Blog Archives

The Church’s One Foundation

“having been built upon the foundation of the Apostles and Prophets, having as the cornerstone, Christ Jesus,”

(Ephesians 2:20)

The language of the church being like a great building and temple goes all of the way back to the prophesies of Haggai, Isaiah, and Ezekiel. They are also picked up by both Peter and Paul in their epistles. Christ is the greater Temple of which Haggai prophesied and we (believers) are the building blocks from which it is built (1 Peter 2). Yet, buildings are established upon a foundation…in this case, that of the Apostles and Prophets — the authors through whom the Scriptures are given to us. And Christ is the cornerstone — he is the first stone laid on the foundation with which all of the subsequent building blocks must be aligned. In other words, if we do not align ourselves with Christ, the writings of Scripture will make no sense.

Before we go too far, it should be noted that some theologians have enjoyed poking fun at the old hymn, “The Church’s One Foundation,” because it speaks of Christ being that foundation (in contrast to what Paul writes here). In defense of the hymn’s author, he was speaking of 1 Corinthians 3:11, where Paul speaks of Christ as the foundation, not of this passage here. Maybe the author could have clarified his text somewhat, but it is not inconsistent with Scripture to think this way (sorry R.C.). Nevertheless, in Ephesians, Paul further clarifies the word picture somewhat to speak of Christ as the cornerstone and the Apostles and Prophets (the inspired Writ) as the foundation on which the church is built.

The question should be asked, then, as to what it means for a church to be built upon the Scriptures. Certainly, most churches would say that they were, but if we raise the question, I fear that most congregations fall far short from the scriptures. So let us start by the notion that if a church is built upon the scriptures, every part of what it does is then dictated and governed by the scriptures. That includes the church government, church discipline, the sacraments, and the attitude toward confessions and creeds (what Jude refers to as the faith that was “once and for all time delivered to the saints”). This includes activities in the church life. This includes the whole of worship. What is read? What is preached? What is sung? What governs our prayers and elements of worship? If it is not the word of God, then the church is not built on the foundation of the Apostles and the Prophets. How does your congregation hold up? Are you in a position to bring reform where needed? If not, flee to a congregation which is intentionally built on these things.

I grant, that sounds a little harsh to our western ears, but listen to a few additional things the the Bible says about this foundation and its cornerstone. This church is chosen and precious to God and made to be a spiritual household, holy, set apart for God’s purposes and not men’s. God is zealous toward his church. He has chosen her unconditionally, but he does not leave her in her rough form. Stones must be shaped prior to being useful in the building of the Temple. Isn’t it interesting that when Solomon’s Temple was being built, the stones themselves had to be shaped (chiseled) away from the Temple Mount — in the world (1 Kings 6:7). What a picture that presents for those of us still being sanctified. We are being sanctified in the world to be prepared for eternity in God’s presence. Sanctification does not take place in heaven nor in the new creation; it takes place here in the fallen world. Thus, if we are to be useful to God, shall we be content with the rough-cut stone all around our being and in our church? Or, shall we desire to be properly dressed and ready for use in the Temple?

We are also told that there is a seal laid into the firm foundation of the church (2 Timothy 2:19). This seal makes two very strong statements about those who are part of the house. First, it reads, “The Lord knows those who are his.” This, of course, speaks very clearly of Election and the fact that when Jesus made atonement for sins, he did not do so for some unnamed masses, but he did so for those whom he knew. Just as the High Priest knew for whom he made atonement and only made atonement for said persons, so too, our great High Priest only made atonement for the elect of God and knew precisely for whom he atoned.

The second part of the seal on the foundation of the church contains the words, “Let everyone who names the name of the Lord depart from iniquity.” The life of a Christian is to be such that sin is contended against. For the Christian, being content with indwelling sin is never an option. And that idea really brings us full circle to where we began. For, if a church is contented with functioning in a way not dictated by the Scriptures and they become aware that they are doing so, the right response would be repentance. Yet, such is a rare trait. Most, instead, content themselves with compromise rather than submitting to the will of God.

God Revealed

You will notice that in question 25 of the Catechism, when asked about the Trinity, the answer begins with the language of “because God revealed…” At first, that might seem like a simple enough phrase and one that is not that important, yet, from the perspective of the Christian faith, it is of significant value. While indeed, the creation testifies to its creator (Psalm 19:1; Romans 1:20), such knowledge is not sufficient to save or to produce saving faith for faith comes by hearing the Word of Christ, not by works or by innate knowledge (Romans 10:17; Galatians 3:2). Further, that Word cannot be found in nature…no matter how hard you may look or how far you may search. That word must be revealed to us by God himself.

With this in mind, we Christians have a faith that is a “revealed faith.” Apart from the revelation from God, we are lost forever. Left to our own devices, we will seek to earn a salvation that we can never earn and thus be lost in despair. Left to our own devices, our imaginations will create gods after our own image which would be molded by our own hands — little gods that cannot save us from our sins. Left to our own devices, we will create philosophies that will justify our own preferences, thus leaving us in utter moral relativism where each man essentially becomes his own god.

And so, God reveals himself to us and while he did so in many ways (think Hebrews 1:1 — dreams, prophesies, history, poetry, wisdom sayings, etc…), the culmination and compilation of the entirety of God’s revelation is found in His Word. Nothing outside of the Bible (66 books, Genesis-Revelation) is the Revelation of God and thus even the most noble and wisest observations of men must be scrutinized by the light of God’s revelation (not the other way around as is done in many liberal circles). 

The sad thing is that many people today would prefer subjective experience to the objectively revealed Word of God. Many prefer their own pragmatic insights to the revealed wisdom of God on high. And many more would prefer a god of their own making to the God of Heaven. Many prefer a god they can control rather than a God who can make demands of them. Such is the nature of fallen man and such is what distinguishes Christianity from every other religion — for Christianity is a revealed religion, not one constructed by men.

What is Non-Negotiable?

There is a well-known phrase that goes back to Saint Vincent of Lerins (died AD 445) that goes as follows: “In Essentials unity, in Non-Essentials liberty, and in all things Charity.” And, in principle, the idea is a good thing. Confessing Christians are commanded in scripture to treat one another with love — ἀγάπη (agape) even. Those who cannot or who will not act with love toward other Christians are not really Christians in the first place (1 John 3:14-15). Further, there are plenty of areas in which we might disagree with Christian brothers (the application of this verse or the interpretation of that passage) and no essential piece of theology is altered. I remember the first time that I preached the “Parable of the Steward of Unrighteousness” (Luke 16:1-13). At the time, I was in seminary still and looked up 17 different commentaries on the parable and each commentator approached the text differently. Go figure…

The real problem with this phrase of St. Vincent is not the latter two clauses, but the initial clause. What defines the “Essentials of the Faith.” Or perhaps, to use more Biblical phraseology, what defines the “Faith once and for all time delivered to the saints.” What points of doctrine are we compelled to be united on lest the Christian faith be lost and we fall into outright heresy? This is a somewhat more hotly debated question.

Some theologians tend toward a more minimalistic approach — if we can all agree on the Apostles’ Creed, we can claim that we are Christians. Yet, Mormons would claim to hold to the Apostles’ Creed and even most mainstream denominations would identify the Church of Jesus Christ of the Latter Day Saints as a cult and not as a Christian denomination. Why is that? It is because the LDS church has redefined some of the terminology to suit their theological views. 

Others have suggested that the four so-called Ecumenical Creeds together form this Essential view (Apostles’ Creed, Nicene Creed, Athenasian Creed, and the Christological Statement of Chalcedon). These four certainly draw us much closer to the answer and add some much-needed definitions to the terminology of the Apostles’ Creed. Yet, the Pope would affirm these four Creeds and most protestants would argue that the Pope is in serious error and many of us (particularly in the Reformed school of thought) would argue that the Pope is an antichrist.

So, where do we go next? While the next logical step is to appeal to the Confessions of the Church, we must be reminded that the purpose of a Confession is to clarify distinctions between Christian bodies, so confessions unapologetically cover things that may not fall into the realm of “Essentials.” So, that still leaves us asking the question, “Where is our starting point when it comes to Essentials?”

The answer has to fall back to looking at the Bible — the sixty-six books that comprise the Old and New Testaments. But, we need to go a little further than that. We ought to clarify that it is these books, treated as the inspired, inerrant, and infallible Word of God, consisting and treated as a unified whole, not a collection of disparate books gathered by the church. When the Scriptures become our starting point and our only rule for faith and practice, we now have a substantial basis upon which essentials can be distinguished.

The Bible is also the only place where we can know the Gospel. Gospel, of course, is a word that is used rather broadly — it refers to the four books that begin the New Testament and it also refers to the message of salvation we might would use in evangelism. In its most basic sense, though, the word means “Good News” and the Gospel (in that sense) is the whole of the Bible as the Bible contains the good news of God’s redemption of man throughout history. Beginning to end, it is the only place where we can discover the good news of the forgiveness of sins and a hope for eternal life. That is our Essential — everything else we hold flows out of this one book.

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.

