An Analysis of the Historic Creeds of the Reformed
Faith on Scripture
"All Scripture is inspired by God and profitable
for teaching, for reproof, for correction and training in
righteousness that the man of God may be perfectly equipped for
every good work…" 2 Tim 3:16-17
The doctrine of Scripture has been under virulent
attack for the past 150 years. As the demise of theological
liberalism vividly demonstrates, once a church loses confidence that
the Bible is the literal word of God, the gospel and saving faith
quickly follows. Today, those who would flee from the authority of
God’s Word deny that the inspiration and authority of the Scriptures
are required by historic Christianity. Instead they are aggressive
in trying to undermine the sufficiency of Scriptures (through modern
pop psychology), its necessity (by replacing it with science and
technology), its authority (by casting doubts on its authorship),
and its clarity (by proposing that the Bible has been edited and
changed so many times no one but the experts really understands what
it originally said). The reason of course is that if you a the
credibility of the Bible, then men are free to make up their own
ethics, morals and rules according to what seems best to themselves.
This is an age old problem, going all the way back
to the garden of Eden when Adam chose to sin against God’s Law. The
serpent initially enticed Eve into sin by challenging the integrity
of God’s Word. Though he may have become a little more sophisticated
in his attack since then, his objective remains the same. The best
way to destroy faith is to attack the authority of God’s Word.
Today, we have many "evangelical" Christians who
insist there are errors in the Bible’s treatment of history,
science, etc. They maintain that the Bible is "infallible" when it
touches on matters of faith and doctrine but not "inerrant" when it
touches on other matters. In fact, it is common in even evangelical
seminaries to suggest that the modern debate over the inerrancy of
Scripture is a result of nineteenth century heresies of certain
right wing, Presbyterian theologians at places like old Princeton.
The implications of course for Christian faith are enormous. If the
Bible makes mistakes in the things you can check out (such as
history, science, culture), then how can you trust it in the areas
you cannot check out (such as the Deity of Christ, the resurrection,
etc.).
Similarly, if the Bible has mistakes in matters of
fact, then perhaps it also has mistakes in matter of doctrine. Thus
many "evangelical" feminists maintain that the Apostle Paul’s
explicit instructions regarding the role of women was not really
inspired, but simply a mistake resulting from his cultural
prejudices. Interesting to note that several of the popular
"evangelical" feminists of the seventies have now come out of the
closet, announced their lesbianism and totally abandoned the
historic Christian faith.
It is important for Reformed Christians to
understand that our view of the Bible is not the creation of men,
but taught in the Scriptures themselves. Thus we need to know
something of how the doctrine of Scripture was understood from the
earliest days of the Reformation. One of the best ways is to see how
the doctrine of Scripture was handled in the various Reformed creeds
authored in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries.
An acorn has within itself all the genetic
potential of a full grown oak. Given the right conditions; fertile
soil, sunlight and water, the acorn will naturally grow and develop,
setting out strong roots and vibrant branches. So also did the
doctrine of Scripture grow and develop as the implications of
Reformed theology were worked out over time. The Reformers did not
discover new truths concerning Scripture, they merely provided the
rich soil of a humble heart, the warm sunshine of open expectation
and the refreshing washing of the Holy Spirit’s illumination. The
same acorn under different conditions will develop slightly
different forms of the same tree. In the same way, the historical
situation facing each Confession subtly affected how the kernel of
truth was expressed..
The earliest Reformed confession, which deals with
the doctrine of Scripture, is the Scots of 1560. Penned in four days
by the "Six Johns"; (i.e. Winram, Spottiswoode, Willock, Douglas,
Row and Knox), the need was urgent since Scotland was going through
Reformation and still had a Catholic Queen. The confession was
quickly ratified by parliament with little opposition (Douglas 891).
Though John Knox had been involved in a number of similar works on
the continent, the Scots’ Confession is in some ways a polemical
tract concerned more with stating the main points of Calvinism and
refuting the heresies of Romanism than developing precise
theological formulations. Accordingly, its treatment on Scripture is
fairly brief and succinct. Scripture is dealt with in articles 18
and 19 where it is stated "...we beleeve and confesse the Scriptures
of God sufficient to instruct and make the man of God perfite..."
