Here are some Q&A's based on
The Infallible Word
The Attestation of Scripture
How does the Scripture claim inerrancy for itself?
We should let the Scriptures speak for themselves and not presuppose at the outset that human agency necessitates errancy and fallibility.[1] If we state this then even those theories that state that spiritual truth exists inside the husks of myth and error have to abandon their theories for if human agency is incapable of transmitting truth inerrantly then it is no less true for the spiritual kernels than it is for the other truths in the Scriptures.
We must admit that the fact that the reader may be unable to resolve apparent discrepancies. To be inerrant or infallible does not imply that the Scriptures testify that everything within them is likewise plain to all. Faith is not inconsistent with unresolved questions.[2] In fact, Christ is pleased to heal the epileptic even after his father admits to a less than perfect understanding of who Christ is (Mark 9:24)
Thus, the question is whether the Scriptures claim inerrancy for themselves and, if so, we have no higher testimony to appeal to in order to contradict or affirm the truth of the very Word of God.
First, there is negative evidence. That is to say that the Scriptures are not seen to be casting doubt on themselves throughout. [3] There are no examples where a later prophet comes on the scene to state that previous portions of the Scripture are in error but the previous is received as authoritative. Even as the Scriptures expose the sinfulness of some of its historical characters (patriarchs, judges, kings, priests, and prophets) it is a testimony to its honesty and authenticity and not to its fallibility.
The Scriptures recognize that certain ceremonies and regulations had a temporary nature and their abrogation in the New Testament is part of the progressive intent and character of the Word of God and never represented as a correction to former misunderstandings. Paul, in Galatians 3, labors to demonstrate that the Judaizing heresy is as much a corruption of Moses and Abraham as it is a corruption of Christianity that represented the mature flower of the former.
Positively, the first evidence of inerrancy is the unequivocal expression throughout the Old Testament of divine origin. The expression “Thus saith the Lord” appears throughout. The Prophets of the Old Testament repeatedly look back at the Pentateuch and appeal to their divine origin as the basis of their authority as well as the divine origin of their own office as explanation to the authority of their own words.
Next, we have the testimony of the authors and speakers of the New Testament as to the authority and inerrancy of the Scriptures. First among these is Jesus himself. Christ, in Matthew 5:17, speaks of the “Law and the Prophets” as an authoritative and God-breathed unit that He (the Son of God) did not come to destroy but to fulfill. If Christ is the Son of God then He surely has knowledge of errors of the corpus of the Old Testament Scriptures and could have redacted the portions that He knew to be in error. As it is, He accepts the entire Canon and states that He comes to fulfill them. Christ even underlines the point by noting that not even a “jot” of Scripture will be overthrown by Him.[4]
Elsewhere, throughout the Gospels, we read of Christ appealing to the Scriptures in His disputations with the Scribes and Pharisees in contra-distinction to their appeal to human authorities. In fact, it is their appeal to other authorities over the Scriptures that He condemns most strongly. “It is written” pervades the speech of our Lord.
Throughout the New Testament, we find the same confidence in the Word of God to establish the truth of Christ’s ministry. It is what the apostle Peter appeals to when he announces Christ at Pentecost. It is what Stephen condemns the Sanhedrin with at his martyrdom, and throughout the Epistles we find Paul and the other Apostles appealing to the inerrant authoritative Word of God in all its parts culminating in the unequivocal statement of 2 Tim 3:16 that all scripture is breathed out by God.
2 Peter 1:20,21 deals decisively with the issue that human authorship would destroy the infallibility and inerrancy of the Scriptures due to the fallibility of the authors. Negatively, he denies that the Scriptures come about by human initiation, volition, or determination. Positively, he affirms human instrumentality (“Men spake from God”).[5] Both human and divine agency are seen to be complementary. The Spirit took up human agents in such a way that they spoke God’s words and not their own.[6]
Due to the fact that the New Testament testifies regularly of the authority and inspired character of the Old Testament Scriptures, it is natural that there would be much more data to corroborate the inerrancy of the Old Testament on the basis of the New Testament’s witness. There is obviously less direct evidence to corroborate the New Testament but the organic unity of the whole can be seen to be an evidence of the New Testament’s authority.[7] That is to say that the New Testament bears witness to itself that it is the fulfillment of the Old and fulfills perfectly the expectations and theology of the Old Testament as they foretold of Christ and the New Covenant.
