Chapter 7.8

The Supremacy of Scripture

Its Authority Over Every Other Authority

 

Table of Topics

A) Supremacy Derived from its Superior Trustworthiness

B) Supremacy Over Biblical Institutions & Religious Writings

C) Supremacy Over Human Reason, Science & Conscience

D) Supremacy Over Prophets, Apostles, & Miracle Workers

E) Supremacy Over Teachers

F) Scripture’s Authentication of God’s Faithful Deeds

G) Scripture’s Authentication of the New Nature

H) Supremacy Over Mysticism

I) Supremacy Over Human Experience

J) Supremacy Over Demonic Revelation of the World

Extras & Endnotes

Primary Points

Scripture is supremely authoritative because in it God has communicated essentially everything He desires or needs to.

God is only going to hold us accountable for heeding the words of Scripture & disobeying it alone results in sin.

The degree of certainty we have with regard to God’s will in a situation is directly proportional to the degree of clarity we have as to how the Scripture applies to the situation.

“All Scripture is . . . useful for . . . rebuking [and] correcting” because it alone in all the Earth can tell every other authority they are wrong.

The reason for Scripture’s superior authority is its superior trustworthiness.

Scripture has never failed to be a truthful guide for life and knowing God’s will. Could we say the same of any other authority available today.

All human authority (parents, Pastors, Presidents) is derived from Scripture.

Scripture is also supremely authoritative over all merely human writings.

While Scripture must appeal to our God-given reason to be believed and obeyed, after it has been accepted as Scripture, our reason must bow to it.

God has granted our conscience much authority, but a conscience straying from Scripture is “weak,” and one reflecting Scripture is “strong”.

At any point that a Teacher deviates from what Scripture teaches, they have no divine authority, and in fact, come under divine disapproval.

We must interpret our more subjective experiences with the more objective Scripture.

The anti-God “pattern of this world (Rom 12:2) is satan’s scripture designed to train the unregenerate in his beliefs and values. The Bible contains “the pattern of sound teaching” (2 Tim 1:13).

A) The Supremacy of Scripture Derived from its Superior Trustworthiness

Scripture is supremely authoritative because in it God has communicated essentially everything He desires or needs to. These characteristics grant it the exclusive ability and authority to judge and evaluate all other divine revelations and human reasonings. Indeed, all other communication must be defended against the standard of Scripture in order to have any divine authority. Neither unbiblical nor extra-biblical statements can carry the same level of authority over our lives. God is only going to hold us accountable for heeding the words of Scripture & disobeying it alone results in sin.

As Christian philosopher Edmund Clowney has said, “The degree of certainty we have with regard to God’s will in a situation is directly proportional to the degree of clarity we have as to how the [written] Word of God applies to the situation.” ^[1]

It is sin against Almighty God to ignore, question, or disobey Scripture. The same can hardly be said of merely the words of humans, or the theories of science, or our own impressions, feelings, or intuitions. While it is certainly wise to value other sources of information, God is only going to hold us accountable for heeding the words of Scripture, and no other. Scripture’s superiority over all other sources of authority certainly illustrates its own authority. This is why the Apostle Paul said that, “All Scripture is . . . useful for . . . rebuking [and] correcting” (2 Tim 3:16) because it alone in all the Earth can tell every other authority they are wrong.

In this way, Scripture is set apart and above all other communication because it is the most direct and reliable revelation of God available to the Church today. This is the supremacy of Scripture.

A primary reason for Scripture’s superior authority is its superior trustworthiness. The Psalmist said: “The statutes of the LORD are trustworthy, making wise the simple. The precepts of the LORD are right, giving joy to the heart. . . . The ordinances of the LORD are sure and altogether righteous” (Ps 19:7, 8, 11). There is no other authority on Earth more trustworthy than Scripture, therefore its authority is superior because only that which we trust will really exercise power over us.

We are again reminded of something Plato once said. His Academy was the university of the ancient world, and his genius is recognized the world over even after almost 2500 years since he lived. His insights into spiritual things and life in general were remarkable, and many of them even biblical. Yet, in spite of his vast learning, as he neared the time of his death, he cried, “Oh, that there were some sure word that like a raft could bear us across the seas to that unknown world.” ^[2] We have that “more sure word” (cf. 2 Pet 1:19 KJV), given to us in the Scriptures by the One Who waits for us on the other side of this life, and guides us by Scripture until then.

Obviously, the trustworthiness of Scripture comes from the fact that its source is “God, Who does not lie” (Tit 2:1). Its trustworthiness is enhanced by the fact that it is objective and unchanging, something that cannot be said of our own thoughts or people. In addition, Scripture has never failed to be a truthful guide for life and knowing God’s will. It would be difficult to dogmatically say the same of any other means of spiritual authority available today.

For example, a multitude of people today are claiming that God has spoken to them through other means including visions, voices, dreams, signs, “prophets,” impressions, tradition, and circumstances. However, many of those same people often fail to recognize the number of times these supposed means of divine communication have misled them. The divine communication contained in Scripture has never, and will never mislead anyone. Any deception deriving from the improper interpretation or application of Scripture is the fault of the deceived person, not Scripture.

It is the supreme trustworthiness of Scripture that gives it authority over all other authorities such that they can and should be checked by it. No commands or communication need be heeded unless it completely conforms to Scripture. That is a lot of authority! This can be illustrated by noting how Scripture’s supreme authority relates to other sources of authority.

B) Supremacy Over Biblical Institutions & Religious Writings

All human authority is derived from Scripture. Not even parents would rightfully be able to exercise authority over their children if Scripture did not permit and even command them to do so. In addition to Scripture being the sole source of parental authority, it checks that authority. No parent has the authority to command their children to do something unbiblical. It was to just such a person that the King said, “if anyone causes one of these little ones who believe in Me to sin, it would be better for him to have a large millstone hung around his neck and to be drowned in the depths of the sea” (Matt 18:6).

The same is true of all other God-ordained authorities, including Presidents, Pastors, husbands, and employers. If Scripture did not command us to be subject to them we would not be obligated to do so, and we are not obligated to do so if any human authority commands something that would violate Scripture. ^[3] Our spiritual freedom from dictatorial Pastors and oppressive governments is the Word of God in Scripture, because it possesses more divine authority than all of them.

