THE AUTHORITY OF THE BIBLE

Authority is a critical issue when it comes to matters of religious truth. Clearly, God himself is the ultimate source of all authority, and thus what God reveals about himself and his purposes should constitute the final authority for testing truth and religious experience.

Christians believe that God has revealed himself through the events and words recorded in the Bible, which as the inspired word of God offers a true and reliable record of divine revelation to humankind.

The Indian theologian A. J. Appasamy related Christian beliefs about the source of authority to the three pramanas, the traditional standards of religious authority in Hinduism. The first, sruti, is literally what was “heard” directly from God by ancient seers. It is very similar to the Christian idea of “revelation” and the divine origin of Scripture. The second source of authority is anubhava or personal experience, an important prerequisite for any conversation concerning the divine in the religious traditions of South Asia. The third pramana is yukti, reason or inference, through which the revealed truths that have been backed up by experience are given an intelligible form and coherent expression. This would correspond to the role of Christian theology. To these three traditional sources of authority, Appasamy adds a fourth, sabha, or the church, which corresponds to the accumulated traditions of the Christian community from the time of Christ to the present.

Scripture (sruti – what God has spoken) must be given the highest authority in matters of faith and practice because truth revealed through divine revelation is supremely trustworthy and authoritative.

For Christians this is found in the Bible, whereas Muslims believe it is found in the Qur’an, and Sikhs that it is embodied in the Guru Granth Sahib. Buddhists, by contrast, regard their many scriptures not as a divinely revealed word but as the recorded wisdom of enlightened masters.

The Bible derives its authority from its claim to be the inspired record of divine revelation given through the prophets in the OT and the apostles in the NT. It was produced under the influence of divine inspiration in that the supernatural influence of the Holy Spirit on the writers of Scripture enabled them to record God’s revelation accurately so that their writings are regarded as the word of God.

Our belief in the divine origin of the Bible is based, first, upon the testimony of the authors of the OT. Moses was commanded to write down the words God gave him (Exod 34:27). David claimed that the Spirit of the Lord spoke through him (2 Sam 23:2). The prophets repeatedly asserted the divine source of their words, using expressions such as “the word of the LORD came to” (Ezek 12:1; Jonah 1:1), “this is what the LORD says” (Amos 1:3) and “hear the word of the LORD” (Hos 4:1).

Secondly, Christian belief in the divine origin of the Bible is based on the attitude of Jesus and the apostles to the OT, the Jewish Scriptures. Jesus often quoted the OT using the phrase: “It is written” (Matt 4:4, 6-7, 10; Luke 19:46). The implication is that Scripture has final authority in any argument. Jesus insisted that the Law and the Prophets must be fulfilled and believed (Matt 5:17-18), stating that not even “the least stroke of a pen” would go unfulfilled (Luke 16:17). He also referred to the words of Moses and Isaiah as the “commands of God” (Matt 15:3-9; Mark 7:5-13; see also Exod 20:12; Isa 29:13). Like Jesus, the apostolic writers regarded the OT as the inspired word of God. When they referred to it, they used expressions such as “what the Lord had said” (Matt 1:22; 2:15), “it is written” (Rom 1:17; Gal 3:13) and “Scripture says” (Rom 10:11).

Thirdly, the case for the divine authority of the Bible rests on the claims of the authors of the NT. They saw the coming of Jesus as fulfilling OT prophecy and confirming the divine authority of the OT.

Peter asserts that Scripture was not of human origin but expressed the will of God. True, God employed human instruments, but they were controlled by the Holy Spirit in what they spoke and recorded (2 Pet 1:20-21). Paul uses even stronger language when he declares that “All Scripture is God-breathed”, affirming that every word of Scripture is breathed out by God (2 Tim 3:16). Moreover, Paul expressly claims to speak the word of God: “when you received the word of God, which you heard from us, you accepted it not as a human word, but as … the word of God” (1 Thess 2:13). He claims Spirit-revealed insight into the mind and wisdom of God for himself and a select group of apostles and prophets who laid the foundation of NT doctrine (1 Cor 2:10-13). Paul’s claim to apostolic authority (2 Cor 10:8) was divinely authenticated by signs and wonders (2 Cor 12:12), visions and revelations from the Lord (2 Cor 12:1-7) and direct revelation from Jesus Christ (Gal 1:11-12). He stated that Christ was speaking through him (2 Cor 13:3), and that his words were endowed with “the authority of the Lord Jesus” (1 Thess 4:2).

