Which Of The 30,000 Protestant Denominations Is The True Church Of God?

[Blackrook]

Question: "Which of the 30,000 Protestant denominations is the true church of God?"

Answer:In order to argue against Protestantism andSola Scriptura, Roman Catholics will often ask, sarcastically, that if we are to only go by what the Bible says, not church tradition, which of the 30,000-plus Protestant denominations has the correct interpretation? The argument is essentially that, since the Reformation has resulted in thousands of denominations/divisions within Christianity, which is clearly not God’s desire,Sola Scripturamust be invalid and God must have established an infallible interpreter of Scripture; namely, the Roman Catholic Church, the first church, the one true church of God.

The “30,000 Protestant denominations” argument fails on several points. First, there are not 30,000 Protestant denominations. Even under the most liberal definition of what constitutes a denomination, there are nowhere close to 30,000 Protestant denominations. The only way to get even remotely close to the 30,000 figure is to count every minor separation as an entirely different denomination. Further, the vast majority of Protestant Christians belong to just a handful of the most common Protestant denominations; i.e., Baptist, Lutheran, Methodist, Presbyterian, Pentecostal, etc. Yes, it is undeniably sad that there are so many denominations, but the 30,000 Protestant denominations argument is an extreme exaggeration of the reality of the divisions within Protestantism.

Second, even if there genuinely were 30,000 Protestant denominations, one thingallProtestant denominations agree on is that the Roman Catholic Church is not the one true church of God. Protestant denominations are unanimous in rejecting thepapacy, the supremacy of Rome,prayer to saints/Mary,worship of saints/Mary,transubstantiation,purgatory, and most other Roman Catholic dogmas.Sola Scripturahas led all Protestant denominations to the same conclusion – the Bible does not teach many of the things Roman Catholics practice/believe. Further, outside of disagreeing with Roman Catholicism, the Protestant denominations agree on far more issues than they disagree on. Most of the Protestant denominations were formed because of a non-essential doctrine, a side issue, on which Christians can agree to disagree. As an example, Pentecostalism separated from the other denominations based primarily on the issue of speaking in tongues. While tongues can be an important issue in the Christian life, in no sense does it determine the genuineness of faith in Christ.

Third, there is no infallible interpreter of Scripture, nor is there a need for one. There is no infallible denomination or church. Even after receiving Christ as Savior, we are all still tainted by sin. We all make mistakes. No denomination/church has absolutely perfect doctrine on every issue. The key is this – all the essentials of the faith are abundantly clear in God’s Word. We do not need an infallible interpreter or 2,000 years of church tradition to determine that there is one God who exists in three Persons, that Jesus died for our sins and was resurrected from the dead, that Jesus is the one and only way of salvation, that salvation is received by grace through faith, that there is an eternal heaven awaiting those who trust in Christ and an eternal hell for those who reject Him.

The core truths that a person needs to know and understand are absolutely and abundantly clear in Scripture. Even on the non-essentials, if Sola Scriptura were consistently applied, there would be unanimity. The problem is that it is very difficult to perfectly and fully applySola Scriptura, as our own biases, faults, preferences, and traditions often get in the way. The fact that there are many different denominations is not an argument againstSola Scriptura. Rather, it is evidence that we all fail at truly allowing God’s Word to fully shape our beliefs, practices, and traditions.

Read more:Which of the 30 000 Protestant denominations is the true church of God

I bolded the "money quote." Protestants admit that none of their 30,000 churches are infallible. What that means is, no matter what Protestant church you belong to, your church is misleading you with erroneous doctrines and interpretations of the Bible.

 

[Mr. H.]

We get it. You hate Catholics. Religio-racist.

 

[shart_attack]

Not entirely true, that OP.

The Seventh-Day Adventists are for all intents and purposes a Protestant denomination, and they argue that they are the true church, the one true Christian Faith.

