Why are many Protestants believers in Sola Scriptura and yet?

Question

Why do many Protestants claim they are believers in Sola Scriptura (bible alone authority) and yet they attend bible college (which they now call seminary) taking courses under different pastorial instructors who teach them an authoritative interpretation and imbrace those interpretations but obviously not thru the bible alone? sounds like one more contradiction to me.

BTW seminary was a creation of the counter-reformation for the better formation of Catholic teaching to combat those heretical teachers opposing the Church authority.

Timameus please expand your answer.
Pastor Art you suck'n eggs again today? come on brother you'll have to do better than that.

"To be deep in history is to cease to be a Protestant." John Henry Cardinal Newman
To justify its break from the Catholic Church, Protestantism has adopted the strategy of pitting the Holy Scripture against the Church. The result is a false dilemma whereby one is to chose between Holy Scripture and the "traditions of men"...the Catholic Church. Fifteen hundred years of Christianity and the working of the Holy Spirit were swept away with the cavalier and unbiblical charge that it is merely the "traditions of men."
Protestantism is the best example of following the "traditions of men." Virtually every Protestant church, denomination, sect and cult can be traced to some human founder(s) within the past 500 years. Whether it is Luther, Calvin, King Henry VIII, Wesley, Knox, Joseph Smith (Mormon), Russell (JW), Eddy (Christian Scientist) or any number cropping up to this very day, all Protestants follow the "traditions of men." Some, such as Lutherans, use the very name of their founder

in their denomination name. Others closely identify with their founders, such as those who call themselves "Calvinists." All approach the Bible and interpret it in accordance with the "traditions of men" they have inherited

"I am going to inquire why it is, that, in this intelligent nation, and in this rational nineteenth century, we Catholics are so despised and hated by our own countrymen, with whom we have lived all our lives, that they are prompt to believe any story, however extravagant, that is told to our disadvantage; as if beyond a doubt we were, every one of us, either brutishly deluded or preternaturally hypocritical, and they themselves, on the contrary were in comparison of us absolute specimens of sagacity, wisdom, uprightness, manly virtue, and enlightened Christianity. I am not inquiring why they are not Catholics themselves, but why they are so angry with those who are. Protestants differ amongst themselves, without calling each other fools and knaves."

Spike the feeling is mutual

Answer 1

Sole Scriptura is neither epistemologically or theologically credible or reliable as a means to understand or explicate the meaning of the Bible as a source for revelation.

Answer 2

I think that you misunderstand the doctrine of Sola (not SOLO) scriptura.

Either you have been misinformed, or else you are a troll.

Protestants believe that the Bible has a higher authority than tradition, while Roman Catholics believe that the Bible is part of tradition, and is thus has less authority than the church.

This is an over simplification, but it does explain why protestants study other people's interpretation of the Bible -- including Catholic writers. We just assume that these other writers are not prophets, and their opinions are just their opinions -- you can take it or leave it.

----------------------
...You can hear the confusion already – “Wait! Are you trying to tell me that the doctrine of Sola Scriptura holds a certain view of tradition within it? Are you saying that Sola Scriptura rests on some kind of church tradition as well?” Yes, that is exactly what I am saying. Tradition, when used by the orthodox Christian church through the centuries, simply designates the complete corpus of “truth” as the inclusive set of Christian beliefs or the whole of “the faith” given to the saints (Jude 3) in which the Church contends for as orthodoxy. This kind of tradition is either verbal (such as the teaching that came verbally from the Apostles) or written (such as any of the books of the Bible that were penned). This does not incur “secret” traditions that were handed down to the church that are shrouded in some mysterious unwritten or secret documents that only a select few recognize (which is Rome’s position). Rather, Scripture and tradition are paralleled ideas that mean the same thing in orthodox Christianity. For example, when I say, “Jesus is Lord,” that is the same thing as quoting John 1:1-3. It is verbal tradition that the church ahs always believed, and it attests to the truth of John 1:1-3 (and other Scriptures that could be cited). One could look through any of the early church fathers (Irenaeus, Clement of Alexandria, Cyprian, etc) and find this type of thinking all through their writings. Irenaeus used an interesting term to describe the tradition of the Church called the regula fidei. This basically places the Holy Scriptures on the same level of confessing the truth of the Holy Scriptures in verbally relatable terms. Again, to use the example, “Jesus is God” is to say, “Most assuredly, I say to you, before Abraham was, I AM (John 8:58).”olyHH