Our Lifeblood

“Therefore, my beloved, just as you have always been obedient, not only in my presence alone, but now also even more in my absence, work out your own salvation with fear and trembling for God is the one working in you, even to will and to work for satisfaction.”

(Philippians 2:12-13)

The word, “His,” is often inserted before the word “satisfaction” in this phrase, which clearly is the meaning in context, though the word is only implied and not present. That stated, it should be noted that when we are in Christ, that which satisfies or brings God good pleasure ought to be that which satisfies us the most. Thus, as God the Father is most satisfied in his Son, we too are only truly satisfied when we are deeply in relationship with the Son as well.

Now, sometimes people get a little hung up on the language of working out your salvation…in this context, Paul is referring not to our justification, where we are made right with God through the atonement of Jesus Christ…we do not contribute to that work … but to the ongoing process of sanctification where we participate alongside of the Holy Spirit in seeking to grow in grace. The clincher, though is found in the language that immediately follows… “for God is the one working in you.” He does the real work both in justification and in sanctification, the question is whether we will be submissive to the work of the Spirit in us or whether we will kick and fight against the goads in that process.

The key word is obedience. Sometimes I wonder whether Americans still understand the word or instead see it as something that is archaic and out of fashion. Obedience is a willing submission to the authority of another. It is hearing what that person in authority says, remembering it, and acting upon it. It seems that people in our culture detest such a notion with every fiber of their being, so whether from God or from men. Yet, as a believer, we are called to be obedient to the Word of God. As Moses commanded, these words are our very lifeblood (Deuteronomy 32:47). All too often people in our culture want what they want and they sometimes even become violent rather than appealing to the authority of scripture, seeking to submit to its wisdom. In a world filled with ideas, it seems that no one wants to critically evaluate them. It seems that instead of wanting to communicate, all people really want is a “bully pulpit.”

Budding Trees

“They are planted in the house of Yahweh;

In the courts of our God, they sprout.”

(Psalm 92:14 {verse 13 in English translations})

How often we find that we do not blossom in life because we do not plant ourselves in the right place. To plant yourself (keeping the analogy of the righteous being like a tree) in the house of Yahweh does not mean that we all need to be pastors of churches; it simply means that we must find our foundation in the Word of God — in a relationship with him — seeking to be in his presence as you do all you do in life, whether that be farming or banking or working in the services industries or being a pastor of a church. Everything we do must be rooted in God and in his word. When we seek to do that, indeed, that is when we will bud and sprout.

Remember, too, that there no longer is a physical temple to travel to; that temple was destroyed by the Romans in 70 AD and God has kept its foundations bare even to this day by placing an Islamic Mosque on its location. Why is this significant? First and foremost, because Jesus is the greater temple. His body is the temple of which he spoke when he said, “tear this down and in three days I will raise it up again” (John 2:21). Thus, in his resurrection, this temple is seated at the right hand of God the Father almighty, maker of heaven and earth — as the creed would word it.

Even so, there are “lesser temples” in this world — the bodies of believers (1 Corinthians 6:19). For we are the Temples of the Holy Spirit, walking and talking and working our way through this world. It is the Holy Spirit in us that fulfills the role that the Old Testament Temple played (to be a sign of God’s presence to the world). Yet, indeed, how can we genuinely be Temples of the Holy Spirit if our roots are not sunk deep into the living water of God’s Word.

A challenge for those who are skeptical. Commit to immersing yourself in the Scriptures. Seek out scriptural counsel before you do anything you do — not just the big things but the little things as well — and discover whether or not you find wisdom there. I believe you will. I also believe that the more you sink your spiritual teeth into the scriptures, the hungrier you will become, for you (again the tree analogy) will sprout forth and will bear the Fruit of the Spirit.

Oh How Deep!

“How your works are great, Yahweh,

Your plans are quite mysterious.”

(Psalm 92:6 [verse 5 in English])

 

Oh, heavenly Father, “what is man that you are mindful of him!” We make plans and perceive our designs to be deep and meaningful, but in a moment they are washed away by the winds of time. How we plan for tomorrow yet have no control over today. How we ponder our designs while neglecting the design that you have revealed in your word. Oh, how foolish are we puny men, yet you have condescended to reveal yourself to us in fearful and wonderful ways. Amen!

As great and mighty as God’s works are, his decrees and plans run deeper. We may spend a lifetime plummeting the depths of that which he has revealed in his Word to us, yet will never scratch much more than the surface. Oh, were we given a thousand generations to dig into the word, we still would not come closer to reaching the bottom of the richness of God’s revealed Word.

Thus, they are a mystery to us, but not the kind of mystery that discourages or disheartens, but the kind of mystery that draws us in, that sparks our interest and curiosity, and that envelops us in the love and truth of this mighty God.

Oh, the depths of the riches and of the wisdom and of the knowledge of God!  How unfathomable are his decrees and incomprehensible are his ways!  For who is he who knows the mind of the Lord? Who is he that has become his counselor? Who is he that first gave to him that he might receive repayment? For out of him and through him and for him are all things.

For to him is the glory unto eternity, amen!

(Romans 11:33-36)

Fidelity to God’s Word

“And my lord made me swear, saying ‘You must not take a wife for my son from the daughters of the Canaanites in whose land I dwell. Instead, to the house of my father you should go and to my family. From them take a wife for my son.”

(Genesis 24:38)

 

We have already discussed the importance of a believer not marrying a pagan in the plan and decree of God (see verses 2-4), though it is a principle of which we ought regularly be reminded. This does not mean we cannot do business with or be neighbors to an unbeliever, but it reminds us that for the covenantal union to make any sense whatsoever, both parties in a marriage must be committed to the same God who is forming the union. If both are not committed to Christ, how then can two become one? They would be a divided person at best. Thus Eliezer explains his vow to the family of Rebekah as commanded by his master, Abraham.

Having already discussed being unequally yoked, what is worth noting here is Eliezer’s fidelity to the call. Here he takes great pains to quote Abraham verbatim and not to simply summarize his master’s words. Because Eliezer recognizes that he is a servant and thus an emissary of Abraham, he recognizes that he does not have the liberty to insert his own interpretations here.

Inserting interpretations, of course, is what always gets us in trouble. It was Eve’s error when debating with the Serpent in the Garden and it is regularly our failure when speaking of God’s word with others in the community. We feel like we have the gist of the statement and just choose to summarize it rather than sticking to the literal word itself. When we summarize like this, we typically insert our own preferences into the teaching and we also tend to denude the Word of its sharpness and power.

Of course, unless we hide the word of God in our heart, regularly meditating on it and memorizing it, how can we have fidelity to that word that God has given us? We have often become lazy in our approach to God’s word and in doing so become guilty of making it say what we would prefer for it to say. When we do this, we cease to be a faithful servant, committed to God’s call upon our lives. Friends, mark the example of Eliezer well, for his fidelity to the very words of Abraham should be reflected in our fidelity to the word of our Almighty God.

What is Truth?

“Sanctify them in the Truth; Your Word is Truth.”

(John 17:17)

“Pilate said to him, ‘What is truth?’  And saying this, he again went outside to the Jews and said to them, ‘I do not find any ground for a complaint with him.’”

(John 18:38)

“Your righteousness is righteous forever!

And your law is truth.”

(Psalm 119:142)

“The fullness of your word is truth;

everlasting is the judgment of your righteousness.”

(Psalm 119:160)

“And the woman said to Elijah, ‘And now this I know, that you are a man of God and the Word of Yahweh in your mouth is Truth.’”

(1 Kings 17:24)

As we reflect on the nature of God’s word being truth, it is worthwhile for us to ask the question that Pilate rhetorically asked, that is, “what is truth?”  Indeed, this is a question that many have asked through history and many are yet asking today in our own culture.  So, what is truth?  The English word for truth comes from the Germanic word, “true,” which essentially refers to something that is in accordance with reality.

This raises an interesting question, because the post-modern thinker will argue that truth is relative to context.  In contrast, older thinkers have asserted that there is such a thing as absolute truth—something that is true no matter who or where you are.  What is very interesting about this is the implication for reality.  In other words, what defines reality—the individual or reality itself?  If, as the postmodern suggests, truth is relative to one’s context, and truth is what is in accordance with reality, then the post modern is suggesting that reality is defined by the individual, her perceptions, and perhaps even his context.  Yet, gravity affects everyone on earth in the same basic way; fire will burn you if you put your hand in it regardless of what you might prefer, and gasoline will ignite if you drop a burning match into it no matter what your perception might be.  So, if scientific truth can be considered absolute, then why not moral truth also?

For truth to be universal, it must appeal to an outside absolute force.  Even what we refer to as the laws of nature must appeal to an outside force as these “laws” are simply descriptive of already exists—in other words, the book will still fall to the ground if the shelf breaks regardless of whether we have defined and articulated the law of gravity.  The law simply describes what takes place.  In terms of the appeal, one seems to have two basic choices.  If one is a naturalist (one who rejects the supernatural, holding that all things are part of the natural order), one must appeal to the structure of nature as a whole.  Such a person would hold that the laws of nature “are” simply because of the structure of the whole of Nature.  The obvious problem with this view is that it assumes an undersigned natural system, which is remarkably improbable and statistically impossible if one would calculate the likelihood of an entire natural system developing “by unguided forces” into the highly structured and predictable universe that we currently observe.  Interestingly enough, science is predicated on the assumption that we live in a predictable universe, yet the only way to reasonably have a predictable universe is through a supernatural design.

