Does Scripture Contradict Itself?

Does Scripture contradict itself?

The Apostle Peter tells us that

no prophecy was ever produced by the will of man, but men spoke from God as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit. (2 Peter 1:21)

Or, as the Apostle Paul puts it, “All Scripture is breathed out by God” (2 Timothy 3:16). If the Bible were simply the writings of dozens of men written over the course of hundreds of years, we would expect some writings to contradict others. But if, as Peter and Paul claim, God is behind everything in the Bible, there should be no genuine contradictions.

Sometimes different authors seem to contradict one another. Most famously, Paul in Romans and James in his letter speak in sharp contrast about justification, faith, and works:

For we hold that one is justified by faith apart from works of the law. (Romans 3:28)

You see that a person is justified by works and not by faith alone. (James 2:24)

But there are issues not only between different authors. Jesus Himself sometimes speaks in seeming contradictions. I well remember as a teen being disturbed when encountering these two statements by our Lord:

For the one who is not against us is for us. (Mark 9:40)

Whoever is not with me is against me (Matthew 12:30a)

Which is it, Jesus? Are those who are neutral for You? Or are the neutral ones against You?

Seeing such examples, we might think the Bible needed a good editor who would clean up such statements, modifying what was written in one place so that it is in accord with what was written in another place. Good publishers check book manuscripts for such issues all the time.

However, the seeming contradictions in Scripture are not limited to those written by different authors. Some are clearly intended by the author of a particular book – for they are placed right next to each other. For example, see Proverbs 26:4-5:

Answer not a fool according to his folly, lest you be like him yourself. Answer a fool according to his folly, lest he be wise in his own eyes.

Clearly the compiler of Proverbs is getting at something deeper than giving us a general rule about how we should respond to those who are foolish.

When we begin to look for apparent contradictions, we see them throughout Scripture. Many deal with issues of central importance to the Christian faith, such as our freedom in Christ:

Live as free people, but do not use your freedom as a cover-up for evil; live as God’s slaves. (1 Peter 2:16 NIV)

Or our attitude towards “life:”

For whoever would save his life will lose it, but whoever loses his life for my sake and the gospel’s will save it. (Mark 8:35)

Or especially the nature of God, the relationship between God the Father and Jesus:

I and the Father are one. (John 10:30)

Or the interplay between wrath and mercy, judgment and grace:

For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life. … Whoever believes in the Son has eternal life; whoever does not obey the Son shall not see life, but the wrath of God remains on him. (John 3:16, 36)

These and other examples of apparent contradictions right next to each other indicate that these paradoxes are not mistakes in need of a good editor, but intended by the authors of individual books to help communicate their message. And if that is the case, it is reasonable to ask if the Holy Spirit, as the claimed author of the entirety of Scripture, uses the same technique across books of the Bible to communicate His revelation – truths that are best communicated through this literary style.

Such apparent contradictions are hard to understand – but in a book that purports to be the words of the sovereign God of the universe, that is not surprising. Peter himself tells us that:

There are some things in [Paul’s letters] that are hard to understand, which the ignorant and unstable twist to their own destruction, as they do the other Scriptures. (2 Peter 3:16)

Let us not be among the ignorant and unstable, twisting Scripture and thus headed to destruction. Let us instead follow the exhortation Paul gives Timothy after making some of those hard to understand statements:

Think over what I say, for the Lord will give you understanding in everything. (2 Timothy 2:7)

Over the next several months, beginning Sunday January 20, we will do just that: Think over seeming contradictions, all the while praying that the Lord would indeed give us understanding, so that we might know Him better, love Him more, and follow Him more closely. In this sermon series, entitled, “Contradictions? How Delving Into Challenging Topics Unlocks the Riches of God’s Revelation”, we’ll consider issues in salvation and judgment, in living the Christian life, and in understanding who God is. After introducing the series this Sunday, on January 27 we’ll consider the topic of prayer: If God does whatever He pleases, how can our prayers have any impact on what happens?

Join us as we think over what God says. May the promise of 2 Timothy 2:7 prove true, as His Spirit unlocks for us the riches of God’s revelation of Who He is, who we are, and how we can follow Him and grow in Him in this world.

[Biblical citations are from the ESV unless otherwise indicated.]

 

Luther on the Authority and Clarity of Scripture

[Tuesday marks the 500th anniversary of the event that many cite as the beginning of the Protestant Reformation: Martin Luther’s nailing 95 Theses to the door of the church in Wittenberg. While the Theses primarily address the sale of indulgences by the Roman Catholic Church, the underlying issue was the relative authority of Scripture and the Roman Church. The issue of the authority of Scripture remains of vital importance today; we’ll focus on it this coming Sunday as we celebrate 500 years of the Reformation.  To honor Luther’s role in the recovery of Scriptural authority, here are some of his own words on this topic – Coty]

[When Luther was under trial in the city of Worms for his writings, after being commanded to recant:]

I am bound to the Scriptures I have quoted and my conscience is captive to the Word of God.

