• Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.

The issues with Sola Scriptura

harkpuff

Newbie
Aug 4, 2014
24
11
✟16,337.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
So the concept of Sola Scriptura, which I shall reference as SS from now on, has been in debate here for the past few days it seems. After reading and watching and debating on a few threads myself, I decided to make a new thread in regards to the issues with this concept.

This will be a long post, please read entirely before responding

First, here is the definition of SS: is a Christian theological doctrine which holds that the Christian Scriptures are the supreme authority in all matters of doctrine and practice.

On the surface, this sounds like a rather valid idea. The Bible is the written word of God right? So how could there be anything higher?

However, when we dig past the surface, there are 3 key issues that come up in regards to SS.

1) The defense of SS is circular logic

First, the definition of circular logic: is a logical fallacy in which the reasoner begins with what they are trying to end with.

Case in point, the Bible.
S)I believe in SS, everything must be found in the Bible.
Q) Well where in the Bible does it teach SS?
S) We know that the Bible is the word of God, so therefore everything must be found in the Bible.
Q) Who told you that it was the word of God?
S) The Bible clearly states that it is the word of God.
Q) I ask again, where in the Bible does it teach SS?
S) The Bible does not need to state SS since it is the word of God.

Every time a question is asked against SS, the statement goes right back to the Bible. This ends up having the debate get absolutely nowhere. How can you defend something, that when you defend it, it places you in a logical fallacy?

This leads right into issue 2
2) SS is found nowhere in the Bible

As stated above, SS claims that the Bible is the highest authority and that everything must be in the Bible for it to be true.

However, the actual concept of SS is found nowhere in the Bible. Don't get me wrong, there are plenty of places that support scripture, as it should, since the Bible is the written word of God.

Namely 2 Timothy 3:14-16 and John 20:30-31

These do not state SS however, as the Bible also gives testament to traditions, namely Traditions of Christ.

Namely in 1 Corinthians 11:2, 2 Thessalonians 2:15 and 2 Thessalonians 3:6

If we were to believe that SS was true, then by its own argument, it must be found in the Bible. If we look at John, this does not tell us SS. In fact, it is stating that Johns gospel should be enough, not the Bible. If we look at Timothy, it also does not state SS. Instead, is referring to the OT on how it is divine scripture and learning it leads to Jesus Christ.

Funny enough, in Timothy, Paul also points out the importance of apostolic tradition with verse 14.

Now on the issue 3

3) SS and authority

Now this will be the largest part. What do I mean by the above statement? This statement is directly tied to the question "If all these denominations follow SS, then why are there so many different ones all following the same book, claim the same truth, yet differ in beliefs?"

There tends to be only 1 answer to this question, and that is that "SS does not determine how the Bible is interpreted. Some denominations are more right than others."

The obvious follow-up question is "Well who is more right and how do you know?"

Another answer that I have heard is "The Bible interprets itself." which is completely impossible, since the Bible is a book. And a book cannot interpret itself.

The issue here is, when you believe the Bible is the highest authority, then there cannot be an authority to interpret the Bible since that authority would then have to be higher or equal to the Bible.

Here, many will say that the Holy Spirit allows us to interpret the Bible. If this was true, then why would the Holy Spirit create so many differing denominations? Does the Holy Spirit teach contradiction? The obvious answer is No.

So then, who has the authority to interpret the Bible and how would one know which interpretation is the best? By following SS, there is no answer here.

This then falls to self-interpretation of the Bible. Martin Luther, the father of the Protestant Reformation, actually quoted, before his death, saying "There are almost as many sects and beliefs as there are heads; this one will not admit baptism; that one rejects the Sacrament of the altar; another places another world between the present one and the day of judgment; some teach that Jesus Christ is not God. There is not an individual, however clownish he may be, who does not claim to be inspired by the Holy Ghost, and who does not put forth as prophecies his ravings and dreams."

With self-interpretation of the Bible, and you come to a different interpretation than the churches in your area, nothing can stop you from making your own church. Nobody has the authority to say you are wrong in your interpretation because that would then place them at the same level of authority has the Bible. Which is against SS.

With SS, everybody is right in their interpretation of the Bible, and everybody is also wrong in their interpretation of the Bible.

Logically, since not everybody is right in their interpretation of the Bible, there needs to be an authority higher or equal to the Bible to claim what is the correct interpretation.

