This topic contains 1 reply, has 2 voices, and was last updated by Anonymous 9 years, 1 month ago.
February 21, 2009 at 7:41 am #1870
During the Reformation, the five solas include:
-Sola Scriptura (Scripture Alone)
-Sola Fide (Faith Alone)
-Sola Gratia (Grace Alone)
-Solus Cristus (Christ Alone)
– Soli Deo Gloria (Glory to God Alone)
Having the full knowledge that Ron posted Sola Scriptura, he attacked rather than disucss the Catholics point of view on these subjects. I posted this subject not to harm but rather grow in knowedge about the Five Solas.
Also in mind that Catholics and Protestants have completely different point of views and that we, whether we are Catholic, Protestant, or other, that we must respect the ideas of others.
My goal for this post is to calmly communicate and maybe learn something new ” title=”Smile” />February 22, 2009 at 5:59 am #9165
One of the problems of Sola Sciptura, is it is not upheld by Scripture. A stock “proof text” that many Protestants use is 2 Timothy 3:16-17, “All Scripture is inspired and is [b:2r9894go]useful [/b:2r9894go]for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness, 17so that the man of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work.”
Well the above misuse of 2 Timothy (and I’ve added the next verse which most Protestants don’t quote because it disproves their teaching against “good work” But you will note it states Scriture is useful, nowhere in the Bible does it say Scripture is the Sole source of Doctrine (teaching), nor the sole source of anything else. What the Bible does say (just a few quotes not an exhaustive list) is the following. In denying the Catholic Teaching of Oral Tradition and Written Tradition (Scripture) one also has to deny what the Bible says. Since you brought up Ron, I’ll also add that he believed that anyone can just pick up the Bible and it would expalin itself, he denied that it was helpful to know the culture, language, and situations that existed when the books where written. But that is a discussion for another thread.
[quote:2r9894go]2 Thes 2:15, “So then, brethren, stand firm and hold to the [b:2r9894go]traditions which you were taught by us, either by word of mouth or by [/b:2r9894go]letter.”[/quote:2r9894go]
Traditions! Traditions taught by word of mouth, in other words, oral tradition, and traditions taught by letter. Traditions which they are being told to “stand firm and hold to”. Sacred Scripture and
[quote:2r9894go]1 Cor 11:2, “I commend you because you remember me in everything and maintain the [b:2r9894go]traditions [/b:2r9894go]even as I have delivered them to you.”[/quote:2r9894go]
The Corinthians are being commended by Paul because they maintain the traditions that he passed on to them. Sacred Scripture and Sacred Tradition.
[quote:2r9894go]2 Tim 2:2: “and [b:2r9894go]what you have heard from me[/b:2r9894go] before many witnesses entrust to faithful men who will be able to teach others also.”[/quote:2r9894go]
What we have here in 2 Timothy is an instance, in Scripture, of Paul commanding the passing on of oral tradition.
[quote:2r9894go]1 Thes 2:13, “And we also thank God constantly for this, that when you received the Word of God [b:2r9894go]which you heard from us[/b:2r9894go], you accepted it not as the word of men but as what it really is, the Word of God, which is at work in you believers.”[/quote:2r9894go]
So, they received as the Word of God that which they heard, not simply that which they read in Scripture.
In other words, the Bible clearly supports the Catholic Church’s teaching that the Word of God is contained in both Sacred Scripture and Sacred TraditionFebruary 22, 2009 at 6:14 am #9166
What is your opinion on the other four Solas?
Again, I bring up that my knowledge is quite inadequate and inferior compared to yours. I know that you’ll say that you’re infallible. I am too. My problem is that I am not well fluent with Holy Scripture. The Catholic Church I attended taught me that the Bible is not a book that you read from beginning to end but rather a library and used for Reference (Again, I could be wrong and I might have gotten the teaching incorrect.)February 22, 2009 at 6:33 am #9168
Another attack on the Teachings of the Catholic Church which attempts to distract from the Truth is Sola Fide. One of the problems with making a statement in the manner Ron learned from his Protestant teachers is when you start with an attack like, “I believe we are saved only by our Faith in Christ. (Sola Fide)” Or any statement like that, the assumption is that the other party does not believe that Faith in Christ is necessary
Many Protestants claim that the Catholic Church does not teach that we are saved by Faith in Christ, but that we add our own works to the mix, the Sola Fide is counter to what the Scriptures really teach. They can’t show where in the Catechism of the Catholic Church, it teaches that we can “work” our way into Heaven? They can’t, because it doesn’t. The Catholic Church does not now, nor has it ever, taught a doctrine of salvation by works…that we can “work” our way into Heaven.
