Sola Scriptura?

[preacher4truth]

Recently, I made the following statement in the thread "Why Is There a Resurgence of Reformed Theology?"

Here it is:

"Not really. Certainly salvation is easy to understand as a babe. But it becomes more complex as we grow. We have more questions. Thus the many volumes of theological works. God gave us a head for more than to only use it as a hat rack."

To which this statement was construed to mean the following by one here on BB:

"See what I mean. Now you're claiming that all those extra biblical books are inspired by God and just as good as His word... Obviously you are mixed up on the true points of Scripture. You believe reading other materials than the Bible is growing in grace. This would be true if those materials were inspired of God. They aren't, they are inspired by men looking to make a few dollars no matter how well intentioned they are. Everything we need to know is in God's word no one has any special revelation. I agree we are to study God's word but that's not to include the words of men. All of the tulip are the ideas of men. They aren't even found in scripture. Placing your faith in men has no benefit"

This was a direct reaction to my above statement. Due to the fact I use the Holy Scriptures and also use the works of fine men of God to help my understanding, I was accused, unecessarily, as placing others works on the same level as the Scriptures, and that Bible study is not to include using the words of men, accused of mixing up the true points of Scripture, whatever that means, and placing my faith in men. None of this is true. My statement does not support the above accusations. The context can be clearly seen on the thread which is now closed. I will not name the accuser, as this is not necessary.

But, is it wrong to use others works to understand Scripture? Why or why not? And if not, why did God give us teachers?

 

[annsni]

I don't think it's wrong but it's important to realize that none of them are inspired or God's Word. Scripture always wins. But I love reading what other people have thought, have been given insight into and how they see the Scriptures. Of course I only stick with those who are theologically sound.

 

[Zenas]

But, is it wrong to use others works to understand Scripture? Why or why not? And if not, why did God give us teachers?

I have never found, nor has anyone ever cited to me, anything in scripture that says we must rely on scripture alone for understanding matters of faith and morals. So long ago I accepted the fact that if I were to believe in sola scriptura I must do so on the basis of what other people say, not on the basis of what scripture says. There is plenty of scriptural evidence that the contents of the Bible were written by men who were inspired by God. Therefore we must understand that if other material contradicts scripture, we must reject it. However, if such material helps to explain scripture, we may pay it heed.

Of course this begs the question of whose commentary we should accept when there is more than one position that is grounded in scripture. For most of us, we will go with the familiar and reject the unfamiliar because we tend to view scripture through the lens of our own experience. That is why children of Baptists tend to become Baptists, children of Methodists tend to become Methodists, etc.

 

[preacher4truth]

I don't think it's wrong but it's important to realize that none of them are inspired or God's Word. Scripture always wins. But I love reading what other people have thought, have been given insight into and how they see the Scriptures. Of course I only stick with those who are theologically sound.

Have you spent time in Scripture in a difficult passage, and continued to study and meditate upon it, and seek truth from it, then have a light go off, and then and only then turn to a favorite authors commentary, having found they themselves came to the same conclusions?

 

[preacher4truth]

I have never found, nor has anyone ever cited to me, anything in scripture that says we must rely on scripture alone for understanding matters of faith and morals. So long ago I accepted the fact that if I were to believe in sola scriptura I must do so on the basis of what other people say, not on the basis of what scripture says. There is plenty of scriptural evidence that the contents of the Bible were written by men who were inspired by God. Therefore we must understand that if other material contradicts scripture, we must reject it. However, if such material helps to explain scripture, we may pay it heed.

Of course this begs the question of whose commentary we should accept when there is more than one position that is grounded in scripture. For most of us, we will go with the familiar and reject the unfamiliar because we tend to view scripture through the lens of our own experience. That is why children of Baptists tend to become Baptists, children of Methodists tend to become Methodists, etc.

I think when asking to whose commentary we should accept, we should seek as many as possible on the given passage. We all probably have our favorite, but when a preacher is always quoting the same person week after week after week, I see that as problematic to some degree. Either that, or he needs some more commentary sets.

I don't think I can speak for most of us here, but I get the gist of what you are saying.

