SCRIPTURE: THE HIGHEST AUTHORITY
Notes
Transcript
When we ask, who should be the authority in life and religion, who are some of the competitors?
“Since Scripture is God’s word, it has supreme authority, for God cannot speak other than with supreme authority.”[1]
Sola Scriptura means that since Scripture is from God it must be the supreme authority for God’s people. Just as creation came into existence by God’s word, God’s people must be shaped and led by the Scriptures. Debates about the place of the Bible’s authority should “seem hardly necessary among Christians who should consider as an incontrovertible truth the fact that the Scriptures are inspired of God (theopneuston) as the primary foundation of faith.”[2]Still yet, “even among Christians of this age, there are too many atheists and libertines who endeavor in every way to weaken this most sacred truth. Therefore it is of the greatest importance to our salvation that our faith should be in good time fortified against the diabolical cavils of these impious persons.”[3]
Theological Foundation and Biblical Basis
Theological Foundation and Biblical Basis
The theological foundation of sola Scriptura rests on two principles: God is God and God has spoken. Since God has spoken there can be no greater authority. Deuteronomy 4:1 begins, “And now O Israel, listen to the rules and statutes that I am giving you.” The laws were not authoritative and consequential merely because Moses delivered them. The words were significant because they were from God. “All Scripture” Paul wrote, “is inspired of God” (2 Tim 3:16). Since Scripture is “God breathed” (ESV), then it is God’s word. Psalm 19:7-11 displays the power and effectiveness of God’s Word: “The law of the Lord is perfect, reviving the soul; the testimony of the Lord is sure, making wise the simple; the precepts of the Lord are right, rejoicing the heart; the commandment of the Lord is pure, enlightening the eyes; the fear of the Lord is clean, enduring forever; the rules of the Lord are true, and righteous altogether.” That power stems from its omnipotent Author.
Throughout Scripture, the God of the Bible is shown to be superior to every alternative. He alone is the true God and there is none like him. He is beyond comparison (Is 46:9). Its stands to reason then that God is the supreme authority. When he speaks, the earthquakes and his people should listen. J. I. Packer explained, “Scripture now functions precisely as the instrument of Christ’s lordship over his followers. All Scripture is like Christ’s letters to the seven churches (Rev. 2–3) in this regard.”[4]
Jesus displayed the importance of Scripture and it’s supreme position for Christians in John 12:48-5: “The one who rejects me and does not receive my words has a judge; the word that I have spoken will judge him on the last day. For I have not spoken on my own authority, but the Father who sent me has himself given me a commandment—what to say and what to speak. And I know that his commandment is eternal life. What I say, therefore, I say as the Father has told me.” God’s words—the Scriptures—are the judge of all, are from God, and offer life. There can be no higher judge, no higher authority, and no greater blessing than what is recorded in Scripture.
Sadly, human struggle against God’s sovereignty and suffer the consequences rather than submit to him and enjoy his blessings. This struggle nowhere more apparent than in the way Bible authority is discarded. As Michael Horton said, “scholars across the ecclesiastical spectrum have been domesticating God’s sovereign voice to the voice of the church or the individual.”[5] Far too often, Scripture is a discussion partner rather than a Sovereign decree.
History of the Doctrine
History of the Doctrine
Early Attestations
Early Attestations
The ancient theologians agreed on the authority of Scripture above all other documents. Augustine, for example displayed the early attestation to the authority of Scripture above all other religious writings when he said,
However, who does not know that the sacred canon of Scripture, both of the Old and New Testament, is contained within its own established limits, and that it is to be preferred to all later letters of bishops to such a degree, that it ought not to be possible to doubt or dispute at all, whether anything established as written in it is true or right? But on the other hand, the letters of bishops which have been written or are being written, since the closing of the canon, may be refuted if there be anything in them which by chance deviates from the truth.”[6]
In a letter to Jerome, he wrote:
I have learnt to ascribe to those books which are of canonical rank, and only to them, such reverence and honour, that I firmly believe that no single error due to the author is found in any of them. And when I am confronted in these books with anything that seems to be at variance with truth, I do not hesitate to put it down either to the use of an incorrect text, or to the failure of a commentator rightly to explain the words, or to my own mistaken understanding of the passage.[7]
Later on Hugh of St. Victor (ca. 1096–1141) described the supreme authority of Scripture as the result of its inspiration. He wrote, “The only Scripture that is rightly called divine is that which is inspired by the Spirit of God and issued by those who speak by the Spirit of God.”[8]
Medieval Struggles and the Reformation
Medieval Struggles and the Reformation
The problem for medieval theologians was not apathy toward Scripture. Aquinas, a representative of the age, wrote commentaries on the majority of Scripture. The rampant Catholic corruption led to the Protestant Reformation. The Reformation began as a call to reform immoral actions and the functional supremacy of the Papacy over Scripture.
However, in the Patriarchal society and with power centered in the church, it was convenient for the church leaders to begin to function as authorities over the church rather than Scripture.
