In today's episode, I'll be reviewing Dr. Michael Horton's criticism of my recent episode on Soliscriptura and the Church Fathers.

Dr. Horton is a well-known figure in reformed circles and currently teaches at Westminster Seminary in California.

To give some background, in a recent episode, I posed a dilemma for Protestants who claimed that the church fathers believed in the doctrine of Sola Scriptura.

First, I noted that Protestant apologists rarely cite the fathers prior to the Council of Nicaea in 8325,

as can be seen in my debates with James White and Gavin Oritland on Sola Scriptura.

The lack of witnesses to the central pillar of Protestantism in the first 300 years of church history is very telling. The other horn of the

dilemma, if you will, admits there are testimonies from fathers in the fourth and fifth

centuries that exalt scripture, use it to settle disputes, and teach what Catholics call

the material sufficiency of scripture. This is the idea that the material theology, such as the dogmas God

is revealed, can all be found in scripture, at least in an implicit form. But the church is still

needed to put that theological material into its final proper form for people to believe. But let's

suppose Christians in the late 300s and the 400s did believe in Sola Scriptura. That's even

worse for Protestantism, because these same Christians also believed in uniquely Catholic

doctrines like the satradotal priesthood, the sacrifice of the mass, confession of sins to a priest,

baptism and baptism, purgatory, seeking the intercession

of the saints, the perpetual virginity and sinlessness of Mary, and the need for bishops and the

pope to oversee the church. If those Christians of the 4th and 5th centuries are role models for Dr.

Horton because they allegedly believed in Soliscriptura, then why not follow their example

and conclude that Catholic doctrines have a solid biblical foundation? Now in his reply to me,

Dr. Horton claims he isn't trying to engage in a bunch of cherry picking. That's another important thing.

How did scripture function? It's not just quotes, cherry-picking quotes. How did scripture function?

Except Dr. Horton does just that, especially in the second half of his reply, where he just reads

...