• Please remember: Pray for Ukraine in the Prayer forum; Share news in the Christian News section; Discuss religious implications in FFA: Religious Topics; Discuss political implications in Politics (and if you don't have access, PM me) Thank you! + Fr. George, Forum Administrator

Does Sola Scriptura actually exist?

Fotina02

Sr. Member
Joined
Jun 3, 2003
Messages
180
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Daedelus1138 said:
Fotina02 said:
You must have some strange, false sect confused with the holy saints and martyrs of the Holy Orthodox Church who loved prayer, fasting, and Liturgies.
Punch's comments are part of the Orthodox tradition:  Amma Theodora, who lived in the desert of Egypt, said the same thing- demons love fasting and vigils, they never sleep and don't eat!

The point is not to love prayer, fasting, and vigils but to love God.  Hopefully the prayer, fasting, and vigils leads a person to that, but if it doesn't something is amiss.



 
FYI: The holy saints and martyrs did not suffer for vain rituals.
 

Punch

Taxiarches
Joined
Aug 24, 2006
Messages
5,799
Reaction score
1
Points
0
Age
61
Location
Omaha, Nebraska
Fotina02 said:
Daedelus1138 said:
Fotina02 said:
You must have some strange, false sect confused with the holy saints and martyrs of the Holy Orthodox Church who loved prayer, fasting, and Liturgies.
Punch's comments are part of the Orthodox tradition:  Amma Theodora, who lived in the desert of Egypt, said the same thing- demons love fasting and vigils, they never sleep and don't eat!

The point is not to love prayer, fasting, and vigils but to love God.  Hopefully the prayer, fasting, and vigils leads a person to that, but if it doesn't something is amiss.



 
FYI: The holy saints and martyrs did not suffer for vain rituals.
I quite well know that.  I am not sure that you do.
 

Fotina02

Sr. Member
Joined
Jun 3, 2003
Messages
180
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Punch said:
Fotina02 said:
Daedelus1138 said:
Fotina02 said:
You must have some strange, false sect confused with the holy saints and martyrs of the Holy Orthodox Church who loved prayer, fasting, and Liturgies.
Punch's comments are part of the Orthodox tradition:  Amma Theodora, who lived in the desert of Egypt, said the same thing- demons love fasting and vigils, they never sleep and don't eat!

The point is not to love prayer, fasting, and vigils but to love God.  Hopefully the prayer, fasting, and vigils leads a person to that, but if it doesn't something is amiss.



 
FYI: The holy saints and martyrs did not suffer for vain rituals.
I quite well know that.  I am not sure that you do.
It's ok. Anyway, thank you for the thoughtful reply above, of which I mostly agree.  Christ is Risen!
 

Punch

Taxiarches
Joined
Aug 24, 2006
Messages
5,799
Reaction score
1
Points
0
Age
61
Location
Omaha, Nebraska
Fotina02 said:
Punch said:
Fotina02 said:
Daedelus1138 said:
Fotina02 said:
You must have some strange, false sect confused with the holy saints and martyrs of the Holy Orthodox Church who loved prayer, fasting, and Liturgies.
Punch's comments are part of the Orthodox tradition:  Amma Theodora, who lived in the desert of Egypt, said the same thing- demons love fasting and vigils, they never sleep and don't eat!

The point is not to love prayer, fasting, and vigils but to love God.  Hopefully the prayer, fasting, and vigils leads a person to that, but if it doesn't something is amiss.



 
FYI: The holy saints and martyrs did not suffer for vain rituals.
I quite well know that.  I am not sure that you do.
It's ok. Anyway, thank you for the thoughtful reply above, of which I mostly agree.  Christ is Risen!
Indeed He has.  The Saints and Martyrs did not "love" fasting and rituals.  They also did not suffer for them.  That is the thinking that I reject, and that unfortunately seems to have a large following among those that call themselves Orthodox.  The Saints and Martyrs loved God, and suffered because of that love for God, which caused the World to hate them.  Their love for God manifested itself in many ways, including fasting, long vigils, hours spent praying and the like.  They also invented rituals so that these things could be passed down in good order.  They certainly did not invent them for God because He does not need our works or our useless actions. 

