2000 Issue 3 - Sola Scriptura - Counsel of Chalcedon

8/12/2019 2000 Issue 3 - Sola Scriptura - Counsel of Chalcedon

1/15

ola criptura

by

Joe Morecraft

Again today it can be said

that

no

one

has expressed the

Roman

Catholic

view

of

the Bible

as Roman

priest

Henry

G.

Grahame

in

his

book,

WHERE

WE

GaT

THE iH"BLE, which

has

gone through

about

20 printings since it

was

first

published in

1911,

(Rockford: Illinois, Tan Books and

Publishers, Inc.)

".our Blessed Lord Himselfnever, so far as we

know, wrote a line of c r i p t u r e ~ e r t a i n l y none

that has been preserved.

He

never told His

apostles to write anything. He did not command

them to commit

to

writing what

He

had delivered

to them .. What

He commanded and meant them to

do was precisely what He had done Himself,

viz ..-deliver the Word

of

God to the people by the

living voice

...

not intrust their message to a dead

book .. and so by a iving tradition, preserviDg and

handing down the Word ofGod as they had re

ceived t, to all generations...."- pp. 17-18

''Noihing'was fuItlu;r from the IIlinds

ofthe

apostles and evangelists than the idea ofcompos

mg

works wmch should be collected and formed

into one volume, and so constitute the Holy Book

ofthe Ghristians ...No one would have been more

shocked at the idea ofhis letters usurping the place

of

he authoritative teacher-the church, than the

greatapostle ..."- pp; 19-20

"The Gospels, then, are incomplete and frag

mentary, giving us certainly the.most important

tilings to know about our Savior'S earthly life, bllt

still not telling us allwe might know,

or

much we

da know jn fact now and understand better, through

the teaching of he Catholic Church, which has

preserved traditions,handed down since the time of

the Apostles ...When, now, what I said about the

Gospels is equally true of he Epistles .... "- pp. 24-

25 ,

" ... they [the Scriptures] nowhere claim to state

the whole of Christian tmth, or to be a complete

guide ofsalvation to anyone... the Church existed

and did its work before they were written, and it

would still have done so, even though theyhad

never been written at all ... andwe may confidently

assert that the very last place We should expect to

find a complete summary ofChristian doctrine is in

the Epistles

ofthe

New Testament."- p. 27

"Venerable and inspired as Catholics regard the

Bible, great as is their devotion to it for spiritual

reading and support of

doctrine, we yet do not

pretend to lean upon it alone, as the Rule offaith

and morals. Along with it we take that great Word

that was never written, Tradition, and hold by both

the one and the other interpreted by the living voice

of he Catholic Church speaking through her

Supreme Head, the infallible Vicar ofChrist."- p.

152

Grahame has not

exaggerated

the official

position of the

Roman Catholic

Church as

any can see if he reads the statements of

the

Council of Trent in the 16

th

Century,

Vatican II in the 20

th

Century, and the

recently published

CATECHISM .OF THE

CATHaLiC CHURC, (CCC).

The Roman Catholic Church "receives and .

venerates with a feeling ofpiety and reverence aU .

the books

of

both ofthe Old and NeW Testaments;

since one God is the author

of

both; also the '

traditions, whether they relate to faith or to morals;

as having been dictated orally by Christ or

by

the

Holy Ghost, and preserved in the Catholic Church

in unbroken succession." - H.J. Shroeder (trans.),

CANaNS AND DECREES

.OFm

caUNCIL

.OF

TRENT, (Rockford, IllinoiS: TanBool


2/15

mation hearkened back to

the testimony

of

the apostolic and early church,

clarifying

that position, and declared Sola Scriptura

which

slogan of

the Reformation, the West

minster Confession of Faith sought to de

fine as precisely and as Scripturally as

possible.

.. .it pleased the Lord, at sundry times, and in

divers manners, to reveal Himself, and to declare

that His will unto His

Church; and afterwards, for

the better preserving and propagating of the truth,

and for the more sWe establishment and comfOlt of

the Church against the corruption of the flesh, and

the malice of Satan and of he world, to commit the

same wholly unto writing, which maketh the Holy

Scripture to be most necessary; those former ways

of

God's revealing His will unto His people being

now ceased. - I, 2.

The whole counsel

of

God, concerning all

things neceSSalY for His own glory, man's salva

tion, faith and life,

is

either expressly set down in

Scripture, or by good and necessary consequence

may be deduced from Scripture: unto which

nothing at any time is

to

be added, whether by new

revelations of he Spirit, or traditions ofmen. - I, 6.

The Old Testament in Hebrew .. and the New

Testalnent

n

Greek ... being immediately inspired

by God, and by His singular care and providence

kept pure in all ages, are therefore authentical; so

as

in all controversies

of

religion, the Church is

finally to appeal unto them. - 1, 8.

The infallible rule of interpretation ofScripture

is the Scripture itself; and therefore, when there is

a question about the true and full sense ofany

Scripture, (which is not manifold, but one,) it must

be searched and known by other places that speak

more clearly. - I, 9.

The supreme Judge, by which all controversies

of religion are to be determined, and all decrees of

councils, opinions ofancient writers, doctrines of

men, alld private spirits, are to be examined, alld in

whose sentence we are to rest, can be no other but

the Holy

Spirit speaking in the Scripture. -I, 10.

In an

attempt

to refute

the

Reformation 's

sola

Scriptura

Modern

Roman.Catholic

apologetes try to turn

our

greatest

strength

into

an

argument against the Reformation.

The Protestant teaching that the Bible is the

sole spiritual

authority sola

Scriptura-is

nowhere to be found in the Bible. - From an article

by George Sim Johnston posted on the Catholic

Infornlation Network alld quoted in SOLA

SCRIPTURA, p. 183, (Morgan,

PA

: Soli Deo

Gloria Publications, 1995).

