• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Sola Scriptura and Canon

tosca1 said:
There aren't many options in Christianity. It's either you're a believer or a non-believer.
If one doesn't believe in Jesus Christ, then he doesn't believe The Word.
Click to expand...

Apparently people can pick and choose which books to acknowledge as inspired.
 
Paul said in 2 Timothy 3

16 All scripture is inspired by God and is useful for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, 17 so that everyone who belongs to God may be proficient, equipped for every good work.

Inspired of God literally is (God breathed), also in the greek it says that they may be FULLY equipped for every good work.

Now we know the OT, based on quotations, as well as Tanakh tradition (some books, like Esther are not quoted in the NT, but we're accepted in the Jewish Tanakh in Jesus' day, and thus "God breathed"), for the rest we know that they are "God breathed" the same way the councils and the Chuch fathers knew, they were earliest manuscripts written by companions of the apostles in the time of the apostles.

The Apocrypha was not quoted in the NT, and was not accepted as Tanakh tradition in Jesus' time ... (or today actually).

But to both Phattonez and Tosca1 .... LINKS ARE NOT ARGUMENTS, learn your stuff and post your own arguments and defences from scripture, if you don't know enough to formulate an argument, don't make it.
 
phattonez said:
It seems now like you're stretching to try to ignore it. But again, you miss my main argument. How can you use a series of books that you don't know whether they are inspired because you can't use something to prove that the thing itself is inspired to prove that something else is inspired? There is nowhere to start to say that something is inspired using sola scriptura. You need tradition, otherwise you have no scripture to start from.
Click to expand...

Well, we have Jewish tradition up until Christ .... then we have the apostolic writings ... After which we base everything we hear on what the scirptures say, which is the format we get in the NT, They never said "peter says" or "james says" or "paul says" they said "it is written.

We need to know what are apostolic writings, but it doesn't require a higher authority, some tradition which is authoritative to tell us that.
 
phattonez said:
Wouldn't deviate or contradict what? You have to start somewhere. Remember that the early Church had no New Testament, so how did they decide where to start? You can't use sola scriptura to decide which books to include in the New Testament.
Click to expand...

No you're right, but Jesus gave the apostles authority to teach the things he taught, so we find out what was from that apostolic authority, and since christ did NOT talk about apostolic succession, we say ok, those writings we have from apostolic authority, those are OUR authority, and every other teaching is based on that.

Now in a sense we need the church fathers to find out what was apostolic, but that isn't aposotlic authority, or spiritual authority, it's simply a matter of historical inquiry, they are historical sources that we can use now to find out what was from the apostolic age and under their authority, of coarse tradition meant that for a long time we didn't need to do that, because it was a given, but that's just historical data, not spiritual authority.
 
nota bene said:
Yes, the Word. I've always wondered, given that Jesus was literate, why He chose not to write anything down. Haven't you? And haven't you wondered how the early Church survived? Christ left a living Church and a living Word.
Click to expand...

No, I never thought of that - how come Jesus never wrote anything. Who knows, perhaps He saw the Apostles as His stenographers. :lol:

Or....like someone famous "writing" his memoir, they usually narrate and someone takes down.

Or....perhaps it's all part of the plan. Part of the learning process for the Apostles being trained. Or....to see if the Apostles were paying any attention.

If He do the writing as well, when will he have the time to go out and preach? He must've wanted to reach as many people as He can. Who knows, maybe He was following a timetable.

Don't forget that He gained popularity because of the people who heard Him, and/or witnessed the miracles that He did. The word got around fast.

And aside from the Apostles, there were also other disciples who follows Him around avidly.
And these disciples - based on what they'd witnessed - may've contributed to the writings of the Apostles - and that doesn't mean the writings were not inspired.



No, I haven't wondered how the early Church survived. It will have to survive - and explode - so the Gospel will reach all corners of the earth. Just as it was prophesied. Some things has to happen before Judgement Day comes.

Just like what Jesus told Peter when He stopped him (Peter) from drawing his sword as Jesus was being arrested, that this all must happen that He may fulfill what He came here for.
 
