Potential proposition to debate your issues with Sola Scriptura

[InquisitorKind]

OBOB forum,

Over the past few months, there have been a number of threads and posts on the topic of Sola Scriptura. A significant number of them have been from Catholics who disagree with the notion, and their posts sometimes expressed those sentiments in the form of arguments.

I would like to address some of these arguments against the Sola Scriptura position in formal debate. However, before I commit, I would like anyone interested in taking up a debate with myself to propose a thesis for consideration. It can range from being broad ("Sola Scriptura is unbiblical, illogical, and is alien to the church fathers") to being more defined ("Sola Scriptura is a blue-print for spiritual anarchy and should be rejected as such"). If those wishing to debate desire as much, they can include the Roman Catholic position in the thesis as the appropriate alternative to Sola Scriptura.

I plan on structuring the debate to include a question/answer section. (Three questions will be posed by each participant and they will respond to the other's set accordingly. There will then be a rebuttal to those answers and an additional response to those rebuttals.) This will allow for specific critiques and on-the-spot questioning that will allow for certain points to be reiterated in a detailed manner or raised for the first time.

There are obviously other details, but I wanted to determine the level of interest in this debate topic and potential thesis ideas before offering up an official invitation.

~Matt

[Christy4Christ]

What about a team debate, like 3 people from your team and 3 from here? Is that possible? I have never been involved in an official debate so I would just be reading. :)

[boughtwithaprice]

OBOB forum,

Over the past few months, there have been a number of threads and posts on the topic of Sola Scriptura. A significant number of them have been from Catholics who disagree with the notion, and their posts sometimes expressed those sentiments in the form of arguments.

I would like to address some of these arguments against the Sola Scriptura position in formal debate. However, before I commit, I would like anyone interested in taking up a debate with myself to propose a thesis for consideration. It can range from being broad ("Sola Scriptura is unbiblical, illogical, and is alien to the church fathers") to being more defined ("Sola Scriptura is a blue-print for spiritual anarchy and should be rejected as such"). If those wishing to debate desire as much, they can include the Roman Catholic position in the thesis as the appropriate alternative to Sola Scriptura.

I plan on structuring the debate to include a question/answer section. (Three questions will be posed by each participant and they will respond to the other's set accordingly. There will then be a rebuttal to those answers and an additional response to those rebuttals.) This will allow for specific critiques and on-the-spot questioning that will allow for certain points to be reiterated in a detailed manner or raised for the first time.

There are obviously other details, but I wanted to determine the level of interest in this debate topic and potential thesis ideas before offering up an official invitation.

~Matt
nyj and myself are organizing a debate with Lotar, et al, on the topic of The Council of Trent and Vatican II. It will address the themes of faith alone, sola scriptura, and ecumenism. Do you want to team up with him, or have a seperate debate. I like your format, but would make these additions. Opening statements from each team, three questions from each team with answers and rebuttals, then closing statements. nyj has proposed one week between replies, and I agree as this topic is broad.
What do you think?

Jerome

[Toney]

I do not believe I would want to join the debate, but just for the fun of it I should like to propose a thesis for your consideration:

Sola scriptura is antithetical to God's salvific plan.

[thereselittleflower]

Christy, I think if it were possible to do team debates, more debates would occur . . i for one simply don't have the time to devote to a formal one on one debate. . .


Peace in Him!

[boughtwithaprice]

Christy, I think if it were possible to do team debates, more debates would occur . . i for one simply don't have the time to devote to a formal one on one debate. . .


Peace in Him!
It is entirely possible to do team debates. One on one is way too tedious. NYJ and I are teaming up to take on Lotar, et al.. Would you like to join, Therese?
Lotar has charged that the Catholic church went into heresy with the council of Trent and was further heretical with vatican II. NYJ and I are going to counter those charges. It could possibly include an argument on Sola Scriptura, which is why I invited Matt(IK) to join Lotar. The debate is scheduled to begin after Easter. The teams will communicate by PM, and posts will be made by one person, but talked about as a team. We have proposed a week between replies, as this is a large topic.
I told NYJ, one of the moderators of IDD formal debates, that I could use all of the help I could get:) PM, if you want to join

[Lotar]

It would probably do better as a seperate debate. We Lutherans consider sola scriptura to be a side note and one of the less important doctrines of the Reformation.

If it is fine with you, we had planned on focusing mainly on justification, which pretty much ties into faith alone, ecumenalism, ect.

[geocajun]

Isn't the justification debate between Catholics and Lutherans essentially nullified by the joint declaration on salvation between our two Churches? the distinctions between the two theologies are very clearly defined in the declaration.

[Lotar]

Basically all that it says is that we both agree that salvation is by grace alone. It doesn't even scratch the surface of the disagreement between our churches.

