On the Sufficiency of Scripture
The doctrine of the sufficiency of Scripture means the Bible contains all the words of God he intended his people to have at each stage of redemptive history, and now contains all the words of God we need for salvation, trusting and obeying him perfectly. [Note: Edited version of definition found in Wayne Grudem’s Systematic Theology.] This is the doctrine of Sola Scriptura, Scripture alone.
Deuteronomy 29:29 tells us, "The secret things belong unto the LORD our God: but those things which are revealed belong unto us and to our children for ever, that we may do all the words of this law."
Everything which could be known about God has not been revealed. Certain things are manifest in the general revelation of creation and man’s nature such that we are without excuse in our ignorance of the Creator. However, because of our blindness due to sin we will never find God through general revelation. God’s special revelation is essential to direct us to him. There remain unrevealed secrets regarding God beyond our comprehension. However, what he has revealed is sufficient; it belongs to us to teach our children and obey.
Of course there are unrecorded things spoken by God’s servants. Elijah, Elisha and other non writing prophets spoke God’s message to their generation. The Apostle Paul wrote at least three, and possibly four, letters to the church at Corinth. As we have two, the other was either incorporated into the extant two or lost. Every word spoken by these inspired prophets or apostles were not necessarily inspired. God did not chose to preserve every word spoken or written. If an authenticated third letter of Paul to Corinth was recovered today, it would be interesting historically but not canonical.
As Roman Catholics point out, Jesus spoke many things to his disciples. Mark 6:34, "And Jesus, when he came out, saw much people, and was moved with compassion toward them, because they were as sheep not having a shepherd: and he began to teach them many things." To our knowledge none of these words were recorded during his earthly ministry. He promised the apostles in John 14:26, "But the Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, he shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you." And thus he did.
Was every word Jesus spoke subsequently recorded by the Apostles in canonical scripture? Of course not. John’s gospel ends (21:25), "And there are also many other things which Jesus did, the which, if they should be written every one, I suppose that even the world itself could not contain the books that should be written. Amen." However, every word which Jesus spoke, which was essential for our salvation, nurture and edification, was recorded. And, on matters where Jesus had left no instruction, inspired Apostles left God’s direction (1 Cor. 7:12). What was recorded by the first generation Apostles and Evangelists was sufficient for future ages, as I will show Scripture teaches.
But, the church of the first generation did not have the Bible! Does this not disprove the doctrine of the sufficiency of Scripture?
God’s special revelation was sufficient for each generation. God’s revelation through Moses was sufficient for the Israelites coming out of Egypt. It contained all they needed for salvation, nurture and edification. Men might not add to or take from it. Only a sovereign God could add to it in his own time as he did through David, Solomon, Ezra, and the written prophets. There were generations and centuries in which there was no new revelation. What they had was sufficient. Such was the time from Joel and Malachi to the time of the Messiah’s coming.
Wait a minute. Roman Catholics and the Eastern Orthodox believe certain books from this period were inspired.
But, what say these books themselves. First Maccabees records the cleansing of the temple after their liberation of Jerusalem. They took down the altar polluted by pagan worship and wondered what to do with the desecrated stones. Chapter 4, verse 46 records, "And they laid up the stones in the mountain of the temple in a convenient place, till there should come a prophet, and give answer concerning them." Note, this was an age without a prophet and no authoritative direction for a new dilemma.
The books Protestants refer to as "Apocrypha" remain helpful as historical documents (like Josephus and Eusebeus) but not as authoritative revelation. The Jews excluded them from their canon and the Protestants followed suit. Jerome, who translated the Old and New Testaments into Latin agreed the Apocryphal books could not be used to establish doctrine and practice. From such come such erroneous doctrines as praying for the dead.
Was the early church left without an authoritative witness? Of course not. The early church continued to have the Old Testament. They also had the continuing testimony of Jesus in the Spirit assisted memory of the Apostles. They also had the additional inspired witness of the Apostles to deal with new circumstances Jesus had not addressed.
Very quickly, they had the writings of Paul and James followed by the gospels. I’d agree with J. A. T. Robinson’s argument, all the books of the New Testament were complete before 70 AD, before the last Apostle and the generation which knew Jesus passed away. Thus, during this first generation, there was a sufficient witness in the Old Testament, the testimony of the living Apostles and the New Testament books as they were written. Already, the letters of Paul were recognized as "Scripture" (2 Peter 3:16).
The canonical documents of the Apostles were circulated even before their death; how much more after the passing of the generation who had known Jesus. Other literature claiming apostolic authorship necessitated lists of books considered inspired. These lists display remarkable agreement long before the persecuted church could manage to hold a council to make such a decision.
During this time, every church may not have possessed every book of the New Testament. However, with the Old Testament and a single gospel or letter of Paul they had sufficient Scripture for their salvation and edification.
The Roman Catholic claim is that other unrecorded teachings of Jesus were passed from the Apostles to their successors and may still be made known to the church today, not as new or prophetic revelation but as a disclosure of previously known revealed truth from the apostolic age.
Gnostic heretics in the early centuries of the church claimed possession of secret doctrines of Jesus. The orthodox church rightly answered, if Jesus had left undisclosed teaching, it would have been to the Apostles, who would have passed these on to their successors. Therefore, truth was to be found in these apostolic churches. This refutation of the Gnostics did not necessitate the actual existence of any unknown deposit of truth, nor was it a warrant to add to or contradict the canonical Scriptures.
Consider 2 Timothy 3:16-17:
All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: That the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works.
and, Psalm 119:1:
Blessed are the undefiled in the way, who walk in the law of the LORD.
Though Paul nor the Psalmist were speaking of the entire canon we currently possess, they indicate the available inspired word of God was sufficient for every good work and by it a man may be perfect and undefiled in the way of God. Likewise, this applies to all the revelation God has given us. Nothing new is necessary for our salvation, perfection or obedience. Scripture alone is sufficient.
What makes a church or minister of Christ apostolic is not some mythical pseudo-historical succession from the apostles but faithful adherence to the once and for all sufficient witness of the prophets and apostles given in the Scriptures of the Old and New Testaments.
Roman Catholics would have us believe a church which historically has taught doctrines and practices contrary to the word of God has authority to add to God’s faithful witness extra canonical doctrines. Thus, the Infallibility of the Pope, the Immaculate Conception and Assumption of Mary must be accepted as divine truth. Such are not mere applications of Scripture but previously unknown doctrines elevated to the level of Scripture. No standard exists by which such may be evaluated if Scripture is not the final measure of divine truth. Thus, the Roman bishop becomes the final arbitrator of truth, making himself a rival of God and Christ, an anti-Christ.
Deuteronomy 29:29 tells us, "The secret things belong unto the LORD our God: but those things which are revealed belong unto us and to our children for ever, that we may do all the words of this law."
Everything which could be known about God has not been revealed. Certain things are manifest in the general revelation of creation and man’s nature such that we are without excuse in our ignorance of the Creator. However, because of our blindness due to sin we will never find God through general revelation. God’s special revelation is essential to direct us to him. There remain unrevealed secrets regarding God beyond our comprehension. However, what he has revealed is sufficient; it belongs to us to teach our children and obey.
Of course there are unrecorded things spoken by God’s servants. Elijah, Elisha and other non writing prophets spoke God’s message to their generation. The Apostle Paul wrote at least three, and possibly four, letters to the church at Corinth. As we have two, the other was either incorporated into the extant two or lost. Every word spoken by these inspired prophets or apostles were not necessarily inspired. God did not chose to preserve every word spoken or written. If an authenticated third letter of Paul to Corinth was recovered today, it would be interesting historically but not canonical.
As Roman Catholics point out, Jesus spoke many things to his disciples. Mark 6:34, "And Jesus, when he came out, saw much people, and was moved with compassion toward them, because they were as sheep not having a shepherd: and he began to teach them many things." To our knowledge none of these words were recorded during his earthly ministry. He promised the apostles in John 14:26, "But the Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, he shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you." And thus he did.
Was every word Jesus spoke subsequently recorded by the Apostles in canonical scripture? Of course not. John’s gospel ends (21:25), "And there are also many other things which Jesus did, the which, if they should be written every one, I suppose that even the world itself could not contain the books that should be written. Amen." However, every word which Jesus spoke, which was essential for our salvation, nurture and edification, was recorded. And, on matters where Jesus had left no instruction, inspired Apostles left God’s direction (1 Cor. 7:12). What was recorded by the first generation Apostles and Evangelists was sufficient for future ages, as I will show Scripture teaches.
But, the church of the first generation did not have the Bible! Does this not disprove the doctrine of the sufficiency of Scripture?
