Now in preparing this address for this morning I was very painfully aware of the danger of
it becoming a mere academic exercise and I feel that would be a tragedy and so though
I have prepared a manuscript I have left it behind in my briefcase so that I should be
able to deliver this with greater freedom I hope and the plan of my address is not to
expound the biblical doctrine of scripture as such that has been done elsewhere on many
occasions and very adequately but is rather to look at the authority of scripture as we
accept it and hold it in the light of the Reformation and the contemporary situation
in which we find ourselves. There would have been no Reformation at all apart from the
authority of the scriptures it wasn't just because men read the Bible nor was it because
they accepted the Bible as the Word of God that the Reformation took place but the Reformation
took place because men and women came under the authority of the Word of God under the
authority of the Bible and as such they were men who obeyed the scriptures. Now the nature
of the dispute at the Reformation was not so much of the inspiration and authority of the Bible as
such but the nature of the dispute was mainly over the interpretation of the Bible and the
relationship of the church to the authority of the Bible and whether the church was to
be supremely authoritative in the interpretation of the Bible and this controversy revolved around
the issue of man's salvation and the principles which arose out of the Reformation conflict as we
might call it were basically three principles. The principles of scripture alone, by grace alone,
by faith alone but the last two principles that man's salvation is by grace alone through faith
alone arose out of the first principle that the only authority of the church is scripture alone.
The Reformers taught that salvation was by faith alone through grace alone because they
recognized in this matter no other authority except the authority of scripture alone and the
only justification for the Reformation lay in this principle of scripture alone as being our guide in
all matters of faith and conduct. The other principles just arose out of it and as soon as
a man rejects the principle of the scripture alone as his only authority then he very soon
departs to a recognition of some other authority such as the church or of human reason. The
Reformers rejected all other forms of authority with regard to man's salvation except scripture
alone. Listen to how Luther denounces the Pope or any man who would raise themselves above the
authority of scripture in the question of man's salvation quoted from his commentary on Galatians
1. Paul subjecteth both himself and an angel from heaven and doctors upon earth and all other
teachers and masters whatsoever under the authority of the scripture this queen ought to
rule and all ought to obey and be subject unto her they ought not to be masters judges or arbiters
but only witnesses disciples and confessors of the scripture whether it be the Pope Luther or
Augustine Paul or an angel from heaven neither ought any doctrine to be taught or heard in the
church besides the pure word of God that is to say the holy scripture otherwise accursed be both
the teachers and hearers together with their doctrine and it is the authority of scripture
scripture alone which has always been the strength of Protestantism reject the authority of
scripture and it will only be a matter of time before you are back in the Roman Catholic Church
or have become a humanist
the strength of Protestantism has always been its adherence to the authority of the scripture
it has no strength apart from scripture it has no reason for any separate existence
apart from scripture and whenever the Protestant church is turned away from the authority of
scripture its testimony has been weakened and its life has become peril perilously impoverished
when I speak of Protestantism I speak of what I understand to be historic Christianity
in contrast to Roman Catholicism or indeed any other system man-made system of religious thought
the authority of scripture is the true strength of historic Christianity
and it is not surprising therefore that the authority of scripture
and the scriptures as a whole have always been the object of Satan's attack in order to weaken
the strength of the church and the strength of Protestantism and the greatest enemy in this
respect has not been the world without but always the doubter within the conflict over the last
150 years or so has been a conflict which has raged over the inspiration of scripture
but the weakening of faith in the inspiration of scripture has led over the last 150 years
to the authority of scripture being undermined because the authority of scripture is tied up
it is bound up with the inspiration of scripture the church has had to fight different battles at
different times in its history in the early Christian church the conflict was over the
nature of God and the trinity and the person of Christ in the days of Augustine it was over the
nature of man and grace and sin in the time of Anselm in the 11th century the conflict was over
the nature of the atonement at the time of the reformation the conflict was over the question
of authority but particularly as it related to man's salvation but for the last 150 years the
conflict which has raged in the church has been a conflict over the inspiration and authority
of the bible and I would maintain this morning that the question of authority is still the
greatest issue which faces us today in the Christian church indeed I believe it is the
greatest issue in the whole realm of thinking in the whole world the issue of authority