The naturalist might argue that the complexity of nature is due to a very simple, overarching rule that then orders the development of all things, thus creating what appears to be a statistically impossible complexity from a very simple rule that is much more probable.  Of course, were this the case, one would expect to be able to find a Grand Unified Theory of science that can explain all things—something that does not exist and has frustrated the brightest minds for many years.  In addition, the complexity of such models is self-defeating, because for the statistics to work in the naturalists favor, the model must be extremely simple and basic, but with the ability to bring forth tremendous complexity.  Yet again, were such a simple principle to have the capacity to bring forth the unimaginable complexity of our universe that we see, it seems that such would again be evidence of design.

With that being said, if one is a naturalist, rejecting anything that is outside of the natural order, one must reject any notion of an absolute morality—all is determined by one’s cultural context.  Yet, if one adapts this view, how is it that anyone can condemn the Nazis’ treatment of the Jews during WWII, the American treatment of slaves in the 19th century, and the Communist Chinese abuses of power when it comes to human rights?  According to consistent naturalism, each of these should be judged not on absolute standards, but according to their own context—a context in each case that allowed for such abuses (and in the case of China, still allows such abuses).  David Hume, the naturalistic philosopher of the 18th century, correctly argued that “is” cannot give rise to “ought”—this is referred to as “Hume’s Guillotine.”  In other words, what Hume was arguing was that there are some things in nature that can be objectively demonstrated to be true (gravity for example).  Yet, ought is not a brute fact, but is a moral argument and one is not able to derive a moral argument from what is observed in nature. Hume recognized that we use the word, “ought,” he argued that this word was simply a convention of habit that contained no real meaning. Yet, while the naturalist’s arguments undermine his ability to make “ought” arguments, they will be quick to tell us that we “ought” to save the whales, that we “ought” to conserve energy an reduce our carbon footprint, and that we “ought” to not chop down trees in the rainforests.  As an atheist once said to me, “thank God for inconsistent naturalists…”  Such is true, because were it not for inconsistent naturalists, this world would be a dangerous place with everyone determining their own morality given their own context and preferences.  Indeed, there would no longer be a king in the land and every man would do what was right in their own eyes.

If, though, we admit design and the reality of a supernatural designer, then we have not only an explanation for the complexity of creation, but we also have a basis for a universal morality, so long as the nature of this designer is such that he would impose a sense of morality upon his creatures.  The Deists, for example, have a god that is hands-off and is considered so far removed from the created order that he would impose nothing upon it.  One might suggest that there is still a possibility of an absolute morality with this kind of God (on the basis of his perfect character), but who can know this kind of God and how can we know his character if he will not condescend to us to reveal himself?  It is only when you come to the Judeo-Christian God that you have a God who condescends to humanity to reveal himself in a trustworthy way, recognizing that while the god of the Muslims is said to condescend to his people, he veils himself from even from his own and is known to deceive others only to suit his own purposes.  Similarly, while the God of the Jews is the same God that the Christians have, because Jesus is the fullness of the revelation of the invisible God, the Jews do not have the complete revelation of the transcendent, creator God.  Thus, as Christians, we do claim that morality is absolute, moreover, we would argue that the absolute nature God’s morality is seen even in the moral codes of various pagan cultures.

So we are back to our original question, what is truth?  If there is clearly such a thing as objective truth when it comes to morality, it follows that there is objective truth to other areas so long as we appeal to the same authoritative source (God).  And how has God revealed himself to us?  He revealed himself in the Bible, in the 66 inspired books covering Genesis through Revelation.  This, of course, is the consistent testimony of scripture—that whatever God speaks is truth.  The question we must ask is twofold.  First, if God’s word is the source of objective and absolute truth, why is it that we tend to spend so little time reading and studying it?  Shouldn’t we pursue Truth with all of our strength?  How sad it is that so many professing Christians wander around wondering what truth is when they have been given the truth in God’s word.  How sad it is that so many professing Christians are so timid when the truth is challenged by unbelievers—because we have the truth, we should be confident that what we stand upon will not shake, yet that which the unbeliever stands upon is made on a foundation of sand and will fall.

The second question that we are left with is what are the ramifications of believing or rejecting this truth that God offers.  The Apostle John records some strong words in answer to this question.  Jesus, we are told, speaks the word of God (the words of absolute Truth), and the one who believes (or places his trust in) Jesus (the source of Truth) is given eternal life.  In turn, when one rejects Christ, one rejects the Truth and in turn has sealed his fate, condemning himself to eternal perdition.  The wrath of God will remain upon his head.  Beloved, there is a stark contrast between these two states, which side of the matter will you be on?  Will you accept or reject the absolute Truth of scripture?  This does not permit you to pick some and reject other aspects, you must accept the word of God in toto!  Truth works that way—it either is or it is not, there is no middle ground.  Which will you choose?  And will you seek to live like it—applying the Truth of God to every aspect of your life.

“The one who comes from above is above everything.  The one that is from the earth is from the earth and speaks from the earth; but the one who comes from heaven is above everything.  The one who has seen and who has heard testifies to these things, but no one received his testimony.  The one who receives his testimony acknowledges that God is true.  For he who God sent speaks the words of God; indeed, he gives the Spirit without measure.  The Father loves the Son and he has given everything into his hand.  The one who believes in the Son has eternal life; but the one who disobeys the Son will not see life and the wrath of God remains over him.”

(John 3:31-36)

Sanctify them in the Truth (John 17:17)

“Sanctify them in the Truth; Your Word is Truth.”

(John 17:17)

What a powerful statement!  Jesus lays out two great truths for us in this little statement…first, that it is by the means of the Truth that we should be sanctified and that the Word of God (Scripture) is Truth.  Yet, we need to lay out some definitions here to make sure we understand the depth of this statement.

The first question we really need to ask is what does the word “sanctify” mean.  In Greek, the term sanctify is the word, aJgia/zw (hagiazw), which is related to the term a¢gioß (hagios), meaning “holy” or “set apart for sacred use.”  The Hebrew equivalent to this term is vwødDq (qadosh); God regularly sets apart his people (Leviticus 19:2, 20:26), his priests (Leviticus 21:8), and implements or items of worship (Leviticus 27:30,32) as hÎwhyÅl v®døq (qodesh layahweh)—“Holy to the Lord.”  Thus, getting back to aJgia/zw (hagiazw), sanctification is the process by which God makes us holy as He is holy.  It is a process by which he refines us as by fire (1 Peter 1:6-7), scraping off the dross and refining us for his work here in this world and to be ultimately purified as we are prepared to enter into his eternal presence in glory.

Thus, if we are sanctified in Truth and the scriptures are the revelation of God’s word, then how are we sanctified in the Bible?  To begin with, let us state up front that the efforts of man in this area avail him nothing if not indwelt and empowered by the Holy Spirit.  Jesus is not talking here about those who do not have new life, but he is talking about the born-again believer in Jesus Christ.  Also, it should be noted that Jesus did speak many other words and do many other things than are recorded in the Bible (John 21:25), so some would argue that the Bible is not synonymous with God’s Word.  While there is some truth to that claim, it is clear that the Bible is the only revelation of God that has been written down and preserved for us through the ages (through the superintending of the Holy Spirit).  Certainly, there are many texts that claim divine or apostolic authorship as well as prophetic authorship, but these texts have clearly been shown to be much later additions, written under pseudonyms, and are not inspired by the Holy Spirit.  It has become popular in this age to drag out these texts and create false theologies based on them, but such is the work of false teachers whose condemnation was designated and written about long ago (Jude 4).  Look to the fruit of such teachers (Matthew 7:15-20) and who pervert the grace of God into sensuality and deny Jesus Christ (Jude 4 again).  The second century church fathers refuted them when they were writing, we should heed their warnings and not stumble into the errors of these charlatans.

As we move, then, back to the Bible—God’s revealed word and the source of all Truth, then how is it that the Bible is a tool in our sanctification?  John Calvin made the argument that there are three purposes to the moral law as it is contained in scripture—the first was simply to set before us a moral code so that we can live together in society without killing one another.  Simply spoken, how different our world would be if every human being on our planet lived by those ten basic commandments!  Secondly, the Ten Commandments are designed to teach us our inability to live a holy life before the Lord.  The simple fact is that try as we may, we cannot keep the commandments of God and thus as we survey the world around us, it is filled with idolatry, crime, adultery, greed, lust, etc…  Thus, the law teaches us we need a savior to redeem us from our wicked state.  Then finally comes the third use of the Law, which is as a tool of sanctification (what Jesus is talking about here) not for all mankind, but for the believer.  As we seek to live according to the Moral Law of God out of a desire to honor our Redeemer and God, we grow more and more like the one who fulfilled that law for us, Jesus Christ.

