All right, well, welcome, friends. It's good to see you.
Last week, we considered the context for any affirmation of the authority of Scripture.
How our cultural context is one deeply suspicious of any claims to authority.
Come on in, friends. Just in time.
Our cultural context is one deeply suspicious of any claims to authority.
But we also considered how the biblical context answers this cultural concern
by revealing how God exercises his authority as an instrument of holy good.
We explored how worthy Jesus is of our trust.
As one who has authority, one meek and lowly of heart.
One who came not to be served, but to serve and to give his life as a ransom.
Now, this morning, we want to consider more specifically God's authority as it is invested and involved in the Scriptures, the Christian Scriptures.
Now, the authority of Scripture, the Christian Scriptures, at least in the West, since the Enlightenment,
has come under unprecedented and sustained attack.
And indeed, for many traditional believers, this stress of this onslaught has proved absolutely overwhelming.
And they found themselves, often to their great sorrow and confusion,
bereaved of their once firm and fundamental conviction as to the trustworthiness and authority of the Bible.
John Ruskin, the greatest theet, confided to a friend that he broke out into cold sweat
at the sound of every strike of the geologist's hammer.
For fear that it would uncover something that would rob him of some precious Bible truth.
A loss that Matthew Arnold's poem, Dover Beach, likens to a receding tide.
The sea of faith was once too at the full and round earth shore lay like the fold of a bright girdled furled.
But now I only hear its melancholy, long withdrawing roar,
retreating to the breath of the night wing down the vast edges drear and naked shingles of the world.
Now, for some of you here, the notion of doubt dealing difficulties with the Bible is completely alien.
Whatever could they mean, problems with the Bible?
God said it, I believe it, and that settles it.
If history or science or moral intuition seems to disagree with the scriptures,
so much the worse for history or science or moral intuition.
And indeed, perhaps, for some of you, the divine God-breathed character of the Bible
is reinforced every time you open its precious pages
and find in them the Savior you have come to love.
Its spiritual work of comfort and guidance and healing and succor is so deep and wonderful.
You could never doubt that the words of scripture are the very words of God.
But there are others in the Christian fold for whom their experience of the Bible
has raised many a question, some pressing.
Some pages of scripture are, for them, not obvious candidates for God's words.
These doubts, often agonizing, need not reflect infidelity.
They may come out of a context of faith and reflect something of Mary's query.
How can these things be?
And I want to direct my comments this morning chiefly to those among us
for whom these gnawing questions are a reality.
Who feel some difficulty in affirming the Bible in all of its parts as God's word
and as such divinely authoritative in all that it affirms.
And indeed, in all likelihood, largely inhabit a world in which such a conviction
is thought utterly implausible, ludicrous, even maybe morally reprehensible.
So I want to first suggest some lines of reflection,
which to my mind at least constitute strong grounds for maintaining the authority of the Bible,
even in the midst of persisting difficulties.
And our time will only allow me to be suggestive here, not exhaustive.
But I hope fruitfully to seed your own further reflections that they might have in them seminally
all that is needed for a harvest of strong conviction on this vital point.
So hopefully, then today, laying this foundation,
next week we'll take up the remaining sheer and stress on the structure,
the foundation that we've laid.
I will next week offer then some considerations,
which I hope will render any persistent problems a little bit less problematic.
How do we deal with the remaining doubt?
So that'll be next week, Lord willing, if we're there.
So let's begin with a word of prayer.
Father, as we take up this topic,
we especially crave the presence of your Holy Spirit,
both in your Spirit's clarifying work,
forming in us convictions,
and in his comforting work,
addressing our doubts and anxieties,
which can easily gnaw on our souls
and rob us of our joy.
So we ask for his presence,
confidently remembering your assurance
that it would indeed be so.
We commit our time to you.
In Jesus' name.
Amen.
Okay, here we go, team.
So let's consider some grounds
for maintaining the authority of Scripture.
And we're dealing with
a wonderfully rich tapestry of warrant here.
And any number of strands could be explored.
We might take up the claims
that Scripture makes for itself
in reference to its truthfulness.
So for instance,
Psalm 119, verse 60 says,
the sum of your word is truth.
Notice, considering the whole collectively.
But then,
but then,
David goes on and states,
concerning its individual parts,
and every one of your righteous rules
endures forever.
