Inter-Varsity Press

CONTENTS

1. Introduction

The locus of Scripture reconsidered
The vocabulary of Scripture reconsidered
The doctrine of Scripture reconsidered
The use of Scripture in the church reconsidered

2. Reconstructing the doctrine

Introduction
Revelation
The work of the Holy Spirit
Reconstructing the vocabulary

3. The Enlightenment and liberal theology

Introduction
The Enlightenment
Liberal theology
The response to liberal theology
Conclusion

4. Fundamentalism and inerrancy

Introduction
Warfield and Hodge
Fundamentalism
The modern inerrancy debate
Arguments against inerrancy
The rationalist implication
Rejecting the incarnational model
Conclusion

5. Infallibility: an evangelical alternative

Introduction
An evangelical alternative
James Orr
Orr and the Dutchmen
Herman Bavinck
Bavinck’s doctrine of Scripture
G. C. Berkouwer
Summary
Conclusion

6. Scripture and confession

Introduction
Scripture and confession
Scripture and tradition
Defining the relationship
Conclusion

7. Preaching Scripture

Introduction
Scripture and the believer
The preaching of Scripture
Reformed preaching
Application

8. Conclusion

Summary of chapters 2–7
Anticipating the critique
Charting the way forward
Conclusion

Extracts from the INTRODUCTION

The purpose of this book is to contribute to discussions about the nature and function of Scripture in evangelical Christianity. I shall argue that, in formulating our doctrine of Scripture, we need to review both our vocabulary and our theology, in order to clarify precisely what we mean when we speak about Scripture as the Word of God. I shall also argue that the way Scripture functions in the church ought to be revisited, first, by analysing the relationship between Scripture, confessional statements and tradition, and second, by a reassessment of how Scripture is to be preached.

Christian theologians must give attention to many difficult issues, but it seems to me that none is more vital than the doctrine of Scripture. I say this because what we believe about Scripture determines what we believe about everything else.

If we take the view that the Scriptures are God-given, then our views on every other subject will be determined with reference to Scripture. It stands to reason that if God has spoken and if what he said has been written down under the supervisory action of the Holy Spirit, then God speaking in and through the Scriptures becomes the final authority for decision-making and the ultimate arbiter of truth. If, on the other hand, we believe that the Scriptures are simply an interesting record of what Jews and Christians have believed over the centuries but that these beliefs are not binding upon believers today, then we may reach quite different decisions in respect of doctrine, ethics and the life of faith.

Since the 1850s, the church has been deeply affected by types of theology that advocate this latter view of Scripture. The dramatic changes in philosophy and theology in the years since the enlightenment have brought the doctrine of Scripture into sharp relief. There is a sense in which one of the early church Fathers, together with one of the sixteenth-century magisterial Reformers and, for example, a seventeenth-century Scottish minister, might happily have agreed on the doctrine of Scripture. That harmony and unity has all been changed by the Enlightenment, the birth of liberal theology, the philosophical influence of existentialism and, even more so, by the recent advent of such views as postmodernism and relativism.

These movements in theology have also affected the evangelical movement. Until fairly recently, one of the clearest identifying marks of an evangelical was a ‘high’ view of Scripture as the Word of God. Unfortunately, it is no longer possible to take it for granted that those who call themselves ‘evangelical’ will hold to the same position on Scripture held by those who were described in this way even in the 1960s. Indeed, the very word ‘evangelical’ has lost something of its clarity and is used to refer to a range of positions. Francis Schaeffer’s final book was called The Great Evangelical Disaster, where he argued that evangelicals had abandoned a truly evangelical view of the Bible and were giving way to other views. In that book, Schaeffer said that an orthodox view of the Bible is the ‘Watershed of the Evangelical World’. In other words, it is a defining position, such that our view of Scripture determines whether or not we are truly evangelical. It seems to me that he was correct in this assessment.

As an evangelical, there have been many influences on my own understanding of Scripture. Naturally, the first influences were my family and church. Next was my involvement with two key organizations within the British evangelical movement, namely Scripture Union and the Inter-Varsity Fellowship. From those earliest days, I was taught that the Bible was the Word of God and that the voice of God speaking by his Spirit through his Word is the final authority on all matters. I have never seriously questioned that commitment and do not do so today. Nevertheless, I have gradually become concerned that some ways of defining and using Scripture within evangelicalism are open to serious criticism and could do us more harm than good if we continue to maintain them in their present form. Through a failure to understand the differences between evangelicalism and fundamentalism, through a failure to engage with biblical scholarship, and sometimes through sheer obscurantist and anti-intellectual approaches, evangelicals have often damaged rather than helped the case for a high view of Scripture. We do not properly state and defend the evangelical doctrine of Scripture by retreating into an untenable ghetto mentality and ignoring genuine matters of concern. Rather, we must engage with those who take a different position and we must do so graciously. In what follows, I shall seek to address these issues and advocate a doctrine of Scripture that is truly evangelical but that avoids some of the problems and challenges rightly laid at our door by those who do not share our position.

When I first began to write this book, I had in mind a rather different project than the one that has unfolded. At the time, I was teaching a course on the doctrine of Scripture and was struggling to find a suitable textbook to cover the whole scope of the module. It seemed to me that I might usefully write such a textbook. As I studied the subject, however, I came to the conclusion that there was a more pressing issue, namely the need for me as an evangelical to clarify my own understanding of the doctrine of Scripture and to make a contribution to the debate among evangelicals regarding its significance for today.

With these concerns in mind, I propose to offer some suggestions regarding the nature and use of Scripture that I hope will be theologically productive and ecclesiastically useful. My proposal essentially has four parts ...

The locus of Scripture reconsidered

First, I shall reconsider the place of Scripture in the theological corpus. For a long time now, in my own Reformed tradition, it has been taken for granted that Scripture comes at the beginning of the theological system ... A study of this matter has led me to conclude that this is a mistake that needs to be corrected. ...

The vocabulary of Scripture reconsidered

Second, I shall revisit the vocabulary of the doctrine. Words like ‘inspiration’ and ‘illumination’ have come to mean rather different things since they were first used in theological discourse and there is a question as to whether ‘inspiration’ was ever a good rendering of what Paul is saying in 2 Timothy 3:16. I shall argue that we should cease to use the word inspiration’, both on exegetical grounds and because of the confusion that arises through modern English usage of the word, opting instead for ‘divine spiration’. ...

The doctrine of Scripture reconsidered

Third, I shall address the important differences between two ways in which evangelicals have traditionally sought to define their doctrine of Scripture, the ‘inerrantist’ position on the one hand and the ‘infallibilist’ position on the other. This being a major part of my proposal, it will occupy several chapters. I shall argue that we should cease to use the word ‘inerrancy’ in relation to our doctrine of Scripture, using instead the word ‘infallibility’. ...

The use of Scripture in the church reconsidered

Fourth, believing as I do that all theology is ‘church’ theology, I shall address two ecclesial issues. First, I shall consider the relationship between Scripture and our creeds and confessions. This will include some discussion of the need for an evangelical theology of tradition. Then, finally, I shall deal with the church’s preaching of Scripture. ...