{"id":55195,"date":"2021-02-26T02:32:20","date_gmt":"2021-02-26T06:32:20","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/?p=55195"},"modified":"2021-02-26T02:32:20","modified_gmt":"2021-02-26T06:32:20","slug":"hilary-of-poitiers-d-367-vs-sola-scriptura-as-the-rule-of-faith","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/2021\/02\/hilary-of-poitiers-d-367-vs-sola-scriptura-as-the-rule-of-faith.html","title":{"rendered":"Hilary of Poitiers (d. 367) vs. Sola Scriptura as the Rule of Faith"},"content":{"rendered":"\n<\/head>

\"\"<\/p>\n

Protestant anti-Catholic polemicist<\/span>s\u00a0David T. King<\/a>\u00a0and<\/span>\u00a0William Webster<\/a>\u00a0are the editors of a three-volume series, entitled,<\/span>\u00a0Holy Scripture: The Ground and Pillar of Our Faith<\/i><\/a>\u00a0(self-published by Webster\u2019s outfit, Christian Resources Inc. [Battle Ground, Washington] in 2001). I\u2019m most interested in<\/span>\u00a0Volume III<\/a>:\u00a0subtitled, \u201cThe Writings of the Church Fathers Affirming the Reformation Principle of\u00a0Sola Scriptura<\/i>\u201d (edited by both Webster and King).\u00a0In the Introduction to Vol. III (p. 9) they make the fantastically absurd, demonstrably false assertion:<\/span><\/p>\n

[T]he Church fathers . . . universally taught\u00a0sola Scriptura<\/em>\u00a0in the fullest sense of the term embracing both the material and formal sufficiency of Scripture.<\/span><\/p><\/blockquote>\n

The definition of\u00a0sola Scriptura<\/em>, according to three of the most able and articulate Protestant defenders of it in our time, is the following:<\/span><\/p>\n

[T]he Bible\u00a0alone<\/strong>\u00a0is the\u00a0infallible<\/strong>\u00a0written authority for faith and morals (Norman Geisler)<\/span><\/p>\n

Scripture . . . is the\u00a0only<\/strong>\u00a0inspired and inherently\u00a0infallible<\/strong>\u00a0norm, and therefore Scripture is the only final authoritative norm. (Keith A. Mathison)<\/span><\/p>\n

The doctrine of\u00a0sola scriptura<\/em>\u00a0. . . is that the Scriptures\u00a0alone<\/strong>\u00a0are sufficient to function as the\u00a0regula fidei<\/em>, the\u00a0infallible<\/strong>\u00a0rule of faith for the Church. (James R. White) [my bolding; see<\/span>\u00a0the\u00a0<\/a>sources<\/a>\u00a0for these quotations and also<\/span>\u00a0a fuller explication<\/a>\u00a0by each man]<\/span><\/p><\/blockquote>\n

Such a definition entails also understanding what\u00a0sola Scriptura<\/em>\u00a0is\u00a0not<\/em><\/strong>. It logically rules out tradition, the Church, ecumenical councils, bishops, popes, or appeal to apostolic succession as infallibly and finally authoritative. Only the\u00a0Bible<\/strong><\/em>\u00a0is that. Therefore, if any Church father believes that\u00a0any<\/em>\u00a0of these are infallible or a final authority, then he (by the same token)\u00a0does not<\/em>\u00a0and indeed\u00a0cannot<\/em>\u00a0believe in\u00a0sola Scriptura<\/em>. I didn\u2019t \u201cset the rules\u201d. Protestants have by defining\u00a0sola Scriptura<\/em>\u00a0as they do. Thus, they have to\u00a0live with<\/em>\u00a0their own definition and unbiblical rule of faith.<\/span><\/p>\n