is the basic issue which confronts us I know that there are those people and evangelicals amongst
them who suggest that the debate over the inspiration and authority of the bible is a
debate which is well nigh closed or if it isn't closed it ought to be closed and that the issue
today is over the nature of the church but the modern church issue and the conflict and
differences amongst christian over the modern christians over the modern church issue
is basically due to an unresolved conflict over the authority of scripture so that the basic
issue which confronts us is not the unity of the church or the nature of the church the basic issue
I believe which confronts us today is the issue which has been the issue of conflict for the past
150 years which has been unresolved and it is the issue of authority and where does authority lie
in the church and what is happening today is that the issue of authority
this truth of the authority of scripture like so many other truths is being swept under an
ecumenical carpet of make-believe upon which gated clergy and so-called religious leaders
strut about talking about fellowship whilst all the time ignoring the very basis upon which that
fellowship can exist unless treading on it as a way of acknowledging its existence
well then let us begin with this question what is the authority of scripture
I think it is necessary to begin with a few bulldozing negatives to
clear away some of the rubble of modern confusion
the authority of scripture is not the reasonableness of scripture
in fact the scripture is very unreasonable to the mind of natural man it is as paul
declares in his first epistle to the corinthians chapter 2 and verse 14 it is foolishness unto him
and the scripture can never be reasonable to the unenlightened man
and if the authority of the scripture were its reasonableness then the authority of scripture
would be the authority of man's minds and the capability of man's mind in making critical
judgments and assessments of scripture
neither is the authority of scripture the authority of its recorders
for then the authority of scripture would be the authority of man's reliability as a witness
or as an interpreter of religious events or as a scribe
nor is the authority of scripture the authority of its custodians
for then the authority of scripture would be subject to the church
and the word of god the scriptures do not owe their existence to the church
but the church owes its existence to the word
and finally fourthly the authority of scripture is not an authority which is derived from the effect
which scripture has over men as is taught by the dialectical theologians such as the bartians
because the authority of scripture is not like that of a yo-yo tied to the strings of
man's subjective feelings the effect which the word of god has over man
varies and the authority of scripture is not a varying subjective thing
the authority of scripture is an innate authority
is an authority which arises out of its divine origin its divine communication its divine
formulation
it is the nature of scripture as scripture which determines its authority
and the authority of scripture rests upon the divine revelation within scripture
and the inspiration of god the holy spirit which has brought scripture into being as a body
as peter says in his second epistle no prophecy of scripture is of any private interpretation
for prophecy came not in all time by will of man but holy men of god spake as they were moved or
born along carried along by the holy ghost the holy spirit determined the form of scripture
the holy spirit determined the content of scripture by inspiration
the authority of scripture arises out of the inspiration the divine inspiration of the scripture
they turn the inspiration of the bible as a term which means very little today or has come to mean
very little because some people have used it to mean almost anything the term divine inspiration
is little better today because there are many people who use the term divine inspiration
is little better today because there are many people who use the term divine inspiration
to refer to an inspiration which has its origin in man but is divine like this is leslie weatherhead's
interpretation of the authority of scripture it is divine he would say yes but only divine in as
much as it has its origin in man and that inspiration that man had is divine like
so when we speak of the inspiration of the scripture we need to say more than that it is
divinely inspired what we mean when we say the scripture is divinely inspired is that it's it
had its origin in god the source of scripture was god and his communication was to holy men of god
as they were moved by the holy spirit
listen to what kelvin has to say in this connection this is a principle which distinguishes
our religion from all others that we know that god has spoken to us and are fully persuaded that
the prophets did not speak at their own suggestion but that being organs of the holy spirit they only
uttered what they had been commanded from heaven to declare and i would suggest that the inspiration
of the scripture must be a verbal inspiration for an inspiration which is not verbal is no
inspiration at all words are used to convey meaning words are used to safeguard meaning
and the substitution or the alteration of one word can change the whole meaning of a passage
an inspiration which is not a verbal inspiration i suggest is no inspiration at all and the
revelation which god has given through his word is a propositional revelation a revelation which
permits us to state propositions of divine truth
and this is only possible because the inspiration of the scripture is a verbal inspiration
