Ambrose
03-11-2007, 05:34 PM
This is a friendly thread directed toward my Protestant brethren.
I've always found the Protestant teaching of sola scriptura (only scripture) to be a little odd. Correct me if I'm wrong, but most Protestants (fundamentalists in particular, but with exceptions such as Anglicans) believe that the Bible is the sole authority in religious matters and that if it ain't in the Bible, it doesn't matter. Basically, there is no need for "Church authority."
To me, this just doesn't make sense. First and foremost because the very idea is self-denying. Here's why:
The doctrine that the Bible should be the only authority is found nowhere in the Bible.
Right there, the concept disproves itself. How can you say that you derive your doctrine only from the Bible if that very doctrine isn't in the Bible? It's like saying: "There are no absolutes". But right there, you have an absolute.
That in itself seems to prove it invalid. But furthermore, in my Biblical wanderings I've found scripture in which Jesus himself advocates the presence of a Church authority. From the New International Version (for your benefit ;) ):
Mathew 23:2-3 The teachers of the law and the Pharisees sit in Moses' seat. So you must obey them and do everything they tell you.
After that, Jesus goes on to advise the people that, while they must do what the Pharisees say, they shouldn't do what the Pharisees do, since we all know that Jesus thought the Pharisees to be hypocrites. Nonetheless, he clearly respected their authority, and showed that here on Earth, men do have authority in religious matters.
Just to clear any misconceptions up, Catholics certainly do not believe that the Bible isn't an authority; we just don't believe that it's the only authority. Why? Because the Bible tells us not to.
Anywho, I'm curious as to how my fellow Christians explain their sola scriptura doctrine.
I've always found the Protestant teaching of sola scriptura (only scripture) to be a little odd. Correct me if I'm wrong, but most Protestants (fundamentalists in particular, but with exceptions such as Anglicans) believe that the Bible is the sole authority in religious matters and that if it ain't in the Bible, it doesn't matter. Basically, there is no need for "Church authority."
To me, this just doesn't make sense. First and foremost because the very idea is self-denying. Here's why:
The doctrine that the Bible should be the only authority is found nowhere in the Bible.
Right there, the concept disproves itself. How can you say that you derive your doctrine only from the Bible if that very doctrine isn't in the Bible? It's like saying: "There are no absolutes". But right there, you have an absolute.
That in itself seems to prove it invalid. But furthermore, in my Biblical wanderings I've found scripture in which Jesus himself advocates the presence of a Church authority. From the New International Version (for your benefit ;) ):
Mathew 23:2-3 The teachers of the law and the Pharisees sit in Moses' seat. So you must obey them and do everything they tell you.
After that, Jesus goes on to advise the people that, while they must do what the Pharisees say, they shouldn't do what the Pharisees do, since we all know that Jesus thought the Pharisees to be hypocrites. Nonetheless, he clearly respected their authority, and showed that here on Earth, men do have authority in religious matters.
Just to clear any misconceptions up, Catholics certainly do not believe that the Bible isn't an authority; we just don't believe that it's the only authority. Why? Because the Bible tells us not to.
Anywho, I'm curious as to how my fellow Christians explain their sola scriptura doctrine.