I keep reading this mantra from certain online prophets: Sola Scriptura. You know, I have read my Bible and I have yet to come across the phrase Sola Scriptura. Be that as it may. I will, for the sake of the argument, concede that Sola Scriptura carries some weight and therefore affirm its validity.
So I’m reading this load of crap over at AM. I was intrigued because over and over again the author, my friend, Pastor-Teacher Ken Silva keeps throwing out this phrase Sola Scriptura–8 times on the page if I counted correctly. Amazing, I thought. Here’s someone who is really living up to what they believe, practicing what they preach. Then I read a little more closely and was shocked at what I saw as the ‘essay’ developed. You might be shocked too at this startling revelation:
- Dr. Walter Martin, The Cult of Liberalism circa 1985 (8 mentions)
- Charles Spurgeon, the Prince of Preachers, At the Master’s Feet, December 4 (1 mention)
- great 60’s pop philosopher Bob Dylan (1 mention)
- Washington Irving (1 mention ‘Rip Van Winkle’)
- Rob Bell (37 mentions)
- Jesus (14 mentions, mostly in quotes of other people)
Well, I found exactly three verses of Scripture in this post. I found 5 paragraphs from Wally Martin, 3 paragraphs from Chucky Spurgeon, and one quote from ‘the great’ Bob Dylan–the only worthwhile part of the post and, to be sure, an inclusion that Bob Dylan would surely be unhappy to acknowledge. No, Pastor-Teacher Silva, the times they are not a changin’. Why do you think Paul wrote that when he did? He was concerned about preachers even then.
OK. It appears that Pastor Silva does not actually practice what he preaches. He doesn’t believe in Sola Scriptura, a man made invention found nowhere in the Scripture.
Just a couple of questions for Pastor Silva as I wrap up this missive.
1. If in fact this is ’spiritual warfare’ as you described in the first several paragraphs of your, uh, ‘work’, then why on earth do you spend so much of the time you are supposed to be redeeming waging war against the flesh and blood? Our battle, Scripture says, is not against flesh and blood. So why are you so determined to ruin people’s lives, reputations, etc? Is your God not big enough to handle is own church, his own body? You cannot continue claiming that Christ has called you to this work and that you are only doing what he told you when you do nothing even remotely resembling the work of Christ. He said, love one another. Even when James and John wanted to call down lightning Jesus refused to give them permission. You are no prophet sir, you are no martyr, and I seriously question whether or not you understand the Scripture you throw around like so much flak.
2. If “The Tip Of The Evangelical Iceberg Of Apostasy Has Been Visible For Many Years Now” then why do you end your ‘post’ by quoting that ‘the times they are a changing’? It seems to me it cannot be both. Are you saying things are getting better?
3. You say in your post, and I quote: “Every Minister Of The Gospel Of Christ Is Accountable To The Body Of Christ.” We have two problems here. First, ‘every minister’ means what? Seems to me that Scripture says we are all a ‘kingdom’ and a ‘priesthood.’ The modern idea of the localized minister is foreign to the Scripture you claim as your authority. I checked the NASB, NIV, ESV and the words ‘every minister’ never occur together (I also checked for ‘preacher,’ ‘worker,’ ‘workman,’ ‘approved,’ and ‘pastor’ in all three versions these words are virtually non-existent as to what you are claiming). In fact, it appears that the English word ‘minister’ appears twice, maybe three times in Romans (depending upon which translation you check) and that is all (Romans 13:4, 15:16, 27) I did find this:
Who are you to judge someone else’s servant? To his own master he stands or falls. And he will stand, for the Lord is able to make him stand. (Romans 14:4)
The word ‘accountable’ appears only one time (ESV, NASB, NIV) and has nothing to do whatsoever with your claims to congregational supervision. Pastor Silva, are you acquainted with the Scripture? Can you show me where in Scripture a localized church minister in any modern or ancient sense was ever held accountable to the congregation, to the Body of Christ beyond his own local congregation or even within his own local congregation? Was it that way for Moses? Was it that way for David? Was it that way for Joshua? Timothy? Titus?
The second problem we have is this: Who are you to make the call for accountability? Even if we agree that Rob Bell, for example, is accountable to the body of Christ at large (and we don’t), who are you to lead that charge? Are you saying you have more authority over Rob Bell than do his own elders? Are you saying that you have more Scriptural authority than his own congregation to which you do not belong and contribute nothing? Your quotation of 1 Timothy 4:2 gives you absolutely no authority to call him out at all. My God man. Even David, anointed of the Lord, would not lift his hand against Saul even though everyone knew that Saul was on his way out of the castle.
