I am a Catholic and I believe in all the teachings of the Church.
If you can answer all these with the "BIBLE ALONE", I'll leave my Church. I'm talking about real good answers.
1. Where did Jesus give instructions that the Christian faith should be based exclusively on a book?
2. Other than the specific command to John to pen the Revelation, where did Jesus tell His apostles to write anything down and compile it into an authoritative book?
3. Where in the New Testament do the apostles tell future generations that the Christian faith will be based solely on a book?
4. Some Protestants claim that Jesus condemned all oral tradition (e.g., Matt 15:3, 6; Mark 7:813). If so, why does He bind His listeners to oral tradition by telling them to obey the scribes and Pharisees when they “sit on Moses’ seat” (Matt 23:2)?
5. Some Protestants claim that St. Paul condemned all oral tradition (Col 2:. If so, why does he tell the Thessalonians to “stand firm and hold to the traditions which you were taught, whether by word of mouth or by letter” (2 Thes 2:15) and praises the Corinthians because they “hold firmly to the traditions” (1 Cor 11:2)?
(And why does the Protestant NIV change the word “tradition” to “teaching”?)
6. If the authors of the New Testament believed in sola Scriptura, why did they sometimes draw on oral Tradition as authoritative and as God’s Word (Matt 2:23; 23:2; 1 Cor 10:4; 1 Pet 3:19; Jude 9, 14 15)?
7. Where in the Bible is God’s Word restricted only to what is written down?
8. How do we know who wrote the books that we call Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, Acts, Hebrews, and 1, 2, and 3 John?
9. On what authority, or on what principle, would we accept as Scripture books that we know were not written by one of the twelve apostles?
10. Where in the Bible do we find an inspired and infallible list of books that should belong in the Bible? (e.g., Is the Bible’s Table of Contents inspired?)

lacum:
I am a Catholic and I believe in all the teachings of the Church.
If you can answer all these with the "BIBLE ALONE", I'll leave my Church. I'm talking about real good answers.
1. Where did Jesus give instructions that the Christian faith should be based exclusively on a book?

Jesus, after resurrection established the Inspiration of the Law, Prophets and Psalms (Luke 24:27,44), referring to that written therein concerning Him!
Furthermore, He sent the disciples to teach men ALL things He had commanded and taught them (Matthew 28:20)- the 4 Gospels. The other parts of the NT were the writings of the Apostles (and Disciples) thus sent and none invented any new thing other than that revealed. Besides, Peter's reference to Paul's writings endorses the latter (for those who want it) having accepted his calling as an Apostle to Gentiles (the first).
Galatians 2:8-10, 2 Peter 3:15-16

2. Other than the specific command to John to pen the Revelation, where did Jesus tell His apostles to write anything down and compile it into an authoritative book?

John 15:20,26,27
There, Jesus spoke about the sayings of the Apostles and that the disciples would testify of Him having being with Him from the BEGINNING (of His Earthly ministry this testifying not being the same as preaching the Gospel-a command to all believers). It is not by mistake that the last of them to die - John - concluded the book of Revelations with Revelations 22:18,19 - an express warning to those who may come to claim new/strange revelations/ tradition contrary to that which was written!

3. Where in the New Testament do the apostles tell future generations that the Christian faith will be based solely on a book?

The Apostles severally warned of ANY belief, teaching or practice contrary to that which was given. See 2 John 10,11; 2 Timothy 3:16; Galatians 1:8,9 and Revelations 22:18,19

4. Some Protestants claim that Jesus condemned all oral tradition (e.g., Matt 15:3, 6; Mark 7:813). If so, why does He bind His listeners to oral tradition by telling them to obey the scribes and Pharisees when they “sit on Moses’ seat” (Matt 23:2)?

That was no approval given! Why? Remember that Jesus denounced the same people for making God's Word of none effect through their TRADITIONS Mark 7:6-13 See:
They worship Me in vain [their worship is meaningless and worthless, a pretense],
Teaching the precepts of men as doctrines [giving their traditions equal weight with the Scriptures].’
Mark 7:7

5. Some Protestants claim that St. Paul condemned all oral tradition (Col 2:. If so, why does he tell the Thessalonians to “stand firm and hold to the traditions which you were taught, whether by word of mouth or by letter” (2 Thes 2:15) and praises the Corinthians because they “hold firmly to the traditions” (1 Cor 11:2)?
(And why does the Protestant NIV change the word “tradition” to “teaching”?)