Perhaps some of my thinking is tainted due to my long years as a Protestant.  Indeed, I was a Protestant for twice as long as I have been Orthodox.  In the areas where I lived, there were a large number of Pentecostals and other sorts of Holy Rollers.  If you got around these people, all they could talk about was speaking in tongues.  In fact, for some of them Salvation was not possible unless one spoke in tongues.  Yet, per the Scriptures, it is the least of the Spiritual gifts.  I see the Orthodox fasting fetish to be no different than the Pentecostal fixation on tongues.  It is all they talk about for 40 days before Easter.  The subject comes up at every gathering and on every forum.  For some priest (as my own), Salvation is not even possible unless you fast.  Heck, I can kill 5000 Croatians and sleep with my wife's best friend and be forgiven.  But don't even think about coming to confession unless you have fasted.  Yet our Church needs Bingo money and hall rental to even come close to making our budget, which BTW contains very little for doing the kinds of work that Christ commanded us, but is mostly used to maintain our ostentatious building.  We have elevated fasting to the same level as the Pentecostals have elevated speaking in tongues, and that goes against everything that I have read either in the Scriptures or in the writings of the Fathers.

Now do you understand where I am coming from?  It is not fasting, prayer, vigils and rituals that I dislike.  In fact, they were some of what brought me to Orthodoxy since I tired of the "cheep Grace" and bare bones fundamentalism of Protestantism.  What I dislike is the way I see these things used in many (but by no means all) Orthodox churches.
 

Rufus

OC.Net Guru
Joined
Mar 4, 2010
Messages
1,337
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Age
32
Location
Massachusetts
Punch said:
...For some priest (as my own), Salvation is not even possible unless you fast....
Wow. I once heard a seminarian say in a sermon that fasting (during Lent) was one of the things we need to do to be justified before God.

There is simply no way someone can read the Gospels or even the entire Bible and come away with the impression that fasting is necessary for salvation.

Where on earth do people get these weird ideas from?
 

Punch

Taxiarches
Joined
Aug 24, 2006
Messages
5,799
Reaction score
1
Points
0
Age
61
Location
Omaha, Nebraska
Rufus said:
Punch said:
...For some priest (as my own), Salvation is not even possible unless you fast....
Wow. I once heard a seminarian say in a sermon that fasting (during Lent) was one of the things we need to do to be justified before God.

There is simply no way someone can read the Gospels or even the entire Bible and come away with the impression that fasting is necessary for salvation.

Where on earth do people get these weird ideas from?
How?  Very simple.  First start with universal illiteracy.  Then create a special class of people with "special graces" and make sure that they are the only ones that can read.  Then tell the people that if they don't do everything that these people say, they will go to Hell.  Kill anyone that disagrees.  Then repeat for 1500 years and, walla, you have it.  By the time the people can read for themselves, everything has already been "interpreted" for them.  A lie repeated often enough becomes the truth.  No, this is not Orthodoxy, it is HUMAN NATURE.  That is why it needs to be guarded against, and that is why study of the Scriptures by Laymen, under the guidance of Priests, is so important.  I have found that in the Orthodox parishes where the Priests encourage reading of the Scriptures and of the Fathers, and welcome discussion and questions, fetishism is minimal if found at all.  In those parishes where questions are answered with "who are you to argue with a Priest" and "don't read that book, it is dangerous for laymen", the parish tends to be filled with the intellectually lazy who simply do what they have always done, and anyone with half a brain has gone elsewhere. 
 