As we discuss more fully elsewhere in Knowing Our God, human traditions in the Church would certainly apply here. ^[4] We are not expected by God to obey any of them that are not explicit commands of Scripture. Accordingly, our Lord confronted the Pharisees on this matter when He said:

[W]hy do you break the command of God for the sake of your tradition? For God said, ‘Honor your father and mother’ and ‘Anyone who curses his father or mother must be put to death.’ But you say that if a man says to his father or mother, ‘Whatever help you might otherwise have received from me is a gift devoted to God,’ he is not to ‘honor his father’ with it. Thus you nullify the word of God for the sake of your tradition. You hypocrites! (Matt 15:3-7)

We see that even a well-meaning human tradition designed to promote devotion to God is sinful because it violates the authority of Scripture. And again, even those that are simply extra-biblical, as opposed to unbiblical, have no divine authority, although they may not be sinful to practice.

Scripture is also supremely authoritative over all merely human writings. This is illustrated by the rather famous example of the French philosopher Voltaire (1694–1778) of which the popular Baptist teacher W. A. Criswell wrote:

So deadly and so merciless has been the poison of rationalism in our schools, in our universities, in our seminaries, and pulpits, that it almost seems as if the prophecy of Voltaire, the infidel who died in 1778, would come to pass. Voltaire said, “One hundred years from my day there will not be a Bible in the earth except one that is looked upon by an antiquarian curiosity seeker.” . . .

Yet one hundred years from the time of Voltaire’s prediction, a first edition of his work sold in the market in Paris for eleven cents. And on that identical day, the British Government paid to the Czar of Russia $500,000 for the Codex Sinaiticus, a copy of the Word of God discovered by Tischendorf. ^[5]

The supremacy of Scripture applies as well to even highly respected documents within the Church. Accordingly, although the early Church valued such writings as the Didache, 1 & 2 Clement, and the epistles of the Bishop Ignatius (c. 40-107), it never put them on par with the authority of Scripture, and was, in fact, very careful to distinguish them. This obviously applies to the writings of godly and popular Christian authors today. No matter how helpful, their authority over the Christian only applies to the extent that they reflect Scripture. Beyond that, as Martin Luther said, “What is asserted without the Scriptures or proven revelation may be held as an opinion, but need not be believed.” ^[6] There is no such thing as a mere opinion in the revelation of Scripture. ^[7]

Of course, other religions claim to have writings that are significant sources of spiritual truth as well. Judaism abides by the Talmud, Islam has the Koran, and Hinduism the Bha-gavad-gita. Why would we claim that Scripture is superior in authority over these? First, only the Christian Scriptures have been written by men historically believed to have performed divine miracles. None of the human authors of other religious texts claimed to be miracle-workers, nor were they, including Muhammad. Related to this is the fact that only Scripture can boast of historically fulfilled prophecies made hundreds of years beforehand. No other religious text even attempts such prophecies, let alone containing fulfilled ones. ^[8]

In other words, Scripture manifests itself as truly and uniquely divine, while the attributes of other “bibles” are solely and merely human, if not demonic. Accordingly, Carl F. H. Henry (1913-2003) wrote:

The study of comparative religions has for almost a century stimulated interest in the variety of “sacred writings” connected with different world religions. The Bible, however, holds its place through its persuasive claim to the distinctive divine inspiration of its writers and their teachings. Although devotees of other than biblical religions regard as sacred certain literary traditions associated with their faiths, the express claim of religious writers to be vehicles of divine disclosure is not nearly so common as often presupposed.

Spokesmen for non-Christian religions have themselves countered the [pluralistic view] that there is divine revelation in all religions. Buddhists protest that this theory too generously bestows upon Buddhism what would be unacceptably destructive of Buddhist tenets-i.e., the Christian insistence that God is personal- since Hinayana Buddhism is atheistic. The sacred Chinese books claim no supernatural inspiration or authority, Confucianism being less a religion than a venerable moral tradition.

Among the great religions of the world, the living God significantly appears as the speaking God only in Judaism, Christianity, and Islam-and the Koran’s considerable borrowing from the Judeo-Christian Scriptures is indisputable. The Koran is really the product of one man, Muhammad, whose fragmented writings were gathered after his death into a single book exasperatingly lacking in arrangement. . . . The Zoroastrian Zend-Avesta reflects not only a composite character, but a variety of religious conceptions as well.

The so-called sacred books of other religions, including the Book of Mormon, assume much less the character of a unified book than does the Bible, and their mythological features, questionable historical particulars, and inconsistencies of religious perspective should put us on guard against speaking of “the Bibles of mankind.” ^[9]

Accordingly, the distinction between the authority of Scripture and that of humans is another illustration of the former’s authority and is described by the Christian philosopher Alvin Plantinga when he writes:

Scripture itself is taken to be a wholly authoritative and trustworthy guide to faith and morals; it is authoritative and trustworthy, because it is a revelation from God, a matter of God’s speaking to us. Once it is clear, therefore, what the teaching of a given bit of Scripture is, the question of the truth and acceptability of that teaching is settled.

In a commentary on Plato [or even Christian literature], we might decide that what Plato really meant to say was XYZ; we might then go on to consider and evaluate XYZ in various ways, asking whether it is true, or close to the truth, or true in principle, or superseded by things we have learned since Plato wrote, and the like; we might also ask whether Plato’s grounds or arguments for XYZ are slight, or acceptable, or substantial or compelling. These questions are out of place [with] scripture . . .

Once convinced that God is proposing XYZ for our belief, we do not go on to ask whether it is true, or whether God has made a good case for it. God is not required to make a case. ^[10]

C) Supremacy Over Human Reason, Science, & Conscience

While we have argued elsewhere that Scripture must appeal to our God-given reason in order for it to be believed and obeyed, after it has been accepted as Scripture, our reason must bow to it. ^[11] Of course, no reasoning grounded in truth will contradict Scripture. We have also pointed out that our Spirit-liberated reason will indeed bow to Scripture, but the devil-darkened reason of the unregenerate will not. ^[12] For example, the theory of Evolution is irrational, unbiblical, and therefore lacking any authority whatsoever. What God expects from us is reasoning from Scripture, as the psalmist wrote, “give me understanding according to Your word” (Ps 119:169).

