Sola Scriptura & Witnessing to Roman Catholics

Alpha and Omega Ministries presents the Dividing Line radio broadcast. The Apostle Peter commanded all Christians to be ready to give a defense for the hope that is within us, yet to give this answer with gentleness and reverence.

The Dividing Line is brought to you by Alpha and Omega Ministries, the Phoenix Reformed Baptist Church, and Bethany House Publishers. Your host is Dr. James White, director of Alpha and Omega Ministries, and an elder at the Phoenix Reformed Baptist Church.

With today's topic, here is Dr. White.

Sola Scriptura as the Sole Infallible Rule of Faith

And it's good to be with you on this beautiful Saturday afternoon. My name is James White, and I'm looking forward to spending some time with you today talking about a very important subject, that being the subject of Sola Scriptura.

You say, we've been talking about that for quite a while. Well, we haven't even gotten to the point where we've been able to present it from a biblical perspective, and we're going to do that today. I would mention in passing that I want to welcome all of our listeners, and I do mean all of our listeners.

There are a number of people who are listening in via the Internet these days, not live, but we do post these programs on our Internet website at www .aomin .org, and my email demonstrates that we have a number of people, especially right now Roman Catholics and Roman Catholic apologists, who are listening in to the program as we are presenting these passages, these discussions in regards to Sola Scriptura, and we welcome you listening in as well, even when you join us by tape or by the Internet, whatever it might be.

We are thankful to have you with us as well. In Mark chapter 7, we have here a presentation of, I think, one of the clearest passages that substantiates and presents to us the importance of Sola Scriptura, Sola Scriptura being the belief that the Scriptures are the sole infallible rule of faith for the Church.

In Mark chapter 7, we read the following words, Neglecting the commandment of God, you hold to the tradition of men. He was also saying to them, You are experts at setting aside the commandment of God in order to keep your tradition.

For Moses said, Honor your father and your mother, and he who speaks evil of father or mother is to be put to death. But you say, if a man says to his father or his mother, Whatever I have that would help you is korban, that is, given to God.

You no longer permit him to do anything for his father or his mother, thus invalidating the word of God by your tradition which you have handed down. And you do many things such as that. Now, all the time you hear from Roman Catholic apologists, Where does the Bible teach Sola Scriptura?

Well, obviously what the person is trying to do is to get you to admit that the term Sola Scriptura doesn't appear in the Bible, therefore you're inconsistent if you believe it. Of course, Jehovah's Witnesses do the same thing.

When they say, Where does the word Trinity appear in the Bible? You say your beliefs are found in the Bible, why don't these terms appear there? Well, obviously, it's far more important to hold to the teaching of Scripture than it is to find particular words in Scripture.

The term abortion as a specific word may not appear in Scripture, but it does not follow that the Scriptures do not address that issue. It may use different terms, it may present the teaching in a different way, but obviously it is there anyways, and we want to hold to the teaching of Scripture, not merely just the words of Scripture.

We want to understand all that Scripture says. And here in Mark chapter 7, I think we have a very clear example that if we are to follow in the footsteps of the Lord Jesus Christ, then we must hold to Sola Scriptura.

Jesus and the Corban Tradition in Mark 7

Why is that? Well, background always helps. The background of this passage is very, very interesting. The Korban rule that Jesus makes reference to in this passage was a tradition of the Jews. It specifically stated that an individual could, in essence, to use today's language, sort of set up a trust.

You could give all of your physical possessions or a portion of your physical possessions, your monetary wealth, whatever it might be, to the temple, to the support of the temple work. But the way it was set up, basically, was this continued to allow you to have access to your money.

It was somewhat of a way to get around the necessity of taking care of your parents in their old age by saying, look, Mom, Dad, I know you're really hurting right now and I know that I do have the money to help you.

But, you know, I'm just such a godly person and I've given all of my physical wealth to the temple, to the maintenance of God's worship. And as a result, I just can't help you. I'd be robbing God. Well, this tradition, this Korban rule, the Jews believed was a part of a whole body of traditions that Jesus calls a tradition of men.

They talk about the tradition of the fathers, the tradition of the elders, actually, is the term that they use. And they believed that there was this body of oral tradition that existed outside of Scripture that was passed down to them through the great rabbis from Moses himself.

In fact, we have an article on our webpage, www .aomin .org, that addresses the use of this external body of tradition by some Roman Catholic apologists and points out that even in the writings of the Jews, they have this idea, they even trace the lineage down to the great rabbis, that these ideas came from Moses.

