# Sola Scriptura is Scriptural



## Osage Bluestem (Sep 28, 2009)

2 Timothy 3:16-17 ESV
16 All Scripture is breathed out by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, 17 that the man of God may be competent, equipped for every good work.

Breathed out by God - Inspired by God authoritative, the words of God, God made this writing happen for a purpose.

Profitable for teaching, for reproof, correction, training in righteousness - This is the purpose of scripture. This is what it is good for. Teaching the truth. Rebuking false doctrines. Correcting errors, and training in righeousness. That is everything a christian would need.

That the man of God may be competent - Who scripture is meant for and for what purpose. Those who are regenerate believers in God the elect; especially teachers.

Equipped for EVERY good work - This is the part where the passage teaches sufficiency of scripture. It is inspired by God so that a child of God can be equipped for EVERY good work that can possibly be done here on earth. If there is any work that can be done that isn't in scripture then this passage isn't true. Therefore, one must believe in the sufficiency of scripture if they believe in biblical inerrancy which the Roman Church claims it does. 

So the word every is all encompasing and certainly teaches sufficiency.

Also, The table of contents of scripture is found in this passage:

Ephesians 2:20 ESV
19 So then you are no longer strangers and aliens, but you are fellow citizens with the saints and members of the household of God, 20 built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Christ Jesus himself being the cornerstone, 

The prophets and apostles spoke from God. Everything they wrote is canonical. We have all of their writings in the 66 book canon of scripture. That is how we got the bible. The prophets and apostles wrote it under inspiration of the Holy Spirit and the Church received it from them as true. Jesus Christ himself the Word of God is the cornerstone of the Church that is built upon the revelation of the prophets and apostles from God himself. That is why the church is apostolic we have their teachings recorded in scripture. The canon was closed when the last apostle (John) died. The bible is the written word of God and includes everything in it we need for faith and practice.


----------



## Osage Bluestem (Sep 28, 2009)

Joshua said:


> DD2009 said:
> 
> 
> > The prophets and apostles spoke from God. Everything they wrote is canonical. We have all of their writings in the 66 book canon of scripture.
> ...



We have in the bible everything they ever wrote. Pauls letters to people are indeed scriptural.


----------



## Skyler (Sep 28, 2009)

DD2009 said:


> Joshua said:
> 
> 
> > DD2009 said:
> ...



How do you know?


----------



## Osage Bluestem (Sep 28, 2009)

Skyler said:


> DD2009 said:
> 
> 
> > Joshua said:
> ...



Because Paul spoke from God.


----------



## Osage Bluestem (Sep 28, 2009)

Joshua said:


> So are you telling me that Paul never wrote a note to remind himself of something, or a message to friends that wasn't Scripture? _Really_?



I believe we have everything Paul wrote to give to the church. If you can find something else by the apostle Paul you can add it to the canon.

-----Added 9/28/2009 at 05:06:16 EST-----



Joshua said:


> That's not the point. We believe, in fact, that the Scriptures are inspired. What I'm saying is that you can't prove that Scripture is *all* the Apostles and Prophets ever wrote. Did Paul not write before he was converted?



Do you have the documents?

We have everything Paul wrote.

-----Added 9/28/2009 at 05:12:13 EST-----

The best way to hear the word of God is from God himself. The second best way to hear it is from the mouth of an apostle or a prophet of God. Since there aren't any left the only way we can hear it today is by reading what they wrote. That's the canon of scripture, they either wrote it, commissioned it, or blessed it as from God and left it for us to read when they were gone.


----------



## KMK (Sep 28, 2009)

DD2009 said:


> Joshua said:
> 
> 
> > So are you telling me that Paul never wrote a note to remind himself of something, or a message to friends that wasn't Scripture? _Really_?
> ...



How did Paul and the others learn to write in the first place?


----------



## carlgobelman (Sep 28, 2009)

DD2009 said:


> Joshua said:
> 
> 
> > So are you telling me that Paul never wrote a note to remind himself of something, or a message to friends that wasn't Scripture? _Really_?
> ...