Along these lines, we discuss elsewhere the superiority of divine Scripture over human science. ^[13] There we demonstrate that essentially the weaknesses of science make it an inferior source of truth compared to Scripture. These include its limited scope in answering the most important questions humanity needs answers to, the unverifiability of its theories which are too often accepted as facts, the ever changing and contradictory nature of those theories, and the relative difficulty of accurately interpreting scientific data.

In fact, the divine revelation of Scripture is superior to all mere human knowledge as we have written elsewhere:

Obviously, the vast majority of our information comes from human information and includes the fields of medicine, economics, politics, law, engineering, psychology, and philosophy. It also includes the actions of others by which we experience things. However, the information we receive from divine revelation is much more important.

For example, a business man can learn all he needs to know to run a business successfully through human information including business principles that have been developed by other humans based on experience and reason. However, we learn from Scripture, a source of divine revelation, that in reality, success is not defined by simply being effective, as any profit-making business would essentially be. We learn from the divine revelation of Scripture that living rightly and successfully includes pleasing God because in the end we will be judged for our morality, not just our effectiveness.

Therefore, to truly live successfully, the business man is greatly blessed by the divine revelation concerning how the operation of his business relates to God and his final judgment. ^[14]

Likewise, although we have pointed out elsewhere the incredible amount of authority God has granted our moral reason (i.e. conscience), the Apostle Paul gently labeled a person with a conscience not in line with Scripture as being “weak,” and a person with a conscience reflecting Scripture as “strong” (cf. Rom 14:1-23). ^[15]

D) Supremacy Over Prophets, Apostles, & Miracle Workers

Scripture’s authority over the words of humans is particularly illustrated in the case of a Prophet or Apostle. Biblical Prophets and Apostles spoke the word of God and to disobey one was to disobey God (cf. Deut 18:17-18; 1 Cor 14:37). However, even they were to be checked by Scripture and subject to its authority.

Accordingly, God said of Prophets:

If a Prophet, or one who foretells by dreams, appears among you and announces to you a miraculous sign or wonder, ²and if the sign or wonder of which he has spoken takes place, and he says, “Let us follow other gods” (gods you have not known) “and let us worship them,”  ³you must not listen to the words of that Prophet or dreamer.

The LORD your God is testing you to find out whether you love Him with all your heart and with all your soul.  ⁴It is the LORD your God you must follow, and Him you must revere. Keep His [written] commands and obey Him; serve Him and hold fast to Him. (Deut 13:1-4; cf. Exod 18:15-16; Isa 8:20)

The “commands” that the Israelites were to “keep” (v. 5) in spite of what even a miraculously authenticated Prophet said, were none other than those Moses had recorded in Scripture (cf. Exod 24:3-4; Deut 31:9-13). ^[16]

The above Scripture teaches us that it also needs to exercise authority over miracle workers. This is because miracle working ability in itself does not guarantee a divine source. The devil can do miracles (cf. Matt 7:23-25). ^[17] Accordingly, Luther once remarked: “Any teaching which does not square with Scripture is to be rejected even if it snows miracles every day.” ^[18]

The same principle applied to Apostles. Paul writes the Galatians, “[E]ven if we or an Angel from Heaven should preach a Gospel other than the one we preached to you, let him be eternally condemned!” (Gal 1:8). The Gospel is the central theme of the NT Scriptures and even if an Apostle like Paul were to teach something different they were to be condemned.

E) Supremacy Over Teachers

As discussed elsewhere, the God-given authority of divinely ordained Teachers in the Church is considerable. ^[19] But again, all of their authority is derived from the Scripture’s sanction of them (cf. Eph 4:11; 1 Cor 12:28), and their adherence to the contents of Scripture. At any point that a teacher in the Church deviates from what Scripture teaches, they have no divine authority, and in fact, come under divine disapproval (cf. Jas 3:1; Heb 13:17).

This is why the Apostle Peter instructs Teachers in the Church that, “If anyone speaks, he should do it as one speaking the very words of God” (1 Pet 4:11). A preacher’s sermon, or the words of anybody for that matter, can be confidently equated with “the very words of God” only to the extent that it reflects the teaching of Scripture. And because it is the word of God that contains spiritual authority, not the words of men, Preachers should take this distinction very seriously.

Accordingly, Wayne Grudem, Research Professor of Bible and Theology at Phoenix Seminary has written:

Throughout the history of the church the greatest preachers have been those who have recognized that they have no authority in themselves and have seen their task as being to explain the words of Scripture and apply them clearly to the lives of their hearers. Their preaching has drawn its power not from the proclamation of their own Christian experiences or the experiences of others, nor from their own opinions, creative ideas, or rhetorical skills [or “prophecies”?], but from God’s powerful words.

Essentially they stood in the pulpit, pointed to the biblical text, and said in effect to the congregation, “This is what this verse means. Do you see that meaning here as well? Then you must believe it and obey it with all your heart, for God himself, your Creator and your Lord, is saying this to you today!” Only the written words of Scripture can give this kind of authority to preaching. ^[20]

F) Scripture’s Authentication of God’s Faithful Deeds

In a subsequent chapter of Knowing Our God we suggest that God’s faithful deeds are an important means of divine revelation. ^[21] These are promised in Scripture, and occur on a fairly regular basis.

For example, we are promised as God’s children that our Heavenly Father will provide for us (cf. Matt 6:25-34; Phil 4:19), and therefore, when we have what we need, we can legitimately thank God for it. However, correctly and confidently recognizing God’s faithful deeds in our life would be virtually impossible apart from the promises in Scripture for it.

Accordingly, we have written elsewhere:

Surely we, like Moses, experience what God is like when we recognize His faithful, loving deeds in our life. However, apart from God’s revelation of His ways in Scripture (doctrine), and our belief in them, we would not know we are experiencing God in our life. We might just think like any happy unbeliever that we’ve got the world’s luck, instead of recognizing we are enjoying God’s blessing. Experience without doctrine does nothing to further our relationship with God because we will not properly interpret the former without the latter. ^[22]

Therefore, even a claim to a faithful deed of God in our life is dependent upon it being promised in Scripture.

G) Scripture’s Authentication of the New Nature

As discussed in a subsequent chapter, the New Nature we have been given by virtue of the indwelling Spirit of God is among the most important sources of divine revelation for the Christian life. ^[23] In fact, because the New Nature is essentially God living inside of us, it is tempting to suggest it is the most authoritative revelation we possess. However, there are at least two reasons that the divine revelation in Scripture is superior to the indwelling of the Spirit in our New Nature.

