Is Sola Scriptura Dead?

At the Emergent Village, Blake Huggins posted the question, "What happens after Sola Scriptura?" I don't agree with most of Blake's argument, but it's a reasonable post and raises some important questions for Christians to consider. In sum, Blake argues that Sola Scriptura (i.e., that the Scriptures are the only infallible rule of faith and practice) is not only an idea that is losing it's usefulness, but isn't even possible to begin with because: (1) we are limited in our understanding of scripture; (2) we are incapable to coming to scripture without bias and thus even if the scriptures are infallible, our own biased interpretations will distort the original meaning; and (3) the scriptures were written by fallible men and recorded over the years by many more fallible men (I hope I'm not misrepresenting your points Blake).

Of the three arguments, I want to focus on the second because no one can deny that the scriptures have been, and continue to be, abused in this way throughout history. As Blake points out, the scriptures have been used to legitimize great injustice, like slavery. Blake is right here, I think, and it's important for Christians to ask, "Does the Bible really say what I believe it says?" before using our own interpretation of God's Word to teach or rebuke another.

However, this point plays out in a different way as well. I was in the bookstore the other day and I overheard a conversation a man was having with one of the salespeople. The man was upset about something he a read in scripture (I wasn't able to determine his complaint) and wanted something to help him determine if what he had read in the scriptures had actually been translated accurately. What this man was saying was that he didn't trust the Bible translators for the same reason that Blake doesn't believe that the Bible is the infallible Word of God, that is because it was written by sinful men, wearing often quite narrow cultural lenses in their reading glasses, who seek to advance their with their own political, theological, and social agendas. In this way, Blake is right! We cannot begin with Scripture alone when reaching out to someone like the guy in the bookstore, because he doesn't trust how the Bible has been translated.

Of course I believe Blake goes too far when he claims, "I seriously doubt whether the Bible is infallible since it was written by pre-modern men." While it's true that the men who God chose to reveal His infallible Word were indeed fallible, I do not agree that they were incapable to presenting God's revelations without error. The Bible teaches that the scritures are God-breathed and that the writers of the Bible were lead by the Holy Spirit in their writings. This means that God himself is the author of scripture, so if there is an error in the Bible, then it must be a God-inspired error, which of course is inconsistent with the nature of God. That said, please do check out Bloake's post (and if you disagree, please disagree respectfully), as well as the following resources, which I believe help us understand what Sola Scriptura means and why the infallibility of the Bible is essential to the Christian faith.

What Do We Mean By Sola Scriptura? By Dr. W. Robert Godfrey
The Sufficiency of Scripture By John MacArthur
Traditionalism and Sola Scriptura, Part I By John Frame
Traditionalism and Sola Scriptura, Part II By John Frame
Men Moved By the Holy Spirit Spoke From God By John Piper
The Holy Spirit: Author of Scripture By John Piper
Thoughts on the Sufficiency of Scripture: What It Does and Doesn't Mean By John Piper
Sola Scriptura By A.A. Hodge
The Bible's Sufficiency By Tim Challies

More helpful kinks here.