Sola Scriptura

The Light Shines in the Darkness...

“I cannot submit my faith either to the pope or to the councils, because it is clear as day that they have frequently erred and contradicted each other. Unless therefore I am convinced by the testimony of Scripture, or by the clearest reasoning,-unless I am persuaded by means of the passages I have quoted, and unless they thus render my conscience bound by the Word of God, I cannot and I will not retract, for it is unsafe for a Christian to speak against his conscience. Here I stand, I can do no other; may God help me! Amen!” -Martin Luther at the Diet of Worms, 1521

“Orth.-Do not, I beg you, bring in human reason. I shall yield to scripture alone.

Eran.-You shall receive no argument unconfirmed by Holy Scripture, and if you bring me any solution of the question deduced from Holy Scripture I will receive it, and will in no wise gainsay it.” –Theoderet, church father, Dialogue I

http://www.ccel.org/fathers2/NPNF2-03/Npnf2-03-19.htm#P2808_866499

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sola Scriptura. It is a Latin phrase that means “Scripture alone”, and it was the “formal” principle of the Protestant Reformation. This principle basically states that all teachings, dogmas, and beliefs that come from any authority other than the Holy Scriptures are not essential doctrines of the faith that need to be believed in order to be saved. Popes, councils, creeds, past Christian writers (other than those of the Scriptures), traditions, and other authorities are relegated to a secondary status. These things are not negated or thrown away, but rather, they are to be tested by the highest and only infallible rule of faith, the Scriptures. James White tells us what sola Scriptura is and is not:

“To summarize sola scriptura:

1. Scripture is the sole infallible rule of faith.

2. No other revelation is needed for the Church.

3. There is no other infallible rule of faith outside of Scripture.

4. Scripture reveals those things necessary for salvation.

5. All traditions are subject to the higher authority of Scripture.”

-James R. White, The Roman Catholic Controversy (Minneapolis, Minnesota: Bethany House Publishers, 1996), p.62.

“To summarize, sola scriptura is not a

1. claim that the Bible contains all knowledge;

2. claim that the Bible is an exhaustive catalog of all religious knowledge;

3. denial of the Church’s authority to teach God’s truth;

4. denial that God’s Word has, at times, been spoken;

5. rejection of every kind or use of tradition;

6. denial of the role of the Holy Spirit in guiding the Church.”

-James R. White, The Roman Catholic Controversy (Minneapolis, Minnesota: Bethany House Publishers, 1996), p.59.

The basis of sola Scriptura is this:

1. Revelation from God has ceased, and there are no other infallible authorities in existence. Thus, the main basis for sola Scriptura is that it is true by default. Traditions contradict each other and have no way of being verifiably traced back to the Apostles. Councils contradict each other and the Scriptures, and historically, they were never viewed as infallible until the Middle Ages. Popes taught blatant heresy and contradict each other, and like councils, the idea of infallible popes did not arise until the Middle Ages. Thus, the only rule of faith that is called “God-breathed” and can be verifiably traced back to inspired prophets and apostles is Scripture. [Traditions, councils, and popes are discussed in other articles.]

2. In every place in Scripture, traditions that claimed Divine origin were always tested by the Scriptures. This is directly related to the issue of the ‘Sacred Tradition’ that is held to in Roman Catholicism, Eastern Orthodoxy, and other “Christian” groups. These groups view ‘Tradition’ to be handed down orally from the Apostles to the priests. These groups view their ‘Sacred Tradition’ as equal to the Scriptures and the vehicle for interpreting Scripture. Thus, in the view of these groups, ‘Tradition’ can never be judged by Scripture because it is the interpreter of Scripture. However, Jesus saw things differently. A great example of this was when Jesus dealt with the errors of the Pharisees:

