The Highway Forums General Discussion Theology Discussion Forum Solo scriptura, or Sola Scriptura?

I actually have several! [img]http://www.the-highway.com/w3timages/icons/laugh.gif" alt="laugh" title="laugh[/img] The first thing I would recommend is that you read the entire book. That would only be fair to Keith. [img]http://www.the-highway.com/w3timages/icons/grin.gif" alt="grin" title="grin[/img]

And, I must admit that although Keith does have a definite "solution", IMHO, it wasn't brought out that clearly in the book and I was compelled to contact him personally and ask for clarification. He's a member of this board but hasn't been active in quite some time. Whether he will read this and respond for himself is unfortunately doubtful but it would be great if he did.

Here are my own personal thoughts on this issue. Sola Scriptura simple means that the Bible, God's inspired, infallible and inerrant Word is the sole and final authority in all matters of doctrine and life. I believe the framers of the WCF and others like it were right on the money. In short, it is the Bible and the Bible alone that we are to submit our questions to and submit to the truth therein. However.. I firmly believe that the Bible doesn't teach a "me, the Bible and the Holy Spirit" is all that one needs to arrive at the "truth once delivered to the saints". The Spirit was first and foremost given to the apostles for the building of the Church upon the cornerstone of Christ. The Spirit was the One who appointed some to be Apostles, some teachers, evangelists, pastor/teachers, etc. for the upbuilding of the church, upon the foundation laid by the Apostles. It was thus to the Church that God entrusted the "truth once delivered to the saints". Now, the Church doesn't create truth, but rather it was given that the Church be the upholder and herald of that already established truth. This is in contradistinction to what Rome claims, i.e., truth comes from God through the church to the people.

Now, part of the last building blocks which I believe the Lord laid through the people of the church are the Ecumenical Creeds. To these, for the most part, the entire body of Christ throughout the known world gave assent to the verity of these Creeds; e.g., Athanasian, Nicene, Chalcedon, etc. Thus for anyone to claim that the doctrine of God should not include Trinity as set forth in the Athanasian and Nicene Creeds, they are de facto in error and not part of the church. Are these Creeds therefore to be deemed "infallible"? No, they are still documents which are subordinate to the Scriptures. However, they are, in fact, true to the infallible and inspired Word and thus are to be given due recognition as being what they are intended to be.

Okay... so what about all these other Confessions and Catechisms which have been written, e.g., Westminster Confession of Faith, Belgic Confession, London Confession, Savoy, etc. These documents likewise are not inspired but rather summaries of biblical doctrines which gifted men sought to put in writing for the Church; i.e., that branch of the Church to which they belonged. These documents too are subordinate in authority to the Scriptures and are subject to scrutiny by the Scriptures, which most all of the Confessions state for themselves. However, those who are members of a confessional church are subject to the teachings of that denominations documents of faith and are subject to their teachings. So, a member of a Presbyterian church would be required to acknowledge the subordinate authority of the WCF, Larger and Shorter Catechisms. But a Calvinistic Baptist who belongs to a church that subscribes to the London or Philadelphia Confession would not be subject to the WCF where it deviates from the teachings of the London Confession. But that same Baptist and vice versa a Presbyterian would recognize the verity of those doctrines which are contained in both. So, that when one looks at the great Confessions of the denominations which came out of the Reformation, one can see a large body of uniform teaching cross-denominationally. This corpus of teaching is to be acknowledged as the voice of the Spirit in the Scriptures Who has spoken to the Church and preserved the "truth once delivered unto the saints". We may disagree with various non-essential doctrines taught in the various Confessions, but the onus is upon the one who would disagree with the essentials to show from the Scriptures that the church historically has erred.

In short, it is my opinion, that God by His Spirit has entrusted His truth to the Church as a whole and given it the responsibility to teach that truth. Individuals within the Church body, being indwelt with the Holy Spirit will find oneness with that truth and reject that which has come in via false teachers. No man can claim to have the truth which is totally alienated from the Church as a whole, for if a person truly belongs to Christ, then he/she has been brought not into some individual salvation, but to the Church of the Living God and the company of the saints, past, present and future. Truth doesn't "belong" to individuals (SOLO) totally unrelated to other individuals. The truth is found in the Scriptures alone (SOLA) and subordinately in the Body of Christ universal.