I shall be examining (in this series of papers) several Church fathers that Webster and King bring up, and documenting that they rejected\u00a0sola Scriptura<\/em>. I\u2019ve\u00a0already<\/em>\u00a0done this documentation with regard to<\/span>\u00a0Augustine<\/a>,\u00a0Athanasius<\/a>,\u00a0John Chrysostom<\/a>,\u00a0Jerome<\/a>,\u00a0Ambrose<\/a>,\u00a0Irenaeus<\/a>,\u00a0Justin Martyr<\/a>,\u00a0Clement of Alexandria<\/a>,\u00a0Hippolytus<\/a>,\u00a0Dionysius<\/a>,\u00a0Basil the Great<\/a>,\u00a0Cyril of Jerusalem<\/a>,\u00a0Theodoret<\/a>,\u00a0Gregory of Nyssa<\/a>,\u00a0Tertullian<\/a>,\u00a0Origen<\/a>, Gregory Nazianzen<\/a>,\u00a0Epiphanius<\/a>,\u00a0Lactantius<\/a>,\u00a0Cyprian<\/a>,\u00a0Papias<\/a>, and<\/span>\u00a0John Damascene<\/a>.<\/p>\n

All citations are from Volume III unless otherwise indicated.<\/span><\/p>\n

*****<\/p>\n

St. Hilary of Poitiers<\/a> (c. 310-c. 367), as Wikipedia informs us, \u201cwas\u00a0Bishop of Poitiers\u00a0and a\u00a0Doctor of the Church. He was sometimes referred to as the \u201cHammer of the\u00a0Arians\u201d . . . and the \u201cAthanasius\u00a0of the West\u201d.<\/span><\/p>\n

[see the online version of Hilary\u2019s<\/span> On the Trinity<\/em><\/a>: from which almost all citations below are drawn]<\/span><\/p>\n

Very unlike the case of<\/span> St. Gregory Nazianzen<\/a>, Webster and King produce quite a few citations from Hilary of Poitiers. None of them will prove their utterly futile enterprise of turning Hilary into a \u201cBible Alone Church father\u201d, of course, but at least they gave it the ol\u2019 college try. E for effort . . . First, they expend much energy (more than six pages) in a non sequitur<\/em> effort of showing that Hilary believed in material sufficiency of Scripture:\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

. . . a man of blessed and religious will who yearns for a creed only according to the scriptures! (Liber II, Ad Constantium<\/em> 8) [p. 52]<\/span><\/p>\n

[L]et us assume that God has full knowledge of Himself, and bow with humble reverence to His words. He Whom we can only know through His own utterances is the fitting witness concerning Himself. (On the Trinity<\/em>, Book I, 18) [p. 53]<\/span><\/p>\n

We must proclaim, exactly as we shall find them in the words of Scripture, the majesty and functions of Father, Son, and Holy Spirit . . . (On the Trinity<\/em>, Book II, 5) [p. 54]<\/span><\/p>\n

[I]t is well with you if you be satisfied with the written word.<\/span>\u00a0(On the Trinity<\/em>, Book III, 23) [p. 54]<\/span><\/p>\n

[W]e . . . display on the evidence of Holy Scripture the impiety of their doctrines.\u00a0(On the Trinity<\/em>, Book IV, 11) [p. 55]<\/span><\/p>\n

[W]e . . . cleave to the very letter of revelation. Each point in our enquiry shall be considered in the light of His instruction . . .<\/span>\u00a0(On the Trinity<\/em>, Book IV, 14) [p. 56]<\/span><\/p>\n

. . . according to the Scriptures, this being the safeguard of reverence against the attack of the adversary . . . [he goes on to repeat the phrase \u201caccording to the Scriptures\u201d nine more times in the overall passage]<\/span> (On the Trinity<\/em>, Book X, 67) [p. 57]<\/span><\/p>\n

The Apostle, the Evangelist, the Prophet combine to silence your objections.\u00a0(On the Trinity<\/em>, Book V, 33) [p. 58]<\/span><\/p>\n

[W]e . . . adduce the evidence of the Gospels and the prophets for our confession . . .\u00a0(On the Trinity<\/em>, Book I, 17) [p. 176]<\/span><\/p><\/blockquote>\n

Since almost all Catholics agree with material sufficiency of Scripture<\/a>, all of the above is a moot point. But Webster and King seem to think it proves<\/em> something. It certainly doesn\u2019t establish an adherence of sola Scriptura<\/em>, since Catholics and Orthodox, who reject that false doctrine, also hold to it. In other words, it\u2019s not exclusive<\/em> to a\u00a0sola Scriptura<\/em>\u00a0outlook.<\/span><\/p>\n

Then they try to argue that Hilary believed in the perspicuity of Scripture (plain meanings to one and all, and self-interpreting):<\/span><\/p>\n

