Many Protestant Christians are familiar with the phrase “sola scriptura,” the Latin term that gained prominence during the Reformation movement of the 16th century. “Sola,” meaning alone and “Scriptura,” referring to Scripture, emphasizes the belief that the Bible is the highest authority for the Christian faith and practice, taking precedence even over long-held Church traditions.[1]
Martin Luther, the German-born, Augustinian monk[2] and arguably the best-known of the reformers, came to understand that many of the Catholic Church’s positions contradicted Scripture. When he challenged the Catholic Church’s practice of subjugating Scripture to Church tradition and papal authority, they threatened him with excommunication and death if he did not recant. At the Diet of Worms in 1521, Luther’s response to their threat would later become the rallying cry for the Reformation movement:
Unless I am convinced by the testimony of the Holy Scriptures or by evident reason—for I believe neither pope nor councils alone, as it is clear that they have erred repeatedly and contradicted themselves—I consider myself convicted by the testimony of the Holy Scriptures, which is my basis; my conscience is captive to the Word of God. Thus, I cannot and will not recant, because acting against one’s conscience is neither safe nor sound. [Here I stand; I can do no other.] God help me. Amen.[3]
Later, a formal statement of faith called the Formula of Concord of 1577, declared Scripture to be the “only true standard by which all teachers and doctrines are to be judged.”[4]
Is Sola Scriptura in the Bible?
While the Bible, a collection of sixty-six books, does not specifically state that it is the sole determiner of what constitutes the Christian faith and practice, the apostle Paul pronounced all Scripture to be God-breathed, that is, inspired, and therefore, authoritative.[5]
2 Timothy 3:12-16 (NASB) Indeed, all who want to live in a godly way in Christ Jesus will be persecuted. 13But evil people and impostors will proceed from bad to worse, deceiving and being deceived. 14You, however, continue in the things you have learned and become convinced of, knowing from whom you have learned them, 15 and that from childhood you have known the sacred writings which are able to give you the wisdom that leads to salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus. 16All Scripture is inspired by God and beneficial for teaching, for rebuke, for correction, for training in righteousness; 17so that the man or woman of God may be fully capable, equipped for every good work.
Paul warned Timothy, his “son in the faith,”[6] to continue walking in the wisdom of the God-inspired texts because they were useful for teaching and related applications. In other words, Scripture is to be used to establish doctrines of the Church.
Is the New Testament Scripture?
Paul’s use of the word “Scripture” in this instance refers to the Old Testament since the New Testament was in the process of being written. But now that we have the New Testament, does it also qualify as “Scripture?” Is it authoritative for determining sound doctrine? Yes, for two reasons. One, the first-century writings were penned by Jesus’ chosen apostles and those who ministered with them.[7] Also, Jesus promised the Holy Spirit would guide them, teach them, and remind them of all that He had said.[8] Their proximity to Jesus and the divine help of the Holy Spirit made their teachings authoritative.
Peter confirmed the veracity of Paul’s writings by equating them with Scripture, thus deeming them to hold the same level of authority as the inspired Old Testament.
2 Peter 3:14-16 (NASB) Therefore, beloved, since you look for these things, be diligent to be found spotless and blameless by Him, at peace, 15 and regard the patience of our Lord as salvation; just as also our beloved brother Paul, according to the wisdom given him, wrote to you, 16 as also in all his letters, speaking in them of these things, in which there are some things that are hard to understand, which the untaught and unstable distort, as they do also the rest of the Scriptures, to their own destruction. (emphasis added)
In the same way, Paul, in his letter to Timothy, quotes Luke (Luke 10:7) in conjunction with Deuteronomy 25:4, calling them both “Scripture.” [9]
Second, even if one does not consider the texts to be divinely inspired, they demonstrate their validity for determining Christian dogma because they provide a historical record of what Jesus and his approved messengers taught.
What About Traditions?
