Talk:Scripture alone

From Theopedia

Wasn't sure if the following article should be included:

• The Supremacy and Sufficiency of Scripture, by Ken Matto (possibly KJV-only)

-Aaronshaf 15:41, 31 Oct 2005 (EST)

Needs ref.

I removed this quote because it needs a clear reference. JordanBarrett (talk) 15:13, 10 February 2006 (EST)

Sola Scriptura "does not mean that the Reformers rejected everything that every Christian in earlier ages has said: indeed, they often cited the early Christians as supporters of their own positions. However, they recognized that those earlier believers were not inspired, were not inerrant, and, in fact, quite often made errors in their judgments and beliefs, just as people do today. The only infallible rule of faith, they argued, is found in the pages of Holy Writ." (James White)

Does this suffice? : http://fccphx.homestead.com/SolaScriptura.html :) -Aaronshaf 16:00, 10 February 2006 (EST)

That quote is from a book that I have called "Sola Scriptura, The Protestant Position on the Bible." (I have a lot of books.) I'll get the page number. But it is James White.

On a more theological and exegetical note,

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

This doesn't necessarily prove the validity of Sola Scriptura. It says that all scripture is profitable, not that it is sufficient all by itself. Just something to think about. But that's probaly for the long-awaited furom.

Come, you binary code messiah, you silicon christ. We need you, FORUM!

Now calm down, it's a joke...

(sola forum! sola forum! sola forum! sola forum!)

Acedaroflebanon 19:57, 13 March 2006 (EST)