REASONS WHY: Sola Scriptura is False

This took a very long time to write, record, and edit. So, I hope you enjoy the video. Make sure to leave a like!
▃▃▃▃▃▃▃▃▃▃▃▃▃▃▃▃▃▃▃▃▃▃▃▃▃▃▃▃▃
☩ Subscribe for more theological topics ☩

☩ Share this video with a friend ☩

▃▃▃▃▃▃▃▃▃▃▃▃▃▃▃▃▃▃▃▃▃▃▃▃▃▃▃▃▃
0:00-3:16 Introduction
3:16-8:11 Summary
8:11-11:37 Overview and Authority
11:37-18:57 Protestant View of Authority
18:57-26:06 Catholic View of Authority
26:06-56:00 Scriptural and Patristic Witness
56:00-1:41:44 Objections to Sola Scriptura
1:41:44 Outro
▃▃▃▃▃▃▃▃▃▃▃▃▃▃▃▃▃▃▃▃▃▃▃▃▃▃▃▃▃
Sources Cited:

Extra Resources:

[KyleWhittington]

Dude peaces out to Rome and yet still drops this gem.

[danielkelly]

Brayden, this is an amazing video. It is so extremely helpful for us existing Catholics to here the passion, love and clarity that you new converts have for this wonderful church of ours. It has ignited a much needed fire in me and I dare say others. Thank you, Braden, God Bless

[robmorgan]

Please don't fear making long videos. I happily watched from beginning to end and I'm sure many others did too. Complicated topics need to be given ample time to do the topic justice otherwise one just does a disservice to what one is trying to achieve. As long as you're engaged with the topic and you are. Then viewer isn't going to mind length. Anyway just my two cents worth. I think it would be a shame to further edit this. Thank you and God Bless.

[maryduggins]

Listened start to finish… also, Anglican here🙋🏽‍♀️

My brain feels like it won’t buffer lol I am having such a hard time refuting your argument and defending Sola Scriptura after this video (keep in mind, I have held so tightly to the 5 solas my whole life that I almost tattooed them on myself a few years ago). Well done. This video is super helpful, well paced, and well thought out.

[nelyayala]

Good job! I thought I won't listen to the whole video because of the length but l did. I couldn't stop listening. Excellent information. Thank you. God blessed you.

[patrickspeedling]

This is such a great channel. I've recently decided to come back to the church. I do have issues with this pope... But it's the traditions I miss and love. It's the comfort of the rosary and being part of something way bigger than just than myself. It's important to me to try and build myself in Christ and being catholic is so beautiful...Mass is beautiful. Plus the tradition keeps me grounded in truth ... Grounded in the spirit.

[mayannsteinbeisser]

You nailed it! I appreciate the thoroughness of the info you presented! Welcome to the one, holy, Catholic, apostolic Church!

[jflow]

Brayden. We are so lucky to have you join the Catholic Church. Your videos are so interesting and thorough. You are helping many of us cradle Catholics learn how to use scripture in broad strokes to grow spiritually. You should lead Bible studies

[FonkyMonk]

Man, a lot of effort went into this. Good Job!

[johnbalao]

Brandon, I am an agnostic, but you made me very curious and interested to read the Catechism of the Catholic Church and the Bible.

[maryduggins]

Looking forward to finishing this video! Also THANK YOU for the super comprehensive resources in the description box!

[josephvincent]

Buddy you know so much I've been catholic my entire life and still can confuse myself. Lol but the lord always reveals himself.

[Nothere]

Appreciate the length of tbis video. Commenting for the algorithm. Keep it up

[williamavitt]

I didn't watch the entire video in one sitting. I listened 15-20 minutes here and there while driving. I also sat in the parking lot before mass this morning listening

[sotem]

The video was better than expected, I was semi-expecting a lot of cheap shots (not because of you) but I guess I have been exposed to lots of bad
arguments (Protestant or Catholic).
I find navigating these matters very difficult, I guess the only way to resolve this is to take my time and study these matters myself.
Still then it will be very difficult.
I'm almost confirmed (will be confirmed this easter), but it's an incredibly bumpy road.
There are lots of difficulties on the way, and my conscious is greatly divided at times.
One day I absolutely love the faith, and the other day I strongly doubt the faith and wish to cancel being confirmed.
Anyway I'll do my best to keep you in my prayers!
Guess it doesn't really help that I come from a strongly anti-Catholic background, so I have to distinguish between valid reasoning and old bias.