Jesus said that if we love him, we will demonstrate that love in obedience to his commands (John 14:15).  In addition, in the great commission, Jesus commands the Apostles to go out and make disciples.  What are the marks of a true disciple?  First, they have been baptized into the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit.  But, secondly, they have been taught to obey “all that I have commanded you” (Matthew 28:20).  Thus, we can infer that it is not just the Moral Law that believers are to seek to obey, but all of God’s word as he lays it out before us.  This is not to suggest that we are to obey all of the sacramental laws of the Old Testament, Jesus has fulfilled them for us once and for all time (Hebrews 10:10) nor is it to mean that the civil laws of the Old Testament are to be applied as they were applied in the Old Testament—Jesus himself forgave sins punishable by death (John 8:11)—such laws were given for a people who were structured into a Theocratic kingdom, now we are a kingdom of priests (1 Peter 2:9) and thus have a priestly function while living within the nations of others (just as the Levites did in Israel and just as Abraham did while living as an alien in Canaan).  We can certainly glean some moral principles from these case laws in the Old Testament, but their application is a moral guide and not civil law.

The heart at what Jesus is getting at, though, is that we must be taking God’s word and applying it to every area of our lives if we are to grow like him.  How do we do this, though, if we are not immersing ourselves in our Bibles and studying it—recognizing it as Truth?  What does it say about our hearts if we go to the Bible, yet it does not change us?  In Christ we are new creations (2 Corinthians 5:17), being changed—transformed even—into the image of Christ through the renewing of our minds (Romans 12:1-2)—and how is that renewal to take place?  It takes place through the application of God’s word to every area of our lives—indeed, as our Lord prayed, we are sanctified according to his Word.  Christian, pursue that end.

We are Marked by God’s Word (John 17:14)

“I have given them your word and the world has hated them because they are not of the world as I am not of the world.”

(John 17:14)

We are used to hearing the language of the world hating us because we are not of the world; what is sad is that all too often, the world does not hate us because we have allowed ourselves to become friends with the world and to compromise who we are—or at least who we are supposed to be.  Too often there is little that distinguishes the life of a professing Christian from the life of a non-Christian either in speech or in action.  How rarely we live intentionally with respect to our faith and in doing so, it makes things more comfortable with respect to the world.  But as Peter wrote, when we don’t build on our faith (hence attracting opposition), we become so nearsighted that we stumble around as much as a blind person does (2 Peter 1:9) and the world cannot tell us apart.

Note too, the connection between receiving the Word of God and becoming citizens of heaven (also see Philippians 3:20).  One of the things that distinguishes the Christian from members of any other organization is that God has given Christians his Word—the Scriptures.  So long as we hold on to that book and so long as we treat that book as the divine and authoritative word of God, the world will not ever come close to being our friend, but instead will hate us.

How sad it is, though, that so many Christians, for the love of this world, are quick to compromise this wonderful Word that sets us apart!  They compromise the truth about Christ’s deity, they compromise the truth about God’s creative work, they compromise the truth about the exclusivity of Christianity, they compromise the truth about abortion, homosexuality, sex outside of marriage, and the list goes on and on and on.  Do you see what we have allowed the church to do?  Jesus said that it is because we have His Word, the world will hate us.

What is it about that Word that makes it so dangerous to the world?  The bottom line is that because God is the author of his Word, which makes the Scriptures true, infallible, inerrant, and absolute.  The world does not like being told that it is wrong—let alone that it is condemned to judgment because it clings to its sin and does not submit to the authority of God Almighty.

The mind of fallen man prefers a god of its own design, one that makes no claims or demands, one that is more like a cuddly friend to get you through a dark night than like an almighty God.  They like the image of a doddering old man who is too senile to remember sins and wrongs but who is able to bestow good gifts.  They want a tame god—one that is safe.  The Bible shatters their illusions and presents not a safe god of man’s design, but a God who demands obedience and submission from his followers.  The God of the Bible is anything but tame and senile, but he is ferocious and vibrant—active not only in the life of his own, but in the lives of those who has forsaken him, using them for his own purposes.  The Bible does not present God as existing to serve man, but on the contrary, the Bible presents man as existing to serve God.  The world cannot stand this—it hates the Bible, it hates what the Bible tells their conscience about their created god, and it hates those who hold to the Bible as true and right.

Oh, loved ones, if you are a believer in Jesus Christ, you are marked by this book we call the Bible.  Do not be ashamed of this even though it will bring you enmity from the world.  Rejoice in this book, because it is the very Word of Life (Philippians 2:16).  In this book, God reveals himself to us in all of his majesty.  Those who love the darkness have chosen to live in the darkness, but you who have professed to hold to the light—do not forsake the Word which is light for the love of the shadowy realms of this world.

Is the Bible Inerrant?

One of the things we talk a lot about in church circles is the authority of scripture—that it is given by God and is designed to instruct us in every area of life.  One of the terms that we use when we speak of why the scriptures are authoritative is the term “inerrant.”  But I have found that while we often throw that term around, a lot of times, people aren’t entirely sure what the term means.

To be “inerrant” means far more than something has no errors in it.  When I was in school, I regularly had “error-free” mathematics tests; when I was in seminary, many of my Hebrew vocabulary tests were found to be “error-free,” but none of these were inerrant.  The word inerrant means not only that something has no errors, but that it is incapable of making an error.  The Oxford American Dictionary defines “inerrant” as “incapable of being wrong.”  One writer described the inerrancy of the scriptures in this way: “They are exempt from the liability to mistake.”

So why do we ascribe such a nature to the scriptures?  To begin with, they are God’s word, and if God is incapable of making a mistake, then his word also must be incapable of making a mistake—remembering that those who wrote down God’s word were “moved along by the Spirit” as a ship is blown by the wind filling its sails (2 Peter 1:21).  In the language of the Apostle Paul, scripture is exhaled by God (2 Timothy 3:16) and thus is the source of all training and guidance for the believer.  These are God’s words and not man’s and thus we ought to expect them to carry the authority and attributes of God’s character and not man’s character.

It is granted that there are many these days that doubt the inerrancy of scripture.  For some, it is a plain matter of unbelief.  For others it is misinformation or not having studied the evidence.  For others it is the fear that if one acknowledges these words to be the inerrant word of God then one must submit one’s life to scripture’s authority and demands, and such is true.  Regardless of the reason that people doubt, Scripture has withstood every test and challenge that has been leveled at it.

There is one other thing that is worth noting about such a book as we have.  Not only are the scriptures our only guide for faith and life, but they are the only book to guide us as we go to our deaths.  The Bible shows us Jesus Christ, our need for him as a redeemer, and his promise that if we trust in him in life, confessing him with our lips and believing in him in our hearts, he will confess us before the Father and guarantee us eternal life in paradise.  For the one who is facing death, this is the kind of knowledge that brings peace and enables them to leave this world with grace and not fear.  It is no wonder that the Scriptures are what most people ask to have read to them on their deathbeds, and not Shakespeare or Coleridge.  The Bible is the one book that transcends death because it was written by a God who died and rose again—promising that he would do the same for us.

God was Speaking Long Ago: Hebrews 1:1-4 (part 3)

“God was speaking long ago to the Fathers through the prophets…”

 

We spoke above about how God is a communicating God.  This is one of the things that separates the One True God from all of the false gods of this world—our God speaks to his people.  Buddha does not speak and has never spoken to his followers.  Allah does not speak and has never spoken to his followers.  Those who relate that they have had an authentic and supernatural experience that contradicts the scriptures, like that of Joseph Smith who founded the Mormons, they are visions of the devil only, the great counterfeiter who seeks to do nothing but usurp the power of God.

With this in mind, this clause makes a very important statement to us.  Our God did speak through the ages in many forms and ways, but he did so through prophets and he spoke to the Fathers of the faith.  God has always had a group of called out and faithful people through whom and to whom he spoke.  God did not speak to the pagans and tell them to bring purity to His people; God speaks in faithfully orthodox circles. 

Throughout the ages, false teachers have claimed to have a “new revelation” from God, and beloved, this is not how God works.  Through the Old Testament, God spoke through his prophets, and in the clause that follows this one, the writer of Hebrews will remind us that now God speaks to his people only through Jesus.  God brings us together as a community of believers not only to bless us with fellowship but also to keep us free from error.  The flock that is held tightly together by the faithful shepherd is safer from predators.  Though tradition is always to be subordinate to scriptural truth, God raises up fathers in the faith for our teaching, instruction, and guidance in the study of God’s word. 

Beloved, we are a culture that thrives on what is new and “groundbreaking,” but God is an ageless God.  Beware of those who would tell you that they have found a “new way” to understand the things of God.  For nearly two thousand years, the finest minds in history have been pouring over God’s word, seeking to understand its riches.  And though the depths are infinite, and though we can never exhaust the riches within God’s word, when we think we have found a new way of understanding something that has been understood a different way by the church fathers of old, we are likely flirting with heresy.  Beloved, let us stand on the shoulders of those who have gone before us, let us be guarded by their orthodoxy so that our lives might safeguard the orthodoxy of the next generation.