[Luther’s enemies mocked him for this stance, yet clearly recognized his position on Scripture. Here is part of the Edict of Worms, the final judgment from that trial:]

This devil in the habit of a monk has brought together ancient errors into one stinking puddle and has invented new ones. . . . His teaching makes for rebellion, division, war, murder, robbery, arson, and the collapse of Christendom. He lives the life of a beast. . . . We have labored with him, but he recognizes only the authority of Scripture.

[Luther was the first to translate the Bible into German. He wrote these words on the flyleaf of a German Bible:]

God will not be seen, known, or comprehended except through his Word alone. Whatever therefore one undertakes for salvation apart from the Word is in vain. God will not respond to that. He will not have it. He will not tolerate any other way. Therefore, let his Book in which He speaks to you be commended to you. For he did not cause it to be written to no purpose. He did not want us to let it lie there in neglect, as if he were speaking with mice under the bench or with flies on the pulpit. We are to read it, to think and speak about it, and to study it, certain that He Himself, not an angel or a creature, is speaking with us in it.

[Luther’s response to Erasmus’ claim that Scripture is obscure. From Bondage of the Will:]

God and his Scriptures are two things, just as the Creator and his creation are two things. Now, nobody questions that there is a great deal hid in God of which we know nothing. . . . But the notion that in Scripture . . . all is not plain was spread by the godless [without evidence.] . . . And Satan has used these unsubstantial specters to scare men off reading the sacred text, and to destroy all sense of its value, so as to ensure that his own poisonous philosophy reigns supreme in the church. I certainly grant that many passages in the Scriptures are obscure and hard to elucidate, but that is due, not to the exalted nature of their subject, but to our own linguistic and grammatical ignorance; and it does not in any way prevent our knowing all the contents of Scripture. For what solemn truth can the Scriptures still be concealing, now that the seals are broken, the stone rolled away from the door of the tomb, and the greatest of all mysteries brought to light—that Christ, God’s Son, became man, that God is Three in One, that Christ suffered for us, and will reign forever? Are not these things known, and sung in our streets? Take Christ from the Scriptures—and what more will you find in them? . . .

The profoundest mysteries of the supreme Majesty are no [longer] hidden away, but are now brought out of doors and displayed to public view. Christ has opened our understanding, that we might understand the Scriptures, and the Gospel is preached to every creature. . . . I know that to many people a great deal remains obscure; but that is due, not to any lack of clarity in Scripture, but to their own blindness and dullness, in that they make no effort to see truth which, in itself, could not be plainer. . . . They are like men who . . . go from daylight into darkness, and hide there and then blame . . . the darkness of the day for their inability to see. . . .

The truth is that nobody who has not the Spirit of God sees a jot of what is in the Scriptures. All men have their hearts darkened, so that, even when they can discuss and quote all that is in Scripture, they do not understand or really know any of it. They do not believe in God, nor do they believe that they are God’s creatures, nor anything else. . . . The Spirit is needed for the understanding of all Scripture and every part of Scripture.

[From Luther‘s exposition of Psalm 45:4, delivered as a lecture to his students. He here comments on the words “go forth and reign” (translated “ride out victoriously” in the ESV):]

Everywhere there is nothing but misfortune: outside they persecute the Word; among us they despise and neglect it; pastors almost die of hunger and receive no other reward for their godly labors than ingratitude and hatred. Where is the prosperity here? Certainly only in the spirit.

Therefore rouse yourself. Do not give in to evils, but go forth boldly against them. Hold on. Do not be disheartened either by contempt or ingratitude within or by agitation and raging without. . . . It is in sorrow, when we are the closest to despair, that hope rises the highest. So today, when there is the greatest contempt and weariness with the Word, the true glory of the Word begins. Therefore we should learn to understand this verse as speaking of invisible progress and success. Our King enjoys success and good fortune even though you do not see it. Moreover, it would not be expedient for us to see this success, for then we would be puffed up. Now, however, he raises us up through faith and gives us hope. Even though we see no fruit of the Word, still we can be certain that fruit will not be wanting but will certainly follow; for so it is written here. Only we should not be discouraged when we look at present circumstances that disturb us, but we should much rather look at these promises.

 

Search the Scriptures

Most churches have one statement of faith. We have two – a statement of faith that all members must agree to that basically outlines the Gospel, and a statement of faith governing teaching that goes in to more detail. All of the elders must agree with this more detailed statement of faith.

Why did we go a different direction? What value do we derive as a church from having that second statement of faith?

As those of you who are members heard in the What is DGCC class, the second statement serves in part as “truth in labeling.” The statement of faith governing teaching speaks to many issues unaddressed by the statement of faith for members. When you read the more detailed statement, you learn what you will hear preached on a number of important issues. You don’t have to agree with the statement to become a member, but you do have to be willing to sit under preaching that brings out these points.