Pastor Silva, I don’t know what you are a pastor of, but I have serious doubts about the legitimacy your ‘ministry’ and I have even more serious questions about your motivation. And the fact that you do it so anonymously does not aid your cause. Maybe you should concern yourself with your local congregation a little more and with others a little less.
**UPDATE**
Sorry for this intrusion, I just noticed that there was a search limit applied when I conducted my searches of the words I noted above. I did a re-check of those words and found the following Scripture:
“Keep reminding them of these things. Warn them before God against quarreling about words; it is of no value, and only ruins those who listen. 15Do your best to present yourself to God as one approved, a workman who does not need to be ashamed and who correctly handles the word of truth” (2 Timothy 2:14-15).
“Neither do we go beyond our limits by boasting of work done by others. Our hope is that, as your faith continues to grow, our area of activity among you will greatly expand, 16so that we can preach the gospel in the regions beyond you. For we do not want to boast about work already done in another man’s territory. 17But, “Let him who boasts boast in the Lord. 18For it is not the one who commends himself who is approved, but the one whom the Lord commends” (2 Corinthians 10:15-18).
I’m sorry for the misinformation above, but as you can see, there doesn’t seem to be any real danger caused by my mistake. jerry
41 Comments(+Add)
Good post, Jerry.
Sola scriptura is a facade. I am reminded of something Jesus said to those who had a similar view of scripture:
You search the Scriptures because you think that in them you have eternal life; it is these that testify about Me; (John 5:39)
A person, especially Jesus, will not and cannot be contained to ink on a page.
Iiiii’m stilll waaaaaaaaiiiiiitiiiiiiiingggg….
Sola Scriptura?
Scripture, please.
Really.
There’s no such thing as “congregational supervision”.
Sheep don’t lead shepherds.
Period.
What’s especially insidious about the way they’ve perverted the use of sola scriptura is it creates a false dichotomy with the scriptures. If you disagree with them about the scriptures then its not because you’ve thoughtfully considered the scriptures, its because you don’t care about the scriptures. It totally shuts down any real communal struggling with the scriptures, and prevents any attempt at understanding why you believe what you believe.
Also, while the alleged Pastor Silva claims to be a teacher, I doubt he teaches anyone much of anything.
nc,
well said. well said.
this is probably why Paul says ‘we’ are accountable to Christ himself.
jerry
Honestly,
I’d love it if one of the “lurkers” actually bothered to demonstrate from Scripture Sola Scriptura.
Or anyone for that matter…
I’m beginning to suspect that for 3-4 threads now I’ve asked for it and receive no answer because….
Oh, I won’t say it…
All we need is the neo-Romish Magisterium of the ADM’s. That’s basically what Bo is pointing out.
I mean, Praise God for them. Seriously. What was God doing for the last 2000 years until the real Holy Spirit was finally given to them? Where would we be today if the Gospel wasn’t held in trust solely by them?
I’ll try it again…
Scripture, please. Pretty please. With sugar and rainbows and hearts on top.
Yes. Since it has been confirmed that Pastor-Teacher Silva is not blocked from this blog, I am hoping he will make an appearance and defend himself against my charges. I hope he will burst into this with all guns blazing (since he is in some sort of war) and show us exactly where Sola Scriptura is ever found in Scripture.
He better also tell Paul who quoted from pagan poets.
Come one Pastor Silva, we are all ears. Teach us Oh Mighty One. Until you do, I guess I will have to conclude that you are a bag-o’-hot air who only quotes the Scripture when it supports your agenda.
I believe in sola scriptura, whatever that means. However, my Scriptura seems to include humility, love, mercy, grace, meekness, forgiveness, forbearance, and other things that seem to be excluded in the traditional sola scriptura view.
Male elders are also a part of the original Greek Sola Scriptura which seem to be left out of the new “message – like” understanding of Sola Scriptura.
Semper Fidelis!!
Jerry,
I need an address from you. As I was waiting for my RSS to open this post I took a swig of some ice old Vernors. That swig is all over my now defunct computer as I began laughing so hard I spewed it. I need to know where to send the bill for a new one.
