Scripture is the only authority?

[Josheb]

No it is still an auto-mobile it just lacks an engine. But it’s designed purpose is to be and auto-mobile. Maybe it’s a poor example

You're familiar with infamous inquiry regarding the tail of a sheep and how many legs the sheep has?

 

[Ladodgers6]

Scripture is the only authority?

Truth of divine revelation is communicated in many ways!

By the heavens: Ps 19:1
By the Father: Matt 16:17
By Christ in person: Matt 5:2 Mk 1:21-22 Lk 5:3 Jn 3:16
By the Holy Spirit: 1 Tim 4:1
By the call of God: Gen 12:1
By the burning bush: Ex 3:2
By Sacred Scripture: Lk 24:32
By Sacred Tradition: 2 thes 2:15
By the apostles preaching the word:
Acts 8:4 Acts 8:35
By the apostolic churches teaching:
Matt 28:19
By the Angels: Ex 3:2 Matt 1:20
Lk 1:28 Acts 8:26
By dreams: Matt 1:20
By visions: Acts 19:17
By unknown means: Lk 3:2
By preaching of John the Baptist: Lk 3:3-5

Not by “Scripture alone”!

Do you understand this Reformation slogan came about? When the Catholic church was teaching heresies; especially about indulgences among other things. The Reformers shouted Ad Fontes (Back to the sources) meaning Scripture Alone.​

 

[Ladodgers6]

Ok then why doesn’t scripture says scripture alone or “scripture is the only authority”?

Thanks

Scripture, God's word is the final authority, right?

 

[donadams]

Having read all the canonical books, I agree with the Protestant canon that the Apocrypha, except for Wisdom, lacks the majesty of style of the Protestant canonical books.

So the word of God is limited to these 66 books is that what you are saying?

 

[donadams]

The church = assembly, ekklesia, of both OT (Ac 7:38) and NT (Eph 5:30-33) people of God.
One takes it to the whole assembly (ekklesia) when taking it to one or two brothers does not resolve the issue (Mt 18:16).

Baptism does not save. Only faith saves. And faith is from the Holy Spirit only (Eph 2:8-9).
Rather baptism is an outward sign of our death and burial into Christ's death (Ro 6:3), in order that,
just as Christ was raised from the dead, we too may live a new life (Ro 6:4).

Men do not administer salvation.
Only the Holy Spirit administers salvation, through the gift (Php 1:29, Ac 13:48, 18:27, 2 Pe 1:1, Ro 12:3) of faith alone (Eph 2:8-9).
Men only preach the gospel and baptize.
Men minister to those who have been saved, helping them grow in the sanctification of that salvation administered by the Holy Spirit alone.
Salvation is only by grace of the Holy Spirit through faith in the gospel which men preach (Eph 2:8-9).

No I don’t believe any of the solas, novelties of the so called reformers

Which so called reformer was an apostle?

Do you believe that if it is by grace then we deserve no reward?

 

[donadams]

The church = assembly, ekklesia, of both OT (Ac 7:38) and NT (Eph 5:30-33) people of God.
One takes it to the whole assembly (ekklesia) when taking it to one or two brothers does not resolve the issue (Mt 18:16).

Baptism does not save. Only faith saves. And faith is from the Holy Spirit only (Eph 2:8-9).
Rather baptism is an outward sign of our death and burial into Christ's death (Ro 6:3), in order that,
just as Christ was raised from the dead, we too may live a new life (Ro 6:4).

Men do not administer salvation.
Only the Holy Spirit administers salvation, through the gift (Php 1:29, Ac 13:48, 18:27, 2 Pe 1:1, Ro 12:3) of faith alone (Eph 2:8-9).
Men only preach the gospel and baptize.
Men minister to those who have been saved, helping them grow in the sanctification of that salvation administered by the Holy Spirit alone.
Salvation is only by grace of the Holy Spirit through faith in the gospel which men preach (Eph 2:8-9).

Baptism does save 1 pet 3:16

 

[donadams]

In what universe does Matt 28:19 oppose the doctrine of scripture alone? You are still arguing a straw man.

What is it that "make disciples and baptizing and teaching" have to do with opposing scripture? What do you think they are teaching, and who are they baptizing into. It merely means to spread the gospel to all nations, not just Israel. And what does Jesus say before that? "All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me."