Then some Pharisees and scribes came to Jesus from Jerusalem and said, “Why do Your disciples break the tradition of the elders? For they do not wash their hands when they eat bread.” And He answered and said to them, “Why do you yourselves transgress the commandment of God for the sake of your tradition? For God said, ‘HONOR YOUR FATHER AND MOTHER,’ and, ‘HE WHO SPEAKS EVIL OF FATHER OR MOTHER IS TO BE PUT TO DEATH.’ “But you say, ‘Whoever says to his father or mother, “Whatever I have that would help you has been given to God,” he is not to honor his father or his mother.’ And by this you invalidated the word of God for the sake of your tradition. You hypocrites, rightly did Isaiah prophesy of you: ‘THIS PEOPLE HONORS ME WITH THEIR LIPS, BUT THEIR HEART IS FAR AWAY FROM ME. BUT IN VAIN DO THEY WORSHIP ME, TEACHING AS DOCTRINES THE PRECEPTS OF MEN.’ ” –Matthew 15:1-9

The Pharisees and some of the scribes gathered around Him when they had come from Jerusalem, and had seen that some of His disciples were eating their bread with impure hands, that is, unwashed. (For the Pharisees and all the Jews do not eat unless they carefully wash their hands, thus observing the traditions of the elders; and when they come from the market place, they do not eat unless they cleanse themselves; and there are many other things which they have received in order to observe, such as the washing of cups and pitchers and copper pots.) The Pharisees and the scribes asked Him, “Why do Your disciples not walk according to the tradition of the elders, but eat their bread with impure hands?” And He said to them, “Rightly did Isaiah prophesy of you hypocrites, as it is written: ‘THIS PEOPLE HONORS ME WITH THEIR LIPS, BUT THEIR HEART IS FAR AWAY FROM ME. 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 7:1-13

In these two parallel passages, the Lord Jesus was accused of not following the ‘Traditions of the Elders’. These traditions were believed by the Pharisees to be handed down orally from Moses to the Levitical priests, and they were placed on an equal footing with Scripture. So what was Jesus’ response? Did he view this tradition as authoritative and an explanation of how Scripture is to be interpreted? The answer from the Lord was in the negative! Instead of using tradition (that claimed Divine origin) as a vehicle for interpreting Scripture, He judged whether traditions were valid or not on the basis of Scripture, and He expected men to know what the Scriptures taught. Thus, He not only held the Scriptures to be the highest authority, but he also believed that what was contained in them was clearly taught.

Next, we come to Matthew 22:23-33:

On that day some Sadducees (who say there is no resurrection) came to Jesus and questioned Him, asking, “Teacher, Moses said, ‘IF A MAN DIES HAVING NO CHILDREN, HIS BROTHER AS NEXT OF KIN SHALL MARRY HIS WIFE, AND RAISE UP CHILDREN FOR HIS BROTHER.’ Now there were seven brothers with us; and the first married and died, and having no children left his wife to his brother; so also the second, and the third, down to the seventh. Last of all, the woman died. In the resurrection, therefore, whose wife of the seven will she be? For they all had married her.” But Jesus answered and said to them, “You are mistaken, not understanding the Scriptures nor the power of God. For in the resurrection they neither marry nor are given in marriage, but are like angels in heaven. But regarding the resurrection of the dead, have you not read what was spoken to you by God: ‘I AM THE GOD OF ABRAHAM, AND THE GOD OF ISAAC, AND THE GOD OF JACOB’? He is not the God of the dead but of the living.” When the crowds heard this, they were astonished at His teaching. –Matthew 22:23-33

Here, the Sadducees try to stump Jesus with their favorite argument that they used against the Pharisees, and He answered them by saying that they don’t understand the Scriptures (v.29). Jesus expected them to know what was Scripture (i.e. the canon) and what it clearly meant. This goes against the claims of Roman Catholics and other groups that believe that one can’t know what the Scriptures say or what books should be Scripture without an infallible interpreter.

Lastly, we come to Acts 17:11:

“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.” –Acts 17:11

In this passage of the Book of Acts, Paul and Silas went to Berea, a city in Macedonia, and started preaching that Jesus of Nazareth was the Messiah. Verse 11 says that the Bereans were ‘more noble-minded than those in Thessalonica’. The reason verse 11 gives for this is that they searched the Scriptures daily to see if Jesus met the qualifications for being the Messiah. They could have consulted the Jewish traditions (which were supposedly of Divine origin) to see if Jesus met those standards, and in fact, that is the basis upon which the Jews in Thessalonica likely rejected Jesus as the Messiah. However, the Bereans did not consult these so called ‘divine’ traditions, but rather, they examined the Scriptures only. As a result, they came to the right conclusion that Jesus was the Messiah, and many believed (v.12).

