With their insistence on sola scriptura, do some Protestants continue the legalistic ways of the Pharisees?

Question

The law and traditions of the Pharisees contradicted and interfered with the law of Moses.

Additoionally, the Pharisees were so strict with the letter of the law, there was no room for the spirit of the law. Protestants who insist on Sola Scriptura leave no room for any further teaching

Answer 1

True or not, many protestants don't see it that way. I guess it depends how positions are interpreted. To us Catholics, sola scriptura could seem kinda Pharisee-ian but does not to protestants.
On a side note, many Catholic's who attend the traditional Mass, also adhere to a legalistic view of the world. Of course they don't see their beliefs that way.

Answer 2

Both Pharisaism and sola scriptura are impediments to understanding the scriptures, but they don't appear to be the same.

The Pharisee takes an interpretive tradition and imposes it as God's standard. For example, God said to take a Sabbath rest. The Pharisees said you can't even heal people from Friday sundown to Saturday sundown. Thus, Pharisees accept outside authority for interpretation, but they use wrong answers.

Sola scriptura is the dictum that only scripture gives reliable information about faith and morality, and that each reader has the authority to decide what scripture means. In practice, this means that scripture means whatever the reader wants it to mean, and that the answers worked out over 2000 years of Christian scholarship count no more than a fool's misreading.

Cheers,
Bruce

Answer 3

That's funny since the Pharisees were condemned by Jesus for adding their own tradition(which they said was divine in origin) to the scripture. Does that sound like anybody we know? I also would like to point out that verses like 1Corinthians 11:2, 2Thessalonians 2:15, and 2 Thessalonians 3:6 do not apply unless you can demonstrate that Paul actually has things like The assumption of Mary in mind. Since the assumption of Mary wasn't even mentioned by anyone for another four centuries (and condemned as a heresy by two popes at that) it would seem that these verses don't apply to your Tradition. If you read the verses in context it becomes pretty clear that the traditions that Paul has in mind are nothing more that the truths of the gospel, which was, according to Jude, "once delivered for all the saints". Also, as someone who took a couple of years to research the Catholic religion(and even convert at one point) you have no business calling a Protestant legalistic. Even if some Protestants are it would be a case of the pot calling the kettle black at the very least. After all we don't teach that a person can end up in Hell for missing church one time, you guys do (it's a mortal sin, I read it in the catechism) and that seems pretty legalistic to me.

Answer 4

Comparing the Pharisees to some of the Bible Alone Fundamentalist Protestants legalists is unfair to the Pharisees.
1) Pharisees did not condemn everyone who disagreed with them to Hell. The Pharisees,who were the one school of 1st cent Judaism to survive70AD and give birth to later forms of Rabbinic Judaism, were much more tolerant than many SS Protestants.
2)Pharisees upheld the Oral Toral or Mosaic Oral Tradition
No Jews until the Medieval Karaites denied Oral Tradition and even they had their own to replace rabbinic traditions and teaching offices. Rabbinic and Pre Rabbinic Judaisms were not Written OT Alone at all
3) The Pharisees were multifaceted and not just legalistic bigots. The NT does not give a complete or balanced picture of the Pharisee party which was seeking holiness and purity.

Jesus and the NT condemned the "traditions of men" which replace or distort the Oral Tradition of God, the Full Gospel(Matt15:3,Mark7:9,Coll 2:8).
Jesus did not write any book of the Bible and the Bible as including the NT was not around in the Apostolic Period since much of the NT was not composed until the end of that period . The NT was not fully compiled and canonized by the authoritative Catholic Church until the 4th century.
The Apostolic Gospel was mostly oral preaching and the handing down of Paradosis,Tradition,as is shown in Cor11:2,2 Thess2:15 and 3:6.,where ST Paul commands the keeping of the Tradition

Answer 5

LOL .... do you even KNOW what the Pharisees were known for? I'll give you a hint: they claimed that God gave Moses "oral traditions" on Mt. Sinai during the 40 days he was up there. Moses supposedly passed the oral tradition to the 70 elders, who passed it to their children, etc. This oral tradition evolved into an evil system that Jesus simply HATED, because it removed God's mercy and love from the equation!

