Scripture and Tradition

Catholic Outlook

Catholic Outlook

Catholic Outlook

Catholic Outlook

1 Corinthians 4:6 says, “Now these things, brethren, I have figuratively applied to myself and Apollos for your sakes, 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.”

Some Protestants claim that this verse establishes sola Scriptura, the belief that God’s revelation can and must be established from Scripture alone. For example, Dr. Greg Bahnsen says,

In I Corinthians 4:6, we have what amounts to a virtual declaration of the Protestant doctrine or principle of sola Scriptura! … Isn’t that amazing? Here’s Paul (long before Luther, long before Calvin, long before the controversy in the late 20th century) saying, I want you to learn the meaning of this, “Not to go beyond the things which are written!” . . . It is very simply the Protestant principle of sola Scriptura.”¹

The Protestant principle of sola Scriptura claims that the entirety of God’s revelation is contained within the canon of Scripture. But if that’s true, it means that it was only possible to practice sola Scriptura after the last book of the Bible was written and the canon of Scripture was complete. As Protestant apologist James White wrote,

Protestants do not assert that sola scriptura is a valid concept during times of revelation. How could it be, since the rule of faith to which it points was at that very time coming into being?²

He’s right. Obviously, it was not possible to practice sola Scriptura until all of the apostles’ oral teachings had been written down. This letter to the Corinthians is thought to be only the fourth of Paul’s fourteen canonical letters. He still had much Scripture left to write. Other writers hadn’t written their parts of the New Testament yet, either. At the time of Paul’s letter to the Corinthians “what is written” did not yet include 2 Corinthians, Romans, Luke, Ephesians, Philippians, Philemon, Colossians, Acts, 1 Timothy, Titus, 1 Peter, 2 Timothy, 2 Peter, Hebrews, Jude, John, 1 John, 2 John, 3 John, or Revelation. 

Dr. White is correct that it would not be possible to practice sola Scriptura with so much of the Scriptura yet to be written. Therefore, when Paul told his readers, “Do not go beyond what is written,” he cannot have been telling them to get all of their doctrines from Scripture alone, because most if it hadn’t been written yet. And if he wasn’t telling them that, he wasn’t telling us that, either.

“I am of Paul,” and another, “I am of Apollos”

So, what was he telling them? Well, if you read this verse in context, you’ll see that it is the conclusion of an exhortation to avoid dividing into factions and elevating one teacher over another. Apparently, the Corinthians were behaving in an immature and “fleshly” (vs. 3:3) manner and dividing into factions, some saying, “I am of Paul,” and others, “I am of Apollos.” 

Paul later clarified that he was using his own name and that of Apollos as aliases, possibly to avoid shaming the divisive Corinthian leaders by using their names. Paul emphasized that he and Apollos (and therefore the Corinthian leaders) were merely servants. One plants and another waters, but neither the one who plants nor the one who waters is anything (vs. 3:7). 

He concluded, “So then let no one boast in men” (vs. 3:21). And then he said, 

Therefore do not go on passing judgment before the time, but wait until the Lord comes who will both bring to light the things hidden in the darkness and disclose the motives of men’s hearts; and then each man’s praise will come to him from God. Now these things, brethren, I have figuratively applied to myself and Apollos for your sakes, 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. (vs. 4:5-6).

It seems to me that what he was saying was, “By using myself and Apollos as examples you can learn from us not to go beyond what the Scriptures I just quoted [in chapter 3] say about human leaders. Remember that they’re just servants. Don’t elevate one over the other and say, ‘I follow this one, or I follow that one’ so you don’t become arrogant.”

What else could it mean?

Is that for sure the meaning of this verse? No, not necessarily. I’ve read several plausible interpretations. John Calvin thought the verse could be explained “either as referring to Paul’s writings, or to the proofs from Scripture which he has brought forward [in chapter 3].” John Wesley thought Paul was saying “not to think of any man above what is here written – or above what scripture warrants.” Matthew Henry thought Paul was saying that “the word of God is the best rule by which to judge as to men.” Charles Hodge thought Paul meant not to go beyond “the doctrine taught in the Scriptures concerning ministers of religion.” G.K. Beale and D.A. Carson thought that going beyond what was written “would mean, quite simply, to boast in human wisdom by supposing that we are, as it were, smarter than God. The last clause of 1 Corinthians 4:6 confirms this interpretation.”³

Any of these could be correct, and none of them has anything to do with sola Scriptura. In fact, if we were to interpret Paul as telling the Corinthians to get all of their doctrines from Scripture alone, we’d make him contradict himself because later in this same letter he praised the Corinthians for holding to tradition:

I praise you for remembering me in everything and for holding to the traditions just as I passed them on to you (1 Corinthians 11:2).

He had written the same thing to the Thessalonians a few years earlier:

So then, brethren, stand firm and hold to the traditions which you were taught, whether by word of mouth or by letter from us. (2 Thessalonians 2:15)

And about 11 years later he would write to Timothy and say,

And the things you have heard me say in the presence of many witnesses entrust to reliable men who will also be qualified to teach others (2 Timothy 2:2)

That is the definition of “tradition,” and that’s how the Christian faith was taught: one generation handing the faith down to the next. So, whatever 1 Corinthians 4:6 means, it can’t be a teaching of sola Scriptura because Paul, writing under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, cannot have contradicted himself.

If the phrase, “Do not go beyond what is written” were addressed to modern Evangelical Christians, it certainly could be interpreted as a clear and concise statement of the Protestant principle of sola Scriptura. So I understand why it’s so tempting to point to it as a biblical justification of that doctrine. But, as I’ve shown, it can’t be. First, because in context it’s not discussing that subject, second because practicing sola Scriptura was not possible while Scripture was still being written, and third because its author explicitly told his readers to hold to Tradition as well as Scripture.