Or Psalm 12, verse 6,
the words of the Lord are pure words,
like silver refined in a furnace,
purified seven times.
clearly,
no dross or ore,
mingled,
making it unreliable.
It's a real potent image, isn't it?
Refined seven times over.
And in fact,
the Hebrew word translated here as pure
gives us another image.
For it was that Hebrew word,
tahor,
I'm not good at Hebrew pronunciation.
It was used,
that was the word that was used
to communicate ritual purity,
as was required for the sacrificial lamb,
without spot or blemish.
That's what God's word is like.
Utterly free from any defect,
like that sacrificial spotless lamb.
And any attentive reader of the scriptures
will know that such claims
are just studded throughout the Bible
and could be multiplied effortlessly.
These are just two.
They're so commonplace.
So that would be one strand of argument,
just going through and looking at
what sort of claims the Bible makes for itself.
Some might plausibly object,
well, wait a minute,
isn't that circular?
Yeah, I mean,
we want to know if we can trust the Bible.
So we look at the Bible
and the Bible says,
yes, it's trustworthy.
You know, it's circular.
Well, yes, it is.
But anytime you're arguing
for your final authority,
you will either be circular
or you will be inconsistent.
Because if I'm arguing for my final authority
and say, well, the Bible's authoritative
and I'm,
well, why do you believe that?
If I say, well,
it seems to make sense,
it pragmatically works out,
well, then my ultimate authority
is pragmatism,
not the word.
So you're either going to be circular
when you're arguing
for your final authority
or you're going to be inconsistent.
Makes sense to me.
Well, then reason is your final authority.
So you got to do that.
So there's one line.
What does the Bible say about itself?
But another particularly compelling line of thought
explores the attitude of Jesus himself
toward the scriptures.
And this would make sense
that we would consider that
because as disciples of Jesus,
what it means to be a disciple
is to conform our views
to the ones that Jesus had.
our thoughts,
we want to conform to his mind
in all matters
so we would naturally act.
Well, what was his view
of scripture's authority?
Seeking to adopt that very view
as our own
if we're his disciples.
And we can get at that,
his view,
straightforwardly revealed
in his direct statements.
And there are plenty of them.
So, for example,
on the Sermon on the Mount,
Matthew 5.18,
he says,
truly I say to you,
truly,
again,
a solemn asserberation.
I'm really confident about this.
Truly I say to you,
until heaven and earth
pass away,
not the smallest
letter or stroke
shall pass away
from the law.
And by law,
Jesus is just using
common parlance
of the Hebrew culture
in his day.
Not pointing to just
one single little bit
of scripture,
the law of Moses,
but speaking of the whole thing
as they commonly did,
considering it
in its commanding form.
Indeed,
taking up this very topic
that we are taking up
in its authoritative
commanding form.
All of scripture
commands us
because it comes
with God's authority.
So not a jot
or a tittle.
That is,
not the least part
shall prove to be
less than of
abiding authority.
Or,
as he tersely states,
recorded in John 10.35,
scripture cannot
be broken.
That is,
it can never fail
in its judgments
and statements
and is incapable
of proving false.
Or again,
Matthew 22.29,
is telling.
Regarding the
much married wife
conundrum
expounded by the Sadducees.
Remember that?
Jesus simply says,
oh,
you err,
not knowing
the scriptures.
Remember that?
That is,
had you known
the scriptures,
you wouldn't have
made this mistake.
The assumption
is clear.
Scripture is
an infallible guide
to truth
in these matters.
And had you clung
to it,
well,
you would have
been right.
Satan in the,
Jesus in the wilderness.
Oh,
that's a good one.
Yeah,
yeah.
That's,
yeah,
I'll get to that
in just a moment.
That's,
I will remember
that one.
So,
summing up
his conviction,
Jesus states
in the course
of his high priestly
prayer,
addressing the Father,
your word
is truth.
John 17,
17.
So these,
some of his
direct statements,
but even if we did
not have these
explicit statements
of Jesus
on the scriptures
authority,
just his whole
manner
is decisively
telling
in its
implicit
presupposition.
Again,
if you're familiar
with the gospels,
you're aware
of this reality.
To settle
any controversy,
Jesus simply
quotes scripture
as decisively
authoritative
to settle the matter
as he does
in Matthew 19,
verse 4,
concerning divorce.
Oh,
here's a question
for you,
Jesus.
Oh,
have you not read?
This is what
the scripture says.
