What you have stated in your reply is very exactly my point. That “The quotation is an argument against Sola Scriptura, not the speaker’s own position.”

Again, my original objection was that the quote presented in this article was taken out of its entire context to make it seem as if Mr. Hahn was using that quote to describe himself. We are in agreement here that Mr. Hahn did not mean that at all.

And yes, I very much did misunderstand. I think any other reader of this article, without reading the last quote in its entire context, would also misunderstand. Because the way the quote is presented in this article, it could easily mislead a reader to conclude that Mr. Hahn was using that quote to describe himself.

You seem to have misunderstood the article. The quotation is an argument against Sola Scriptura, not the speaker’s own position. As such, it accurately stated the argument. The context you provided (and thank you for providing it) confirms that the quotation was used as the article says it was used.

Perhaps you have simply misunderstood – the point was not that Dr. Hahn himself does not respect authority, but that he claims Sola Scriptura-ians don’t respect authority unless it agrees with them (a bogus argument that we hear all the time from Rome’s apologists these days).

-TurretinFan

My objection is not whether the full link of the transcript is included or not. Yes, it is included.

My objection is to using an isolated quote in the article itself that makes it seem as if Hahn endorses “‘I will respect authority only when it agrees with my interpretation.’” Hahn is merely demonstrating the mindset of certain Protestant denominations, some of which he was involved with, that when they listen to authority, it is a ‘pick and choose’ respect for authority: ‘I will respect authority only when it agrees with my interpretation.’

Again, my objection is to using an isolated quote that can easily mislead a sincere reader of your article to believe that Hahn meant that quote for himself.

In Christ, by Christ, of Christ, through Christ, all things are! Thank God for Christ crucified for the sin of all who love God! Mine was of a very much of the worse of sinners. How than can I not continue as his grace leads me an look to Him alone for all I need?

Thank you for your blog to help me come to see Him more and more. I trust you will accept my apology here for my previous comment. Centered on the word by faith – Amen and Amen! I see you too are and am so glad for you. Do as he calls u to do.

In Christ with an ever so grateful heart and His rest and love, Bruce

I don’t understand your objection. I gave a link to the full debate which, of course, includes the quote in context. Am I to understand you to say that the above quote is not what Hahn believes about Sola Scriptura? Please feel free to explain.

Whether out of honest or accidental omission, I do not know, but you did not relay the last quote in your article in its entire context. It is quite misleading to make it seem that Mr. Hahn meant that quote for himself. The full context of the quote reads:

“I’d like to also point out that when we are speaking about being centered on the Word, I say ‘yeah’ and ‘amen’. You’ve got to remain centered in on the Word of God, but I don’t see anywhere in Scripture proof that we should reduce the Word of God to the printed page. And I sense that that’s what sola scriptura does. Respect for authority? Yes, but it’s a pick and choose kind of respect. “I will respect authority only when it agrees with my interpretation.’ Well, most parents would not tolerate that kind of respect within their household.”

Sorry for my rant. But I love the study of God by his very word and not the popes non-verbal and even taught understanding of him! What kind of understanding is that? God rules all man, not the pope who desires his rule here on earth!

Well brother, who are the “people” you are talking about? is it the body of believers (christians) who grouped together (councils of Hippo and Carthage)and decided to declare such books were divinely inspired?

If you were refering to the above then I agree with you but if you are insinuating that somehow people with the same beliefs started to group and align themselves together and within by themselves somehow already “KNEW” which books were INSPIRED, so sorry I don't buy that…I go with written historical records.

However, when you said, ” I simply believe that Jesus' intention was never a hierarchal system of works-salvation and endless traditions “…Well brother Douglas I guessed Apostle Paul would also disagree with you because he told us that the church of God is hierachical in nature, actually Paul described it as with deacons, priests and their Bishops.

I'm not surprised God set-up it like that because in His Kingdom (Heaven) it is like that, HIERACHICAL…where He is the Head, and the Archangels and angels follow their own rank, position and dominions.

Peace of Christ be with you.

Well brother, who are the “people” you are talking about? is it the body of believers (christians) who grouped together (councils of Hippo and Carthage)and decided to declare such books were divinely inspired?

If you were refering to the above then I agree with you but if you are insinuating that somehow people with the same beliefs started to group and align themselves together and within by themselves somehow already “KNEW” which books were INSPIRED, so sorry I don't buy that…I go with written historical records.