In Many Parts and in Many Ways: Hebrews 1:1-4 (part 2)

“In many parts and in many ways…”

 

While many of our Bibles read something to the extent of “in many times and ways…” the word that the Greek text uses is polumerw:V (polumeros), which refers not to chronological divisions but to material divisions.  Thus, as the author of Hebrews begins speaking of God’s revelation, he is speaking of the many divisions and kinds of literature within the Canon.  Indeed, the author of all scripture is God himself, but he wrote by inspiring the prophets (and later the apostles) so that you can see their stylistic fingerprint upon the literature. 

One of the things about God’s word that should cause is to stand in amazement is the incredible unity within and between the books.  This is in itself a testimony to God’s existence and inspiration of its writers.  There are 66 books in the Bible, 39 in the Old Testament and 27 in the New.  This was done through 9 authors in the New Testament and at least 29 authors in the Old Testament.  Its writing was begun somewhere around 1450 BC (when the Israelites were on Mount Sinai) and completed around 95 AD (when John penned the book of Revelation)—across 1500 years, which includes a break of 400 years between the last prophet (Malachi) and the close of Chronicles and the coming of a new prophet (John the Baptist) on the scene.  Were this simply a book of compiled religious writings, not only would it not have survived in tact to this day, but it would be filled with inconsistencies and problems—the Bible is not.

In addition, the very fact that God spoke through a variety of people through history is not only a testimony that God exists, it tells us quite a bit about his character.  First, God communicates.  God is not the “unmoved mover” of the ancient Greeks who is transcendent above all else and cannot be communicated with from the mortal world.  God transcends the gap between himself and a sinful world to make his will known to man.  Secondly, God is a God that is active in the affairs of humans.  He cares about the purity of his chosen people and he cares about the right and proper worship of his name.  He cares about the affairs of men and he proved it by speaking to men for more than 1000 years, slowly revealing and explaining his redemptive plan until it met its perfection and completion in the sending of his Son to die a sacrificial death on the cross.

Thirdly, God is a God who had a plan for mankind.  Humans fell into sin with Adam and Eve and sin is deserving of death and destruction.  The simple fact that God pronounced a promise of a coming redeemer (Genesis 3:15) is a reminder that throughout the history of mankind, God had his plan of redemption in place.  That plan had its ultimate fulfillment in the cross, which stands at the very center of all human history.  All that took place before the cross was a process of preparing for the work of Jesus; all that has taken place afterward and all that will yet take place is a result of that work that Jesus completed.  The fact that God did not bring judgment to the human race at the fall and that he would reveal himself to a people throughout history, means that he has a plan for mankind, namely the redemption of the race through the eternal salvation of the elect and the judgment of those who do not cling to Christ in faith.

Fourthly, it tells us that we have a God who desires for his people to know him personally and intimately.  We know about the character and nature of God because he has revealed it to us so that we might know him.  Fifthly, the variety of types of literature contained within the Scriptures (historical narrative, law, prophetic works, poetry, wisdom literature, Gospel, apocalyptic, etc…) tells us that God is a creative God.  And just as God is creative, we who have been made in God’s image express our creativity in what we do and in how we write. 

The fact that God’s word (as well as his world) is orderly tells us that God is an orderly God.  Chaos and misadventure are not part of God’s character and they have only become a part of mankind’s character as a result of sin.  There is also a unity within God’s word that points clearly at his Son, Jesus Christ.  All of the scriptures are about Jesus and God wants us to know this.  He is the redeemer and the author of our faith.  He is the great Lord and Master of the believer and it is through Christ that all things were created (though we are getting ahead of ourselves).  The very fact that the scriptures point unanimously to Christ is a reminder to us that our lives also ought to point to Christ without any compromise.  The way we live should not contradict what we say, just as the way God acts toward his people does not contradict what the scriptures say about the nature of God.

Beloved, while we could go on and on, what I want more than anything for you to see is the incredible unity of scripture as well as its intricate complexity.  It is simple enough for a child to understand the basics when it is read, yet it is complex enough for even the most well-educated scholar to never exhaust, and it is deep enough that any, no matter how wise or how long they have walked in the faith, will find it satisfying and rich throughout a lifetime of study.  This is the nature of the word that God has given us in various parts and in various ways, and this nature reflects the God who is behind these words.  Dig deeply, dear friends, though at times you may feel overwhelmed and discouraged, press on, you will never be dismayed by the depth of what you find.

Forms of Special Revelation

Forms of Special Revelation:

We have been speaking of and citing some of the weaknesses of General Revelation and our need for something more.  Yet, let us point out that General Revelation was never designed to teach us our obligation towards God and our proper relationship to him as our creator.  Indeed, it was never designed to even guide us in morality even if the fall were not to have taken place.  How do we know this?  It is because God engaged in Special Revelation prior to the fall of mankind.  God gave Adam the law in the garden and regularly communicated with him in terms of instructing him in his role as regent over the creation.  We are also told that God was prone to walk through the garden (by implication, to speak with Adam and Eve).  Thus, communication beyond what could be learned from nature was part of God’s pre-fall relationship with his creatures.  Now, one could argue that all revelation from God is Special Revelation.  Was not God the author of the genetic code by which organic creatures function?  Was God not the author of the laws of science by which the physical bodies of the universe operate?  Certainly the limitation of understanding science lies within us, not within God’s revelation of it in creation.  And certainly, in our fallen state, we sometimes mis-interpret the Special Revelation that is given to us.  Thus, the important thing to note is that the purpose of General and Special Revelation is different.  General reveals broadly and to all; Special reveals narrowly (dealing especially with God and our relationship with and obligation towards him) and only to whom it is delivered.  How many people have read the scriptures only to come away with heretical teachings?  Thus, not only is it delivered to few, its proper interpretation requires insight from the Holy Spirit, who effectively guides Special Revelation’s delivery.

We can categorize Special Revelation in the following way:

  1. Manifestations of God:  God manifests himself to his people to guide them, encourage them, and teach them.  And, God has done this in a variety of ways.
    1. Theophanies:  Where God physically presents himself to the prophet while the prophet is awake and aware of such taking place.  For example, God descended upon Mount Sinai when the law was given, He appeared to Job in a whirlwind, and He spoke to Elijah on Mount Sinai to mention just a few.
    2. Visions:  This is where God manifests himself in a vision (not physically) to a prophet who is awake and aware of what is taking place.  God came to Abram in a vision, to Samuel, and to the prophet Isaiah again to name just a few. 
    3. Dreams:  This is where God manifests himself visually (not physically) to a prophet who is asleep.  God communicated this way to Jacob, to Joseph the son of Jacob, and to Joseph, the earthly adoptive father of Jesus again to name just a few.
    4. In his Son:  Jesus is the ultimate manifestation of God given not just to the prophets, but to all people.  He is also the perfect image of the invisible God and the object of all Special Revelation.  All of scripture, not just the Gospels, points to Jesus.
  2. Prophesy:  God also speaks to and through his prophets.  The role of the prophet, as we have already discussed, is to faithfully be the mouth of God to his people.  The role of prophesy is two-fold: it is to foretell and to forthtell.  While some prophesy does speak of things that will take place in the future (foretell), the bulk of prophesy is to speak forth God’s word to the people of God, for rebuke and encouragement (forthtell).  With this before us, God speaks prophetically in a variety of ways.
    1. Direct Verbal Prophesy:  God speaks directly to his prophets and then the prophets relate it either orally or in writing to God’s people.  This is the “thus says the Lord” clause in scripture.
    2. Indirect Prophesy:  God also spoke to his people through indirect means.  God gave the High Priest the Urim and Thummim, by drawing lots, and signs.
    3. Typology:  As God is the God of history, it is not surprising that God would order events in similar ways as a means of demonstrating his hand at work.  Typology is the study of these repetitions through persons, events, or institutions that are repeated with intensification in the events that follow—usually pointing toward Christ.  For example, the institution of the priesthood, particularly that of the High Priest was designed to prefigure Christ’s priesthood.  Moses, as a mediator for his people, prefigures Christ’s mediatorial work.  There are many more such events that God has arranged in such a way as that they point to what is to come.
  3. Miracles:  While miracles are not sufficient in and of themselves to generate faith, but they are given to confirm and strengthen the faith that is already present.  They were given as signs that the prophets were genuine and given as signs that Jesus really is the Son of God.

 

Scripture

 

In a sense, scripture is the ultimate Special Revelation of God as it is the record of the forms of Special Revelation we have already spoken of that is preserved in writing for God’s people through history.  Scripture is the ultimate manifestation of God’s special Revelation to his people, revealing Christ and uniting in Christ all of these separate forms of Special Revelation.  Thus, with the close of scripture, the necessity of such authoritative revelation from God has ceased.  Scripture reveals Christ in his fullness for God’s people and thus, the completed canon of scripture is given to us as the capstone upon which our faith is held together.  It is, according to the Apostle Peter when comparing the scriptures to his own experience of walking with Christ and witnessing (as well as performing) miracles, something that is “more sure.”  Thus, we have General Revelation and Special Revelation, and all of the many forms of Special Revelation find their climax in the Scriptures—the written word of God.