Boom.
End of issue.
As Jesus asserted,
and this is what
Raul just brought up,
Jesus asserted
against Satan
in the temptation,
Matthew 4,
4.
Man shall live
by every word
that proceeds
out of the mouth
of God.
And his practice
testifies
to his confidence
as to every word.
For Jesus
is quite comfortable
hanging his arguments,
letting them
turn entirely
on a single word
of scripture.
Even a single
tense
of a single
word
of scripture.
So,
for example,
we see this
in Matthew 22,
32.
Again,
taking up
with the Sadducees
on the matter
of the resurrection.
Remember that
where he says,
oh,
no,
what do the scriptures
say?
I am
the God
of Abraham,
Isaac,
and Jacob.
In other words,
not I was their God
when they were alive.
I am
currently
their God.
In other words,
they are still
arrived.
God is still
their God
because they
are still alive.
Notice the whole
argument is just
on the tense
of that.
There's more
to the argument
to that,
but that's
a lot of it.
Not only
God is still
their God
because they
are still alive,
but they are
still alive
because God
is their God,
their personal God.
God is so
involved with them
intimately,
he can call them,
I am the God
of Abraham,
Isaac,
and Jacob.
I have a special
relationship,
an intimate
relationship with
them.
Therefore,
because that's
so,
it's impossible
to think that
they could just
die and go.
So that's part
of his argument,
but part of it
is just based
on the tense,
just the tense.
Recall his
remark in the
Sermon on the
Mount,
remember Matthew
5,
18,
authoritative
down to the
last stroke,
or in Hebrew
just jot or a
tittle,
the smallest
little,
he illustrates
his conviction
in reference
to Psalm 110
verse 1
where he
points out,
do you remember
that passage
when he's
dealing with
the Pharisees
and asking,
hey,
think about
who the
Messiah is.
And he
points out
that David
calls the
Messiah
Lord.
The Lord,
God the
Father,
said to
my Lord,
the Messiah,
sit at thy
right hand,
and so forth.
But it all
pivots on
just one
stroke that
makes it a
reference,
David's reference
to my
Lord in
that.
one stroke
would have
been a
little bit
longer,
would have
changed the
reference on
that.
So the
argument depends
on just
slightly
lengthening the
tiniest little
jot.
The argument
depends on a
single stroke of
scripture,
and Jesus
doesn't hesitate
to confidently
assert it.
So this is his
practice.
I'm supposed to be
talking about good
books on these
as I go along.
So one of
these is John
Wenham,
an English
scholar,
and the book
is called
Christ and the
Bible.
It's an old
book,
but I don't
think it's
been improved
upon.
It's fantastic.
I think it was
out in 72,
University Press,
John Wenham's
Christ and the
Bible.
So I think
these in
themselves,
one,
we've looked
at the claims
of scripture
that it makes
for itself,
and the
attitude of
Jesus himself
concerning
scripture,
I think those
constitute good
grounds for
affirming
scripture's
authority.
And these
lines of
argument are
commonly and
justly invoked
and rightly
part of an
argument's
stout weave,
stout weave.
But the
strand that I
want particularly
to take up
and reflect
upon with you,
we might call,
or I'm going
to call it
this,
the Trinitarian
ontology of
scripture.
The Trinitarian
ontology of
scripture.
That is,
I want to
explore the
question,
what are the
implications
for the
character of
scripture,
of the
involvement in
them of the
trinity,
Father,
Son,
and Spirit?
What are the
implications for
the characters
of scripture,
of the
involvement in
them of the
trinity,
Father,
Son,
and Spirit?
And while we
will consider all
three persons of
the trinity,
and we'll kind of
go through them
one at a time,
given, as we
know, the
intimate relations
within the
trinity, a
crisp parsing
out of their
various involvements
is a little
artificial,
because you
say, wow,
is that really
the father?
Is that really
the son?
After all,
any action of
one person of
the trinity
entails the
involvement of
all, what
theologians call
the perichoresis,
or it's a
Greek word kind
of for an
interwoven or
interlocking
dance of
the persons
of the
trinity,
peri,
around,
choresis,
a choreography,
kind of an
interwoven dance
of all the
persons of the
trinity together
in all of
their activities.
So a little
bit of
artificial to
separate them
out.
