Sola Scriptura

The Protestant response to apostolic succession, which was discussed in my last blog, was a claim that they would use Scripture Alone as their authority. Let us look at this flawed claim to authority.

The Dead Sea Scrolls include three different texts of books that eventually were canonized into the so-called Old Testament. The three texts include one that is very much like the Septuagint Greek version of scripture translated in Alexandria and used by the Greek speaking world and Yeshua and his disciples. Another text seems to be from the scriptural tradition which culminated in the Masoretic text proclaimed at Yavneh by the Pharisees in the last decade of the first century of the Christian Era. The third text is not reflected in the modern textual history. All three were common in the time of Yeshua and theoretically, he could have been aware of them.

If the Essene Theologians of the Nasorean Movement had been putting the Old Testament together, they would have included 1 Enoch, Jubilees, perhaps 2 Enoch and 3 Enoch, and certainly the Coming of Melchizedek and the Messianic Apocryphon. Their Old Testament would no doubt have included the Wisdom of Solomon, which is in the Apocrypha and in the Septuagint text. But, it is hard to imagine that the Maccabees would have made it in and it is doubtful that Judith would have made it in. Esther would have been out and Daniel would have been redacted.

The Septuagint included six books that are not in the Masoretic text and they include changes and additions to Esther and Daniel. All scriptural passages quoted by Yeshua come from this textual tradition.

The Pharisees set the Masoretic Text which is the Protestant Canon.

The Nasorean Sect, that is, the Jerusalem Church rejected all Pauline works and Mark, Luke and John. They would not have accepted Acts either. But, they probably would have included Thomas and may be the Gospel of Mary. Almost certainly, the Nasorean Sect would have include Didache, which was considered scripture by the Eastern church for five centuries. Eusebius questions James, Jude, and Revelations. Luther also questioned James.

So, how do we decide which Scripture is authoritative. The question is inspiration. Now, if one adopts the position that all scripture is an infallible statement that should be accepted literally, most modern people will not find scripture authoritative. However, if one looks at scripture as the Jews do, then there are four levels of understanding, each adding something to our final comprehension of the text. These levels are Pashat, the literal meaning; Remez, the figurative meaing; Drosh, the contextual understanding; and Sod, the hidden meaning. All together these meanings tell us the divine meaning, but any one alone is not sufficient to understand the text. How can rational people accept the claim that a flood covering the whole world was caused by raining? Such a claim denies the fact that rain comes from evaporation of water and the resulting distribution of the water on land. There is a finite amount of water. It cannot cover all the land. How can rational people accept the claim that technology is bad and a hunter gatherer lifestyle is better? How can rational people accept the command by G-d through Samuel to genocide? Surely, these statements are not to be taken literally. I have been inspired in writing, but although I knew at the time that I was writing under the guidance of the Holy Spirit, my mind was engaged, my prejudices were engaged, my thoughts were engaged.

Not only are there problems with which books are inspired and how we are to interpret the words of scripture, we have the problem of translations. Every translation is a political and doctrinal statement. Muslims forbid the translation of the Koran without the Arabic at the side of the translation. The same should be the law for translating the Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek texts that became the English translation. Is it the translation that is inspired or the original? St. Jerome argued that the Septuagint was a divinely inspired translation from Hebrew and Aramaic into Greek, but there are many places in which the received Masoretic text and the underlying Hebrew text from which the Septuagint was taken disagree and come to different conclusions. Which text is inspired? Which text do we follow?

Ultimately, placing the decisions of authority directly on the backs of the believer is dangerous because most believers do not have the skills to read the original text, nor the inquisitiveness to seek other opinions on translation from Hebrew, a very lax language when it comes to accuracy in speech. The believer is taken away by his feelings, her emotions, there desire to make the text fit their needs.

Scripture without tradition is not reliable any more than politicians who became bishops. Where then do we find authority? The answer is unpalatable to many. In order to be authoritative in the Western tradition, one must be both a scripture scholar with knowledge of the original texts and languages and one must be a prophet with all the signs and wonders that surround a true prophet. In every age, there are people like this, but they remain hidden, silent. The Jewish faith teaches that they are the hidden pillars that uphold the universe and allow the Light to enter through our worldwide misapprehensions and lies. They are called Tzadikkim. There are never more than 36 nor less than 10 at any time. They are the appointed witnesses in every age of the truth of G-d.