Preface
Sola Scriptura is a trick used to create one’s own churches. Like the tricks of shell-game players, simple but deft moves confuse the listeners, who do not notice the substitution taking place right before their eyes. They are not taught a doctrine “according to Scripture alone” at all, but are merely offered yet another interpretation of Scripture, rejecting everything that does not agree with the personal faith of the new teacher (his opinion). The teacher’s personal faith is passed on to the listeners, becoming yet another human tradition. But this tradition is not called a tradition — and therein lies the trick: the listeners get the illusion that they believe according to Scripture alone. In the same way the earlier heretical societies were created: rejecting the faith of the Church, received directly from the apostles together with Scripture, they raised above everything the personal opinions of their teachers, all of whom are different. However many sects arise, their teachers can interpret absolutely any faith out of Scripture.
Hieromartyr Irenaeus of Lyons (~130-202)
And it is not only from the writings of the evangelists and the apostles that they endeavour to derive proofs for their opinions by means of perverse interpretations and deceitful expositions: they deal in the same way with the law and the prophets <…> And others of them, with great craftiness, adapted such parts of Scripture to their own figments, lead away captive from the truth those who do not retain a stedfast faith <…> You see, my friend, the method which these men employ to deceive themselves, while they abuse the Scriptures by endeavouring to support their own system out of them. <…> Let us now look at the inconsistent opinions of those heretics (for there are some two or three of them), how they do not agree in treating the same points, but alike, in things and names, set forth opinions mutually discordant.
Such are the variations existing among them with regard to one [passage], holding discordant opinions as to the same Scriptures;
Blessed Jerome of Stridon (~347-420)
But as we have already had a long discussion and the protracted controversy has wearied out the attention of our audience, I will tell you my opinion briefly and without reserve. We ought to remain in that Church which was founded by the Apostles and continues to this day. If ever you hear of any that are called Christians taking their name not from the Lord Jesus Christ, but from some other, for instance, Marcionites, Valentinians, Men of the mountain or the plain, you may be sure that you have there not the Church of Christ, but the synagogue of Antichrist. For the fact that they took their rise after the foundation of the Church is proof that they are those whose coming the Apostle foretold. And let them not flatter themselves if they think they have Scripture authority for their assertions, since the devil himself quoted Scripture, and the essence of the Scriptures is not the letter, but the meaning. Otherwise, if we follow the letter, we too can concoct a new dogma and assert that such persons as wear shoes and have two coats must not be received into the Church.
(The Dialogue Against the Luciferians)
Venerable Vincent of Lérins († before 450)
We inveighed also against the wicked presumption of Nestorius in boasting that he was the first and the only one who understood holy Scripture, and that all those teachers were ignorant, who before him had expounded the sacred oracles, forsooth, the whole body of priests, the whole body of Confessors and martyrs, of whom some had published commentaries upon the Law of God, others had agreed with them in their comments, or had acquiesced in them. In a word, he confidently asserted that the whole Church was even now in error, and always had been in error, in that, as it seemed to him, it had followed, and was following, ignorant and misguided teachers.
See other sayings like these (in Russian).
Sola Scriptura
“Sola Scriptura” (Latin — Sola Scriptura, “Scripture alone”) is a method of building doctrine proposed in the 16th century by the reformers (who started the Protestant movement), according to which the highest authority for building doctrine is Holy Scripture alone (as subjectively understood by the reader).
Despite the theory, among Protestants and neo-Protestants the understanding of “Sola Scriptura” as a complete rejection of Tradition is widespread. Not many Protestants are ready to argue in the area of the patristic heritage, and most often, in the course of debates between the Orthodox and Protestants, even the mention of the names of the holy fathers, let alone their works, meets with sharp rejection and mockery. The very word “tradition” is given a negative connotation in Protestant societies by identifying it with “the tradition of the elders” (Matt. 15:2), while completely ignoring the existence of the apostolic Tradition, which the apostles themselves commanded to be kept (2 Thess. 2:15) — the faith planted in the Church in various ways by the Lord and the apostles, and continuously kept in it and handed down from forefathers to descendants.
Attempts to Justify Sola Scriptura
The defenders of Sola Scriptura cite quotes from Scripture, presenting them as if they spoke of the necessity of regarding Scripture as the highest or the only authority of faith. However, in reality not a single one of the quotes cited speaks of Sola Scriptura, that is, that supposedly Scripture alone (and nothing besides it) has some exclusive, highest or only role in doctrine.
In defense of Sola Scriptura, quotes of the following types are offered.
1. The Word of God Is Truth
What God communicates in any way (orally, in writing, in a vision, through a messenger: an angel, a prophet or an apostle) is truth:
“Sanctify them by Your truth. Your word is truth” (John. 17:17)
We do not dispute this. Every word of God is truth, and not only the written one. Oral tradition is also called the word of God:
“when you received the word of God which you heard from us, you welcomed it not as the word of men, but as it is in truth, the word of God, which also effectively works in you who believe” (1 Thess. 2:13) (1 Pet. 1:23-25)
We also do not dispute that all Scripture is God-inspired:
“All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness” (2 Tim. 3:16)
2. Scripture Is Important for Believers
Holy Scripture is of great importance for believers:
“All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness” (2 Tim. 3:16)
“You search the Scriptures, for in them you think you have eternal life; and these are they which testify of Me” (John. 5:39)
We do not dispute this either.
All this is true. The Orthodox Church disputes none of the above, but itself affirms all of it.
However:
these quotes do not show that the truth is only in Scripture and that Tradition is not truth; the same kind of quotes about Tradition are simply ignored (see below), since the supporters of Sola Scriptura have no aim of defending the necessity of Tradition.
these quotes do not show that all divine revelation is written down in Scripture, and that therefore, supposedly, Tradition can be cast aside. Casting aside Tradition is an act against Scripture (2 Thess. 2:15).
None of the quotes cited says absolutely anything about the word “alone” from the concept of “Scripture alone”. All of them merely point to the necessity of divine revelation and its truth, in whatever form it is received: written, spoken or shown visually. In this we believe, and there is nothing of “Sola Scriptura” here.
The Trick of the Preachers of Sola Scriptura
Having shown the listener that Scripture has high authority, and that listening to Scripture is the same as listening to God, a substitution then takes place quite unnoticed by the listener: instead of God and Scripture, the preacher begins to speak and to interpret Scripture in his own way. And now the listener is already asked to accept as the words of God the words of the preacher, the founder of one of thousands of societies contradicting one another in the interpretation of Scripture.
