Would Paul Washer Be Welcome to Speak at Your Local Church

[Iconoclast]

Icon,
Hope all is going well with you.

:thumbs:

This line between saved and unsaved in relation to Christians sinning for me in what I have read in Scripture is hard to exactly define.

Ageed and that by God's design

It is a given that habitual, pattered, persistent sin give an indication of a person without Christ. On the other hand, the person that is truly saved does still have the old sin nature, and does sin daily.

SN...we are still in a body of flesh that can sin...but we do not have two natures like a spiritual schicophrenic fighting with a good dog and a bad dog all day long.The scripture says the Old man has been co-crucified with Christ.
We are to live in light of this reality by the Spirits power and our obedience of faith...mortifying or putting to death the motions of sin in the body.Part of biblical mortification is a positive pursuit of holiness which most pay not enough attention to. The means of grace are not to be neglected.

The difference between the two is that the Holy Spirit resides in the saved person, and is constantly at work reproving, conviction, etc to bring this person back on the path to becoming more like Christ. The reason the lost persons pattern is persistent is that there is no Holy Spirit to guide him.

correct:thumbs:

So, given that, it comes down to how we make a judgment. First of all, of all people, you know that we live in a fallen state and our observations are subject to error. We also know that there is no or an unknown time limit that the Holy Spirit does in taking the saved person back on the narrow path.

we are sinners saved by grace and yet as we grow in knowledge we are our brothers keeper...we do not have perfect judgement at all so we have to careful on one hand not to shoot wounded soldiers....and yet not to look away or in any way enable sin.

6 Brethren, if a man be overtaken in a fault, ye which are spiritual, restore such an one in the spirit of meekness; considering thyself, lest thou also be tempted.

2 Bear ye one another's burdens, and so fulfil the law of Christ.

3 For if a man think himself to be something, when he is nothing, he deceiveth himself.

4 But let every man prove his own work, and then shall he have rejoicing in himself alone, and not in another.

5 For every man shall bear his own burden.

6 Let him that is taught in the word communicate unto him that teacheth in all good things.

Lets say you were driving your truck down the road past a bar. You see a drunk stagger out. What does through your mind? The person is unsaved, or is there the possibility this just happened, and the Holy Spirit is working on a Christian brother to repent? What about the second night? We could think of endless examples, but I think you get what I am trying to say.

When we see Sinful behavior in the life of another professed believer we are to be concerned....in other words...if I see a deacon coming out of a topless bar fondling a barmaid outside the no tell-motel...i am not going to assume they are heading for bible study. I would have the right and responsibility to question him and urge him to repent of such sin....i would at that point give him no assurance that he is a christian,and yet i cannot conclude that he is not ...even though it looks bad. Any christian can fall. they can be restored. At no time however should we enable sin telling them they are "carnal christians" who have not made the discovery of the spiritual life....
most times that is done to a person who made a false profession in the flesh...so we tell them to re-dedicate themselves...which is another fleshly mistake...and it becomes a cycle that ends in death.

So my question to you is, do you have a way of discerning which side of the line these folks are on? I suppose you would have to spend some time with them to get a more accurate answer.

yes...first we have to hold ourselves up against the standard of the word of God by serious self examination and strive to obey the laws of God by the Spirit's power.. who will listen to us if we do not obey ourselves to any degree?

We have the verses that say the drunkard, fornicator (which includes mental gymnastics as much as the physical act), liars, etc shall not enter the Kingdom of Heaven.

Those passages are life and death , not to be side stepped at all.

When does the act become patterned, habitual, or persistent? I do not believe there is an exact answer. The best I could say is that if there is no response from the Holy Spirit, then there is no salvation.

We do not have to know exactly...but we have to be cautiously concerned if a problem arises. God has no undisciplined children..hebrews 12...who would be bastards and not sons.

I do not want to get back on the subject of Paul Washer, but in several of his sermons, he says, if you are doing this or that, then you are going to hell. He does not know.

