Sola Scriptura is FALSE | w/ Suan Sonna

Hey everyone! In this live steam, Suan Sonna will be presenting a new argument against Sola Scriptura.
▃▃▃▃▃▃▃▃▃▃▃▃▃▃▃▃▃▃▃▃▃▃▃▃▃▃▃▃▃

☩ Subscribe for more theological topics ☩

☩ Share this video with a friend ☩

▃▃▃▃▃▃▃▃▃▃▃▃▃▃▃▃▃▃▃▃▃▃▃▃▃▃▃▃▃

[NotSoCradleCatholic]

Shameless popery has a really good video on this titled “the biblical case for infallibility.”

[TheOtherPaul]

Thanks for showing my question boss :)

[griffingartner]

I'm a Catholic convert and do a decent amount of work in the field testing arguments like this. I'm in the South, so there are no shortage of Baptists to talk to.

I run into two main problems. The first is that the slavery argument falls. They will shrug and tell you that if you need a Pope to tell you that the Bible is against slavery, something is wrong with you. It's similar to an agnostic telling you that they don't need God to know that murder is wrong. You know the rabbit hole there.

The second issue is that it's functionally a pathos argument. We would say it's morally repugnant to allow slavery under a Christian worldview. A Methodist might counter that they find it equally repugnant that you don't have priestesses or gay marriage under your Biblical/Ecclesial framework.

It's a logical argument, but I'm not sure how well it works on the ground. God bless you and thank you for all of your excellent work. Pax Christi.

[theosophicalwanderings]

Thanks for taking my questions Braden!

[TJBowman-vrco]

Protestants: Bible Alone
Also Protestants: Gay Churches

[MrDoyle]

This is an excellent presentation! The excellent points are so numerous that I can’t express gratitude for them in an enumerated way. One giant take away that stood out in my mind is that without a Magisterium in harmony with Scripture both receiving their commission with and from the same one God, the hope of the institution surviving for even hundreds of years intact is nil. The Prot deformation no matter the original intent is proof of that. There are 1000s of denominations none accountable to any power greater than itself each claiming to be “bible” orientated that don’t agree with each other. It’s frightening to hint of where they will be in another 200 years given how far they have descended in just 500 years. The Catholic Church? Still the same 2000 years later. An Apostle could walk into one of our services anywhere on earth and still recognize us by what they themselves taught.

[susand]

Dear Suan Sonna and The Catechuman, I am very grateful to have come across this video today. I have been thinking about Acts 15. Let me see if I have this right... (If I have it wrong, please feel free to erase this comment!)
The Circumcision Party was made up of Bible-believing Christians, using the historical -grammatical approach.
Peter and Paul went beyond the text, looking at the actions of the Holy Spirit in Peter's vision and baptism of Cornelius, and in the wonders and miracles among the Gentiles wrought at the hands of Paul and Barnabas.
Because he was looking at the situation through an ecclesial hermeneutic, Paul was able to see Abraham's justification by faith came before God required circumcision. (Galatians 3) And James was able to read into Amos 9:11-12 proof that the Gentiles qua Gentiles would be brought into the house of David (Acts 15:16-18).

Thank you for giving me this better understanding of ecclesial hermeneutic, which underlies a passage like Acts 16:4-5 -- Then as they were passing through the cities, they were delivering the dogmas decided on by the apostles and elders who were in Jerusalem, that they might obey. Therefore indeed the Churches were strengthened in faith, and were growing in number every day.

[Traditionchristian]

My wife converted because of you thank you suan you are a saint in my book

[milkeywilkie]

Always love new installments in the sola scriptura rebuttal canon

[fantasia]

Protestants, consider a Bible, which you regard as the sole infallible authority on doctrine – except this particular Bible is in a language you don't know. Is that particular Bible still your sole infallible authority?

If not, suppose you take classes on that language. How well must you learn that language until that Bible becomes your sole infallible authority? What if someone else learns that language slightly differently and disagrees about what that Bible says. Who is correct?

