one of the most beautiful truths of the reformation is the doctrine of sola scriptura .. which speaks to the authority of the bible being the sole infallible rule of faith and the final authority on all biblical matters
bare in mind this is exactly what the doctrine is all about ... its not that the bible is the only authority .. there are other lesser authorities like the early church fathers, personal authorities in the church as in creeds
the first objection i want to address is a common one .... which is sola Scriptura has led to a diverse understanding and many false teachings and cult ... as seen in these words
The disintegration of Protestantism into so many competing factions, teaching different doctrines on key theological issues (What kind of faith saves? Is baptism necessary? Needed? Is baptism for infants? Must baptism be by immersion only? Can one lose salvation? How? Can it be gotten back? How? Is the Real Presence true? Are spiritual gifts like tongues and healing for today? For everyone? What about predestination? What about free will? What about church government?) is itself an important indicator of the practical failure of the doctrine of private judgment, and thus the doctrine of sola scriptura.
one must note the hatred of the bible in these words .. and particularly the fact it is its own authority .... the bible interprets the bible ...
this objection is a dishonest one to say the least .... as it makes every false view a biblically revealed fact when it is not
a) .... false teachers come and go they base their view not on scripture but upon their own authority .. for example the heresies of the early church .. like Arianism ... was based on a flaw reading of scripture
rather than having full biblical orbed understanding of things .. it came from his false misunderstandings
b) cults like Mormonism, and Jehovah witness these teachings do not strictly come from the bible, but from an authority outside of it .. the watchtower and other authority's like the priesthood in Mormonism
we must remember these came from one mans observation of the church and his confusion in both cases
c) issue such as baptism, salvation (read john 6 and 10 .. Jesus says he loses none of those given) and predestination and free will are clear taught in the bible ... the first three are biblically true (immersion for the baptism)
are all biblical concepts, it is the rejection of something based on outside traditions that makes the church false, the doctrine sola scriptura is not the course
d) for a bonus i will ask .... has the catholic church given authoritative teachings on every passage of the bible no .. its stands on 7, what scripture substantiates the Mariam doctrine .. none .. where did it come from ... not the church either .. it is a false set of doctrines that have no basis in scripture or in the church fathers writings
on top of this how does one know the authoritative teaching of the pope are being interpreted properly ... no one does
just how many catholic denominations are there and do they agree on everything
so from these four basis points we can gather a great deal about catholic apologetic and how far it has come in 2 thousand years ... not very far 7 passages falsely interpreted ... which shows something ...
the church fathers never believed what Catholicism does on Matthew 16
However, there is a whole set of practical presuppositions that the doctrine of sola scriptura makes, every one of which provides not just an argument against the doctrine, but a fatal blow to it. Sola scriptura simply cannot be God's plan for Christian theology
are any of these presuppositions mention by the author of this article i am responding too valid ones .. lets find out
First, if each Christian is to make a thorough study of the Scriptures and decide for himself what they mean (even taking into consideration the interpretations of others) then it follows that he must have a copy of the Scriptures to use in making his thorough study (a non-thorough study being a dangerous thing, as any Protestant apologist warning one against the cults and their Bible study tactics will tell you). Thus the universal application of sola scriptura presupposes the mass manufacturing of books, and of the Bible in particular
now what we are dealing with is what i call pass the back approach of a response .. meaning since the person clearly does not know how to defence his own position .. he has to attack another to makes his own seem better off ... the are several problems with this approach
a) if the church began to teach the bible in a way that was God honouring instead of teaching doctrines that are directly opposed to the biblical truth .. then we would not have this problem
clearly the catholic church over time has backslide from the biblical truth, they cannot logical defend true doctrine by scripture
like the trinity .. they believe it because they are told too .. this has not change since they believe the papacy, indulgence, purgatory and Mariam doctrine on the same basis
because mother church tells them too
b) the fact that the bible was only to be used by church officials for 1000 years or more .. does not change the fact that the bible itself tells to study to show yourself approved
and every christian who is truly of Christ must do this ....
Know this, my beloved brothers: let every person be quick to hear, slow to speak, slow to anger; 20 for the anger of man does not produce the righteousness of God. 21 Therefore put away all filthiness and rampant wickedness and receive with meekness the implanted word, which is able to save your souls. 22 But be doers of the word, and not hearers only, deceiving yourselves. 23 For if anyone is a hearer of the word and not a doer, he is like a man who looks intently at his natural face in a mirror. 24 For he looks at himself and goes away and at once forgets what he was like. 25 But the one who looks into the perfect law, the law of liberty, and perseveres, being no hearer who forgets but a doer who acts, he will be blessed in his doing. 26 If anyone thinks he is religious and does not bridle his tongue but deceives his heart, this person's religion is worthless. 27 Religion that is pure and undefiled before God, the Father, is this: to visit orphans and widows in their affliction, and to keep oneself unstained from the world -- James 1
and also
Command and teach these things. 12 Let no one despise you for your youth, but set the believers an example in speech, in conduct, in love, in faith, in purity. 13 Until I come, devote yourself to the public reading of Scripture, to exhortation, to teaching. 14 Do not neglect the gift you have, which was given you by prophecy when the council of elders laid their hands on you. 15 Practise these things, immerse yourself in them, so that all may see your progress. 16 Keep a close watch on yourself and on the teaching. Persist in this, for by so doing you will save both yourself and your hearers. -- 1 timothy 4
and finally we have 2 practical examples of how the scripture is to function in all manners of context
The brothers immediately sent Paul and Silas away by night to Berea, and when they arrived they went into the Jewish synagogue. 11 Now these Jews were more noble than those in Thessalonica; they received the word with all eagerness, examining the Scriptures daily to see if these things were so. 12 Many of them therefore believed, with not a few Greek women of high standing as well as men. 13 But when the Jews from Thessalonica learned that the word of God was proclaimed by Paul at Berea also, they came there too, agitating and stirring up the crowds. 14 Then the brothers immediately sent Paul off on his way to the sea, but Silas and Timothy remained there. 15 Those who conducted Paul brought him as far as Athens, and after receiving a command for Silas and Timothy to come to him as soon as possible, they departed -- acts 17
and also
Pay careful attention to yourselves and to all the flock, of which the Holy Spirit has made you overseers, to care for the church of God, which he obtained with his own blood. 29 I know that after my departure fierce wolves will come in among you, not sparing the flock; 30 and from among your own selves will arise men speaking twisted things, to draw away the disciples after them. 31 Therefore be alert, remembering that for three years I did not cease night or day to admonish everyone with tears. 32 And now I commend you to God and to the word of his grace, which is able to build you up and to give you the inheritance among all those who are sanctified -- acts 20
note in all the above referenced scripture .. the word of God that has been inspired by the holy spirt .. 2 timothy 3 :16 -17 and 2 peter 20 -21 make plain this is the only way the scriptures function .. as the sole infallible and final authority for Gods people .. we do not rely on external sources that claim to on the same level of authority , no, not ever
Third, if the average Christian is going to read the Scriptures and decide for himself what they mean then he obviously must be able to read. Having someone read them to him simply is not sufficient, not only because the person would only be able to do it occasionally (what with a bunch of illiterates to read to), but also because the person needs to be able to go over the passage multiple times, looking at its exact wording and grammatical structure, to be able to quickly flip to other passages bearing on the topic to formulate the different aspects of a doctrine as he is thinking about it, and finally to be able to record his insights so he doesn't forget them and he can keep the evidence straight in his mind. He therefore must be literate and able to read for himself. Thus sola scriptura presupposes universal literacy
no the doctrine does not presuppose that every person should be able to read ... this is nothing more than a cop out ... it speaks of what a person of the catholic faith believes should be apart of the doctrine .. not what the actual doctrine teaches
the only position that is actually represented in this doctrine is that the bible is the final authority which instructs the believer in how to live, and the right doctrines ..
