On the surface of it, to speak of the Bible as divinely authoritative may seem—and some modernist critics have formulated this as a theological objection—to elevate a second authority alongside that of God himself, or alongside Jesus Christ as Head of the church, or alongside the Spirit as the Giver of life. But does the Protestant principle sola scriptura really elevate a historical phenomenon to the level of divine majesty, ascribing too little to the living God because it ascribes too much to the Bible? Does it confer godlike worth in a subtle or sinister way on a human book with its human phrasing and vocabulary, thus putting it in devilish antithesis to the authentically divine and thereby affirming what must be devoutly resisted in the name of God, Christ, Spirit, revelation, and (some would even say) of the prophets and apostles themselves? Are the modern theological motivations for relativizing the Bible really nourished by a determination to preserve or protect the uncompromised absoluteness of God? Or does not the assault on an absolute Word or Bible and on an absolute God rather go hand in hand? Does not the substitution of exotic theological notions for the authoritative doctrine of Scripture involve the denial to God of one or another of the priorities that are rightfully and biblically his?
Carl F. H. Henry. "The Authority and Inspiration of the Bible: God's Word as Dynamically Vital". The Expositor's Bible Commentary, Volume 1.
Answer. As it was in the beginning, is now, and ever shall be : world without end. Amen.
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment