I have spent the last few evenings compiling notes for a Sunday School class I am teaching on the Five Solas. The class is relatively small, which is good for the sake of interaction and discussion, and is comprised of six “students” who all have children my age or older. It is a bit daunting being in a teaching position over men and women I have come to respect, but none of them had any knowledge over these five Latin phrases which meant so much in the Protestant Reformation.
This Sunday, we will be discussing Sola Scriptura, and I thought I would share my notes with you. I plan to have the men and women in the class look up the various passages and read them for the rest of the class as we get to each one. I also have some questions to ask of the class, which were given to me by Kevin Sorensen, who has many ties to my church and to my family. Let me know what you think, understanding that this is the first class I have ever taught and that I do have a tendency to skip around my notes a bit.
THESIS ONE: SOLA SCRIPTURA
We reaffirm the inerrant Scripture to be the sole source of written divine revelation, which alone can bind the conscience. The Bible alone teaches all that is necessary for our salvation from sin and is the standard by which all Christian behavior must be measured.We deny that any creed, council or individual may bind a Christian’s conscience, that the Holy Spirit speaks independently of or contrary to what is set forth in the Bible, or that personal spiritual experience can ever be a vehicle of revelation.
In Martin Luther’s day, Sola Scriptura had to do with the Bible being the sole ultimate authority for Christians over the traditions of the medieval church. Today, our fight has shifted from authority to sufficiency as churches and para-churches disregard the teaching of the Bible for other methods.
When asked to repudiate his books and his stance that the Bible defined the church, rather than the church defining the Bible, this is what he said.
“Since then Your Majesty and your lordships desire a simple reply, I will answer without horns and without teeth. Unless I am convinced by sacred Scripture or by evident reason – I do not accept the authority of popes and councils, for they have contradicted each other – my conscience is held captive by the word of God. I cannot and I will not recant anything, for to act against conscience is neither right nor safe. Here I stand! I can do no other. God help me! Amen.”
The material issue of the Reformation was the debate over justification by faith alone. The formal issue (the structure in which the whole debate ensued) was the issue of final authority – who or what speaks for God?
The Bible is sufficient:
For evangelism
Isaiah 55:10-11
To convert the sinner
1 Peter 1:22-25
2 Tim. 3:14-17
If the Scripture fully equips the man of God for every good work then the Scriptures are sufficient for the task.
For sanctification
John 17:14-19
To stand under the weight of temptation
Matthew 4:1-11 (verse 4)
The Scriptures are perfect and need no substitute or supplement
Psalm 19:7-9
2 Peter 1:19-21 – It is the origin of Scripture in God and in His care in which is grounded the authority of Scripture.
In this present day
2 Timothy 3
1. How sufficient is Scripture? In all areas of life? or simply pertaining to spiritual matters?
2. Must one have the Scriptures in order to know Christ? What about those in other lands that do not have the Scriptures in their native language?
3. If Scripture is sufficient, why do so many seem to talk about receiving revelations from God, saying things like, “God told me such-and-such the other day” or “I have a word from the Lord for you”?
4. Is Scripture closed? Has revelation ceased? If so, how do we know this? If not, how do we test modern day revelations?
5. If Scripture is God’s ordained means for us to know Him best, why do I leave it lying around far too long without consulting it, studying it, memorizing it, searching for God’s wisdom like a treasure, digging hard & deep until I find it and prizing it above all other things?
WHAT SOLA SCRIPTURA IS NOT
1. a claim that the Bible contains all knowledge. The Bible is not a scientific textbook, a manual on governmental procedures, or a catalog of automobile engine parts. The Bible does not claim to give us every bit of knowledge that we could ever obtain.
2. Sola scriptura is not a denial of the authority of the Church to teach God’s truth.
3. Sola scriptura is not a denial of the role of the Holy Spirit in guiding and enlightening the Church.
WHAT SOLA SCRIPTURA IS
1. The doctrine of sola scriptura, simply stated, is that the Scriptures alone are sufficient to function as the infallible rule of faith for the Church.
2. All that one must believe to be a Christian is found in Scripture, and in no other source. This is not to say that the necessary beliefs of the faith could not be summarized in a shorter form. However, there is no necessary belief, doctrine, or dogma absolutely required of a person for entrance into the kingdom of heaven that is not found in the pages of Scripture.