Of course, the preacher continues to refer to Scripture in his speeches, backing his words with a set of quotes, but the obvious problem here is that Protestantism has thus given birth to thousands of every possible teaching about God, His actions and the ways of salvation. Moreover, from the very beginning of Christianity, societies external to the Church tried to distort the faith and lead people after themselves precisely through the distortion of Scripture. Even the devil did this, tempting Christ precisely with Scripture:
“Then the devil took Him up into the holy city, set Him on the pinnacle of the temple, and said to Him, ‘If You are the Son of God, throw Yourself down. For it is written: “He shall give His angels charge over you,” and, “In their hands they shall bear you up, lest you dash your foot against a stone”’” (Matt. 4:5-6)
The devil also, taking occasion from the words of God, led the first people to their fall:
“Now the serpent was more cunning than any beast of the field which the LORD God had made. And he said to the woman, ‘Has God indeed said, “You shall not eat of every tree of the garden”?’ And the woman said to the serpent, ‘We may eat the fruit of the trees of the garden; but of the fruit of the tree which is in the midst of the garden, God has said, “You shall not eat it, nor shall you touch it, lest you die.”’ Then the serpent said to the woman, ‘You will not surely die. For God knows that in the day you eat of it your eyes will be opened, and you will be like God, knowing good and evil’” (Gen. 3:1-5)
So the devil and the founders of societies at enmity with the Church used precisely Scripture to lead people astray. How does this happen? It happens because a private interpretation of Scripture is endowed with the authority of Scripture.
The Fundamental Problem of Sola Scriptura — Subjectivism
The fundamental problem of this approach to building faith is that there is no objective understanding of Holy Scripture. Every person perceives it through the prism of his accumulated experience, worldview, interests and preferences, that is, perceives it subjectively. Simply put, the problem is this: who will decide what agrees with Scripture and what does not? Sola Scriptura does not answer this question. This is precisely what makes it merely a theory that cannot be carried out in practice. And these are not groundless claims.
The very first users of Sola Scriptura (the reformers) proposed different doctrines based on their own, different understanding of Holy Scripture. The disagreements concerned the most important questions:
salvation;
the predestination of people to salvation,
the sinfulness of man,
the role of the sacraments in the life of believers,
the reality of Christ’s presence in the Eucharist,
the possibility of baptizing infants,
the presence of icons in the life of believers.
Different doctrines immediately gave birth to different societies. And this is only the very beginning. In the course of time, the number of disagreements and divisions among the users of Sola Scriptura grew rapidly and, starting from a few doctrines and societies, within 500 years reached tens of thousands of divisions and disagreements on every possible question of faith, up to the most important ones — about God and the person of Christ.
Thus Sola Scriptura, as a concept, did not in practice make it possible to sift out human accretions and arrive at the faith of the authors of the biblical books. Sola Scriptura, despite the loud claims of its supporters, merely opens the way for the appearance of many new human accretions — new traditions, which will be discussed further.
Sola Scriptura Has Led to the Appearance of Many Traditions
According to the declared intention of the reformers, Sola Scriptura was to sift out human traditions. In reality, every new founder of yet another Protestant society became the founder of yet another human tradition, simply clothing his own faith in quotes from Scripture, which various heresiarchs did long before the reformers, ever since authoritative statements and texts appeared (Gen. 3:1,4-5).
Around the new leader a society would form, which received, kept and handed down to its descendants nothing other than the faith of this leader. And if someone wants to join this society, he will be obliged to receive the faith of the leader of this society and to understand Scripture just as this particular society understands it. A person comes to the Baptists — he receives the faith according to the tradition of the Baptists; with the Pentecostals he receives the faith according to the tradition of the Pentecostals; with the Adventists — according to the tradition of the Adventists; and the same with all the rest. The societies condemn each other’s traditions: a Baptist will not be allowed to teach a society of Adventists, nor a Pentecostal a society of Baptists.
As a result, all such societies arrived from Sola Scriptura at the point that one must believe not at all “according to Scripture alone”, but strictly according to their tradition: only as their leader once said, and as the society has kept in the form of tradition, handing down knowledge from forefathers to descendants through oral preaching and the books of teachers. It is simply not customary to call this tradition, let alone “human tradition”, a name which, as a bogeyman, is customarily given only to the Tradition of the Church.
The Leader of a Society as the Source of Faith
If Scripture were some self-sufficient source of faith, then everyone who undertook to establish faith “on Scripture alone” would have the same faith as the other users of Sola Scriptura. However, all of them ended up with different faiths, which means that the source of faith is different too. This source is the person who founded the society. He invented it, handed it down to his followers, and they keep the faith of their leader.
De Facto, Not Scripture but Their Own Tradition Takes First Place in Protestant Societies
In all such societies, first place is given precisely to their tradition, and Scripture is used only as an auxiliary instrument, from which quotes useful for justifying the tradition are selected. The faith received in one of such communities in fact prevails over Scripture, and the biblical texts are used only to create a soap bubble around the listener, a distracting illusion that here people believe according to Scripture alone, while into his mind, through preaching, precisely the tradition of the community in which he has found himself is being laid.
Scripture can easily be ignored if it comes into contradiction with the tradition. For example, nowhere does Scripture say that infants may not be baptized; on the contrary, the prefiguration of baptism (circumcision) was applied precisely to infants (Gen. 17:10-12), yet many Protestants insist on forbidding the baptism of infants, citing indirect reasons from Scripture. Scripture does not say that infants are saved without baptism; on the contrary, the Savior said that without being born of water and the Spirit no one can either see or enter the Kingdom of Heaven (John. 3:3,5-6), and without the prefiguration of baptism a person in the Old Testament also had to be cut off from the people (Gen. 17:14); but many Protestants teach that infants are saved without baptism, again trying to cite indirect quotes from Scripture, though relying even more on their own reasoning about it.
Keeping the faith in what is found only in their tradition, they denounce the Church for its teaching on the transmission of the grace of the priesthood through ordination, easily casting aside the most direct words about the transmission of God’s gift through the laying on of hands (2 Tim. 1:6; Act. 8:18). Why so? Simply because their tradition offers a different faith, and since the tradition prevails over Scripture, the direct biblical text is cast aside, for one may not believe otherwise than this society was once taught. Although this is so, it may not be spoken of in such words: one may not use the word tradition (this word is used only for attacks on the Church), one may not openly say that here they pass on only the faith of the founder of this particular society.
