Thursday, March 31, 2022

A Challenge to Paul Gee concerning Proverbs 30:5-6 and Sola Scriptura

Paul, as many already know, we were scheduled to debate the thesis, "Is the Bible the Only Word of God?" on March 27, and you chickened out. Here is one question I wanted to ask you in the cross-examination period. I would love to see you meaningfully respond to such.

 

In your "Statement Of Faith," you state that "We believe the Bible to be the only Word of God. God’s Word is pure and holy and should not be added to or taken away from."

 

In support of this, you reference Prov 30:5-6:

 

Every word of God is pure: he is a shield unto them that put their trust in him. 6 Add thou not unto his words, lest he reprove thee, and thou be found a liar. (KJV)

 

To give an alternative translation:

 

Every word of God is tested; He is a shield to those who take refuge in Him. Do not add to His words Or He will reprove you, and you will be proved a liar. (NASB)

 

Now, ignoring the fact that "Word of God" is not one-to-one equivalent to inscripturated revelation, let alone the Bible ("The Word of God" = "The Bible" Fallacy, something I washoping to address in my opening statement of our debate), my questions are:

 

·       Do you know the difference between "inspiration" and "sufficiency"?

 

Assuming you do, then to show the folly of using Prov 30:5-6 to support Sola Scriptura:

 

Is the book of Obadiah "inspired," and the words contained therein, to borrow from Prov 30:5-6, "true" or "pure" (the author of Proverbs is using metallurgical imagery)? I am sure you will say "yes." Good. Now, answer me this:

 

Using only the book of Obadiah, please show me, using the historical-grammatical method of exegesis, the following primary doctrines of your faith:

 

·       The personal pre-existence of Jesus

·       The personality of the Holy Spirit

·       The divinity of the Holy Spirit

·       The worship-worthiness of the Holy Spirit

 

Bonus points if you can prove forensic justification and atonement.

 

Now do you see the difference? Something being "inspired" and even if the autographs (and even copies thereof) are inerrant, that does not make them sufficient.


Further Reading


Not By Scripture Alone: A Latter-day Saint Refutation of Sola Scriptura