They also:

• still observe the seventh day of the week as the Sabbath;
• do not eat foods that aren't kosher;
• believe that the seat of The Antichrist of eschatology is the United States;
• believe in annihilationism with regard to hell.

If I'm not mistaken in my recollections about them, they also believe that the mark of the beast of eschatology will be the enforcing of all people to observe Sunday as the Sabbath. Something like that.

 

[Blackrook]

We get it. You hate Catholics. Religio-racist.

I did not post the article because I agreed with it. I posted the article to prove that the Protestants admit that none of their churches are infallible, and all teach error.

What is the error? How can any Protestant know whether his church is teaching him truth or error? All is uncertain, all is doubtful, and personally, if I was a Protestant I wouldn't know what to believe.

 

[ninja007]

We get it. You hate Catholics. Religio-racist.

I did not post the article because I agreed with it. I posted the article to prove that the Protestants admit that none of their churches are infallible, and all teach error.

What is the error? How can any Protestant know whether his church is teaching him truth or error? All is uncertain, all is doubtful, and personally, if I was a Protestant I wouldn't know what to believe.

the 30,000 denom. is a lie. Second of all, the vast majority teach the same basic message of God's grace and salvation through Jesus Christ and His substitutionary death on the Cross for us sinners. Most of the inter-denom. differences are about MINOR NON-SALVATION issues like the end times, dress, etc...

 

[Mr. H.]

We get it. You hate Catholics. Religio-racist.

I did not post the article because I agreed with it. I posted the article to prove that the Protestants admit that none of their churches are infallible, and all teach error.

What is the error? How can any Protestant know whether his church is teaching him truth or error? All is uncertain, all is doubtful, and personally, if I was a Protestant I wouldn't know what to believe.

Churches are the enclaves of fools.

 

[Blackrook]

We get it. You hate Catholics. Religio-racist.

I did not post the article because I agreed with it. I posted the article to prove that the Protestants admit that none of their churches are infallible, and all teach error.

What is the error? How can any Protestant know whether his church is teaching him truth or error? All is uncertain, all is doubtful, and personally, if I was a Protestant I wouldn't know what to believe.

the 30,000 denom. is a lie. Second of all, the vast majority teach the same basic message of God's grace and salvation through Jesus Christ and His substitutionary death on the Cross for us sinners. Most of the inter-denom. differences are about MINOR NON-SALVATION issues like the end times, dress, etc...

If all those disagreements are so minor, why can't Protestants get along with each other? Why all the division and disagreements?

You claim to know the Biblical truth and preach it, but you're on very shaky ground. The fact is, Protestant leaders admit that their teachings are not infallible, and their interpretations of the Bible aren't infallible. And neither is yours.

So you could be wrong about everything you believe.

So why don't you grow some humility?

 

[Blackrook]

We get it. You hate Catholics. Religio-racist.

I did not post the article because I agreed with it. I posted the article to prove that the Protestants admit that none of their churches are infallible, and all teach error.

What is the error? How can any Protestant know whether his church is teaching him truth or error? All is uncertain, all is doubtful, and personally, if I was a Protestant I wouldn't know what to believe.

Churches are the enclaves of fools.

Which makes you not a fool?

Why don't you start a thread about how smart you are and how you know everything and we Christians are ignorant savages?

 

[ninja007]

We get it. You hate Catholics. Religio-racist.

I did not post the article because I agreed with it. I posted the article to prove that the Protestants admit that none of their churches are infallible, and all teach error.

What is the error? How can any Protestant know whether his church is teaching him truth or error? All is uncertain, all is doubtful, and personally, if I was a Protestant I wouldn't know what to believe.

the 30,000 denom. is a lie. Second of all, the vast majority teach the same basic message of God's grace and salvation through Jesus Christ and His substitutionary death on the Cross for us sinners. Most of the inter-denom. differences are about MINOR NON-SALVATION issues like the end times, dress, etc...

If all those disagreements are so minor, why can't Protestants get along with each other? Why all the division and disagreements?

