodists do *not* believe in transsubstantiation, or even consubstantiation.)

3.talking in tongues -- does one HAVE to talk in tongues (Oneness Pentecostal) to display faith or not?

No. Talking in tongues (and interpreting tongues) is but one spiritual gift that some believers have. Read 1 Corinthians 12 in its entirety, verse 4 of which says "Now there are diversities of gifts, but the same Spirit."

4.and the episcopate (bishops etc.) -- some who have scripture alone have it, some don't

The Church of Jesus Christ allows for elders (bishops) to guide the flock; Paul does a thorough job of setting down their qualifications and their duties in his letters to Timothy and Titus. A better question would be: are elders (bishops) congregational only, that is "no hierarchy", or is there scriptural justification for a "world hierarchy" of men who govern the church? In this, I adhere to the Church of Christ et al belief that elders are intended to be "congregational only", without hierarchy. However I don't believe that soul salvation hinges on this point.

5. Do you read in scripture alone whether Baptism is for infants and sufficient (Presbyterian etc.) or not (Baptists)?

Baptism of infants is OK but unnecessary; an infant is without sin. After the age of accountability, a believer must, and will, be baptized. A better question: is baptism for the remission of sins, or a sacrament of belief?

Baptism is never sufficient for salvation, of course; men are saved through God's grace, freely given, in the form of Jesus Christ.

6. God pre-damns people to hell (Calvinism) or not (others)

John 3:16: "For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life."

2 Peter 3:9 "The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance.

Calvinism is misguided but harmless in terms of men's souls. Think about it. :-)

7.Jesus came only for the salvation of a few (Calvinists) or he was Savior of the world (everyone else)?

Redundant question

8. agree or disagree with soul sleep?

Not sure I understand the question, but if you're asking what I think your asking, agree

That's all I have time for, Chronos. It's been an interesting exercise though. I may answer the others later, or not, depending on whether you give *me* an honest answer to my question to you.

In closing, let me mention this:

Hearing that Jesus had silenced the Sadducees, the Pharisees got together. One of them, an expert in the law, tested him with this question: “Teacher, which is the greatest commandment in the Law?” Jesus replied: “‘Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.’ This is the first and greatest commandment. And the second is like it: ‘Love your neighbor as yourself.’ All the Law and the Prophets hang on these two commandments.

"When we all get to heaven...":

A lot of Catholics are going to be shocked -- SHOCKED!! -- that members of the Church of Christ are there. And vice versa.

Catholics and Church of Christ are going to be rather surprised that ANYONE else is there. :-)

Calvinists will be amused to learn that they were NOT picked for all eternity.

Methodists will be asked why they came up with that presumptuous name, and won't have a good answer for the Almighty

Mennonites will discover that the hat and beard requirement went out of style in the first century

Pentecostals will learn -- as they always suspected -- that a lot of that gibberish that guy in the next pew spouted was in fact just gibberish...

But the point is, we'll BE there. In Heaven. Eternal life worshipping the Almighty, thanks be to GOD for the gift of Jesus, for " there in no other name under heaven given among men by which we must be saved.".

What really matters, Chronos?

FRegards

437 posted on 07/05/2012 5:42:37 AM PDT by Nervous Tick (Trust in God, but row away from the rocks!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 414 | View Replies]

To: Cronos

Well, I can’t prove tongues as anything more than people’s enthusiasm. That is where faith, comes in. but I know for a fact that healing still exists. I’ve seen it and heard about it from too many reputable leaders.
I don’t beleive for a second that the gifts ceased, and I’m pretty sure Catholics agree. I gather Catholics don’t beleive tongues are for all.
Tongues are not salvation, but supernatural prayer. I fell into the tongues are salvation game until I was encouraged to read my bible. Drove me nuts thinking I was unsaved.


438 posted on 07/05/2012 5:51:16 AM PDT by LevinFan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 416 | View Replies]

To: Rashputin
Sorry, but it's not "all about you".

You're right it isn't, but it must be about standing on a corner screaming at any one who walks by because one is too ignorant to discern who is part of the problem. Lunatic ravings that include everyone, include no one. for no listens to the words of the screaming fool. Work on target ID, then the rants might have an effect. Good luck.

439 posted on 07/05/2012 5:55:03 AM PDT by xone
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 412 | View Replies]

To: Cronos

No problem, you corrected yourself anyone can make a mistake.


440 posted on 07/05/2012 5:57:02 AM PDT by xone
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 433 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 401-420421-440441-460 ... 501-503 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson