Blog Archives

Clinging to the Word of Life

“clinging to the Word of Life, that I will be satisfied in the day of Christ that I did not run in vain nor did I labor in vain.”

(Philippians 2:16)

Much can be said from these words of Paul, but I want to focus first on the initial words which follow the statement in the previous verse. What is the way in which we live our lives in a way that is blameless and pure? The answer is that we must do so clinging to the Word of Life. It is the Bible that provides us with every standard by which we may know the life we are to strive to live. It is the Bible that gives us wisdom and discernment for the decisions we make. And it is the Bible that records all of the promises of God that will give us the courage to live the way we are called to live…that is if we trust the Bible.

But Paul doesn’t simply say for us to trust the Bible. He says we are to cling to it like one might cling to the edge of a great cliff lest we fall to our doom on the valley floor below. This clinging is a life or death clinging. These scriptures for us are our very life (Deuteronomy 32:47). For we do not live by bread alone, but by every word that comes from the mouth of the Lord (Deuteronomy 8:3). And it is not only our calling to live by them, but to speak of this word to others at every opportunity and no matter the cost (Acts 5:20).

Yet, how many professing Christians reject this word that God gives to us…or at least pick and choose that which they want to follow and that which they wish to ignore. Selective hearing does not an obedient follower make.

Thus, friends, set the Word of God before you, which is God’s Word of Life. Do so in all things and in every way. Let it guide your steps and do not deviate to the right or to the left from that which it instructs and commands. Let the Word of God guide your speech and your attitudes as well as your reasoning. Do not let any idea into your life except through the sieve of the Scriptures. It will always prove faithful and reliable…cling to it for it is your very life.

God Communicates through Christ: Hebrews 1:1-4 (part 5)

“he spoke to us through the Son…”

 

What a wonderful gift has been given to us in Jesus Christ.  All of the many parts and pieces of scriptures, all of the narratives, all of the prophetic literature, all of the songs, the poems, the laments, the dirges, all of the exalted praise find their meaning and unity in Jesus Christ.  In Christ scripture finds its fullness of meaning, apart from Christ we are left with a puzzle that is disjointed and confusing.  Is it any wonder that so many non-believers have looked at the Bible and have seen nothing but random words of men through the history of the church and of Israel, while as believers we come to the word of God and see Christ!  Oh, beloved, do not back down, shy away from, or give up this great truth!  How great a truth that the church in our own day has given up, when they give up the doctrines of the plenary inspiration, inerrancy, and infallibility of scripture, for when you let go of these views, you begin looking at scripture as the unbeliever looks at scripture and you lose its unity because you lose the one piece that gives it significance, unity, and life—you lose Christ.  The writer of Hebrews states boldly and clearly that in the ancient times God spoke to his people in many and sundry ways, now, in these last days—they days between the cross and the return of our Lord, God speaks to us through Christ—through the Word made flesh, and now written out for us in the complete scriptures.

Have you ever noticed how often our God speaks?  This is one of the wonderful attributes of our God—he is communicating and he designs to communicate with his creation—an infinite God condescending to communicate with a finite man.  God did this with Adam and Eve in the Garden and even after their sin and the fall, God continued to communicate with them.  We even see God communicating with himself before mankind existed, during his creative process (Genesis 1:26), and God used communication as the means by which he created in the first place, for he spoke creation into existence.  What a wonderful thing that communications is—it is the way that ideas are shared, thoughts are put together, and societies are united.  Communicating is part of our very nature for it is part of God’s nature.  The sad thing is that often we fail to communicate or refuse to communicate truth to others.  In turn, that is why relationships, marriages, and cultures break down.  Now, notice the connection to our passage, for while God has many ways of communication at his disposal, his preferred and happy means of communicating with his people is through his wonderful Son, Jesus Christ! 

Oh, loved ones, how we often fall into sin and error when we refuse to communicate in the context of Christ.  What do I mean by that statement?  What I mean is this:  if God chooses to reveal all we need to know for living (see 2 Timothy 3:16-17 for the reminder that the scriptures are profitable for all of life) through his Son, then we also should communicate all we do through God’s Son as well.  Thus, if you are a historian, we should communicate all of history on the basis of its relationship to the life and work of Christ.  If you are a philosopher, all philosophies should be understood and communicated in their relationship to Christ.  If you are a mathematician, mathematic principles should be communicated in their relationship to Christ, knowing that all things were created through and for Christ—hence the regularity of mathematical or scientific descriptions of the world was established for the glory of Christ himself.  Christian, if you want to see reformation and even revival in our culture once again, it begins by breaking down the dichotomy between life in Church and life elsewhere.  If you want to see real change, you will need to communicate as God communicates—through Christ—in every endeavor you undertake.

What then do we mean that the Bible is infallible and inerrant?

What do we mean when we state that the Bible is infallible as well as being inerrant?