God’s special revelation was sufficient for each generation. God’s revelation through Moses was sufficient for the Israelites coming out of Egypt. It contained all they needed for salvation, nurture and edification. Men might not add to or take from it. Only a sovereign God could add to it in his own time as he did through David, Solomon, Ezra, and the written prophets. There were generations and centuries in which there was no new revelation. What they had was sufficient. Such was the time from Joel and Malachi to the time of the Messiah’s coming.
Wait a minute. Roman Catholics and the Eastern Orthodox believe certain books from this period were inspired.
But, what say these books themselves. First Maccabees records the cleansing of the temple after their liberation of Jerusalem. They took down the altar polluted by pagan worship and wondered what to do with the desecrated stones. Chapter 4, verse 46 records, "And they laid up the stones in the mountain of the temple in a convenient place, till there should come a prophet, and give answer concerning them." Note, this was an age without a prophet and no authoritative direction for a new dilemma.
The books Protestants refer to as "Apocrypha" remain helpful as historical documents (like Josephus and Eusebeus) but not as authoritative revelation. The Jews excluded them from their canon and the Protestants followed suit. Jerome, who translated the Old and New Testaments into Latin agreed the Apocryphal books could not be used to establish doctrine and practice. From such come such erroneous doctrines as praying for the dead.
Was the early church left without an authoritative witness? Of course not. The early church continued to have the Old Testament. They also had the continuing testimony of Jesus in the Spirit assisted memory of the Apostles. They also had the additional inspired witness of the Apostles to deal with new circumstances Jesus had not addressed.
Very quickly, they had the writings of Paul and James followed by the gospels. I’d agree with J. A. T. Robinson’s argument, all the books of the New Testament were complete before 70 AD, before the last Apostle and the generation which knew Jesus passed away. Thus, during this first generation, there was a sufficient witness in the Old Testament, the testimony of the living Apostles and the New Testament books as they were written. Already, the letters of Paul were recognized as "Scripture" (2 Peter 3:16).
The canonical documents of the Apostles were circulated even before their death; how much more after the passing of the generation who had known Jesus. Other literature claiming apostolic authorship necessitated lists of books considered inspired. These lists display remarkable agreement long before the persecuted church could manage to hold a council to make such a decision.
During this time, every church may not have possessed every book of the New Testament. However, with the Old Testament and a single gospel or letter of Paul they had sufficient Scripture for their salvation and edification.
The Roman Catholic claim is that other unrecorded teachings of Jesus were passed from the Apostles to their successors and may still be made known to the church today, not as new or prophetic revelation but as a disclosure of previously known revealed truth from the apostolic age.
Gnostic heretics in the early centuries of the church claimed possession of secret doctrines of Jesus. The orthodox church rightly answered, if Jesus had left undisclosed teaching, it would have been to the Apostles, who would have passed these on to their successors. Therefore, truth was to be found in these apostolic churches. This refutation of the Gnostics did not necessitate the actual existence of any unknown deposit of truth, nor was it a warrant to add to or contradict the canonical Scriptures.
Consider 2 Timothy 3:16-17:
All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: That the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works.
and, Psalm 119:1:
Blessed are the undefiled in the way, who walk in the law of the LORD.
Though Paul nor the Psalmist were speaking of the entire canon we currently possess, they indicate the available inspired word of God was sufficient for every good work and by it a man may be perfect and undefiled in the way of God. Likewise, this applies to all the revelation God has given us. Nothing new is necessary for our salvation, perfection or obedience. Scripture alone is sufficient.
What makes a church or minister of Christ apostolic is not some mythical pseudo-historical succession from the apostles but faithful adherence to the once and for all sufficient witness of the prophets and apostles given in the Scriptures of the Old and New Testaments.
Roman Catholics would have us believe a church which historically has taught doctrines and practices contrary to the word of God has authority to add to God’s faithful witness extra canonical doctrines. Thus, the Infallibility of the Pope, the Immaculate Conception and Assumption of Mary must be accepted as divine truth. Such are not mere applications of Scripture but previously unknown doctrines elevated to the level of Scripture. No standard exists by which such may be evaluated if Scripture is not the final measure of divine truth. Thus, the Roman bishop becomes the final arbitrator of truth, making himself a rival of God and Christ, an anti-Christ.
posted by J. Glenn Ferrell at 8:41 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home