OUR DIFFERENCES WITH ROMAN CATHOLICISM (Part 2)

-{2 Timothy 3}

-Tonight we continue learning what it is that we believe as Evangelical Protestants by comparing our beliefs with beliefs that differ from ours. This helps us to dig deeper into our own theology so we have a better foundation in our faith. It also equips us to defend our faith and to share the truth of the gospel with those who think differently from us.

-Last week I began to compare our beliefs with the teachings of the Roman Catholic Church. While there are some things that both may hold to that seem similar, there are some stark contrasts that I believe is important to point out. I began by touching on the subject of the source of authority that is the foundation of our practice and belief.

-Roman Catholics believe that there are two pieces to the foundation of faith for the church—tradition and Scripture. We Evangelical Protestants believe that there is only one source, and that is Scripture alone. We call this doctrine sola scriptura (Latin for Scripture alone).

-But what do we mean by sola scriptura? Let me share with you some salient points from an article in the Southern Baptist Journal of Theology:

For Luther and the Reformers sola scriptura meant that only Scripture, because it is God’s inspired Word, is our inerrant, sufficient, and final authority for the church. ...

Notice, first of all, that sola scriptura means Scripture alone is our final authority. ... Notice, however, that I didn’t say the Bible is our only authority. Sola scriptura is too easily confused today with nuda scriptura, the view that we should have “No creed but the Bible!” Those who sing this mantra believe that creeds, confessions, the voices of tradition, and those who hold ecclesiastical offices carry no authority in the church. But this was not the Reformers’ position, nor should it be equated with sola scriptura.

Sola scriptura acknowledges that there are other important authorities for the Christian, authorities that should be listened to and followed. Nonetheless, Scripture alone is our final authority. It is the authority that rules over and governs all other authorities. It is the authority that has the final say. We could say that while church tradition and church officials play a ministerial role, Scripture alone plays a magisterial role. This means that all other authorities are only to be followed in as much as they align with Scripture, submit to Scripture, and are seen as subservient to Scripture, which alone is our supreme authority.

Second, sola scriptura means Scripture alone is our sufficient authority. Not only is the Bible our supreme authority, but it is the authority that provides the believer with all the truth he or she needs for salvation and for following after Christ. The Bible, therefore, is sufficient for faith and practice. As Paul says in 2 Timothy 3:16–17, “All Scripture is breathed out by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, that the man of God may be complete, equipped for every good work.” Or consider The Belgic Confession (1561): “We believe that those Holy Scriptures fully contain the will of God, and that whatsoever man ought to believe unto salvation is sufficiently taught therein.” And the Westminster Confession of Faith (1646) says: “The whole counsel of God concerning all things necessary for his own glory, man’s salvation, faith and life, is either expressly set down in Scripture, or by good and necessary consequence may be deduced from Scripture: unto which nothing at any time is to be added, whether by new revelations of the Spirit, or traditions of men....” In short, the Bible is enough for us.

Third, sola scriptura means that only Scripture, because it is God’s inspired Word, is our inerrant authority. Notice that the basis of biblical authority—the very reason why Scripture is authoritative—is that God is its divine author. The ground for biblical authority is divine inspiration. As The Westminster Confession of Faith says, “The authority of the Holy Scripture, for which it ought to be believed, and obeyed, dependeth not upon the testimony of any man, or Church, but wholly upon God (who is truth itself) the author thereof; and therefore it is to be received, because it is the Word of God....” Scripture is the church’s final and sufficient authority first and foremost because Scripture is the Word of God.

Scripture and Scripture alone (not Scripture and tradition) is God-breathed in its totality and on this basis stands unshakable as the church’s final, flawless authority.

-The Roman Catholic Church, however, believes that the Bible is not enough, for there were teachings that went from Jesus to the apostles to the bishops and so forth that were never written down and needed to be discovered by the Church over time. They believe that the Bible itself teaches the need for tradition. For example:

2 Thessalonians 2:15 LSB

15 So then, brothers, stand firm and hold to the traditions which you were taught, whether by word of mouth or by letter from us.

and...

2 Thessalonians 3:6 LSB

6 Now we command you, brothers, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that you keep away from every brother who walks in an unruly manner and not according to the tradition which they received from us.

-For the 2:15 verse, they say that Paul obviously made a distinction between what was written down and that which was passed along orally. And the 3:6 verse also confirms that there were traditions passed along which were not written down. Now, no doubt, whatever the apostles spoke to the church would be authoritative. However, there is nothing that prevents us from thinking that the traditions which Paul talks about were not eventually written down as Scripture. Considering that the Thessalonians letters were some of Paul’s earliest letters and that the canon had not yet been codified, we have every reason to believe that the traditions Paul talked about were eventually written down and canonized as Scripture.

-So, only the traditions and teachings that were written down are the inspired, infallible Word of God. Yes, they may have taught other things, but had God wanted to preserve those teachings as somehow authoritative for life and practice, He would have inspired the authors of Scripture to write them down.

-Authors Norm Geisler and Ron Rhodes give several reasons why the Bible alone is the full and final authority for faith and practice for all believers.

First, the Bible makes it clear that God, from the very beginning, desired that his normative revelations be written down and preserved for succeeding generations. “Moses wrote down all the words of the LORD” (Exod. 24:4). Indeed, Moses said in Deuteronomy, “these are the words of the covenant which the Lord commanded Moses to make with the sons of Israel” (Deut. 29:1)....

