Sola Scriptura Part I

 1 Paul, an apostle—not from men nor through man, but through Jesus Christ and God the Father, who raised him from the dead—

English Standard Version Catholic Edition (n.p.: Augustine Institute, 2019), Ga 1:1.

Paul’s missionary work did not end with the oral proclamation of the good news of Jesus Christ and with the conversion of individuals. Paul established churches, communities of men and women who had come to faith in Jesus the Messiah and Savior, and who came together to study the Scriptures, to learn what Jesus Christ had done and taught, and to live according to the will of the living God.

Eckhard J. Schnabel, “Paul’s Missionary Strategy: Goals, Methods, and Realities,” in Christian Mission: Old Testament Foundations and New Testament Developments, ed. Stanley E. Porter and Cynthia Long Westfall, McMaster New Testament Studies (Eugene, OR: Pickwick Publications, 2011), 183.

Paul knew the importance of authorized apostolic letters, for he saw the authority behind the letter that came from the first Jerusalem church council. The first epistle from the church leaders who had assembled at Jerusalem was the prototype for subsequent epistles (see Acts 15.1). It was authoritative because it was apostolic, and it was received as God’s word. If an epistle came from an apostle (or apostles), it was to be received as having the imprimatur of the Lord. 

This is why Paul wanted the churches to receive his word as being the word of the Lord. This is made explicit in 1 Thessalonians 2:13, an epistle he insisted had to be read to all the believers in the church (1 Thess. 5:27). In the Second Epistle to the Thessalonians, Paul indicated that his epistles carry the same authority as his preaching see 2 Thess. 2:15. 

Paul also told his audience that if they would read what he had written, they would be able to understand the mystery of Christ, which had been revealed to him (see Eph. 3:1–6). Because Paul explained the mystery in his writings (in this case, the encyclical epistle known as “Ephesians”), he urged other churches to read this encyclical (see Col. 4:16). In so doing, Paul himself encouraged the circulation of his writings. 

Philip Comfort, Encountering the Manuscripts: An Introduction to New Testament Paleography & Textual Criticism (Nashville, TN: Broadman & Holman, 2005), 16.

With regard to the divine and saving mysteries of the faith no doctrine, however trivial, may be taught without the backing of the divine Scriptures.

CYRIL OF JERUSALEM

We are not obliged to regard the arguments of any writers, however Catholic and estimable they may be, as we do the canonical Scriptures.

AUGUSTINE

If Tradition or the Magisterium claimed to teach something contradicting the Holy Scriptures, it would  certainly be false, and the faithful ought to reject it.

YVES CONGAR

Donald G. Bloesch, Holy Scripture: Revelation, Inspiration & Interpretation (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1994), 141.

So sola Scriptura simply means that Scripture is sufficient. The fact that Jesus did and taught many things not recorded in Scripture (John 20:30; 21:25) is wholly irrelevant to the principle of sola Scriptura. The fact that most of the apostles’ actual sermons in the early churches were not written down and preserved for us does not diminish the truth of biblical sufficiency one bit. What is certain is that all that is necessary is in Scripture—and we are forbidden “to exceed what is written” (1 Cor. 4:6).

As other chapters in this volume demonstrate, Scripture clearly claims for itself this sufficiency—and nowhere more clearly than in 2 Timothy 3:15–17. A brief summary of that passage is perhaps appropriate here. 

In short,  2 Timothy 3:15  affirms that Scripture is sufficient for salvation: “The sacred writings … are able to give you the wisdom that leads to salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus.”  2 Tim.3:16 affirms the absolute authority of Scripture, which is “God-breathed” (Greek, theopneustos) and profitable for our instruction. 2 Tim.3 17 states that Scripture is able to equip the man of God “for every good work.” So the assertion that the Bible itself does not teach sola Scriptura is simply wrong.

John MacArthur, “Chapter Five: The Sufficiency of the Written Word,” in Sola Scriptura: The Protestant Position on the Bible, ed. Don Kistler (Lake Mary, FL: Reformation Trust Publishing, 2009), 80–81.

In current ecumenical dialogues, the doctrine of infallibility has received extensive attention. In general, it may be said that most Churches do not have difficulty with infallibility in believing. With regard to infallibility in teaching, some Churches accept the infallibility of an ecumenical council. 

The majority of Churches, however, have objections to papal infallibility as Vatican I defined and Vatican II reaffirmed it. Recently, some Roman Catholic theologians began questioning the validity of this doctrine either on philosophical grounds or on the basis of the doctrine’s alleged lack of biblical foundation or on the argument that the bishops at Vatican I were deprived of sufficient freedom to express their opposition to the doctrine. Others accept the teaching of papal infallibility but suggest that it should not be imposed on non-Catholic Christians either because Vatican I taught it without consulting other Churches or because it does not belong to the core of the Christian faith.

Michael Glazier and Monika K. Hellwig, The Modern Catholic Encyclopedia (Collegeville, MN: Liturgical Press, 2004), 402–403.