Good post.
BTW, did you see my wife’s post dealing with this?
ooooh, Vernors!!!
That’s a sola to live by.
Sola Vernor
Everyone just chill and get the wad out of their panties.
Sola Scriptura — OK let’s start here.
Then let’s go here:
Then here:
And here:
etc.
Just because the ADM’s **don’t** follow the whole counsel of God themselves, does not invalidate the concept of sola scriptura. In deed, sola scriptura, is a powerful weapon against the ADMs.
I’ll need to include the price of the Vernors as well, I suppose. I hadn’t thought of that.
NC
For one, Sola scriptura historically is not separated from the other solas. Taken together, they were 95 theses put into five pithy statements. They are not from scripture, but based upon ideas found in scripture.
I think the reformers were looking at the Papal Bulls, edicts, and traditions which added to scripture and were part of the requirements for one to be saved which included membership in the one true Catholic church. They said Sola scriptura to emphasize the Word of God was supreme and superior to anything written by men. Sola Fide demonstrated that salvation was by faith alone, not by works (like sacraments) that we have done. Sola Cristus emphasized that Christ was superior to the Popes and the Priests and to Mary, and that He was our perfect advocate.
I could go on but you get the point, NC. I think you had the point before, but you wanted someone to say it.
When one says Sola Scriptura, he is not saying that Scripture is the only thing we should ever read, but what it is saying is that everything that A Christian needs is found in the scripture pertaining to life, to training, to exhortation, and to salvation etc. can be found therein.
For me, it means that I can use a commentary, or a dictionary, concordance, or a lexicon, but I do not need any extra-biblical writings like NT Wright to explain to me that Paul meant something different when he spoke about justification by faith, or some ignorant Duke professor to tell me that Paul’s stand on women in ministry and homosexuality is invalid because of some false context they have made up.
Joe,
I did see those posts which is one reason why I decided to write. Pastor Silva is very condescending and not very knowledgeable.
John,
Your Scriptures notwithstanding, not one of them ‘proves’ the notion of Sola Scriptura. They speak highly of the Scripture, and to be sure, I happen to agree with them. However, my point is not whether or not that is true. My point is that clearly Pastor Silva does not believe it.
PB,
You have lost all credibility with me after your little rant on FB about what the writers of this blog are ‘doing’ with Scripture.
jerry
When one says Sola Scriptura, he is not saying that Scripture is the only thing we should ever read, but what it is saying is that everything that A Christian needs is found in the scripture pertaining to life, to training, to exhortation, and to salvation etc. can be found therein.
interesting…I agree with that. So do all the “emergents” I know.
So when you and I or the ADM’s and the “emergents” have disagreements then it is patently dishonest to say that there is a “rebellion against Scripture” going on.
It might be better to say that people are simply in disagreement over the interpretation of scripture. That’s not the same thing as denying the importance of Scripture.
As to the scripture passages above, those don’t prove sola scriptura, they might make a case for prima scriptura, but not sola.
Materially, sola scriptura is a load. And, yes, I love the Scripture and see it as a norming norm, etc. etc. etc.
I’m just saying that much of what gets described as being anti-Bible is really just the difference between interpretations and a rhetorical strategy to demonize the other person’s position.
Yikes.
PB, as far as commentaries vs. N.T. Wright.
Those are 2 things cut from the same cloth.
It’s just a matter of the interpretation you like or don’t like.
As far as “making up contexts”, I’d be careful about how you characterize hard historical work…
I mean, there’s a lot of evidence for evangelical scholars “making up” contexts to explain things.
i.e. the woman at the well mythology about her being a prostitute, the crap about “middle of the day water retrieval for ashamed women” is not validated by any historical research or corroboration.
It’s an interpretive move by somebody somewhere, but not based on historical context and work.
So much for the dirty liberals “making stuff up”.
Please…
it’s that kind of rhetoric that I’m talking about.
Trying to nullify people’s positions without taking it seriously.
to be totally clear…
a commentary IS an extra-biblical resource that engages in the interpretive task. That’s why there’s 3 million of them on any given book.
PB,
Are you basing these assumptions on reviews that you have read, or have you actually engaged NT Wright’s writing? Have you sat through classes at Duke or have you read reviews of classes at Duke?
