Is the
Doctrine of Sola Scriptur Biblical?
Cross
Examination Session
The following is a
cross-examination session between Moses Flores and Benjamin Rosado concerning
the doctrine of Sola Scriptura. Each of
the participants met in a private chat room and were
given 30 minutes to exchange questions and answers.
Examiner: Moses Flores
MOSES: I’m having a bit of trouble
understanding what your view of Scripture is and what its role is in the
Christian life and in Christian doctrine.
Could you explain your view on the nature and role of Scripture?
BEN: Sure. To me, scripture is the word of God that was
written down for all people to help the church in its knowledge of Jesus Christ , the Word made flesh
MOSES: Is Scripture unique revelation
from God or is there other revelation from God that can be likened to it?
BEN: It is
definitely unique in the sense that there is nothing else like it. But also, if I put a bible next to Jesus
Christ Himself, there would definitely be a comparison.
MOSES: In one
of your rebuttal statements, you offered the argument that the Church was
"God-breathed" like the Scriptures.
But you just asserted the uniqueness of the Scriptures. How would you reconcile that statement?
BEN: When I
said unique I meant unique as in nothing else like it. The church is not the same thing as the
scriptures. Maybe you mean something
other than unique?
MOSES: I’m also having a bit of trouble
understanding your view of exactly what “tradition” is in your view. Could you please explain briefly what
“tradition” is?
BEN: Tradition
is the teaching of the church, practically speaking,
it is the true understanding of Christ based upon His person and His
revelation.
MOSES: Are you aware of how
"tradition" was defined by the Council of
BEN: No how?
MOSES: well I won't ask that
question....
BEN: ok
MOSES: According to the way you initially defined "tradition"
as the "true interpretation" of the Scriptures, are you aware of any
methodology that
BEN: Well I
would only quote how the church interpreted Christ in the scriptures itself: In
the book of Acts chapter 15. It is the
decision of the holy Spirit and us..."
The church defined what must be believed by all Christians there. That is just like the true interpretation.
MOSES: In Acts 15, when the Church
defined what must be believed, isn't it true that there were not mentioned
later elements of Roman Catholicism like belief in Papal Infallibility, or the
Immaculate Conception, or the Assumption of Mary, etc...?
BEN: Well I
would agree that in that chapter, the immaculate conception
and the assumption of Mary were not mentioned, but that chapter is not all that
the church ever defined.
MOSES: Would it be fair to assert then
that the Church, at one time, did not require belief in those doctrine's which
were later declared as dogmatic and infallible, meaning that if one does not
believe them they are considered anathema by Rome?
BEN: I agree
with you, some doctrines were not defined until later. A good example of that is the doctrine of the
holy Trinity which was defined in the 4th century, but that does not assume
that they didn't believe in the Trinity back then.
MOSES: Did those later defined
doctrines come into existence after the completion of the Canon of Scripture?
BEN: No they
always existed. The church always
believed in the Trinity but they didn't define the doctrine until the 4th
century because a doctrine is not defined until it is spoken against.
MOSES: But regarding, say the Marian
doctrines, were they always necessary for salvation as they were defined by
BEN: They were
always believed Moses. Not until the 19th century was the need to define them
there; people were speaking against the teaching.
MOSES: According to your view, which,
if any, would you say carries greater authority, Scripture or the “true
interpretation” of Scripture?
BEN: Neither
because neither can stand without the other.
I cant believe in scripture unless I know what
it really means and I cant know what it means unless I read it with the Holy
Spirit’s guidance.
MOSES: Is it your position then, that
Scripture is not clear in and of itself?
BEN: Not to all
people, no.
MOSES: When Paul told the Philippian
jailer how to be saved, He said, "believe in the Lord Jesus Christ and you
shall be saved." Is there any way
to misunderstand the call to faith in Christ there?
BEN: Well the
problem lies in "who is Jesus Christ" some
people (Jehovah’s witnesses) claim that Jesus Christ is someone else so He must
be understood to be who He truly is otherwise that statement can not save you.
MOSES: But wouldn't you have to say
that one's interpretation of Christ apart from the Scriptures is a foreign
Jesus?
BEN: Do you
mean that someone can have the scriptures but have a false understanding of
Christ?
MOSES: But as far as what to do to be
saved, "having faith in Jesus".
Is there any way to misunderstand those clear words of what to do, not
necessarily dealing with the details of who Jesus is
exhaustively?
BEN: I once
believed Jesus was another Buddha. I
believed in Him in a sense, but was I saved?
MOSES: Concerning the canon of
Scripture, you say that the Roman Catholic Church first established the canon
of Scripture in the councils of Hippo and
BEN: As far as
I know, the scriptures were being studied and also the apocrypha throughout the
early years of the church, then, as they studied the church finally defined
what books were true and [put] aside the non-inspired books.