4

As a follow-up to my previous question What is the difference between Sola Scriptura and the belief in a closed canon?, I would like to know now about the implications that the doctrine of Sola Scriptura might or might not have over one's position in the debate between Cessationism & Continuationism.

Does Sola Scriptura entail Cessationism? (And if so, to what extent?)

Is it possible to believe that the Bible is "the sole infallible source of authority for Christian faith and practice" and be simultaneously open to extra-biblical divine means of revelation and guidance such as:

Improve this question
1
  • It was Martin Luther who coined the phrase “sola scriptura”. His bible, called “Luther’s Bible”, also included seven apocryphal books. Anglicans in early 19th century removed them from the Bible, while coining the phrase “prima scriptura”. The Prima Scriptura doctrine acknowledges that there are other secondary inspirational sources, besides the primary source, the Bible.
    – Constantthin
    Commented Feb 4, 2022 at 6:18

2 Answers 2

Reset to default
2

It does not seem that it would be logically possible to hold Sola Scriptura as the truth and simultaneously to hold that cessationism is not true, at least as cessationism relates to new teachings (prophecies, doctrinal developments, etc). If a true prophet were to speak today, guided by the Holy Spirit, then his words would be binding, since He is speaking for God. Hence, there would be some other infallible authority besides Scripture. Namely, that man's prophetic words. Hence, one could no longer be an adherent of Sola Scriptura were one to believe that man's prophecies.

Therefore, as long as one holds that it is possible for prophecies or other infallible teachings to be handed down by the guidance of the Holy Spirit today (ie not cessationism), one cannot hold that Scripture is the final and sole authority for Christian faith (Sola Scriptura). From this, we can derive the conclusion: if one adheres to Sola Scriptura, one is implicitly a cessationist, at least with regard to new infallible teaching.

Beyond infallible teaching, there is no reason why those who adhere to Sola Scriptura cannot believe that the Holy Spirit sometimes acts to bring about miracles, etc, but nothing He brings about could be new doctrine, nor could it be doctrinal development, as these would require extra-biblical means of conveying Divinely revealed truth.

It should be noted that the converse is not problematic. One might be a cessationist without being an adherent to Sola Scriptura. For instance, one might believe that the Apostles handed down the full deposit of faith through both letters and oral teachings, and that no new infallible teachings will come down until the Last Day, which would entail cessationism, but would put authoritative stock in Early Church oral traditions that were not written in the canon of Scripture.

Improve this answer
8
  • Adherents to Sola Scriptura would say there are no new supremely authoritative prophecies, but that doesn't rule out any prophecies at all. As I wrote in another answer, "Just as the political principle of separation of powers isn't needed and wouldn't make sense in an absolute monarchy or a dictatorship, so too does the doctrine of sola scriptura assume and require that there are actually other sources of divine inspiration alongside the scriptures. ... Sola scriptura governs how we understand and use the spiritual gifts of prophecy."
    – curiousdannii ♦
    Commented Feb 7, 2022 at 1:32
  • Whether new prophecies are "infallible" is a trickier question. They come from God and so are infallible in that way, but are repeated by humans and so are fallible for that reason. Some modern prophets may claim to be repeating the words of God verbatim (like the dictation theory), but they can't prove that's the case. So I think it's better to talk about whether a prophecy is supremely authoritative or not. I think God could give an infallible modern prophecy without intending it to be authoritative for all churches in all times.
    – curiousdannii ♦
    Commented Feb 7, 2022 at 1:35
  • 1
    @curiousdannii if a prophecy truly comes from God, it can't be fallible. If humans repeat it faithfully, I don't see how it could suddenly become fallible.
    – jaredad7
    Commented Feb 7, 2022 at 15:51
  • When humans repeat a true prophecy to others then they may twist and distort it, even unintentionally. Think of Caiaphas in John 11:50. That's probably the clearest biblical example.
    – curiousdannii ♦
    Commented Feb 7, 2022 at 22:01
  • 1
    @JedSchaaf Yes thanks! I edited it.
    – curiousdannii ♦
    Commented Apr 30 at 8:03
0

No. Sola scriptura doesn't entail cessationism. Actually, Scriptures teach continuanism many times over.

First of all, no scriptures say that there would be no miracle after the death of the apostles. Many passages of the Bible talk about the fact that believers in general will be accompanied by miraculous signs and have miraculous gifts and none of these passages add "believers contemporary to the apostles" or "...as long as the apostles are alive" or something along these lines. The Scriptures also say why these gifts and signs have been given, they have been given "to equip the Church until we reach the stature of Christ" and well, this didn't happen yet.

Second, here are instances of the Scriptures asserting more clearly that the gifts would continue past the days of the apostles:

  • "And it shall come to pass in the last days, saith God, I will pour out of my Spirit upon all flesh: and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, and your young men shall see visions, and your old men shall dream dreams" Act2:17. Are we in the last days or did the last days stop with the death of the apostle John? If we are still in the last days, then the Scriptures tell us that now, right now, some of our brothers and sisters will prophesy, see visions and dreams. The Scriptures basically announced continuanism.
  • the Scriptures say that the two witnesses will prophesy and perform miracles. When these two come, will the offspring of the cessationists oppose them?
  • cessationism would mean that verses like Rom12:6, 1Cor14:1,24,31,39 were written for just a couple decades and aren't valid instructions for the Church anymore.

Finally, God is the same today, yesterday and forever. He performed miracles through his servants from Enoch to John during 4 millenia, why would he suddenly stop altogether for no particular reason? The existence of Scriptures can't be the reasn because the churches already had Scriptures when Agabus prophesied and while Paul was healing people and casting out demons.

So, sola scriptura doesn't support cessationism at all, quite the contrary.

By the way, here's some real-life experience: the current Pastor of my local church used to be Muslim and very hostile to the Gospel. He became Christian because at some point, he became physically blind (completely) and completely paralyzed as well for years, and then one fine day, a lady preached the Gospel to him and the same night while he was alone, Jesus talked to him, healed him from his blindness and told him that he had to go to church and serve him (Jesus). He went to church the next day, not blind anymore, seeing perfectly but still paralyzed. But at church, he was healed and walked. That's how he believed and became a fervent Christian. Cessationism is not reality! My hypothesis is that cessationism was born as a rationalization, a way to cope for religious leaders who realized that they never witnessed signs and wonders like the apostles.

Improve this answer

You must log in to answer this question.