shouldn't Sola Scriptura be considered as man-made tradition too, since that doctrine came from Martin Luther?

Question

Edge, anyone can claim they are being used by God to correct the ways of others, so your excuse concerning Martin Luther can also be other people's excuse that oppose Martin Luther and his doctrines.

Answer 1

Makes sense to me;
The Protestant reformers such as Calvin and Beza claim the Catholic Church to have been the True Church during the early centuries of Christianity (before they claim it fell into error). During those five hundred years the Church had fought and condemned the doctrines of the Protestant reformers. Yet now Calvin and Beza have the audacity to offer the same doctrines again as medicine and holy reformations? If when the True Church in the early centuries of Christianity declared those Protestant beliefs to be error, how can the Protestant reformers now claim them to be truth and to base their new churches on them?
If the Church can err, to whom shall we have recourse in our difficulties? Protestants will say Scripture. We do not doubt that we must believe in and consult Scripture, but what if our difficulty pertains to Scripture itself? How can we find an answer? I cannot go to Luther or Calvin for they have opposing opinions. Do you really think Our Lord went to the trouble to establish His Church just to leave us in anarchy with no recourse on matters which could or could not damn us?
All denominations shout their claims with equal assurance that their interpretation of Scripture is accurate, which would leave all others inaccurate. To say Our Lord has not left us any guides to help us choose the good from the bad in an environment that He knew contained much error, is to say that He wishes us to perish, which we know He does not.
Our Lord said, "And if he will not hear them: tell the church. And if he will not hear the church, let him be to thee as the heathen and publican" (Matt 18:17). How else can this be understood than Our Lord sends us to the Church in our differences?
If the Church can err, and God commands us to go to the Church, then this means God wishes to deceive us. Does it make sense that God would send all of His lambs to the slaughter by commanding them to consult a Church that can contain error?
When St. Paul says, "But if I tarry long, that thou mayest know how thou oughtest to behave thyself in the house of God, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and ground of the truth" (1 Timothy 3:15), why would he call the Church the "pillar and ground of truth" if it could contain error?
If the Church did err and the Protestant reformers started churches of their own as they did, then how can we explain this verse from Scripture: "And he hath subjected all things under his feet, and hath made him head over all the church" (Ephesians 1:22). This verse refers to Jesus being head of ONE church, not multiple churches such as those started by Lutheran, Calvin and subsequent Protestants.
It must be made clear here that when we refer to the Church not erring, we are referring to the Church not misguiding the faithful with respect to faith and morals, which we are required to hear and know for our salvation. The Church at the same time is also a human society because it consists of human members. This is why scandals, heresies, schisms and sins among its members also arise. These sins are expected with human beings and do not indicate a failure of a divinely founded Church that Our Lord promised would never fail! Did the mission of all the Apostles fail or cease to be because Judas turned to betrayal? Of course not. Christ Himself foretold of these type of problems in Scripture when He spoke parables in Matthew 13 regarding the cockle growing together with the wheat and the net containing good fish and bad fish. Consider the verses, "Again the kingdom of heaven is like to a net cast into the sea, and gathering together of all kind of fishes. Which, when it was filled, they drew out, and sitting by the shore, they chose out the good into vessels, but the bad they cast forth. So shall it be at the end of the world. The angels shall go out, and shall separate the wicked from among the just." Matthew 13:47-49.
In summary, Our Lord said His Church would never fail, yet we clearly see members of His Church making mistakes due to their human natures. These mistakes clearly do not indicate failure of the Church. Again, the Church is equivalent to an army with good and bad soldiers, many of which stray or are killed, but this does not affect the army as a whole. The same applies to the true Church of Christ; it continues unscathed over the gates of hell despite the downfalls of its members

Answer 2

The Raven and Sentinel explained this very well, so I guess I don't need to write much, except post some more Bible verses contradicting the Protestants in support of Sola Scriptura.

John 21:25 "But there are also many other things which Jesus did; were every one of them to be written, I suppose that the world itself could not contain the books that would be written."

2 Thess 2:15 "So then, brethren, stand firm and hold to the traditions which you were taught by us, either by word of mouth or by letter."

2 Pet 1:20-21 "First of all you must understand this, that no prophecy of scripture is a matter of one's own interpretation, because no prophecy ever came by the impulse of man, but men moved by the Holy Spirit spoke from God."

Protestants - how do you explain THAT?

Answer 3

What's funny is that so many protestants use the verses 2 Tiomothy 3:16All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness, 3:17so that the man of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work.

What they don't seem to see is that while it says "All scripture", it doesn't say "Only scripture". Nor, at that point was all that the Bible is even written.

Christ himself spoke out against a legalistic and blind adherence to scripture. He broke the literal interpretation by healing on the Sabbath.

Paul also admonished believers in 2 Thessalonians 2:15 So then, brethren, stand firm and hold to the traditions which you were taught, whether by word of mouth or by letter from us.

