Sola Scriptura and the Regula Fidei

Sola ScripturaThe purpose of this very brief excerpt is to concisely and simply set forth the doctrine of Sola Scriptura over the false, modern-day evangelical doctrine of SOLO Scriptura that always seems to rise up among religious sects through church history.  Evangelicals today, for whatever reason, seem to be confusing Sola Scriptura with Solo Scriptura without understanding either precisely.  Those evangelicals who say they hold to the Sola Scriptura hermeneutic of the Reformation are really using the Reformed terms of the Reformation but are, in actuality, denying the authentic doctrine itself.  This is not just a play on words or some kind of semantic game.  Rather, this is a conflagration of the true doctrine, and a propagation of something the church has deemed in error by way of a faulty hermeneutic.  Hopefully the following points will clarify this and amend this theological mayhem.

It is unfortunate that false view of Sola Scriptura today is aiding the modern church in further schism, rather than unifying the church.  Sola Scriptura should not be used as a “me and my bible” hermeneutic which allows “each individual Christian” to maintain their own theological view point on a given doctrine.  That is not what the Reformers intended, and it is not what the doctrine of Sola Scriptura teaches.  If you believe that Sola Scriptura means “each individual Christian should, on an individual level, use the Bible alone in understanding and determining the corpus of biblical truth” you have completely missed the idea and point of the doctrine itself.  Many people believe that the moment they hear the word “tradition” (the “t” word) that this is a very bad thing.  They want to say “the Bible alone!  But they have missed the point again.  They believe this as a knee jerk reaction to Roman Catholicism which has a very different view of tradition than what Sola Scriptura teaches.  I want to note here and now, the Reformed position of Sola Scriptura is not, in any way, the same thing, as the view of the Roman Catholic Church’s view of Tradition PLUS Scripture as the church’s ecclesiastical authority.  Hopefully this will be made clear in a moment.

READ THE REST OF THIS GREAT ARTICLE By Dr. C. Matthew McMahon

Follow this link: http://www.apuritansmind.com/Creeds/McMahonSolaScriptura.htm

Review of article

Gobbledygook    

Still didn't answer the question WHO in history in particular has represented the "true orthodox Church" (Because he CAN'T).

In fact, this author supports the idea that a hierarchy of Christian "elites" are the Church - the ones whose interpretation is "right" -in direct opposition to Roderick's belief that no such cadre of individuals continued to exist past the first century: "Though Scripture interprets Scripture, as all agree, the church is also the interpreter of Scripture as a whole.  It is impossible to deny this.  The very force of Ephesians 4 and the gifts Christ’s gives to His church demonstrate this.  Ephesians 4:11-16 says, “And He Himself gave some to be apostles, some prophets, some evangelists, and some pastors and teachers,"

As men (including Roderick) continue to try to establish their idea of "orthodox beliefs" that are specially spiritually discerned outside of plainly revealed Scripture (allowing them to definitively pronounce condemnation on others) instead of allowing the holy spirit to separate the wheat and the chaff and continue to work through men to bring about God's Kingdom, these embarrassing divisions and sniping among Christians will remain.