We are going to pursue our study of this great, central topic – the Bible, the Holy Scriptures – with the presupposition [most fundamental heart commitment, loyalty] that all the words in this book are: the very words of God [Ro 3. 2, Mt 4. 4], the product of His ‘breath’ = inspiration [2 Ti 3. 16, 2 Pe 1. 20 - 1], infallible [ask for definition] [Ps 12. 6, 18. 30, 19. 7, 119. 160], the power of God unto salvation [Ro 1. 16], the Father’s testimony concerning the Son [Jn 5. 37 – 40, 46; Lk 24. 25 – 7, 44], able to give life to the soul [Ps 19. 7], useful for teaching, rebuking correcting, and training in righteousness [2 Ti 3. 16], living and active [He 4. 12], effectual [Is 55. 11], all-controlling [Is 44. 24 – 8, Lam 3. 37 – 8, Ps 147. 15 - 8], absolutely authoritative [Ex 20. 1f, Le 18. 4 – 5, Dt 6. 4 – 9], that by which we will be blessed or cursed [Dt 5. 30 – 2, Dt 30. 15 – 20, Mt 7. 24 – 8, Jn 5. 45 – 7], our very life [Dt 32. 47]. In other words, we as Christians are (indeed must be) going to submit our thinking about the Scriptures (just as we would any other doctrine) to the Scriptures themselves – Sola Scriptura! (Is. 8. 19 – 22). As Professor Frame writes, "… the self-witness of Scripture must not only be the first consideration in the argument; it must also be the final and decisive consideration also."

But here someone may object, ‘Doesn’t this prejudice the case… shouldn’t we start out from a point of neutrality and let the facts speak for themselves?’ [What’s wrong with this argument?] Our answer is this: there are only two types of mindsets in this fallen world: theistic, obedient, covenant-keeping, humble, Christian thinking; or anti-theistic, disobedient, covenant-breaking, proud, pagan thinking. There is no neutral mindset; indeed to insist that there is such a possibility is itself an anti-theistic proposition. (There are no "brute" facts.)

Now the anti-theistic mind is revealed in many Scripture passages: Ro 1. 18f. The wrath of God is being revealed from heaven against all the godlessness and wickedness of men who suppress the truth by their wickedness, 19 since what may be known about God is plain to them, because God has made it plain to them. 20 For since the creation of the world God's invisible qualities--his eternal power and divine nature--have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that men are without excuse. 21 For although they knew God, they neither glorified him as God nor gave thanks to him, but their thinking became futile and their foolish hearts were darkened. 22 Although they claimed to be wise, they became fools…; Ro 8. 6 – 7, The mind of sinful man is death, but the mind controlled by the Spirit is life and peace; 7 the sinful mind is hostile to God. It does not submit to God's law, nor can it do so…; and 1 Co 1. 18 – 21, For the message of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God. 19 For it is written: "I will destroy the wisdom of the wise; the intelligence of the intelligent I will frustrate." 20 Where is the wise man? Where is the scholar? Where is the philosopher of this age? Has not God made foolish the wisdom of the world? 21 For since in the wisdom of God the world through its wisdom did not know him, God was pleased through the foolishness of what was preached to save those who believe… Let us be clear – the unbeliever, if left to his own presupposition, his own assumptions, his own logic, his own interpretation of the ‘facts’, will never conclude that the Bible is the very word of God! Why? Because the evidence is lacking? No! because the evidence everywhere is suppressed, the light is hated (Jn 3. 19), the mind is blinded (2Co 4. 4), the lie is believed (2Th 2. 11).

But praise be to God, we who are Christians have been transferred from the kingdom of darkness to the kingdom of light; the veil has been removed, the truth has set us free! The Christian starting point therefore is and must deliberately be one in which we now think as a creature ought to think: obediently, loyally; the attempt is made to think God’s thoughts after Him, to love Him with all one’s heart, mind, soul, and strength, to give Him the glory due His name. And so a Christian looks very carefully at the facts, at the evidence, all the while interpreting them, deriving their meaning, on the basis of an ultimate heart commitment to the LORD God. A Christian earnestly uses logic and the process of reasoning all the while refusing to ever use his mind to contravene the clear teaching of Scripture.

