Response to Russell's series on Sola Scriptura

Merry Christmas! Some of the more popular articles on my blog have been my debates with Russell. In an effort to bolster my popularity, I will respond to his series on Sola Scriptura.

 Hi Russell,

Longtime no see. I'm going to respond to your article and simultaneously post my comments on my blog. I hope you have time to respond.

Wednesday, March 27, 2013
QUICK NOTES ON SOLA SCRIPTURA (Part 1)
“All Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness; that the man of God may be adequate, equipped for every good work.” (2 Timothy 3:16-17 – NASV)

This is a beautiful verse which is totally misunderstood by Protestants. The verse tells us that all of Scripture was written by man through God's prompting. God didn't write Scripture. Nor is writing Scripture the only thing which God prompted man to do. The explanation to this verse is found in 2 Peter 1: 19-21.

2 Peter 1:19-21

Revised Standard Version Catholic Edition (RSVCE)

19 And we have the prophetic word made more sure. You will do well to pay attention to this as to a lamp shining in a dark place, until the day dawns and the morning star rises in your hearts. 20 First of all you must understand this, that no prophecy of scripture is a matter of one’s own interpretation, 21 because no prophecy ever came by the impulse of man, but men moved by the Holy Spirit spoke from God.

As you can see, holy men of God were moved by the Holy Spirit to preach the word of God. They preached first and then they wrote. Therefore, Scripture alone was not inspired of God. That is to say, Scripture and tradition were inspired of God. Both. Together. Not one by itself without the other.  

I won't take too much more time on this verse because you use it frequently and I'll have plenty more opportunities to explain how you are misusing it.

This is the main passage that Protestants use to demonstrate the concept of “Sola Scriptura” (“Bible Alone”). Just as a reminder, Sola Scriptura simply means that Scripture is the only infallible Rule of Faith (or spiritual standard) for the church today. And it is therefore the final authority in spiritual matters.

That's what I like about you Russell, you are the bravest Protestant run across. Now you say that Sola Scriptura means that Scripture is the only infallible Rule of Faith for the church today. So, I would like you to point that out in Scripture.

The reason for this request should be plain. If this rule is not in Scripture then sola Scriptura contradicts itself. Sola Scriptura is a rule which cannot be found in Scripture. Yet it requires that all rules be found in Scripture.

We want to point out that there is a relentless attack on this Protestant interpretation of the passage above from many today (especially Catholics) who try to avoid its clear and simple message, and they use several common arguments. So, the purpose of this series of articles is to deal with these arguments by demonstrating their weaknesses.

Now, from the outset, we want to say that no single verse in the Bible contains ABSOLUTE PROOF of Sola Scriptura. The concept of Sola Scriptura is something that is derived from many verses. However, the passage above strongly implies this teaching.

Having said that, each of these articles will deal with only one specific argument at a time, mainly those surrounding 2 Timothy 3. So, let’s begin. Today’s specific argument is:

ARGUMENT #1 – “THE PASSAGE SAYS THAT ALL SCRIPTURE IS INSPIRED, BUT NOT *ONLY* SCRIPTURE. SO, SOMETHING ELSE, LIKE “SACRED TRADITION,” COULD ALSO BE INFALLIBLE.

While it is true that the word “only” is not there, the context reveals that it is indeed Scripture that is able to equip each believer for every good work.

That's not true. Let's look at the verse carefully. Is he talking mainly about Scripture? Or is he talking about teaching?

Let's look at the whole letter of 2 Timothy. From the first chapter, St. Paul is exhorting St. Timothy to teach.

2 Timothy 1:8 Do not be ashamed then of testifying to our Lord, nor of me his prisoner, but take your share of suffering for the gospel in the power of God,

2 Timothy 2:1 You then, my son, be strong in the grace that is in Christ Jesus, 2 and what you have heard from me before many witnesses entrust to faithful men who will be able to teach others also.

2 Timothy 4:1 I charge you in the presence of God and of Christ Jesus who is to judge the living and the dead, and by his appearing and his kingdom: 2 preach the word, be urgent in season and out of season, convince, rebuke, and exhort, be unfailing in patience and in teaching. 

He only briefly mentioned Scripture in chapter 3 and even then within the overall context of TEACHING.

2 Timothy 3:16 All scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness,

The context is about an inspired (“God-breathed”) and infallible Rule of Faith to which the believer can turn in times of difficulty (3:1), persecution (3:12), and deception (3:13). If this Rule of Faith is able to equip someone FOR EVERY GOOD WORK, then it must be, by definition, sufficient as a Rule of Faith, and therefore, it is the only infallible source needed. This is just plain logic and common sense.

It is the teaching of the Word of God in Scripture and tradition which equips the man of God for every good work.

Consider this analogy: If a particular math book (as a tool for learning math) is profitable for simple math, algebra, geometry, trigonometry, and calculus, and it will equip you to handle every math problem, then, logically, it is the ONLY one you need, as math books go. No one should have a problem with this logic.

No one except those who have actually studied math. I went to 12 years of elementary school in four years of college. Every math class had a teacher explaining the contents of the books from which we studied.

But in the same way, Paul tells us that the Bible (as a Rule of Faith) is profitable for doctrine, etc

"Profitable" does not mean necessary.

and will equip you for every good work.

He is speaking within the context of teaching. Not passing out Bibles. He said the Bible is a good book to use to support your teaching, reproof, correction, and for training in righteousness. This strongly insinuates that there is someone standing there interpreting the Scripture for you and telling you what it means.

St. Paul is explicitly telling St. Timothy that this is his role.

So why wouldn’t the same logic apply? How can it NOT be sufficient if it equips you for ALL good works? And if we need another infallible source for the post-apostolic church, why does Paul not mention it here, in the context of a Rule of Faith? Notice that Paul never says, “Scripture equips you for every good work, EXCEPT for those works found in Tradition.” No, he doesn’t say anything like that. The Bible’s principles are sufficient for what the church needs to know and how the church needs to behave. He mentions no other infallible source here, but only points to Scripture.

He doesn't need to point to any other infallible source here. He has already mentioned it many times in other scriptures. Take for instance, Ephesians 3:10. Here he teaches us that the church teaches the wisdom of God. Obviously, the church is infallible. It must be in order to teach the wisdom of God.

In another verse, 1 Timothy 3:15, he says the church is the pillar of truth. In order to be the pillar of truth, the church must always uphold the truth. Obviously then, the church must be infallible.

The entire letter of 2 Timothy is written in the context of this Christian doctrine. Therefore, he doesn't need to mention it again.

Now, there are indeed other legitimate authorities, or rules of faith, in the church. For example, church leaders, theologians, the writings of the early church fathers, Bible commentaries, traditions, creeds, councils, catechisms, etc. But these are all lesser authorities and are subject to and tested by the Bible, since it is “God-breathed.” Thus, the Bible is the FINAL authority. 2 Timothy 3:16-17 not only implies sufficiency in its immediate context, but this sufficiency lines up with the whole of Scripture. The Bible is God’s blueprint for our lives and our spiritual roadmap, our infallible “toolbox” which equips us for EVERY good work. There is no rule of faith greater than it, nor is there one equal to it.

So, the fact that a particular word (i.e., “only”) is not in the passage is irrelevant. Context shows us that the CONCEPT is there.

In this final paragraph, you mix a great deal of error with the truth. The word of God, is the highest authority. But Tradition AND Scripture both contain the word of God.

The church herself teaches that she is the servant of the word of God. She does this by making certain that the word of God is taught correctly both in Tradition and Scripture.

Sincerely,

De Maria