i use the terms scripture and word of god interchangeably listen to what luther says here
i will not waste a word arguing with one who does not consider the scriptures are the word of god
what we mean when we say that the bible is the word of god
is that in the bible god speaks to men
that god is speaking through all the scriptures to men through the scriptures
we do not mean to suggest that there is no there is nothing recorded in scripture
which is not revelation or which is not truth
the speech of rab shakur was neither revelation nor truth but it was divinely inspired in as much
as it was recorded by divine intent and there was a divine lesson for us to be learned through
that passage god is speaking to us and instructing us through it and in that sense it is scripture
and the word of god
so the authority of the scripture is the authority it possesses by reason of its divine origin by
reason of it being the very word of god the scriptures came from god not man says vingli
and the scripture carries with it the very authority of god himself of the very person of the
of a godhead you cannot think of the words of a person apart from the person you cannot think
of the words of a person apart from the character of a person the words of an individual convey the
thoughts of the person the words of an individual reveal the character and the attributes of a
person the scripture is the word of god the word of god conveys the person the character of the
person the attributes of god are conveyed by the word of god the scriptures as the word of god
convey the authority of god's person of his majesty when we read the scriptures we are
confronted with the divine majesty we are confronted by the faithfulness and the truthfulness
and the reliability of god the scripture partakes to the very nature of god the scripture partakes
to the very attributes of god because it is the word of god and the word of a person cannot be
separated from the person or the character of the person who speaks those words
when we read the scriptures we hear god
this was the position of our lord regarding the old testament this was the position of the apostles
day that spoke are but it was the spirit who was speaking very often words which were recorded or
spoken by man are said in the new testament to have been words of the spirit the holy spirit said
what the word of god confronts us with god himself
and we must never forget that
the word of god constitutes the authority of scripture the spirit of god confirms the authority
of the world we would say that the authority which the scripture possesses is an infallible authority
we must inevitably say this if the scriptures partake of the very nature of god if they partake
and reveal and convey the very character of god then they must convey the infallibility of god
one cannot think of god as being fallible only man is fallible the scriptures are an infallible
record in as much as they are the word of god and all scripture taught the reformers is the
word of god though some parts of scripture may make that word more evident than other parts of
scripture and this is what luther meant when he spoke of the epistle of james as a right story
epistle in comparison he said in comparison with some of paul's epistles such as his epistle to the
romans and ethessians and galatians and so on he wasn't in any sense suggesting that the epistle
to james was not the word of god and was not scripture and was not reliable what he was saying
was this that it is scripture it is the word of god but the word of god is not as evident in the
epistle of james as it is in some of paul's epistles in no sense was luther denying the
authority or the right of the epistle of james to be included in the corpus of scripture
now this surely brings us to this point that to depart from scripture is to depart from god
if the scriptures carry with them the authority of god himself then to depart from the scripture
is to depart from god to disobey scripture is to disobey god to close our ears to scripture is to
close our ears to the word of god and to the voice of god and it is nonsense for some of our
modern ecumenicals to talk about being guided by the will of god and being led by the spirit of god
whilst at the same time rejecting the authority of the word of god as they are contained in the
scripture for this is where his will is made known and this is where the spirit of god speaks to man
through the scriptures
to reject the authority of scripture is to reject the authority of god who gave scripture
is to reject the authority of jesus christ to whom scripture points
is to reject the authority of the holy spirit who inspired it
the scripture cannot be broken declared our lord
and we would say that the scripture is authoritative for us and for men in all
matters about which it speaks these scriptures speak about god and man the scriptures speak
about sin and salvation but the scriptures also speak about the origins of the world
the scriptures also speak about history the psychology of man
of human culture and if we are serious in our profession of faith in the authority of scripture
then the authority of scripture must rule us not merely in matters which concern god and our
salvation but the authority of scriptures must also rule us in matters of history and psychology
and psychology and culture
we cannot have our faith in one compartment and our mind in another compartment
we mustn't seek to accommodate the scriptures to the to the to the uh modern scientific method
we can't accommodate the scriptures to man's interpretation of the nature of man in modern
psychology we can't accommodate the scriptures to man's view of history no history psychology