God bless!

[leticitotan]

I agree! It should be remembered that the church was already functioning, presumably, even before the emergence of the HOLY scriptures through the directions by the apostles. Hence, it is logical to believe that the early church's practices which became customs and/or traditions should be given consideration along side with the written words of God.

[OzCrusader]

Excellent work Brayden! If all young Catholics had your zeal, the world would be a totally better place. You cherish and share the same jewel of Faith that many young cradle Catholics reject as irrelevant superstition.

[angelperl]

Excellent argumentation on the position of the Catholic Church both Scripture and Tradition have equal importance.

[TheAndreas]

Interesting take! There's a few things I was wondering as a Lutheran though:

BTW: You asked us not to write an essay. Then ... I wrote an essay. Oops. The first two comments are most interesting I think, the last few lines are just meant to share some ideas that popped into my head and not be viewed as an argument.

1:04:15 You're saying that the data pool from which we pull doctrin is skewed if we don't have an infallible magisterium defining the canon. Bu how so? There's no "meta-magisterium" to determine whether there is a magisterium. But apparently we'd need something like that to make sure our theological verdicts don't go wrong? It seems to me this argument is "too big" and eventually gives all of Christendom problems. The exact issues you raise at 1:06:00 can also be raised against a magisterium, councils etc. Also, I don't see how you can consistently use Scriptural arguments for the magisterium, if you think we need the magisterium to set the boundaries of Scripture. It seems like you must show that the RC magisterium is true from history and a priori arguments alone.

Some examples from your video: "In Protestantism none of these debates can ever be settled for it is all left up to the individual to decide on the validity of the doctrine before joining a church." (1:36:24) I think it would be more correct to say "Christianity", not "Protestantism". For isn't it by weighing the evidence you decided to join the RCC? It's up to you (and me) to decide whether the papal claims are true. Again, Protestantism, Catholicism, Eastern Orthodoxy and Oriental Orthodoxy all have to figure this out. "The secondary authorities in these classical Protestant traditions only settle the debate for those who have already agreed on the doctrinal system" (1:37:24). But this is close to how the Roman Catholic Church works. You must already have agreed on the system of *authority* from Scripture, tradition and a priori arguments - and you are the judge! Only then can you trust the judgment of the magisterium (and your trust shouldn't extend your level of certainty in your confidence in the truth of the RCC authority claims). "so the confessions don't resolve the debate. They are an identifying mark of which side of the debate you chose to agree with." (1:37:45). Exactly *this*! But this is exactly why it's very difficult to take the RCC (or EO/OO) claims of the need for settling the debate without an infallible magisterium seriously - it only solves the issues if you already agree with the system. But we have to weigh the evidence to get there.

Are you aware of the Lutheran approach to the canon? Interestingly, the Book of Concord has no canon list. We don't view the contents of the canon as a theological but historical question. And we also take into account that some texts were difficult to canonize, so we distinguish between the antilegomena and homologoumena, so we should not hold to doctrines that are in antilegomena only, but the antilegomena may deepen our understanding of what we see in the homologoumena. In this way, the Lutherans try and take seriously the sometimes messy historical process of canonization in forming our theology.

Also, you give some examples of "the word of God" being used referring to oral preaching/teaching. Maybe you're already aware, but this is not uniquely a Roman Catholic datapoint - it's very much a natural way of speaking for Lutherans, that we "preach/teach the word of God" (and we don't just mean expository preaching, but preaching Christ more broadly speaking.

1:21:30 On the category of Orthodoxy in forming the canon: If we distinguish between those texts that are very easy to determine as canonical and those that are more difficult, we start recognizing the easy ones and then compare the other texts to the easily recognized texts.

I enjoyed the video a lot! I don't hope I've come across as harsh - I'm very much interested in the ecumenical dialogues and have studied the RCC to some extend recently.

[jasonanderson]

Lutheranism teaches that Scriptures are final authority, but that tradition is authoritative. RC apologists tend to just address modern evangelical errors rather than what was presented during the reformation. The main issue of why I left Rome is because they historically have contradicted themselves, even to this day, and there are beliefs that contradict the Scriptures. Confessional Lutheranism has the better view without sacrificing tradition and the sacraments.