Do these passages prove Sola Scriptura?

Ask all the people burdened down by centuries of corruption how "secure" they felt. The security being discussed here is really that of the leadership to maintain absolute unquestionable control over gullible helpless sheep (Acts 20:29)
The doctrine is contrary anyway, when you have the split between the east and west, and the flow of new doctrines -er, "clarifications" by the Western body.
And it doesn't matter how fast or slow it is; change is change, and it is still "the wind of doctrine".

In other words, just let us spread our error and control over everyone, as we redefine the faith; so long as the change is slow and not sudden.

You may have kept out Arianism and Sabellianism, but there is plenty of gnostic influence, and even practical polytheism (praying to saints, exaltation of Mary with some wanting her as "Co-redemptrix")

Once again, why not give all this glory to God, instead of to men.

 

According to Bokenkotters "Concise History of the Catholic Church" the same Cardinals that elect URBAN claim that the "mob" altered the elections and so they elected another Pope - free of the mob. And thus began the great schism pg 166-168.

BEFORE the Schism - when Gregory XI died the Romans feared a French Pope "might" be elected. As Bokenkotter states (pg 166)

<<All three successors to the three Pope system were in effect - deposed. >>

<<At this time they also burned John Huss at the stake!! What a fitting crime.>>

On November 11, 1417 the used a NEW system - The cardinals were joined by six delegates of each RC nation - thirty in all - . That group then selected the next Pope - a complete break from all THREE Papal lines !

 

:thumbs: Good points all.

Stan, it's not a question of rebooting but a question of resetting to the plumbline of Scripture - which we all need to do from time to time.

 

sola scriptura

 

I was under the impression that sola scriptura was scripture only. How is that reflected in scripture?

What is prima scriptura?

 

Prima Scriptura asserts the supremacy of Scripture in matters of faith and practice but acknowledges the necessity of some other kind(s) of doctrinal tools such as reason, experience or some kind of church tradition to act as an interpretative tool of that Scripture; in this model tradition is the servant of and subordinate to Scripture but is nevertheless important. So Scripture is not the only doctrinal authority here, but is the most important.

Sola Scriptura however asserts that Scripture is the only authority for determining doctrine and practice and rejects the role of tradition or any other source of doctrine (kind of like "Me, Jesus and my Bible") - although in practice nearly all Christians do acknowledge some kind of tradition, even if many deny this...

 

Sola Scriptura as used by Christians like me - means that all faith doctrine and practice is judged against scripture. Anything in contradiction to scripture is condemned.

Suppose Priest Matt Black declares -- all the saints in church must wear pink tennis shoes. We would not take that as a Bible command even though members of his parish might choose to follow along with that rule. BUT IF Priest Matt says "Those who do not wear pink tennis shoes are sinning and will burn in pratcheatory for an unspecified amount of time" -- THEN we conclude that Matt is promoting man made tradition and man made commandments "as doctrine" and his teaching is condemned.

It really is that simple!

 

Thanks for ordaining me, Bob! Are your Holy Orders recognised by any other denomination? And do I get a lease car thrown in as part of the job spec?:smilewinkgrin: