 |
|
| Volume 25 Number 2 February 2023 |
Page 9 |
|
|
| Volume 25 Number 2 February 2023 |
Page 9 |
The All-Sufficiency of the Scriptures
Ernest S. Underwood
Few people who profess Christianity totally reject the Bible. They believe that it is in some way useful in forming their religious beliefs. However, they also claim that one needs more than the Bible in their quest for rules of faith and practice. As one makes a study of the many denominational churches today, he comes to realize that they all subscribe to the latter of the two positions stated above in beliefs and actions. In this article we will notice some examples of those who do not believe in the sole authority and sufficiency of the Holy Scriptures of God. Let’s look at some of them.
There are those who accept the traditions of men as having equal authority with the Holy Scriptures. In a book, A Catholic Dictionary, it is stated concerning Scripture: “It’s authority is equal to that of sacred tradition.” Then, when it speaks of Catholic tradition, it states, “It is, therefore, to be received with the same internal assent as Scripture, for it is the word of God… Tradition would suffice without Scripture; it is the safeguard of Scripture” (41-42). Man, in his arrogant, contemptible and blasphemous attitude has dared to place his puny and sometimes ridiculous opinions on par with God’s Word. The apostle Paul correctly described the whole system of Roman Catholicism with his statement in Galatians 1:8-9. It reads, “But even if we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel to you than what we have preached to you, let him be accursed. As we have said before, so now I say again, if anyone preaches any other gospel to you than what you have received, let him be accursed” (NKJV). Surely, when one compares Catholic doctrine with what Paul or any other inspired writer wrote, he comes to realize that there is hardly anything that they wrote to be found in the teachings of Catholicism.
Many denominational churches claim that their manmade and devised creeds are necessary for man today. In the preface of a Baptist manual are found these words, “This manual is offered to Baptist churches because it is believed that such a book suited to modern church life is needed.” Perhaps a question or two is in order at this point. Is the modern church different from the church of the first century? If the Scriptures were sufficient for the first century church, and they were (2 Timothy 3:16-17), then why are they not also sufficient for the twenty-first century church? Since sin is still man’s spiritual problem, and since obedience to the Gospel cleansed those of the first century, who would dare to think that a Baptist manual is needed by modern man? Modern man would only need a Baptist manual if he wanted to be a Baptist rather than to be a New Testament Christian. The two are definitely not the same!
The Methodist Church has its “Discipline.” In this document it is written, “Far from wishing you to be ignorant of any of our doctrine, or any part of our discipline, we desire you to read, mark, learn, and inwardly digest the whole. You ought to, next to the word of God, to procure the articles and canons of the church to which you belong.” Again, a question or two. What is the difference in our doctrine and the doctrine of the Scriptures? One of the articles which a member of that church is admonished to “read, mark, learn, and inwardly digest” states, “Wherefore, that we are justified by faith only is a most wholesome doctrine, and very full of comfort” (Doctrines and Discipline 20). How can one claim to have any knowledge of the Scriptures and still believe such a false and foolish doctrine? When one upholds a creed book or a religion which has a manmade creed, he upholds the proposition that the Scriptures are not sufficient for man today.
Such is also the doctrine of Mormonism. Joseph Smith, founder of Mormonism, denied the all-sufficiency of the Bible. He wrote about God’s divine word, “And because my words hiss forth – many of the Gentiles shall say: A Bible! A Bible! We have got a Bible, and there cannot be any more Bible… Thou fool, that shall say: A Bible, we have got a Bible, and we need no more Bible. Have ye obtained a Bible save it were by the Jews?... Wherefore, because that ye have a Bible ye need not suppose that it contains all my words; neither need ye suppose that I have not cause more to be written” (2 Nephi 29:3, 6, 10). A simple and casual reading of Galatians 1:8-9, 2 Peter 1:3 and Revelation 22:18-19 will convince an honest student that Joseph Smith was nothing more than an ignorant man and a false prophet. Furthermore, the religion he established – Mormonism – is just one of many other false denominations that exists today.
Mary Baker Eddy, founder of the Christian Scientist movement, also claimed latter revelation from God. In her book, Science and Health with Key to the Scriptures, she claimed the Bible is impure (139:20-22), parts of the Bible are lies (524:20-27) and the Bible does not contain the final revelation of God. According to Eddy, God reserved that honor for her (107:46). However, isn’t this also the presumptuous and ungodly claim of just about every Pentecostal preacher who promotes their lies and false claims of having miraculous leading of the Holy Spirit as they appear on different radio and televisions programs?
The modernist is adamant in his denial of the truth and all-sufficiency of the Holy Scriptures. In a rather lengthy article in the May 1968 issue of the Reader’s Digest, Dr. Warren Weaver made some ignorant and bizarre statements. He claimed that he could not believe the Bible if it was necessary to believe it to be completely true. He wrote, “But don’t the facts of science that are taught in school contradict what is taught in Sunday School? Doesn’t science destroy religious faith.” Then, he answered his own question.
Yes, if you insist on an older, inflexible, fundamentalist type of religion, holding to the ultimate accuracy and truth of every sentence in the Bible, and – most important – if you think that religion is a static and closed affair, incapable of growing and changing its ideas in the light of modern knowledge. If such is your belief, then, I see no way in which you can live rationally in a modern, scientific world. I believe that the Bible is the purest revelation we have of the nature and goodness of God. But it seems to me natural –indeed, inevitable – that records this human record should exhibit a little human frailty along with much divine truth; and it seems to me quite unnecessary to be disturbed over minor eccentricities in the record. The reports of miraculous happenings in the Biblical times are more reasonably understandable as poetic exaggeration, as ancient interpretations of events that we would not consider miraculous today, or as concession to the problem of competing with the magical claims of other religions.
When I wrote to the Reader’s Digest to point out the errors of Dr. Weaver, I was told in answer to my inquiry, that surely, with his advanced learning, Dr. Weaver just couldn’t be wrong. So much for giving evidence! Dr. Weaver’s god is not only a liar, but he is also incapable of doing anything more than mere mortal man. Those who advocate that the Bible is a dead letter, and those who claim that something they call the “new hermeneutic” is how one must view the Scriptures, are people who do not believe the Bible to be all-sufficient for man. All such are, according to the Scriptures – foolish (1 Corinthians 1:20)!
How Sufficient Are the Scriptures?
In conclusion, the Bible claims for itself divine, plenary inspiration. This being true, man must accept it and abide by its commands and principles if he is to be forgiven of his sins and have the eternal salvation it offers.
Works Cited
Attwater, Donald. A Catholic Dictionary. New York: MacMillan, 1952.
Doctrines and Discipline of the Methodist Episcopal Church, The. New York: Nelson and Phillips, 1876.
Eddy, Mary Baker. Science and Health with Key to the Scriptures. Boston: The Christian Science Board of Directors, 1994.
