On Authority

The bodies of my Christian grandparents are buried on the west side of a cemetery. On the east side of the same cemetery, dead bodies of Freemasons are buried beneath the shadow of a stone pedestal upon which is cast the form of an open book. There are no words inscribed in the grey pages of the book, just blank nothingness. There is nothing to read in the open book.

I grew up in the Christian church and listened to sermons in which the pastors, preachers, and evangelists would hold up their Bibles and declare, "This is the perfect, inspired word of God." They also claimed that, according to the book they were holding, Jesus Christ was the Word of God made flesh. It was a confusing idea. Was the book a man, or was the man a book? It was a difficult concept for an eight-year-old to digest, but I did my best to accept the truth of it. 

Growing older, I came to understand that there were various translations of the Bible. There were word-for-word translations, such as the King James and the New American Standard, and then there were thought-for-thought translations, such as the Living Bible and the New International Version. In my church, the preacher taught from the New King James Bible, which replaces words like thee and thine with updated, modern equivalents such as you and yours but otherwise attempts to preserve the word choice and syntax of the King James as much as possible Still, it didn't make much difference to the congregation's understanding of the teaching. Most of us followed along with our own Bibles in various translations, and the pastor made regular references to the original Greek, Hebrew, and Aramaic, so I was well acquainted with the idea that all translations were imperfect. As a church, we did our best to understand as well as we could what were the original intentions of the writers in the original texts. 

Of course, there are a plethora of other considerations that could sidetrack my objective in writing these words. Any serious student of Bible scholarship knows that there are many variables that must be considered when a translator attempts to produce a copy of "The Word of God" in a new language. All translation is interpretation. There is no such thing as a perfect translation.

Despite the fact that there are serious disagreements among scholars, theologians, and denominations concerning which particular translation of the Bible is the best, most accurate representation of the original language, I always felt--as a child at least--that the truthful message of the Bible was, on the whole, fairly accessible to me no matter which translation I used. After all, I began to notice that there were "Bibles" designed for children that didn't even attempt to relate the entire content of God's Word. Instead, they were composed of very brief summaries of entire books of the Bible, replete with verses like "God made the world in just seven days! When He was finished, God thought that he had done a very Good job! And then, he created Adam and Eve to take care of it. Until one day, the Devil tempted Eve to eat fruit that God told her NOT to eat!" Okay, well, that is just me doing my best to remember the gist of the various "Bibles" designed for children. People never seemed to complain about these simplified translations of the Bible that had been created for children, so I never understood why some people were upset by translations such as the Living Bible that did a much better job of paraphrasing the entire Bible to help readers understand its basic message. 

As I grew older, I began to learn more things about the Bible, theology, orthodoxy, church structure, and various disagreements that people held concerning the correct interpretation of scripture. Then, I learned about the Freemasons. I learned that they required members to build their lives upon the principles of a book of morality, and it didn't matter which book the person chose, as long as the initiate believed that the principles within the book were, in some way or another, transcendent. To this end, some Freemasons build their lives upon the Bible, while others build their lives upon the Quran.  I suppose some might even build their life upon The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy, as long as their reverence for the book were sincere. 

My grandparents were what people around these parts would call "Bible-believing" Christians, which is to say that they were the type of people who really did believe that the Bible is the infallible and inspired Word of God. But they grew up in a simpler time. When they were children, I doubt they had much access to many different translations of the Bible. Born in the 1910s, it's probable that, for the most part, they rarely came into physical contact with a translation of the Bible other than the King James or the American Standard Version for most of the first part of their lives. I was born in the 1970s, entering the world at approximately the same time as The Way and the NIV. My grandparents grew up being taught the principles of Christianity from books that attempted to present the message as closely as possible as direct, word-for-word translations into English from the original ancient texts. Their grandchildren, on the other hand, were trained by books that attempted to deliver the gist of the message as closely as possible, even if sentences were not translated as directly as possible. 

I suppose that the psychological effect of this difference in Christian pedagogy is that my grandparents never had to wrestle with the problem of translation as much as I have. When they opened their Bibles to Psalm 23, they simply read the words and believed that they were the inspired words of God. Their grandson, on the other hand, can never read any translation without reviewing the original Greek and reading various commentaries written by a few different scholars to better understand not only the historical context of the original writings but also the various historical contexts of the various orthodox interpretations of the text over the past two millennia. I can't help but think that life might have been a little easier for my grandparents. 

Of course, they had more requirements for how they had to spend their time each day than I do. Meat wasn't packaged in the refrigeration section of Wal-Mart, and microwaves hadn't been invented. There were actual things they had to do in order to feed themselves. I spend most of my time watching videos on YouTube and grazing on literally any food I can imagine. I know this is a bit of a sidetrack, but I hope there are some people out there reading this who remember that there used to be a time when you couldn't buy an orange in Illinois in January. True story. 