The Bible nowhere teaches that it is the sole

authority in matters ofbelief. n fact, the Bible

teaches that Tradition-the oral teachings given by

Jesus to the apostles and their successors, the

bishops-is a parallel source ofauthentic belie f.

From a tract issued by Catholic Answers and

quoted in SOLA SCRIPTURA, p. 183.

Sola Scriptura contradicts the clear teaching

of

God's Word that there exists, alongside Sacred

Scripture, a divine Tradition and a Teaching Au

thority (the Magisterium of the Church) which

must equally be heeded alld without which Scrip

ture is inevitably misinterpreted. - Gerald

Matatics,ANTITHESIS, Vol. I, No .5, September/

October 1990, p. 50.

My

intention

is to try to show that

our

Sola

Scriptura doctrine is in fact the teach

ing

of the written

Word

of God and by doing

so refute

the

Roman Catholic viewpoint by ,

the

grace of God.

But

first let me quickly

poin t out what

we

do NOT mean by Sola

Scriptura.

I.

We

are not arguing that all truth, such as

mathematics, physics, industrial science, etc., is to

be found in the Bible.

2. Or that the Bible is the only'form in which

God's truth has come to His

people-

God .. spoke long ago to

the

fathers

in the

prophets

in many

portions

and in many ways,

Hebrews I: 1.

3.

Or that every verse in the Bible is equally.

clear

to

every readeI'. Some passages are less

clear than others to be sure, viz. Revelation 20.

4. Or that the church in its preaching-teaching

office

is not of great value and assistance to the

people ofGod in wlderstallding the Bible, for

preachers and teachers are gifts of the ascended

Christ for

the equipping

ofthe saints

for the

.

work of service to

the

building

up of the bOdy

of Christ , Ephesians4: 10-12.

April/May,

Z - THE COUNSEL ofChalcedon -27


3/15

5. Or that

all

extra-biblical knowledge is unnec

essary, like

how

to'cook a meal or how to perform

brain sUtgery, .

6

. r that there is lio need for textual and

historical studY ofthe Bible.

7. Or that

theo,lo&)'

is merely a matter ofproof-

texting. '

8. Or that Christian living was impossible before

the invention of he printing press. .

. 9. Or that God has failed to reveal Himself

elsewhere, .as in creation. .

10. Or

that

we only study

the

Bible and never

read theologians or early church fathers, as if we'

do not appreciate them. Listen to John Calvih's

insig)1tful comnients'on the value of he early

church fathers to Christians today, taken frOni his

prefatory address to King Francis I bfFrance in

hisINSnTUTES

OF THE CHRISTlANRELI

GION, VoL l, pp : 18-19, (Battles Edition):

"

...

hey (the Roman Catholic Church) unjustly

set the ancient fathers against us ... as if in them

they

hadsuppoitersoftheir

own impiety. lfthe

contest were to be determined by patristic author

ity, the tide ofviCtory-to put it very modestly- .

would turn to

Our

side. Now, these fathers have

writtentnaDy wise and excellent thiIigs. Still, what

commonly happens to:men has befallen them too .

,

.

', . . . : '

:

' . , . _ .,,', .'. - '

m some mstances. For these so-called pious

'children Of theirs, with all their sharpness ofwit

aiidjudgment and spirit, worship only the faults and

errors of he fathers. The good things that these

fathers have written they either do not notice,

or

misrepresent or peJ,'Vert. You might say that their

only care is to gather-dung amid gold. Then, with a

frightful to-do, they overwhelm us as despisers and

adversaries of he fathers

But

we do not despise

them;

in

fact,

ifitwere

to our present purpose, I

couldwith

no trouble at all prove that the greater

part

of

what

we

are s lying today meets their

approval. Yet we are so versed in their writings as

to remember always that all things are ours

.

, to

serve us, not to lord it over us. " and tbat we all

belong to the one Christ . , whom we must obey in

all thiIlgs without exception ... "

After listingwjl.


4/15

Word for you; indeed it is

your

life. And by "

this Word you shllll prolong your dllYS in the.

.land., ..- D ~ u t e r o n o m y 32:46-47

In these two

passages

we can see soml'l

'obvio\1s principles:

(I).

The Word Moses

)received from ODd and spoke to the people

';was

written

down. (2). The

people

,them- .

s:elves were commanded to read it

andit

. "

.was plain enough

that they were

able to .'

read and understand it

with

the ,Spirit's

assistance.

(3).

In this

written

Law-Word

the people could find life in the fullest

sense. (4). The covenant

people

do

not

need any additional institution to interpret

correctly the Word of Ood. The priests ; ,

prophets and

scribes

oflsrael certainly

function to help people ministerially. But

the Word

alone

was

sufficient for salvation.

.;.... The function of the prophets and priests

was

not

to add to or even clarify

the

rather, they

applied

it to the

people

who

were sinfully indifferent."-

Rober

t Godfrey,

What Do We Mean By Sola

Scriptura?

in SOLA

SCRIPrURA;

p . 4. Thc;refore

we

.see that .during the days of Moses, the

written Law-Word

of ODd

was .

clear enough

anq'oomprehensive enough

that

it wasthe

s)lfficientn le of faith and practice. 9 s

J:. aw

never directs

the

priests

r

the

people

;

to

give equal reverence to some e c c l e ~ i a s t j

cal orpriestly

tradition

; instead, they a f l ~

repeatei;lly

pointed back

to the

clear

r ~ v e l a .

tionof Ood.'s covenant."- Douglas Jone.s,

ANTITHESIS, Vol. I,

No.5, September

09t()ber 1990, p. 47.