a) none of these two issues can be reached by the pope as he himself has no authority over scriptures as he presupposes to be the case
how does a catholic know what is the right way of living .. is it down to God word on the issue or a subjective answer given by the pope
an office which has no biblical place to be seen .. it is a pagan duty -- the church has the divine order of elders and overseers
b) what this objection really shows is the catholic denial of the fact that scripture truly do hold everything we need to know about salvation and christian life
Indeed, all who desire to live a godly life in Christ Jesus will be persecuted, 13 while evil people and impostors will go on from bad to worse, deceiving and being deceived. 14 But as for you, continue in what you have learned and have firmly believed, knowing from whom you learned it 15 and how from childhood you have been acquainted with the sacred writings, which are able to make you wise for salvation through faith in Christ Jesus
it is the scriptures claim that they are sufficient to do the task they are given to do .. not ours .. we just allow for them to do what they are suppose to do
Fourth, if the average Christian is going to make a study of what Scripture says and decide what it teaches, he must possess adequate scholarly support material, for he must either be able to read the texts in the original languages or have material capable of telling him when there is a translation question that could affect doctrine (for example, does the Greek word for "baptize" mean "immerse" or does it have a broader meaning? does the biblical term for "justify" mean to make righteous in only a legal sense or sometimes in a broader one?).
He must also have these scholarly support works (commentaries and such) to suggest to him possible alternate interpretations to evaluate, for no one person is going to be able to think of every interpretive option on every passage of Scripture that is relevant to every major Christian doctrine. No Protestant pastor (at least no pastors who are not in extreme anti-intellectual circles) would dream of formulating his views without such support materials, and he thus cannot expect the average Christian to do so either. Indeed! The average Christian is going to need such support materials even more than a trained pastor. Thus sola scriptura also presupposes the possession-not just the existence-of adequate support materials
this objection really reveals the desperation one must go to .. in order to make a point ... this is not at all the position we have
a) while having scholarly writings on a subject can be helpful .. it is by no means the standard that we follow ... everything that is to be taken as a reasonable understanding ... must first be examined in accordance to the scripture .. and when it is seen as being faithful then it is to be consider as a lesser source of information
this is the only viable way to allow the scripture to speak on their own manner
b) this statement "or have material capable of telling him when there is a translation question that could affect doctrine" says it all ... so we must have something to determine what the bible teaches .. an aid, a office that makes the bible clear ... interestingly enough we do they are the divinely inspired scriptures
meaning we allow the bible to first speak on all matters pertaining to doctrine, and don't just believe one mans words over against Gods spoken word .. which is clearly what the author of the article i am critiquing does .. he believes the church as the only authority
lets ask has the Church (catholic) truly given the pronouncement that another scripture as been rightly handled .. what if one of the 7 scriptural interpretations like Matthew 16 is found to be theologically in error and historically ... then can we truly trust anything the catholic church has pronounced in its time
the average catholic will need to see it, he will need materials to find support for everything pope has stated
Fifth, if the average Christian is to do a thorough study of the Bible for himself, then he obviously must have adequate time in which to do this study. If he is working in the fields or a home (or, later, in the factory) for ten, twelve, fifteen, or eighteen hours a day, he obviously doesn't have time to do this, especially not in addition to the care and raising of his family and his own need to eat and sleep and recreate. Not even a Sunday rest will provide him with the adequate time, for nobody becomes adept in the Bible just by reading the Bible on Sundays-as Protestants stress to their own members when encouraging daily Bible reading. Thus sola scriptura presupposes the universal possession of adequate leisure time in which to make a thorough study the Bible for oneself.
interestingly the same question can be asked of the catholic .. does the average catholic ever have time to study the scriptures ... or do they blindly follow the pope on everything without studying the scriptures to see if the pope is being true to them
the ones who do study, by Gods grace are no longer catholics .. (for by study they realise no catholic doctrine is biblically grounded and therefore it does not come from God himself)
a) there is plenty of time to read the bible ... even when you do have a busy life ... and to truly study it
this is just another way to cast doubt on the position you have failed to understand
and simply by saying that people don't have time to study the bible ... does not mean the doctrine is not biblical ... that is a non - sequitar
Seventh, if the average Christian is going to evaluate competing interpretations for himself then he must have a significant amount of skill in evaluating arguments. He must be able to recognize what is a good argument and what is not, what is a fallacy and what is not, what counts as evidence and what does not. That is quite a bit of critical thinking skill, and anyone who has ever tried to teach basic, introductory logic to college students or anyone who had tried to read and grade the persuasive essays they write for philosophy tests can tell you (I'm speaking from personal experience here), that level of critical thinking does not exist in the average, literate, well-nourished, modern college senior, much less the average, illiterate, malnourished, Medieval peasant. This is especially true when it comes to the abstract concepts and truth claims involved in philosophy and theology. Thus sola scriptura also presupposes a high level of universal education in critical thinking skills (a level which does not even exist today).
while is true that it take time to study and understand many areas ... it does not follow that it can not be done, and that it has not been accomplished
for instance .. the writer of this critique on sola scriptura a number has made assumption that if logically followed would mean that the papacy is false .. since it has no support
he has no made another fallacy .. non sequitar in the last two points ..