When churches don’t have such a statement, there are still theological guidelines that control what is preached – they’re just unstated. Frequently they consist of whatever the primary preaching pastor believes. And it may take a while for visitors to figure out what those guidelines are. Furthermore, the guidelines are subject to change with a pastoral change.

We don’t think that’s helpful for visitors or healthy for the congregation. We want to be upfront about what we believe – thus this second, more detailed statement of faith.

But the preface to the Statement of Faith Governing Teaching helps bring out a second reason we think it is valuable:

The aim of this statement is to encourage a hearty adherence to the Bible, the fullness of its truth, and the glory of its Author. A passion for the supremacy of God in all things for the joy of all peoples is best sustained in an atmosphere of deep and joyful knowledge of the character of God. We thus aim to teach the whole counsel of God rather than aiming to discover and teach some minimum required for salvation. In affirming what we believe on these matters, we separate ourselves doctrinally from some brothers and sisters within the universal church.  The cause of unity in the church, however, is best served not by finding the lowest common denominator of doctrine, but by elevating the value of truth through stating clear doctrinal parameters, and then demonstrating to the world how Christians can love each other across doctrinal boundaries, rather than by removing those boundaries. We commit ourselves to both elevating truth and loving our brothers.

So we’re saying this more detailed statement helps us “elevate the value of truth.” How does it do that?

After Paul tells Timothy that all Scripture is God-breathed and profitable for teaching, reproof, correction , and training in righteousness so that each man of God can be thoroughly equipped for every good work, he gives the younger man a solemn charge: “Preach the Word; be ready in season and out of season; using the Scriptures, reprove and rebuke, exhort, encourage, and comfort, with great patience teaching all doctrine” (2 Timothy 4:2, my paraphrase).

So that’s what we try to do: As we say in the preface just quoted, we aim to “encourage a hearty adherence to the Bible” through teaching “the whole counsel of God.” We don’t avoid controversial passages or issues; we primarily preach straight through books of the Bible – Old Testament and New, prophecy and narrative, wisdom and epistle, Law and Gospel – and thus have to address the whole range of issues that Scripture brings up. We believe, as the Apostle states, that this is for your good.

So through the two doctrinal statements, we’re saying, “Here in this shorter statement is what we all must believe to be united in the body of Christ; and here in this longer statement is what the elders of this church think Scripture says on a much wider range of vital, life-giving biblical doctrines. This second document is the Cliffs notes version of what you will hear from us. All these scriptural truths are profitable; and we’re going to do our best to patiently teach all of them to you over decades. Through such teaching you can be fully equipped for every good work.”

So the statement of faith governing teaching serves both as truth in labeling, and as a way to elevate the value of biblical truth.

We want to emphasize those last two words: BIBLICAL TRUTH. This more detailed statement of faith is not above Scripture; it is rather an attempt to summarize what Scripture says on a number of issues. If the statement of faith were to supplant Scripture as our authority, we would be in the wrong.

Consider Acts 17:10-11. Paul has been persecuted in the city of Thessalonica.

 The brothers immediately sent Paul and Silas away by night to Berea, and when they arrived they went into the Jewish synagogue. Now these Jews were more noble than those in Thessalonica; they received the word with all eagerness, examining the Scriptures daily to see if these things were so.

The Jews of Berea question what Paul is saying. They are intrigued. They are eager. But they are not convinced that what Paul says is true. So they go back to the Scriptures. They search them. They examine them. They test Paul by the Scriptures.

The author, Luke, does not fault the Bereans for searching the Scriptures to see if what Paul said was true. He doesn’t say, “Those foolish Bereans – they didn’t believe the Apostle Paul based on his own authority!” Rather Luke commends them – they were more noble than the Thessalonians.

We want all of you in Desiring God Church to be like those Bereans. Scripture is our authority. Not the elders. So when we say something that puzzles you, something different from your previous understanding of Scripture – go to the Word! Search the Scriptures! Ponder them! It’s ok to disagree with something said in a sermon, and it’s ok to disagree with something in the statement of faith governing teaching. We want to drive you to Scripture – if we do that, we’ve succeeded in our teaching, whether or not you in the end agree with us on the interpretation.

So rather than stifling debate, the longer statement of faith brings these truths to the forefront where they can be discussed. We’re by no means saying through this statement, “Never talk about alternative understandings of Scripture.” Comparing Scripture to Scripture, we’re trying to build up from Scripture what it says about God, about man, about the plan of redemption. Some of our conclusions are widely debated in the evangelical church – and we welcome such debates among us , when together we search the Scriptures to see what is true.

How then do we see this longer statement of faith functioning in the life of the church?

Authoritative teaching at DGCC – that is, speaking without discussion – is to be done in accord with the statement. That includes preaching, and other occasions in which Scriptures are opened up without discussion. But in small groups and in Sunday School classes where there is considerable discussion, we welcome alternate understanding of passages when these discussions are aimed at honestly trying to discern what Scripture says. Indeed, as young men neither Pastor Fred nor I agreed with a number of the doctrinal positions of our longer statement of faith; we came to believe these doctrines through searching the Scriptures ourselves, and through teachers who helped us search the Scriptures. We believe that all the doctrines in our longer statement of faith stand up to scrutiny – but we want you to search the Scriptures, and not necessarily take these positions because we do.  And so we welcome, and never want to stifle, discussion.