We also see the express exercise of Apostolic authority throughout as the Apostles are given authoritative office by Christ Himself to speak for Him. Thus, we see Paul in Galatians 1 establishing His apostolic credentials as coming from Christ Himself and the Church being under obligation to heed His instruction as being a matter of eternal life or damnation if they do not heed His instruction (Gal 1:8,9). Paul, and the other Apostles, speak frequently of their Spirit-taught words as a plenary body that the disciples after them must keep fast and teach to others.[8]
How are the Scriptures self-authenticating?
This is in reference to the issue of authority. It is common for men to erroneously assume there is an “objective” standard that stands apart from men and God and can be used to arbitrate between the two. Thus, men arrogantly ascribe to themselves the ability to “scientifically” evaluate the authenticity of Scripture on the basis of any authority as long as it is not Scripture itself.
The Scriptures, however, contain God-breathed Words. Scripture is not judged by man but, rather, judges and exposes man in his innermost parts (Heb 4:12). There is, therefore, no outside standard, either in man or in nature apart from God, that can be brought forward as an authority that can stand above the Scriptures and authenticate the Scriptures for to admit such would be to admit that God is in need of His creatures and turns the universe on its head.
What is the internal testimony?
First, it must be understood that the Scriptures are of divine origin and authority as previously ascribed. The truth of that matter is established outside of us because God is and has acted in human history. The inspired and God-breathed nature of the Scriptures make them authoritative without our help.
The issue, however, is that the Scriptures have to be received by us if we are to believe that they are the Word of God. The Word provides many excellent testimonies of itself that can be measured historically and rationally as the Westminster Standards note: the majesty of the style, the consent of its parts, and the very statements within the Scriptures that God has breathed it out.
All of these external evidences notwithstanding, our reason cannot lift us up to the kind of faith that we need to receive and rest upon the Word of God – that kind of evidence upon which faith will rest must have a divine origin. Only evidence that has the quality of divinity is sufficient to ground faith in divinity.[9]
In spite of all the excellencies and divine evidences of Scripture, man’s fallen mind is unable to have fruition in these evidences. 1 Cor 2:14 testifies that natural man cannot receive spiritual things and, just as we need the regenerating power of the Holy Spirit, to see the Kingdom of God, we need the Spirit to testify to us of the Truth of the Scriptures.
In summary, the truth of the Scriptures is manifest from the evidence that abounds to us but, in our fallen state, we are blind and suppress this evidence. The Holy Spirit overcomes us and renews our minds and testifies to us that the Word is true and to be trusted in with an evangelical faith.
How is illumination different from inspiration?
Inspiration speaks to the God-breathed nature of the Scriptures as discussed above. The Spirit, working with human agency, directed the minds of the writers of Scripture so that they are infallible and inerrant and speak forth the very Word of God.
Illumination is the work of the Holy Spirit upon the minds of believers as they read and hear the Scriptures to give them spiritual understanding of them.
In the temptation of Christ, Satan could parrot the Word of God but could not understand them or give appropriate spiritual explanation to them. Heretics do the same.
We do not come to the Scriptures with unassisted reason, even as believers, but the Holy Spirit works with the Word to illumine our hearts and minds that we might be properly trained, reproved, disciplined, and taught by the Scriptures and built up to the perfect man in Christ Jesus.
The Authority of the Old Testament
What is meant by the term canonical?
Canonical refers to those Books which are inspired by God and together form the Holy Sciptures. They are those writings which constitute the inspired rule for faith and life to be distinguished simply from the writings of men. If a book has been inspired by God, it is canonical
in itself, and not because a Church court granted it canonical status.[10] The Church
receives the Canon but does not create it. God alone determines and identifies what it is that proceeds from His mouth.
Why did some scholars believe the books of Moses were canonized in the time of King Josiah?
The vain imaginations of unstable men have inferred from the loss of the Scriptures and the re-discovery of them during the reign of Josiah actually records a
new discovery of the Law, recognized it as the word of Jehovah and canonized it at that time. This book, as the theory goes, is Deuteronomy. [11]
How is this view in error?