That authority falls to the Church that was started by Jesus. The Bible came from that Church in the late 4th century. That Church being the only Church to be able to trace itself back to the first Pope, St Peter. That Church, first being called the Catholic Church in the year 107AD by St Ignatius of Antioch. That Church being the Catholic Church, which at the Council of Nicaea in the year 325 AD developed the Nicene Creed and started the process developing a Church canon, the Bible and without this Church, nobody would have the Bible today.

The 3 authorities: https://www.crossroadsinitiative.co...word-of-god-part-3-tradition-and-magisterium/
Early Church Fathers on Holy Tradition: http://www.staycatholic.com/ecf_tradition.htm
Council of Nicaea: http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/11044a.htm
Council of Carthage: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Councils_of_Carthage#Synod_of_397
St Ignatius: http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/0109.htm

God Bless

First of all churches that were established by the disciples shortly after Jesus left them after His ascension into heaven were not Catholic churches. Paul in his missionary journeys throughout known Europe at the time established many congregations of churches which were lead by Elders and Deacons as instructed in Scripture. Paul also returned to visit the churches he established and many of his letters in the New Testament were written to these congregations concerning various topics of concern and instruction. Nowhere in his letters does Paul mention a Pope or any kind of Catholic tradition or authority other than the local church Elders with Christ as its head. Catholicism was established by Constantine many years later which in many ways hardly resembles the first churches established by Paul.
 
Upvote 0

Sibyl

The Heretic
Mar 5, 2008
68
11
Falling Waters. WV.
✟16,693.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Don't we refer to most of the letters that make up the New Testament as "books" of the Bible?

"We" refer to them as books and verses; a more precise description would be chapters, paragraphs and lines or as a poem, stanza and line. Why would John refer to his "letter" as a book unless there was there was an idea to compile, Revelation, and the other epistles and letters together? Jesus did not instruct the apostles to do this. Did the apostles together realize that the church needed an instruction manual? Is there evidence of this mutual effort?
I'm still trying to find my way out of the weeds of obsession.
 
Upvote 0

Albion

Facilitator
Dec 8, 2004
111,127
33,262
✟583,992.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Married
"We" refer to them as books and verses; a more precise description would be chapters, paragraphs and lines or as a poem, stanza and line. Why would John refer to his "letter" as a book unless there was there was an idea to compile, Revelation, and the other epistles and letters together? Jesus did not instruct the apostles to do this. Did the apostles together realize that the church needed an instruction manual? Is there evidence of this mutual effort?
I'm still trying to find my way out of the weeds of obsession.
I guess my point was simply that this doesn't pose the difficulty that you think it does...for the reason that referring to such epistles as books is what we all do and long have done in Christian history. It could be that we should ask why that's done, but I don't think there's a hint here that something special or unusual exists in John's case.
 
Upvote 0

mikpat

Active Member
Apr 25, 2016
201
52
92
Evans, GA
✟23,316.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Without a visible authority, like the Catholic Church, guiding Scripture's interpretation,, reading the bible is subject to free judgment—- from orthodxy to rationalism, indifferentism and modernism.

The human mind is so constituted that it colors with its own previous conceptions (subjectivism) any new notion that presents itself with acceptance.
 
Upvote 0

Monk Brendan

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Jul 21, 2016
4,636
2,875
74
Phoenix, Arizona
Visit site
✟339,430.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Melkite Catholic
Marital Status
Private
Politics
US-Others
So what do we do about that? Invent a tradition which has him saying, "In the twenty first century there will be somebody called Leslie Dellow living in Britain, and I command the Catholic Church of that time to pay him a million pounds a year?"

You wish
 
  • Like
Reactions: MichaelS
Upvote 0

Monk Brendan

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Jul 21, 2016
4,636
2,875
74
Phoenix, Arizona
Visit site
✟339,430.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Melkite Catholic
Marital Status
Private
Politics
US-Others
I'm trying not to get lost in the weeds, but I keep getting distracted by inconsistancies.