. . . the plain words of Holy Writ . . .\u00a0(On the Trinity<\/em>, Book II, 3) [p. 53]<\/span><\/p>\n

. . . by the clear teaching of the Evangelists and Apostles . . .\u00a0(On the Trinity<\/em>, Book VI, 4) [p. 58]<\/span><\/p>\n

. . . clear assertions of prophets and evangelists to refute the insanity and ignorance of men . . .<\/span>\u00a0(On the Trinity<\/em>, Book I, 17) [p. 176]<\/span><\/p>\n

If we find ourselves in difficulty, let us lay the fault to our own reason; if God\u2019s declaration seem involved in obscurity, let us assume that our want of faith is the cause.<\/span>\u00a0(On the Trinity<\/em>, Book VII, 38) [p. 179]<\/span><\/p>\n

He has so far tempered the language of His utterance as to enable the weakness of our nature to grasp and understand it.<\/span>\u00a0(On the Trinity<\/em>, Book VIII, 43) [p. 180]<\/span><\/p>\n

God out of regard for human weakness has not set forth the faith in bare and uncertain statements.<\/span>\u00a0(On the Trinity<\/em>, Book VIII, 52) [p. 180]<\/span><\/p>\n

The Lord enunciated the faith of the Gospel in the simplest words that could be found, and fitted His discourses to our understanding, so far as the weakness of our nature allowed Him . . .<\/span>\u00a0(On the Trinity<\/em>, Book IX, 40) [p. 180]<\/span><\/p>\n

[T]he Lord spoke in simple words for our instruction in the faith . . .<\/span>\u00a0(On the Trinity<\/em>, Book XI, 7) [p. 180]<\/span><\/p><\/blockquote>\n

But Hilary taught (very un-Protestant-like) that the Church<\/em> was necessary for individuals to understand the Bible. So much for a self-interpreting Scripture: a thing that Webster and King (p. 10) affirm as one of the premises of sola Scriptura<\/em>:<\/span><\/p>\n

They who are placed without the Church, cannot attain to any understanding of the divine word. For the ship exhibits a type of Church, the word of life placed and preached within which, they who are without, and lie near like barren and useless sands, cannot understand.\u00a0 (Homily 13:1 on Matthew)<\/span><\/p><\/blockquote>\n

Hilary believed in authoritative and decisive apostolic tradition and succession and ecumenical councils (all utterly contrary to sola Scriptura<\/em>):<\/span><\/p>\n

[W]e shall not recede from the faith \u2026 as once laid it continues even to this day, through the tradition of the fathers, according to the succession from the apostles, even to the discussion had at Nicea against the heresy which had, at that period, sprung up. (History Fragment<\/em> 7)<\/span><\/p>\n

. . . the apostolic\u00a0faith\u00a0to which we adhere . . .<\/span>\u00a0(On the Trinity<\/em>, IV, 1)<\/span><\/p>\n

. . . the apostolic\u00a0faith\u00a0and power.<\/span>\u00a0(On the Trinity<\/em>, VI, 38)<\/span><\/p>\n

. . . the\u00a0Church, whose\u00a0faith\u00a0is based upon the teaching of Evangelists and Apostles, . . .\u00a0(On the Trinity<\/em>, VII, 7)<\/span><\/p>\n

. . . the Apostolic\u00a0faith . . .\u00a0<\/span>(On the Trinity<\/em>, VII, 31 and again in 32; IX, 28; XII, 28, 51)<\/span><\/p>\n

. . . the apostolic teaching . . .\u00a0(On the Trinity<\/em>, VIII, 2)<\/span><\/p><\/blockquote>\n

Hilary thought that the Church could by herself refute heretics, and would never defect from the Christian faith:<\/span><\/p>\n

I trust that the Church, by the light of her doctrine, will so enlighten the world\u2019s vain wisdom, that, even though it accept not the mystery of the faith, it will recognise that in our conflict with heretics we, and not they, are the true representatives of that mystery.\u00a0 . . . It is the peculiar property of the Church that when she is buffeted she is triumphant, when she is assaulted with argument she proves herself in the right, when she is deserted by her supporters she holds the field. (On the Trinity<\/em>, VII, 4)<\/span><\/p>\n

. . . that Church against which the gates of\u00a0hell\u00a0shall not prevail.<\/span>\u00a0(On the Trinity<\/em>, VI, 38)<\/span><\/p><\/blockquote>\n

He also held that one must be in the bosom of the Church to be saved:<\/span><\/p>\n

It is her wish that all men should remain at her side and in her bosom; if it lay with her, none would become unworthy to abide under the shelter of that august mother, none would be cast out or suffered to depart from her calm retreat. But when heretics desert her or she expels them, the loss she endures, in that she cannot save them, is compensated by an increased assurance that she alone can offer bliss.<\/span>\u00a0. . .\u00a0The Church, ordained by the Lord and established by His Apostles, is one for all; . . .\u00a0(On the Trinity<\/em>, VII, 4)<\/span><\/p>\n

The light, or lamp of Christ, is not now to be hidden under a bushel, nor to be concealed by any covering of the synagogue, but, hung on the wood of the Passion, it will give an everlasting light to those that dwell in the church. (Commentary on Matthew<\/em>, 5:13)<\/span><\/p><\/blockquote>\n

He rejected sectarianism and denominationalism:<\/span><\/p>\n

[T]he frantic folly of discordant sects has severed them from her. And it is obvious that these dissensions concerning the faith result from a distorted mind, which twists the words of Scripture into conformity with its opinion, instead of adjusting that opinion to the words of Scripture. And thus, amid the clash of mutually destructive errors, the Church stands revealed not only by her own teaching, but by that of her rivals. They are ranged, all of them, against her; and the very fact that she stands single and alone is her sufficient answer to their godless delusions. The hosts of heresy assemble themselves against her; each of them can defeat all the others, but not one can win a victory for itself. The only victory is the triumph which the Church celebrates over them all.<\/span>\u00a0(On the Trinity<\/em>, VII, 4)<\/span><\/p><\/blockquote>\n

He thought one should follow the faith of the Church: not a faith of one\u2019s own making:<\/span><\/p>\n

. . . the clear and definite evidence of the Church\u2019s\u00a0faith . . .<\/span>\u00a0(On the Trinity<\/em>, V, 30)<\/span><\/p>\n

\u00a0And this is the confession of\u00a0faith\u00a0made, in the fullness of time, by the\u00a0Church\u00a0in loyal devotion to Christ her Lord.<\/span>\u00a0(On the Trinity<\/em>, V, 31)<\/span><\/p>\n

. . . the Church\u2019s\u00a0faith, . . .<\/span>\u00a0(On the Trinity<\/em>, V, 39; VI, 12; VI, 38; VII, 1, 31; VIII, 34)<\/span><\/p>\n

The\u00a0faith\u00a0of the\u00a0Church, . . .<\/span>\u00a0(On the Trinity<\/em>, VI, 9; VI, 17; VIII, 2; IX, 2, 19, 36; X, 52)<\/span><\/p>\n

[T]hey wish to\u00a0rob\u00a0the\u00a0Church\u00a0of her\u00a0true\u00a0faith\u00a0. . .<\/span>\u00a0(On the Trinity<\/em>, VI, 11)<\/span><\/p>\n

. . .\u00a0<\/span>the Church\u2019s doctrine, . . .\u00a0(<\/span>On the Trinity<\/em>, VI, 45)<\/span><\/p>\n

. . . the Church\u2019s confession of\u00a0faith.\u00a0(<\/span>On the Trinity<\/em>, VII, 19)<\/span><\/p><\/blockquote>\n

All of this is evidence that Hilary of Poitiers definitely did not<\/em> believe in sola Scriptura<\/em>. But it would be easy to think he did<\/em>, if all one read was the half-truth presentation of Webster and King, who deliberately ignored all of this contrary (and quite relevant) information (almost all from one book, easy to search), lest any of their readers would see that Hilary \u2014 like all the Church fathers \u2014 was Catholic and infinitely more similar in belief to present-day Catholicism than any form of Protestantism.<\/span><\/p>\n

***<\/p>\n

Photo credit:<\/strong> Hilary of Poitiers<\/span> (Catholic.Net<\/a>)<\/p>\n

***<\/p>\n

Summary<\/em>:\u00a0Hilary of Poitiers did not<\/strong><\/em> believe in sola Scriptura<\/em>. But it would be easy to think he did<\/em>, if all one read was the highly selective, \u201chalf-truth\u201d presentation of William Webster and David T. King.<\/span><\/p>\n