Genesis 3:8.

Exodus 19:16-20.

Job 38:1.

1 Kings 19:12ff.

Genesis 15:1.

1 Samuel 3:15.

Isaiah 1:1.

Genesis 28:12.

Genesis 37:5.

Matthew 1:20.

This phrase occurs 414 times in the Bible, some examples are: Exodus 4:22, Isaiah 37:33, and Jeremiah 23:16.

Numbers 27:21.

1 Samuel 10:20, Jonah 1:7, Acts 1:26.

Judges 6:17 ff.

Hebrews 1:1-4.

This is a view that is hotly debated by the Pentecostal and Charismatic movements in the church, and this is not the place to go into an extensive discussion of the relevant issues.  In short, the Pentecostal and Charismatic movements would look to what they refer to as gifts of the Holy Spirit (Prophesy and Tongues) from the New Testament as normative for the church in all ages.  In response, the question must be asked, “Is the canon of scripture closed?”  Certainly that is the Bible’s own testimony about itself, as we have discussed.  If there is continuing authoritative prophesy, for example, thus God speaking verbatim (thus says the Lord) through an agent to his people, are you not adding to scripture?  There are many good books which argue on both sides of the debate, but the most important aspect of this discussion is what scripture says of itself.  Scripture’s testimony, as we have discussed, is that it is complete and sufficient for matters of faith and matters of life.  If it is complete and sufficient, why is there need for further supernatural revelation to be given?

2 Peter 1:19.

Outline of 1 Peter

 

I.  Greeting (1:1-2)

 

II.  God in his Grace is raising you out of your sin to salvation (1:3-12)

            1.  God has given us new birth to a greater inheritance (1:3-5)

            2.  God will keep that inheritance while you are being sanctified through

persecutions (1:6-7)

            3.  The joy of that salvation in your hearts and in the hearts of those who have

pointed to Christ from old (1:8-12)

 

III.  Therefore, be holy for God is holy (1:13-25)

            1.  Live your life obediently and in anticipation of what is coming (1:13-16)

            2.  God has redeemed you by the blood of Jesus Christ (1:17-21)

            3.  God has purified you through his imperishable word (1:22-25)

 

IV.  Therefore, live your lives to reflect God’s good work in you (2:1-3:22)

            1.  Rid yourself of sinful ways and nourish yourself on spiritual things (2: 1-3)

            2.  God has made you a holy nation, built on the Living foundation stone of Jesus

Christ (2:4-12)

            3.  Live in submission to authorities outside of the home (2:13-25)

            4.  Live in submission to authorities inside of the home (3:1-7)

            5.  Living submissively in spite of persecution brings you blessing and the

persecutor shame (3:8-17)

            6.  Look to your baptism as a reminder of Christ’s past work and its eventual

completion (3:18-22)

 

V.  Therefore, since Christ was persecuted, expect to be persecuted yourselves (4:1-19)

            1.  Misery loves company and will seek to drag you down into their sin (4:1-6)

            2.  Yet, judgment is coming, so be prepared (4:7-11)

            3.  Do not be surprised by your sufferings, but take joy in them (4:12-19)

 

VI.  Closing remarks to church leaders (5:1-11)

            1.  Be good shepherds, modeling your service on Christ, the Chief Shepherd

(5:1-4)

            2.  Live humble lives (5:5-7)

            3.  Resist the enemy in faith and persevere until the end (5:8-11)

 

VII.  Personal remarks and closing blessing (5:12-14)

Outline of 2 Peter

I.  Greeting (1:1-2)

 

II.  God’s Call on the life of a Christian and the Christian’s response (1:3-11)

            1.  God’s calling His people to glory (1:3-4)

            2.  The Christian’s response to God’s call (1:5-11)

                        a.  progression of faith to love (1:5-7)

                        b.  work to grow in grace (1:8-11)

 

III.  Purpose (1:12-15)

 

IV.  Defense of Apostolic and Scriptural authority (1:16-21)

            1.  Defense of Apostolic authority (1:16-18)

            2.  Defense of Scriptural authority (1:19-21)

 

VI.  Warnings against false teachers (2:1-22)

            1.  Warning of their imminent arrival (2:1-3)

            2.  Warnings from history and God’s Faithfulness through history (2:4-10)

                        a.  the fall of the angels (2:4)

                        b.  the fall of the ancient world and salvation of Noah’s family (2:5)

                        c.  the fall of Sodom and Gomorrah and salvation of Lot’s family (2:6-8)

                        d.  reminder of God’s competence in saving his people from trial (2:9-10)

            3.  Description of the false teachers (2:11-17)

            4.  Warning about the road these teachers travel along (2:18-22)

 

V.  The second coming of Christ, the imminent judgment of ungodly, and the new

                        heavens and the new earth (3:1-13)

            1.  Have confidence in Christ’s promise to return (3:1-9)

            2.  Have confidence that Judgment is coming (3:10-12)

            3.  Have confidence in the remaking of heaven and earth (3:13)

 

VI.  Closing exhortation (3:14-18)

Biblical Perspicuity

What do we mean when we speak of the Perspicuity of Scripture?

 

            While there are certainly many areas of scripture that are difficult to interpret and to understand, given that the Bible was given to all people throughout history, not to just a select few, and given that the Bible was given for the edification of people of every age and level of intelligence and education, not just those trained as theologians, in matters of salvation, the scriptures are clear enough that all can understand what God has communicated, particularly with respect to the question of salvation.  The church fell into grave error in the medieval period when it argued that the scriptures were too difficult for any but the clergy to understand and thus restricted the Bible into the hands of the educated elite of the church.  This is contrary to the Biblical testimony of the early church, where the gospel was proclaimed and the command to study scripture was given to all believers.  The Bible is clear on the question of what sin is, the fallen state of man, the reality that man needs a redeemer, the fact that Jesus came and paid the penalty for sin for those who come to him in faith, and that if we yearn for redemption, we must flee to Christ.  The Bible is also clear in terms of the explanation of what the life of the believer should look like in terms of moral behavior and good works.  These things, even a young child or one with the least amount of education can understand and thus the scriptures should be read and studied by all who call themselves believers in Jesus Christ.  This does not ignore that there are difficult passages of scripture; such passages should be labored over and assistance sought from reliable theologians and commentaries should be sought, but the last thing one should do is to flee from them.

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.

What of people who would claim that there are errors in the Biblical text?

What of those who claim that the Bible contains errors and discrepancies either in its internal unity or in its scientific or historical claims?  Also, what of those who claim that the Biblical books were assembled, revised, and rewritten through the ages resulting in our modern Biblical text?

 

            Largely, the claims that seek to refute the inerrancy of scripture fall into one of two categories.  The first is that of simple inconsistencies that are seen on a cursory examination of scripture and the second falls into the category of the study of source criticism or what is often referred to as “Higher Biblical Criticism.”

            The first category is more simply explained than the second.  Many, in seeking to discredit the Bible have taken to seeking out areas of apparent discontinuity and have argued that there are errors within the text.  Yet, in each of these cases, a thorough study of the passages in question as well of the broader contexts of those passages, will serve to nullify any claim to Biblical error.  For every objection to the internal unity of the Bible, evangelical Christian scholars have set forth a reasonable and legitimate response which demonstrates the unity of the texts.

            This first category also includes those who would look to current historical, scientific, or archaeological data and conclude that the Bible is in error in terms of the events that it relates.  Once again, this demonstrates the limitations of modern science.  Scientific and archaeological premises change from discovery to discovery and we cannot expect to rewrite our understanding according to the whim of these scientists.  In addition, scientists are relying only on their own ability to observe the world around them, an ability that has been marred and weakened by the fall of man.  Scripture is given by God, who has not been affected by the fall, thus it is relayed to us by the one who we ought to appeal to as the highest authority by which we understand the things in the world around us.

            The second category is more involved, and that is in terms of the question of source criticism, a theory that dates back to the early eighteenth century and a French physician named Jean Astruc.  His suggestion was that the ancient Biblical texts were not unique manuscripts written by one individual over a period of time, but were instead compilations of the writings of many assembled together to form the whole we have today.  In the case of Astruc, he largely divided up the Pentateuch according to the use of God’s name and assigned each related text to a different tradition, assuming then that our Biblical account was combined from these source traditions to form a kind of amalgam that was revised and edited eventually into a final form. 

            While there were others who built on Astruc’s hypothesis, the major proponents of this principle were two German scholars named Julius Wellhausen and Karl Heinrich Graf who lived in the 19th century.  Their position, called the Documentary Hypothesis theory, went as far as to suggest many contributors, later redactors, and then editors of the Biblical texts, constantly revising the text as history progressed.  This theory has formed the basis for much of Biblical critical scholarship, essentially treating the Bible as they would a humanly written document. 