First, only Scripture contains reliable doctrinal revelation concerning God’s nature, ways, and purposes. The New Nature is a very valuable source of moral directional revelation, but we would not know Who we were obeying, nor anything about our Master beyond the universal revelation of Creation, without Scripture.

Secondly, because the promptings of the New Nature (always and only moral in nature) are, in themselves, subjective in nature, Scripture serves as an objective check on these as well. It is by Scripture that we know that the personality of the New Nature in us is “love, joy, peace . . .” (Gal 5:22). Therefore, while the indwelling Spirit and Scripture can be distinguished as separate means of revelation, they are always in perfect agreement. The New Nature within us will never prompt us to do anything apart from or in addition to what Scripture has already commanded us. Likewise, everything about God’s will for our lives stated in Scripture will resonate with our New Nature, and never violate it. This is another reason why the suggestion that the Spirit living in us will also provide direction that is amoral ^[24] and extra-biblical, like which of two equally moral occupations to choose, is both unbiblical and dangerous because such promptings cannot be evaluated with Scripture. ^[25]

H) Supremacy Over Mysticism

There are a growing number of Christians who promote the idea that the Holy Spirit is constantly conversing with us apart from both Scripture and our New Nature. We discuss this issue more fully elsewhere under what we call mega mysticism. ^[26] There, for example, we quote the popular charismatic author Jack Deere who has said:

In order to fulfill God’s highest purpose for our lives we must be able to hear His voice both in the written word and in the Word freshly spoken from heaven. . . . Satan understands the strategic importance of Christians hearing God’s voice so he has launched various attacks against us [who promote mega mysticism] in this area. One of his most successful attacks has been to develop a doctrine that teaches God no longer speaks to us except through the written word. Ultimately this doctrine is demonic even though Christian theologians have been used to perfect it. ^[27]

While this is not the place to debunk such heresy, let us note this is a direct attack on the historical view of the sufficiency of Scripture discussed in the next chapters. Those who would make a case that the Holy Spirit may “prompt” us with specific thoughts or extra-biblical direction from God, must admit that such a position is essentially useless. This is because on this side of Heaven, we can rarely be sure of the source of our thoughts apart from Scripture. No matter how good or gripping a thought, idea, or desire may be, if there is not a particular verse of Scripture that would verify God as the source, we must always admit that it may only be simply our own human, and possibly mistaken thought. And if we cannot trust our thoughts beyond clear statements of Scripture then we are back to the fact that the only direction that can be fully trusted is the written Word of God, not our impulses or impressions. While mega mysticism claims a more personal relationship with God in extra-biblical matters, they lose something even more important: certainty in their relationship with God.

The “Old Princeton” theologian Geerhardus Vos (1862-1949) was right when he wrote:

Mystical revelation claimed by many as a personal privilege is out of keeping with the [category] of Biblical religion. Mysticism in this detached form is not specifically Christian. It occurs in all types of religion. . . . At best it is a manifestation of [natural] religion [as opposed to supernatural], subject to all the defects and faults of the latter. As to its content and inherent value it is unverifiable, except on the principle of submitting it to the test of harmony with Scripture. And submitting it to this it ceases to be a separate source of revelation concerning God. ^[28]

Along the same lines, the renowned OT scholar Bruce Waltke has written concerning those who find support for mega mysticism in Scripture:

That same hermeneutic misinterprets Proverbs 3:5, 6 and James 1:5, and relies on a principle that God is hiding His will from us, rather than revealing Himself to us [in Scripture] and holding back nothing from the children He loves. This demeans Scripture, since it requires a Christian to reject the Bible as the ultimate source of authority so as to wait for a new revelation. It sets a dangerous precedent of placing our feelings and experiences above those of God’s inspired Word, and therefore is akin to heresy.

We evangelicals get up in arms when a cult claims they cannot accept a blood transfusion because the Old Testament warns against “eating blood” or when an obscure passage is relied upon to defend the cultic practice of baptizing for the dead, but we don’t bat an eye when someone in our own camp speaks in a way that places personal experience over God’s revealed Word. This kind of theology, in my view, rejects the depiction of God in the New Testament as loving and caring, and replaces it with the remote and mysterious god of the pagans. He is reduced to the level of a genie. ^[29]

All of which is why we thoroughly discuss these issues elsewhere. Promoters of mega mysticism would seem to have a difficult time explaining why we would even need Scripture if direct extra-biblical revelation from God is readily available. How would they distinguish the divine revelation experienced by Apostles and Prophets from the divine revelation they claim? While we may wish it were different, both biblical and post-biblical history reveal the fact that God has rarely chosen to speak directly to people, and when He did, it was most often for the purpose of providing authoritative revelation that was to be communicated to others.^[30] God is not interested in micro-managing our lives through an abundance of extra-biblical revelation, as those promoting mega mysticism claim. ^[31] It has simply been God’s way to speak through the words and writings of authenticated messengers instead of to every individual He has a relationship with. ^[32] We’re not in Heaven yet where such a personal and direct relationship with God will be our experience and this is what the life of faith which God desires is all about. ^[33]

I) Supremacy Over Human Experience

It is very easy for humans to live by feelings instead of faith. The only reliable basis for any specifically Christian faith is Scripture, and absolutely nothing else. ^[34] Feelings, however, can come from all sorts of circumstances and experiences, and if allowed to lead us, will inevitably mislead us. ^[35] Nonetheless, as discussed more thoroughly elsewhere, extra-biblical experiences are worshipped in American Christianity and widely thought to be a source of divine revelation. ^[36]

This is a problem that many Evangelical theologians have perceived in neoorthodoxy which emphasizes that the authority of Scripture is dependent upon experiencing it. ^[37] Accordingly, the Reformed theologian Robert Reymond has written:

The human religious [person] who would espouse the epistemological views of neoorthodoxy can never be sure that the nonverbal subjective religious encounter concerning which he boasts was with God and not with his own subjective consciousness, if not with Satan himself. How does he know it is a true and not a false religious experience? What reason can he offer to justify his verbal explication of his nonverbal religious experience? And why should anyone believe him? ^[38]

While the authority of experience is certainly a part of neoorthodoxy, it is obviously charismaticism ^[39] that is the foremost promoter of such a thing. Accordingly, Mr. Deere, has written:

The Bible deist is so confident in the sufficiency of his interpretation [of Scripture] that it is difficult for him to be corrected by experience. ^[40]

 

In other words, according to Mr. Deere, we are to believe that our experiences are more reliable than our interpretation of Scripture. This is nothing less than an all out attack on the authority of Scripture and its God-intended clarity. ^[41] However, it is also an exaltation of the authority of experience, which is so foundational to charismaticism. Obviously, there are challenges to our interpretation of Scripture which we discuss elsewhere, but correctly interpreting objective Scripture is a lot easier than interpreting our subjective experiences, and God designed it to be so. ^[42] Nonetheless, charismaticism continually places personal experience on par with Scripture as a source of divine authority, both in its teachings and practices.

We believe this is the primary reason charismaticism has accepted unbiblical versions of spiritual gifts. When biblical Prophets spoke, it was sin to disobey and they authenticated themselves by foretelling the future accurately. The modern counterfeit gift of prophecy results in suggestions that might be from God with no authentication demanded to support the claim of such a gift.

Every miracle worker in Scripture was also a source of direct divine revelation, but “faith healers” today make no such claim and cannot heal as those in Scripture do. So why do they claim the gift of “workers of miracles” (1 Cor 12:28) still exist in their midst?

The biblical gift of “Tongues . . . are a sign . . . to unbelievers” (1 Cor 14:22) because it enabled a person to miraculously speak a foreign human language. But because of their experience, our charismatic brothers and sisters have turned it into a private prayer language that is usually never interpreted in disobedience to Scripture.

Obviously, all of these issues require more discussion to prove our point, and we offer that here in Volume 2. Nevertheless, we suggest here that charismaticism has given greater authority to their experience than to Scripture and have therefore misinterpreted their experience. And this should not surprise us when one of their most influential teachers, such as Mr. Deere, claims that those committed to the exclusive authority of Scripture should be more open to being “corrected by experience.” We will see who had the truth of this matter on that Day.

Along these lines, Thomas Edgar, Professor of NT at Capital Bible Seminary, writes:

The significance of the experience-centered focus of the charismatic is often missed. Part of the problem that underlies the controversy is that cessationists [non-Charismatics] assume that solid scriptural discussion will be the basis for determining the validity of the cessationist or charismatic viewpoint. . . . [However], the experience of the charismatic . . . is assumed to be true and has no need to be validated by Scripture. Therefore, Scriptural argument will seldom convince charismatics that their interpretation of the experience is wrong. ^[43]

Hence, Mr. Deere’s remark above that our experiences should trump our interpretation of Scripture.

Dr. Packer, in the context of a gentle rebuke on this very point to our brothers and sisters in charismaticism, wisely responds:

Experience is a slippery word, and experiences coming to imperfectly sanctified sinners cannot but have dross mixed with their gold. No experience just by happening can authenticate itself as sent by God to further his work of grace. The mere fact that a Christian has an experience does not make it a Christian experience. ^[44]

Indeed, elsewhere in Knowing Our God we discuss the unbiblical nature of many of the most valued worship experiences in charismaticism. These include being “slain in the Spirit,” being “drunk in the Spirit,” and “holy laughter,” all of which have absolutely no biblical support whatsoever but because they are experienced in a church setting, they are believed to be Christian. ^[45]

Whenever the objective, dependable, written Word of God is neglected or devalued, there will always be a subsequent emphasis and exaltation of our subjective, deceitful, experiences. A common reply in Charismaticism to those who would question that the source of their experiences is the Holy Spirit is to say, “Don’t judge it unless you have experienced it.” Obviously there are many things that the Bible teaches us that we can know for certain without experiencing it. Hell would be one. And such a response misses the point of an honest and biblical inquiry.

We do not question that many charismatic experiences are real, but when charismatic brethren claim that the source of those experiences are the Holy Spirit then they have stepped on biblical ground and they must interpret those experiences on that ground. It is not right, nor rational, to claim that an event or experience is from God, and then dismiss or devalue the use of the Bible to examine it. Instead, the tendency in charismaticism is to make Scripture conform to their experience, rather than interpreting their experience through Scripture.

On the contrary, the historic Christian position on human experience is related by the well-known Presbyterian theologian Donald Bloesch when he writes:

Scripture without experience is empty, but experience without Scripture is blind (H. Richard Niebuhr). Scripture is the objective norm by which we can measure the validity of our experience. But to be vital and fruitful, this norm must take root in our lives, which means that we must experience the reality of God presented in Scripture. ^[46]

We might put it this way: If you want to experience God, seek sacrificial obedience, not an emotional experience.

J) Supremacy Over the Demonic Revelation of the World

Elsewhere we wrote in KOG:

In virtually every category of divine revelation, satan has his counterfeit counterpart. While the Scriptures provide God’s people with “the pattern of sound teaching” (2 Tim 1:13), the devil has authored and controls “the pattern of this world” (Rom 12:2) that trains the unbeliever to worship him (cf. 1 John 5:19; Eph 2:2). ^[47]

Accordingly, we would suggest that the anti-God “pattern of this world [aiōn]” (Rom 12:2), or “this world [kosmos] in its present form [schēma]” (1 Cor 7:31), is satan’s scripture designed to train the unregenerate in his beliefs and values. On the other hand, the Bible contains “the pattern of sound teaching” (2 Tim 1:13). Christians learn the beliefs, values, promises, and truths of the Kingdom only from Scripture. Unregenerate humanity learns the beliefs, values, desires, and lies of the devil from the media, culture, schools, and experiences of this world. Scripture is “inspired” revelation of the Holy Spirit to teach us how to love & really live, and the “world” is the “inspired” revelation of demonic spirits teaching people how to love themselves be empty.