Not the Catholic church. And nothing in your laundry list opposes scripture alone either. I gave you the definition of sola scriptura right out of the Westminster Confession. And you still base your beliefs and arguments on what it isn't.

Why should we ever accept the “Westminster confession” as authoritative? And if you do you are adding to scripture! Opposing sola scriptura!

 

[Josheb]

Words have meaning, and you do not know the meaning of the words "sola scriptura." Not only do you not know the correct definition of the term, but you have now thrice refused to provide a definition when asked and four pages have transpired and there's still not proof any adherent of sola scriptura believes scripture is the only authority.

Stirring up disagreement using red herring and straw men is trolling.





Sola scriptura is the doctrine asserting scripture is the sole infallible source of authority for Christian faith and practice. That's it; nothing more. The "only" or "sole" part of sola scriptura is that scripture is the only infallible authority, not the only authority. Other authorities exist, but they are not infallible. The authority of scripture is also limited, not universal or applicable to everything. Sola scriptura does make any claims about God, or Jesus, or the Holy Spirit and their respective authority and/or infallibility. Sola scriptura makes no claims the Bible is a biology book, or a carpentry book. Sola scriptura does not make any claim to tell Christians how to scientifically study plants or rocks, or how to make boards out of trees and how to assemble the boards. Sola scriptura does not preclude God from being an infallible authority in the life of a believer, but it does prevent every believer from thinking he is an infallible authority in his life and others. Sola scriptura does not preclude religious leaders from being authorities in the lives of Christians, but it does say they are fallible. Sola scriptura does not preclude the existence of other authoritative documents, like those issued by the Council of Trent or the Chicago Statement.



No Protestant actually believes the only authority in his life is scripture, and if s/he did then they would 1) be mistaken, and 2) violating sola scriptura. So, understand ALL these many, many ops you've posted arguing a strawman version of sola scripture serve only to prove a profound ignorance and a serious corruption within.

Galatians 5:19-21
Now the deeds of the flesh are evident, which are: ............enmities, strife, jealousy, outbursts of anger, disputes, dissensions, factions, ...............and things like these, of which I forewarn you, just as I have forewarned you, that those who practice such things will not inherit the kingdom of God.

Titus 3:9-11
But avoid foolish controversies, genealogies, dissensions, and quarrels about the law, for they are unprofitable and worthless. As for a person who stirs up division, after warning him once and then twice, have nothing more to do with him, knowing that such a person is warped and sinful; he is self-condemned.

Actively asserting a strawman based on a red herring while repeatedly refusing to provide a correct and truthful definition is an indication of much bigger problems than any simple factual mistake. Stop posting abusive and misguided versions of sola scriptura. Then stop abusing Prots with a strawman. Both are wretched practices. I'll waste no more time on this thread.

 

[donadams]

In what universe does Matt 28:19 oppose the doctrine of scripture alone? You are still arguing a straw man.

What is it that "make disciples and baptizing and teaching" have to do with opposing scripture? What do you think they are teaching, and who are they baptizing into. It merely means to spread the gospel to all nations, not just Israel. And what does Jesus say before that? "All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me."

Not the Catholic church. And nothing in your laundry list opposes scripture alone either. I gave you the definition of sola scriptura right out of the Westminster Confession. And you still base your beliefs and arguments on what it isn't.

If the apostles have authority to teach then it cannot be “scripture alone”! It would be scripture and the traching of the apostles as acts 2:42 says
Thanks

 

[donadams]

Ad hominem noted. Double standards noted.

Non sequitur noted. Your presence is not in question. Your comprehension may be, because if you have been paying attention in Prot boards for 25 years then you should know the correct definition of Sola Scriptura (and you do not), and you should know straw men, shifting onuses, ad hominem, and double standards are worthless nonsense not worth the time and effort they take to post.

I told you: this op is yours. It is not my op. They onus is on you to justify and then prove your claims. It's not up to me to provide alternatives for you in avoidance of you doing what you are supposed to do. I will provide the correct definition after 1) you have been given sufficient opportunity to do the right thing or 2) you've proven yourself incapable or unwilling to do so.

Yes! Your failure to comprehend that is one of the problems to be solved.



Now.....

Will you provide the definition of sola scriptura, as you understand it, in your own words?


And....


Will you provide proof of some sola scripturist stating scripture is the only authority?