Likewise, “Samuel told the people the ordinances of the kingdom, and wrote them in the book, and placed it before the LORD” (1 Sam. 10:25)....a collection of “the books” of Moses and the prophets right down to his contemporary Jeremiah (Dan. 9:2).

Jesus and New Testament writers used the phrase “Scripture has it” or “It is written” ... more than ninety times, stressing the importance of the written Word of God....The apostles were told by Jesus that the Holy Spirit would guide them to all truth (John 16:13). But Jesus said in the very next chapter, “Your word is truth” (John 17:17) and the apostles claimed that their writings to the churches were Scripture inspired of God (2 Peter 3:15–16; cf. 2 Tim. 3:16–17). Clearly, God intended from the very beginning that his revelation be preserved in Scripture. No similar intent is demonstrated to preserve religious traditions.

Second, the Bible states that inspired Scripture is competent to equip a believer for every good work (2 Tim. 3:16–17). If the Bible is sufficient to do this, then nothing else is needed. The fact that Scripture, without mention of tradition, is said to be “God-breathed” (theopnuestos) and thus by it believers are “competent, equipped for every good work” (2 Tim. 3:16–17), supports... sola Scriptura.

Third, Jesus and the apostles constantly appealed to the Old Testament (which was all the Bible written to their time) as the final court of appeal. Jesus appealed to Scripture as the final authority in his dispute with Satan (Matt. 4:4, 7, 10). Of course, since God was still giving new revelation, Jesus (Matt. 5:22, 28, 31; 28:18) and the apostles (1 Cor. 5:3; 7:12) sometimes referred to their own God-given authority. But since even Catholics agree that new revelation ceased with the death of the last apostles, there is no reason to believe there is any revelation outside the Bible. ...

Fourth, Jesus made it clear that the existing Bible was in a class of its own, exalted above all tradition. He rebuked the Pharisees for not accepting sola Scriptura and negating the final authority of the Word of God by their religious traditions, saying, “And why do you break the command of God for the sake of your tradition?… You have nullified the word of God, for the sake of your tradition” (Matt. 15:3, 6b). Jesus applied his statement specifically to the traditions of the religious authorities who used their traditions to misinterpret the Scriptures.

Fifth, Solomon affirmed that “every word of God is tested.… Do not add to his words, lest he reprove you, and you will be proved a liar” (Prov. 30:5–6). ... It is clear that God does not wish anything that claims divine authority to be added to his inspired words, whether oral or written.

Sixth, the Bible teaches sola Scriptura by stressing its own status as revelation from God (Gal. 1:12; cf. 1 Cor. 2:11–13), as over the mere words of human beings. A revelation from God is a divine unveiling or disclosure. The apostle Paul put the contrast vividly when he wrote, “I want you to know, brothers, that the gospel I preached is not something that man made up. I did not receive it from any man, nor was I taught it; rather I received it by revelation from Jesus Christ” (Gal. 1:11–12). Note that “man” includes the other apostles, of whom Paul adds, “nor did I go up to Jerusalem to those who were apostles before I was” (Gal. 1:17). So even the preaching of an apostle was not on the same level as direct revelation from God....

Seventh, although written revelation was progressive, Catholics and Protestants agree that normative revelation ended by the time of the completion of the New Testament. Indeed, Jesus told the apostles that he would lead them into “all truth” (John 14:26; 16:13). And to be an apostle one must have lived in the first century in order to be an eyewitness of the resurrected Christ (cf. Acts 1:22; 1 Cor. 9:1; 15:4–8). But the only infallible record we have of apostolic teaching is in the New Testament....

Eighth, apostolic “traditions” or oral teachings were authoritative in their days, but the apostles are dead and all of their essential teaching is the Bible. The New Testament speaks of following the traditions or teachings of the apostles, whether oral or written because they were living authorities set up by Christ (Matt. 18:18; Acts 2:42; Eph. 2:20). However, when they died there was no longer a living apostolic authority since, as already noted, only those who were eyewitnesses of the resurrected Christ could have apostolic authority (Acts 1:22; 1 Cor. 9:1).... there is no longer apostolic authority, except in the inspired writings the apostles left us. And since the New Testament is the only inspired (infallible) record of what the apostles taught, it follows that, since the death of the apostles, the only apostolic authority we have today is the inspired record of their teaching in the New Testament. ...

Ninth, oral traditions are notoriously unreliable. They are the stuff of which legends and myths are made. What is written is more easily preserved in its original form. Dutch theologian Abraham Kuyper notes four advantages of a written revelation: (1) It has durability whereby errors of memory or accidental corruptions, deliberate or not, are minimized; (2) It can be universally disseminated through translation and reproduction; (3) It is fixed and can be kept pure; (4) It is given a finality and normativeness which other forms of communication cannot attain (Milne, 28). By contrast, what is not written is more easily polluted....

-We have absolute grounds to believe that Scripture alone is our final authority—that God gave us an inspired and infallible work by which to live. That does not mean that Scripture contains everything that ever happened or that it contains all truth that there is. But it does mean is that what it contains is truth and is sufficient for what is needed. Anything added on top of Scripture is not authoritative, and as we will see in our further studies, is most likely not even true and can be refuted by Scripture.

-So, we want to pray that the Holy Spirit enlightens us to know the truth of His Word so we can integrate it into our lives. And we want to pray that Scripture will lead people to faith who have yet to believe in Christ...