***<\/p>\n<\/body><\/html>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Protestant anti-Catholic polemicists\u00a0David T. King\u00a0and\u00a0William Webster\u00a0are the editors of a three-volume series, entitled,\u00a0Holy Scripture: The Ground and Pillar of Our Faith\u00a0(self-published by Webster\u2019s outfit, Christian Resources Inc. [Battle Ground, Washington] in 2001). I\u2019m most interested in\u00a0Volume III:\u00a0subtitled, \u201cThe Writings of the Church Fathers Affirming the Reformation Principle of\u00a0Sola Scriptura\u201d (edited by both Webster and King).\u00a0In […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2331,"featured_media":55196,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[239],"tags":[48,33,1029,1031,13225,13222,32,35,47,1030],"class_list":["post-55195","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-fathers-of-the-church","tag-bible-alone","tag-christian-authority","tag-church-authority","tag-david-t-king","tag-hilary-of-poitiers-sola-scriptura","tag-hilary-of-poitiers-the-rule-of-faith","tag-rule-of-faith","tag-scripture-alone","tag-sola-scriptura","tag-william-webster"],"yoast_head":"\nHilary of Poitiers (d. 367) vs. Sola Scriptura as the Rule of Faith Hilary of Poitiers (d. 367) vs. Sola Scriptura as the Rule of Faith<\/title>\n<meta name=\"description\" content=\"Protestant anti-Catholic polemicists\u00a0David T. King\u00a0and\u00a0William Webster\u00a0are the editors of a three-volume series, entitled,\u00a0Holy Scripture: The Ground and Hilary of Poitiers did NOT believe in sola Scriptura. But it would be easy to think he did, if all one read was the highly selective, "half-truth" presentation of William Webster & David T. King.\" \/>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/2021\/02\/hilary-of-poitiers-d-367-vs-sola-scriptura-as-the-rule-of-faith.html\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Hilary of Poitiers (d. 367) vs. Sola Scriptura as the Rule of Faith Hilary of Poitiers (d. 367) vs. Sola Scriptura as the Rule of Faith\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"Protestant anti-Catholic polemicists\u00a0David T. King\u00a0and\u00a0William Webster\u00a0are the editors of a three-volume series, entitled,\u00a0Holy Scripture: The Ground and Hilary of Poitiers did NOT believe in sola Scriptura. But it would be easy to think he did, if all one read was the highly selective, "half-truth" presentation of William Webster & David T. King.\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/2021\/02\/hilary-of-poitiers-d-367-vs-sola-scriptura-as-the-rule-of-faith.html\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Biblical Evidence for Catholicism\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2021-02-26T06:32:20+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/wp-media.patheos.com\/blogs\/sites\/572\/2021\/02\/HilaryPoitiers.jpg\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"334\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"500\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Dave Armstrong\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Dave Armstrong\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"10 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/2021\/02\/hilary-of-poitiers-d-367-vs-sola-scriptura-as-the-rule-of-faith.html\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/2021\/02\/hilary-of-poitiers-d-367-vs-sola-scriptura-as-the-rule-of-faith.html\",\"name\":\"Hilary of Poitiers (d. 367) vs. Sola Scriptura as the Rule of Faith Hilary of Poitiers (d. 367) vs. Sola Scriptura as the Rule of Faith\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2021-02-26T06:32:20+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2021-02-26T06:32:20+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/#\/schema\/person\/471eaa20e441eca4bb1ea50393cf632e\"},\"description\":\"Protestant anti-Catholic polemicists\u00a0David T. King\u00a0and\u00a0William Webster\u00a0are the editors of a three-volume series, entitled,\u00a0Holy Scripture: The Ground and Hilary of Poitiers did NOT believe in sola Scriptura. But it would be easy to think he did, if all one read was the highly selective, \\\"half-truth\\\" presentation of William Webster & David T. King.