Apples

Protokentarchos
Joined
Jul 6, 2010
Messages
4,360
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Cyrillic said:
Cyrillic said:
Come on, I gave you two quotes and I could give you a dozen more if you want them.
To prove my bold assertion:

St. Cyprian of Carthage said:
1. "Marcianus, who abides at Aries, has associated himself with Novatian, and has departed from the unity of the Catholic Church (St. Cyprian, Epistle 66)"

2. "When we were together in council, dearest brethren, we read your letter which you wrote to us concerning those who seem to be baptized by heretics and schismatics, (asking) whether, when they come to the catholic Church, which is one, they ought to be baptized. (St. Cyprian, Epistle 69)"

3. "Remission of sins is not granted except in the Church, and that among heretics, where there is no Church sins cannot be put away. (Idem)"

4. "Those who have been dipped abroad outside the Church, and have been stained among heretics and schismatics with the taint of profane water, when they come to us and to the Church which is one ought to be baptized. (St. Cyprian, Epistle 71)"

5."For it has been delivered to us, that there is one God, and one Christ, and one hope, and one faith, and one Church, and one baptism ordained only in the one Church, from which unity whosoever will depart must needs be found with heretics. (St. Cyprian, Epistle 73.11)"

6. "Therefore, dearest brother, having explored and seen the truth; it is observed and held by us, that all who are converted from any heresy whatever to the Church must be baptized by the only and lawful baptism of the Church (St. Cyprian, Epistle 73.12)"

7. For which reason Novatian neither ought to be nor can be expected, inasmuch as he also is without the Church and acting in opposition to the peace and love of Christ, from being counted among adversaries and antichrists. (St. Cyprian, Epistle 75.1)

8. In addition, moreover, the Lord establishes it in His Gospel, and says, "But if he neglect to hear the Church, let him be unto you as a heathen man and a publican." Now if they who despise the Church are counted heathens and publicans, much more certainly is it necessary that rebels and enemies, who forge false altars, and lawless priesthoods, and sacrilegious sacrifices, and corrupter names, should be counted among heathens and publicans; since they who sin less, and are only despisers of the Church, are by the Lord's sentence judged to be heathens and publicans. (St. Cyprian, Epistle 75.1)

9. Wherefore, since the Church alone has the living water, and the power of baptizing and cleansing man, he who says that any one can be baptized and sanctified by Novatian must first show and teach that Novatian is in the Church or presides over the Church. For the Church is one, and as she is one, cannot be both within and without. For if she is with Novatian, she was not with Cornelius. But if she was with Cornelius, who succeeded the bishop Fabian by lawful ordination, and whom, beside the honour of the priesthood, the Lord glorified also with martyrdom, Novatian is not in the Church; nor can he be reckoned as a bishop, who, succeeding to no one, and despising the evangelical and apostolic tradition, sprang from himself. (St. Cyprian, Epistle 75.3)

10. They strive to set before and prefer the sordid and profane washing of heretics to the true and only and legitimate baptism of the Catholic Church, not considering that it is written, "He who is baptized by one dead, what avails his washing? "  Now it is manifest that they who are not in the Church of Christ are reckoned among the dead. (St. Cyprian, Epistle 70.1)

11. And they say that in this matter they follow ancient custom; although among the ancients these were as yet the first beginnings of heresy and schisms, so that those were involved in them who departed from the Church, having first been baptized therein (St. Cyprian, Epistle 70.2)

12. For when they [the Novatians] say, "Do you believe the remission of sins and life eternal through the holy Church? "they lie in their interrogatory, since they have not the Church. (St. Cyprian, Epistle 75.7)
+12
 

Apples

Protokentarchos
Joined
Jul 6, 2010
Messages
4,360
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Daedelus1138 said:
 There is a legend that when St. Patrick was travelling around Ireland he was shown a pagan moon symbol chalked onto a rock.  He drew a cross through it and that's how the Celtic cross came to be.  Rather than choosing an adversarial stance against the pagan culture he worked with what he had.  Maybe there is a lesson there.
 