Dishonest Oppositions
In societies created by supporters of Sola Scriptura, the following opposition is widespread: the Church has cast aside Scripture and believes only according to Tradition, while every Protestant society, on the contrary, has cast aside Tradition and believes only according to Scripture.
In reality:
neither does the Church believe only according to Tradition, using Scripture equally with it;
nor do Protestant societies believe only according to Scripture, recognizing as correct only the faith of their leader, which they keep as a tradition.
Thus no Sola Scriptura exists in practice. It exists only in theory. The implementation of this concept by any particular person inevitably entails the appearance of yet another new faith, a new understanding of Scripture, a new society, and as a consequence, a new tradition.
Proving this is not at all difficult. It is enough to carry out an experiment. If a person comes into one of these societies and it does not hand down its knowledge to him, but simply puts a Bible into his hands, then, reading the Bible alone, this person will 100% not arrive at the faith of this society. He will arrive at their faith in only one case — if the society hands down its faith to him.
The Orthodox Church confirms all its doctrine by Holy Scripture. However, Protestant societies do not agree with the Church’s understanding of Holy Scripture, offering in its place not “Scripture alone” (silently), but their own understanding and faith.
Sola Scriptura Comes into Direct Conflict with Scripture
The objections of the Orthodox Church to Sola Scriptura concern not the word “Scripture”, but the word “alone”. And the objections are built on Scripture itself:
“Sola Scriptura” is absent from Scripture. Scripture itself contains no requirement to build faith on Scripture alone or to give preference to Scripture alone. That is why Protestants cite quotes only about the importance of Scripture (keeping silent about the quotes on the importance of Tradition), because there are simply no quotes about Sola Scriptura in Scripture.
On the contrary, Scripture says to keep the oral Tradition. It is repeatedly required to keep Tradition: not only the written, but also the oral preaching of the apostles (quotes). And the oral preaching is put in first place by the apostles (2 Thess. 2:15).
Scripture requires learning from the teachers of the Church. God appoints presbyters and teachers in the Church (1 Cor. 12:28; Eph. 4:11), to whom the leadership and teaching of the Church’s flock is entrusted. The supporters of Sola Scriptura refuse to learn from the Church. Not wishing to become disciples in the Church, these people have proclaimed themselves teachers (2 Tim. 4:3).
Scripture can be interpreted wrongly. Scripture indicates that people not established by the Church interpret Scripture to their own destruction (2 Pet. 3:15-16). The supporters of Sola Scriptura do not even intend to learn from the Church. Rejecting the teachers and taking only the textbook, they interpret Scripture however it happens, which has led them to the existence of a huge number of divided societies with different faiths and different understandings of the textbook (Scripture). And Scripture says that independent interpretation of Scripture without instruction from the Church leads to the twisting of Scripture and to destruction (2 Pet. 3:15-16).
Thus the supporters of Sola Scriptura act against Scripture in the following:
They teach what is not in Holy Scripture. There is no teaching of “Sola Scriptura” in Scripture;
They reject the oral Tradition of the apostles. They say that only Scripture is of primary importance, acting contrary to the words of the apostles written in Scripture, in which they require keeping Tradition, putting oral preaching in first place, and only then the written (2 Thess. 2:15);
They reject the teaching office of the Church and the teachers of the Church appointed by God, directly contrary to Scripture (1 Cor. 12:28; Eph. 4:11).
They interpret Scripture without being established by the Church. Every Protestant society has its own understanding of Scripture; every community of a society, and even within a community, can understand Scripture as they themselves please, because Sola Scriptura prompts rejecting the highest authority of any other doctrinal sources besides Scripture (as understood by the reader). If a person has come to like another understanding of Scripture, then it will be considered true, for Scripture is above the speech of a preacher, even a Protestant one.
The Main Proof That the Idea of Sola Scriptura Is Mistaken
If the aim of inventing Sola Scriptura was the strongest possible division of the Christian world, then this idea proved extremely effective. But if the aim of its invention was the search for the faith of the apostles, then Sola Scriptura became a mistaken idea, one that only led away from the goal and gave birth to many traditions and divisions.
The main proof that Sola Scriptura is mistaken is the users of Sola Scriptura themselves: a countless multitude of societies contradicting one another, with doctrines invented under the slogan “Scripture alone”. No other idea has created as many divisions among believers in Christ as “Sola Scriptura”. And this was done directly contrary to Scripture (John. 17:20-21; 1 Cor. 1:10; 1 John. 2:18-19).
“I do not pray for these alone, but also for those who will believe in Me through their word; that they all may be one, as You, Father, are in Me, and I in You; that they also may be one in Us, that the world may believe that You sent Me” (John. 17:20-21)
“Now I plead with you, brethren, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that you all speak the same thing, and that there be no divisions among you, but that you be perfectly joined together in the same mind and in the same judgment” (1 Cor. 1:10)
“Little children, it is the last hour; and as you have heard that the Antichrist is coming, even now many antichrists have come, by which we know that it is the last hour. They went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, they would have continued with us; but they went out that they might be made manifest, that none of them were of us” (1 John. 2:18-19)
In the 16th century the reformer Luther proposed the concept of Sola Scriptura. Subsequently, every reformer began to build faith, giving the highest authority, as they claimed, to “Scripture alone” (their own understanding of Scripture). It was assumed that building faith on Scripture alone should lead to the faith of the apostles. Thus it was declared that precisely this method, and it alone, allows a person to arrive at the faith of the apostles. But in the end, contrary to the intention, all the reformers ended up with different faiths.