-- saying that because the church has not always had a bible in mass production among the believer .. therefore the teaching of the sufficiency of scripture can not be true .... since it is seen through the scriptures
but we can add to this the fact that this argument proves fatal to Catholicism more than protestant .....
how did one know that any of the doubtful doctrines of Catholicism were true or false before the printing press .. if they were not allowed to have a bible in ordinary use ....
does this not show that Catholicism has always operated in a conspiracy fashion ... believe in this because i say so mentality
conclusion ...
in this article i have critiqued we come to a summery of the above points which reads
Therefore sola scriptura presupposes (1) the existence of the printing press, (2) the universal distribution of Bibles, (3) universal literacy, (4) the universal possession of scholarly support materials, (5) the universal possession of adequate time for study, (6) universal nutrition, and (7) a universal education in a high level of critical thinking skills. Needless to say, this group of conditions was not true in the crucial early centuries of the Church, was not true through the main course of Church history, and is not even true today. The non-existence of the printing press alone means sola scriptura was totally unthinkable for almost three-quarters of Christian history
and after evaluating all seven reason we see the writer, a catholic maybe, does not use the same criteria for his own position ... as too ours which show an inconsistency on his part .. the use of a double standard
and upon my critique not one of the reason stands to scrutiny .. as they are very destructive for the catholic position and not ours
and we have seen that sola scriptura has been vindicated, since the person presupposed a position which has no real historical connection until 400 -500 ad .. meaning the papacy was a later invention and this shows there was no external authority in the church .. the only authority was the word of GOD ... regardless of its unbinded manner .. this was the true authority from God and all else came under its authority
and the first pope to be know was not till near 600 ad .. 580 plus to be precise
bare in mind this is exactly what the doctrine is all about ... its not that the bible is the only authority .. there are other lesser authorities like the early church fathers, personal authorities in the church as in creeds
the first objection i want to address is a common one .... which is sola Scriptura has led to a diverse understanding and many false teachings and cult ... as seen in these words
The disintegration of Protestantism into so many competing factions, teaching different doctrines on key theological issues (What kind of faith saves? Is baptism necessary? Needed? Is baptism for infants? Must baptism be by immersion only? Can one lose salvation? How? Can it be gotten back? How? Is the Real Presence true? Are spiritual gifts like tongues and healing for today? For everyone? What about predestination? What about free will? What about church government?) is itself an important indicator of the practical failure of the doctrine of private judgment, and thus the doctrine of sola scriptura.
one must note the hatred of the bible in these words .. and particularly the fact it is its own authority .... the bible interprets the bible ...
this objection is a dishonest one to say the least .... as it makes every false view a biblically revealed fact when it is not
a) .... false teachers come and go they base their view not on scripture but upon their own authority .. for example the heresies of the early church .. like Arianism ... was based on a flaw reading of scripture
rather than having full biblical orbed understanding of things .. it came from his false misunderstandings
b) cults like Mormonism, and Jehovah witness these teachings do not strictly come from the bible, but from an authority outside of it .. the watchtower and other authority's like the priesthood in Mormonism
we must remember these came from one mans observation of the church and his confusion in both cases
c) issue such as baptism, salvation (read john 6 and 10 .. Jesus says he loses none of those given) and predestination and free will are clear taught in the bible ... the first three are biblically true (immersion for the baptism)
are all biblical concepts, it is the rejection of something based on outside traditions that makes the church false, the doctrine sola scriptura is not the course
d) for a bonus i will ask .... has the catholic church given authoritative teachings on every passage of the bible no .. its stands on 7, what scripture substantiates the Mariam doctrine .. none .. where did it come from ... not the church either .. it is a false set of doctrines that have no basis in scripture or in the church fathers writings
on top of this how does one know the authoritative teaching of the pope are being interpreted properly ... no one does
just how many catholic denominations are there and do they agree on everything
so from these four basis points we can gather a great deal about catholic apologetic and how far it has come in 2 thousand years ... not very far 7 passages falsely interpreted ... which shows something ...