Rufus

OC.Net Guru
Joined
Mar 4, 2010
Messages
1,337
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Age
32
Location
Massachusetts
Punch said:
Rufus said:
Punch said:
...For some priest (as my own), Salvation is not even possible unless you fast....
Wow. I once heard a seminarian say in a sermon that fasting (during Lent) was one of the things we need to do to be justified before God.

There is simply no way someone can read the Gospels or even the entire Bible and come away with the impression that fasting is necessary for salvation.

Where on earth do people get these weird ideas from?
How?  Very simple.  First start with universal illiteracy.  Then create a special class of people with "special graces" and make sure that they are the only ones that can read.  Then tell the people that if they don't do everything that these people say, they will go to Hell.  Kill anyone that disagrees.  Then repeat for 1500 years and, walla, you have it.  By the time the people can read for themselves, everything has already been "interpreted" for them.  A lie repeated often enough becomes the truth.  No, this is not Orthodoxy, it is HUMAN NATURE.  That is why it needs to be guarded against, and that is why study of the Scriptures by Laymen, under the guidance of Priests, is so important.  I have found that in the Orthodox parishes where the Priests encourage reading of the Scriptures and of the Fathers, and welcome discussion and questions, fetishism is minimal if found at all.  In those parishes where questions are answered with "who are you to argue with a Priest" and "don't read that book, it is dangerous for laymen", the parish tends to be filled with the intellectually lazy who simply do what they have always done, and anyone with half a brain has gone elsewhere. 
This is part of it, but I'm sure your tongue-talking Pentecostals read their Bibles plenty. I don't agree that this is just a Biblical illiteracy problem.
 

Punch

Taxiarches
Joined
Aug 24, 2006
Messages
5,799
Reaction score
1
Points
0
Age
61
Location
Omaha, Nebraska
Rufus said:
Punch said:
Rufus said:
Punch said:
...For some priest (as my own), Salvation is not even possible unless you fast....
Wow. I once heard a seminarian say in a sermon that fasting (during Lent) was one of the things we need to do to be justified before God.

There is simply no way someone can read the Gospels or even the entire Bible and come away with the impression that fasting is necessary for salvation.

Where on earth do people get these weird ideas from?
How?  Very simple.  First start with universal illiteracy.  Then create a special class of people with "special graces" and make sure that they are the only ones that can read.  Then tell the people that if they don't do everything that these people say, they will go to Hell.  Kill anyone that disagrees.  Then repeat for 1500 years and, walla, you have it.  By the time the people can read for themselves, everything has already been "interpreted" for them.  A lie repeated often enough becomes the truth.  No, this is not Orthodoxy, it is HUMAN NATURE.  That is why it needs to be guarded against, and that is why study of the Scriptures by Laymen, under the guidance of Priests, is so important.  I have found that in the Orthodox parishes where the Priests encourage reading of the Scriptures and of the Fathers, and welcome discussion and questions, fetishism is minimal if found at all.  In those parishes where questions are answered with "who are you to argue with a Priest" and "don't read that book, it is dangerous for laymen", the parish tends to be filled with the intellectually lazy who simply do what they have always done, and anyone with half a brain has gone elsewhere. 
This is part of it, but I'm sure your tongue-talking Pentecostals read their Bibles plenty. I don't agree that this is just a Biblical illiteracy problem.
Oh, believe me, they wore them out.  What I could never understand, however, was how such a group of people that were, for the most part, functionally illiterate could understand the KJV so well.  Then again, maybe that was their problem - they couldn't.
 

Daedelus1138

High Elder
Joined
May 9, 2010
Messages
991
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Location
Orlando
Faith
Lutheran
Jurisdiction
ELCA
Punch said:
Oh, believe me, they wore them out.  What I could never understand, however, was how such a group of people that were, for the most part, functionally illiterate could understand the KJV so well.  Then again, maybe that was their problem - they couldn't.
  It may not be well known but it was actually illegal in many parts of Protestant Europe to hold "Bible studies" or "prayer groups" without a licensed preacher or minister present.  Individuals like John Bunyan, the writer of Pilgrim's Progress, were persecuted under such laws.  While the early Protestant Reformers believed people should be able to read the Bible, they weren't individualists, and governments feared the social unrest that small religious groups might cause:  one of the earliest Anglican homilies disseminated by the establishment to be preached was against quarreling.


