Exchange with a Baptist on Sola Scriptura, Part 2

Jesus built the Church and entrust its authority to St. Peter

H. C. September 30 at 7:46am

WHO IS THE HUMAN PERSON WHO INVENTED THE PROTESTANT DOGMA OF SOLA SCRIPTURA?

Luther did not "invent" it, FATHER, he studied Scripture and saw that only the Bible is infallible, thus sola scriptura which means "for Luther, the sola of Sola Scriptura was inseparably related to the Scriptures’ unique inerrancy. It was because popes could and did err and because councils could and did err that Luther came to realize the supremacy of Scripture. Luther did not despise church authority nor did he repudiate church councils as having no value. His praise of the Council of Nicea is noteworthy. Luther and the Reformers did not mean by Sola Scriptura that the Bible is the only authority in the church. Rather, they meant that the Bible is the only infallible authority in the church. Paul Althaus summarizes the train of Luther’s thought by saying:

We may trust unconditionally only in the Word of God and not in the teaching of the fathers; for the teachers of the Church can err."

You are taking it all out of context, Father. Luther's sola scriptura is very clear, would you say that the "authorities in the church" are infallible? You, as a priest, would you claim infallibility? Only the Word of God is inerrant therefore, whatever you or the Pope or the Council says must be according to Scriptures. I will not even begin to question the many, many other unbiblical practices of the Catholic church, I will just leave that all to you and pray that the Lord would be merciful and gracious even more to those who are disobedient and unbelieving.

When W. corrected Ms. N.'s statement regarding the angels, he was presenting to her the Scriptures. He showed all of you verses from the Bible that would back up his claim that we can not pray to angels because only Jesus Christ is the mediator, but what did you and your friends do? You all ganged up on him and when he left the thread you all gloated, is that "Christ-like", Father? You throw insults around just as easily as any other individual on the streets would do and I am aghast. I grew up in the Catholic Church, my uncle has been serving as a priest for decades (even before you were born, I assume), my whole family are devout, I dined with priests and laymen many times over, I have discussed theology with parish priests and asked them good, honest theological questions which led to light debates, BUT NEVER, never have I experienced the same treatment you accorded my husband ever before. What was it that you said again, "is unworthy of a Christian"? Yeah, I may also say the same to you, Father, may I not?

I'm sorry that I had to write you privately, I do not belong to Ms. N.'s circle of friends on FaceBook so there is no way I could join in your "fun adventure" on that thread. I would have loved to ask more questions, exchange ideas and be friends Father, but then, your above letter only shows that my efforts to reach out are in vain.

In Christ,

Mrs. C.

_____________________________________

Mrs. C.,

LET ME RESPOND TO YOUR LETTER PIECE BY PIECE BECAUSE I’VE NOTICED THAT YOU ANSWERED ONLY THE LAST PORTION OF MY LETTER AND THE REST YOU COMPLETELY IGNORED.

[Luther did not "invent" it, FATHER, he studied Scripture and saw that only the Bible is infallible, thus sola scriptura which means "for Luther, the sola of Sola Scriptura was inseparably related to the Scriptures’ unique inerrancy.]

Who says that Luther did not ‘INVENT’ Sola Scriptura? You, Mrs. C.? If that doctrine is not taught explicitly, categorically and clearly in the Bible by Sola Scriptura standard that doctrine is humanly invented. And you already gave the INVENTOR: MARTIN LUTHER who is like you a former Catholic. By Church standard he is a heretic.

So, you cannot give a direct teaching of Jesus and the Apostles to support Sola Scriptura and then you are relying on the teaching of Luther. Imagine, for 1500 years no Christian upheld Sola Scriptura suddenly there is this person who presented a Dogma which is not given by the Bible itself and yet you believe him. Amazing. A Bible Alone teaching that is not in the Bible. Very nice. That is an example of what the Bible say: “Be careful of another gospel not coming from us.” It fits there exactly.

[It was because popes could and did err and because councils could and did err that Luther came to realize the supremacy of Scripture.]

Good Lord... what kind of reasoning is that. How about Luther? Did Luther commit errors? How sure are you that his INVENTED DOGMA SOLA SCRIPTURA is not in error when you cannot give a Biblical citation for it? If you are using the capacity to err of the Church leaders why did you transfer your belief to someone who is also capable of the same error. How about you and W. are you free of errors? Why do I have to leave the Church founded by Jesus to join a newly established fellowship like the one you have?

WHY DID THE REFORMED BAPTIST REFORMED? BECAUSE THERE WERE ERRORS IN THE PREVIOUS. IS THE REFORMED BAPTIST FREE FROM ERROR? NO. PROOF: SOLA SCRIPTURA IS UNBIBLICAL!

The Lord Jesus didn’t say: “Because you can commit mistakes I WILL NOT BUILD THE CHURCH. And the gates of hell shall prevail over it.” O no, that is not the Biblical teaching. St. Paul knows that St. Peter and he, himself, can commit mistakes and had lots of errors but he still declared: THE CHURCH AS THE PILLAR AND GROUND OF TRUTH.