science must be accommodated to the authority of the word of god because the word of god speaks
to some extent regarding these matters and in no respect are we at liberty to depart
from the authority of scripture in matters about which the scripture has something to say
this brings me to the second main heading which follows inevitably from
the authority of scripture the authority of scripture and the church
it is often one often hears the argument today that the reformation was a big mistake
we are told you mustn't keep harping back to the reformation
what you must do is you must go back before the reformation
you must go back right beyond the reformation the reformation after all these people tell us
only happened 450 years ago the christian church existed before the reformation you
mustn't keep going back to the reformation but beyond it well now this argument seems very
plausible superficially it seems very impressive but it is utterly fallacious
and it is fallacious for this reason that the very principle upon which the reformation took place
and the very principle that the reformers kept emphasizing was that the church had to go back
to the origins of christianity and what happened at the reformation was that men were taken back
to the very beginning to the very origins of christianity and you cannot therefore get back
in principle beyond the reformation because the reformation did bring men back in principle
to the very beginning to the origins of christianity
the beginning which these models are getting back to is not to the origins of the gospel they're
getting back to the very beginning of time when man lifted himself up in the arrogance of his own
reason and began to question the authority of god and the word of god these people are not men of a
new reformation nor are they new christians they are just the old retrogrades dressed up in modern
fig leaves another argument you hear these days is that uh is it is sometimes claimed that the
scriptures owe their existence to the church that it was the church that decided what the canon of
scripture should be and therefore the scriptures are not a final authority the church is a final
authority or at least the authority of the church is an authority on a power with the authority of
scripture because it is argued the scriptures owe their existence to the church this argument is
also fallacious for two reasons the church at no time decided what the canon of scripture ought to
be what the church did was in the process of time come to acknowledge and accept certain books as
the canon of scripture which had been recognized in the life of the church as authoritative in the
sense of being god-given and secondly the church owes its existence to the word of god and not vice
versa when the reformers went back to the origins of the gospel when they went back to the beginning
they stressed the priority of the word of god over the church
god's people owe their existence to his word
the word of god the scriptures do not owe their existence to god's people
abraham became a child of god because as stephen declares the god of glory appeared to him
because he received revelation from god he entered into fellowship with god
god called abraham and on receiving the call of the word of god abraham left his father's gods
and served the living god it was the word of god which brought abraham into being as a child
of god so it was with israel it was god's word to israel which created them as his people and
his nation so it was in the days of the christian church it was the preaching of the word of god
it was the preaching and the testimony of the scriptures of the old testament
and their application to christ and to the person and work of christ at the day of pentecost
which enlarged the church it was the word of god which brought people into existence
as the people of god
never never have the people of god brought the scriptures into existence never had the people
of god brought the word of god into existence true as some people would remind us today the
acts of god accompanied his word but the word which accompanied his acts was not the
churches or before the church israel's interpretation of god's acts but the word
which accompanied the acts of god was god's interpretation of his own acts
in order that his people should know who it was who was acting and what it was that he was doing
the scriptures themselves declares luther have been brought down to us by act of god
and so the church of the old testament of the church of the new testament the people of god
in the old and new testament the people of god since the days of the new testament the
people of god today owe their existence to the word of god and not vice versa
and there are certain important principles conclusions it seems to me which follow from this
from this principle and there are these one that the nature of the church therefore is defined by
the nature and authority of scripture two that the christian life is defined by the authority
of scripture and three that the church and christian have no authority apart from the
authority of that to which they owe their existence as the people of god namely the word of god
but it seems to me that evangelicals over the past hundred years whilst accepting the inspiration of
scriptures have been loathed in many respects in practice to accept the implications of the
authority of scripture and in particular with regard to these conclusions which i have just
drawn but the reformation took place not because men accepted the inspiration of scripture not
because men accepted the scripture as the word of god but because having accepted its inspiration
having accepted it as the word of god they accepted the authority of it
