Arguments for the Authority of Scripture
Arguments for the Authority of Scripture
The first point to make is that the historic Christian churches have consistently maintained and defended the divine origin of Scripture. Only in comparatively recent times have some churches changed their official doctrine on this matter. Whether we consult the formularies of Protestant churches (for example, Anglican, Presbyterian and Lutheran) or of the Roman Catholic and Orthodox Churches, the witness is virtually unanimous. Now this is not a conclusive argument and may not appeal at all to some. Nevertheless, the consensus of the centuries is very impressive and is not to be lightly set aside or despised.
Secondly, we turn from what the historic churches have consistently taught to what the biblical writers themselves claimed. This is even more impressive. For example, Moses said he had received the law from God. The prophets introduced their oracles with formulae like “Thus says the LORD” or “The word of the LORD came to me, saying.” And the apostles could write such statements as this one from Paul:
When you received the word of God, which you heard from us, you accepted it not as the word of men, but as it actually is, the word of God, which is at work in you who believe. (1 Thess. 2:13)
The biblical authors also make similar claims for each other. We find in Scripture an elaborate pattern of cross-authorization. For example, the prophets endorsed the law, and the psalmists extolled its truth, beauty and sweetness (for example, Pss. 19; 119). Above all, the New Testament confirms the Old, the apostolic authors drawing from it a rich variety of quotations as divine warrant for what they were writing. There is even the famous passage in which the apostle Peter refers to the letters of “our dear brother Paul,” comments on the “wisdom” given to him, and equates his epistles with Scripture (2 Pet. 3:15–16).
The third line of evidence for the inspiration and authority of Scripture is supplied not by the writers but by the readers of Scripture. For there are certain characteristics of the Bible which cannot fail to strike the observant reader. There is, for instance, the books’ remarkable unity and coherence, on which I have tried to enlarge in earlier chapters. In view of the diversity of human authorship, the best explanation of this unity seems to be the overshadowing activity of a single divine author behind the human authors. There is also, as one aspect of this overall unity, the striking phenomenon of fulfilled prophecy. Then there are the nobility and dignity of the great themes of Scripture and the extraordinary relevance of its message thousands of years later, to which its continuing popularity bears witness.
Further, there is the power which the Bible has had (God’s power through it, we believe) in human lives, disturbing the complacent and comforting the sorrowful, humbling the proud, reforming the sinful, encouraging the fainthearted, bringing hope to the bereaved and giving direction to those who have lost their way. Added to all this is what the Reformers called “the inward witness of the Holy Spirit.” It is the deep assurance that Scripture is truth from God, an assurance arising not from external confirmation such as archaeological discoveries (helpful as these are), but internally from the Holy Spirit himself. It is the experience of the “burning heart,” given first to the disciples on the Emmaus Road, but still granted to Christian disciples of the modern world:
Were not our hearts burning within us while he talked with us on the road and opened the Scriptures to us? (Luke 24:32)
However, the first and foremost reason why Christians believe in the divine inspiration and authority of Scripture is not because of what the churches teach, the writers claimed or the readers sense, but because of what Jesus Christ himself said. Since he endorsed the authority of Scripture, we are bound to conclude that his authority and Scripture’s authority either stand or fall together.
Some may at once retort that to rely on Christ’s witness to Scripture is to employ a circular argument, which might be expressed like this: “How do I know that Scripture is inspired? Because of Christ, who says so. How do I know that Christ says so? Because of Scripture, which is inspired.” This, our critics point out, is to beg the question, for it is to assume the very truth we are wanting to prove. But they have misstated our argument. When we make our first approach to the Bible, we bring with us no assumptions about its divine inspiration. We accept it merely as a collection of historical documents, containing in particular the witness of first-century Christians to Christ. As we read their testimony, we come to believe in Christ, still without formulating any particular doctrine of Scripture. But then the Christ we have come to believe in sends us back to Scripture. He gives us a new understanding of it because he endorses its authority for us.
But how did Christ endorse Scripture? Scripture consists, of course, of two separate sections, the Old and the New Testaments. And the way in which Jesus Christ set his seal on each is different.