Sola Scriptura CANT Be True - Answering Tough Questions About Christianity

Answering tough questions about Christianity and difficult Bible verses explained with church history and apologetics.
#solascriptura #truth #bible #apologetics #faith #evangelistnickgarrett #churchhistory #gospel #catholic #catholicchurch #protestant #reformation #biblestudy #sacrements #catechism #evangelism
Email [e-mail]
Website www.evangelistnickgarrett.com
Mail
Evangelist Nick Garrett
P.O. Box 831
Chesapeake Beach, MD 20732
Digital options to support our work financially
Paypal PayPal.me/NGarr...
Venmo @Nicholas-Garrett-17
Cashapp $EvangelistNickG
Purchase my books in paperback or for kindle/electronic device here - www.amazon.com/author/nicholasgarrett
“Just Tell Me the Truth About the Crusades” Paper $7.99, elec.$3.99
:Just Tell Me the Truth About the Future of Christianity” Paper $7.99, elec.$3.99
“Just Tell Me the Truth About the Early Church Councils” Paper $5.99, elec.$2.99 (this book is slated for a second edition and rewrites in 2023/2024)
KZbin - / evangelistnickgarrett
(Check out our cool Church History Merch below any of our vids)
Twitter- EvangelistNickG
Facebook - evangelistnickgarrett
Instagram - evangelistnickgarrett
TikTok - / evangelistnic. .
Bitchute - www.bitchute.com/EvangelistNickG
Patreon www.patreon.com/evangelistnickg
Rumble -
Pinterest - pin.it/7feyj0v
Discord Server - / discord
Evangelist Nick on all apps
(shortcut-on most platforms just search #evangelistnickgarrett, @EvangelistNickG, or Evangelist Nick Garrett)

[@partofthetribe3277]

Please never stop making videos

[@cmac369]

Watching the Chosen episode where Jesus changed Simon's name to Peter, it was very awkward when he said, "and on this rock I will build my church". It was like he was talking to Peter than suddenly started talking someone else's who was invisible. I know they did that intentionally because they have a mixed audience. I don't understand how anyone can hold to the idea that Jesus was referring to the rock they were standing on, how is the rock he's standing on the foundation of his church? In what sense is that a foundation? And doesn't it completely miss the point that Jesus is building his church on a rock so that his church will have a strong enduring foundation? Why would some pagan site be a strong enduring foundation? And finally, people use keys, not rocks. I think that scene was a good illustration of bizarre the protestant interpretation is.

[@maryruth7977]

The Rock was the confession that the Holy Spirit gave Him "You are the Christ, the Son of the Living God. Jesus is the Rock of our confession.

[@jsnwaffles]

The original messianic church split at the end of the second century over the changing of Sabbath from Saturday to Sunday. The churches of Asia minor held to keep the Sabbath on Saturday and the churches that became the Catholic Church separated from those that wouldn’t change.

[@EvangelistNickGarrett]

Good on you, you know your history - there is truth in what your saying, but the institutional church rooted in the five ancient centers is still the Roman Catholic Church of today - it’s the repository of the records of the faith - even the ones that point to the narrative you’re discussing. I couldn’t agree more that the event you described happened. I own the volumes in which you can read about them. But I don’t see any church around the world that has a greater claim to being got institutional repository of the Christian faith on earth, rooted in the ancient centers Jerusalem, Antioch, Rome, Alexandria, and Byzantium/Constantinople.

[@milkman6385]

7:10 this is just a lie. St Augustine wrote this: But who can fail to be aware that the sacred canon of Scripture, both of the Old and New Testament, is confined within its own limits, and that it stands so absolutely in a superior position to all later letters of the bishops, that about it we can hold no manner of doubt or disputation whether what is confessedly contained in it is right and true; but that all the letters of bishops which have been written, or are being written, since the closing of the canon, are liable to be refuted if there be anything contained in them which strays from the truth, either by the discourse of some one who happens to be wiser in the matter than themselves, or by the weightier authority and more learned experience of other bishops, by the authority of Councils; and further, that the Councils themselves, which are held in the several districts and provinces, must yield, beyond all possibility of doubt, to the authority of plenary Councils which are formed for the whole Christian world; and that even of the plenary Councils, the earlier are often corrected by those which follow them, when, by some actual experiment, things are brought to light which were before concealed, and that is known which previously lay hid, and this without any whirlwind of sacrilegious pride, without any puffing of the neck through arrogance, without any strife of envious hatred, simply with holy humility, catholic peace, and Christian charity? (On Baptism 2.3.4)

[@colina4699]

If you want to say that our authority is the Bible and the teachings of the apostles, then you are by default arguing for Sola Scriptura, because the teachings of the apostles are recorded ONLY in the NT.

