Should Christians Follow Tradition And Scripture? Is Sola Scriptura Biblical?
Introduction.
This Article has been coming for a long time and at the time of writing I am very excited to dig into this topic to share to many. I have spoken many times about my past. I was raised a diehard/hardcore Wels Lutheran. I was very devote to the Sola's, often called the Five Solae of Lutheranism. Previously I have broken down and refuted Sola Fide and the Lutheran misconception about what Catholic Christians believe about Faith and Works. Click here to read that Article. Growing up in the environment of Protestantism in my Traditional, Conservative Synod of Wels Lutheranism, I whole-heartedly believed in Sola Scriptura and I had not a single drop of doubt in my being that The Holy Bible has supreme authority. I was a true Protestant for 17 years of my life, I witnessed many teachings and studies at my school/church and what I reflect from it to you is the truth from my witness to it.
Looking back now, I can describe this basic teaching that I feel is only best described as a made-up story. The basic way the story that is taught as truth by Lutheranism at least is that after the last Apostle died, all the churches that were started by Saint Paul, Saint John, Saint Peter and so on, slowly faded into corruption by Roman paganism. So the churches were left without good leaders so God stepped back and let this pagan mixed Christianity to go for 1500 years and then inspires Luther to search the Bible and bring back the true Christianity that died with the last Apostle. Now the teachers and preachers will not word it this way presumably, but the sermon they will give on this, if taken to the conclusion can be worded like I have. And this was sold to me and I took it bait line and sinker. For a majority of that time how was I to know, when I was raised up in this environment being indoctrinated? Thank God, that I have come to know the exact truth now while I am young still. And as I have discovered the truth I came across the Catholic Nicene Creed and reading it, I was shocked, I didn't know where the Nicene Creed came from but I remembered that as Lutheran we also would say the Lutheran Nicene Creed. After reviewing both versions I notice only one change, the word "Catholic" to "Christian" in the Lutheran version. And what is more interesting enough is that on the Wels site that I linked to, they tell you where the creed came from. Which was the Catholic Church. That is why they changed the term Catholic within the creed to prevent us Lutherans from finding out. Yet the ironic part of the Creed is that the Lutheran left the "apostolic church" within the creed. When I saw it, I laughed for a long time because I knew what Apostolic meant. I knew that Catholics claimed Apostolic Succession from the Apostles of Christ. Lutherans whole-heartedly believe they have Apostolic Succession but that is not true. I realized in these recent times of discovering truth that it would be impossible according to how Lutherans teach, that we have Apostolic Succession because Luther was not alive with the Apostles and Christ so how could we have Apostolic Succession? The basic answer is the Lutheran Church doesn't. And with all this, we were taught that the Wels Lutheran Church is the true church and if we went back in time, the early churches within the New Testament would be almost completely similar without our Lutheran hymns, creeds, deep understandings of certain doctrines, and technology. That sounds very reasonable which is why I believed it and so did everyone else around me presumably. And this teaching, they include that the early church would have believed in Sola Scriptura, among the other Solas. Throughout this Article I will go over a Biblical basis against Sola Scriptura and refuting the Lutheran Objections, and I will show the Biblical basis for following Tradition and I will be going over Church Fathers and early Church Writers on this subject. Remember, when speaking to a Lutheran or protestant, ask for their preferred Bible Translation or appeal to a version that they accept that shows the passages I give you, that disprove Sola Scriptura.
Section 1. What is Sola Scriptura
"
Sola scriptura is a formal principle of many Protestant Christian denominations, and one of the five solae.[2] It was a foundational doctrinal principle of the Protestant Reformation held by many of the Reformers, who taught that authentication of Scripture is governed by the discernible excellence of the text, as well as the personal witness of the Holy Spirit to the heart of each man.
"
Sola Scriptura is a formal and foundational doctrine upon which all other Solae and other doctrines are founded upon which is amazing for someone like me to use against them, but also is ironic because all the Lutheran traditions have to be 100% Biblical because of Sola Scriptura. And at the end of the excerpt, we see that the reformers taught that Authentic Scripture is governed by discernible excellence of the texts. Which I determine to be the Canon of Scripture. Which I have touched upon, and I will touch upon later. And the excerpt says that Personal Witness from the Holy Spirit to the heart of every man determines not just the Canon of Scripture, but the meanings and ways of living. The belief and teaching goes just a little beyond what it written here, I remember that an added definition to what is given, is that anything that is not within Scripture, within the covers of the Holy Bible, then it is false and not true because Scripture doesn't touch upon it. And that is only for Christianity and teaching and doctrine. Which is a very hypocritical way of thinking because I do not know a single Lutheran who would deny any event that wasn't recorded in a History Book, but they have this way of thinking and arguing with the Bible.
Section 2. Arguments for Sola Scriptura
Within this section I will be quoting the verses given in favor for Sola Scriptura from the Wels Website. Click here to read the Article.
The first argument that I see listed on this small Article on the Wels site lists two passages.
2 You shall not add to the word which I command you, nor take from it; that you may keep the commandments of the LORD your God which I command you.
18 I warn every one who hears the words of the prophecy of this book: if any one adds to them, God will add to him the plagues described in this book, 19 and if any one takes away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God will take away his share in the tree of life and in the holy city, which are described in this book.
These are the two major points in my opinion that will be used for Sola Scriptura and yet these passages are destructive to Sola Scriptura and to the people who will quote these to argue for Sola Scriptura. The majority, which doesn't always mean correct, view on Deuteronomy 4:2 is that the passage refers to God's commandments and not the Scriptures, so according to how the Lutheran uses it here, "shall not add to the word, nor take from it" this passage does not work. And for Revelation, the verses directly give us the context for the warning. The warning is for the book of Revelation and all its prophecy. The warning in the Revelation 22, does not say that every bad plaque throughout all the Scriptures will fall upon you, only the one within this book. The very verses give the context of the warning that only regard to the Book of Revelation. If a Lutheran or other protestant quotes these to you, bring this up and bring up how it denies Sola Scriptura because it gives direct context and does not cover the entire Bible.
The next verse the Luther claims: "states clearly that God’s word is the foundation of the Christian Church and Jesus Christ is the chief cornerstone" Now let's look at the verse.
20 built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Christ Jesus himself being the cornerstone,
When I read this passage I put on my Lutheran thinking cap, remembering what Sola Scriptura allows one to do when reading Scripture, the Luther reads this and changes apostles and prophets to the word of God (technically breaking their own rule according to their quoting of Deuteronomy 4:2 and Revelation 22:18-19). I can see how one could see that, but CONTEXT is everything.
19 So then you are no longer strangers and sojourners, but you are fellow citizens with the saints and members of the household of God, 20 built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Christ Jesus himself being the cornerstone, 21 in whom the whole structure is joined together and grows into a holy temple in the Lord; 22 in whom you also are built into it for a dwelling place of God in the Spirit.
Saint Paul is speaking on spiritual sojourning. He says that we are not sojourners but citizens of the household of God, which is built upon the apostles and prophets and Christ is the cornerstone. So the argument here is similar to that which I showed that Mary is the Queen of Heaven. In this sentence, Christ is a real, living breathing person, and He is called the cornerstone, and the apostles and prophets are "translated in the mind" to be Scripture. The Lutheran argument is that the apostles and prophets here are not physical, living, breathing people but rather the Scriptures named and attributed to them. I believe it is undoubtedly a fact that in verse 20, the apostles and prophets are the people and not meaning the Scriptures based on common sense. Secondly, the Ephesians did not have the same access to the New Testament as we do now, they would have had people who heard things from the apostles or even people who witnessed events within the Gospels, and even the many letters of Saint Paul, those letters went to individual places meaning for some time they did not have the information within the other letters so how could they have done Sola Scriptura when they did not have the entirety of Scripture?
39 You search the scriptures, because you think that in them you have eternal life; and it is they that bear witness to me;
Here Jesus our Lord is rebuking the Pharisees and scribes because they spend all this time searching the Scriptures trying to find salvation within the Scriptures but when Jesus comes claiming to be God and the Messiah and the Son of God, they reject Him even though the Scriptures the Pharisees and scribes search for salvation also testifies to Jesus. I find no way of seeing what the Lutherans claim about this verse. The Lutheran claims that in this verse, Jesus is commanding us to read the Scriptures. That is not the case, and they are instead reading their own ideas into the text, which is what Sola Scriptura allows, yet contradicts their belief according to Deuteronomy 4:2 and Revelation 22:18-19. Do not forget that context is important.
39 You search the scriptures, because you think that in them you have eternal life; and it is they that bear witness to me; 40 yet you refuse to come to me that you may have life.
Jesus is saying here that you, the Pharisees and scribes, go to the Scriptures for eternal life, but the Scriptures only bring you to Him, Jesus and He will give you eternal life. That is the context and true meaning of verse 39.
The next verse is also quite terrible for the Pro Sola Scriptura argument because they quote out of context as it seems the Lutheran has done this entire time.
29 But Abraham said, ‘They have Moses and the prophets; let them hear them.’
The Lutheran quotes from the Parable of the Rich Man and Lazarus. This single verse is hard to argue against because it is so terribly misquoted out of context.
27 And he said, ‘Then I beg you, father, to send him to my father’s house, 28 for I have five brothers, so that he may warn them, lest they also come into this place of torment.’ 29 But Abraham said, ‘They have Moses and the prophets; let them hear them.’ 30 And he said, ‘No, father Abraham; but if some one goes to them from the dead, they will repent.’ 31 He said to him, ‘If they do not hear Moses and the prophets, neither will they be convinced if some one should rise from the dead.’”
The context is that the Rich Man wanted Abraham to let someone from the dead go to his family to warn them so they may believe. Abraham says no because they have Moses and the prophets. And in verse 31, we see Abraham that if someone does not believe the prophets, neither will they believe if someone rises from the dead. Now the Lutheran quotes this saying: "and not to look anywhere else for saving truth." However that is not what this means at all. The meaning of this section of Scripture is not that Scripture is not the supreme place to look for Salvation, rather the message here in the passage is similar to that when Saint Thomas doubted whether or not Christ had actually risen from the dead and then when He saw Christ He believed.
The next passage the Lutheran quotes relates to a passage we looked at already.
7 You hypocrites! Well did Isaiah prophesy of you, when he said: 8 ‘This people honors me with their lips, but their heart is far from me; 9 in vain do they worship me, teaching as doctrines the precepts of men.’”
Before saying my own breakdown of the passage, let me quote what the Lutheran says. "Jesus rebuked people who added to the word of God" The main part the Lutheran is speaking about is verse 9, "teaching as doctrines the precepts of men." Now doctrines are Bible based, hopefully, in all cases but here Christ our Lord is rebuking the Pharisees and scribes because they teach doctrines that make it hard to keep following in the faith at that time. The issue however is that the doctrines/traditions were were not adding to the Scripture of God necessarily but to the Law of God, the Commandments. They added things into the Law that were completely bogus and served absolutely no good whatsoever. And we will see this when READING IN CONTEXT.