But anyway,
even if we
can't separate
them out for
our purpose as
to the
involvements in
scripture of
the persons of
the trinity,
what counts is
not the
distinctiveness of
their involvement,
but it's
decisiveness.
That's really
what the
argument is
going to be
based upon.
So let's
go into
that.
What about
the involvement
of the
father?
Let's go
back to the
beginning and
reflect upon
the relationship
between God's
person and
the words that
he speaks.
And scripture
indicates a
very close
relationship
between them.
Think back
of Eden
where God
establishes a
relationship
between himself
and Adam
and Eve
in part
by means
of a
command.
Remember?
Do not
eat from
the tree of
the knowledge
of good and
evil.
And when
they disobeyed
this verbal,
this spoken
command,
they fractured
their relationship
with God
himself.
When his
words are
set aside,
he himself
is set
aside.
This helps
us to see
how God
has invested
himself in
his words.
Indeed, in a
sense, he has
identified himself
with his
words.
whatever
somebody does
with God's
words, they
do to
God
himself.
And this
covenantal, I
think we could
call it a
covenantal pattern,
runs throughout
scripture.
And it is the
fundamental way
his redemptive
relationship with
his people
unfolds and
is expressed.
The reality
and nature
of our
relationship
with God
is determined
by the
reality and
nature of
our relationship
to the
words God
speaks.
Think of
the Ark of
Covenant
containing the
tablets of
his words
to us.
His words
were the
mode by
which he
chose to be
present among
his people.
So God's
actions,
including verbal
actions, are
a kind of
extension of
himself.
To put
trust in
the covenant
words God
spoke to his
people was
to put trust
in God
himself.
So, and
think about
this,
communication
from God
is communion
with God
when met
with a
response of
trust.
Communication
from God
is communion
with God
when met
with a
response of
trust.
How we
might wonder,
did God
speak to
Adam and
Eve in the
garden or
to his
people,
Abraham,
Isaac,
Jacob,
Moses?
Well, we're
not told
how, but
as the
Old Testament
unfolds, one
form of
divine speaking
does emerge
as prominent.
God's speech
through his
appointed
prophets in
words that
they utter in
ordinary human
language.
And the
Bible gives
no worked
out theology
or philosophical
account.
we could
put some
together,
and some
have done
so,
of how
human words
can be
said to
be God's
words.
There's no
clear
philosophical
account for
that in
Scripture.
But it
does hint
as to how
it might
be.
It is
interesting,
and I
think significant,
that when
the Bible
speaks of
God creating
mankind in
his image
and likeness.
Though we're
not told
exactly what
this means
by being
created in
his image
and likeness.
We have,
remember,
we have
God speaking,
let us
make mankind
in our own
image.
Then,
he fashions
mankind
in his
likeness,
and then
immediately
addresses
them in
speech.
Could not
God's image
and likeness
then include
a capacity
for complex
language
reflecting
God's own
character?
Though I
don't think
that the
image of
God is
exhaustively
this,
it's more
than just
that,
it,
I think,
includes
this.
It is
this capacity
for complex
language.
That's part
of God's
image in
us.
And if
so,
that language
is a
divine gift
from God,
then it
is a
point of
contact,
not a
chasm
between
the human
and the
divine.
God's
mind.
And this
is where I
think a
lot of
people get
this wrong.
Well,
our language
is human
and how
could human
language actually
ever be a
point of
contact with
the divine,
the transcendent?
How could it
be?
Well,
what if
actually our
language capacity
is a gift
of God,
an endowment?
And that's
what it
seems to
be.
Then it
would be a
point of
contact,
not a
chasm
between us.
Our
language can
be made
by God
to speak
truthfully
of Him
because
our
language
has its
origin
in Him
and
in ways
requisite
for
communication
is like
His own.
So,
throughout
Scripture,
we see
Scripture
presented as
God's
Word.
It is
divine
rhetoric.
And not
only that
portion in
which His
very finger,
we are told,
inscribed the
words upon
stone tablets,
but also,
as mentioned,
the prophetic
word, the
words that the
prophets speak
are divine
rhetoric.
As a
test by
the
repeated
refrain
that we
see again
and again,
and the
word of
the Lord
came to
Amos,
and the
word of
the Lord
came to
Jeremiah,
and the
word of
the Lord
came to
again and
again.
And this
is true
whatever
genre
happened to
be the
prophet's
medium.
Sometimes
poetry,
sometimes
song,
narrative,
apocalyptic.