However, when you said, ” I simply believe that Jesus' intention was never a hierarchal system of works-salvation and endless traditions “…Well brother Douglas I guessed Apostle Paul would also disagree with you because he told us that the church of God is hierachical in nature, actually Paul described it as with deacons, priests and their Bishops.

I'm not surprised God set-up it like that because in His Kingdom (Heaven) it is like that, HIERACHICAL…where He is the Head, and the Archangels and angels follow their own rank, position and dominions.

Peace of Christ be with you.

Finally, your snide comment that Jesus didn't leave us copies of the Bible is rather inane – considering that inscripturation was still taking place at that point. I am not denying that there is such a thing as the Church – I simply believe that Jesus' intention was never a hierarchal system of works-salvation and endless traditions explaining away what the clear surface understanding of Scripture yields, particularly in the context of the Gospel – which Rome does not have. I could believe in a Pope, cardinals, bishops, etc. – if they believed the Biblical Gospel, but Rome doesn't, and because it doesn't understand the Gospel, everything ELSE is off-center.

“The Bible creates the Church – not the other way around.” Im sorry but I don't agree with what you have said and together with historical records have shown otherwise in the Catholic Church's Councils of Hippo and Carthage (300-400 A.D.) that had finalized which set of books belong from thousands of books in that era.

You could deny but written historical records don't lie.

Jesus didn't leave us copies of the Bible when He ascended to Heaven but rather He gave the authority and His commission to 12 sinful men who were “leaders and bishops” of their time.

Jesus left us with an answer, “If he refuses to listen to them, tell it to the CHURCH; and if he refuses to listen even to the Church, treat him as you would a pagan or a tax collector.” (Matt 18:17)

Notice Jesus didn't say go to the Bible but go to My CHURCH.

Is the “church” Jesus refering to was a local church, a whole body of believers as protestants believed regardless of affilliations? like people aligning themselves who have the same believe?

Could my church pass a decision and judgment to declare the guy who didn't listen as ANATHEMA?

Not to mention some issues not even found in the Bible like embryonic stem-cell, genetic design, cloning, in-vitro fertilization etc. WHO do you think has the authority to speak for Christ that is binding to all christians? Jehovah Witness? Mormons? Seventh day or your church or just YOU?

Do you think Jesus overlooked these LIFE issues when He left us 2,000 years ago? besides He is the Author of Life, don't you think?

Do you know that ALL Christian Churches before 1930 agreed that artificial contraception was contrary to the Will of God? because of secular pressures christian churches caved-in and crumbled to the ground one by one that opened the gates of pornography, free sex movement, abortions, gay-marriage etc.

If you trust and believe the promise of God to Peter and His Church, that “the gates of hell will not prevail against it” until the end of ages because just by teaching what is Biblically and morally wrong is already a forfeiture of that GREAT PROMISE of Jesus.

The promise was not based on a person (pope) which we are all sinners but by God Himself working through His appointed one to lead His Church (like Moses did).

Peace in Christ.

Indeed, the entirety of the Protestant experiment hinges on the truth of the idea that the Scriptures were intended to function as described by the Westminster Confession. The Scripture’s inability to perform the ecclesial function expected of it by the Confession is one of the more common factors provoking Protestants to consider the claims of the Catholic Church, and eventually leave their communities to seek full communion with the body that Christ founded to give us the true interpretation of Sacred Scripture.

Do Protestant churches not speak to the issues of “cloning? stem-cell? RU-486? gay-marriage?“

Who says that the Bible is the only authority?

What to you mean by “GOOD excuse to hide responsibility and authority to oneself?” It seems there are cases where the Roman Catholic Church hides behind itself. For example, this post.

Do Protestant churches not speak to the issues of “cloning? stem-cell? RU-486? gay-marriage?“

Who says that the Bible is the only authority?

What to you mean by “GOOD excuse to hide responsibility and authority to oneself?” It seems there are cases where the Roman Catholic Church hides behind itself. For example, this post.

If she is not the appointed one with authority from God, then WHO? Good example today, who speaks for Christ today in issues like artificial contraception (which by the way prior to the 1930's ALL christian churches agreed it is contrary to the Will of God), how about cloning? stem-cell? RU-486? gay-marriage? and so many more daunting issues not even mentioned in the Bible?

I really do think the claim that the Bible is the only authority is a GOOD excuse to hide responsibility and authority to oneself. Just by claiming which is “essential” or “not” in the bible is already an affirmation of authority which protestants hated the Catholic Church for.

It is just a matter of who is the authority which speaks for Jesus?