Answering Practical Objections To Sola Scriptura

• Is Sola Scriptura Based On Circular Reasoning?:

          -This objection would hold water if, and only if, adherents to this doctrine were to argue for belief in the divine inspiration of Scripture solely on the basis of what it says about itself. That would be a fallacious claim by reason of being a viciously circular argument.

          -Arguments giving credence to the inspiration of Scripture:
            *Excellent moral teaching and life transforming power of Scripture. One could argue for the supremacy of the moral teachings of Christ compared to other world religions.
            *Incredible manuscript evidence for the authenticity of the New Testament writings
            *Consistency with world history/archaeological discoveries. If the four gospels, for instance, can be shown to be as reliable as (or even more so than) extra-biblical authors such as Plutarch, Josephus, and Tacitus, then we must accept Jesus Christ as the Son of God. Radical skepticism toward the biblical text would not be appropriate in that instance.

            *The fulfillment of prophecies contained in Scripture points to its supernatural origin.
          -If the Bible is truly the Word of God, then it follows from that premise everything set forth by that source must also be true. That would not be circular, but sequential thinking.
          -Sola Scriptura is not a denial of the usefulness of extra-biblical sources. It does not mean that we cannot consult material outside of the Bible to verify claims.

          -Some degree of circularity will always exist in the operational processes of any system that functions on the basis of an ultimate source of authority. It does not matter whether whether it be Catholic, Protestant, or secular. 

• High Illiteracy Rates In The Early Church: 

          -Being illiterate does not mean that a person has less of an ability to understand concepts. Sola Scriptura was still possible for the early Christians because:
            *Scripture can be taught orally by those who are literate. Scripture can be memorized or recited from memory. It can still be studied.

            *In Paul's day, literate people would read things aloud to those who could not read. That is also how the average Israelite learned Deuteronomy. It has the structure of a song that they could easily memorize. This is basic knowledge of the ancient world.

            *The early church had a practice of sharing letters and teachings among different congregations, which would have included the writings of Paul, Peter, James, and others. This practice helped to establish a unified doctrine and fostered communication between separated Christian groups.
          -The fact that persecution of Christians in the early church was problematic for the spread of the gospel did not reduce the importance of the unconverted hearing that message. In similar fashion, illiteracy rates would indeed make it harder to learn Scripture. However, that point does not lessen its authority. The Bible still testifies to who Christ is (John 5:46-47).

          -The Roman Catholic Church expected its priests to interpret the Bible for the average person. Efforts were even made to stop the Bible from being translated and circulated. This became more pronounced during the Middle Ages, particularly from the 5th to the 15th centuries. This was certainly different from the Jewish practice of public Torah readings and how the earliest Christians (coming from that background) treated Scripture.
          -If Jesus Christ passed on infallible, extra-biblical oral traditions that were meant to be heard by us, then what about the people who are deaf? If illiteracy rates disqualify Scripture from functioning as the only infallible rule of faith, then is the Roman Catholic "three-legged stool" disqualified because deaf people cannot hear oral teaching?

• Malnutrition In The Early Church:

          -The availability of food varied among early Christians. Some faced challenges due to religious fasting practices, while others cared for the sick and poor. Overall, their nutrition depended on factors like socio-economic context and adherence to religious rules. It takes no more nourishment to understand teachings found in a catechism than it does to understand passages of Scripture.

          -In order to refute Sola Scriptura, one has to demonstrate that this principle somehow conflicts with Scripture. The authority of Scripture is not determined by our intelligence. The authority of Scripture is not determined by our health. The authority of Scripture is not determined by its availability. Scripture is inherently authoritative because it is God-breathed (2 Timothy 3:16). It is not limited by personal circumstance or inconveniences.