[@EvangelistNickGarrett]

The teachings of the apostles are documented and covered in dozens of additional places. For Protestants they are not authoritative - it is rare they are acknowledged. Church histories and the writings of the early fathers in addition to other items. The authority of scripture and tradition are in the Magesterium or teaching office of the church, this is where another deviation occurs, it’s viewed as manmade, uninspired, and without truth and value. I find it to be helpful and better to be built on a consensus than the interpretation of one person in one building. It’s not good when a church has to count on one person.

[@colina4699]

@@EvangelistNickGarrett Protestants place more authority on the actual writings of the apostles because they are inspired by the Holy Spirit. The writings of their students were not inspired. If they were just as authoritative then the Early Church would have included them in the canon of scripture. You seem to not understand Protestantism. Confessional and historic Reformed, Presbyterians, Lutherans, and Anglicans do not count on one person. Each group had its own councils of educated clergy and layman sit down and interpret the scriptures so that they could have an agreed-upon consensus that was recorded in their respective confessions. Even a group like the Southern Baptist Convention has its own confession.

[@houbertcanitio2199]

@@colina4699 "Protestants place more authority on the actual writings of the apostles because they are inspired by the Holy Spirit. The writings of their students were not inspired. If they were just as authoritative then the Early Church would have included them in the canon of scripture" But not all uninspired writings are not true in their teachings, for examples in the early church many of them believed in the stories of the protoevangelium of James, and many of them also believed in the stories of the deuterocanonical, so really there's no black and white teaching of inspired scripture and uninspired scripture. In fact, uninspired scripture is quoted in the bible like Jude quoting Enoch 1, Jude 1:14-15

[@colina4699]

@@houbertcanitio2199 Whenever an uninspired passage is quoted in scripture, it by default becomes inspired, so your point is moot. Who has ever argued that the only true teachings are those found in scripture? What point are you trying to make?

[@jsnwaffles]

Since Deuteronomy was written and all the prophets that came after, we are commanded to memorize and hold ourselves to the words of God. Or we will go astray our own way, creating our own laws to uphold as if they are from God and ultimately worshipping a creation of our own making. Every Israelite and Christian absolutely must do this to walk the narrow path. The Papacy interprets scripture and believes their interpretation is sola scriptora right? Gods Word absolutely take’s precedence over any preacher or priest. In the New Testament and the Old we are called to hold everything to scripture to test the message and messenger.

[@houbertcanitio2199]

Then how do you understand Matthew 16 and 18 binding and loosing?

[@EvangelistNickGarrett]

The papacy doesn’t have anything to do with sola scriptura - it’s a protestant doctrine of only a few hundred years - before that scripture had been an authority in the church for centuries alongside apostolic tradition. The church has morphed and changed so much over time that the papacy of today has very little if anything to do with interpreting scripture - there are vast departments with experts and historians specially trained and collaborating - since scriptural authority is not a difference between protestants and Catholics, but something they share in common, you can view the same things happening in the Catholic Church with scripture as happen in the Protestant world - God’s word is unchanging, but there is never a shortage of people claiming inspiration and trying to talk about and interpret what scripture means - from the most educated to the least. Understand that my point is never to discredit any denomination. I believe we are many parts and all one body. God calls us two different places for different reasons at different times. I do worry for my protestant friends that their modes of observance in church service are woefully incomplete. On one hand denominations are simply different expressions of worship and different emphasis on the same doctrines that were universally shared and believed. I think it is very problematic that since the reformation various sects and offshoots have continued to interpret and draft new doctrines. This is a huge problem and as the tree of Protestantism grows faster than ever, its branches die quicker than ever. it is in the protestant world there is an alleged devotion to scripture as the authority, but no concern whatever that there are sects literally changing what it means in practice all the time year after year. The institutional church doesn’t do that. I can go to mass in India, and even though I don’t speak the language, I know exactly what’s going on, what’s being said, and what to do. The Catholic Church doesn’t change liturgy unless it’s to go back to more and earlier practices as they are proven and done worldwide by ecumenical council - not one person in one building in Omaha. I find the institution to be a more stable and safe repository of the Christian faith, but to each his or her own. It’s Gods call, not mine. And of course, we agree that the word of God takes precedence over any preacher . Priests don’t even have that authority. Only Protestant pastors do.

