What is sola scriptura?

Answer

The phrase sola scriptura is from the Latin: sola meaning “alone,” “ground,” or “base,” and the word scriptura meaning “writings”—referring to the Scriptures. Sola scriptura signifies that Scripture alone holds authority for the faith and practice of Christians. The Bible is complete, authoritative, and true. “All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting, and training in righteousness” «All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: », (2 Timothy 3:16).

Sola scriptura became the rallying cry of the Protestant Reformation. For centuries, the Roman Catholic Church had elevated its traditions above the authority of the Bible. This led to numerous practices that contradicted the teachings of the Bible. Examples include prayer to saints and/or Mary, the immaculate conception, transubstantiation, indulgences, and papal authority. Martin Luther, the founder of the Lutheran Church and a key figure in the Protestant Reformation, openly criticized the Catholic Church for its teachings that were not supported by the Bible. The Catholic Church threatened Martin Luther with excommunication (and death) unless he retracted his statements. In response, Martin Luther declared, “Unless I am convinced by the testimony of Scripture or by clear reasoning, unless I am persuaded by the passages I have quoted, and unless they guide my conscience by the Word of God, I cannot and will not retract, for it is unsafe for a Christian to go against his conscience. Here I stand, I can do no other; may God help me! Amen!”

The main Catholic argument against sola scriptura is that the Bible does not explicitly teach sola scriptura. Catholics contend that the Bible does not explicitly state that it is the sole authoritative source.I’ve guide for faith and practice. However, this is only true in the shallowest sense. The principle is strongly indicated by verses such as Acts 17:11, which commends the Bereans for testing doctrine—taught by an apostle, no less—to the written Word. Sola scriptura is all but explicitly indicated in 1 Corinthians 4:6, where Paul warns not to “go beyond what is written.” Jesus Himself criticized those who allowed traditions to override the explicit commands of God in Mark 7:6–9.

Whether sola scriptura is overtly mentioned in the Bible or not, Catholicism fails to recognize a crucially important issue. We know that the Bible is the Word of God. The Bible declares itself to be God-breathed, inerrant, and authoritative. We also know that God does not change His mind or contradict Himself. So, while the Bible itself may not explicitly argue for sola scriptura, it most definitely does not allow for traditions that contradict its message. Sola scriptura is not as much of an argument against tradition as it is an argument against unbiblical, extra-biblical, and/or anti-biblical doctrines. The only way to know for sure what God expects of us is to stay true to what we know He has revealed—the Bible. We can know, beyond the shadow of any doubt, that Scripture is true, authoritative, and reliable. The same cannot be said of tradition.

The Word of God is the ultimate and only infallible authority for the Christian faith. Traditions are valid only when they conform with Scripture. Traditions that contradict the Bible are not of God and are not a valid aspect of the Christian faith. Sola scriptura is the only way to avoid subjectivity and keep personal opinion from taking priority over the teachings of the Bible. The essence of sola scriptura is basing one’s spiritual life on the Bible alone and rejecting any tradition or teaching that is not in full agreement with the Bible. Second Timothy 2:15 declares, “Do your best to present yourself to God as one approved, a workman who does not nee

“Do your best to present yourself to God as one approved, a worker who does not need to be ashamed and who correctly handles the word of truth.”

Sola Scriptura does not invalidate the concept of church traditions. Instead, Sola Scriptura provides a strong foundation on which to build church traditions. Many practices in both Catholic and Protestant churches stem from traditions rather than explicit Scriptural teachings. It is beneficial, and even essential, for the church to uphold traditions. Traditions play a crucial role in explaining and organizing Christian practices. However, for these traditions to be legitimate, they must align with God’s Word. They should be rooted in the firm foundation of Scriptural teaching. The issue with the Roman Catholic Church, and many other churches, is that they build traditions upon traditions that are built upon traditions, often with the original tradition not fully aligning with Scripture. This is why Christians must always return to Sola Scriptura, the authoritative Word of God, as the sole reliable basis for faith and practice.

On a practical note, a common objection to Sola Scriptura is that the Bible’s canon was not officially established until at least 250 years after the church’s inception. Furthermore, the Scriptures were not accessible to the general public for over 1500 years after the church’s establishment. How then were early Christians expected to adhere to Sola Scriptura when they did not have the complete Scriptures? And how were Christians before the invention of the printing press supposed to base their faith and practice solely on Scripture without access to a complete copy of the Scriptures? This challenge is exacerbated by historically high levels of illiteracy. How does Sola Scriptura address these concerns?

The flaw in this argument lies in suggesting that Scripture’s authority depends on its availability. This is not the case. Scripture’s authority is inherent in its nature as the inspired Word of God.

iversal; because it is God’s Word, it is His authority. The fact that Scripture was not readily available, or that people could not read it, does not change the fact that Scripture is God’s Word. Further, rather than this being an argument against sola scriptura, it is actually an argument for what the church should have done, instead of what it did. The early church should have made producing copies of the Scriptures a high priority. While it was unrealistic for every Christian to possess a complete copy of the Bible, it was possible that every church could have some, most, or all of the Scriptures available to it. Early church leaders should have made studying the Scriptures their highest priority so they could accurately teach it. Even if the Scriptures could not be made available to the masses, at least church leaders could be well-trained in the Word of God. Instead of building traditions upon traditions and passing them on from generation to generation, the church should have copied the Scriptures and taught the Scriptures «preach the word; be instant in season, out of season; reprove, rebuke, exhort with all longsuffering and doctrine. », (2 Timothy 4:2).

Again, traditions are not the problem. Unbiblical traditions are the problem. The availability of the Scriptures throughout the centuries is not the determining factor. The Scriptures themselves are the determining factor. We now have the Scriptures readily available to us. Through the careful study of God’s Word, it is clear that many church traditions which have developed over the centuries are in fact contradictory to the Word of God. This is where sola scriptura applies. Traditions that are based on, and in agreement with, God’s Word can be maintained. Traditions that are not based on, and/or disagree with, God’s Word must be rejected. Sola scriptura points us back to what God has revealed to us in His Word. Sola scriptura ultimately points us back to th

God always speaks the truth, never contradicts Himself, and consistently demonstrates His reliability.