It is not in the Bible ?

[Hoddie]

On Thursday, August 25, 2016 at 9:11 AM, shiloh357 said:

The water comparison is not a very good one. 

No? How about putting it like this. I know many believe 2 Tim. 3:16–17 claims Scripture is sufficient as a rule of faith. But an examination of the verse in context shows that it doesn’t claim that at all; it only claims Scripture is "profitable" (Greek: ophelimos) that is, helpful. Many things can be profitable for moving one toward a goal, without being sufficient in getting one to the goal.

The doctrine of Sola Scriptura isn't that the Bible is all we need, spiritually. It is that the Bible is the final authority on all matters of faith and practice.

Where in Scripture does it state this?

I Tim. 3:15-16 is appealing solely to the Bible as being all we need to be equipped for service. It appeals to no other authority for that purpose. The text indicates that the Bible is what makes us complete and fully equipped for service.

This is a type-o correct? Anyhoo..... Equipped for service? The bible makes us complete and fully equipped? Again, the bible wasn't even compiled at this time. How about those that were alive before the bible was compiled, were they incomplete and ill-equipped?

There was no cannon, but there were, even before the death of Paul and Peter, an understanding that Paul's epistles were Scripture. Paul referred to Luke as "Scripture." And Luke took from both Matthew and Mark, so it is fair to consider that they would have assumed at least the first three Gospels to be Scripture before the end of the first century.

Are you sure about that? The books of the New Testament were composed decades after Christ ascended into heaven, and it took centuries for there to be general agreement among Christians as to which books comprised the New Testament. Which leads to other questions like, how do you know what constitutes the New Testament canon? How do you know for certain that these 27 books in the New Testament are in fact inspired and should be in the New Testament? And how do you know for certain that maybe some inspired books haven’t been left out of the canon?"

And contrary to what you said, the Church did not "decide" on the books of the Bible. The Church does not sit in judgment on the Bible and decide what does or does not belong in the Canon. The Church discovered the Canon. God decided the canon and gave it to the Church. The Canon is not the servant of the Church.

I disagree. The bible didn't drop down from heaven ready made; it didn't suddenly appear on earth carried down by God by the hand of an angel. Again, up until the third century or so there was no Bible. There was the Torah and an assortment of books some of which the bishops of the Catholic Church with the guidance of the Holy Spirit during an Ecumenical Council determined were inspired and they codified the Canon of the Bible. Other books were left out because those bishops, again guided by the Holy Spirit, determined that they were not inspired. This is fact, this is History. Like it or not, you have to take the say-so of the Catholic Church that in fact those copies are accurate, as well as her decision that those 27 books are the inspired canonical New Testament Scriptures. You do accept her testimony as trustworthy, or else your Protestant Bible would not have those 27 books.

People could read, but the RCC translated the Bible into a language the average person could not read and brainwashed them into letting the priest "interpret" the Bible for them. The priests took full advantage of that, and began telling people that the Bible said things that it didn't say.

You are speaking of Latin, correct? Yes, "some" people could read, however, there were just two classes of people in the Middle Ages: those who could read, and those who could not read. Those who could read read Latin and were perfectly content with the Scriptures in Latin, and those who could not read Latin could not read at all. So why should the Church prior to the spread of education in the vernacular translate the Bible from Latin for them? Latin was then the language of all cultured men and it was the common language of Europe. Students heard their lectures in Latin and they talked Latin. Retreats to nuns were preached in Latin and they understood the discourses. Hence, Latin was not a dead language but a living one. If the Church desired to keep the Bible from the people then why did the Church translate the Bible out of Greek into Latin and call the Vulgate Version of the fourth century the "Bible of the People"?

Those 66 books of the Christian Bible are the only rule of faith for those who truly follow Jesus.

66 books? That's incomplete. There are 72 books in the Christian bible. You are talking about Martin Luther's version of the bible, where he rejected the books of Tobias, Judith, Wisdom, Ecclesiasticus, Baruch and the two Books of Machabees. But thats a whole differnt topic. Again I ask, where in these 66 books of your bible does it say they are the only rule of faith for those who truly follow Jesus?

Jesus didn't give the Church "all authority." That is just another RCC myth.

The Bible teaches that the rulers of Christ's Church have authority which must be obeyed in matters of religion. Let's see what it say's:

Heb. 13, 17: "Obey them that have the rule over you and submit yourselves: for they watch for your souls as they that must give account, that they may do it with joy, and not with grief: for that is unprofitable for you."

Matt 18-17: "And if he shall neglect to hear them tell it unto the church: but if he neglect to hear the church let him be unto thee as an heathen man and a publican."

Luke 10-16: "He that heareth you heareth me; and he that despiseth you despiseth me; and he that despiseth me despiseth him that sent me."

Matt. 16-19: "And I will give unto thee (Peter) the keys of the kingdom of heaven: and

whatsoever thou (Peter) shall bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever thou (Peter) shall loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven."

The apostles repeatedly claimed this authority: Gal. 1-8; John 1-10; Acts 15, 23 and 28. Hence the laws or precepts of the true Church are founded upon the same authority as the commandments of God. For the Church of Christ has authority to act in his Name. And what Church was this? The Holy Catholic Church of course. Which brings up a couple of questions I'd like to ask you. How old is your church, and who started it?

Peace

 

p.s. Sorry about taking so long getting back to you