What about the objection that this amounts to reasoning in a circle? Quoting E.J. Young, "… the Bible tells you what you are to believe about God, and God tells you that the Bible is His Word; surely that is reasoning in a circle. In reply, we many answer that, in the nature of the case, if we are but creatures, and God is the creator, this is the only way in which it is possible to reason. If God has actually created us, it follows that all we know we must receive from Him. He must tell us what we are to believe about anything. If, therefore, He tells us, as He does in the work of the inward testimony of the Holy Spirit, that the Scriptures are His word, we must obey His voice. On the other hand, because He has thus identified the Scriptures as His word, we must in turn listen to them when they tell of Him… There is no other way. Any other way is the way of deception and will ultimately lead to the point where we shut God out of our thinking.

Such a commitment is only possible for the Christian… because only a believer has in fact, at a past point in time, become a new creation by the Spirit of God. God, who is rich in mercy, has opened the Christian’s eyes such that he is no longer blind to spiritual reality. The believer knows (and implicit in this knowledge, loves) the Triune God because God loves him (Ga 4. 8 – 10)! Included in this Spirit-given knowledge is the recognition, the unshakable assurance, that the Scriptures which reveal this great God are indeed the very words of God.

Such a starting point is only possible for the Christian, and is the only possible ‘presupposition for the Christian – he now knows and affirms (on the basis of his union with Christ in covenant love) that he must take every thought captive to the obedience of Christ. Certainly theology is an activity comprehended in this command (2 Co 10. 4 - 6f)! To do otherwise is sin; it is wrong-headed, and it will lead us to disaster (as has been noted in connection with many denominations and famous individuals in the last 200 years).

What then, does the Bible say concerning itself (the "objective witness")? Before we look specifically at the Old, and then the New, Testament, let us consider some very important points that Frame makes in GIW: "… when the Bible speaks of atonement, reconciliation, justification, glorification, it speaks of these in such a way as to presuppose a crucial role for itself… from the beginning of God’s dealings with men God has taught them to give his words a particular role in their lives… (Man’s) salvation requires verbal revelation. In saving man, God speaks to him."

Note that "… redemption, according to Scripture, involves a re-assertion of God’s lordship." Yahweh is the LORD God, Jesus is Lord – these are central themes of the Bible. And from the very beginning of man’s creation we see this lordship given prominent expression by means of authoritative statement and demand e.g. "And God blessed them, and God said unto them, ‘Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth…"

[Ge 1. 28]. From the very beginning of his creation, man needed God’s word to give him definition and direction. Of course, man rebelled against this word. And so, as Frame writes, "… our God is not only Lord, he is also savior. And he speaks to us not only demands… but also gospel… But we must emphasize that he speaks the gospel. The gospel is a message, a revelation in words… Just as there can be no lordship without an absolute demand, so there is no salvation without a gracious and certain promise. Therefore the whole biblical message presupposes the necessity of verbal revelation. Without revealed words, there is neither lordship nor salvation."

The Old Testament’s Attestation

(Some of the following points from are Murray, The Infallible Word ).

First, the Bible never criticizes itself.

Second, the statement, "Thus saith the Lord", introduces many, many O.T. passages. We may note in conjunction with this fact that the Scripture claims to give us the very words of God: cf. Dt 18. 18; Ex 4. 15, 7. 1 – 2; Jer 1. 9; Is 5. 3 (note use of first person); Jn 14. 26; 1 Th 2. 13; Ro 9. 17 & Ga 3. 8 (note the equating of Scripture with God’s voice); Ac 28. 25.

Third, the latter portions of the O.T. look upon the Pentateuch as divine (Mal 4.4).

