Surpassing Sola Scriptura

Answering Protestants ^ | 31 March 2014 | Matthew Olson

[matthewrobertolson]

“[The Church] does not, in the conventional phrase, believe what the Bible says, for the simple reason that the Bible does not say anything. You cannot put a book in the witness-box and ask it what it really means.” – G. K. Chesterton

Sola Scriptura is the Protestant doctrine that the Bible contains all knowledge necessary for salvation and holiness. Under it, only doctrines that are found directly within the Bible or are drawn indirectly from it by simple reasoning are allowed. (See material vs. formal sufficiency & perspicuity.)

2 Timothy 3:16-17 is the primary passage used to defend this view, which always boggles my mind. Perhaps I need spectacles, but I do not see an “Only” at the beginning of this verse. The Church teaches (as Scripture teaches) that all Scripture is valuable. She does not, however, turn it into an idol.

Some Protestants also claim to honor other authorities, like the Church – but do they really? In a short written debate with a Protestant professor, he said, “Sola Scriptura does not even claim that there is no other authority besides the Bible; it maintains that the Bible is alone (sola) as the only infallible authority.” Some apologists concede this position, but I see no reason to, and so I responded, “The practical effect [of Sola Scriptura] is that it denies the authoritativeness of any other authority – making that authority not an authority at all.” The professor quickly changed the topic.

Sacred Tradition (capital ‘T’) is, obviously, a stumbling block for many, but it is perfectly reasonable. Not everything of relevance could fit within the Bible (John 20:30-31, John 21:25). This is evidenced by the elaborations of the Church Fathers, as well as the decrees of the Councils. And much of this has been written and can therefore even qualify as (extra canon) Scripture! Anyway, all Scripture must be interpreted “according to the spiritual meaning which the Spirit grants to the Church” (Origen).

Pope Francis noted, “Sacred Scripture is the written testimony of the divine Word, the canonical memory that attests to the event of Revelation. However, the Word of God precedes the Bible and surpasses it. That is why the center of our faith isn’t just a book, but a salvation history and above all a person, Jesus Christ, the Word of God made flesh.” (cf. CCC #108). All teaching is valuable – God is not limited to a book compiled by His Bride. On this point, the Bible is like a wedding album shared by two spouses: the husband, typically, arranges and provides for everything, while his wife fills in the details – but still, at the end of the day, it does not sum up their whole marriage.

Another great blow to Sola Scriptura is that the Bible did not put itself together, and it does not list the books that belong within it. It took the Jews thousands of years to decide on the Tanakh (their canon) and, even then, “Hellenistic” Jews preferred the Septuagint! The only reason that we know which books comprise the Testaments is that the Church has informed us. If the Church, as Her own entity, is not infallible on such doctrine, then the Bible cannot be trusted.

Many Protestants also allude that absolute truth can only be found within the Bible. If I throw an apple up into the air, it will fall. Where is that in the Bible? Of course, one could quickly retort with the idea that the Bible only necessarily contains the absolute moral truth necessary for salvation. But many Protestants do not actually believe that – just look at the large crowds of literal creationists! To be clear, the Bible is not guaranteed to be totally historically or scientifically inerrant in a literal sense. “Inerrancy extends to what the biblical writers intend to teach, not necessarily to what they assume or presuppose or what isn’t integral to what they assert.” [Catholic Answers] And if a Protestant would like to say otherwise, he must prove his position from the Bible – which he cannot do, at least not to any definite degree. Even natural law, which exists outside of the Bible, does not encompass such. Leaders like Ken Ham could be defeated with these points.

I just cannot help but despise this great heresy of Sola Scriptura, the implication of which is that the Bride of Christ does not know Her Husband.

I love the Second Vatican Council’s statement on all of this: “[T]he task of authentically interpreting the word of God, whether written or handed on, has been entrusted exclusively to the living teaching office of the Church, whose authority is exercised in the name of Jesus Christ. This teaching office is not above the word of God, but serves it, teaching only what has been handed on, listening to it devoutly, guarding it scrupulously and explaining it faithfully in accord with a divine commission and with the help of the Holy Spirit, it draws from this one deposit of faith everything which it presents for belief as divinely revealed.” (Dei Verbum)

Let us put it this way: only trusting the Bible without the Church would be like loving “Romeo and Juliet” and hating Shakespeare’s explanation of it.