Now, why is this important? Well, a number of years ago, Patrick Madrid, then vice president of Catholic Answers, and Mark Brumley, who was then on staff with Catholic Answers, he's no longer with them, came to Phoenix and gave a seminar here in the Phoenix area.

And during the question and answer period, I got up and I asked Mr. Brumley concerning Matthew chapter 15, which is the parallel passage here to Mark chapter 7, and the common response of Roman Catholic apologists when you cite this passage is, well, you need to realize Jesus wasn't condemning all tradition, he was only condemning the traditions of men.

He was only condemning corrupt tradition, not divine tradition, and therefore these passages like Mark 7 and Matthew 15 are not properly cited in response to the Roman Catholic doctrine of tradition being added to scripture as an important element of God's revelation.

Well, that is the common response, but there is a major problem with it. The major problem with it is that the tradition that the Lord Jesus is examining, the Corban rule, was considered by the people who followed it not to be a mere tradition of men.

I mean, how many people are going to be saying, oh, I follow tradition, it's just man's tradition, it's a corrupt tradition, but I follow it anyways. No, of course not. Everyone who follows traditions thinks that they are actually following a tradition that comes from God.

And so the Jews did not present the tradition of the fathers as a mere tradition of men or a corrupt tradition. They believed it was in fact divine in origin, that it came from Moses himself. In fact, the parallels between the Jewish view of tradition that Jesus is here dealing with and the Roman Catholic view of tradition are striking.

The Jews believe that this tradition was passed down orally outside of the written scriptures, and of course, those Roman Catholics who hold to the majority view at the Council of Trent and believe that tradition does contain revelation and that it is something that was given to the apostles and actually has a historical existence down through time believe the same thing.

And so the parallels are truly striking between the two. So the Lord Jesus here is not dealing with a tradition of men as they would present it, as the Jews believed it. He's dealing with a tradition that they claim to be divine in origin.

And now you can see why that background is so important. Because you see, he specifically says in Mark 7, verse 13, that they, by holding to this tradition, were invalidating the word of God by your tradition which you have handed down.

You see, even those traditions that claim to be divine in origin must be tested by a higher source of authority. And what is that higher source of authority? Well, here you have the incarnate Son of God holding men accountable to the written word of God.

He holds these men accountable and, in fact, very severely reprimands them for not first reading scriptures as their ultimate source of authority, but instead, they invalidate the word of God by their traditions which they had handed down.

It is plain that the Lord Jesus believes that men are accountable to the word of God, will be judged on that basis, and it is our responsibility to judge all alleged traditions by the sure word of God which is in scripture.

Just as Peter himself said, even though he had stood upon the very mount of transfiguration and had experienced the very presence of God, the Father, God, the Son, had seen Moses and Elijah, yet, in spite of all of that, Peter could call the word of prophecy, scriptures themselves, a more sure word than even the experience he himself had had.

And the Lord Jesus certainly views scripture in that very way. Another beautiful passage of scripture that I believe very plainly helps us to understand why sola scriptura must be true is in Matthew chapter 22.

Jesus and the Sadducees in Matthew 22

Here, you encounter the debate between the Lord Jesus and the Sadducees. What had happened earlier in Matthew chapter 22 is that the Lord had silenced the Pharisees when he said, Render to Caesar the things that are Caesar and to God the things that are God's.

The Sadducees saw the Pharisees had been shut up and so they decided to take their shot at the teacher and so they presented their favorite story of all, the story they had used to debate the Pharisees for a long, long time.

You see, the Sadducees only accepted the first few books of the Old Testament as scripture. They did not believe in a physical resurrection. They, therefore, liked to attack the Pharisees who did believe in a physical resurrection and I've said many times that that's how you can remember the difference between the Pharisees and the Sadducees.

The Sadducees did not believe in a resurrection which is why they were sad, you see. And the Pharisees did, which is why they were fair, you see. And that's how you remember the difference between them.

So they had made up a story of the woman and the seven brothers and the Old Testament law said that if a man died without having children, that his brother was to take the widow and raise up seed, raise up children to his brother's name.

Well, this woman went through seven brothers. They all died. And here in Matthew 22, verse 27, last of all, the woman died. In the resurrection, therefore, whose wife of the seven will she be? For they all had married her.

Now you can tell this was their favorite story. This was a story they used to quiet the Pharisees all the time. And, of course, I would not have wanted to have been the seventh brother in that line as well.

But Jesus' answer is very straightforward and very wise, as, of course, all of his answers are. Matthew 22, 29. But Jesus answered and said to them, You are mistaken, not understanding the Scriptures nor the power of God.

