In the previous post, I laid out an argument against the Protestant doctrine of sola Scriptura as follows (I have added steps 9 and 10 for the purposes of this post):
- If a collection of books is fallible, then it can be the case that something that one of the books in the collection teaches is wrong (since at least one of the books could be fallible).
- If a collection of books is a collection of infallible books, then all of the books in the collection are infallible.
- If a book is infallible, then it cannot be the case that something it teaches is wrong.
- Therefore, if a collection of books is a collection of infallible books, then all of the books in the collection are such that it cannot be the case that something that one of the books in the collection teaches is wrong (2, 3).
- Therefore, if a collection of books is a collection of infallible books, then it is not the case that the collection of books is fallible (1, 4).
- Assume for reductio that Sacred Scripture is a fallible collection of infallible books.
- Then, Sacred Scripture is not a fallible collection of infallible books (5, 6).
- Contradiction (6, 7). Therefore, Sacred Scripture is not a fallible collection of infallible books.
- If the doctrine of sola Scriptura is true, then Sacred Scripture is a fallible collection of infallible books.
- Therefore, the doctrine of sola Scriptura is false (8, 9).
The justification for (9) is that given that the canon of Scripture is not taught in Scripture and given that sola Scriptura maintains that Scripture is the sole infallible authority, it follows that the canon (since we know of it by a source other than Scripture) is known only fallibly. But then since the canon specifies the collection of books that belong in Scripture, Scripture becomes—epistemologically speaking—a fallible collection of infallible books. The other premises essentially just unpack the concept of a fallible collection of infallible books.
This argument seems rather devastating for the Protestant doctrine of sola Scriptura. But consider the following parody argument that a Protestant could construct against the Catholic doctrine of an infallible Magisterium:
