Tag Archives: sola-scriptura

Rightly Dividing the Word of Truth

"Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth." – 2 Timothy 2:15 (KJV)

This verse seems to be a favorite among Evangelicals. It's an essential part of the Protestant doctrine of sola scriptura. It occurred to me yesterday that sola sciptura has not only the exegetical and hermeneutical consequences, with which most are already familiar, but also ecclesiological.

If there is a right way of dividing the Word, i.e. handling (RSV) or imparting without deviation (NAB), there must also be a wrong way (or several wrong ways). Obviously, Protestants do not believe that Catholics rightly divide the Word. We reject sola scriptura. In their eyes, that doctrine is essential to correct interpretation.

So I find myself wondering whose version of "scripture interpreting scripture" is to be believed? If sola scriptura is so right, shouldn't there be a single obvious Protestant counterpart to the Catholic Church? Why are there so many competing denominations today? Why are there thousands of new groups appearing every year? Shouldn't there be only one right division of the Word?

One of the key problems with sola scriptura is that it robs Protestants of a proper sense of ecclesiology. They have no unified Church to maintain and protect the Deposit of Faith. When only scripture can interpret scripture, there can be no authoritative external interpretation. For Catholics and Orthodox, this external authority is Sacred Tradition. It's what helps the Church maintain unity and orthodoxy. Heresy is relatively easy to identify and counter.

Protestants have no such authority to which they can appeal. One denominations's heresy is another's doctrine. Don't like what you're hearing? Find another place to hang your hat. Don't like any group you've tried? Start your own.

Why is sola scriptura a bad doctrine? By its fruits you will know it. One of those fruits is division in the Body of Christ.

Rightly Dividing the Word of Truth

This evening I wrote an email to Evangelical Christian talk show host Marty Minto. I anxiously await his response. In the meantime, I’d love for my Protestant readers to give me their take.

Marty,

I mean the following as a serious question, not just some anti-"sola scriptura" taunt. I honestly want your answer to this, so please be open minded to it.

You repeatedly make reference to "rightly dividing the word of truth" (2 Timothy 2:16) If there is a right way, there must also be a wrong way. My concern is that there seem to be so many ways. For nearly every belief you hold and defend with Scripture, I can find someone else who holds an opposing belief that they can defend with Scripture.

All who claim Scriptural support believe that theirs is the "right division" of the Word. Obviously, someone must be wrong. In fact, several must be. Is one necessarily right? Unless God’s Word returns void, there must be. Who is it? How can we know? When many reputable and born-again faithful hold differing interpretations of Scripture, who is to be trusted and believed? Does majority rule? Does one person or group hold the authoritative interpretation?

The Catholic and Orthodox churches believe that apostolic succession places interpretive authority with patriarchs (the bishop of Rome being the head patriarch according to Catholics). When the apostles, including Paul, were alive, they acted as supreme earthly authorities in disputes among the faithful. Before they died, they appointed successors to hold that authority. Until the Reformation, that succession of leaders was unbroken. Even the split between East and West did not break that. Once the Reformation began, it did not take long before very disparate interpretations and teachings arose. One need not be a trained scholar of the Reformation to know some of the differences between Luther, Zwingli, Calvin, Wesley, and Fox, to name but a few. In the 400 years since that pivotal century, the number of denominations has grown exponentially. As soon as someone disagrees with the beliefs held by the majority of a denomination, they leave, often forming splinter groups of their own, where the process can repeat itself. While there are some constants between at least the mainline denominations, there are almost as many Evangelical interpretations and teachings as there are Evangelicals. With no central authority to appeal to, everyone can say theirs is the right reading of Scripture. Even among the mainlines, there are major disagreements and there is no final authority for them to appeal to. So I cannot help but ask this question of you:

Why should anyone trust your interpretations of Scripture over others? Perhaps you could answer this during Theological Thursday.

Eric

Going It Alone

There was a very interesting Marty Minto show recently. His Catholic producer, Shaun "Powerball" Pierce, received a booklet by R.C. Sproul called "Justification by Faith Alone". In it, Sproul examines what justification is according to Scripture, compares the Roman Catholic and evangelical stances on this core doctrine, and discusses the relationship of faith and works–all to show why "by faith alone" is so essential. As Sproul puts it, "The crucial issue of infusion versus imputation remains irreconcilable. We are either justified by a righteousness that is in us or by a righteousness that is apart from us. There is no third way." Pierce’s Catholic sensibilities were offended and a two-page response was the result. I’ve obtained his permission to reprint it here. I’d like to hear your reactions to it.

Continue reading