Furthermore, I know that some positions I hold are wrong. I don’t know which ones (or I would change them!). The Lord will show me at an appropriate time – perhaps on the Last Day, or perhaps by one of you convincing me from Scripture that I am wrong. So – once again – we welcome discussion.

So, people of Desiring God Church: Be faithful Bereans. Search the Scriptures. Know the Scriptures. And spur one another on to know them better.

(An earlier form of this article served as the devotion at the August 14 members meeting.)

Seeing the Truth of Scripture

How does a person come to believe in the truth and authority of the Bible?

John Piper’s most recent book, A Peculiar Glory: How the Christian Scriptures Reveal Their Complete Truthfulness, addresses this question. The answer: We see its glory rather than infer its truth.

Seeing is central because saving knowledge is more than intellectual acknowledgment of truth claims. Saving knowledge includes loving God, treasuring Jesus, and staking your life on the Gospel. These don’t result from research that simply leads to inferences that the Bible is probably accurate. Furthermore, Scripture makes clear that such saving knowledge is available to all mankind, to the educated and uneducated, to the adult and the child, and not only to those with analytical minds and ability in historical research. So Piper writes:

The pathway that leads to sight may involve much empirical observation, and historical awareness, and rational thought. . . . But the end we are seeking is not a probable inference from historical reasoning but a full assurance that we have seen the glory of God. Thus, at the end of all human means, the simplest preliterate person and the most educated scholar come to a saving knowledge of the truth of Scripture in the same way: by a sight of its glory. (p. 15)

Does this even make sense? Note that this is the way Scripture speaks of salvation: Satan has “blinded the minds of the unbelievers, to keep them from seeing the light of the gospel of the glory of Christ” (2 Corinthians 4:4). But God is the One who creates light! He “has shone in our hearts to give the light of the knowledge of the glory of God in the face of Jesus Christ” (2 Corinthians 4:6). Furthermore, if “faith comes from hearing, and hearing through the word of Christ” (Romans 10:17), then the saving sight of God’s glory comes to us through the Word – through Scripture. There thus must be a similar shining of God’s light in our hearts to come to trust the revealed Word.

Piper argues that although seeing the glory of Scripture may sound strange to our ears, there are other times when we must see truth rather than infer it. In Chapter 9 he presents several analogies to help us have some idea of what that seeing by divine illumination consists of. Here we will look at two of them.

First, as C.S. Lewis writes, “I believe in Christianity as I believe that the Sun has risen, not only because I see it, but because by it I see everything else.” That is, “In Your light do we see light” (Psalm 36:9). Piper writes:

Ordinarily when we seek to have a well-grounded conviction about some claim to truth in this world, we bring all our experience to bear on the claim and try to make sense out of it. . . . Does it cohere with what we know to be true? Does it make sense in the light of what we already know? What we know from experience is the standard, the arbiter, the measure of truth.

But what happens when we encounter a claim that says, “I am the Standard, the Arbiter, the Truth”? This claim is unique. It is not like other claims to truth in this world. When the ultimate Measure of all reality speaks, you don’t subject this Measure to the measure of your mind or your experience of the world. He created all that. When the ultimate Standard of all truth and beauty appears, he is not put in the dock to be judged by the prior perceptions of truth and beauty that we bring to the courtroom. The eternal, absolute original is seen as true and beautiful not because he coheres with what we know but because all the truth and beauty we know coheres in him. It is measured by him, and it is seen flowing from him. (p. 158)

Now, think: Jesus is “the true light, which gives light to everyone” (John 1:9). He is the standard. He is the measure. And He is the One who is the source of all knowledge:

He is one who can be known and the one who makes all knowing possible. He is a point of light—a point of truth and knowledge—that enters our minds, and he is the light by which we see all points of light. Thus we know him to be true, not because our light shows him to be so, but because his divine light shines with its own, all-enlightening, all-explaining glory. (p. 160)

And this provides us with an analogy for Scripture:

We know the Scriptures to be true, not because our light shows them to be so, but because their divine light shines with its own unique, all-enlightening, all-explaining glory.

The second analogy we will consider concerns Peter and Judas. Both lived with Jesus for about three years. Both saw Him, heard Him, spoke with Him, ate with Him. Jesus sent them both out to preach and to heal. Both are called disciples. Both are called apostles. Yet Peter saw Jesus as “the Christ, the Son of the living God” (Matthew 16:16). Judas betrayed Him for a few thousand dollars.

What led to the difference between these two men? Why did one see, and the other did not?

Jesus Himself tells Peter, “Flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but my Father who is in heaven” (Matthew 16:17). Peter would not have seen apart from the revelation of God.

However, Piper argues that it would be wrong to say Judas did not see because it was not revealed to him. He did not see because he was a liar, a thief, a covetous person.

Consider John 3:19-20 in this regard:

Light has come into the world, and people loved the darkness rather than the light because their works were evil. For everyone who does wicked things hates the light and does not come to the light, lest his works should be exposed. (John 3:19-20)

Commenting on these verses, Piper writes:

The root of our blindness is not that we are victims of darkness, but lovers of darkness. The root of our blindness is not that we are hindered from the light, but that we are haters of the light. We love the darkness of doing things our way, and we hate the light of the surpassing beauty of the all-authoritative, all-satisfying, sovereign Christ. And, therefore, our blindness is blameworthy—not, as the lawyers say, exculpatory. It does not remove our guilt. It is our guilt.

In this analogy, Judas represents people who approach the Christian Scriptures with a mind and a heart that are so out of tune with the music of its meaning that they cannot hear it for what it is. There is such a dissonance that the heart repels the revelation of God as undesirable and untrue. Peter represents the people who come to the Scriptures with a mind and a heart humbled by the Holy Spirit and open to the beauty and truth of God’s glory shining through the meaning of the text. What the analogy brings to light is that two people can be looking at the very same person (Jesus Christ) or the very same book (the Bible) and miss what is really there.

So the Scriptures are like Jesus in His essence  – the Light by which all is seen – and like Jesus in His humanity – the One who divides humanity into those who see His glory and delight in it, and those who are blinded by their own sin.

In our fallen state, we must see this glory – and our very fallenness blinds us to this glory.

Thus, there is no way we can have such sight unless we humble ourselves before God and His Word, unless we seek Truth from Him rather than establish ourselves as the arbiters of Truth. So may we approach God’s Word as supplicants, as needy people, as those thirsting in a desert – and may He satisfy us with His Truth, His Beauty, His Glory.

[The pdf version of the book is available as a free download at Desiring God. My approach to arguing for the authority of Scripture – as well as my personal story of coming to trust that authority – can be found in these blog posts from 2013: first, second, third.]

Why Did a Davidson Math Major and Stanford PhD Submit Himself to the Authority of Scripture? The Authority of Scripture, Part 3

Over three blog posts, we’re considering our position before God’s revelation in Scripture. Two weeks ago, we looked at the biblical image of us as two-year-olds before God. Last week, we considered the impact of sin on our ability to think and reason. Today, I’ll tell my own story of coming to submit myself to the authority of Scripture.

I graduated from Davidson as an excellent student and an accomplished athlete. I believed I could do anything I set my mind to doing. For to that point in my life, I either had – or had a good excuse for why I hadn’t.

I called myself a Christian. I read the Bible – occasionally. I had read all the New Testament, and perhaps eighty percent of the Old. I thought I knew it.

But I did not believe in the authority of Scripture. I was not under the Word; rather, I was over it, judging it. If Scripture seemed reasonable to me, I liked it and followed it – and used it to justify what I already believed. If it didn’t seem reasonable to me, I didn’t follow it. So in the end, my own reason was my authority – my own fallen reason, my own sin-soaked reason.

I had grown up in the Washington, DC area. Many of my friends in high school had parents with bad marriages – usually because the father was a workaholic, neglecting his wife and children. So even while I was in high school, I told myself: Should I ever get married, I won’t be like that. I will make the marriage work.

By the time of my Davidson graduation, I was seriously involved with the perfect woman, Beth. There was no question: Our marriage would work. We loved each other; we were committed to each other; and we were both wonderful. Of course our marriage would be wonderful.

Yet two and a half years after our wedding, the marriage was in disarray. Indeed, it was falling apart. One pivotal night thirty-one years ago, I had to acknowledge that I was destroying our marriage, Beth, this supposedly perfect woman, was destroying our marriage, and there was nothing I could do to keep it from dissolving. Indeed, I had to recognize that, left to my own devices, I would continue to destroy it.

I was an economics PhD student, but I was not maximizing my utility. Instead: I was destroying what I really loved and wanted most.

That night, I confessed my sin before God, and asked His forgiveness through the blood of Jesus.

God worked powerfully that night. I still didn’t believe in the authority of Scripture. But I did see that my putting myself above scriptural authority was part of the problem. I had ignored parts of Scripture that I didn’t want to listen to – and some of those parts spoke directly to the issues in our marriage.

So I began reading the Bible in a fresh way. I asked God to give me insight into it. I prayed for wisdom to understand His Word. I beseeched God to change me through His Word.

As I approached Scripture as a supplicant, I began to see more and more of myself described in it. Particularly powerful was Romans 7, where Paul describes exactly what I had gone through:

I find it to be a law that when I want to do right, evil lies close at hand.  For I delight in the law of God, in my inner being, but I see in my members another law waging war against the law of my mind and making me captive to the law of sin that dwells in my members. Wretched man that I am! Who will deliver me from this body of death? Thanks be to God through Jesus Christ our Lord! (Romans 7:21-25)

As I read this and other Scriptures over the course of the next eighteen months, God convinced me of Scripture’s authority. Though I wouldn’t have used these terms at that time, this is how it came about:

I recognized that I had been seeing God as the coach and myself as His quarterback, or God as president and myself as Secretary of State. And I had to acknowledge that I was not even His second string defensive tackle. I had thought that God was fortunate to have someone with my talents and abilities to call himself a Christian; and I had to acknowledge that I was the problem, not the solution to God’s problems.

I had made my own reason my ultimate authority, judging Scripture by it. Because of the noetic effects of sin, I had to acknowledge that my reason could never play that role; I could not understand His Scriptures apart from Him, apart from His help. Indeed, I would without fail distort them and misinterpret them for my own selfish – and ultimately harmful – purposes.

But when I approached His Word with humility, I discovered the truth of Proverbs 2:3-6:

If you call out for insight and raise your voice for understanding, if you seek it like silver and search for it as for hidden treasures, then you will understand the fear of the LORD and find the knowledge of God. For the LORD gives wisdom; from his mouth come knowledge and understanding.

I then saw that I was only God’s two-year-old. That is, I had nothing that would make Him want to choose me, nothing that would make Him want to have me on His team.

“Only” His two-year-old – that was a humbling thought. However, I was His two-year-old! I was His precious child! This process of putting myself under the authority of Scripture was not solely an intellectual process, a way of coming to Truth – but it was fundamentally relational. I was His beloved child – He chose me out of His own goodness and mercy, He gave His Son for me, He welcomed me into His presence.

He accommodated Himself to my capacity; He spoke baby talk to me so that I could be like a weaned child with his mother: so that I could rest in Him and delight in Him.

So that’s how a Davidson math major and Stanford PhD came to submit himself to the authority of Scripture.

So where are you? Do you doubt the authority of Scripture?

If so, take this test: Commit yourself every day to come humbly before the Word of God. Follow some systematic plan for reading through Scripture (the Bible Unity Plan is one option). Before you read each day, pray to God something like this: “God, if You exist, and if the Bible is indeed Your revelation, then it tells me I cannot understand it on my own. In my inner being, I really do want know the Truth; I want to submit to the Truth. So if the Bible is Your Word, open up this passage to me. Enable me to understand it and apply it. If it is Your revelation, open my eyes to see that truth.”

I challenge you: Make that commitment. And then go to the Word in that way every day – for thirty years.  I trust that God, by then, will have answered your prayer.

(A final blog post will point to other recommended references concerning the authority of Scripture.)

(For printing, download this pdf file.)

We Can’t Think Straight: The Authority of Scripture, Part 2

Over three blog posts, we’re considering our position before God’s revelation in Scripture. Last week, we looked at the biblical image of us as two-year-olds before God. Today we consider the impact of sin and the Fall on our ability to think and reason.

Two-year-olds push the limits against their parents. They rebel against authority.

Scripture tells us that this holds for every one of us: All humans have rebelled against God. This rebellion so permeates our being that we cannot think straight. Our reasoning is distorted. Our view of the world is twisted. Some theologians term this the noetic effects of sin.

Many passages bring out this truth. Perhaps the most in depth discussion is found in 1 Corinthians 1:18-2:16. I commend the entire passage to you; here are a few excerpts:

1: 18 For the word of the cross is folly to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God.  . . .  21 For since, in the wisdom of God, the world did not know God through wisdom, it pleased God through the folly of what we preach to save those who believe.  22 For Jews demand signs and Greeks seek wisdom,  23 but we preach Christ crucified, a stumbling block to Jews and folly to Gentiles,  24 but to those who are called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God and the wisdom of God.  . . .   27 But God chose what is foolish in the world to shame the wise; God chose what is weak in the world to shame the strong;  28 God chose what is low and despised in the world, even things that are not, to bring to nothing things that are,  29 so that no human being might boast in the presence of God.  30 And because of him you are in Christ Jesus, who became to us wisdom from God, righteousness and sanctification and redemption,  31 so that, as it is written, “Let the one who boasts, boast in the Lord.” . . . 2:14 The natural person does not accept the things of the Spirit of God, for they are folly to him, and he is not able to understand them because they are spiritually discerned.

Note three points from this text and related passages. These points then lead to a few corollaries:

First, Scripture says that the truths it presents will be rejected – indeed, that those whose minds have not been renewed by the Spirit are not able to understand these truths (see especially 2:14). Put that idea in the context of the overall storyline of the Bible: God created mankind in His image as the pinnacle of His work, to glorify Him by enjoying Him forever. Yet the first man and the first woman rejected God’s purposes for them, choosing to believe Satan’s lie that God was withholding good from them. They chose to disbelieve God, and to establish themselves as the arbiters of what was in their own interest. They then deserved to be wiped out. All of their descendants normally born display that same rebellion. Yet God in His mercy established a plan of redemption which He implemented over the centuries, eventually sending His Son to live the life all men should have lived, and to die to pay the penalty we deserve for our rejection of Him. God raised Him from the dead, and will send Him again to usher in a new heavens and new earth, in which redeemed and perfected humanity will indeed glorify Him by enjoying Him forever.