\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/2021\/02\/hilary-of-poitiers-d-367-vs-sola-scriptura-as-the-rule-of-faith.html#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/2021\/02\/hilary-of-poitiers-d-367-vs-sola-scriptura-as-the-rule-of-faith.html\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/2021\/02\/hilary-of-poitiers-d-367-vs-sola-scriptura-as-the-rule-of-faith.html#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Hilary of Poitiers (d. 367) vs. Sola Scriptura as the Rule of Faith\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/\",\"name\":\"Biblical Evidence for Catholicism\",\"description\":\"Catholic biblical apologetics\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":\"required name=search_term_string\"}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/#\/schema\/person\/471eaa20e441eca4bb1ea50393cf632e\",\"name\":\"Dave Armstrong\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/820e6db89734ae7a9e5dac8d498f5ac7?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/820e6db89734ae7a9e5dac8d498f5ac7?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Dave Armstrong\"},\"description\":\"Dave Armstrong is a Catholic author and apologist, who has been actively proclaiming and defending Christianity since 1981, and Catholicism in particular since 1991 (full-time since December 2001). Formerly a campus missionary, as a Protestant, Dave was received into the Catholic Church in February 1991, by the late, well-known catechist and theologian, Fr. John A. Hardon, S. J. Dave\u2019s articles have appeared in many influential Catholic periodicals, including \\\"This Rock\\\" (now called \\\"Catholic Answers Magazine\\\"), \\\"Envoy Magazine\\\" (Patrick Madrid), \\\"The Catholic Answer,\\\" \\\"The Coming Home Journal,\\\" \\\"Gilbert Magazine\\\" (American Chesterton Society), and \\\"The Latin Mass.\\\" He also writes a featured column for every issue of \\\"The Michigan Catholic\\\": published by the archdiocese of Detroit, and was editor for most of the apologetics tracts published by the St. Paul Street Evangelization apostolate. Dave\u2019s apologetics and writing apostolate was the subject of a feature article in the May 2002 issue of \\\"Envoy Magazine.\\\" He served as the staff moderator at the Internet discussion forum for The Coming Home Network, from 2007-2010. Dave has been interviewed on many nationally syndicated Catholic radio shows, including \\\"Catholic Answers Live\\\" (twice), \\\"Faith and Family Live\\\" (Steve Wood), \\\"Kresta in the Afternoon,\\\" \\\"Son Rise Morning Show,\\\" \\\"Catholic Connection\\\" (Teresa Tomeo), and \\\"The Catholics Next Door.\\\" His large and popular website, \\\"Biblical Evidence for Catholicism,\\\" was online from March 1997 to March 2007, and received the 1998 Catholic Website of the Year award from \\\"Envoy Magazine.\\\" His blog of the same name (now transferred to Patheos), begun in February 2004, contains more than 1,500 papers, at least 500 debates or dialogues, and over 50 distinct \\\"index\\\" web pages. Unsolicited correspondence has indicated many hundreds of conversions (or returns) to the Catholic faith as a result, by God's grace, of these writings. Dave's conversion story was published in the bestselling book \\\"Surprised by Truth\\\" (edited by Patrick Madrid; San Diego: Basilica Press, 1994). Sophia Institute Press has published six of his books: \\\"A Biblical Defense of Catholicism\\\" (Foreword by Fr. John A. Hardon, S. J., 1996 \/ 2003), \\\"The Catholic Verses\\\" (2004), \\\"The One-Minute Apologist\\\" (2007), \\\"Bible Proofs for Catholic Truths\\\" (2009), \\\"The Quotable Newman\\\" (editor: 2012), and \\\"Proving the Catholic Faith is Biblical\\\" (2015). He is co-author (with Dr. Paul Thigpen) of the inserts for \\\"The New Catholic Answer Bible\\\" (Our Sunday Visitor: 2005), and editor for \\\"The Wisdom of Mr. Chesterton: The Very Best Quotes, Quips, and Cracks from the Pen of G. K. Chesterton\\\" (Saint Benedict Press \/ TAN Books: 2009). \\\"100 Biblical Arguments Against Sola Scriptura\\\" was published by Catholic Answers in May 2012. His \\\"Quotable Wesley\\\" compilation was published by (Protestant \/ Wesleyan publisher) Beacon Hill Press in April 2014. Several of his 49 books are bestsellers in their field. Dave maintains a popular personal Facebook page, a Facebook author page, and has a Twitter account as well. He offers almost all of his books in e-book form on his own Biblical Catholicism site (http:\/\/biblicalcatholicism.com\/), at a permanent deep discount: only $2.99 for ePub, mobi, and AZW, and $1.99 for PDF. His writing has been enthusiastically endorsed or recommended by many leading Catholic apologists, authors, and priests, including Dr. Scott Hahn, Fr. Peter M. J. Stravinskas, Marcus Grodi, Patrick Madrid, Steve Ray, Tim Staples, Devin Rose, Mike Aquilina, Al Kresta, Karl Keating, Fr. Dwight Longenecker, Brandon Vogt, Marcellino D'Ambrosio, and Fr. John A. Hardon, S. J. Dave has been happily married to his wife Judy since October 1984. They have three sons and a daughter, and reside in southeast Michigan (metro Detroit).