[geocajun]

JOINT DECLARATION ON THE DOCTRINE OF JUSTIFICATION Lutheran World Federation and the Catholic Church (http://www.ewtn.com/library/CURIA/pccujnt4.htm)

-----

RESPONSE OF THE CATHOLIC CHURCH
TO THE JOINT DECLARATION OF
THE CATHOLIC CHURCH AND THE LUTHERAN WORLD FEDERATION
ON THE DOCTRINE OF JUSTIFICATION (http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/pontifical_councils/chrstuni/documents/rc_pc_chrstuni_doc_01081998_off-answer-catholic_en.html)

[InquisitorKind]

nyj and myself are organizing a debate with Lotar, et al, on the topic of The Council of Trent and Vatican II. It will address the themes of faith alone, sola scriptura, and ecumenism. Do you want to team up with him, or have a seperate debate.
Either would be acceptable at this point, although I still would like to wait for a bit to determine if there is more interest in just Sola Scriptura.

I will contact Lotar to figure out what his plans are. I certainly do not wish to assume that he would desire me as a partner, especially when I consider that I am not Lutheran.

I like your format, but would make these additions. Opening statements from each team, three questions from each team with answers and rebuttals, then closing statements. nyj has proposed one week between replies, and I agree as this topic is broad.
What do you think?

Jerome
My idea was not for the question/answer section to be the focus of the debate. Although I'm quite flexible as to what the final format will entail, I would prefer to have at least one round of rebuttal to the opening statements before the question/answer section; I believe that there needs to be substantial material on the table explaining the respective positions in order for the question/answer section to be worthwhile and effective.

If the occasion should arise, I will discuss further details on your debate invitation thread.

~Matt

[Lotar]

JOINT DECLARATION ON THE DOCTRINE OF JUSTIFICATION Lutheran World Federation and the Catholic Church (http://www.ewtn.com/library/CURIA/pccujnt4.htm)



-----

RESPONSE OF THE CATHOLIC CHURCH
TO THE JOINT DECLARATION OF
THE CATHOLIC CHURCH AND THE LUTHERAN WORLD FEDERATION


ON THE DOCTRINE OF JUSTIFICATION (http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/pontifical_councils/chrstuni/documents/rc_pc_chrstuni_doc_01081998_off-answer-catholic_en.html)

Interesting to see the other side of it. That is more of the problem, we both see what it means differently.

This agreement is like the Orthodox and Catholics coming together and signing a "Joint Agreement on the Position of the Pope," which only states that the Pope is the bishop of Rome and successor of Peter. Nothing about what we believe has changed, we just signed a document that affirms what we have always agreed.

Also, ChiRho, Theologia Crucis and I belong to the LCMS, who paricipated in the dialogue but decided not to sign the joint agreement because of the fact that it would confuse people into thinking that we agree when we do not. Some of the other posters here, like Rechtglaubig, belong to the WELS, who refused to even take part in the dialogue.

[BAChristian]

What is the goal of this debate?

[Christy4Christ]

For us to believe in Sola Scriptura I think?

[InquisitorKind]

For us to believe in Sola Scriptura I think?
That would be the ideal goal for each debator. However, I highly doubt that this written debate will change many minds. The purpose of the debate is to meet the challenges and arguments put forth by Catholics on this subject in a formal setting, since they can't be responded to in any other medium on this site. It is for a defense of Sola Scriptura.

~Matt

[Benedicta00]

That would be the ideal goal for each debator. However, I highly doubt that this written debate will change many minds. The purpose of the debate is to meet the challenges and arguments put forth by Catholics on this subject in a formal setting, since they can't be responded to in any other medium on this site. It is for a defense of Sola Scriptura.

~Matt

You know how I translate this?

So you can plant seeds of doubt in the minds of those who are now either coming into the Church or those looking into the Church.

If you believe your doctrine is true, you shouldn't have to debate us. Just speak your truth in love Matt, and let the Holy Spirit do the rest.

[boughtwithaprice]

It would probably do better as a seperate debate. We Lutherans consider sola scriptura to be a side note and one of the less important doctrines of the Reformation.

If it is fine with you, we had planned on focusing mainly on justification, which pretty much ties into faith alone, ecumenalism, ect.

Understood:wave: We will keep planning to start after Easter. Let's all study our repsective postions, and wait till after Easter to start the debate.:D i.e. no predebate debate in this thread;)

[JeffreyLloyd]

I'm moving this to IDD: Non-Participant Commentary & Debate Invitations

Thanks,
JeffreyLloyd
OBOB Mod.

[InquisitorKind]

If you believe your doctrine is true, you shouldn't have to debate us. Just speak your truth in love Matt, and let the Holy Spirit do the rest.
You have debated me on many occasions for extended periods of time. Are you saying that you don't believe that your doctrine is true?

The subject of this thread is the debate proposition, not your poorly concealed attempt to discredit my arguments before they are presented. I would appreciate if you stuck to that topic.

~Matt

[Carlos Vigil]

For us to believe in Sola Scriptura I think?



Hi Christy,
This could be fun and challenging (and one may learn something),
If you are interested in putting together a team...would you consider me?
:rolleyes: ...even as the waterboy?
Carlos

[Hoonbaba]

not your poorly concealed attempt to discredit my arguments before they are presented.
Was that really necessary?

-jason

[InquisitorKind]

Was that really necessary?

-jason
Yes, it's appropriate considering the double-standard that was being evoked.

Since this thread is about a debate proposition, not my style of posting, was your response necessary?

~Matt