What is Sola Scriptura?

[CeeBee]

I have heard about it, what is it?

 

[Filia Mariae]

Sola Scriptura was one of Martin Luther's basic principles for the Protestant Reformation. It means "scripture alone," that Scripture alone is the sole rule of faith.Problem is...you won't find sola scriptura in Scripture.

 

[KennySe]

I believe you should ask at P/R/E. I suspect the answers given here by Catholics won't be considered correct by our PRE brethren.

I'll give it a shot.

Sola Scriptura is Latin for "Only Scripture".
It is the Protestants' belief that the Bible is the ultimate authority.
(If it goes against the Bible, we don't do it."

However. TO complicate this definition is that some Protestants understand sola scriptura to be the ONLY authority. Those who agree with the first definition I gave, call this second definition solo scriptura (with an o, instead of an a)
"If its not IN the Bible, we don't do it."

We Catholics do not have this belief.
We believe in Holy Tradition AND Holy Scripture AND the Teaching of the Church (the Magesterium).

Martin Luther rejected the authority of the Church and he clung to the belief in sola scriptura.

Again, I recommend you ask our brethren in PRE.

Peace,
Kenny

 

[CeeBee]

Okay, thanks. That is all nee really, thanks!

 

[Cary.Melvin]

I have heard about it, what is it?

It is a very convienient way for Protestants to dismiss any Church Authority.

 

[astralislux]

Some Protestants also claim Sola Scriptura doesn't negate Tradition but supercedes it.

 

[Arc]

I have a question about this;

In 2 Timothy 3 it says:

14 But you, remain faithful to what you have learned and believed, because you know from whom you learned it, 15 and that from infancy you have known (the) sacred scriptures, which are capable of giving you wisdom for salvation through faith in Christ Jesus.

If the scriptures are capable of giving us wisdom for salvation through faith in Christ Jesus, isn't that "Only Scripture"? I don't know how else to interpret this passage. BTW, I'm not protestant or catholic, I'm learning.

 

[boughtwithaprice]

I have a question about this;

In 2 Timothy 3 it says:


If the scriptures are capable of giving us wisdom for salvation through faith in Christ Jesus, isn't that "Only Scripture"? I don't know how else to interpret this passage. BTW, I'm not protestant or catholic, I'm learning.

Just think, which sacred scripture is the verse referring to? The New Testament did not yet exist in completion when the verse was written.
Does the Old Testament alone have the capability to give wisdom for salvation?
The verse says the scriptures give wisdom, because it is good to know scripture, but it does not say that it gives all wisdom. Sola Scriptura accepts only scripture; the Catholic church accepts scripture and Tradition. It does not nullify or undermine scripture as some protestants claim; it completes it.

2 Thessalonians 2:15
So then, brethren, stand firm and hold to the traditions which you were taught, whether by word of mouth or by letter from us.

 

[KennySe]

If the scriptures are capable of giving us wisdom for salvation through faith in Christ Jesus, isn't that "Only Scripture"? I don't know how else to interpret this passage. BTW, I'm not protestant or catholic, I'm learning.

Welcome, Arc.

The passage says that scripture is a really good thing.
And it certainly is!

But the passage doesn't say "All you need is the written word."
Nor does it say, "Put your nose in this book, and ignore the words of my faithful servants."

 

[Suzannah]

Kennyse,
I am (still) a Protestant, but I thought your explanation was absolutely correct. And everyone else who added things, are also 100% correct.
The only I would add is: In Protestantism, we are generally taught that as a matter of history, Luther's "concern" was that a) Scripture alone was not the rule and b) He also had a disagreement with Church hierarchy that Scripture should be available to everyone. The latter issue is the one that causes most of the problems for Protestants when it comes to understanding their Catholic brothers and sisters. In Protestantism they are taught that Catholics do not read or study the Bible and that they don't hold it in authority over themselves. this is where the prejudice comes from. They don't understand the history as it really played out, but simply accept the Reader's Digest version from the pulpit
Sad but true.

 

[Arc]

Just think, which sacred scripture is the verse referring to? The New Testament did not yet exist in completion when the verse was written.
Does the Old Testament alone have the capability to give wisdom for salvation?
The verse says the scriptures give wisdom, because it is good to know scripture, but it does not say that it gives all wisdom. Sola Scriptura accepts only scripture; the Catholic church accepts scripture and Tradition. It does not nullify or undermine scripture as some protestants claim; it completes it.

2 Thessalonians 2:15
So then, brethren, stand firm and hold to the traditions which you were taught, whether by word of mouth or by letter from us.

That's right, the OT was the only scriptures at that time. I believe the OT does give wisdom for salvation because I believe 2 Timothy 3 is the inspired word of God. That's why it says:

"But you, remain faithful to what you have learned and believed, because you know from whom you learned it"

What did they learn that they must remain faithful too? They learned about Christ crucified for the forgiveness of sin and the completion of the OT proficies concerning his coming. The NT is the historical fact of Jesus life death and resurrection and His teachings (including Baptism & Love God and one another).

