Featured Sola Scriptura: The Sufficiency of Scripture

Creation done in 24 hour days and a 7 day week and the earth is only between 6 to 10,000 years old - and you say I blindly believe stuff? It's time you put your thinking cap on and come back to reality.

According to Universe Today ( a Space and Astronomy news outlet) scientists estimate that planet earth is 4.54 billion years old, which coincidentally is the same age as the rest of the planets in our solar system. As for the dinosaurs, the best guess is that they were killed off about 66 million years ago after an asteroid hit the earth and caused a cataclysmic climate change. All in all, that is a far cry from your estimation that the earth is a maximum of 10,000 years old.

Now none of that information causes my belief in God, His creation of all the universe, and His Son Jesus Christ to falter in any way, shape, manner or form. Why would such a reality be a problem for you? You are right with one thing though - true science does not contradict the bible or vice - versa, it is what you erroneously come up with as you attempt to reconcile the two that's the problem.

 

Here is where one might say that the Catholic doctrine has changed.
Christ doesn't change. God doesn't change. The Bible doesn't change. But on this topic the RCC has changed its stance. For centuries it stood against evolution. Now it allows evolution. Why the change? It has caved in to godless "science so-called."

1 Timothy 6:20 O Timothy, keep that which is committed to thy trust, avoiding profane and vain babblings, and oppositions of science falsely so called:
21 Which some professing have erred concerning the faith. Grace be with thee. Amen.

It doesn't make them right does it. Are you that gullible to simply take their word over God's Word without doing any research on your own. Poor Catholics. They reject sola scriptura and thus reject the author of Bible rejecting God and His Word and turn to philosophy instead.
Why are you putting your faith in philosophy and in "oppositions of science falsely so called."

A paraphrase of the same verse:
(CEV) Timothy, guard what God has placed in your care! Don't pay any attention to that godless and stupid talk that sounds smart but really isn't.

Weymouth in 1912
(WNT) O Timothy, guard the truths entrusted to you, shunning irreligious and frivolous talk, and controversy with what is falsely called 'knowledge';

What is science?
"It is the systematic knowledge of the physical or material world gained through observation and experimentation." (from dictionary.com)
--All true science is gained through observation. There is no observation in evolution. For example, who was there to observe the Big Bang? No one. It is outside the realm of science and now inside the realm of faith and the metaphysical where science does not belong. If there is no observation it isn't science. Science requires observation.
--Secondly, there is nothing that we have today accurate enough to measure four billion years. That also is all guess work and outside the realm of science.
--Even your 66 million years is far too long of a stretch for anyone to measure. Man doesn't have the tools to measure those wide expanses of time. It is just his own guess work. It is not science.
Creation vs Science. The two don't oppose each other; in fact they agree. But what you gave as an example isn't science, it is only purported as such.

There is nothing here that is a problem for me. I know what I believe. I know where unbelievers stand. You stand with them. You have taken a stand against creation and against God. You don't believe in sola scripture "thus saith the Lord," nor the biblical record of God's creation, or the way that God told Moses to write it down.
You would rather put your faith in what some here call "scientism." It is not science at all. Science can be observed. There is a scientific method. But with things like the "Big Bang," it is just another religion that requires blind faith. No one was there. No one saw it. There is no evidence that it ever took place. It is another theory to take the place of the biblical record of creation, and that is exactly why it was proposed--not for the sake of science itself. Read up on the real history of it.

Science and the Bible do reconcile with each other.
The Bible teaches they do. It also teaches that there are people that won't agree with this.

2 Peter 3:3 Knowing this first, that there shall come in the last days scoffers, walking after their own lusts,
4 And saying, Where is the promise of his coming? for since the fathers fell asleep, all things continue as they were from the beginning of the creation.
5 For this they willingly are ignorant of, that by the word of God the heavens were of old, and the earth standing out of the water and in the water:

 

This is a non sequitur.
BTW, in every day speech, a non sequitur is "It can also refer to a response that is totally unrelated to the original statement or question:"
This comes from:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non_sequitur_(logic)

Where it also states:
"Many types of known non sequitur argument forms have been classified into many types of logical fallacies."
--The fact is you have stated a somewhat irrelevant "statement" or "challenge" seeing that there are 66 books in the Bible not just one. Why does a person need to demonstrate from the book of Hebrews the doctrine of sola scriptura when it has so clearly been demonstrated in many other books. There are 66 books not one. If the Bible says it just once, then that is good enough.

Isa.8:20 was the standard for the nation of Israel. Everything was tested against the law. If it was not according to the law of God, it was not of God.

Acts 17:11, The Bereans did the same thing. They checked out Paul's NT message with their OT. If his NT message did not check out according to the scriptures they had (the OT), they were not going to believe it. And Paul commended them for this. It was sola scriptura. We see this all throughout the Bible.

As to #1: Matthew 3:17 And lo a voice from heaven, saying, This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased.
That is the testimony of God the Father as recorded in the Word.

Also, John 10:30 I and my Father are one.
John 10:33 The Jews answered him, saying, For a good work we stone thee not; but for blasphemy; and because that thou, being a man, makest thyself God.
--The claim of Jesus was a claim to deity.

