"Our ambition...is to be pleasing to Him" (2 Cor. 5:9)
Office Hours (MT)
Dr. James White, Director
Richard Pierce, President
Sean Hahn, Vice President
Monday - Friday
10:00AM - 5:00PM
(602) 973-4602

 

 

Does The Bible Teach Sola Scriptura?

 


Gerry Matatics vs. James White
November, 1992
Omaha, Nebraska


Third of Four 7-Minute Rebuttals
------------------------------
James White


Seven minutes is not a long period of time to cover as many things as we need to cover. Mr. Matatics indicated that we are fallible and we are, but church history teaches us that so was the Council of Arminum, Sermium. The Council of Constantinople condemned the Roman Catholic Bishop of Rome as a heretic. The Fourth Lateran Council, the 12th ecumenical council of the Roman Catholic Church, gave its blessing to those Roman Catholics who would take up the cross in the effort to exterminate the heretic which resulted in the deaths of thousands of Christian people. Yes, we are fallible, as are the councils of the Roman Catholic Church. The Scriptures, however, are not.

Secondly, Mr. Matatics says that, "Well, the canon--it was done by the councils. Hippo and Carthage. They're the ones who determined the canon." That's interesting. The Muratorian fragment, which dates to nearly 200 years prior to either Hippo or Carthage, listed 97 percent of the canon of the Scripture that I use long before any council began to look at that. I would challenge you to look at my book, Answers to Catholic Claims and look at what the early fathers themselves said. They did not feel they had the authority to "determine a canon" and they did not claim that it was this other mysterious oral tradition out there. We still haven't seen it. It hasn't been held up for us to see, but his mysterious oral tradition out there, that's supposedly inspired, did not determine the canon of the Scripture. That would actually make it superior to the Scriptures themselves. And so I certainly disagree with that.

Mr. Matatics then brought up Augustine and I don't think he understood what I was saying. He turned to me and said, "Are you saying that Augustine never appealed to any tradition outside of Scripture?" and I said, "No, I am not saying that." Because he most definitely did. Augustine was in a hard spot, as Gerry knows. Augustine was fighting against the Donatists. And who did the Donatists have on their side? Cyprian, the great bishop of Carthage. And when Augustine had to go up against what Cyprian had to say, you bet he referred to all sorts of other things outside of Scripture because he was fighting a losing battle, in some respects, on some of the things that he was saying. I'm not saying that Augustine was perfectly consistent but what I am saying is Mr. Matatics said, "Hey, all these early Fathers that are being quoted, they're all about heretics." No they weren't. A number of them that I quoted to you had nothing to do with heretics at all. There are a number of the passages that I gave to you that have nothing to do about heretics and if you want a couple others, just very quickly. Chrysostom says, "If anything is said without Scripture the thinking of the hearers limps. But the where the testimony proceeds with divinely given Scripture it confirms both the speech of the preacher and the soul of the hearer." Elsewhere he says, "Whatever is required for salvation is already completely fulfilled in the Scriptures." This had nothing to do with heretics. Nothing to do with heretics at all, so those passages cannot be dismissed, simply saying, "You're meeting them on their own ground." Not at all. When we are talking about the Lord Jesus being resurrected and confirming the believer's heart in Scripture, what does that have to do with heretics? Nothing whatsoever. It has to do with the Christian life, the Christian Church and the standard, the rule of faith for the Christian Church, which was the Scriptures and not something beyond that.

Then Augustine was cited where he said the following, and I want to give you the exact quote, "For my part I should not believe the Gospel except as moved by the authority of the Catholic Church." What is Augustine talking about there? I would encourage you to look at what is being said. Look at the passage. Read it in its entire context. He is writing against a Manichaean epistle entitled The Fundamentals and he is writing against the Manichaean religion and a little bit later on he says, "When I praise what I believe and laugh at what you believe, how do you think we are to judge or what are we to do? Should we not forsake those who invite us to a knowledge of things certain and then bid us believe things uncertain? Must we follow those who invite us first to believe that we are not yet strong enough to see that strengthened by this very faith we may become worthy to comprehend what we believe with God Himself, not men, now inwardly strengthening, illumining our mind?" If you will look at the discussion that is provided by John Calvin on this passage in The Institutes of the Christian Religion you will discover that Augustine is not placing the Scriptures under the authority of the Church, as Mr. Matatics would have us to believe.

Now, in just a few more seconds that is available to me, I want to bring up the issue of self-authentication. Mr. Matatics took on the issue of my statement that the Scriptures are self-authenticating. I want to point out again the vast chasm that separates us on this issue and how this demonstrates it. What is Scripture? What have I said from the very first this evening? Scripture is theopneustos. It is God-breathed. God authenticates Himself. If it is the Word of God it requires no authentification outside of God saying it, does it? Who does God refer to to authenticate Him? What is the authority above God's Word? If we say you have to look to the Church to authenticate God's Word, what are we saying about the Church? That is not the church of the New Testament. The Church of the New Testament is the Bride of Christ. She is obedient to the Word of God. She does not authenticate the Word of God. This is not something we should hear coming from a presentation that is supposed to be biblical in nature.

There is another section that was brought up and that is in regards to the subject of self-interpretive. And you always say, "Would you please give us a passage." Well, I don't have a whole lot of time left but I just wanted to give you one quote to demonstrate that I am not the only one who has believed this. Chrysostom in Homily 13 on Genesis, "They say that we are to understand the things concerning paradise, not as they are written but in a different way. But when Scripture wants to teach us something like that, it interprets itself and does not permit the hearer to err. I therefore beg and entreat that we close our ears to all these things and follow the canon of the holy Scriptures exactly." Where does the Bible teach this? We already looked at it. Paul said that all Scripture what he say previous to this in II Timothy 3:14-15, that the Scriptures were able to make us wise unto salvation. He never indicated that something else was going to be needed, some oral tradition. All Scripture that is able to make you wise unto salvation, he says. What is it? It's God-breathed, therefore what? It is sufficient. It is able to thoroughly equip the man of God. Now if I say I can thoroughly equip someone to go hiking, what am I saying? That I am sufficient to equip them for the task at hand. Paul says the Scriptures, the God-breathed Scriptures are sufficient to equip the man of God for every good work, and that is what we believe.

Thank you very much.



Copyright 2005-2006 Alpha and Omega Ministries