Second, if asked to show where in the Bible does it teach that we are saved by “faith alone.” They can’t, because it doesn’t. The only place in all of Scripture where the phrase “Faith Alone” appears, is in James…James 2:24, where it says that we are not justified (or saved) by faith alone.
So, one of the two main pillars of Protestantism…the doctrine of salvation by faith alone…not only doesn’t appear in the Bible, but the Bible actually says the exact opposite – that we are not saved by faith alone.
Third, if works have nothing to do with our salvation…then how come every passage in the N.T. that I know of that talks about judgment says we will be judged by our works, not by whether or not we have faith alone? We see this in Rom 2, Matthew 15 and 16, 1 Peter 1, Rev 20 and 22, 2 Cor 5, and many, many more verses.
Fourth, if we are saved by faith alone, why does 1 Cor 13:13 say that love is greater than faith? Shouldn’t it be the other way around?
As Catholics we believe that we are saved by God’s grace alone. We can do nothing, apart from God’s grace, to receive the free gift of salvation. We also believe, however, that we have to respond to God’s grace. Protestants believe that, too. However, many Protestants believe that the only response necessary is his or her own claiming of Jesus by faith; whereas, Catholics believe a response of faith and works is necessary…or, as the Bible puts it in Galatians 5:6, “For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision nor uncircumsion is of any avail, but faith working through love…faith working through love…just as the Church teaches.February 22, 2009 at 7:03 am #9170
James, I’ll continue with the other Solas over the next few days, and as before, the answers are just the tip of the Iceburg, and due to the limits of an online forum, not exhaustive.
[quote:18dqrn1u]The Catholic Church I attended taught me that the Bible is not a book that you read from beginning to end but rather a library and used for Reference (Again, I could be wrong and I might have gotten the teaching incorrect.)[/quote:18dqrn1u]
What I can tell you is that the Catholic Church believes that God has revealed Himself through Tradition. Tradition is a bad word among many Protestants who equate it with the Biblical prohibition to the “Traditions of Men” However what we have to do is break down what we are really talking about.
Traditon comes from a latin word (Traditio) which means simply, that which is handed on, or handed down, (from one person to another) Now the Bible, or the Books that compose the Bible where first handed down orally. When we today read about the “Word” of God, (which Protestants limit to only the words written in the Bible) the Greek word most often used is Rhema, or “Spoken Word” In the New Testament when Jesus is spoken of as the Word, the term used is Logos. Scriptura, is used for a word written down. This brings us to the problem with the Protestant approach to reading the scripture unaided and on ones own expecting that God will inspire you to know what the meaning is. If you and I read the Bible in English, as a set of rules, and do not understand what the text says in the original language, ie. where rhema, Logos, and scritura is used. If we (as Ron claimed he did not need to) do not look at the individual books in the context of God’s ongoing revelation of Himself in preparation for His utlimate revelation of Himself in the Incarnation of Jesus.
Now not having been in the class where you where told the above, I can speculate that what the person was trying to tell you is that the Bible is composed of different books, that where inspired by God over a couple of thousand year period of time. Not as some believe something that was just written all at once. So too the Bible is not a novel or something to be read as a simple how too manual. But rather the Bible consists of different themed books that show God’s plan for humanity. Some people read the Bible without any context to what God was addressing, and want to simply apply everything from cover to cover outside of it’s context.
I think the following website may be good for you and save my finger tips from too much typing.
[url:18dqrn1u]http://www.scripturecatholic.com/index.html[/url:18dqrn1u]February 23, 2009 at 5:25 am #9173
Very well put LARobert ” title=”Smile” /> I believe that’s were the person was trying to get at that the Bible is composed of many different books (much like a library.)
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.