3. The best Scripture verse that can be cited for sola Scriptura is 2 Timothy 3:14-17:

“You, however, continue in the things you have learned and become convinced of, knowing from whom you have learned them, and that 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. 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 3:14-17

At the time of the writing of this letter, Paul had just been imprisoned a second time by the Emperor Nero, and he is anticipating that these will be his last days, the end of his ministry. Thus, he tells his close disciple, Timothy, how to handle the ministry of being an elder in the church. He tells of “men and imposters” that “will proceed from being bad to worse, deceiving and being deceived” (v.13).

Then, he says that to combat these heretics, Timothy should “continue in the things you have learned…from childhood”, the Scriptures (v.14-15). Paul says that the Scriptures are “able to give to you the wisdom that leads to salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus” (v.15). He then says that “all Scripture is inspired by God and is 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” (v.16-17).

From this, we know that the Scriptures are perspicuous (“…able to give you the wisdom that leads to salvation…”), they contain all things necessary to believe in order to be saved (“…able to give you the wisdom that leads to salvation…”), they are the authority that corrects other authorities (“profitable for…reproof, for correction…”), they teach men theology and salvation history (“profitable for teaching”), and teach and equip men for every good work (“profitable for… training in righteousness; so that the man of God may be adequate, equipped for every good work.”). Therefore, for infallible guidance in the absence of the apostles, Paul points Timothy to the Scriptures, not to the successor of Peter, not to a council of bishops, not to an oral tradition that is separate in content from the Scriptures, but to the Scriptures. Paul is implying that apart from God or living apostles and prophets, Scripture is the only thing that is ‘theoneustos’, ‘God-breathed’ (translated “inspired” in v.16), and hence, it is the authority from which all other authorities of the Church are derived.

As can be expected, Roman Catholics have tried to downplay this verse. David King explains the arguments presented and refutes them:

“Objecting to the doctrine of the sufficiency of holy Scripture as taught in 2 Timothy 3:15-17...Sungenis draws this conclusion:

“If we were to use the concept of ‘sufficiency’ that Protestants force into 2 Timothy 3:17, we could claim, in light of the similar language in 2 Timothy 2:21, that refraining from bad influences and behavior is all that is needed to make a man useful for every good work.” [-Not By Scripture Alone: A Catholic Critique of the Protestant Doctrine of Sola Scriptura, Robert Sungenis, Editor (Santa Barbara: Queenship Publishing Co., 1997), p.117.]

Sungenis’ conclusion is not warranted. The participles employed in the phrase ‘every good work’ in 2 Timothy 3:17 and 2 Timothy 2:21 are not the same. In 2 Timothy 3:17, Paul uses the Greek participle…(exertismenos), which is the participle form of …(exartizo). It means ‘having been completely or fully equipped.’ But in chapter 2 and verse 21 Paul uses a completely different word…(hetoimasmenon) which is the participle form of…(etoimazo), meaning ‘having been prepared’…Sungenis attempts to equate the participles…(exertismenos) and …(hetoimasmenon), completely ignoring the verbal distinctions and the fact that these terms are not equivalents…Also, the participle…(hetoimasmenon) in 2 Timothy 2:21 signifies ‘readiness’ for the task of ‘every good work,’ but does not expressly address the issue of doctrinal preparedness as does 2 Timothy 3:16-17 with respect to Scripture…Sungenis has taken a novel approach in asserting a semantic equivalent between the verbs…(etoimazo) and…(exartizo), a fact which has evaded the attention of virtually every New Testament grammarian but himself.”

-David King, Holy Scripture: The Ground and Pillar of Our Faith, Vol. I (Battle Ground, Washington: Christian Resources, 2001), p.83-84.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

All Scripture quotes are from the NASB.

Also, some helpful audio on this topic can be found at:

http://www.straitgate.com/aom/dl/98.htm

http://www.straitgate.com/webster/

Some helpful online reading can be found here:

http://www.the-highway.com/calvinism.html

http://aomin.org/SS.html

http://aomin.org/This%20Bereans%20passage.html

http://members.aol.com/jasonte2/solawhat.htm

http://www.christiantruth.com/bahnsen.html