Being an Apostle whose Apostleship was not denied by the other Apostles, Paul's traditions here was nothing different from that which characterised the early church - breaking of bread (1 Cor 11:23-33), prayers (Ephesians 6:18/ Colossians 4:2,12,) teaching of the Word (Acts 20,21), dignity of labour ( 2 Thess.3:6,7,10), holiness of life (1 Thess 2:10), church administration (1 & 2 Timothy), discipline (1 Corinth 5:11-13) etc

6. If the authors of the New Testament believed in sola Scriptura, why did they sometimes draw on oral Tradition as authoritative and as God’s Word (Matt 2:23; 23:2; 1 Cor 10:4; 1 Pet 3:19; Jude 9, 14 15)?

These quotes were from Inspired sources! Besides, one rallying point is that none of those contradicted that which was written! (One of the surest test of what is inspired and what is not). etc Moreover, can it be perfectly established that they were quoting from oral traditions? Is it not possible that the Writers were being Inspired by He that Inspired the first speakers?
Afterall:
21 For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost.
2 Peter 1:21

7. Where in the Bible is God’s Word restricted only to what is written down?

This question is a summary of some earlier ones already answered.

8. How do we know who wrote the books that we call Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, Acts, Hebrews, and 1, 2, and 3 John?

How does this apply to the church issue? For assistance, remember that the book of Jeremiah contains the prophecies and part of the biography of Jeremiah but most of the writings were done by Baruch! Paul authored a good number of epistles but the actually penman were his lieutenants eg Tertius Romans 16:22...

9. On what authority, or on what principle, would we accept as Scripture books that we know were not written by one of the twelve apostles?

On the basis for which Christ authenticated His Ministry - the Law, prophets and the Psalms. But we have a plus now - the Words of Christ.

10. Where in the Bible do we find an inspired and infallible list of books that should belong in the Bible? (e.g., Is the Bible’s Table of Contents inspired?)

Deep calleth unto deep. That neither Christ nor His disciples referred or quoted from the inter-testament period books underscores the statement in Isaiah 34:16
Seek ye out of the book of the Lord, and read:
no one of these shall fail,...:
for my mouth it hath commanded,
and his Spirit it hath gathered them.
The Spirit that inspired them will do the sifting.


Summary
Salvation is through faith in Christ (after repentance), not in a Church.

even if someone answers all this your questions. you will still not change that your church.
it will take only God's spirit to convince you my brother.

@scholar, i jv gone through ir post . yes you tried but you know u didnt answer even one of it. eg question 2 dats where u spoilt d whole thing,lolz.
pls try again.
that am going to testify to somtin does not mean dat i must write them down. in short how many times hv u testified of d goodness of God in ur life n how many hv u written it down.? he didnt even say that only d testimonies written down will b accepted as word of God.

@sammy its not about Church here but my point is to prove dat d belief in bible alone is false,wrong and even alien to d bible itself.

*please give a straight answer to this question: What is the pillar and foundation of truth? The Church or the Bible?

Belief in the bible alone is called bibolatry

lacum:
@scholar, i jv gone through ir post . yes you tried but you know u didnt answer even one of it. eg question 2 dats where u spoilt d whole thing,lolz.
pls try again.
that am going to testify to somtin does not mean dat i must write them down. in short how many times hv u testified of d goodness of God in ur life n how many hv u written it down.? he didnt even say that only d testimonies written down will b accepted as word of God.

But even John that was asked to write the Revelations said thus:

For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book, If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book:
Revelations 22:18

He testified in writing!

Besides, the Pharisees are a good example of those who were against sola scriptura of their time! They invented traditions, bound grievous burdens tried to monopolise the Law and its interpretations in ways that served their purpose (reminds me of Tetzel in Luther's time) etc and Christ denounced them and their traditions! Why? It made the Word - the Scriptures - of none effect! The same still holds true today!

Take note of Revelations 22:18,19 and Mark 7:7 and 2 John 9-11. Does it look like they discourage the sola scriptura stand point?

Scholar8200:

But even John that was asked to write the Revelations said thus:

For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book, If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book:
Revelations 22:18

He testified in writing!