Last edited:
Anyway, why would Jesus worry about writing when He already knows that what's supposed to be written....will be written.
 
tosca1 said:
No, I never thought of that - how come Jesus never wrote anything. Who knows, perhaps He saw the Apostles as His stenographers. :lol:

Or....like someone famous "writing" his memoir, they usually narrate and someone takes down.

Or....perhaps it's all part of the plan. Part of the learning process for the Apostles being trained. Or....to see if the Apostles were paying any attention.

If He do the writing as well, when will he have the time to go out and preach? He must've wanted to reach as many people as He can. Who knows, maybe He was following a timetable.

Don't forget that He gained popularity because of the people who heard Him, and/or witnessed the miracles that He did. The word got around fast.

And aside from the Apostles, there were also other disciples who follows Him around avidly.
And these disciples may've contributed to the writings of the Apostles - and that doesn't mean the writings were not inspired.



No, I haven't wondered how the early Church survived. It will have to survive - and explode - so the Gospel will reach all corners of the earth. Just as it was prophesied. Some things has to happen before Judgement Day comes.

Just like what Jesus told Peter when He stopped him (Peter) from drawing his sword as Jesus was being arrested, that this all must happen that He may fulfill what He came here for.
Click to expand...

The early Church survived because of the living Word. What those who witnessed the Resurrection experienced was transformational, especially for those who also experienced the Pentecost. I've always found intriguing the fact that Jesus chose not to write and how important the living Word remains.
 
tosca1 said:
No, I never thought of that - how come Jesus never wrote anything. Who knows, perhaps He saw the Apostles as His stenographers. :lol:

Or....like someone famous "writing" his memoir, they usually narrate and someone takes down.

Or....perhaps it's all part of the plan. Part of the learning process for the Apostles being trained. Or....to see if the Apostles were paying any attention.

If He do the writing as well, when will he have the time to go out and preach? He must've wanted to reach as many people as He can. Who knows, maybe He was following a timetable.

Don't forget that He gained popularity because of the people who heard Him, and/or witnessed the miracles that He did. The word got around fast.

And aside from the Apostles, there were also other disciples who follows Him around avidly.
And these disciples - based on what they'd witnessed - may've contributed to the writings of the Apostles - and that doesn't mean the writings were not inspired.
Click to expand...

Jesus was probably not writing literate .... if he was reading literate ... remember he was a manual laborer from Nazareth ... That's why it was so suprising he knew the law, most of his disciples were also illitirate being fishermen from galilee, they've done sudies on leteracy rates in the area at that time, and it was extremely tiny and basically only among the urban professionals and upper classes.
 
RGacky3 said:
Didn't Rome change it's position on Purgatory recently?
Click to expand...
No. The position on Purgatory has not changed and cannot change.
 
tosca1 said:
Anyway, why would Jesus worry about writing when He already knows that what's supposed to be written....will be written.
Click to expand...

And how do we know who wrote for Him?
 
RGacky3 said:
Well, we have Jewish tradition up until Christ .... then we have the apostolic writings ... After which we base everything we hear on what the scirptures say, which is the format we get in the NT, They never said "peter says" or "james says" or "paul says" they said "it is written.

We need to know what are apostolic writings, but it doesn't require a higher authority, some tradition which is authoritative to tell us that.
Click to expand...

Okay, you have the writings of the apostles. But how do you know that they were actually written by the apostles and not forgeries? How about the letters of Paul? Same problem.
 
RGacky3 said:
No you're right, but Jesus gave the apostles authority to teach the things he taught, so we find out what was from that apostolic authority, and since christ did NOT talk about apostolic succession, we say ok, those writings we have from apostolic authority, those are OUR authority, and every other teaching is based on that.

Now in a sense we need the church fathers to find out what was apostolic, but that isn't aposotlic authority, or spiritual authority, it's simply a matter of historical inquiry, they are historical sources that we can use now to find out what was from the apostolic age and under their authority, of coarse tradition meant that for a long time we didn't need to do that, because it was a given, but that's just historical data, not spiritual authority.
Click to expand...

That is tradition. Thank you.
 
phattonez said:
Okay, you have the writings of the apostles. But how do you know that they were actually written by the apostles and not forgeries? How about the letters of Paul? Same problem.
Click to expand...

Historical analysis, we take the Church Fathers testimony, and say "ok then," they took those texts as having apostolic authority, so there we go.