The intent was to refute the Romanist idea that Mother Church has
authority over the Scriptures. The Scots’ Confession calls this idea
to be "...blasphemous against God and injurious to the trew
Kirk...".
Yet within the brief treatment given by the Scott’s
Confession can be found the kernel of the whole doctrine of
Scripture. Its authority is maintained, divine authorship understood
and the right of each believer to have personal access to
interpreting and applying it rightly. "For we dare non receive or
admit any interpretation quhilk repugnes to ony principall point of
our faith, or to on other plaine text of Scripture or zit unto the
rule of charitie."
Guido de Bres authored (primarily) the Belgic
Confession) in 1561 as the Netherlands were about to begin their
rebellion against Spanish rule. Originally written in French it was
quickly translated into Dutch and German and remains one of the
three standards used in the Dutch Reformed Church. Again,
undoubtedly because of the historical situation, it draws heavily on
the 1559 Gallic Confession written by Calvin for the Huguenot
churches (Douglas 117).
Scripture is one of the first doctrines treated
(article 3) and since de Bres could depend upon the reflections of
others in less urgent situations, its development is far more
complete. The doctrine of Scripture is introduced in article II
concerning the means by which God is known. While acknowledging the
importance of God’s self-disclosure through creation, His holy and
divine Word is necessary for us to know "His glory and our
salvation."
The inspiration of the Scriptures is stated in that
the Word of God was delivered by "holy men... moved by the Holy
Spirit..." who were commanded to commit His revealed Word in
writing. "Pour cette cause, nous appelons tels ecrits; Ecritures
saintes et divines" (Schaff 385). The historical situation is
again evident in the repudiation of the Roman church’s insistence of
ultimacy. Scripture is to be believed, not because the Church
approves of it, but rather because of the inner witness of the Holy
Spirit in our hearts (Schaff 386). Scripture thus is self attesting
and carries the evidence for its divine origin in itself.
The doctrine of the necessity of Scripture is
hinted at in the statement that the canonical books of the Bible are
received for the regulation, foundation and confirmation of our
faith. Interestingly enough, the Belgic Confession makes an explicit
claim for the inerrancy of Scripture when it says, "believing
without any doubt, all things contained in them..." (Schaff 386).
This is an important answer to those who claim that the insistence
on inerrancy is a nineteenth century aberration of the Princeton
theology of Hodge, Warfield and Machen.
The doctrine of the sufficiency of Scripture is
also explicitly stated here. The Scriptures "fully contain the will
of God and that whatsoever man ought to believe unto salvation is
sufficiently taught therein" (Schaff 388).
By the time of the Second Helvitic Confession of
1566, the doctrine of Scripture is presented in a far richer, fuller
way. The confession was penned by Henrich Bullinger on the request
of Friedrich III (Douglas 459). The first Helvitic Confession of
1536 was thought to be too much a compromise with the Lutherans.
Bullinger had been working on a lengthy statement of his own beliefs
when the Elector Palatine (publisher of the Heidelberg Catechism of
1563) turned to him for help. He needed a confession to aid him
against charges of formenting religious dissension. Bullinger’s
personal statement with slight modifications received a warm
reception and quickly established a new standard (Douglas 459).
However, its origins as a personal statement of
faith had implications in how it developed various doctrines.
Theological precision is really not the main objective and thus
though it contains a flowering of truth, it lacks a complete
development. Much is implicit that could have been made
explicit.
The Confession begins with Scripture as the very
first chapter. The authority of Scripture is implied in that it is
the "true Word of God" and has "sufficient authority of themselves."