Both of those testimonies (one written and inspired, and one creedal or tradition) are in fact part of the regula fidei. The regula fidei is, as Augustine stated, a summary of Holy Scripture....

Answer 3

You have a misunderstand of what "Sola Scriptura" means. It does not mean that the born-again Believe has only the scriptures as their only guide. But that the Bible is the inspired Word of God and accept the same as the only infallible guide and rule of our faith and practice.

Sola scriptura teaches that the Scriptures are the sole infallible rule of faith for the Church. The doctrine does not say that there are not other, fallible, rules of faith, or even traditions, that we can refer to and even embrace. It does say, however, that the only infallible rule of faith is Scripture. This means that all other rules, whether we call them traditions, confessions of faith, creeds, or anything else, are by nature inferior to and subject to correction by, the Scriptures. The Bible is an ultimate authority, allowing no equal, nor superior, in tradition or church. It is so because it is theopneustos, God-breathed, and hence embodies the very speaking of God, and must, of necessity therefore be of the highest authority.

The Roman Church claims to have the ability to infallibly interpret the meaning of the text of Scripture, therefore they hold to the false doctrine of "sola ecclesia". The belief that Rome alone has the final authority superseding and overriding even the Holy Scriptures themselves.

Hope this helps.

Answer 4

To Selah and others: we've all examine 2 Tim 3:sixteen besides the undeniable fact that it would not say that the Bible on my own is our authority! you're analyzing a Protestant interpretation into that verse. and you're ignoring different key passages inclusive of 1Tim 3:15 which particularly tells us that's the the Church that's "the pillar and commencing place of reality." In 2 Tim 3:sixteen Paul is purely announcing that Scripture is stimulated via God and "rewarding" in coaching doctrine and teaching believers in righteousness. rewarding would not advise unique! The observe "rewarding" is "ophelimos" in Greek. "Ophelimos" purely skill functional, which underscores that Scripture isn't mandatory or unique. EDIT: people who cite 2 Tim 3:sixteen additionally ignore that purely 2 verses formerly that Saint Paul says (in 2 Tim. 3:14) "proceed in what you have found out and believed understanding from whom you found out it." that is concerning custom that's stumbled on exterior of the Bible. undergo in techniques...."a textual content with no context is a pretext." Peace be to you all+

Answer 5

Why would anyone put tradition or scripture above the role of The Spirit of truth in bringing us to a knowledge of what we are to believe? I tried that route for 8 miserable years and it sucks big time. So much confusion, so many ambiguous answers. and virtually no credible answers to the really important questions. I am so thankful that the Spirit of truth set me free from all that religious nonsense.

Answer 6

As a seminarian your understanding of the role of theological education among Protestants is off. Again, like a typical Roman Catholic, you're totally ignorant of Protestant ways and methods. We believe Sola Scriptura because the sole authority for life and doctrine is Scripture alone. Though we also have confessions and statements of faith we do not hold them on equal par with Scripture. Nor do we have some guy with a funny hat dictating to us what is true or false doctrine.

Answer 7

Pastor Art seems to be suggesting that:

1) Protestants DON'T believe in Sola Scriptura (which is false)

2) or that they don't go to seminary (which is false)



Sorry, Artieboy, both assumptions are true; I guess they didn't teach logic at your seminary school.

Answer 8

Great question, Pastor Billy!

Answer 9

you sure babble a lot without saying much of any value...

Answer 10

Okay, so now what ?