That is tradition. Thank you.
Click to expand...

Yes, but we don't take tradition as the infallible word of God, tradition is not "God Breathed" the way scripture is.
 
RGacky3 said:
Historical analysis, we take the Church Fathers testimony, and say "ok then," they took those texts as having apostolic authority, so there we go.
Click to expand...

Then if we take the Church Fathers as authoritative, then we also have to take everything that goes along with that.

Yes, but we don't take tradition as the infallible word of God, tradition is not "God Breathed" the way scripture is.
Click to expand...

Yet you don't know what is scripture without tradition. It's an illogical position to take scripture but not tradition, then.
 
nota bene said:
The early Church survived because of the living Word. What those who witnessed the Resurrection experienced was transformational, especially for those who also experienced the Pentecost. I've always found intriguing the fact that Jesus chose not to write and how important the living Word remains.
Click to expand...

Yes, indeed! The Apostles were perhaps doubtful, or they did not fully comprehend - and they were fearful and went into hiding after the death of Christ - until they witnessed the risen Christ! The sudden change was dramatic! They were suddenly brimming with confidence, they were fearless and were aggressive!

Perhaps the reason why it was the Apostles who wrote instead of Jesus is because testimonies from witnesses gives a more powerful impact.
 
RGacky3 said:
Jesus was probably not writing literate .... if he was reading literate ... remember he was a manual laborer from Nazareth ... That's why it was so suprising he knew the law, most of his disciples were also illitirate being fishermen from galilee, they've done sudies on leteracy rates in the area at that time, and it was extremely tiny and basically only among the urban professionals and upper classes.
Click to expand...

If Jesus was illiterate, that shouldn't matter at all. If He managed to debate with the Pharisees, and if He knew about the law despite His illiteracy, surely He would've written something Himself if He wanted to.
 
phattonez said:
No. The position on Purgatory has not changed and cannot change.
Click to expand...

Why?

purgatory - a place or state of suffering inhabited by the souls of sinners who are expiating their sins before going to heaven.
Click to expand...

It's not mentioned in the Bible! The idea of a purgatory contradicts this:

31] “When the Son of Man comes in his glory, and all the angels with him, then he will sit on his glorious throne. [32] Before him will be gathered all the nations, and he will separate people one from another as a shepherd separates the sheep from the goats. [33] And he will place the sheep on his right, but the goats on the left. [34] Then the King will say to those on his right, ‘Come, you who are blessed by my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world. (Matthew 25:31-34 ESV)
 
Furthermore Phattonez, purgatory suggests that the death of Christ for our salvation was not sufficient! That His mission was not fulfilled! Surely the Church fathers does not suggest His sacrifice was for naught?

Perhaps they were thinking of Sheol?
Dead people from Old Testament go to this place, however it's not only for the righteous. The wicked were there too.


Psalm 9:17
The wicked shall return to Sheol, all the nations that forget God.

Psalm 31:17
O Lord, let me not be put to shame, for I call upon you;
let the wicked be put to shame; let them go silently to Sheol.

Psalm 49:14
Like sheep they are appointed for Sheol; death shall be their shepherd,
and the upright shall rule over them in the morning. Their form shall be consumed in Sheol, with no place to dwell.

Isaiah 5:14
Therefore Sheol has enlarged its appetite and opened its mouth beyond measure,
and the nobility of Jerusalem8 and her multitude will go down, her revelers and he who exults in her.

Genesis 37:35
35 All his sons and all his daughters rose up to comfort him, but he refused to be comforted and said, “No, l shall go down to Sheol to my son, mourning.” Thus his father wept for him.

Job 14:13
Oh that you would hide me in Sheol, that you would conceal me until your wrath be past,
that you would appoint me a set time, and remember me!
Click to expand...

Now that we've been saved, when a believer dies it seems that he is "present with the Lord."

2 Corinthians 5:6–9
6 So we are always of good courage. We know that while we are at home in the body we are away from the Lord, 7 for we walk by faith, not by sight. 8 Yes, we are of good courage, and we would rather be away from the body and at home with the Lord. 9 So whether we are at home or away, we make it our aim to please him.
Click to expand...

The New Testament mentioned Hades, instead of Sheol.

