...against Sola Scriptura?

Wait, put down the pitchforks and torches!

I ask because I've encountered an endless stream of shallow arguments from Rome that claim to disprove the Reformation position, but in reality they only disprove the flimsy "Me 'n My Bible" evangelical approach. The same bad arguments are advanced ad nauseum..."John's gospel says that Jesus did stuff not in Scripture..." or "Paul says we need to hold fast to tradition..." or "There was no official cannon until the 4th century so the doctrine was impossible..." You know the drill. Many of these are picked up by Orthodox people too, although they have an entirely different view of "Tradition" from the west. And in almost every case, the convert to RC/EO came from an evangelical background that never actually explained Sola Scriptura intelligibly to begin with--and probably never really held to it.

At any rate, if somebody were to put forward an argument against the Reformation position that is difficult to refute (note I say difficult and not impossible), what would it be? What presuppositions do we bring that are perhaps difficult to justify vs. competing presuppositions?

Sometimes I find it helpful to view myself through the eyes of those who disagree and see what they see--sometimes I find holes in my armor that I didn't see before and it makes me that much better able to clarify and articulate my own thinking.

Just curious what you all think?

__________________
Bill in Dayton, OH
Member of Redeemer OPC

"Show me Your ways, O LORD;
Teach me Your paths.
Lead me in Your truth and teach me,
For You are the God of my salvation;
On You I wait all the day." (Psalm 25:4-5)

Sola Scriptura, it is argued, is a "blueprint for anarchy." If I remember correctly, the phrase comes from the first Surprised by Truth book.

__________________
Albert, The Republic of the Philippines
Pasig United Covenant Reformed Church (a Reformed church plant)
United Covenant Reformed Churches in the Philippines (UCRCP)
Three Forms of Unity and Westminster Confession of Faith

Psalm 27:1a (AV) The LORD is my light and my salvation; whom shall I fear?
“Perseverance is the badge of true saints. The Christian life is not a beginning only in the ways of God, but also a continuance in the same as long as life lasts.” -

I'm not sure we are competent, who have not studied all the ins and outs of deception, to define the "best" forms of it. We know what we have succumbed to in the past, or what books have told us (or have seen the enemy likes to use).

What makes an argument "good" or "strong" when deployed against the truth? Is it not the weakness within, rather than the power of persuasion without?

Christians are weak when they think they are strong. When his hope is in Christ, no matter how supercharged with intellectual firepower the enemy's attacks, the simple believer remains unmoved.

Perhaps, then we can say that the "best" arguments against the Force of Truth residing in the Scriptures are aimed at the occasions of intellectual pride as we exercise them. If our faith is in our arguments, and not in Christ, then if (as in the case of BartEhrman) when our (relatively weak, fundamentalistic) arguments are barraged by sophisticated intellectual atheists, or megalomaniac Romanists, our defenses crumble.

"My sheep hear my Voice... they will not follow another." Jn.10:27, 5

__________________
Rev. Bruce G. Buchanan
ChainOLakes Presbyterian Church, CentralLake, MI


When posting friends, kindly bear those words of earthly wisdom in mind:
Oh, that God the gift would give us
To see ourselves as others see us.
--Robert Burns, 1786 (modernized) ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ Click to get: Board Rules -- Signature Requirements -- Suggestions? --

Clarification: I don't mean that it is difficult to refute. What I'm saying is that it seems difficult on the surface.