As to #2. Luke 24:44 And he said unto them, These are the words which I spake unto you, while I was yet with you, that all things must be fulfilled, which were written in the law of Moses, and in the prophets, and in the psalms, concerning me.
--Jesus used all three divisions of the OT when speaking to the two on the way to Emmaus. That is his endorsement on the entire OT.
1. The Law of Moses is the Torah, the first five books of the Bible.
2. The Prophets include all the prophetical books and the historical books.
3. The Psalms or writings are the Poetical books.
--In these three divisions are all 39 books that we have today in our OT.

Matthew 5:18 For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.
--The scripture was sacred and inspired. Not one verse, one word, one letter, or even a part of a letter would be missing. God would preserve His Word. It is a promise from Christ. A yod is the smallest letter of the Hebrew alphabet, and a tittle is the smallest part of a letter, like the crossing of a "t".

Christ is the Son of God, that is God Himself.

He is the one who says that Scripture shall remain forever, that it will be preserved, and that He Himself will preserve it--even to the smallest letter and/or part of a letter.

If it is so important for the King of kings and Lord of lords to preserve the Word of God until such time that heaven and earth shall pass away, then it should be important enough to us to study it and heed it as he commanded us.

Note that three times in one chapter--just in a matter of a few verses he tells us that if we are to demonstrate our love to him we need to keep his commandments, his Word. The only way to do that is to follow them or obey them as they are written in the Scriptures:

John 14:15 If ye love me, keep my commandments.

John 14:21 He that hath my commandments, and keepeth them, he it is that loveth me: and he that loveth me shall be loved of my Father, and I will love him, and will manifest myself to him.

John 14:23 Jesus answered and said unto him, If a man love me, he will keep my words: and my Father will love him, and we will come unto him, and make our abode with him.

--The great demonstration of our love for Christ is our obedience to Him according to His Word which is sola scriptura.

 

If sola scriptura was true it would have been clearly spelled out to be true.

On the contrary scripture states scripture alone is dangerous, hard to understand, REQUIRES proper guidance.

2 peter 3
16as also in all his letters, speaking in them of these things, in which are some things hard to understand, which the untaught and unstable distort, as they do also the rest of the Scriptures, to their own destruction.

I've pulled out actual BIBLE VERSE stating the TRUTH. And the sweet thing is this ain't the only verse.

Yet none of you can pull one verse saying scripture alone is valid.

The best line is that it PROFITS instruction, never claiming to BE the instruction. It HELPS doctrine never claims to BE doctrine.

This error is expected. Its not just a few 30 million folks out of 1.2 billion folks can't read. Catholics themselves made the mistake.......they can't read.

ie. UNTAUGHT and UNSTABLE.

Anyone who actually knows how to read and has reading comprehension can clearly understand 2 Timothy 3:16

Some folks in this world are two cans short of a six pack.

They read:
24You see that a man is justified by works and not by faith alone.

But in their backwards spiritual dyslexia......its You see that a man is justified by FAITH ALONE and not by works.


They read:
14“For if you forgive others for their transgressions, your heavenly Father will also forgive you. 15“But if you do not forgive others, then your Father will not forgive your transgressions.

They think, Well for if father forgives you then you will forgive others.

Let me tell you God bless these people. They have my upmost forgiveness and mercy. And its party because of them I believe so much in God. Because there is no way anyone can get this stuff wrong unless there were some divine intervention.

 

'For by grace you have been saved through faith.......It is the gift of God, not of works, lest anyone should boast' (Ephesians 2:8-9).
But of course some people have backwards spiritual dyslexia......its By works you have been saved, not by grace or faith, so that you can boast.' And worse yet, they haven't found away to reconcile Paul and James.

 

All of us have presented a Biblical case for sola scriptura. No matter what argument is presented you simply reject it. It is the argument of an atheist (note: I am not calling you one).
No matter how much evidence one may set in front of an atheist that Christ rose again from the dead, will the atheist believe? No. He has already made up his mind not to believe. You have already made up your mind to dismiss the evidence, whatever it is, that is set in front of you. (or so it appears).

Some basic truths do agree with the RCC. No doubt we can find some that agree with the J.W.'s as well. It is not those that we are in agreement that we are concerned about, rather those that we are in disagreement: purgatory, indulgences, praying to Mary, etc.

Please remember how many times you have repeated yourself (non sequitur, straw man, etc.).
As I said previously: well-thought out arguments have been placed before you, but you simply reject them. When the Scripture is quoted it is not human opinion any longer. It is an appeal to authority, God as our authority, which is what sola scriptura is all about.

No true believer believes what you have stated.
The Bible did not come to us through Tradition within "The Church." When your premise is a fallacy then your conclusion will be a fallacy, and thus your beliefs are based on error. Is it any wonder you don't believe in sola scriptura or that it is taught in the Bible. It does. If it didn't then Jesus would not use the Bible as "His sole authority" when answering others. And that has already been demonstrated to you. The RCC never existed until over 300 years after the time of Christ.

