The Bible in the Balance
The fact that the Bible is exposed to criticism is nothing new. Questioning much of what is written in the Bible is the rule more than the exception for many leading theologians. But it is not so common for conservative Christians to question whether the Bible is God’s Word to us. Nevertheless, in recent years, through what is often called the preaching of hypergrace, we have seen a cunning form of biblical criticism that is likely to undermine trust in the Bible. We could call it charismatic liberal theology.
Dispensationalism
The phenomenon is not new. When the biblical interpretive tradition called dispensationalism was developed, it was based on the premise that salvation history could be divided into so-called households, also called dispensations. In these passages of salvation history, God laid down the conditions under which man should live and be judged. In one household after another, man fell short and had to recognize the need for a Savior. The leading Bible interpreters among the dispensationalists divided the history of salvation in different ways. Common to all of them was that they claimed that we are now in the dispensation of grace, the church age. There is some disagreement between them about when we passed into the dispensation of grace. Some believe that it happened when Jesus died on the cross, others believe that it happened on the day of Pentecost. Still others believe that it happened when Paul was saved on the road to Damascus, while some again put the transition into the new covenant at the end of Acts.
Division in the Bible
The fact that the history of salvation is divided into different sections can also be seen in Paul’s teaching, even though he does not make any teaching out of it. Such a way of viewing the history of salvation can help when studying the Bible. But when one wants to grade the Bible’s authority for us Christians today on the basis of household teachings, the whole thing immediately becomes more problematic. Then what was supposed to be a key to understanding God’s plan of salvation can become an obstacle to accepting the Bible as God’s inspired Word. There is a broad consensus among Bible interpreters that we find in the Old Testament a lot of material that is connected to the covenant between God and Israel and that is not valid for the Christian church. The ceremonial laws and dietary regulations are included here. There is also a lot in the Old Testament that is spoken into a historical setting and that is therefore not relevant to us today.
Jesus or Paul
The challenge is that with the household doctrine as a backdrop, one grades the New Testament scriptures and claims that not everything applies to the Christian church today. It is therefore claimed that the gospels belong to the Old Covenant, that the Sermon on the Mount is an Old Testament sermon, that the Lord’s Prayer is an Old Testament prayer, that the Great Commission was given to the Jews, that Jesus preached to Jews and that what he said must be understood from this, to name a few. Based on the same reasoning, it is claimed that there are contradictions between what Jesus said and what Paul said and it is Paul we are to listen to, for his preaching belongs to the dispensation of grace.
Paul or Peter
It is also claimed that there are differences between the gospel Paul preached and the gospel Peter preached. It is believed that there is a basis for this in the division of labour that took place at the Apostles’ Council in Jerusalem (Acts 15). Peter was to preach to the Jews while Paul was to preach to the Gentiles. Based on this, it is claimed that they preached two different gospels and that we as Gentiles should use Paul’s letter as the basis for life and teaching. Peter’s letter is read for edification. Similar reasoning applies to the other parts of the New Testament.
Bible Judges
Clearly, such a way of grading the Bible is likely to undermine trust in the Bible as God’s Word to us. We become judges of the Bible. We will decide what is valid for us today and what we should leave behind. When such a method of biblical interpretation meets postmodern individualism, the objective basis of Christian preaching is removed. Then we should sound a warning. At a time when we are reaping the fruits of 200 years of liberal theology with full weight, we least of all need that trust in the Bible be further weakened. The fact that this undermining comes from people who is normally considered evangelical conservative makes the matter extra serious.
The Sum of God’s Word
The new covenant began with Jesus. Even though He was born under the law and lived under the law, He represented the new covenant in everything He said and did. John says that grace and truth came with Jesus, and Hebrews writes that God has spoken to us through the Son. Jesus himself said that the Holy Spirit would carry on what he taught his disciples. This was to happen after his death and resurrection. It is therefore not possible to find any basis in the Scriptures for there to be any contradiction between what Jesus said when he was on earth and what he said by the Holy Spirit after his ascension. There are no contradictions in the Bible. Therefore, it is a generally accepted principle of interpretation that Scriptures interprets Scripture. Where there are apparent contradictions between two passages, one must be interpreted in the light of the other. The sum of God’s Word is truth.
Progressive Revelation
The Bible is a whole in which revelation is progressive. This progressive revelation can be found within the Old Testament, between the Old Testament and the New Testament and between the Gospels and the rest of the New Testament. And we have not yet reached the climax of this progressive revelation. John says in his first letter that when Jesus comes, we will see him as he is and we will become like him. The same is suggested several places in the New Testament. But in the Bible, we have sufficient revelation to be saved and to live the Christian life. It has been revealed what God wants us to see and understand while we are here on earth.
One Gospel
It is also untenable to claim that Peter and Paul preached two different gospels. At the apostles’ meeting in Jerusalem, Peter draws an interesting conclusion after Paul and Barnabas had made a report after their first missionary journey. Peter states that the Gentiles had received the same Holy Spirit as the apostles and that they had been saved in the same way as them. When Paul writes the letter to the Romans, he says that he is not ashamed of the gospel of Christ, for it is the power of God unto salvation for everyone who believes, for the Jew first and then for the Greek. In first Corinthians he writes the same thing when he says that he preaches Christ crucified to both Jews and Greeks. According to Hebrews, Jesus was the first to preach about salvation. Then this gospel was confirmed by those who had heard him, that is, by the apostles. It was the same gospel all the way.
Nor did Paul make any distinction between Jews and Gentiles when he was on his missionary journeys. First, he addressed the Jewish synagogues with the gospel. As a rule, he was thrown out of there. Then he addressed the non-Jews in the place. Therefore, the churches Paul planted also consisted of both Jews and Gentiles.
The authority of the Bible
At a time like ours, when Christian faith and morality are being challenged and attacked from many quarters, we need to assert the authority of the Bible – not to weaken trust in the Bible. If we do not hold fast to God’s Word, we are on shaky ground. Then we will end up preaching our opinions and perceptions. And our opinions will change after the spirit of the times. It is faith in the Bible as God’s inspired and infallible Word that gives the church a sure foundation in all storms and that gives weight to the Christian preaching.
But in any case, even if we devalue the authority of the Bible, God’s Word still stands. For we cannot do anything against the truth, only for the truth.