Protestants and Sola Scriptura adherents: When was scripture alone sufficient?
score:2
Protestants and Sola Scriptura adherents: When was scripture alone sufficient?
There is a picture of the Bible being sufficient given in the parable of the rich man and Lazarus.
Luke 16:31 And he said unto him, If they hear not Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded, though one rose from the dead.
We see that even the Old Testament was sufficient for one to be inclined to receive Jesus.
John 5:46 For had ye believed Moses, ye would have believed me: for he wrote of me.
The Old Testament was sufficient for people to hear about God and his promise and to trust in that promise.
Hebrews 11:6 But without faith it is impossible to please him: for he that cometh to God must believe that he is, and that he is a rewarder of them that diligently seek him.
Hebrews 11:32 And what shall I more say? for the time would fail me to tell of Gedeon, and of Barak, and of Samson, and of Jephthae; of David also, and Samuel, and of the prophets:
Upvote:0
When was scripture alone sufficient?
TLDR; Never. Scripture has never been sufficient, and never will be.
Your question is based on a false premise. The irony is that you actually point out the fallacy in the opening sentence of your question (emphasis mine):
Sola Scriptura is defined as "the Protestant Christian doctrine that the Bible contains all knowledge necessary for salvation and holiness."
What is necessary for salvation and holiness never has been, nor never will be scripture. Rather it is knowledge (precisely what knowledge is necessary for salvation and holiness is subject to debate, and not directly relevant to this question).
How this is interpreted by Protestants is that if someone completely unfamiliar with Christianity were handed a Bible and read it, they would have enough information that if they chose (or according to some doctrines, if they were elected), they could make a soul-saving decision to follow Christ.
In other words, they would not need to read the Bible and then also start attending church to gain more information. Or they would not have to read the Bible and then also attend a catechism class, or learn from Catholic Tradition, or also read the Book of Mormon, or also read Joyce Meyer, or also watch TBN, or anything else. That doesn't mean these other things might not be edifying or otherwise useful to a believer, but all the knwoledge that is necessary for salvation can be found in scripture.
That also does not mean that this information can be found only in scripture. It's possible (and in fact, quite common) that someone becomes a Christian without ever having read the Bible, by assimilating the necessary information second-hand (from someone who had read the Bible), or by another means of revelation.
The important part is that, to an adherent of Sola Scriptura, no other form of knowledge acquisition will contradict the scripture. If a missionary tells you "To be saved you must do XYZ," that XYZ will either be consistent, or inconsistent with scripture.
Summary
Asking "When was scripture alone sufficient?" is asking a nonsensical question, because it puts the emphasis on the scripture, rather than on the knowledge contained in the scripture.
If instead you wish to ask "When did the knowledge alone become sufficient?" the answer is, "It always was."
Scripture came to contain the knowledge which was always necessary and sufficient.
Perhaps you could ask, then, the related question: When did scripture come to contain the minimum of knowledge necessary and sufficient for salvation?
I believe most Christians would say that this information is contained in the Old Testament (if primarily through types and shadows), indeed even in the oldest form of the Old Testament, the Torah. So the answer to that question would be "The moment scripture began to exist as scripture" which was apparently roughly 445 BCE.
Upvote:0
The question has been asked: "when was scripture alone sufficient?" If we accept that a good synonym for Scripture is "word", then the principle of *Sola Scriptura *was first put forth by the Lord in Deuteronomy 8:3. Jesus quotes this verse in Matthew 4:4. Later Peter, after seeing many disciples turn back from Jesus (John 6:66), says to Jesus, to whom shall we go? You have the WORDS of eternal life. This would seem to indicate, that even if the term SOLA SCRIPTURA is not explicitly used, it is clearly put forth in principle. See also how the term WORD is used in John 17. Never do we find a hint that His word is not sufficient for all life and faith. And only HE spoke with authority (Matthew 7:29), and only in specific cases did the apostles use the authority He gave to them, and it was never mentioned that this authority was to be passed on from generation to generation.
Upvote:1
Below I have put together some key passages from two scholarly articles on the subject. At the Bottom of this post you will find links to the two, much longer, articles.
"We know that the Bible is the Word of God. The Bible declares itself to be God-breathed, inerrant, and authoritative. We also know that God does not change His mind or contradict Himself."
"Sola scriptura is not as much of an argument against tradition as it is an argument against unbiblical, extra-biblical and/or anti-biblical doctrines."
"Take the temptation of Christ in Matthew 4 as an example. The Devil tempted Jesus, yet Jesus used the authority of scripture--not tradition and not even His own divine power as the source of authority and refutation. To Jesus, the Scriptures were enough and sufficient."
"Again, traditions are not the problem. Unbiblical traditions are the problem."
"Of course, Acts 17:11 says, "Now these were more noble-minded than those in Thessalonica, for they received the word with great eagerness, examining the Scriptures daily, to see whether these things were so." Paul commends those who examined God's Word for the test of truth. He did not commend them for appealing to tradition."
"The Bible is for tradition where it supports the teachings of the apostles (2 Thess. 2:15) and is consistent with biblical revelation. Yet, it is against tradition when it "transgresses the commands of God" (Matt. 15:3). By Jesus' own words, tradition is not to transgress or contradict the commands of God. In other words, it should be in harmony with biblical teaching and not oppose it in any way."