The word “world” in the NT is obviously used in various ways. Such Greek words as oikoumenē (“the inhabited earth” 18 times in the NT), and kosmos (the “world order” 185 times in the NT). It is the frequency of use of the latter that especially makes it an important concept in NT theology. Kosmos also has a rather broad meaning of which Baptist theologian Millard Erickson writes:

Sometimes this term designates the physical object, the earth. At other times it refers to the entire population of the human race, at still other times to all those inhabiting the earth at a given time. But there are other references where [kosmos] designates a virtual spiritual force, the antithesis, as it were, of the kingdom of God. It is the very embodiment of evil. This concept is found particularly in the writings of John and Paul, although it is found elsewhere in the New Testament as well. ^[48]

 

It is this latter usage that we are concerned with here. In general, when kosmos is used to refer to God’s relationship with the world, it reflects the idea of an anti-God system of beliefs, values, desires, and living that is authored by satan and empowered by the sinful nature. This is the aspect of the “world” that the Apostle John is referring to when he writes, “We know that . . . the whole world [kosmos] is under the control of the evil one” (1 John 5:19).

This biblical view of “the world” was derived from the use of kosmos in ancient Greek philosophy in which it was “the basic term for the world-order, the world-system, the sum total of things preserved by this ordering.” ^[49] And it is because satan had been given dominion over this “world system” that it is evil. Or as NT scholar R. V. G. Tasker puts it:

The Gk. word kosmos means by derivation ‘the ordered world’. . . . It is, however, an axiom of the Bible that this world of human beings, the climax of the divine creation, the world that God made especially to reflect his glory, is now in rebellion against him. Through the transgression of one man, sin has entered into it (Rom. 5:18) with universal consequences. It has become, as a result, a disordered world in the grip of the evil one (I In. 5:19).

And so, very frequently in the NT, and particularly in the Johannine writings, the word kosmos has a sinister significance. . . . This world is pervaded by a spirit of its own, which has to be exorcized by the Spirit of God, if it is not to remain in control over human reason and understanding (I Cor. 2:12). Man is in bondage to the elements which comprise the world (Col. 2:20) until he is emancipated from them by Christ. He cannot overcome it till he is himself ‘born of God’ (I Jn. 3:4). ^[50]

Several important conclusions can be made about the demonic revelation of the “world.” First, its source is demonic. The Apostle Paul refers to “the ways of this world [kosmos] and of the ruler of the kingdom of the air” (Eph 2:2), suggesting that the source of the former is the latter. Likewise, the Apostle John is emphatic that the source of the world’s revelation is not God: “For everything in the world [kosmos] —the cravings of sinful man, the lust of his eyes and the boasting of what he has and does—comes not from the Father but from the world [kosmos]” (1 John 2:16). It is no doubt the fact that, “the whole world [kosmos] is under the control of the evil one” (1 John 5:19), that he is able to use it to teach unregenerated humanity his lies.

Secondly, this demonic revelation of “the world” is diametrically opposed to divine revelation. “The pattern of this world [aiōn]” (Rom 12:2) reflected in its politics, morals, media, entertainment, culture, learning, and literature, is founded on a multitude of lies designed to enable and encourage humanity to live independent of God, and ultimately dependent on the devil. Unregenerated humanity takes its cues from the messages coming from the “world” which is merely the spokesman for satan. Because this demonic revelation is contradictory to divine revelation, the Apostle taught that only when you refuse to “conform any longer to the pattern of this world,” and “be transformed by the renewing of your mind” with the divine revelation of Scripture, that only then “you will be able to test and approve what God’s will is—His good, pleasing and perfect will” (Rom 12:2-3).

The Apostle elsewhere reflects the dichotomy between the revelation of the “world” and Scripture when he writes, “For the wisdom [i.e. revelation] of this world [kosmos] is foolishness in God’s sight” (1 Cor 3:19). And he writes:

See to it that no one takes you captive through hollow and deceptive philosophy, which depends on human tradition and the basic principles of this world [kosmos] rather than on Christ. . . . Since, then, you have been raised with Christ, set your hearts on things above, where Christ is seated at the right hand of God. Set your minds on things above, not on earthly things” (Col 2:8; 3:1-2).

Likewise, along these lines, we read in James: “You adulterous people, don’t you know that friendship with the world [kosmos] is hatred toward God? Anyone who chooses to be a friend of the world [kosmos] becomes an enemy of God” (4:4). This is because the revelation of the world is demonic, and the revelation of Christ, found only in Scripture, is divine.

The opposition of the “world’s” revelation to the Word of God is illustrated when Christ warns: “Still others, like seed sown among thorns, hear the word; but the worries of this life, the deceitfulness of wealth and the desires for other things [all of which derive from the message of the “world”] come in and choke the word, making it unfruitful” (Mark 4:18).

The revelation of the “world” is so contradictory to the revelation of Scripture that, as J. Guhrt remarks, the word kosmos is never used in the latter to describe the New World where Christ will reign:

This understanding of the world primarily finds verbal expression where Paul speaks of this world (ho kosmos houtos) analogously to this age (ho aiōn houtos, cf. I Cor. 3:19; 5:10; Eph. 2:2). God’s judgment is passed on this cosmos (Rom 3:6) which belongs to the present age (aiōn).

The degree to which the word kosmos serves to denote the existent world threatened by futility and need can also be seen in the fact that the future redeemed world is never called kosmos, but the “kingdom of God”, “a new heaven and a new earth.” There is no phrase corresponding to “this cosmos” (ho kosmos houtos) such as “the coming [kosmos],” “the future [kosmos],” or “that [kosmos]” cosmos. God and kosmos are strictly disparate. ^[51]

Finally, it is obvious that our most objective source of truth to recognize, expose, and correct the lies of the “world” is Scripture. While the New Nature in us would certainly convict us of the moral wrongs of the “world,” many of its beliefs and “doctrines” would be impossible to distinguish between demonic and divine without Scripture. For example, how else would we know Christ died for our sins and that we cannot pay for them ourselves, which is the common theme of every other world religion?

Accordingly, Scripture says, “the grace of God,” revealed ultimately only in Scripture, “teaches us to say “No” to ungodliness and worldly [kosmikas] passions, and to live self-controlled, upright and godly lives in this present age” (Tit 2:11-12). It was in the context of protecting the Church from the “world’s” revelation that the Apostle wrote, “Timothy, guard what has been entrusted to your care [i.e. the NT revelation]. Turn away from godless chatter and the opposing ideas of what is falsely called knowledge, which some have professed and in so doing have wandered from the faith” and the truth of divine revelation.

