1) The doctrine of sola scriptura need not be taught formally and explicitly. It may be implicit in Scripture and inferred logically. Scripture explicitly states its inspiration in 2 Timothy 3:15-17, and its sufficiency is implied there as well. This passage contains the essence of sola scriptura, revealing that Scripture is able to make a person wise unto salvation. And it includes the inherent ability to make a person complete in belief and practice.
2) Scripture has no authoritative peer. While the apostle Paul’s reference in verse 16—to Scripture being “God-breathed”—specifically applies to the Old Testament, the apostles viewed the New Testament as having the same inspiration and authority (1 Tim. 5:18; Deut. 25:4 and Luke 10:7; 2 Pet. 3:16). The New Testament writers continue, mentioning no other apostolic authority on par with Scripture. The New Testament writers directed Christians to test their teachings by remembering the words of the prophets and apostles, not by accessing the words of living prophets, apostles, or other supposedly inspired teachers (Heb. 2:2-4; 2 Pet. 2:1; 3:2; Jude 3-4, 17).”
3) Scriptural warnings such as “do not go beyond what is written” (1 Cor. 4:6) and prohibitions against adding or subtracting text (Rev. 22:18-19) buttress the principle that Scripture stands unique and sufficient in its authority.
4) Christ held Scripture in highest esteem. The strongest scriptural argument for sola scriptura, however, is found in how the Lord Jesus Christ himself viewed and used Scripture. A careful study of the Gospels reveals that he held Scripture in the highest regard. Jesus said: “The Scriptures cannot be broken” (John 10:35); “Your word is truth” (John 17:17); “Not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law” (Matt. 5:18); and “It is easier for heaven and earth to disappear than for the least stroke of a pen to drop out of the Law” (Luke 16:17).
5) Christ appealed to Scripture as a final authority. Jesus even asserted that greatness in heaven will be measured by obedience to Scripture (Matt. 5:19) while judgment will be measured out by the same standard (Luke 16:29-31; John 5:45-47). He used Scripture as the final court of appeal in every theological and moral matter under dispute. When disputing with the Pharisees on their high view of tradition, he proclaimed: “Thus you nullify the word of God by your tradition” (Mark 7:13).
Conclusion: Because Scripture came from God, Jesus considered it binding and supreme, while tradition was clearly discretionary and subordinate. Whether tradition was acceptable or not depended on God’s written Word. This recognition by Christ of God’s Word as the supreme authority supplies powerful evidence for the principle of sola scriptura.
“The doctrine of sola scriptura need not be taught formally and explicitly.“
ReplyDeleteThe Scriptures explicitly say that there are being traditions passed down via spoke word:
2 Thessalonians 2:15: “So then, brothers, stand firm and hold to the traditions that you were taught by us, either by our spoken word or by our letter.“
So actually, you do need an explicit passage stating scripture is all Christians need because scripture itself states otherwise.
Anonymous,
DeleteThe author of this article is absolutely correct. You say that there are traditions being passed down orally, but my question to you is, “What exactly are those traditions that Paul was talking about in 2 Thessalonians 2:15?” No one even knows with absolute certainty. But you can’t just assume that he is talking about “Catholic Tradition.”
I don’t know if you are a Catholic or not, but most Catholics use this verse to claim that “Tradition” has equal authority to Scripture, and that there is a distinction between infallible “oral” teachings and infallible “written” teachings.
But Paul's "distinction" here was NOT to emphasize a difference in content between the two (as Catholics claim), but rather, to demonstrate the unity of his message in both forms. In the context of 2 Thessalonians 2, Paul was addressing the fact that someone (an imposter) had apparently written a letter in Paul’s name to the Thessalonians, saying that they missed the Day of the Lord (2:2), causing the Thessalonian church to be shaken and disturbed. He is now writing to correct that false letter and to bring comfort and strength to the church. So, Paul was basically telling them, "Why are you disturbed by this letter that was supposedly from me? Any true letter from me will agree with the message I already gave to you personally/orally. I wouldn't contradict that message, or give you two different gospels."
It is NOT AT ALL saying that we need two infallible sources today.
Again, the author of the article has already provided 2 Timothy 3:15-17, which, when studied carefully, demonstrates the sufficiency of Scripture as the only infallible source. You can view the following link for more clarification on the topic of Tradition:
https://answeringcatholicclaims.blogspot.com/2010/05/what-about-tradition.html
And the following link is the first in a series on Sola Scriptura articles:
https://answeringcatholicclaims.blogspot.com/2013/03/quick-notes-on-sola-scriptura-part-1.html
Hope this helps to clarify.