            To understand this challenge to scriptural inerrancy, one must understand the historical context behind the Graf-Wellhausen hypothesis.  In the early 19th century, a philosopher named G.W.F. Hegel rose to prominence.  Hegel argued that all things are constantly in the process of change, something he referred to as the “passing of opposites.”  Opposite positions were constantly colliding with one another and as they collided, a synthesis would result.  This process, Hegel called the “dialectic.”  As a result of this presupposition, Hegel argued that this process applied to all things—including religion.  Though his book on the Philosophy of Religion was published posthumously, it was a compilation of his lecture notes on the subject, notes that he taught to his students for many years.  This position implies that religion began as the primitive worship of rocks and trees and as the people grew more sophisticated, so too, the religion became more spiritual, and hence a development takes place.  Carl Marx would apply Hegel’s philosophy to politics, Charles Darwin would apply Hegel’s philosophy to biology, and Graf and Wellhausen would apply Hegel’s philosophy to the development of scripture. 

            Aside from being based on a faulty presupposition, for when you have a religious text given by an omniscient God, there is hardly room for this kind of theological revision, the principles upon which source criticism is based are faulty.  First, we have already spoken of how they see use of different names of God to signify different traditions of authorship of the Biblical text.  Yet, the reality is that the different names of God are used to describe different aspects or attributes of God’s character.  Thus, depending on the context of the event that is being recorded, there is often variation in the name of God being used to reflect the activity that is taking place.

            The second area of attack for source critics is that of repeated narratives, where we find a very similar story taking place in the lives of two people.  First of all, this view simply ignores the rhetorical tradition of the Jewish people, where repetition was deliberately used as a mnemonic tool and to draw theological connections between two similar events.  Neither of the events are manufactured as the source critics suppose, but in the providence of God, there were often similarities between two events so that the story could be told in such a way as to bring out those similarities and draw that connection.

            The third area of attack for the source critics is that of apparent discrepancies, something we have already discussed.  The fourth approach is to look at varying writing styles, which is connected with the variance in the use of the names of God.  Can one not consider that a single author is capable of writing in different ways and using different vocabulary at different points in his life or when describing different situations?  The position of the source critics in this area is based solely on the premise that one writer will always write with the same writing style and will always utilize the same vocabulary and themes to get his point across.  This simply is not so, either in modern writing or in writing from ancient times.  The final area of attack is that of distinctive theologies seeming to show up in the context of certain texts and not in others.  For the same reasons, this position fails as well.  Theology is developed in the scriptures not by thesis and antithesis colliding, but by the gradual revelation of God to his people.

            To some degree, all who study the Bible need to use some level of source criticism.  There are more than 5000 full or partial manuscripts of the New Testament text alone, from which scholars have worked to discern the most accurate rendering of the original text.  Texts must be compared and one must determine which is most reliable and which likely carries scribal errors (misspelled words, transposed words, fuller explanations given, etc…).  Yet, this level of scholarship does not hold the authenticity of divine revelation in question, but simply seeks to sift through the wealth of evidence at hand for the purpose of most accurately presenting that which is divinely revealed in scripture.  Those involved in the “Higher Critical” schools take things one step further, placing into doubt the divine origin of scripture and arbitrarily eliminating texts or theological concepts that do not agree with their Hegelian presuppositions.


Thesis plus anti-thesis equals synthesis is the sum of his argument.

How do we know that the 66 Books of the Bible are God’s complete revelation?

How do we know that the 39 books of the Old Testament that we have actually constitute the complete written revelation of God during that era?  How do we know that the 27 books of the New Testament complete that which was begun in the Old Testament?

 

            First of all, the 39 books of the Old Testament are confirmed as genuine by both Jesus and the New Testament writers.  Jesus not only quoted or alluded to many Old Testament texts, but he used the traditional Jewish groupings to speak of the Old Testament scriptures, referring to them as the Law of Moses (Genesis through Deuteronomy), the Prophets (former and later), and the Psalms (also called “the writings”).  In addition, the New Testament Writers either quoted from or alluded to passages from every book of the Hebrew Old Testament except for the Song of Solomon.  Also, Peter’s sermon at Pentecost, the sermon that inaugurated the Christian church, was largely an exposition of Old Testament Passages.  Paul the Apostle is also regularly found “reasoning with the Jews from scripture” when he is on his missionary journeys.  Peter also boldly points out in his first epistle that it is Jesus that all of the Old Testament prophets were searching for.  Jesus himself speaks of the Old Testament as being writings about himself.  While it is true that the New Testament writers also are found to allude to extra-Biblical writings, that fact in itself is not enough to bestow Canonicity upon the whole of the outside cited text, it simply means that the cited text is accurate insomuch as the citation has used it.

            Secondly, we have the Greek translation of the Hebrew Old Testament called the Septuagint or the LXX.  This text was begun about 300 years before the birth of Christ and was a popular text in the first-century.  While the LXX is nothing more than a translation, the books that it translates are the texts which we now refer to as the Hebrew Old Testament.  Yes, many do cite that the Greek translation of the Apocrypha is often included with the Greek LXX, but it is clear that the Apocrypha and the Septuagint comprise two separate texts.

            Thirdly, the Jews venerated the scriptures as they were the very words of God.  They were dedicated to preserving it and making sure that it was not defiled by error or false teaching.  The Masorites labored tirelessly to make sure that the text we have in our hands is the whole of what God revealed to his people in the ancient times.  Their testimony is that the Old Testament that we have today is the Old Testament that Jesus used and was used for years before he walked the earth in the flesh.

            The Jewish historians Philo and Josephus, who were contemporaries of the New Testament writers, refer to the books of the Bible that we refer to as the “Old Testament” as the Jewish Canon.  Early Latin and Syriac (the Peshito) translations present to us the consistent witness that the 39 books of the Old Testament are God’s revealed word to his people.  The Targums and Talmudic writings as well, which are the writings of Jewish tradition and an ancient commentary on the Bible, also submit that the Old Testament books we have in our hands today are the Canon of the Hebrew faith.  Ancient Hebrew scrolls found in Archaeological sites like Qumran contain texts which once again confirm the content of the Old Testament as containing the complete Jewish canon of scripture.

            The formation of the New Testament canon developed in the same way as did the Old Testament canon.  As mentioned above, the New Testament writers understood that the letters they were writing were scripture and thus inspired by the Holy Spirit to be God’s witness or standard for his church for generations to come.  As the Apostles began to die off, the church became more and more deliberate in their work to define for all, those letters and books which were God-breathed.  As time went on, the church also had to fight heretical teachings and to communicate to the congregations what documents were heretical, thus councils were held, not unlike how the early rabbinical councils were held, to clarify for the church which books were canonical and which books were not. 

            There have been many who have accused the church of manufacturing their canon based along the lines of church traditions, but this claim cannot be substantiated and is quite contrary to what took place.  While the final form of the canon that we know today as the New Testament did not take place until the Council of Hippo in A.D. 393, the role of the council was simply to clarify and affirm what the churches had been affirming as far back as the first century A.D.  The oldest formal listing of Canonical books is the Muritorian Canon, which dates back to the mid-second century (named after the scholar who discovered it), contains a listing of canonical books that is almost identical to our modern listing, with only slight variations. There were other second-century theologians, like Irenaeus, who also produced canonical lists, which are remarkably similar to what we find in our New Testament today.

            In addition to these formal listings, we can also look to the writings of the early church fathers to see the citations that they make to the Apostolic writings.  For example, while the Muritorian Canon does not include the book of Hebrews in its formal listing, Clement of Rome, a contemporary of Paul and the other Apostles, cites it in his writings.  Hebrews is also cited by others like Ignatius in his letter to the Philadelphians and it is found in the Didache, a late first century or early second century guide for instructing new communicants.  Thus, it is clear from the earliest extant documents that even the books not included in the Muritorian Canon were being used by the churches as scripture. 

            When the church fathers were organizing these canonical listings, there were three criteria that were used.  First, they sought to insure that the documents of canon were either directly written by an Apostle or were guided by an Apostle.  In this case, Matthew, John, and Peter were all apostles originally called by Jesus to follow him and were sent out with power at Pentecost.  Paul was called as an apostle separately from the others to be the Apostle to the Gentile nations.  Mark, though not an Apostle, traveled with Paul and served under Peter’s guidance in Jerusalem.  It is held that Mark’s gospel account is largely drawn from Peter’s teaching and preaching in Jerusalem.  Luke, who also was not an Apostle, served with Paul on his mission trips and certainly wrote under his guidance.  James and Jude, while not believers during the life of the Lord, came to faith after the death and resurrection of their half-brother, Jesus.  They served in Jerusalem and would have been under the guidance of the Apostles there.  There is also evidence that this James would lead the church in Jerusalem at least for a time.  The book of Hebrews is the greatest mystery of all.  It is structured more like a sermon than a letter, so it does not contain the customary greeting which would instruct us as to who the writer was.  It does contain themes that are similar to many of Paul’s writings which has led some to believe it is of Pauline origin, but the language is very different.  Some have suggested that it may have been the Apostle John or one of his students, others have suggested Barnabas or Apollos.  The reality is that we do not know.  What we do know is that from the earliest era of church history, it has been understood as having come from or having at least been influenced by one of the Apostles.