Catholics have done the same when they insist that their supposed "oral tradition" was passed down from the Apostles. I DARE YOU: read the writings of the earliest church writers and you WILL NOT find even ONE HINT of this supposed "apostolic tradition." As I pointed out to Father K this morning, the supposed "apostolic tradition" regarding infant baptism, taught by Hippolytus in approx. 215 AD, also requires en mass nude baptisms of adults. Can you imagine a more paganistic practice?

It is this unsubstantiated "oral tradition" that Protestants have shunned by espousing Sola Scriptura. So who's the Pharisee -- me or you?

EDIT: Hogie, you have quoted a teaching that is followed by a TINY minority of Protestant Christians, which doesn't prove your point at all.

Answer 6

Protestant, from the word protest, is to be free of the legalistic ways of any Jewish laws. Jesus' advice to the believer was to seek a relationship, not a religion. Jesus was against religion. The Protestant movement was to get back to the first century church. Which was the people, not the building. The first century Christian would never have had the first though of spending money on a building. He would be giving to the poor, taking care of the sick, and oppressed. The Protestant movement was taking back the idea of the congregation as it was when Peter, and the other apostles were laying the foundation for the church that Jesus started while He was in the flesh.

The Catholic belief system was keeping the public from reading the Bible. The Bible was meant for all to read, it is the instruction book of life. The Catholics were also draining all the money from the poor. Making them think they had to pay money to be forgiven of their sins. Of course it was the priest, bishops, and pope who got the money. They built great, and beautiful buildings to worship in, and for them to live in, and made the people believe it was for God, when it really was for them. They lived a life of luxury, while the people starved in their streets. It was said that while the leaders of the Catholic church feast, and live in luxury, Jesus is starving, and naked in their streets.

No, to be a protestant, is to be free of the law, it is instead, to have a relationship with God, through Jesus the Messiah.

However, It is indeed sad to have to say, the Protestant church is now, spending large amounts of money on buildings, and entertainment for other Christians. Less and less is going to the brothers ans sisters in third world countries who are in great need. Missionaries and pastors in the 10/40 window are being persecuted, and living under the pressure of anti-christian groups causing them harm, even death. While the good Christian is safe at home with luxuries every where he looks.

So it seems that once again, while the good christians feast, and live a life of luxury, Jesus is starving to death, and naked in their streets.

God be with you,
Evangelist, William M. Butler
Grace Evangelistic Ministry

Answer 7

The strict adherents to Sola Scriptura are not even worthy to be called Pharisees. At least the Pharisees were well versed in the Law and in the Old Testament.

That being said, Jesus never said "Go and write the Gospels," but he did say "Go and PREACH the Gospels."
Jesus himself never wrote a single word either in an epistle or in a Gospel. However, Jesus did say on numerous occasions, "It is written..., but what I say is..."

This confirms the validity of the Oral Tradition.

Answer 8

Anyone can become legalistic. What the insistence on is so that no one can add to the words of God, the way some groups add their traditions and rules.

Answer 9

Cute... D* shame I was in a meeting and didn't catch this fresh.

No. It wasn't the scriptures that determined that a man couldn't save a life on the Sabbath, that was the Pharisees and Sadducees interpreting the law.

The Bible says soli gratia. The modern-day Pharisees (RCC) add a whole lot of other latin sounding stuff...

Answer 10

Do you really think this is helping?

In the garden of Gethsamane Peter cut off Malchus ear, and Jesus rebuked him. And mended Malchus' ear.

Now you may ask "who started the trouble in the garden and who was responsible for what happened?" But Jesus did not ask who was in the right or in the wrong but healed the ear.

Let us heal the ears of our brothers and sisters in Christ and continue with preparing the bride for the Great Day of the Lord.