For in the resurrection they neither marry nor are given in marriage, but are like angels in heaven. But regarding the resurrection of the dead, have you not read what was spoken to you by God? I am the God of Abraham and the God of Isaac and the God of Jacob.

He is not the God of the dead, but of the living. When the crowds heard this, they were astonished at his teaching. The Lord Jesus pointed out that they were wrong. They were mistaken. They did not understand the Scriptures nor the power of God.

The Lord Jesus had no problem whatsoever telling people when they were wrong. He did not say to them, You are truth-challenged. He did not say to them, You are doctrinally challenged. He was not PC in what he did.

He was very straightforward in saying, You are wrong. But we are often so focused upon the answer that the Lord Jesus gives that we go right past something that is very, very important. We recognize that the Lord Jesus, in quoting from the Old Testament, I am the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, the God of Jacob, He is pointing out that God is not the God of the dead, but of the living.

Therefore, Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob are still alive in the presence of God and therefore the Sadducees are incorrect in their teachings and their beliefs regarding the resurrection. But there's something else.

And I had gone all the way through Bible college and I think I was probably already through at least one master's program in seminary before I even saw this because I was so focused upon the argument as it was taking place.

You see, in verse 31, listen as I read this verse a little more slowly this time. But regarding the resurrection of the dead, have you not read what was spoken to you by God? Now you see, when I use the term read, if I say have you not read, normally I would then follow that up with what I wrote to you.

Have I not read what I wrote? Have you not read what I wrote to you? Or if I use the term spoke or spoken, normally it would be, did you not hear what was spoken to you? Hear and speak, read and write.

But the Lord Jesus doesn't say that. He says, have you not read what was spoken to you by God? Spoken to you. Directly, direct address to these Sadducees. And then he quotes from the Old Testament. Do you see what the Lord Jesus is doing?

Do you see what His view of Scripture was? You see, for the Lord Jesus Christ, the Scriptures are God speaking. And He holds men accountable to the Scriptures as if God had directly spoken to those men.

Now it's sad, in light of the clarity of this type of presentation, that I've encountered Roman Catholic apologists who rather than simply bowing to the authority of that passage and recognizing what it says, well, but Jesus, He only quoted from the sections of Scripture they'd accept.

And so that really doesn't establish that Jesus held men accountable to all of Scripture. Ignoring, of course, the fact that the Lord Jesus quotes from all over the Old Testament in establishing His Messiahship and in holding men accountable for all of those things.

You see, the knowledgeable Roman Catholic apologist recognizes the problem here. It's a problem that I have posed to many an apologist over the years during debates. Not only does this demonstrate that the Lord Jesus' view of Scripture is tremendously high, and we will see this is the view that is expressed by the Apostle Paul in the classical passage presenting the sufficiency of Scripture, 2 Timothy 3 .16, where he says all Scripture is God-breathed.

Jesus says it's God-speaking. Same concept, same idea. But if the Lord Jesus can hold men accountable to the Scriptures without some external, infallible source of authority to tell them what is Scripture and what isn't, then how can Rome claim, as she does all the time, that we cannot know what the Scriptura is without Rome's authority?

How can Roman Catholic apologists say that we cannot know what Scripture is without Rome's telling us when it is obvious that the Lord Jesus held men accountable for what Scripture was hundreds of years before there was ever a man who sat on a throne in the city of Rome and called himself the Vicar of Christ?

And so I have developed a question that I have asked many times, and it's fascinating all the different answers you get. How did the believing Jewish man know that Isaiah and 2 Chronicles were Scripture 50 years before Christ came?

How would he have known? And I would submit to you that the consistent Roman Catholic cannot answer that question. Cannot answer that question. You see, if they say, well, he didn't know, then they run smack dab into the fact that the Lord Jesus obviously holds men accountable to those Scriptures, so they did have to have some way to know to be held accountable.

Well, if they say it was due to the Jewish leaders and to some sort of tradition, well, the Jews didn't accept the Apocrypha as canonical Scripture the way that Roman Catholicism does, so if that was an infallible source of authority back then, when did it cease being infallible?

There simply isn't any way to answer the question. I've had some go so far as to say, well, the only way they could have known for certain would be to go to the priest and to throw the divine dice, the Urim and the Thummim, or receive a direct revelation from God.