\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/author\/davearmstrong\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Hilary of Poitiers (d. 367) vs. Sola Scriptura as the Rule of Faith Hilary of Poitiers (d. 367) vs. Sola Scriptura as the Rule of Faith","description":"Protestant anti-Catholic polemicists\u00a0David T. King\u00a0and\u00a0William Webster\u00a0are the editors of a three-volume series, entitled,\u00a0Holy Scripture: The Ground and Hilary of Poitiers did NOT believe in sola Scriptura. But it would be easy to think he did, if all one read was the highly selective, \"half-truth\" presentation of William Webster & David T. King.","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/2021\/02\/hilary-of-poitiers-d-367-vs-sola-scriptura-as-the-rule-of-faith.html","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Hilary of Poitiers (d. 367) vs. Sola Scriptura as the Rule of Faith Hilary of Poitiers (d. 367) vs. Sola Scriptura as the Rule of Faith","og_description":"Protestant anti-Catholic polemicists\u00a0David T. King\u00a0and\u00a0William Webster\u00a0are the editors of a three-volume series, entitled,\u00a0Holy Scripture: The Ground and Hilary of Poitiers did NOT believe in sola Scriptura. But it would be easy to think he did, if all one read was the highly selective, \"half-truth\" presentation of William Webster & David T. King.","og_url":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/2021\/02\/hilary-of-poitiers-d-367-vs-sola-scriptura-as-the-rule-of-faith.html","og_site_name":"Biblical Evidence for Catholicism","article_published_time":"2021-02-26T06:32:20+00:00","og_image":[{"width":334,"height":500,"url":"https:\/\/wp-media.patheos.com\/blogs\/sites\/572\/2021\/02\/HilaryPoitiers.jpg","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Dave Armstrong","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Dave Armstrong","Est. reading time":"10 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/2021\/02\/hilary-of-poitiers-d-367-vs-sola-scriptura-as-the-rule-of-faith.html","url":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/2021\/02\/hilary-of-poitiers-d-367-vs-sola-scriptura-as-the-rule-of-faith.html","name":"Hilary of Poitiers (d. 367) vs. Sola Scriptura as the Rule of Faith Hilary of Poitiers (d. 367) vs. Sola Scriptura as the Rule of Faith","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/#website"},"datePublished":"2021-02-26T06:32:20+00:00","dateModified":"2021-02-26T06:32:20+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/#\/schema\/person\/471eaa20e441eca4bb1ea50393cf632e"},"description":"Protestant anti-Catholic polemicists\u00a0David T. King\u00a0and\u00a0William Webster\u00a0are the editors of a three-volume series, entitled,\u00a0Holy Scripture: The Ground and Hilary of Poitiers did NOT believe in sola Scriptura. But it would be easy to think he did, if all one read was the highly selective, \"half-truth\" presentation of William Webster & David T. King.","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/2021\/02\/hilary-of-poitiers-d-367-vs-sola-scriptura-as-the-rule-of-faith.html#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/2021\/02\/hilary-of-poitiers-d-367-vs-sola-scriptura-as-the-rule-of-faith.html"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/2021\/02\/hilary-of-poitiers-d-367-vs-sola-scriptura-as-the-rule-of-faith.html#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Hilary of Poitiers (d. 367) vs. Sola Scriptura as the Rule of Faith"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/","name":"Biblical Evidence for Catholicism","description":"Catholic biblical apologetics","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":"required name=search_term_string"}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/#\/schema\/person\/471eaa20e441eca4bb1ea50393cf632e","name":"Dave Armstrong","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/820e6db89734ae7a9e5dac8d498f5ac7?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/820e6db89734ae7a9e5dac8d498f5ac7?