[@houbertcanitio2199]

@@EvangelistNickGarrett I agree its best to stick what the early church believe on authority i.e Scripture, Traditions and the Church Magiesterium

[@jsnwaffles]

@@houbertcanitio2199 Moses was given authority to bind and loose laws off of the laws of God. Jesus referenced then when he said Moses allowed you to divorce because your heart was hard. Rabbis bind and loose what kind of crock pot you can use, or if the light in your fridge can be called “lighting a fire” during when you open the door on the sabbath. In the New Testament this is talked about in areas of personal convictions and observance like in Romans 14. In Judaism There is different camps of observance as far as different Rabbis teach. This is the same. Main point is this doesn’t give anyone the right to make rules that are equal to or superior over Gods laws. Jesus literally came rebuking and judging the rabbis for making their own extra rules about the sabbath and hand washing and holding them as equal to Gods laws and telling others to observe them.

[@houbertcanitio2199]

@@jsnwaffles Then what the hell is the council of Jerusalem in Acts 15. That's literally the Chapter in Acts where the Apostles practice their Keys and bind and loose divinely inspired laws. And with that council the sinaitic covenant are no longer applied to us, and reverted us back in the pre sinaitic covenant similar to the noachide covenant. Btw since all Protestant adhere to the council of Jerusalem, then the council are the infallible word of God since it is declared in scripture that this authority is granted to us. In fact, all christians can bind and loose divinely inspired laws so long as they are consistent with the teaching of God of course

[@onionsans]

I'm pretty sure you're misrepresenting sola scriptura. Sola scriptura is the fact the the bible is the only infallible authority. Nothing beyond that. your definition of sola scriptura is wrong and therefore this entire video is useless

[@EvangelistNickGarrett]

Feel free to approach the arguments I’ve made against its veracity. By not agreeing with the definition we don’t address the extremely valid arguments made for it, and the problems present in real world practice. I do note the scripture is Gods inspired infallible word, it is NOT and Cannot be the sole authority and have functioning true historical Christianity in practice that is long lasting . There is also the evidence of it in practice that supports my arguments. I don’t doubt anyone’s good intentions - I don’t think we are at war.

[@onionsans]

@@EvangelistNickGarrett I will feel free indeed. I appreciate your openness. 1. The definition of sola scriptura is that the bible is the only infallible authority. Other authorities can exist, but they must conform to the teachings of the bible. 2. sola scriptura does not require that everyone has a bible. It simply says that all authority must come from the bible. 3. Actually, sola scriptura comes to different conclusions than the early church saints, and we can defend these conclusions very strongly, which is why the reformation was so successful in the first place. 4. Protestants use the exact same tools that the church used. It is not anachronism, by saying that it is, you are insulting those who study the bible vigorously, yet come to conclusions other than those of the catholic church. You have no actual basis here. 5. The idea of apostolic succession comes from a misunderstanding of Matthew 16:13-19. Also the scripture came before the traditions. 6. That 6 inch square brick is the cornerstone of that building, from which the building could not be built without, making it the most important part of the building by far. 7. Actually, the church is about teaching first, works second. Also, there exist actual denominations that have no organization at all, such at Congregationalists and Baptists, and they always come to the same conclusions. Therefore there is nothing wrong with letting people read the bible themselves and understanding themselves what it means. The early church was not scared of the people finding a different interpretation, they were probably more scared of the people finding out that what the church had been teaching was wrong.

[@julianemperor2554]

I agree Sola Scriptura is the only truth to judge and only in the Eastern Orthodox Church is that truth visible in every service! Amin ☦️☦️☦️

[@houbertcanitio2199]

@@onionsans " Actually, sola scriptura comes to different conclusions than the early church saints, and we can defend these conclusions very strongly, which is why the reformation was so successful in the first place." Actually this is wrong, none of the early church saints affirm to only scripture, they also affirm traditions and councils like St Athanasius, Basil and Cyprian " The idea of apostolic succession comes from a misunderstanding of Matthew 16:13-19. Also the scripture came before the traditions" But traditional protestant do have apostolic succession, what they mean is ordination and succession that can be trace to the Apostles you are conflating apostolic succession with episcopal succession "Therefore there is nothing wrong with letting people read the bible themselves and understanding themselves what it means. The early church was not scared of the people finding a different interpretation, they were probably more scared of the people finding out that what the church had been teaching was wrong." Well if you read against heresies by St Irenaeus you know that he also criticized groups who follow their own understanding of the church so the ECF may not have the same opinion like a baptist or Congregationalist, moreover St Ignatius also writes that a church that is schismatic like most Prrotestant who broke off churches and make churches everytime can't be the true church. So really, this was the position fo the early church