Then Pharisees and scribes came to Jesus from Jerusalem and said, 2 “Why do your disciples transgress the tradition of the elders? For they do not wash their hands when they eat.” 3 He answered them, “And why do you transgress the commandment of God for the sake of your tradition? 4 For God commanded, ‘Honor your father and your mother,’ and, ‘He who speaks evil of father or mother, let him surely die.’ 5 But you say, ‘If any one tells his father or his mother, What you would have gained from me is given to God, he need not honor his father.’ 6 So, for the sake of your tradition, you have made void the word[c] of God. 7 You hypocrites! Well did Isaiah prophesy of you, when he said: 8 ‘This people honors me with their lips, but their heart is far from me; 9 in vain do they worship me, teaching as doctrines the precepts of men.’”
In verse 2 the scribes and Pharisees question Christ our Lord about the disciples transgressing the traditions of the elders. The tradition was hand washing before eating. Notice, the scribes and Pharisees have raised this tradition to the height of God's Law even though it is not. And Christ responds in this way, "why do YOU transgress the COMMANDMENT of God for the sake of YOUR tradition?" Not only did the Pharisees and scribes put their traditions at level or above God's Commandments but they even went against God's Commandments as we see in verse 4. In verse 4, Christ recites the Commandment of Honoring Father and Mother, and then quotes the tradition of the elders where the tradition allows you to dishonor your Father and Mother. Directly going against the Commandment of God. And verse 6, if the Lutheran were reading my Article they would begin to jump for joy thinking their argument is winning, because in verse 6 we see Christ saying, "for the sake of your tradition, you have made void the word of God." But notice I left in the [c] note. Let me show you what the [c] note is: c. Matthew 15:6 Other ancient authorities read law. And when you look at the verses before right up to verse 6, we see that word meaning Law is an accurate translation based on the topic of the conversation happening here. The topic is the elders tradition vs. God's Commandments where the elders made traditions that void the Commandments and they put their traditions first before God's Commandments. As we know the Jews regulate on their sabbath how many steps one can take on the sabbath. They put this above God's Commandments and it restricts people and makes worshipping God incredibly difficult because one has to keep in mind all these traditions that the pharisees count as Law and will punish you for not doing just as they supposedly would for breaking God's Law. And This passage here in Matthew goes well with the first foundation passage the Lutheran quotes out of context in favor for Sola Scriptura, Deuteronomy 4:2.
I am going to skip the next three verse they give because they are ones that anti-Sola Scriptura Christians will use against protestants and I will touch upon them in a later section.
14 Remind them of this, and charge them before the Lord to avoid disputing about words, which does no good, but only ruins the hearers.
The Lutheran quotes this verse saying, "The apostle Paul wanted Timothy to remind other Christians of what he had just written previously in this inspired letter." And honestly I have to search up commentaries on 2 Timothy and read through them and I figured out a common understanding and it is not what the Lutheran is claiming. The common consensus is that Saint Paul is reminding Timothy that people should not argue over pointless topics to avoid turning away listeners and to focus on main points that are sound within the Scriptures. Very commonly in Evangelical circles we often hear the phrase, "Win hearts for Christ," and that is very much derived from this passage.
Now before giving you the final passage the Lutheran quotes I said I was skipping three passages the Lutheran uses in favor for their argument. I was shocked that the Lutheran uses these verses that so harshly go against them, and twist and mangle the meaning of the passages to try and prove their point.
Section 3. The Old Testament Disproves Sola Scriptura
As we know from the definition of Sola Scriptura, that the Scriptures are the supreme Authority over a Christian and Faith. The doctrine denies that the church has any authority. And as we have seen, the Lutheran has quoted from the Old Testament trying to prove their case, meaning they believe Sola Scriptura to be a doctrine from the Old Testament.
What is my argument? I shortened it down in the Title of the Section, but let me give a more worded and explained argument. [ The Old Testament does not Teach Sola Scriptura, rather it teaches the exact opposite and can be found within the first five books of the Old Testament. ]
The first major point I have is that up until Moses, the Israelites did not have Scripture to back up on, they had a structure of "church" and had dedicated priests once they received the Scriptures.
3 And Moses went up to God, and the Lord called to him out of the mountain, saying, “Thus you shall say to the house of Jacob, and tell the people of Israel: 4 You have seen what I did to the Egyptians, and how I bore you on eagles’ wings and brought you to myself. 5 Now therefore, if you will obey my voice and keep my covenant, you shall be my own possession among all peoples; for all the earth is mine, 6 and you shall be to me a kingdom of priests and a holy nation. These are the words which you shall speak to the children of Israel.”
God says that He will make Israel a "kingdom of priests." God does not say that He will make Israel a kingdom of people reading the Scriptures on their own. And I feel like the Lutheran would argue: "that Since Moses was to repeat this back to all the Israelites, God was speaking to all people that they would be their own priest." Hence Sola Scriptura is Biblical. But on the Contrary, Throughout Exodus 28-29 and in Exodus 30:30-33 where Aaron and his sons are the priests, and later in Deuteronomy 18:1-8 and Numbers 18:3 we are told that only Levites can be priests of God. So this idea within Sola Scriptura where everyone is their own priest through the Holy Spirit is not Biblically found in the Old Testament regarding the anointing and setting of priests.
Then through chapters 20-31 we see the Laws given to Moses but it is only in the New Testament that we find that during this time, Moses received the Pentateuch but also we get told something else very shocking.
37 This is the Moses who said to the Israelites, ‘God will raise up for you a prophet from your brethren as he raised me up.’ 38 This is he who was in the congregation in the wilderness with the angel who spoke to him at Mount Sinai, and with our fathers; and he received living oracles to give to us.
