Against Sola Scriptura...

[Tree of Life]

I'm writing an academic paper for my seminary program AND teaching two Sunday school classes on the doctrine of Sola Scriptura. My basic thesis will be something like: "The Bible teaches the doctrine of Sola Scriptura and therefore we should accept it."

In order to do a bang-up job I need to confront and dispatch the most formidable objections to the doctrine. What objections are you aware of? Also, if you could recommend a good book or scholarly article, perhaps from a Catholic perspective, which seeks to argue against Sola Scriptura, I would appreciate it!

Edit: By the way, let me define Sola Scriptura. The definition I'm working from is this:

The Bible alone is the Word of God and the only infallible rule of faith and practice.

 

[dreadnought]

I'm writing an academic paper for my seminary program AND teaching two Sunday school classes on the doctrine of Sola Scriptura. My basic thesis will be something like: "The Bible teaches the doctrine of Sola Scriptura and therefore we should accept it."

In order to do a bang-up job I need to confront and dispatch the most formidable objections to the doctrine. What objections are you aware of? Also, if you could recommend a good book or scholarly article, perhaps from a Catholic perspective, which seeks to argue against Sola Scriptura, I would appreciate it!

I think Sola Scripture has two weaknesses. First, it might indicate that Paul's words are always the words of the Lord. It might also suggest that the Bible is God, and that we can't learn anything from the real God.

 

[HereIStand]

One argument that I've heard recently from Peter Kreeft is that Medieval theology taught that there are two books, nature and Scripture. God is revealed in both. Although the theology appears to have come to fruition in the Middle ages, it has roots in the early church. Tertullian noted, "We conclude that God is known first through Nature, and then again, more particularly, by doctrine; by Nature in His works, and by doctrine in His revealed word."
Book of Nature - Wikipedia

Most Protestants would see nature as a source of general revelation, although not as a second "book" equal with Scripture. One exception is Karl Barth, who apparently rejected the theology of general revelation.

 

[Tree of Life]

One argument that I've heard recently from Peter Kreeft is that Medieval theology taught that there are two books, nature and Scripture. God is revealed in both. Although the theology appears to have come to fruition in the Middle ages, it has roots in the early church. Tertullian noted, "We conclude that God is known first through Nature, and then again, more particularly, by doctrine; by Nature in His works, and by doctrine in His revealed word."
Book of Nature - Wikipedia

Most Protestants would see nature as a source of general revelation, although not as a second "book" equal with Scripture. One exception is Karl Barth, who apparently rejected the theology of general revelation.

Protestants fully accept the idea of general revelation. We just believe that sin has so clouded our reading of general revelation - and that GR is not sufficient to give us saving knowledge of God - that the Scriptures are therefore most necessary in order for us to properly interpret GR.

 

[ChristIsSovereign]

I'm writing an academic paper for my seminary program AND teaching two Sunday school classes on the doctrine of Sola Scriptura. My basic thesis will be something like: "The Bible teaches the doctrine of Sola Scriptura and therefore we should accept it."

In order to do a bang-up job I need to confront and dispatch the most formidable objections to the doctrine. What objections are you aware of? Also, if you could recommend a good book or scholarly article, perhaps from a Catholic perspective, which seeks to argue against Sola Scriptura, I would appreciate it!

10 Arguments Against Sola Scriptura - St Michael Catholic Radio

According to Scripture | Catholic Answers

A Much Better Argument Against Sola Scriptura – Shameless Popery

Two Highly Illogical Arguments for Sola Scriptura.

Library : A Quick Ten-Step Refutation of Sola Scriptura

https://chnetwork.org/2013/09/04/the-illogical-logic-of-sola-scriptura/

Twenty One Reasons to Reject Sola Scriptura

I hope you find that a challenge to refute. May God be with you.

 

[Tree of Life]

10 Arguments Against Sola Scriptura - St Michael Catholic Radio

According to Scripture | Catholic Answers

A Much Better Argument Against Sola Scriptura – Shameless Popery

Two Highly Illogical Arguments for Sola Scriptura.