Furthermore,

the

Law itself explicitly

tqrbids

both

c,?venant people and the

Levjtic"l priests from adi;ling another stan- .

dard to ODd's Written revelation: You shall

nO

.t

add

to

the

Word which

I

am com

manding

you, nor take away

from

it,

that

you m ~ keep the c o ~ m n d m e n t s of the

LORD your God

which I command

you,

Deuter

onomy4

:2. This commandment Was

given to all of Isra'eJ, Deuteronomy 4:1.

The

people therefore

were

expected

to .

understlmd and apply God's Word for thein

selveswitho

'ut abddging

or supplementing

i f

with human or priestly traditions, even

if

the priests were unfaithful and added to it

God alone has the authority to add to His Word,

and, at this point in redemptive history, He directs .

them to His written Word as their supreme stan

dard alone and not

to

another Biblical institutionor

tradition. The law then, serves

as

exemplary

support for the doctrine

of

Sola Scriptura

and

since the Law serves as the standard in the histori

cal revelation that follows Moses, we shonld

expect to see the written Word as the standard of

faith andpractice there

as

well, and we do (cf.

Joshua 1:7- do not turn from it to the right or .

to the left - [loSiall] Go,

inquire

ofthe

LORD

,

- -'

for me and the people and all Judah conCern

ing the words of this book that has been

found, for

great

is the wrath of

the

LORD that

burns

against us, because

our

fathers

have

n ~ t

listened to thewords

of

this booli, to do .

according to all

that

is

written

concerning us,

rrKi gs

22: 13.

.

- -'

" ...the Old Testament does not contain anything

close

to

a body ofauthpritative tradition or an ' .

infallible institution on par with Scripture. ,No... ..

where in the Old Testament will You tind a body

of

living tradition like that advocated by Roman ...., \

Catholicism, i.e., a non-revelatory, secondary . .

explication . .. This sort

of

arrangement is unknown

in the Old Testament. Nowhere will [you] find

ti1e

.people ofGod appealing to o n - r e y e l a t o r y i n t e I P . ~ e

t a t i o n ~

or institutions

as

a norm on par with Scrip-.

..

- .

.. .

ture ."- Douglas Jones, ANTITHESIS, pp, 4 7 ~ n d , ;

55

" 1. . ,"

The New Testament case for Sola "'.

Scriptura has basically four points:

'r

1. The contrast between the wisdom of Ood

and the wisdom ofman: ""

2. The relation.ofthe Word ofGod to

t r j d i t i o n

in the teaching ofJesus. .

,

;

3. The nature

of

apostolic tradition. "

.

4: The ilecessity for the inscripturation Oftllll

Word

of

God.

'

.

' "

First, the contrast between the wisdom '

of God and the wisdom of men. Our 'cb'n

vitticHis and beliefs are not to be

b a

s ~ d o n "

w i ~ d o m and insights th at originatewjt1i

.

:.:

AprillMay,

2000 -

THE COUNSEL ofChaicedlln -

29


5/15

man; because,human wisdom is fallible and

not

a sufficient foundation for believing

anything about God, because God alone is

qualified

to testify ,regarding

HimselL

As

Paulwrote :

Even

so

the

'

thoughts of

God

noone,

knows except

the Spirit of God, I

Corjnthians 2:

11.

'

, I Corinthians 2:5 informs,the Coririthfan

church that your faith

should

not rest on

die

wisdom

of men, buton the power of

God

. ',

Here

we see in opposition

to

one another '

the power of God and the wisdom

orman

showing that

our faith

is not to

stand in

the

wisdom Of man , but in the power of God.

For that

reason

Paul's message and

preaching were not in persuasive

,words i

of wisdom, but ln demonstration of the '

Spirit

'

andafpower,

2:4

, '

Wisdom

based

,

bnthe,autonomy of fallen '

man always

leads

away from God, but the revealed wisdom of

God is a sufficient basis and a sufficient ,,',,

powedo

build

one ' s life

andworldview

For

since

in

the wisdom ;of God the

world ,

through

its

wisdom

,

did

,

no

,t ,come"

to

;know

God, God was

'weIJ ,

pleased

, through the foolishness of preaching to

slivethose who

believe, I Cor

,inthian >

, '

1:21.

'

.

...

"PaUl continues

thiscoiltrast

between the

wisdom of man and the wisdom of God,in ,

2:12.I'J-,;Now we

bave

received,

noitbe :

spfrU oHhe world, but the

SpirHwho;is f

from Gdd,

tbat 'we mtghtknow ' the

tilings :

freely given to

us

by God, which

,

' things w,e speak, not in words':taught by '

h ~ m n

wisdom, butiri

those

taught by; ,

tb'

eSpirit, combining p i r i t ~ p r o d i t c e d

tboughts ;with Spirit-produced words.

The'contnlstnow is

drawn

in terms of;

,,:

""ords 'and ideas about God and ilife' that '

Qriginate,;

with

the .spirit of w o r l ~ a n d

human wisdom versus words, and ideas

of

' . ,

,

" _ '

-

.

,

truth

,and.life that

are

the actual words and

h i e ~ s

of ,the ~ p . i r i t

of God

b r Q 1 , l g h ~ t Q ~ a n -

f r o ~ t ~ e m i n d , o f God, Plj-pl is sayi ).g

that

a P Q ~ t o l i c m e s ~ a g e didnot

in

allY way

Qriginatc;:

with

the wisdom

of

man, nor were

,

:.,.

,

,.'

., ....

-;

';',.,

..

. , " .. . ... ..

'-

0 ,

his words taught him by human wisdom, but

, both

the

message he

proclaimed

and

the

words by whioh he proclaimed that message

were

from God, .For this reason Paul .'.

praises God for the Thessalonian chur:ch

be'cause when you rec 'e.ivedJrom ns the "

Word of God's

message,

yon

accepted

i t

'

not as

thewo,d

of

m,en,

but

for wbat i t

.

-

- ' ,

.

: . : ,

.

reallY

'

is,

the

Word

of God, wlllch .also

per,fDrmslts wor,li

in

yo,u

WllO

.believe" I ,

Thessalonia

,ns.2:11.

Paul

s ,words were his

words, but

they

w e r e n i ~ c h more, theY,

we

i e

the wor

.ds

of the hying

9od,.His fllyssage , ,

was s o ~ e t h i n g he

t l l O U g ~ t

about

deep;1y

; b\l,(

His message di4 1;10t o r i g i ~ a t e with

thoughts, it originated.with 004, 50 that . i ;

what he p r e a c h ~ d was very \Vordj()f

God,

andt4at

is

~ o w

t,

he

chuTGh

of

: ; h r j

is,

to receive. the.

aposiolicwo,rd,not

;as t h ~ . ,'

wQ,dOfJIlen, but as the Wor.d of ,God.

'.'

" . ,

.

..

\ . .. .

The contrast comeSQut also,

iri

CotoSs- ,

ians 2: &=See ',tD

i t that no

one ,takeyou,

captive through

philosopby

and

empty

deception,accDrding

to the;fraditillD: ,Df '

men, accDrding to the ,

elemenfary

prin- "

ciples of the

wDrld,

rather than accDrd .

.

ing to

C l ; 1 ~ i s t The e((hort,a,.iol b e r ~ ,

to

.t

he

C()losSiancliufch is

r ~ g a

r 4 i I i g p ~ ~ c M i

the believers

~ a v e b e f o r e t h e m :

al1o\Y

:

i'

;

theD;lselves to be

enslaved to

human, entpty"

deceptive

h i l o s ~ p h y t h a t d o ~ s

n o t ~ o w e " .

from Ood

or

'leij.dto GOd, wq..kh,is

fpund

the

t:r;ad(tipnsof

~ A ,

.p.

e.

#rJ ,IYr\,o.

teq

;

a n d

. b u i l t

up

jn

Christ,

h e I l ) ; -

selves in t r ~ d i t i ( m

that

o r i g i n a t ~ d ~ i t h ,

Christ alld is about Christ. Jes.usHi,lIlself . \

: 1

_ .

\ .

, , . ' , : . I ,

mad,e:

he

, a m . t ;

c o w p a r . i s o p

w e e n

the

,

"

J;

l

traditioJ?saIldp,rec,?pts

q

nwn y

m us

,

the

;,

commandment 1;lDd word

of

God. whi.ch the"

,. , ,

,

, ,

,.

. " ' , . . , j

Jews had

invalidated

for

the sake

ofthtjir

,

human traditions,

Matthew

15:3-9.

,

. . , , .

.

" ' . .

; , ' ,

And so, the contrast. cannotpe any o ,

stronger

or c 1 ~ a r e r (I.). The') 'j

sdo]l1 ;

.

power of

G,od yerS\lS

* e l ; 1 q L i m p o t " ' \ t

wisdom of men;

(2).'

T,;J.1 ;: won;is &.ideas . ,

" . , " '

,

. .

that

originate

.

with

God. versas the words,,&'

e a , ~ t ~ a t o r i g i A e ~ i llle.n;J ?) : ~

30-

.

THE COUNSEL ofChalcedon - April May,

2000


6/15

' < . -....

: . '

.

.

.

'

tradition of

Chrjst

versus the

tradition

of

men; (4). The divine authority of Christ

versus thepseljdo-authority

of

men; (5).

The Word (If

God versus the word of men.

Ancl .theapostolic command to Christ's

church is. that your

faith

should not

rest

on the

whd(lm

of men,

,>ut on

the power

of .God.

.. Or as the prophet Jeremiah teaches us,

God's people

must not submit themselves

to

the

uninspired

words of men:

Thus

says

the .LORD of bosts, Do Dot listen to

the

'wordsof the prophets

who

are

propbesying

to you.

They are leading

YOl . into

futility;

they

speak

a vision of

their own imagination,

not from the

mouth of the LORD,

Jeremiab

23: 16.

And now

the

contrast is

portrayed

as

that

claims to

truth that

originate with the

imagination

of men, even religiOUS men

who boast tl1at.they aFe chosen by Godto

speak for

God, and

those

claims to truth

that

originate:with .the mouth of

the

LORD.

The church

isnot to listen even to

prophets.in the church,

who speak .ex

ca-

hedra

if

their

message does not come

froOl the

mouth

.of God.

Second, the .relation

of

the Word

of

God

to '

traditions in

the

teaching

of

Jesus.

Ad

dressing

the

.

Pharisees

He

said

regarding

. thc;:m and their religious practices: " .. .in

Vain do they worship Me,

teaching

as '

doc

'trines tile precepts of inen.' N e

glectingthe c o J D ~ a n d m e n t

(If God,

you

b o l ~ t o

t h e trjldition of men.

He

was .

also

saying

to thelll;

You nicely set aside

the commandmentofGoll

in

order to

k'eep

your

tradition ... thus invali'dating

the Word

of G.

od

by

your traditions

which you

have

handed down

...

- Mark

7 : 7 ~ 3

.

The

pharisees

added

rabbinical traditions

to the written .Law- Word

of God

so' as' to

protect that Word from

misinterpretation

.

J

eSIjS told

them

that rather than

protecting

the Law-Word

of

God

they were

neglecting ...

niCely setting aside . ., in-

validating the Word of God by your

traditions which

you have

handed

down

... They had

empti

ed

the

Scripture

of

meaning and authority

.

Having placed

their:

traditions alongside Scripture as the final :

authority

for the

people,

they

had

in

effect

supplanted Scripture, loweri

ng

the preroga-.

tives of

Scripture

and

raisin

g

the

value.

of

'

traditions originating in human wisdom :

"Protestants do not beg-the-questionagainst "" ,

Roman Catholicism by arguing that Christ's con"

demnation of Pharisaical traditions, (e:g., to Mat,,:

thew 15:3) also applies to Roman Catholic tradi-


7/15

Christ and rest secure that

that

testimony

is

trustworthy?

