Definition
Sola Scriptura does not necessarily mean that the Bible is the only source of Christian instruction. But what it does affirm is that tradition is inherently secondary to scripture, because only scripture is infallible.
The New Covenant
The Mosaic religion begins with the reception of the Ten Commandments. Then, God’s first act of business is to spend 15 chapters of Exodus and 16 chapters of Leviticus describing liturgical statutes. Then, chapters 17-27 focus on Levitical conduct. God makes it clear that if the people “keep [His] word,” then “[He] will be their God” (Leviticus 26:3-13).
There are 27,000 contiguous words describing liturgy between Exodus and Leviticus. There are 223 words in 1 Corinthians 11:23-32, the only explicit description of Apostolic liturgical practice in scripture. We don’t even have that passage because Paul wanted to write it down to pass on to future generations, but purely because he had to scold the Corinthians for messing it up.
God’s command was to keep the 613 Mosaic statutes in order to be faithful. Christ’s command is 18 words: “A new commandment I give to you, that you love one another just as I have loved you” (John 13:34).
Modern artists have managed to make replicas of Solomon’s temple due to the incredible detail of God’s instructions. Meanwhile, Acts doesn’t have a single description of a Christian church.
The Apostles were aware their writings held the same authority as scripture – in 2 Peter 3:15-17, Peter refers to Paul’s epistles as scripture. But they were not interested in codifying a robust library for future followers. To the contrary, they purposely avoided creating a robust scriptural deposit. Paul said, “the letter kills, but the Spirit gives life” (2 Corinthians 3:3-8), referencing Jeremiah’s prophecy that the new covenant would not be scriptural (Jeremiah 31:31-34). Consequently, the Apostles spent a lot more time preaching than writing things down (1 Cor 11:34, 1 Thess 5:1-2, 2 Thess 2:5, 2 John 12).
There are almost no “ground rules” anywhere in the New Testament. Every epistle is ad-hoc, addresses specific concerns and situations, and carries an expectation that the audience was aware of pre-existing norms and practices (I Cor 2:1-2 and 15:1-3, Gal 1:8, 1 Thess. 2:13, Rom 10:14 and 15:20-22, Eph 1:13, Jude 3). There are almost no verses about the roles of the elders, deacons, and presbyters. We are never told their exact qualifications, what they do, nor given any details on how they do it.
For 300 years after the Apostles had died, the Christian Church thrived with nothing but tradition and authority. There was no Bible. Even then, it would be more than a thousand years before any meaningful number of people in Europe could read. So for 1500 years, the practice remained substantially the same – tradition, community, faith, and authority.
The Interpretation Paradox
Which is the higher authority – the law, or the judge applying the law? In ruling on the law, the judge is bound to serve the law, and in this sense the law is the higher authority. But, the judge, in interpreting the law, determines the meaning of the law in the context of the situation, considering not only the letter of the law, but the mind of the legislator and the legal precedent. We can see the question is paradoxical. Without the law, the judge has nothing to rule on; but without the judge, the law is just words on a page.
Now, consider an unjust or untrained judge: they may not be sufficiently familiar with the letter of the law to rule on it; or they may not truly know the mind of the legislator; or they may bear the wrong precedent in mind. If the judge rules unjustly because of these imperfections, though the law may be just, the result will be unjust.
Let me ask another question: which is the higher authority – the Bible, or the Christian reading the Bible? In interpreting the Bible, the believer is bound to serve the Bible as the word of God, and in this sense the Bible is the higher authority. But the interpreter, in interpreting the Bible, determines the meaning of scripture in the context of their situation, considering not only the letter, but the mind of God and the Christian tradition. We can see this question is paradoxical. Without the Bible, the interpreter hasn’t the word of God; but without the interpreter, the Bible is just words on a page.
Now consider an unjust or untrained Christian: they may not be sufficiently familiar with the whole of the canon to judge one part; or they may not have sufficient wisdom to know the mind of God, the legislator; or they may be interpreting in the context of a bad tradition.
The Bible itself presents the problem of the “bad judge” as an existential threat to salvation. Throughout the Old Testament, there are constant condemnations of the error of pagan and Jew alike doing “what is right in his own eyes” (Judges 21:25, Deut 12:8, Proverbs 3:5, Proverbs 14:12, Psalm 12:1-4). The New Testament gives the same warnings about “hearing what we want to hear and preaching what we want to preach” (Matt. 24:24, 2 Tim 4:3-4, 1 John 4:1, 2 Peter 2:1).
Is there an answer to this issue? Well, it could just be that the Holy Spirit grants every Christian the gift to judge scripture rightly. Jeremiah did say that all men would know God, “from the greatest to the least” (Jeremiah 31:31-34). But that cannot be so; scripture and empirical evidence disagree. Peter’s second epistle makes explicit reference to misinterpretation of Paul’s epistles already becoming an issue while he was still alive: “[Paul’s] letters contain some things that are hard to understand, which ignorant and unstable people distort, as they do the other Scriptures, to their own destruction” (2 Peter 3:15-16). Peter has the same dire tone as the Old Testament. Misinterpreting scripture leads to doing what is right in your own eyes, and that leads to destruction.
