Is Sola Scriptura Biblical?

Is Sola Scriptura biblical?

#catholicchurch #catholicfaith #catholicmass #eucharist #eucharisticmiracles #bishopmarmariemmanuel #bishopbarron #jidion #gideon #sneako #mattwalsh #benshapiro #michaelknowles #candaceowensppdcast #easternorthodox #ruslankd #jordanpeterson

[savagemode.]

The most funny thing is for the first 300 years of Christianity, there wasn't Holy Bible as of we know it today. The early Christians relied on the teachings of the Apostles, the oral tradition, Liturgy and various letters and writings of 100s of people circulated among the communities.
The New Testament canon was not formally established until the late 4th century. Even after the canon was established, most people were not even literate and could not read the Scriptures themselves. They depended on the oral Tradition and the teaching authority of the Church, guided by the Holy Spirit, to preserve and transmit the faith accurately.
This underscores the importance of Tradition and the Magisterium (the teaching authority of the Church) alongside Scripture. The Bible itself emerged from this living Tradition, and the authority of the Church was essential in discerning and compiling the inspired texts.
Thus, the claim that the Bible is the sole infallible authority does not align with the historical reality of how the Christian faith was preserved and transmitted in the early centuries. Or if you wanna claim nobody was True Christian to begin with until Luther and his followers.

[IndoHelleneBall]

bro dissproved sola scriptura with sola scriptura 🤣


edit: i just need to clarify, i am a Catholic, i was just found it funny how he uses a protestant's own trick against them

[robertmoon]

"All Scripture is inspired by God and beneficial for teaching, for rebuke, for correction, for training in righteousness; so that the man or woman of God may be fully capable, equipped for every good work." - 2 Timothy 3:16-17

^ This says Scripture is all we need.

[willcruikshank]

Throwing up a female “pastor” as the representative of Protestants is quite disrespectful

[Mo-skxo]

where in the Bible does it teach the infallibility of the Position of the Pope?

[Roman_Leo]

2 Thessalonians 15

15 So then, brothers, stand firm and hold to the traditions that you were taught by us, either by our spoken word or by our letter.

[prodigalsonposts]

I love how Protestants quote 2 Timothy 3:16-17 but can't tell me how 2 Timothy is considered Scripture in the first place. They're using circular reasoning and don't even realize it. Also, 2 Timothy 3:16-17 doesn't affirm SOLE, it only affirms that Scripture is infallible

Scripture by the way affirms that Sacred Tradition is also the word of God in 1 Thessalonians 2:13 and 2 Thessalonians 2:15

Also Protestants, in Matthew 2:23 it mentions about Jesus "He will be called a Nazarene" and that this was "mentioned by the Prophets"

Where is this prophecy in the Old Testament?

[KelvinBautista-dn]

“But he answered and said, It is written, Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God.”
‭‭Matthew‬ ‭4‬:‭4‬ ‭KJV‬‬

[JaMes-qyfy]

Doesnt the bible say to hold to traditions aswell?

[MsterChiefPettyOfficerJohn-]

Most Christians here will be knowing much more than me, but i just wanted to clarify something.
Is it possible for traditions to be corrupted over time in the hands of men?
If so, don't you think the Holy Bible was compiled to maintain the clarity of the Word of God even after 2000 yrs?
I mean I could be wrong. I'm not here to point fingers.
I just dont understand this.
If men are fallible, then can the church not be fallible too?
If men are fallible, can traditions not be fallible too?
But among whoever calls himself/herself a Christian, who can say that the Holy Bible is flawed/fallible?

Its just my unrefined take on the topic at hand.

[globofgreen]

Doesn’t Catholicism have a lot of practices not found in the Bible?

[TheRealTrucido]

The phrase sola scriptura is from the Latin: sola having the idea of “alone, ” “ground, ” “base, ” and the word scriptura meaning “writings”—referring to the Scriptures. Sola scriptura means that Scripture alone is authoritative for the faith and practice of the Christian. The Bible is complete, authoritative, and true. “All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness” (2 Timothy 3:16).

