Below is a comprehensive comparison of how the principle of *sola scriptura* is understood differently across various Christian traditions, including Reformation churches, Pentecostal churches, Catholic Church, Restoration Movement churches using the CENI principle, and modern evangelical churches.

—

Reformation Churches (e.g., Lutheran, Reformed)

Context:

Originated during the Protestant Reformation in the 16th century with leaders like Martin Luther and John Calvin.

Understanding of Sola Scriptura:

– Scripture’s Authority: Scripture is the sole infallible rule of faith and practice, holding the highest authority above church traditions and teachings².

– Clarity and Sufficiency: Scripture is clear and sufficient for understanding salvation and proper Christian living. The Holy Spirit helps believers understand and apply Scripture correctly².

– Interpretation: Emphasis on grammatical-historical exegesis, focusing on the original meaning of texts based on their historical and literary contexts².

– Role of Preaching and Sacraments: Preaching and sacraments are viewed as means of grace, grounded in Scriptural commands and ordinances, administered within the church community².

Pentecostal Churches

Context:

Emerged in the early 20th century, focusing on the work of the Holy Spirit, spiritual gifts, and experiential faith¹.

Understanding of Sola Scriptura:

– Scripture’s Authority: Scripture is paramount, but interpretation and application are seen through the lens of the Holy Spirit’s present activity¹.

– Clarity and Sufficiency: Scripture is sufficient, with strong reliance on the active role of the Holy Spirit to illuminate and apply God’s Word dynamically¹.

– Interpretation: Interpretive method is more fluid. Personal testimony and communal experiences significantly influence how Scripture is understood¹.

– Role of Spiritual Gifts: Emphasis on charismata, such as healing, prophecy, and speaking in tongues, seen as vital expressions of God’s current communication¹.

Catholic Church

Context:

Rooted in apostolic tradition and the early Christian church, with a continuous presence through history³.

Understanding of Scripture and Tradition:

– Scripture’s Authority: Scripture is authoritative but operates within the context of Sacred Tradition and the Magisterium³.

– Scripture and Tradition: Both Scripture and Tradition together convey God’s revelation. The Magisterium (teaching authority of the Church) authentically interprets Scripture³.

– Interpretation: Scriptural interpretation is guided by the Magisterium to ensure consistency with apostolic faith and traditions³.

– Role of Sacraments: Sacraments are essential means of grace instituted by Christ, deeply embedded in both Biblical and traditional foundations³.

Restoration Movement (Churches Using CENI Principle)

Context:

Originating in early 19th century America, emphasizing a return to New Testament Christianity.

Understanding of CENI Principle:

– Scripture’s Authority: High view of Scripture, with authority determined through commands, examples, and necessary inferences found within the Biblical text⁴.

– Clarity and Sufficiency: The Bible is considered both clear and sufficient, with the CENI framework used to interpret and apply its teachings⁴.

– Interpretation: Focuses on identifying direct commands, approved examples, and necessary inferences as the basis for doctrine and practice⁴. Rejects, in most cases, any ongoing illumination by the Holy Spirit. Such activities limited to original authors.

– Church Practices: Seeks to restore the New Testament church’s practices to perceived original ideal, often rejecting denominational creeds and traditions not found in Scripture⁴.

Modern Evangelical Churches

Context:

A diverse movement within Protestant Christianity, emphasizing conversion, biblical authority, and evangelism⁵.

Understanding of Sola Scriptura:

– Scripture’s Authority: Scripture is viewed as the ultimate authority for faith and practice, often coupled with a high view of biblical inerrancy⁵.

– Clarity and Sufficiency: Belief in the Bible’s clarity and sufficiency for all matters of faith and life⁵.

– Interpretation: Emphasizes personal and communal Bible study, often utilizing historical-grammatical exegesis and contemporary application⁵.

– Role of Preaching and Evangelism: Preaching and evangelism are central, with a focus on personal conversion and active faith principles derived from Scripture⁵.

—

References

1. Anderson, A. (2014). An Introduction to Pentecostalism: Global Charismatic Christianity. Cambridge University Press.

2. McGrath, A. E. (2011). Reformation Thought: An Introduction. Wiley-Blackwell.

3. Catechism of the Catholic Church. (1994). Vatican: Libreria Editrice Vaticana.

4. Campbell, A., & Campbell, T. (1843). Declaration and Address of the Christian Association of Washington. Office of the Christian Association.

5. Noll, M. A. (2001). The Rise of Evangelicalism: The Age of Edwards, Whitefield and the Wesleys. InterVarsity Press.

According to the Reformation principle of “Sola Scriptura”, the Scriptures alone are the rule of faith and life. But Scripture is not just one book. Scripture is a small library of books! So how do we determine which books are in the canon of Scripture? Do we need a church or a man to tell us what should be included? It is my position, and the historical position of the church, that the Holy Spirit reveals what is God-breathed, not any man or organization. In this way, one can say the canon of Scripture is self-authenticating. Do assume otherwise is to place a man or an organization above the Scriptures in authority. 

