A Dialogue on Sola Scriptura Part III: An Ancient Christian and a Modern Christian

Disclaimer: Sola Scriptura in this dialogue does not refer to the classical Reformation understanding of the term, but it refers to the modern Protestant way of thinking of “me and my Bible alone.”

If you did not read Part I or II, click here to read Part I, and here to read Part II.

German Bible, Image by Pixabay

ANCIENT CHRISTIAN: Let me give you yet one more example.  Cultural context affects our interpretation of the Scriptures.  If you remember, an interpretation is an inference from a specific point of view.  If our point of view is 21st Century American culture, then we may end up making a lot of incorrect inferences.

I often hear modern Christians saying, “Oh my gosh!  Look at how many wars there are.  This must be the end times.  Jesus will be coming back soon, not later than 20 years.  The Bible says, ‘You will hear of wars and rumors of wars’ (Matthew 24:6), and that is what is happening now.  There have never been this many wars in the past.”  And that is where I laugh.

MODERN CHRISTIAN: Why do you laugh?

ANCIENT CHRISTIAN: Because they say “there have never been this many wars in the past, and so it must be the end of the word.”  I wish you would have a chance to see the world I lived in in the ancient world.  The closest you can come is by reading history.  Wars were non-stop.  Whole cities were massacred at a time.  The resulting diseases and famines killed a lot more people than the wars.  We are talking in the hundreds of thousands and millions every several decades.

These people are interpreting this verse from the point of view of their own culture.  The reality is, this time I see, with all the problems it has, is the most peaceful time the world has ever known.  When you lose 4,000 people in a war over 10 years, those are precious lives, but in my day, we lost that many in one battle, forget the war.  How are these days the end of the world, if then was not?  I will leave you to hunger for the answer on how early Christians understood this verse.  I suggest you look up how the Church Fathers understood it.

MODERN CHRISTIAN: That is a lot of information that I never considered before.

ANCIENT CHRISTIAN: Well, you are considering it now.  So to point out why the interpreter of Scripture is important, we talked about continuity and context.  Clement, Ignatius, and Polycarp had continuity with the Apostles.  They knew them, they learned from them, and they were appointed by them to be the bishops (overseers) of the communities they started.  That placed them in the best possible position for understanding the Scriptures correctly.  They  knew their writers personally.  In addition, they lived in the same historical, linguistic, intellectual, and cultural context.  Further, the three agreed in their interpretations thus bearing witness to something greater than all of them, which is the actual teaching of the Apostles.  We are now talking about eight factors that were present simultaneously in these three men.

MODERN CHRISTIAN: There are many other Church Fathers which you as an Orthodox Christian rely on besides the three bishops you have referenced.  You cannot deny that they made errors.  Therefore, they can’t be trusted.  This is why you have to use Scripture Alone.

ANCIENT CHRISTIAN: For you to make that claim is like me saying that many modern Protestants following Scripture Alone have made errors in interpretation, therefore we should not follow Scripture Alone.  Would you accept that argument?

MODERN CHRISTIAN: Well, no….

ANCIENT CHRISTIAN: So what makes you think I would accept your argument?  There were Church Fathers who clearly erred, you don’t need to tell me that twice.  Origen made a few serious errors.  Tertullian made errors.  Augustine made errors.  Then others made some minor errors.  I know that before you because I have read their works.

MODERN CHRISTIAN: How did you determine that they made errors?

ANCIENT CHRISTIAN: It is simple.  Go back to the Scriptures and the earliest Fathers who interpreted them, then see what they taught, for example, on the divinity and humanity of the Son, the condemnation of the unjust, the promises of God, divine grace, the Apostles, Apostolic succession, the omnipotence, omniscience, and omnipresence of God, predestination vs freewill, and so on.  You will find a stream from the earliest fathers (which has its origin in our Lord Jesus and the Apostles and in the Scriptures they wrote) and a continuity with those following them.

Those three bishops also had disciples and communities that they pastored.  For example, Irenaeus of Lyons heard and learned from Polycarp of Smyrna.  He wrote a massive five volume work that you can still read today, and in your own language too.

The Christians of Antioch were pastored by Ignatius.  Look at the work of Theophilus of Antioch, a Christian from the same community later that century, and compare it with what Ignatius wrote.

Then, the Roman Christians were pastored by Clement.  From that community came Justin Martyr who wrote three large works on the faith.  See how they compare in their ideas.

Then, follow this stream through the centuries to the third century, then the fourth, and beyond.  Then, compare it to the other communities that began producing written works like the Egyptians, the Cappadocians, the Syrians, and the North Africans, then see how it compares.

What you will find is that there is general agreement between the Fathers on the major teachings of the faith and in the interpretation of the Scriptures.  When you find a disagreement, then that is probably the interpretation of that Father resulting from his own thinking.  It may be accepted, or it must be rejected.  When you find a certain Father who is totally off that stream, we will reject it.

For example, if you find an author saying that our Lord Jesus was not human but appeared to be that way, that he was a phantom, or if you find an author saying that the devil will be saved in the end of the world, or if you find an author saying that the God of the Old Testament is not the Father of Jesus Christ.  You will recognize that this is not part of that stream.  It is totally off. 

But with the Fathers, you will notice the continuity of the stream.  That right there is the work of the Holy Spirit, who not only inspired the Scriptures, but has preserved them for us, and has given us those who interpret them so we can live in the Way of Christ.  Further, this is the fulfillment of the promises of our Lord Jesus Christ who told us that the Holy Spirit will be with us, live in us, and the gates of Hades will not prevail against His Church.

If you liked this blog entry, click here to like my Facebook page here OR sign up to my email list to receive my latest blog entries every week in your inboxes, and you will also receive my free eBook The Way of Christ.  Click here to sign up.

Please note: I reserve the right to delete comments that are offensive or off-topic.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

One thought on “A Dialogue on Sola Scriptura Part III: An Ancient Christian and a Modern Christian

  1. Simon says what modern Protestants really mean by “sola scriptura” is actually “prima scriptura”. A modern Protestant does not mean to say that an individual’s reading of scripture is the only source of faith and doctrine, rather h/she means to say that scripture constitutes an objective yardstick by which the individual Believer can evaluate all human actions and human communication, including that of Church Leaders.