the church fathers never believed what Catholicism does on Matthew 16
However, there is a whole set of practical presuppositions that the doctrine of sola scriptura makes, every one of which provides not just an argument against the doctrine, but a fatal blow to it. Sola scriptura simply cannot be God's plan for Christian theology
are any of these presuppositions mention by the author of this article i am responding too valid ones .. lets find out
First, if each Christian is to make a thorough study of the Scriptures and decide for himself what they mean (even taking into consideration the interpretations of others) then it follows that he must have a copy of the Scriptures to use in making his thorough study (a non-thorough study being a dangerous thing, as any Protestant apologist warning one against the cults and their Bible study tactics will tell you). Thus the universal application of sola scriptura presupposes the mass manufacturing of books, and of the Bible in particular
now what we are dealing with is what i call pass the back approach of a response .. meaning since the person clearly does not know how to defence his own position .. he has to attack another to makes his own seem better off ... the are several problems with this approach
a) if the church began to teach the bible in a way that was God honouring instead of teaching doctrines that are directly opposed to the biblical truth .. then we would not have this problem
clearly the catholic church over time has backslide from the biblical truth, they cannot logical defend true doctrine by scripture
like the trinity .. they believe it because they are told too .. this has not change since they believe the papacy, indulgence, purgatory and Mariam doctrine on the same basis
because mother church tells them too
b) the fact that the bible was only to be used by church officials for 1000 years or more .. does not change the fact that the bible itself tells to study to show yourself approved
and every christian who is truly of Christ must do this ....
Know this, my beloved brothers: let every person be quick to hear, slow to speak, slow to anger; 20 for the anger of man does not produce the righteousness of God. 21 Therefore put away all filthiness and rampant wickedness and receive with meekness the implanted word, which is able to save your souls. 22 But be doers of the word, and not hearers only, deceiving yourselves. 23 For if anyone is a hearer of the word and not a doer, he is like a man who looks intently at his natural face in a mirror. 24 For he looks at himself and goes away and at once forgets what he was like. 25 But the one who looks into the perfect law, the law of liberty, and perseveres, being no hearer who forgets but a doer who acts, he will be blessed in his doing. 26 If anyone thinks he is religious and does not bridle his tongue but deceives his heart, this person's religion is worthless. 27 Religion that is pure and undefiled before God, the Father, is this: to visit orphans and widows in their affliction, and to keep oneself unstained from the world -- James 1
and also
Command and teach these things. 12 Let no one despise you for your youth, but set the believers an example in speech, in conduct, in love, in faith, in purity. 13 Until I come, devote yourself to the public reading of Scripture, to exhortation, to teaching. 14 Do not neglect the gift you have, which was given you by prophecy when the council of elders laid their hands on you. 15 Practise these things, immerse yourself in them, so that all may see your progress. 16 Keep a close watch on yourself and on the teaching. Persist in this, for by so doing you will save both yourself and your hearers. -- 1 timothy 4
and finally we have 2 practical examples of how the scripture is to function in all manners of context
The brothers immediately sent Paul and Silas away by night to Berea, and when they arrived they went into the Jewish synagogue. 11 Now these Jews were more noble than those in Thessalonica; they received the word with all eagerness, examining the Scriptures daily to see if these things were so. 12 Many of them therefore believed, with not a few Greek women of high standing as well as men. 13 But when the Jews from Thessalonica learned that the word of God was proclaimed by Paul at Berea also, they came there too, agitating and stirring up the crowds. 14 Then the brothers immediately sent Paul off on his way to the sea, but Silas and Timothy remained there. 15 Those who conducted Paul brought him as far as Athens, and after receiving a command for Silas and Timothy to come to him as soon as possible, they departed -- acts 17
and also
Pay careful attention to yourselves and to all the flock, of which the Holy Spirit has made you overseers, to care for the church of God, which he obtained with his own blood. 29 I know that after my departure fierce wolves will come in among you, not sparing the flock; 30 and from among your own selves will arise men speaking twisted things, to draw away the disciples after them. 31 Therefore be alert, remembering that for three years I did not cease night or day to admonish everyone with tears. 32 And now I commend you to God and to the word of his grace, which is able to build you up and to give you the inheritance among all those who are sanctified -- acts 20
note in all the above referenced scripture .. the word of God that has been inspired by the holy spirt .. 2 timothy 3 :16 -17 and 2 peter 20 -21 make plain this is the only way the scriptures function .. as the sole infallible and final authority for Gods people .. we do not rely on external sources that claim to on the same level of authority , no, not ever