            The second criterion that the early church fathers used was whether or not a book contained theology that was consistent with the rest of the scriptures (both Old and New Testaments).  They understood that while God was doing “something new” he was also building on the foundation that had already been laid in ancient Israel.  They understood also that the canonical writings were breathed out from God and thus ultimately had one author, that is God himself.  If there is one author and that author is God, there cannot be any contradiction within the whole of the text. 

            The third criterion was that the book was being used by the churches to the edification of the church.  In other words, the church fathers understood that the scriptures were given by God for instruction and the building up of faith as well as for the conversion of lost souls.  They understood, then, that documents which bred nothing but contention within the church did not come from the lips of God.  Certainly there are some of the Biblical documents that are difficult to hear, particularly if they contain rebukes that happen to apply to you, but the rebukes as well as the promises of blessing are given so that the body of Christ might be built up in its most holy faith to the glory of God on high.

            In terms of confirming that the canon we have today is the authentic New Testament canon, we can look at many of the same kinds of things as we did when we discussed the Old Testament canon.  There is an internal unity to the New Testament books that cannot be manufactured by human writers.  New Testament writers quote and allude to each others’ texts.  Extra-Biblical writers quote from the New Testament writers extensively, quoting or alluding to almost the entirety of the New Testament.  In addition, when looking at the Bible as a whole, certain observations can be made about scripture that set it apart from other writings, either ancient or modern:

  1. The scriptures do not glorify man in any way, but glorify God.  Ancient texts tend to glorify men and to create a mythology around them that makes them larger than life.  This is not the case with scripture.  God alone is glorified.
  2. The scriptures go out of their way to portray all of the Biblical characters in all of their sin and weakness.  God is clearly the hero of the Biblical narrative, not Abraham, Isaac, or Jacob, etc…
  3. The Bible gives names, dates, and place names that have been found and confirmed to be accurate.
  4. Never has a book so impacted the course of history as has the Bible.  No book of ancient religion or philosophy has brought about the rise and the fall of men and nations and no book has inspired men to such good deeds as a result of what it contains.
  5. Never has a book other than the Bible inspired men and women to die rather than to give it up.  Never has a book other than the Bible inspired men and women to go to the furthest corners of the earth, risking life and limb, to present it and its contents to those who live in remote or government restricted areas.
  6. No other book has the power to give peace to a person’s spirit when they lie at death’s door.  The sheer power of the book to shape a person’s life is testimony of its divine nature and origin.

 

As was written by A.A. Hodge on this subject:

In this respect you may compare the Koran of Mohammed with the Christian Bible.  In the great debate between the missionary Henry Martyn and the Persian moulvies, the latter showed a great superiority of logical and rhetorical power.  They proved that the Koran was written by a great genius; that it was an epoch-making book, giving law to a language pre-eminent for elegance, inexhaustible fullness, and precision, revolutionizing kingdoms, forming empires, and molding civilization.  Nevertheless, it was a single work, within the grasp of one great man.  But Henry Martyn proved that the Bible is one single book, one single, intricate, organic whole, produced by more than forty different writers of every variety of culture and condition through sixteen centuries of time—that is, through about fifty successive generations of mankind.  As a great cathedral, erected by many hands through many years, is born of one conceiving mind, and has had but one author, so only God can be the one author of the whole Bible, for only he has been contemporaneous with all stages of its genesis; he has been able to control and co-ordinate all the agents concerned in its production, so as to conceive and realize the incomparable result.


Luke 24:44.

1 Peter 1:10.

Luke 24:27.

The word Canon comes from the Greek word “kanw/n” (kanon) which in turn is derived from the Hebrew word hn<q’ (qaneh).  The Hebrew word literally refers to a “reed” or a “rod.”  In common usage, it referred to a straight rod of uniform length that could be used for measurements. In figurative use, it was common to use the term to refer to an ideal or a standard.  Thus, the idea of a Canon of scripture was to designate the writings which had been inspired by God for use as the standard for religion and life for God’s people.  By the time the New Testament writers were writing, the concept of Canon was clearly understood in the church and the writers understood themselves to be agents of God in the completion of the Canon. 

In citing the traditional three-fold division of scripture in Luke 24:44, Jesus himself rejects the idea that the Apocrypha should be considered Canon.

2 Peter 3:17.

It is worth noting that Marcion also published an early second century canon, but it was highly doctored to reflect his heretical views.  Thus, it should not be seen as a genuine canon, but as a heretical document of a false teacher.

The Muritorian Canon contained the following list of books in this order:  Matthew & Mark (the first section of the document is missing, but what follows implies the presence of Matthew and Mark in the missing section), Luke, John, the Acts of the Apostles, 1 Corinthians, Ephesians, Philippians, Colossians, Galatians, 1 Thessalonians, Romans, 2 Corinthians, 2 Thessalonians, Philemon, Titus,  1 Timothy, 2 Timothy, Jude, 1 John, 2 John, The Wisdom of Solomon (Apocryphal), Revelation, and the Apocalypse of Peter (but listed as doubtful).  The Shepherd of Hermas is listed as useful for the believer but not scripture and is prohibited as a subject of preaching.  Also, the Letters of Paul to the Laodiceans and to the Alexandrians is listed as forged in Paul’s name to further the heresy of Marcion.  Finally, the writings of Arsinous, Valentius, Miltiades, and Basilides are condemned.  To include these documents, the canon instructs, would be to “mix gall with honey.”

Numerous citations from the book of Hebrews are found between 1 Clement and 2 Clement. 

Hodge, A.A.  Evangelical Theology.  London:  T. Nelson and Sons, 1890.  Pg. 74-75.

How do we know that the Bible is complete and unified?

How do we know that the Bible is a unified and complete book in its presentation to us and that it alone contains the written revelation of God for his people?

 

            While the Bible has many human authors through which the text was written, there is one divine author.  This is clear by looking at its overall unity.  There is not a humanly produced book, wherein multiple authors have contributed over a long span of time, that contains the unity that scripture contains.  Not only does the Bible not contradict itself, it also presents a progression of theology that could not have evolved from the imagination of men.  Themes and theological concepts are found in their infancy in early Old Testament writings, are developed further in later Old Testament writings, and are found complete within the New Testament—all without contradiction or inconsistency.

            More importantly than its unified nature are the many claims that the Bible makes of itself being God’s word.  Throughout the scriptures there are commands to “write this down” or “speak this to my people” given by God to his prophets and apostles.  The Old Testament itself contains more than 600 instances of “and God said” or “thus says the Lord.”  That in itself is an occurrence of about once every 35 verses.  The New Testament contains numerous direct quotes from Jesus himself, again being God’s speech recorded by the Apostles.  The Bible goes as far as to refer to itself as being the very “breath” of God and thus the revelation of God to his people.

            To those who would suggest that there are other texts that necessarily supplement the Bible that also contain God’s word, the Bible contains strong warnings that judgment will come upon those who suggest such things.  The Apostle Paul wrote to the Galatians and told them that anyone who proclaimed a gospel not consistent with that of scripture would be accursed.  The consistent witness of every prophet and apostle within the history of the Biblical writings is that these words that are recorded in the scriptures contain the very words of God.


2 Timothy 3:16.

Revelation 22:18-19.

Galatians 1:9.

The Garden of God’s Word

Before I enter scripture itself, I wanted to begin with it as a whole.  God’s word is very much like a wonderful garden, filled with all kinds of produce.  And, it is a garden that reflects back at us all of the thorns and thistles of our lives.  When I was growing up, my parents kept a large vegetable garden.  This garden usually caused me to lament the coming of Saturday, for I often was made to spend them pulling up weeds or tilling the soil when I would have rather been playing baseball or watching cartoons like my friends.  Yet, though we all sweated and toiled over it, the produce was always a blessing on the dinner table. 

God’s word is the same way.  As a Christian, we need to labor in it.  It takes work to root out the deep truths and riches that it contains.  Does that mean that the Bible is full of thorns and thistles, subject to the fall?  Certainly not!  The thorns and thistles are the things that we bring to the table.  These are our secret sins and lusts.  The word of God is powerful and potent when it comes to convicting men of their sinful ways.  And if we are going to approach the word of God seeking its fruit, then those thorns and thistles in our own life must be pulled out by the root.

But what a rich variety of fruit that lies within God’s Word!  There are the sweet berries of God’s promises, the abundant and hearty beans of God the Father’s nature revealed within, the spicy peppers of the power of God the Holy Spirit moving through history, and the earthy tubers of God the Son’s work on earth.  There are the majestic and flowering fruit trees of God’s grace and there are the bitter radishes of God’s judgment on unbelievers.  And the abundance therein proclaims without hesitation God’s glory and his constancy toward and provision for his people. 

And just as is with any healthy garden, it is full of life.  Worms to till the soil, bugs to pollinate, and birds to fill the trees with song, God’s word is alive and healthy and how the Christian ought to long to rest therein for all of his days.  And the garden most importantly is a garden that is fed with a spring of pure and living water, even though it is surrounded by a dry and arid land.  What an oasis we have in God’s Word!  Oh, how the Christian inflicts such pain on himself by seeking the worldly pleasures of baseball and cartoons over the riches of God’s word.