I found Sola Scriptura in the Bible! #catholic #protestant #orthodox

[rippedgoat]

using the bible alone to justify using only the bible is a circular argument

[figurefour]

St Paul says go beyond what is written in 2 Thessalonians 2:15 Stand firm, then, brothers, and keep the traditions that we taught you, whether by word of mouth or by letter.

[HellenicPapist]

There are several of ways to demonstrate that 1 Corinthians 4:6 can’t rescue sola scriptura from the realm of myth. First, note that none of the Reformers attempted to use this verse to vindicate sola scriptura. In fact, John Calvin says Paul’s use of the phrase “what is written” is probably either a reference to the Old Testament verses he quotes within his epistle or to the epistle itself (Commentary on 1 Corinthians 4:6). Not only did Calvin not see in 1 Corinthians any support for sola scriptura, a theory he vociferously promoted, he regarded the verse as obscure at best and of negligible value in the effort to vindicate Protestantism.

What is certain is that Paul, in saying, “do not go beyond what is written, ” was not teaching sola scriptura. If he had, he would have been advocating one of four principles, which are inconsistent with the rest of his theology: (1) Accept as authoritative only the Old Testament writings; (2) accept as authoritative only the Old Testament writings and the New Testament writings penned as of the date Paul wrote 1 Corinthians (circa A.D. 56); (3) accept as authoritative orally transmitted doctrine only until it has been reduced to writing (scripture) and only while the apostles are alive, then disregard all oral tradition and adhere only to what is written; or (4) the most extreme position, accept as authoritative only doctrine that has been reduced to writing.

The already flimsy case for sola scriptura is further weakened by Paul’s comments in 1 Corinthians 11:2 where he praises the Christians in Corinth for holding fast to the traditions just as he had handed them on to them. It’s clear from the context that he was referring to oral Tradition because the Corinthians had as yet no New Testament Scriptures, 1 Corinthians being the very first letter Paul had sent them. Prior to this letter all his teaching had been oral.

God bless.

[toddcarver]

2 THESSALONIANS 2:15 So then, brothers and sisters, stand firm and hold to the traditions you were taught, whether by what we said or what we wrote.
You shouldn't be making videos. You are woefully misguided.

[Jerome]

Hmm, inserting point, but I question if that is really what it means when he’s saying to apply it to himself. That would mean he would no longer be able to write letters about new topics that popped up as that would go beyond what is written at that point.

[Convert]

The context is so they don’t say who they follow Peter or Paul or others. The context is very clear. Plus referring to the Old Testament. The new wasn’t even a thing yet.

[tonysaborio]

Who says that what you are quoting is even Scripture? Where do you get your canon?

[curtisjordan]

In the scripture you mentioned, Paul says "not to go beyond what is written, " we (Catholics) don't see this as promoting Sola scriptura. Instead, we believe Paul is addressing specific issues in the Corinthian church about pride and division, urging them to stick to the teachings already provided.

Catholics emphasize that both the Bible and the traditions passed down from the apostles are important. We point to passages like 2 Thessalonians 2:15, where Paul tells believers to hold onto traditions taught by word of mouth and letter, showing that early Christians relied on both written and oral teachings.

We also believe Jesus gave the apostles and their successors the authority to teach and interpret His message. This authority includes understanding and explaining the Scriptures. Therefore, for Catholics, the Church's teachings and the Bible together guide their faith, rather than relying solely on the Bible.

[GM-bckg]

Interesting argument since the bible was not written or compiled till after Paul's death.

[Moskal]

What does he mean by what is written? By your logic we should only follow the old testament.

[vman]

First of all you must understand this, that no prophecy of Scripture is a matter of one’s own interpretation, - 2 Peter 1:20

[Mosesthewhiteboy]

What does the Bible mean when it says in 2 Thessalonians chapter 2 verse 15 when it says "Hold to the Traditions handed down to you whether by word of mouth or our Epistle"?

[kokomorquis]

In other words; "BE HUMBLE AND DO GOOD TO ALL THINGS AND BEINGS"!❤

[HillSummitHomestead]

Read it in context and whom they were speaking to. Same Paul said clearly TENETE TRADITIONES without any room for "interpretation" and he also clearly stated that his words are from The Holy Spirit and not from him but via him.
Again, read the entire chapter (book).
The Holy Bible is ALL or nothing and cherry picking versus = nothing.

[DUZCO]

Wasn't Paul talking about the OT???

[sacamedeaca]

Also does not contradict Catholicism. What Protestant mis understand or don´t want to see is that The Catholic teaching is based on The Bible. That´s why protestant have bible teaching or bible reunion to read....because no one can get along and knows and has all the tradition behind to know what The Writer is talking about. To know how to read something you have to know context, that will bring you more accurate interpretation. In case of Word of God . God Is ONE so HIS CHURCH must be ONE attached to HIS WORD. That´s why you don´t go farbeyond what is writtn. Also you are proving the contrary you try to proove. To go beyond is to split in multiple denominations.

[HrvojeSL]

See, but here's the problem:
1. The same apostle who said that exhorted the Thessalonian Church to hold fast to both written and oral tradition.
2. Even if I grant your argument, you must throw out at a minimum all the New Testament as Scripture because the only Scripture Paul had was the OT
3. Way back in Deuteronomy we are told not to add anything to the book. So if we were to take a narrow view of this we'd have to get rid of the vast majority of the OT as well and be left with just the books of Moses at a maximum as our Scripture. Like the Sadducees.

Bottom line is you didn't find anything except one verse out of context

[roshankurien]

Yeah who told you Paul wrote Corinthians. 😂😂… just Paul writes it’s him doesn’t make it true… this is such poor logic there was NO 27 NT books when Paul Worte this letter. It’s not rocket science 😂😂

It’s Called the Church
Council of Hippo and Carthage out of 200 books 27 were chosen..

“if I delay, you may know how one ought to behave in the household of God, which is the CHURCH OF THE LIVING GOD, a pillar and buttress of the truth.”
‭‭1 Timothy‬ ‭3‬:‭15‬ ‭ESV‬‬

[CatholicCraig]

The problem you have there in that reasoning is that if you apply what you just said to the Jews Paul is talking to then they would all have to reject everything in the New Testament because when Paul taught this, the New Testament was not in the Bible yet……????😂

[tabandken]

How do you know when your interpretation is correct? That is what Tradition is for. To help you not go beyond what is written. When you misinterpret Scriptures, you're going beyond what is written. And written by who? The first Catholic leaders of the Church. Paul was talking to laymen, not Church leaders who are guided by God.