the scripture demands obedience the scripture demands that we should walk in the ways of the
lord as they're set forth for us in the scriptures and this was why the reformation took place
and the authority of scripture
is not only the greatest issue in the christian church as a whole today it is the greatest issue
which faces us as evangelicals today
now i want to look at some of those conclusions which i've drawn from the statement that the
church owes its existence to the word of god the first was this that the nature of the church
church is defined by the nature and authority of scripture
so if we ask this question what is a church
what answer are we to give there is only one answer we can give to the question what is a
church and that that must be a scriptural answer let kelvin answer the question what is a church
he says this wherever we find the word of god purely preached and heard and the sacraments
duly administered according to the institution of christ there it is not to be doubted is a
church of god it is the word of god that constitutes churches as churches it is the
word of god that has brought people into being as the people of god it is the word of god which
constitutes a church as a church of god it is the word of god which perpetuates the church
apart from the word of god the church has no hope of continuing its existence
the acceptance of the authority of scripture is the only guarantee that the church remains the
church the acceptance of the authority of scripture is the only guarantee that the church
is enlarged because it is the scripture which constitutes the people as the people of god
it is the scripture which brings people into being as the people of god
and where the scriptures are rejected and where the word of god ceases to be preached
there the church ceases to be the church of jesus christ
whatever doctrinal articles it may possess and acknowledge in theory
the church is where the word is and where the word isn't the church isn't
it seems to me that that is fundamental to one's understanding of the nature of the people of god
as having been created by the nature and authority of the scriptures as the word of god
but the conclusions of this truth are painful
we must say this surely
that a company of people worshiping together
are not a church of jesus christ
unless the word of god is as calvin puts it purely preached in that company of worshipers
and that people no matter how religious they may be no matter how much they may think of themselves
as christian no matter what their religious traditions are have no right biblical right
to call themselves a church of jesus christ unless the word of god is purely preached in their midst
the word of god is purely preached in their midst
and i would suggest to you that it is a biblical obligation
and if believers find themselves amongst a company of worshiping people where the word of god
and the authority of the word of god is not acknowledged and the word of god is not preached
that their obligation is to withdraw from that company of people
and associate themselves with a company of people where the word of god is preached
because unless they do that they are not hellishipping within a church as it is biblically
defined by the word of god to acquiesce in error is just another way of denying the truth
and it is another way of promoting error
of course i know that it is argued by some people that christians who find themselves in such
situations should seek the reformation of apostate churches and not to separate from them as a holy
elite there are wrong grounds of separation
evangelicals it seems to me have been notorious for separating from churches on wrong grounds
in the past we must never separate from people because in our view their spirituality is not
as great as it ought to be ours isn't as great as that i ours isn't all that great either
we must never separate from professing christians on the ground that they are guilty of this or that
christians on the ground that they are guilty of this or that or the other sin
these are not grounds for separation
but the true treasure of the church as luther declares in his 62nd thesis is the sacrosanct
gospel of the glory and grace of god and where the treasure has
disappeared there the receptacle ceases to be the treasury
where there is no word of god which is the treasure of the church
there there is no treasury which is the church
the apostle paul would not have us to separate from any body of professing christians on the
grounds of sinful living
there is no suggestion in his epistles to the corinthians
that there was any grounds for any of them separating from
others of them even though their conduct was far from what it ought to be
but in writing to the galatians
he lays upon christians a biblical obligation to separate from those that preach another gospel
it is wrong to anathematize christians for a low standard of christian life
but it is a biblical obligation to anathematize those who
no matter how respectable in their lives are preaching another gospel
this principle that the church is where the word is and where the word isn't the church isn't
applies surely to the relationship of true churches with false churches
the apostasy over the last 150 years in this country has meant that many
true churches find themselves linked within denominations to apostate churches
what is their biblical obligation in the light of the authority of scripture
need i provide the answer i would think the biblical obligation is obvious
there can be no church fellowship with companies of people
who in a biblical sense have ceased to bear the marks and evidences of a true church