Saint Stephen gives a sermon and he mentions Moses in with the CONGREGTION which is also translated as Church in many translated, and many of them are protestant used translations. So Saint Stephen says that the church existed before the Scriptures which is translated as oracles.
But with that stated, everyone before Moses receiving the Pentateuch, had no Scriptures to lay back upon. To dictate themselves. And we have an instance priests before the anointing of the Levities. In Genesis 14:18 we see Melchizedek being a priest from Salem to God. And certainly the faith in God, Yahweh the true God that was passed down throughout the generations up until the giving of the Pentateuch. How was this faith passed down? It would have been an oral tradition which appears quite evident when we see prayers that occur before Exodus 20, and the announcements of God and the Angel/Word, when He appears to people. So before we even have the Scriptures, we see people relying on traditions to pass on the knowledge of God to continue faith in God and there was even priests to God before there was even an ounce of Scripture. How then could these figures from Genesis right up to the giving of the oracles in Exodus 20-31, relied on Sola Scriptura?
Second, The Lutheran quoted from Deuteronomy 4:2 in favor of Sola Scriptura when it clear does not
2 You shall not add to the word which I command you, nor take from it; that you may keep the commandments of the LORD your God which I command you.
I already told you in the previous section that the passage is referring to the Commandments of God. But let's fancy this idea that it does mean what the Lutheran says it does. How then would the Lutheran explain every other book within the Bible that comes after the Pentateuch? Because every book that comes after the first five are called the word of God, Holy Scriptures yet according to the Lutheran, here God commands not to add to His words.
25 “And you, Ezra, according to the wisdom of your God which is in your hand, appoint magistrates and judges who may judge all the people in the province Beyond the River, all such as know the laws of your God; and those who do not know them, you shall teach. 26 Whoever will not obey the law of your God and the law of the king, let judgment be strictly executed upon him, whether for death or for banishment or for confiscation of his goods or for imprisonment.”
I know the Lutheran would try to use my refuting argument here by using my refutation of their use of Deuteronomy 4:2 and try to apply it here. However, it cannot be done. The Law of God is within the Scriptures and we see Ezra is appointed here to teach those who do not know the Law of God. Meaning he is going to teach them the Scriptures that go over the Laws, and in verse 26 we see that anyone who will not obey the Law of God will face judgement. Sola Scriptura is not applicable here because many do not know the Laws of God that are retained in the Scriptures so Ezra is appointed. What does this exactly mean then? That Ezra will be teaching them the only view and understanding on the Laws within Scripture because you simply cannot read them and interpret the Laws in to a meaning which is that of the total opposite of their true meaning.
Lastly this is the last passage I have from the Old Testament to disprove Sola Scriptura. As I have mentioned Sola Scriptura denies the church from any authority and many protestants will deny even having to attend a church if, "the Holy Spirit guides them to understand Scripture." They rarely follow any Christian Traditions and some protestant churches create their own form of worship because of Sola Scriptura. Let's see what happens when a group of people tried that within the Old Testament.
Now Nadab and Abihu, the sons of Aaron, each took his censer, and put fire in it, and laid incense on it, and offered unholy fire before the LORD, such as he had not commanded them. 2 And fire came forth from the presence of the LORD and devoured them, and they died before the LORD.
Two sons of Aaron who were priests to God, made an offering to God in a way that God did not command and so God sent fire to devour them. Even though they were priests to God, they could not make up whatever type of worship they felt like, God commanded worship to Him to be done in a certain manner.
Section 4. The New Testament Denies Sola Scriptura.
This Section will focus on New Testament passages that disprove the false doctrine of Sola Scriptura and how it was not affirmed and taught by any of the Apostles and even Christ.
A major Point that I have found only so far that has affiliation to the Pharisees and Sadducees, because Protestants, especially Lutherans will be easy to sling as sling as a slur towards Catholics because of Traditions.
5 But some believers who belonged to the party of the Pharisees rose up, and said, “It is necessary to circumcise them, and to charge them to keep the law of Moses.”
Here Saint Luke mentions in chapter 15 this group of believers in Christ our LORD from the Pharisees. Out of all the Priestly groups among the Jews in the 1st Century, only one group is not mentioned to have any members to believe in Christ. Here in Acts we are told there is a group of Pharisees that believe in Christ. In John 3 we have Nicodemus who was a famous Pharisee Rabbi. And we have Joseph of Arimathea who was on the council and was a Pharisee from Luke 23. We have these three cases of Pharisees. In Luke 6:15; Acts 1:13, we have Simon the Zealot, Zealot was a very militant sect of Jews that was one of the four orders also called, "The Fourth Philosophy." What is the third group we know of then if it is not the Sadducees? The Third group is a group called the Essenes. You probably don't know that you know something that was discovered 78 years ago. The Qumran Scrolls, most commonly known as the Dead Sea Scrolls are speculated to the highest degree of certainty to be written by the Essenes. And any knowledgeable Sola Scriptura Christian does not know of a single verse that speaks of the Essenes. But as the great Catholic Scholar Dr. John Bergsma, Christ Bless him, he has brought this to the attention of Catholics for years. He has studied the Qumran Scrolls quite intensely and studied the Essenes and has found instances of the Essenes in the New Testament. Dr John Bergsma has given many interviews and lectures and speeches on the topic of Essenes in the New Testament. Bergsma points out from the Qumran Scrolls that speak on the ways of living for Essenes that Saint John the Baptist appears to be a former Essene before we see Him beginning His famous preaching. This is based on many factors. And Bergsma points out Saint John Mark, famously called Saint Mark the Gospel writer, to be an Essene. This is based on verses Mark 14:12-16; Mark 14:51-52, this being based on knowledge of the lifestyle of the Essenes. The main interview where you can listen to Dr. Bergsma give this information is in this video with Matthew Leonard. Click here to watch the interview. Notice that three of the four sects of Judaism at this time are know to be followers of Christ, and the Sadducees is not one of them. Why is that, not only did the Sadducees reject all the other books of the Old Testament besides the first five Books of Moses. The Sadducees rejected all Oral Tradition, yet all the sects that followed Christ, followed oral Tradition.
