The authority of Scripture

by Jonathan Sarfati, AiG–Australia

Exodus 24:4: ‘Moses then wrote down everything the LORD had said …’

³ Some Pharisees came to him to test him. They asked, ‘Is it lawful for a man to divorce his wife for any and every reason?’
⁴ ‘Haven’t you read,’ he replied, ‘that at the beginning the Creator `made them male and female,’
⁵ and said, ‘For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh’?
⁶ So they are no longer two, but one. Therefore what God has joined together, let man not separate.’

Note: Christ clearly shows how important the Old Testament is. Many liberal evolutionary theologians who reject Moses also refuse to believe that Christ rose from the dead.

John 5:46–47:

⁴⁶ If you believed Moses, you would believe me, for he wrote about me.
⁴⁷ But since you do not believe what he wrote, how are you going to believe what I say?

Also, this shows that the ‘JEDP/Documentary Hypothesis’ of the Pentateuch is contrary to Christ, who clearly taught that the Pentateuch was edited by Moses. See Did Moses really write Genesis?

Matthew 22:23–34:

²³ That same day the Sadducees, who say there is no resurrection, came to him with a question.
²⁴ “Teacher,” they said, “Moses told us that if a man dies without having children, his brother must marry the widow and have children for him.
²⁵ Now there were seven brothers among us. The first one married and died, and since he had no children, he left his wife to his brother.
²⁶ The same thing happened to the second and third brother, right on down to the seventh.
²⁷ Finally, the woman died.
²⁸ Now then, at the resurrection, whose wife will she be of the seven, since all of them were married to her?”
²⁹ Jesus replied, “You are in error because you do not know the Scriptures or the power of God.
³⁰ At the resurrection people will neither marry nor be given in marriage; they will be like the angels in heaven.
³¹ But about the resurrection of the dead — have you not read what God said to you,
³² ‘I am the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob’? He is not the God of the dead but of the living.”
³³ When the crowds heard this, they were astonished at his teaching.

1. the Sadducees only accepted the Pentateuch as Scripture, while the Pharisees accepted the same books as the Protestant OT (as confirmed by the prologue to Ecclesiasticus (ca. 130 BC), Josephus (ca. AD 90), Melito (ca. AD 170)). Jesus accused the Sadducees of not knowing the Scriptures, because they did not accept the Prophets and Writings.

2. Even the Scriptures accepted by the Sadducees taught the resurrection: Christ demonstrated this with an argument depending on the present tense of the implied verb ‘to be’ implied — the patriarchs were living in a sense in Moses’ day, centuries after they had died physically. This passage shows that the Lord believed in verbal plenary inspiration of Scripture.

The Apocrypha was not recognised as canonical by the Jewish scholars at Jamnia (AD 90), and the Talmud stated that the Holy Spirit departed from Israel after Malachi. Many Church Fathers agreed, e.g. Origen, Cyril of Jerusalem, Jerome. Athanasius, in his 39^th Festal Letter of AD 367, listed the same canon as modern Protestants (with the exception of the book of Esther). He also stated that the Apocryphal books Wisdom of Solomon, Wisdom of Sirach, Esther additions, Judith and Tobit were worth reading but not canonical. He made no mention of the books of Maccabees.¹

¹⁵ and how from infancy you have known the holy Scriptures, which are able to make you wise for salvation through faith in Christ Jesus.
¹⁶ All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness,
¹⁷ so that the man of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work.

• the Greek word for ‘Scriptures’ in v.15 is γραμματα (grammata), and must refer to the OT alone, as these are the only Scriptures Timothy would have known from his childhood

• in v. 16, the word translated ‘Scripture’ is γραφη (graphè), which would include the OT plus all the NT written by then (AD 63), i.e. all the NT except 2 Peter, Hebrews, Jude, and John’s writings. As Paul’s writings were divinely inspired, this statement would apply even to the latter books.

• ‘God-breathed’ is a correct translation by the NIV of the Greek word θεοπνευστος (theopneustos). If Scripture is ‘God-breathed’ and God cannot err, it logically follows that Scripture cannot err.

• Scripture is able to make a man ‘wise unto salvation’ and ‘thoroughly furnished unto all good works’. This implies that Scripture contains all the doctrine and moral law we need.