That's the only way they could have known as if these Sadducees had in point of fact received a direct revelation from God in that way. You see, the only way to answer the question how they could know is to demonstrate from Scripture the use of the people of God, from history the use of the people of God, to demonstrate from Scripture the consistency of the Old Testament.

In other words, to use the arguments that Protestants have used since the time of the Reformation to answer the question of how we know what the canon of Scripture is, and since that seems to be the favorite argument of Roman Catholic apologists that we can't know what Scripture is without their authority, they can't possibly allow that the man who lived 50 years prior to Christ could have known what Scripture was or was not.

But isn't it interesting that whenever the Lord Jesus literally skewers His opponents with a Scriptural argument, they never come back and say, Oh, but I didn't know that was Scripture. I didn't know that was inspired.

They never come back with that response. And the reason is it never crossed their mind. And so, the Lord Jesus' view of Scripture is the same view that the Apostle Paul had. In 2 Timothy 3, he writes to his beloved Timothy, beginning in verse 12, I prefer the translation, God-breathed.

The Greek term is theionoustos. Improfitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness, so that the man of God may be, and again, the New American Standard says adequate, but that doesn't really communicate anymore, may be complete, yet equipped, thoroughly equipped, for every good work.

I can only begin to unpack what this passage is all about in the few minutes that we have together today. But notice that in the midst of warning the young Timothy, who obviously was up against so many difficulties there in the church in Ephesus, in the midst of warning him about dire days to come, difficulties right around the corner, that evil men will grow worse and worse, deceiving and being deceived.

Here in the midst of that type of warning, to what does Paul direct Timothy? Does he direct him to the papacy? Does he direct him to Peter and Peter's successors in Rome? No. Does he say, well, just hold on until 1830, when the Book of Mormon comes out and Joseph Smith can help you out in that situation?

No. Does he say, well, hold on until the Watchtower Bible and Tract Society, the faithful and discreet slave comes along? No. He doesn't do any of that. Instead, just as he did with the Ephesian elders in Acts 20, where knowing that he was about to leave them and never see them ever again, that he was going to Jerusalem and he was going to be bound and he would never be with these precious brothers again, he says in Acts 20 .28,.

Be on guard for yourselves and for all the flock among which the Holy Spirit has made you overseers, to shepherd the church of God, which He purchased with His own blood. I know that after my departure savage wolves will come in among you, not sparing the flock, and from among your own selves men will arise speaking perverse things to draw away the disciples after them.

Oh, what dire things! The Apostle Paul knew that the Lord Jesus had not promised to keep the church from false teaching in the sense of false teachers rising up in her midst. So in the midst of this warning, what does Paul direct the church to?

Acts 20 .32,. And now I commend you to God and to the word of His grace, which is able to build you up and to give you the inheritance among all those who are sanctified. Oh, but Paul, that's not enough.

Paul, that still allows for false teachers. Yes. It's God's will that the church struggle, that the church fight. That's clearly the situation in Acts 20. It is also clearly the situation in 2 Timothy 3 as well.

When Paul directs us to the source that will safeguard his followers, he does not direct us anywhere in Acts 20 or in 2 Timothy 3, but to God's inspired word. Young Timothy, you want to be the man of God?

You want to be sufficient in your task? Timothy, don't look anywhere but to that which is theanoustos, that which is God-breathed, Timothy. That's where you'll find your sufficiency. We'll look some more at 2 Timothy 3 next week as the Lord wills.

And that's a passage we believe at the Phoenix Reformed Baptist Church where I'm an elder. We believe that all Scripture is God-breathed. And we pray that God will help us to teach it and preach it in such a way as to help people to understand that.

You can find our webpage at www .prbc .org. We're located at 3805 North 12th Street in Phoenix. We'd invite you to come worship with us as well. And I'm very happy to announce just quickly here toward the end that the book The Forgotten Trinity has finally come out from Bethany House Publishers.

My Biblical Defense of the Doctrine of the Trinity is now available. You can track that down at www .aomin .org. That's our webpage. We finally have it out. It's been a long process, but I am so thankful that the Lord has given me the opportunity of addressing this tremendously important issue, this tremendously important topic.

And I really do pray that God will use this book to help many people know His truth even better.

...is a presentation of Alpha and Omega Ministries. You can contact us at 602 -973 -0318 or you can write us at P .O. Box 37106, Phoenix, Arizona, 85069. We are easy to find on the World Wide Web at www .aomin .org.

That's www .aomin .org. You can also find a complete listing of James White's books, tapes, debates, and tracks on our website. We hope you will join us again next Saturday afternoon at 1 .30 p .m. for The Dividing Line.