 

Fotina02

Sr. Member
Joined
Jun 3, 2003
Messages
180
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Punch said:
Fotina02 said:
Punch said:
Fotina02 said:
Daedelus1138 said:
Fotina02 said:
You must have some strange, false sect confused with the holy saints and martyrs of the Holy Orthodox Church who loved prayer, fasting, and Liturgies.
Punch's comments are part of the Orthodox tradition:  Amma Theodora, who lived in the desert of Egypt, said the same thing- demons love fasting and vigils, they never sleep and don't eat!

The point is not to love prayer, fasting, and vigils but to love God.  Hopefully the prayer, fasting, and vigils leads a person to that, but if it doesn't something is amiss.



 
FYI: The holy saints and martyrs did not suffer for vain rituals.
I quite well know that.  I am not sure that you do.
It's ok. Anyway, thank you for the thoughtful reply above, of which I mostly agree.  Christ is Risen!
Indeed He has.  The Saints and Martyrs did not "love" fasting and rituals.  They also did not suffer for them.  That is the thinking that I reject, and that unfortunately seems to have a large following among those that call themselves Orthodox.  The Saints and Martyrs loved God, and suffered because of that love for God, which caused the World to hate them.  Their love for God manifested itself in many ways, including fasting, long vigils, hours spent praying and the like.  They also invented rituals so that these things could be passed down in good order.  They certainly did not invent them for God because He does not need our works or our useless actions. 

Perhaps some of my thinking is tainted due to my long years as a Protestant.  Indeed, I was a Protestant for twice as long as I have been Orthodox.  In the areas where I lived, there were a large number of Pentecostals and other sorts of Holy Rollers.  If you got around these people, all they could talk about was speaking in tongues.  In fact, for some of them Salvation was not possible unless one spoke in tongues.  Yet, per the Scriptures, it is the least of the Spiritual gifts.  I see the Orthodox fasting fetish to be no different than the Pentecostal fixation on tongues.  It is all they talk about for 40 days before Easter.  The subject comes up at every gathering and on every forum.  For some priest (as my own), Salvation is not even possible unless you fast.  Heck, I can kill 5000 Croatians and sleep with my wife's best friend and be forgiven.  But don't even think about coming to confession unless you have fasted.  Yet our Church needs Bingo money and hall rental to even come close to making our budget, which BTW contains very little for doing the kinds of work that Christ commanded us, but is mostly used to maintain our ostentatious building.  We have elevated fasting to the same level as the Pentecostals have elevated speaking in tongues, and that goes against everything that I have read either in the Scriptures or in the writings of the Fathers.

Now do you understand where I am coming from?  It is not fasting, prayer, vigils and rituals that I dislike.  In fact, they were some of what brought me to Orthodoxy since I tired of the "cheep Grace" and bare bones fundamentalism of Protestantism.  What I dislike is the way I see these things used in many (but by no means all) Orthodox churches.
Yes, I understand. Misuse is not uncommon and can be discouraging and worrisome. But we always have the marvelous examples of the Saints and their prayers.
 

Punch

Taxiarches
Joined
Aug 24, 2006
Messages
5,799
Reaction score
1
Points
0
Age
61
Location
Omaha, Nebraska
Fotina02 said:
Punch said:
Fotina02 said:
Punch said:
Fotina02 said:
Daedelus1138 said:
Fotina02 said:
You must have some strange, false sect confused with the holy saints and martyrs of the Holy Orthodox Church who loved prayer, fasting, and Liturgies.
Punch's comments are part of the Orthodox tradition:  Amma Theodora, who lived in the desert of Egypt, said the same thing- demons love fasting and vigils, they never sleep and don't eat!