Besides, the Pharisees are a good example of those who were against sola scriptura of their time! They invented traditions, bound grievous burdens tried to monopolise the Law and its interpretations in ways that served their purpose (reminds me of Tetzel in Luther's time) etc and Christ denounced them and their traditions! Why? It made the Word - the Scriptures - of none effect! The same still holds true today!

Take note of Revelations 22:18,19 and Mark 7:7 and 2 John 9-11. Does it look like they discourage the sola scriptura stand point?

ur quoting d bible out of contxt. no body even d church added anything to d book of revelatn and oda books.d bible, the church help us undastand more Gods word. u too sola scriptura but believe diffrent doctrins but we took our teachings and d bible as authority n we are not confused because d church is d pillar of truth.

lacum:


ur quoting d bible out of contxt. no body even d church added anything to d book of revelatn and oda books.d bible, the church help us undastand more Gods word. u too sola scriptura but believe diffrent doctrins but we took our teachings and d bible as authority n we are not confused because d church is d pillar of truth.

Pls highlight:
1. what passages i quoted out of contexts and kindly correct me.
2. What doctrines I believe that are 'extra-scriptura'

Thank you

[[Mat 15:1-6/KJV]]Then came to Jesus scribes and Pharisees, which were of Jerusalem, saying, 2 Why do thy disciples transgress the tradition of the elders? for they wash not their hands when they eat bread. 3 But he answered and said unto them, Why do ye also transgress the commandment of God by your tradition? 4 For God commanded, saying, Honour thy father and mother: and, He that curseth father or mother, let him die the death. 5 But ye say, Whosoever shall say to his father or his mother, It is a gift, by whatsoever thou mightest be profited by me; 6And honour not his father or his mother, he shall be free. Thus have ye made the commandment of God of none effect by your tradition.
.............................................................................................................
The above scripture is just one example of cases where the oral tradition starkly contradicted the word of God.
Remember 2 timothy 3:16 : All scripture( not all tradition)] is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness.
My dear brothers, when ur church tradition contradicts God's written word as we see in many instances regarding the CC doctrines, WHAT DO U DO? I need a sincere answer from a catholic.

accountable:
[[Mat 15:1-6/KJV]]Then came to Jesus scribes and Pharisees, which were of Jerusalem, saying, 2 Why do thy disciples transgress the tradition of the elders? for they wash not their hands when they eat bread. 3 But he answered and said unto them, Why do ye also transgress the commandment of God by your tradition? 4 For God commanded, saying, Honour thy father and mother: and, He that curseth father or mother, let him die the death. 5 But ye say, Whosoever shall say to his father or his mother, It is a gift, by whatsoever thou mightest be profited by me; 6And honour not his father or his mother, he shall be free. Thus have ye made the commandment of God of none effect by your tradition.
.............................................................................................................
The above scripture is just one example of cases where the oral tradition starkly contradicted the word of God.
Remember 2 timothy 3:16 : All scripture( not all tradition)] is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness.
My dear brothers, when ur church tradition contradicts God's written word as we see in many instances regarding the CC doctrines, WHAT DO U DO? I need a sincere answer from a catholic.

Tell us one Catholic tradition that contravene God law?

accountable:
[[Mat 15:1-6/KJV]]Then came to Jesus scribes and Pharisees, which were of Jerusalem, saying, 2 Why do thy disciples transgress the tradition of the elders? for they wash not their hands when they eat bread. 3 But he answered and said unto them, Why do ye also transgress the commandment of God by your tradition? 4 For God commanded, saying, Honour thy father and mother: and, He that curseth father or mother, let him die the death. 5 But ye say, Whosoever shall say to his father or his mother, It is a gift, by whatsoever thou mightest be profited by me; 6And honour not his father or his mother, he shall be free. Thus have ye made the commandment of God of none effect by your tradition.
.............................................................................................................
The above scripture is just one example of cases where the oral tradition starkly contradicted the word of God.
Remember 2 timothy 3:16 : All scripture( not all tradition)] is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness.
My dear brothers, when ur church tradition contradicts God's written word as we see in many instances regarding the CC doctrines, WHAT DO U DO? I need a sincere answer from a catholic.

my bro try to understand Jesus in this context. Christ said "he has not come to abolish the law(tradition) but to fulfill all righteousness. Meaning that just as we are against some old laws of our land that are bad so Christ too. Example of old tradition was killing of twins, Killing of 10 people when a king dies. Now to the passage Christ was simply say 'he who seek equity must go with clean hand' were the elders righteous? So what Catholic law do u feel is against human or godly law?