Sybil, don't bother with little things like that. Most of the time, the word for "Scroll" was translated "book."
Center on the important things, like Jesus loves you, and He wants you t love Him, and spend all eternity with Him in heaven
 
  • Like
Reactions: MichaelS
Upvote 0

DJKWord

Active Member
Jun 23, 2015
61
26
63
Providence, RI
✟15,435.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Single
Why would John refer to his "letter" as a book unless there was there was an idea to compile, Revelation, and the other epistles and letters together? Jesus did not instruct the apostles to do this. Did the apostles together realize that the church needed an instruction manual? Is there evidence of this mutual effort?
I'm still trying to find my way out of the weeds of obsession.

I believe the way out of the weeds is simply, trust. Look at the Old Testament. Moses wrote down the first five books, but I don't believe the prophets got any directive to record their own stories. Certainly not all of them. And the OT was never officially canonized like the NT was. But Christ quoted it as authoritative, and did it often.

Hope this helps.
 
Upvote 0

DJKWord

Active Member
Jun 23, 2015
61
26
63
Providence, RI
✟15,435.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Single
And the OT was never officially canonized like the NT was.

Got further word on this. Cut & pasted from http://afaithfulversion.org/commentary-canonization/:

In Getting Acquainted with the Bible, Martin Hegland writes: "There is much evidence to indicate that the canon of the Old Testament was fixed by about the year 400 BC largely as a result of the work of Ezra and Nehemiah and a council of Jews known as the Great Synagogue… Long before that time, however, many of the books we now have in the Old Testament had been agreed upon as inspired" (anabaptists.org/history/howwegot.html).

  • Indeed, Ezra—a priest of the Aaronic line—returned to Jerusalem from Babylon in 458 BC with "the Law of God" in his hands (
    Ezra 7:14), and boldly proclaimed the Law before the post-exilic congregation of Judah (Neh. 8-9). Ezra undoubtedly had in his possession numerous additional texts regarded as canonical—such as writings by the prophets, as well as those that make up the "Writings" of the Old Testament.

  • While the preceding periods of canonization are significant, scholars generally consider them to be primarily of historical interest. Martin, for example, writes that the canonization efforts prior to Ezra "do not involve what books [ultimately] belong in the Old Testament canon for us today. The question of exactly which books represent the complete Old Testament for us can only be answered by understanding the canonization of Ezra and those one hundred and twenty priests who comprised the Great Assembly. It is Ezra's final work which is most important to us and to later Judaism… [It] was Ezra (the 'Second Moses') who gave to the Jewish world the official (and final) Old Testament to be read in the Temple and synagogues. This makes the canonization by Ezra the most important of all" (Restoring the Original Bible, ch. 12).

Again, hope this helps.
 
Upvote 0

DJKWord

Active Member
Jun 23, 2015
61
26
63
Providence, RI
✟15,435.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Single
Logically, since not everybody is right in their interpretation of the Bible, there needs to be an authority higher or equal to the Bible to claim what is the correct interpretation.

My issue with this particular church is, how from the Bible did they ever get:

--Peter's appointment as Pope of all Christians, and the succession of that rank
--Praying to Mary
--Praying to Saints
--Canonizing dead people as saints
--Indulgences
--Confession of sins to priests
--Purgatory

I'd be curious to go over these. Thanks
 
Upvote 0

lesliedellow

Member
Sep 20, 2010
9,654
2,582
United Kingdom
Visit site
✟119,577.00
Faith
Calvinist
Marital Status
Single
Politics
UK-Liberal-Democrats
Without a visible authority, like the Catholic Church, guiding Scripture's interpretation,, reading the bible is subject to free judgment—- from orthodxy to rationalism, indifferentism and modernism.

And what makes their interpretation authoritative? Oh, of course - because the Pope says so.

Besides which, the Catholic Church has its conservatives, liberals and in-betweens, just as much as any other church.

http://archive.thetablet.co.uk/article/3rd-july-1971/4/hans-kung-on-infallibility
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Albion

Facilitator
Dec 8, 2004
111,127
33,262
✟583,992.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Married
Without a visible authority, like the Catholic Church, guiding Scripture's interpretation,, reading the bible is subject to free judgment—- from orthodxy to rationalism, indifferentism and modernism.

You could make that point...but it's not as though just about every Christian denomination is without seminaries, colleges, and scholars who interpret Scripture, guide and teach the faithful.

The notion that has everybody being strictly "on his own" with a copy of the Bible is neither correct as concerns the meaning of Sola Scriptura nor correct in practice. Most Christians (other than some unaffiliated individuals) actually do have the guidance that you assume they do must be without.
 