That's what I get out of it.

but it does not say that it gives all wisdom.

I don't understand. It says "which are capable of giving you wisdom for salvation". What other wisdom is needed if you have wisdom for salvation?
Weren't people saved before the traditions of both the Catholic and or Reformed doctrines? If so, why does it seem everyone has added to:

"But you, remain faithful to what you have learned and believed"
(past tense)?

It seems to be saying that what has already been stated by the apostles, and later cannonized into the NT is enough.

 

[CeeBee]

Well, then I am not a sola scripturist, if the deifinition you all give is correct. I believe the Bible is not the sole rule of faith.

 

[MorphRC]

If the Bible alone is authority and there is no Papacy, heirarchy, whether in Catholicism, Anglicanism, Baptists etc, how can a book be authority? And on whos interpretations would say so? Since Luther started this, look at Protestantism, in 1994 we had 12,554 denominations, today we have 32,234 Denominations, then we have the Protestant non-affiliated ministries which make over over 2 million ministries[seperate]. Luther started this with Sola Scriptura, can you imagine the trouble it would cause if Catholics accepted this heretical teaching?

 

[CeeBee]

yeah, it would be bad.

 

[MorphRC]

yeah, it would be bad.

Thats one way to put it

 

[nyj]

What is sola scriptura?

Good question. After reading various threads in IDD where those who supposedly adhere to this principle describe what sola scriptura isn't, I am left with only one conclusion. No one, not even those who subscribe to sola scriptura, knows what sola scriptura is.

Which I suppose, at least for them, is a good thing, as it avoids them having to answer all the tough questions about this doctrine.

 

[II Paradox II]

Sola Scriptura is Latin for "Only Scripture".
It is the Protestants' belief that the Bible is the ultimate authority.
(If it goes against the Bible, we don't do it."

Again, I recommend you ask our brethren in PRE.

hmmm... a few thoughts on this...

1) As far as Luther goes, the latin phrase associated with his view of sola scriptura was Norma normans non normata, the norm that norms but is itself not normed. For Luther and most of the reformers, the primary source of their frustration was the accretions associated with the late medieval peroid. As many of them were strong humanists, their goal was to get "back to the sources", as it were. This included the writings of the fathers and the scriptures, with comparatively little attention paid to what was perceived as a largely bloated and corrupt clerical culture in the church. If you wish to read more of this, I would suggest works by A.N.S Lane or Heiko Oberman. They both cover this issue well in different ways.

2) How one defines sola scriptura largely depends on where one's confessional position lies and frankly, how much one has thought through the issues. The epistemic problems associated with saying the scriptures are the "only authority" should be obvious to everyone. There is practically a cottage industry evolving over refutations of this idea. usually those more thoughtful will advance more nuanced positions such that scripture is the sole infallible authority, or perhaps one that I have used in the past, that it is the sole transcendent, verifiable infallible authority.

anyways, have a good day...

ken

 

[InquisitorKind]

No one, not even those who subscribe to sola scriptura, knows what sola scriptura is.

Many Protestant apologists have definitions for it that are consistent and in line with other Protestant apologists and some of the Reformers. If that isn't sufficient, at least I know what Sola Scriptura is. Have you read any books from Protestant prospectives dedicated to the topic?

~Matt

 

[Benedicta00]

What is sola scriptura?

Good question. After reading various threads in IDD where those who supposedly adhere to this principle describe what sola scriptura isn't, I am left with only one conclusion. No one, not even those who subscribe to sola scriptura, knows what sola scriptura is.

Which I suppose, at least for them, is a good thing, as it avoids them having to answer all the tough questions about this doctrine.

YES!

 

[Jason1646]

What is sola scriptura?

Good question. After reading various threads in IDD where those who supposedly adhere to this principle describe what sola scriptura isn't, I am left with only one conclusion. No one, not even those who subscribe to sola scriptura, knows what sola scriptura is.

Perhaps instead of obtaining ones definition of Sola Scriptura from your personal interactions with people in IDD, you should try to understand it according to the manner in which it is outlined in the creeds of the Reformation. Every denomination, including your own, could be perceived as inconclusive on matters of faith if we were to base our understanding of things from the posts of individuals representing their communions. Conflicting arguments and/or explanation of doctrine from individual members within the same communion is not the peculiar problem of any single denomination.

Sola Scriptura is not difficult to define. It means that Scripture is the only infallible rule for the faith. Infallible is emphasized for the simple reason that it is often left out of the definition by Catholics, as was done in the very first post by Carly in this thread.

Which I suppose, at least for them, is a good thing, as it avoids them having to answer all the tough questions about this doctrine.

Well then, I'd be happy to define it, defend it, and answer your tough questions in a formal debate, nyj, so long as you are willing to consider such tough questions as applied to your own worldview as well.

Sincerely in Christ,

~Jason