 

            As discussed above, the Bible is inerrant, or, in other words, without error.  The idea of infallibility takes the premise one step further.  When we say that the Bible is infallible, we say that the Bible is incapable of making mistakes, or in practical terms, that the Bible is incapable of leading the believer into error.  This is not to say that there have never been students of the Bible that have drifted into error, indeed, the history of the church is filled with those who have done just that.  Yet, the reason that they drifted into error is not because they were misled by scripture, but it was because their own sin got in the way of the proper interpretation of scripture.  To understand scripture fully, it must be approached in faith and with respect for what it is, and thus guided by the Holy Spirit for its interpretation.  Many non-believers have spent their lives studying the Bible and have often provided valuable insights into the text, but they eventually fall into error because they do not have a relationship with Jesus Christ, and as a result, their minds are not illumined by the Holy Spirit.  Yet, for those who are born again believers, those who are trusting in Jesus Christ as their Lord and Savior, prayerful study and application of the scriptures will not lead them into error.

            In addition, the scriptures are infallible in teaching the way by which men and women must be saved.  To put it another way, it is through the writings of scripture, being taught and proclaimed, that people come to know the beauty of Jesus and to experience the wonders of salvation that Jesus wrought.  So important was this idea that the Apostle Paul wrote the following words:

Therefore, how are they to call on him of whom they have not believed?  And how can they to believe in whom they have not heard?  And how are they to hear without one preaching?  And how can they preach if they have not been sent?  Just as it is written, “How beautiful are the feet of the one who proclaims the good news!”  But they have not all heard the gospel.  For Isaiah says, “Lord, who has believed what they heard from us?”  Therefore, faith comes out of hearing, and hearing through the word of Christ.”  (Romans 10:14-17)

Thus, the very content of our proclamation of the gospel and of our preaching in the church must always be God’s word.  The thoughts and ideas of the pastor can lead one to fall, but God’s word is incapable of doing just that.

            There have been different approaches to this concept in the history of the church.  The Eastern Orthodox church has largely held that since the early Christian councils were so scripturally based, said councils should be considered to be infallible as well as the scriptures.  The difficulty with this view is that there have been many books, creeds, and confessional texts that are deeply based in scripture, but when one argues that infallibility extends from scripture to those writings based on scripture, one enters into subjectivity in terms of what constitutes a document based on scripture.  Such a view also places a great deal of weight upon the interpretation of scripture and not upon the scriptures themselves. Invariably, this view will lead you into theological error and toward crediting the minds and the pens of men with honor that God never intended that they be given.  Such a position elevates the writings of these church councils to the level of scripture as well, and the dangers of that matter have already been touched upon.  While there are many wonderful texts that have been written to guide our studies, we should always be cognizant that they have been written by men and not by God.

            The Roman Catholic church has taken a different approach to this as well.  They have held that the Pope, as “Christ’s Vicar” on earth is preserved by God from entering into error on matters of the church, faith, and morality.  He is said to demonstrate that infallibility when he speaks from “Peter’s Chair,” properly known as speaking ex cathedra.  This is built on the assumption that Peter was the first Pope of the church and that through the process of a succession of Popes, the Apostolic authority of Peter was handed down from generation to generation.  Again, this makes the error of assuming that men are incapable of failing, something all sinful men can do, no matter the character of the individual.  It is only God who is infallible and thus the infallibility of God extends to his divine word alone, not to the words of men.   What we do with that word is what opens us up to error.


In the larger context, Paul is also making the point that not all who physically hear the gospel will respond to it, but that the ability to hear comes from the Holy Spirit.

To what extent does inerrancy extend?

To what extent is the Bible inspired and thus inerrant?  Does the inspiration extend only to the ideas conveyed or to the very words of scripture?

 

A debate that has been taking place between the Orthodox branches in the church and what is normally called the Neo-Orthodox movement, is over the question of the extent of revelational authority.  Another way of phrasing the question is, “Is the Bible the word of God or does the Bible contain the word of God?”  This presents a contrast between a view of the inspiration of scripture and the view of the plenary inspiration of scripture.

The Neo-Orthodox movement in the church has held that it is not the words of scripture that contain the inspiration of God, but it is that when those words find themselves to rest upon the ears and the heart of a believer, then, and only then, genuine inspiration takes place.  This allows the Neo-Orthodox theologian to not get very hung up by source critical arguments because, after all, it is not the words of scripture that are important; rather, it is the effect that those words have on the believing heart that is important.  As one can see, this scheme of understanding revelation becomes extremely subjective and robs the text of any genuine content, for content, according to this view, comes from the hearer’s interpretation of the words.  Exegetical theology also becomes nearly impossible, for exegesis becomes about “what this text means to me…” instead of what this text actually says.  And though this position can be attributed to Neo-Orthodoxy today, it is not a new sin, but one that can be traced all of the way back to Adam and Eve who doubted God’s word that they would die if they ate of the forbidden fruit.