Jesus commissioned certain

men

to act

as

His authorized representatives in the

church and world,' to speak for Him in His

name. An apostle

of

a person,

in

the an

cient

legal

sense of the term , was viewed

as

that

person

himself

whom

he

represented

in a court of l1iw. The apostles word

were

legally

received

as the

words

of the one

who commissiooed

him. Christ's apostles

were His apostles

in this sense.

The

apostles' word was Christ's word, and it

was

to be

received

as Christ's

word,

and

not

merely

the word

of men.

To receive

their message is to receive

Christ,

and to

reject

their message

is to reject the

Christ

who commissioned them.

T

he apostles'

word was Christ's

word,. and. it was to be received as

Christ's

word, and

not

merely

the

word

of

men ,

To

receive

their

mes

sage

is to receive

Christ,

and to

reject

theif

message is to reject the Christ

who

commissioned them.

In Johri 14:26, Jesus promised His

apostles that after

His

death

,

resurrection

and

ascension:

the Helper,

the Holy

Spirit,

whom the Father will

send

in My

oame,

He

will teach yon

all things,

and

bring to yonr remembrance all that I

said

to

you. Jesus

inspired

His apostles

with

His

Word by His Holy Spirit. Now

Jesus passed

on

to the world through His

apostles, not their own insights and

o p n ~

ions, but His own Word abouJ ,Rimself by ;,,

the

inspiration of

the

Holy

Spirit, who

wOltl,d

teach them everything

and cause

them

to

remember everything that

He

qad taught

them.

t was His Word they were to com- .

inunicate. The apostolic message

a

.

Christ and

it

was from Christ by the S:pirit d

of ChriSt.

Jesus said to His apostles: He who

receives you receives Me, and he who

receives Me receives Him who sent Me,

Matthew

10:40. From this statement we

learn that ,

just

as

Jesus

was sent and com

missionedby

God to speak for Him and to

represent

Him as the

Father

's apostle, so

Jesus with the Father's authority sent and

commissioned

His apostles to speak for Him

and to be His authoritative spokesmen

to.

speak His Word and the Word of His Fa

c

ther, and only that Word. What

they

com

municated therefore was according to the

revelation of God the

Father

and God the

Son.

This

is

what JeSus

meant

when He said

to Peter, who confessed for all the apostles

that

Jesus is the Christ, the,Son

of

he

living

God-Blessed

are you,

Simon

Barjonas,

because flesh

and

blood

did

not

reveal

this to yon, but My

Father

who is in heaven, Matthew 16:17. Paul

gives a similar

testimony

in Galatians

I: I I , I2 For 1wonld have yon know,

brethren, that the gospel which was '

preached by me is not according to man.

For I neither received i t

from

man, nor

was

I

taught it, but

I

received i t through

a revelation of Jesus Christ. So then,

God the Father and

God

the Sonincarnate

reveal the

Word

of

God

to

the

apostles

directly who are taught that Word by the

Holy Spirit, so

that

they can teach

that

Word in all its purity and entirety to the

Church with infallible divine authority.

Christ builds His

church

.upon His

apostles as

receptors

and transmitters

of

His own

revelation.

Paul speaks of the

church

of Christ as

God's

Househoid,

havi'ng been built upon

the foundation of

.

the

a'

postles

and prophets,

Christ

Jesus

Himself being the cornerstone, Eph

esians 2:19-20. He said to Peter, who

had

just

confessed

Him to be the divine Christ,

And

1

also

say to you that you are Peter,

and 'Upon 'this

rock

1

wiWbuild My

church; and the gates of hell shall not

overpower

it

, Matthew 16:I8 .The rock

32 -rHE COUNSEL ofChalcedon - AptillMay, 2000

.


8/15

upon

which

Christ will build His church

cannot

be the

person

of

Peter, for

just a

few verses later in the same chapter, Jesus

calls

Peter

Satan, because, confused

about the word

of

Christ concerning His

death and

resurrection,

Peter

wants

to keep

Christ

from accomplishing

what

God sent

Him to accomplish, 16:21-23. The church

of Christ is not

built

on Satan,

which

it

would be if it were

built

on the human

personality

of Peter. What,

then,

did

Jesus

mean in His

response

to Peter'sconJession

of

faith in Him?

Its context helps us see what He

meant.

After asking the apostles what

other

people

were saying about

Him,

He

said to them,

But who do you say that am? - Mat

thew 16: 15.

Notice that Christ

was not

speaking to Peter

alone

but

to

them,

i.e.,

to

all the apostles. And you

in

His

question

is

plural,

so

that

He was

not asking Peter

what he as an individual believed about

Himself,

rather He was

asking

all

the

apostles what

they

thought of Him. And

Peter

answering for all the

apostles

said,

Thou art the

Christ

.. , ' 6:16.

Then Jesus

says to Peter, speaking to

him

as a

repre

sentative of

the

apostles in whose

behalf he

had spoken, and not merely for himself

Upon

this

rock

I

will

build

My

church,

6 :18.

What

then is this

rock, this

'

''foun

dation upon which Christ will

build

His

church? t

is

none other than the confess

ing apostles, who are faithful and truth

confessors of

revealed '

truth,

As a

person

Peter

could

become Satan,

when

he

departed from Christ's

truth,

but as

Spirit

inspired vehicles and transmitters of

Christ's truth ,

the

apostles

are the solid,

rocky foundation of the

church of

Christ

that

is

faithful

to

that foundation

.

. The teaching of the apostles then was

received

as a

body

of truth bearing

divine

authority, the criterion and

standard

for

truth and life in the church of Christ. What

the apostles spoke and wrote

as truth

while

inspired by the Spir it did not originate with

them

or

with the wisdom of men

in

any

sense. t was God-breathed,

just

as is all

holy Scripture,

II

Timothy

3: 16.

It was the

revelation

of God, both in its doctrines and

in

the verbal expression of those

doctrines.

How did the

church

learn of the apos

tolic truth that

was

from

God

the Father,

Son

and

Spirit, this

body

of

dogma

of

divine

authority?

It

was

passed down to the

apostles from Christ,

which apostles

then

passed it

down

to and through the church

of

Christ; and

therefore

it

was

called

in

the

New Testament, that which was deliv

ered, or

the

deposit, or the pattern

of

sound words,

or

the tradition,

paradosis

that which was handed over and passed

down, that

which is

transmitted

by one

person to another , that which is entrusted ,

.

deposited,

and

passed

on. The

apostles

delivered to the

church

that deposit

of

truth

they

received from

God

the Father, Son

and

Holy

Spirit.

Paul's

exhortation to Timothy

was:

Re

tain

the

standard of

sound words which

you

have

heard

from

me,

in

the

faith

and

love which

are

In

Christ

Jesus.

Guard

through

the

Holy Spirit who dwells

in

you,

the

treasure (the

good

deposit)

which

has

been entrusted to you, II

Timothy

:

13-14.

What does this

exhorta

tion tell us

about

the

nature

of apostolic

tradition? The

standard

or pattern

of

sound

words,

i.e., the revealed system of

theology

and ethics, is what Timothy re

ceived

from

the

apostle Paul.

Paul

re-

ceived this

deposit

of truth, this trea

sure

of

sound

doctrine from

Christ

and

passed

it on, or delivered it, to Timothy who

in

turn was to

retain

it ,

guard

it and

preach it to Christ's church. Timothy

was neither

to

abridge

it

or

supplement

it

with ideas of his own, he was to keep the

commandment without stain

or

re

proach,

until the

appearing

of

our Lord

Jesus Christ, I

Timothy

6: 14.

He was

to

guard that which had

been

entrusted

to

him

to

retain

and

preach in

all its pristine glory

AprillMay, 2000 - THE COUNSEL ofChalcedon - 33


9/15

just

as it had

been delivered

to him from the

apostle, just

as the

apostle

had

retained it

in

all

its

purity

as he

had

received it from

Christ.

Paul's intensity and

sense

o urgency is

seen

in his concluding exhortation to Timo

thy

in his

first epistle: 0 Timothy, gnard

what has

been

entrusted

to

you, avoid

.

ing worldly and empty chatter and the

opposing

arguments of what

is falsely

called knowledge- which some have

professed and

thus gone astray

from the

Faith. Grace

be

with you, I

Timothy

6:20-

21.

Ministers o the

gospel and

the

church

of Christ are to guard the precious treasure

of the

standard

of

sound words," the

apostolic tradition received from Christ,

which

Christ has entrusted to them without

synthesizing

it

in

any

way with anything

that originates with

man

in the

church

or in

the world, because

to

fail

to

guard it and

to

retain it in pure and entire form is to aposta

tize from

the Faith,

i.e., the pattern of

sound

words to be believed received from

the

apostles

who

received it

from Christ.

That treasure-deposit is

to

be the

church's one standard of faith and life,

theology and

ethics.

In guarding the apostolic deposifoftruth

pure

and entire, the apostle

Paul

commands

us that

in the

name of our

Lord

Jesus

Christ,

that

you keep

aloof from

every

brother who leads an unruly life a.nd not"

a.ccording to the

tradition

which

you

received from

us, II Thessalonians 3:6.

The

church

is to

separate

itself from

every

professed Christian or

minister who

by

his

life contradicts the tradition which you

received from us, i.e.,

the

apostles,

be

cause that apostolic tradition, that divinely

rev() iled

body

of

truth is

the churCh's

one

standard for

Christian

living.

I t is a

serious

and terrible

thing

to

turn

away in thought

or

life from the apostolic

deposit of

divine truth, as the

apostle

Peter

has

written: For i t

would be better for

them not to have

known

the way of righ-

teousness, than having known it, to turn

away

from

the

holy commandment deliv

ered to

them,

II Peter 2:21.

Here the

apostolic tradition is called the holy com

mandment that

wa.s

delivered

to hem.

I t is given this designation because of its

divine source, Godin Christ, whodelivered

it

to the

apostles

who

delivered

it to the

church. That )l.Oly commandment is the

way

ofrighteousness

in which the church

is always to walk. And God hates and

punishes

apostasy so severely,

that

it would

be

better for a person

not

to

have

known

that way

at

all,

than

to

have known

the

apostolic

doctrine,

and

then to turn away

from it

in

defiance. God describes such a

person

as a dog

returning

to its

own

vomit,

2:22.

This

apostolic deposit

of

verbal revela

tion

from God was

not

only to be the stan

dard for truth and life in

the

first century

,

it

was

to

continue

as such a standard govern

ing all the teaching

of

the church through

out the future. In II Timothy 2: 1-2, Paul

instructs Timothy: You therefore,my son,

be strong in the grace that is

in

Christ

Jesus.

And

the

things which

you

have

heard

from me

in

the presence of many

witnesses, theseentrilst to Jaithful men,

who will

be able to

tC/lCh

others

also.

In these verses

we see that the

apostolic

church had a class of officers called the

ministers

of the Word, distinct from church

members,

who were set apart to their

work

.

by the ordination

of

the

presbytery,

and

whose

duties included

the

preaching and

teaching of the Word of God. These minis

ters were

placed

in the

church

' by the divine

institution and divine authority of Christ the

head

o

the church through the ministry

of

the apostles. Acting under

Christ's com

mission and authority they, these apostles,

as we see here,

ordained men

to this office.