We know that Paul at least four letters to Corinth because 1 Corinthians mentions a previous letter as does 2 Corinthians (not referring to 1 Corinthians). So to say we have in the Bible everything the apostles ever wrote is clearly wrong. We have everything they wrote in the sense that the Holy Spirit preserved those writings which were inspired. The point others are trying to make is that not everything they wrote was under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit. It is correct to say that the writings, not the authors, were inspired.


----------



## Contra_Mundum (Sep 28, 2009)

David,
All Josh did was offer a suggestion to tighten up the language of what is otherwise a pretty complete and well-put statement. Your statement, left as it is, says more than you want it to say.


----------



## Osage Bluestem (Sep 28, 2009)

Joshua said:


> Nobody here's arguing with the fact that the Scriptures are inspired. However, I think you're taking a bit far with say *anything* that an Apostle or Prophet *ever* wrote is Scripture.



I'm saying that what the apostles verbally said was the word of God. That is how they taught, verbally. What they wrote is the second best option and is how we hear the word of God today since they have all passed away.

Peter clearly is teaching below that he plans to leave apostolic writings that are to be received as scripture for the Church.

2 Peter 1:12-21 ESV
12 Therefore I intend always to remind you of these qualities, though you know them and are established in the truth that you have. 13 I think it right, as long as I am in this body, [8] to stir you up by way of reminder, 14 since I know that the putting off of my body will be soon, as our Lord Jesus Christ made clear to me. 15 And I will make every effort so that after my departure you may be able at any time to recall these things. 16 For we did not follow cleverly devised myths when we made known to you the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, but we were eyewitnesses of his majesty. 17 For when he received honor and glory from God the Father, and the voice was borne to him by the Majestic Glory, “This is my beloved Son, [9] with whom I am well pleased,” 18 we ourselves heard this very voice borne from heaven, for we were with him on the holy mountain. 19 And we have something more sure, the prophetic word, to which you will do well to pay attention as to a lamp shining in a dark place, until the day dawns and the morning star rises in your hearts, 20 knowing this first of all, that no prophecy of Scripture comes from someone's own interpretation. 21 For no prophecy was ever produced by the will of man, but men spoke from God as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit.


----------



## Osage Bluestem (Sep 28, 2009)

Contra_Mundum said:


> David,
> All Josh did was offer a suggestion to tighten up the language of what is otherwise a pretty complete and well-put statement. Your statement, left as it is, says more than you want it to say.



Oh, I thought he was trying to say that we couldn't know for sure that the apostolic writings were from God.... sorry.

-----Added 9/28/2009 at 05:24:56 EST-----



carlgobelman said:


> We know that Paul at least four letters to Corinth because 1 Corinthians mentions a previous letter as does 2 Corinthians (not referring to 1 Corinthians). So to say we have in the Bible everything the apostles ever wrote is clearly wrong. We have everything they wrote in the sense that the Holy Spirit preserved those writings which were inspired. The point others are trying to make is that not everything they wrote was under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit. It is correct to say that the writings, not the authors, were inspired.



If Ephesians 2:20 does not teach that the teachings of the prophets and apostles are to be received as from God then that only leaves the Roman Catholic argument for their "sacred tradition" 

I firmly believe as did Matthew Henry that Ephesians 2:20 teaches what it teaches that the church is built off of the old and new testaments written by the prophets and apostles. We do not decide which of their writings is true, they are our teachers so all of their writings are received as from God.


----------



## KMK (Sep 28, 2009)

DD2009 said:


> Contra_Mundum said:
> 
> 
> > David,
> ...



Just for clarification, do you agree that the apostolic writers wrote other things that are not included in the canon?


----------



## Herald (Sep 28, 2009)

> 1 Corinthians 5:9-11 9 _*I wrote you in my letter*_ not to associate with immoral people; 10 I did not at all mean with the immoral people of this world, or with the covetous and swindlers, or with idolaters; for then you would have to go out of the world. 11 But actually, _*I wrote to you*_ not to associate with any so-called brother if he should be an immoral person, or covetous, or an idolater, or a reviler, or a drunkard, or a swindler-- not even to eat with such a one.



Theologians and textual critics are pretty much agreed that Paul wrote a previous letter to the Corinthians that we do not have as part of the canon of scripture, thus that letter is not scripture.


----------



## Osage Bluestem (Sep 28, 2009)

KMK said:


> Just for clarification, do you agree that the apostolic writers wrote other things that are not included in the canon?







> Theologians and textual critics are pretty much agreed that Paul wrote a previous letter to the Corinthians that we do not have as part of the canon of scripture, thus that letter is not scripture.



Ok, I'll say this. If there is anything that was written that God found it best to be lost to the Church then that is obviously not elected by God to persevere in the canon. However it was at one time in the received text as scriptural canon because it was received by the Church from the apostle as from God.

Any believer who is not an apostle or a prophet must receive the direction of an apostle or a prophet as from God, we can't decide what apostolic teaching is true we are to simply learn from it. So the teaching of Ephesians 2:20 stands that the table of contents for the canon of scripture is absolutly everything the Church ever received from the prophets or the apostles, so everything they wrote.

The Church receives the canon it does not create it.


----------



## Semper Fidelis (Sep 28, 2009)

I think you're missing the point.

Not everything that the Apostle Paul said or wrote was inspired. This is, quite frankly, Theology 101.

Peter makes this point:
[bible]2 Pe 1:21[/bible]

In other words, they might have said or written many other things but inspiration occured "...as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit."


----------



## Herald (Sep 28, 2009)

David,

With all the Christian charity I can muster I need to tell you that you are in over your head with this topic. You said that the church has everything that Paul wrote. 1 Cor. 5:9-11 says otherwise. Not everything written by the biblical authors was God breathed. Not all of it is scripture. Paul certainly had apostolic authority, and his previous letter to the Corinthians was to be obeyed based on that authority, but it is not scripture. Everything that God decreed to be scripture is scripture. None of it was lost. 



> Isaiah 40:8 The grass withers, the flower fades, But the word of our God stands forever.


Your view on scripture is unconfessional. You are treading a thin line. I urge you to acquaint yourself with chapter 1 of your own confession, the WCF.


----------



## carlgobelman (Sep 28, 2009)

DD2009 said:


> Contra_Mundum said:
> 
> 
> > David,
> ...



It's not a question of deciding which writings are true. The point I, and others, are trying to make is that the apostles wrote things that were not inspired as is attested by the fact that Paul wrote to the Corinthian church on more than two occasions.

Peter, Paul, John, etc. were not constantly spouting the infallible words of the Holy Spirit 24-7, were they? They were men, as we, and they erred, as we. However, when under the influence of the Holy Spirit they penned gospels and letters, they wrote infallibly. Therefore, it it their writings that are infallible.

The same goes with their overall ministry. Read through the book of Acts and you will see a constant refrain "...filled with the Holy Spirit." Peter's Pentecost sermon was given while filled with the HS. The point being that Peter, Paul, etc. were no different than you or I. The same HS who filled them for ministry, fills us as well. The NT also records times when the apostles weren't filled with the HS. Consider Paul and Barnabas' parting over the issue of John Mark, or Paul's ill-advised insult to the High Priest, or Peter's favoritism of the Judaizers which received a rebuke from Paul.

This is not to denigrate their foundational part in the history of the church, and certainly apostolic teaching and tradition is important, but that's why we have a NT so that we a record of what the apostles taught. If we hold to the theory that there is some apostolic tradition or teaching that is not recorded in the NT, then we have devoled to a form of Romanism.


----------



## Mushroom (Sep 28, 2009)

> Col 4:16 And when this epistle is read among you, cause that it be read also in the church of the Laodiceans; and that ye likewise *read the epistle from Laodicea*.


David, dear brother, where is this particular epistle? Did God lose it somewhere?


----------



## Osage Bluestem (Sep 29, 2009)

Herald said:


> David,
> 
> With all the Christian charity I can muster I need to tell you that you are in over your head with this topic. You said that the church has everything that Paul wrote. 1 Cor. 5:9-11 says otherwise.



I'm sorry but I do not believe I'm in over my head, and I'm not claiming that the apostles grocery list is canonical, that should be taken as a given understanding this forum and the context of it. 

Everything they wrote that we can read about God and presented to the church is indeed canonical scripture. I know of no exisitng apostolic writing you can pick up today at barns and noble that is not considered canonical. Apostles are those with direct commisions sent from Christ himself.

If the Church receives teaching from an apostle then it is teaching from God himself. That letter was apostolic teaching. Obviously none of us have ever read it, but unless Paul directly specified it was not inspired then it was to be received as such. The only reason it isn't in our canon today is because apparently God chose it not to be or Paul specified that it wasn't inspired.





> Not everything written by the biblical authors was God breathed. Not all of it is scripture. Paul certainly had apostolic authority, and his previous letter to the Corinthians was to be obeyed based on that authority, but it is not scripture.



How could you judge the value of the writings Paul delivered to the church? He is above you as an Apostle of Christ and his teachings must be obeyed. If the apostle hands us written apostolic teachings that is scripture.



> Everything that God decreed to be scripture is scripture. None of it was lost.



as stated above, only God or an apostle speaking for God can make that call. Apparently in this situation God did, but without reading the letter it could have been clearly stated by Paul to burn it upon receipt for all we know.



> Isaiah 40:8 The grass withers, the flower fades, But the word of our God stands forever.
> 
> Your view on scripture is unconfessional. You are treading a thin line. I urge you to acquaint yourself with chapter 1 of your own confession, the WCF.



I saw nothing in the first chapter of the westminster confession that states apostolic writings are not scriptural. Obviously it is too late to receive any further writings from them because they have all passed away, but if they were alive the canon would still be open until they were no longer with us.

-----Added 9/29/2009 at 12:36:19 EST-----



carlgobelman said:


> If we hold to the theory that there is some apostolic tradition or teaching that is not recorded in the NT, then we have devoled to a form of Romanism.



The apostles taught many inspired things that are not recorded in scripture. However what is binding to us is what is written because that is what they left for us. No one has apostolic authority but the apostles. Their teachings cannot be passed authoritatively by word of mouth as the RCC claims. That is why we have scripture to keep the Church apostolic.

The prophets and apostles are the witnesses to God.

-----Added 9/29/2009 at 12:39:44 EST-----



Brad said:


> > Col 4:16 And when this epistle is read among you, cause that it be read also in the church of the Laodiceans; and that ye likewise *read the epistle from Laodicea*.
> 
> 
> David, dear brother, where is this particular epistle? Did God lose it somewhere?



Hi brother,

That is the same argument the Roman Catholics brought up when I posted this on Catholic Answers about a month ago.

There is nothing in that passage that describes the origin of the letter to Laodicea. It could have been written to another church and simply had made it to Laodicea. Or as stated above it could have been specified it was uncanonical or God could have made that call in his own way, however the church itself was bound to receive it as such unless otherwise stated. If it was of apostolic origin which it appears it was but does not specify that either it had to be received as holy.

-----Added 9/29/2009 at 12:43:17 EST-----



Semper Fidelis said:


> I think you're missing the point.
> 
> Not everything that the Apostle Paul said or wrote was inspired. This is, quite frankly, Theology 101.
> 
> ...



THe fact that the apostles presented it to the Church as authoritative apostolic teaching makes it canonical based on the testimony of the apostles.

If Paul gave you a written letter that he wrote that within taught about God, you have just received scripture from an apostle of God...you do not have the power to edit it, debate it, or complain about it, you can only learn from it.

As Ephesians 2:20 says the church is built on the foundation of the prophets and apostles. So in practice sola scriptura is scriptural indeed as shown, but only in the absence of an apostle or a prophet of God.

That's all I'm saying.


----------



## Semper Fidelis (Sep 29, 2009)

David,

Paul said a lot of things on a daily basis. He made tents in the marketplace. Somebody might have asked him how much it would cost to repair a tent. His response to them did not become Scripture. In other words, not everything that Paul or any other Apostle wrote or said after he became an Apostle was God-breathed. As Moses noted, none of God's Word fall to the ground. If what Paul said was meant to be in-Scripturated then it was. But, again, he wasn't always speaking what had been breathed out by God. He wasn't being moved by the Holy Spirit every time somebody asked him how his day was going.

Yes Paul had authority as an Apostle. Yes, the things he wrote the Churches had authority due to his Apostleship but stating that everything Paul ever wrote or said was Scripture is not only heterodox but it is absurd.


----------