The point is not to love prayer, fasting, and vigils but to love God.  Hopefully the prayer, fasting, and vigils leads a person to that, but if it doesn't something is amiss.



 
FYI: The holy saints and martyrs did not suffer for vain rituals.
I quite well know that.  I am not sure that you do.
It's ok. Anyway, thank you for the thoughtful reply above, of which I mostly agree.  Christ is Risen!
Indeed He has.  The Saints and Martyrs did not "love" fasting and rituals.  They also did not suffer for them.  That is the thinking that I reject, and that unfortunately seems to have a large following among those that call themselves Orthodox.  The Saints and Martyrs loved God, and suffered because of that love for God, which caused the World to hate them.  Their love for God manifested itself in many ways, including fasting, long vigils, hours spent praying and the like.  They also invented rituals so that these things could be passed down in good order.  They certainly did not invent them for God because He does not need our works or our useless actions. 

Perhaps some of my thinking is tainted due to my long years as a Protestant.  Indeed, I was a Protestant for twice as long as I have been Orthodox.  In the areas where I lived, there were a large number of Pentecostals and other sorts of Holy Rollers.  If you got around these people, all they could talk about was speaking in tongues.  In fact, for some of them Salvation was not possible unless one spoke in tongues.  Yet, per the Scriptures, it is the least of the Spiritual gifts.  I see the Orthodox fasting fetish to be no different than the Pentecostal fixation on tongues.  It is all they talk about for 40 days before Easter.  The subject comes up at every gathering and on every forum.  For some priest (as my own), Salvation is not even possible unless you fast.  Heck, I can kill 5000 Croatians and sleep with my wife's best friend and be forgiven.  But don't even think about coming to confession unless you have fasted.  Yet our Church needs Bingo money and hall rental to even come close to making our budget, which BTW contains very little for doing the kinds of work that Christ commanded us, but is mostly used to maintain our ostentatious building.  We have elevated fasting to the same level as the Pentecostals have elevated speaking in tongues, and that goes against everything that I have read either in the Scriptures or in the writings of the Fathers.

Now do you understand where I am coming from?  It is not fasting, prayer, vigils and rituals that I dislike.  In fact, they were some of what brought me to Orthodoxy since I tired of the "cheep Grace" and bare bones fundamentalism of Protestantism.  What I dislike is the way I see these things used in many (but by no means all) Orthodox churches.
Yes, I understand. Misuse is not uncommon and can be discouraging and worrisome. But we always have the marvelous examples of the Saints and their prayers.
In that we agree.
 

rakovsky

Toumarches
Joined
Aug 17, 2006
Messages
12,691
Reaction score
246
Points
63
Location
USA
Website
rakovskii.livejournal.com
Faith
Christian
Jurisdiction
Orthodox Church in America
The most official statement by Lither on the meaning of Sola Scriptura seems to be in the Smalcald Articles:
"For it will not do to frame articles of faith from the works or words of the holy Fathers; otherwise their kind of fare, of garments, of house, etc., would have to become an article of faith, as was done with relics. [We have, however, another rule, namely] The rule is: The Word of God shall establish articles of faith, and no one else, not even an angel." (Martin Luther, 1537, Smalcald ArticlesII, 15.)
A common objection to Luther's concept is that one needs other sources like dictionaries and Commentaries because the Bible's meaning is not clear. Luther didn't see the language translation issues as important, because he was talking about the Bible texts in Hebrew and Greek. That is, once you understand those languages, then you use the original text to make/find its teachings.

As for commentaries, his idea was that you should use commentaries, but only to get into the Bible's meaning. Then once you get the Bible's meaning, you don't need commentaries any more. One problem with this explanation is that commentaries bias your reading of the text, and it's not just as simple as using a door to get into a building. Another is that if you are using commentaries to supposedly get into the meaning of the text, then you de facto are using the commentary to establish what is the text's meaning.

