Discussion about Sola Scriptura at a Muslim blog.
Muslims are using Roman Catholic arguments to cast doubt on the doctrine of Sola Scriptura and the basis for the canon. They then use the arguments against Sola Scriptura and the Canon to cast doubt on reliability of the NT books themselves. I noticed this a long time ago in evangelism with Muslims. And then when I started listening to Dr. White's debates and reading his books, and visiting regularly his web-site sometime in 1996- 2004, (when it had these articles on Roman Catholicism), I noticed it even more in the details of Roman Catholic agruments and how Muslims would bring up the same objections as regards the canon and Sola Scriptura and church history details.
I remember when Dr. White started sharing why he was going into debating Muslims - because a lot of the apologetic issues are the same on the history of the text of the Bible, textual variants, inerrancy, the canon, Sola Scriptura, church history, etc. His experience with Roman Catholics, King James Only advocates, Mormons, atheists, and others had prepared him for defending the faith against Muslims. Dealing with Mormons, Jehovah's Witnesses and Oneness Pentecostals prepared him for dealing with Muslim objections to the Trinity.
Jonathan Doyle is a Roman Catholic. If I recall correctly, he is a traditionalist Roman Catholic, one who holds to the Tridentide Latin Mass as binding, sees the "no salvation outside of the church" as binding and Vatican 2 was wrong to soften that tradition, and probably disagrees with a lot of Vatican 2 and the modern Popes since that time. But he has not shared the exact details of his views on those issues.
There are other comments since I grabbed this much of the discussion. Most people know this, but in case this is the first time you are reading here, Paul Bilal Williams is an English convert to Islam. (see his story at his blog, linked above.)
Muslims are using Roman Catholic arguments to cast doubt on the doctrine of Sola Scriptura and the basis for the canon. They then use the arguments against Sola Scriptura and the Canon to cast doubt on reliability of the NT books themselves. I noticed this a long time ago in evangelism with Muslims. And then when I started listening to Dr. White's debates and reading his books, and visiting regularly his web-site sometime in 1996- 2004, (when it had these articles on Roman Catholicism), I noticed it even more in the details of Roman Catholic agruments and how Muslims would bring up the same objections as regards the canon and Sola Scriptura and church history details.
I remember when Dr. White started sharing why he was going into debating Muslims - because a lot of the apologetic issues are the same on the history of the text of the Bible, textual variants, inerrancy, the canon, Sola Scriptura, church history, etc. His experience with Roman Catholics, King James Only advocates, Mormons, atheists, and others had prepared him for defending the faith against Muslims. Dealing with Mormons, Jehovah's Witnesses and Oneness Pentecostals prepared him for dealing with Muslim objections to the Trinity.
Jonathan Doyle is a Roman Catholic. If I recall correctly, he is a traditionalist Roman Catholic, one who holds to the Tridentide Latin Mass as binding, sees the "no salvation outside of the church" as binding and Vatican 2 was wrong to soften that tradition, and probably disagrees with a lot of Vatican 2 and the modern Popes since that time. But he has not shared the exact details of his views on those issues.
There are other comments since I grabbed this much of the discussion. Most people know this, but in case this is the first time you are reading here, Paul Bilal Williams is an English convert to Islam. (see his story at his blog, linked above.)
Posts
God spoke through prophets and apostles.
the Prophets and apostles wrote the Word of God down in Scriptures.
God cannot lie.
So, the Scripture are also infallible.
When traditions are tested and questioned, the Scriptures overrule them; therefore only the Scriptures are infallible, since man is not infallible and his interpretations and traditions therefore are not infallible.
Traditions (oral teaching and preaching during the process of the time of en-Scripturation – 30-96 AD) of the apostles (2 Thess. 2:15; 3:6; I Cor. 11:2, 1 Cor. 15:1-9; Jude 3; Galatians 1:6-9) are infallible because the Scriptures say that they are. (in those contexts – also 1 Thessalonians 2:13 – the preaching of the gospel / word of God was accepted not as the word of men, but as the word of God.
Tertullian (200 AD)
Origen (250 AD)
Athanasius (died in 373 AD)