Mateo el Feo Posted December 1, 2004 Share Posted December 1, 2004 Hi guys! I know that some Protestants make it a point to claim that they believe in sol[b]a[/b] scriptura, not sol[b]o[/b] scriptura. So, my two questions are: 1) What's the alleged difference? 2) Do the two Latin terms actually distinguish the intended modern meanings, or is the distinction based on some added meaning to the terms where none originally existed? I hope that makes sense! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thessalonian Posted December 1, 2004 Share Posted December 1, 2004 Good question. I am not a Protestant so I can't help you with any definitive answer. But I have been asked many times "where's that in the Bible" by people who claim to believe in Sola scriptura. My guess is your takers will say they believe in Solo Scriptura. Problem is by what authority do they say which is which? So if this question muddles the thread. Blessings Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Justified Saint Posted December 1, 2004 Share Posted December 1, 2004 That is the big question that everyone is trying to figure out. The reformers believed in sola scriptura, but Protestants today believe in solo scriptura although they will deny this charge merely as a means of defense against Catholic apologetics. Sola scriptura, on the other hand, is an ecclesiology mess which ultimately says the same thing as solo scriptura but attaches to it some fancy words and ideas. They say they accept tradition and the church councils but then turn around and say that the scriptures are the sole, normative, infallible rule of faith. This just confuses the matter (are there multiple rules of faith?) and creeps back into the pitfalls of solo scriptura by affirming its central identity of private judgement. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thessalonian Posted December 3, 2004 Share Posted December 3, 2004 No takers? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gal. 5:22,23 Posted December 3, 2004 Share Posted December 3, 2004 Well, I'm a non-Catholic Christian and I've never heard of Solo Scriptura. Sola Scriptura, on the other hand is the battle cry of the reformers, along with Sola Fide. But I'm not the one to argue for it, as I am seriously considering the Catholic faith. If God had intended for us all to be guided by our own interpretations of Scripture, then He would have given us each the knowledge necessary to do so correctly. One only has to look at the hundreds of (US) denominations and thousands of (Worldwide) Protestant denominations to see that we do not have that gift. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
homeschoolmom Posted December 3, 2004 Share Posted December 3, 2004 I have no idea what you all are talking about... I never heard of Solo Scriptura... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brother Adam Posted December 3, 2004 Share Posted December 3, 2004 [quote name='Gal. 5:22,23' date='Dec 3 2004, 05:07 PM'] If God had intended for us all to be guided by our own interpretations of Scripture, then He would have given us each the knowledge necessary to do so correctly. One only has to look at the hundreds of (US) denominations and thousands of (Worldwide) Protestant denominations to see that we do not have that gift. [/quote] Woah. You do sound exactly like me just months before I became Catholic. Uncanny Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mateo el Feo Posted December 3, 2004 Author Share Posted December 3, 2004 I'm just starting to look at the results of this Google search: [url="http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=%22sola+scriptura%22+%22solo+scriptura%22+difference"]Google search (link)[/url] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Benedict Posted December 4, 2004 Share Posted December 4, 2004 Based on my studies and dialogues with Protestants, the difference is subtle: Sola Scriptura holds Sacred Scripture to be the [b]final [/b]authority in matters of faith. Solo Scriptura holds Sacred Scripture to be the [b]only [/b]authority in matters of faith. Sola Scripturists accept creeds, councils, etc so long as they do not contradict with Scripture (read: their understanding and interpretation of Scripture). Solo Scripturists accept nothing beyond Scripture (read: their understanding and interpretation of Scripture). In my experience (with lay Protestants), sola Scripturists tend to be solo Scripturists who agree that Biblical concepts can be presented and accepted in other forms (such as councils and creeds). Solo Scripturists only deal with chapter and verse (and it is fun to point out that a Catholic cardinal, Stephen Cardinal Langton, put those in the Bible in the early 13th century). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MagiDragon Posted December 4, 2004 Share Posted December 4, 2004 [quote name='Benedict' date='Dec 4 2004, 12:36 PM'](and it is fun to point out that a Catholic cardinal, Stephen Cardinal Langton, put those in the Bible in the early 13th century).[/quote] hmmm . . . i was wondering about this. So it was a Catholic that botched Revela . . . ok, this deserves it's own thread. Just a moment . . . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phazzan Posted December 6, 2004 Share Posted December 6, 2004 [quote name='Justified Saint' date='Dec 1 2004, 06:12 PM'] That is the big question that everyone is trying to figure out. The reformers believed in sola scriptura, but Protestants today believe in solo scriptura although they will deny this charge merely as a means of defense against Catholic apologetics. Sola scriptura, on the other hand, is an ecclesiology mess which ultimately says the same thing as solo scriptura but attaches to it some fancy words and ideas. They say they accept tradition and the church councils but then turn around and say that the scriptures are the sole, normative, infallible rule of faith. This just confuses the matter (are there multiple rules of faith?) and creeps back into the pitfalls of solo scriptura by affirming its central identity of private judgement. [/quote] That is a perfect answer. Basically, sola scriptura states tradition can be accepted and respected so long it doesn't contradict the Bible. But then they believe all Traditions contradict the Bible, so they borrow the Creeds manipulate their meanings just a little and there you have it, Tradition in the evangelical church. So basically it's a compromise of biblical teaching to allow for traditions without actually accepting them, that's why solo and sola scriptura acheive the same means, NO Tradition. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yiannii Posted December 6, 2004 Share Posted December 6, 2004 (edited) [quote name='Benedict' date='Dec 5 2004, 04:36 AM'] Based on my studies and dialogues with Protestants, the difference is subtle: Sola Scriptura holds Sacred Scripture to be the [b]final [/b]authority in matters of faith. Solo Scriptura holds Sacred Scripture to be the [b]only [/b]authority in matters of faith. Sola Scripturists accept creeds, councils, etc so long as they do not contradict with Scripture (read: their understanding and interpretation of Scripture). Solo Scripturists accept nothing beyond Scripture (read: their understanding and interpretation of Scripture). In my experience (with lay Protestants), sola Scripturists tend to be solo Scripturists who agree that Biblical concepts can be presented and accepted in other forms (such as councils and creeds). Solo Scripturists only deal with chapter and verse (and it is fun to point out that a Catholic cardinal, Stephen Cardinal Langton, put those in the Bible in the early 13th century). [/quote] So with this understanding would you be safe to say that many Protestant denominations practice solo scriptura rather than sola scripura? Edited December 6, 2004 by yiannii Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Benedict Posted December 6, 2004 Share Posted December 6, 2004 Yes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paladin D Posted December 6, 2004 Share Posted December 6, 2004 [quote name='Benedict' date='Dec 6 2004, 11:04 AM'] Yes. [/quote] Yep. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tombone07 Posted December 7, 2004 Share Posted December 7, 2004 Sola is latin for only so solo in englis hand sola in latin mean the same thing Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now