Martin Luther wrote, “The truth of Scripture comes first. After that is accepted one may determine whether the words of men can be accepted as true.”[9]In An Assertion of All the Articles (1520) he wrote, “I do not want to throw out all those more learned [than I], but Scripture alone to reign, and not to interpret it by my own spirit or the spirit of any man, but I want to understand it by itself and its spirit.”[10]
The principle of Sola Scriptura did not forbid the use of commentaries, teachers, or preachers. Scripture was to be the authority, but even Scripture commands that the Scriptures be taught. Those things that are taught are to be examined by Scripture. Sola Scriptura, therefore, does not mean “nothing but Scripture.” Rather, sola Scriptura affirms that Scripture is the ultimate authority and only divine authority. “ So for Luther, Scripture itself remained the final authority, but this did not eliminate all appeal to the fathers, the creeds, and the decisions of the church. Reading Scripture is a fellowship activity in which the voices of those who have read before us need to be heard attentively. The individualism of later centuries is only anachronistically read into Luther’s appeal to sola Scriptura.”[11]
The “Wesleyan Quadrilateral” of “reason, tradition, experience, and Scripture” lends itself toward a moderating position between the radical “nuda Scriptura” and the Catholic magisterium. Unfortunately, this quadrilateral can be easily abused if reason, tradition, or experience begin to encroach the supreme authority of Scripture. This encroachment occurs easily and almost subconsciously as the human desire to be his or her own sovereign manifests itself. This slip away from Bible authority is demonstrated in the preaching which dominates much of the religious landscape.
It is possible to hold a high view of biblical authority and sufficiency in theory while yielding a magisterial role in practice to sociology, politics, marketing, psychology, and other cultural authorities. Within evangelical circles, the decline of expository preaching in favor of topical speeches laced with personal anecdotes, insights, and examples drawn from cultural authorities communicates to God’s people where we think the power and relevance of our speech really lies.[12]
Just as Satan tempted Eve in the Garden, God’s people can be tempted to doubt Scripture or to “reinterpret” Scripture to fit their own desires.
Modern Babel?
Modern Babel?
Since the Reformation began, those who seek biblical authority for all they do have splintered into various groups. In 2016 Keven Vanhoozer wrote Biblical Authority After Babel to discuss this problem. How should Christians be united if there is no central authoritative interpreter such as the Pope and Catholic Magisterium? Vanhoozer suggested that “Rightly understood, sola scriptura is not a recipe for schism or sectarianism, but a call to listen to the Holy Spirit in the life of the church’s history of interpretation.”[13]
Biblical authority must be applied, but it must be applied in the church. No one is to be the chief interpreter. Rugged individualism has no place in the Christian community. Instead, the authoritative Scriptures should be studied by the church and applied by the church together. This enables the Christian to learn from contemporaries and forerunners alike. Still, Scripture remains the only authority for the individual and the church. Interpretation in the church helps to prevent misguided or even embarrassing interpretations and encourages sharper understandings of what God has said. This principle undergirds the value of our Bible classes, lectureships, seminars, commentaries, class books, and other teaching opportunities.
Nuda Scriptura is an alternative to sola Scriptura. Nuda scriptura means nothing but Scripture. Sola Scriptura maintains that Scripture is the only authority and other material may be helpful but must be weighed against Scripture’s authority. While it may sound appealing at first, nuda Scriptura results in the reader only accepting his or her own private interpretation. Furthermore, it is impossible to argue for this position or to teach this position since to do so would require extra-biblical words. With nuda Scriptura, one’s private interpretation cannot be critiqued or confirmed by anyone. This leads to isolationism and pride among each interpreter. In fact, each interpreter becomes the chief interpreter of Scripture—at least in his own mind. If God’s people are permitted to enjoy Bible classes, sermon books, commentaries, and other devotional material then nuda Scriptura practiced. After all, Scripture teaches that God would have teachers in his church (Eph 4).
Contemporary Applications
Contemporary Applications
The Bereans provide an example of how to view the authority of Scripture and also to benefit from extra-biblical teachers. Paul taught the Bereans and “Now these Jews were more noble than those in Thessalonica; they received the word with all eagerness, examining the Scriptures daily to see if these things were so” (Acts 17:11). Notice three important lessons from this biblical example: 1) they held the Scriptures as the supreme authority, 2) they were willing to benefit from someone explaining the Scriptures to them, and 3) the helpfulness of what was taught was accepted or rejected based on what God had said in Scripture.
Christians, we can follow the Berean model. We can benefit from the teaching, correction, and insight from others. We dare not be so prideful as to ignore the insights of two millennia theological reflection or the best among contemporaries. We must fully submit to God as he has spoken to us in Scripture.
[1]John M. Frame, The Doctrine of the Christian Life, A Theology of Lordship (Phillipsburg, NJ: P&R Publishing, 2008), 146.
[2]Francis Turretin, Institutes of Elenctic Theology, Institutes 2.4.2.
[3]Francis Turretin, Institutes 2.4.2.
[4] J. I. Packer, Concise Theology: A Guide to Historic Christian Beliefs (Wheaton, IL: Tyndale House, 1993), 16–17.
[5] Michael Horton, The Christian Faith: A Systematic Theology for Pilgrims on the Way (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2011), 199–200.
[6]Augustine, De Baptismo contra Donatists Libri Septum, CSEL 51:178.11-21.
[7]Augustine Epistulae 82.3 in CSEL 33:354.
[8] Hugh of St. Victor, De scripturis et scriptoribus sacris 1, in PL 175:10–11A; English translation by Hugh Feiss.
[9]Martin Luther, Acta Augustana 2.21.5-6 in Luthers Works 31:282.
[10] Martin Luther, Assertio omnium articulorum M. Lutheri per bullam Leonis X. novissimam damnatorum (1520), WA 7:98.40–99.2.
[11] Mark Thompson, “Sola Scriptura” Reformation Theology Matthew Barrett, editor (Grand Rapids: Crossway, 2017), 155-156.
[12] Michael Horton, The Christian Faith, 200.
[13]Kevin Vanhoozer, Biblical Authority After Babel, 137.