Secondly, again I know that a well versed Sola Scriptura Lutheran and protestant will know this next verse but will not be answer my question.
23 And he went and dwelt in a city called Nazareth, that what was spoken by the prophets might be fulfilled, “He shall be called a Nazarene.”
My challenge to Sola Scriptura affirmers, tell me the verse of prophecy that Saint Matthew is quoting here. I will give you the answer, you cannot because this prophecy is not from the Bible but from TRADITION. Now many scholars argue that it is a mix of multiple prophecy from the Old Testament, however when the Gospel writers quote prophets all the other times, they quote almost word for word from specific passages.
Next sadly, when I discovered this next fact, I was so disheartened. Protestants do purposeful mistranslations to favor their doctrines and beliefs just like certain cults that believe in the Bible but corrupt it. As I said at the beginning of the Article, I grew up in a conservative Wels Lutheran Church and school. I have a slight memory of using the KJV, but the majority of my time in that church and school, we used the NIV, comically called the Non-Inspired Version, but in actuality is the New International Version. I grew up memorizing Scripture in NIV, and the NIV has some amazing translations in certain spots of Scripture, but often drops the ball in many instances. But as I am pointing out, purposefully mis-translates to get a narrative across to back up their false doctrines.
- Mathew 15:2-6 (NIV)
2 “Why do your disciples break the tradition of the elders? They don’t wash their hands before they eat!” 3 Jesus replied, “And why do you break the command of God for the sake of your tradition? 4 For God said, ‘Honor your father and mother’ and ‘Anyone who curses their father or mother is to be put to death.’ 5 But you say that if anyone declares that what might have been used to help their father or mother is ‘devoted to God,’ 6 they are not to ‘honor their father or mother’ with it. Thus you nullify the word of God for the sake of your tradition.
- Mark 7:8–13 (NIV)
8 You have let go of the commands of God and are holding on to human traditions.” 9 And he continued, “You have a fine way of setting aside the commands of God in order to observe your own traditions! 10 For Moses said, ‘Honor your father and mother,’ and, ‘Anyone who curses their father or mother is to be put to death.’ 11 But you say that if anyone declares that what might have been used to help their father or mother is Corban (that is, devoted to God)— 12 then you no longer let them do anything for their father or mother. 13 Thus you nullify the word of God by your tradition that you have handed down. And you do many things like that.”
- Colossians 2:8 (NIV)
8 See to it that no one takes you captive through hollow and deceptive philosophy, which depends on human tradition and the elemental spiritual forces of this world rather than on Christ.
These are the three massive quotes of Scriptures within the NIV Bible that put this negative notion about Tradition. Because remember, Sola Scriptura denies Tradition. The Greek word that is translated to Tradition in English is:
This is found in all the verses I just gave if you read an interlinear, you will see a variation of Paradosis, which ALWAYS means Tradition. Strong's Concordance tells us it means Tradition. Now let's look at the verse that will refute Sola Scriptura in the NIV to see why the Lutheran quoted it in favor on the Article on the Wels website.
- 2 Thessalonians 2:15 (NIV)
15 So then, brothers and sisters, stand firm and hold fast to the teachings[a] we passed on to you, whether by word of mouth or by letter.
Any Catholic will see this verse should be disgusted but amused. Let me bring you the Greek Interlinear for this verse.
The Greek says PARADOSEIS. Which does not translate to Teaching according to Strong's Concordance. I also left the footnote in the NIV verse, footnote [a] and shockingly the NIV admits that teachings could be translated as tradition but it is never mentioned or ever memorized to read as such because traditions are supposed to be bad in the eyes of Sola Scriptura Christians. Now just for my sake let me give you 2 Thessalonians 2:15 in RSVCE.
15 So then, brethren, stand firm and hold to the traditions which you were taught by us, either by word of mouth or by letter.
Saint Paul, one of the most reverence Apostle by all Christians, quite openly encourages the keeping of Tradition that is oral and written. Any of the Tradition that is written would presumably found in his letters, and the oral traditions would have been given orally and kept by the churches and is most likely tradition that is not written down in the letters of Saint Paul. Remember I said that the Lutheran quoted this passage in their favor and that can be seen when you read the NIV. The Lutheran says about this passage: "The apostle Paul taught the Christians in Thessalonica in person and through his inspired letters to them." However we can see that this is not the what the passage is speaking about at all. However it is quite clear that the way it is written within the NIV is not the true message that was given in the Greek. This is the first major passage that refutes Sola Scriptura.
Now the next passage I had skipped because in the RSVCE the passage did not do well for the Lutheran in their argument for Sola Scriptura, however when I see the passage in the NIV, it appears the NIV did an oopsie because it uses Tradition positively and did not change it to "teaching" to deceive Sola Scriptura Protestants.
- 1 Corinthians 11:2 (NIV)
2 I praise you for remembering me in everything and for holding to the traditions just as I passed them on to you.
The Lutheran will try to argue that I am not reading in context, when in fact I am. Verse 2 here, Saint Paul is praising the Corinthians for holding to TRADITIONS that Saint Paul passed on to them. Then Saint Paul addresses a problem with women covering their heads. Verse 2 is not solely about the verses following but can be realized that Saint Paul is referring to Traditions that are not mentioned. Again, the Lutheran quoted this in favor for Sola Scriptura when it does not help their case, nor does their explanation even make sense. "The apostle Paul taught the Christians in Corinth in person and through his inspired letters to them." They barely came up with a detailed explanation for this choice and seems just copied from their explanation for 2 Thessalonians.