---

“Follow” me on Twitter, “Like” Answering Protestants on Facebook, Add Answering Protestants to your Circles on Google+, and “Subscribe” to my YouTube apologetic videos.

---

[Elsie]

And hereby we do know that we know him, if we keep his commandments. He that saith, I know him, and keepeth not his commandments, is a liar, and the truth is not in him. But whoso keepeth his word, in him verily is the love of God perfected: hereby know we that we are in him. He that saith he abideth in him ought himself also so to walk, even as he walked. Brethren, I write no new commandment unto you, but an old commandment which ye had from the beginning. The old commandment is the word which ye have heard from the beginning. Again, a new commandment I write unto you, which thing is true in him and in you: because the darkness is past, and the true light now shineth. He that saith he is in the light, and hateth his brother, is in darkness even until now. He that loveth his brother abideth in the light, and there is none occasion of stumbling in him. But he that hateth his brother is in darkness, and walketh in darkness, and knoweth not whither he goeth, because that darkness hath blinded his eyes.

 

 

1 John 3:21-24

Dear friends, if our hearts do not condemn us, we have confidence before God and receive from him anything we ask, because we keep his commands and do what pleases him. And this is his command: to believe in the name of his Son, Jesus Christ, and to love one another as he commanded us. The one who keeps God’s commands lives in him, and he in them. And this is how we know that he lives in us: We know it by the Spirit he gave us.

[Elsie]

There are two reasons I am here. The second is to answer the questions the lurkers don't ask, by countering the prot lies.

Makes me wonder what the FIRST is...

[Elsie]

There is one reason I am here; to further the knowledge of GOD's word as it is written; not explained.

---

I post it: you decide whether it makes sense to you; or whether you need someone else to tell you what it is supposed to mean.

[Elsie]

It understandable how you would think that ‘it would be a buy in’ however we accept Peter as the first Pope as a sign of our faith - an immense difference.

While we PROTESTants accept the FACT that Peter is NOT shown in Scripture to be 1st, 2nd, or ANY 'pope'.

So why do we catch hell for that?

[LurkingSince'98]

Hey Elsie,

Protestants rejected the notion in the 16th century - before that not so much.

But I respect your beliefs - but it seems you don’t respect mine.

But I love ya like a brother anyway.

For the Greater Glory of God

[aMorePerfectUnion]

“It understandable how you would think that ‘it would be a buy in’ however we accept Peter as the first Pope as a sign of our faith - an immense difference.”

Even though the Bible does not teach there is an office of Pope, or that Peter was chosen as a pope, or that there is a succession of popes...

Romans are required to adhere to what is taught. They have to buy into the whole construct, which I described elsewhere as a “clean story.”

Believe as you wish also :-)

[Elsie]

But I respect your beliefs - but it seems you don’t respect mine.

Well; you may have something there...

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/06/21/alien-poll_n_3473852.html

Are ALL beliefs to be 'respected'?

[Elsie]

But I respect your beliefs - but it seems you don’t respect mine.

Well; you may have something there...

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/06/21/alien-poll_n_3473852.html

Are ALL beliefs to be 'respected'?

[Elsie]

But I love ya like a brother anyway.

Cain or Abel?

;^)

[LurkingSince'98]

Romans are required to adhere to what is taught.

Wrong again.

we CHOOSE to believe and again the difference would be lost on a protestant.

The Nicene Creed which faithful Catholics have repeated at every mass since 325 A.D.

We believe in one God,
the Father, the Almighty,
maker of heaven and earth,
of all that is, seen and unseen.

We believe in one Lord, Jesus Christ,
the only Son of God,
eternally begotten of the Father,
God from God, light from light,
true God from true God,
begotten, not made,
of one Being with the Father;
through him all things were made.
For us and for our salvation
he came down from heaven,
was incarnate of the Holy Spirit and the Virgin Mary
and became truly human.
For our sake he was crucified under Pontius Pilate;
he suffered death and was buried.
On the third day he rose again
in accordance with the Scriptures;
he ascended into heaven
and is seated at the right hand of the Father.
He will come again in glory to judge the living and the dead,
and his kingdom will have no end.