How do we handle persons that only use Scripture, and claim that no other sources are needed to garner truth, when many passages of Scripture need some cultural, extrabiblical information to understand the meaning?

If you asked someone to teach Sunday School, and they rejected quarterlies, other teachers insight, what would you do? I find most that hold to this position have a very superficial understanding of the Word.

 

[annsni]

Have you spent time in Scripture in a difficult passage, and continued to study and meditate upon it, and seek truth from it, then have a light go off, and then and only then turn to a favorite authors commentary, having found they themselves came to the same conclusions?

Oh, good golly yes!!!

 

[Amy.G]

Have you spent time in Scripture in a difficult passage, and continued to study and meditate upon it, and seek truth from it, then have a light go off, and then and only then turn to a favorite authors commentary, having found they themselves came to the same conclusions?

Yes! About a billion times!

Sola scriptura means that the scriptures are the final authority (unless I have learned the wrong definition).

The scriptures are without question THE final authority, but it helps to seek other views to help with difficult passages. God gave us teachers for a reason, but they also are mere men and as such are subject to misinterpretation.
When I can't understand something in scripture even after I've gone to other sources, I just pray and don't worry about it. God will reveal it to me when I'm ready to hear it.


I used to use a lot of different sources when studying, but now I mainly use the Wycliff Bible Commentary.

 

[Zenas]

Have you spent time in Scripture in a difficult passage, and continued to study and meditate upon it, and seek truth from it, then have a light go off, and then and only then turn to a favorite authors commentary, having found they themselves came to the same conclusions?

You betcha! (with apologies to Sarah Palin) :thumbsup:

 

[Dr. Bob]

God's WORDS are truth. But even in an attempt to understand them, I need a lexicon and a great inter-depending on other works/teachers - standing on the shoulders of giants - to grasp all the nuances of truth.

The Bible is 2+2=4 simple truth AND often much deeper/complex x + 2y + 3z = 14, 3x + y + 2z = 11, 2x + 3y + z = 11

I have seen some horrendous conclusions of people using the Bible and thinking (deceiving themselves) they had it all figured out. I someday soon WILL have all the answers . . when in my new body and new brain (to go with my new spirit) I have the mind of Christ!

 

[quantumfaith]

I don't think it's wrong but it's important to realize that none of them are inspired or God's Word. Scripture always wins. But I love reading what other people have thought, have been given insight into and how they see the Scriptures. Of course I only stick with those who are theologically sound.

That is probably pretty much the position of most on this site. Our "contentions" come from how we define who are the ones "theologically" sound enough to pay attention to. It seems to me, many of us have differences of opinion in this matter.

 

[quantumfaith]

God's WORDS are truth. But even in an attempt to understand them, I need a lexicon and a great inter-depending on other works/teachers - standing on the shoulders of giants - to grasp all the nuances of truth.

The Bible is 2+2=4 simple truth AND often much deeper/complex x + 2y + 3z = 14, 3x + y + 2z = 11, 2x + 3y + z = 11

I have seen some horrendous conclusions of people using the Bible and thinking (deceiving themselves) they had it all figured out. I someday soon WILL have all the answers . . when in my new body and new brain (to go with my new spirit) I have the mind of Christ!

Great post.. BTW, how would you personally go about solving that system of three linear equations in three variables? Just curious which method you would find the most efficient.

 

[Dr. Bob]

Great post.. BTW, how would you personally go about solving that system of three linear equations in three variables? Just curious which method you would find the most efficient.

Let the given eqn be identified as follows.
x + 2y + 3z = 14 -->(1)
3x + y + 2z = 11 -->(2)
2x + 3y + z = 11 -->(3)
Consider the equations (1) and (3)
(1)--> x + 2y + 3z = 14
(3) * 3--> 6x + 9y + 3z = 33 subtracting
–5x – 7y = –19
5x + 7y = 19 -->(4)
Consider the equations (2) and (3)
(2)--> 3x + y + 2z = 11
(3) * 2 --> 4x + 6y + 2z = 22 subtracting
–x – 5y = –11
x + 5y = 11 -->(5)
Consider the equations (4) and (5)
(4) --> 5x + 7y = 19
(5) * 5 --> 5x + 25y = 55 subtracting
–18y = –36 :
y = 2
Substitute y = 2 in (5) we get
x + 5(2) = 11; x + 10 = 11
x = 1
Substitute x = 1, y = 2 in (3) we get
2(1) + 3(2) + z = 11;
2 + 6 + z = 11
z = 3

The solution is x = 1, y = 2, z = 3.