In this interim period between the first and second coming of the Son, all mankind is stained by the Fall. Should we hear this story, should we read Scripture, we naturally reject it; we belittle it; we mock it. Unless God intervenes, our very thought processes are infected with a disease we do not notice that keeps us from seeing Truth.

This leads to a corollary: When a skeptic launches a broadside assault on Scripture, he is fulfilling Scripture. Now, clearly this corollary does not in and of itself prove that Scripture is true. But we must realize that attacks on scriptural authority are perfectly consistent with Scripture being true.

One more corollary of this first point: If we are to understand Scripture, we will have to come to God as supplicants, asking for His Spirit to open our minds, to clarify our vision, so that we might understand His Word.

Second point to note from 1 Corinthians 1 and 2:

b) God predominantly does not choose to renew by His Spirit the minds of the most intelligent of men. (see especially 1:27). He does renew the minds of some of the most intelligent (including the Apostle Paul himself). But God’s redeemed people are not exclusively or even on average from among those who, based on their worldly accomplishments and education, would be considered the brightest men and women on the planet. Paul tells us here why God works this way: So that no human being will have any grounds for boasting before Him (1:29). That is, so that no one might think, “God picked me because I was so smart. God needed me on His team. I have so much to contribute to His cause that God had to draft me.” No. God works in such a way that all of our boasting can be only in Him. Otherwise, we would be glorifying ourselves, not Him.

This leads to another corollary, but some personal information first: My undergraduate degree in mathematics is from Davidson; my PhD is from Stanford. Here’s the corollary: God is not impressed by a Davidson bachelors or a Stanford PhD. He doesn’t need me. He doesn’t need my intellectual abilities or my credentials. Indeed, no intellectual accomplishment is impressive to God. No intellectual accomplishment earns merit with God. Should He open my mind to see Him, the only reason will be His grace and mercy.

Third point: The wisdom of God is not intellectual only or primarily. The wisdom of God is fundamentally relational. Through His plan of redemption, God is reconciling men and women to Himself. Through Jesus’ sacrifice on the cross, God restores men and women to an intimate relationship with Him. So Paul says that Christ becomes to us not only wisdom, but also righteousness (granting us what we lost in the fall), sanctification (setting us apart for God Himself as His precious possession), and redemption (covering the relational distance necessitated by our rebellion) (1:18-24, 30).

This point also flows from the summary of the overall storyline of the Bible: Since God created us to glorify Himself by enjoying Him forever, His plan of redemption must restore the relationship, and not only enable us to appraise truth intellectually.

One final corollary: God is not and cannot be solely the object of our study. If the Bible is true, God is not an impersonal unmoved mover; He is not some abstract force or principle. He is personal. To know Him truly is to love Him deeply.

Similarly, my wife Beth is not and cannot be solely the object of my study. In order to be a good husband, I should learn all I can about her. But if I treat her as an object, I will fail miserably as a husband. My knowledge of her must lead to greater love and more effective service for her.

Just so, our knowledge of God must be relational – for it originates with His reaching out to us. He is the offended party. We are under His judgment. We owe Him everything – for life, for breath, for food, for shelter, for intelligence. We are not blank slates rationally looking at the evidence and deciding if Scripture reflects truth. If Scripture is true, we are rebels against Him, grasping at any straw we can find that will indicate, “I am in control; I am wise; I can forge my own path.” He graciously offers us His love and mercy; indeed, He graciously offers us Himself, a relationship with Him, for all eternity.

So consider those points from 1 Corinthians. Next week we’ll ask: Why did a Davidson math major and Stanford PhD submit himself to the authority of Scripture?

(For printing, download this pdf file.)

You Are God’s Two-Year-Old: The Authority of Scripture, Part 1

Over three blog posts, we’ll consider our position before God’s revelation in Scripture. This post may not seem to have much to do with scriptural authority, but be patient; we’ll get there.

How do you picture your relationship to God? What images do you use?

  • Perhaps you use a business image: He’s the boss, you’re His right hand man.
  • Or a political image: He’s President, you’re His Secretary of State.
  • Or a sports image: He’s the head coach, you’re His quarterback.
  • Or a military image: He’s a general, you’re a colonel.
  • Or a family image: He’s a big older brother – stronger, wiser, more experienced than you, while you are His faithful and loyal younger brother.

Does something disturb you about all those images? I hope so.

Surely the difference between God and me is far greater than the difference between Barack Obama and John Kerry.

So to get this right, do we just need to diminish our role in these images?

  • Business: He’s the boss, you run a local branch.
  • Politics: He’s the President, you’re a congressman in His party.
  • Sports: He’s the coach, you’re the second string defensive tackle.
  • Military: He’s a general, you’re an inexperienced lieutenant.  
  • Family: He’s the father, you’re His teenage son.

Do those changes solve the problem?

