Sola Scriptura?

Question

One of the main arguments made against the idea of Sola Scriptura is the fact of denominations arising from it. If Sola Scriptura is wrong because of denominations then isn't oral tradition wrong too? If not why are the Orthodox church and Catholic church not in communion? The both claim to follow oral tradition and yet they do not agree with each other.

Answer 1

the availability of the scriptures throughout the centuries isn't the determining factor. the scriptures themselves are the determining factor. we now have the scriptures readily available to us. through the careful study of God’s word, it is clear that many church traditions which have developed over the centuries are in fact contradictory to the word of God. this is where sola scriptura applies. traditions that are based on, and are in agreement with God’s word can be maintained. traditions that are not based on, and/or are in disagreement with God’s word, must be rejected. sola scriptura points us back to what God has revealed to us in his word. sola scriptura ultimately points us back to the God who always speaks the truth, never contradicts himself, and always proves himself to be dependable.

Answer 2

I don't see the validity of the first sentence: that denominations (that is, differences) arise from sola scriptura. They may, of course, but there are plenty of other reasons for divisions among the Protestants, let alone between them and the Catholics and Orthodox.

The problem with sola scriptura is that it is simply not possible. There are two many internal inconsistencies, and too much that is contradicted by logic and scientific evidence, to be able to take the Bible literally. And if you are going to treat it as the ONLY resource, then you have to believe you are taking it literally. Otherwise, you are not using just the scripture, but also your interpretation, or someone else's. All that really does is ruin the definition of the word "literally."

But that's happened in modern English anyway. People talk about being "literally" starving to death when all they really mean is they are ready to eat.

Answer 3

Actually many of the Orthodox Churches are in Communion with the Roman Catholic Church, 22 infact out of 29 or 30. (some such as the Maronite Orthodox Church never left). However there are many branches of the Orthodox Church all with different patriarchs (leaders) (they had their own reformation. Mostly due to the make up of the Soviet union and other historical empires that separated them) It is mostly the Orthodox Churches of the former Soviet Empire that are not in Communion with Rome, but not in Communion within the groups of Orthodox Churches either.

If sola scriptura (by bible alone) is correct then that would have to come from the bible. Where in the bible does it say scripture alone?

Steve-
while the first section of Bible verses you post actually mention the word scripture (a few) none of them define scripture as the ultimate authority, or any thing more then a reference or order to reject tradition or hold scripture over it. None of them say refer to scripture only. In fact a few say listen and hear (audible). For that matter everything Paul states in 2 Tim 3 before the passage you quote is all oral tradition and history not found anywhere in the Hebrew bible.

Also the section on rebuking changes to scripture it is on changes to teaching (oral) not written scripture.

You want biblical evidence in support of Tradition:
1 Cor 11:2 I praise you because you remember me in everything and hold fast to the traditions, just as I handed them on to you.

2 thes 2:15 Therefore, brothers, stand firm and hold fast to the traditions that you were taught, either by an oral statement or by a letter of ours.

2 thes 3:16 We instruct you, brothers, in the name of (our) Lord Jesus Christ,to shun any brother who conducts himself in a disorderly way and not according to the tradition they received from us

Now also you must understand that the first Gospel was not written until 30 years after Christ died so until then it was all handed down orally, as oral tradition. So none of the writers understood or learned the concept of sola (written) scripture alone.

Also it is a misrepresentation to say Holy Tradtion is oral alone anymore the bible that oral at the time. The actual writings of tradtions date back to gospel times with the Didache:Teachings of the 12 Apostles and beofre the comilation of scripture.

So Steve, I know you will not accept this but you have still shown no justification for scripture alone. You have shown justification for scripture as reference (which I never disputed), but not as sole authority in a direct or indirect way. I have shown you direct address of tradition without even using 1 Maccabees which the Protestant Council removed in 1600's from the bible because it directly refuted Sola Scriptura.

Answer 4

Cathy, here are the biblical proof texts on sola scriptura (by bible alone):

Christ and his apostles always refer to the written Scriptures, then existing, as authority, and to no other rule of faith whatsoever.--Luke 16:29; 10:26; John 5:39; Rom. 4:3;2 Tim. 3:15.

The Bereans, in book of Acts, are commended for bringing all questions, even apostolic teaching, to this test.--Acts 17:11; see also Isa. 8:16.

Christ rebukes the Pharisees for adding to and perverting the Scriptures.--Matt. 15:7-9; Mark 7:5-8; see also Rev. 22:18, 19, and Deut. 4:2; 12:32; Josh. 1:7.

Bible is authoritative on any thing it speaks, and it speaks about all things.

Cathy, where does the Bible command oral tradition?

Answer 5

The Jews have the oral law also-the Mishna & the Talmud
The Orthodox fell out on the definition of the trinity but things are better now between the two

Answer 6

Sola Scriptura is unbiblical simply for one reason -- The Bible is not laid out in the Bible. This would be akin to expecting a camera to take a photograph of itself without the use of mirrors or highly convoluted lenses.

The selection of Books that belong in the Bible were chosen literally by a vote, and that vote was never unanimous (so much for 'inspiration of the Holy Spirit').

As such, without Tradition, there would be no Bible to begin with.