 

[Amy.G]

PI R round, cornbread R square.

 

[preacher4truth]

God's WORDS are truth. But even in an attempt to understand them, I need a lexicon and a great inter-depending on other works/teachers - standing on the shoulders of giants - to grasp all the nuances of truth.

The Bible is 2+2=4 simple truth AND often much deeper/complex x + 2y + 3z = 14, 3x + y + 2z = 11, 2x + 3y + z = 11

I have seen some horrendous conclusions of people using the Bible and thinking (deceiving themselves) they had it all figured out. I someday soon WILL have all the answers . . when in my new body and new brain (to go with my new spirit) I have the mind of Christ!

Thanks for those good words and the humility that went with it. Very much appreciated Dr. Bob.

:thumbsup:

 

[preacher4truth]

Yes! About a billion times!

Sola scriptura means that the scriptures are the final authority (unless I have learned the wrong definition).

The scriptures are without question THE final authority, but it helps to seek other views to help with difficult passages. God gave us teachers for a reason, but they also are mere men and as such are subject to misinterpretation.
When I can't understand something in scripture even after I've gone to other sources, I just pray and don't worry about it. God will reveal it to me when I'm ready to hear it.


I used to use a lot of different sources when studying, but now I mainly use the Wycliff Bible Commentary.

That's really cool Amy, thanks for sharing, and sometimes we do have to wait for the insight to come. Then it seems we finally grasp that new light, but then it only grows from there, we have more questions, then more light, and so on.

Awesome.

:thumbsup:

 

[quantumfaith]

Let the given eqn be identified as follows.
x + 2y + 3z = 14 -->(1)
3x + y + 2z = 11 -->(2)
2x + 3y + z = 11 -->(3)
Consider the equations (1) and (3)
(1)--> x + 2y + 3z = 14
(3) * 3--> 6x + 9y + 3z = 33 subtracting
–5x – 7y = –19
5x + 7y = 19 -->(4)
Consider the equations (2) and (3)
(2)--> 3x + y + 2z = 11
(3) * 2 --> 4x + 6y + 2z = 22 subtracting
–x – 5y = –11
x + 5y = 11 -->(5)
Consider the equations (4) and (5)
(4) --> 5x + 7y = 19
(5) * 5 --> 5x + 25y = 55 subtracting
–18y = –36 :
y = 2
Substitute y = 2 in (5) we get
x + 5(2) = 11; x + 10 = 11
x = 1
Substitute x = 1, y = 2 in (3) we get
2(1) + 3(2) + z = 11;
2 + 6 + z = 11
z = 3

The solution is x = 1, y = 2, z = 3.

Excellent, though I did not "check" your work. Might I suggest the use of a matrix, makes the analagous operations much more simple and tight. I did not "expect" all the typing though, just hoping you might describe the manner in which you would solve it. :thumbsup:

BTW: I certainly wished I could get my students to display their work with such clarity.

 

[quantumfaith]

PI R round, cornbread R square.

That is only true in infinitely dimensional isomorphic vector space theory.

 

[MB]

Preacher for truth;
You have expressed a belief in Calvinism yet none of Calvinism lines up with scripture. I can only presume you learned all this stuff from a teacher or some book because your sure haven’t learned it from scripture.

Can you show where scripture clearly states the Natural man cannot respond to the gospel nor will he ever with out first being saved?

Can you show biblical proof of before faith regeneration from scripture? I’m not talking about some dance around answer?

Can you prove The atonement is only for a pre-elect group from before the foundation of the world with out them being in Christ to begin with?