It's all
the word of
the Lord
coming to
the prophet.
prophet.
As
Hebrews 1.1
tells us,
God spoke
in the
prophets
in many
portions
and in
many ways,
but it's
still all
God
speaking
in these
many ways.
Continuing
with the
involvement of
the Father,
in 2 Timothy
3.16,
Paul
describes
the relation
of the
Father to
Scripture
as one
of
literally
breathing
out
the
Scriptures.
Breathing
them
out.
All
Scripture
is
inspired
by God
and is
profitable
for and
on and
on it
goes.
And our
English
rendering
there
inspired
doesn't
really do
a great
job
translating
the
Greek
on this
because
you think
Shakespeare
is
inspired
or that
was an
inspiring
dessert.
But
literally
the word
theonoustos
literally
God
breathed.
So the
word,
the Scripture
is actually
exhaled
by God.
A lot
has been
written on
this.
Excuse me.
B.B.
Warfield
has done
extensive
work on
that.
In a
work called
The
Inspiration
and
Authority
of
Scripture
is
fantastic.
This
Swiss
scholar
Gausen.
And then
notice
all
Scripture
or
every
Scripture
could be
rendered
anyway
but it
doesn't
really
make
much
of a
difference.
All
involves
every
because
it is
all
inspired
not
just
the
bits
that
come
down
in
reported
speech
of the
Father.
The
bits
in
quotes
so to
speak.
Finger
on the
wall
many
you
have
been
weighed
in the
balances
and found
wanting
or the
voice
from
heaven
this
is my
beloved
son
in whom
I am
well
pleased.
We
might
call the
quotation
mark
bits
not
just
that
but
because
it's
all
expired
from
God
everything
it is
all
invested
with
God's
authority
and
this
conviction
Jesus
reflects
when
citing
bits
of
scripture
that are
actually
not
in
quotation
marks
even
though
it's
not
reported
speech
of
God
Jesus
says
well
just
quoting
any
bit
of
scripture
as
God
says
so
for
example
in
Matthew
19
when
he's
taking
up
the
question
of
divorce
he
says
well
God
says
and
then
he
quotes
a little
bit
that's
actually
Moses
speaking
but
in
Jesus
mind
it's
scripture
even
though
Moses
is
saying
it
so
God
says
it
God
says
it
man
shall
leave
and
cleave
and
the
two
shall
become
one
flesh
as
God
says
it's
actually
Moses
but
God
says
it's
expired
by
God
this
relation
of the
father
to
scripture
is
true
not
simply
of the
Old
Testament
prophetic
voice
but
also
of the
New
Testament
apostolic
voice
for
they
also
spoke
under
the
same
divine
inspiration
thus
their
words
too
were
and
are
the
words
of
the
father
as
the
apostle
told
the
Thessalonians
this is
1st
Thessalonians
2
13
we
thank
God
that
when
you
receive
from
us
the
words
of
God's
message
you
accepted
it
not
as
the
words
of
men
in
other
words
not
merely
as
the
words
of
men
but
for
what
it
really
is
the
very
words
of
God
that
is
the
apostolic
speech
as
recorded
in
the
scriptures
are
not
merely
the
words
of
men
but
the
very
words
of
God
1st
Thess
2
13
so
that
on
the
involvement
of
the
father
it's
very
intimate
involvement
what
about
the
involvement
of
the
spirit
in
the
scriptures
2
Peter
1
21
reminds
us
of
the
remark
of
2
Timothy
3
16
about
all
scripture
being
inspired
but
here
2
Peter
1
21
focuses
on
the
relation
of
the
spirit
to
scripture
so
2
Timothy
talks
about
God
expired
but
in
the
2
Peter
passage
we
will
look
at
it's
the
spirit
effecting
it
Peter
writes
for
no
prophecy
of
scripture
he's
talking
about
scriptural
prophecy
no
prophecy
of
scripture
was
ever
made
by
an
act
of
the
human
will
but
men
moved
by the
Holy
Spirit
spoke
from
God
so
notice
the
Holy
Spirit
as
the
agent
the
instigator
and
every
once in
a while
you'll
encounter
some
regarding
either
implicitly
or maybe
even
explicitly
that
the
explicit
words
of
Jesus
somehow
in their
mind
possess
greater
authority
than the
rest of
scripture
you
know
all
that's
all
very
well
and
good
but
that's
Paul
or
that's
the
Old
Testament
but
what
does
Jesus
say
about
this
matter
I don't
know if
you've
ever
encountered
that
objection
as if
somehow
kind of
the
red
print
stuff
takes
on
greater
authority
you know
it's
from
the
horse's
mouth
and
somehow
makes
the
requirement
for
greater
clout
you know
give me
something
dominical
something
that
Jesus
said
but
But this distinction that we often hear is completely scuttled by an appreciation that Jesus' words are divine precisely because they are spirit-inspired.