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Dave Armstrong"},"description":"Dave Armstrong is a Catholic author and apologist, who has been actively proclaiming and defending Christianity since 1981, and Catholicism in particular since 1991 (full-time since December 2001). Formerly a campus missionary, as a Protestant, Dave was received into the Catholic Church in February 1991, by the late, well-known catechist and theologian, Fr. John A. Hardon, S. J. Dave\u2019s articles have appeared in many influential Catholic periodicals, including \"This Rock\" (now called \"Catholic Answers Magazine\"), \"Envoy Magazine\" (Patrick Madrid), \"The Catholic Answer,\" \"The Coming Home Journal,\" \"Gilbert Magazine\" (American Chesterton Society), and \"The Latin Mass.\" He also writes a featured column for every issue of \"The Michigan Catholic\": published by the archdiocese of Detroit, and was editor for most of the apologetics tracts published by the St. Paul Street Evangelization apostolate. Dave\u2019s apologetics and writing apostolate was the subject of a feature article in the May 2002 issue of \"Envoy Magazine.\" He served as the staff moderator at the Internet discussion forum for The Coming Home Network, from 2007-2010. Dave has been interviewed on many nationally syndicated Catholic radio shows, including \"Catholic Answers Live\" (twice), \"Faith and Family Live\" (Steve Wood), \"Kresta in the Afternoon,\" \"Son Rise Morning Show,\" \"Catholic Connection\" (Teresa Tomeo), and \"The Catholics Next Door.\" His large and popular website, \"Biblical Evidence for Catholicism,\" was online from March 1997 to March 2007, and received the 1998 Catholic Website of the Year award from \"Envoy Magazine.\" His blog of the same name (now transferred to Patheos), begun in February 2004, contains more than 1,500 papers, at least 500 debates or dialogues, and over 50 distinct \"index\" web pages. Unsolicited correspondence has indicated many hundreds of conversions (or returns) to the Catholic faith as a result, by God's grace, of these writings. Dave's conversion story was published in the bestselling book \"Surprised by Truth\" (edited by Patrick Madrid; San Diego: Basilica Press, 1994). Sophia Institute Press has published six of his books: \"A Biblical Defense of Catholicism\" (Foreword by Fr. John A. Hardon, S. J., 1996 \/ 2003), \"The Catholic Verses\" (2004), \"The One-Minute Apologist\" (2007), \"Bible Proofs for Catholic Truths\" (2009), \"The Quotable Newman\" (editor: 2012), and \"Proving the Catholic Faith is Biblical\" (2015). He is co-author (with Dr. Paul Thigpen) of the inserts for \"The New Catholic Answer Bible\" (Our Sunday Visitor: 2005), and editor for \"The Wisdom of Mr. Chesterton: The Very Best Quotes, Quips, and Cracks from the Pen of G. K. Chesterton\" (Saint Benedict Press \/ TAN Books: 2009). \"100 Biblical Arguments Against Sola Scriptura\" was published by Catholic Answers in May 2012. His \"Quotable Wesley\" compilation was published by (Protestant \/ Wesleyan publisher) Beacon Hill Press in April 2014. Several of his 49 books are bestsellers in their field. Dave maintains a popular personal Facebook page, a Facebook author page, and has a Twitter account as well. He offers almost all of his books in e-book form on his own Biblical Catholicism site (http:\/\/biblicalcatholicism.com\/), at a permanent deep discount: only $2.99 for ePub, mobi, and AZW, and $1.99 for PDF. His writing has been enthusiastically endorsed or recommended by many leading Catholic apologists, authors, and priests, including Dr. Scott Hahn, Fr. Peter M. J. Stravinskas, Marcus Grodi, Patrick Madrid, Steve Ray, Tim Staples, Devin Rose, Mike Aquilina, Al Kresta, Karl Keating, Fr. Dwight Longenecker, Brandon Vogt, Marcellino D'Ambrosio, and Fr. John A. Hardon, S. J. Dave has been happily married to his wife Judy since October 1984. They have three sons and a daughter, and reside in southeast Michigan (metro Detroit).","url":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/author\/davearmstrong"}]}},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/55195","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2331"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=55195"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/55195\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/55196"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=55195"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=55195"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=55195"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}