The belief that Scripture alone is sufficient for establishing doctrine does not exclude the importance of traditions. On the contrary, traditions taught by Jesus and the inspired first-century authors are recorded in Scripture. Together, they form the doctrines of the early Church. Paul wrote:
2 Thessalonians 2:15 (NASB) So then, brothers and sisters, stand firm and hold on to the traditions which you were taught, whether by word of mouth or by letter from us.[10] (emphasis added)
In all doctrinal matters, the New Testament should serve as the standard by which post-Biblical teachings and traditions are measured. Jesus taught that the word of God supersedes man-made teachings and traditions:
Mark 7:6-8 (NASB) And the Pharisees and the scribes asked Him, “Why do Your disciples not walk in accordance with the tradition of the elders, but eat their bread with unholy hands?” 6 But He said to them, “Rightly did Isaiah prophesy about you hypocrites, as it is written: ‘This people honors Me with their lips, but their heart is far away from Me.’ 7‘And in vain do they worship Me, teaching as doctrines the commandments of men.’ 8 Neglecting the commandment of God, you hold to the tradition of men.” (emphasis added)
To be sure, the teachings and traditions of the Pharisees and scribes had the appearance of religious propriety. Both groups carried a weight of authority related to their position and training. Jesus, however, charged them in Mark 7:13 with “invalidating the word of God by keeping their traditions.” Thus, any tradition that contravenes Scripture should be rejected.
Is Scripture Enough?
Today, some question whether Scripture is enough. Can post-Biblical teachings, those not a part of Scripture’s dogma, such as the sinlessness of Mary or her bodily ascension, indulgences, purgatory, and papal infallibility, be added to Church doctrine? According to the inspired authors of the New Testament, the sacred writings are sufficient.
For example, Jude, the brother of Jesus and a first-century Church leader, exhorted believers to contend against doctrines that had infiltrated the Church and were threatening the faith. He wrote:
Jude 1:3 (NASB) Beloved, while I was making every effort to write you about our common salvation, I felt the necessity to write to you appealing that you contend earnestly for the faith that was once for all time handed down to the saints. (emphasis added)
The Amplified Bible puts it this way:
Beloved, while I was making every effort to write you about our common salvation, I was compelled to write to you [urgently] appealing that you fight strenuously for [the defense of] the faith which was once for all handed down to the saints [the faith that is the sum of Christian belief that was given verbally to believers].
Jude emphasized that the faith was complete, having been handed down to the saints.
Also, Paul wrote that when he taught believers in Ephesus, he did not withhold any instruction from them that was beneficial, having declared to them the whole purpose of God.
Acts 20:17-20; 27 (NASB) From Miletus he sent word to Ephesus and called to himself the elders of the church. 18 And when they came to him, he said to them, “You yourselves know, from the first day that I set foot in Asia, how I was with you the whole time, 19 serving the Lord with all humility and with tears and trials which came upon me through the plots of the Jews; 20 how I did not shrink from declaring to you anything that was beneficial, and teaching you publicly and [from house to house…27 For I did not shrink from declaring to you the whole purpose of God.
What’s more, Paul exhorted believers in Corinth not to exceed what had been written:
1 Corinthians 4:6 NASB Now these things, brothers and sisters, I have figuratively applied to myself and Apollos on your account, so that in us you may learn not to exceed what is written, so that no one of you will become arrogant in behalf of one against the other. (emphasis added)
Factions in the Church developed because some had exceeded the teachings handed down to them. For Paul, the inspired writings were sufficient to instruct the Church.
Elsewhere, early Christians understood that the sacred writings were the ultimate arbiter of truth. Believers in Thessalonica faithfully observed this standard when Paul and Silas brought the gospel message to their city. Even though they eagerly welcomed the apostolic teachings, they examined them to see if they were in keeping with Scripture.
Acts 17:11 NASB Now these people were more noble-minded than those in Thessalonica, for they received the word with great eagerness, examining the Scriptures daily to see whether these things were so. (emphasis added)
In sum, the inspired teachings and traditions that shaped and defined the Christian faith and practice have been revealed by God, once, for all. The dogma necessary for instructing believers in the faith is complete. Sola Scripture.
Sola Scriptura and The Doctrine of the Trinity
It is surprising, therefore, that most Protestant denominations continue to adhere to Catholic traditions not found in the Bible. The greatest example is the doctrine of the Trinity. To be sure, most Protestant denominations teach that a belief in the doctrine of a tri-personal God is required for salvation. Yet, this doctrine is never found in Scripture.
Numerous Trinitarian scholars across the denominational spectrum agree that the doctrine of a triune God is nowhere found in the Bible. Here are but a few examples:
Oxford Companion to the Bible
Because the Trinity is such an important part of later Christian doctrine, it is striking that the term does not appear in the New Testament. Likewise, the developed concept of three coequal partners in the Godhead found in later creedal formulations cannot be clearly detected within the confines of the canon.
While the New Testament writers say a great deal about God, Jesus and the Spirit of each, no New Testament writer expounds on the relationship among the three in detail that later Christian writers do… [there are New Testament] texts where God, Jesus, and the Spirit are referred to in the same passage (e.g., Jude 20-21), it is important to avoid reading the Trinity into places where it does not appear.[11]
Charles Ryrie, professor, author, and theologian
Many doctrines are accepted by evangelicals as being clearly taught in the Scripture, for which there are no proof texts. The doctrine of the Trinity furnishes the best example of this. It is fair to say that the Bible does not clearly teach the doctrine of the Trinity… In fact, there is not even one proof text, if by proof text we mean a verse or passage that ‘clearly’ states that there is one God who exists in three persons.[12]
Millard Erickson, pastor, author, professor, Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary
Other passages have been seen on closer study to be applicable only under the greatest strain. The question, however, is this: It is claimed that the doctrine of the Trinity is a very important, crucial, and even basic doctrine. If that is indeed the case, should it not be somewhere more clearly, directly, and explicitly stated in the Bible? If this is the doctrine that especially constitutes Christianity’s uniqueness, as over against Unitarian monotheism on the one hand, and polytheism on the other hand, how can it be only implied in the biblical revelation?
Further, [the doctrine of the Trinity] is not clear or explicitly taught anywhere in Scripture, yet it is widely regarded as a central doctrine, indispensable to the Christian faith…
In this regard, [the doctrine of the Trinity] goes contrary to what is virtually an axiom of biblical doctrine, namely, that there is a direct correlation between the scriptural clarity of a doctrine and its cruciality to the faith and life of the church….It is the peripheral matters that are hazy or on which there seem to be conflicting Biblical materials. The core beliefs are clearly and unequivocally revealed.” This argument would appear to fail us with respect to the doctrine of the Trinity, however, for here is a seemingly crucial matter where the Scriptures do not speak loudly or clearly. Little direct response can be made to this charge.[13]
The Harper Collins Bible Dictionary
The formal doctrine of the Trinity as it was defined by the great church councils of the fourth and fifth centuries is not to be found in the NT [New Testament].[14]
Even Catholic scholars admit the doctrine of the Trinity is not a Biblical teaching but one born out of post-Biblical, Catholic tradition.
Cardinal Stanislaus Hosius, Roman Catholic Cardinal, 16th century
We believe the doctrine of the triune God because we have received it by tradition, though not mentioned at all in Scripture.[15]
John L. McKenzie, Dictionary of the Bible, a Catholic Studies Reference Work
The Trinity of God is defined by the Church as the belief that in God are three persons who subsist in one nature. The belief as so defined was reached only in the 4th and 5th centuries AD and hence is not explicitly and formally a biblical belief.
The trinity of persons within the unity of nature is defined in terms of “person” and “nature,” which are GK [Greek] philosophical terms; actually, the terms do not appear in the Bible.[16]
What Does the Bible Say?
Remember that Paul told the elders in Ephesus that he did not “shrink from declaring to you anything that was beneficial,” having declared to you “the whole purpose of God.”[17] Yet, he never taught that the One God of the Bible was actually a three-in-one deity. (Here’s more on Paul’s theology.)
If Scripture does not teach that the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are three persons of a Godhead, what, then, does it teach? Both Old and New Testaments teach that the one true God is God the Father and that Jesus is His Messiah or Christ,[18] that is, the human agent acting on behalf of and at the command of the One God. What is more, Scripture never refers to a plurality of persons in a theorized Godhead, but rather always uses singular personal pronouns to refer to God.[19] Every so-called proof text used by Trinitarians to support the post-Biblical Trinitarian theory can be more clearly understood in a unitarian way. Truly, the preponderance of the Biblical evidence demonstrates this reality.
How Did We End Up Here?
How then did the Church come to promulgate doctrines about God that were never taught in God’s word? Briefly put, the doctrine of the one God subsisting in three persons evolved over time as Platonic philosophy entered the Church. (See The Evolution of the Doctrine of the Trinity; How Plato Influenced Our View of God, and Do The Creeds Reflect the Church’s Earliest Theology?) The Jewish worldview in which Scripture was penned was slowly replaced by a Greek philosophical one. Scholarly sources attest to this historical fact:
Philip Schaff, Calvinist theologian and Church historian
…many of the early Christians, in turn, found peculiar attractions in the doctrines of Plato, and employed them as weapons for the defense and extension of Christianity, or cast the truths of Christianity in a Platonic mold. The doctrines of the Logos and the Trinity received their shape from Greek Fathers, who…were much influenced, directly or indirectly, by the Platonic philosophy, particularly in its Jewish-Alexandrian form. That errors and corruptions crept into the Church from this source cannot be denied.[20]
James Strong, scholar and author of Strong’s Exhaustive Concordance
Towards the end of the 1st century, and during the 2nd, many learned men came over both from Judaism and paganism to Christianity. These brought with them into the Christian schools of theology their Platonic ideas and phraseology.[21]
Shirley Guthrie, Jr., professor, theologian, Presbyterian minister
The Bible does not teach the doctrine of the Trinity. Neither the word ‘trinity’ itself nor such language as ‘one-in-three,’ ‘three-in-one,’ one ‘essence’ (or ‘substance’), and three ‘persons,’ is biblical language. The language of the doctrine is the language of the ancient church, taken from classical Greek philosophy[22]
The New Catholic Encyclopedia
The formulation ‘one God in three Persons’ was not solidly established, certainly not fully assimilated into Christian life and its profession of faith, prior to the end of the 4th century. But it is precisely this formulation that has first claim to the title The Trinitarian Dogma. Among the Apostolic Fathers, there had been nothing even remotely approaching such a mentality or perspective.
[The doctrine of the Trinity] is not directly and immediately in the Word of God.
It is difficult in the second half of the 20th century to offer a clear, objective, and straightforward account of the revelation, doctrinal evolution, and the theological elaboration of the Mystery of the Trinity… Historians of dogma and systematic theologians [recognize] that when one does speak of an unqualified Trinitarianism, one has moved from the period of Christian origins to, say, the last quadrant of the 4th century. It was only then that what might be called the definitive Trinitarian dogma ‘One God in three Persons’ became thoroughly assimilated into Christian life and thought… it was the product of three centuries of development.[23]
Encyclopedia Americana
Unitarianism as a theological movement began much earlier in history; indeed, it antedated Trinitarianism by many decades. Christianity derived from Judaism, and Judaism was strictly Unitarian. The road which led from Jerusalem to Nicea was scarcely a straight one. Fourth century Trinitarianism did not reflect accurately early Christian teaching regarding the nature of God; it was, on the contrary, a deviation from this teaching. It therefore developed against constant Unitarian, or at least anti-Trinitarianism opposition, and it was never wholly victorious.[24]
Catholic scholar and author Graham Greene points to the irony of those who hold to Sola Scriptura while embracing doctrines not found therein:
Our opponents sometimes claim that no belief should be held dogmatically, which is not explicitly stated in Scripture … but the Protestant Churches have themselves accepted such dogmas as The Trinity, for which there is no such precise authority in the Gospels.[25]
Trinitarian apologists like James R. White add to the irony:
Church history has repeatedly and clearly proven one thing: Once the highest view of Scripture is abandoned by any theologian, group, denomination, or church, the downhill slide in both its theology and practice is inevitable. I firmly believe Christian truth requires a solid foundation in the beliefs that (1) God made us, and (2) God has communicated to us with clarity. Without this basis, attempts to Christian theology are untenable.[26]
Yet, as we have seen, the One God never communicated in Scripture, let alone with any clarity, that He was a plurality of persons. Nevertheless, White and other Sola Scriptura-affirming apologists demand that one cannot truly be a Christian without a belief in the Trinity.
The Unfinished Reformation
Some members of the 16th century Protestant Reformation movement said the effort was incomplete because the Church had not abandoned all non-Biblical doctrines, including the doctrine of the Trinity. Reformers, like Michael Servetus, Faustus Socinus, and Peter Gonesius, risked their lives to hold the doctrine of the Trinity to the Sola Scriptura standard. Unfortunately, they were in the minority as many were unwilling to challenge the unbiblical, yet deeply entrenched, doctrine.
The New International Encyclopedia notes the failure of the Reformation movement to examine thoroughly the doctrine of the Trinity in its bid to restore the supremacy of Scripture:
The Trinity doctrine, the Catholic Faith, is this: We worship one in trinity, but there is one person of the Father, another of the Son, and another of the Holy Ghost – the Glory equal, the Majesty coeternal. The doctrine is not found in its fully developed form in the Scriptures. Modern theology does not seek to find it in the O. T. [Old Testament]. At the time of the Reformation, the Protestant Church took over the doctrine of the Trinity without serious examination.[27]
If Sola Scriptura is the rallying cry of Protestants who believe God’s word is sufficient, and that it should supersede post-Biblical Catholic tradition, then we must return to the inspired texts regarding the person and nature of God and Jesus, His Christ. We must be willing to set aside any doctrine, no matter how hallowed to our traditions, if it is not taught in Scripture. We must finish the reformation.
[1] More specifically, Sola Scriptura referred to the belief that Scripture held greater authority than the Roman Catholic Church, Church traditions, and the pope.
[2] Luther joined the Augustinian monastery in Erfurt, Germany, in 1505. He took his vows in 1506. The following year, he was ordained a priest at the Cathedral Church of St. Mary in the same city.
[3] W. Robert Godfrey, There He Stood: Luther at Worms, TableTalk, April 2021, https://tabletalkmagazine.com/article/2021/04/there-he-stood-luther-at-worms/, accessed 12/28/25. (Note, some contend that the bracketed words were added later.)
[4] The Formula of Concord, The Book of Concord Online, https://bookofconcord.org/solid-declaration/, accessed 12/01/25.
[5] The apostle Peter would later categorize Paul’s writings as also being “Scripture.” See 2 Peter 3:14-16.
[6] 1 Timothy 1:2.
[7] For example, Mark, who wrote the gospel of Mark, served with Peter and Paul. Luke, who also penned a gospel account and the book of Acts, was a companion of Paul.
[8] John 14:26; 16:13.
[10] Letters written by the apostles and those who closely served with them were considered authoritative and were passed from city to city as a means of instructing the early Church. For example, see Colossians 4:16; 1 Thessalonians 5:27; Acts 15:23, 30-31; 1 Peter 1:1; Revelation 1:3, 11, etc.
[11] Daniel N. Schowalter, Oxford Companion to the Bible, ed. Bruce M. Metzger, Michael D. Coogan, (Oxford University Press, 1993), p. 782-783.
[12] Charles C. Ryrie, Basic Theology: A Popular Systematic Guide to Understanding Biblical Truth (Chicago, IL, Moody Publishers, 1999), p.89.
[13] Millard J. Erickson, God in Three Persons: A Contemporary Interpretation of the Trinity (Grand Rapids: Baker Publishing Group, 1995), p. 11-12, 109.
[14] “Trinity” in The Harper Collins Bible Dictionary, ed. Paul Achtemeier (1996).
[15] Cardinal Stanislaus Hosius, Conf. Cathol. Fidei, Chap. XXVI.
[16] John L. McKenzie, Dictionary of the Bible, (New York, NY: Macmillan Publishing Company, 1995), p. 899-900.
[17] Acts 20:17-20; 27.
[18] Messiah (Hebrew transliteration) and Christ (Greek transliteration) mean “anointed one,” which refers to the calling and equipping of an individual to the work God has chosen for them. The title of “anointed” and the act of anointing were for kings, priests, and prophets. God does not need to be anointed.
[19] Most modern Trinitarian scholars now agree that the three passages in which God says, “Let us,” (Genesis 1:26, etc.) He is referring to His angelic court. See this brief article for more information.
[20] Philip Schaff, “Platonism and Christianity” in The New Schaff-Herzog Encyclopedia of Religious Knowledge, Vol IX.
[21] James Strong and John McClintock, Cyclopaedia of Biblical, Theological, and Ecclesiastical Literature, Vol. 10, “Trinity”, (New York: Harper, 1891), p. 553.
[22] Shirley J. Gutherie, Jr., Christian Doctrine, (Louisville, KY: Westminster John Knox Press, 1994), p. 76-79.
[23] Thomas Carson, “Trinity,” The New Catholic Encyclopedia, Second Edition, Vol. XIV (Farmington Hills: Gale, 2003), p. 299, 295, and 30, respectively.
[24] Encyclopedia Americana, 1956 ed. vol. 27, p. 249L.
[25] Graham Greene, “Assumption of Mary,” Life Magazine, October 30, 1950, Vol. 29, No. 19), p. 51.
[26] James R. White, Scripture Alone: Exploring the Bible’s Accuracy, Authority and Authenticity, Bethany House, Minneapolis, MN, 2004, pg. 65-66.
[27] New International Encyclopedia, 1916 edition, Vol. 23; p. 47, 477.