The point is this: I have come to disagree with the teaching of my childhood pastors: The Bible is not the inspired, inerrant Word of God. If I were to accept that supposition, then I would have to qualify it with the caveat that it is only inspired and inerrant in the original languages. I had never been able to reconcile in my mind how two Bible translations, the NIV and the KJV, could both assert themselves as being equivalent to the person of Jesus Christ, the man whom John calls in his gospel, the Logos sarx egeneto.  Okay, so how do we translate that? A common translation is "word made flesh," but if we have any understanding at all of language, we can see that this is not necessarily most useful. 

However, the claim that I make, that the Bible is not the inspired, inerrant Word of God does not mean that the Bible is not authoritative in some sense. My criticism is not necessarily of scripture, but rather, the authority of scripture in the hands of men. What do I mean by this? I understand that this may be a difficult train of thought to follow, so let's try to start at the beginning so that I can better explain what I mean. 

Suppose you buy one of those children's books that I mentioned earlier and read it to your child. You tell these stories to your child by reading the words that were written by some other person who took the gist of the information from the stories in the Bible and rewrote the words in a way that a four-year-old can understand. The child accepts the truth of what you have read, and the child believes in God. However, according to John MacArthur et al., the words read to the child are not "scripture." Still, the books that John MacArthur et al. regard as "scripture" tell us that "faith comes by hearing and hearing by the Word of God." So, let's set up the following syllogism:

1. Faith comes by hearing the Word of God.

2. Faith comes to a child who hears a parent read a children's version of the Bible.

Therefore, a children's Bible is the Word of God. 

I suppose the argument that John MacArthur et al. would make concerning this syllogism is that the faith that the child received is not true and lasting faith. Okay, maybe. So what is to be done about this?

Well, obviously, the child would have to mature in faith. The maturation process would ultimately lead the child through several developmental stages, perhaps beginning with a children's Bible, and then, perhaps at the age of 10 or 11, moving onto a translation such as The Living Bible or The Message. After that, the child may graduate to the New International Version, and then, perhaps, the English Standard Version, the Holman Christian Standard, New American Standard, New King James, and penultimately, the King James. 

But why penultimately? Why can't we stop there? Well, the answer to that is clear: Even those who belong to the King-James-only crowd admit that the reason the KJV is authoritative because it is based upon a more authoritative set of texts: the Textus Receptus. So, we find that the KJV is not, in fact, authoritative because we base the authority of the KJV upon the TR, which means that as our child continues to grow in greater maturity, the path he must walk requires the ability to learn and study in new languages, including Latin, Greek, Aramaic, and Hebrew. For logic requires us to consider that the purest version of the Word of God is necessarily that Word which flowed from the ink in Paul's pen (Galatians 6:11). Surely if we had access to the original document delivered from Paul to the churches scattered across modern-day Turkey, then we would have found the truest and most sure Word of God possible, right?

But what does Paul himself write in the scriptures? Let's take a look at I Corinthians 2:10-16 as presented in the KJV:

10But God hath revealed them unto us by his Spirit: for the Spirit searcheth all things, yea, the deep things of God. 11For what man knoweth the things of a man, save the spirit of man which is in him? even so the things of God knoweth no man, but the Spirit of God. 12Now we have received, not the spirit of the world, but the spirit which is of God; that we might know the things that are freely given to us of God. 13Which things also we speak, not in the words which man's wisdom teacheth, but which the Holy Ghost teacheth; comparing spiritual things with spiritual.

14But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned. 15But he that is spiritual judgeth all things, yet he himself is judged of no man. 16For who hath known the mind of the Lord, that he may instruct him? But we have the mind of Christ.

Okay, so let's set up another syllogism:

1. The letters of Paul as presented in the Bible are the Word of God.

2. The letters of Paul inform its readers that the knowledge of God is given freely to anyone who is spiritual in Christ.

Therefore, the knowledge of God is received by anyone who is in Christ. 

"But aha,"John MacArthur et al. will exclaim, "Knowledge of God is not the same thing as the Word of God." Then, they will no doubt point to what Paul writes elsewhere in the same letter (I Corinthians 13:9-12):

9For we know in part, and we prophesy in part. 10But when that which is perfect is come, then that which is in part shall be done away. 11When I was a child, I spake as a child, I understood as a child, I thought as a child: but when I became a man, I put away childish things. 12For now we see through a glass, darkly; but then face to face: now I know in part; but then shall I know even as also I am known.