Fourth, the N.T. witnesses to the O.T. are copious – Ro. 15. 4, 2 Ti 3. 16,1 Pe 1. 10 – 12, 2 Pe 1. 20 –1. We want to see what E.J. Young has to say in connection with these last two references: "… Paul does not wish Timothy to understand that the Scriptures are a body of human writings into which something divine has been breathed…Modern theories of inspiration wish more and more to give a larger place to the activity of man and a lesser place to that of God… (however)… what Paul wishes to assure Timothy is that the Bible is the product of the Divine breath…"

As regards the 2^nd Peter passage…"Peter insists that the

Scriptures are from God, but he goes on to say that men, being borne by the Holy Spirit, spoke… the Scriptures are not a magical book dropped down from heaven, but, rather, God gave them to us by means of men who spoke from Him… That which is picked up and borne… is absolutely passive…In being borne by the Spirit the writers were passive; in speaking and writing they were active…"

Fifth, we see God’s institution of an authoritative, written document as Israel’s history progresses: Ex 17. 14; Ex 24. 4, 7; Dt 31. 24 – 6; Josh 24. 26; Is 8. 1; Jer 25. 13, Dan 9. 1 – 2. By virtue of such additions the collection of writings known as the O.T. was brought into existence over a period of some 1200 – 1500 years.

Sixth, and most important is our Lord’s view of the O.T.… quoting Pinnock in God’s Inerrant Word, "… it is difficult to see what meaning the doctrine of the Incarnation could have if it did not at least uphold the normativeness (definition) of Jesus and his teachings… the chief reason why Christians believe in the divine origin and authorship of the Bible is because Jesus Christ himself taught it plainly… Unreserved commitment to Jesus requires us to look at the Bible through his eyes."

1. Jesus explicitly spoke to this issue in Mt. 5. 17 –9 (note – here [and in Jn 10. 33 – 6] is affirmation of verbal, plenary inspiration);
2. he stated his view regarding the O.T. as he defended his right to claim equality with the Father [Jn 10. 33 – 6]; "the underlying assumption in this passage is that God is the author of Scripture, and that consequently its teaching, even in an unassuming phrase, is inviolable."
3. He completely trusted the literal truth of biblical history – he referenced Adam and Eve (Mt 19. 4), Abel (Lk 11. 51); Noah (Mt 24. 37); Abraham (Jn 8. 56), Sodom and Gomorrah (Lk 10. 12), Isaac and Jacob (Mt 8. 11), Moses and the burning bush (Mk 12. 26f). Note that, per Pinnock, "Jesus interpreted the O.T. typologically – persons such as David, Solomon, and Jonah were types of himself. The prophetic hope was being fulfilled in him. Nevertheless, it was typology and not allegory which characterized his interpretation, and typology does not involve any denigration of the historical matter being fulfilled. Quite the opposite, it depends on its being true."
4. He completely trusted the O.T.’s doctrinal teachings – note how he rebuffed Satan in the wilderness ("it is written…"); note how he rebuked the Pharisees for setting human traditions over against the O.T. laws (Mk 7. 1 – 13).
5. He stated that the Scriptures were "… his [Father’s] word…" (Jn 5. 37 – 9);
6. He constantly used the Scriptures to ‘prove’ his Messiaship and his Kingship (Mk. 9. 12, Mt. 26. 31, Lk. 22. 37, Mt. 21. 16, Mt. 26. 64);
7. By his use of O.T. passages he related his perfect knowledge and freedom with which he went to the cross (Jn 13. 18 c.f. Ps 41. 9; Mt. 26. 56, Ze 13. 7, Is 53; Mk 14. 21, 49); his entire life was conditioned by "the Scripture must be fulfilled…";
8. Even during the hell and agony of the cross, Jesus looked to and spoke Scripture (Mt 26. 54, Jn 19. 28).
9. In the post-Resurrection appearance detailed in Lk 24, Jesus directed the disciples’ attention not to the present miracle (!), but to the fulfillment of Scripture.

The final and the authoritative witness to the infallibility and authority of the Scriptures is the author of these Scriptures, the Holy Spirit (quote Calvin p.109 GIW). But when we have said this, we have also given the answer to the question of the N.T. canon- i.e. it is just those writings that the Holy Spirit has and does so certify to be His very words to the elect, God’s church. Note that Jesus in the days of his pilgrimage on earth testified concerning the O.T. canon; so now, in the person of the Holy Spirit, Jesus bears witness to the N.T. canon. Two additional points regarding the above:

• the aforementioned attestation is to the church (the elect) and for the church; we will not expect the pagan academicians to agree or understand! Cf. Jn 14:16-7, 26; 15:26; 16:12-4; 1 Co 2:12-4; 2 Pe 3:1-2, 16.
• This is not a witness ‘against all prevailing evidence’; rather it is in harmony with the evidences.

We want to look at three of these evidences in turn:

1. Additional canonical writings (beyond the O.T.) are what we would expect- it is in keeping with the pattern laid down by God in connection with Israel- the people were placed under a covenant , governed by God’s words (cf. Josh 8:33-5), and awaiting a promised Messiah. God acted and then provided the interpretation of those actions. Just so, in this new era, which Paul describes as the ‘fullness of time’, (realize that the N.T. is completory, more excellent – cf. Ro 1. 2), ushered in by the Messiah revealed- the incarnate Son of God- there is a new covenant and new divine words (quote Stonehouse, p. 214 GIW, then Frame, p. 191 GIW). Cf. Jn 12:48; 14:15, 23; 15:3, 7; 17:8. Note: this understanding makes it clear why no further additions to the canon are now expected or seen- there is no new age or ‘stage’ in God’s economy of redemption until Christ returns. Cf. He 1:2.
2. The canonical writings are intimately bound up with the apostles- with a capital ‘A’. That this would be the case is implied in the Johannine passages quoted earlier- these are Jesus’ chosen men who would be entrusted with the deposit of gospel revelation. That this was the case is recognized and asserted by the apostles themselves. Cf. also 2Pe 3:16; Ga 1:8; 1Co 2. 13, 1Co 7:10-2; 1Co 14:37; 1 Th 2. 13; 2Th 3:14f.
3. The successors to the apostles clearly appreciated a fundamental distinction between their writings and those deriving from the ‘apostolic age’ (quote Stonehouse, pp. 125, 129, 134, 137 The Infallible Word). Thus, while the church’s recognition of the entire canon involved a process over time, the church Fathers all looked back to the gospels and epistles- not to their own letters- when seeking those words which had God’s own authority to ‘universally bind the conscience’. And so it has been with all the ‘giants’ of the church- they have submitted to and gloried in the Scriptures- not added to them! Note: this militates against those who would argue for modern-day additions to holy writ- no, the apostolic age has passed!

His control. All knowledge is based on revelation and such revelation is entirely a result of His eternal plan and present ongoing witness. In other words, God chose to have his creation be revelatory of himself, and he chose how it is revelatory of himself (cf. Ro 1. 19 – 20).

It is clear that the natural man thus knows enough only to be culpable. But of course knowledge in the most full-orbed, biblical sense of the term is saving knowledge of God… it comprehends relationship, love, personal knowledge – none of which is possible unless He first regenerates us, effectually calls us by the Spirit through the gospel, and grants us repentance and faith – salvation is of the Lord and under His sovereign control! We can only echo the Song of Moses recorded in Re 15, Who shall not fear thee, O LORD!

Our knowledge of Him is under His authority. His authority is his right to command, to tell us what to do, what to think, how to feel. He is the standard of truth. True knowledge of God, then, is an obedient knowledge. First, knowledge of God must be sought in an obedient way – subject to the Scriptures. His Word is not subject to us – to evaluation by human standards. Rather we must submit our every thought to the obedience of Christ (Dt. 29. 29; 2 Co 10. 5). Second, true knowledge of God produces obedience (Jn 17. 6, 2 Pe 1. 3, Jn 14. 15). Third, obedience to God leads to increased knowledge, which leads to more obedience, etc (Is 33. 5 – 6; Ps 25. 14, Ex 33. 13). Fourth, ‘obedience’ and ‘knowledge’ are often used in Scripture as synonyms (1 Sa 15. 22 cf. Ho 6. 6; Jer 22. 16, Jn 8. 31). Fifth, obedience is the criterion of knowledge. He is an absolute person, not an abstraction or force that perhaps can be manipulated by clever individuals.

[from Frame, Doctrine of God] This great and awesome God, the LORD Almighty, thus retains full authority to reveal Himself as he is… He alone will name himself… What he tells us to believe in His Word [concerning His person] we have an obligation to believe… His word is more credible than any other word or any other means of knowing… When we know that God has truly spoken… we have no right to question him. When he tells us something, we have no right to demand evidence over and above God’s own word (cf. Ro 4. 16 – 22)… A word of ultimate authority is beyond human criticism – we may never judge it to have failed or to have been mistaken. Truly our God is an awesome God!

