This is my response to the Challenge on Salvo-Noodle.Com in regards to Sola Scriptura. It has been edited slightly. If any fellow Catholics out there has any input it would be appreciated.
I would like to first discuss what the Catholic Church teaches about the Bible. I agree that the Church rejects the concept of Sola Scriptura. It rejects it because the Bible does not teach it. Since the Church and the Bible do not teach the doctrine I also reject it as a tradition of man.
I do want to clarify that Catholics are free to affirm the material sufficiency of scripture but not the formal sufficiency. Material sufficiency means that the Bible contains all the material needed for Theology either implicitly or explicitly but not in the correct form. This would affirm that Sacred tradition and an authoritative Church are needed to properly interpret what scripture means. You need to look at the Bible through the lens of Sacred Tradition. There may be a better definitions of it out there so don’t take my word for it. Look at what the Church teaches from her own mouth not from sources that have a bias against her.
An example supporting this would be 2 Peter 3:15-16 ESV.
15 And count the patience of our Lord as salvation, just as our beloved brother Paul also wrote to you according to the wisdom given him, 16 as he does in all his letters when he speaks in them of these matters. There are some things in them that are hard to understand, which the ignorant and unstable twist to their own destruction, as they do the other Scriptures.
Here we can see that you need more than just the Bible to interpret the Bible. The Greek word here that is translated as ignorant really means unlearned or untaught. You need to be correctly taught or you may end up twisting scripture to your own destruction. Who does the teaching? I think you can find the answer out by reading the Bible.
I want to now look at the passages from the Bible that CK used to help support Sola Scriptura.
Matthew 15:1-9 … Jesus sternly warns of how traditions of men can render the commands of God ineffectual. This tradition is hollow… it pays lip service to God while the heart is dead.
The problem is that this passage Jesus is refuting tradtions of men, not all traditions. This in no way proves Sola Scriptura as I will show later.
Acts 17:10-11… The Bereans were considered “more noble” because they didn’t just receive the word that was spoken to them without first testing it against Scripture. They were more noble because they did this even to the words that Paul spoke!
The problem when using this passage is that the scriptures that Paul is referring to is the OLD TESTAMENT. So are you going to tell me that the Old Testament is all that is needed?
2 Timothy 3:14-17 … Paul says Scripture is able to bring the truth of salvation. Scripture is completely sufficient for doctrine, reproof, correction and instruction in righteousness. Learning the Word equips us to pursue a life pleasing before God.
Actually I would like to call you out on this one. Using your Bible: the passage really says :
14 But as for you, continue in what you have learned and have firmly believed, knowing from whom [1] you learned it 15 and how from childhood you have been acquainted with the sacred writings, which are able to make you wise for salvation through faith in Christ Jesus. 16 All Scripture is breathed out by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, 17 that the man of God [2] may be competent, equipped for every good work.
CK has again engaged in some Biblical eisegesis.The first problem I have is that it says All Scripture is profitable for training etc and equipped for every good work. Profitable does not mean sufficient. The next problem is that it does not say “ONLY” scripture.
I do agree that traditions of men are not held to the same authority of God’s word, the problem is that we are not talking about traditions of men. We are talking about Sacred Tradition. The Word of God is not only passed through the written form.
I do have a few questions I would like answered.
1.) Did Jesus practice Sola Scriptura?
2.) Did the apostles practice Sola Scriptura?
3.) Did the hearers of the Apostles practice Sola Scriptura?
4.)Are the Table of Contents of the Bible infallible? If so, where is it written that says so?
5.)How do you know that any of the Books of the NT are scripture. I would like the chapter and verse from each book making the claim.
6.) Where did Jesus command the apostles to write? Chapter and verse please.
7.)How do you know who actually wrote the Gospel of Matthew?
This only scratches the surface of this discussion. I plan on delving into this more in the next few days.