The reason there are so many commentaries is because not one single author has it all right, all the time. There’s probably not two commentators on the planet who agree at every point. Your disparaging remarks about NT Wright demonstrate your ignorance of truly scholarly work and why such work is done in public.
jerry
This is just par for the course, guys. PB is always criticizing and judging that which he knows nothing about.
Agreed.
I’ve certainly got the battle scars from Reformed sites who equate Reformed theology = Scripture. But I still believe in the concept of Sola Scriptura. It’s its application that’s the rub.
Interestingly, Luther, Calvin and others used the early church fathers as “commentaries”… they did not write them off as so many so called “reformed” people today do…
I about spit my coffee out when it was stated in one breath that they don’t “need NT Wright to explain to me”… hogwash… the same people that say that turn to Spurgeon, Calvin, Luther, Tozer and the Puritans for their own interpretation.
Though W. Martin was great in what he did, he was in no way the same league with someone like NT Wright who has dedicated of 20 some years to the letters and theology of Paul. Those that write NT Wright off such often toss him in the same pile as Marcus Borg or other New Perspective writers, yet miss that NT Wright is not even stating and is most often writing against what those writers have stated. I guarantee anyone who listens to any sermon or reads any book by Wright will learn more in one sentence or paragraph than they will learn from most highly held teachers out there today. Wright has humility that most do not… He stated that he often says in his classes that he may be 25% wrong on things… but does not know of that 25% it might be… and cautions his students to dig into the bible themselves… meanwhile most of the so called reformed “acceptable” teachers arrogantly write as if they alone hold the truth and their interpretation is the only way to see it… and in the end they even disagree with their peers on such crucial doctrine such as “baptismal regeneration”… one will state that it is a RCC heresy while the other holds to it as “biblical”… yet both will attack Rob Bell who may have a better historical and grounded foundation when it comes to the doctrine of grace than they hold.
Interactions with almost all of those that see themselves as the “true remnant” have really set themselves as the High Priests and want no one to listen to others than themselves….
I see the atrocity of people like Ken and Ingrid and even PB is that they have not real grasp of the historical Christian faith and say outrageous things that are a re-write of history to justify their actions. In the end it is only proof of their own ignorance.
I see them as my brothers and sisters, yet I am deemed the enemy… though I am flesh and blood I am called Satanic or Satan’s representative for just disagreeing with their tactics…
In the end they mock what they claim to defend… they add to Grace works and then sin against others by their lies. As far as Sola Scriptura, it is only their relativistic theological view that they truly deem Sola and Scripture be damned as they twist it to their own means and ends.
iggy
Jerry,
Chad is a contributor on this blog. He is trying to ( at the very least) liberalize interpretation to the point where everybody is going to heaven, homosexuality is a-ok, and etc.
I believe that the attack on scripture goes on daily on this blog with commentary from Phil, Chad, and to a lesser extent Iggy. Many who comment here take liberties with the scripture.
PB -
Chad is no more (or less) a contributor on this blog than you are. So, by your reasoning, because you are a contributor, we could be accused of gross Pharisaical use of Scripture, ignorance of church history, repeating lies, casting brothers in the darkest light possible, etc…
Chad is a commenter, not a contributer. If you’re going to argue that commenting is contributing then your blog is just as guilty since the commenters you allow on your blog are many of the same commenters here.
Not to mention that statement requires you to divine motives other than those stated. Which esesntially means that you’re just making stuff up and publicizing it at this point. Which means you need to repent of gossip and slander.
A more honest assessment of what goes on here would be: They interpret scripture differently than I do. Of course if you took that tact you couldn’t revel in your own self-righteous works.
PB,
If you were able to take an truly honest look at yourself for a change, you take more liberties with Scripture than many of those you mentioned….
We all do, but some at least try to leave it in context and work with it… you seem to take it and make it say whatever seems right in your own eyes to justify your actions at any given moment. And really if your were not so judgmental, you would see that most the time you think you disagree, you end up restating in your own words that you believe the very thing you are fighting against….
You might be taken more seriously if you understood the things you state and had a bit more grasp of history and knowledge of scripture untainted by legalism and disdain toward your brothers and sisters in Christ.
iggy
Personally PB, you have are rarely even close to understanding what I believe… even when you restate it in your own words and show you agree with me which just lets us know you may not eve grasp what you claim you believe.
LOL!
iggy
#25…
My Bad…I thought he was….
