Subject: Sola Scriptura supported by bible? |
Bible Note: Greetings Dschaertel! No, I believe that I'm right on target, my friend. 1. Let's talk about the authoritativeness of Scripture.. What makes them authoritative, you ask? First of all, what is meant by "authoritative"? What we mean by authoritative is that it can be said of this book as it was said of Jesus in Mark 1:22: "They were astonished at His teaching because, unlike the scribes, He was teaching them as one having authority." [HCSB] Does the book in question come across in the same way that Jesus came across? That is what we mean when we say that the books of the Bible are 'authoritative.' And from Genesis to Revelation, this is so, since each book rings with a sense of "thus saith the Lord." It could be said that we get this definition of "authority" from the Lord, and from the way in which He conveys His teaching and message to us, since the Bible and the teachings of the Lord are entirely different from anything else that exists on this earth! There is no other book or manuscript that is quite like the Bible, and it is truly a 'one of a kind'! Only the Bible speaks "authoritatively" (in the same sense that Jesus did) to the human race. And the only document or book that speaks this way IS the Bible. So, it is not a sense of having a word being defined by itself as in a dictionary, but it is an acknowledgement of the Bible being something totally unique, different and the only one 'of its kind.' And the best way for us to describe this distinction is as "speaking with authority." And those books that uniformly "speak with authority" should be included in and amongst each other, forming a small 66 book "library" of 'authoritative' teaching from God to humankind. 2. I was able to find your support of the book of Enoch, as being quoted from in Scripture, in the book of Jude (Jude 14-15). However, there are good reasons for the exclusion of the book of Enoch, and that is something that Catholics and Protestants are not in disagreement with, as you have stated. However, I am hard-pressed to find the Scripture quotation in the New Testament from the book of Baruch. If you know it, then please share it. Yes, quotation DOES hold up as criteria for determining canonicity. Through Jesus, we know and have confirmation that the Old Testament is sound and complete, and the Gospel writers, who used the Old Testament on occasion, were in themselves inspired by the Holy Spirit while writing the Gospels. So by being quoted from, that adds precedence and weight to the inclusion of that book within Scripture. However, you mentioned the book of Esther. True, the Book of Esther is not quoted from in the New Testament. However, it could be argued that the CONTENT of the book of Esther does, in fact, provide all of the evidence that the book of Esther needs for inspiration, and this is what separates the book of Esther from the Apocryphal books. But the same cannot be said of the Book of Enoch, simply because it is quoted from in Jude. With that, one must examine the Book of Enoch to realize just why it cannot be included within Scripture. So yes, quotation is an excellent measure in determining what books should be included within Scripture, even though a book is not automatically included within Scripture just by being quoted from. 3. In your third thought, you make it sound as if everyone is confused about which books should be included, when there was, in fact, really not that much confusion at all. The books of James and Revelation always spoke authoritatively and were widely accepted, even though James was doubted because of its apparent conflict with Paul's teaching about salvation by faith alone. Revelation was doubted because it teaches a thousand year reign of Christ, which unfortunately was the same belief of a popular cult at that time. But many of the early church fathers believed in the inclusion of James and Revelation within Scripture, and it was eventually made so, despite these alleged "contradictions" or "heresies" that were not really contradictions or heresies at all. But the fact of the matter is is that the complete Word of God has been preserved and carried through history until today, and we can be assured that the Lord will protect His word and keep it complete for all time! "Heaven and earth will pass away, but My words will not pass away." [Matthew 24:35] Blessings to you, Makarios Note: Much of the reasoning that I have used was gleaned from the "Bible Answer Man" himself, Ron Rhodes' "The Complete Book of Bible Answers", 1997, Harvest House Publishers. |