In response to this, the Orthodox theologians have taken a strong stand on the plenary (or complete) inspiration of scripture.  In other words, every single word of scripture is a result of the inspiration of God.  Every noun, every verb, ever preposition, every adjective, every pronoun, ever article is a result of the breathing out of God and thus carries with it the full authority of God himself.  This view holds that meaning comes from within the text and not from within the hearer.  This view holds that God is a rational and intentional God and that as a result, when he rationally and intentionally communicates with his people, he has a plain and intended purpose and meaning behind what was said.  This view holds that the very statements of scripture contain propositional truth given to God’s people so that we might know him and glorify him with our lives.  This view holds that while we see the stylistic fingerprint of the human authors within each text, that it is God who is writing through them, using all of their gifts and talents to produce his word, and that word—every word of it—is true and perfectly given and preserved by the Holy Spirit.

            There are many in the post-modern world that would contend that words in themselves contain no meaning.  They would continue that words are nothing but culturally formatted symbols with which we communicate and that it is the context in which language is used that conveys meaning.  On one level, there is a degree of truth to this argument.  We have already spoken of the dynamic nature of language as it is used by a culture.  Many of our words carry with them very different meanings depending on the context in which they are found.  For example, depending on the context, the word “dope” in English could refer to illegal drugs, to someone who is foolish or not intelligent, to gossip that is shared, to a form of varnish used on aircraft, or to lubricant that is used as a sealant.  Context, then determines which form of the word you are using.  This being said, words in a culture do have a fixed and limited set of meanings.  Dope does not also mean dog, cat, and grocery cart; it cannot mean anything we want it to mean.  If it could, then language would become meaningless, for “Dope dope doped dope” could then mean, “I need you to pick up a gallon of milk at the grocery store.”  If such use of language were ever to become the case, then, as a culture, we would be returned to the state people found themselves in at the Tower of Babble, when God confused the languages.  Culture cannot exist and reproduce itself if language is rendered meaningless.

            Yet, even the post-modern thinker, when pressed on the issue, would assert that language does contain meaning, though it pains them to do so.  Post-modern thinkers write books for people to read.  Certainly in writing a book, the post-modern thinker expects people to understand what he is trying to teach.  When a post-modern thinker goes to the bank and asks that his paycheck be deposited in his checking account, certainly he expects the teller to understand what he is saying and he trusts that the money will actually go into his account rather than in some random account.  When the post-modern thinker goes to the emergency room in agony because he has kidney stones, when he communicates this to the doctor, he does not expect the doctor to start by examining his knees.  When the post-modern thinker goes to a restaurant and orders an expensive meal, the post-modern thinker expects to be served the meal he ordered.  Thus words have meanings and any rational person is forced to admit such by the way they use their words in practical situations.  And, as God is a rational God, the words that God speaks in scripture are spoken with an expectation that they be understood—and that they be obeyed!

 


It is important to note that scripture was not given as dictation, squelching the various personalities through whom God wrote.  We see stylistic language, artistic structure of texts, and themes that run through the writings of given authors, showing us something of the human nature of the Bible.  Exodus 4:14-17 records the calling of Aaron to be Moses’ prophet (also see Exodus 7:1).  God would tell Moses what to say, Moses would tell Aaron what to say and Aaron would speak it.  The words that the prophet speaks belong to God (or in Aaron’s case, Moses), but the mannerisms, inflections of speech, and personality belong to the prophet.  So too with scripture—the words belong to God, but the structure and personality of the writings belong to the prophetic or Apostolic author.

It is worth emphasizing here that only the Orthodox view of plenary inspiration preserves the infallibility and inerrancy of scripture.  When the meaning of scripture becomes subjective, the truth of scripture becomes subjective as well.  In addition, scripture itself claims to be the word of God, not just to contain God’s word.  As the scriptures claim to be inspired in a plenary sense, to claim otherwise is to invalidate the value of scripture as a whole, suggesting that it is nothing more than a book of lies.

To what extent does Biblical infallibility extend?

If the Bible is incapable of error, to what extent does that infallibility extend, just to theological matters or to all maters to which it speaks?

 

We have already touched on this idea but it bears repeating.  Given that the Bible is written by God, it is impossible for the text to be in error.  God is omniscient and as he is the author of the Bible, the Bible reflects his omniscience in all areas.  This means that the Bible is inerrant in the history of which it speaks, of the geography of which it speaks, of the science of which it speaks, and of real existence of the miraculous deeds that it records.  It is our obligation, when our own understanding seems to contradict the revelation of scripture, to submit our understanding to the revelation that is given.  Anything that compromises this view accuses God of being untruthful in his revelation of all things or it denies that scripture is divine revelation altogether and accuses its authors of being charlatans and frauds in the name of religion.