Jesus' prophethood was a spiritual gift, a gift of the spirit.
It was the spirit's anointing that made his words God's.
As he said in the synagogue at the opening of his ministry, remember Jesus cites Isaiah 61.1.
The spirit of the Lord is upon me and appointed me to preach.
This is Luke 4.18.
So Jesus' speech is God's speech because it is the Holy Spirit's speech.
Because he was the spirit-anointed son.
And John 3.34 makes this point.
For he whom God has sent, speaking of Jesus, utters the words of God for, okay, it's giving an explanation, for, or reason.
For he gives him the spirit without measure.
Do you see that?
Because of the involvement of the Holy Spirit, Jesus' words are divine words.
Therefore, despite Jesus' uniqueness, his words are no more divine than those of the New Testament apostles or Old Testament prophets,
whose words were also uttered under the Spirit's mediation and agency.
Just as Jesus asserted in what we just crafted it.
As David said, through the Holy Spirit or by the Holy Spirit.
He talks about that again and again and again.
So, what this does, it keeps the words in red.
If you have a red print Bible, keeps the words from red from superseding those in black.
There is no difference in terms of their authority.
Because of inspiration and the involvement of the Spirit.
And just as the Holy Spirit conceived, anointed, and mediated the words Jesus spoke.
So, the Holy Spirit carried on this work in Jesus' absence in the words of the apostles.
And this was Jesus' own promise to them.
He writes,
These things I have spoken to you while abiding with you.
But, the helper, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name,
he will teach you all things and bring to your remembrance all that I have said to you.
It's John 14, 25 and 26.
Or again, I have, Jesus speaking,
I have many more things to say to you, but you cannot hear them now.
But, when he, the Spirit of truth comes,
he will guide you into all the truth.
For he will not speak on his own initiative,
but whatever he hears, hears me,
he will speak.
He shall take what is mine and disclose it to you.
John 16, 12 through 15.
So, as with the Word of God made flesh,
Jesus,
so with the Word of God made words,
the Scripture,
both are the work of the Holy Spirit.
So, the great work of the Holy Spirit,
the incarnation,
this is the Word of God made flesh,
and also,
in Scripturation,
the Word of God made words.
So, both the work of the Holy Spirit.
When he conceived,
when the Spirit conceived Jesus in Mary's womb,
she was, by the Spirit,
the Word-bearer,
logotakos,
the theologians say.
Her human body
introduced God's eternal Word
into the human world.
And likewise,
the prophets and the apostles
are word-bearers.
Logotakoi.
Word-bearers, just like Mary.
Okay?
And introduce God's eternal Word
into human words.
So,
we're saying the Spirit-conceived Son
is analogous,
at this point,
to the Spirit-conceived speech acts.
And incidentally,
just as Jesus
bore the marks
of his human bearer,
he's probably,
hey, you look just like Mary.
Oh, that did Joseph to you?
Well, not Joseph, sorry.
Just like Mary.
You look just like Mary.
Okay?
So, God's words
bear marks
of their human authors.
The apostles' personality,
diction,
idiom.
You can kind of tell the difference
between Peter, Paul,
and even the author of Hebrews.
So,
bear the marks.
Jesus in the Bible,
no less human for being divine.
You know,
you've got the hypostatic union,
no less divine for being human.
And you've got the verbal union,
the words of God
in the words of people,
no less divine for being human.
Analogous in that respect.
So, that on the spirit.
Well, let's finally consider
what is the involvement
of the Son,
God the Son,
Jesus,
in the scriptures.
First,
it's worth pausing
to notice that
with the incarnation
of the Son,
we have God's logos
introduced into
speaking humanity.
That means
the divine logos,
the second person
of the Trinity,
and wordly humanity
can and do
co-inhere.
They can come together.