Sn......of course he does not know...specifically...but he does know that any living in open sin are in danger of second death.he warns attempting to turn the people back to God and self examination.
he is called in many times to deliver just such a message because the pastors who invite him know what he is about.he travels around and coming from the outside can speak in general yet specific terms .

Anyway, I would appreciate any comments you have on what I said. I also and glad we exchange posts in a civil manner. I wish I had the ability to do that to everyone I came across.

We have both in times past failed in this. In this thread i believe you have gotten worked up and blew a fuse with some of the other men...tour regular conflict with Rippon, and now also JDF. You get heated up, blow a fuse then attack.....i might be in danger of that myself with TNDC in responding to his errant post. It is not the best as we talk past each other and rather than communicate....we suspect hostile motives and intent....which cycles down to a base level.it should not be....it is....and we all need to work on this.
Someone suggested you pause and take a breath and relax a bit more.This i find it difficult to do also as an attack, or even a preceived attack comes... we do not seeing it as coming from another brother...but an enemy who needs to be defeated...especially not having sat or spoken with the other person face to face.
I do not think we need to avoid it, but work through it,warts and all.

The bottom line is for the Christian, living a life for Christ is not in our effort anyhow, but Gods,

God does work in us...but we then work as a response
phil 1;6 followed by phil 2:
12 Wherefore, my beloved, as ye have always obeyed, not as in my presence only, but now much more in my absence, work out your own salvation with fear and trembling.

13 For it is God which worketh in you both to will and to do of his good pleasure.

14 Do all things without murmurings and disputings:

15 That ye may be blameless and harmless, the sons of God, without rebuke, in the midst of a crooked and perverse nation, among whom ye shine as lights in the world;

and should be a natural thing for the saved, and it should be very uncomfortable when he or she strays. The HS must be waving red flags, bells, and whistles, a warning of the rough road ahead. James paints a picture of a life for Christ as being a byproduct of being saved. For the unsaved person, he just continues to sin with the natural consequences.

exactly...and yet we struggle and fail on our best days...that is why Paul says ;
24 O wretched man that I am! who shall deliver me from the body of this death?

25 I thank God through Jesus Christ our Lord. So then with the mind I myself serve the law of God; but with the flesh the law of sin.

 

[Iconoclast]

You have a 17th century (at best) understanding of what addiction entails. I would not purport to instruct a professional counselor on addiction as to the definition of it. You're in way over your head.

God's word takes priority over mans carnal philosophy. I do think there is a proper use for counseling...but that use is NOT to redefine sin...into sickness or disease when our Creator has already defined reality for us.He has defined sin and the remedy and in scripture we have all we need that pertains to life and godliness.
I am not in over my head.Worldly counseling models, from rogers, maislow, skinner, etc come mostly from an evolutionary base and not scripture.

Someone like Jay Adams saw this and has tried to return to a bible based model.most counseling models do not have this. An add mixture is also tragic.

 

[JohnDeereFan]

I am NOT a reformed baptist, but would see nothing wrong with using creeds/confessions to help explain and illustrate the truths and doctrines of the Bible As LONG AS

One using them does not see them as infallible, ONLY way to see the scriptures, nor see them equal to the bible itself!

Nobody considers them inspired. But they are authoritative.

And why do you have to be Reformed Baptist? Most of them are accepted by Arminians, too.

 

[InTheLight]

God's word takes priority over mans carnal philosophy.

Then according to you we should pray over the sick, anoint them with oil, but not seek medical help.

I do think there is a proper use for counseling...but that use is NOT to redefine sin...into sickness or disease when our Creator has already defined reality for us.He has defined sin and the remedy and in scripture we have all we need that pertains to life and godliness.

TND said addiction could also be sin. No one is denying that. But there are physical factors as well.

I am not in over my head.

You're so far in, you're drowning. You are being overly simplistic in your view. You don't understand the physical changes that take place in a person's brain with addictive substances. A person's brain literally gets physically rewired. A spiritual approach may not always be the most efficient way to treat people with rewired brains.

