Buddhist Catholic Contemplative Evangelical General Christian Hindu Jewish Latter-day Saint Muslim New Visions Progressive Christian

Beliefs

Topics

Columnists

Resource Library

Research Tools

Video

Podcasts

Thought Readers

Faith In Media Tracker

Newsletters

Ad-Free & Subscriber Log-In Subscription Support

Follow Patheos

Home
Progressive Christian
The Sufficiency of Scripture Slogan is a Dodge

The Sufficiency of Scripture Slogan is a Dodge

Last updated on: December 10, 2021 at 4:52 pm by Darrell Lackey

The Sufficiency of Scripture Slogan is a Dodge 2021-12-10T16:52:21-08:00 Darrell Lackey

LOGO Patheos Explore the world's faith through different perspectives on religion and spirituality! Patheos has the views of the prevalent religions and spiritualities of the world.

What do Protestants in general, specifically fundamentalists/evangelicals, mean when they speak of the sufficiency of Scripture? Here, in a general way, is a fairly good take on what they mean. This writer defines the idea this way:

“Scripture is sufficient in that it is the only inspired, inerrant, and therefore final authority for Christians for faith and godliness, with all other authorities being subservient to Scripture.”

The writer goes on to note that this doesn’t mean we should never avail ourselves of extra-biblical sources. He writes:

“Does sufficiency mean all extra-biblical resources should be eliminated? No. To say it does is to confuse sola scriptura with nuda scriptura. Remember, sola scriptura does not preclude other authorities in the church (such as creeds, councils, church leaders, theologians, traditions, etc.). Rather, it is to say Scripture alone is our inspired, inerrant, and therefore final authority. While there may be many important authorities, they are all subservient to Scripture, which alone is God-breathed and without error, fully trustworthy and sufficient for faith and practice. Scripture alone is our magisterial authority; all other authorities are ministerial.”

The writer also goes into the historical circumstances of where this understanding came from (sola scriptura) and it being a part of the Reformation’s break with Rome in general. The Catholic and Eastern Orthodox streams of thought take a high view of tradition and the papal or conciliar decisions regarding doctrine and practice. However, those traditions also believe there is no conflict between those and scripture. Protestants disagree, but that is another matter.

Here, in my view, is the problem with the idea or assertion of the sufficiency of scripture: It’s a dodge—in reality it doesn’t mean anything. It operates more as a slogan than anything substantive. What does it dodge? The matter of interpretation and the matter of how interpretation is never done in a vacuum.

For instance, the writer asserts this:

“As seen in these confessional statements, sufficiency distinguishes the Protestant evangelical, who turns to Scripture as that which contains all that is necessary for salvation and godliness.”

What is really being asserted here though? It isn’t that we turn to the Bible as that “which contains all that is necessary…” We turn to our interpretations of what the Bible contains—interpretations already formed by a presupposition of sufficiency understood in a specific and historical context.

Even Catholics and Eastern Orthodox would assert that the Bible contains all that is necessary for salvation and godliness but would also add, and correctly so, that such has to be interpreted correctly and what helps us do that is tradition and the teaching authorities in those traditions.

A clear tell though comes here:

“Nonetheless, we should naturally worry if any extrabiblical source claims superiority to scriptural truth or poses itself in opposition to biblical Christianity.”

I hate to break this to the writer, but inanimate extrabiblical sources don’t claim anything. And neither does the Bible. Only people make claims. I’ve never placed my ear real close to the Bible and heard it claim anything. Science, history, philosophy, social science, astronomy, geology, archeology, or any other area of inquiry one wants to name do not make claims of superiority or opposition to anything. People do.

And people make those claims depending upon how they interpret the information, the facts, and the evidence provided by any source of information, biblical or otherwise. The way they interpret said information is through the philosophical presuppositions they bring to bear upon those aspects. All Information/knowledge is interpreted information and knowledge. Further, that is all done in a context of a myriad of other factors and influences.

Does that mean we can have our own “facts” or that there are “alternative” facts? No. But it does mean that facts/information/evidence can be viewed differently, from different perspectives, and lead to more than one reasonable conclusion. If one doesn’t believe this, simply delve into the history of science or any area of inquiry.

But I digress. Back to the point, when fundamentalists/evangelicals tell us they are worried about an extrabiblical source becoming a superior or greater authority than the Bible, what they really mean is they fear another source may question or even possibly demonstrate that their interpretation of the Bible is wrong. Some good examples would be the belief in a 6000-year-old earth or pre-Civil War views on slavery.

That it’s difficult for them to see the possibility only their interpretation might be wrong or in question and not the Bible’s content or authority, just shows how mixed up they have all these aspects to begin with. Look, the Bible may be sufficient in many areas but that doesn’t mean our interpretation or understanding of the Bible is—and that’s the true issue.

I have a Patreon—please consider supporting my writing.

Previous Post

November 6, 2021

Evangelicals Should Change Their Name to Religious Neoliberals

Next Post

December 22, 2021 Mary The Pregnant Revolutionary

Browse Our Archives

Select a Category Uncategorized

Select a Month April 2025 February 2025 December 2024 October 2024 September 2024 July 2024 May 2024 January 2024 November 2023 September 2023 July 2023 April 2023 March 2023 February 2023 December 2022 November 2022 September 2022 August 2022 July 2022 June 2022 May 2022 March 2022 February 2022 January 2022 December 2021 November 2021 October 2021 September 2021 August 2021 July 2021 June 2021 May 2021 April 2021 March 2021 February 2021 January 2021 December 2020 November 2020 October 2020 September 2020 August 2020 July 2020 June 2020 May 2020 April 2020 March 2020 February 2020 January 2020 December 2019 November 2019 October 2019 September 2019 August 2019 July 2019 June 2019 May 2019 April 2019 March 2019 February 2019 January 2019 December 2018 November 2018 October 2018 September 2018 August 2018 July 2018 June 2018 May 2018 April 2018 March 2018 February 2018 January 2018 December 2017 November 2017 October 2017 September 2017 August 2017 July 2017 June 2017

TAKE THE

Religious Wisdom Quiz

Who was Abraham's firstborn son?

Select your answer to see how you score.

Esau Ishmael Isaac Jacob