Sola scriptura means scripture alone! (A closed book on a table, I presume)

Nothing else has any authority to teach the truths revealed by God!

And that’s why I refute it, cos Christ commanded his apostolic church to teach and sanctify all men!

 

[donadams]

Words have meaning, and you do not know the meaning of the words "sola scriptura." Not only do you not know the correct definition of the term, but you have now thrice refused to provide a definition when asked and four pages have transpired and there's still not proof any adherent of sola scriptura believes scripture is the only authority.

Stirring up disagreement using red herring and straw men is trolling.





Sola scriptura is the doctrine asserting scripture is the sole infallible source of authority for Christian faith and practice. That's it; nothing more. The "only" or "sole" part of sola scriptura is that scripture is the only infallible authority, not the only authority. Other authorities exist, but they are not infallible. The authority of scripture is also limited, not universal or applicable to everything. Sola scriptura does make any claims about God, or Jesus, or the Holy Spirit and their respective authority and/or infallibility. Sola scriptura makes no claims the Bible is a biology book, or a carpentry book. Sola scriptura does not make any claim to tell Christians how to scientifically study plants or rocks, or how to make boards out of trees and how to assemble the boards. Sola scriptura does not preclude God from being an infallible authority in the life of a believer, but it does prevent every believer from thinking he is an infallible authority in his life and others. Sola scriptura does not preclude religious leaders from being authorities in the lives of Christians, but it does say they are fallible. Sola scriptura does not preclude the existence of other authoritative documents, like those issued by the Council of Trent or the Chicago Statement.



No Protestant actually believes the only authority in his life is scripture, and if s/he did then they would 1) be mistaken, and 2) violating sola scriptura. So, understand ALL these many, many ops you've posted arguing a strawman version of sola scripture serve only to prove a profound ignorance and a serious corruption within.

Galatians 5:19-21
Now the deeds of the flesh are evident, which are: ............enmities, strife, jealousy, outbursts of anger, disputes, dissensions, factions, ...............and things like these, of which I forewarn you, just as I have forewarned you, that those who practice such things will not inherit the kingdom of God.

Titus 3:9-11
But avoid foolish controversies, genealogies, dissensions, and quarrels about the law, for they are unprofitable and worthless. As for a person who stirs up division, after warning him once and then twice, have nothing more to do with him, knowing that such a person is warped and sinful; he is self-condemned.

Actively asserting a strawman based on a red herring while repeatedly refusing to provide a correct and truthful definition is an indication of much bigger problems than any simple factual mistake. Stop posting abusive and misguided versions of sola scriptura. Then stop abusing Prots with a strawman. Both are wretched practices. I'll waste no more time on this thread.

If you don’t believe it and nobody believes it why should I believe it?

 

[donadams]

Words have meaning, and you do not know the meaning of the words "sola scriptura." Not only do you not know the correct definition of the term, but you have now thrice refused to provide a definition when asked and four pages have transpired and there's still not proof any adherent of sola scriptura believes scripture is the only authority.

Stirring up disagreement using red herring and straw men is trolling.





Sola scriptura is the doctrine asserting scripture is the sole infallible source of authority for Christian faith and practice. That's it; nothing more. The "only" or "sole" part of sola scriptura is that scripture is the only infallible authority, not the only authority. Other authorities exist, but they are not infallible. The authority of scripture is also limited, not universal or applicable to everything. Sola scriptura does make any claims about God, or Jesus, or the Holy Spirit and their respective authority and/or infallibility. Sola scriptura makes no claims the Bible is a biology book, or a carpentry book. Sola scriptura does not make any claim to tell Christians how to scientifically study plants or rocks, or how to make boards out of trees and how to assemble the boards. Sola scriptura does not preclude God from being an infallible authority in the life of a believer, but it does prevent every believer from thinking he is an infallible authority in his life and others. Sola scriptura does not preclude religious leaders from being authorities in the lives of Christians, but it does say they are fallible. Sola scriptura does not preclude the existence of other authoritative documents, like those issued by the Council of Trent or the Chicago Statement.



No Protestant actually believes the only authority in his life is scripture, and if s/he did then they would 1) be mistaken, and 2) violating sola scriptura. So, understand ALL these many, many ops you've posted arguing a strawman version of sola scripture serve only to prove a profound ignorance and a serious corruption within.