Extras & Endnotes

A Devotion to Dad

Father, we think again of Plato’s death bed declaration of despair: “Oh, that there were some sure word that like a raft could bear us across the seas to that unknown world.” God, thank You for giving us that sure word in Scripture, which tells us everything we need for life and godliness. Few things are more valuable on this Earth and bless our life more, than having the truth, and You have provided it in Scripture. Help us diligently study it that we may understand its doctrines, and diligently obey its commands to experience its blessings.

Gauging Your Grasp

We claim that “God is only going to hold us accountable for heeding the words of Scripture.” Do you agree or disagree? If you agree, what does this suggest about the divine authority of Scripture?

We quote Dr. Clowney writing: The degree of certainty we have with regard to God’s will in a situation is directly proportional to the degree of clarity we have as to how the Scripture applies to the situation.” What are examples in life that this would apply?

What is the primary reason for Scripture’s superior authority? Has this quality been proven in your life?

Why do we say that all human authority (parents, Pastors, Presidents) is derived from Scripture? Give biblical references to these things?

What are several things that happen when a Teacher of God’s word deviates from what Scripture teaches?

What are the reasons that Scripture must have authority over human experience? What are the examples of violating this that we suggest are occurring in charismaticism? Do you agree or disagree? What is the solution?

Why do we say that “the pattern of this world” is satan’s scripture? How does God’s Scripture overcome it?

Publications & Particulars

1. Quoted in Wayne Grudem, Systematic Theology (Zondervan, 1994), 128. ↑

2. Quoted by W. A. Criswell, Great Doctrines of the Bible (Zondervan, 1982), I:33. ↑

3. For further discussion of the delegated divine authority of human authorities see chapter 7.14. ↑

4. For further discussion regarding the relationship between Church traditions and Scripture see chapters 13.1-2. ↑

5. Criswell, I:109. ↑

6. Martin Luther, quoted in William Abraham, Canon and Criterion in Christian Theology : From the Fathers to Feminism (Clarendon Press, 1998), 120. ↑

7. For discussion of Paul’s statement in 1 Corinthians 7:10-12 that some perceive as mere opinion see section 8.4.A.4. ↑

8. For further discussion of biblical prophecies see chapter 9.8 ↑

9. Carl F. H. Henry, “The Authority and Inspiration of the Bible,” in The Expositor’s Bible Commentary, vol. 1, (Zondervan, 1979), 4. ↑

10. Alvin Plantinga, Warranted Christian Belief (Oxford University Press, 2000), 384. ↑

11. For further discussion regarding the relationship between human reason and the authority of Scripture see section 3.1.C; 3.3; 11.E. ↑

12. For further discussion regarding the relationship between the unbeliever’s reason and Scripture see section 4.15.C. ↑

13. For further discussion regarding the relationship between Scripture and science see section 11.B. ↑

14. Excerpt from section 9.C.1. ↑

15. For further discussion regarding “strong” and “weak” consciences see section 3.2.C. ↑

16. The miraculous authentication that divine revelation requires in order to be recognized may not come directly in the form of observed miracles, but more indirectly through already miraculously authenticated revelation (cf. Deut 13:1-5; Isa 8:19-20; 1 John 2:22-26). Therefore, Scripture can be used to authenticate revelations as divine. (3.1.D.3) ↑

17. Regarding demonic miracle working see section 10.6.A and chapters 11.11-13. ↑

18. John H. Armstrong, “The Authority of Scripture” in Sola Scriptura! The Protestant Position on the Bible (Soli Deo Gloria, 1995), 141 ↑

19. For further discussion of the place of pastors and teachers in God’s plan of divine revelation see section 7.14.G. ↑

20. Grudem, 82. ↑

21. Regarding God’s faithful deeds as a source of divine revelation see chapter 7.11. ↑

22. Excerpt from section 7.6.A. ↑

23. Regarding our New Nature as a source of divine revelation see chapter 7.12. ↑

24. By amoral direction we do not mean immoral. Webster’s simply defines amoral as, “being neither moral or immoral; lying outside the sphere to which moral judgments apply” (Webster’s Ninth New Collegiate Dictionary, Frederick C. Mish, ed. [Merriam-Webster, 1986], 80). Amoral decisions concern things that are logically true or false, not morally right or wrong, and have no ethical ingredient. Amoral matters often include merely personal preferences such as choosing what flavor of ice cream we will have for dessert. Accordingly, the sources of amoral desires are primarily logical reasoning and personal preferences. Because sinning against God involves morality, you cannot sin in an amoral desire. ↑

25. For further discussion regarding the distinction between the divine revelation available in our New Nature and the amoral revelations promoted by mega mysticism see section 7.12.B.4 ↑

26. For further discussion regarding what we refer to as mega mysticism see Book 14. ↑

27. Jack Deere in “John Wimber: Friend or Foe?” reprint from The Briefing (St. Matthias Press, 1990), 18. ↑

28. Geerhardus Vos, Biblical Theology: Old and New Testaments (Eerdmans, 1948), 326-27. ↑

29. Bruce Waltke, Finding the Will of God: A Pagan Notion? (Eerdmans, 1995), 68. ↑

30. For further discussion of the covenantal nature of divine revelation see sections 7.2.B; 7.3.B and 7.5.B. ↑

31. For further discussion regarding the relationship of divine revelation to spiritual maturity see section 7.3.D. ↑

32. For further discussion of the communal nature of divine revelation see section 7.3.D. ↑

33. For further discussion regarding the indirect nature of divine revelation see section 7.3.C. ↑

34. For further discussion of biblical faith in relation to Scripture see section 6.10.A. ↑

35. For further discussion on the place of feelings in decision making see sections 4.4.C; 4.6.C. ↑

36. Specifically on the place of experience and emotion in Christian worship see chapters 4.8-11. ↑

37. Neo-orthodoxy is a relatively complex theological perspective best known as the position Karl Barth (1886-1968) promoted. R. V. Schnucker relates in the Evangelical Dictionary of Theology (EDT):

    Neo-orthodoxy . . . does not have the popularity it enjoyed earlier in the [20^th] century. Certain inherent elements have precluded its continuing influence. For example . . . its view of Scripture, “The Bible is God’s Word so far as God lets it be his Word” (Barth, Church Dogmatics, I/2, 123), has been seen as a rejection of the infallible sola Scriptura of conservative Protestantism. . . .