You claim to know the Biblical truth and preach it, but you're on very shaky ground. The fact is, Protestant leaders admit that their teachings are not infallible, and their interpretations of the Bible aren't infallible. And neither is yours.

So you could be wrong about everything you believe.

So why don't you grow some humility?

Jesus' teachings are infallible- not the RCC's. Protestants go by Jesus' teachings and not man made tradition. Try studying the Bible for yourself, guided by the Holy Spirit. What teachings do you not agree with in the Protestant Church?

 

[Mr. H.]

We get it. You hate Catholics. Religio-racist.

I did not post the article because I agreed with it. I posted the article to prove that the Protestants admit that none of their churches are infallible, and all teach error.

What is the error? How can any Protestant know whether his church is teaching him truth or error? All is uncertain, all is doubtful, and personally, if I was a Protestant I wouldn't know what to believe.

Churches are the enclaves of fools.

Which makes you not a fool?

Why don't you start a thread about how smart you are and how you know everything and we Christians are ignorant savages?

I am Catholic. And a former Altar Boy. I have been to Mass more times than you've wiped your ass.

 

[Blackrook]

We get it. You hate Catholics. Religio-racist.

I did not post the article because I agreed with it. I posted the article to prove that the Protestants admit that none of their churches are infallible, and all teach error.

What is the error? How can any Protestant know whether his church is teaching him truth or error? All is uncertain, all is doubtful, and personally, if I was a Protestant I wouldn't know what to believe.

the 30,000 denom. is a lie. Second of all, the vast majority teach the same basic message of God's grace and salvation through Jesus Christ and His substitutionary death on the Cross for us sinners. Most of the inter-denom. differences are about MINOR NON-SALVATION issues like the end times, dress, etc...

If all those disagreements are so minor, why can't Protestants get along with each other? Why all the division and disagreements?

You claim to know the Biblical truth and preach it, but you're on very shaky ground. The fact is, Protestant leaders admit that their teachings are not infallible, and their interpretations of the Bible aren't infallible. And neither is yours.

So you could be wrong about everything you believe.

So why don't you grow some humility?

Jesus' teachings are infallible- not the RCC's. Protestants go by Jesus' teachings and not man made tradition. Try studying the Bible for yourself, guided by the Holy Spirit. What teachings do you not agree with in the Protestant Church?

The Holy Spirit doesn't guide you when you read the Bible. You have to figure out the Bible all by yourself. That's why Protestants can't agree on anything, because everyone has a different interpretation of the Bible.

For example, the Amish don't build churches because something in the Bible says not to build churches. But all the other denominations ignore this part of the Bible.

And the Bible says not to get divorced, unless your partner has committed adultery. EVERY Protestant denomination ignores this part of the Bible.

The Bible says to rest on the Sabbath. But ONLY the Seventh Day Adventists obey this part of the Bible. All other Protestants rest on Sunday, which is the FIRST day of the week.

You ask me what part of Protestant teaching I disagree with.

The answer is this: I agree with Protestants where they haven't departed from the truth taught by the Catholic Church.

I disagree with Protestants where they have departed from the truth taught by the Catholic Church.

Because unlike Protestant churches, the Catholic Church IS infallible, and CANNOT teach error in matters of faith and morals.

So as a Catholic, I know where I stand. The Catholic Church has my back, and I know they're not going to pull the rug out from under me.

 

[Blackrook]

We get it. You hate Catholics. Religio-racist.

I did not post the article because I agreed with it. I posted the article to prove that the Protestants admit that none of their churches are infallible, and all teach error.

What is the error? How can any Protestant know whether his church is teaching him truth or error? All is uncertain, all is doubtful, and personally, if I was a Protestant I wouldn't know what to believe.

Churches are the enclaves of fools.

Which makes you not a fool?

Why don't you start a thread about how smart you are and how you know everything and we Christians are ignorant savages?