Galatians 5:19-21
Now the deeds of the flesh are evident, which are: ............enmities, strife, jealousy, outbursts of anger, disputes, dissensions, factions, ...............and things like these, of which I forewarn you, just as I have forewarned you, that those who practice such things will not inherit the kingdom of God.

Titus 3:9-11
But avoid foolish controversies, genealogies, dissensions, and quarrels about the law, for they are unprofitable and worthless. As for a person who stirs up division, after warning him once and then twice, have nothing more to do with him, knowing that such a person is warped and sinful; he is self-condemned.

Actively asserting a strawman based on a red herring while repeatedly refusing to provide a correct and truthful definition is an indication of much bigger problems than any simple factual mistake. Stop posting abusive and misguided versions of sola scriptura. Then stop abusing Prots with a strawman. Both are wretched practices. I'll waste no more time on this thread.

Why say scripture alone if you admit that you don’t believe scripture alone?

 

[donadams]

Words have meaning, and you do not know the meaning of the words "sola scriptura." Not only do you not know the correct definition of the term, but you have now thrice refused to provide a definition when asked and four pages have transpired and there's still not proof any adherent of sola scriptura believes scripture is the only authority.

Stirring up disagreement using red herring and straw men is trolling.





Sola scriptura is the doctrine asserting scripture is the sole infallible source of authority for Christian faith and practice. That's it; nothing more. The "only" or "sole" part of sola scriptura is that scripture is the only infallible authority, not the only authority. Other authorities exist, but they are not infallible. The authority of scripture is also limited, not universal or applicable to everything. Sola scriptura does make any claims about God, or Jesus, or the Holy Spirit and their respective authority and/or infallibility. Sola scriptura makes no claims the Bible is a biology book, or a carpentry book. Sola scriptura does not make any claim to tell Christians how to scientifically study plants or rocks, or how to make boards out of trees and how to assemble the boards. Sola scriptura does not preclude God from being an infallible authority in the life of a believer, but it does prevent every believer from thinking he is an infallible authority in his life and others. Sola scriptura does not preclude religious leaders from being authorities in the lives of Christians, but it does say they are fallible. Sola scriptura does not preclude the existence of other authoritative documents, like those issued by the Council of Trent or the Chicago Statement.



No Protestant actually believes the only authority in his life is scripture, and if s/he did then they would 1) be mistaken, and 2) violating sola scriptura. So, understand ALL these many, many ops you've posted arguing a strawman version of sola scripture serve only to prove a profound ignorance and a serious corruption within.

Galatians 5:19-21
Now the deeds of the flesh are evident, which are: ............enmities, strife, jealousy, outbursts of anger, disputes, dissensions, factions, ...............and things like these, of which I forewarn you, just as I have forewarned you, that those who practice such things will not inherit the kingdom of God.

Titus 3:9-11
But avoid foolish controversies, genealogies, dissensions, and quarrels about the law, for they are unprofitable and worthless. As for a person who stirs up division, after warning him once and then twice, have nothing more to do with him, knowing that such a person is warped and sinful; he is self-condemned.

Actively asserting a strawman based on a red herring while repeatedly refusing to provide a correct and truthful definition is an indication of much bigger problems than any simple factual mistake. Stop posting abusive and misguided versions of sola scriptura. Then stop abusing Prots with a strawman. Both are wretched practices. I'll waste no more time on this thread.

Sola scriptura is the doctrine asserting scripture is the sole infallible source of authority for Christian faith and practice.

Then you agree it is a false doctrine???

 

[donadams]

Words have meaning, and you do not know the meaning of the words "sola scriptura." Not only do you not know the correct definition of the term, but you have now thrice refused to provide a definition when asked and four pages have transpired and there's still not proof any adherent of sola scriptura believes scripture is the only authority.

Stirring up disagreement using red herring and straw men is trolling.





