2) "...By revelation there was made known to me the mystery, as I wrote before in brief. And 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..." (Eph. 3:2-5).
3) "...These are written that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that
believing you may have life in His name." (John 20:31).
4) "If anyone thinks himself to be a prophet or spiritual, let him acknowledge that the things
which I write to you are the commandments of the Lord." (1 Cor. 14:37).
5) "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 may 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 Tim. 3:14-15).
6) "And these things we write to you that your joy may be full." (1 John 1:4).
7) "My little children, these things I write to you, so that you may not sin." (1 John 2:1).
8) "These things I have written to you who believe in the name of the Son of God, that you may
know that you have eternal life, and that you may continue to believe in the name of the Son of
God." (1 John 5:13).
9) "Now these things, brethren, I have figuratively applied to myself and Apollos for your sakes,
that in us you might learn not to exceed what is written, in order that no one of you might become
arrogant in behalf of one against the other." (1 Cor. 4:6).
10) "All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for
correction, for instruction in righteousness, that the man of God may be complete, thoroughly
equipped for every good work." (2 Tim. 3:16-17).
11) "...And the dead were judged according to their works, by the things which were written in the books." (Rev. 20:12).
12) I humbly beseech all the readers of this Debate to carefully examine the above passages. Each
of them mention the sacred writings ("these are written," "the things which I write" etc.), and
reveal what they (the inspired writings) provide ("that you may believe," "that you may know you
have eternal life," etc.). The passages, and others like them, claim for themselves that they alone
are the authority. There are no passages which state that "oral traditions independent of
Scripture," "laws given by the church," "ex-cathedra pronouncements of the Popes," etc., are
given to bring life in the name of Jesus (John 20:31), to equip for every good work, (2 Tim. 3:17),
to give assurance of salvation (1 John 5:13), to judge us in the last day (Rev. 20:12), etc. The
Hebrew writer made an argument from the silence of the Scriptures. He said, "For it is evident
that our Lord arose from Judah, of which tribe Moses spoke nothing concerning priesthood."
(Heb. 7:14). In other words, since Moses spoke nothing concerning anyone from the tribe of
Judah being a priest, Jesus could not have been a priest under the Levitical system. Likewise,
since the New Testaments Scriptures spoke nothing concerning other authorities in religion today,
there are no other authorities.
13) It is evident that my opponent in his Denial (Nov. 1, 1997) has twisted and perverted several
passages in effort to prove that there are other authorities in religion today besides the New
Testament Scriptures. For example, he perverted the Scriptures by taking the verses which were
spoken to the apostles and prophets, and applied them to the church. He said, "If you have a
church commissioned by Jesus to bind and loose (Mt.16:18-19; Mt. 18:17-18) with the authority
of God behind it to guide into all truth (Jn 16:13; 14:26) then we have something solid to stand
on." (Par. 3 & 14). I beg of our readers to carefully examine those verses. The church was not
given the authority to bind and loose, guide into all truth, etc. Only the apostles and prophets
were given that authority. The phrase "pillar and ground of truth" (1 Tim. 3:15) does not mean
that the church is the originator of truth, or that it can make or change the laws of God. It simply
means that the church is the upholder, defender and proclaimer of the truth. The apostles often
praised the churches for proclaiming the truth, "for from you the word of the Lord has been
spread abroad" (1 Thess. 1:8; see also Acts 11:22; 14:26-27). Churches were partakers in the
defense and confirmation of the truth by sending funds to support those who were preaching the
truth (Phil. 4:15-16; 2 Cor. 11:8-9). There are no verses in all of the holy Scriptures which
indicates that the church has the authority to originate truth or to decree laws for God. The
apostles and prophets, and they alone, were commissioned by the Lord, not to originate truth, but
to reveal truth. Their task was once and for all completed for they gave us the written New
Testament of Christ. The responsibility of the church today is simply to follow, defend and
proclaim the truth which they revealed.
14) My opponent makes the oft repeated argument on "Moses' seat" from Matt. 23:2-3. He
quotes David Palm who said, "Jesus here draws on oral Tradition to uphold the legitimacy of this
teaching office in Israel. The Catholic Church, in upholding the legitimacy of both Scripture and
Tradition, follows the example of Jesus." Again, we plead with our readers to carefully and
honestly examine Matt. 23:2-3. Those verses say absolutely nothing about "the legitimacy of both
Scripture and Tradition." Jesus was simply telling the people to follow the things which the
Pharisees taught them by Moses' authority, but not to follow their example, because they did not
practice what they taught. Instead of "drawing on oral Tradition" and "upholding the legitimacy of
both Scripture and Tradition," Jesus repeatedly condemned the oral traditions handed down by
the Jews. He said, "All too well you reject the commandment of God, that you may keep your
tradition...making the word of God of no effect through your tradition which you have handed
down. And many such things you do." (Mark 7:9,13). Jesus' manner of condemning the traditions
of men was, "God said...but you say..." (Matt. 15:4-5; Mark 7:10-11). After He mentioned, "God
said," He then quoted Scripture. That was His method of drawing a clear, sharp contrast between
the written Word of God and the oral traditions handed down by men.