and the sooner we drop the pretense of having fellowship with companies of people that have
ceased to be churches because they rejected the word of god and with christians who are
not christians because they have rejected the authority of the word of god the sooner we
drop this ungodly pretense the better it will be for the gospel of jesus christ in our land
and i believe that some of the denominational revival fellowships have caused to examine
themselves along these lines the very arguments which they bring forth against
participation in the world council of churches may equally be applied to their participation
and affiliation with apostate churches within their own denominations
it is not schism to come out from fellowship with churches that are not churches
schism the breaking of the body of christ
to leave a company of people that has ceased to be the body of christ is not schism therefore
there are those who say they remain within their
churches which have rejected the scriptures and within their denominations which are rejecting
the scriptures in order to bear witness to the truth of the scriptures
but these scriptures do not call us to bear witness to the truth within the professing
church the scriptures do not call us to be in it to win it either to be in our churches to win them
to the truth of the gospel or in our denominations to win them or in the world council of churches to
win it the place to bear witness to the gospel is the world not the church we're in the world
as the church in order to bear witness to the gospel we're not in the church to bear witness
to the gospel and wherever our traditions no matter how precious they may be to us
conflict with the authority of scripture we must follow the reformers in the biblical duty
of severing ourselves from our traditions in order to be faithful to the word of god
we do not promote christian fellowship by being affiliated or in association
with so-called churches that recognize no other authority except denominational imperialism
are our consciences to be under the word of god and the authority of the word of god
or are they not and the second conclusion i drew was this
the christian life is defined by the authority of scripture
we live in an age of false tolerance
but i believe essentially it is not tolerance at all it is a form of laxity and indifference to
truth which we are confronted with today in the easiness of people
it is a reluctance to be definite and to be incisive in one's thinking and in one's judgments
and it seems to me that evangelicals have been very greatly affected also
by the tolerance of the age and this is seen in that since about the year 1880
there has been a tendency in evangelical circles to avoid
to avoid coming to the conclusion about anyone that he or she is not a christian
and rather to show a tolerance so-called to all men and to recognize anyone as a christian
and the division instead has been made on another level
a division between what are called carnal christians and spiritual christians
between children of god and sons of god in order to preserve the evangelicalism of the world
the evangelicalism of our gospel we have to make a division between men
but instead of making the incisive divisions which the scripture makes that a man is either
a christian or not a christian either a believer or an unbeliever he is either saved or lost
we have instead blurred over the incisive distinctions of the scriptures
and we have been reluctant to think of any man as a christian and have instead introduced this
artificial and this unbiblical distinction within the churches between spiritual christians and
unspiritual christians and spiritual churches and unspiritual churches
any of you who have one corinthians three in mind i would advise you to read it in the light
of one corinthians chapter two
it could only be interpreted in that light
but to introduce within the christian church this further distinction is to fall into the
old gnostic heresy of suggesting that there are christians who are living at a higher level and
christians that are living at a lower level and this sort of heresy is productive for very great
spiritual pride and a great deal of the confusion about today in the churches over the over the
question of church unity and christian unity is because evangelicals have been reluctant
to define in the incisive biblical terms what they mean by the word christian and what they
mean by the word church and i believe that our differences with many other professing christians
today are not basically differences over matters of church unity at all i believe the basic
difference is much more fundamental than that the base it is a basic difference which involves the
whole nature of the gospel and what a christian really is and what a church really is
and if we accepted the authority of the scriptures in this matter we define the christian life
clearly in terms of scripture without introducing these artificial editions which for which the
scripture gives us no warrant then a great deal of modern confusion would would be swept away
and we would be seeing things a great deal more clearly
my third observation was that the church and the christian have no authority
apart from the authority of the word of god to which they owe their existence
the life of the church the life of the christian must be lived under the authority of the word of
god but again and again in the history of protestantism there has been a danger
because of the individual liberties with the word of god and the fact that the church is
which are given to individuals in context of biblical teaching there has always been the
danger of elevating experience above scripture again and again experience and the authority