I assume you will agree to the first two statements, and that they don't have to be proved.
I already gave you a decent answer here.

http://www.baptistboard.com/threads...ciency-of-scripture.99648/page-5#post-2230976

You ignored it. Christ clearly presented himself as the Lord, the Scriptures as divine, sufficient, and went through every part of the OT. He then requires us to obey him, as in obeying the Scriptures.

 

This part of your quote serves to illustrate how sinful sin is. And what ruin the fear of man/the love of men brings and what a snare it causes. Mankind would rather place the opinions of men over the Word of God. We would prefer to go the way of the wicked, walk in counsel of the ungodly, rather than sit at supper with the prophets and patriarchs. You prefer the accolades of modern man than praise of God. We would take the word of scientists over Moses.

Those who would walk in the counsel of the ungodly will stand in the way of sinners and sit in the seat of the scornful. These are like the chaff which the wind driveth away. But the godly has his delight in the law of the Lord, and in His law he doth mediate day and night. They shall be like a tree planted by rivers of water that brings forth fruit in his season. His leaf shall also not whither and whatsoever he does shall prosper. See Psalm 1.

 

It is interesting to note how discounted and flippantly are treated the Words of Christ, and, the Word of God (Scriptures), all for the sake of the traditions of men, and is done without blushing or shame.

Nothing new under the Sun.

 

There is nothing sinful about using one's intelligence to rightly figure out the truth in regards to what is said in the Holy Scriptures. No Catholic deny's God's creation of the world, we just think that a 24/7 creation time period does not pass the smell test. God's time frame is different than ours, he operates beyond time and space as we humans know it. One day in our time could be 10 billion years in God's time and in reality we are all just guessing.

 

Andonia -

There is something very sinful about not submitting our intelligence to the Holy Scriptures. To place our reason about revealed truth is to violate the 1st commandment and set ourselves as a god above the one True and Living God.

The creation of the world must not pass or fail by our "smell test" but must be taken from Holy Scripture. The Lord has chosen to communicate with His people. Rationalizing that we are simply guessing is to impugn the Lord who has chosen to give us His Holy Word and to suppose that we could not understand it. The Lord says, "All the words of my mouth are in righteousness; there is nothing froward or perverse in them. They are all plain to him that understandeth, and right to them that find knowledge." Proverbs 8:8-9

See how the Lord says that His words are very plain to those who understand and right (rather than wrong) to them that find knowledge. It stands then that the inverse would be true. To those without understanding the words are not plain. To those who have not found knowledge the words are not right in their eyes.

The language of Genesis could not be more plain to human understanding concerning time. There was an evening, and a morning, which is a day. The Lord furnished the cycle of the earth to mark the time frame. Do we suppose it takes 10 billion years for the earth to rotate? Does it take millions of years for the sun to rise and set? Of course not!

So the timing of God's creation and the manner in which he did it is explained so plainly in Genesis that a child can understand it. The difficulty with people comes from their sin. Pride prevents them from submitted to the Word of God. Loving the praise of this world will always cause a snare Andonia. Place God first. And place His Word above the words of scientists, priests, and popes. You will not give an account at judgement to popes or councils. You will give an account to the Word of God.

 

Thank you for being concise. I really appreciate that. Part of the reason that I answered your longer responses was to show how unwieldy things can get.

I have answered this before, but not to worry. As I said, I don't usually do syllogisms, and the one you have posted above is certainly not anything that I have ever posted.

If I were to do a syllogism, it might go like this:

1. The Lord Jesus Christ is the Divine Son of God.
2. He regularly quoted from the Scriptures, affirmed their authority, referred others to the Scriptures, never endorsed any other form of revelation as normative, and specifically denounced 'tradition' (Mark 7:5-13).
3. Therefore, the onus is on those who deny that Scripture is the sole and final authority for Christians to prove that they are following Christ.

How does that work for you?

Have you seen that I have opened a separate thread on the subject of 'Tradition'?

 

So which is true - a 24 hour day and 7 day time of

While creation by God is true, what we have here is a story made to a simple level that all men, even uneducated men, could easily understand. We do not disregard Gods hand in all of creation, just questioning the time period - so that now makes us guilty of the sin of pride? You to tend to read certain parts of the Scriptures literally, just like other people do to other parts of the Scriptures regarding certain doctrines. Are we to assume that you now believe the literal interpretation concerning the Holy Eucharist as orthodox believers do? If you do fine, if not, where does that leave you vis a vis Jesus's stated words concerning that particular issue - guilty of the sin of pride perhaps?

 

I agree, sin through Adam and death through sin, but could you expound on your "creation was subjected to futility" statement?

 

Adonia -

What we have in Genesis 1 is God's Holy Word describing the origin of the universe. This is history. If we look at the language we see no evidence that its a metaphor, an allegory, et. We are all guilty of pride if we are unwilling to submit to Holy Scripture, wouldn't you agree? The Holy Scriptures are made up of many different types of writing. And so, by God's grace, I would take what he has said in a literal manner, literally, and what He has said allegorically, as an allegory, and metaphorically, as metaphors, et.

Concerning the Lord's Table, I take the Lord's teaching quite literally on the subject. Perhaps you think Jesus' teaching in John 6 is about the Lord's Table?