Here’s another long-overdue installment in the series on my selection of a Christian church, continued from the previous post on sola scriptura.
Related to sola scriptura is the idea that every Christian has the right and responsibility to interpret the Bible for himself. This becomes necessary if you reject the authority of a formal hierarchy of Church leaders, e.g. if you are Baptist or Evangelical. Someone has to interpret the Bible, and if you don’t recognize any church leaders to interpret the Bible for members of that church, then interpretation falls to the individual. Even among denominations or local congregations that hold their members to a particular interpretation of the Bible, the right of interpretation still ultimately falls to the individual, because anyone can leave these churches for another Protestant church at any time. As mentioned in part 1, few Protestant denominations claim a monopoly on the truth, and to do so would be problematic for a denomination that was founded in the last few hundred years, over a millennium separated from Jesus’ time on Earth.
Certain Protestants claim that the Bible is self-interpreting, but by this they mean that the interpretation of the Bible is self-evident upon comparing certain passages to each other—and their particular interpretation is the one that’s self-evident. In other words, the “self-interpreting” interpretation is simply another individual’s interpretation of Scripture.
But this doctrine of the ultimate right of private interpretation of the Bible is not supported by the Bible. In fact, it is explicitly condemned:
His letters contain some things that are hard to understand, which ignorant and unstable people distort, as they do the other Scriptures, to their own destruction.—2 Peter 3:16
Anyone can use the Bible to distort the truth and, as evidenced in Peter’s letter quoted above, this has been happening for the entire history of the Church. For passages that give rise to doctrines of the Christian faith, there is a correct interpretation, and there are incorrect interpretations. To claim anything less would be to yield to relativism and claim that even fundamental doctrines of the faith are mutable, subject to each Christian’s opinions.
So how can we know whether a particular Bible passage has been interpreted correctly? As is often the case, the Bible itself provides a clue:
if I am delayed, you will know how people ought to conduct themselves in God’s household, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and foundation of the truth.—1 Timothy 3:15
Nowhere in the Bible does it say that the Bible itself is the pillar and foundation of the truth—rather, the Church is. This does not mean that the Bible is somehow lacking in the truth, but that the Bible by itself is not and was never meant to be the only means by which we learn about who God is what what he asks of us. To know the fullness of the truth, we need to look to the institution that God himself set up for us: his Church.
Certainly the Bible contains much truth, and in theory it may be possible to come to a knowledge of all of the truth revealed by God using only the Bible. After all,
All scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness, so that the man of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work.—2 Timothy 3:16–17
But as is abundantly clear, not everyone who sits down with a Bible and a desire to be led by the Holy Spirit comes away with an understanding of the truth and “thoroughly equipped for every good work.” We must remember that it is the Church which is the pillar and foundation of the truth, thereby not falling prey to our own opinions and becoming “ignorant and unstable people” as warned against in 2 Peter 3:16.
A frequent charge leveled against some non-Protestant Christian doctrines is that “they’re not in the Bible.” Of course, the fact that a given doctrine (say, the perpetual virginity of Mary) is not explicitly stated in the Bible does not of necessity make the doctrine untrue. Furthermore, it certainly does say in the Bible that the Church is the pillar and foundation of the truth. As a result, determining the veracity of the doctrines taught by a given denomination or church is closely related to the question of whether the organization in question is the true Church founded by Jesus (see part 1 of this series).
It is indeed important to test doctrines against the Bible, but means that doctrines must not contradict the Bible, not that we should condemn a particular doctrine if it is not stated explicitly in the Bible. Any stronger requirement is not supported by the Bible. For example, Paul instructs Timothy to pass on his oral teachings, not simply preserve copies of his letters:
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.—2 Timothy 2:2
My point here is that God chose to reveal his will through more than simply publishing a book. While he was on Earth, Jesus could have written a book himself and simply left instructions for his followers to read it and follow its directions. Instead, Jesus founded a Church, chose his Apostles, and equipped them to “go and make disciples of all nations” (Matthew 28:19). This same Church exists today, in accordance with Jesus’ promise: “And surely I am with you always, to the very end of the age” (Matthew 28:20).
This Church began at Pentecost after Jesus’ ascension (Acts 2), not decades later once all of the books of the Bible were written, or centuries later when the canon of Scripture had been decided. To insist today that the Bible in itself forms the foundation of the truth (recall 1 Timothy 3:15 above), and that the Church Jesus founded is wholly dependent on this subset of its own writings, is, in the light of history, a non sequitur.
All verses are from the NIV.
Tags: Christianity