15) In paragraph 9, my opponent perverts 2 Thess. 2:15 by trying to make it teach that we are to
receive oral traditions which have been handed down independent of the Scriptures. Again, I
beseech our readers to please examine the verse very carefully and see if it is teaching what he is
claiming. The verse says, "So then, brethren, stand firm and hold to the traditions which you were
taught by us, either by word of mouth or by letter." (2 Thess. 2:15 Catholic Edition - RSV). "So
then, brethren, stand firm and hold to the traditions which you were taught, whether by word of
mouth or by letter from us." (2 Thess. 2:15 NASV). Thus, please notice: (1) The Thessalonians
were not to hold to just any traditions, but "the traditions which you were taught by us." The
authority was in the inspired apostles and prophets and the traditions taught by them whether
verbally or written were to be held. (2) The expression, "which you were taught" is past tense.
They were to hold to the traditions which they had already received. The verse is certainly not
teaching that mankind would continue to be guided by "oral traditions" which would be handed
down through the ages by word of mouth.
16) As Catholics often do, my opponent quoted passages which reveal that the Word of God was
given orally in that early age, and then assumed that it would be given orally in every age. (Par.
8). He assumed the very thing he needs to prove. To assume something, and then assert it, is no
way to prove anything. As readers of this debate know, in my Affirmative (Nov. 1, 1997), I went
to great lengths to show from the Scriptures that there was a time when the Word of God was
given all orally, then both orally and written, and now all written. I also quoted many passages
which reveal what the inspired writings claim for themselves. I beg of my opponent to please
show by the Scriptures that the "Word of God independent of the Scriptures" would continue to
be handed down through the ages. I emphatically deny that a continual handing down of the
"Word of God independent of Scripture" is authorized in the Scriptures. We are not told: (1) that
we are to receive it, (2) from whom we are to receive it, nor (3) how we are to receive it.
17) My opponent made the oft repeated Catholic argument that the apostles and prophets were
not commissioned to write anything (Par. 2 and 14). He asked, "Will my opponent who will admit
that of the 12 apostles, only Matthew, John and Peter wrote anything, accuse the 9 other apostles
of not doing their job because they didn't write?" Of course, I would not accuse them of not doing
their job. Their job was to deliver God's revelation to mankind (Eph. 3:2-5), and they completed
their task in that early age. Jude said, "...I found it necessary to write to you exhorting you to
contend earnestly for the faith which was once for all delivered to the saints." (Jude 3). Christ
commanded John, "Write therefore the things that thou hast seen, and the things that are, and the
things that are to come hereafter." (Rev. 1:19). If the Catholic argument that "the apostles were
not commanded to write" proves anything, it proves that we should not have the Scriptures at all.
If the New Testament was never intended to have been written, there shouldn't be one, and
definitely, Catholics shouldn't be quoting from it as an authority.
18) My opponent also made the oft repeated Catholic argument that the Catholic Church gave us
the Scriptures. He used two long paragraphs laboring that point (Par. 3 & 4) and listed it as No. 2
in his conclusion. I remind my opponent that it is his responsibility in this debate to deny the
proposition, "The inspired writings (the holy Scriptures of the New Testament of Jesus Christ)
claim for themselves that they alone are the standard of authority in Religion today." Thus, I beg
of him to please SHOW BY THE SCRIPTURES that they do not claim for themselves to be the
sole authority. Whether or not the Catholic Church determined the Canon of the New Testament
Scriptures is another debate for another time. To show, however, that the Catholic argument can
be easily answered, I copy the concluding remarks from my Essay entitled, "Did the Catholic
Church give us the Bible?"
19) "We have studied, therefore, that the Catholic Church argues that since one of its councils in
390 selected the sacred books, one can accept them only on the basis of its authority. We have
answered by showing: (1) The Bible is inspired and has authority, not because a church declared it
so but because God made it so. (2) Jesus did not teach the people in His day that they could
accept the Old Testament Scriptures only on the basis of those who placed the books into one
volume. (3) It is a mere assumption that the Council of Hippo in 390 was a Council of the church
which is now the Roman Catholic Church. (4) God did not give councils the authority to select
His sacred books, nor does He expect men to receive His books only on the basis of councils. (5)
The Catholic Church is not solely responsible for the gathering and selection of the New
Testament books. (6) The Catholic Church has not been the sole possessor of the Bible at any
time. (7) Even if it could be proven that the Catholic Church gathered the books into one volume,
it still remains that it is not following the Bible today."