It is clear from Scripture that the covenant Lord has chosen to save his elect by His Spirit working in and through His word (cf. Ro 1. 16 –7, 10. 17, 16. 25 –7; Ac 16. 14, 10. 44; 1 Co 1. 20f; Js 1. 18; 1 Pe 1. 23 – 5; Ep 1. 13, 1 Co 15. 1 - 2).

The Scriptures "equate" being saved with possessing a knowledge of the truth (2 Ti 2. 4); a knowledge also described as a love for the truth (2 Th 2. 10). There is no salvation possible outside of propositional revelation!

Note, even in paradise, man could read nature aright only in connection with and in the light of supernatural, positive revelation. Both general and special revelation are equally necessary, authoritative, sufficient, and perspicuous… (but) special revelation is unique because it is given for distinct purposes: 1) to guide our interpretation of general revelation; 2) after the Fall, to correct our sinful distortion of general revelation; and 3) to bring God’s promise of salvation through Christ.

If, as the Westminster Confession reminds us, the Word of God is "the rule of faith and life", clearly we must understand it as we ought – as the apostle Peter reminds us, it is quite possible to distort… the Scriptures, to [our] own destruction…(2 Pe 3. 16). Which begs a host of questions: ‘How is interpretation to be accomplished? Who has the right of interpretation? Are all interpretations equally valid? What is the orthodox view of these matters?’ To answer these questions we must examine the discipline of hermeneutics.

But first some preliminary considerations (and review). We have taken note of the fact that we must turn to these Scriptures for true knowledge of God and His relations to man. There is no other, higher extra-biblical source of such knowledge. So the teachings of the Scriptures themselves must guide us in determining how we are to interpret God’s written words; the Bible will give us our doctrine of interpretation, just as it gives us all doctrines!

First, we must understand that these issues are not worked out in a vacuum; rather, the context is God’s lordship over His people, the Church. And it is apparent from the book of Acts that His plan for those who respond to the gospel is that they immediately recognize and embrace an essential truth – all those who are born again and born into the body of Christ. A Christian is by definition a member of God’s church!

This wonderful reality is given doctrinal expression in the epistles: Ro 12. 4 – 8; 1 Co 12. 7 –31; Ep 2. 19 – 22, 4. 11 – 16; 1 Ti 3. 14 – 5; 1 Pe 2. 4 – 5. The practical working out of such doctrine resulted in the speedy formation of local church fellowships as documented in Acts: 2. 41 – 7, 4. 32 – 5, 5. 12 – 3, 13. 1, etc. Christians then are bound by the Word to live and function as members of the church, which in practical terms means to live and function within the confines of one local church.

What does this have to do with understanding the Scriptures aright? When we live and function properly in the local church we do so under the shepherding and leadership of God’s delegated authorities (cf. I Th 5. 12; I Ti 1. 3; Ti 1. 5, 2. 15; He 13. 17) – and one of the primary responsibilities given by God to these authorities is… teaching (interpreting) His word to those under their care (cf. Ga 6. 6; Ep 4. 11 – 14; I Ti 5. 17; I Th 4. 1 – 2; He 13. 7). The apostles wrote the Word; pastors, elders, and teachers are tasked with correctly interpreting the apostolic doctrine once received! The inexorable conclusion? The first step towards a correct understanding of the Bible is submission to a pastor and elders who teach the … faith that was once for all entrusted to the saints. (Jude 3)

Four points in this connection:

1. If we fail to honor God’s proper government in the church, we will fall into subjectivism in our interpretation of the Bible – a self-serving subjectivism.
2. If we fail to honor God’s proper government in the church, we deny His lordship and affirm autonomy and pride – such a person is uncorrectable.
3. If we fail to honor God’s proper government in the church, we are at risk for substituting personal reading of the Bible for attending church services and sitting under the preached Word.
4. If we fail to honor God’s proper government in the church, we are at risk to lapse into mere intellectual assent. This falls far short of God’s definition of true knowledge [which equals obedience, cf. Ro 6. 17].