Worldly counseling models, from rogers, maislow, skinner, etc come mostly from an evolutionary base and not scripture.

Worldly counseling models are evolutionary in origin? M-Kay...

 

[saturneptune]

:thumbs:



Ageed and that by God's design



SN...we are still in a body of flesh that can sin...but we do not have two natures like a spiritual schicophrenic fighting with a good dog and a bad dog all day long.The scripture says the Old man has been co-crucified with Christ.
We are to live in light of this reality by the Spirits power and our obedience of faith...mortifying or putting to death the motions of sin in the body.Part of biblical mortification is a positive pursuit of holiness which most pay not enough attention to. The means of grace are not to be neglected.


correct:thumbs:


we are sinners saved by grace and yet as we grow in knowledge we are our brothers keeper...we do not have perfect judgement at all so we have to careful on one hand not to shoot wounded soldiers....and yet not to look away or in any way enable sin.

6 Brethren, if a man be overtaken in a fault, ye which are spiritual, restore such an one in the spirit of meekness; considering thyself, lest thou also be tempted.

2 Bear ye one another's burdens, and so fulfil the law of Christ.

3 For if a man think himself to be something, when he is nothing, he deceiveth himself.

4 But let every man prove his own work, and then shall he have rejoicing in himself alone, and not in another.

5 For every man shall bear his own burden.

6 Let him that is taught in the word communicate unto him that teacheth in all good things.

When we see Sinful behavior in the life of another professed believer we are to be concerned....in other words...if I see a deacon coming out of a topless bar fondling a barmaid outside the no tell-motel...i am not going to assume they are heading for bible study. I would have the right and responsibility to question him and urge him to repent of such sin....i would at that point give him no assurance that he is a christian,and yet i cannot conclude that he is not ...even though it looks bad. Any christian can fall. they can be restored. At no time however should we enable sin telling them they are "carnal christians" who have not made the discovery of the spiritual life....
most times that is done to a person who made a false profession in the flesh...so we tell them to re-dedicate themselves...which is another fleshly mistake...and it becomes a cycle that ends in death.


yes...first we have to hold ourselves up against the standard of the word of God by serious self examination and strive to obey the laws of God by the Spirit's power.. who will listen to us if we do not obey ourselves to any degree?



Those passages are life and death , not to be side stepped at all.


We do not have to know exactly...but we have to be cautiously concerned if a problem arises. God has no undisciplined children..hebrews 12...who would be bastards and not sons.

Sn......of course he does not know...specifically...but he does know that any living in open sin are in danger of second death.he warns attempting to turn the people back to God and self examination.
he is called in many times to deliver just such a message because the pastors who invite him know what he is about.he travels around and coming from the outside can speak in general yet specific terms .



We have both in times past failed in this. In this thread i believe you have gotten worked up and blew a fuse with some of the other men...tour regular conflict with Rippon, and now also JDF. You get heated up, blow a fuse then attack.....i might be in danger of that myself with TNDC in responding to his errant post. It is not the best as we talk past each other and rather than communicate....we suspect hostile motives and intent....which cycles down to a base level.it should not be....it is....and we all need to work on this.
Someone suggested you pause and take a breath and relax a bit more.This i find it difficult to do also as an attack, or even a preceived attack comes... we do not seeing it as coming from another brother...but an enemy who needs to be defeated...especially not having sat or spoken with the other person face to face.
I do not think we need to avoid it, but work through it,warts and all.




God does work in us...but we then work as a response
phil 1;6 followed by phil 2:
12 Wherefore, my beloved, as ye have always obeyed, not as in my presence only, but now much more in my absence, work out your own salvation with fear and trembling.

13 For it is God which worketh in you both to will and to do of his good pleasure.

14 Do all things without murmurings and disputings:

15 That ye may be blameless and harmless, the sons of God, without rebuke, in the midst of a crooked and perverse nation, among whom ye shine as lights in the world;



exactly...and yet we struggle and fail on our best days...that is why Paul says ;
24 O wretched man that I am! who shall deliver me from the body of this death?