I am Catholic. And a former Altar Boy. I have been to Mass more times than you've wiped your ass.

You are an obnoxious person, so your Catholic faith has taught you nothing about being less obnoxious.

 

[ninja007]

We get it. You hate Catholics. Religio-racist.

I did not post the article because I agreed with it. I posted the article to prove that the Protestants admit that none of their churches are infallible, and all teach error.

What is the error? How can any Protestant know whether his church is teaching him truth or error? All is uncertain, all is doubtful, and personally, if I was a Protestant I wouldn't know what to believe.

the 30,000 denom. is a lie. Second of all, the vast majority teach the same basic message of God's grace and salvation through Jesus Christ and His substitutionary death on the Cross for us sinners. Most of the inter-denom. differences are about MINOR NON-SALVATION issues like the end times, dress, etc...

If all those disagreements are so minor, why can't Protestants get along with each other? Why all the division and disagreements?

You claim to know the Biblical truth and preach it, but you're on very shaky ground. The fact is, Protestant leaders admit that their teachings are not infallible, and their interpretations of the Bible aren't infallible. And neither is yours.

So you could be wrong about everything you believe.

So why don't you grow some humility?

Jesus' teachings are infallible- not the RCC's. Protestants go by Jesus' teachings and not man made tradition. Try studying the Bible for yourself, guided by the Holy Spirit. What teachings do you not agree with in the Protestant Church?

The Holy Spirit doesn't guide you when you read the Bible. You have to figure out the Bible all by yourself. That's why Protestants can't agree on anything, because everyone has a different interpretation of the Bible.

For example, the Amish don't build churches because something in the Bible says not to build churches. But all the other denominations ignore this part of the Bible.

And the Bible says not to get divorced, unless your partner has committed adultery. EVERY Protestant denomination ignores this part of the Bible.

The Bible says to rest on the Sabbath. But ONLY the Seventh Day Adventists obey this part of the Bible. All other Protestants rest on Sunday, which is the FIRST day of the week.

You ask me what part of Protestant teaching I disagree with.

The answer is this: I agree with Protestants where they haven't departed from the truth taught by the Catholic Church.

I disagree with Protestants where they have departed from the truth taught by the Catholic Church.

Because unlike Protestant churches, the Catholic Church IS infallible, and CANNOT teach error in matters of faith and morals.

So as a Catholic, I know where I stand. The Catholic Church has my back, and I know they're not going to pull the rug out from under me.

I guess you missed this part of the bible- But when he, the Spirit of truth, comes, he will guide you into all the truth. He will not speak on his own; he will speak only what he hears, and he will tell you what is yet to come. (John 16:13)


Catholicism is unbiblical on so many levels you would need months to study all their errors and false teachings, but we can start with just a few of these false teachings. Purgatory, Mary Worship and the Priesthood.

 

[ninja007]

If sola Scriptura cannot be the correct method of determining truth because of the religious division among churches that claim to use sola Scriptura, then does this not also disqualify the Roman Catholic and Orthodox churches method of using tradition, since they are divided against themselves?

 

[ninja007]

If the personal illumination of the Holy Spirit upon each believer to understand the Bible is not a valid method of determining truth because of the many denominations that use this approach, then does it not follow that apostolic succession and oral church traditions are likewise invalid because the Roman Catholic and Orthodox churches are two denominations that use this method yet are divided on doctrine? Does this not prove both methods are wrong and a third method, one which we and the apostolic church practiced must be the correct method?

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

"Which Of The 30,000 Protestant Denominations Is The True Church Of God?"

None.

Or all – it really makes no difference.

 

[Blackrook]

I can't speak about the Orthodox. The Orthodox church is recognized by the Catholic Church as having Apostolic succession, valid sacraments, and they are invited to Councils of bishops.

The Protestant churches do not have Apostolic succession or valid sacraments. Negotiations were in the works to recognize the Anglicans, but they ruined it when they started ordaining women.

