Does the Bible teach the doctrine of Sola Scriptura?
Third Rebuttal
Moses Flores
As I mentioned in
my previous responses, I want to now deal with the formation of the canon of
Scripture. It is posited by
Regarding the theological view of the canon, we turn to two clear passages of Scripture in the New Testament that give witness to the nature of Scripture: II Timothy 3:16 and II Peter 1:19-21.
First in II Timothy 3:16 we read,
“All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, reproof, correction and training in righteousness.”
I have already given exposition of this text in my opening statement so I will only make my necessary points here.
It is important that we see that Paul is talking about what “all Scripture” is and not merely “some Scripture”. This is a categorical statement about the true nature of Scripture. This becomes important when considering the nature of the canon of Scripture. Since only Scripture is God-breathed, it is logical to say that only those writings that are God-breathed are Scripture and those that are not God-breathed are not Scripture, thus not part of the canon. The recognition of the canon of Scripture, then, is not revelation itself. That is, the Church has never claimed to have a “divine table of contents” that was revealed by God that helps us to recognize which books are to be part of the canon. Rather, the canon is what could be called an “artifact of revelation.” It is what is left behind from God’s act of revelation. Thus, the nature of Scripture as God-breathed revelation serves as the foundation for the existence of a “canon of Scripture” – a standard collection of writings.
Another Scripture that reveals the nature of Scripture is found in II Peter 1:19-21 which says,
“And so we have the prophetic word confirmed, which you do well to heed as a light that shines in a dark place, until the day dawns and the morning star rises in your hearts, knowing this first, that no prophecy of Scripture is of any private interpretation, for prophecy never came by the will of man, but holy men of God spoke as they were moved by the Holy Spirit.”
Here, Peter is exhorting his readers that in light of his upcoming death and the passing away of the apostolic authority, His readers are exhorted to follow the Scriptures as their “light” that shines in a dark place. However, lest his readers follow Scripture blindly, he wants them to know about the nature of Scripture and the origin of its contents. Most translations read that “no prophecy of Scripture is of any private interpretation.” The word “interpretation” here can be a little misleading. For instance, most take this to say at face value that no one has the right to “private interpretations” of Scripture, but instead should be submitted to an infallible interpreter. But this is not what the text is saying at all. Continuing within the context into verse 21, the reader should understand that “being of one’s own interpretation” is meant to say that Scripture does not find its origin in the will of man, but rather Scripture is the product of holy men of God who were moved, or carried along, by the Holy Spirit.
Interestingly enough, Peter wants us to know “above all” (NIV) or to know first, about the nature of Scripture. Particularly that Scripture is not the product of men but of the Spirit of God. This is entirely consistent with II Timothy 3:16 in that Scriptures are “God-breathed”. Thus, Peter’s identification, or categorical statement for Scripture is that they are those writings by men who were carried along by the Holy Spirit. Thus, only those writings of men who were guided by the Spirit to write the things they did are Scripture.
Summing this up, there exists a category of writings authored ultimately by God through the Holy Spirit. These writings are known to God and comprise what can be called the “theological canon.[1]” Whether these writings are acknowledged or not by other men, they still remain what they are by nature: God-breathed Scripture. Thus, the “theological canon” exists whether or not it is recognized by any other.
In other words, suppose that I have written several works. The totality of these works comprises what would be called the canon of works. Whether or not, anybody believes them to be written by me or even reads them. The fact would remain that I did write those works and they are what they are by nature, and not by recognition from any other external source.
With such a view and understanding of the nature of the canon, it should be obvious that no external authority, such as a Church Council, nor even the Church itself, can make a book to be God-breathed, or Scripture, anymore than someone could make the writings of mere human origin into the Word of God. Instead, what the Church does is recognize which books are God-breathed Scripture and passively receives those works as part of the canon of Scripture thus, giving us the Holy Scriptures or what we know as the Bible. Historically speaking, the Roman Catholic Church claims to have authoratively determined the Canon, however, this cannot be the case for it is clear that the God-breathed writings exists as what they are by nature irrespective of our recognition or declarations.
But we still ask the question, how did the God-breathed writings come together to give us the Bible that we have today? How did the early Church recognize the Canon of Scripture?