None of this,
well, that's too transcendent
and our human language
is too imminent,
so the transcendent
can never connect
with the imminent.
No!
The incarnation does that.
That's exactly
what it does.
As an aside,
this means,
for one,
the troublesome
Kantian distinction,
you know,
for those of you
that do a philosophy
between the noumenal
and the phenomenal,
those two realms,
boy,
these two can't come together.
You know,
there's ever going to be
an inseparable bridge.
We can never,
you know,
from the phenomenon,
have any sort of
noumenal sense.
That dissolves
forever
with the annunciation
that God
has actually
come down
into the phenomenal.
That's a huge,
huge thing.
Since Jesus
is the incarnate
Son of God,
His words
are the words
of God,
the words of God
and also the words
from God,
surely without qualification.
That is,
Jesus' words
are the words
the Father gave to Him.
John 8, 28.
I do nothing,
Jesus says,
I do nothing on my own
but speak just
what the Father
has taught me.
John 12, 49.
I do not speak
on my own
but the Father
who has sent me
commanded me
to say
all that I have spoken.
John 17, 8.
I gave them
the words
you gave to me,
speaking to the Father.
the Father.
This implies
that
God the Son,
the word incarnate,
speaks to us
in human words,
the very words
He heard the Father say
in the eternal life
of the Trinity.
But,
so that's clear enough,
but
consider
what
Jesus
so often
speaks
in His career
as those words.
Scripture.
Jesus
commonly
speaks
the words
of Scripture
as His
own words,
as the words
the Father
gave Him
to speak.
You know,
again,
you think of
the temptation
in the desert
as just one example.
quote Scripture,
takes them
as His words.
And it is
noteworthy
that when
Jesus
quotes Scripture,
He does it
as
canon,
okay,
in virtue
of it being
Scripture.
He doesn't
quote
as if
selectively
appropriating
a bit here
or a bit there,
which might
happen to
reflect
His perspective.
Kind of like
some speaker
might rummage
through a book
of quotes
to see if
he can find
one that
he can use.
No!
He takes
it upon
His lips
as Scripture.
Because it's
Scripture,
He takes it
on His lips
and appropriates
it.
No,
the rummaging
around in the
little,
you know,
fortune cookie
sayings
or whatever.
That's
precisely the
way the
devil uses
Scripture
and used
Scripture
to try
to tempt
Jesus
to do
so in
the same
way Himself,
but He
would not.
There is
no indication,
no indication
of Jesus
favoring
some
scriptural
words over
others.
Just as
Scripture says,
as Scripture
says,
as Scripture
says.
On the
contrary,
one lives
by,
as He
put it
back in
Satan's
face,
one lives
by every
word,
every word,
Matthew 4.4,
that comes
from the
mouth of
God.
Not a
single stroke
accepted,
Matthew 5.18.
So,
how then
can the
biblical passages
that He
does not
quote be
any less
true revelation?
If what He
does quote,
He just
quotes as
Scripture
and because
it's
Scripture.
Thus,
we see
Jesus'
endorsement.
His
taking
Scripture
words
as His
own
affirms
those
Scripture
words
as
divine.
But,
really,
the interplay
of Jesus
and Scripture
runs both
ways,
does it
not?
There is
a reciprocal
authorization.
Oh,
the weave
is so rich
and thick
here.
not only
does Jesus
point back
to the words
of the
prophets
and say
in effect,
these are
my words
too,
but
the prophetic
words
pointed also
to Him
and authorized
Him.
It was
the Scriptures
that formed
the Christ.
The Scriptures
defined
His vocation
as Messiah.
They
constituted
Him.
They
marked
out
His
path
of
faithfulness.
As He
would say
again and
again,
no,
the Scriptures
must be
fulfilled.
I must
do this.
The Scriptures
form me.
They shape
me.
Scripture
was His
master
and He
its pupil.
He rendered
it obedience.
It was
there
that He
listened
to the
voice of
the Father.
Thus,
the written
Word
formed
the
incarnate
Word.
The
life that
was truly
divine
was the
life that
fulfilled
the Scripture.
This is
the relation
of reciprocal
authorization.
In
obeying
Scripture,
Christ is
revealed as
more than
its servant.
He is
the very
Lord of
Scripture.
And Scripture
reveals that
and confirms
Him as
that.
So He's
able to
declare all
food
clean.
And so
He
transforms
Scripture
by rendering
it intelligible.