St. Paul didn’t say: “Because we can err therefore we follow Bible Alone... We must practice Sola Scriptura.” Excuse me Madam, such kind of reasoning and conclusion is UNBIBLICAL AND NON APOSTOLIC AND UN CHRISTOLOGICAL.

[ Luther did not despise church authority nor did he repudiate church councils as having no value.]

He did! Virtually and practically he rejected the Church Authority. By teaching Sola Scriptura he declared himself his own Pope and Bishop. He INVENTED A NEW DOGMA so he is equal to an Apostle or even Christ Himself. That is unacceptable. The authority of a Church Council is no longer necessary because it is Me and the Bible Alone.

In Sola Scriptura, the Authority is not the Bible BUT THE PERSON WHO READS IT. It is becoming ME and the Bible Alone. Every person who reads the Bible becomes an Independent Authority, a Pope of himself. That is the reason why Protestants are multiplying into various sects and fellowships with so many Pastors founding their own churches and religions. Each is becoming a ‘Christ’ of his own congregation.

Every one of them claims Sola Scriptura yet their Bibles failed to unite them in One Church and in One Faith.

What is striking is the claim that: .“Religion is not necessary for Salvation.” Even though we agree on the statement, with the Protestants it appears self-deceiving because they have religion and they keep on inventing one. After establishing one they record it at the Security and Exchage Commission as a Corporation and then they will preach: “Religion is not necessary for Salvation... so leave your Catholic Church and transfer to the one I founded.” Very clever, isn’t?

[His praise of the Council of Nicea is noteworthy.]

The Council of Nicaea is the gathering of Catholic Bishops in order to teach the truth of faith against heresy – the heresy of Arius. The Catholic Church is calling for a Church Council, which is the gathering of Bishops from all over the world, in order to decide on matters of faith and morals and to protect the faith from heresies. Just like what the Apostles did in Jerusalem as narrated in Acts 15.

Did you ever ask yourself why your churches failed to call a Church council? You haven’t called one and you never had one. Only the Catholic Church practices a Universal Council of Bishops that can teach with definite authority on matters of faith and morals.

[Luther and the Reformers did not mean by Sola Scriptura that the Bible is the only authority in the church. Rather, they meant that the Bible is the only infallible authority in the church.]

WHERE IS THAT IN THE BIBLE? IT IS NOT IN THE BIBLE? That is the point.

When St. Paul was not believed by the Judaizers he went to the Apostles and Elders in Jerusalem and they gathered in a Council. They didn’t employ Sola Scriptura to settle the election for the replacement of Judas Iscariot, the election of Deacons, the Baptism of Pagans, the declaration of Non-Necessity of Circumcision for Gentile Christians, etc.

Sola Scriptura is NOT given in Scripture. Why do you have to impose Sola Scriptura on yourselves, your faithful and on us when the Bible, the Lord Jesus, the Apostles and the early Christians didn’t believe and practice it? YOU ARE IMPOSING LUTHER’S HERESY ON US. And that is foul. You want us to accept an invented heresy.

[Paul Althaus summarizes the train of Luther’s thought by saying:We may trust unconditionally only in the Word of God and not in the teaching of the fathers; for the teachers of the Church can err."]

If you are upholding Sola Scriptura YOU MUST QUOTE THE BIBLE AND THE BIBLE ALONE. Not Luther! And definitely NOT PAUL ALTHAUS. Where is Sola Scriptura in the Bible? Where, where, where???

[You are taking it all out of context, Father.]

I have taken your position in full context: SOLA SCRIPTURA = BIBLE ALONE IS THE INFALLIBLE AUTHORITY IN THE CHURCH.

That is the context and that is what you mean. Is that right or wrong? Did I get it right or wrong? If it is right, Where is Sola Scriptura in the Bible?

[Luther's sola scriptura is very clear, would you say that the "authorities in the church" are infallible?]

Where can you find in the Bible that “Authorities in the Church” are NOT Infallible? Where?

Matthew 18:18 (New International Version) 18"I tell you the truth, whatever you bind on earth will be[a]bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven."

The authority has been given to the Church ALSO and NOT TO THE BIBLE ALONE. The personal pronoun ‘You’ there refers to human persons and not to King James Version or to New International Version or the English Standard Version of the Bible that your husband quoted in the Facebook.

Your mistake is rooted in the fact that you erroneously interpret Infalliblity with incapacity to commit mistakes. Paul committed mistakes but God gave him the authority to preach correctly and even to write his New Testament Epistles with grace of Infallibility. And so did for Peter, James, John, Luke, Mark, Matthew, Jude and all Biblical authors.

[You, as a priest, would you claim infallibility? ]

I am not referring to myself but to the CHURCH AUTHORITY. And, it is not me who says it but the Bible: THE CHURCH IS THE PILLAR AND GROUND OF TRUTH. That is not my statement. This is the testimony of THE INFALLIBLE WORD OF GOD. Your Sola Scriptura, on the other hand, is based only on the Invention of Luther as interpreted by Paul Athaus and preached by you and your husband.

I believe St. Paul of Tarsus rather than Luther and Paul Althaus combined.

[Only the Word of God is inerrant therefore, whatever you or the Pope or the Council says must be according to Scriptures.]