Library : A Quick Ten-Step Refutation of Sola Scriptura

https://chnetwork.org/2013/09/04/the-illogical-logic-of-sola-scriptura/

Twenty One Reasons to Reject Sola Scriptura

I hope you find that a challenge to refute. May God be with you.

Thanks a lot! I'll try to look for something scholarly in there.

 

[ChristIsSovereign]

Thanks a lot! I'll try to look for something scholarly in there.

You're welcome and God bless. I've been leaning back and forth denominationally, trying to answer my own questions about why the Catholic church seems to feel like home.

 

[Tree of Life]

I think Sola Scripture has two weaknesses. First, it might indicate that Paul's words are always the words of the Lord. It might also suggest that the Bible is God, and that we can't learn anything from the real God.

The Bible is the Word of God. I don't think it's very easy to separate God's Word from his person. So the Bible is God, in a sense.

Paul's words in Scripture are God's words.

 

[Apologetic_Warrior]

One challenge that come to mind is the oral tradition especially as it relates to Old Testament periods of time. From Creation to Moses where would one find support for Sola Scriptura? Before man was created who was there to witness and record to memory the events? It is revelation from God and oral tradition later recorded in writing and passed down to future generations, along with written tradition of genealogies.

 

[Tree of Life]

One challenge that come to mind is the oral tradition especially as it relates to Old Testament periods of time. From Creation to Moses where would one find support for Sola Scriptura? Before man was created who was there to witness and record to memory the events? It is revelation from God and oral tradition later recorded in writing and passed down to future generations, along with written tradition of genealogies.

Good thought. The Westminster Confession covers this issue in 1.1, but it's important to address.

 

[ChristIsSovereign]

Good thought. The Westminster Confession covers this issue in 1.1, but it's important to address.

I'm an ex-Calvinist semi-Arminian who happens to have a moderate affinity for Rome. I feel a deep respect when I see a Catholic priest, for example.

 

[dreadnought]

The Bible is the Word of God. I don't think it's very easy to separate God's Word from his person. So the Bible is God, in a sense.

Paul's words in Scripture are God's words.

So there you prove my point: You believe that that Bible is God, and a lot of people agree with you.

 

[St_Worm2]

Hi Tree, it's certainly not the best read on the subject, but if you want the "no stone left unturned" book on the subject, this one by Robert Sungenis might be right up your alley.

https://www.amazon.com/Not-Scripture-Alone-Protestant-Scriptura/dp/1579180558

 

[St_Worm2]

I think Sola Scripture has two weaknesses. First, it might indicate that Paul's words are always the words of the Lord. It might also suggest that the Bible is God, and that we can't learn anything from the real God.

Hi DN, which words of St. Paul's do you believe ARE the words of God, and which ones do you believe are his alone? He does tell us several times that certain statements of his are not a direct revelation from God. Is that what you are talking about, or is there more to it?

Thanks!

--David

 

[FenderTL5]

Paul's words in Scripture are God's words.

Not always.

 

[Tree of Life]

Hi Tree, it's certainly not the best read on the subject, but if you want the "no stone left unturned" book on the subject, this one by Robert Sungenis might be right up your alley.

https://www.amazon.com/Not-Scripture-Alone-Protestant-Scriptura/dp/1579180558

Thanks this will be a helpful resource! Why is this not the best read?

 

[Tree of Life]

Not always.

Always.

 

[Apologetic_Warrior]

So there you prove my point: You believe that that Bible is God, and a lot of people agree with you.

*ahem* Sorry but ^ is not so much a point as it is the logical fallacy of ad hom.

 

[FenderTL5]

Always.

The words of Paul in I Corinthians, "To the rest I say this (I, not the Lord).."
what follows is Paul's personal opinion and not God's word and he tells us so.
Paul's opinion carries the weight of Apostolic authority but it's not something that the Lord said.

 

[dreadnought]

Hi DN, which words of St. Paul's do you believe ARE the words of God, and which ones do you believe are his alone? He does tell us several times that certain statements of his are not a direct revelation from God. Is that what you are talking about, or is there more to it?

Thanks!

--David

I do not believe Paul and the Lord were in agreement over whether or not women should speak in church.