Defending Sola Scriptura

A response to two points made by the Roman Catholic apologist Jimmy Akin during his recent debate with The Other Paul, in which I defend the doctrine of Sola Scriptura

The Debate can be found here:

[molodoychilovek]

Very good comments from the legendary River Deveraux. 😊

[Convexhull]

Sola scriptura just seems so self evident too. If Sola Scriptura is false, then what other metric do we have comparable to scripture? If the church is the final authority, then which church has the right tradition? Good job brotha!

[molodoychilovek]

May I suggest you and Paul secure and study a copy of John Owen’s volume 14, Adminadversions of Fiat Lux, Owen’s work on countering Roman Catholicism. You will be repaid many times over.

[jamessheffield]

Isaiah 55:11 So shall my word be that goeth forth out of my mouth: it shall not return unto me void, but it shall accomplish that which I please, and it shall prosper in the thing whereto I sent it.

[mikeparker]

Good responses to the debate and great defense of scripture. God bless

[Robert-vvqp]

It is interesting how much Roman Catholic doctrine is related to the New Apostolic Reformation.

[marsherrmadd]

Thankfully, we serve a merciful God that is full of love for His children even when they get their theology wrong. I cling to that bc I know my views aren't infallible. I cling to Jesus bc I know He is love and mercy and His Holy Spirit will guide me in this life and despite my little knowledge, He will bear fruit through me, through my surrender to His will. The more I dig into apologetics, the more I'm thankful for Jesus bc I just can't understand everything perfectly. But, He is giving me deeper understanding of His love. That's the most important aspect of who He is and the most misunderstood.

[andrefouche]

But how do you know that you have the correct books in the Bible?

[Hadrianus]

Would love to see you debate Jimmy Akin 🙂

[candyclews]

There is so much that is extraneous about the Catholic faith that can potentially lead one astray (Marian dogmas, Novenas, relics, apparitions, indulgences, as well as Papal infallibility) that I feel we are on safer ground if we concentrate only on God's Word.

[revmatthewbyers]

Your article on The North American Anglican concerning the ordination of women and why it's prohibited was absolutely perfect by the grace of God. So edifying. Thanks so much brother. Much love in Christ.

[stephenmccaughey]

Hey River, good points added and agreed Jimmy's harping on that Sola Scriptura as doctrine needed to be explicitly in the text as doctrine isn't the knockout punch he thinks it is. However, the RC and EO positions around magisterium and infallibility are they define what is implicitly or explicitly in the deposit of faith from the Apostles whether passed down orally or in writing, not the charism of adding to the deposit as with the Apostles. And this is the stronger argument that, again, comes down to authority. They assert that as the "one, Catholic and apostolic church" the Holy Spirit will guide the church to proper interpretation of Holy Scripture and passing on of oral traditions (which I think as Anglicans we would agree with), infallibly so in cases of Ecumenical Council or Ex Cathedra statement (which is finally where we differ). So it becomes a "because I said so" situation. And unfortunately while that was the central debate, "authority", Paul and Jimmy didn't get into it all that much: what is the charism of the magisterium as it pertains to passing on the deposit of faith and on what assurance of authority?

[CranmanPhotoCinema]

This is brilliant. The only thing I can anticipate is someone saying that’s all fine that Scripture is the “new magisterium”, but it still needs interpreting. For instance the early church dealt with heresies which entails they had to go deeper than what’s at face value in scripture to explicate certain doctrines. Are their interpretations infallible or fallible? How do you make sense of this with what you said?

[Pablo]

Well done.
As a former Roman Catholic who came to a true faith in Christ over 40 years ago, I know from first hand experience that only God can break through the religious strongholds over Roman Catholics.

Roman Catholicism is a huge mission field and they need to hear the truth of the gospel, but only God can remove their blinders.

It’s easier to share the gospel with a hardcore sinner than a Roman Catholic because they believe they are serving God when in reality they are greatly deceived. 🥲

[balletktmc]

Question: did the jerusalem counsel contain only the apostles? If yes, then your argument seems very strong. If more than just the apostles, then it seems Jimmy’s argument may be plausible, or at least there is some wiggle room for him to argue this point. 
You have a very clear way of explaining and summarizing multifaceted arguments- thank you for this video!

[tiborkovacs]

Without the Holy Scriptures the Story of what God Taught & did then there would be no church or tradtion. Maybe a bit simplistic view of it. Great vids thanks.

[MrKingishere]

Trent Horn made a sola scriptura video and used a clip of your video. He’s a joke but just wanted you to know

[jackdaw]

The Word of God apparently included at some point in time everything taught by by Pharisees who sat in Moses' seat.
However reading the entire Old Testament, I never found it.
So someone like Our Lord or the apostles could point and laugh at the Seat of Moses and say, the exact same argument you made and ignore the teaching of the Pharisees.
However that would be foolish.
Now, the early Christians would point to something called laying on of hands and the office of bishop as inheriting the authority of apostles to some degree.
Now you can say, corrupted traditions, but at that point it is if we are hearing materialistic skeptics with regards to Scripture itself.
You can say it isn't clear in Scripture, but I know you know that St Irenaeus would not agree with you. Because, he was quite happy with how the church would function and would continue to function even if the apostles didn't write a single letter. At least that's how it seems, you could say like The Other Paul that it is only because of close proximity in time and place, but note he makes the point if no letter was ever written. So, when would you say would his argument no longer work? 3 century or 4th century?

[aajaifenn]

We could credibly argue that Sola scriptura is not a doctrine in itself but a method of finding the apostles doctrine for the church( ie to look to the infallible scriptures) . The slogan was coined in the historic setting of other additional infallible methods being proposed to find the apostles doctrine ( ie the pope ex cathedra or ecumenical councils ).So even if Akin does not find the biblical evidence for Sola scriptura convincing it does not matter to the concept of Sola Scriptura.

[paynedv]

You can't defend something not there