Luther also put down the importance of commentaries by saying that clear scripture proves scripture. Ie. Find a related verse with a clear meaning and use it to establish the meaning of the verse in question. This can often help clear up a passage, but the solution can be still in fact elusive, otherwise Protestants wouldn't have so many disagreements with each other, like on whether "This is My body" was meant literally. (Luther said Yes, Calvin said No.)

A second objection is that if two sources, the Bible and another eg. a council, are used to make a teaching, then both are in fact establishing the teaching.

However, Luther's idea seems to be that the Bible is the highest authority and it's used to verify all other statements and writings, so it's really the only actual judge of writings. For example, if Augustine makes a declaration on something, then Augustine would (according to this theory) back his declaration up with Scripture. Thus Luther concluded, the Bible alone is the master of all writings.

This rationale still has problems. One is that apologists and seekers use sources outside the Bible like apostolic fathers and archaeology books to verify that the Bible is correct, so it's not just a one way street 9f the Bible verifying other writings.

A second problem is that even if the Bible is used to verify that a writing is Biblically correct, it doesn't follow that the verified extra biblical writing doesn't participate in establish teachings. If Augustine's writing and teaching on a topic is "Biblically correct" while remaining subordinate in authority to the Bible, it doesn't mean that the Bible alone establishes the teaching, and not Augustine. In other words, it's not a zero sum game like Luther presents it.

A third common objection to Sola Scriptura is that the Scripture does not talk directly or even perhaps hardly if at all on some topics. An easy example is Infant Baptism. Per Luther's method, it seems that one must construct a meaning. The Bible says that whole families were baptized, but doesn't specify if that included infants. Calvin noted that infants were circumcised in the OT and used this to conclude that infants should be baptized.

Events that occurred after the book of Acts would seem generally to be outside the Bible, unless it had a special proohecy. A common Protestant idea is that all 12 apostles but John and Judas were martyred, for example, but how could this idea be established in the Bible with solidity, outside general claims that the apostles would get persecuted? Perhaps Luther's logic implies that this therefore cannot be established as a "teaching."

Further, the Bible doesn't teach Sola Scriptura, that only the Bible can establish teachings. The Bible says lots of related statements, like Paul saying that "the Scripture cannot be broken", referring to a particular OT prophecy (perhaps meaning that the particular verse cannot be violated). But the Bible doesn't specifically teach that only the Bible can establish teachings, or that the Bible is the only authority. I have seen Protestants get into debates on this topic and they pull out lots of verses that do lot specifically teach Sola Scriptura, but that only declare the importance of the Bible. Even if the Bible said that it was infallible, it would not entail that there could be no other authority to establish teachings, nor would it mean even that there was no other authority, including fallible ones.

One reason why the Bible likely would not teach that it was the only Establisher of teachings is that the Bible was still being compiled and decided on after the texts themselves were written.

The idea that the Bible is the only establisher of teachings is just Luther's construct from his premises that the Bible is the highest authority and that the Bible is the only infallible authority (EOs typically consider ecumenical councils infallible).
 

Sethrak

Protokentarchos
Joined
May 15, 2017
Messages
5,028
Reaction score
282
Points
83
Location
California & Nevada ranches
Faith
Armenian Orthodox
Jurisdiction
Etchmiadzin, Armenia
Among Pokagan (Protestants) I know and have met there is often the question: Is it Biblical?)
They don't seem to understand or realize: We wrote the Bible, That the New Testament is the History of the Church (Churches) now called Orthodox,,,

What we, Orthodox, mostly , don't understand: Protestants are a product of the Latin Church ( Catholic )

Protests try to reach past, over the Catholic church to Christianity to us the Orthodox,,,