This certainly seems to imply that Sola Scriptura is not Biblical.

Just my 2 cents, but what would I know?

Answer 4

The words 'pot', 'kettle' and 'black' come to mind... but before you jump to the wrong conclusion, let me concede that man-made traditions HAVE sprung up in Luthernism (after the fellow's demise, I would add). Here's one tradition you should be particularly interested in (seeing as nobody so far has actually detailed even one supposed Luthern tradition). The Luthern church in Germany saw the Sisterhood of Mary established in 1947. These godly ladies wear habits, have a Mother Superior and devote themselves to prayer and charity. They took a lot of stick from many Protestants who feared they were just copying Catholic Nuns. Not so. There ARE critical differences! But this tradition of Christians drawing apart from the world to be utterly devoted to the religious life certainly began with Catholicism. So there you have it - some Protestant Lutherns following the Catholic traditions! I hope you are suitably impressed!

Answer 5

Yes, "sola scriptura" is man-made tradition. But not because of Martin Luther.

Scripture is writings of man inspired by God. So anything that we write that is God-Inspired (even such as this reply I write to you) is scripture, holy and sacred. And of course what I'm writing to you is not worthy of preaching to everyone! And so there is the falacy of "sola scriptura" ....

But one more point, I need to back up further and say, as I just illustrated in the above paragraph - Writing alone, even writing about God - is nothing more than man-made tradition. However - where what I'm writing here is relevant to this moment only, there are writings inspired by God that remain relevant through eons of history. I believe it is important to look at all that comes to us through the ages of history, as well as the history behind these writings. . . That is if you want to discern what writing is "inspired" as well as SACRED (Set apart) from what writing is just a bunch of discourse answered to some question.

Or if that is more than what you include in your own "cup of tea" then just throw the whole mess out and listen for God's word in your heart. Everyone has an understanding of Love, and God is Love. That is always the ultimate and final end all ~Word~.

Yah, I think we could throw the whole bible in a bon fire and still there would be God and His Word/Son -- so this "sola scriptura" concept can't be anything but man-made tradition (doctrine)

PS haha I already got a thumbs down on this - probably for my proposition of throwing the bible in a bon fire. That cracks me up people so focused on the bible so as not to realize the bible isn't what it's all about. . .huh - maybe the bible SHOULD be burned just so people would be forced to figure it out?

Answer 6

Yes, tango, it is a man-made tradition. The Church existed more than 300 years before the Bible was compiled and the Church was the authority...not the Bible.

Secondly, the Catholic Church gave us the Bible. The Church and the Bible are to go hand-in-hand, not be separated. However, the Bible itself tells us to hold to the traditions of the apostles.

Martin Luther was a wicked man and I can give you some quotes of what actually came out of his mouth:

"Whenever the devil harasses you, seek the company of men or drink more, or joke and talk nonsense, or do some other merry thing. Sometimes we must drink more, sport, recreate ourselves, and even sin a little to spite the devil, so that we leave him no place for troubling our consciences with trifles. We are conquered if we try too conscientiously not to sin at all. So when the devil says to you: do not drink, answer him: I will drink, and right freely, just because you tell me not to."

"Be a sinner and sin boldly, but believe and rejoice in Christ even more boldly for he is victorious over sin, death, and the world. As long as we are here in this world we have to sin. This life is not a dwelling place of righteousness"

"The Jews deserve to be hanged on gallows, seven times higher than ordinary thieves"

"We ought to take revenge on the Jews and kill them."

"If I had to baptize a Jew, I would take him to the river Elbe, hang a stone around his neck and push him over with the words `I baptize thee in the name of Abraham'."

Does this sound like the kind of man you would want to follow? As for me, I will stick with the Church that Christ established for me and for the rest of the faithful.

Answer 7

The usage of the phrase "Sola Scriptura" can be traced back to him but the concept of sticking to God's Word alone goes back a thousand years before Christ's Incarnation.

Answer 8

yes, sola sciptura and sola fide are the absolute man-made traditions nothing more! it's a very dangerous and unbiblical doctrine.

Answer 9

if Jesus Christ had intended His followers to centre their faith on a book, He would have written one.

He didn't. He passed on His ministry by word of mouth to the apostle peter.

Jesus Christ left a living thing on earth: His church.

a book is not a living thing.

Answer 10

Sola Scriptura is taught very clearly in Scriptures, although it does not use those exact words.

2 Timothy 3:16-17

16All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness, 17so that the man of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work.

1 Cor 4:6

6Now, brothers, I have applied these things to myself and Apollos for your benefit, so that you may learn from us the meaning of the saying, "Do not go beyond what is written." Then you will not take pride in one man over against another.

Jesus taugh against tradition and told the Jews to only use the Scripture in Mark chapter seven.

Pastor Art