This office

of

ministry

was to be a

perma

nent institution in the Church, and the

apostles never

'

intended for

the

church after

their

death

to be

left destitute of iostrue-

34

THE

COUNSEL

of

ChalCedon - April May,

2000

- - - - . . _ _ _ _. - -

-


10/15

tors, who were not to be received as

apostles themselves with infallible apostolic

anthority, but who

were

to be received as

ministers of

the things

which

you have

heard

from

me in the presence of many

witnesses, i.e., the apostolic tradition from

God, which is entrusted to them to keep

pure and entire and to propagate throughout

the world.

This text says

nothing

at all about

apos

tolic succession nor does it suggest

that

Paul is passing on to Timothy continuing

infallible apostolic authority. What these

words

are describing is

the

process of

discipleship and the ordinary training re

quired for the office of the miuistry of the

gospel.

"Far from imparting

to

these men some apos

tolic authority that would guarantee their infallibil

ity, Timothy was

to

choose men who had proved

themselves faithful, teach them the gospel [Paul

taught him], and equip them in

the principles

of

church leadership he had learned from Paul. -

Nothing in these verse suggests that the truth

Timothy would teach other faithful men would be

preserved without error from generation

to

genera

tion."- John MacArthur in SOLA SCRIPTURA, p.

169-70.

How did the apostles pass down imd

transmit this deposit

of

divinely revealed

truth to the church of Christ? II

Thessalonians

2:

15 gives us

the

answer : So

then, brethren, stand firm and hold to

the

traditions

which

you

were

taught,

whether

by

word of

mouth

or

by letter

from

us.

t

was transmitted orally

and

in

written form from the apostles to the

church .

This text speaks

of

ONE deposit

of

truth

transmitted

in TWO ways. The

apostles

handed over this deposit to the church by

word

of mouth or by letter from us.

There

is not

the

slightest hint in this text

that part of the apostolic traditions came

orally

and part of

them

came

in written

form so that both must be kept

together

because it is only in both together

that the

church

has

the complete

Word

of

God . Not

the slightest hint Our text does

NOT

say

that there are two things

that came

to the

church-scripture and oral tradition; rather

it clearly says

that

there is one thing-the

apostolic deposit

o f

divine

truth,

that came

to

the

church in two ways

orally

and

inscripturated. I f a person or church

has

'

received that one deposit

from

the apostles

in

either

way, he has

one and

the

same

. .

system

of

doctrine.

".: .thereal thrust

of

what Paul is writing here is'

antithetical

to

the spirit

of

Roman Catholic Tradi-

tion. Paul is not encouraging the Thessalonians to

receive some tradition that had been delivered to

them via second or third hand reports. On the

contrary, he was ordering them to receive as

infallible truth only what they had heard directly

from his own lips."- MacArthur, SOLA

SCRIPTURA, p. 177

Why was the oral .

transmission

of the

apostolic traditio.ns

by the

apostles as

authoritative in the church in the New .

Testament as the

inscripturated form

of

those

traditions?

Because

the one orally

communicating those traditions had

tolic authority directly from Jesus,

the

revelation of the Father, and the inspiration

of

the Holy Spirit, and that authority bound

. the church to believe and obey

what

was

contained in the treasure of

sound

doctrine.

And

what must be said time and again is

that

no one but Christ's

apostles and

apos

tolic authority, so that when they taught the '

church

in sermons or

letters, the

church

was to receive their words as truth from

Jesus

Christ

Himself passed on to His

church through them . ' Therefore, we who '

are members

of

Christ's church today, as

always, are

under obligation

to

submit

to

the Spirit-inspired oral teaching of

Christ;s

apostles,

if they

were still alive, but

they

.

are all dead And according to

the

Bible

this apostolic authority that is foundational

to

the

church has not been passed on to

anybody.

The

apostles have no successors.

There

is no apostolic succession

of the

April/May, 2000 -

THE

COUNSEL

ofChalcedon 35 '

, ' , ' ,

. ' ,

-

-.

,


11/15

apostolic

office .

Rome's

claim that the

popes are the successors of the

apostles

has

one problem:

it

is not and cannot be

rounded

n

the Bible, or in the

apostolic

deposit of divine

truth

and life. Timothy

was

Paul's

"son" in the ministry, and yet

Timothy is never

given the

name

apostle,

nor

does he function as an apostle,

nor

is he

treated as

an

apostle . The apostolate was

not a permanent and continuing office in the

church. t was foundational. Paul himself

said he was the "last" of the apostles in I

Corinthians 15:9. Moreover, it is impossible

for anyone

after

the

First

Century to be an

apostle because according to the apostolic

deposit of

divine

truth, two prerequisites

are necessary for one to be an apostle: (I).

He

had to have seen the

resurrected

Christ,

and (2).

He

had

to

be

called

to

office

personally by Jesus Christ.

So then, the authority of the apostles

continuing in the church today is only

through their "deposit" of God-breathed

doctrine. And the only way now that we

can receive that

deposit

is in

writing

for

one obvious reason: Christ's apostles are

all dead and have been dead for almost 2000

years There

has

not been

any oral apos

tolic instruction since the las t apostle died ,

and

contrary

to

Rome's

contention,

the

apostolate transmitted their apostolic au

thority

on to

NO successors.

Therefore, what the apostles wrote is to

be

received

by

us

as the very Word of God.

As Paul

wrote: f

anyone

thinks he is a

prophet

or spiritual, let him recognize

that the things which I write

to

you are

the Lord's commandment, I

Corinthians

15:37. Their writings have the same divine

authority as the rest of the God-breathed

Scriptures.

Peter urged

his

readers

to

regard

the patience of our

Lord

to be

salvation; just as also our

beloved

brother Paul, according

to

the wisdom

giveil

him, wrote to you, as also in all

his

letters, speaking in them of

these

things, in which

are

some things hard to

understand,

which the

untaught and

unstable distort as they do also the rest

of the Scriptures,

to

their own

destruc

tion,

II

Peter 3:15-16.