• But since v. 16 makes it clear that all Scripture is God-breathed, not just some, inerrancy applies to whatever the Bible affirms, and is not restricted just to those verses deemed to relate to faith and conduct. After all, doctrine is inextricably linked to history and science, so that whatever Scripture affirms on scientific or historical matters is also true. For example, the key doctrine of the Resurrection is linked to the historical fact that Jesus’ body had vacated the tomb on the third day. It also impinges on science, because naturalistic scientists assert that it is impossible for dead men to rise. And the meaning of Jesus’ death and resurrection is tied to the historical accuracy of the event recorded in Genesis (1 Cor. 15:21–22). And if we bow to uniformitarian ‘science’ in the area of origins, what should we do when Scriptural teaching on morality conflicts with ‘science’, e.g. the Bible’s prohibition on adultery or homosexual acts vs ‘scientific’ assertions that such behaviours are ‘in our genes’. Jesus asked Nicodemus ‘I have spoken to you of earthly things and you do not believe; how then will you believe if I speak of heavenly things?’ (John 3:12).

• 1 Tim 5:18 cites both Deut. 25:4 and Luke 10:7 as graphè; i.e. both the Old and New Testaments. This again shows that the NT was already regarded as Scripture even in apostolic times.

1 Timothy 2:12–14:

¹² I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man; she must be silent.
¹³ For Adam was formed first, then Eve.
¹⁴ And Adam was not the one deceived; it was the woman who was deceived and became a sinner.

Note: Paul accepted the Genesis account as a historical narrative, and used it to teach on the role of men and women in Church.

Acts 17:1–3:

¹ When they had passed through Amphipolis and Apollonia, they came to Thessalonica, where there was a Jewish synagogue.
² As his custom was, Paul went into the synagogue, and on three Sabbath days he reasoned with them from the Scriptures,
³ explaining and proving that the Christ had to suffer and rise from the dead. ‘This Jesus I am proclaiming to you is the Christ,’ he said.

Note: this shows how important the Scriptures were to Paul’s evangelism to Jews, who already accepted them as authoritative.

Acts 17:10–11:

¹⁰ As soon as it was night, the brothers sent Paul and Silas away to Berea. On arriving there, they went to the Jewish synagogue.
¹¹ Now the Bereans were of more noble character than the Thessalonians, for they received the message with great eagerness and examined the Scriptures every day to see if what Paul said was true.

²⁰ Above all, you must understand that no prophecy of Scripture came about by the prophet’s own interpretation.
²¹ For prophecy never had its origin in the will of man, but men spoke from God as they were moved by the Holy Spirit.

Note: The chief Apostle, Peter, believed that God moved (literally ‘carried along’) the writers of Scripture so that they recorded exactly what He wanted. However, God did not usually dictate the words, but superintended the authors so that, using their own individual personalities, they recorded His revelation without error.

2 Peter 3:15–16:

¹⁵ Bear in mind that our Lord’s patience means salvation, just as our dear brother Paul also wrote you with the wisdom that God gave him.
¹⁶ He writes the same way in all his letters, speaking in them of these matters. His letters contain some things that are hard to understand, which ignorant and unstable people distort, as they do the other Scriptures, to their own destruction.

N.B. If the faith was once delivered, then there is no need for additional revelations of doctrine after the canon of scripture was closed).

Christ’s promise in John 14:26 was to His disciples personally present. John was the last survivor, so his books are the last of the NT Canon. It is possible that Rev. 22:18–19 is an indication that this book closes the Canon.

This verse is sometimes alleged to support the existence of essential tradition not recorded in scripture. However, this book was probably one of the first NT books written (AD 51), so the verse does not apply once all the essential traditions had been recorded in the NT.  1 Cor. 15:1 ff. is a good example of a well established oral tradition which Paul writes down.

1. As shown, even many liberals believe that there is overwhelming evidence that Christ affirmed biblical inerrancy. Such independent support of Christ’s statements proves that evangelicals do not necessarily commit the fallacy of arguing in a circle, of using the Bible to prove the Bible.

2. It is not circular to use Matthew to prove Genesis (Mt. 19:3–6, cf. Gen. 1:27, 2:4), Paul to prove Luke (1 Tim 5:18, cf. Lk. 10:7) or Peter to prove Paul (2 Pet. 3:15–16). Finally, allegedly circular reasoning at least demonstrates the internal consistency of the Bible’s claims it makes about itself. If the Bible had actually disclaimed divine inspiration, it would indeed be illogical to defend it. This is one argument against the canonicity of the Apocrypha — as shown above, 1 Macc. 9:27 and 2 Macc. 15:37–39 disclaim divine inspiration.

3. Answers in Genesis accepts the authority of Scripture as an axiom or presupposition: i.e. as a starting point or assumption that requires no proof, and is the basis for all reasoning. All philosophical systems start with axioms. So it’s not a question of a religious system starting from prior assumptions vs. a ‘scientific’ system without any prior assumptions, but which axioms are self-consistent and provide a consistent framework in which to fit the evidence. See also Creation: ‘Where’s the proof?’ and Loving God With All Your Mind: Logic and Creation.