I recently had a conversation with a Latter-day on Twitter who insisted that Jesus Christ was endorsing the apochryphal Book of Tobit in Matthew 22:23-33. I found his argument extremely unpersuasive. I then asked him why he thought this mattered. He responded that he thought this was the death knell of sola scriptura.
This is a common enough argument, but it’s completely wrong
In this post I am going to explore two related questions:
- What if a rejected book like Tobit really belonged in the canon?
- What if we discovered a truly inspired book that was lost for centuries?
At first glance, these scenarios seem like they would destabilize sola scriptura. But when you dig deeper, neither one actually does.
1. What If Tobit (or Another Rejected Book) Was Actually Scripture?
The Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox canons include Tobit and other books Protestants call “Apocrypha.” Catholics sometimes argue that Protestants “cut books out of the Bible” and therefore can’t consistently hold to sola scriptura. Instead, you need to rely on the papacy and church councils.
Latter-day Saints sometimes make a similar argument: If Christians can’t even agree on which books belong in the Bible, then you need a living prophet to settle the issue.
This argument always seems a bit disingenuous coming from Latter-day Saints since Joseph Smith’s own revelations affirm what Christians said for centuries which is that the Apocrypha contains many good and useful things, but is also mixed with error and therefore should be not be used to determine doctrine–See D&C 91.
But regardless, sola scriptura does not mean “Christians have always perfectly recognized every inspired book.” It means that Scripture is, by virtue of its god breathed and inspired nature, the only infallible rule of faith and practice for the Church.
The Nature of Scripture
The word of God was authoriative the moment it left the pen of the inspired authors. Those who received Paul’s letter in Galatia did not have to wait for the Church to consult and determine that it was from God. It had an inherent power and authority and was scripture.
Canon recognition has always been a fallible human process where people discern the inherent qualities of scripture. The church didn’t make certain books Scripture; it received and recognized what God inspired.
The Reliability of the Canon
Sola Scriptura does not mean that church tradition is worthless or irrelevant. In fact, the historical witness of the Church is one of the strongest reasons we can trust the New Testament canon. From the earliest centuries, we see near-universal recognition of at least 22 of the 27 books. The four Gospels and the Pauline letters were acknowledged as authoritative almost immediately, not only by the earliest Church fathers but even within the New Testament itself—Peter affirms Paul’s letters as Scripture (2 Peter 3:15–16), and Paul quotes Luke’s Gospel alongside Deuteronomy as Scripture (1 Timothy 5:18).
This early consensus gives us strong confidence in the core of the canon without requiring an infallible Church council. The councils that later ratified the canon did not create Scripture; they recognized what God had already given. Because the heart of the canon was accepted so early and so widely, the remaining disputed books could be evaluated using that core as the standard.
This is a deep topic that one could spend a lifetime studying. I highly recommend the writing of Michael Kruger on this topic. His insights have shaped my appreciation for the Christian canon and affirmed my confidence in its reliability.
What if We Got it Wrong about a Book?
If an apocryphal book like Tobit were inspired, that would mean Protestants made an error in recognition—but it would not mean sola scriptura is false. God’s Word would still be the only ultimate authority; we would simply need to correct our canon. The doctrine stands because it depends on the nature of Scripture, not on the perfection of our historical judgments.
It is worth again reiterating the solid core of the Biblical canon. There is virtually no dispute about the Five Books of Moses, the Prophetic writings, the Gospels and the core of the Pauline canon. If it turns out that Tobit shoud be a part of the canon, it would do nothing to unsetttle or disrupt this solid scriptural foundation.
And we have strong reasons to believe Tobit is not Scripture—it never claims divine authority, contains theological errors, and was never universally received by God’s people. But even if it were, sola scriptura would remain intact.
2. What If We Discovered a Lost Epistle, Like Paul’s Missing Letter?
Paul mentions a previous letter to the Corinthians (1 Cor 5:9) and a letter to the Laodiceans (Col 4:16) that we no longer have. So what if an archaeologist unearthed a letter, and we could verify beyond all doubt that Paul wrote it under inspiration?
Here’s where Christians disagree. Some say the canon is absolutely closed by God’s providence, so any lost letter was never intended for the whole Church. Others—including me—take a slightly different view: The canon is closed in practice, but not in principle. If God inspired Paul’s earlier letter, then by nature, it is Scripture—even if we only rediscover it now.
Would that break sola scriptura? Not at all. In fact, it would confirm it. Why? Because the authority of Scripture lies in what God inspires, not in what the Church happens to have or recognize at every moment. If a new inspired book surfaced, the principle would remain: Scripture alone is the supreme authority, and this newly discovered text would share that authority by virtue of God’s inspiration—not because a council voted on it.
Even if some inspired writings were lost for centuries, that doesn’t mean God failed to provide His people with what they needed or that they needed to be led by a pope or a living prophet. Scripture claims sufficiency for salvation and godliness (2 Tim 3:16–17), not exhaustive preservation of every inspired word ever written. Sola scriptura means that the Church has always had all it needs to know God and live faithfully, not that it has every single word that God has ever spoken.
This is also very different from the LDS Church’s open canon such as the addition of the D&C. Finding a lost epistle is not an open-ended invitation to continue to add new revelations that are contrary to what God has already revealed–which is exactly what Scripture itself warns against (Gal 1:8).
So Does This Undermine Sola Scriptura?
Not at all. Don’t let “what if” scenarios shake your confidence in Scripture. The authority of God’s Word does not depend on having every single word God ever inspired, or on the flawless judgments of the Church. It depends on what God has spoken by His Spirit. We can rest assured that what God has preserved for His people is all that is necessary for faith and salvation.