The Kingdom Come

As a Reformed Christian, the subject of Sola Scriptura or Bible alone is a very important part of my approach to Christianity. But it is not so much "my" approach I want to understand, as I'm not very keen on developing a radical individualized theology. I am pursuing a course that will bring my faith more in line with the "faith once and for all delivered to the saints" (Jude 1:3). Unfortunately, I have had Roman Catholics (RC) and Anabaptistic Christians alike tell me that if I want that kind of faith, I'll have to become a Roman Catholic. I disagree.

The topic of Sola Scriptura is prescient because so many times, we non-Roman Catholics seem to use that phrase but instead behave like it is "Sola private interpretation" and to heck with the faith passed down via the apostles (2 Thes 2:15) -- as if the Church was so corrupted within a few centuries, that it was not revived again until the Reformation. This is wrong thinking in that it ultimately undermines the continuity of Christianity and saws off the very branch we claim to sit on.

In this regard, I have had some interactions with Joe Heschmeyer, a Roman Catholic Christian and law student at Georgetown University Law Center.

This is a chapter-by-chapter review of the book "The Shape of Sola Scriptura" by Keith Mathison. This review began on March 30, 2009 & is expected to end before September 2009.

The purpose for the review is to enhance Bible study by first studying how to approach the Bible. In modern Evangelical denominations, it is common to take a "private interpretation" approach where every individual gives their own private interpretation & then perhaps shares it with a larger group. Sometimes, all such interpretations are considered equally valid. This method is NOT what the Reformers had in mind when they articulated Sola Scriptura (Bible Alone). The Reformers did not intend to divorce Bible interpretation from historic Christian interpretation but merely question Papal/Church infallibility.