Or do these images still make you too smart, too important, too able compared to God?

How should you picture your relationship to God?

How do you picture your relationship to God?

Consider Psalm 8:3-4:

When I look at your heavens, the work of your fingers, the moon and the stars, which you have set in place, what is man that you are mindful of him, and the son of man that you care for him?

As soon as we consider the heavens, the moon, the billions and trillions of stars, the extent of the galaxies, we have to conclude that if they have a Creator, we are indeed minuscule in comparison to Him. I can’t possibly be His advisor. I can’t possibly be his quarterback, or even His branch manager.

But if these images make us appear as too close to God, what image should we use?

Consider yourself God’s two-year-old.

This is one way to understand Psalm 131:

O LORD, my heart is not lifted up; my eyes are not raised too high; I do not occupy myself with things too great and too marvelous for me.  But I have calmed and quieted my soul, like a weaned child with its mother; like a weaned child is my soul within me.  O Israel, hope in the LORD from this time forth and forevermore.

The psalmist thinks of himself as a child – perhaps a two-year-old. Whether or not this child is still nursing, at the moment pictured he has finished eating. He is well satisfied. He is clean. He is secure. He is caressed. He is loved. Surrounded by all of Mommy’s welcome smells, embraced by her warmth, he is completely secure. Completely at rest. Completely content. All he wants is right there: He has his Mommy. He has his Daddy. They provide. He trusts them. He is confident in them.

That is how Scripture says we should be before God.

That’s the picture of Psalm 131. What else do we know about two-year-olds from our own experience?

I have six children. We thus spent six years with a two-year-old in the house (and more than thirteen years with at least one child two or under). Here are five characteristics of two-year-olds I have observed:

  • They are completely dependent; they will die apart from the attention of their parents or other adults.
  • They assert themselves, they test their limits, pushing those in authority over them to define what they really mean.
  • They are perfectly able to think, and make surprising connections and observations; nevertheless, they have many misunderstandings and misapprehensions.
  • They simply are not able to understand many things that their parents say; in order to communicate effectively, their parents have to talk in a way the two-year-old can derstand.
  • They also cannot understand many things about the world around them that their parents know; thus, they have to learn to listen to their parents, to trust them, to obey them.

With those characteristics in mind, let’s turn from two-year-olds to John Calvin. He writes:

The majesty of God is . . . far above the reach of mortals who are like worms crawling upon the earth (Institutes 2.6.4).

So how can a worm have any relationship to such a God? That doesn’t seem possible.

Calvin continues:

The Father, who is infinite in himself, becomes finite in the Son because he has accommodated himself to our capacity, that he may not overwhelm our minds with the infinity of his glory. (emphasis added)

We can have a relationship to God because God chooses to make that possible. We are nothing before Him. We are insignificant – unless He gives us significance. But He has chosen to reveal Himself through redemptive history; through His living Word, Jesus Christ; through His written Word, the Bible.

He  accommodates “Himself to our capacity.” He speaks to us in language we can understand. He uses images from everyday life so that we can know all we need to know of Him and His work.

Commenting on this passage of the Institutes, Derek Thomas links this idea with the image of us as toddlers:

What we know of God we know only in part, only to the extent to which he has revealed himself. And even that revelation is just so much “baby-talk” and we must always remember that it is so. (emphasis added)

“Just so much baby talk.”

When God speaks to us, He speaks like we speak to toddlers.

Consider: When you speak to a two-year-old, how do you talk?

From Beth’s first pregnancy, we decided we weren’t going to speak what’s often called baby talk – “wad dus da widdle bebee wunt do do?” We were going to enunciate clearly, just as when we would speak to each other. For we wanted to communicate clearly to our children, and to teach them how to speak clearly.

That’s what God does for us. “Baby talk” in this sense is not a distortion of speech. Rather, it is speaking in terms and in words that can be understood by the little one.

Now, in our home we explicitly pushed our children to grow in their understanding. One way we did this was by reading them books that challenged them. But at two-years-old, we didn’t read them War and Peace; rather, we read The Narnian Chronicles.

That’s how God speaks to us.

We are two-year-olds before Him. There are many things we cannot understand. If He explained to us the intricacies of His creation, of His thoughts, of His plans, it would be like our reading War and Peace to a two-year-old. Nothing would get through. We wouldn’t learn a thing. Instead, He accommodates Himself to our capacity. He speaks to us true words, in helpful images, in the Bible. He tells us of His workings throughout history. He shows us what He is like through God incarnate, Jesus Christ. And so we get an incomplete, but a true picture of who He is, and what our relationship to Him can be.

God is beyond us. We can never comprehend him on our own. If left to our own reason, we will never figure out who He is – just as a two-year-old who never grew up could never understand his parents. But God has chosen to reveal who He is to us – through His Word.

Next: The Noetic Effects of Sin

(Several years ago I preached two sermons on Psalm 131: first, second. Part of this post is based on the first of those sermons).

(For printing, download this pdf file.)