Sola Scriptura: The Unscriptural Protestant Dogma

In my conversations with Protestants friends over the past several years, I have found that the single greatest obstacle to developing a consensus is the Protestant principle of sola scriptura (that the scriptures alone infallibly and sufficiently contains and communicates all of the teachings necessary for salvation). While seemingly innocuous, it is so detrimental to dialogue because it eliminates relying upon philosophy and authority as infallible content and strictly limits it to the realm of exegesis. In the remainder of this article, I would like to offer three brief arguments against what I believe to be the dogmatically-held, impractical, unscriptural principle of sola scriptura and so pave the way to a more constructive dialogue.

1. “Sola Scriptura” is self-defeating

Sola scriptura is self-defeating because nowhere in scriptures does it say that the Bible alone is to be sufficient in communicating the saving truth of Christ. Thus, sola scriptura is not Biblical and is to be rejected on its own principle.  

Furthermore, even if one were to grant that there is a verse in the Bible that says “scripture alone” (which there is not), nowhere in the Bible does declare the complete list of books that are to be considered scriptures.  Thus, by sola scriptura, we have no infallibly certain canon of Scripture and thus no infallibly certain Scripture.  

Furthermore, even if we were to grant that every single book of the Bible explicitly communicates that it is the divine Word of God, not even this would permit us to consider it divinely inspired. After all, many writings over the course of history (The Quran, The Book of Mormon, even some Christian writings) have claimed to be the Word of God, but this claim is not enough for them to be considered Scripture. Thus, without an authoritative, external dogmatic principle or an authoritative external Magisterium, we could not have the Bible.

 2. “Sola Scriptura” does not remove the problem of interpretation

Even if one grants a canon, it does not change the fact that the meaning of Scripture is not always clear, even to the most sincere and educated of readers. 

While it is true the existence of many of the reformers posited that the meaning of scriptures is authoritative due to the internal direction of the Holy Spirit in the conscience of the interpreter, it does not make clear how to settle a dilemma between two persons both claiming Spirit-guided interpretation. Regardless of how hard one huffs and puffs in such a situation, draws connections with different parts of the scriptures, and even claims the personal guidance of the Holy Spirit, they cannot overcome the objection that “that is just your interpretation.” 

Thus, without force, there is no final say, only chronic disputes and eventual schism behind persons with mutually exclusive interpretations; hence the devolving of Protestant churches into cults of personality (e.g. Lutherans, Calvinists). Yet the fragmentation of Christendom did not stop with these men. Rather, the perpetual personal scriptural disputation brought about by sola scriptura has continued to divide. Today there are with over 31,000 different Protestant churches currently in existence, each with their own “correct” Spirit-led biblical interpretation.

3. The Scriptures themselves contain the Catholic conception of Sacred Tradition

Even if we grant that there is an established canon and that it is possible to interpret the scriptures, there are several passages in the scriptures in which the apostles speak with authority regarding necessary elements for salvation, and do so without appealing to the scriptures.  

The clearest example of this is when the Apostles came together in the Council of Jerusalem to decide whether or not Gentile converts needed to follow the Mosaic Law.  The result of this Church council was a formal and binding decision regarding matters of salvation that “it is the decision of the Holy Spirit and of us not to place any burden on you besides these necessities[…]”(Acts 15:28).  

Note that in rendering this decision, the apostles did not first consult the scriptures. After all, the New Testament was not yet written for another several hundred years, but rather the Holy Spirit guided their decision. Since the leaders of the early Church could not have used the scriptures in their decision making, adhering to these divisions currently contained Scripture denies the principle of sola scriptura.