Peter, in other words, puts Paul's writing

on par with the Old Testament Scriptures,

just as Paul puts Luke s writing on par

with

the Old Testament,

when

in I Timothy 5:18,

he writes: For the Scripture says, "You

shall not mUZZle the ox while he is

threshing," (which s from Deuteronomy

25:4) , and

"The

laborer

is worthy of

his

wages," (which is from Luke 10:7).

There is no continuing oral apostolic

traditions

because

there have been no

apostles for almost 2000 years.

Now

the

authority

of Christ's apostles continue to

govern the church through their written,

objective instruction. .

The author of the epistle of Jude lived

when the apostle's were still alive and still

transmitting

the

truth

of God orally, and yet

he could still urge his readers to contend

earnestly

for the faith

which was once

for

all

delivered to

the

saints,

vs. 3. He

knew of a body of revealed truth, callea ,

the

Faith, i.e. , that which is to be believed

because it

ll

divinely revealed. He knew

that this

had been

once

for all

delivered

to the church of Christ. Therefore all

claims to additional revelation-oral or

written

- are false

claims.

This "Faith" was

accomplished and completed in the genera

tion

of the

apostles.

Since the,death of the

last apostle, the apostolic

tradition

is not a

growing tradition, continuing to develop, nor

is it a "living tradition",which can be

supplemented by the ex cathedra declara

tion of the Roman pope.

Paul

warns in

Galatians

I :6-9 that

if

anyone preaches another gospel other than

the

one

that originated

with

Christ and was

passed down to him by direct revelation and

inspiration, i.e,

the faith

which was once

for all delivered to the saints, he will be

cursed of God.

36 - THE COUNSEL

of

Chalcedon - AprillMay, 2000


12/15

"What this demonstrates is that the gospel

in

Paul's time was a completed message which would

not be subject to "development" over time, in the

sense that there could be dogmas added to the

truth

of

he faith which were not clearly taught by

the apostles. It was a body of truth whose contents

were defended by the apostles and which were

preserved in the New Testament epistles. - The

Church of Rome , of course, partly defends its

tradition under

the

notion of "development

of

doctrine." That is, that the apostles left truth in

genn in

tlle

Scriptures which took centuries to

develop fully .Teachings,inlplicitly recorded

in

Scripture, are slowly over time more fully revealed

by the Spirit of God

as

he gives de eper understand

ing. This is a clever theory. No one denies that

tllere can

be

a development in understanding the

deep truths of Scripture over time, but the theory

now under consideration cannot legitimize Roman

Catholic tradition for it fails

as

we have seen] in

two very important

tests-the

test

of

Scripture and

the test ofhistory."- William Webster, THE

CHURCH OF ROME AT THE BAR

OF

HIS

TORY,p.18-l9.

So then, to repeat: what governs the

church today? Oral apostolic tradition? No

Why ? The

apostles

are dead. What

about

the teaching of the apostles in

objective

written

form? Yes Praise God for it

Although

Peter

was

on the

Mount

of

Trans

figuration and heard God speak audibly

from the

heavens

, he wrote in

his second

epistle that he would rather have the di

vinely revealed book

than the

audible

and

oral divine voice. He said

that

in the Bible

we have the prophetic word made more

sure,

II

Peter

1: 19. Why is

the

written

Word more sure ? Because no

prophecy

of Scripture

is a matter

of one's

own

interpretation,

for

no

prophecy was ever

made

by

an

act of

human

will,

but

men

moved by the

Holy Spirit

spoke

from

God

[in the

Scripture],

II Peter 1:20-21.

Third, the necessity for the

inscripturation of the

Word

of

God. God

has revealed Himself

in a

variety

of

ways

in the history of redemption since the cre-

ation: orally through the prophets , audibly

and

directly

from Heaven, through the

Angel

of

the Lord, in dreams and

visions

, in

apostolic preaching and in writing, from

Moses

through John .

From tablets

of stone

to epistles God has rev ealed

Himself in

written

form

. Why?

The

Word of

God

that

was originally delivered in oral form needed

to

be reduced

to

writing

in order

for

the

rest of

God's

people to know the truth

about

Him and His will for

them,

so it

could

operate as an effective standard for faith

and

obedience,

truth and

life,

theology and

ethics. In

writt

en Jorm t is an objec

tiv

e

inJallible

standard

to

govern

th e church

through all gen era t ions to test

the

truth

claims oj

prophets

and

teachers

Jar

the

establishment

oj the church in

all

ages

to guard

against Satan

to give

the

a

ss

ur-

an ce

o

salvation

again

s t human

opin

ion

expres

sed

by preachers or prie

st

s. As the

Westminster Confession

of Faith

states:

" ... for the better preserving and propagat

ing of the truth, and for

the more sure

establishment

and comfort

of the Church

again

st the corrupti on of

the

flesh, and

malice of

Satan

and of

the

world , to

commit

the

same [i.e. , the re velation of God and

His will] wholly unto writing;

which

makes

the

Holy

Scripture

to

be most

llecessary;

those

fanner ways

of

God's revealing His

will

unto His people being

now ceased. -

I,

I

That this confessional statement

has

solid Scriptural support can be shown from

the following texts :

So that your trust may be

in

the LORD, I

have taught you today, even you. Have I not

written to you excellent things, of counsels

and knowledge, to make you know the cer

tainty

ofthe

words

oftruth that

you may

correctly answer to him who sent you?- Prov

erbs 22: 19 21

Inasmuch as many have

undertaken

to

compile

an

account

ofthe

things accomplished

among us,

just

as those who

from the

begin

ning were eyewitnesses and servants of t)Ie

April/May, 2000 - THE COUNSEL ofChalcedon -37


13/15

: -

Documents

2000 Issue 3 - Sola Scriptura - Counsel of Chalcedon