Bo,
In my opinion, many, including yourself, take very unfortunate liberties with scripture, particularly in the areas of Justification, Redemption, and certainly how to treat those who are brothers and sisters in Christ.
Peace.
Ruach
Again, an honest assessment would be: you have a different interpretations than I do. And a moral action would be to not post all over the internet that people here want to destroy scripture. Of course then you wouldn’t get your ego stroked by other ADMs.
I also doubt you know much about my theology since I haven’t posted my entire life and ministry on the internet, as you have.
Of course PB excludes himself yet he has proven many times to not even understand some basic theology he claims to hold dear…
but man, if there was an arrogance meter his comments would pop the top!
iggy
Right back attcha PB…
iggy
Wait wait wait!!!
commentary, or a dictionary, concordance, or a lexicon,
those aren’t “extra-biblical” sources. There’s a word that applies here. If only I could think of it…
hypo…
hypo…something. Greek play actors are coming to mind…
John – I was following you until this:
…and certainly how to treat those who are brothers and sisters in Christ.
That deserves a John McEnroe “You can’t be serious!”
Rick,
I totally missed that bit. Its unbelievable that pastorboy would complain about how people treat brothers and sisters on the very thread that’s about his slander, lies and gossip about other believers.
This goes beyond hypocrisy into hypercrisy.
I don’t think PB is as bad as ya’ll make him out…
I mean there are lurkers here who are total vampires–living off this site to fuel their sense of righteousness and anger to the glory of their god.
Bo,
It is disengenuous that I posted these things on the internet for all to see. I posted it on FB, on which I have 520 friends. At most, it was for them to see. Primarily, it was for the 5 people I was having a conversation with, the other 515 people were not involved in the conversation.
It only got posted all over the internet when Jerry or Chad brought it over.
They also didn’t mention the correction I posted later.
But thats okay.
Ruach.
Guys,
I am sure PB gets frustrated as we all do… and needs to rant to his friends… and that is fine… unless in his rant there are just more lies about people… but that is also to be expected…
I would not get too bent out of shape if PB let his feelings known to his friends. He is human you know…
The one thing I admire is his tenacity. He comes here everyday and gives us crap and then we give it back.
I just wished he showed more humility at times and would take time to really consider some things others state…. something in a Ben Harper song hit me one day….
Sometimes just listening to our friends do not allow us to grow… it often can reinforce even the negative that we have and sedates us from really looking at who we are.
I see that if PB can look at the stones cast here as challenges that will allow him to look at who he really is, that maybe there is hope for growth and change in him.
PB is sincere and is at times really a jerk… but so are we all… and as I have stated, my hope is that those who see us (me) as an enemy will take up the challenge of questioning “what if I am wrong?”
To humbly assess anothers view with honesty and even in giving ones “enemies” value, one can overcome the division and work toward reconciliation.
My heart goes out to PB today… to me he is harmless and those that agree with him are few…but to argue will only set his determination deeper and unless he can seek humility, he will not grow but only get deeper into the rut he is already in.
Pray for him today… lift him before the Throne of Grace… let your anger against him free and receive the Spirit of forgiveness and grace…
To disagree is not a sin, but to hold another in contempt is.
Be blessed,
iggy
Two problems:
1. I’m the one that brought it over so send your hate for that my way, not to Chad or Jerry.
2. It’s still problematic for you to make statements about this site that are not true. At best, it’s a gross miss-characterization; at best, it’s a outright lie. People who are your friends trust what you say because they are your friends and you are a pastor, you should be more careful with your words.
Besides, it was in the feed section of FB it was not a private note tagged to specific friends. It was a note that I was specifically tagged in. Remember we were talking about the Shack when your friend started making statements about my faith and Chad’s.
Then, your statement that ‘CRN.info’ is trying to ‘destroy’ the Word of God were beyond pale. You fouled up on that one and you seriously need to reject those statements.
Point is, you let it go on in one thread, and you encouraged it in another. All this time I have given you the benefit of the doubt, but those two instances were just wrong and you know it.
But this is a thread here about my friend Pastor Silva’s misuse and distrust of Sola Scriptura so I’ll drop it.
jerry
I’ll admit that pointing out PB’s erroneous readings have been a good exercise for me in logic. And I share Iggy’s sense of remorse for PB’s attitude – I know that sounds condescending, but that’s not how I meant it.
But I was truly bothered that he told others that we try and destroy the Bible…