Sola Scriptura Turns Protestant Understandings of the Bible into a Novelty

Protestant View on Scripture Interpretation

Protestants Say: Scripture is self-interpreting; therefore, the believer’s private interpretation is what the Holy Spirit intended.

Catholic Response to Self-Interpretation of Scripture

The Catholic Response: This assertion is problematic for several reasons.

First, the Bible nowhere says it is self-interpreting; rather, it explicitly states or shows that it is not. See for example 2 Chron. 17:7-9; Neh. 8:1-9; Matt. 13:18-23; Luke 24:27, 45; Acts 8:30-31, 18:11; 1 Tim. 4:13; and 2 Pet. 1:20, 3:16.

Second, it is hard to believe that all Christians will arrive at the same interpretation of any given Scripture passage. The thousands of Protestant denominations in existence and their disagreements on major doctrines—baptismal regeneration, the real presence of Christ in the Eucharist, sanctification, and eternal security, to name a few—show how this has played out. If Scripture interprets itself, why don’t all Protestants agree on its meaning?

Third, you can easily test the veracity of this assertion by referring to passages such as Matthew 16:18, Mark 16:16, and John 6:53. The Protestant understanding of these passages is a novelty. Why doesn’t it agree with how the Church has always understood them if Scripture is self-interpreting?

Fourth, Martin Luther disagreed with John Calvin and Ulrich Zwingli, two of his Protestant contemporaries, on major doctrines such as the Eucharist. Nor did Calvin and Zwingli agree with each other.

How does one account for this discrepancy from the start of Protestantism?

The Role of the Church in Interpreting Scripture

Luther took the same approach elsewhere. In 1521, at an imperial assembly called the Diet of Worms, he said,“Unless I am convinced by Scripture and plain reason—I do not accept the authority of the popes and councils, for they have contradicted each other—my conscience is captive to the word of God. I cannot and I will not recant anything, for to go against conscience is neither right nor safe.”

In other words, since there is no other authority to interpret it, Scripture has to bow to Luther’s intellect, will, and conscience—and to ours.

But it should be the other way around. The human heart—the seat and center of all the operations of life—is deceitful and corrupt (Jer. 17:9), and it has been hardened (Eph. 4:18). The human mind also has been darkened by sin (Rom. 1:21, Eph. 4:18) and needs renewal (Rom. 12:2). A conscience must be formed correctly (1 Tim. 1:5, 19; Heb. 9:14) and subject to the ultimate judgment of an agency set up by God. We therefore cannot trust these things on their own.

We must be guided by God through Scripture,but never apart from the spiritual and theological authority he has paired with it.Jesus knew exactly what he was doing when he founded his Church: he was keeping our flawed intellects and consciences from leading us astray. His Church is guaranteed his divine guidance; our personal reading comprehension is not. But since Luther expressly rejected the authority of Christ’s Church, he was left with only his ego to guide himself and others.

Jesus cares deeply about us, and he desires intimate fellowship with us. Just as he is the visible sign of the Father (John 14:8-9), his Church is the visible sign of him. This is, no doubt, why he explicitly gave the Church his authority. The doctrine of sola scriptura, however, diminishes that authority and distorts Jesus’ arrangement.

Let us, therefore, examine the reasons why sola scriptura could not have originated with him.

Did you enjoy this content? Order your copy of Sola Scriptura Doesn’t Work: 25 Practical Reasons to Reject the Doctrine of “Bible Alone” today!