Sola Scriptura is an invention of the Protestant Reformers, and was a way to lure people away from the sacraments of the Catholic Church. So now every Protestant goes his entire life without partaking of the Eucharist, which is a tragedy in my opinion.

 

[ninja007]

I can't speak about the Orthodox. The Orthodox church is recognized by the Catholic Church as having Apostolic succession, valid sacraments, and they are invited to Councils of bishops.

The Protestant churches do not have Apostolic succession or valid sacraments. Negotiations were in the works to recognize the Anglicans, but they ruined it when they started ordaining women.

Sola Scriptura is an invention of the Protestant Reformers, and was a way to lure people away from the sacraments of the Catholic Church. So now every Protestant goes his entire life without partaking of the Eucharist, which is a tragedy in my opinion.

there are two sacraments to be kept in the NT. Baptism and the Lord's Supper, not 5 added manmade "sacraments" of the RCC.

 

[ninja007]

Are the seven Catholic sacraments biblical

 

[ninja007]

I can't speak about the Orthodox. The Orthodox church is recognized by the Catholic Church as having Apostolic succession, valid sacraments, and they are invited to Councils of bishops.

The Protestant churches do not have Apostolic succession or valid sacraments. Negotiations were in the works to recognize the Anglicans, but they ruined it when they started ordaining women.

Sola Scriptura is an invention of the Protestant Reformers, and was a way to lure people away from the sacraments of the Catholic Church. So now every Protestant goes his entire life without partaking of the Eucharist, which is a tragedy in my opinion.

S.S. is in the Bible..

Sola Scriptura proven from the Bible! Sola Scriptura home page Anti-Sola Scriptura arguments refuted! Pro-Tradition arguments refuted!

[TBODY] [/TBODY]

Introduction:

A. Sola Scriptura is taught in scripture:

1. We invite all those who rely on the organization to interpret the Bible for them including Orthodox, Catholics, and their twin organization, the Jehovah's Witnesses, to think for themselves. If you have the intelligence to read the newspaper, why not the Bible?
2. We are in a difficult position with Catholics, Orthodox and Watchtower believers alike, because when we point out the verses that prove sola Scriptura is taught in scripture, they don't believe they can understand the Bible without their church interpreting it for them... and they say sola Scriptura is not taught in the Bible. What an amazing system of circular deception the Catholic, Orthodox and Brooklyn New York, churches have invented.
3. Sola Scriptura means that you use the Bible alone for doctrine. This means Catholics and Orthodox need not appeal to their contradictory oral church traditions and Jehovah's Witnesses need not rely upon the Watchtower magazine to interpret the Bible for them.

B. Catholics and Orthodox claim Sola Scriptura not taught in the Bible itself and is unscriptural.

"the doctrine of sola Scriptura is not scriptural." ... "The idea of sola Scriptura was an invention of the sixteenth century." (THE WAY: What Every Protestant Should Know About the Orthodox Church, Clark Carlton, 1997, p 117, p 91)

1. On this page, is all the proof you need to know that both the Roman Catholic and Orthodox churches are wrong, because you will see for yourself, that Sola Scriptura is a Bible doctrine.
2. See also: The apostolic fathers taught Sola Scriptura.

Sola Scriptura Power texts Quick Reference

[TBODY] [/TBODY]