Or consider if that Bible is translated later for you. On what basis do you know if that translation is accurate enough to be your sole infallible authority?

[oldmovieman]

The problem with the slavery argument is that slavery itself is not necessarily evil. There are of course evil forms of slavery which the Bible explicitly condemns, but not all kinds are condemned.

[tafazziReadChannelDescription]

I think something that could be added to the answer given to Justas' question is that the magisterium works on an ordinary level as well. The church did work to abolish slavery in Europe, which is why there's a markedly different proportion of slaves to free people in the roman times compared to the middle ages. It's an institution that the church patiently chipped away at, and only stepped it up with an act of the papal magisterium when it experienced an unexpected resurgance right before the church's eyes during the colonization period.

Same thing with the death penalty. It's something that the church has at the local levels discouraged, and it's only now that she's sealing the deal universally.

[tonyl]

Just started reading St Francis de Sales chapter on this topic in _The Catholic Controversy_ . So not sure how new it is, at least argument 2.... Can see the influence of the recent YT video discussions of slavery on the topic.

[Chegui-km]

I love how Gregory of Nyssa was touched on in passing lol He actually is a good case on how someone who is based on the sola scriptura principle can deduce from scripture the doing away with slavery without a magestrium.

[arminkleinke-manner]

Maybe I am ill informed, but does the historical grammatical approach require, that Abrahams answer in Gen. 22, 8 "God will provide himself a victim for an holocaust, my son." can never be interpreted as a prophetic word for neither Abraham nor the author of Genesis intended it as such? I mean it is possible, that the author meant it as such, but you can't establish that definitly which lands you again in territory which the historical grammatical approach should reject.
So in short: the historical grammatical interpretation rejects, where God obviously wants you to read between the lines and understand a typology. A typology I hope no protestant would ever reject. Let alone all the other unwitting prophetic utterances and the scripture word fulfilled which only make typological sense (sign of Jonah very explicitly by our Lord himself) in the bible.

Don't know whether it's strawmaning the position though.

[ProjectMysticApostolate]

Thanks Braden and Suan.

This video was so enlightening.

[notavailable]

I am leaning towards distilling this all down to a sort of transcendental argument for church authority by arguing from the impossibility of the contrary: If God's people recognize(d) scripture, and scripture helps us know who God's people are, then neither term has any meaning because they are circularly defined by each other. You have to know what scripture is to know who God's people are, and you have to know who God's people are in order to know what scripture is. This doesn't prove which church authority is the real one, but I think it shows that if Christianity is true then there must be one it's just a matter of developing that line of thought further.

[mememe]

The only problem i see is the common sense strength of the historical-grammatical interpretive sense in plenty of other areas. Sure, against slavery, polygamy, and other things it cant do much but the bible itself has been so hijacked by protestants and seculars that its hard to read it and not see it the way they do. Its hard to feel the magic of the Catholic Churches history and authority when reading. If this is our book why doesn't it jump off the page the way it does for protestants?

But to contribute something:
When i converted, frustrated with my protestant past, i took a long break from reading the bible because i never properly understood it. I came across an article online about the book of Romans. The author, a catholic, asserted that the main theme of the book was not soteriology but the priesthood. With various proofs to back him up. Which was so electrified my interest in the bible that i spent almost all that night doing a bible study instead of sleeping.

[L.A.]

Great teaching. Can these slides be downloaded somewhere?

[annakimborahpa]

1. As:
(A) the human person is the unity of soul and body,
- so -
(B) Divine Revelation is the unity of Sacred Scripture and Sacred Tradition.

2. Sacred Scripture is the Inspired Word of God and comprised of the books of the Old and New Testament.

3. Sacred Tradition is composed of Active Tradition and Passive Tradition:
(A) Active Tradition is the Church's living and ever-present Magisterium, i.e., the Pope and the bishops in union with him,
- and -
(B) Passive Tradition is the accumulation of Church teaching over the centuries that reflects upon the written and unwritten traditions passed down from the Apostles.