Question: “Pastor Ronald, if Protestants hold to Sola Scriptura, how can Scripture’s authority avoid being circular?"

Question:

“Pastor Ronald, if Protestants hold to Sola Scriptura, how can Scripture’s authority avoid being circular? Who determined the canon, and without an infallible teaching authority, how do we resolve contradictory interpretations? Does this not imply the Church must be the rightful interpreter of God’s Word?”

Answer:

Excellent and deep question, this is one of the most common and challenging Catholic critiques of Sola Scriptura. Let’s respond carefully, biblically, and historically.

“Is Sola Scriptura circular?”

At first glance, saying “Scripture alone is the final authority because Scripture says so” sounds circular. But that’s only true if you assume that every ultimate authority must appeal to something higher to validate itself. Think of it this way: every worldview has an ultimate authority that can’t be proven by something higher because it’s the highest.

• For the Christian, it’s God’s self-revelation.

• For the Roman Catholic, it’s the Church’s magisterium.

• For the atheist, it’s human reason or science.

So the question isn’t “Is it circular?” but “Which ultimate authority is consistent and divinely grounded?” Scripture’s authority doesn’t depend on human validation; it rests on its divine origin. Jesus and the apostles treated the Old Testament as inherently authoritative“It is written” (Matt. 4:4) without needing an external committee to certify it. The Word of God bears self-attesting divine authority, authenticated by the internal witness of the Holy Spirit (John 10:27; 2 Tim. 3:16; 1 Thess. 2:13).

“Who decided which books belong to the Bible?”

This is a historical misunderstanding. The early Church did not “create” the canon; it recognized it. When Protestants say the Church recognized the canon, they mean the Church discerned which writings already bore divine authority, much like astronomers discover planets; they don’t create them. Long before any council “decided” anything:

• The Old Testament was already established in Jewish Scripture and affirmed by Jesus (Luke 24:44).

• The New Testament books were widely recognized by apostolic churches within the first and second centuries (see 2 Peter 3:15-16, where Peter calls Paul’s writings “Scripture”).

• Early church fathers like Polycarp, Ignatius, and Irenaeus already quoted nearly all NT books as authoritative Scripture decades before any council “approved” them.

The councils of Hippo (393) and Carthage (397) did not grant authority to Scripture; they merely acknowledged the consensus already held by the believing church.

As Augustine himself said:

“I would not believe the Gospel unless moved by the authority of the Catholic Church.” 

That doesn’t mean the Church created the Gospel; it means the Church testified to it just as a courtroom witness confirms a truth, not creates it.

“Doesn’t that mean the Church is the final authority?”

No. The Church is a minister of the Word, not the master of it. The authority of Scripture and the authority of the Church function differently:

• Scripture is norma normans non normata, the “rule that rules and is not ruled.”

• The Church is norma normata a“ruled rule.”

In other words, the Church is under the Word, not over it. Even the apostles submitted to the Word of God (Acts 17:11; Gal. 1:8). The Church has a ministerial authority to teach, but only derivatively, meaning its authority is valid only as long as it aligns with and submits to Scripture.

“But why are there so many interpretations among Protestants?”

Great question, but that argument cuts both ways. Even within Roman Catholicism, there are vastly differing interpretations of official teachings, theologians disagree on papal statements, and laity often hold contradictory beliefs. Sola Scriptura doesn’t mean solo Scripture (no teachers, no creeds). It means Scripture is the final court of appeal, the ultimate standard by which all teachings are tested (Acts 17:11; 1 Thess. 5:21). Differences in interpretation don’t disprove the Bible’s sufficiency; they prove human fallibility. The solution to human error isn’t another fallible human authority, but the Spirit’s ongoing work of illumination (John 16:13). Even with a “magisterium,” history shows disagreement and inconsistency, consider debates over the Immaculate Conception before 1854 or papal infallibility before 1870. So “having an infallible Church” doesn’t prevent division or misinterpretation either; it just moves the question of authority one step back.

“So how can we know Scripture is inspired and interpreted correctly?”

We know Scripture is inspired through a combination of historical recognition and spiritual confirmation:

• Historically: Apostolic origin, consistency with God’s revelation, and early universal acceptance by the believing community.

• Spiritually: The Holy Spirit bears witness in the hearts of believers (John 10:27; 1 Cor. 2:12–14).

And we interpret Scripture correctly through sound hermeneutics, guided by the Spirit, in community with the historical Church, not isolated from it. The Reformation never rejected church tradition per se; it rejected tradition as equal authority with Scripture.

“So doesn’t this still point to Rome as the final interpreter?”

Historically and logically, no. The Roman Church did not define the canon; it affirmed it centuries after the fact. The early church was already using the same Scriptures without papal oversight. Rome’s later claim to infallible interpretive authority has no grounding in the apostolic era. The apostles never commanded submission to a continuing, infallible hierarchy; they commanded submission to the Word once for all delivered to the saints (Jude 3). If the Roman Magisterium were truly infallible, it would have to be explicitly instituted and perpetuated by apostolic mandate, which is nowhere found in Scripture or the first two centuries of church history.

Bottom Line

Sola Scriptura doesn’t mean the Church is irrelevant; it means the Church is accountable to the Word of God. The Bible’s authority is not circular; it is self-attesting and Spirit-confirmed. The canon wasn’t created by the Church but recognized by the Church under God’s providence. Interpretation isn’t chaos; it’s a call to humble, Spirit-led study in community. And no human institution, not even Rome, can sit as judge over the Word that judges all (Heb. 4:12).

In short:

The Bible is not true because the Church says so. The Church is true because it faithfully proclaims what the Bible says.

---

Former Adventists Philippines

“Freed by the Gospel. Firm in the Word.”

For more inquiries, contact us:

Email: formeradventist.ph@gmail.com

Website: formeradventistph.blogspot.com

Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/groups/formeradventistph