Body: | Anti-Sola Scriptura Arguments Refuted:
Click to View "Sola Scriptura is an invention of 16th century Protestants."
False arguments that Catholics and Orthodox use to trash Sola Scriptura are
refuted.
Sola Scriptura proven from the Bible!
Click to View
Click to View More Anti-Sola Scriptura arguments refuted!
Click to View A list of Sola Scriptura proof texts.
Click to View Sola Scriptura home page
Click to View "Sola Scriptura is an invention of 16th century Protestants."
"The truth of the matter is ... that the doctrine of sola Scriptura is not
scriptural. In other words, the claim that the Bible is the sole source of
authority for Christian life and doctrine is not found in the Bible." (THE
WAY: What Every Protestant Should Know About the Orthodox Church, Clark
Carlton, 1997, p 117)
"The irony is that the principle by which the Reformers sought to return to
the purity of the early Church was itself unknown to the early Church. The
idea of sola Scriptura was an invention of the sixteenth century. No Father
or council of the early Church ever asserted that the Scriptures, in and of
themselves, with-out any reference to the Church, are the all-sufficient
rule of faith. The Reformation principle of sola Scriptura was an invention
of the Reformation itself. ... This means that from the Day of Pentecost to
October 31, 1517-a span of approximately 1488 years-the kind of theology
which Protestantism exalts as being "authentic" could not have existed. In
other words, the early Church, to which the Reformers theoretically wanted
to return, had a theology quite different from that of the Reformers." (THE
WAY: What Every Protestant Should Know About the Orthodox Church, Clark
Carlton, 1997, p 91)
"The Reformation did not do away with tradition; it merely substituted the
traditions of sixteenth-century nominalists and humanists for the tradition
of the Apostles and early Church Fathers." (THE WAY: What Every Protestant
Should Know About the Orthodox Church, Clark Carlton, 1997, p 109)
Click to View
Refutation of the false Roman Catholic and Orthodox argument:
"Sola Scriptura is an invention of 16th century Protestants."
Sola Scriptura was not invented by 16th century Protestants, but is taught
in the Bible and practiced by the Apostolic Fathers.
Click here: For a list of Bible verses that proof sola Scriptura is
taught in the Bible. On this page, is all the proof you need to know that
both the Roman Catholic and Orthodox churches are wrong, because you will
see for yourself, that Sola Scriptura is a Bible doctrine.
The idea that Sola Scriptura was "an invention of the sixteenth
century" is proven wrong by the fact that the earliest apostolic Fathers
clearly taught Sola Scriptura. The Bible and Apostolic Fathers taught it.
Then between 200 AD and 1500 AD, there was a gradual move towards the
adoption of human creeds and traditions. By the time Luther came along, the
Roman Catholic church had become so tradition bound, that the church barely
resembled the one you can read about in the Bible. Luther simply restored
the concept found in the Bible that scripture overthrows all traditions.
For Catholic and Orthodox defenders to say sola Scriptura was invented in
the 16th century, is as historically dishonest as it is wishful thinking.
We actually agree in part, that Luther and Calvin did replace
Catholic traditions with some 16th century traditions. We highlight their
approach to scripture, not what they specifically taught. Furthermore, both
Luther and Calvin violated the concept of Biblical Sola Scriptura by
creating their own set of authoritative man made creeds. They clearly did
replace Catholic creeds, with their own set of creeds. This is where both
the Catholic church and reformers went wrong. All creeds are as dangerous
as they are unnecessary. After all, both Calvin and Luther accepted most of
the early ecumenical councils and creeds. This was their big mistake.
Luther and Calvin did not restore the church, they merely reformed it.
But we do applaud, Luther and Calvin for having the guts to stand up
and say, "Current traditions are clearly wrong and contradict scripture."
For example, in 1809 AD, Thomas Campbell believed infant baptism was
a Bible doctrine when he said, "Where the Scriptures speak, we speak; where
the Scriptures are silent, we are silent" (Declaration and Address, to the
Christian Association of Washington, PA, 1809) When the reply came back,
"Mr. Campbell, if we adopt that as a basis, then there is an end of infant
baptism." Campbell agreed that even infant baptism would be thrown out if
it was not Biblical. When Campbell made this statement, he had no idea that
when he finally studied the scriptures on the validity of infant baptism,
he would discover, to his surprise, that it was not a bible doctrine. So
Campbell was committed to the principle, but did not know where it would
lead him. Likewise Luther and Calvin knew that the Catholic system of oral
tradition was wrong and were committed to "sola Scriptura" not knowing at
the time that later reformers would correctly define it.
Luther, Calvin and Campbell all made hermeneutic statements of sola
Scriptura, that would later change their view of what is true.
That's what happens when men throw out traditions and creeds and
start to use the Bible only, they begin a journey where they know the
vehicle in which they ride, but know not where the vehicle will finally
lead them. Luther never dreamed he would leave the Catholic church when he
nailed his 95 articles on the door. Campbell never dreamed he would reject
infant baptism when he said, "Where the Scriptures speak, we speak"
Catholics actually changed from their original sola Scriptura to
their current oral tradition: "When discrepancies between Catholic doctrine
and Scripture became apparent, Catholic apologists stopped insisting that
the doctrines of the Church could be deduced from Scripture and revived the
theory of some early heretics, refuted by Irenaeus, that the Bible does not
contain the whole of God's revelation and that a body of traditional
doctrine existed in the Church equally deserving of veneration. [28] When
it was pointed out that things were taught in the Roman Church for which
the Bible furnished no adequate justification, Roman advocates insisted
that though the Bible contained truth, it did not contain the whole truth,
and that the Church was able by them to supplement the deficiencies of
Scripture, having in those traditions a secure record of apostolic teaching
on many points on which the Bible contained only obscure indications, or
gave no information at all. [28-291]" (George Salmon, "The Infallibility of
the church, p 28)
Click here: For a list of Bible verses that proof sola Scriptura is
taught in the Bible.
Click to View More Anti-Sola Scriptura arguments refuted!
Click to View More Pro-Oral Church tradition arguments refuted!
by Steve Rudd
Click to View
Go To Start: WWW.BIBLE.CA
|