	1 Cor 4:6: Click for detailed outline. Jesus said, "upon this rock I will build My church" and Paul warned: "in building the church, do not exceed scripture!"
	Luke 1:1-4: Click for detailed outline. Luke begins by mentioning uninspired gospels by Christians, then the oral tradition of the apostles and concludes that scripture alone will allow Theophilus to know for certain what the truth is.
	Matthew 4:1-11. Three times Jesus was tempted by the Devil and each time Jesus replied exactly the same three dangerous words that defeated the Devil: "IT IS WRITTEN" Read it for yourself! If any one could have used oral tradition, it was Jesus, yet he chose the only safe and sure way to defeat Satan: Scripture. We just with that the Roman Catholic and Orthodox churches held scripture alone in the same high regard!
	2 Timothy 3:16-17: No matter how traditionalists twist it, it still says that scripture alone is all-sufficient to equip us for EVERY good work. "2 Timothy 3:16-17 doesn't say the Bible is all sufficient by itself." CLICK HERE "How could 2 Timothy 3:16 teach the all-sufficiency of scripture, when several New Testament books were not even written yet?" CLICK HERE
	Luke 10:26: "What is written in the Law? How does it read to you?" Jesus expected even his enemies to correctly interpret the Bible by simply reading and studying it. Unlike Jesus, Catholics and Orthodox don't ask you what you think scripture says, they just tell you how their church interprets it and you have no choice but to accept what they tell you.
	Acts 17:11-12: Even though the apostles were inspired with genuine oral revelation, they always directed people to the scriptures for the final determination of truth. Oral tradition is worthless without the witness of scripture! Unlike the apostles, Catholics and Orthodox would never send you to scripture, since they don't think you can even understand it!

[TBODY] [/TBODY]

I. The example of Jesus: Quoted scripture, never tradition:

A. Jesus defeated the three temptations of the Devil with, "it is written", not "I say". Mt 4:1-11

1. The Temptation of Jesus: Matthew 4:1-11. Three times Jesus was tempted by the Devil and each time Jesus replied exactly the same three dangerous words that defeated the Devil: "IT IS WRITTEN" Read it for yourself! If any one could have used oral tradition, it was Jesus, yet he chose the only safe and sure way to defeat Satan: Scripture. We just with that the Roman Catholic and Orthodox churches held scripture alone in the same high regard!
2. Traditionalists have simply not comprehended just how devastating it is that Jesus never appealed to his own authority in his 40 days temptation in the wilderness with the Devil.
3. Three times Jesus was tempted, three times Jesus replied, "It is written".
4. If oral tradition, or the authority of the church was valid, then Jesus would have at least one time referred to oral tradition, or used himself as the authority, as the Catholics, Orthodox and JW's use the church organization as an authority.

B. Never did Jesus refer to oral tradition to prove or defend truth.

1. Never does Jesus refer to oral traditions in a positive way.
2. Every time he defends truth he refers to the scriptures.
3. The only times Jesus referred to Oral traditions, was condemning them: 'But in vain do they worship Me, Teaching as doctrines the precepts of men.' "Neglecting the commandment of God, you hold to the tradition of men." He was also saying to them, "You are experts at setting aside the commandment of God in order to keep your tradition. "For Moses said, 'Honor your father and your mother'; and, 'He who speaks evil of father or mother, is to be put to death'; but you say, 'If a man says to his father or his mother, whatever I have that would help you is Corban (that is to say, given to God),' you no longer permit him to do anything for his father or his mother; thus invalidating the word of God by your tradition which you have handed down; and you do many things such as that." (Mark 7:7-13)

C. Jesus made over 100 references to scripture. Jesus never relies upon oral traditions but scripture alone. Let's follow the Lord's pattern of relying upon scripture!

1. "Have you not read" Matthew 12:3
2. "have you not read in the Law" Matthew 12:5
3. "Did you never read in the Scriptures" Matthew 21:42

D. Jesus expected the scriptures to be understood by the average man, even his enemies:

1. "What is written in the Law? How does it read to you?" (Luke 10:26)
2. Jesus said to them, "Is this not the reason you are mistaken, that you do not understand the Scriptures or the power of God? (Mark 12:24)
3. But Jesus answered and said to them, "You are mistaken, not understanding the Scriptures nor the power of God. (Matthew 22:29)
4. "The Son of Man is to go, just as it is written of Him" There were any oral traditions as to who the messiah was. All were wrong! Some thought he was merely a king, some merely a prophet, some merely a priest! (Matthew 26:24)
5. "What then is this that is written: 'The stone which the builders rejected, This became the chief corner stone'? (Luke 20:17)
6. "You search the Scriptures because you think that in them you have eternal life; it is these that testify about Me (John 5:39)
7. "How then will the Scriptures be fulfilled, which say that it must happen this way?" (Matthew 26:54)

II. The example of the apostles using Sola Scriptura:

A. Even though the apostles were inspired with genuine oral revelation, they always directed people to the scriptures for the final determination of truth. Oral tradition is worthless without the witness of scripture!

