Protestant Faith; "Sola scriptura"or tradition base doctrines?
64Sola scriptura or human tradition?
One of the fundamentals in protestant faith today is a doctrine call: "Sola Scriptura"which refer to the belief that the bible is the Word of God and that our life should be base on it and not on human traditions(which oppose to Roman Catholics, were traditions are considered sacred too). I live under that faith until I starting realizing that Sola Scriptura is by definition a contradiction. Check this out.
This is the "rationale":
Me, as a protestant can not follow the roman catholic church doctrines, because they were created by man and tradition, and not by God, since they are not find written in the Bible. Since the Bible do not talk about the doctrines they have made, and are just tradition of that church, then they are false doctrines. Any doctrine that is supported by human tradition and not the Bible, is not a valid doctrine.
Now, if doctrines made by human tradition are not valid. Why should we believe in the "Bible" doctrine?
The Bible is a group of books from different authors. We have them because the church during hundreds of years arranged a list of books which they thought were inspired by God. In other words, the New Testament Canon is a doctrine of Human Tradition Origin (the doctrine that states that they were inspired by God). Those book did not came from heavens; there were intentionally arranged to preserve the beliefs the church had during that period of time.
How then can I say that I only follow the will of God, and not the will of men, just because I do not follow human tradition but the Bible; when the "Bible Canon" exists thanks to Human Tradition.
Many people do not know that the process of establishing the list of canonical books was not a straight foward process. Rather was a long painful process which last hundreds of years.
So my purpose with this article is not to make you stop believing in the Bible. I'm only trying to make you see that believing in the Bible and not believing in church traditions is a contradiction since the Bible Canon has it origen in human tradition.
Feel free to give your opinion in a respectful way.
Is the Bible the Word of God?
Is the Bible the Word of God?
See results without votingPrintShare it! — Rate it: up down flag this hub
Comments
Friend, I want to make sure to you that I am not questioning your God. The God experience in your life is as real as the air we breath. I was a born again christian for more than 10 years, and the God experience during that moment was as real as it is now(even thought I change my christian philosophy from been a "born again christian" to be a "progressive christian"). I study the bible and the christian theology with passion and intensity during that time. The bible contain great principles for life. But not everything in the Bible can be applied today, because as weird as it sound applying them will be unchristian. The Bible declare that homosexual have to be stone to death.But Jesus teach against that type of doctrines(love your enemy, if someone hit you in one cheek let the other be hit too). We know that is something Jesus would never accept. So many things in the Bible(old testament in the majority) have to be ignore in order to live a christian live. About apocrypha and contradiction, I have to say that there are many contradictions in the NT and the books are still together: For example and I am going to post as the scholar Bart Ehrman wrote them in his book misquoting Jesus, since my english is poor and I want to to make my self clear:
"....May be when MArk says that Jesus was crucified the day after the Passover meal was eaten(Mark 14:12; 15:25) and John says he died the day before it was eaten(John 19:14) - may be that is a genuine difference. Or when Luke indicates in his account of Jesus 's birth that Joseph and Mary returned to Nazareth just over a month after they had come to Bethlehem...(Luke 2:39)whereas Matthew indicates they instead fled to Egypt(Matt 2:19-22)- may be that is a difference. Or when Paul says that after he converted on the way to Damascus he did not go to Jerusalem to see those who were apostles before him(Gal 1:16-17), whereas the book of Acts says that that was the first thing he did after leaving Damascus(Act 9:26)- maybe that is a difference."...
You see contradictions are not something just from the apocrypha., but from the canonical too.
" Psalmist said that the Word of God is tested. "
When the psalmist said that, the bible did not existed was we know it today. So I wonder, what is the Word of God for the Salmist.
Blessings
Vladimir Uhri says:
2 months ago
I did write coup of books. Then I should demand to put them into Bible.
Apocrypha were and some are in contradiction to original Bible. Otherwise they are repeating what we know already from the Bible. They were considered as Old Testament books but OT books are in Greek and not in Hebrew. All Books of NT were written up to 80 AD, Apocrypha after 150 years.
Psalmist said that the Word of God is tested. Then we may test it as well. I did and many did. I suppose to be 3 x death and I am living health. Praise God.
Thank you for interesting view.