of experience has been made more authoritative than the authority of scripture
we have all met those evangelical popes
who give their views a stamp of infallibility
by announcing them with by announcing them with the words god has told me i know
that is elevating the authority of experience above the authority of the word
god hasn't told you if it's in conflict with his word
and we must be very careful how we use the phrase the lord guided me
otherwise we may be claiming to be guided by the lord contrary to clear principles which the lord
himself has laid down in his inspired word and we may find ourselves attributing to ourselves and
ourselves attributing to ourselves and our own subject feelings an infallibility which we deny
to the pope it is true that the reformers spoke of an internal as well as an external witness
to the authority of god the internal witness is the spirit the external witness is the word
the internal authority is the spirit the external authority is the word but they never separated the
two the witness of the spirit was never thought of was never taught apart from the testimony of
the word and we must never separate the two we may say the lord guided us we may say we know
but we can only say it because we have received our guidance from the word and are able to justify
it in terms of the word we may only say it because we've received our beliefs from the word
and from an understanding of the word the witness of the spirit is a witness to the truth of the
word through which the spirit works and illuminates and guides his people
the internal witness confirms the external witness in true experience
now my third heading is the authority of scripture and preaching
this surely follows from the authority of scripture and the church
we have said that the christian and the church owe their existence to the word
and that whoever believes in the author and whoever believes therefore in the authority
of scripture must believe in the authority of preaching which is obedient to the exhortation
of the apostle Paul preach the word the word of god is the most effective instrument the church
possesses
to perpetuate itself
i read some time ago in a religious journal this
speaking of the modern day the writer said the sermon as an effective instrument is dead
well i must confess that the first thought that went through my mind was this
let him speak for his own sermons
but the second thought that went through my mind was one of anger
how can a man claim to be a prophet of god how can a man claim to be proclaiming the word of god
and say the the sermon as an effective instrument is dead
is the word of god as an effective instrument dead thank god it's life from the dead
if we believe in the authority of the word of god if we believe the church of god and
the believer has been brought into being as a result of the word of god coming to them
with life and by the spirit we will believe in the preaching of the word of god
and yet it is an undeniable fact is it not that there has been a loss of confidence in preaching
not only in liberal churches but also in evangelical churches
a friend of mine some Sundays ago he went to preach in a church which is extremely sound
it was a one sunday afternoon and no sooner had he opened the bible
and to his utter astonishment he found everyone in that church closing their eyes for an after in a
nap
can't blame it onto the preacher he's only just started preaching
but my friends the profession to believe in the authority of scripture was there being belied
in practice and in attitude if we are believers in the authority of the word of god because we
believe it is the word of god and carries with it the very authority of god himself
we will be earnest and attentive hearers of the word surely
and the rediscovery in the reformation of the authority of scripture led to a revival of
preaching and the reason why there was a revival of preaching at the reformation was that people
had come to rediscover the true authority and nature of the word of god
a religion of ritualism needs no preacher a sacramental religion needs no preacher
but a spiritual life which depends upon the communication of the very words of god to the
ends upon the communication of the very words of god to the soul of its life
is utterly dependent upon preaching
this is why people flocked to Geneva and this is why out from Geneva they went
to all parts of Europe men who were possessed with zeal to preach the word of god such as the fiery
from Scotland spiritual life cannot survive without the preaching of the word of god
this follows from our faith in its authority but in times of spiritual decline
preaching has always declined and attempts are made to regain the authority which only the
authority of scripture through preaching has in the church attempts are made by the church to
regain their lost authority in the day after the days of the puritans for example when the church
passed into the so-called age of reason when there was an attempt in terms of man's reason
to regain for the church its lost authority theology was based upon natural laws god's
existence was based upon human proofs and of course this sort of theology this sort of
preaching had no more authority than human reason has over men and women and that has very little
but is it not true to say that in our day there are many who are seeking the lost authority of
the church in organizational unity or in dignifying the person of the minister and the function of the
ministry in ways other than by the word of god the authority of the ministry my dear friends
is not the authority of a religious expert trained in a theological college nor is the