Third, if the average Christian is going to read the Scriptures and decide for himself what they mean then he obviously must be able to read. Having someone read them to him simply is not sufficient, not only because the person would only be able to do it occasionally (what with a bunch of illiterates to read to), but also because the person needs to be able to go over the passage multiple times, looking at its exact wording and grammatical structure, to be able to quickly flip to other passages bearing on the topic to formulate the different aspects of a doctrine as he is thinking about it, and finally to be able to record his insights so he doesn't forget them and he can keep the evidence straight in his mind. He therefore must be literate and able to read for himself. Thus sola scriptura presupposes universal literacy
no the doctrine does not presuppose that every person should be able to read ... this is nothing more than a cop out ... it speaks of what a person of the catholic faith believes should be apart of the doctrine .. not what the actual doctrine teaches
the only position that is actually represented in this doctrine is that the bible is the final authority which instructs the believer in how to live, and the right doctrines ..
a) none of these two issues can be reached by the pope as he himself has no authority over scriptures as he presupposes to be the case
how does a catholic know what is the right way of living .. is it down to God word on the issue or a subjective answer given by the pope
an office which has no biblical place to be seen .. it is a pagan duty -- the church has the divine order of elders and overseers
b) what this objection really shows is the catholic denial of the fact that scripture truly do hold everything we need to know about salvation and christian life
Indeed, all who desire to live a godly life in Christ Jesus will be persecuted, 13 while evil people and impostors will go on from bad to worse, deceiving and being deceived. 14 But as for you, continue in what you have learned and have firmly believed, knowing from whom you learned it 15 and how from childhood you have been acquainted with the sacred writings, which are able to make you wise for salvation through faith in Christ Jesus
it is the scriptures claim that they are sufficient to do the task they are given to do .. not ours .. we just allow for them to do what they are suppose to do
Fourth, if the average Christian is going to make a study of what Scripture says and decide what it teaches, he must possess adequate scholarly support material, for he must either be able to read the texts in the original languages or have material capable of telling him when there is a translation question that could affect doctrine (for example, does the Greek word for "baptize" mean "immerse" or does it have a broader meaning? does the biblical term for "justify" mean to make righteous in only a legal sense or sometimes in a broader one?).
He must also have these scholarly support works (commentaries and such) to suggest to him possible alternate interpretations to evaluate, for no one person is going to be able to think of every interpretive option on every passage of Scripture that is relevant to every major Christian doctrine. No Protestant pastor (at least no pastors who are not in extreme anti-intellectual circles) would dream of formulating his views without such support materials, and he thus cannot expect the average Christian to do so either. Indeed! The average Christian is going to need such support materials even more than a trained pastor. Thus sola scriptura also presupposes the possession-not just the existence-of adequate support materials
this objection really reveals the desperation one must go to .. in order to make a point ... this is not at all the position we have
a) while having scholarly writings on a subject can be helpful .. it is by no means the standard that we follow ... everything that is to be taken as a reasonable understanding ... must first be examined in accordance to the scripture .. and when it is seen as being faithful then it is to be consider as a lesser source of information
this is the only viable way to allow the scripture to speak on their own manner
b) this statement "or have material capable of telling him when there is a translation question that could affect doctrine" says it all ... so we must have something to determine what the bible teaches .. an aid, a office that makes the bible clear ... interestingly enough we do they are the divinely inspired scriptures
meaning we allow the bible to first speak on all matters pertaining to doctrine, and don't just believe one mans words over against Gods spoken word .. which is clearly what the author of the article i am critiquing does .. he believes the church as the only authority
lets ask has the Church (catholic) truly given the pronouncement that another scripture as been rightly handled .. what if one of the 7 scriptural interpretations like Matthew 16 is found to be theologically in error and historically ... then can we truly trust anything the catholic church has pronounced in its time
the average catholic will need to see it, he will need materials to find support for everything pope has stated
Fifth, if the average Christian is to do a thorough study of the Bible for himself, then he obviously must have adequate time in which to do this study. If he is working in the fields or a home (or, later, in the factory) for ten, twelve, fifteen, or eighteen hours a day, he obviously doesn't have time to do this, especially not in addition to the care and raising of his family and his own need to eat and sleep and recreate. Not even a Sunday rest will provide him with the adequate time, for nobody becomes adept in the Bible just by reading the Bible on Sundays-as Protestants stress to their own members when encouraging daily Bible reading. Thus sola scriptura presupposes the universal possession of adequate leisure time in which to make a thorough study the Bible for oneself.