Sola scriptura was the rallying cry of the Protestant Reformation. For centuries the Roman Catholic Church had made its traditions superior in authority to the Bible. This resulted in many practices that were in fact contradictory to the Bible. Some examples are prayer to saints and/or Mary, the immaculate conception, transubstantiation, indulgences, and papal authority. Martin Luther, the founder of the Lutheran Church and father of the Protestant Reformation, was publicly rebuking the Catholic Church for its unbiblical teachings. The Catholic Church threatened Martin Luther with excommunication (and death) if he did not recant. Martin Luther’s reply was, “Unless therefore I am convinced by the testimony of Scripture, or by the clearest reasoning, unless I am persuaded by means of the passages I have quoted, and unless they thus render my conscience bound by the Word of God, I cannot and will not retract, for it is unsafe for a Christian to speak against his conscience. Here I stand, I can do no other; may God help me! Amen!”

The primary Catholic argument against sola scriptura is that the Bible does not explicitly teach sola scriptura. Catholics argue that the Bible nowhere states that it is the only authoritative guide for faith and practice. However, this is only true in the shallowest sense. The principle is strongly indicated by verses such as Acts 17:11, which commends the Bereans for testing doctrine—taught by an apostle, no less—to the written Word. Sola scriptura is all-but-explicitly indicated in 1 Corinthians 4:6, where Paul warns not to “go beyond what is written.” Jesus Himself criticized those who allowed traditions to override the explicit commands of God in Mark 7:6–9.

Whether sola scriptura is overtly mentioned in the Bible or not, Catholicism fails to recognize a crucially important issue. We know that the Bible is the Word of God. The Bible declares itself to be God-breathed, inerrant, and authoritative. We also know that God does not change His mind or contradict Himself. So, while the Bible itself may not explicitly argue for sola scriptura, it most definitely does not allow for traditions that contradict its message. Sola scriptura is not as much of an argument against tradition as it is an argument against unbiblical, extra-biblical and/or anti-biblical doctrines. The only way to know for sure what God expects of us is to stay true to what we know He has revealed—the Bible. We can know, beyond the shadow of any doubt, that Scripture is true, authoritative, and reliable. The same cannot be said of tradition.

The Word of God is the ultimate and only infallible authority for the Christian faith. Traditions are valid only when they conform with Scripture. Traditions that contradict the Bible are not of God and are not a valid aspect of the Christian faith. Sola scriptura is the only way to avoid subjectivity and keep personal opinion from taking priority over the teachings of the Bible. The essence of sola scriptura is basing one’s spiritual life on the Bible alone and rejecting any tradition or teaching that is not in full agreement with the Bible. Second Timothy 2:15 declares, “Do your best to present yourself to God as one approved, a workman who does not need to be ashamed and who correctly handles the word of truth.”

Sola scriptura does not nullify the concept of church traditions. Rather, sola scriptura gives us a solid foundation on which to base church traditions. There are many practices, in both Catholic and Protestant churches, that are the result of traditions, not the explicit teaching of Scripture. It is good, and even necessary, for the church to have traditions. Traditions play an important role in clarifying and organizing Christian practice. At the same time, in order for these traditions to be valid, they must not be in disagreement with God’s Word. They must be based on the solid foundation of the teaching of Scripture. The problem with the Roman Catholic Church, and many other churches, is that they base traditions on traditions which are based on traditions which are based on traditions, often with the initial tradition not being in full harmony with the Scriptures. That is why Christians must always go back to sola scriptura, the authoritative Word of God, as the only solid basis for faith and practice.