First we should understand how the Old Testament canon came into being. It is recognized by strict Jewish tradition that body of writings that came to be known as the “oracles of God” was closed by about 400 B.C. The Jewish historian Josephus acknowledges that there was no more authorative communication from God through prophet to be put on writing after the time of Malachi [2]. Thus, by the time our Lord, Jesus Christ, began his ministry, there was already a generally accepted Canon of Scripture referred to by its three fold division of “the Law, the prophets and the Psalms” (cf. Luke 24:44-45) the Deuterocanonicals, or apocrypha, not included. It is notable that Jesus never debated with the Pharisees or Scribes what was or what was not Scripture. It was recognized already that there was a body of writings that were the very words of God. But how did this happen? The answer: God simply led His people to recognize them for what they were.
There was no council that met and discussed which works seemed to be or could be the Word of God. Rather they were accepted as they came through the prophets or those who penned the words of the prophets which were the very words of God. Essentially, by about 200 B.C. the Jewish canon was completed with 22 books (which are the same 39 books in the Protestant Old Testament[3]).
What about those of the New Testament? How did we come to recognize those writings as God-breathed? In a very general way, the immediate followers of Christ through the ministry of the Apostles believed that it was the closest followers of Jesus who were divinely appointed to authoratively declare the person and work of Christ. Thus, in a general way, it was their writings that were accepted as authorative. Thus, almost immediately, the writings of Paul are accepted as Scripture as acknowledged in II Peter 3:15-16. This text says,
“…and consider that the longsuffering of our Lord is salvation- as also our beloved brother Paul, according to the wisdom given to him, has written to you, as also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things, in which are some things hard to understand, which untaught and unstable people twist to their own destruction, as they do also the rest of the Scriptures.”
When Peter says that Paul’s writings are twisted with the “rest of the Scriptures”, Peter is showing that he counts Paul’s writings to be on par with the known authorative Scriptures of the time, namely the Old Testament.
Peter is not alone in acknowledging other writings of the New Testament era as Scripture. In I Timothy 5:18, Paul is instructing the church to “honor” their elders who labor in the Word and in doctrine. He substantiates his exhortation by saying,
“For the Scripture says, ‘You shall not muzzle an ox while it treads out the grain,’ and ‘the laborer is worthy of his wages.’”
The first quote is recognizable from Deuteronomy 25:4 while the second quote comes from the Gospel according to Luke 10:7. It is generally accepted by New Testament scholars that I Timothy was written around A.D 62 – A.D. 64, which would mean that the Gospel according to Luke was already accepted and functioning as Scripture along with the Old Testament as well. The final writing from an apostle would be the apocalyptic work of the Revelation of Jesus Christ, written as late as A.D. 95. This final writing of the last remaining apostle essentially ended the revelation of God in Christ to the Church. With the coming of Christ and the exposition of His person and work by the apostles, God was fully revealed in Christ (cf. Hebrews 1:1-3). Thus, those writings written by the apostles, or their commissioned “secretaries” (like Mark for Peter, or Luke) that were God-breathed were recognized for what they were, the Word of God.
In dealing with the formation of the canon, we must remember that the canon was never an early issue in Church history since, as mentioned before, Christians were being persecuted and the Scriptures were burned if they were found. Christians didn’t have time to formulate much of their doctrines in any unified way while having to keep their religion underground. The first attempt at a “canon” was by the Gnostic Marcion in the mid-second century. He proposed that the entire OT was not Scripture at all, and that only some of the known NT was to be accepted.
We must also consider the geographical locations of Scripture as well as its transmission. Scripture was primarily written on Papyrus and arranged into a “codex.” Due to the lack of printing presses available at the time, the transmission of Scripture took place through scribes. What would essentially happen is that an apostle, or one sanctioned by an apostle, would deliver a letter to a local Church in a given geographical area. From there, the letter would either get copied by a scribe and passed on to another Church in the geographical area. This process took time. We must also consider that some works did not reach others until much later. Hence, when it came time to consider some letters as Canonical, there were some Churches who had not heard of such works as Revelation, or 2 Peter or Jude. Hence, the historical disputes of these books. One book, Hebrews, did not even bear an author’s name, and so it was disputed whether or not it was apostolic in origin, and hence an authorative communication from God.
Now, this is not to say that the Church did not have a functioning canon before there was ever an official recognition of which books were God-breathed and which ones were not. On the contrary, there is clear evidence from the writings of the early Fathers, even the Scripture themselves, as seen above, that though there was no existing formal declaration of what was Canonical and what was not, the Church already knew by the wisdom and guidance of the Holy Spirit what Scripture was and what was not.