Having said all this, we must keep firmly in mind that walking in proper submission to delegated shepherds does not imply that we should remain spiritual ‘babes’ the rest of our lives. No! We have an additional obligation to learn the Scriptures as we are taught. Everywhere we turn in the New Testament we find the Christian being exhorted to grow in the knowledge of God, to become mature, to know the facts about this revealed faith (cf. Ep 6. 17; Phil 2. 12; 1 Ti 4. 15, 2 Pe 1. 8). Indeed, we are rebuked by the bible if we fail to mature (cf. He 5. 11 – 2). Not all are called to teach in a formal sense; all are called to learn well what they are taught, parents are called to teach their children, and each of us is called to encourage and exhort the other.

Finally, before turning to some fundamentals of hermeneutics, let us remember the overarching goal of Bible study: to understand the Word in agreement with the meaning given to it by its author, the Holy Spirit. Note Paul’s exhortation to Timothy and Titus – their teaching was to be done with diligence, perseverance, devotion, correctly handling the word of truth, correcting with great patience and careful instruction, keeping as a pattern of sound teaching what they heard from Paul, holding firmly to the message as it had been taught. All of which is summarized in 2 Ti 2. 2: And the things you have heard me say in the presence of many witnesses entrust to reliable men who will also be qualified to teach others.

We are now ready to examine in a summary fashion the most important hermeneutical principles (the following from Sproul, Knowing Scripture):

1. Sacra Scriptura sui interpres (sacred Scripture is its own interpreter): no part of Scripture can be interpreted in such a way as to render it in conflict with what is clearly taught elsewhere in Scripture. This principle follows inexorably from what we know about the LORD – He cannot lie, nor can He be self-contradictory. Note another assumption inherent in this precept: we must know the rest of the Scriptures; we must have a systematic, ordered understanding of biblical doctrine in order to comply with the mandate! We can also conclude that there is no justification for appealing to an outside authority to support a view that does violence to the Bible. Rather it is Scripture itself, the whole counsel of God, that is the standard, the rule against which all interpretation must be measured.
2. Determine the Sensus literalis: Per Sproul, "The term literal comes from the Latin litera meaning letter. To interpret something literally is to pay attention to the litera or to the letters and words which are being used. To interpret the Bible literally is to interpret it as literature. That is, the natural meaning of a passage is to be interpreted according to the normal rules of grammar, speech, syntax, and context." Under inspiration a noun remains a noun! An analysis of literary forms (e.g. poetry vs. historical narrative), figures of speech, style, use of hyperbole, use of personification, and use of metaphor is critical to a correct understanding of a given passage. Examples include: Ps. 114. 3f {personification}; Mt. 13. 31f {hyperbole}; Jn 10. 9 {metaphor}. On the other hand, those books which are obviously meant to be historical should be viewed as documents recording real ‘time and space’ history, not myth (remember our Lord’s view of the O.T.).
3. Learn Biblical lexicology: the meaning of the Hebrew and Greek words should be carefully determined by studying: a) etymologies (origins of words); b) the usus loquendi (customary usage of the words at the time they were written). For example, there are different shades of meaning in the original words that are translated in the English as ‘sin’ {missing the mark}, ‘transgression’ {revolt, rebellion}, or ‘iniquity’ {bend that which is straight – these differences are important to our full understanding of a given text.
4. Utilize the grammatico-historical method: this methodology, which focuses attention not only on literary forms but upon grammatical construction and historical contexts, is used by the interpreter to gain an objective reading of the text. The grammatical structure determines, for instance, whether words are to be taken as questions (interrogative), commands (imperative), or declarative (indicative). Our understanding of the text is also strengthened as we learn about the relevant cultural considerations, the so-called "manners and customs" of the Jewish people and surrounding nations, the geography and climate of Palestine, etc. (E.g. The meaning of the commodity ‘salt’ to these ancient peoples).
5. Extra-biblical linguistic and cultural considerations must be employed ministerially, not magisterially.
6. Historical narratives are to be interpreted in light of the didactic (E.g. Gen 22. 11f… Now I know you fear God…).
7. Implicit messages are to be interpreted in light of explicit passages. Implications cannot be used to cancel explicit teaching (e.g. Jn 3. 15, cf. Jn 6. 65).
8. Be careful when interpreting parables; is best to look for one basic central point.
9. Be careful with predictive prophecy. For instance, some of the O.T. prophecies were fulfilled ‘to the letter’ (e.g. the Messiah’s birth in Bethlehem), while others were fulfilled in a broader sense (e.g. Malachi’s prophecy concerning the return of Elijah).