Some feel they've found it in Orthodoxy,,,


Still many see in the Orthodox, the spitting of hairs,,,

Orthodox saying to Orthodox: We are the head of Christs Church!!! When we you and I decided what God is: How Big, how small, how many,
Anyway our Bishop is the of the Church, unlike when the Latin church did this, we are holy and not usurping the power of Christ,,,


Pari Louys,,, Goodmorning 🌹🎶
 

RichardW

Newbie
Joined
Mar 28, 2021
Messages
6
Reaction score
4
Points
3
Location
UK
Faith
Orthodox
Jurisdiction
Not sure
"You search the Scriptures, for in them you think you have eternal life; and these are they which testify of Me. "But you are not willing to come to Me that you may have life. (John 5:39-40 NKJV)

That 'life' is not some emotional spiritual feeling, but the vision of the uncreated divine Glory and Light, like which shone from Christ during the Transfiguration. Claim to base everything on the Bible alone as much as you want - or on the Bible with traditions, or on Tradition with a capital 'T' - yet without the divine Vision of Light we are all infants in Christ. Just my viewpoint.
 

Sethrak

Protokentarchos
Joined
May 15, 2017
Messages
5,028
Reaction score
282
Points
83
Location
California & Nevada ranches
Faith
Armenian Orthodox
Jurisdiction
Etchmiadzin, Armenia
Sola Scriptural , as I understand,is saying it must be in the Bible,,, held by those who don't understand we wrote the Bible, it is the History of the Church,,
 

Brother Michael

Sr. Member
Joined
Aug 15, 2021
Messages
189
Reaction score
85
Points
28
Location
Encinitas, CA
Faith
Greek Orthodox
Jurisdiction
Metropolis of San Francisco
My thought is that this is part of the larger picture of Socrates/Plato versus Homer in Greek history. The idea versus the image is at issue. In the one hand Orthodox view the image as at one with the actual, whereas Protestants take Socrates and Plato to the extreme, concluding the image has negative value, being an idol, no value whatsoever, or at best only communicating a message. And is thus a detractor from the idea, of Jesus, of communion, etc.
 

rakovsky

Toumarches
Joined
Aug 17, 2006
Messages
12,691
Reaction score
246
Points
63
Location
USA
Website
rakovskii.livejournal.com
Faith
Christian
Jurisdiction
Orthodox Church in America
Luther's theory was that you should use dictionaries and certain commentaries like Augustine's to "get into" the meaning of the Bible, and that it is the "pure" "meaning" of the "Bible Alone" that supposedly judges all teachings. The Bible supposedly contains various principles and he talks as if these principles indirectly establish the Bible's positions on various topics. So Luther's way of talking, the Bible establishes the teaching of infant baptism, and the way that you as a theologian should do this is by reading commentaries, getting the Bible's relevant principles, and then see what these principles teach on a given topic.

This is the reasoning behind Luther's assertion in the Smalcald Articles when he says:
"For it will not do to frame articles of faith from the works or words of the holy Fathers; otherwise their kind of fare, of garments, of house, etc., would have to become an article of faith, as was done with relics. [We have, however, another rule, namely] The rule is: The Word of God shall establish articles of faith, and no one else, not even an angel." (Martin Luther, 1537, Smalcald Articles II, 15.)
To give an example: Certainly Luther would agree that the Angel Gabriel announced Christ's miraculous birth to Mary, but Luther's explanation of his approach to teachings would claim that the Bible is really the only "true" establisher of this doctrine, because the Bible verifies the Angel's announcement to be correct.

The key practical consequential problem for Luther's theory, even if we were to accept Luther's premises and approach, seems be that occasionally there are teachings that cannot be covered by the Bible and its principles alone, such as specific extraBiblical events. In his Augsburg Confession, Articles XV and XXI Luther approved of making non-compulsory holidays and commemorations of saints. There are several Lutheran churches named St. Augustine in the US, and Lutherans sometimes called their church a Church "Augustana". However, Augustine's life and writings are not themselves in the Bible's narrative and principles.
 
Top