Where is that in the Bible? Where is it stated in the Bible that ONLY THE BIBLE IS INERRANT? Where? Where? Where? You are multiplying your claims without Biblical support.

[ I will not even begin to question the many, many other unbiblical practices of the Catholic church, I will just leave that all to you and pray that the Lord would be merciful and gracious even more to those who are disobedient and unbelieving.]

We are ready to questions your Unbiblical practices and pray to the Benevolent Lord to have mercy on your souls for falling into the heresy of Luther and his kind.

Speaking of disobedient, it is obvious in this discussion who among us is following the Bible and who is following a HUMAN TRADITION. You are at the side of a humanly invented doctrine. If you have Biblical support for your claim you should have thrown it on us right from the start. You have nothing to bank on and then you will turn the table on us. What kind of Christianity is that? A Bible Alone that doesn’t have a Bible support.

[When W. corrected Ms. N.'s statement regarding the angels, he was presenting to her the Scriptures. ]

Really? I asked W. to give me a Bible passage prohibiting communications with Angels and he didn’t give one. Instead these are what the Bible gave us about Angels-Humans encounters:

Zechariah talked to Angel Gabriel and so did Mary of Nazareth.

The parents of Samson did, Abraham did, Jacob even wrestled with an angel.

The Angels communicated with the Shepherds in announcing the Birth of Jesus and they communicated again to the women during the Resurrection of Jesus.

Then another commenter sent this:

If you don't talk to angels, then you forgot this verse from your dearly loved Bible:"Do not neglect to show hospitality to strangers, for by this some have entertained angels without knowing it."(Hebrew 13:2) Beware of accepting strangers, you might be talking to angels. ;-)" How will you answer that?

Where is it in the Bible? Where is it in the Bible that it is prohibited to communicate with Angels?

[He showed all of you verses from the Bible that would back up his claim that we can not pray to angels because only Jesus Christ is the mediator, but what did you and your friends do? You all ganged up on him and when he left the thread you all gloated, is that "Christ-like", Father?]

Gloated? Bro. R. simply said: “Good defense of the faith, father.” And I answered with: “Glory to the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit.” Is that gloating for you? What do you want us to do, to bow to the personal opinion of your husband which is a distortion of Sacred Scriptures?

Jesus is the Only Mediator! That is right! DID MS. N. CLAIM THAT ANGELS ARE MEDIATORS? NO! So, his use of Scripture is out of touch with reality. He was using a verse that is not denied and now you claim that we deny or violate that passage of Scripture.

[You throw insults around just as easily as any other individual on the streets would do and I am aghast.]

What insults? I simply questioned your husband’s use of Biblical passages and examined his claims with logical reasoning. I didn’t attack the person of your husband. I refuted his claims and the doctrines that he was presenting and dismantled his interpretations of the Bible verses he used.

[I grew up in the Catholic Church, my uncle has been serving as a priest for decades (even before you were born, I assume), my whole family are devout, I dined with priests and laymen many times over, I have discussed theology with parish priests and asked them good, honest theological questions which led to light debates, BUT NEVER, never have I experienced the same treatment you accorded my husband ever before. What was it that you said again, "is unworthy of a Christian"? Yeah, I may also say the same to you, Father, may I not?]

Your relative and friend priests just like the ordinary Catholics for years prefer to deal with Born Again and the anti-Catholic tirades with kid gloves. We usually say, “O let’s not debate. We are brothers.” Instead of treating us with respect, the anti-Catholics intensified their attacks on our faith and successfully deceived and lured into heresies some of us who are not solid in Faith. Now, it’s time for us Catholics to respond to anti-Catholic tirades in a language understandable to them. It is time for Catholics to question the claims of these Born Again and anti-Catholics. “Unworthy of a Christian”. Why did I use that? Because Ms. N. doesn’t attack your faith and your husband suddenly ganged on her. Ms. N. didn’t attack your faith. She didn’t post a statement that is offensive to people of other faith. If your husband doesn’t like what she posted he could have let it pass. Instead he bombarded her with comments to the point that she is already being accused of presenting another Gospel, etc. Every knowledgeable Catholics must defend the faith when it is attack. It is a moral responsibility on our part.

[I'm sorry that I had to write you privately, I do not belong to Ms. N.'s circle of friends on FaceBook so there is no way I could join in your "fun adventure" on that thread.]

Do you think this is ‘fun adventure’ for us? We were busy helping in the relief efforts for the victims of the floods when your husband fired his tirades on Ms. N.’s account. We would have been happier focusing on that; instead of finding time answering anti-Catholic remarks on Facebook.

[I would have loved to ask more questions, exchange ideas and be friends Father, but then, your above letter only shows that my efforts to reach out are in vain.]

If you mean by friendship I will just bow my head to you and say yes to your claims I’m sorry for that. But, if you mean by friendship we will have an honest exchange of ideas wherein you can question me and I will answer and I will question you as well then we can have a fruitful and meaningful friendship.

If your friends and relatives priests do not answer you directly this way then you should find more time with the one who respond to you fairly and squarely.

In Christ the Lord,

Fr. Abe Arganiosa, CRS