Upvote 0

Paul of Eugene OR

Finally Old Enough
Site Supporter
May 3, 2014
6,373
1,858
✟278,532.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
God's people, the Jews, new exactly what was God's word and what was not, long before the the OT was ever assembled, or even completed, as the prophets referenced each other occasionally, such as Daniel reading Jeremiah to to find out when the Babylonian captivity would end, and they did so without "tradition". They just knew God's voice when they heard it.
Jesus even affirmed the OT in it's entirety, such as in Luke 11:51, to indicate they got it right.

And without "tradition".

How likely is it that God had to rely on the tradition of man when putting together the NT, rather than also relying on His people to just still know His voice? Not very.

So how come, if the OT was understood, the greek translation of the OT that the Jews themselves made had more books in it than the Hebrew version of the OT?
 
Upvote 0

SeventyOne

Well-Known Member
May 2, 2015
4,673
3,205
✟174,798.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Calvary Chapel
Marital Status
Married
So how come, if the OT was understood, the greek translation of the OT that the Jews themselves made had more books in it than the Hebrew version of the OT?

For the same reason people today try to cram non-inspired books into the NT. This doesn't even address the point, but a good deflection, I must say.
 
Upvote 0

Paul of Eugene OR

Finally Old Enough
Site Supporter
May 3, 2014
6,373
1,858
✟278,532.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
For the same reason people today try to cram non-inspired books into the NT. This doesn't even address the point, but a good deflection, I must say.

How are you able to ascertain which set is the correct set?
 
Upvote 0

Paul of Eugene OR

Finally Old Enough
Site Supporter
May 3, 2014
6,373
1,858
✟278,532.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
2 Peter 1:20(NKJV)
20knowing this first, that no prophecy of Scripture is of any private interpretation,

the bible says that no one can interpret it! . . . .

That's not what Peter meant there. Peter meant that the writer of scripture was not writing his own personal interpretations but was writing what God inspired him to write.

Peter's words don't, therefore, particularly guide us on how we today interpret those words, other than to assure us we are, indeed, reading God's word.
 
Upvote 0

lesliedellow

Member
Sep 20, 2010
9,654
2,582
United Kingdom
Visit site
✟119,577.00
Faith
Calvinist
Marital Status
Single
Politics
UK-Liberal-Democrats
Upvote 0

lesliedellow

Member
Sep 20, 2010
9,654
2,582
United Kingdom
Visit site
✟119,577.00
Faith
Calvinist
Marital Status
Single
Politics
UK-Liberal-Democrats
Regarding post 250 above,
my response:

Uhh What makes the Sola Scriptura interpretation so authoritative?
Oh, of course, each individual/bible group has his/its own opinion, uhh guided by the Holy Spirit.

Most Protestant Christians would allow themselves to be guided by the theological outlook of their respective denominations, and by the 90% of doctrine which they share with other denominations. They do not, however, have somebody with a super sized ego claiming to be infallible. If somebody did claim that, they would certainly be treated with contempt and ignored.
 
Upvote 0

mikpat

Active Member
Apr 25, 2016
201
52
92
Evans, GA
✟23,316.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Regarding −post 255, 2Peter 1:20.

Most Definitely is a warning about false prophets, false teachers, false translations (thousands of bibles with different publishers). "…Many will follow their licentious ways……they will exploit you (the reader)……"

Thousands of bibles and thousands pf protestant denominations all claiming that what they read is inspired,

Then we have Mohammed (Islamism) who also claimed to be divinely inspired,
Joseph Smith, (Mormonism) claimed to be inspired,
Mary Baker Eddy (Christian Science) claimed to be inspired,
Ellen G White (Seventh Day Adventistism) claimed to be inspired.

Truth cannot be divided, if it did, it would undermine the "faith" argument.

In studying the Bible, the goal, the initial goal is to authenticate the "accuracy" not the inspiration of the biblical texts. Anyone can say their Bible and interpretations are inspired. No need for a Pope, a Magisterium, no man, woman or scholars are necessary to understand what God meant to say in Scripture. As many "bible only" people say , we can all grasp the meaning of Scripture because the Holy Spirit comes to each one of us to impart the truth, whether we are scholars or not.
 
Upvote 0