We believe in the Holy Spirit, the Lord, the giver of life,
who proceeds from the Father [and the Son],
who with the Father and the Son is worshiped and glorified,
who has spoken through the prophets.
We believe in one holy catholic and apostolic Church.
We acknowledge one baptism for the forgiveness of sins.
We look for the resurrection of the dead,
and the life of the world to come. Amen.

Again we choose to believe this and ACCEPT IT FREELY AND WITHOUT RESERVATION - IT’S WHAT MAKES US CATHOLIC.

You don’t have to accept it - you don’t have to accept that Catholics worldwide say it daily at Mass, but just because you don;t accept it doesn’t make it not true.

For the Greater Glory of God

[aMorePerfectUnion]

“Again we choose to believe this and ACCEPT IT FREELY AND WITHOUT RESERVATION - IT’S WHAT MAKES US CATHOLIC.”

Actually, it doesn’t work quite that way. You accept the Roman denomination and in doing so, the thinking is over. From there on, you must accept it or leave.

I’m fine with the Nicene Creed as a very good expression of Christianity. Not complete, but very good.

[dsc]

“You are making a blanket statement that all Protestants reject all God’s gifts and make a big deal out of doing so and it saddens God because they do.”

Here I really think it would be appropriate to make disparaging comments about your ability to read and think, but FR doesn’t allow that.

Therefore, I’ll just point out that I didn’t say “all God’s gifts;” I said “all those” gifts, which clearly means those of God’s gifts that Protestants reject.

“Would you call that a prejudiced or bigoted statement to say ALL Catholics do something that saddens God?”

No. Nor would anyone who knows what prejudice and bigotry are.

“I’m giving you a chance to gain back some credibility among right-thinking people.”

You have no standing to offer anything of the sort, to anyone.

[dsc]

“Just hunting for a little honesty...Guess I’ll have to keep looking... “

First you should take measures to increase the odds that you’ll know it when you see it. Then you’ll discover that it was in the Church all along.

[LurkingSince'98]

Yes we accept all the precepts, doctrine and dogma of the Church freely and without reservation and WE DO BECAUSE WE WANT TO

I have spoken with several protestants who said they disagreed with 25 % or more of what there minister would preach, and I’m sure YMMV however it is a common theme.

Well if I disagreed with the Church on even ONE teaching I would get down on my knees and beg the a Holy Spirit for understanding so I COULD CONFORM MYSELF TO THAT TEACHING.

That is as foreign to a protestant as anything I can think of - you just will not understand it nor will you accept it - but then that’s why your protestant.

For the Greater Glory of God

[Syncro]

Thank you, I will edit:

Catholics seem to want to separate themselves from Christians

[Syncro]

LOL!

Some are so filled with knowledge that it squeezes out any chance for wisdom to reign.

Proverbs 1-7:

The fear of the Lord is the beginning of knowledge: but fools despise wisdom and instruction. [KJV]

Some better understand the NIV:

The fear of the Lord is the beginning of knowledge, but fools despise wisdom and instruction.

I'm not sure if the original Latin uses a colon or a comma...

[Syncro]

Well if I disagreed with the Church on even ONE teaching I would get down on my knees and beg the a Holy Spirit for understanding so I COULD CONFORM MYSELF TO THAT TEACHING.

Be careful what you pray to the Holy Spirit for, He just may conform you to GOD's teachings.

James, 4:3: Ye ask, and receive not, because ye ask amiss...

God never answers prayers with the wrong action.

[LurkingSince'98]

yeah right sync.. "He just may conform you to GOD's teachings." for 2000 years we as Catholics have been continuously making the Sign of the Cross, in the presence of the Crucifix, singing 1st and 2nd century songs the same prayers and songs as the early persecuted Christians in the catacombs, we have icons copied directly from those same catacombs, we say the same Creed from the Catholic Council of Nicea in 325 AD. you protestants threw the Sign of the Cross, the Crucifix, the songs, the ancient prayers and the icons down the drain with Luther in 1520 and YOU are the only ones who are 'faithful to God's teachings.'

yeah right.. us Catholics are the missing out on all the things you protestants threw out.

Ad Majoram Dei Gloriam

[LurkingSince'98]

been around a VERY long time and for the first 50+ years I NEVER heard a Catholic refer to or about ANY protestant in ANY conversation.

you flatter yourself if you think Catholics think or care about their separated brethren.

why should we - your saved - right?

For the Greater Glory of God