interestingly the same question can be asked of the catholic .. does the average catholic ever have time to study the scriptures ... or do they blindly follow the pope on everything without studying the scriptures to see if the pope is being true to them
the ones who do study, by Gods grace are no longer catholics .. (for by study they realise no catholic doctrine is biblically grounded and therefore it does not come from God himself)
a) there is plenty of time to read the bible ... even when you do have a busy life ... and to truly study it
this is just another way to cast doubt on the position you have failed to understand
and simply by saying that people don't have time to study the bible ... does not mean the doctrine is not biblical ... that is a non - sequitar
Seventh, if the average Christian is going to evaluate competing interpretations for himself then he must have a significant amount of skill in evaluating arguments. He must be able to recognize what is a good argument and what is not, what is a fallacy and what is not, what counts as evidence and what does not. That is quite a bit of critical thinking skill, and anyone who has ever tried to teach basic, introductory logic to college students or anyone who had tried to read and grade the persuasive essays they write for philosophy tests can tell you (I'm speaking from personal experience here), that level of critical thinking does not exist in the average, literate, well-nourished, modern college senior, much less the average, illiterate, malnourished, Medieval peasant. This is especially true when it comes to the abstract concepts and truth claims involved in philosophy and theology. Thus sola scriptura also presupposes a high level of universal education in critical thinking skills (a level which does not even exist today).
while is true that it take time to study and understand many areas ... it does not follow that it can not be done, and that it has not been accomplished
for instance .. the writer of this critique on sola scriptura a number has made assumption that if logically followed would mean that the papacy is false .. since it has no support
he has no made another fallacy .. non sequitar in the last two points ..
-- saying that because the church has not always had a bible in mass production among the believer .. therefore the teaching of the sufficiency of scripture can not be true .... since it is seen through the scriptures
but we can add to this the fact that this argument proves fatal to Catholicism more than protestant .....
how did one know that any of the doubtful doctrines of Catholicism were true or false before the printing press .. if they were not allowed to have a bible in ordinary use ....
does this not show that Catholicism has always operated in a conspiracy fashion ... believe in this because i say so mentality
conclusion ...
in this article i have critiqued we come to a summery of the above points which reads
Therefore sola scriptura presupposes (1) the existence of the printing press, (2) the universal distribution of Bibles, (3) universal literacy, (4) the universal possession of scholarly support materials, (5) the universal possession of adequate time for study, (6) universal nutrition, and (7) a universal education in a high level of critical thinking skills. Needless to say, this group of conditions was not true in the crucial early centuries of the Church, was not true through the main course of Church history, and is not even true today. The non-existence of the printing press alone means sola scriptura was totally unthinkable for almost three-quarters of Christian history
and after evaluating all seven reason we see the writer, a catholic maybe, does not use the same criteria for his own position ... as too ours which show an inconsistency on his part .. the use of a double standard
and upon my critique not one of the reason stands to scrutiny .. as they are very destructive for the catholic position and not ours
and we have seen that sola scriptura has been vindicated, since the person presupposed a position which has no real historical connection until 400 -500 ad .. meaning the papacy was a later invention and this shows there was no external authority in the church .. the only authority was the word of GOD ... regardless of its unbinded manner .. this was the true authority from God and all else came under its authority
and the first pope to be know was not till near 600 ad .. 580 plus to be precise