Further, they will argue that perfection has already come. And what is perfection: the Holy Bible. How do we know this? When did all these men come to the agreement that the sixty-six (odd number, but the way) books of the Holy Bible are the beginning and end of the Word of God? I mean, this is not just a general idea that people have gradually come to accept, understand. On the contrary, there was a singular moment when this fact was declared, and that declaration was made in England in 1647 in The Westminster Confession of Faith:

Although the light of nature, and the works of creation and providence do so far manifest the goodness, wisdom, and power of God, as to leave men unexcusable; yet are they not sufficient to give that knowledge of God, and of His will, which is necessary unto salvation. Therefore it pleased the Lord, at sundry times, and in divers manners, to reveal Himself, and to declare that His will unto His Church; and afterwards for the better preserving and propagating of the truth, and for the more sure establishment and comfort of the Church against the corruption of the flesh, and the malice of Satan and of the world, to commit the same wholly unto writing; which makes the Holy Scripture to be most necessary; those former ways of God's revealing His will unto His people being now ceased.

So it is time for another syllogism. However, this time, let's set one up on behalf of John MacArthur et al.

1. The Westminster Confession of Faith declares that "former ways of God's revealing His will unto His people being now ceased," which makes the scriptures "most necessary."

2. The supreme judge by which all controversies of religion are to be determined, and all decrees of councils, opinions of ancient writers, doctrines of men, and private spirits, are to be examined, and in whose sentence we are to rest, can be no other but the Holy Spirit speaking in the Scripture. 

Therefore, the Holy Spirit speaking in Scripture reveals the will of God to mankind.

But what do the Scriptures reveal about the mind of God? Once again, read what Paul wrote to the Corinthian church:

Now we have received, not the spirit of the world, but the spirit which is of God; that we might know the things that are freely given to us of God.

It must be asked, then, who is the "we" who have received the spirit given by God? Is it only Paul who has received this spirit, or is the same spirit available to others? Well, what does Scripture say about this (Acts 2:38):

Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost. 

If the people to whom Peter preached received the gift of the Holy Ghost, then can we, too, receive it? And if we, too, can receive this gift, then we, like Paul, may know the mind of God. For Paul writes that anyone who receives the Spirit of God also knows the mind of God, for the Spirit that searches the mind of God reveals the hidden things of God to those who have received the gift of His Spirit. 

In summary, this is the Truth:

Anyone who has believed in Jesus Christ, who has repented of sin and has been baptized in His name will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit, who reveals the mind of God to all who have believed in the testimony of His Son, Jesus Christ. Men, such as Paul, who believed the testimony of God, were moved by the Spirit of God to write things revealed to them by the Spirit of God, and these things are a sure testimony to the Truth, having been revealed to them by the Holy Spirit. Likewise, any man or woman who has received the Spirit of God may receive the revelation of God's will without the intermediary of Scripture, because the Spirit of God reveals the will of God directly from the mind of God to the mind of man through the intermediary of the Spirit. 

This is not to say, though, that Scripture is not revealed truth. On the contrary, it is a sure revelation of the Truth. However, Jesus (in the Scripture of John, the Apostle) tells us that Scripture is only one of five different testifiers to the Truth, including (John 5):

1. Jesus himself

2. John the Baptist

3. The works that Jesus does

4. God the Father himself

5. The Scriptures

Jesus says of himself (John 5:31:

31If I bear witness of myself, my witness is not true.

Jesus says this because the Old Testament scriptures require that the truth be established on the evidence of two or three witnesses. Jesus says of himself that even if what he says is true, it cannot be accepted as truth if there is no other witness to confirm it. Then, Jesus lists four testifiers in addition to himself to confirm the truth of what he reveals about himself.  For this reason, the Westminster Confession of Faith is in error when it declares:

The authority of the Holy Scripture, for which it ought to be believed, and obeyed, depends not upon the testimony of any man, or Church; but wholly upon God (who is truth itself) the author thereof: and therefore it is to be received, because it is the Word of God

and

The infallible rule of interpretation of Scripture is the Scripture itself.

Because we know that a thing must be established on the testimony of two or three witnesses, and because we know that Jesus himself regards John the Baptist, a man, to be a true witness to the Truth, we must accept that a man in whom abides the Spirit of Truth may speak with authority equal to the Scriptures. 

Not greater than the Scriptures, but equal to. 

Thus, according to the Scriptures, and according to the Mind of God revealed to me by the Holy Spirit of God, what do I say about the authority of the Holy Bible. 

1. The words of the apostles, moved by the Holy Spirit, testified truthfully to the Truth about God as revealed by His only begotten Son, Jesus Christ, our Lord. 

2. We, having believed their testimony, have received the Holy Spirit, which testifies to us the Truth concerning the Mind of God, which may at all times and in all places be made known to us with the assistance of no other intermediary. For if any man agrees with God concerning the Truth revealed to him by God, then there are three who agree: Father, Spirit, and Man, which fulfills the legal proof required by Scripture. 

3. Having agreed with God, Man is more blessed to understand the Truth about God that God has revealed to other men, such as the Apostles, as recorded in the Holy Scriptures, but by the exact same mechanism, viz., the Holy Spirit, Man may testify to the Truth as it is revealed in the writings of men who abide bodily upon the Earth as they have access to the Spirit of God, delivered to Jesus by the Father and delivered to Man by the Son.