authority of the ministry the authority of a man's personality or dress neither is the authority of
the ministry the authority of his academic attainments or degrees though we do not despise
learning nor is it the authority of a central appointments body
but the authority of the ministry is the authority of the word of god alone
the authority of the minister of the gospel is the authority of preaching
and the authority of preaching is the authority of the word of god
one of my members went to germany recently and he found himself in freiburg on a sunday and he
decided to attend the one of the lutheran churches there for worship well the lutheran
preacher ostensibly based his sermon upon the authority of scripture and he took us
his passage for his sermon the raising of the widow of naon's son but he drew certain singular
and extraordinary conclusions from this passage of scripture the first of which was this
that the raising of the widow of naon's son proved
the doctrine of baptismal regeneration that was the first point
and the second was even more extraordinary it was this
that the raising of the widow of naon's son demonstrated the need for the reunification of
germany now we may laugh at it and we may disagree with his conclusions
but the application i want to make is not so pleasant and it is this that we ourselves as
evangelicals in this century have again and again employed exactly the same technique in preaching
we have taken verses of scripture and passages of scripture not as the text of our preaching not as
the text upon which our sermons have been based but as the pretext
and if we believe that the scripture itself is relevant and authoritative then it doesn't need
enhancing by any fanciful additions which we may like to add to it if we believe in the authority
preaching then it seems to me the following conclusions are axiomatic
my time is almost gone i must hurry our handling of the word of god will be a serious examination
and study of what the word itself has to say you can't just get up into the pulpit and preach
as the lord moves you because he should move you to study his word before you do it and to study
exactly what his word has to say so that you say what the word says and secondly we will endeavor
to preach the whole council of god you know there are two forms of higher criticism there is the
higher criticism of the liberal who doesn't hesitate to cut great sections out of the bible
and disagree with the apostle paul and reject the doctrine of the depravity of man and of judgment
and of hell and so on there is that form of higher criticism but there is also the form of
higher criticism which is current in evangelicalism the criticism of prejudice and neglect we can cut
great chunks out of our gospel and our bible by neglect we can deny the depravity of man
and the biblical teaching of the judgment of god against sinners the truths regarding heaven and
hell by never preaching on them one is a criticism of pride the other is a criticism of neglect or
prejudice but both are criticisms of unbelief we will preach and endeavor to preach the whole
council of god if we believe in the authority of scripture and thirdly our preaching will be an
exposition of scripture so that what we are doing in our preaching is to project the divine truth
surely there's been a great lack of this in the 20th century what luther and kelvin did was to
open their bible luther at the psalms then in romans and so on kelvin right the way through
the scriptures and expound patiently verse by verse chapter by chapter book by book the word of god
and surely we must do this if we really believe in the authority of scripture and fourthly
our preaching will be an interpretation by scripture of scripture the inspiration of
scripture demands it god is his own interpreter the inspiration and the authority of the pulpit
is the inspiration and authority of the word and we cannot expect the one without the other
but too often in our in our evangelical churches we have looked for inspiration in the pulpit
without the word of god being the basis of what is proclaimed from our pulpits
well i had another section which i haven't time to consider it is the authority of scripture
and evangelism i believe that if we really believe in the authority of scripture
and that faith cometh by hearing and hearing with the word of god
then the preaching of the word will be that instrument and method in which our confidence
is most fully grounded and that our confidence will not be in new methods
or in other things no matter how harmless they may be in themselves all you have to do
and this i say in conclusion all you have to do to accept the inspiration of the scriptures
is to be an evangelical in your head but to accept the authority of scripture you have to
be an evangelical in your heart too but the truth of the matter my friends is this that unless we
accept the the authority of scripture our professions to believe in the inspiration of
scripture are so much humbug the reformation took place not because men accepted the authority the
reformation took place because men accepted the authority of the word of god it was not a mistake
it blasted a false ecumenicity in two and it created a holy division in the church
of the middle ages as the flail of the word of god moved across the freshing floor of europe
so wind from heaven came and separated the chaff from the wheat unity for unity's sake
is a pagan notion it is a legacy in the church inherited from the days of constant time
but the unity we must strive after is a unity which begins with the word of god
and is based upon the authority of the scriptures as his word let us pray
this recording is brought to you by the christian library.org.au