On a practical matter, a frequent objection to the concept of sola scriptura is the fact that the canon of the Bible was not officially agreed upon for at least 250 years after the church was founded. Further, the Scriptures were not available to the masses for over 1500 years after the church was founded. How, then, were early Christians to use sola scriptura, when they did not even have the full Scriptures? And how were Christians who lived before the invention of the printing press supposed to base their faith and practice on Scripture alone if there was no way for them to have a complete copy of the Scriptures? This issue is further compounded by the very high rates of illiteracy throughout history. How does the concept of sola scriptura handle these issues?

The problem with this argument is that it essentially says that Scripture’s authority is based on its availability. This is not the case. Scripture’s authority is universal; because it is God’s Word, it is His authority. The fact that Scripture was not readily available, or that people could not read it, does not change the fact that Scripture is God’s Word. Further, rather than this being an argument against sola scriptura, it is actually an argument for what the church should have done, instead of what it did. The early church should have made producing copies of the Scriptures a high priority. While it was unrealistic for every Christian to possess a complete copy of the Bible, it was possible that every church could have some, most, or all of the Scriptures available to it. Early church leaders should have made studying the Scriptures their highest priority so they could accurately teach it. Even if the Scriptures could not be made available to the masses, at least church leaders could be well-trained in the Word of God. Instead of building traditions upon traditions and passing them on from generation to generation, the church should have copied the Scriptures and taught the Scriptures (2 Timothy 4:2).

Again, traditions are not the problem. Unbiblical traditions are the problem. The availability of the Scriptures throughout the centuries is not 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 in agreement with, God’s Word can be maintained. Traditions that are not based on, and/or disagree 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.

[luvster]

The way Catholics use the argument that "So what about everyone who claimed to be a follower of Christ before Luther?, what about all the church fathers, and all the saints, were they wrong and you alone right" is used as a gotcha moment against many Protestants yet,

Were the Jews not the chosen people of God? Before Jesus died on the cross for all the world, all the Gentiles (I am willing to bet most believers now-a-days are not Jews) these were the most holy and blessed followers of God, yet they fell into sin over and over again, witchcraft, idolatry, sexual immorality, violence, rebellion, deceit, doubt, and schisms. To the point where even Slavery and the destruction of the Temple was the consequence for their constant disobedience.

My point being what makes the Catholic, Protestant, or Modern Christian so confident in their "authority" that even the Jews who are certainly have longer tradition and many from the ministry of John the Baptist, Jesus, and then the Apostles have become Christian Jews up until today,

If the Catholic Church claims authority by the event of Peter and the Keys then what of the chosen people of God? Why are the Popes not predominantly Jewish Christians as many of the Apostles were? Why are the Protestants wrong because the Catholics were given the authority, when the Jews (starting with Peter and the other Apostles) were given the authority first?

This is not meant to be an argument against the who is owed the authority of the "One Church", this is meant to open our eyes to the weakness of this common argument and the arrogance of man that usually brings nothing but division.

[danielomitted]

"the catholic church recognizes three pillars of truth" all of which the catholic gets to define. So ultimately its just one pillar, which is just whatever the Catholic Church says.

[Belacthemighty]

I grew up in a Lutheran church and was told that the Bible is truth but never once have I been told that its the only acceptable writing and that no others can be taken into consideration.

[Benny-zxbi]

This is also untrue as the written scriptures were being read and used prior to the 4th century with consistent unity in what the scriptures were and were not.

[CharlesSeraphDrums]

Oh brother, you’ll absolutely love what Saint John Chrysostom had to say about 1 Timothy 3:15 and the role of Scripture in the Church.

[seveesco]

The fac is: the bible was produce by the catholic church. 😂😂 No my friend, the bible was produced and inspired by God

[thundr]

So how else am I supposed to be a good disciple without the Bible? We don’t need priests and we don’t need the saints, all we need is is Jesus for “I am the way the truth and the life non come to the father except through me” where do we learn about Jesus? The Bible. We can study it our selves, Jesus never said “you need to confess to a PRIEST” it’s to confess to him not anyone else

[cobeleland]

Makes sense because this guy never uses scripture to support his arguments.