Sola scriptura is the doctrine asserting scripture is the sole infallible source of authority for Christian faith and practice. That's it; nothing more. The "only" or "sole" part of sola scriptura is that scripture is the only infallible authority, not the only authority. Other authorities exist, but they are not infallible. The authority of scripture is also limited, not universal or applicable to everything. Sola scriptura does make any claims about God, or Jesus, or the Holy Spirit and their respective authority and/or infallibility. Sola scriptura makes no claims the Bible is a biology book, or a carpentry book. Sola scriptura does not make any claim to tell Christians how to scientifically study plants or rocks, or how to make boards out of trees and how to assemble the boards. Sola scriptura does not preclude God from being an infallible authority in the life of a believer, but it does prevent every believer from thinking he is an infallible authority in his life and others. Sola scriptura does not preclude religious leaders from being authorities in the lives of Christians, but it does say they are fallible. Sola scriptura does not preclude the existence of other authoritative documents, like those issued by the Council of Trent or the Chicago Statement.



No Protestant actually believes the only authority in his life is scripture, and if s/he did then they would 1) be mistaken, and 2) violating sola scriptura. So, understand ALL these many, many ops you've posted arguing a strawman version of sola scripture serve only to prove a profound ignorance and a serious corruption within.

Galatians 5:19-21
Now the deeds of the flesh are evident, which are: ............enmities, strife, jealousy, outbursts of anger, disputes, dissensions, factions, ...............and things like these, of which I forewarn you, just as I have forewarned you, that those who practice such things will not inherit the kingdom of God.

Titus 3:9-11
But avoid foolish controversies, genealogies, dissensions, and quarrels about the law, for they are unprofitable and worthless. As for a person who stirs up division, after warning him once and then twice, have nothing more to do with him, knowing that such a person is warped and sinful; he is self-condemned.

Actively asserting a strawman based on a red herring while repeatedly refusing to provide a correct and truthful definition is an indication of much bigger problems than any simple factual mistake. Stop posting abusive and misguided versions of sola scriptura. Then stop abusing Prots with a strawman. Both are wretched practices. I'll waste no more time on this thread.

How can scripture alone (Sola scriptura is the doctrine asserting scripture is the sole infallible source of authority for Christian faith and practice.) be the sole source of Christ founded a church to be the source?

 

[donadams]

Words have meaning, and you do not know the meaning of the words "sola scriptura." Not only do you not know the correct definition of the term, but you have now thrice refused to provide a definition when asked and four pages have transpired and there's still not proof any adherent of sola scriptura believes scripture is the only authority.

Stirring up disagreement using red herring and straw men is trolling.





Sola scriptura is the doctrine asserting scripture is the sole infallible source of authority for Christian faith and practice. That's it; nothing more. The "only" or "sole" part of sola scriptura is that scripture is the only infallible authority, not the only authority. Other authorities exist, but they are not infallible. The authority of scripture is also limited, not universal or applicable to everything. Sola scriptura does make any claims about God, or Jesus, or the Holy Spirit and their respective authority and/or infallibility. Sola scriptura makes no claims the Bible is a biology book, or a carpentry book. Sola scriptura does not make any claim to tell Christians how to scientifically study plants or rocks, or how to make boards out of trees and how to assemble the boards. Sola scriptura does not preclude God from being an infallible authority in the life of a believer, but it does prevent every believer from thinking he is an infallible authority in his life and others. Sola scriptura does not preclude religious leaders from being authorities in the lives of Christians, but it does say they are fallible. Sola scriptura does not preclude the existence of other authoritative documents, like those issued by the Council of Trent or the Chicago Statement.



No Protestant actually believes the only authority in his life is scripture, and if s/he did then they would 1) be mistaken, and 2) violating sola scriptura. So, understand ALL these many, many ops you've posted arguing a strawman version of sola scripture serve only to prove a profound ignorance and a serious corruption within.

Galatians 5:19-21
Now the deeds of the flesh are evident, which are: ............enmities, strife, jealousy, outbursts of anger, disputes, dissensions, factions, ...............and things like these, of which I forewarn you, just as I have forewarned you, that those who practice such things will not inherit the kingdom of God.

Titus 3:9-11
But avoid foolish controversies, genealogies, dissensions, and quarrels about the law, for they are unprofitable and worthless. As for a person who stirs up division, after warning him once and then twice, have nothing more to do with him, knowing that such a person is warped and sinful; he is self-condemned.

Actively asserting a strawman based on a red herring while repeatedly refusing to provide a correct and truthful definition is an indication of much bigger problems than any simple factual mistake. Stop posting abusive and misguided versions of sola scriptura. Then stop abusing Prots with a strawman. Both are wretched practices. I'll waste no more time on this thread.

Then it does not say what it means or mean what it says!

