Does 1 Corinthians 4:6 really prove Sola Scriptura? In this episode of Catholic Bible Highlights, Catholic apologist Kenny Burchard breaks down one of the most common proof-texts used by Protestants to defend the doctrine of Sola Scriptura. With clarity, humor, and insight, Kenny shows how this verse—“Do not go beyond what is written”—has been misused, misapplied, and lifted out of its original context. You'll learn what Paul was actually saying to the Corinthians, why this can’t be a reference to the Protestant doctrine of Sola Scriptura, and how proof-texting distorts the true meaning of the Bible.

• CBH AMAZON BOOK STORE - Get your note-taker Bible, your highlighters, and all the books we feature in this series in one place: - https://amzn.to/3SFNir0
• GREAT ADVENTURE Note Taker's Bible - https://amzn.to/3Fnn49S

GIVE A GIFT TODAY
Tax-deductible donations: https://tinyurl.com/3v4cakns
When you give $12 or more to CBH, you'll receive our CBH notebook sticker and Adoration prayer guide as our special thank you for your support.

Learn more about me, and contact me directly at my website:
https://kennyburchard.com/

Follow me on X - https://x.com/KennyBurchard

BONUS - Mr. Casey's Original Tweet HERE: https://x.com/MrCasey62/status/1924798141922197841
**
Mr Casey's 11-point Response to "1 Cor. 4:6 = Sola Scriptura"
When Protestants point to 1 Cor 4:6, teach them what the Bible ACTUALLY says:
ELEVEN reasons why 1 Cor 4:6 has ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to do with Sola Scriptura:

1. Paul’s whole emphasis here is that the Corinthians were “arrogant” & “puffed up”. Suddenly sticking in the concept “Sola Scriptura” in the middle of this discourse would have done NOTHING to address that problem
2. “these things” refers to what Paul has ALREADY written “for YOUR sakes” in the previous chapters—NOT Sola Scriptura
3. He could even be referring to his previous letter (Paul says in 1 Cor 5:9 he had written them a previous letter, now lost)
4. He’s certainly NOT referring to the Old Testament alone (especially since many of the newly converted Corinthians were Gentiles who would be unfamiliar with the Old Testament anyway)
5. He’s certainly NOT referring to the New Testament, much of which hadn’t even been written
6. If Paul were to insist on sticking with “these things” already written, the Corinthians would’ve been justified in rejecting his oral teaching at his next visit there (2–3 years later)
7. And in no way can Bible Christians claim that Paul had some sort of authority to maintain that the oral teaching of the other Apostles who never wrote a word of Scripture themselves could be dismissed simply because it wasn’t written down.
8. 1 Corinthians was written in ~57 AD. Letters would continue to be written for another FORTY years (John’s letters ~97 AD). Nowhere in the Bible does it say Paul had a crystal ball to see WHO would write, or WHAT they’d write, or what would eventually be called “Scripture”.
9. Even JOHN CALVIN says the phrase “what is written” is either a reference to the Old Testament verses he quotes within his epistle or to the epistle itself: “The phrase, ‘beyond that which is written’, can be explained in two ways, as referring either to what Paul has written, or to the scriptural proofs he has adduced.” (‘Commentary on 1 Corinthians 4:6’)
10. Protestant theologian Anthony Thiselton says there are SEVEN ways to interpret this passage—NONE of which corresponds to Sola Scriptura.
11. Protestant Bible scholar Tim Savage, says it refers only to the five OT passages Paul referred to in 1 Cor 1-3.