We should not take lightly the words of Jesus when He said in John 10:3-5:
“…and the sheep hear [the Good Shepherd’s] voice; and he calls his own sheep by name and leads them out. And when he brings out his own sheep, he goes before them; and the sheep follow him, for they know his voice. Yet they will by no means follow a stranger, but will flee from him, for they do not know the voice of strangers.”
The verse is certainly a revelation that the Church, the sheepfold of God, knows the voice of their Lord and they have heard him in the writings they recognized as Scripture.
Now,
it is often asserted by
4. There are, then, of the Old Testament, twenty-two books
in number; for, as I have heard, it is handed down that this is the number of
the letters among the Hebrews; their respective order and names being as
follows. The first is Genesis, then Exodus, next Leviticus, after that Numbers,
and then Deuteronomy. Following these there is Joshua, the son of Nun, then
Judges, then Ruth. And again, after these four books of Kings, the first and
second being reckoned as one book, and so likewise the third and fourth as one
book. And again, the first and second of the Chronicles are reckoned as one
book. Again Ezra, the first and second are similarly one book. After these
there is the book of Psalms, then the Proverbs, next Ecclesiastes, and the Song
of Songs. Job follows, then the Prophets, the twelve being reckoned as one
book. Then Isaiah, one book, then Jeremiah with Baruch, Lamentations, the
epistle, one book; afterwards, Ezekiel and Daniel, each one book. Thus far
constitutes the Old Testament.
5. Again
it is not tedious to speak of the [books] of the New Testament. These are, the
four Gospels, according to Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John. Afterwards, the Acts
of the Apostles and Epistles (called Catholic), seven, viz. of James, one; of
Peter, two; of John, three; after these, one of Jude. In addition, there are
fourteen Epistles of Paul, written in this order. The first, to the Romans;
then two to the Corinthians; after these, to the Galatians; next, to the
Ephesians; then to the Philippians; then to the Colossians; after these, two to
the Thessalonians, and that to the Hebrews; and again, two to Timothy; one to
Titus; and lastly, that to Philemon. And besides, the Revelation of John.
6. These
are fountains of salvation, that they who thirst may be satisfied with the
living words they contain. In these alone is proclaimed the doctrine of godliness.
Let no man add to these, neither let him take ought from these. For concerning
these the Lord put to shame the Sadducees, and said, ‘Ye do err, not knowing
the Scriptures.’ And He reproved the Jews, saying, ‘Search the Scriptures, for
these are they that testify of Me.’
7. But
for greater exactness I add this also, writing of necessity; that there are
other books besides these not indeed included in the Canon, but appointed by
the Fathers to be read by those who newly join us, and who wish for instruction
in the word of godliness. The Wisdom of Solomon, and the Wisdom of Sirach, and
Esther, and Judith, and Tobit, and that which is called the Teaching of the
Apostles, and the Shepherd. But the former, my brethren, are included in the
Canon, the latter being [merely] read; nor is there in any place a mention of
apocryphal writings. But they are an invention of heretics, who write them when
they choose, bestowing upon them their approbation, and assigning to them a
date, that so, using them as ancient writings, they may find occasion to lead
astray the simple.
Space
prevents me from going further into the historical development of the Canon of
Scripture. However, it is worth noting
that the Councils of Hippo and Carthage DID NOT settle the canon issue once and
for all. This is apparent by the fact
that the Council of Trent excludes 3 Esdras, which was included at Hippo and
I would recommend reading such works as William Webster’s and David King’s “Holy Scripture” (3 volumes) concerning the formation of the Canon as well as William Webster’s works on the historical process of the formation of the canon. I hope that what was presented here, proves useful in understanding my position and I look forward to our cross examination session. God bless.
[1] See
James R. White’s “Scripture Alone”, Bethany House Publishers,
[2] See Josephus, Against Apion, 1.8
[3]
Lightfoot, Neil R., How we got the Bible,
3rd Edition, MJF Books,
[4] “The
Tridentine list or decree was the first infallible and effectually promulgated
declaration on the Canon of the Holy Scriptures (The Canons and Decrees of the
Council of Trent,
Likewise the Catholic
Encyclopedia concurs: “