1. And according to Paul's custom, he went to them, and for three Sabbaths reasoned with them from the Scriptures (Acts 17:2)
2. Now these were more noble-minded than those in Thessalonica, for they received the word with great eagerness, examining the Scriptures daily to see whether these things were so. Therefore many of them believed, along with a number of prominent Greek women and men. (Acts 17:11-12)
3. "Apollos powerfully refuted the Jews in public, demonstrating by the Scriptures that Jesus was the Christ." (Acts 18:28)

B. Scriptures were read in the churches every Lord's Day:

1. Until I come, give attention to the public reading of Scripture, to exhortation and teaching. (1 Timothy 4:13)

III. Powerful Sola Scriptura proof texts:

A. Abide only within scripture to the exclusion of oral tradition:1 Corinthians 4:6

1. Now these things, brethren, I have figuratively applied to myself and Apollos for your sakes, so that in us you may learn not to exceed what is written, so that no one of you will become arrogant in behalf of one against the other. 1 Corinthians 4:6
2. Jesus said, "upon this rock I will build My church" and Paul warned: "in building the church, do not exceed scripture!"
3. 
   Click for detailed outline on 1 Cor 4:6 to prove sola Scriptura!

B. Scripture is understandable, even by young children:

1. "from childhood you have known the sacred writings which are able to give you the wisdom that leads to salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus." 2 Timothy 3:15
2. "if indeed you have heard of the stewardship of God's grace which was given to me for you; that by revelation there was made known to me the mystery, as I wrote before in brief. By referring to this, when you read you can understand my insight into the mystery of Christ, which in other generations was not made known to the sons of men, as it has now been revealed to His holy apostles and prophets in the Spirit; Ephesians 3:2-5
3. "For we write nothing else to you than what you read and understand, and I hope you will understand until the end" 2 Corinthians 1:13

C. Scripture alone is all-sufficient for life, morality, conduct and doctrine:

1. "All Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness; so that the man of God may be adequate, equipped for every good work." 2 Timothy 3:16-17
   
   
   
   CLICK HERE "2 Timothy 3:16-17 doesn't say the Bible is all sufficient by itself."
   
   
   
   CLICK HERE "How could 2 Timothy 3:16 teach the all-sufficiency of scripture, when several New Testament books were not even written yet?"
2. "I am writing these things to you, hoping to come to you before long; but in case I am delayed, I write so that you will know how one ought to conduct himself in the household of God, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and support of the truth." 1 Timothy 3:14-15
3. "seeing that His divine power has granted to us everything pertaining to life and godliness, through the true knowledge of Him who called us by His own glory and excellence. For by these He has granted to us His precious and magnificent promises, so that by them you may become partakers of the divine nature, having escaped the corruption that is in the world by lust." 2 Peter 1:3-4
4. My little children, I am writing these things to you so that you may not sin. 1 John 2:1

D. The Gospel of John, by itself, is sufficient to bring about saving faith in Christ without oral traditions and the other three gospels! Actually, this may be true of each of the four gospels, although it is only stated by John:

1. Therefore many other signs Jesus also performed in the presence of the disciples, which are not written in this book; but these have been written so that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing you may have life in His name. (John 20:30-31)

E. Scripture alone is all-sufficient for complete hope, joy and assurance of salvation without any oral tradition:

1. For whatever was written in earlier times was written for our instruction, so that through perseverance and the encouragement of the Scriptures we might have hope. (Romans 15:4)
2. These things we write, so that our joy may be made complete.1 John 1:4
3. These things I have written to you who believe in the name of the Son of God, so that you may know that you have eternal life. 1 John 5:13