Christ said to tell the truth, let your yes be yes and your no be no!
Amen!

 

[donadams]

Words have meaning, and you do not know the meaning of the words "sola scriptura." Not only do you not know the correct definition of the term, but you have now thrice refused to provide a definition when asked and four pages have transpired and there's still not proof any adherent of sola scriptura believes scripture is the only authority.

Stirring up disagreement using red herring and straw men is trolling.





Sola scriptura is the doctrine asserting scripture is the sole infallible source of authority for Christian faith and practice. That's it; nothing more. The "only" or "sole" part of sola scriptura is that scripture is the only infallible authority, not the only authority. Other authorities exist, but they are not infallible. The authority of scripture is also limited, not universal or applicable to everything. Sola scriptura does make any claims about God, or Jesus, or the Holy Spirit and their respective authority and/or infallibility. Sola scriptura makes no claims the Bible is a biology book, or a carpentry book. Sola scriptura does not make any claim to tell Christians how to scientifically study plants or rocks, or how to make boards out of trees and how to assemble the boards. Sola scriptura does not preclude God from being an infallible authority in the life of a believer, but it does prevent every believer from thinking he is an infallible authority in his life and others. Sola scriptura does not preclude religious leaders from being authorities in the lives of Christians, but it does say they are fallible. Sola scriptura does not preclude the existence of other authoritative documents, like those issued by the Council of Trent or the Chicago Statement.



No Protestant actually believes the only authority in his life is scripture, and if s/he did then they would 1) be mistaken, and 2) violating sola scriptura. So, understand ALL these many, many ops you've posted arguing a strawman version of sola scripture serve only to prove a profound ignorance and a serious corruption within.

Galatians 5:19-21
Now the deeds of the flesh are evident, which are: ............enmities, strife, jealousy, outbursts of anger, disputes, dissensions, factions, ...............and things like these, of which I forewarn you, just as I have forewarned you, that those who practice such things will not inherit the kingdom of God.

Titus 3:9-11
But avoid foolish controversies, genealogies, dissensions, and quarrels about the law, for they are unprofitable and worthless. As for a person who stirs up division, after warning him once and then twice, have nothing more to do with him, knowing that such a person is warped and sinful; he is self-condemned.

Actively asserting a strawman based on a red herring while repeatedly refusing to provide a correct and truthful definition is an indication of much bigger problems than any simple factual mistake. Stop posting abusive and misguided versions of sola scriptura. Then stop abusing Prots with a strawman. Both are wretched practices. I'll waste no more time on this thread.

Then you must believe the teach of the apostles is not infallible?

And therefore the teaching of Christ?

 

[donadams]

Words have meaning, and you do not know the meaning of the words "sola scriptura." Not only do you not know the correct definition of the term, but you have now thrice refused to provide a definition when asked and four pages have transpired and there's still not proof any adherent of sola scriptura believes scripture is the only authority.

Stirring up disagreement using red herring and straw men is trolling.





Sola scriptura is the doctrine asserting scripture is the sole infallible source of authority for Christian faith and practice. That's it; nothing more. The "only" or "sole" part of sola scriptura is that scripture is the only infallible authority, not the only authority. Other authorities exist, but they are not infallible. The authority of scripture is also limited, not universal or applicable to everything. Sola scriptura does make any claims about God, or Jesus, or the Holy Spirit and their respective authority and/or infallibility. Sola scriptura makes no claims the Bible is a biology book, or a carpentry book. Sola scriptura does not make any claim to tell Christians how to scientifically study plants or rocks, or how to make boards out of trees and how to assemble the boards. Sola scriptura does not preclude God from being an infallible authority in the life of a believer, but it does prevent every believer from thinking he is an infallible authority in his life and others. Sola scriptura does not preclude religious leaders from being authorities in the lives of Christians, but it does say they are fallible. Sola scriptura does not preclude the existence of other authoritative documents, like those issued by the Council of Trent or the Chicago Statement.



No Protestant actually believes the only authority in his life is scripture, and if s/he did then they would 1) be mistaken, and 2) violating sola scriptura. So, understand ALL these many, many ops you've posted arguing a strawman version of sola scripture serve only to prove a profound ignorance and a serious corruption within.