Now, this last major passage in refuting Sola Scriptura was quoted by the Lutheran and what is ironic is that the wording of the passage in the NIV is very clear and easy to understand compared to RSVCE that uses architectural language.
- 1 Timothy 3:15 (NIV)
15 if I am delayed, you will know how people ought to conduct themselves in God’s household, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and foundation of the truth.
Saint Paul here says that the CHURCH of God is the Pillar and foundation of the TRUTH. WHAT? Meaning that as the foundation, truth is laid upon the church, and being the pillar, it holds up the truth and supports it. Protestants often claim the Apostles would be Protestants, however, Saint Paul here does not appear to be anywhere close to being a Protestant or Lutheran. He did not say that the Scriptures are the foundation of truth but the CHURCH. Can it be any clearer that Sola Scriptura is not found Biblically taught within the Bible? The Lutheran quoted this passage saying, "God preserves the truth of his word among Christians and looks for his people to proclaim that truth." The Lutheran is reading too much into the text because they cannot accept the direct truth that Saint Paul just said here in verse 15.
These are the main passages to use against Sola Scriptura and the Lutheran quoted them. Isn't that Ironic? They quoted the very verses that refute them trying to twist them. But I have many more passages that disprove Sola Scriptura from the New Testament.
There are instances within the New Testament where Oral Teaching is used interchangeably with Word of God, meaning Scripture. As pointed out by many Scholars and Apologists, when the phrase, "Word of God," is used in the Book of Acts, it is always referring to Oral Teaching because by the events within Acts, the Gospels were not written. Although Acts was written much later, the events within Acts happened earlier then when it was written. And we see this beyond the Book of Acts.
13 And we also thank God constantly for this, that when you received the word of God which you heard from us, you accepted it not as the word of men but as what it really is, the word of God, which is at work in you believers.
Saint Paul is reminding the Believers in Thessaloniki that they are not receiving the word of men but of God, meaning what the Believers were receiving Oral Teaching and Saint Paul is reminding them that it is God's Word. And Saint Paul even goes on to warn the Believers about certain people.
6 Now we command you, brethren, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that you keep away from any brother who is living in idleness and not in accord with the tradition that you received from us.
Saint Paul warns the Believers in Thessaloniki to keep away from any brother in who decides to not act according to the TRADITIONS that were given by Saint Paul and the Apostles. Meaning that some Believers acted in a way that was slightly like Sola Scriptura, most likely they only gathered in the church and would listen to the repetition of Oral Teachings but not hold to any of the Traditions and Saint Paul said to stay away from those people. WOW. Within the Bible it says stay away from these people who are believers who deny to keep in Traditions.
2 “The scribes and the Pharisees sit on Moses’ seat; 3 so practice and observe whatever they tell you, but not what they do; for they preach, but do not practice. 4 They bind heavy burdens, hard to bear, and lay them on men’s shoulders; but they themselves will not move them with their finger.
Here Christ our Lord is is speaking about the scribes and Pharisees had this ability to bind because they sit on seat of Moses. Now, again a Sola Scriptura Christian such as a Lutheran will not be able to find what Christ is speaking about here because it is a Tradition that was once Oral in the Mishnah. And notice, this was a Tradition about the priests of God, and notice, Christ turns it into a legitimate authority when He appoints the Apostles, specifically Saint Peter in Matthew 16:19.
8 As Jannes and Jambres opposed Moses, so these men also oppose the truth, men of corrupt mind and counterfeit faith;
This a very famous section of Scripture that quotes Tradition that I heard long ago when I was rediscovering my faith and realized that there is stuff within Scripture that is quoted and spoken about that is not found in the Bible. Janes and Jambres are the names of the magicians of Pharoah who opposed Moses as Saint Paul says here. Saint Paul is not solely quoting Scripture but Traditions as well that were known by the Jews and passed down for a very long time.
14 If any one refuses to obey what we say in this letter, note that man, and have nothing to do with him, that he may be ashamed.
Saint Paul is not only giving the Thessalonians letters that are the Word of God, but also hold Traditions within it.
17 I appeal to you, brethren, to take note of those who create dissensions and difficulties, in opposition to the doctrine which you have been taught; avoid them. 18 For such persons do not serve our Lord Christ, but their own appetites, and by fair and flattering words they deceive the hearts of the simple-minded.
Saint Paul tells the Believers to take note of people who oppose doctrines that they have been taught, which would have been Oral Teaching and Tradition. If those people denied these doctrines, they did not serve Christ. Why? Because Oral Teaching and reptation of Oral Teachings and keeping of Traditions is what these early Christians had before they had the Scriptures in physical form.
And Saint Paul is not speaking as if the doctrines of Oral Teachings and Traditions are fallible, but rather he is speaking of them as they are true and infallible.
11 And his gifts were that some should be apostles, some prophets, some evangelists, some pastors and teachers, 12 for the equipment of the saints, for the work of ministry, for building up the body of Christ, 13 until we all attain to the unity of the faith and of the knowledge of the Son of God, to mature manhood, to the measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ; 14 so that we may no longer be children, tossed to and fro and carried about with every wind of doctrine, by the cunning of men, by their craftiness in deceitful wiles. 15 Rather, speaking the truth in love, we are to grow up in every way into him who is the head, into Christ,
Here we see that Saint Paul is affirming that the servants of Christ and the saints, believers, have the tools to not be waivered by false doctrines by cunning lairs. So we have seen Saint Paul defend the Church and it's Tradition with authority and foundation in the Faith and we see the Scripture given is own basis for grounding us as well.
