The Bible: Notes, Quotes, and FAQs
Some passages to consider and/or discuss in RC
· Jesus on Scripture
o Matthew 4.4 (notice Jesus’ use of Deuteronomy in answering the challenges of the devil)
o Matthew 5.17
o Matthew 22.29-32
§ Challenges Sadducees because they do not understand the Scriptures (v. 29)
§ V. 31 “… have you not read what was spoken to you by God…”
· Jesus understands the written word (Exodus 3.6) as being spoken by God to his contemporaries
o John 5.45-47
§ Moses wrote about Jesus
o John 10.35
§ Jesus’ parenthetical comment: “and the Scripture cannot be broken”
o Luke 24.25-27
o Luke 24.44-47
· 2 Timothy 3.14-17
o “sacred writings” lead us to salvation
o “All Scripture” is inspired (breathed out) by God
§ Authority of Scripture: comes from God
§ Sufficiency of Scripture: able to equip the people of God
· 2 Timothy 4.1-5
o Preach the word; not our experience
o People in every age have turned aside from God’s word to false teachers
§ Question: Where do we see this happening today?
o Timothy cannot “fulfill his ministry” (v. 5) without the Word
· Isaiah 30.8-11
o OT counterpart to 2 Timothy 4.3-4
o Notice the call to write down the word of the Lord (v. 8): God’s intention is for a written word
· 2 Peter 1.16-21
o Not following “cleverly devised tales” (NASB)
o Peter mentions his experience of seeing the glory of Jesus on the Mount of Transfiguration (Mark 9.1-8)
o And yet Peter looks to the prophetic word as even more sure than his experience (v. 19)
o V. 21 human will and Holy Spirit both involved in production of Scripture
Meditations from Jude
· Verse 3: contend for the faith: defend the body of Christian truth against false teachers
· Verse 20: build yourself up on the faith: need to be feeding ourselves and others with Christian truth
· Jude points to the OT and the words of the apostles: “remind” and “remember”
o V. 5 “Now I desire to remind you…”
§ 3 examples from the OT in verses 5-7 (and three more in v. 11)
o V. 17 “… remember the words that were spoken beforehand by the apostles of our Lord Jesus Christ”
· False teachers: “by dreaming”
o “… it probably indicates that the false teachers supported their antinomianism by laying claim to divine revelation in their dreams.” Michael Green (TNTC, 182)
o Dreams vs. the Word of God
§ Jeremiah 23.25-32; 27.9; 29.8-9
o Key: God’s word comes from the outside—outside of our human experience—and judges our human experience. The false teachers generate their own word.
· Jude keeps together the OT and the apostolic words with the message of Jesus.
o There are teachers today who wish to keep only Jesus (just the “red letters”) and ditch the OT and the epistles.
o Jesus endorsed the OT (see above) and authorized his apostles (including Paul!) to teach with authority
Quotations
“How one views Scripture will determine the rest of one’s theology. There is no more basic issue: Every system of thought that takes seriously the claims of the Bible to be the inspired, authoritative Word of God will share a commitment to particular central truths, and that without compromise. Those systems that do not begin with this belief in Scripture will exhibit a wide range of beliefs that will shift over time in light of the ever-changing whims and views of culture. Almost every single collapse involving denominations and churches in regard to historic Christian beliefs can be traced back to a degradation in that group’s view of the Bible as the inspired and inerrant revelation of God’s truth. Once this foundation is lost, the house that was built upon it cannot long stand.
“There is little worth in speaking of the sufficiency of a non-inspired, errant collection of ancient works, which is why the denial of the inspired nature of Scripture inevitably leads to a denial of its ability to function as the sole infallible rule of faith for the church.” --James White[1]
“It is, moreover, an observable fact of history, both past and contemporary, that the degree of the church's commitment to world evangelization is commensurate with the degree of its conviction about the authority of the Bible. Whenever Christians lose their confidence in the Bible, they also lose their zeal for evangelism. Conversely, whenever they are convinced about the Bible, then they are determined about evangelism.” --John Stott[2]
"I do not deny that we need continual refinement in our views. Challenges and opportunities arise constantly. The Chicago statements on inerrancy and hermeneutics, while compelling, can be improved upon. But I think Jesus' response to the devil is suggestive for our response to calls to lighten up on our high view of the Bible. 'Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that comes from the mouth of God' (Matt 4:4 ESV). Jesus regarded Scripture as words from God's mouth. That should be understood analogically, of course, and not crudely literally, but the integral link between God and divine enscripturated speech remains.
