By Nicholas Accetta
1. Our Lord Jesus Christ never commanded His Apostles to write any part of the New Testament.
He did command them to teach and to preach the good news. He also promised them the gift of
the Spirit (John 14:26) and that he would be with them unto the end of the world (Matt 28:20).
Not once did Christ command the Apostles to write anything, thus disproving the "bible only"
theory.
2. Scripture teaches that leaders of Christ's Church have authority in matters of faith and that they
must be obeyed. "...and if he shall neglect to hear them tell it unto the Church; but if he neglects
to hear the Church let him be unto you as a heathen and a publican." (Matt 18:17) "....he that
hears you hears me" (Luke 10:16)"...whatever you (Peter) shall bound on earth shall be bound in
heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven." (Matt 16:19).
3. The Bible clearly states that many truths of the christian faith were to be handed down by word
of mouth. ..."stand fast, and hold the traditions that you have been taught, whether by our word,
or by our epistle." (2 Thes 2:15) If the Bible was meant to be the only rule of faith, it would seem
odd that Scripture itself denies the theory.
4. The New Testament itself plainly teaches that it does not contain everything that Jesus did or
taught. "...there are many other things that Jesus did, the which, if they should be written every
one, I suppose the world itself contain the books that should be written". (John 21:25)
5. Scripture teaches that the Apostles appointed successors to carry out their work. "...as they
ministered to the Lord, and fasted, the Holy Spirit said, separate me Barnabas and Saul for the
work that I have called them. And when they had prayed and fasted, and laid their hands on them,
they sent them away." (Acts 13, 2 and 3) "...For this cause I left you in Crete that you should set
in order the things that were wanting, and ordain elders (ie priests) in every city, as I appointed
thee." (Titus 1:5)
6. The first book of the New Testament was not written until ten years after Christ's ascension.
The last book, probably Revelations, was not written until about 100 AD. Furthermore, prior to
397 AD, when the Council of Constantinople, through the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, decided
upon the canon of the Bible, The New Testament had yet to be placed under one cover. It would
be rather hard for the Christians living in the first 400 years of the Church's existence (remember,
the Bible as we know it did not exist) to practice the Lord's Faith if the Sola Scriptura theory is
correct.
7. The original writings were written on papyrus, a frail material which had temporary enduring
qualities. The books that were judged to be inspired by the Church were copied with great care
and dedication by Her monks, while the rejected writings were left to rot away. If the Catholic
Church has no divine authority, then why do the Protestants continue to use the Bible that the
Church proclaimed to be God's Word? If it were not for the divine authority of the Church,
Protestants would probably be reading the Gospel of Thomas as the inspired Word of God.
8. Who gave Martin Luther and the rest of the so called "reformers" the authority to break away
from the teaching of the True Faith and invent the Sola Scriptura doctrine? Scripture itself
answers that question perfectly. "....though we or an angel from heaven, preach any other Gospel
than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed." (Gal 1:8). The consequences
of the teaching of the false dogma of Sola Scriptura have been embarassingly clear: there are
currently over 5,700 Protestant sects today, each one claiming to have the Bible alone as their
guide to the truth, yet each one disagreeing on a particular Biblical doctrine. If the Bible
wasintended to be the sole rule of faith, then what is the explanation for this mess?
9. Contrary to popular Protestant thought, Scripture implicitly states that it is not open to private
interpretation. "...Knowing this first, that no prophecy of Scripture is open to private
interpretation." (2 Peter 1:20) "...as also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things, in
which are some things hard to be understood, which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest,
as they do in their other scriptures, unto their own destruction." (2 Peter 3:16). If the Holy
Scriptures are not open to private interpretation, then we would need an unfallable guide to
interpret the Scriptures correctly. That infallable guide is the Church.
10. Which came first, the Church or the Bible? Well, of course, the answer is obvious. When the
Holy Spirit came at Pentecost, when the Apostles were preaching the good news across the
world, and when countless numbers of christians were being martyred for the faith that they
believed in, the New Testament was not in existence. It was by the spoken word of the Church
that the Christian converts believed in the good news, not by reading the Bible. I challenge my
opponent to deny this historical fact.
11. The Bible teaches that the one Church that Jesus founded had Simon Bar-Jona, also called
Peter, as its head. "...and I say unto you, thou art Peter, and upon this Rock I will build my
Church". (Matt 16:18) "...Simon son of Jonah do you love me?..feed my lambs". (John 21:15-17)
By telling Peter to "feed my lambs", Jesus made Peter pastor of His flock, that is, His Church.
12. Scripture teaches that Christ's visible Church will have uninterrupted existence. "..Go,
therefore, and teach all nations, baptzing them in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy
Spirit..and lo, I am with you always, even unto the end of the world." (Matt 28;19-20) "...the
gates of hell shall not prevail against it (the Church) (Matt 16:18) Therefore, the theory that
Christ's Church somehow became nonexistent for 1000 years until the reformers revived it is
ridiculous and contrary to the Bible.
In view of these biblical truths and historical facts, it is difficult for me to understand how my opponent can continue to defend the bogus Sola Scriptura theory.