Sola Scriptura Pt. I

I would like to begin with a formal apology. Our recent announcement concerning our upcoming conversion to Catholicism has kicked up a little bit of dust, so to say. It is only natural that those we love and have journeyed with would have questions and/or concerns about our decision. I admit that I may have responded in anger to some of the concerns that were brought about, and for this I ask your forgiveness. It has never been my intention to point out how Protestants are wrong and why Catholics are right. Are Protestants Christians? Yes. Are Catholics Christians? Yes. We are all Christians. We all declare Christ as Lord. However, there is a key difference between Protestantism and Catholicism. Catholics understand and proclaim the importance of Scripture for faith and salvation, but we also hold to Church Tradition as a pillar of faith. This is where Protestants disagree.

           Sola Scriptura, by Scripture Alone, is one of the Five Solae of the Protestant Reformation. This doctrine basically means that the Bible contains all knowledge necessary for salvation and holiness. What is interesting about the interactions we’ve had with our friends during this experience is that some say that by professing Catholicism we are denying the importance of the Scriptures, but this is definitely not the case. The Bible is absolutely necessary for righteous living and knowing Christ. II Timothy 3:16 says that all Scripture is God-breathed and useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting, and training in righteousness. What follows are my thoughts, which some will most surely disagree with. Nevertheless, they are the thoughts and questions that I have been pondering for some time now. As such, I ask that you take them as my thoughts and not a declaration of who is right and who is wrong.

This is a painting by Albrecht Dürer. It was painted around the time of the Protestant Reformation. Peter, representing the Papacy, is seen with his key in hand but pushed into the dark background. The Apostle John is showing Peter the importance of sola scriptura. This was painted in an effort to downplay the importance and authority of the Papacy.

            As I stated before, I do not deny the power and importance of Scripture for faithful living in Christ, but I have begun to question some of the beliefs and doctrines surrounding the Bible. For many Christians, the words Scripture(s) and Bible are used interchangeably. However, in the New Testament anytime the word Scriptures is used it is referring to only the Old Testament. So II Timothy 3:16 is referring to the books of the Old Testament. The Navigators’ Topical Memory System (TMS) is a fantastic tool to aid anyone striving to memorize Scripture. The two verses used to emphasize the importance of Scripture memory are II Timothy 3:16 and Joshua 1:8, which says, “This book of the law shall not depart out of your mouth; you shall meditate on it day and night, so that you may be careful to act in accordance with all that is written in it. For then you shall make your way prosperous, and then you shall be successful.” This book of the Law spoken of is referring to the Torah and not the entire Bible, which makes sense because Jesus Christ had not even been born when the book of Joshua was written. My point is that we need to be careful when reading passages that talk about the Scriptures. Many people believe that the Holy Bible is indeed Holy and different from any other book in existence, and I agree. But what is the Holy Bible?

            While on staff with The Navigators we came across a Bible Study called Route 66. Any guesses as to why a study would be named so? Go to a Christian bookstore and open just about any Protestant Bible and see how many books are in it. You will find that there are indeed 66 books in the Bible, 39 in the Old Testament and 27 in the New Testament. Take all of these books and combine in them into one book and you have the Holy Bible. However, ask a Catholic how many books are in the Bible and they will give you different answer: 73. There seems to be a discrepancy. If indeed Scripture is God-breathed, Holy, infallible, and divinely inspired then someone has to be right and someone has to be wrong, there cannot be two opposing books that are infallible. So we must ask an important question, which was canonized first, the 66 books we find in most Protestant Bibles today, or the 73 that are found in Catholic Bibles? To make matters more complicated, we could even throw in the Eastern Orthodox version of 75 books. But lets just stick to Catholicism and Protestantism. I’ve heard that some people are under the impression that seven books were added to the 66 canonized books of the Bible at one point or another in Church history. This is not the truth.

            In about 367 AD, St. Athanasius came up with a list of 73 books for the Bible that he believed to be divinely inspired.  This list was finally approved by Pope Damasus I in 382 AD, and was formally approved by the Church Council of Rome in that same year.  Later Councils at Hippo (393 AD) and Carthage (397 AD) ratified this list of 73 books

(http://www.catholicbible101.com/thebible73or66books.htm). So about 300 years after the death and resurrection of Christ, 73 books are canonized as “the Holy Bible.” This Bible remains so for many years until the Protestant Reformation in 1517. Martin Luther believed that the seven books that make up the Apocrypha were not valid and did not belong in the Scriptures, so he got rid of them. But here’s something that you may not know about Luther: if he had had his ultimate wish Protestants would have a Bible that contained 62 books. It is a little known fact that Martin Luther also wanted to get rid of James, Hebrews, Esther, and Revelation. So when we talk about the Holy Bible we have to understand that men were always involved with the process of deciding what that Bible would be. The answer to the question, then, is that the “Catholic Bible” of 73 books came first 300 years after Jesus and was then altered in 1517. The follow-up question would have to be, was this alteration necessary, especially given the fact that Luther also wished to get rid of four books that are still in Protestant Bibles? Was it necessary? I would argue that it was not.

            Another comment on reading the Bible: sometimes when we read it we read what we want it to say rather than what it actually says. II Timothy 3:16 is a perfect example of this observation. Here is what it actually says: “All scripture is inspired by God and profitable/useful for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness.” But this is how I have read it for many, many years: All scripture is inspired by God and is the only way for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness. The difference is that the Scriptures are indeed useful for teaching and training in righteousness, but it does not say that the Scriptures are the only way that these things can come about.

            There is more to be said about this topic, but I would like to stop here until next time (which will hopefully be in a few days). The next session will tackle my issues with the interpretation of the Scriptures. Please feel free to leave comments. Remember that these are my thoughts and concerns, but I should also like to know what yours are.