Again, the Word of God is seen to be self attesting, not needing the
testimony of men, councils or churches to establish their divine
origins or authority (Schaff 831). Scripture is complete, nothing is
to be added or subtracted.<p>
The doctrine of the necessity of Scripture is
implicit without being so stated; "from these Scriptures are to be
taken true wisdom and godliness, the reformation and government of
churches; as also instruction in all duties of piety." While it is
the Holy Spirit who illumines and can do so without external
ministry, even so God’s normal way of instructing men is through the
preaching of the Scriptures.<p>
Personal interpretation is ruled out (after all,
this canard was a recurring charge levied by Rome and needed to be
refuted) and Scripture is stated to be its own best interpreter
(Schaff 833). First mention here is made of understanding the
original languages and of respectful dissent of the church Fathers
when their teaching can be shown to depart from Scripture. Human
tradition is rejected and the authority of Scripture implicit in
that "in controversies of religion or matters of faith, we can not
admit any other judge that God Himself, pronouncing by the Holy
Scriptures what is true, what is false, what is to be followed or
what to be avoided."
The full flowering of the acorn is the Westminster
Confession of 1643-46. The Westminster Divines had over a century of
theological wisdom to draw on as well as the practical need of
stating clearly and precisely true Reformed doctrine in the light of
the dangers posed by a growing Arminianism (and an imminent civil
war with Charles I). The Confession remains as the best expression
of classical Reformed theology.
In regards to the doctrine of Scripture, as is to
be expected, the Confession most fully develops the kernels of
contained in the earlier works. It begins with the necessity of
Scripture (I.i.). Though acknowledging the reality of revelation of
God in nature, creation and providence, the Confession concludes
that they are insufficient to give knowledge of God and His will
necessary unto salvation. In article vi of chapter one, Scripture is
considered necessary for the whole counsel of God concerning His
glory, man’s salvation, faith and life.
Those things which are not specifically stated in
Scripture, can be deduced from it (though nothing is to be added).
This is a new insight, not clearly articulated in previous
Confessions. As well, the Confession recognizes that though
absolutely true, the Scriptures are not exhaustively true; i.e.,
that there are some circumstances concerning the worship of God,
government of the church etc., which are not specifically addressed
and must be ordered according to general rules, rather than specific
precept (vi.).
The authority of Scripture depends not upon the
testimony of man or church but wholly upon God. Therefore it must be
received because it is the Word of God. Though not neglecting the
force of human argumentation for its divine character, the
Westminster divines are careful to state that persuasion comes "from
the inward work of the Spirit bearing witness by and with the Spirit
in our hearts" (v.).
The Confession also introduces the doctrine of
perspicuity; i.e., that though not all things in Scripture are easy
to apprehend, all things necessary for salvation are clearly stated
so that even the unlearned may attain a sufficient understanding.
This takes the Bible out of the exclusive hands of the
theologian/teacher/pastor and encourages lay reading and study. This
is explicitly confirmed by paragraph viii which states, "...all the
people of God, who have a right unto and interest in the Scriptures
and are commanded in the fear of God to read and search them,
therefore they are to be translated into the vulgar [i.e., common]
language of every nation unto which they may come..."
Finally, the Westminster Confession again echoes
the fundamental principle of interpretation that Scripture is its
own best interpreter (ix.). Scripture can only be understood by the
illumination of the Holy Spirit (vi.) for it is the Holy Spirit
Himself who speaks through the written word (x.).
Though the Westminster Confession is a full grown
Oak tree, solid and steady, a sure anchor in perilous times, it
never claims for itself to be the final statement of Biblical truth.
It developed during a specific historical situation when certain
doctrines were in jeopardy and needed careful definition. Some may
consider it necessary, that without losing any of the truths of the
Confession, to continue to develop those truths to counter the
errors of our day (e.g. the inerrancy question, feminism, evolution
etc.). However, sadly, we would be hard put to find a twentieth
century assembly equivalence of the Westminster Divines. Their work
will have to stand for a while yet. The branches are not so bowed,
or the leaves so bare that we cannot still find shelter for a good
time yet.<p>
Works Cited
Douglas, J. D. The New International Dictionary of
the Christian Church. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1974
Schaff, Philip. The Creeds of Christendom. London,
1877