Jun

24

Sola Scriptura (Part 1)

Posted By nbeck | Filed Under Nicholas Beck 

Nicholas Beck

Recently, I wrote the following commentary on Sola Scriptura. My intent is to post the entire commentary, in segments, over the next several weeks. Here is the first installment.

SOLA SCRIPTURA
By: Nicholas J. Beck
20 June 2007

Sola Scriptura (Scripture Alone) is one of the two fundamental tenets of Protestant Christianity and is a perennial argument that Protestants, especially evangelicals and fundamentalists, raise against the Tradition of the Catholic Church; but how logical is Sola Scriptura? Is it a valid argument, or is it flawed? Let us see for ourselves the validity of this widely accepted doctrine.

DEFINITION

Sola Scriptura can be defined as the theological assertion that the scriptures contained within the Holy Bible—Protestants omit seven books of the Greek Septuagint, known as the deuterocanonical texts, from their bible—are the sole rule of faith, and thus, the only authority of what is and is not Christian. As a sufficient-necessary statement, Sola Scriptura can be stated as thus: If a theological assertion is not scriptural (i.e. explicitly stated in the Bible), then it is not Christian. Also true would be its contra-positive: If a theological assertion is Christian, then it is scriptural (i.e. explicitly stated in the Bible). For Sola Scriptura to be valid, it must adhere to both these rules. Keep this in mind as our examination proceeds.

HISTORY OF THE NEW TESTAMENT CANON

One of the greatest obstacles to Sola Scriptura is the history of the New Testament itself. If Sola Scriptura is valid, then one must question what the first generations of Christians measured their faith by, as the first books of scripture did not emerge until several decades after the resurrection of Jesus; the last was written over one-half century after our Lord’s resurrection. Which scriptures did these early Christians use before the New Testament books were written? The Old Testament alone? Which books did they rely upon as the New Testament books were written? The gospels alone? The Gnostic texts alone? The many widely disputed letters and epistles alone?
The truth is that the early Christians could not have relied on scripture alone, for the Church predates the New Testament scriptures. I repeat, the Catholic Church existed before the New Testament! The New Testament that all Christians use, Protestant and Catholic alike, did not exist until the year 397 A.D., when the Council of Carthage solidified the New Testament as we know it and sought and gained the approval of the Bishop of Rome (the Pope), recognizing the primacy of Peter’s successors as set forth by the teachings of the Apostles. Before that time, there was no clearly identified New Testament canon, and there were many “scriptures” that were claimed to be inspired. (Graham, Ch. 4; Madrid Tradition 69-72; Hahn, 75-78)
During the first four centuries of Christianity many books emerged that claimed to be authentically inspired scriptures. The Catholic bishops—among them the great St. Augustine—recognized the need to separate the wheat from the chaff. As a result, several Church councils were convened—Carthage being the most notable—to determine, by the guidance of the Holy Spirit, which texts were truly inspired/canonical. These various texts were placed into three categories: those that were universally accepted as inspired (e.g. the four gospels), those that were universally rejected as bogus (e.g. The Gnostic gospels), and those whose canonical status was highly contested (e.g. Hebrews, II Peter, II and III John, James, Jude, Barnabas, the Shepherd of Hermas, the Didache, Clement’s Letter to the Corinthians, and Revelation). By the end of the fourth century, all these writings were closely examined and scrutinized and were either accepted or rejected as divinely inspired by the bishops. Thus, the New Testament was born out of Catholic Tradition by the guidance of the Holy Spirit. (New Advent; Graham, Ch. 4)
Given that the New Testament that all Protestants accept as canonical is a Catholic Tradition, Sola Scriptura cannot be true. Nowhere in scripture can one find, in any form, a list of which writings belong in the New Testament canon and which ones do not; which ones are divinely inspired and which ones are not. If we were to apply this fact to the statement “If it is not in the Bible, then it is not Christian” we would have to declare that the Bible itself is not Christian, which any reasonable person can agree is an utterly absurd assertion. Without the Church’s sacred Tradition and authority bestowed upon it by Christ himself, Protestants would have no New Testament scripture at all. (Graham, Ch. 4; Madrid Tradition, 69-72)

Comments

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.