Scripture is God’s true, perfect, delightful, inspired and sufficient word to the world. While every Christian I know affirms all of this, in practice the sufficiency of Scripture seems to be getting far less attention, and I am convinced that it is the most important aspect of Scripture for the church in the 21st century to wrestle with. It is possible to affirm verbal, plenary inspiration and the inerrant and infallible nature of Scripture, and still miss the principle that it is enough; that the Scripture alone is our only rule in faith and practice. When we miss this truth, we may find ourselves falling into the errors of legalism, speculative theology, or ecclesiological invention that goes beyond and works against what God has revealed. If we really believe in both the authority and sufficiency of God’s word, then we will embrace both certainty and mystery when it comes to our faith and express that faith in confidence and humility.
Because God has spoken definitively of himself, his creation and his salvation in the pages of Scripture, some things can be known. By “some things,” I mean those things he has chosen to address. One can have certainty in his theology, and make those “absolute truth” claims that are getting so much press these days. I have to admit such wording is not necessarily biblical and sounds like an oxymoron, but I do not have trouble using the term. Truth is absolute and God has revealed truth in Scripture. In short, there is no such thing as Christian theology that does not make absolute claims about God, man, and redemption, and I have grown very weary of the growing trend to dismiss any form of dogmatism that goes beyond the catholic creeds.
To take no pleasure in assertions is not the mark of a Chritsian heart; indeed one must delight in assertions to be a Christian at all. …take away assertions and you take away Christianity.
Martin Luther, Bondage of the Will, 66, 67.
In a culture that rejects the concept of truth being the unchanging reality of God, this is something we need to articulate well to the people God has sent us to. If we believe that God has spoken, that he has revealed himself in a way meant to be understood, then we cannot avoid the need to make assertions, and to be certain. But such assertions concerning the believer’s ethics and theology must be radically limited to the word of God.
If this thought prevails with us, that the word of the Lord is the sole way that can lead us in our search for all that is lawful to hold concerning him, and is the sole light to illumine our vision of all that we should see of him, it will readily keep and restrain us from all rashness. For we shall know that the moment we exceed the bounds of the Word, our course is outside the pathway and in darkness, and that there we must repeatedly wander, slip and stumble.
John Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion, III.XXI.2.
Sufficiency teaches all of this. God has revealed himself and it is enough. But sufficiency says still more.
The sufficiency of Scripture equally pushes the need to humbly affirm the mystery and limited nature of our knowledge of God. God has spoken to us in words we can understand, but there is much he has not told us. And some of what he has told us is simply more than we can fully comprehend. If God has spoken definitively, and if we believe the canon is closed, then we have to admit that while we have all of the answers we need, we do not have all of the answers. The sufficiency of Scripture halts dogmatism in those areas God has not addressed. If his word is enough for us, then speculative theology and extra-biblical and inventive ethics must not hold sway in the life of the church.
The desire to go beyond what Scripture says in developing our theology and determining the will of God is to reject the gift of God’s revelation and remain dissatisfied with what God has given. It is the claim, at least implicitly, that God was not clear enough, or that he needs our help in leading his people in righteousness.
When we grasp both the authority and sufficiency of Scripture the result is confidence and humility. Confidence comes from the knowledge of what God has revealed. He can be known (in part) and his word is meant to be understood and communicated to others. Humility comes from understanding that we are absolutely dependent on God’s divine self-disclosure in Scripture to grasp any truth about him at all, for even though he is revealed in nature, we naturally reject it. Humility also comes from the knowledge that of all that God has told us, we are still left with questions that will not be answered this side of the resurrection. Though we can known God, his eternal nature is more than our finite minds can comprehend.
I believe that if we can maintain a healthy understanding of the authority and sufficiency of Scripture we will have clearer expressions of the truth, a more generous spirit when cooperating together for the cause of Christ, greater boldness to declare the God who speaks, and appropriate humility when speaking on his behalf.
I am the Lead Pastor of Redeemer Fellowship; husband to Jen; Dad to Katherine, Elias, Madeline, and Kilian. If you're in town you can probably find me in the local coffee house or running through the neighborhoods.
{ 7 comments }
great site joe. i always enjoy your humble posture in approaching things.
while i would probably disagree with you on some points (what with me being an emergent heterdoxical kind of guy according to driscoll), i’m right on with you when you wrote, “then we have to admit that while we have all of the answers we need, we do not have all of the answers.”
i’m glad you reminded us that while scripture certainly provides us with everything we need, it doesn’t always paint a clear black and white picture for us on some things. i think that’s why paul’s doxology has always been so important to me. discussing and laying out some of the most heady theological framework in romans 1-10, landing in romans 11 where he simply acknowledges how mysterious and higher god is than he.
that’s such a freeing and humbling thought as well. that i don’t need or have to have all of the answers in order to practice and live what i know. it keeps me in the rhythms of whats important.
good thoughts.
Hey Joe,
How do you know which books are scripture and which aren’t? Who gets to decide that for you?
Is there an infallible golden list somewhere?
Being rather obnoxious,
Matt
P.S. I’ve got a hum dinger of a question for you about Russ Moore
Matt, I know nothing about Russ Moore outside of what he has written. If your question is about anything he has written, ask away. If not, it is not appropriate here. Thanks.
Concerning the Bible… yeah – God put a list right in the front of the Bible. He also went through the trouble of highlighting Jesus’ words in red.
Ok, The question is a larger discussion and tangentially related to the topic so I will answer is brief and point you elsewhere to get a better feel for the details of my thoughts.
1. God determines what is Scripture, the church recognizes it.
2. The church recognized what was Scripture early on.
For example, by the second century the church fathers were using/quoting all of our 27 NT texts as Scripture. The Council of Hippo formally expressed this recognition in 393.
For more reading on this check out the following links:
The Canon of the NT by FF Bruce.
The Formation of the NT Canon by BB Warfield
How We Got Our Bible by Mike Vlach
I think you said it all, Joe. When God speaks, He speaks with absolute authority. When He is silent, His silence carries absolute authority. When He is vague, when He is precise, it is all with authority (and trustworthiness). I’m not saying that there is no place for “speculative theology,” just that it must never be elevated to the place of Scripture (nor even to the place where it distracts us from Scripture). My students have a hard time getting this, because they have always been taught (implicitly) that the Bible has the answer to every question.
I love the post. Nice Luther quote. You have a gift. Total stud!!
Hey Joe,
The “church” recognizes the official canon eh? Sounds strange to me
. Did the SBC formally adopt a resolution stating that it believes that those books listed at the Council of Hippo were in fact the correct canon? If so, on what basis did it make this decision? Would this decision by SBC “hierarchy” be binding upon you as local pastor?
You wrote:
For example, by the second century the church fathers were using/quoting all of our 27 NT texts as Scripture. The Council of Hippo formally expressed this recognition in 393
They were also quoting lots of other texts that were not finally deemed scripture as well.
Furthermore, and more importantly, if the Council of Hippo was correct, then why don’t you accept the canon that THEY listed? Why do you now reject books that they said were “in”?
Ciao,
Matt
Matt, I am not sure where you are going – but you seem to misunderstand what went down at Hippo (they listed the 27 books we have in our NT – no more), the history of canonization and how the SBC works. Since my post assumes these things I really don’t have time to follow this particular trail. I appreciate the desire to engage though. So, let’s move along. Thanks.
Comments on this entry are closed.