[@EvangelistNickGarrett]

@houbertcanitio2199 they weren’t scared at all of people knowing or reading - the world of the time was different, no phones, cars, tvs, internet, newspapers, etc. this is silly. You presume bad intent to n the institutional church instead of reality which is most people in most churches have good intentions and are doing the best they can, but we are sinful, and therefore our institutions are sinful. If one actually reads the volumes of the early church, this becomes evident and apparent immediately . I think people understand that the Roman Catholic Church is the true church because of posts like your own , where you expect the church to be perfect because it’s gods, but it’s not so it becomes the bad guy for every mistake. Humanity has made in the Christian faith for the past 2000 years. The church has never claimed perfection. I do agree with your line of thinking, but I would use different terms - there is a difference between apostolic succession and apostolic lineage. The two split by the end of the 100s A.D.

[@andrewhrabina9322]

Another wonderful message!!

[@BryanKirch]

Apostle means librarian in Aramaic. They simply went door to door giving people bibles. And Jesus told them to dust off their sandals if they didn’t read the Bible. Unfortunately most people were illiterate so it’s a miracle the Holy Spirit allowed them to read the Bible’s the apostles were giving. Much like jehovas witnesses and Mormons

[@EvangelistNickGarrett]

lol. 😂 you have a great sense of humor.

[@vanessamartz7596]

The Bible was collated during the reign of Theodocia and was not available to any Apostle.

[@BryanKirch]

@@vanessamartz7596 oh. My bad. Thank you for correcting me.

[@jacobusvandermerwe1922]

Jesus said when He the Spirit of Truth comes He will teach you. He will take of mine and make it known to you. Study to shew thyself approved. 2Ti 2:15 KJV Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth. Jesus also warned us that in the end times great deception will come to deceive even the very elect. Jesus used fishermen The Bible also says that God hides His Truth from the wise and the learned The Bible also says that knowledge will increase in the end times. Not one church will be raptured Individuals are raptured Those who are alive and remain will be caught up to meet the Lord in the air. Scripture confirms Scripture. 2Co 13:1 KJV This is the third time I am coming to you. In the mouth of two or three witnesses shall every word be established. That keeps one from error

[@Humbleservant0707]

Agreed. This means that all end of times, churches are false. Jesus led me to the Catholic church, and I feel blessed that He didn't forget me. He forgave me for everything and loved me enough to send me home. When He left me, I was given a gift, and when I read, daily, I understand is all very clearly. We are at the end. Prepare.

[@vanessamartz7596]

He did teach us. Peter feed my sheep. Peter thou art Rock.

[@y.cschmidlin8172]

Well, i did not know that the Spirit of truth is the RCC . What a discovery?

[@EvangelistNickGarrett]

It is for me. It may not be for everyone else. God calls us to different places for different reasons.

[@Humbleservant0707]

But clearly, many Christians don't have the HS or aren't listening to the spirit of truth. Otherwise, they have one interpretation and be under one church. Irrefutable. Jesus gave us a church with the truth and authority because He didn't want us confused and misled by false teachers. The Catholic church has withstood 2000 years above any secular or religious institution, and teachings are consistent. Jesus didn't want us divided and confused the way Satan wants us. Jesus made sure He left us with stability and truth.

[@thund3r94]

@@Humbleservant0707when did he give us a building? (That’s what a church is) he gave us his life and resurrection

[@Humbleservant0707]

@thund3r94 Do you go to church in a building, and if so, why? I mean, if the church isn't spiritual and a building, why go to church at all? Also, what does the building have to do with my comment? Based on your question, I'd say you are in support of ALL denominations. Church buildings should be demolished. What say you about the HS? I know how the HS speaks to me. God always supernaturally validates when the HS is speaking to me. However, if we all have the HS, then wouldn't we all come to the same truth? When you have a quarrel with a brother and you and two witnesses can't resolve it, what church do you go to for resolution? Please.. I am very interested in how you reconcile this.

[@tacticalinsanity7375]

@@thund3r94 When He gave Peter the "keys" to it (the Church).