F. Scripture is the standard to which oral tradition may not be added:

Although Roman Catholic and Orthodox defenders dismiss Rev 22:18 as applying only to the single book of revelation, these four texts prove it is a principle that applies to the whole Bible. Notice also that God knew that Revelation was the last book of the 66 book canon and that the warning not to add or take away from scripture is at the very end of the very last book of the canon. This simply cannot be coincidence but is God's eternal warning not to use oral traditions in addition to scripture! Although Revelation was not always placed in its current position at the end of the Bible, everyone always realized that it was the last book written.

1. "I testify to everyone who hears the words of the prophecy of this book: if anyone adds to them, God will add to him the plagues which are written in this book; and if anyone takes away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God will take away his part from the tree of life and from the holy city, which are written in this book." Revelation 22:18-19
2. "You shall not add to the word which I am commanding you, nor take away from it, that you may keep the commandments of the Lord your God which I command you." Deuteronomy 4:2
3. "Whatever I command you, you shall be careful to do; you shall not add to nor take away from it." Deuteronomy 12:32
4. "Every word of God is tested; He is a shield to those who take refuge in Him. Do not add to His words Or He will reprove you, and you will be proved a liar." Proverbs 30:5-6

G. Scripture is the Lord's command:

1. If anyone thinks he is a prophet or spiritual, let him recognize that the things which I write to you are the Lord's commandment. 1 Corinthians 14:37

H. Scripture is the standard through which Jesus will judge:

The words of Christ are only known today from scripture. Although traditionalists claim oral tradition, they cannot come up with even one thing Jesus said, that is not recorded in scripture that will judge us. Scripture is the all-sufficient standard for the "words of Jesus". Although we cannot be certain that the phrase, "books were opened" in Rev 20:12, refers to 66 books of scripture, we are certain that no oral tradition is part of Judgement. The passage clearly states that books, to the exclusion of oral tradition, is the standard of judgement. The Law of Liberty in Jas 2:12 is a direct reference to scripture.

1. "He who rejects Me and does not receive My sayings, has one who judges him; the word I spoke is what will judge him at the last day. John 12:48
2. And I saw the dead, the great and the small, standing before the throne, and books were opened; and another book was opened, which is the book of life; and the dead were judged from the things which were written in the books, according to their deeds. Revelation 20:12
3. So speak and so act as those who are to be judged by the law of liberty. James 2:12

I. Scripture is how we are reminded of oral traditions, proving oral tradition is replace by scripture:

"This is now, beloved, the second letter I am writing to you in which I am stirring up your sincere mind by way of reminder, that you should remember the words spoken beforehand by the holy prophets and the commandment of the Lord and Savior spoken by your apostles." 2 Peter 3:1-2

1. Here we have a reference to oral traditions, "spoken beforehand".
2. Although traditionalists claim oral tradition, they cannot come up with even one phrase or the apostles Jesus said, that is not recorded in scripture!
3. Yet Peter uses scripture as the method of reminding Christians of this oral tradition.
4. Since there is no known "oral tradition" of the specific words spoken, it is obvious that scripture replaced oral tradition.

J. Scripture alone brings certainty in the midst of various oral traditions, proving oral tradition is unreliable: Luke 1:1-4

1. "Inasmuch as many have undertaken to compile an account of the things accomplished among us, just as they were handed down to us by those who from the beginning were eyewitnesses and servants of the word, it seemed fitting for me as well, having investigated everything carefully from the beginning, to write it out for you in consecutive order, most excellent Theophilus; so that you may know the exact truth about the things you have been taught." Luke 1:1-4
2. Luke begins by mentioning uninspired gospels by Christians, then the oral tradition of the apostles and concludes that scripture alone will allow Theophilus to know for certain what the truth is.