Why is it Calvinist claim unconditional election yet only a few, (according to them), are elect? If it’s really unconditional then why isn’t everyone saved?

Why would perseverance of the saints be called such, when Salvation is a permanent arrangement? Who’s doing the perseverance? Since for all intents and purposes perseverance is work?.

All this Calvinist get from books or there pastors or teachers because none of it is in scripture.
Oh I’ve seen all the scriptures used to support these false beliefs and not one of them clearly define any of them. No Calvinist teacher has ever proved it nor will they ever because it is not truth.
God dependence is your only hope of ever understanding the scriptures. I’m not asking that you believe me but, you really should believe God alone and that’s what sola scriptura means.
MB

 

[quantumfaith]

Preacher for truth;
You have expressed a belief in Calvinism yet none of Calvinism lines up with scripture. I can only presume you learned all this stuff from a teacher or some book because your sure haven’t learned it from scripture.

Can you show where scripture clearly states the Natural man cannot respond to the gospel nor will he ever with out first being saved?

Can you show biblical proof of before faith regeneration from scripture? I’m not talking about some dance around answer?

Can you prove The atonement is only for a pre-elect group from before the foundation of the world with out them being in Christ to begin with?

Why is it Calvinist claim unconditional election yet only a few, (according to them), are elect? If it’s really unconditional then why isn’t everyone saved?

Why would perseverance of the saints be called such, when Salvation is a permanent arrangement? Who’s doing the perseverance? Since for all intents and purposes perseverance is work?.

All this Calvinist get from books or there pastors or teachers because none of it is in scripture.
Oh I’ve seen all the scriptures used to support these false beliefs and not one of them clearly define any of them. No Calvinist teacher has ever proved it nor will they ever because it is not truth.
God dependence is your only hope of ever understanding the scriptures. I’m not asking that you believe me but, you really should believe God alone and that’s what sola scriptura means.
MB

:thumbs::thumbs::thumbs:

 

[annsni]

Preacher for truth;
You have expressed a belief in Calvinism yet none of Calvinism lines up with scripture. I can only presume you learned all this stuff from a teacher or some book because your sure haven’t learned it from scripture.

Can you show where scripture clearly states the Natural man cannot respond to the gospel nor will he ever with out first being saved?

Can you show biblical proof of before faith regeneration from scripture? I’m not talking about some dance around answer?

Can you prove The atonement is only for a pre-elect group from before the foundation of the world with out them being in Christ to begin with?

Why is it Calvinist claim unconditional election yet only a few, (according to them), are elect? If it’s really unconditional then why isn’t everyone saved?

Why would perseverance of the saints be called such, when Salvation is a permanent arrangement? Who’s doing the perseverance? Since for all intents and purposes perseverance is work?.

All this Calvinist get from books or there pastors or teachers because none of it is in scripture.
Oh I’ve seen all the scriptures used to support these false beliefs and not one of them clearly define any of them. No Calvinist teacher has ever proved it nor will they ever because it is not truth.
God dependence is your only hope of ever understanding the scriptures. I’m not asking that you believe me but, you really should believe God alone and that’s what sola scriptura means.
MB

Well, the blind can't see it, can they? The doctrine of grace is so clearly in the Scripture that it is how I learned it - being in an Arminian church. I was finding Scripture after Scripture that spoke very differently than what I was taught and it was confusing. So I studied more. Wow. What a humbling eye opening that was.

Scripture is clear that God is the initiator from start to finish. That man is dead. Dead man tell no tales - or have the ability to do anything. Christ came and died the death that I should have but instead He did and for some reason, when presented with the Gospel, I responded. I was young - only 7 - but I had an overwhelming desire to follow Christ whereas I did not before. Perseverance of the saints is straight from Scripture - but probably a better word for us to understand the underpinnings of this concept is not perseverance but preservation of the saints. God preserves me because, God knows - there's no way I could hang on to my salvation no matter HOW hard I tried.

The doctrines of grace is absolutely 100% Scripture. There is no question. I praise God that it's up to Him and not me because as much as I try, I could never do anything to satisfy what needs to be done.