It's all
about me.
Luke 24,
Road to
Emmaus.
He renders
it intelligible,
renewing and
reprobligating
it.
We also
see an
expansion of
these divine
words becoming
human words.
As Jesus
prayed to the
Father in His
high priestly
prayer,
John 17,
I gave
them,
speaking of
the apostles,
I gave
them the
words you
gave to
me,
verse 8.
Then He
goes on to
pray for
those who
will believe
in me
through their
the apostles'
message.
So we
have the
words the
Father gave
to the
Son being
passed on
by the
incarnate
Son in
ordinary human
language to
His disciples.
apostles.
And now
these words
are passed
on by the
apostles to
those who
did not hear
the Father's
words from
Jesus'
mouth.
Thereby we,
at a distance
in time and
space,
may encounter
the words
the Father
and Christ
who in
those words
of the
apostles
present
themselves to
us as a
covenant-making
God and
His words
to us.
We see this
pattern in
the sending
out of the
twelve.
Remember
Matthew 10.
If anyone
will not
welcome you,
is apostles
giving these
words,
if anyone
will not
welcome you
or listen
to your
words,
shake the
dust of
your feet
off.
It will
be more
bearable for
Sodom and
Gomorrah.
Anyone who
welcomes you
welcomes me
and anyone
who welcomes
me welcomes
the one who
sent me,
the Father.
Thus,
to reject
the apostles'
words,
which come
from Christ,
is to
reject God.
God has
identified
himself
both
with Christ
in person
and with
the passing
on by his
apostles of
the words of
Jesus.
with the
result that
to reject
the words
of the
apostles
is to
reject
God.
So,
this is
what we
have called
the
Trinitarian
ontology
of Scripture.
Do you get
a sense of
what I mean
by that now?
The deep,
profound
involvement of
every person
of the
Trinity
in the
Scriptures
themselves.
Do you
feel that?
Do you
see that?
The
Trinity
is so
profoundly
involved
in the
being of
Scripture
that the
character of
Scripture
is invested
with the
divine
character.
That is,
the Trinity
is so
profoundly
involved in
the being
of Scripture
that the
character of
Scripture
is invested
with divine
character.
The Trinity
is the
three-fold
cord,
this
intertwined
involvement.
And these,
it strikes
me,
are solid
grounds
for
maintaining
Scripture's
authority.
So finally,
just a few
seconds on
so what.
Well,
if this
is so,
how should
we then
live?
Well,
God's
Word,
the Scriptures
must
find
functioned
as
authority
in our
lives.
Four,
the
authority
of Scripture
is simply
shorthand
for the
authority
of God
exercised
through Scripture.
Okay,
this is the
one phrase
takeaway.
The authority
of Scripture
is simply
shorthand
for the
authority
of God
exercised
through Scripture.
So we
must never
place
ourselves
over it
in judgment.
Reminds me
when I was
in the Louvre
some time
ago,
there was
a,
and he's
sitting there
just kind
of looking
at the
pictures
and,
you know,
he's kind
of looking
at this
thing
and kind
of wincing
and,
you know,
he's in
Mona Lisa
and that
and kind
of looking
that
and just
shaking his
head,
overrated,
going forward
to the next.
At one point,
this very
elegant
and kind
of demure
guard
that was there
kind of leaned
over and said,
monsieur,
in this
museum,
it is not
the artwork
that is under judgment.
In other words, you just judge yourself as a Philistine
by not approving that.
Look, when it comes to scripture,
it's not the scripture that's under judgment.
It's us.
Just like it says that the cross was not,
in one sense, that was the judgment of the world,
it says in 1 Corinthians 7.
When Jesus was judged by the world
and hung on the cross in judgment of him,
that judgment of him was the judgment of the world.
That judged them to be false,
to be out of touch with reality,
to be on the wrong side of everything.
And it's the same way with the word.
It's the same way with scripture.
It must judge us.
James writes in James 1.21,
in humility, receive the word.
In humility, receive the word.
Which works for our salvation.
That we receive the word
shows that we are being saved.
That there is a saving work that is going on in us.
Or why don't we end with this?
Isaiah 66.2.
But to this one I will look,
to him who is humble and of contrite spirit,
who trembles at my word.
Who trembles at my word.
Tremble.
We need to respond to God's word
exactly as we would to God himself.
In trembling awe.
In reverential, urgent submission.