25 I thank God through Jesus Christ our Lord. So then with the mind I myself serve the law of God; but with the flesh the law of sin.

Icon,

Thank you for the very detailed and Christ like response. I feel deep in my heart that your study of Scripture has yielded more fruit than all the seminary courses combined. The reason maybe that the line between saved and unsaved is so hard to define my be understood in this illustration. When I was an electronics tech for the Postal Service, we were expected to be at the job on time daily. If we were not, without good reason, discipline was progressive. First, there was a verbal warning, then a letter of warning, followed by a one week suspension, a two week suspension, then, out the door. Workers were always trying to make the Postal Service define exactly how many absences would trigger the next level of discipline. The Postal Service would not reply, and would treat each case individually. Had they replied, then the line would have been defined, and the games would begin. The absences would stay just this side of the defined line. Maybe that is a crude example, but I believe you know what I mean.

About blowing my fuse, yes, Mr. Washer is a tripping point for that, and an area obviously the Lord and I need to work on. I saw him live and in action. Anyway, to get away from him for a second, if I was getting into a mean back and forth with every Christian on this board, in all honesty, I would question my own salvation. We started off rough, but through the guidance of the Lord, we get along fine. This is the Holy Spirit in me connecting with the Spirit in you. I have gone from our first posts to the highest admiration and respect for your spiritual advice. I also can talk civilly to Zaac and Winman for example.

I am not going to comment on anyone's salvation. It is worthy of comment however, to observe that no matter what I say, do, or hope for, that I cannot have a good spirit about Rippon or John Deer Fan. I stayed away from Rippon for months, and he interjected himself into this thread. Why cannot the Holy Spirit in me come to some love of Christ with the Holy Spirit that Rippon claims, I do not know. Each person can come to their own conclusion. I have sent him letters of apology to both him and JDF, and both were either ignored or outright rejected. I have nothing else to say on this subject.

Again, thanks for your post. That reading uplifted my spirits and was very edifying. Please be careful as you take that 18 wheeler through the winter.

 

[Yeshua1]

Nobody considers them inspired. But they are authoritative.

And why do you have to be Reformed Baptist? Most of them are accepted by Arminians, too.

How do you define Authoritative though, as isn't the bible alone our sole authority for all doctrines/practices?
And mentioned reformed baptists, as they are the bethren who mainly abide and use them, aren't they?

 

[Rippon]

no matter what I say, do, or hope for, that I cannot have a good spirit about Rippon or John Deer Fan. I stayed away from Rippon for months, and he interjected himself into this thread. Why cannot the Holy Spirit in me come to some love of Christ with the Holy Spirit that Rippon claims, I do not know. Each person can come to their own conclusion. I have sent him letters of apology to both him and JDF, and both were either ignored or outright rejected. I have nothing else to say on this subject.

Mike,your dishonesty is galling. You sent me two PM's of apology more then 4 years ago. Since that time I have not sent you any PM's. You have sent more than a half dozen to me. Your missives have been absolutely disgraceful --not the kind worth of someone professing to be a Christian. Your continued traits of dishonesty, hypocrisy and immaturity coupled with a coarse streak are not the marks of a decent individual.

And for you to slander and demean men of God in the most brutal fashion as you have done with John Calvin and Paul Washer is repugnant.

 

[Iconoclast]

I am not going to comment on anyone's salvation. It is worthy of comment however, to observe that no matter what I say, do, or hope for, that I cannot have a good spirit about Rippon or John Deer Fan. I stayed away from Rippon for months, and he interjected himself into this thread. Why cannot the Holy Spirit in me come to some love of Christ with the Holy Spirit that Rippon claims, I do not know. Each person can come to their own conclusion. I have sent him letters of apology to both him and JDF, and both were either ignored or outright rejected. I have nothing else to say on this subject.

