Tag: sola scriptura

120 Comments

Sola Scriptura and the Empty Tomb

Workshop of Daniel Chorny and Andrey Rublev, Icon of the Women at the Grave (1420s)
Was sola Scriptura true during the time of the Apostles?Were the Apostles and the first-century Christians bound to follow Scripture alone? These are the two options. You can claim, despite the clear evidence to the contrary, that the Apostles and early Christians believed in Scripture alone. But doing so both undermines John's faith in the Resurrection and renders the New Testament irrelevant. Or you can concede that the Apostles and early Christians didn't believe in Scripture alone. But then you have to throw out all of the alleged "Scriptural proofs" for sola Scriptura, and concede that it's a post-Apostolic man-made tradition that contradicts the written word of God.

Continue reading: “Sola Scriptura and the Empty Tomb”

14 Comments

The Public Nature of Reading Scripture

James Tissot, Jesus Unrolls the Book in the Synagogue (c. 1890)
In the modern age, it's easy to assume that Christians always studied Scripture by reading their personal Bible, or that theological questions always settled by the believer looking through his Bible at home, alone. But none of that is true. As St. Augustine and Scripture itself confirm, the Bible was originally intended to be proclaimed to the community. Which is why I'm happy to be part of a project that seeks to do just that.

Continue reading: “The Public Nature of Reading Scripture”

53 Comments

Karl Barth v. Keith Mathison on the Early Church & Sola Scriptura

German postage stamp honoring Karl Barth's 100th birthday
Did the early Christians believe in "sola Scriptura" (Scripture alone)? Or did they also believe in Apostolic Tradition? Keith Mathison, in his book "The Shape of Sola Scriptura," claimed that the Catholic view wasn't found in the first centuries of the Church, and that the earliest Church Fathers believed in sola Scriptura. Mathison's views are thoroughly debunked by (of all people) Karl Barth, the Reformed theologian Christianity Today called "the most important theologian of the twentieth century." And Barth capably proved the Catholic Patristic case... even though he personally believed in sola Scriptura!

Continue reading: “Karl Barth v. Keith Mathison on the Early Church & Sola Scriptura”

15 Comments

No, the Bible Isn’t the Fullness of Revelation. Jesus is.

The debate over sola Scriptura is often framed as a question of whether the fullness of revelation is Scripture or Scripture plus Tradition. But the Bible points us to the fullness of revelation, and it doesn’t look like this: Vincent Van Gogh, Still Life with Bible (1885) Rather, the fullness of revelation looks more like […]

Continue reading: “No, the Bible Isn’t the Fullness of Revelation. Jesus is.”

12 Comments

Reason #6 to Reject the Reformation: Patristic Scriptural Exegesis

Caspar Schwenckfeld Catholic beliefs are often rejected by “Bible-only” Protestants on the grounds that they are “extra-Scriptural Traditions.” This accusation typically misses the mark: on teachings like the priesthood, or the Eucharist, or regenerative baptism, it’s not that the Church is deriving these views from a source other than Scripture. It’s that she sees support […]

Continue reading: “Reason #6 to Reject the Reformation: Patristic Scriptural Exegesis”

15 Comments

The Church, the Bible, and the Trinity of Divine Persons

Did you know that the word “person” comes to us through Catholic philosophy and theology? Theatrical masks of Comedy and Tragedy, Roman mosaic, (2nd c.). It’s true, although the word existed before Christianity in a different context. Etymologically, the word “person” originally comes from a Latin word meaning “sounding through” (personare), which referred to actors […]

Continue reading: “The Church, the Bible, and the Trinity of Divine Persons”