20) My opponent quotes Matt. 2:23 and Jude 14-15 and says that this is oral tradition at work
(Par. 7). We plead with him to please explain how those verses prove that "apostolic oral
traditions" are an authority in addition to the Holy Scriptures. The verses do not show "oral
tradition at work," but "revelation by Holy Spirit at work." The Holy Spirit is not dependent on
oral traditions to deliver God's message to man. The Holy Spirit knows perfectly what was
spoken by Him in every age whether it be oral or written. Even though we don't have all the
words that Enoch orally spoke during that early age, we now have some of them because the
Holy Spirit has written them for us. My opponent said, "As Palm writes, 'Paul does not hesitate to
draw on stock oral Tradition to enhance his presentation of the gospel.'" He also added in Par. 8
regarding the apostle Paul, "In fact, he shows a reliance on apostolic oral tradition himself by
mentioning a saying of Jesus nowhere found in Scripture (Acts 20:35)." What an insult to the
apostle Paul! Under no circumstances was the apostle Paul dependent on oral traditions for
anything. He said, "But I make known to you, brethren, that the gospel which was preached by
me is not according to man. For I neither received it from man, nor was I taught it, but it came
through the revelation of Jesus Christ." (Gal. 1:11-12).
21) My opponent said in Par. 10, "This is the end of Paul's life (2 Tim. 4:6-7). It is a perfect
opportunity to preach sola scriptura." He added, "Paul gives no hint that after he dies, the
following generations are only to rely upon written scripture." I ask my opponent to please let
Paul speak for himself. He said, "All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for
doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness, that the man of God may be
complete, thoroughly equipped for every good work." Thus, Paul's words vividly teach that the
Scriptures thoroughly equip us for every good work and, thus, no other standard is needed or
allowed. Any so-called good works that men might do which are not in the Scriptures, cannot be
good works in God's sight because the Scriptures equip to every good work. Furthermore, I ask
my opponent to please let Peter, who also was at the close of his life (2 Pet. 1:12-14), speak for
himself. He said, "Beloved, I now write to you this second epistle (in both of which I stir up your
pure minds by way of reminder), that you may be mindful of the words which were spoken before
by the holy prophets, and of the commandment of us, the apostles of the Lord and Savior..." (2
Pet. 3:1-2). Now, I ask my opponent to please give the verses where Paul, Peter, or any other
inspired writer, plainly revealed that "apostolic oral traditions" would equip us to every good
work or remind us of the commandment of the Lord.
22) My opponent would have us to believe that when people use the Scriptures as their only rule
of faith, it causes division. (Par. 13). This is another Catholic argument devised to undermine the
Scriptures as the only authority. Please notice, first, that the argument comes from man, not God.
The Scriptures teach, "...Let God be true, but every many a liar" (Rom. 3:4). "Beware lest anyone
cheat you through philosophy and empty deceit, according to the tradition of men, according to
the basic principles of the world, and not according to Christ." (Col. 2:8). Secondly, it is
absolutely wrong to assume that all Protestant churches use the Scriptures alone as their
authority. Most of them, like Catholicism, have their own laws, creeds, traditions, revelations,
conventions, headquarters, etc., along with the Scriptures. Thirdly, it is not the "Scriptures alone"
which has produced much division among us, but the Catholic Church. The Catholic Church is
truly the mother of division. All of the identifying characteristics of the great apostasy predicted in
the Scriptures perfectly fit the Catholic Church (1 Tim. 4:1-3; 2 Thess. 2:3-12). Every major
division that is in Christianity originated with and came out of the Catholic Church. The bulk of
Protestant denominations today are branches and sects of groups which originally broke away
from the Catholic Church. Even today those who have knowledge of the current trends know that
the Catholic Church is not united.
23) The prime cause of division in the religious world today is the continual mirage of teaching of
the Catholic Church against the Scriptures as the sole standard. Even in this Rebuttal we have
been answering common charges made by the Catholic Church against the Scriptures as the only
authority. Such charges lead people away from the Scriptures and cause them to distrust them as
the only rule of faith. It does this even in so-called Protestantism because many of the same
charges are repeated by Protestants. Very few Protestants today truly respect the Scriptures as
God's sole authority in religion. In fact, most of their doctrines originated in the Catholic Church
rather than in the Scriptures, i.e., clerical dress, baptism by pouring or sprinkling rather than
immersion, addressing religious leaders with religious titles, instrumental music in worship,
observance of Christmas and Easter. Holding to the Scriptures alone does not cause division, but
to the contrary, is the only true means of unity. The solution for overcoming division among us is
to reject all the unscriptural practices which have been introduced by men and go back to the
Bible. We must completely denounce all the decrees, doctrines, and traditions of men and fully
return to the written Word of Christ, the New Testament. This is the only way to please God and
to be united in His name.
24) May the Eternal God be with everyone in the study and application of His Word.