Three Misunderstandings of Sola Scriptura

When the Reformers were doing the work of reforming, one of the main issues they had to address was that of authority. That is, in the church, who or what has final authority? This became singularly important because upon this idea would be determined the nature of justification. The Roman Catholic church at the time believed that both tradition and scripture (as interpreted by church leaders) were authoritative . The Reformers, on the other hand, asserted the notion that because humans are fallible and will often err, the church must protect herself by submitting to the only thing that does not err, namely, the Scriptures. Sola Scriptura latin for "By scripture alone." We also refer to this as the "sufficiency of scripture."

Now much of the church has adopted the latter stance (and even the Roman Catholic church to some degree), but there are still lingering questions about this doctrine. John Frame in his article "A Theology of Opportunity: Sola Scriptura and the Great Commission" answers to three of the most common objections. The objections?

There are three misunderstandings which especially need to be corrected, in my view. One is the idea that sola Scriptura warrants traditionalism; the next is that sola Scriptura leaves no room for human creativity, and the third is that sola Scriptura leaves no room for the Holy Spirit.

For readability, I will give each objection its own post.