It is said that to be truly Australian, one must have a hatred of authority. It should also be said that in practice Australians tend to respect authority whilst proclaiming their hatred of it. I guess it is some sort of pragmatic approach in which deep-down one recognizes the need for authority in order to have a law-abiding, stable society, quite in contrast to certain times in the life of ancient Israel where every man did that which was right in his own eyes. (Judges 21:25). But what is the situation with respect to God and the Bible?
James Packer wrote: the problem of authority still divides Christian people…… the deepest cleavages in Christendom are doctrinal; and the deepest doctrinal cleavages are those which result from disagreement about authority. He went on to say, Those who disagree as to the right method in theology, can reach no significant agreement on anything else. (Fundamentalism and the Word of God pp. 44,45). I think he strikes some nerves there. All believers would agree that God is the authority, but such authority must be appropriated because of the epistemic distance between man and God. The concept of delegated authority is biblical:- Matt.28:18 – the Father gave all authority to the Son, but it must be expressed in some form so people can respect and obey it. Thus the Son invests His word with His authority – John 12:48. But that spoken word, which we never heard but can only read, has come to us via the apostles and prophets of the N.T. He promised them the inspiration afforded by the Holy Spirit to guide them into all truth (John 16:1-7). That which they committed to paper with ink was done one time (Jude 3) and is all-sufficient (2 Tim. 3:16,17). Essentially, we thus say that the New Testament as recorded in the 27 books constitutes the authority for today.
Consequently, authority and hermeneutics (the science of interpretation) are involved with one another. Everyone appeals to Scripture, but that is not to say it’s that simple. A number of groups appeal to scripture plus the edicts of a hierarchy or government which gives the ‘party line’. There was a time when the common man was not allowed to read the Scriptures, and being in Latin the average man was hard pressed to read them even if he could find access to them. Even today, with the translation of the Bible into the language of the common man, the rank and file are allowed free reign with much of scripture, but not totally. They must submit to the church’s spin on particular doctrines, as set out in various creedal statements etc.. But if you appeal to scripture to authorize a doctrinal position, at what point do you reject scripture as authority in favour of something else such as a Pope or Watchtower Society etc? This is where hermeneutics comes in. Reformers challenged the ‘party line’ where they believed the hermeneutics was dodgy. Luther referred to his church’s (he was a catholic priest) use of allegorising scripture as monkey tricks. He also believed in sola scripture, meaning scripture was the sole authority, not the Pope, but we will come back to him in the next blog.
Pretty much all who claim to be Christian give, at least, lip service to the concept of the authority of the scriptures, but in practice there is a whole spectrum of approaches. Some run the scriptures through the filter of their own personal opinions. This is syncretism at its worst and is nothing more than idolatry. In effect, a man becomes his own authority and any appeal to scripture would only be in the name of convenience if it appeared to support a pre-conceived view. But why appeal to the scriptures at all if one is free to reject them at will? That would render them meaningless, as far as authority goes. Others measure scripture to see if it passes the “pub test”; ie. if it has general public approval, then it is ‘in’. eg. ‘God is love’ generally passes muster because this sounds all very non-confrontational and nice, but many things do not. It reminds me of a time when a preacher was preaching on Hell and there was a man in the audience who was grumbling and obviously upset by what was being taught. The preacher asked him if he disagreed with what the Bible said about Hell and the fact most people were going there and the man said yes. Why? asked the preacher. Because the people naturally wouldn’t stand for it! was the reply.
God is not a democracy. He is Almighty and His Word is the expression of His authority in human affairs. We must be a people who tremble at His word (Isa. 66:2,5). On that day we will not be judged by majority views (Matt.7:13,14) or our own personal views, or Aussie pragmatism, but by the words of Christ (John 12:48).