Mike,your dishonesty is galling. You sent me two PM's of apology more then 4 years ago. Since that time I have not sent you any PM's. You have sent more than a half dozen to me. Your missives have been absolutely disgraceful --not the kind worth of someone professing to be a Christian. Your continued traits of dishonesty, hypocrisy and immaturity coupled with a coarse streak are not the marks of a decent individual.

And for you to slander and demean men of God in the most brutal fashion as you have done with John Calvin and Paul Washer is repugnant.

It is easier for me to comment on this...when I am not the one involved directly. When SN and i had it out we looked at whatever the issue was...started to discuss it...but quickly set each other off.I knew how to press his buttons and he went back at me. To sin seems easier than to obey godly principle.

He would take shots at me , and I shamefully targeted him. I say it that way because even if one person has more truth than the other on the issue....still there is little or no justification to fail to speak to edify others...even when they are a perceived enemy.
It is easier to speak about it when I am removed from it or commenting on others.As i observed this thread i say why can't they work through this but i say it because I am not being attacked...[at least not at first,lol}

The thing is each person has much to offer on many other topics...so once it slips down to this kind of level it is just trouble .I can often enjoy posts from most on here if they have a bible foundation. I would prefer that but often we get the "other stuff".


4 Answer not a fool according to his folly, lest thou also be like unto him.

5 Answer a fool according to his folly, lest he be wise in his own conceit.

 

[Iconoclast]

InTheLight


Hello ITL,

Then according to you we should pray over the sick, anoint them with oil, but not seek medical help.

I have not said anything like that at all...It does not follow.

TND said addiction could also be sin. No one is denying that. But there are physical factors as well.

Again I do not deny physical or chemical factors as a consequence of the sin.

You're so far in, you're drowning.

I know you think so,,,you are free to hold your opinion,,,but can you offer any scriptural base where you think I have departed.

You are being overly simplistic in your view.

Y

I agree it is simple.....

5 Trust in the Lord with all thine heart; and lean not unto thine own understanding.

6 In all thy ways acknowledge him, and he shall direct thy paths.

7 Be not wise in thine own eyes: fear the Lord, and depart from evil.

8 It shall be health to thy navel, and marrow to thy bones.

you don't understand the physical changes that take place in a person's brain with addictive substances. A person's brain literally gets physically rewired.

What if i do have some understanding ITL? I do not deny some of this,

A spiritual approach may not always be the most efficient way to treat people with rewired brains.

I believe you to be 100 percent in error on this unless you can show how this would be so,
4 And Jesus answered him, saying, It is written, That man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word of God.

read psa 119 and get back to me on that....or even psalm 1

Worldly counseling models are evolutionary in origin? M-Kay.

they treat man as if he were an animal and not an image bearer subject to His law...true mental health is found here and no where else;
3 Thou wilt keep him in perfect peace, whose mind is stayed on thee: because he trusteth in thee.

4 Trust ye in the Lord for ever: for in the Lord Jehovah is everlasting strength:
[/QUOTE]

 

[JohnDeereFan]

How do you define Authoritative though, as isn't the bible alone our sole authority for all doctrines/practices?

No. Even the Bible tells us there are other authorities.

You're confusing sola scriptura with solo scriptura.

Sola scriptura, which we believe, refers to the primacy of scripture, while solo scriptura, which we don't, refers to the exclusivity of scripture.

And mentioned reformed baptists, as they are the bethren who mainly abide and use them, aren't they?

No. These things transcend Reformed vs. Arminian. I attended two Arminian churches, including one which my grandparents helped to found. We recited the Apostles' Creed every week.

 

[thisnumbersdisconnected]

Sorry, but I've got to break my vow of "done here" to respond to this:

No. Even the Bible tells us there are other authorities.

You're confusing sola scriptura with solo scriptura.

Sola scriptura, which we believe, refers to the primacy of scripture, while solo scriptura, which we don't, refers to the exclusivity of scripture.

