Winnie Bonilla Ibe

Here is Dennis Butic post which is his response to a known catholic apologist Dave Armstrong on Sola Scriptura.

I will try to refute each response he made.

Dave’s main points:

1. Sola Scriptura Is Not Taught in the Bible

Catholics agree with Protestants that Scripture is a “standard of truth”—even the preeminent one—but not in a sense that rules out the binding authority of authentic apostolic Tradition and the Church. The Bible doesn’t teach that. Catholics agree that Scripture is materially sufficient. In other words, on this view, every true doctrine can be found in the Bible, if only implicitly and indirectly by deduction. But no biblical passage teaches that Scripture is the formal authority or rule of faith in isolation from the Church and Tradition. Sola scriptura can’t even be deduced from implicit passages.

Dennis’ RESPONSE:

The scripture called sepher of the lord is the standard of truth as it say,
ISAIAH 34:16 Seek ye out of the sepher (writing) of the lord and read, none of it shall fail, none shall want her reuth (additional one)…his spirit it has gathered them.”

MY REPLY TO Dennis Butic:

Sorry Dennis but you’re out of context interpretation is WRONG. Here is why:

First, YOU DON’T even know WHICH these WRITINGS are truly inspired Scriptures. Tell me which WRITINGS which does NOT REQUIRE “additional”?

The fact that YOU STILL NEED your cult leader to teach you knocks your VERY stand to the ground.

Dennis said:

1 Corinthians 4:6
[6]And these things, brethren, I have in a figure transferred to myself and to Apollos for your sakes; that ye might learn in us not to think above that which is written, that no one of you be puffed up for one against another.

2 Peter 1:3
[3]According as his divine power hath given unto us all things that pertain unto life and eusebiae (piety or devotion) through the knowledge of him that hath called us to glory and virtue:
By these decisive verses, it inferred that we must not exceed written scriptures, which scriptures called sepher of the lord is infallible logically in terms of exegesis and that it don’t need additional materials in relation to its nature, a religious writing, therefore when it comes to religious truth, the sepher is the only source, as reference and standard of truth. These sepher was already with the apostles as all things about piety were already with them, thus during apostolic times, they have complete oral and written tradition.
This sepher was particularly called “gathered”, implying, many writings gathered as one sepher. It is in the sense that whatever is not included in the one sepher as a gathered one collective writing is not scripture, as this one sepher don’t need additional one. There is a historical gathering of these writings as one collective document which through the process of canonization determines its extent-66 books! That as one sepher, must not have additional source of standard truth as implied,
NONE SHALL WANT HER REUTH (ADDITIONAL ONE)

My RESPONSE TO DENNIS:

Dennis you are NOT thinking, note that the verse you used IS THE OT, if a Jew used that verse to reject what we both agree are scriptures (NT) then you are in trouble. Note that even we have only the four gospels IT WOULD BE ENOUGH, yet God GAVE US MORE THAN THAT. God gave us both the OT and New Testament, the written and the oral traditions, we have Church and the Holy Spirit, and also our brains and souls.

Dennis said:

Its illogical for god to say, exceed not what is written if it did not certify which is the scope of that “written” bec he claimed a sure word of prophecy (teachings). Sure teachings. Certain! Thus there must be specification of that “written” that must be the standard source of truth. Indeed, there is, he called sepher of the lord. Historically, as canon of scriptures, which as the verse say is infallible and not wanting additional ones.
Besides, GOD never certified OT oral tradition as inspired, therefore, its invalid.)

My REPLY TO DENNIS:

Yes, we HAVE CERTAINTY of what are those WRITINGS that are truly inspired WORD OF GOD, because GOD gave us the Catholic Church which the Holy Spirit guides. When the scriptures says,” exceed NOT what is written” should be understood in its context. The fact that Dennis recognises the APOSTOLIC tradition then his SOLA SCRIPTURA is illogical and unbiblical. The phrase “Not going beyond what is written” simply means NOT TO Violate or contradict what is IN Scriptures. In 1 Corinthians 4:6 statement USED THE WORD “written” and this is past tense, if we take it in strict sense of the word IT WOULD MEAN that anything written AFTER THAT would not count, neither the VERY statement and teachings of the apostate would violate Dennis interpretation. Of course his interpretation does NOT MAKES SENSE and absurd! 

The FACT THAT THE CATHOLIC Church taught you what Scriptures are and you recognised the NT canon as defined by her THEN you Scriptures alone is CONTRADICTION!

 

Dennis Butic

Dennis Butic

The sepher in OT is applicable upon completion thus jews cannot use it then as doctrine, its a prophecy.
AKALA KO BA LALABAN KA? ASAN?

you did not falsify me or defended Dave’s defeated argument,

Now you’re avoiding this

IS ORAL TRADITION INFINITE?
prove!

 

Winnie Bonilla Ibe
Wait ka lang Dennis Butic! I am doing it ONE AT A TIME. 😊 Where did it says it’s A prophecy? See you cannot find your opinion IN YOUR SOLA SCRIPTURA, it’s always “Scriptures and my opinions”
Dennis Butic
None shall want additional one! It cannot be OT as gospel is needed!
Winnie Bonilla Ibe
You proved my point!
Dennis Butic
You always claim catholic church is the authority! Puff!
Winnie Bonilla Ibe
That is Fact! You previously admitted that the canon of scriptures is through the Catholic are you again changing your beautiful mind?
Dennis Butic
So what? God used pharaoh
Winnie Bonilla Ibe
God used pharaoh and even the Satan for God is sovereign! However TO SAY THAT “an apostate church which has a claim of authority to teach ALL NATIONS then used by GOD TO TEACH US INFALLIBLY about his WORDS does not make sense!
Dennis Butic
Dennis Butic

Sola scriptura means both oral and written tradition, but where is the proof that tells us which are these oral tradition and were they infinite?

No proof pa!

Winnie Bonilla Ibe

It’s CONTRADICTION itself!

“Sola Scriptura means both oral and written”

Don’t you know what the WORD “Sola” means? It means “SOLE” or “alone” and NOT BOTH! If it’s Scriptures is NOT ALONE then it NOT ALONE!