The best way to put it is the way the Second London Baptist Confession put it in 1689 (my apologies to those who are confession averse).  Section 1, Paragraph 4. “The authority of the Holy Scripture, for which it ought to be believed, depends not upon the testimony of any man or church, but wholly upon God (who is truth itself), the author thereof; therefore it is to be received because it is the Word of God.” (See 2 Pet. 1:19-21; 2 Tim. 3:16; 2 Thess. 2:13; 1 John 5:9)

There are two components to the “Canon of Scripture”, which can be referred to as the “Macro-canon” and the “Micro-canon”. The Macro-canon is the list of exactly which writings were to be regarded as Scripture. Basically, your bible’s table of contents. The Micro-canon is the actual verses that are part of the writings in the Macro-canon. The early church fathers of the first few centuries quoted extensively from the canon, and in fact there are quotes from every book in the New Testament within their writings. This is pretty impressive since they didn’t set out to make sure and quote everything so we would know they approved of it!

While most would agree with the Macro-canon, there are issues with the Micro-canon. Apart from minor textual variations, there are those men and women who advocate for the “Critical Text” that regard parts of the Micro-canon that was accepted as authentic by centuries of Christians as spurious. Not only are there several individual verses, there are entire passages such as the longer ending of Mark and the account of the woman caught in adultery in John 8. The traditional Greek text has these passages included, but they date later than the Alexandrian manuscripts and papyri that omit them. The issue with these Alexandrian texts is that they have survived solely through an accident of climate, as drying air is more conducive so document preservation. Unfortunately, this area was also a hotbed of heretical activity among people like Arius and the Gnostics. And since these portions and were found in trash piles, I find them to be untrustworthy.

But of greater importance is the attack, whether intentional or not, on the self-authentication of the canon. If we accept the critical text over the traditional text, we are de facto admitting that 1.) there are men that have veto power of the Holy Spirit when it comes to authenticating Scripture, or 2.) we really do need an ecclesiastical authority to determine the Macro and Micro canons for us. In either instance, they place either a man or an organization in judgment over Scripture. This is not acceptable.

So does that mean we go “King James Only”? Not necessarily.  What it does mean is that we should use translations of the traditional text over those of the critical text. To their credit, many critical text translations include traditional text readings, albeit in brackets or footnotes. But there are also good translations that use the traditional text that the Holy Spirit has authenticated to believers over the centuries. These would include the King James, 21^st Century King James, King James-Easy to Read, the New King James, and the Modern English Version.

Bible software has also made access to multiple versions much more convenient, so you can read different translations side by side. 

But my personal conclusion is this:  If the Scriptures are self-authenticating (and they are), then I should study from translations that use the text that the Holy Spirit has witnessed to over the last 20 centuries over a critical text that depends on human wisdom and academic argument. To do otherwise is to subjugate the determination of the Micro-canon to the academic “experts” instead of the Spirit. No Thanks!

When attorneys are preparing a case for court, one of the things they normally do is to find witnesses to the event in question. A believable witness under oath is a powerful weapon they can use to prove their case. In addition, written testimony may be presented in the form of sworn statements. If someone wants to investigate Jesus of Nazareth, where can they find witnesses, since He lived so long ago? That testimony is found in the Scriptures, and in the First Century it was found in the Old Testament.

When New Testament writers refer to “the Scriptures” they are usually talking about the Law (or Torah), the Prophets (major and minor), and the Writings (Psalms, Proverbs, Song of Solomon, etc). S why do I mention this? Because Jesus was talking about these Scripture when He said this:

You search the Scriptures because you think that in them you have eternal life; it is these that testify about Me; (John 5:39 NASB).

And later, after the resurrection, Jesus used those Scriptures to open their minds to comprehend what they had witnessed a few days before.

And beginning at Moses and all the prophets, he expounded unto them in all the scriptures the things concerning himself. (Luke 24:27 KJV)

Phillip, and the road with the Ethiopian eunuch started in Isaiah chapter 53 and “preached Jesus unto him”, which resulted in salvation (Acts 8).
There is also a reason that the Apostle Paul was able to go into synagogues every Sabbath and prove from the Scriptures that Jesus was the Christ.

So why doesn’t everyone see the references to Jesus in the Old Testament? Mostly, it is because they don’t realize that He is in there! Just like some optical illusions, once you know where and how to look, the references to Christ become clear. For those who refuse to believe, they can’t find Jesus for the same reason a burglar can’t find a policeman. God only rewards those who “diligently seek him” (Hebrews 11:6).

What we as disciples of Jesus Christ need to do is to take a fresh look at the Old Testament. For one, it provides the context for the New Testament. But it also contains types and shadows that not only deepen the meaning of many passages in the New Testament, but also give us a glimpse into how the message would have made sense to those first Jewish believers who left all to follow Jesus.

Along with that, as you are reading, meditate and pray, and look for things that hint about, or downright shout about Jesus. I doing so we can gain a fresh appreciation for the depth and congruity of Scripture. Jesus is the Word made flesh who dwelt among us (John 1:12) and He still desires to take us deeper into the treasures of wisdom and knowledge that can only be found in Him (Colossians 2:3). And may The Lord open our eyes to discover great and marvelous things in His Word!