How to Ascertain Bible Authority

HOW TO ASCERTAIN BIBLE AUTHORITY

Mark Mosher

When we speak in terms of Bible authority we infer two things. We infer that one has the ability to know truth and that truth has its origin in the Christ. The Bibles authoritative claim is evident. Paul said, “All scripture is given by inspiration of God and is profitable for doctrine for reproof for correction for instruction in righteousness that the man of God may be perfect throughly furnished unto every good work” (II Tim. 3:16-17). Christ was given this authority when He ascended up on high (Matt 28:18-20). Yet Christ did not give us a written authority that we could not ascertain for Jesus proclaimed while on earth, “and ye shall know the truth and the truth shall make you free” (John 8:32). Paul proclaimed that whatever we do in word or deed do all in the name of (by the authority of) Jesus Christ (Col. 3:17). If authority cannot be ascertained than Paul’s command is arbitrary and meaningless. The authority of God can be ascertained if one approaches God’s work correctly.

One may approach the Bible from the standpoint of man’s interpretation. Yet the Holy Spirit anticipated man’s thinking and answered this as recorded in II Peter 1:20, “Knowing this first that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation”. One may approach the Bible as being partly authoritative. Some argue that the Bible contains the word of God. While on the surface this sounds correct it is in fact a denial of biblical inspiration. For the Bible to merely contain the word of God implies that it contains other elements. Those who hold to such will determine from human judgment which of the scriptures they will accept as authority and which they will not. One may approach the Bible as the thought of God. Again on the surface this sounds correct. However those who subscribe to such are denying verbal plenary inspiration of the Bible. Those who accept thought inspiration deny that we have the very words of God saying we simply have the thoughts of God. Yet one would question one’s ability to express a thought without doing it in words. David claimed inspiration and said, “The Spirit of the Lord spake by me, and His Word was in my tongue” (II Sam. 23:2; emphasis mine). One may approach the Bible subjectively. Subjectivity by definition is that which is from within. To this individual everyone has his own interpretation and truth then is within the individual. Yet to approach the Bible this way is to say that the interpreter is the highest authority. This approach is a rejection of God. To approach the Bible correctly one must accept the evidence that the Bible is the verbal (words given by God), inerrant (without errors), plenary (full and complete), inspired (coming from the breath of God) Word of God. Therefore one approaches the scriptures objectively accepting God as the authority.

Without the authoritative scriptures we cannot reason right and wrong. The Hebrew writer proclaimed that we must exercise our senses with the word of God to ascertain right and wrong (Heb. 5:12-14). Yet how do we ascertain the scriptures? How do we rightly divide the Word of truth (II Tim. 2:15)? One can do this in three ways: Divine commands, Approved Examples, and Necessary inference.

DIVINE COMMANDS HAVE TWO KINDS: SPECIFIC AND GENERIC

When we speak in terms of Divine commands we have reference to two types, specific and generic. When we speak in terms of a command being specific we mean it is exclusive in nature. It will therefore exclude everything that is not included within the command itself. For example, Noah was told to build an Ark (Gen. 6:14). He was commanded specifically to make it out of gopher wood. Was it necessary for God to mention every other type of wood? Should God say, “thou shalt not make it out of oak, pine, or some other wood”? Certainly for God to do so on every specific command we would have a book the world could not contain. God created us reasoning individuals (Isa. 1:18). As such we have the ability to reason logically and come to absolute truth. If a mother tells her child to, “play in the back yard” and the mother later sees the child playing the front yard the child cannot argue with the mother that he/she did not understand the mother. The child could not argue, “we’ll you did not tell me I couldn’t play in the front yard”. Such logic will only lead to discipline for the child knows when the mother gives a specific command that excludes everything else.

Another example cited might be Lev. 10:1-3.