26 But an angel of the Lord said to Philip, “Rise and go toward the south to the road that goes down from Jerusalem to Gaza.” This is a desert road. 27 And he rose and went. And behold, an Ethiopian, a eunuch, a minister of the Candace the queen of the Ethiopians, in charge of all her treasure, had come to Jerusalem to worship 28 and was returning; seated in his chariot, he was reading the prophet Isaiah. 29 And the Spirit said to Philip, “Go up and join this chariot.” 30 So Philip ran to him, and heard him reading Isaiah the prophet, and asked, “Do you understand what you are reading?” 31 And he said, “How can I, unless some one guides me?” And he invited Philip to come up and sit with him.
The Eunuch here exclaims that one cannot understand the Scriptures unless one guides them, and it just so happens to be one of the new Priests of God appointed by Christ, Saint Phillip. The Eunuch did not say, "of course because the Spirit tells me it's meaning." Is this not a very shocking point in refuting Sola Scriptura?
This next example I will give, I have gone over in my Article on Purgatory, click here to read that Article on Purgatory.
35 Women received their dead by resurrection. Some were tortured, refusing to accept release, that they might rise again to a better life.
Every single verse that comes before verse 35 here in Hebrews can be traced to passages throughout the Bible. However, when you get to verse 35 a Protestant would not be able to find the area of the Bible that Hebrews 11:35 is speaking about. However it is quite clear that it comes from 2 Maccabees 6:18-31 and they could not use Sola Scriptura to explain this passage because it clearly has a specific meaning and is referring to a very specific event which I told you is from 2 Maccabees 6:18-31.
22 It was the feast of the Dedication at Jerusalem; 23 it was winter, and Jesus was walking in the temple, in the portico of Solomon.
We see the feast of the Dedication which happens in Jerusalem and its winter time and Jesus is present celebrating the feast. So tell me Protestant with your NIV or ESV, tell me what Feast this is. Where in the Bible does this feast come from? If you tell me its Hanukah I will personally condemn you because you cannot show me from your Bible version that fact. Why? Because Hanukah is found in the First and Second Book of Maccabees. I had always wondered where Jews got this Holiday because I had never found it in my Protestant Bible. So we see the New Testament speaking about a Holiday that was started in the Books of Maccabees and Jesus our Lord was celebrating the holiday and being a Sola Scriptura Christian who would not have the Book of Maccabees, they could not explain what this section of Scripture means and is speaking about because the Lutherans and Protestants deny the Deuterocanonicals that were passed down from the Apostles to the Early Church and Church Fathers said to be Scripture.
Lastly the last bit of Scripture I am going to give you is from the Epistle of Saint Jude.
6 And the angels that did not keep their own position but left their proper dwelling have been kept by him in eternal chains in the nether gloom until the judgment of the great day;
The footnotes suggest that Jude may be quoting from Genesis, however that is untrue. Scholars and Apologists have made known that Saint Jude here is actually quoting from Enoch. Yes the Book of Enoch 6-15.
Now remember, Sola Scriptura is the belief that Scripture is the supreme authority and not the church and the understanding of Scripture is for each individual. Very often, Christians will stop going to Church because they become so absorbed in Sola Scriptura. I certainly was, that is partly why I was kicked from my Church because I thought that since Scripture is the supreme authority, what need is there for me to be at a church. Yet, the Lutheran church holds the practice that believers must come to church based on 1 Timothy 4:13. Which also brings up that Sola Scriptura collides with 1 Timothy 4:13 because it is commonly understood that you don't need a church because of Sola Scriptura. Now part of my argument is this, if God started a system of priestly order and Temple worship, why would He get rid of this system in the New Testament? Did Christ our Lord not say: "Think not that I have come to abolish the law and the prophets; I have come not to abolish them but to fulfil them." [ 1. Matthew 5:17] So If God started a system of worshipping that required Priests and Temples and places of worship, would He truly get rid of them? I would argue no, and I know that protestants will argue using John 4:20-21, however Christ is not referring to the retirement of Temple worship with priestly orders, Christ is most likely referring to the Temple for 2 reasons. 1. That the Temple was going to be destroyed later in the first Century, and 2. that Christians would be persecuted and not allowed in the Temple. And His mention of the mountain they were on is in reference to the gathering of Christians in the places they knew they were safe, far from where the Jews would have practiced. Now after all these New Testament and Old Testament Passages, isn't quite clear that Sola Scriptura is not Biblical, and cannot be found anywhere in the Bible. Now Let's look at the Early Church and Church Fathers.
Section 5. The Church Fathers and Early Christians held to Tradition and Scripture?
Many times, I heard that the early Christians before Christianity "got corrupted" held views of protestantism that was buried beneath lies until Martin Luther rediscovered them. So let's go over some quotes to see if this claim by Lutherans at least, is true.
“And in dizziness about the truth, are full set upon accusing the Council, let them tell us what are the sort of Scriptures from which they have learned, or who is the Saint by whom they have been taught…”
Saint Athanasius, who is held in reverence by Lutherans because we do recite the Athanasius Creed, says that the Council should tell the non accusatory group on what Scriptures they learned from or by what Saint they have been taught, meaning Oral Tradition. Here we see Saint Athanasius holding Scripture and Oral Tradition to the same level of truth and authority.
“But beyond these [Scriptural] sayings, let us look at the very tradition, teaching, and faith of the Catholic Church from the beginning, which the Lord gave, the Apostles preached, and the Fathers kept. Upon this the Church is founded, and he who should fall away from it would not be a Christian, and should no longer be so called”
Saint Athanasius says here that beyond the Scriptures, we have tradition and teaching of the Church that came from the Lord, Christ, was given to the Apostles and handed down through the Fathers. And He says that the Church is founded upon the Tradition and if anyone falls away from it, they are not Christian. Wow, Saint Athanasius does not sound like a Sola Scriptura, Lutheran type Christian at all!
“Let the unlearned persons cease such misrepresentations, but let them learn from the example of the Fathers; AND let them read the Scriptures”
Saint Athanasius says that the unlearned persons need to learn from the Fathers, referring to TRADITION and they read the Scriptures. Again putting both Tradition and Scripture on equal levels of importance.
“But do you, remaining on the foundation of the Apostles, and holding fast the Traditions of the Fathers, pray that now at length all strife and rivalry may cease, and the futile questions of the heretics may be condemned”
Here Saint Athanasius is inquiring the readers if they are holding to the Traditions of the Fathers and pray that the heretical questions will be condemned. It is quite clear so far that Saint Athanasius held Traditions very high in importance.
“Wherefore keep yourselves all the more untainted by them, and observe the tradition of the fathers, and chiefly the holy faith in our Lord Jesus Christ, which you have learned from the Scripture, and of which you have often been put in mind by me”
Saint Anthony of Egypt here combines Tradition of the Fathers and faith in Christ from Scripture to the highest degrees in what should be kept by the Christians.
“Well, they preserving the tradition of the blessed doctrine derived directly from the holy apostles, Peter, James, John, and Paul, the sons receiving it from the father (but few were like the fathers), came by God’s will to us also to deposit those ancestral and apostolic seeds. And well I know that they will exult; I do not mean delighted with this tribute, but solely on account of the preservation of the truth, according as they delivered I”
Saint Clement here says that Tradition of Blessed Doctrine came from the Holy Apostles, Saint Peter, Saint James, Saint John, Saint Paul and the Traditions came from God's will. Wow, this does not sound very Lutheran in my humble opinion.
“For those are slothful who, having it in their power to provide themselves with proper proofs for the divine Scriptures from the Scriptures themselves, select only what contributes to their own pleasure. And those have a craving for glory who voluntarily evade, by arguments of a diverse sort, the things delivered by the blessed apostles and teachers, which are wedded to inspired words; opposing THE DIVINE TRADITION OF HUMAN TEACHING, in order to establish the heresy”
Saint Clement calls out a group who are slothful and select from Divine Scripture to what contributes to their own pleasure. That sounds very similar to what Sola Scriptura is when taking to the conclusion, and those who oppose the divine Tradition do so to establish heresy. Already by the time of Saint Clement, 150 AD-215 AD, that anyone who denied Traditions here heretics.
“But we have nevertheless felt compelled to give a catalogue of these also, distinguishing those works which according to ecclesiastical tradition are true and genuine and commonly accepted…”
Saint Eusebius of Caesarea here says that distinguishing whatever works are being spoken of here are true and genuine and commonly accepted through Ecclesiastical Tradition. Showing that Traditions are held to authority to distinguish truths.
“But Polycarp also was not only instructed by apostles, and conversed with many who had seen Christ, but was also, by apostles in Asia, appointed bishop of the Church in Smyrna, whom I also saw in my early youth, for he tarried a very long time, and, when a very old man, gloriously and most nobly suffering martyrdom, departed this life, having always taught the things which he had learned from the apostles, and which the Church has handed down, and which alone are true”
Saint Irenaeus here says that the Traditions handed down by the Apostles to the church handed down, "which alone are true."
“Although there are many who believe that they themselves hold to the teachings of Christ, there are yet some among them who think differently from their predecessors. The teaching of the Church has indeed been handed down through an order of succession from the Apostles, and remains in the Churches even to the present time. That alone is to be believed as the truth which is in no way at variance with ecclesiastical and apostolic tradition”
Here Origen is calling out some believers who say they are holding to the teachings of Christ, which sounds similar to what I was told by the Lutherans, and they seem to oppose the Tradition handed down by the Church, by the Apostles to that present time.
“But now according to our ability let us make investigation also into the things that are stored up in it. In this place it does not appear to me that by Elijah the should is spoken of, lest I should fall into the dogma of transmigration, which is foreign to the church of God, and NOT HANDED DOWN BY THE APOSTLES, NOR ANYWHERE SET FORTH IN THE SCRIPTURES”
Origen is warning about falling into a foreign dogma that is not handed down by the Apostles, Tradition or in the Scriptures, hence Origen is showing the two authorities of truth that are within the Church. Origen truly does not sound like a protestant, Lutheran, at all. Not a single ounce of Lutheranism.
Section 6. My Final Thoughts.
It seems quite evident that Sola Scriptura is a Heresy that was formed by Martin Luther. It is not a Biblically sound Doctrine nor can it be found supported within the Bible or by Christ or the Apostles as claimed by Lutherans and other protestants. Early Church Theologians and Fathers did not uphold this doctrine but rather had this view of Scripture and Tradition as having the same level of authority and both should be followed and anyone who does not is a heretic according to the Church Fathers and Theologians and the Church being the foundation of truth in which both Tradition and Scripture may be found. Knowing what I know now I completely reject Sola Scriptura and denounce it as a heresy and I truly could never become protestant again.
"The LORD bless you
and keep you;
the LORD make His face shine upon you
and be gracious to you;
the LORD turn His face toward you
and give you peace." ☦
Comments
Post a Comment