Sola Scriptura means that Scripture alone is authoritative for the faith and practice of the Christian. The Bible is complete, authoritative, and true. There is nothing about "the primacy of Scripture" in its definition. it is about Scripture alone as authoritative. Nothing else. The characterization of it as leaving room for "other authority" is false. Sola Scriptura is "solo Scriptura" -- a term that doesn't even exist among any respected biblical scholars.

Now, back to topic, as this subject is definitely ...

 

[JohnDeereFan]

Sorry, but I've got to break my vow of "done here" to respond to this:Sola Scriptura means that Scripture alone is authoritative for the faith and practice of the Christian. The Bible is complete, authoritative, and true. There is nothing about "the primacy of Scripture" in its definition. it is about Scripture alone as authoritative. Nothing else. The characterization of it as leaving room for "other authority" is false. Sola Scriptura is "solo Scriptura" -- a term that doesn't even exist among any respected biblical scholars.

Sounds like you're confusing sola scriptura with solo scriptura.

 

[thisnumbersdisconnected]

Sounds like you're confusing sola scriptura with solo scriptura.

Sounds like you haven't a clue what you're talking about. Back to "done here."

 

[Jacob_Elliott]

Sounds like you're confusing sola scriptura with solo scriptura.

The doctrine that the Bible alone is the ultimate authority was the "Formal Principle" of the Reformation. In 1521 at the historic interrogation of Luther at the Diet of Worms, he declared his conscience to be captive to the Word of God saying, "Unless I am overcome with testimonies from Scripture or with evident reasons -- for I believe neither the Pope nor the Councils, since they have often erred and contradicted one another -- I am overcome by the Scripture texts which I have adduced, and my conscience is bound by God's Word." Similarly, the Belgic Confession stated, "We believe that [the] holy Scriptures fully contain the will of God, and that whatsoever man ought to believe unto salvation is sufficiently taught therein...Neither may we consider any writings of men, however holy these men may have been, of equal value with those divine Scriptures nor ought we to consider custom or the great multitude, or antiquity, or succession of times and persons, or councils, decrees or statutes, as of equal value with the truth of God... Therefore, we reject with all our hearts whatsoever does not agree with this infallible rule" (VII).

Sola Scriptura= Scripture alone
http://solochristo.com/_SC/reformationindex.htm#Sola Scriptura

 

[JohnDeereFan]

Sola Scriptura= Scripture alone
http://solochristo.com/_SC/reformationindex.htm#Sola Scriptura

The fact that this comes from the Diet of Worms shows that the Bible isn't the only authority.

Again, there is a world of difference between the primacy of scripture and the exclusivity of scripture.

 

[Jacob_Elliott]

The fact that this comes from the Diet of Worms shows that the Bible isn't the only authority.

Again, there is a world of difference between the primacy of scripture and the exclusivity of scripture.

The Reformation principle of sola Scriptura has to do with the sufficiency of Scripture as our supreme authority in all spiritual matters. Sola Scriptura simply means that all truth necessary for our salvation and spiritual life is taught either explicitly or implicitly in Scripture. It is not a claim that all truth of every kind is found in Scripture. The most ardent defender of sola Scriptura will concede, for example, that Scripture has little or nothing to say about DNA structures, microbiology, the rules of Chinese grammar, or rocket science. This or that “scientific truth,” for example, may or may not be actually true, whether or not it can be supported by Scripture—but Scripture is a “more sure Word,” standing above all other truth in its authority and certainty. It is “more sure,” according to the apostle Peter, than the data we gather firsthand through our senses (2 Peter 1:19). Therefore, Scripture is the highest and supreme authority on any matter on which it speaks.

But there are many important questions on which Scripture is silent. Sola Scriptura makes no claim to the contrary. Nor does sola Scriptura claim that everything Jesus or the apostles ever taught is preserved in Scripture. It only means that everything necessary, everything binding on our consciences, and everything God requires of us is given to us in Scripture (2 Peter 1:3).