And Nadab and Abihu, the sons of Aaron, took either of them his censer, and put fire therein, and put incense thereon, and offered strange fire before the Lord, which he commanded them not. And there went out fire from the Lord, and devoured them, and they died before the Lord. Then Moses said unto Aaron, This is it that the Lord spake, saying, I will be sanctified in them that come nigh me, and before all the people I will be glorified. And Aaron held his peace (emphasis mine).

It is interesting that the Lord said he commanded them not to offer strange or foreign fire. Fire that is foreign is from the wrong source. The passage we have that commands the burning of incense is Lev. 16:12, “And he shall take a censer full of burning coals of fire from off the altar before the Lord, and his hands full of sweet incense beaten small, and bring it within the vail:” (emphasis mine). Could Nadab and Abihu argue with God that He did not tell them they could not get the fire from some other source. God expected man to know that when He commands something specifically it excludes everything else. Lets apply this to our worship. Eph. 5:19 states, “Speaking to yourselves in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, singing and making melody in your heart to the Lord;” Note the specific command to sing. Note also that it specifically says whatever music you choose must speak. Again in Col. 3:16 Paul commanded that whatever music we use must teach and admonish. Singing is the only act that will accomplish all of those specific requirements. One may argue before God, “we’ll He did not say we couldn’t use an instrument. God expected man to reason that when he commands something specifically it excludes everything else.

Divine commands can also be Generic, which makes them inclusive in nature. They include everything necessary to the execution of the command itself. Matt. 28:18-20 teaches us to go out into the entire world and teach all nations. Yet the HOW is not specified. We may go by plane, boat, and car. We may use the radio, television or simply knock door to door. God simply wants us to fulfill the command. Some brethren have abused the generic command and as such will not support orphans homes from the treasury of the church. They claim that we are to SPECIFICALLY do that individually. James stated that, “Pure religion and undefiled before God and the Father is this, to visit the fatherless and the widows in their affliction, and to keep himself unspotted from the world” (James 1:27). The word visit comes from episkeptesthai which means to inspect.1 The idea of the word is to inspect the widows and orphans so you can see the needs and take care of them. This command was given to all Christians. Yet the how was not stated. We can do this collectively as the church or individually as the church.

APPROVED EXAMPLES HAVE TWO KINDS: PERMISIVE AND EXCLUSIVE

Often times we read in scripture where the early church did something. But does that mean we must do the very same thing? For example in Acts 20:8 they met in the “upper room”. Are we to ascertain from this that we must also partake of the Lord’s Supper in an upper room? Some commands are simply permissive. We may do them but if we do not do them it is not a sin. There are some commands that merely show us what they did and some that bind us. Those commands that bind us are exclusive in nature. For example in Acts 20:7 prior to telling us that they met in the upper room they tell us they partook of the Lord’s supper on the first day of the week. How do we know if an example is binding? We know when it is an exclusive example. To be an exclusive example it must have a command associated with it. For example Christ when teaching the apostles about the Lord’s Supper stated he would not drink of the fruit of the vine until, “that day when I drink it new with you in my Fathers Kingdom” (Matt. 26:29). Since Christ established a specific day than the day the early church partook of the Lord’s Supper is exclusive and binding.

NECESSARY INFERENCE

While there is such a thing as simple inference it is not important to our study. Necessary inference is connected to expediencies. For example in Heb. 10:25 we are commanded to assemble. Necessary inference tells us there must be a place. What kind of place? The Word does not specify so we may rent, borrow etc. While the day of worship is specifically commanded the time during that day and the length is not. It is in this area that Elders rule and find their authority. The eldership cannot change the authority of God and change the day of worship or introduce mechanical instruments into our worship. They can however determine an expedient time on the first day of the week to meet. They can determine what type of building we will meet in. These expediencies are necessary. But they can also be abused. Elderships must be careful not to abuse an expedient and add to the commands of God.

1 Archibald Thomas Robertson, Word Pictures In The New Testament (Grand Rapids, Michigan; Baker Book House, 1933) p.25.