Scholar8200:
Jesus, after resurrection established the Inspiration of the Law, Prophets and Psalms (Luke 24:27,44), referring to that written therein concerning Him!
Furthermore, He sent the disciples to teach men ALL things He had commanded and taught them (Matthew 28:20)- the 4 Gospels. The other parts of the NT were the writings of the Apostles (and Disciples) thus sent and none invented any new thing other than that revealed. Besides, Peter's reference to Paul's writings endorses the latter (for those who want it) having accepted his calling as an Apostle to Gentiles (the first).
Galatians 2:8-10, 2 Peter 3:15-16
John 15:20,26,27
There, Jesus spoke about the sayings of the Apostles and that the disciples would testify of Him having being with Him from the BEGINNING (of His Earthly ministry this testifying not being the same as preaching the Gospel-a command to all believers). It is not by mistake that the last of them to die - John - concluded the book of Revelations with Revelations 22:18,19 - an express warning to those who may come to claim new/strange revelations/ tradition contrary to that which was written!

The Apostles severally warned of ANY belief, teaching or practice contrary to that which was given. See 2 John 10,11; 2 Timothy 3:16; Galatians 1:8,9 and Revelations 22:18,19


That was no approval given! Why? Remember that Jesus denounced the same people for making God's Word of none effect through their TRADITIONS Mark 7:6-13 See:
They worship Me in vain [their worship is meaningless and worthless, a pretense],
Teaching the precepts of men as doctrines [giving their traditions equal weight with the Scriptures].’
Mark 7:7

Being an Apostle whose Apostleship was not denied by the other Apostles, Paul's traditions here was nothing different from that which characterised the early church - breaking of bread (1 Cor 11:23-33), prayers (Ephesians 6:18/ Colossians 4:2,12,) teaching of the Word (Acts 20,21), dignity of labour ( 2 Thess.3:6,7,10), holiness of life (1 Thess 2:10), church administration (1 & 2 Timothy), discipline (1 Corinth 5:11-13) etc

These quotes were from Inspired sources! Besides, one rallying point is that none of those contradicted that which was written! (One of the surest test of what is inspired and what is not). etc Moreover, can it be perfectly established that they were quoting from oral traditions? Is it not possible that the Writers were being Inspired by He that Inspired the first speakers?
Afterall:
21 For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost.
2 Peter 1:21


This question is a summary of some earlier ones already answered.

How does this apply to the church issue? For assistance, remember that the book of Jeremiah contains the prophecies and part of the biography of Jeremiah but most of the writings were done by Baruch! Paul authored a good number of epistles but the actually penman were his lieutenants eg Tertius Romans 16:22...

On the basis for which Christ authenticated His Ministry - the Law, prophets and the Psalms. But we have a plus now - the Words of Christ.

Deep calleth unto deep. That neither Christ nor His disciples referred or quoted from the inter-testament period books underscores the statement in Isaiah 34:16
Seek ye out of the book of the Lord, and read:
no one of these shall fail,...:
for my mouth it hath commanded,
and his Spirit it hath gathered them.
The Spirit that inspired them will do the sifting.


Summary
Salvation is through faith in Christ (after repentance), not in a Church.

Unfortunately, you didn't answer OPs questions correctly and dribbled a fair bit.that's because they can't be answered via sola scriptura. E.g. you didn't state how we know who wrote Matthew etc.
how we know the books that make up the bible.

your answers are from your tradition and the benefit of history, not sola scriptura

Scholar8200:

Pls highlight:
1. what passages i quoted out of contexts and kindly correct me.
2. What doctrines I believe that are 'extra-scriptura'

Thank you

sorry i hv not bin feeling well since dis week dats y i didnt reply.
1. i said u quote out of contxt because St. John wrote a book where he testified of wat God revealed to him but do u want to tell me dat John never said anytging else apart from d ones he wrote down? rmemba he lived after all oda disciples died and after many popes hv come n gone so he must hv also revealed many things to d church and testified oda ting dat he never wrote down. those things are also testimonies or are they not?
2. i didnt say that u blive in extra scriptural books i mean u blive in only d bible while we d catholics blive in sacred yradition, d teaching authority of d church and d bibl