"I am optimistic that Jesus' approach to the Tanach, already revered as holy in his day, retains value for Jesus' followers as they approach the whole canon of writings acknowledged in the Bible of the church. Let me put that more strongly: in light of Jesus' dogged recourse to written Scripture from his temptation to his scriptural words from the cross, how is something like inerrancy not an entailment of discipleship? Kevin Vanhoozer poses the question this way: 'how can we follow Jesus if we cannot follow with the utmost trust the words that oriented his own life?'" --Robert Yarbrough[3]
· Below is a section of notes from a class I taught on Systematic Theology—they may be helpful
Systematic Theology: Scripture (2)
1. Theological implications flowing from Jesus’ and Apostle’s view of Scripture:
a. Scripture has ultimate authority and comprehensive authority
i. Ultimate: highest authority
ii. Comprehensive: speaks to everything; touches upon everything
1. Not merely “spiritual” aspects of life
2. “The Bible is thought of as authoritative on everything of which it speaks. Moreover, it speaks of everything. We do not mean that it speaks of football games, of atoms, etc., directly, but we do mean that is speaks of everything either directly or by implication.”[4]
iii. Liberal theological conception of Scripture
1. “To summarize my view, the Bible is not the criterion of truth. That criterion is fallibly developed in the always difficult, always tentative process of reflection as it is conducted in conversation with our contemporaries. Judgments about truth in theology are made in the same kinds of discussions, employing the same open rules of evaluation, that are used in making judgments about claims of history, science, philosophy, and common sense. To realize this is the contribution of liberalism to Christianity in our time. I believe it is an enduring contribution, one that conservatives ought to affirm.”[5] –Delwin Brown
2. The self-conscious liberal conception of theology flows from differing starting points about the nature of God. The conception of God within liberalism makes it impossible for there to be an authoritative, inspired revelation from God.[6]
b. Scripture’s self-attestation
i. There is no other standard outside or beyond God himself to which he must appeal to validate his authority
c. Unity of Scripture
i. Acts 17.11
ii. Liberalism: “multiple voices” none of which are ultimately authoritative[7]
d. Inerrancy of Scripture
i. “Inerrancy means that when all facts are known, the Scriptures in their original autographs and properly interpreted will be shown to be wholly true in everything that they affirm, whether that has to do with doctrine or morality or with social, physical, or life sciences.”[8]
ii. International Council on Biblical Inerrancy (1978): “Chicago Statement on Biblical Inerrancy”[9]
iii. Phenomena of Scripture àalleged errors/problem passages
1. “The debate over inerrancy frequently comes down to choosing whether to tolerate such problems as “unanswered questions” or to transfer them to the category of “demonstrated errors.” Often that decision reflects one’s initial attitude toward Scripture and toward critical methods. If Scripture is accepted as the inspired Word of God, as “the standard that sets the standard,” one will be reluctant to charge it with error—since to do so one must have some other, perhaps higher, norm by which to evaluate Scripture.”[10]
2. See sheet: “Dealing with Alleged Bible Contradictions”
iv. Primary doctrine? No. Functions as a sub-set of “authority”
1. Tends to become central in the midst of battle and argumentation
“When focusing on any doctrine in debate, it can inadvertently become primary though it seems preferable to speak of inerrancy as a distinguishing aspect of an evangelical Scripture principle rather than the primary one.”[11]
2. Importance of inerrancy
“One good reason for this might be that inerrancy was deemed most conducive to the gospel’s advancement as the message that truly saves sinners, who are located in real-time-space present and are looking to a real-time-space Savior whose work in both creation and redemption is not subject to any passing cultural or ideological whims since he stands outside of them.”[12]
“Being forged in the fires of American evangelicalism, the doctrine of inerrancy provides the platform for a gospel-advancing movement and a defensive strategy to ward off invaders.”[13]
[3]Robert Yarbrough, "The Future of Cognitive Reverence for the Bible"Journal for the Evangelical Theological Society (57/1: 2014), 17—emphasis added.
[6]See my brief essays: “Liberal Theology and Its Pantheizing Tendency.” Available online: http://whiterosereview.blogspot.com/2013/12/liberal-theology-and-its-pantheizing.html. “Liberal Theology and Its Naturalizing Tendency.” Available online: http://whiterosereview.blogspot.com/2014/01/liberal-theology-and-its-naturalizing.html.
[9]Available online: http://www.bible-researcher.com/chicago1.html
