|
Lessons -
Apologetics
|
|
One of the divisive matters of faith between Catholics and Protestants is the latter's insistance on Sola Scriptura (Latin ablative, "by scripture alone"), the assertion that the Bible is the only inspired and authoritative word of God. We look at the arguments for and against this assertion.
Objection # 1: Sola Scriptura means, ‘Scripture Alone’. We believe that the Scriptures alone are the formal authority and the rule of faith. The Christian faith should be based on the Bible and nothing else.
Rebuttal # 1: We believe in ‘Solum Verbum Dei’, which means, the Word of God alone. It’s just wrong to say, “The Word of God is found in the Bible alone.” We don’t deny that the Word of God is found in the Bible but it is wrong to say that it is found only in the Bible. Not everything that happened is all recorded in the Bible. When men were inspired by God they wrote down words which are venerated as scriptures.
For example 1 Corinthians 10:4 says, “and all drank the same spiritual drink. For they drank from the spiritual rock that followed them, and the rock was Christ.” Paul talks about this rock that “followed” the Jews through the wilderness but no where in the Old Testament do we find this record. But we hear of this in rabbinic tradition.
Another example is 2 Timothy 3:8, “As Jannes and Jambres opposed Moses, so these people, of corrupt mind and counterfeit faith, also oppose the truth.” But when we read the book of Exodus we don’t find this.
Acts 20:35 Apostle Paul says, “In all this I have given you an example that by such work we must support the weak, remembering the words of the Lord Jesus, for he himself said, “It is more blessed to give than to receive.” When we read through the gospels we don’t find this anywhere either. Moreover how did Paul know what Jesus said since he had not even met Jesus? It’s quite clear this was passed on through Oral Tradition which is maintained in the Church.
John 20: 25 says in the end of his gospel, “But there are also many other things that Jesus did; if every one of them were written down, I suppose that the world itself could not contain the books that would be written.” We cannot just nullify all these things just because they haven’t been written down (see Jude 1:9,14,15; we do not find these details in the Bible either.) The Catholic Church maintains the Oral Word / Traditions which have not been written down as well. We need to keep in mind that Jesus did not command his disciples to write anything. (Jesus, too, to the best of our knowledge wrote nothing other than a few words on the sand.) However, when men were inspired by God they wrote down words which are venerated as scriptures. Jesus commanded his disciples to go and ‘Proclaim the Gospel and teach all nations.’ He did not command them to write. We do not find Peter running around Jesus taking notes in order to compile a book.
Objection # 2: The Bible says in 2 Timothy 3: 16,17 “All scripture is inspired by God and is useful for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, so that everyone who belongs to God may be proficient, equipped for every good work.” This means that Scriptures have the Sole Authority we don’t need a Pope or a Magisterium, all we need is the Bible. We have it all in Scriptures.
Rebuttal # 2: We do not have it all in Scripture; refer to Rebuttal # 1. 2 Timothy 3: 16-17 says, “All Scripture….” It does not say “Only Scripture”. If it said “Only Scripture” then it would mean that only the Bible can be useful for teaching, training in righteousness etc. This means that we must go not by Scripture alone but by the Word of God alone, which includes both the written and Oral Tradition. We find in the Bible that the Apostles themselves did not believe in Sola Scriptura but in the written and Oral Tradition of God’s Word.
Look at Acts 2: 42 says: “They devoted themselves to the apostles’ teaching and fellowship, to the breaking of bread and the prayers.” In this verse we learn that the earlier Christians were devoted to the apostles teaching, they were not devoted to the apostles writing, considering the fact that nothing had been written at that time.
2 Thessalonians 2:15 says: “So then, brothers and sisters, stand firm and hold fast to the traditions that you were taught by us, either by word of mouth or by our letter.” Here Paul reminds the Thessalonians believers that they must hold fast to whatever the traditions the apostles have passed down either in writing or by word of mouth. So Scripture insists that the Scriptures by itself are not the only source for God’s Word; we have Sacred Tradition as well, oral tradition as vouched, as attested by the New Testament itself.
Romans 16:17 says: “I urge you, brothers and sisters, to keep an eye on those who cause dissensions and offences, in opposition to the teaching that you have learned; avoid them.”