Furthermore, we are forbidden to add to or take away from Scripture (cf. Deut. 4:2; 12:32; Rev. 22:18–19). To add to it is to lay on people a burden that God Himself does not intend for them to bear (cf. Matt. 23:4).

Scripture is therefore the perfect and only standard of spiritual truth, revealing infallibly all that we must believe in order to be saved and all that we must do in order to glorify God. That—no more, no less—is what sola Scriptura means.

“The whole counsel of God, concerning all things necessary for his own glory, man’s salvation, faith, and life, is either expressly set down in scripture, or by good and necessary consequence may be deduced from scripture: unto which nothing at any time is to be added, whether by new revelations of the Spirit, or traditions of men.” — Westminster Confession of Faith

Adapted from John MacArthur’s contribution to Sola Scriptura: The Protestant Position on the Bible.

http://www.ligonier.org/blog/what-does-sola-scriptura-mean/

The principle of Calvin's system can be expressed by the term Sola Scriptura (Scripture alone). This principle of the Reformation demonstrates the conviction that the Bible is the Word of God and therefore the final authority in belief and practice. A common mistake is made when Sola Scriptura is understood as the Bible "alone." Calvin and the Reformers, believed strongly in church tradition, e.g. Calvin consistently and often cites the early church fathers. However, Scripture had the final authority and tradition was given a subordinate role. The authority of Scripture was not through rational argumentation or proofs, but through the witness of the Holy Spirit. [1]

http://www.theopedia.com/Calvinism

Answer: The phrase sola scriptura is from the Latin: sola having the idea of “alone,” “ground,” “base,” and the word scriptura meaning “writings”—referring to the Scriptures. Sola scriptura means that Scripture alone is authoritative for the faith and practice of the Christian. The Bible is complete, authoritative, and true. “All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness” (2 Timothy 3:16).

Read more: http://www.gotquestions.org/sola-scriptura.html#ixzz2qaeugwWZ

Sola Scriptura is the teaching that the Scriptures contain all that is necessary for salvation and proper living before God. Sola Scriptura means that the Scriptures, the Old and New Testaments (excluding the Catholic apocrypha) are the final authority in all that they address (1 Cor. 4:6) and that tradition, even so-called Sacred Tradition, is judged by Scriptures. Sola Scriptura does not negate past church councils or traditions. Those who hold to Sola Scriptura are free to consider past councils, traditions, commentaries, and the opinions of others. But, the final authority is the Scripture alone because the Scripture alone is what is inspired by God (2 Timothy 3:16) and not past church councils, tradition, commentaries, and opinions. Scripture is is above them all.

http://carm.org/dictionary-sola-scriptura

 

[Yeshua1]

No. Even the Bible tells us there are other authorities.

You're confusing sola scriptura with solo scriptura.

Sola scriptura, which we believe, refers to the primacy of scripture, while solo scriptura, which we don't, refers to the exclusivity of scripture.



No. These things transcend Reformed vs. Arminian. I attended two Arminian churches, including one which my grandparents helped to found. We recited the Apostles' Creed every week.

baptist hold that the Bible ALONE is to be our primary/only source for doctrines and practices though!

 

[Yeshua1]

The fact that this comes from the Diet of Worms shows that the Bible isn't the only authority.

Again, there is a world of difference between the primacy of scripture and the exclusivity of scripture.

Historically, baptists taught and held BOTH are true!

 

[Jacob_Elliott]

Historically, baptists taught and held BOTH are true!

:thumbsup: :applause:

 

[JohnDeereFan]

baptist (sic) hold that the Bible ALONE is to be our primary/only source for doctrines and practices though!

I see. So then, Baptists don't have the Baptist Distinctives, the Baptist Faith and Message, or the Apostles' Creed?

Incidentally, something can't be both "primary" and only. If something is "primary", then that assumes that there are lesser things under it and, thus, it is not the only thing.

Now, if you had said "Baptists hold that the Bible is the supreme authority to which all other sources of doctrines and practices must defer", then you would have been absolutely correct.