3. That which is not found in the Scripture either directly or by necessary implication is not binding upon the Christian.
4. All traditions are subject to the higher authority of Scripture (Matt. 15:1-9). There can be no understanding of the sufficiency of Scripture apart from an understanding of the true origin and the resultant nature of Scripture. The Reformers had the highest view of the Bible, and therefore had a solid foundation on which to stand in defending the sufficiency of the Scriptures.
You’ve heard the phrase sola scriptura, but do you really understand what it is and is not saying? You might call this, “The Dummy’s Guide to Sola Scriptura.” Important truths simply and concisely explained over @Coffee Swirls. For example, one correlary of sola scriptura is: 3. That which is not found in the Scripture either directly or by necessary implication is not binding upon the Christian. Only problem is that I can’t think of one single thing on my to-do list that
. The theme for this month’s carnival is children’s poetry. Al Mohler explains why you should read Total Truth.Language: Chez Kneel on Speaking Inuit. Theology: You didn’t think I’d have school without a class in theology did you? Doug explainsSola Scriptura.Life Under the Sun takes on the meaning of text of Exodus 21, and it’s implications for abortion, in Is Abortion Biblical?Kim of The Upward Call gives us a lesson on the gospel, and of all things, she’s telling us
voluntarily subjecting oneself to Jewish law after accepting Christs. I’m still exploring this subject though; still open, still learning. Doug over at Coffeeswirls is teaching a Sunday School class on this subject. Catch up on his first two posts[IMG]here and [IMG]here. And if you have an opinion on this subject, I’d love to hear it, but make sure it’s in agreement with scripture. [IMG
] Posted in Faith | 6 Comments »
sounds like a great class, about 3years ago, i was asked to ‘teach’ our ‘auditorium’ class.(about 15 or so of men and women also older than me ). .with God’s help and a lot of prayer,i got though the first class, then this became a true time of joy and learning for me, . God bless.
Looks good. I wish you would ask and discuss this question for my benefit:
Is Sola Scriptura sufficient for all of life or just spiritual matters.
This is similar to the question you have above but I added the “Sola” to it. The word “Alone” is the food for thought. I’ve heard it said that “Sola Scriptura” applies only to spiritual matters of faith and salvation and that we should rely on tradition and other sources other areas of life.
Looking forward to what your class has to add on the subject.
I would be interested to hear the students take on: “All Scripture is breathed out by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness,”
Since the “New Testament” didn’t exist, what is Scripture that is for teaching, correction and training? And what does that mean in “chruches” not reading Moses every Sabbath (Acts 15)?
Almost sounds like that “Old Testament” isn’t “Old”.
Shabbat Shalom!
Very interesting stuff. Thanks for posting this. I hope you have to time to do a follow up post after the class.
Doug, this is the first time I have had to get back to the site since Friday. Did you move our conversation?
Sean.
No, I lost it. My site went down for a few days and my host had to back up to a previous date. I’m sorry, but we have lost the continuity of this conversation. I also lost a few posts that I worked hard on. See the post called “test” for a short description of this.
Sorry to hear that.
I would like to post on this again, but you have your hands full.
Pehaps I can pick up the thread of thought next week.
Cheers.
I dont believe anything qualifies to be called “scripture” unless God asked it to be either written down or spoken to the people.
Thus, most of the NT does not qualify because there is no evidence that they wrote under direct command from God. But are they authoritative? Yes. Because the apostles had authority vested in them, and therefore what they spoke or wrote is authoritative.
Therefore, I believe in “open revelation” which comply with the revealed scripture of the OT. There is no evidence that the apostles were asked to write. And there is no evidence that it all ended there and the Bible is a closed book. The OT is a closed book but the NT is a new chapter which continues until the return of the King, and then a new chapter begins. Therefore it can be added to as and when authoritative men of God arise among us.
Chris
I wouldn’t want to be in the shoes of anyone who attempted to add to the word of God on the last day. The Apostles, who you agree are authoritative, confirmed each other’s words in their writings. They also called on curses from anyone who wished to add to them. So either their words are authoritative in this matter as well or they are not.
If they are calling curses on anyone who does what you say is OK, I think I’ll side with them if you don’t mind.