First, Christ attested to Mosaic authorship of these books. Second, it appears from the account itself, that much more than merely the Book of Deuteronomy was found. Third, the theorist has a low view of Scripture assuming that previous accounts were merely accepted as human writings and then later adopted as canonical by the fiat of men. It assumes men would accept the insertion of non-Canonical legislation into a Book they considered canonical and presents a monstrous view of devout men. Finally, it would make the unknown authors of the work “discovered” a fraud passing itself off as an ancient work when, in fact, it was contemporary and manufactured to be “discovered” and received as a historical record of God’s inspiration.
The Authority of the New Testament
How did the New Testament recognize the authority of the Old Testament?
There is one authority that speaks forth form the New Testament and that is the Lord, Jesus Christ. [12] Our Lord spoke with authority, not as the Scribes and testified of His authority by the miracles He wrought – especially establishing His status by raising from the dead. He repeatedly testified to the Old Testament as the Word of God.
Very briefly, how did the church attest to the authority of the New Testament?
First, Christianity began and continued as a religion of a divine Book, as a religion of authority which definitely acknowledged the Bible as an objective expression of God Himself.
[4] Modern scholarship starts with the assumption that Christianity began as a religion and then collected writings to justify its religious experience but, from the beginning, the Church worshipped Divine Persons that it believed had inspired not only the Old Testament but the New Testament no less.
Next, the Church affirmed the Deity of Christ and, as such, His Words were “God breathed” and, by definition, Scripture. This authority extends no less to those that the Lord Himself endowed with authority to be His Apostles in the establishment of the Church of the New Covenant. An Apostle is one who spoke for Christ on the basis of His commission.
Undergirding this is the fact that Christ “fit” within redemptive history as the expected Messiah that the Old Testament Scriptures testify to. He was not a timeless principle or idea but the historical, long-awaited Messiah and His story and the Church He established find a place along the line of God’s revelation of the salvation of mankind.
Indeed, without the Lord and Messiah Jesus Christ coming into divine history, Revelation of God would remain obscured and hidden in shadows. It was necessary that Christ come in History to make known the Godhead and to provide for a means for our union with the Godhead in Jesus Christ.
Returning to apostleship, the early Church considered apostolic authority to be the very foundation of the Church as the Scriptures testify. The Church’s major creeds testify that the doctrine of the Church is either apostolic or it is not Christian. The Church recognized that, in Apostolic teaching was contained the authority to speak on behalf of Christ and that the Holy Spirit moved these men even as He had moved Prophets in the Old Testament to testify of Divine Truth. The Apostles, themselves, in the transmission of Divine Authority repeatedly appealed to their authority as coming from Christ Himself.
Within the early Church,
I Clement displays a reverence for the New Testament. There is recognition of the Lord’s authority and that it was mediated by the Apostles. The understanding of the authority of the Apostles was bound to make their explication of the Old Testament Scriptures themselves and inevitable part of Revelation. Later, Ignatius letters display a great reliance upon the New Testament in his letters. At one point, Ignatius refers to the Gospels as the “…perfection of incorruption (Philadephians 9:2), demonstrating their fulfillment of the Old Testament. He testifies that the New Testament can stand apart from the Old as inherently authoritative in themselves. Next, Papias Hierapolis called the New Testament the oracles of God in the early to mid second century. Next, Justin Martyr in the sixth decade of the second century recognized the new era of divine revelation. He notes that the memoirs of the apostles are read during Christian worship along with the Old Testament Scriptures. Later struggles against Gnosticism and heretical groups helped the Church more clearly recognizes the nature of the New Testament Scriptures by the end of the second century.
[1] Stonehouse and Woolley,
The Infallible Word, New Jersey: P&R Publishing, 1967, p. 3.
[2] Ibid, p. 8
[3] Ibid, p. 11
[4] Ibid, p.22
[5] Ibid, p. 32
[6] Ibid, p. 32
[7] Ibid, p. 34
[8] Ibid, p. 40.
[9] Ibid, p. 47
[10] Ibid, p. 62.
[11] Ibid, p. 78.
[12] Ibid, p 108.
[13] Ibid, p 107.