We Catholics believe that the Bible and Tradition are to be co-ordinate sources for a rule of faith. We also believe that the decrees of the Pope and councils are the only legitimate and infallible interpreter of the Bible.
Objection # 3: Why do we need a Pope and a Council to interpret the Bible? Anyone and everyone can interpret the Bible. The Holy Spirit is the best teacher and interpreter of the Bible.
Rebuttal # 3: The Bible seems simple to interpret. However, they can be several interpretations for each passage, which accounts in no small part for the 33,000 Protestant denominations that exist, ALL claiming they have interpreted the Bible the correct way! If there is only one Holy Spirit interpreting the Bible then why do we have so many different interpretations for a single text? When two parties arrive at contradictory interpretations, there needs to be mediation and a consensus reached. For this we need councils. We see the first council recorded in the Acts of the Apostles (Acts 15:1-35). As the church grew in the early days, there were many people who didn’t quite fully understand the New Covenant. Some went around teaching that people still had to be circumcised as required by Mosaic law. Paul and Barnabas disagreed with them, but unable to come to a come to any consensus, they decided to go to Jerusalem and resolve the issue with the apostles and other elders of the Church. There, after much discussion—because there were several in Jerusalem, too, who believed that circumcision was a requirement to being baptized—it was finally agreed that circumcision was not necessary to become a Christian.
We need somebody to interpret things for us. The question of heresy wouldn’t arise otherwise, because if everybody is entitled to their own interpretation then nobody would be wrong. Even the Ethiopian eunuch realized the need for somebody else, “How can I understand scripture unless someone explains it to me?” he asked (cf Acts 8:31).
Objection # 4: Jesus was always against the tradition of men. He condemned tradition, as can be seen in Matthew 15:3: “He answered them, ‘and why do you break the commandment of God for the sake of your tradition?” Then, again, in Matthew 15:6 he says, “So, for the sake of your tradition, you make void the word of God.” And, once more, in Mark 7:8-13, ““You abandon the commandment of God and hold to human tradition.” Then he said to them, ‘You have a fine way of rejecting the commandment of God in order to keep your tradition! For Moses said, “Honor your father and your mother”; and, “Whoever speaks evil of father or mother must surely die.” But you say that if anyone tells father or mother, What ever support you might have had from me is Corban” (that is, an offering to God) then you no longer permit doing anything for a father or mother, thus making void the word of God through your tradition that you have handed on. And you do many things like this.”” Through these verses we clearly see that Jesus was not in favor of tradition.
Rebuttal # 4: Jesus was not condemning all tradition but only those that made the Word of God void. Moreover, Catholics do not hold on to myths or legends but to the Apostolic teachings of Christ, whether written or oral. Jesus also upheld oral tradition. Matthew 23: 2-3 says, “The scribes and the Pharisees sit on Moses’ seat; therefore, do whatever they teach you and follow it; but do not do as they do, for they do not practice what they teach.” Here Jesus is clearly upholding oral tradition. Apostle Paul himself commended oral tradition.1 Corinthians 11: 2 says, “I commend you because you remember me in everything and maintain the traditions just as I handed them on to you.”
If the Bible is the sole authority then why doesn’t the Bible state so? In fact the Bible says the Church is the pillar and foundation of truth. 1 Timothy 3:15 says, “if I am delayed, you may know how one ought to behave in the household of God, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and bulwark of the truth.” We come to much doctrine through this Church. For instance, the word “Trinity” is nowhere to be found in the Bible, but Christians universally believe in the doctrine of the Trinity. We know that the third person of the Trinity is the Holy Spirit—through tradition. We also know who wrote the books of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John through tradition. The Jews too believed in oral tradition. That is why they have the Mishnah, which is nothing but the oral teachings of the rabbis. So we see that the Jews, Jesus, as well as the apostles all supported oral teaching. The Catholic Church is the pillar and foundation of this truth whether written or spoken.
|
|
Mumbai Community, First Quarter Report
September 13: The HSI School of Discipleship in Don Bosco Church, Borivili completed its first quarter on September 13, 2009, and from all indications has proven to be a far greater success than anybody expected. A total of 101 confirmed members in the Community that include men, women and children of ages ranging from 7 to 70, testifed to the wonderful impact this program has made on their lives. Click here for their testimonies.
This is the sixth HSI School of Discipeship to open internationally, and the second in India.
|
HSI's next 
Lessons 