    Perhaps the greatest weakness within the movement has been its pessimism concerning the reliability and validity of human [even Christian] reason. [Its critics claim] If human reason cannot be trusted, then it follows that since neo-orthodoxy relied on human reason, it could not be trusted. (“Neo-orthodoxy,” [Baker, 1994], 756)

    Which is the same inevitable result of any philosophy or theology that degrades the God-given place of especially Spirit-liberated reason. ↑

38. Robert L. Reymond, What About Continuing Revelations And Miracles In The Presbyterian Church Today?: A Study Of The Doctrine Of The Sufficiency Of Scripture (Presbyterian & Reformed, 1977), 16. ↑

39. For a description of charismaticism see endnotes in chapter 7.1. ↑

40. Jack Deere, Surprised by the Voice of God Voice (Zondervan , 1996), 253. Underlining added. ↑

41. For further discussion on the clarity of Scripture see section 3.3.A.3. ↑

42. For further discussion regarding the challenges of interpreting Scripture see 1.? ↑

43. Thomas R. Edgar, Satisfied by the Promise of the Spirit (Kregel Resources, 1996), 25. ↑

44. J. I. Packer, Keep in Step with the Spirit (Baker Book House, 1984), 201. ↑

45. For further discussion of non-biblical worship phenomena in charismaticism see chapters 4.10-11. ↑

46. Donald G. Bloesch, A Theology of Word & Spirit (InterVarsity Press, 1992), 189. ↑

47. Excerpted from section 7.2.E. ↑

48. Millard Erickson, Christian Theology, 2nd ed. (Baker, 1998), 660.

    Dr. Erickson continues regarding the demonic view of the “world”:

    The Bible teaches that evil has a status apart from and independent of any individual human will, a subsistence of its own, an organized or structured basis. We occasionally refer to this reality as “the world.” . . .

    There are numerous references to the enmity, hostility, and opposition that the world displays toward Christ, the believer, and the church. . . . . Paul says the world and the believer have totally different understandings of things. The things of God are foolish to the world (I Cor. 1:21, 27); they are low and despised in the world (v. 28). God has, on the contrary, made foolish the wisdom of the world (I Cor. 1:20; 3:19).

    This is because different “spirits” are involved: “We have not received the spirit of the world but the Spirit who is from God, that we may understand what God has freely given us” (2:12). The things and gifts of the Spirit of God are not received by the “unspiritual man” because they must be spiritually discerned (v. 14). They are foreign to such a person, and therefore he or she cannot (or will not) accept them. . . .

    The world represents an organized force, a power or order that is the counterpoise to the kingdom of God. . . . There is a permeating order of the world, a structure that affects and governs humankind. . . . These elemental spirits are the operating principles according to which the world is governed. Paul also writes to the Galatians of their having formerly been slaves to those “who by nature are not gods,” and then questions how they who now know God can turn back again to become slaves of “those weak and miserable principles” (Gal. 4:8-9).

    As evil as is the devil, so also is this world, which is the very embodiment of all that is corrupt and which defiles those who come under its control and influence. Jesus indicated that he is not of this world, and had not come from it. He contrasted himself with the Jews: “You are from below; I am from above. You are of this world; I am not of this world” (John 8:23). . . . Jesus proclaimed and demonstrated himself to be separated from the evil attitudes and practices of the world. His followers are to do likewise. (660-662)

    The Greek word aiōn is often used in Scripture as a synonym of the demonic environment and revelation of the “world.” Accordingly, we read in the Dictionary of Biblical Imagery:

    In Paul the present age is evil (Gal 1:4), being ruled by the “elemental spirits of the world” (Gal 4:3, 9; Col 2:8, 20), “the rulers of this age” (I Cor 2:6; cf. Jn 12:31), “the god of this age” (2 Cor 4:4), “the prince of the power of the air, of the spirit now working in the sons of disobedience” (Eph 2:2), the “devil,” “rulers,” “powers,” the “world rulers of this darkness,” the evil spiritual powers in heavenly places (Eph 6:11-12). “This age” may also have the sense of “the present time” (Rom 3:26; 8:18; 11:5; 2 Cor 6:2; 8:13) and “the present age” (I Tim 6:17; 2 Tim 4:10; Tit 2:12).

    This age/world is evil and opposed to God. It has a hostile character. It is opposed to God just as the wisdom of the world is opposed to the wisdom of God. . . . This age is ruled by spiritual powers, and to it, fallen, unredeemed humanity belongs (I Cor 1:20,21,27,28; 2:12; 3:19;5:10; 6:2; 11:32; 2 Cor 7:10; Gal 4:3; 6:14;Eph2:2; Col 2:8, 20). . . .

    James, 2 Peter and I John identify the world (kosmos) as people at enmity with God, those who oppose God’s will and purpose. James asks, “Do you not know that friendship with the world is enmity with God?” (Jas 4:4). Therefore a Christian is “to keep oneself unstained from the world” (Jas 1:27). 2 Peter describes the world as the place where antagonism toward God dwells, and believers must escape its “defilements” (2 Pet 2:20). . . .

    In John the focus moves from the world perceived as creation to the world of humanity dominated by the darkness of false loves, false values, false knowledge and to the mission to save the world. . . .

    In 1 John we also find a sharp dichotomy between two sides. God and the world are diametrically opposed, and believers must choose between them. The world is apostate from God, and John urges full loyalty to God: “We know that we are of God, and the whole world is in the power of the evil one” (1 Jn 5:19); “they are of the world, therefore what they say is of the world and the world listens to them” (1 Jn 4:5).

    Believers are not to “love the world or the things in the world. If anyone loves the world, love for the Father is not in him” (I Jn2:15). They should not be perplexed that the world “hates” them (1 Jn 3:13). Sinfulness originates from and belongs to this world and is to be avoided (1 Jn 2:16-17; cf. 1 Jn 4:3-5, 9). (“World” in Dictionary of Biblical Imagery, Leland Ryken, et. al. eds. [InterVarsity, 1998], 967-969. ↑

49. J. Guhrt “World” in New International Dictionary of New Testament Theology (NIDNTT), Colin Brown ed., 4 vols., (Zondervan, 1986), III:521. ↑

50. R. V. G. Tasker, “World,” New Bible Dictionary (NBD), J. I. Packer, et al. eds., 3rd ed., (Intervarsity, 1996), 1249. ↑

51. Guhrt, III:524-5. ↑