Galatians 5:19-21
Now the deeds of the flesh are evident, which are: ............enmities, strife, jealousy, outbursts of anger, disputes, dissensions, factions, ...............and things like these, of which I forewarn you, just as I have forewarned you, that those who practice such things will not inherit the kingdom of God.

Titus 3:9-11
But avoid foolish controversies, genealogies, dissensions, and quarrels about the law, for they are unprofitable and worthless. As for a person who stirs up division, after warning him once and then twice, have nothing more to do with him, knowing that such a person is warped and sinful; he is self-condemned.

Actively asserting a strawman based on a red herring while repeatedly refusing to provide a correct and truthful definition is an indication of much bigger problems than any simple factual mistake. Stop posting abusive and misguided versions of sola scriptura. Then stop abusing Prots with a strawman. Both are wretched practices. I'll waste no more time on this thread.

But I don’t blame you, I knoow it’s not your fault!

 

[Josheb]

If the apostles have authority to teach then it cannot be “scripture alone”!

It's not scripture alone. This was just explained to you.

It would be scripture and the teaching of the apostles as acts 2:42 says
Thanks

Yep. However, the teachings of the apostles is scripture. They are not two separate things. Furthermore, the apostles were not infallible. Scripture is infallible; the apostles are not.

Sola scriptura means scripture alone!

No, it does not.

(A closed book on a table, I presume)

Your presumptions are the problem to be solved.

Nothing else has any authority to teach the truths revealed by God!

I just got done saying other authorities exist. God can still teach. Jesus can still teach. The Holy Spirit can still teach, and they can all do so authoritatively and infallibly. The guy standing in the pulpit giving a sermon can preach with the authority of scripture as long as he's teaching what scripture teaches. He, however, is fallible.

And that’s why I refute it, cos Christ commanded his apostolic church to teach and sanctify all men!

No, you refute it because you're fallible and utterly lacking in authority.

How can scripture alone (Sola scriptura is the doctrine asserting scripture is the sole infallible source of authority for Christian faith and practice.) be the sole source of Christ founded a church to be the source?

Let's not put words I did not write in bold-face along with what I did write and insinuate I said something I did not say. I did not say scripture was the sole source of authority. I said it was the sole infallible source. Big difference. You are, again, arguing another straw man, and doing so by abusing my posts.

Then it does not say what it means or mean what it says!

Again, you're acting foolish and so obviously foolish the only question is whether or not it is intentional. The word "Trinity" means much more than what the mere word itself states. There is no requirement anywhere (except possibly in that woefully misguided thinking of yours) that a label communicate exhaustively. If that were the case definitions would be unnecessary. The phrase "sola scriptura" is meaningless to anyone lacking an accurate understanding of the doctrine.

You've provided that here and in many threads.

Among those possessing a correct understanding of the doctrine the phrase serves as short-hand so we don't have to post many words when two suffice.

Christ said to tell the truth, let your yes be yes and your no be no!
Amen!

If that were something you truly believe then that should have practiced that here in this thread, but it wasn't and active refusal to do so repeated itself.

And that is why I'll be moving on.


Scripture is the sole authority for Christian faith and practice.
Scripture is the sole infallible source for Christian faith and practice.

Those are two very different sentences. The first is not what Protestants believe (or anyone else I know of). The second is sola scriptura and you got it wrong and then repeatedly refused to look it up and post an accurate version. YOU do not practice the truth even as you posture and pose behind scripture as the authority for Christian faith and practice.

Bye

 

[Arial]

If the apostles have authority to teach then it cannot be “scripture alone”! It would be scripture and the traching of the apostles as acts 2:42 says
Thanks

The teaching of the Apostles is IN THE SCRIPTURES!! The Scriptures are what we have that are the authority of truth concerning the things of God and salvation. What they taught are the same thing His followers are to teach. How many times do you have to be told something? And why do you have to be told that at all? Is this just a game you are playing?

 

[Arial]

Why should we ever accept the “Westminster confession” as authoritative? And if you do you are adding to scripture! Opposing sola scriptura!

I never said we should. You wanted a definition of sola scriptura. I gave it to you. All the reformation creeds define it the same way. A diefinition of something is a definitions of something. It making no claim to authority. The Presbyterians make no claim to authority. Neither do the Baptists or any other protestant denomination. Only the Catholics do that, and only by their own witness. Not the witness of Scripture, God, Christ, or the Holy Spirit.

??