Authority of Scripture

[eric]

Is it necessary to believe in the authority of Scripture, in order to be a Christian? Are we required to affirm this at the new birth? Can I be a viable witness without submission to the truth of His Word? Note: the word "authority" versus "inerrant"... Southern Baptist discussed at great length, but it was packaged a little differently...It was discussed from an identification angle...Are we a people who had an encountered with the Word or an encounter with Jesus? Or is there any difference? Now don't wimp out and say this is purely semantics...Theology is about preciseness...

In answer to your second question David, I can't see how you can possibly a viable witness if you don't use the authority on the inspired word. Jesus told his disciples in Acts.1:8 that they would receive power (authority) when the holy spirit fell upon them, so that they would be able to be His witnesses. (paraphrased)

No holy spirit = not christian = no authority of scripture.

[Elihu's Girl]

Greetings,

I have yet to meet a Christian who has matured without the Word of God being fully tucked into their heart and mind. God does not automatically pour out knowledge into our minds, but instead uses His Word to bring us along to maturity. A person who never "studies to show themselves approved", is like a tree that never received any water or nourishment. It will spring up for a time, but will quickly fade away. The parable of the sower is a good example. Fertile ground, one with access to good nourishment and water will produce good fruit, and by their fruit shall you know them.

I don't expect a baby Christian to "know" very much, but if they truly love the Lord, they will desire to get to know Him through His Word. If they don't, I question their faith AND their salvation.

Blessings,

Dad Ernie

This is a fantastic reply Dad Ernie (luv this name by the way ) and I'm just growing to the point where I am falling in love with the scriptures and desiring to have them in my heart, to memorize them. To live them! There's really nothing else to say besides the above.

I understand though where your question is coming from David. You can get to this place in theology and apologetics study where it's head knowledge. It doesn't penetrate. And the bible can become more about having the right answers and getting your kicks in a hard-core debate than it is about living like Jesus. It stops being your spiritual food and just becomes an idol. It stops being your correction and your guide and becomes your way to fame and eggheadedness.

So there is a trap that is there intellectually from the bible. But ultimately the Word is Jesus. There is no separation. Hope all that made sense.

[David from New Bern]

Is it necessary to believe in the authority of Scripture, in order to be a Christian? Are we required to affirm this at the new birth? Can I be a viable witness without submission to the truth of His Word? Note: the word "authority" versus "inerrant"... Southern Baptist discussed at great length, but it was packaged a little differently...It was discussed from an identification angle...Are we a people who had an encountered with the Word or an encounter with Jesus? Or is there any difference? Now don't wimp out and say this is purely semantics...Theology is about preciseness...

Greetings David from New Bern,

Are you positing this as a serious question, one which you would like to have the answer, OR are you throwing your statement out to the crowd just to get responses? Is it edifying?

Anyone who suggests that knowing Christ without knowing His Word, I question their faith, perhaps even their salvation. I believe the Canon of Scripture is currently closed. What we have in the form of the Bible is God's "inspired Word" to us. It is good and profitable to make the person of and in Christ whole in all ways.

What is the answer you were looking for?

Blessings,

Dad Ernie

Dad Ernie...thanks for your input. Yes, this is a sincere question with honest intentions to edify the Body of Christ. Yes, I have a well thought out opinion. However,I enjoy productive converstation and consider myself a wordsmith in training. I write and speak constantly, I believe this to be my calling. And I am always looking for a more concise way to communicate truth and find truth in the comments of others. In conversations like these I often find someone else has a better grasp of the subject than I thought I had. I have helped some people with my articulations and very often I have found direct or indirect revelation or correction in the words of others. I enjoy delving into the deeper things of God. I am unafraid to question what I believe or what you believe. I have a holy respect for the authority of God's Word even the parts I have yet to put my very finite mind around as of yet. I think the average Christian has settled for too shallow of an understanding of his/her faith. They have wrongly believed that this kind of thought process is reserved for intellectuals and clergy. Every believer is mandated to explore the depths of his faith as a sign of his willingness as his contribution to his sanctification.

Edited April 6, 2006 by David from New Bern

[Smalcald]

I agree with Elilu's girl about falling in love with the scriptures.

I read the bible because I love the Word of God but I love the Word of God because the bible rings true to me as I read it, and confirms it to me. My secular friends call this circular reasoning, and it is to some degree, but because of the Holy Spirit, the bible confirms its own validity in the heart of the believer. Its truth is in the fact that it alone contains the true power of the Holy Spirit to convert people to faith in Jesus Christ and strengthen that faith, and this is proved by the fact that it indeed does that very thing!

There were a couple of other points brought up about the cannon. It is true that it was not formally closed until the fourth century, however, it was totally complete long before this, the Gospel which is the entire New Testament was written in a period between ten and fifty years after the resurrection, all of it within the first century.

Certainly Luther was a bombastic preacher, but when we read his sermons and his writings we must always look at the total context. Luther although critical of how James was used to support a works based idea, still felt that James was a part of the Cannon if understood properly in the context of faith alone as preached by St. Paul. Also Luther was sometimes wrong, and I say that as a Lutheran.