It is also significant that when Paul combines a quotation from Moses (Deut 25:4) and another from Jesus (Luke 10:7) he refers to both as “Scripture”: “For Scripture says, ‘Do not muzzle an ox while it is treading out the grain’ and ‘Workers deserve their wages’” (1 Tim 5:18).

Even in his lifetime, Paul’s letters were regarded as having divine authority. They were to be read in the churches and obeyed. The spiritually mature person or true prophet was expected to recognise Paul’s words as a command from the Lord (1 Cor 14:37). Peter acknowledged Paul’s writings as part of Scripture (2 Pet 3:16) and claimed scriptural authority for his and the other apostles’ writings, equating the authority of the OT prophets with that of the NT apostles (2 Pet 3:1-2).

An important question we often encounter in the multi-religious context of South Asia concerns the authority of the scriptures of other religions. Do they offer only human discourse about God, or do they contain any revelation from God? There are essentially three responses to this question. Very few Christian theologians would concur with the Indian theologian P. D. Chenchiah that the Hindu sacred writings are equal to the Christian Scriptures and should take the place of the OT for Christians in the Hindu context. The conservative response to this would be an unequivocal No, seeing no truth or value in the sacred literature of other religions. A third view, which is similar to the way the early church fathers approached Greek philosophy, sees some truth in the sacred books of other faiths, but does not regard this as grounds for treating them on a par with the Bible, the “God-breathed” record and testimony to the decisive revelation of God in Jesus Christ.

The process by which the inspired books were recognised is referred to as canonisation and the approved books constitute the “canon” (a name derived from a Greek word meaning a “measuring rod” or “rule”). The Protestant canon, accepted by most evangelical Christians, consists of 39 OT and 27 NT books. Christians believe the Holy Spirit guided the canonisation process, which acknowledged the inspiration, apostolic authorisation and divine authority of individual books.

Essential to Christian belief in the Bible’s divine authority is our conviction of the integrity of the process of transmission of the biblical text through the centuries. Thousands of manuscript copies have been made. Many ancient copies, such as the sections of the OT found among the Dead Sea Scrolls, still exist and attest that the text of the Bible has been preserved and transmitted without loss of its authenticity, reliability and authority. Today, translations of the Bible from the original Hebrew, Aramaic and Greek texts into the languages of the world’s peoples take great care to accurately transmit the meaning of the original Greek and Hebrew texts.

The living Christ speaks to us today in various ways with lifetransforming impact, but his trustworthy and authoritative word is given to us only in the Bible. Our conviction regarding the Bible’s authority should move us to study it and seek to understand it, in reliance on the Holy Spirit and using standard principles of interpretation such as those set out in the article “Biblical Interpretation”. Among the most important principles are:

• Scripture should be interpreted in the light of Scripture. In other words, more obscure texts are to be understood and interpreted in the light of the texts that are clearer in meaning.

• Scripture should be interpreted in the light of the literary forms and historical context in which it was written. The Bible contains historical narratives, poetry, wisdom literature, prophetic discourses, letters and other literary forms. Each of these forms is distinctive and must be appreciated as such. Poetry, for example, cannot be understood in the same way as historical narrative. Moreover, some portions of Scripture were written two to three millennia ago, and it is important to take into consideration the context of the author and the originally intended readers when interpreting such ancient texts.

• Scripture can never mean anything that is contrary to what it meant in the first place. It is important to determine the intended meaning of the author and to allow that meaning to control any application of the concerned text.

Acceptance of the Bible’s authority as God’s word should take us beyond lip service to a passionate commitment to live under its authority by applying it in our individual lives, our families, the church and every sphere of public life.

Ivan Satyavrata