(The above guidelines do not cover all of the science of hermeneutics! And given that few of us are Greek and Hebrew scholars, and that few of us are experts in history, or theology, we ought to thank God for a pastor who has been professionally trained in these disciplines.)

Believe (Faith)

(from Frame, Doctrine of God, p. 90f) "One way to summarize the Bible is to say that it is a story of God’s word to human beings and their response to that word… belief or unbelief, humility or pride." This one with whom Israel had to do and with whom we have to do is the Lord God Almighty; His lordship is absolute, He possesses the right and the might to demand complete, faultless obedience. It is the creator God who sets the standards, and the creature may not argue with Him! When He tells his people to believe His word, they have a moral obligation to do so. His authority is absolute, all-comprehensive, and unquestionable. Quoting Frame, "To know God is to know his law. God himself necessarily acts as law to all being other than himself. To be Lord is to be the giver and ultimate enforcer of ultimate law… And that law is revealed to us through… Scripture."

Lets set the context for the mandate of faith. Man was created upright, in the image of God, with the metaphysical capacity and ethical covenant mandate to love and enjoy fellowship with his Creator. Adam’s epistemology was thus certain; he knew God truly (and understood God’s creation, c.f. Ge 2. 19 – 20) through God’s revelation as it came to him by means of his own nature, the creation external to him, and God’s verbal communication. [And as is the case even in our fallen world, this revelation was sufficient, necessary, authoritative, and perspicuous]. But Adam did not remain upright - the tragic story of our first parents’ subsequent fall is highly significant for our present topic.

While the entrance of evil into God’s good universe is a mystery, we are given some insight in Ge 3 into the particulars surrounding the temptation and sin. Heretofore, Adam and Eve had obeyed their covenant Lord with all their heart, mind, soul, and strength – and implicit in this statement is the fact that neither had ever for a moment doubted or questioned God’s right to command, His perfect knowledge of His world, or His goodness. But now, in Ge 3, at each point a question enters into Eve’s mind as the serpent speaks – perhaps God’s command could be set aside with impunity; perhaps another person’s worldview was just as valid as the one set out by her Creator; perhaps God was unfairly keeping something back from them. Such questions, while fully consistent with modern man’s claims to autonomy, must be seen for what they were and are: first, this is sin – failure to trust God and His word; second, this is the inevitable prelude to further disobedience. And we should note, such questions are stupid! – Eve chose to trust a creature – a stranger- over against her creator, from whom she had received nothing but blessing, who is goodness, light, without shadow of turning.

What we witness in Ge 3 is the abandonment of one presupposition (one worldview) for another – a defection in heart-commitment from the Creator God to an ultimate allegiance to would-be autonomy – which in fact is of course servitude to the god of this world. Once this transaction occurred, the woman’s decision to eat of the fruit was inevitable. Per Hoeksema, "… it is in the light, or rather in the darkness of that lie, with eyes that had been darkened by the lie, that the woman now looked at the tree and passed her own judgment upon it. She saw nothing anymore of the Word of God… and upon that judgment she acted". [2 Co 11. 3]. To quote Pastor, her mind became sick.

The opposite of Eve’s response is faith; an activity of the heart, mind, and will (which is so often wrongly held out to be antithetical to reason). Faith is conviction induced by judgment of mind with respect to the sufficiency of evidence. When it has respect to a person, we mean that we credit Him as trustworthy in respect of that character which is under consideration. Per Murray, "To sum up, faith is trust. Trust presupposes an object. An object evokes trust when there is an antecedent judgment of the mind that the object is trustworthy. This judgment is formed by the evaluation of evidence as sufficient. It is a state of mind induced by considerations objective to ourselves though always apprehended by our minds." Now when we speak of faith, we of course mean Christian faith, not generic ‘faith’. What is this faith?

