Video argues sola scriptura impossible in first twenty years of church
The video presents an Orthodox challenge to the Protestant doctrine of sola scriptura. The speaker asks how the early church could have practiced sola scriptura during its first twenty years when no completed New Testament existed. He acknowledges that the Old Testament, the Gospels, and oral teaching from prophets and apostles were regarded as infallible in that period.
The argument proceeds that during the apostles' lifetime one would not have doubted Paul's teaching simply because it was not yet written down; therefore sola scriptura did not exist while the apostles were alive. The church relied on living apostolic teaching, which later became inscripturated. The speaker also questions what authoritative standard remains after the apostles' deaths and challenges the idea that infallible oral teaching continues today.
He concludes by thanking his debate opponent for conceding that sola scriptura is not apostolic in origin.
Key moments
- The speaker asks how sola scriptura could be practiced in the first twenty years of the church when there was no completed Bible or scripture.
- The speaker acknowledges that the Old Testament, the Gospels, and oral teaching from prophets and apostles were considered infallible.
- The speaker questions what the stand is after the death of the apostles and challenges the idea that there is infallible oral teaching today.
- The speaker says that during the apostles' time one would not doubt Paul's teaching just because it was not written down, and concludes that sola scriptura did not exist then; the church had apostolic teaching which later became scripture.
- The speaker thanks the opponent for conceding that sola scriptura is not apostolic.