Now, one may argue that the Bible is so clear that none could possibly deviate from it in good faith. But we’ve already established that the New Covenant is incredibly vague. Furthermore, this was a deliberate choice on God’s part, as the Old Testament actually was that specific! So, if sola scriptura is true, then God’s express plan was to create a religion in which each is his own judge… contrary to His constant, dire warnings against such self-reliance.
The Litmus Test
The Lord Himself weighs in on the issue of true and false Christians and provides a litmus test.
“Beware of false prophets, who come to you in sheep’s clothing but inwardly are ravenous wolves. You will know them by their fruits. Are grapes gathered from thorns or figs from thistles? In the same way, every good tree bears good fruit, but the bad tree bears bad fruit. A good tree cannot bear bad fruit, nor can a bad tree bear good fruit. Every tree that does not bear good fruit will be cut down and thrown into the fire. Thus you will know them by their fruits” (Matthew 7:15-20). So, when judging a Christian group, we are to judge them by their fruits.
What are the signs of God’s presence – “good fruits?”
Christ says, “I pray for those who will believe in me through [the Apostles’] message, that all of them may be one” (John 17:20-21). St. Paul says, “if you have any encouragement from being united with Christ, if any comfort from his love, if any common sharing in the Spirit, if any tenderness and compassion, then make my joy complete by being like-minded, having the same love, being one in spirit and of one mind” (Philippians 2:1-2). He also says, “you are the body of Christ, and each one of you is a part of it” (1 Corinthians 12:27). So, clearly, unity is one such sign of God’s presence. In fact, the unity spoken of is so intimate that it unites believers as a body unites its limbs.
And how does this body stay so close-knit? First, tradition – “Can the blind lead the blind? Will they not both fall into the ditch? A disciple is not above his teacher, but everyone who is perfectly trained will be like his teacher” (Luke 6:39-40). Second, obedience – “Do you not know that to whom you present yourselves slaves to obey, you are that one’s slaves whom you obey, whether of sin leading to death, or of obedience leading to righteousness?” (Romans 6:16).
What are signs of the presence of the enemy, “bad fruits?”
First, St. Paul points out that appearances can be deceiving. “[Heretics] are false apostles, deceitful workmen, disguising themselves as apostles of Christ. And no wonder, for Satan himself masquerades as an angel of light. It is not surprising, then, if his servants also masquerade as servants of righteousness. Their end will be what their actions deserve.” (2 Corinthians 11:13-15). St. Peter speaks likewise: “There will be false teachers among you. They will secretly introduce destructive heresies… if God did not spare angels when they sinned, but sent them to hell… this is especially true of those who follow the corrupt desire of the flesh and despise authority” (2 Peter 2:1-12). The false shepherd is not a Muslim or a Buddhist, nor a man running around with red horns and a cape. The false shepherd – the ravening servant of Satan bound for destruction – wears polo shirts and runs a youth group.
And how do these false prophets harm the body? First, by causing people to break with tradition – “It would have been better for them not to have known the way of righteousness, than to have known it and then to turn their backs on the sacred command that was passed on to them” (2 Peter 2:21). Second, by encouraging disobedience – “You were dead… when you followed the ways of this world and of the ruler of the kingdom of the air, the spirit who is now at work in those who are disobedient” (Ephesians 2:1-2). “Whoever makes a practice of sinning is of the devil, for the devil has been sinning from the beginning. The reason the Son of God appeared was to destroy the works of the devil” (1 John 3:8).
There are presently over 40,000 Protestant churches. Because of sola scriptura, all of them have different interpretations and traditions and doctrines of faith and morals. All are mutually in disagreement, perpetually dividing and branching off of each other to create new traditions. This confusion surely drives away people who may have believed if all of Christendom were unified. Non-Christians typically don’t know what Christians believe, because Christians don’t know what Christians believe. In his own lifetime, Martin Luther famously complained “there are as many sects and creeds as heads.” Furthermore, the common definition of sola fide excludes penance and thus makes sin an almost meaningless issue – as Martin Luther said, “sin boldly, but believe in Christ even more boldly.” Even beyond this fundamental issue, Protestantism in practice removes men’s basic awareness of sin. Again, there are 40,000 denominations, all of which disagree on what even qualifies as a sin!
Disunity, disobedience, clever heresies, misunderstanding, and rejection of tradition. These are the trademarks of Protestantism.
Often, the Protestant response is that the Apostolic alternatives (Catholicism and Orthodoxy) are overly legalistic, or even pharisaic. Of course, Christ decried the false piety of the Pharisees often, but He also said to obey the Pharisees, “for they sit on the chair of Moses” (Matthew 23:1-3). Christ leaves no excuse for abandoning the hierarchy He created. The office maintains its power and authority, regardless of the holiness of whomever sits in it. If this was the case for the Pharisees, how much more so for the Apostolic offices of the everlasting covenant?
Conclusion
Sola scriptura inherently leads to self-referential spirituality, as the New Covenant is extraordinarily vague. This is an existential problem, as the Bible constantly asserts that self-reliance leads to damnation. Furthermore, Protestant churches bear all the marks of the Satanic influence, and none of the marks of the Spirit. They are inherently atomized, disobedient to tradition in one form or another, and rife with disagreement. The very scripture which sola scriptura depends upon condemns it both in principle and in empirical result.