First, Christian faith is the gift of God – it is not a result of one’s ‘whipping it up from the inside’. Indeed it is man’s activity – man must believe, not God – but true Christian faith follows new birth (the monergistic work of God) as the first fruits of the tree made good. Second, the objects of the Christian’s faith are the Scriptures (broadly speaking), and the Christ of the Scriptures (narrowly speaking). Thus the born again man or woman looks at the evidences (the gospel, the Scriptures, the Lord Jesus Christ) with a renewed mind, judges them to be worthy of his complete trust, and then acts on this conviction by committing his or her soul to Christ Jesus for salvation, for life (cf. Ro 4. 20 – 4; Ac 17. 2f, 19. 8f, 26. 25f).

Our Lord’s statements give us the divine perspective on the value of faith. Jesus everywhere rebukes unbelief and gives high praise to those who believe in the Scriptures and in His person and words (Mt 8. 10; Lk 24. 25). He castigates those who demand signs and miracles (Mt 16. 4). And in the parable of Lazarus and Dives (Lk 16. 19f), He makes it quite clear that the unbeliever will not believe God even in the presence of the miraculous – someone rising from the dead.

Apparently in God’s view His word is ‘evidence’ enough! Our Lord, while graciously allowing for doubting Thomas’ need to see the marks, specifically says that they are blessed who believe on the basis of God’s testimony without ‘needing’ to physically see the risen Christ (Jn 20. 29). The apostle Peter states the same in his first epistle, Though you have not seen him, you love him, and even though you do not see him now, you believe in him and are filled with an inexpressible joy… (1. 8). The contrast couldn’t be clearer – the unbeliever remains under condemnation because he will not trust God’s word, even in the context of a real, visible miracle; the believer has crossed over from death to life because he does trust God, he does ‘take Him at His word’, without demanding additional, personal ‘proof’ (as if God was a suitable subject for a science experiment!).

Why is faith then not the result in each and every case when man is confronted with the Word of God? As noted before, the answer bears witness to the intensity of human blindness and depravity (1 Co 2.14) – it has nothing to do with the quality or reality of the evidence. The sinner’s mind is enmity towards God (Ro 8.6f – it does not and will not ever judge the divine evidence to be sufficient- Cf. Jn 3.31f "The one who comes from above is above all; the one who is from the earth belongs to the earth, and speaks as one from the earth. The one who comes from heaven is above all. 32 He testifies to what he has seen and heard, but no one accepts his testimony. 33 The man who has accepted it has certified that God is truthful. 34 For the one whom God has sent speaks the words of God…)

Per Frame, "The covenant between Yahweh and Israel… has a written constitution. Israel’s relationship to God was not to be governed by the people’s imagination, or by religious wisdom, or by scholarship, or by oral tradition, but by a written word, authored by the Lord." [TDG, p. 33] (Jer 31. 33; Jn 14. 15, 21, 23; 1 Co 14. 37; Mt. 5. 17 – 20; Lk 16.31; Jn 5. 39, 47; 10. 35; Ro 15. 4, Mt. 28. 19f, 1 Thess 4. 1 - 2).

Contra those who would somehow divorce saving faith from a subsequent life of obedience: Lk 6. 46f., 8. 21; 2 Co 5. 7, 9, 14 – 7; Ep 2. 10; Ti 2. 11 – 4; I Jn 2. 3 – 6, 3. 10; Lk 17. 5 – 10; Jn 3. 19 – 21, 8. 31 – 47, 12. 25 – 6, 14. 12, 15. 9 – 17. Justification is by faith alone, but not by a faith that is alone!

Teach (Example of obedience)

(Dt 6. 4f) Hear O Israel: The Lord our God, the Lord is one. Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your strength. These commandments that I give you today are to be upon your hearts. Impress them on your children… Observe the commands of the Lord your God, walking in his ways and revering Him… Fix these words of mine in your hearts and minds; tie them as symbols on your hands and bind them on your foreheads. Teach them to your children…

(Ps 119. 11, 15) I have hidden your word in my heart that I might not sin against you… I meditate on your precepts and consider your ways. (Co 3. 16) Let the word of Christ dwell in your richly as you teach and admonish one another with all wisdom…