The Rich Man and Lazarus

19 “There was a rich man who was clothed in purple and fine linen and who feasted sumptuously every day. 20 And at his gate was laid a poor man named Lazarus, covered with sores, 21 who desired to be fed with what fell from the rich man’s table. Moreover, even the dogs came and licked his sores. 22 The poor man died and was carried by the angels to Abraham’s side.6 The rich man also died and was buried, 23 and in Hades, being in torment, he lifted up his eyes and saw Abraham far off and Lazarus at his side. 24 And he called out, ‘Father Abraham, have mercy on me, and send Lazarus to dip the end of his finger in water and cool my tongue, for I am in anguish in this flame.’
Click to expand...

Non-believers go to Hades when they die. On Judgement Day, Hades will be emptied.

Revelation 20:13–15
13 And the sea gave up the dead who were in it, Death and Hades gave up the dead who were in them, and they were judged, each one of them, according to what they had done. 14 Then Death and Hades were thrown into the lake of fire. This is the second death, the lake of fire. 15 And if anyone’s name was not found written in the book of life, he was thrown into the lake of fire.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
tosca1 said:
Why?
Click to expand...

Because the teaching of the Church does not change.

It's not mentioned in the Bible! The idea of a purgatory contradicts this:

31] “When the Son of Man comes in his glory, and all the angels with him, then he will sit on his glorious throne. [32] Before him will be gathered all the nations, and he will separate people one from another as a shepherd separates the sheep from the goats. [33] And he will place the sheep on his right, but the goats on the left. [34] Then the King will say to those on his right, ‘Come, you who are blessed by my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world. (Matthew 25:31-34 ESV)
Click to expand...

Why does Purgatory contradict this? Why is a temporary time in Purgatory negated by this? And it is in the Bible, but you've chosen to ignore it even though the early Church fathers whom you say are a reliable source to know which books are inspired erred when they included Maccabees.
 
tosca1 said:
Furthermore Phattonez, purgatory suggests that the death of Christ for our salvation was not sufficient! That His mission was not fulfilled! Surely the Church fathers does not suggest His sacrifice was for naught?
Click to expand...

Without Christ we would all deserve Hell; His sacrifice remitted our eternal punishment. However, there is still a temporal punishment for sins that must be accounted for.
 
phattonez said:
Without Christ we would all deserve Hell; His sacrifice remitted our eternal punishment. However, there is still a temporal punishment for sins that must be accounted for.
Click to expand...


Whether there is indeed purgatory or not.....how it all transpire in the end doesn't matter much to me.
It shouldn't to you, too, or to other Christians as well. This just causes disputes and discord between brothers and sisters.

We should instead keep our eyes on the ball.

What is important is to try our best to be spiritually prepared that we may be ready to face the judgement of God. That's what truly matters.
 
Last edited:
tosca1 said:
Whether there is indeed purgatory or not.....how it all transpire in the end doesn't matter much to me.
It shouldn't to you, too, or to other Christians as well. This just causes disputes and discord between brothers and sisters.

We should instead keep our eyes on the ball.

What is important is to try our best to be spiritually prepared that we may be ready to face the judgement of God. That's what truly matters.
Click to expand...

Recognizing the authority of the Bride of Christ and her magisterium is pretty important. It leads to all kinds of issues that many sects don't really deal with yet are mortal sins, like contraception, for instance.
 
31] “When the Son of Man comes in his glory, and all the angels with him, then he will sit on his glorious throne. [32] Before him will be gathered all the nations, and he will separate people one from another as a shepherd separates the sheep from the goats. [33] And he will place the sheep on his right, but the goats on the left. [34] Then the King will say to those on his right, ‘Come, you who are blessed by my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world. (Matthew 25:31-34 ESV)
Click to expand...

phattonez said:
Why does Purgatory contradict this? Why is a temporary time in Purgatory negated by this?
Click to expand...

How does it not? Clearly, there are only two groups given in that verse! The goats and the sheep (which understandably will be the believers). There is no if, or but about it - the ones on his right will enter His kingdom.



And it is in the Bible, but you've chosen to ignore it
Click to expand...

I did not ignore it. You gave Matt 18 as an example that you say depicts purgatory....and I showed you how it couldn't have been a reference to purgatory because it contradicted Ezekiel. Go back and read it again.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom