Recently, Protestants have moved away from defending Soliscriptura with Bible verses

and instead make a logical argument for this doctrine.

For example, here's how Wes Huff defends Soliscriptura.

The defense of the idea goes something like this.

Scripture is ontologically unique.

It is the direct speech of God.

Nothing we possess as a rule is akin to it.

Gavin Ortland makes a similar argument.

Put plainly, we can say scripture is divine speech or the words of God. That is exactly how

scripture speaks of itself. And Jesus quotes the Old Testament as God speaking. This explains

why scripture is infallible, or as Jesus

puts it, it cannot be broken because God is infallible and scripture is God's speech.

So according to them, scripture has unique authority because it is the spoken word of God.

Scripture is the direct word of God, and since nothing else has this unique

ontological status, it follows that Scripture has more authority than anything else, or

Scripture is the only infallible rule of faith for the Church. But as you'll see in today's

episode, this argument has a fatal flaw that undermines the very concept of Sol of Scriptura.

Before I reveal what that flaw is,

I hope you will not be fatally flawed and choose to subscribe to our channel and support us at

Trenhornpodcast.com to help us keep creating edifying content. All right, so here's the fatal flaw.

The first premise in this argument that scripture is the direct speech of God is either assumed to be true

or it's defended with irrelevant examples. Of course, I agree with the Catholic Church's teaching

...