Sola Scriptura

[sotzo]

What is the best evidence that putting Tradition on par with Scripture is a novelty of Roman Catholicism? In other words,, what is the best evidence to support the view that what the Reformers did was reinstate the primacy of Scripture to where it had existed in the Church prior to Rome?

 

[Confessor]

The apostles are dead, and therefore unwritten apostolic tradition does not exist. Sola Scriptura kicked in when they drew their last breath. The Catholic needs to offer positive evidence that this authority is continuing in order to attack the material sufficiency of Scripture (i.e. that Scripture has all the information necessary for salvation), while he may use various arguments about interpretations to attack the formal sufficiency of Scripture (i.e. that no authoritative interpreter is required; Scripture interprets Scripture), which I can also discuss if you would like.

 

[sotzo]

The apostles are dead, and therefore unwritten apostolic tradition does not exist. Sola Scriptura kicked in when they drew their last breath. The Catholic needs to offer positive evidence that this authority is continuing in order to attack the material sufficiency of Scripture (i.e. that Scripture has all the information necessary for salvation), while he may use various arguments about interpretations to attack the formal sufficiency of Scripture (i.e. that no authoritative interpreter is required; Scripture interprets Scripture), which I can also discuss if you would like.

Ben:

Wouldn't the positive evidence from their standpoint be a defense of Matt 16:18 as indicating that apostolic tradition did not die with the apostles?

 

[Ex Nihilo]

The apostles are dead, and therefore unwritten apostolic tradition does not exist. Sola Scriptura kicked in when they drew their last breath. The Catholic needs to offer positive evidence that this authority is continuing in order to attack the material sufficiency of Scripture (i.e. that Scripture has all the information necessary for salvation), while he may use various arguments about interpretations to attack the formal sufficiency of Scripture (i.e. that no authoritative interpreter is required; Scripture interprets Scripture), which I can also discuss if you would like.

Do you know any good books on this topic?

 

[Contra_Mundum]

William Whitaker Disputations on Holy Scripture
available at: Alpha and Omega Ministries

An oldee but a goodee

 

[Prufrock]

William Whitaker Disputations on Holy Scripture
available at: Alpha and Omega Ministries

An oldee but a goodee

Further, yes, he's Lutheran, but I cannot recommend highly enough Martin Chemnitz's section on scripture in his Examination of Trent (1st volume).

 

[MW]

For a sound introductory article, one might consult with profit John Murray's "Tradition: Romish and Protestant," Collected Writings 4:264-273.

 

[Confessor]

The apostles are dead, and therefore unwritten apostolic tradition does not exist. Sola Scriptura kicked in when they drew their last breath. The Catholic needs to offer positive evidence that this authority is continuing in order to attack the material sufficiency of Scripture (i.e. that Scripture has all the information necessary for salvation), while he may use various arguments about interpretations to attack the formal sufficiency of Scripture (i.e. that no authoritative interpreter is required; Scripture interprets Scripture), which I can also discuss if you would like.

Ben:

Wouldn't the positive evidence from their standpoint be a defense of Matt 16:18 as indicating that apostolic tradition did not die with the apostles?

They would have to do a marvelous exegesis to get that out of Matt. 16:18. If a Catholic were to attempt to prove his position from the Bible, he would almost immediately lose. It is an unfortunate truth for him.

 

[Ex Nihilo]

Any articles I could access on the Internet for free? I have no money.

 

[MW]

Prof. Murray's article is available here:

Tradition: Romish and Protestant

 

[Confessor]

Also, here's a good article from Bahnsen:

Untitled Document

 

[Thomas2007]

The apostles are dead, and therefore unwritten apostolic tradition does not exist. Sola Scriptura kicked in when they drew their last breath. The Catholic needs to offer positive evidence that this authority is continuing in order to attack the material sufficiency of Scripture (i.e. that Scripture has all the information necessary for salvation), while he may use various arguments about interpretations to attack the formal sufficiency of Scripture (i.e. that no authoritative interpreter is required; Scripture interprets Scripture), which I can also discuss if you would like.

Do you know any good books on this topic?

Post Reformation Reformed Dogmatics, Volume 2, Holy Scriptures: The Cognitive Foundation of Theology, by Richard A Muller
ISBN: 0-8010-6299-3

 

[Ex Nihilo]

Prof. Murray's article is available here:

Tradition: Romish and Protestant

Thanks so much, and thanks to you, also, packabacka! It is not just a matter of intellectual curiosity for me, but something of a personal struggle. This is very helpful.

 

[Mathetes]

Here are some further good (free) articles on sola scriptura vs. tradition:

Triablogue: By Scripture alone

Triablogue: Sola Ecclesia

http://triablogue.blogspot.com/2005/10/tradition.html