The Changing Face Of Catholicism

As a Baptist I don't believe I use the term sola scriptura in the strictest sense of the word. It literally means "scripture alone."
I would rather define my stance as saying that "The Bible is my 'final' authority in all matters pertaining to faith and doctrine. Certainly I use, what I would call other "authoritative" material. But who has the final say? It is the Word of God every time. It is the only scripture, in that it is the only authority that is inspired. There is no tradition, no other authority that can claim inspiration. Only the Bible has that claim. That is why we can appeal to it, as our final and greatest authority.

 

Almost everyone on this board, for example, would at least use a concordance.
That is a good example of an authoritative reference.
We also use lexicons and like materials.

 

Yes indeed. That is why most Baptists define or re-define it as the Bible being "their final authority in all matters of faith and doctrine," instead of
"their only authority in all matters of faith and doctrine.

 

1. Our "primary" source of learning is the Word of God, and the Holy Spirit illuminating the Word to us who believe. That is of primary importance.
2. We are commanded to: Study to show ourselves approved unto God (2Tim.2:15); to "Search the Scriptures;" to "meditate on them day and night;" to "be ready always to give an answer" (Scripturally), etc. This takes much personal study, along with prayer.
3. Next to the Bible a diligent student would consult the closest thing to the Bible, which is the original language (not necessarily a commentary). That is a concordance, a lexicon, language helps. and other such tools.
4. Many of the authors of good commentaries are simply sermons of good preachers gone on before us. Faith comes by hearing and hearing by the word of God. These are sermons in print. However "older is better" philosophy is not necessarily true. Thus the ECF does not have any more weight than many conservative commentators today. In fact they had less light. Hindsight is always better than foresight.
5 "Tradition" in liturgical religions is often binding and thus leads to heresies. Therefore we have in the RCC, such heresies springing from Tradition as: purgatory, indulgences, the assumption of Mary, the perpetual virginity of Mary, the immaculate conception of Mary, praying to Mary and the other "saints," transubstantiaton, baptismal regeneration, and many other doctrines that come from tradition. Once declared a doctrine of the church, even if wrong, it cannot be changed. The religion is then steeped in religious superstition and heretical beliefs.
6. Because the Word of God is always of primary importance such heresies cannot creep into the church. The Word of God will not allow it. It reigns supreme. Tradition can never trump God Himself. God reveals Himself through His Word, not tradition or through any other means.

 

The illustration given in 2Tim.2:15 is that of a carpenter putting together or making a piece of furniture. The degree of work he puts into the end product will determine on whether or not he will be ashamed of his work or not. It is your decision as to how much time you want to study God's Word and to what approach you take. The Lord wants due diligence as a workman. You answer to Him, not me.

That depends on what you are studying. There is a difference in disagreeing on who the two witnesses are in Rev.11 and the meaning of "born again." If there is too much disagreement on the latter, then your salvation may be called in question, whereas on the former topic it really doesn't matter.

What pre-eminence. In all the Bible there is only one reference, and that is in the last chapter of Mark. One verse in the Bible. Out of 31,173 verses there is only one that speaks on this particular subject!

The older wine gets the more likely it is to turn into vinegar or even go mouldy. It naturally corrupts itself.
Often witnesses turn out to be unreliable. How honest are they in their reporting? Do they have an agenda? Many of the early writers (outside of the apostles) did.

I can believe in a doctrine without knowing its theological name. That is just nonsense.
My daughter believes she has an arm (or two); but she didn't know that she had an ulna and radius (the names of the two major bones that make up the arm). Your logic makes no sense.
BTW, theological twenty-five cent words are not what one calls "Bible language."