At first the approach of “Sola Scriptura” gave birth to three directions with different understandings of Scripture: Lutherans, Calvinists and Anglicans. Later, this concept made it possible for any person on the planet to create his own society with his own doctrine — it is enough just to take a Bible in hand. Thus appeared thousands of so-called denominations, each with its own faith and its own understanding of Scripture. This process continues to this day. Because of the difference in faith, following human ways (1 Cor. 3:3), they all separate from one another, all have a different faith, a different baptism and a different idea of God. All this contradicts how it should be in the Church:
“There is one body and one Spirit, just as you were called in one hope of your calling; one Lord, one faith, one baptism” (Eph. 4:4-5)
Some may object regarding the different faith in God, saying that everyone believes in Jesus. However, not all have the apostolic faith in Christ as God; there are not a few Protestant Unitarians, who deny faith in God, one in nature and triune in persons: Father, Son and Holy Spirit. Besides, many societies have different ideas about God, about His will and the ways of pleasing Him. For example, Pentecostals/charismatics believe that their incoherent muttering and falling to the floor are pleasing to God, and that all this is supposedly the action of the Holy Spirit, that is, of God. At the same time, the other societies reject this Pentecostal idea of God, offering their own ideas in its place. Thus they have different ideas about God, and sometimes different teachings about God.
A countless multitude of people contradicting one another with a Bible in their hands, claiming that they have built yet another faith “according to Scripture alone”, is the most striking argument against Sola Scriptura. Through “Scripture alone” people were promised a road to the one apostolic faith, freeing the faith from “human accretions”, but in reality this approach gave birth to a great multitude of human accretions and gave the Christian world nothing but countless divisions, contrary to God’s will for the unity of believers (John. 17:20-21; 1 Cor. 1:10; 1 John. 2:18-19).
“I do not pray for these alone, but also for those who will believe in Me through their word; that they all may be one, as You, Father, are in Me, and I in You; that they also may be one in Us, that the world may believe that You sent Me” (John. 17:20-21)
“Now I plead with you, brethren, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that you all speak the same thing, and that there be no divisions among you, but that you be perfectly joined together in the same mind and in the same judgment” (1 Cor. 1:10)
Old Testament Parallels[3]
A similar division took place in the Old Testament during the building of the city and tower of Babel (Gen. 11:1-9). People decided by their own efforts to build a city and a tower up to heaven (Gen. 11:4), but began to speak differently (Gen. 11:7), divided and dispersed (Gen. 11:8). So it is now.
God created the Church, sent the Holy Spirit to it forever (John. 14:16), Himself promised to be with it always (Matt. 28:20), handed down the teaching orally, appointed priests (Act. 20:17-18,28) and teachers (1 Cor. 12:28), who taught orally, but also carried on correspondence.
More than fifteen centuries later, people come, take from the Church only the correspondence of some apostles (not all) preserved by the Church, contrary to this very correspondence cast aside the invincible Church (Matt. 16:18) — the foundation that God laid — cast aside the faith received from the apostles and kept in the Church, the Tradition of the apostles (2 Thess. 2:15 and others), the priests (Act. 20:17-18,28) and teachers (1 Cor. 12:28) appointed by God, and resolved by their own mind and strength (by research in history, archaeology, linguistics and so on) independently, apart from the Church founded by God, to build their own city. Other builders join them. In the end, they began to speak differently, divided and dispersed, beginning to build their own settlements with their own languages of communication, not wishing to live in the city “which has foundations, whose builder and maker is God” (Heb. 11:10).
“Scripture Alone” Leads to “Alone”-Thinking
The teaching of the Protestants, which includes many postulates with the word “alone”, often leads its supporters to a way of thinking that can be briefly called “alone”-thinking. It makes many of them pay attention only to separate parts of a text that they like, imagining the word “alone” in the right places, as if saying to themselves: “only these words must I take into account”, and building some construction on this. When the author of a text considers different sides of one subject, describing them either one after another or in different places of his work, Protestants often choose only one thing and make it an absolute.
For example, the apostles write about the necessity for salvation of both faith and works. “Alone”-thinking makes one choose here the fragment of text about faith and insert the word “alone”.
The apostles write about the necessity of both Scripture and Tradition. “Alone”-thinking makes one choose here the fragment of text about the importance of Scripture and insert the word “alone”.
In the study of the texts of ancient writers this way of thinking shows itself in almost everything.
For example, when explaining the Eucharist, authors give two explanations (a literal and a symbolic one); Protestants tend to see only the symbolic explanation, trying to pass these authors off as supporters of their “alone”-teachings.
Many heresies arose on this principle. Does the fact that Jesus Christ is a man mean that He is only a man? No, He is also God. And if He is God, does that mean that He is only God? No, He is also a man. If Christ is the image of the Father, does that mean that He is only an image (merely a picture)? No, He is also true God and true man. How many have stumbled over this, and still stumble. So it is here: the symbolic explanation does not reject the literal one, and the literal does not reject the symbolic.
Nothing prevents the Orthodox from recognizing the necessity of both Scripture and Tradition, of both faith and works, and, recognizing the literal understanding of the Eucharist, also recognizing in addition the symbolic meanings. Many Protestants insist everywhere on the word “alone”, simply ignoring the other statements of the same authors.
The Council in Jerusalem and Scripture
One of the clearest proofs that the Church did not live by the principle “Scripture alone” is the events of the first church council in Jerusalem, headed by the apostles.
At the Jerusalem council, without instructions from Scripture, the Law of Moses is abolished: circumcision, the prohibition of unclean food, the Sabbath rest, the prohibition of touching the dead, of associating with Gentiles and so on. This decision was made by the Church, having gathered together and deliberated (Act. 15:22). It was done without Scripture, because the author of Scripture lives in the Church — the Holy Spirit; and therefore the council’s decree is sealed not by the phrase “for it is written in Scripture”, but by an indication of the will of the Holy Spirit and the Church: “For it seemed good to the Holy Spirit, and to us” (Act. 15:28-29).
So, the abolition of the Law of Moses is the decision of the Holy Spirit and the Church. On the other side, they were opposed by Christians who had come to believe from the sect of the Pharisees (Act. 15:5). On the side of the latter were some clear expressions from Scripture (Gen. 17:14). But on the side of the apostles was precisely the authority of the Church, for they, as it is written, deliberated with the whole Church (Act. 15:22), and then proclaimed the common decision. Without Scripture, but only by their word, they indicated the abolition of the Law to those who demanded that the Law be kept according to Scripture.
Scripture says that one must be circumcised and that whoever is not circumcised will be cut off from the people (Gen. 17:14). But the apostles gave no commandment to teach this:
“Since we have heard that some who went out from us have troubled you with words, unsettling your souls, saying, ‘You must be circumcised and keep the law’ — to whom we gave no such commandment” (Act. 15:24)
But this, after all, is said in Scripture. On what basis must this not be taught? On the basis of what Scripture was it decided that one need not be circumcised? What Scripture allowed eating pork? This was done not according to Scripture, but by the conciliar decision of the whole Church, which establishes the truth (1 Tim. 3:15).
Since then, the decision of the Jerusalem council has become the Tradition of the Church:
“And as they went through the cities, they delivered (Greek: παρεδίδοσαν — “handed down”, from the same root as παράδοσις, “tradition”) to them the decrees to keep, which were determined by the apostles and elders at Jerusalem” (Act. 16:4)
The president of the apostolic council in Jerusalem, the apostle James, recalls in his speech the words of the prophet Amos. In this prophecy there are no words about circumcision:
“On that day I will raise up the tabernacle of David, which has fallen down, and repair its damages; I will raise up its ruins, and rebuild it as in the days of old; that they may possess the remnant of Edom, and all the Gentiles who are called by My name, says the LORD who does this thing” (Amos. 9:11-12)
If on this basis what was done at the council in Jerusalem is accepted (some implicit reference to Scripture and the mention of the Holy Spirit), then all the Ecumenical Councils of the Orthodox Church should naturally be accepted, and not only the one in Jerusalem, because the Holy Spirit is sent to the Church not only for the Jerusalem council, but forever:
“And I will pray the Father, and He will give you another Helper, that He may abide with you forever” (John. 14:16)
And Christ Himself promised to be with the Church always:
“I am with you always, even to the end of the age. Amen” (Matt. 28:20)
Far weightier grounds from Scripture were shown at all the Councils, including the 7th, which defended the veneration of icons. The Holy Spirit is still in the Church. All the Councils must be accepted in accordance with such arguments.
The Teaching Office of the Church
The Flock Is Entrusted to the Presbyters, Who Are Its Overseers
“he called for the elders of the church. And when they had come to him, he said to them: <...> take heed to yourselves and to all the flock, among which the Holy Spirit has made you overseers (Greek: ἐπισκόπους — “bishops”), to shepherd the church of God which He purchased with His own blood” (Act. 20:17-18,28)
God Appointed Teachers in the Church; Not All Are Teachers
“And He [Christ] Himself gave some to be apostles, some prophets, some evangelists, and some pastors and teachers, for the equipping of the saints for the work of ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ” (Eph. 4:11-12)
“And God has appointed these in the church: first apostles, second prophets, third teachers; <…> Are all apostles? Are all prophets? Are all teachers? Are all workers of miracles?” (1 Cor. 12:28-29)
People Not Established by the Church Interpret Scripture to Their Own Destruction
“as also our beloved brother Paul, according to the wisdom given to him, has written to you, as also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things, in which are some things hard to understand, which untaught and unstable people twist to their own destruction, as they do also the rest of the Scriptures” (Greek: ἀστήρικτοι — “not established, not made firm”) (2 Pet. 3:15-16)
Scripture Can Be Interpreted Wrongly
“as also our beloved brother Paul, according to the wisdom given to him, has written to you, as also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things, in which are some things hard to understand, which untaught and unstable people twist to their own destruction, as they do also the rest of the Scriptures” (2 Pet. 3:15-16)
More: https://bibleox.com/en/en/w/Ip7w_Interpretation_of_Scripture
If such bewilderment and empty speaking be from ignorance, Scripture will teach them, that the devil, the author of heresies, because of the ill savour which attaches to evil, borrows Scripture language, as a cloak wherewith to sow the ground with his own poison also, and to seduce the simple. Thus he deceived Eve; thus he framed former heresies; thus he persuaded Arius at this time to make a show of speaking against those former ones, that he might introduce his own without observation. <…> For who was ever yet a hearer of such a doctrine? or whence or from whom did the abettors and hirelings of the heresy gain it? who thus expounded to them when they were at school? <…> But if they themselves own that they have heard it now for the first time, how can they deny that this heresy is foreign, and not from our fathers? But what is not from our fathers, but has come to light in this day, how can it be but that of which the blessed Paul (1 Tim. 4:1–2; Titus 1:14) has foretold, that ‘in the latter times some shall depart from the sound faith, giving heed to seducing spirits and doctrines of devils, in the hypocrisy of liars; cauterized in their own conscience, and turning from the truth’?
(Athanasius the Great, Discourses Against the Arians, I, 8)
What Is Tradition?
Tradition is the revelation of God the Father, which He, through His Only Begotten Son, handed down to the apostles, and they handed down to the Church, and the Church hands it down as faith from generation to generation by word (spoken and written) and by deed:
“For I have given to them the words which You have given Me; and they have received them, and have known surely that I came forth from You; and they have believed that You sent Me” (John. 17:8)
“Now I praise you, brethren, that you remember me in all things and keep the traditions just as I delivered them to you” (1 Cor. 11:2)
The Command to Keep Tradition and to Teach in Accordance with It
“Therefore, brethren, stand fast and hold the traditions which you were taught, whether by word or our epistle” (2 Thess. 2:15)
“Now I praise you, brethren, that you remember me in all things and keep the traditions just as I delivered them to you” (1 Cor. 11:2)
“Moreover, brethren, I declare to you the gospel which I preached to you, which also you received and in which you stand, by which also you are saved, if you hold fast that word which I preached to you — unless you believed in vain” (1 Cor. 15:1-2)
“And the things that you have heard from me among many witnesses, commit these to faithful men who will be able to teach others also” (2 Tim. 2:2)
“Finally then, brethren, we urge and exhort in the Lord Jesus that you should abound more and more, just as you received from us how you ought to walk and to please God” (1 Thess. 4:1)
“Beloved, while I was very diligent to write to you concerning our common salvation, I found it necessary to write to you exhorting you to contend earnestly for the faith which was once for all delivered to the saints” (Jude. 1:3)
“holding fast the faithful word as he has been taught, that he may be able, by sound doctrine, both to exhort and convict those who contradict. For there are many insubordinate, both idle talkers and deceivers, especially those of the circumcision, whose mouths must be stopped, who subvert whole households, teaching things which they ought not, for the sake of dishonest gain” (Titus. 1:9-11)
“But I fear, lest somehow, as the serpent deceived Eve by his craftiness, so your minds may be corrupted from the simplicity that is in Christ. For if he who comes preaches another Jesus whom we have not preached, or if you receive a different spirit which you have not received, or a different gospel which you have not accepted — you may well put up with it! <...> For such are false apostles, deceitful workers, transforming themselves into apostles of Christ. And no wonder! For Satan himself transforms himself into an angel of light. Therefore it is no great thing if his ministers also transform themselves into ministers of righteousness, whose end will be according to their works” (2 Cor. 11:3-4,13-15)
“As I urged you when I went into Macedonia — remain in Ephesus that you may charge some that they teach no other doctrine, nor give heed to fables and endless genealogies, which cause disputes rather than godly edification which is in faith” (1 Tim. 1:3-4)
Tradition Is Not Only Texts but Also Words That Were Heard
“For this reason we also thank God without ceasing, because when you received the word of God which you heard(!) from us, you welcomed it not as the word of men, but as it is in truth, the word of God, which also effectively works in you who believe” (1 Thess. 2:13)
“Hold fast the pattern of sound words which you have heard(!) from me, in faith and love which are in Christ Jesus” (2 Tim. 1:13)
“And the things that you have heard(!) from me among many witnesses, commit these to faithful men who will be able to teach others also” (2 Tim. 2:2)
“Therefore, brethren, stand fast and hold the traditions which you were taught, whether by word(!) or our epistle” (2 Thess. 2:15)
“Therefore let that abide in you which you heard from the beginning. If what you heard(!) from the beginning abides in you, you also will abide in the Son and in the Father” (1 John. 2:24)
“Now I praise you, brethren, that you remember(!) me in all things and keep the traditions just as I delivered them to you” (1 Cor. 11:2)
“Remember therefore how you have received and heard(!); hold fast and repent. Therefore if you will not watch, I will come upon you as a thief, and you will not know what hour I will come upon you” (Rev. 3:3)
The Necessity of Tradition
Holy Scripture Is Not the Source of All Information About Jesus Christ
“And truly Jesus did many other signs in the presence of His disciples, which are not written in this book; but these are written that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that believing you may have life in His name” (John. 20:30-31)
“And there are also many other things that Jesus did, which if they were written one by one, I suppose that even the world itself could not contain the books that would be written. Amen” (John. 21:25)
The Teaching on the Laying On of Hands Is Not Described in Scripture
In not a single epistle is there a teaching on how to baptize rightly, how to ordain deacons, presbyters, bishops:
“not laying again the foundation of repentance from dead works and of faith toward God, of the doctrine of baptisms, of laying on of hands, of resurrection of the dead, and of eternal judgment” (Heb. 6:1-2)
The Apostles Preferred Communication by Word of Mouth
“Having many things to write to you, I did not wish to do so with paper and ink; but I hope to come to you and speak face to face, that our joy may be full” (2 John. 1:12)
“I had many things to write, but I do not wish to write to you with pen and ink; but I hope to see you shortly, and we shall speak face to face” (3 John. 1:13-14)
Both the Oral and the Written Preaching Must Be Kept
The Apostle Paul asks to keep Tradition (the instruction of the apostles), received not only in the epistles, but also from words:
“Therefore, brethren, stand fast and hold the traditions which you were taught, whether by word or our epistle” (2 Thess. 2:15)
“And the things that you have heard from me among many witnesses, commit these to faithful men who will be able to teach others also” (2 Tim. 2:2)
The Great Length of the Spoken Preaching of the Apostles
3 Years
The Apostle Paul taught the presbyters of Asia for three years, night and day:
“Therefore watch, and remember that for three years I did not cease to warn everyone night and day with tears” (Act. 20:31)
1.5 Years
For a year and a half he taught the community in Corinth:
“After these things Paul departed from Athens and went to Corinth. <...> And he continued there a year and six months, teaching the word of God among them” (Act. 18:1,11)
2 Years and 3 Months
He preached in Ephesus: first for three months in the synagogue, and then for two years with the disciples in a school:
“And he went into the synagogue and spoke boldly for three months, reasoning and persuading concerning the things of the kingdom of God. But when some were hardened and did not believe, but spoke evil of the Way before the multitude, he departed from them and withdrew the disciples, reasoning daily in the school of Tyrannus. And this continued for two years, so that all who dwelt in Asia heard the word of the Lord Jesus, both Jews and Greeks” (Act. 19:8-10)
Altogether, the Apostle Paul alone preached for at least 30 years: from his conversion in 33-34 AD until his death in 64-67 AD.
The Apostles Made Use of Tradition
The apostle names two Egyptian sorcerers whose names are absent from Scripture:
“Now as Jannes and Jambres resisted Moses, so do these also resist the truth: men of corrupt minds, disapproved concerning the faith” (2 Tim. 3:8)
The apostle Jude tells of a dispute absent from Scripture:
“Yet Michael the archangel, in contending with the devil, when he disputed about the body of Moses, dared not bring against him a reviling accusation, but said, ‘The Lord rebuke you!’” (Jude. 1:9)
About the words of Enoch, absent from Scripture:
“Now Enoch, the seventh from Adam, prophesied about these men also, saying, ‘Behold, the Lord comes with ten thousands of His saints’” (Jude. 1:14)
The Apostle Paul speaks of the prophet Isaiah, who was sawn in two after hiding in the hollow of a tree:
“They were stoned, they were sawn in two, were tempted, were slain with the sword. They wandered about in sheepskins and goatskins, being destitute, afflicted, tormented” (Heb. 11:37)
The evangelist Luke writes down the Gospel on the basis of words heard from eyewitnesses, that is, he writes down tradition:
“Inasmuch as many have taken in hand to set in order a narrative of those things which have been fulfilled among us, just as those who from the beginning were eyewitnesses and ministers of the word delivered them to us, it seemed good to me also, having had perfect understanding of all things from the very first, to write to you an orderly account, most excellent Theophilus” (Luke. 1:1-3)
They Report Information Absent from the Gospel
The Apostle Paul, in his talk with the Ephesian pastors, points to a teaching of Christ the Savior that is absent from the Gospel:
“I have shown you in every way, by laboring like this, that you must support the weak. And remember the words of the Lord Jesus, that He said, ‘It is more blessed to give than to receive’” (Act. 20:35)
He reports the appearance of the risen Christ to a great number of people, which is also not written in the Gospel:
“After that He was seen by over five hundred brethren at once, of whom the greater part remain to the present, but some have fallen asleep. After that He was seen by James, then by all the apostles” (1 Cor. 15:6-7)
The Importance of Tradition
A wrong teaching does not lead to God:
“Whoever transgresses and does not abide in the doctrine of Christ does not have God. He who abides in the doctrine of Christ has both the Father and the Son” (2 John. 1:9)
Heresies (false teachings) do not inherit the Kingdom of God:
“heresies <...> of which I tell you beforehand, just as I also told you in time past, that those who practice such things will not inherit the kingdom of God” (Gal. 5:20-21)
Withdraw from Those Who Bring In a New Teaching
“Reject a divisive man (Greek: αἱρετικὸν ἄνθρωπον — “a heretic”) after the first and second admonition” (Titus. 3:10)
“If anyone teaches otherwise and does not consent to wholesome words, even the words of our Lord Jesus Christ, and to the doctrine which accords with godliness, he is proud, knowing nothing, but is obsessed with disputes and arguments over words, from which come envy, strife, reviling, evil suspicions <...> From such withdraw yourself” (1 Tim. 6:3-5)
“O Timothy! Guard what was committed to your trust, avoiding the profane and idle babblings and contradictions of what is falsely called knowledge — by professing it some have strayed concerning the faith. Grace be with you. Amen” (1 Tim. 6:20-21)
“But we command you, brethren, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that you withdraw from every brother who walks disorderly and not according to the tradition which he received from us” (2 Thess. 3:6)
“Now I urge you, brethren, note those who cause divisions and offenses, contrary to the doctrine which you learned, and avoid them. For those who are such do not serve our Lord Jesus Christ, but their own belly, and by smooth words and flattering speech deceive the hearts of the simple” (Rom. 16:17-18)
“If anyone comes to you and does not bring this doctrine, do not receive him into your house nor greet him; for he who greets him shares in his evil deeds” (2 John. 1:10-11)
“But even if we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel to you than what we have preached to you, let him be accursed. As we have said before, so now I say again, if anyone preaches any other gospel to you than what you have received, let him be accursed (Greek: ἀνάθεμα — “anathema”)” (Gal. 1:8-9)
Anathema (Greek ἀνάθεμα) — excommunication from the Church.
The Need to Honor and Follow the Saints
«Remember those who rule over you, who have spoken the word of God to you, whose faith follow, considering the outcome of their conduct» (Heb. 13:7)
«Therefore I urge you, imitate me» (1 Cor. 4:16)
“Brethren, join in following my example, and note those who so walk, as you have us for a pattern” (Phil. 3:17)
More about the veneration of the saints: https://bibleox.com/ru/ru/w/почитание-святых-в-Библии
Criticism
“To the Law and to the Testimony” (Is. 8:20)
In defense of Sola Scriptura the following quote from the Old Testament is cited:
“And when they say to you, ‘Seek those who are mediums and wizards, who whisper and mutter,’ should not a people seek their God? Should they seek the dead on behalf of the living? To the law and to the testimony! If they do not speak according to this word, it is because there is no light in them” (Is. 8:19-20) [4]
Nothing is said here about the superiority of Scripture over Tradition. Needless to say, between sorcerers and Scripture one must choose Scripture. These lines speak of comparing the Pentateuch of Moses (the Torah) and Revelation (the words of the prophets) with the words of sorcerers and mediums, who should not exist among the people at all (Deut. 18:9-14). The prophet Isaiah proposes using the Torah and the prophetic words as an external means of exposing the sorcerers, pointing out to the people the difference between what the sorcerers say and what God says.
Moreover, in Old Testament times Scripture in principle could not be separated from Tradition. Without Tradition it could not only not be understood rightly, but not even read rightly, because it was written only in consonants (more). Not knowing the reading, one and the same word can be read in different ways. To read the words correctly, one has to be within the tradition of reading, and it was handed down as Tradition from forefathers to descendants. Therefore any words about Scripture are inseparable from Tradition.
It is worth reminding opponents of their own thesis — “Sola scriptura” insists on the word “Sola” (alone): that Scripture alone is the highest authority. However, in the quote cited there is no such exclusiveness of the authority of Scripture, no word “alone” (or anything similar), which the supporters of “Scripture alone” wish to see. If one adds it here only on the ground that Tradition is not directly mentioned, then one should be consistent and admit that other, similar quotes propose building faith on Tradition alone, since Scripture is not mentioned:
“Hold fast the pattern of sound words which you have heard from me, in faith and love which are in Christ Jesus” (2 Tim. 1:13)
“And the things that you have heard from me among many witnesses, commit these to faithful men who will be able to teach others also” (2 Tim. 2:2)
Following the Tradition that was heard makes it possible not only to distinguish right from wrong, but infinitely more — it makes it possible to abide in God:
“Therefore let that abide in you which you heard from the beginning. If what you heard from the beginning abides in you, you also will abide in the Son and in the Father” (1 John. 2:24)
The Lord Jesus Christ Himself also calls to keep what was heard, when almost all of the New Testament Scripture had already been written:
“Remember therefore how you have received and heard; hold fast and repent. Therefore if you will not watch, I will come upon you as a thief, and you will not know what hour I will come upon you” (Rev. 3:3)
Does this mean that the Lord and the apostles teach “Tradition alone”? After all, having written this very Scripture, here they do not even mention Scripture, but require following Tradition.
Taking only these verses, the opponents of the Church could in exactly the same way invent the opposite extreme — the thesis “Tradition alone”. But since they did not receive the Tradition of the apostles, having arisen fifteen centuries (and more) after the apostles, and having no aim of defending Tradition, they do not derive such extremes about Tradition. The Church, however, having received from the apostles both Tradition and Scripture, rejects neither the one nor the other, and also does not reject the commandments of the apostles to keep the oral Tradition, regarding both Scripture and Tradition as equally true.
“Not to Think Beyond What Is Written” (1 Cor. 4:6)
“Now these things, brethren, I have figuratively transferred to myself and Apollos for your sakes, that you may learn in us not to think beyond what is written, that none of you may be puffed up on behalf of one against the other” (1 Cor. 4:6)
Here a certain written text is spoken of, on the basis of which one must understand that one should not be puffed up against one another. What text is meant? The previous chapter of this same epistle, in which a lesson of a lowly opinion of oneself was taught. The apostle proposes to learn from them not to be puffed up against one another, not thinking beyond what had just been written.
This epistle was written because of a division that had arisen in the Corinthian community. Throughout chapter 2 the apostle diminished the significance of himself and Apollos, exalting Christ, in order to prevent divisions in Corinth into followers of Paul and followers of Apollos (1 Cor. 3:4-7), to prevent the division of the Church into parties. Those who were dividing did not differ in teaching (otherwise the apostle would have spoken about teaching), but in their attitude to one another. They divided by the name of a church teacher, as if everyone in the Church should have fellowship only with those who had studied under the same teacher, and reject the disciples of other church teachers. To correct this false thinking, the apostle diminished the significance of the names by which the divisions had formed, that is, he humbled himself and Apollos, exalting Christ.
A little further on, summing up what had been said, the apostle says the same in other words, calling on them to follow no longer what was written, but himself:
“Therefore I urge you, imitate me” (1 Cor. 4:16-17)
Thus the quote is about Christians not thinking of themselves beyond the written apostolic example, and, following the call to a lowly opinion of oneself, not being puffed up against one another and not dividing.
Not to Listen Even to an Apostle or an Angel if They Teach Otherwise?
From the supporters of Sola Scriptura one can hear the argument that the apostle places his own letters above himself and even above an angel of God. They refer to this line:
“But even if we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel to you than what we have preached to you, let him be accursed” (Gal. 1:8)
The apostle is not speaking here about himself, but has in mind false letters that were sent to the communities as if in the name of the apostles:
“not to be soon shaken in mind or troubled, either by spirit or by word or by letter, as if from us, as though the day of Christ had come. Let no one deceive you by any means; for that Day will not come unless the falling away comes first, and the man of sin is revealed, the son of perdition” (2 Thess. 2:2-3)
He also teaches not to listen to the revelations of people who falsely present themselves as speaking with the tongues of angels and as if prophesying from them.
How can one determine that a letter is not from an apostle, and a revelation not from an angel? Another faith is communicated in them. Not the one which the apostles once handed down. Of course, the apostle is not trying to take away the authority given by God to the apostles. The preceding lines, and indeed the whole epistle, are written against the teachers who had arisen and were seducing the Galatians into Judaism.
“O foolish Galatians! Who has bewitched you that you should not obey the truth, before whose eyes Jesus Christ was clearly portrayed among you as crucified?” (Gal. 3:1)
“I am afraid for you, lest I have labored for you in vain” (Gal. 4:11)
“You ran well. Who hindered you from obeying the truth? <...> I could wish that those who trouble you would even cut themselves off!” (Gal. 5:7,12)
The apostle’s intention is to protect his flock from false teachers, and not from himself, and still less from the angels of God. The holy angels cannot lead astray from the true path the Church of the God whom they serve. The apostle only makes clear that one must hold to the faith which he once handed down, and whoever teaches otherwise, even if he presented himself as an apostle or pretended to be an angel of God, should not be received.
In this quote there are three steps of meaning:
These things I have figuratively transferred (μετεσχημάτισα) to myself and Apollos for your sakes, that (ἵνα),
you may learn in us not to think [of yourselves] beyond what is written [a chapter earlier], that (ἵνα),
none of you may be puffed up on behalf of one against the other.
Where did the apostle portray himself and Apollos as not puffed up before the other brethren? A chapter earlier:
“For when one says, ‘I am of Paul,’ and another, ‘I am of Apollos,’ are you not carnal? Who then is Paul, and who is Apollos, but ministers through whom you believed, as the Lord gave to each one? I planted, Apollos watered, but God gave the increase. So then neither he who plants is anything, nor he who waters, but God who gives the increase” (1 Cor. 3:4-7)
In a similar way the apostle speaks in another epistle, calling to be of one mind:
“Be of the same mind toward one another. Do not set your mind on high things, but associate with the humble. Do not be wise in your own opinion” (Rom. 12:16)
The Savior taught the same:
“whoever exalts himself will be humbled, and he who humbles himself will be exalted” (Matt. 23:12)
“whoever desires to become great among you shall be your servant” (Mark. 10:43)
Thus the apostle only calls to humility and unity, referring to what was written about himself and Apollos earlier.
In this same epistle the apostle praises the Corinthians for keeping the tradition:
“Now I praise you, brethren, that you remember me in all things and keep the traditions just as I delivered them to you” (1 Cor. 11:2)
And he says that the Corinthians are saved if only they hold fast what was taught, as it was proclaimed:
“Moreover, brethren, I declare to you the gospel which I preached to you, which also you received and in which you stand, by which also you are saved, if you hold fast that word which I preached to you — unless you believed in vain” (1 Cor. 15:1-2)
There are also many other statements about the oral tradition, already mentioned earlier. Let us cite some of them:
“Hold fast the pattern of sound words which you have heard from me, in faith and love which are in Christ Jesus” (2 Tim. 1:13)
“And the things that you have heard from me among many witnesses, commit these to faithful men who will be able to teach others also” (2 Tim. 2:2)
“Therefore let that abide in you which you heard from the beginning. If what you heard from the beginning abides in you, you also will abide in the Son and in the Father” (1 John. 2:24)
Conclusion
To defend the thesis “Scripture alone”, the following tactic is used: having no explicit quotes about Sola Scriptura, show quotes about the importance of Scripture, ignoring and keeping silent about the quotes on the importance of Tradition. In this way the listener is supposed to get the impression that Scripture alone is important.
Protestants often reproach the Orthodox, saying:
— just show in Scripture where it is written to venerate icons, to pray to the saints and so on.
We show it, but we tell them:
— Tradition is also important; even Scripture confirms this.
Then they say:
— no, only Scripture is important.
And then we ask them:
— just show in Scripture that only Scripture is important, or that Scripture is more important than Tradition.
They cannot show this, because there are no such words in Scripture. Demanding from us to show such phrases about icons, about prayers to the saints, they cannot show exactly the same kind of phrase saying that everything must be in Scripture alone. They cannot meet their own demands, showing double standards.
They themselves invented this, they themselves demand that we show everything in Scripture, and they themselves cannot show their own principle in Scripture.
So the thesis “Sola Scriptura” contradicts itself and did not allow those who invented it to arrive at the apostolic faith, but instead gave birth to thousands of new beliefs and divisions among people who believe in Christ. Sola Scriptura gained its popularity as a trick through which any person alien to the Church of Christ intends to endow his statements with divine authority and to gather separate societies on the basis of his opinion.