“Unless therefore I am convinced by the testimony of Scripture, or by the clearest reasoning, unless I am persuaded by means of the passages I have quoted, and unless they thus render my conscience bound by the Word of God, I cannot and will not retract, for it is unsafe for a Christian to speak against his conscience. Here I stand, I can do no other; may God help me! Amen!” -Martin Luther
http://www.gotquestions.org/sola-scriptura.html#ixzz3MZ5d2wvf
More post
- 📝 How do Christians reconcile the following reasoning?
- 📝 Is Jesus atoned for us?
- 📝 Is Pre-Adamism considered heretical by any mainstream denominations?
- 📝 Can our own spiritual gifts be given to others?
- 📝 Why use Yeshua instead of Jesus?
- 📝 What is so special about a fig tree. Is it the tree of life?
- 📝 What is the precise manner of expressing the relationship of the humanity (human nature) to the divine person of the Son?
- 📝 Am I still Catholic?
- 📝 Did King Solomon have any personal Prophets during his reign over Israel?
- 📝 What is the basis that many mainstream Christian groups justify labeling groups like the Mormons and Jehovah Witnesses as Non-Christians?
- 📝 What major changes have American Presbyterians made to the Westminster Confession of Faith?
- 📝 Was the flood of Noah global or local?
- 📝 Perfect relationship between Trinity and other relationships in heaven - Catholic
- 📝 Is Baptism of a child still valid if one of the pouring during baptism misses?
- 📝 Did St. Paul ever claim prophethood?
- 📝 Tree of Life in the Book of Mormon a common Near Eastern motif?
- 📝 Proper Abbreviation of "Servant of God" in Catholic Writings?
- 📝 How does one reconcile Sola Fide with the parable of the talents?
- 📝 What is the Biblical basis for binitarianism?
- 📝 Can a female Religious (a nun or sister) be expelled from her order after a hysterectomy?
- 📝 Are pride and boasting ever okay?
- 📝 Did St. Augustine warn us about interpreting the Bible in a way which harms science?
- 📝 Can a third party ask for an annulment if neither married person wants it to happen?
- 📝 Did JWs believe in trinity and immortality of the soul before they got their own Bible?
- 📝 What is the highest position a married man can achieve in the Catholic church?
- 📝 Is the Eastern Orthodox opposition to the Immaculate Conception an innovation?
- 📝 According to the LDS Church, what is the purpose or result of proxy baptisms for those who have already died?
- 📝 What does John 3:13 mean, NO MAN has ASCENDED to heaven?
- 📝 Why do Jehovah's Witnesses hold a "commemoration of the death of Jesus Christ"?
- 📝 What does the Book with Seven Seals contains?
Source: stackoverflow.com
Search Posts
Related post
- 📝 Protestants and Sola Scriptura adherents: When was scripture alone sufficient?
- 📝 How could Jesus be born during the reign of Herod, and when Quirinius was governor of Syria, if those periods were not contemporary?
- 📝 When was the OT canon as used by Protestants finalized?
- 📝 When was the New Testament divided into sentences and paragraphs?
- 📝 Why did Adam claim he was "naked" before God when he and Eve had clothed themselves with fig leaves?
- 📝 When did the Orthodox and Catholic Churches distinguish the manner in which the Sign of the Cross was to be made?
- 📝 When and how was the doctrine of the one divine will established?
- 📝 According to Protestants following the Reformation, what did Jesus mean when he said "do this and you will live"?
- 📝 What is the origin of the term Prima Scriptura and the background against which it was defined?
- 📝 Since when did the Catholic church accept Protestant baptism, and what was the original rationale for accepting?
- 📝 When was Jesus anointed and who did the anointing?
- 📝 When were Protestants first called 'Protestants' and what were they, originally, protesting about?
- 📝 How and when was h*m*sexual practice separated from "h*m*sexuality"?
- 📝 Were the Gospels considered Scripture when the rest of the New Testament was written?
- 📝 Sola Scriptura and the Biblical Canon
- 📝 Why was Esther not sinning when she broke the law and approached the king?
- 📝 What was first, sola scriptura or sola fide?
- 📝 Why and when did allegorical interpretations of Scripture lose their appeal?
- 📝 Was there a time when bishops were not appointed to other sees and did not generally ever relocate?
- 📝 What is the difference between Sola Scriptura and the belief in a closed canon?
- 📝 Was charging interest on loans ever forbidden to laymen in the Eastern Orthodox Church? If so, when was this promulgated and when was it revoked?
- 📝 When and by whom was the Exsultet written?
- 📝 How was the idea of h*m*ousion developed, and when was this term used prior to the Nicean Council?
- 📝 What was St Paul's age at the time of his conversion and what was his age when he died?
- 📝 According to Catholicism, why was Adam alone given the charge of naming the animals and birds?
- 📝 When was the tripartite (body, soul, and spirit) view of man officially rejected by a church council?
- 📝 When was the term 'substitutionary atonement' first coined and what was the reason for the choice of the 2 words?
- 📝 How do Christians who see Scripture as self-evidently inspired explain that Catholics, Protestants and Mormons have different sacred scriptures?
- 📝 Within the Catholic Church, when and by whom did the story that Jesus was born in a house arise?
- 📝 How old was Moses when he parted the Red Sea and how old was he when he received the Ten Commandments?
